I have been wondering whether it was worthwhile buying a monopod for my Nikon D90. Are you happy with yours and do you have any tips on what to look for, or brands to recommend? I am also looking for tripod recommendations, for that matter, so if you have any wisdom to impart on that score, it would be welcome as well.Quote:
Originally Posted by mythlady
Janis
You don't bring me Flowers anymore.
Printable View
-
29th October 2010, 12:44 AMpurplehazeRe: You don't bring me Flowers anymore.
-
29th October 2010, 09:54 PMScoutRQueen Anne's Lace
http://ftp.execulink.com/~wfsweb/Ima...ks-1070752.jpg
Panasonic Lumix G1: 20mm: 1/80s: f1.8: ISO 100: 20mm
Wendy -
29th October 2010, 10:10 PMcarregwenRe: Queen Anne's LaceWendy - you have changed lenses! How is the 20mm? It looks pretty good from here. Nice shot indeed.Quote:
Originally Posted by ScoutR
-
29th October 2010, 10:29 PMScoutRRe: Queen Anne's Lace
Yes, I finally started using the 20mm. I'm not sure if it is working right. Sometimes it focuses just fine and other times it hunts and hunts and then focuses on the wrong thing. It's probably operator errror, but it seems quite different from the other 2 lenses I have for the Lumix. It's great to have the control over DOF, and when I get the focus thing worked out, I think it will be a good lens - unless it actually is broken. :( The focus issue is at all aperatures not just wide open.
Wendy -
30th October 2010, 12:46 AMCamelliaYou don't bring me flowers anymore
-
30th October 2010, 12:58 AMScoutRRe: You don't bring me flowers anymore
Gorgeous: Nice one Raylee
Wendy -
30th October 2010, 02:30 AMKaty NoelleRe: Queen Anne's LaceHang on a second! When did you take this picture? (They don't have a "smilie" for this - raise one eyebrow, knit them together and put a very quizzical look on my face.) Our Queen Anne's Lace was done a couple of months ago! (I know because I seemed to be addicted to snapping at it. :rolleyes:) It's so fun to see how many variations on it there are. This is so fresh and beautifully lit in just the right place. Now, how did you.....?????Quote:
Originally Posted by ScoutR
-
30th October 2010, 03:21 AMScoutRRe: Queen Anne's Lace
Katy: it was taken just a couple days ago along the railway tracks. Maybe it is a bit more sheltered or something, most of the blooms that are left are quite small, so they are probably late bloomers, and we have not really had a good frost here yet so I still see quite a few of them.
Here is what most of them look like right now.
http://ftp.execulink.com/~wfsweb/Ima...-1080023-2.jpg
This was taken yesterday miles away from the first one. While we are at it notice the difference in Bokeh between the 2 shots ewww. First one was taken at f1.7 second one at f2.8. Background distances would have been different but both were taken with the same lens.
No special lighting, both were taken on dull days.
Wendy -
30th October 2010, 03:39 AMKaty NoelleRe: Queen Anne's LaceThis is funny, I was just replying to you in the bokeh thread while you were replying to me, here. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by ScoutR
And, in a nutshell, "interesting!" -
30th October 2010, 04:32 PMWirefoxRe: Queen Anne's Lace
Not flowers but it seemed like a reasonable place to put this one. Fishing pool at Pestfurlong Hill
http://www.soloimages.co.uk/Public-G...4_AJqSb-XL.jpg -
31st October 2010, 02:01 AMRob DouglasRe: Queen Anne's Lace
-
31st October 2010, 02:06 AMRob DouglasRe: Queen Anne's Lace
-
2nd November 2010, 10:14 PMClactonianLillies
http://www.bareham-net.co.uk/aaAnd4More_tonemapped.jpg
D2Xs,Sigma 150 macro
Click to enlarge -
3rd November 2010, 03:41 AMmythladyRanunculus
-
3rd November 2010, 04:11 AMPeter RyanRe: You don't bring me Flowers anymore.Hi Melanie and welcome to CiC. Another Canadian girl I see. You know I have been made an honorary Canadian – but that’s another story.Quote:
Originally Posted by girlwithpearl
I do not often visit this thread and it appears your image has been missed in the continual discussion that goes on. The colours are nice in this image but a different angle might have given more strength to the composition. You will learn to see different presentation here that might help. Many have developed their own style and others are trying to find it. Please keep showing us your work that is how we all improve from us seeing what you do and visa versa. -
3rd November 2010, 04:39 PMScoutRRe: RanunculusBeautiful Elise! Did you use textures on the flowers? Either way, I do love the textures of the petals and stemsQuote:
Originally Posted by mythlady
Wendy -
3rd November 2010, 05:59 PMmythladyRe: RanunculusNope -- no textures on that ones -- except the actual textures on the flowers! Thanks.Quote:
Originally Posted by ScoutR
-
4th November 2010, 04:28 AMKlickitClematis.
First proper go at image stacking, thanks to Sean. :) Still a bit fuzzy for a really, truly sharp stack, but heaps better than previous attempts.
https://www.cambridgeincolour.com/fo...achmentid=7547 -
4th November 2010, 08:21 AMcarregwenRe: Clematis.Pretty good, Kit. It gets addictive, I warn you.Quote:
Originally Posted by Klickit
I think you could have improved the shot by getting centre of the flower head, all of the detail on the left doesn't seem to add much. And just using USM sharpen will get it sharper, as you can see in this edit.
Sorry about the C+C that you didn't ask for!:o
http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1329/...f06b9938_o.jpg -
4th November 2010, 11:06 PMmythladyBrugmansia
https://www.cambridgeincolour.com/fo...achmentid=7587
Brugmansia in my back patio.