Tannin
Storage? I am Storage!
What an extraordinarily beautiful creature! Those neat little spots just set it off.
Yup. Really beautiful. Shame I was in a 2-stop exposure bracketing mode when it began to take off; trying to get the individual shots to match was a pain. Also on that trip I got some pictures of Night Herons in Palm Trees.
Another guy who was out let me try shooting with his 1Ds-III and EF 500/4L IS. Damn that is a heavy rig to hand-shoot, but he didn't even have a tripod with him. Sitting on the shore by the wetlands, with the camera resting on his lap. I wish I had had that gear when that hawk took off.
That is a big, heavy lens. It might be nice in the first 5-10 minutes, but then you realize that you can't hold the darn thing anymore and then you wish you had a lighter lens
The news emerged during an informal discussion with a high-ranking Samsung official at an industry event in Seoul, Korea, attended by Amateur Photographer (AP) technical writer Barney Britton.
Kyong-Kook Shin, assistant manager for Samsung's digital camera marketing planning group, suggested that the firm is actively pursuing development of a full-frame CMOS sensor intended for use in a professional camera.
Reporting on the 2 April meeting, Barney writes: 'Although there is no indication yet as to when it might arrive, it seems now that photographers can look forward to a professional full-frame DSLR with a Pentax lens mount at some point in the future.'
Thanks e_dawg. Some of these panoramas are bigger than that.
I found access to a 64" wide by 100' long color printer, and am getting ready to try it out.
Good catch. I doubt they would drop the price that much. I think they'll position the D3 as the ultimate low-light, high-speed action camera, and the D3x as the ultimate resolution camera. So the D3x may not be thought of as a higher class of camera.
Question is, is there this inherent chroma noise in the sensor in wide DR situations, even if the exposure was dialed in correctly such that the red channel wasn't clipping?
Would the Fuji S5 Pro have done better in this situation (correct exposure, or overexposure?).
If you would have manually (or bracket exposure which KR poo-poos as not being necessary if you are a pro like him, lol) exposed -1 here, you'd end up with his eyeball completely gone in the shadows, difficult to pull back from PP even if the image was taken in RAW format.
So what do you do in this situation, are you stuck with excessive red noise in the shadows at what is not really that high as far as ISO.
Out of curiosity I tried some jpegs for the first time in several years. How can one remove all the EXIT info from a 1Ds MK III .jpg file without reprocessing the image? I want to keep the files confidential. Thanks.
Can't you do Save for Web in PS? I thought it's known for stripping the EXIF unceremoniously without asking the user, which actually bugs most people since you would WANT to show the EXIF for most images you post to the web (except for special situations where you're trying to maintain confidentiality). It was a relic from the days when stripping the EXIF saved you a few KB here and there. But it's rather ridiculous these days when bytes are dirt cheap and everybody's got gigs to spare.
I don't understand why anyone would want the EXIF data in files, other than for instructional or specific technical purposes.
Buy the manufacturer brand whenever possible.
Save for web seems to reprocess the image for compression. I thought there was a simple way to strip the EXIF data only. I don't understand why anyone would want the EXIF data in files, other than for instructional or specific technical purposes.
If you save at maximum quality, doesn't it more or less leave your image alone?
How can I photograph all of my Canon gear without using one of the camera bodies that should be photographed? It seems like a riddle, but someone requested that I do this. Maybe I could do a composite of some kind.