Coming back with a bang?

Constructive criticisms always welcome































more fireworks here: Photobucket

Camera info:

Canon Rebel T1i
EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 @ 42mm
ISO 400
2.5s
f/18
RAW format
tripod
remote shutter release with lock on

Editing info in Lightroom:

Increase contrast
Increase blacks
Adjust exposure value

Probably some of the best pics of fireworks I've ver seen!

I love you, d.


your user name should be dshnjeg.

hot.

Wow, so nice.

Damn I missed yur pics D!

Please don't leave us again.

Ohh I really want to see a b1tch fight between Jer and Amber for D......

jer's fat. amber would win.

Woo, fantastic shots, D. Perfectly exposed!
Told ya you would be back.

Jer is not fat. I've seen the pics....(thinks back to the sexiest man on N-R thread)

But yeah, I'm still sticking with Amber winning.

he can't fit into his star trek uniform anymore. fatty.

but I digress. D, I hope these aren't the only pics you plan to post.

Beautiful pics.

thanks guys

@jer:
don't listen to 'em...fat elvis still got all the chicks

@lani: piiyb


more on the way...i'm just backlogged since, well, July 4th

Hawaii panos!!!!!

I think Amber would kick some butt. You saw what she did in that "V" movie, dincha?

Sweet shots Dan! Welcome back.

i'm not discussing that


thanks chaz.

Trying to steal my man jere?

Back off don't you have your own ginger anyway?

Glad to have you back D. Fantastic shots!

thanks!






one more for the night...trying something new:

I like this!
Firework shots were cool too, but I like this one better.
Hubby is helping me set up a little computer/personal space/office area for me with our tax refund this year, and it'd be cool to put up some pics from you, Lani, and Jer.
I don't think I have enough wall space for everything I'd want to put up though.
All 3 of you have some beautiful stuff, and I'm not saying that just to be nice, either.

fireworks were great, but I really love this one. Where/how was it taken?

Great shots!

Also thanks for saying how you took the pictures, very helpful

Welcome back! Fantastic shots as always

You have lots of tube anemones
I saw this in the LOTR movies.

lol...i actually came here to say this.

It was taken on the side of the road at a look out in Hanalei, Hi. this past July. As for how thats a Daniel question. I'm remembering a tripod. I can't tell if he HDR'd it or if he used the gritty effect. I'm sure he'll be on later to answer your question.

Thanks again, all

Weets, I would be honored to have my photos on your walls


Like A said, it was on Kauai at the Hanalei overlook. (Didn't know they shot in Kauai for LOTR...maybe I should actually watch them...)

Camera stuffs:
Rebel T1i
EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS @ 17mm
ISO 200
f/22
1/13 sec
tripod

The processing was a mix of my single image HDR process and photo stacking - process the RAW file to make 5 tiffs at different exposure values, then photo stack the resulting images. Then it's just a bit of contrast/fill light/recovery adjustment and reduced vibrance in lightroom. Seems to make for more realism than my usual HDR and more texture than photo stacking, but I've only done it on a couple of landscapes so far.



Same processing:

I like the landscape bits better than traditional HDR, but the clouds... I dunno.



they sure are purdy though.

Dramatic skies.

thanks jer. clouds are definitely a work in progress. seems to have a different effect on different types of clouds too...

They probably work better at full resolution, but it's a lot to take in. It's like my eye doesn't know where to go or what to focus on. They're definitely very dramatic and moody though

methinks you may be right...

let me try a couple with more focused subjects...





edit: jpeg compression really isn't helping matters here

no, I think vic's right. take a look at any of my landscapes; puffy clouds are a rarity out here, so I'm used to the sky being monochromatic, allowing me to visually focus on the landscape. the combination of a relatively busy sky and the aforementioned low res images are messing with my head.

in other words, it's not you, it's me.

in 35 posts, you went from "i love you" to "it's not you, it's me"

maybe i'll post up a high res sometime and see what everyone thinks then. thanks for the critique guys - helps out a lot with the new processing technique.

new direction for a while:

Nice!

Don't get me wrong, the landscapes are great pictures, but the processing is just somehow not doing it for me.

nope, thats what i want to hear can't improve without criticisms.





alright...set #1 (still going for "different" here)





7 image panos, nifty (imo) framing idea. little did i know how much of a pain it was to make that kinda frame in PS.

Camera settings:
Canon Rebel T1i
EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 L @ 100mm
ISO 100
1/200 sec
f/11
stitched in PTGui, framed in Photoshop CS4, minimal adjustments in Lightroom

Did you rent or buy the 100-400? How do you like it?

Damn, I love the layout of those panos, D. Out of the ordinary.

Rented the 100-400 L, 70-200 f/2.8 IS L, and the 17-55 f/2.8 for the trip. Wasn't sure which one I wanted to save up for first. I suppose that first requires a job though.

The 100-400 was nice quality, easy to use. The push-pull design was a little awkward at first due to the way you can adjust the resistance to sliding - sometimes I'd try to go out to 400 to shoot a bird, and it'd stick, sometimes I'd be walking around and it'd extend all the way out on it's own. (Second scenario can be a little awkward, especially when you're on a beach near bikini-clad women.) If I hadn't rented the 70-200, I would have loved it, but the 70-200 was just that much nicer.

I'll have some more shots from the 100-400 at some point, mostly wildlife.



Thanks Lani

did you find yourself opening the 70-200 up much? i've been thinking about grabbing one of those lenses, but i'm leaning more towards the f/4 IS rather than breaking the bank on the 2.8 or 2.8 IS

I only used f/2.8 at the luau after sunset, wasn't much reason to have it otherwise. I suppose if you decide to do action photos in darker settings, it'd be nice. Otherwise, I'd stick to the f/4 IS and save the money. Honestly, I don't even know why they make an f/2.8 without IS.

The only reason I got the 2.8 IS for the trip was because it was only $10 more than the 4 IS on a 2-week rental. Too good to pass up.

edit: well poo, that isn't much larger than my sig version stupid NR scaling

Right-click and Open Image opens it fullsize.
Your compositions are spot-on, especially with the frog. They just seem to be lacking a little bit of contrast.. or it might be my monitor.. hrm.

I like the triptych. a lot.


in fact, email me the hi-res files so I can print and frame them.

I know...i just hate making you guys do the extra work

thanks lani. they look okay on my laptop, but well...it could probably stand to be calibrated. (input from anyone else?) i'll have to plug the desktop back in and see how it looks there.




thanks jer

how's about i send you prints instead? you don't need 40Mb of jpeg filling up your inbox anyway







O, and Vic - those last two are the 100-400 @ 400mm, handheld. It's worth the pricetag, imo.

ok. they'd fit perfectly above our tub, matted and framed as 8x10s. or I guess 8x12s, as the case may be.