20D FINDS THE 5TH BEETLE !!!

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Annika1980, Jun 13, 2005.

  1. Annika1980

    Annika1980 Guest

    Annika1980, Jun 13, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Annika1980

    Pete D Guest

    Pete D, Jun 13, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Annika1980

    Mark² Guest

    "Annika1980" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/44690021


    I'm not sure what you've done, but I can't figure out teh depth of field on
    that shot.
    You seem to have applied sharpening in a way that leaves a strange
    out-of-focus surface to teh left of the beetle...yet you've retained focus
    both below adn above that portion of the plain. It makes it look rather
    unnatural.

    How about applying similar sharpening to the area to the beetle's left so as
    to not be such an obvious cheat?
    :)
    Mark², Jun 13, 2005
    #3
  4. Annika1980

    Pete D Guest

    "Mark²" <mjmorgan(lowest even number here)@cox..net> wrote in message
    news:mWare.100967$Wr.76938@fed1read04...
    >
    > "Annika1980" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >> http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/44690021

    >
    > I'm not sure what you've done, but I can't figure out teh depth of field
    > on that shot.
    > You seem to have applied sharpening in a way that leaves a strange
    > out-of-focus surface to teh left of the beetle...yet you've retained focus
    > both below adn above that portion of the plain. It makes it look rather
    > unnatural.
    >
    > How about applying similar sharpening to the area to the beetle's left so
    > as to not be such an obvious cheat?
    > :)


    Looks more like he tried to clone something out to me, does look a bit
    "scungy".
    Pete D, Jun 13, 2005
    #4
  5. Annika1980

    Annika1980 Guest

    > http://www.pbase.com/bret/imag­e/44690021

    I'm not sure what you've done, but I can't figure out teh depth of
    field on
    that shot.
    You seem to have applied sharpening in a way that leaves a strange
    out-of-focus surface to teh left of the beetle...yet you've retained
    focus
    both below adn above that portion of the plain. It makes it look
    rather
    unnatural.
    ================

    Yeah, I got a little sloppy with that one. The pic is actually a
    combination of two shots using "focus bracketing" with the intention
    of increasing the DOF. The bug part came out OK, but I really screwed
    up the left part as you noticed. I'll fix it and re-post.
    Annika1980, Jun 13, 2005
    #5
  6. Annika1980

    Frank ess Guest

    Pete D wrote:
    > "Mark²" <mjmorgan(lowest even number here)@cox..net> wrote in
    > message
    > news:mWare.100967$Wr.76938@fed1read04...
    >>
    >> "Annika1980" <> wrote in message
    >> news:...
    >>> http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/44690021

    >>
    >> I'm not sure what you've done, but I can't figure out teh depth of
    >> field on that shot.
    >> You seem to have applied sharpening in a way that leaves a strange
    >> out-of-focus surface to teh left of the beetle...yet you've
    >> retained
    >> focus both below adn above that portion of the plain. It makes it
    >> look rather unnatural.
    >>
    >> How about applying similar sharpening to the area to the beetle's
    >> left so as to not be such an obvious cheat?
    >> :)

    >
    > Looks more like he tried to clone something out to me, does look a
    > bit
    > "scungy".


    My guess is: the bird droppings are disappeared.
    Frank ess, Jun 13, 2005
    #6
  7. Annika1980

    JohnR66 Guest

    "Pete D" <> wrote in message
    news:pVere.15648$...
    >
    > "Mark²" <mjmorgan(lowest even number here)@cox..net> wrote in message
    > news:mWare.100967$Wr.76938@fed1read04...
    >>
    >> "Annika1980" <> wrote in message
    >> news:...
    >>> http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/44690021

    >>
    >> I'm not sure what you've done, but I can't figure out teh depth of field
    >> on that shot.
    >> You seem to have applied sharpening in a way that leaves a strange
    >> out-of-focus surface to teh left of the beetle...yet you've retained
    >> focus both below adn above that portion of the plain. It makes it look
    >> rather unnatural.
    >>
    >> How about applying similar sharpening to the area to the beetle's left so
    >> as to not be such an obvious cheat?
    >> :)

    >
    > Looks more like he tried to clone something out to me, does look a bit
    > "scungy".
    >

    You guys are pretty sharp. Other than the weirdness with its middle right
    leg, I'm not seeing any problems.
    John
    JohnR66, Jun 14, 2005
    #7
  8. Annika1980

    Guest

    JohnR66 wrote:


    > You guys are pretty sharp. Other than the weirdness with its middle right
    > leg, I'm not seeing any problems.


    I am very new at this, but I also noticed the right leg blur. I
    emailed Bret directly to see if this was post-processing or if the bug
    was moving. I suspect the latter. I will also admit to noticing the
    mildly blurry ring to the immediate left of the bug, but really only
    because it was called to my attention. With that said, I think it's an
    awesome picture. I told him if this was considered a so-so shot, I
    have a LONG, LOOOOOOOOOOOONG way to go!

    Regards,

    Ben
    , Jun 14, 2005
    #8
  9. Annika1980

    Brad Guest

    On Mon, 13 Jun 2005 12:24:15 GMT, "Pete D" <> wrote:


    >
    >Looks more like he tried to clone something out to me, does look a bit
    >"scungy".
    >



    Damn there I go again, I thought I really liked that picture but now I
    hate it, thanks for setting me straight......lol......


    Brad

    LIFE'S JOURNEY IS NOT TO ARRIVE AT THE GRAVE SAFELY IN A
    WELL-PRESERVED BODY, BUT RATHER TO SKID IN SIDEWAYS, TOTALLY WORN OUT,
    SHOUTING... " HOLY @#$%... WHAT A RIDE!"
    Brad, Jun 14, 2005
    #9
  10. Annika1980

    Annika1980 Guest

    I didn't even notice the right leg blur, but I fixed that and tried to
    clean up the left side as well.
    Here is the newer version:
    http://pbase.com/bret/image/44690021/original

    You may have to reload the pic if your browser has it in cache.
    Annika1980, Jun 14, 2005
    #10
  11. Annika1980

    Guest

    Annika1980 wrote:
    > I didn't even notice the right leg blur, but I fixed that and tried to
    > clean up the left side as well.
    > Here is the newer version:
    > http://pbase.com/bret/image/44690021/original
    >
    > You may have to reload the pic if your browser has it in cache.


    What is the surface? FWIW, I liked the original "crazy leg" version.
    Not to be a pretentious asshole, but would you see flash in that leg or
    no? Anyway, awesome shot, Bret.
    , Jun 14, 2005
    #11
  12. Annika1980

    Annika1980 Guest

    >What is the surface?
    The beetle was on top of the ball atop one of the posts in my chain
    link fence.
    ------------------------

    >Not to be a pretentious asshole, but would you see flash in that leg or

    no?
    Is this a Rorschach test? I see a little flash in that leg, but mostly
    I see the Olsen twins. But that's just me.
    Annika1980, Jun 14, 2005
    #12
  13. Annika1980

    Guest

    Annika1980 wrote:
    > >What is the surface?

    > The beetle was on top of the ball atop one of the posts in my chain
    > link fence.
    > ------------------------
    >
    > >Not to be a pretentious asshole, but would you see flash in that leg or

    > no?
    > Is this a Rorschach test? I see a little flash in that leg, but mostly
    > I see the Olsen twins. But that's just me.


    Touche'. I knew I had a long way to go with this whole image analysis
    thing.
    , Jun 14, 2005
    #13
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Jeff

    What is the 5th number in ip address

    Jeff, Mar 14, 2006, in forum: Wireless Networking
    Replies:
    6
    Views:
    722
    Malke
    Mar 16, 2006
  2. Bill Cleere
    Replies:
    14
    Views:
    405
    Jerry Nash
    Oct 21, 2003
  3. yachtboy!
    Replies:
    9
    Views:
    454
    TonyAtRest
    Dec 17, 2003
  4. Enigma
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    461
    Doctor Who
    Sep 8, 2004
  5. Network Guru

    Happy 5th anniversary

    Network Guru, Nov 17, 2006, in forum: MCSE
    Replies:
    34
    Views:
    1,083
    BD[MCNGP]
    Nov 20, 2006
Loading...

Share This Page