Post Your Photos
Created 17 years ago2007-08-06 23:50:34 UTC by
Archie
Created 17 years ago2007-08-06 23:50:34 UTC by
Archie
Posted 12 years ago2012-04-04 05:06:22 UTC
Post #304922
Thank you. It's odd that I'm not yet used to using the term 'bokeh'. I always think about 'FOV' when thinking about that blur.
Posted 12 years ago2012-04-04 15:46:32 UTC
Post #304929
Depends on what you're referring to.
If you're referring to what is in focus and what isn't, then you're referring to DOF (or FOV, although incorrect). [EG, the DOF is so shallow!]
If you're referring to the blur itself, you're referring to the bokeh. [EG, that bokeh looks so creamy, that bokeh looks horrible] Bokeh literally means "quality of blur".
If you're referring to what is in focus and what isn't, then you're referring to DOF (or FOV, although incorrect). [EG, the DOF is so shallow!]
If you're referring to the blur itself, you're referring to the bokeh. [EG, that bokeh looks so creamy, that bokeh looks horrible] Bokeh literally means "quality of blur".
Posted 12 years ago2012-04-04 15:50:54 UTC
Post #304930
I stand corrected, I was referring to DOF.
So you mean that the blur that results from the depth of field is named bokeh.
So you mean that the blur that results from the depth of field is named bokeh.
Posted 12 years ago2012-04-04 16:10:31 UTC
Post #304931
Yeah, a simple explanation\breakdown would be:
Depth of field: The depth of the plane [Field] that accommodates acceptable focus.
Bokeh: The quality of the area that is outside of the acceptable focus plane [Field], usually referred to as the blur.
So basically, DOF is the in focus parts, Bokeh is to refer to the out of focus parts.
Depth of field: The depth of the plane [Field] that accommodates acceptable focus.
Bokeh: The quality of the area that is outside of the acceptable focus plane [Field], usually referred to as the blur.
So basically, DOF is the in focus parts, Bokeh is to refer to the out of focus parts.
Posted 12 years ago2012-04-06 16:44:46 UTC
Post #304989
Here I took some photographs of microscopic cells(first one is actually a cephalocordata) and grains of copper sulfate that remind me of the minerals in starcraft:
I don't have a microscope, but you can read the story of how I took these on my blog.
Posted 12 years ago2012-04-06 18:35:56 UTC
Post #304994
I have a toy microscope somewhere. I always said I'd use it for something but never really bothered. I also have a toy telescope and tried to take a photo through it once, but it doesn't have a firm base and I couldn't get a good shot.
Posted 12 years ago2012-04-10 21:50:06 UTC
Post #305224
Posted 12 years ago2012-05-01 00:31:33 UTC
Post #305620
Posted 12 years ago2012-05-08 11:35:21 UTC
Post #305897
Green leaves explosion by Carstic Productions, on Flickr
[EDIT 08 May]
Train line by Carstic Productions, on Flickr
It's strange, but I thought this photo could be altered a bit:
Posted 12 years ago2012-05-08 12:11:09 UTC
Post #306029
Looks like you took a wrong turn somewhere and ended up in the Zone.
Posted 12 years ago2012-05-08 14:06:23 UTC
Post #306031
Awesome photos, especially by Crolo. He be pro.
Also, that tree is way to nice Striker
Also, that tree is way to nice Striker
Posted 12 years ago2012-06-03 23:01:20 UTC
Post #306119
Went to the Salt Spring Island Karate Tournament today, and being the dumbass I am I improperly loaded my nice 400 ISO film and ended up wasting it.
The only two digitals I took:
Add insult to injury I overexposed Lawrence's GI.
EDIT: Restored my 400 ISO film. Hopefully it will work correctly.
The only two digitals I took:
EDIT: Restored my 400 ISO film. Hopefully it will work correctly.
Posted 12 years ago2012-06-16 09:30:17 UTC
Post #307134
SnailSport by Carstic Productions, on Flickr
Look at that speed! by Carstic Productions, on Flickr
Vrooom! by Carstic Productions, on Flickr
Posted 12 years ago2012-06-16 22:20:32 UTC
Post #307167
Great shots. Except for the second one, I'm not too fond of motion blur.
@Crollo: Is that REALLY 400 ASA?? D:
@Crollo: Is that REALLY 400 ASA?? D:
Posted 12 years ago2012-06-16 22:31:01 UTC
Post #307168
That is not motion blur. That is Zoom Blur 
It's meant to give the impression of speed
It's meant to give the impression of speed
Posted 12 years ago2012-06-17 06:47:03 UTC
Post #307171
Speed? You can't fool me.
/me doesn't like fake blurs
/me doesn't like fake blurs
Posted 12 years ago2012-07-07 05:27:30 UTC
Post #307472
RIP Steve.
He had a good life.
Just kidding Steve was a cheap piece of consumer that nobody cared about.
Just kidding Steve was a cheap piece of consumer that nobody cared about.
Posted 12 years ago2012-07-28 16:15:40 UTC
Post #308528
Made 2 new summer wallpapers. Haven't posted here for a long time...
link
[off-topic] May I ask how can Crollo change his name so often?
link
[off-topic] May I ask how can Crollo change his name so often?
Posted 12 years ago2012-08-04 04:02:08 UTC
Post #308766
Has anybody been to Rand McNally? No? WELL I HAVE.
Posted 12 years ago2012-08-28 21:33:32 UTC
Post #309434
Posted 12 years ago2012-08-29 00:26:26 UTC
Post #309438
Lovely blog there (c)Striker, and very cool shots too. I'm very new at photography but I believe I can learn some neat tricks from you guys.
Here are a few by me;
Here are a few by me;
Posted 12 years ago2012-08-29 08:46:40 UTC
Post #309443
Thanks :D. Wow, haven't seen a flag bike since... forever :D. The last photo is quite artistic and well thought in terms of arranging yourself, the bike, and the horizon.
The first three look very "action packed". What did you use to make the vignette?
The first three look very "action packed". What did you use to make the vignette?
Posted 12 years ago2012-08-29 13:22:55 UTC
Post #309452
The vignette? It is a type of fisheye lens, funny thing is I did not know what it really was when I first took the photos, and thought there was something wrong with the lens until I figured out it was supposed to work like that.. lol. It is quite expensive too, from what I heard. I just borrowed it.
Also thanks, I lack a bit of technical knowledge about cameras and I'm basicly trying to make up for it with creativity (Not sure how successful they are in terms of creativity). They were mostly projects, the first three shots are a part of my typology series. I'm glad you like it.
Haha..yea, the bike is very nostalgic
Also thanks, I lack a bit of technical knowledge about cameras and I'm basicly trying to make up for it with creativity (Not sure how successful they are in terms of creativity). They were mostly projects, the first three shots are a part of my typology series. I'm glad you like it.
Haha..yea, the bike is very nostalgic
Posted 12 years ago2012-09-04 21:09:28 UTC
Post #309625
Posted 12 years ago2012-09-04 21:51:19 UTC
Post #309626
That just looks odd.
Posted 12 years ago2012-09-05 02:28:21 UTC
Post #309627
something i made with my smartphone a few days ago i have added some effects with GIMP
i have added some effects with GIMP
Posted 12 years ago2012-09-05 06:22:51 UTC
Post #309628
That's interesting. Did you add the blur with GIMP also? What smartphone do you have?
Posted 12 years ago2012-09-05 12:00:50 UTC
Post #309634
yes i did everything in GIMP
What smartphone do you have?Sony-Ericsson XPERIA X8
Posted 12 years ago2012-09-24 18:32:35 UTC
Post #310029
It's time for serious dog.
Posted 12 years ago2012-11-01 00:53:35 UTC
Post #310696
...and not a single photo was taken in October.
Posted 11 years ago2013-01-30 21:08:25 UTC
Post #312386
In hindsight the shit I posted here is shit... Can't believe I couldn't see that.
Did a walkaround today and couldn't find anything worth snapping, except maybe construction sites [which there are plenty of]. Living in a barren, boring town sucks.
What a shit reintroduction into photography.
Did a walkaround today and couldn't find anything worth snapping, except maybe construction sites [which there are plenty of]. Living in a barren, boring town sucks.
Posted 11 years ago2013-01-30 21:19:10 UTC
Post #312387
I'm really good at taking timed selfies. I'm on the far right by the way
Posted 11 years ago2013-01-30 22:10:43 UTC
Post #312388
That's golden.
Posted 11 years ago2013-02-01 15:33:00 UTC
Post #312413
Impossibru excited.
Posted 11 years ago2013-03-31 03:07:04 UTC
Post #313094
I wholeheartedly regret making a fast buck off of my AE-1 and it's lenses.
Fuck it's been way too long since I've had quality glass and a quality body.
The difference in viewfinders [manual focus/consumer dslr] is absolutely staggering.
Fuck it's been way too long since I've had quality glass and a quality body.
Posted 11 years ago2013-04-18 19:44:05 UTC
Post #313335
Didn't quite hit the nail with the focus here, but I like it.
Bird in the pines by Carstic Productions
Bird in the pines by Carstic Productions
Posted 11 years ago2013-04-20 22:25:59 UTC
Post #313347
What a friendly hedgehog.
And I like that one (c)Striker.
Posted 11 years ago2013-04-21 08:23:14 UTC
Post #313349
D'oohhh, hedgehogs! Haven't seen one for months. They are so cute that... they hurt.
Posted 11 years ago2013-05-10 16:05:38 UTC
Post #313463
Posted 11 years ago2013-05-22 01:27:46 UTC
Post #313652
Took this with my phone today. (Samsung Galaxy S3)
Her name is Jolie; She's 6 year old Golden Retriever.
The filter is called blue point. Turns everything grayscale except for objects with blue in them. I love modern technology.
Her name is Jolie; She's 6 year old Golden Retriever.
Posted 11 years ago2013-05-22 01:33:45 UTC
Post #313653
B'aw nice doggie. B'aww.. =P
Posted 11 years ago2013-05-22 11:35:34 UTC
Post #313654
DSC_1551 by youngsatchmo, on Flickr
DSC_2720 by youngsatchmo, on Flickr
DSC_2909 by youngsatchmo, on Flickr
DSC_3031 by youngsatchmo, on Flickr
Posted 11 years ago2013-05-22 11:56:14 UTC
Post #313655
Your son grows fast! Good health throughout his life.
Flickr just got a lot more awesome. The site has been revamped, and now free accounts hold 1TB of data! The old free limitation was 200 photos, this is just insane. My favorite photo upload site again.
Flickr just got a lot more awesome. The site has been revamped, and now free accounts hold 1TB of data! The old free limitation was 200 photos, this is just insane. My favorite photo upload site again.
Posted 11 years ago2013-10-01 00:33:07 UTC
Post #316030
By request, bump.
Posted 11 years ago2013-10-01 00:50:45 UTC
Post #316032
Those are glorious Satchmo. The first one in particular is so mischievous. Marvellous!
I just spent all my pennies on a Panasonic GH3 - primarily for its exceptional video datarate (72Mb/s - almost double the BBCHD minimum requirement for broadcast in the UK) but it's also a fantastic stills camera. I don't have any particularly exciting lenses yet and I've been working so much that I've barely had time to play with it, but here're a few shots I've come up with so far. There are full res options for a few of them for comparison. The RAW shots come out at about 19.5MB each, so the full res images have been compressed slightly with Photoshop.
FULL RES (7.9MB)
FULL RES (7.5MB)
FULL RES (6.3MB)
FULL RES (8.1MB)
I just spent all my pennies on a Panasonic GH3 - primarily for its exceptional video datarate (72Mb/s - almost double the BBCHD minimum requirement for broadcast in the UK) but it's also a fantastic stills camera. I don't have any particularly exciting lenses yet and I've been working so much that I've barely had time to play with it, but here're a few shots I've come up with so far. There are full res options for a few of them for comparison. The RAW shots come out at about 19.5MB each, so the full res images have been compressed slightly with Photoshop.
Posted 11 years ago2013-10-01 01:31:28 UTC
Post #316034
First picture: Great shot. Razor sharp focus, perfect bokeh, great colour. A bit soft around the edges, maybe it could improve by stopping the lens down a stop.
Second picture: I can tell you used a different lens here. Focus is good, bokeh not so much, and there's colour fringe all over the place. Sometimes you can alleviate that by stopping down a bit, but it's mostly on the quality of the glass. I like her camera.
Third picture: I suppose it's the same lens. A tiny bit blurred by long exposure time but it's a very good shot.
Fourth picture: razor sharp focus again. Did you go back to the first lens? I think the white balance is a little bit off, and I'm not too fond of the high ISO noise (despite it seeming to have been taken at the same ISO as the others).
As for the other two, they're not at original resolution so I can't look as closely. But the first four, I think you got yourself a good camera.
Second picture: I can tell you used a different lens here. Focus is good, bokeh not so much, and there's colour fringe all over the place. Sometimes you can alleviate that by stopping down a bit, but it's mostly on the quality of the glass. I like her camera.
Third picture: I suppose it's the same lens. A tiny bit blurred by long exposure time but it's a very good shot.
Fourth picture: razor sharp focus again. Did you go back to the first lens? I think the white balance is a little bit off, and I'm not too fond of the high ISO noise (despite it seeming to have been taken at the same ISO as the others).
As for the other two, they're not at original resolution so I can't look as closely. But the first four, I think you got yourself a good camera.
Posted 11 years ago2013-10-27 13:43:14 UTC
Post #316242
A couple of autumn shots:
Posted 11 years ago2013-11-01 13:02:25 UTC
Post #316610
I was going to lie and say that the shutter delay stopped this photo from being mid-fish-catch, but I had actually pressed the button a half second before the bird even started to lunge.
The photo has also been edited to remove a greenish haze that was everywhere.
Posted 10 years ago2013-12-05 01:41:25 UTC
Post #316985
This is probably optically and mechanically the most advanced and best lens I have ever owned. But its tiny size and ridiculous blue and silver finish makes me literally embarrassed to use it in a professional setting. It looks like a toy.
Posted 10 years ago2013-12-05 01:57:02 UTC
Post #316986
It does. But if it actually is the best lens you have, who cares? Don't be ashamed of it, it's your finest piece of equipment!
You must be logged in to post a response.