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 9 years ago2015-04-07 22:48:43 UTC
Post #325216
Posted 9 years ago2015-04-08 13:54:33 UTC
Post #325222
I absolutely love your photos Elliot. You're like a master of the macro world.
Each macro shot of yours seems to be meticulously fine-tuned, and has an interesting atmosphere. I've been using one of your photos in my wallpaper-shuffle folder for over a year now.
Each macro shot of yours seems to be meticulously fine-tuned, and has an interesting atmosphere. I've been using one of your photos in my wallpaper-shuffle folder for over a year now.
Posted 9 years ago2015-04-08 22:34:24 UTC
Post #325223
I was doing a bit more astrophotography tonight.
Here you can see Jupiter, as well as three (or possibly four) of it's moons.
I'm not sure if that one in the upper right is a moon or a star.
This seems to be approaching the maximum level of detail I can obtain with what equipment I have. Even the most focussed of my photos have chromatic aberration which is larger than the details of the planet, so none of them are visible in the photos. The camera adapter I have has a lens attached to it which is meant to increase the effective magnification, but since it is the only refracting optic in the system it must be the cause of the quality loss. I'll have to get a more expensive adapter, or one without a lens.
Here is a photograph of the moon I took a few days ago:
Pretty. And edited in order to bring some of the features out.
And this photo is one I just took while messing around with the camera, but I like how it turned out:
It's a photo of a lightbulb, taken with an extremely low exposure time.
Here you can see Jupiter, as well as three (or possibly four) of it's moons.
I'm not sure if that one in the upper right is a moon or a star.
This seems to be approaching the maximum level of detail I can obtain with what equipment I have. Even the most focussed of my photos have chromatic aberration which is larger than the details of the planet, so none of them are visible in the photos. The camera adapter I have has a lens attached to it which is meant to increase the effective magnification, but since it is the only refracting optic in the system it must be the cause of the quality loss. I'll have to get a more expensive adapter, or one without a lens.
Here is a photograph of the moon I took a few days ago:
Pretty. And edited in order to bring some of the features out.
And this photo is one I just took while messing around with the camera, but I like how it turned out:
It's a photo of a lightbulb, taken with an extremely low exposure time.
Posted 9 years ago2015-04-09 14:25:22 UTC
Post #325224
Great moon shot! I like the bulb as well - looks quite old styleee
Posted 9 years ago2015-04-22 22:24:59 UTC
Post #325344
Thanks Striker.
I really do appreciate the kick in the ass from the other members when I first started posting [and even still so] because I couldn't really see how my fixation on the one photo style was so awful after 30 images. Now I try my best to really fine tune it to not only be as best as I can get it but also be unique from any of my other photos.
I really do appreciate the kick in the ass from the other members when I first started posting [and even still so] because I couldn't really see how my fixation on the one photo style was so awful after 30 images. Now I try my best to really fine tune it to not only be as best as I can get it but also be unique from any of my other photos.
Posted 9 years ago2015-04-30 21:21:52 UTC
Post #325445
Did a quick shoot to show off the new Core tees. There was a community competition to win one on the moddb page recently, so I thought getting an image to accompany the news post announcing the winner would be prudent.
Don't judge too harshly, done literally 20 mins before rushing out to our regular pub quiz and I only had one reflector.
Don't judge too harshly, done literally 20 mins before rushing out to our regular pub quiz and I only had one reflector.
Posted 9 years ago2015-05-01 00:09:30 UTC
Post #325446
Don't judge too harshly, done literally 20 mins before rushing out to our regular pub quiz and I only had one reflector.Looks fine where I'm standing.
Posted 9 years ago2015-05-01 07:34:17 UTC
Post #325448
You've done well. #2 is slightly overexposed for my likes, but it's just a nitpick. They're all very good. Except the last one. The last one sucks. The lighting looks incomplete and the angle is terrible. But besides that one, they're very good especially for a rushed shoot.
Makes me think of some extremely rushed 3-minute shoots I did in my early days. They were all crap.
Makes me think of some extremely rushed 3-minute shoots I did in my early days. They were all crap.
Posted 9 years ago2015-05-01 08:57:37 UTC
Post #325451
Very good, if a bit dark. In photography there's more room for overexposing some things.- Discostu, Page 23, this thread.
#2 is slightly overexposed for my likes- Discostu, Page 26, this thread.
Haha, I like that you said the last one sucks since it's probably the one I'll actually be using for the promotional shot. The lighting is perfect for placing her in one of The Core's environments.
Posted 9 years ago2015-05-01 19:35:18 UTC
Post #325452
I can't tell if I like the shirt because of the Girl or the design.
Posted 9 years ago2015-05-01 20:34:48 UTC
Post #325453
Hahaha sorry mate. Photography is a perceptual subject, it depends a lot on who's looking at it and when, and even what mood you're in when you're looking at it. There's plenty of room to go either way, I was just being nitpicky because I can't not be an arse.Very good, if a bit dark. In photography there's more room for overexposing some things.- Discostu, Page 23, this thread.#2 is slightly overexposed for my likes- Discostu, Page 26, this thread.
It's a good photo, personally I'd just stop it down a tiny bit if only to match the lighting of the others, with slightly darker shadows. Maybe I'd have overexposed more whilst keeping (or trying to keep) the rest of the frame even. But I don't NEED to explain this to you, you know all this already and probably better than me. I shame myself.
About the last one, my first complaint is that a too bright light is only in a small part of the frame, pushing the rest of the picture down. Not that you can't use multiple sources of light, in this case I assume sunlight and skylight, just at least not like that. BUT if it suits your needs, definitely go for it. If a picture is good for what you will be using it for, then it is good. Only me, in a context like wedding and sweet sixteen shoots very unlike The Core, would have considered that a throwaway shot in most photobook cases.
While I'm posting here, some old photos I just found:
Posted 9 years ago2015-06-01 18:11:11 UTC
Post #325762
Very cool building! If there's one positive aspect of religion - it's sure inspired some creative architecture over the years!
Just a quickie from a windy trip to a loch today:
Just a quickie from a windy trip to a loch today:
Posted 9 years ago2015-06-01 19:52:42 UTC
Post #325764
See, I'm genuine, I even liked your image on facebook.
Posted 9 years ago2015-06-01 20:28:24 UTC
Post #325765
I'm not a photographer, nor do I have a good camera. These are shots of my back garden a few months back, taken from my phone. 
Posted 9 years ago2015-06-26 20:10:32 UTC
Post #326124
I was out today taking photographs of the moon for some art project my cousin wants to do, and I decided to try my hand at photographing one of my cats. Like Urby, I am not a photographer, but at least I can borrow my brother's camera. 
By that point she, and several other cats had decided to sit on my back, so I took a photograph of my telescope as it was really the only interesting thing to see from that angle.
I also tried to photograph a bumblebee on some flowers but I was unsuccessful as it flew away too fast.
A few days ago I attempted to get some photos of the Hercules Cluster, but it was fairly suddenly obscured by thick clouds which didn't go away for the rest of the night. I did manage to snap a quick picture of Saturn near the horizon before that was covered though.
I was really bummed by those clouds too. We'd just got back from Belfast, it was a beautiful clear sky (literally the first time I had seen the moon in a month). I could see the constellation of Hercules, so I brought my telescope out and set it up and didn't even get the setup in focus before the clouds rolled in.
A few days ago I attempted to get some photos of the Hercules Cluster, but it was fairly suddenly obscured by thick clouds which didn't go away for the rest of the night. I did manage to snap a quick picture of Saturn near the horizon before that was covered though.
Posted 9 years ago2015-06-27 02:08:57 UTC
Post #326125
That could be:
1- Saturn
2- Lens flare
3- Dust on your sensor
4- A sombrero in the night
I've never even seen Saturn. The only two things I ever saw in the sky were the sun and the moon.
1- Saturn
2- Lens flare
3- Dust on your sensor
4- A sombrero in the night
I've never even seen Saturn. The only two things I ever saw in the sky were the sun and the moon.
Posted 9 years ago2015-06-27 17:54:19 UTC
Post #326126
Saturn? Pluto and Ceres are the hot topics now my friends!
Posted 9 years ago2015-06-27 19:58:16 UTC
Post #326128
Explain why.
Posted 9 years ago2015-06-28 18:13:06 UTC
Post #326131
The Dawn spacecraft is now orbiting Ceres, the largest body in the asteroid belt. It is currently at a higher altitude, and just returned some pictures that show in more detail, albeit not enough to guess what it is, the mysterious bright white spots on Ceres's surface.
Not even NASA is sure what's happening, they made a page where you can cast a vote on whatever you think that white spot is,here.
Dawn will progressively be taking photos at lower and lower orbits, and by autumn I expect we should know what that thing is.
The New Horizons probe has been in flight toward its main destination since 2006. Even though now it's very close to Pluto, its distance from it only let's us see 2 pixelated spheres in space. But the Pluto flyby is happening in July, and for the first time in history we'll have pictures taken of the plutonian surface and some of its satellites. After that it will continue exploring the Kuiper Belt, possibly sending image of KBOs(Kuiper Belt Objects). Sadly, because of its trajectory and lack of fuel, it won't perform a flyby of Eris, a Kuiper Belt dwarf planet like Pluto.
Oh and as a bonus, another big thing in space exploration happening is the Rosettamission, launched in 2004 by ESA, which arrived at its destination(comet "67P") in 2014, successfully deployed its lander named Philae, which somewhat successfully landed. I said somewhat because it bounced off a couple of times and landed in an area without sun light, but it had enough batteries to carry its scientific duties. It will awake in a couple of months when the comet will be close enough to the sun.
Not even NASA is sure what's happening, they made a page where you can cast a vote on whatever you think that white spot is,here.
Dawn will progressively be taking photos at lower and lower orbits, and by autumn I expect we should know what that thing is.
The New Horizons probe has been in flight toward its main destination since 2006. Even though now it's very close to Pluto, its distance from it only let's us see 2 pixelated spheres in space. But the Pluto flyby is happening in July, and for the first time in history we'll have pictures taken of the plutonian surface and some of its satellites. After that it will continue exploring the Kuiper Belt, possibly sending image of KBOs(Kuiper Belt Objects). Sadly, because of its trajectory and lack of fuel, it won't perform a flyby of Eris, a Kuiper Belt dwarf planet like Pluto.
Oh and as a bonus, another big thing in space exploration happening is the Rosettamission, launched in 2004 by ESA, which arrived at its destination(comet "67P") in 2014, successfully deployed its lander named Philae, which somewhat successfully landed. I said somewhat because it bounced off a couple of times and landed in an area without sun light, but it had enough batteries to carry its scientific duties. It will awake in a couple of months when the comet will be close enough to the sun.
Posted 9 years ago2015-06-28 23:41:04 UTC
Post #326132
Hey now, that's supposed to be my text!
But indeed, very well explained.
But indeed, very well explained.
Posted 9 years ago2015-06-29 00:57:17 UTC
Post #326133
Nice explanation!
I hope the ceres dots are something incredible. But im guessing it was a massive comet they left behind ice insode the impact crater.
I hope the ceres dots are something incredible. But im guessing it was a massive comet they left behind ice insode the impact crater.
Posted 9 years ago2015-06-30 20:21:49 UTC
Post #326146
I know what it is. It's the soundstage where they filmed the fake moon landing!
DiscoStu, you've probably seen Saturn at some point. To the naked eye it's pretty much indistinguishable from a star. The Andromeda galaxy is visible to the naked eye as more than just a bright point, however unless you have dark skies and a very clear night you won't be able to see it very well.
As for Pluto or Ceres, I don't even know if they would be visible even with my telescope. I've never actually tried looking for them.
[Edit]
Also, if anyone has clear skies tonight, I'd recommend going out near/shortly after sunset and looking towards the west. Venus and Jupiter will be extremely close together in the sky at the moment. Apart from the moon and sun they are the two brightest objects in the sky, so it should look quite impressive.
DiscoStu, you've probably seen Saturn at some point. To the naked eye it's pretty much indistinguishable from a star. The Andromeda galaxy is visible to the naked eye as more than just a bright point, however unless you have dark skies and a very clear night you won't be able to see it very well.
As for Pluto or Ceres, I don't even know if they would be visible even with my telescope. I've never actually tried looking for them.
[Edit]
Also, if anyone has clear skies tonight, I'd recommend going out near/shortly after sunset and looking towards the west. Venus and Jupiter will be extremely close together in the sky at the moment. Apart from the moon and sun they are the two brightest objects in the sky, so it should look quite impressive.
Posted 9 years ago2015-07-01 00:46:32 UTC
Post #326147
Too bad I just read this, sunset was too long ago.
Posted 9 years ago2015-07-01 11:09:06 UTC
Post #326148
Evening of 1st July(today)?
Posted 9 years ago2015-07-01 15:09:25 UTC
Post #326151
I'll be in class today.
Posted 9 years ago2015-07-01 19:25:35 UTC
Post #326154
30th of June, but they should still be very close together for the next few days.
Posted 9 years ago2015-07-02 11:34:24 UTC
Post #326165
Found this Walnut Sphinx moth a few weeks ago.
I only had my Phone on me so it's taken with flash at about 8" away.
Nexus 5 Camera.
Beautiful colors though - the flash really brought them out.
I only had my Phone on me so it's taken with flash at about 8" away.
Nexus 5 Camera.
Beautiful colors though - the flash really brought them out.
Posted 9 years ago2015-07-02 18:35:37 UTC
Post #326169
My friends made me being using my instagram account again... I went flying with dad, after a successful test flight, I took this, filtered it, and uploaded it. Taken with a iPhone 4, not 4s, 4.
Not too sure if it's good enough to stand here, but there are a few people who do remember my love for the R/C hobby, and hopefully, it'll interest them.
Tally-ho!
Tally-ho!
Posted 9 years ago2015-07-08 13:34:18 UTC
Post #326260
Hi, everybody!
Long time no post. Not gonna kill your browsers with a dozen 50MB images this time. Back in January I sold all my gear and switched to mirrorless Sony. My plan was to get myself a small camera with a single, good, all-around lens, and then I'd leave it at that.
Things did not go as planned. Sure, the camera is a lot smaller, but now I have too many lenses, and I can't store them properly. And my wallet hasn't exactly been too pleased with me. And, to be completely honest, the live-view viewfinder was way overhyped. It'll never replace the feel and accuracy of a real viewfinder.
However! I do take the camera out a lot more often, since it is a lot lighter, which was the end goal. So here are some shots I think came out all right.
PS: They're thumbnails. See? I am learning.
Long time no post. Not gonna kill your browsers with a dozen 50MB images this time. Back in January I sold all my gear and switched to mirrorless Sony. My plan was to get myself a small camera with a single, good, all-around lens, and then I'd leave it at that.
Things did not go as planned. Sure, the camera is a lot smaller, but now I have too many lenses, and I can't store them properly. And my wallet hasn't exactly been too pleased with me. And, to be completely honest, the live-view viewfinder was way overhyped. It'll never replace the feel and accuracy of a real viewfinder.
However! I do take the camera out a lot more often, since it is a lot lighter, which was the end goal. So here are some shots I think came out all right.
PS: They're thumbnails. See? I am learning.
Posted 9 years ago2015-07-11 13:28:31 UTC
Post #326284
Some of those are gorgeous, dude! Just so you know, you can use simg tags to removed the thumbnail's "open in new window" link!
Really nice work, and you can never have too many lenses ^_^
Since upgrading from the S3 to the S5, I've been using my phone as a camera a lot more recently. Results are mixed, but I'm not overly concerned about it getting wet, for example, so I'm able to take it places where I wouldn't be comfortable taking my GH3.
But I still always choose my GH3 on dry land 
Really nice work, and you can never have too many lenses ^_^
Since upgrading from the S3 to the S5, I've been using my phone as a camera a lot more recently. Results are mixed, but I'm not overly concerned about it getting wet, for example, so I'm able to take it places where I wouldn't be comfortable taking my GH3.
Posted 9 years ago2015-07-11 19:34:52 UTC
Post #326285
I don't know if such is the case with the S5, but I'd totally buy an IP67 phone if I could afford it.
Posted 9 years ago2015-07-12 09:24:40 UTC
Post #326300
I don't know if such is the case with the S5, but I'd totally buy an IP67 phone if I could afford it.You're not alone on that one.
Posted 9 years ago2015-07-21 13:00:55 UTC
Post #326521
Went early morning flying today, snapped a pic of the Sbach-342, post-routine image.
Posted 9 years ago2015-07-21 13:14:51 UTC
Post #326522
I've been plucking mushrooms.
Posted 9 years ago2015-08-11 13:17:28 UTC
Post #326670
New 90-300 zoom lens is a lot of fun!
Posted 9 years ago2015-08-12 01:31:13 UTC
Post #326682
Absolutely love the last three.
Posted 9 years ago2015-08-12 11:20:28 UTC
Post #326684
Beautiful pictures, Archie.
What's the max aperture on that lens?
What's the max aperture on that lens?
Posted 9 years ago2015-08-12 12:43:58 UTC
Post #326687
Gotta say Chi, you have quite the view at night.
Posted 9 years ago2015-08-12 18:22:53 UTC
Post #326696
How did you take the 2nd last, Archie?
Baby hen! I mean, chicken!
Baby hen! I mean, chicken!
Posted 9 years ago2015-08-12 20:20:18 UTC
Post #326698
I'd guess he changed the zoom level during the exposure.
I like your photo Striker, it looks like it's posing for the photo.
I like your photo Striker, it looks like it's posing for the photo.
Posted 9 years ago2015-08-12 22:13:14 UTC
Post #326702
Thanks, guys! 
Striker, that chick is adorable! It's not far off being a Pixar poster!
What's the max aperture on that lens?It's not a particularly expensive or fast lens. 4.0 at its widest, 5.6 at its most telephoto. The really good thing about it is that it's internal zooming (no turret) and constant focus throughout the whole range. I'd have to pay a lot more for constant aperture as well.
Gotta say Chi, you have quite the view at night.I find it quite appealing during the day as well! Also never underestimate the power of a balcony when it comes to dating. Gdamn. Couple of glasses of champagne and a cityscape? She's in a movie!
How did you take the 2nd last, Archie?It's a secret!
I'd guess he changed the zoom level during the exposure.You ruined the secret!
Striker, that chick is adorable! It's not far off being a Pixar poster!
Posted 9 years ago2015-08-25 04:46:37 UTC
Post #326823
Posted 9 years ago2015-09-25 19:13:51 UTC
Post #327014
Finally got a new body.
[approximation, not my photo]
Only has 23k on it, so it should be good for a while [not counting disasters].
Only has 23k on it, so it should be good for a while [not counting disasters].
Posted 9 years ago2015-09-26 09:20:48 UTC
Post #327020
Finally got a new body.Nice one!
I am a Nikon guy too.
What lenses have you got?
Posted 9 years ago2015-09-26 10:08:36 UTC
Post #327021
Pictures from our Galapagos Islands trip this summer:
Mangrove leaves on cooled lava bed on the Galapagos Islands.
Arched lava formation.
Giant marine iguana
Sally lightfoot crab
Posted 9 years ago2015-09-26 11:02:51 UTC
Post #327022
looks like an awesome trip. the landscape is very inspiring. I like the shot of the leaves on the lava.
Posted 9 years ago2015-10-03 02:34:31 UTC
Post #327028
Not much worth mentioning other than a Nikkor 50mm f1.4, Minolta 50mm f2 and a Dimension 135mm f3.5.
I have another Nikkor (300mm f4.5) and quite a few more Minolta lenses but I don't usually use them as they are simply too slow in anything but the best of lighting conditions.
EDIT: Went for a walk today.
I have another Nikkor (300mm f4.5) and quite a few more Minolta lenses but I don't usually use them as they are simply too slow in anything but the best of lighting conditions.
EDIT: Went for a walk today.
Posted 9 years ago2015-12-09 05:00:18 UTC
Post #327694
I posted in the wrong thread...
Posted 9 years ago2015-12-13 13:29:43 UTC
Post #327773
Repurposed a [useless] LCD panel to be a softbox light for video work.
Fairly disappointed at the light output, expected more light from it without the LCD panel, but it's better than not having a cool, soft light at all.
Fairly disappointed at the light output, expected more light from it without the LCD panel, but it's better than not having a cool, soft light at all.
Posted 9 years ago2015-12-13 22:32:20 UTC
Post #327775
Bear in mind that the actual display matrix is purposely designed to be as transparent as possible
You must be logged in to post a response.