Photo Critique Thread

[NC_IslandRunner]

Photography is all luck, better equipment, skill & talent just reduce the # of bad photo's you have to delete!

I'd have to argue against that. I know a number of photographers, and they're always saying they just take a million shots and spend time finding the best moments. Sure, some are setup and planned, others are luck of the draw because you took 1000 shots of the same thing.

Argue? It kinda sounds like you just agreed with me...I said skill and talent give you less crappy pics not none at all, if they take millions then average joe has to take billions to get as man good ones.

[Gordinho80]

You have to have skill/talent to take great pictures. A great photographer can take great shots using crappy equipment. DigitalRev TV on YouTube has some awesome videos of professional photogs using ridiculous equipment in challenges, http://www.youtube.com/user/DigitalRevC ... uery=cheap

Now, take an average joe and give him a P.O.S. and a top notch DSLR, he'll get much better shots with the DSLR, but will they be amazing? Not without talent/skill. On occasion, you'll get a WHOA shot, but that is when the stars align and the sun shines on the dog's ass. Like the pics I post... LOL.

[Wahugg]

Here are two more I took late this and winter.



---------------------------

----------------------------

-Wahugg

[Trail X]

Dang Wallace, how are you keeping your noise down so well? What ISO did you shoot those with? Did you run a denoiser?

[Wahugg]

I routinely use an ISO between 3000 to 5000. I believe the top was taken at 3200 and the bottom was taken at 4000. I found that investing in some good glass made a huge difference. I use a tokina 11-16mm 2.8/f lense. The 2.8 apature really helps bring the light in, and the 11-16mm range brings me down to the 'normal' focal range of a full size sensor.

As for the denoise, I simply use the standard lightroom denoise tool. I usually go up to 48%. After that I start to loose more detail then What I would like.

-wahugg

[Trail X]

That 2.8 sounds nice. I've got a 3.5, so you're right that could make a bit of a difference, but I've also got 10-24 range. It's all about compromises I guess. I try to keep my ISO low, at 1600, when I get above that that on a long exposure it gets really fuzzy.

I think I need to invest in lightroom.

[Gordinho80]

I've got an old version of Lightroom, 3.5. Haven't used it at all yet. I want to finish setting up my office and possibly acquire a new machine for processing.

I got my camera with 2 kit lenses, 18-55mm f3.5-5.6 and 55-200mm f4-5.6. I sold the 55-200 when I got my 50mm 1.8. The 1.8 is such a fast lense, its awesome! I would use it for everything but sometimes having a wider angle is needed. I'm looking at a Tamron 28-75mm 2.8. http://www.amazon.com/Tamron-28-75mm-As ... +2.8+nikon

I think this would really become my everyday lense.

[Trail X]

I've heard a prime 35 is great for a crop sensor. It's the full frame equivalent of the 50.

But zoom is basically required for an everyday lens. That one you linked looks impressive, especially boasting it's 2.8ness, but it's a beast in size. It's as big as my 10-24 is, and that one isn't too fun to carry around all the time. My 50 is really nice to just walk around with, but again doesn't have the range. My view: there is no correct answer.

[NC_IslandRunner]

Taken with my Canon T2i, Raw no editing.

[Trail X]

There are certain things I like about all of the shots.

With the first one, I might try a really shallow depth of field. Maybe not possible, but it's a thought... would be neat to really blur out the background.

The second one would be really interesting if taken on a long exposure. N/D filter on a tripod with a 20 second exposure would be really crazy.

The last has some great color, and the right amount of blacked out shadowy areas. My favorite of the group.

[Wahugg]

That 2.8 sounds nice. I've got a 3.5, so you're right that could make a bit of a difference, but I've also got 10-24 range. It's all about compromises I guess.

The Tokina is 2.8/f and has a focal range of 11-16mm (16.5mm-24mm 35mm equivalent), so trade off's don't necessarily have to be made unless Tokina doesn't make a lens for your mount.

-Wahugg

[1brushscrubber]

This is some of the railroad photography a buddy and I go out and take. Some of the reasons I want to lift the TB. Let the opinions come. I have done a couple presentations on railroad photography specifically places in Indianapolis to "railfan" and areas to stay away from. Like some have said in the planes thread, if you have a camera in hand next to railroad tracks you must be a terrorist, I've had to stand my ground a couple of times. Hope you enjoy I have plenty more if you want to see. Jake

[Trail X]

Good stuff Jake. I like the last one by far. The middle one looks a bit overworked for my tastes though.

[1brushscrubber]

James, the 1st and 2nd photo are shot in the Canon raw mode. They actually look a lot better when the resolution is set for printing quality. The middle shot is just about identical to what my eyes were seeing when I had to go in and add the values back in. I may have the clarity turned up just a little much I agree. What is funny, if you could blow the image up (zoom in), you can see the conductor was giving up the rock on gestures as they flew by us. This is coming down Edelstein Hill in Illinois just before they enter a sweeping curve and cross the river. The first pic looks really nice enlarged and printed, I have it on the wall as a 16X20 picture. The red in the foreground was an added bonus that just happened it was from the crossing signal coming on and lighting up the scrub brush in front of us.

[Wahugg]

I was able to sneak away last night and grab this picture. ISO was a little high for my liking, but other than that, I think it turned out pretty good.

-Wahugg

-------------------------------------------------------------

[Wahugg]

Hate to double post but here is another one from tonight! Man was it cold (-4)!!!

Enjoy!



-Wahugg

[ErikSS]

Hey Wallace, I'm looking for a wedding photographer! haha

[Trail X]

Dang Wallace, that first one is awesome. The stars are incredible.

[KE7WOX]

Had some fun at the airport today. This was at 560mm (factoring in the crop factor, the 35mm equivalent is 725mm), plus some cropping in post.

[Wahugg]

Thanks Eric and James! I never would have thought that this interest would have developed so far.

And Eric, I'm just a young guy chasing stars. I would be no good taking pictures for you, however if you need someone to eat food.....

-Wahugg