Steve Orrell said:me and the brick (my Canon G5)...
Your lightweight rectangle of plastic.
Quoted message said:or should that be "my brick and I"
I wish I still had a tiny pocket camera like that
which I could carry anywhere without realising I was
carrying anything.
Quoted message said:have at last been able to collate our findings after a few
outings of late and offer the following for your
delectation:
Simonside from just this past mid-week :
thenmc.org.ukview album.phpOpen ↗
Would would be the album 10 page?
Quoted message said:The sunset on the above evening was amazing with
"curtains" of shafts of red sunlight highlighting various
permutations of the hills in the distance.
Like these? wilderness-wales.co.uk0212170051Open ↗
75.jpg wilderness-wales.co.uktbhts75.jpgOpen ↗
wilderness-wales.co.uktbhts75.jpgOpen ↗
Quoted message said:Needless to say I failed to capture this on film :-(
...anyone know how?
Point a camera at it?
Quoted message said:Polarising filter praps?
No. To be honest I've never had any problem capturing them.
A good exposure would help.
One common feature in most of your shots is my pet hate,
overexposure,
i.e. burnt-out skies. I know, I know, auto exposure. I'd
recommend you take an exposure reading off the sky to
avoid burning out the clouds. Don't worry about the
foreground looking dark, you can easily lighten it
later, but you can't recover detail in the clouds if
you over-expose the picture.
Did you take these pics in RAW mode by any chance? If so
then it will be possible to recover some of the burnt out
detail, but probably not all of it.
As for photographing a sunset, if the sun isn't hidden by
clouds then that's a lot more tricky. The brightness of the
sun is vastly greater than the rest of the picture. Best to
take the shot when the sun is hidden behind clouds or when
only a tiny amount is showing. If you expose for an unhidden
sun the rest of the pic will come out very dark. The lower
the sun gets the darker it gets. (Film is actually better
for a bright sun since a bright sun burns out more smoothly
than digital where you get a sharp transition to white.)
Quoted message said:And a few in the miscellany section :
thenmc.org.ukview album.phpOpen ↗
That's the same link! Your links are very confusing. I've
just noticed another Simonside link lower down the page. It
says "Owner: Steve O", so I was obviously looking at the
wrong ones then! Sorry!
These are much better! Photos rather than snaps! ;-)
The Boulder face pano is very nice. Slightly over-exposed
clouds in the top left but I can just about put up with
that. RAW mode by any chance?
Quite nice sunset shots but still some nasty burnout on the
sun. I'd really take the effort to expose for the bright
area and sod how dark the rest of the picture comes out.
Since the sun is the most important part of the picture it
really shouldn't be burnt out like that. In one problematic
sunset I took different exposures, some very dark, then
pasted the correctly exposed sun from one onto the burnt out
area in another.
I can see the shafts in the second sunset pic. They're quite
faint. Perhaps a darker exposure would have brought them out
more clearly.
The climber topping out is very nice. Not quite the rule of
thirds but what the heck! I like it. The sky is interesting
enough to support a
50/50 composition in this case IMNSHO. As fp
Quoted message said:The "St Mary's" pano is the most pleasing and the most
infuriating, whilst the "Bolam" series (sic.) are 'new to
the web' but taken a few weeks ago.
I really don't know what you're talking about here. Maybe a
different page that I didn't manage to find.
Quoted message said:Wouldn't say no to a little feedback, spot any obvious
bloopers?
Not apart from the niggly burnt out sun.
Quoted message said:The "pano in IR" is false IR and I deliberately 'forced'
the IR effect, does it work?
That's pretty cool actually. Not strictly IR, more like a
polarised red filter. The grass isn't white enough for IR.
Do you have an IR filter yet? Get one. Pricey but great
fun. Ask for a Hoya Infrared (R72). About £30 (you'll need
a lens adapter to attach it to, £15 if you haven't already
got one). You'll also need a tripod, 15 second exposures
are typical.
Paul
--
wilderness-wales.co.ukwilderness-wales.co.ukOpen ↗
wildwales.fsnet.co.ukwildwales.fsnet.co.ukOpen ↗
photosig.comuserphotosOpen ↗
