Get yourself a neutral density filter for your prime. An ND3 reduces the light by three stops. Your camera will still focus fine and you'll be able to use 1.4 in bright sunshine without exceeding 1/8000 or whatever the D3 goes to.
Cesare
pfm Picture A Week (PAW) 2008 part I
- Thread starter Tony L
- Start date
- Status
Get yourself a neutral density filter for your prime. An ND3 reduces the light by three stops. Your camera will still focus fine and you'll be able to use 1.4 in bright sunshine without exceeding 1/8000 or whatever the D3 goes to.
Cesare
cliffpatte
Speed camera anarchist
Joe, It's an old manual Nikkor. I quite like how it works. It certainly adds something compared to other lenses I have with the same focal length (in their range).
cliffpatte
Speed camera anarchist
cliffpatte
Speed camera anarchist
(Alpaca)
vuk
\o/ choose anarchy
mr. cat.
i think getting closer to the the animals (or framing far more tightly with a longer lens) would have raised your game considerably here. i am think not just of isolating the interesting from all the jarring distractions, but an exploration of textures/patterns which is the interesting thing here. something like this is what i'm thinking, though possibly from a slightly better angle/perspective:
yes, it's relatively easy to see things like this after the fact, but you need to visualise them on the spot.
vuk.
i think getting closer to the the animals (or framing far more tightly with a longer lens) would have raised your game considerably here. i am think not just of isolating the interesting from all the jarring distractions, but an exploration of textures/patterns which is the interesting thing here. something like this is what i'm thinking, though possibly from a slightly better angle/perspective:
yes, it's relatively easy to see things like this after the fact, but you need to visualise them on the spot.
vuk.
Mr Cat
Owner
mr. cat.
i think getting closer to the the animals (or framing far more tightly with a longer lens) would have raised your game considerably here. i am think not just of isolating the interesting from all the jarring distractions, but an exploration of textures/patterns which is the interesting thing here. something like this is what i'm thinking, though possibly from a slightly better angle/perspective:
yes, it's relatively easy to see things like this after the fact, but you need to visualise them on the spot.
vuk.
yeah, thanks for that...I guess one of the most common comments on my pics (on flickr) are suggestions for crops...I agree - I should defo look at this a bit more - however, most of my photos are just representations of of what happened and at times i don't always have time to study the composition etc so I tend just to leave in everything that's in the shot...
but this is a decent shot I took a couple of years back - untouched apart from a bit of sharpening...
Tony L
Administrator
#8 Pallet.
I've just been going through my desktop 'temporary' camera folder and this is one from earlier in the year (Jan). I got as far as doing the Photoshop stuff at the time (i.e. making it B&W) but never bothered uploading it. Given that I've taken so little this year it's possibly worth sticking up.
Tony.
vuk
\o/ choose anarchy
tony.
there is a nice tonal palette (wink) there, but your lines are all verticals and horizontals. it's very difficult to make that sort of thing work in a picture. it's the equivalent of a thud. diagonals lead the viewer through the picture, make it seem to have flow.
similar problem here. for it to work, i would have needed the impossible: both higher sun and longer cap-nut shadows:
vuk.
there is a nice tonal palette (wink) there, but your lines are all verticals and horizontals. it's very difficult to make that sort of thing work in a picture. it's the equivalent of a thud. diagonals lead the viewer through the picture, make it seem to have flow.
similar problem here. for it to work, i would have needed the impossible: both higher sun and longer cap-nut shadows:
vuk.
Tony L
Administrator
I know exactly what you mean, and it is what made me hesitate in uploading it in the first place. Looking at it again fresh I kind of liked it, as for some reason that I can't pin down it works, at least on some level. Possibly in an 'anti-photography' way, i.e. that it is clearly 'wrong'.
I'm at the stage with photography where, whilst I may not have fully grasped them, I at least acknowledge the existence of the 'rule of thirds', 'diagonals = good', 'triangles = good' etc etc, but find it far too easy to get trapped into doing the predictable and as a result find much of what I take boring. The thing I love about Eggleston etc is that they completely break these rules - I see them as a punk-like "f*** off!" to convention and when they work they really work. I like your pic for the same reason, even more so that you left some obvious lens barrel distortion in that I'd have wimped out and fixed in Photoshop ;-)
Tony.
mentalp
pfm Member
Been laid up in bed for the best part of the last two days, feeling like absolute shite and apparently going for the world record in how much sweat a body can produce, but got round to developing the roll I finished off in the Yashica the other day.
Here's a couple
Neopan400 & Xtol
More in my stream http://flickr.com/photos/pete_tainsh/
Here's a couple
Neopan400 & Xtol
More in my stream http://flickr.com/photos/pete_tainsh/
cliffpatte
Speed camera anarchist
Is that the chunky £25 rangefinder?
- Status