|
| Group |
Round |
C/R |
Comment |
Date |
Image |
| 64 |
Feb 22 |
Reply |
Yes, the green was a slip-up.
I traded most of my earnings for more camera kit. I soon learned not to ask the mean shop owner to check out my purchases as he charged me full price, whereas the shop manager, a Scottish chap (the stereotypical Scot is very "canny", ie tight with money, but it's far from the truth) with a big heart sold me them at cost price and hid the evidence! Hence a Weston Master 5, 2x teleconverter, a very early Sunblitz electronic flash, extension tubes, film, darkroom stuff and probably lots more that I've forgotten. He was the one who helped me the most. I doubt he can hear me, but "Thanks, Ian". |
Feb 27th |
| 64 |
Feb 22 |
Reply |
Correction the ladle is on the right, sorry |
Feb 27th |
| 64 |
Feb 22 |
Reply |
Yes, grey or black card (what I call) mounts often work well with mono prints. ie the card with a window cut into it for the print to appear through. Some have different colour internal card so that the window edge has a different colour to the face. Some have a second mount, often seen in picture frames, to give a complementary coloured surround between the two.
I still don't quite understand, though. Must be the transatlantic phraseology! Is the card I described the frame or the mat? And then, what is the other one? - the "second mount"? |
Feb 12th |
| 64 |
Feb 22 |
Reply |
Yes, I guess this is a fair alternative view. Judges can be very fickle, of course I'm sure we know.
What's a "mat and frame combo", John? |
Feb 12th |
| 64 |
Feb 22 |
Comment |
And finally for me, one pipe with many others in an annealing furnace to reduce weaknesses from the casting process before being cooled and subsequently sold. Oddly, none of these seem to have a green cast - don't know why. I thought the one with the man in was the most interesting. I remember it like it was yesterday. Pity I can't remember yesterday so well..... |
Feb 11th |
 |
| 64 |
Feb 22 |
Comment |
The pipe leaving the casting area behind the machine... |
Feb 11th |
 |
| 64 |
Feb 22 |
Comment |
Here's a pipe being pulled out of the back of the casting machine, solid now having been cooled by water jackets in the machine, but still red-white hot |
Feb 11th |
 |
| 64 |
Feb 22 |
Comment |
Since people are interested, here's another picture of the casting process. You can see the ladle on the left, the finger-like trough carrying the molten cast iron diagonally in the centre, and the spinning casting machine top left. One of the gay's tasks was to skim off any solid cast iron as it went with the molten iron down the trough as it would cause weakness in the product! Only a boiler suit, goggles, gloves and hard hat for protection! |
Feb 11th |
 |
| 64 |
Feb 22 |
Reply |
My printing was all done in a local youth club in those days. Youth clubs seem to be no more, now. Pity, we learned as well as played there. In my teens I took mainly B&W prints, colour slides (limited by pocket money and my camera shop Saturday job pay), and a few black and white reversals. I bought a slide and negative copier maybe 20 years ago when I stopped photography for a while and had decided to ditch my negatives and slides. Glad I did! I had pruned my collection previously and discarded those. But I now have scans of 1250 B&W negatives and reversals, 1034 colour negatives (mainly taken by my first wife), and 2994 colour slides. Some were taken by my parents and others, so I have pictures of their wedding and me at my christening and through childhood. I doubt you'd like to see many, though! |
Feb 11th |
| 64 |
Feb 22 |
Reply |
My pleasure, Jerry, I do like editing! This is another picture that breaks all the rules but still works, IMHO. |
Feb 8th |
| 64 |
Feb 22 |
Reply |
It's odd you say that, because I've been looking at it online and thinking, "Is this my modified version or the original?" It's not straight, either, and I remember removing some of the highights, so I guess I goofed somehow. I've redone it, result below. |
Feb 8th |
 |
| 64 |
Feb 22 |
Reply |
Exciting! I guess that might happen over here in Scotland, but I've never seen it apart from on the television. |
Feb 8th |
| 64 |
Feb 22 |
Comment |
Yes, I find this a harmonious and interesting photo.I wonder if it would havebeen possible to retain or recover just a tad of detail in the bright areas on the floor? |
Feb 7th |
| 64 |
Feb 22 |
Comment |
I like the "distraction" on the left, it complements the soft shadows. I don't really like the window frame cutting across the frame though. I've removed it to see - |
Feb 7th |
 |
| 64 |
Feb 22 |
Comment |
Well spotted image, and a pleasant mono result. Images like this make me keen to up the contrast to emphasis the lines more, a bit like this |
Feb 7th |
 |
| 64 |
Feb 22 |
Comment |
Alas, I find most contemporary art leaves me rather cold. Sorry. But as usual I think you have made an excellent image in the technical sense, and the crop is important to remove unhelpful detail. |
Feb 7th |
| 64 |
Feb 22 |
Comment |
I think it's an exciting mountain scape.
I'd prefer to lighten the foreground a bit. However I like it more if I crop it down a little from the top right, making the closer cloud more prominent. It looks like plume of snow in a strong wind! |
Feb 7th |
| 64 |
Feb 22 |
Comment |
A big wow factor here! The sweep of the bay and the waves is very attractive.
I do think thought that the very detailed sky is a distraction from this for me. It even looks a bit like asky replacement, although I know it isn't. The "touch" of the clouds to the mountain top in the centre spoils the horizon line of the mountains a little for me. Although I like the distant downpour! Overall, I think the sky is a bit too extreme. |
Feb 7th |
10 comments - 8 replies for Group 64
|
| 85 |
Feb 22 |
Reply |
Yes, a new phone would be cheaper! I saw somewhere that the smart controller is no longer being made, but I've still seen it on sale. I'm keeping an eye on ebay in case a hardly used 2S comes up. |
Feb 28th |
| 85 |
Feb 22 |
Reply |
Hi Lisa,
Thanks for your reply. I've been doing a lot of reading about them and think you are probably right. They do a DJI Mini which looks quite good but with a smaller sensor. There are lots of cheap look-alike ones, but most are little more than toys I think. Alas a 2S fly-more kit with extra batteries etc costs about £1200 here, about $1500, and with a smart controller is over $2000 - quite expensive, I could almost get a new Olympus OM-1 for that! Do you use a smart controller or an app on your phone? |
Feb 28th |
| 85 |
Feb 22 |
Reply |
OK, thanks for your advice, I'll do some research!
I hope you have a good journey. |
Feb 18th |
| 85 |
Feb 22 |
Reply |
Thanks for your reply, Pete. Legislation! It's pervasive.
That's an interesting question! Probably 80% of the models I've ever made or bought, and that is many hundreds. As I always say to beginners I'm teaching, "It's not IF you will crash your model, it's WHEN you will crash it". These type of drones are much more autonomous I gather, so crashing should be much less frequent, I would hope.
If I set a budget of $1000 say, how would you advise me to spend it? Would it include FPV goggles such as Fat Shark (always used in racing drones I think and FPV fixed wing), or does everyone use a smartphone for this type of drone? |
Feb 18th |
| 85 |
Feb 22 |
Comment |
I think this is an impressive photo, I didn't realise you could control a drone's camera to do multiple exposures for HDR.
I'm an amateur pilot who's taken a lot of aerial photographs, but about to retire from flying. I'm also a lifelong aeromodeller, but apart from a racing drone bought out of curiosity which didn't capture me after the novelty wore off, I'm not a drone pilot. However if you can do photos like I see this group doing, I rather fancy one! I see you can even get a drone with a Hasselblad on now! My budget won't stretch to that I don't think.
Can I ask you guys, what drones do you use and recommend? I see Pete is using a DJI Air 2S. Why was 350' its limit? Here in the UK, we have rules about flying heights - do you have there?
Thanks for any help. |
Feb 17th |
1 comment - 4 replies for Group 85
|
| 95 |
Feb 22 |
Reply |
The base is a decent size to make it stable, but in use it sits on a table about 20" square, and it stands about 27" high above the table to the top of the column, so it's not very big. But it is home made; you can buy similar things, but not exactly the same. It was on the floor for the photo and I was fairly close hence used a short focal length hence it appears bigger than it actually is! |
Feb 19th |
| 95 |
Feb 22 |
Reply |
OK, it's a fair cop. The ones near the point were quite obtrusive now you've pointed them out. |
Feb 18th |
| 95 |
Feb 22 |
Reply |
Nice! When's that summer coming?? |
Feb 18th |
| 95 |
Feb 22 |
Reply |
Glad you like it. I bought a net of shells at a seaside place last summer as I was going to do a practical macro evening at my camera club and needed subjects, so this was a good contributor to that. Didn't want it too challenging as most of our members only dabble in close-up and macro. |
Feb 17th |
| 95 |
Feb 22 |
Reply |
Done! |
Feb 16th |
| 95 |
Feb 22 |
Comment |
OK, your wish is my command ;-)
I've taken a quick pic of the whole shell, it's about 2" long from tip to tip. Too deep for one shot, even at f32, so stack of 13 images at f11, 2x Adaptalux lights with diffusers + DIY LED light, Helicon Focus.
.
|
Feb 16th |
 |
| 95 |
Feb 22 |
Reply |
Well, it was right to start with it for your creative work!
Nothing ventured, nothing gained, we only progress by trying new things, so well done for trying. We don't criticise close-ups here! ;-) |
Feb 14th |
| 95 |
Feb 22 |
Reply |
Nice one, Tom! |
Feb 14th |
| 95 |
Feb 22 |
Reply |
Macro was around long before we got computers and software to do stacking, so it's a very optional technique! A slider / rail is useful for getting the subject in focus, and when placement of your in-focus region is important, it's a boon.
But it only moves backwards and forwards. For more precision movement, I also have a 3-way geared head which is excellent for pointing the camera accurately to frame the subject. The higher the magnification, the more these helpful such devices become. I have a Benro geared head which wasn't cheap but is really good quality and steady - see for example https://www.harrisoncameras.co.uk/pd/benro-gd3wh-precision-3-way-geared-tripod-head_gd3wh.
If you are placing your camera on a tripod and the subject is easily moveable (like a small plant in a pot, or a loose flower, etc) then using a double slider to move it with the camera stationary works well. This can be a cheap on such as https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/154752469458?hash=item2407f749d2:g:i9IAAOSwNxNhu7xr
as rigidity isn't important when it's used this way. I use one on my macro rig - the camera only moves up and down, the subject moves on a card platform fastened on the slider. I've put a picture of my indoor macro rig below. You can see the velbon slider for mounting the camera held on a pillar, and on the base a 2-way slider with a card platform on it for the subject, with various lights around it.
----
Odd numbers of subjects is an oft-quoted rule of thumb in I've attached a picture of that rig.composition, and to be fair I go with that by and large, but that's not to say that an even number is wrong in any way.
|
Feb 14th |
 |
| 95 |
Feb 22 |
Comment |
Just the job for a grey February day, here.
I'm not much of a gardener, but they seem to like me, or my garden, as I've had many super ones over the three years I've been growing them. As a result, I love dahlias!
The yellow here seems a bit overpowering to me, although the red petal tips do give more interest, and the slightly green background adds.
f4 is causing the far edges to become blurred, but it probably was your intention, so I accept that as giving emphasis to the centre. The water drops add interest, as usual.
|
Feb 12th |
| 95 |
Feb 22 |
Comment |
I go back to my comments some time ago on types of macro, and can see nothing wrong with a macro image as the starting point of a creative work.
Despite your narrative, I still can't really imagine what the object was. But I don't think that matters, it's an intriguing photo. I can't think of any suggestions for you, sorry. |
Feb 12th |
| 95 |
Feb 22 |
Comment |
Looks like you succeeded getting 1:1. Even if not quite, it's definitely a good macro in my books.
If you don't have a macro rail for your tripod, then getting focus without focussing the lens (to keep it as 1:1 or close) by moving, is a challenge. Doing it by hand, a 1 in 15 success rate is OK! A macro rail is a real boon. There is a vast range of them for sale, from cheap Chinese ones at $20 or so, to precision engineered ones costing $400 or more. I have a Velbon which cost about $120, and is a good rail. Having 3 rods to make up the rail, it doesn't give the impression of being very rigid, but it is. See https://www.amazon.co.uk/Velbon-Super-Mag-Slider/dp/B001HFG6BY
I also have a cheap one, and never use it for the camera now, but it is handy to support a small table for placing specimens on.
Anyway, I like your photo. I've seen similar pics of lots of coloured pencils together, but this is a new one on me. It's nice and sharp on the main subject, although I'd have preferred the blurred one to be more obviously in the background. I've just noticed the third rubber - I think it's a bit too small, looking as though it's there by accident, so I'd have preferred it more on view, or absent.
But well done, keep looking for those small subjects! |
Feb 12th |
| 95 |
Feb 22 |
Comment |
Hello Bernie,
Welcome to our group! I hope you can learn from us, and us from you.
This looks really odd as a thumbnail! I thought it was a strange white spider on a flower, and I guess I wasn't too far wrong in a roundabout way.
Your photo is nice and sharp in my opinion (see, I've done the Image Analysis course too!) Being f19 at 26mm focal length, you've had plenty of depth of field at this distance so it's all pretty sharp. Your exposure is bang on, the white of the flower is bright but still has detail - well done. The orange anthers really stand out, giving a nice composition despite being very symmetrical.
The only negative comment I'd make is to say that this is a close-up image, not a macro. Your lens will get much closer to macro at its longer focal lengths if it is similar to my similar-range zoom lenses. But for this subject, this is an appropriate composition.
|
Feb 12th |
5 comments - 8 replies for Group 95
|
16 comments - 20 replies Total
|
