Picture Of The Day

Jon L · « **Reply #1560 on:** 20 May 2012, 02:08 am »

thunderbrick · « **Reply #1561 on:** 21 May 2012, 03:08 am »

Not your usual sunset.........

Got lucky (I wish). Skies cleared out so we headed for high ground, only to have a storm pop up in front of us. Clouds parted and the sun skipped through several bands of clouds before sinking below the horizon. Quite an evening!

Russell Dawkins · « **Reply #1562 on:** 21 May 2012, 03:18 am »

Spectacular! Congratulations.

thunderbrick · « **Reply #1563 on:** 21 May 2012, 03:48 am »

Thanks! Hope I'm around for the next one.

jqp · « **Reply #1564 on:** 21 May 2012, 03:57 am »

Quote from: thunderbrick on 21 May 2012, 03:08 am

Not your usual sunset.........

Got lucky (I wish). Skies cleared out so we headed for high ground, only to have a storm pop up in front of us. Clouds parted and the sun skipped through several bands of clouds before sinking below the horizon. Quite an evening!

nice!

Bob in St. Louis · « **Reply #1565 on:** 21 May 2012, 02:49 pm »

Nice job Bob!

Jon L · « **Reply #1566 on:** 21 May 2012, 08:57 pm »

Quote from: thunderbrick on 21 May 2012, 03:08 am

Not your usual sunset.........

Got lucky (I wish). Skies cleared out so we headed for high ground, only to have a storm pop up in front of us. Clouds parted and the sun skipped through several bands of clouds before sinking below the horizon. Quite an evening!

Those are some nice shots!

It was bright daylight here when the eclipse hit, and not having any filters, it was difficult to get exposure down enough for detailed shots. What filters/camera settings/lens were used?

thunderbrick · « **Reply #1567 on:** 21 May 2012, 10:59 pm »

OK, here goes.

Please remember that the higher the sun is, the brighter it is, so through the process things change a LOT, even over 45 minutes. The farther the sun goes toward the horizon the more atmosphere we view it through, so it is darker.

Also, the eclipse images were shot through breaks in a cloud as a storm was breaking up. Lots of humidity, haze and thin clouds which cut down on sharpness and brightness.

I shot two days of practice to prepare for the eclipse, and while practicing the sky was much clearer = brighter sun = higher shutter speeds.

Lens? 800mm 5.6 manual focus on a massive Bogan tripod with a Wimberly gimble head on top. The Wimberly is pricey, but if you use long glass it's the best money you'll ever spend.

ISO? 100 formost of the shots. When the eclipse was right at the horizon I ran it to 400 ISO or higher for two reasons. To keep the shutter speed from getting so slow as to induce vibration on the long lens, and also (more importantly) to let the foreground hills form a foundation to the image.

F stop? On the practice days I racked the aperture ring all the way over to f32, which is really an effective F128 once you factor in the two-stop ND filter. Started the same with the eclipse, and in all situations I started to open up the aperture to f8, in reality f16 with the filter in place. I may have even gone to 5.6, but since my lens doesn't have the CPU chip, it doesn't record that data.

Filters? I inserted a 52mm ND4 neutral density INSIDE the lens, so the lens was always an effective 800mm f11 optic.

Shutter? The eclipse shot with the clouds to the left was 1/5,000th second, with the aperture @f32. As the sun became dimmer close to the horizon I had opened up the aperture to f8, and the shutter speed was all the way down to 1/100th, and ISO cranked to 800. I suppose I could have removed the ND filter and used an ISO of 200, but it was quicker to switch ISO, because the sun was setting so fast.

Hope this helps!

Bob

EDIT: Aside from lightening the shadows and touching up saturation in iPhoto, no manipulation from the original RAW file.

EDIT, Part Deux: The practice shots started at 1/8,000th second, the eclipse images at 1/5,000th.

bside123 · « **Reply #1568 on:** 21 May 2012, 11:40 pm »

Yellowmoon Cafe, Cobden, IL

Jon L · « **Reply #1569 on:** 21 May 2012, 11:57 pm »

Quote from: thunderbrick on 21 May 2012, 10:59 pm

I shot two days of practice to prepare for the eclipse, and while practicing the sky was much clearer = brighter sun = higher shutter speeds.

Lens? 800mm 5.6 manual focus

I knew some serious practice and gear was involved. I decided to take a photo 15 minutes before heading out the door on a bright, clear day, and my ND filters are in mail to me still, i.e. no way in heck I was going to capture any detail.

To make matters worse, my longest lens is 70-200 with 1.4x extender, so in order to increase focal length, I stuck on my crop body instead of FF, dialed everything to minimum, set exposure comp to max, and hoped for the best. Next time, I will be more prepared.

Somewhat abstract at f/45(!) but I kind of like it.

Eclipse 5.20.12 by drjlo1, on Flickr

thunderbrick · « **Reply #1570 on:** 22 May 2012, 12:03 am »

Very cool! I like it! I wonder if those radiating lines might be a reflection of your aperture.

BTW, I used a crop camera, not full frame, and the images are nearly full frame. Jon, where are you located, and what time of the day did you shoot yours?

Bob

Bob in St. Louis · « **Reply #1571 on:** 22 May 2012, 04:58 pm »

Bob is my hero.

Great shots fella!

Jon L · « **Reply #1572 on:** 22 May 2012, 09:34 pm »

Quote from: thunderbrick on 22 May 2012, 12:03 am

Very cool! I like it! I wonder if those radiating lines might be a reflection of your aperture.

BTW, I used a crop camera, not full frame, and the images are nearly full frame. Jon, where are you located, and what time of the day did you shoot yours?

Bob

I'm sure the aperture is the cause of those neat lines. I'm in SoCal, and this shot was taken near 6:30-40 PM from my driveway

One from last night driving into town, from moving car through window.

City of Angel? by drjlo1, on Flickr

Bob in St. Louis · « **Reply #1573 on:** 22 May 2012, 09:50 pm »

Quote from: Jon L on 22 May 2012, 09:34 pm

One from last night driving into town, from moving car through window.

Wow! nice shot.

thunderbrick · « **Reply #1574 on:** 22 May 2012, 10:07 pm »

PeteG · « **Reply #1575 on:** 23 May 2012, 12:01 am »

Very nice Jon.

thunderbrick · « **Reply #1576 on:** 29 May 2012, 02:22 am »

Ya know, we can wax rhapsodic about a picture being worth a thousand words, or we might see a photograph the beauty of which leaves us speechless, but once in a generation or so we find that momentous happenstance of imagery that leads us to ask:

WHAT THE HELL WAS THE ADVERTISING COMPANY THINKING???

BTW, this photo was taken while standing next to a liquor store. You think THAT isn't a sign that points to the folly of Demon Rum?

Jon L · « **Reply #1577 on:** 29 May 2012, 04:05 am »

That's classic.

Messing with Kenko 1.4x teleconverter again.

DZ3C3219 by drjlo1, on Flickr

thunderbrick · « **Reply #1578 on:** 29 May 2012, 12:37 pm »

Jon L, what version of the 1.4x are you using? On what lens? My wife has a 70-300 Tamron lens (Nikon mount) and wants a little more reach.
Thanks!

'brick

Jon L · « **Reply #1579 on:** 29 May 2012, 08:19 pm »

Quote from: thunderbrick on 29 May 2012, 12:37 pm

Jon L, what version of the 1.4x are you using? On what lens? My wife has a 70-300 Tamron lens (Nikon mount) and wants a little more reach.
Thanks!

'brick

It's the Kenko Pro 300 "DGX" 1.4x. Nikon version is this one:
http://www.amazon.com/Kenko-1-4X-Teleconverter-Nikon-Digital/dp/B002C6QE00/ref=dp_cp_ob_p_title_2

I got it after reading some photogs say they compared it to Canon 1.4x MkII and found Kenko DGX a bit sharper..