General Photography thread

[Uncle C]

Fully agree. Took this photo of a kestrel the other day. Wing is horribly out of focus but it (just about) works as the eye is in focus.

I think at that distance its unlikely that its out of focus, the depth a field would be deeper than that.

Most likely the wing tip was moving too fast to be frozen, and nicely captures the feeling of movement.

 

[Bodian]

My stream is https://www.flickr.com/photos/jjwillow/

These are super. There's so many in here that I would love to have taken - especially the more quirky ones. 90% of photos I take are of landscape - I must get out into towns and cities again - as this is where the interesting bits and bobs are.

 

[Kneon Light]

I think at that distance its unlikely that its out of focus, the depth a field would be deeper than that.

Most likely the wing tip was moving too fast to be frozen, and nicely captures the feeling of movement.

You'd be suprised at how narrow the depth of focus can be when shooting at 400mm F5.6 from just a few feet away. I have pics with the eye in focus but the beak blurred. Shutter speed was 1/1600 which would have frozen the motion blur. (especially as it was gliding rather than hovering)

 

[Jack Straw]

It's definitely worth doing. You could create a personal 'album' on there, and/or put some in a shared 'group'. There's one HERE just called "Brighton & Hove Albion FC" - it's not one I've created or anything, just one I found by searching - others may know a better one.

I remember your photos back during the construction - they were great and I agree it would be better to have a collection together rather than fragmented.

I've just joined the group. Is it possible to put my photos in an album on that page, or can they only be posted in the main batch?

 

[Norman Potting]

I took a few photos of the Amex during its build. Although of no artistic merit as such, would a few hundred photos of our stadium documenting its progress from a muddy field to the completed structure be the sort of thing that would enhance Flickr, or is this site not for this type of thing. Although you could find them here on NSC, the collection is fragmented, so by putting them on Flickr, they would instead all be in one place.
The photos are just sitting in my computer, and I'm sure there's lots of people who would be interested in them, even if they followed my "Falmer Watch" at the time.
Any thoughts?

Definitely put them on there. There were some interesting recently discovered pics on the BBC website last week of Tower Bridge in the course of construction - they probably were considered of "no artistic merit" at the time!

 

[DTES]

I've just joined the group. Is it possible to put my photos in an album on that page, or can they only be posted in the main batch?

No - sadly I don't think there are albums within groups.

 

[Uncle C]

Your probably right . Thanks for the extra info on shutter speeds etc.

 

[Jack Straw]

That's a shame. I'll get round to putting them on Flickr soon.

 

[Triggaaar]

Fully agree. Took this photo of a kestrel the other day. Wing is horribly out of focus but it (just about) works as the eye is in focus.

Nice - you need to up the exposure a lot, will be much better.

 

[Dick Knights Mumm]

My stream is https://www.flickr.com/photos/jjwillow/

Just had a look Willow. Some excellent photos on there. From a non-photographic perspective I liked the Hook Norton Brewery shots - well worth a visit.

 

[Jack Straw]

Shutterstock ID - Passport.

Does anyone upload images to Shutterstock? If so, did you scan and submit your passport? I fancy doing this, but am uncomfortable with sending them my passport.

 

[Kneon Light]

Nice - you need to up the exposure a lot, will be much better.

I know. Bloody frustrating that kestrel was.
I had been photographing a little egret (which is all white) and had to turn the exposure down to stop blowing the highlights. Kestrel that had been staying too far away for photos then chose that moment to fly over my head - didn't have time to adjust settings so they were all wrong

 

[Triggaaar]

I know. Bloody frustrating that kestrel was.
I had been photographing a little egret (which is all white) and had to turn the exposure down to stop blowing the highlights. Kestrel that had been staying too far away for photos then chose that moment to fly over my head - didn't have time to adjust settings so they were all wrong

You can increase the exposure with software though. Obviously it would be best if we could nail every shot, but life's not that easy, and if you haven't already done it, increasing the exposure now won't be a problem. If you're not sure what to do, email me the original and I'll do it for you.

 

[Uncle C]

 

[Kneon Light]

You can increase the exposure with software though. Obviously it would be best if we could nail every shot, but life's not that easy, and if you haven't already done it, increasing the exposure now won't be a problem. If you're not sure what to do, email me the original and I'll do it for you.

Thanks. I have already upped the exposure as much as I dare without adding too much noise. I know there is more I can do but it is not one of my better shots so I can't be bothered. Hopefully will take a better kestrel shot soon.

 

[Doc Lynam]

View attachment 61781

Double exposure on an instamatic i had whilst traveling through Jasper in Canada; odd result but i like it.

 

[Triggaaar]

Thanks. I have already upped the exposure as much as I dare without adding too much noise. I know there is more I can do but it is not one of my better shots so I can't be bothered. Hopefully will take a better kestrel shot soon.

Ok cool. I wasn't meaning to teach you to suck eggs, I thought you knew what you were doing, didn't realise the shot had already had the exposure increased.

 

[Uncle C]

 

[Uncle C]

And another

 

[jevs]

Are you a Carper, uncle C ?