[chupathingie]

Here’s a shot of Maggie, our Russel-mongrel mix for comparison… apparently the Corgi has similar coloring, but Mags has the typical medium wiry coat with a short soft undercoat.

[chupathingie]

^what he said, now that I think about it… The colors and the eyes are right for a Jack. The build and over-all shape definitely screams Corgi, so she may have a bit of both. There is so much variation in Jack Russels that it’s hard to tell sometimes. My wife and I think our newest is a Jack/Greyhound mix… she’s leggy with hindquarters shaped like a greyhound, with a Jack’s grizzled muzzle and colors and she sleeps with her eyes open (which is a little weird, but apparently common to greyhounds). I’ll post a pic tonight after work for comparison’s sake.

[chupathingie]

Nice to see others doing the rescue thing… I’ve got a pair of terriers that way… one looks to be Jack Russel; full of energy…a good thing, they both have their accellerators stuck to the floor so they keep each other entertained. Cause‘s last shot there reminds of my two…all bared teeth and mock snarls as they play with each other. They look fierce in a pic out of context.

‘Cuda, that last shot under the chair is aaaawwesome! Too dang cute.

[chupathingie]

Thanks, folks 🙂 Yeah, there is some tonemapping going on… I’ve not settled on how I really want to treat the final for print yet. This image is a blend of the original photo and a tonemapped version. If I can stretch out details in the fog without tonemapping, I’ll go that route… but the fog was the focus, so whatever it takes to bring out the wispies.

I took the series the day I left my folks’ house last saturday, just across the river from Cotter, Arkansas (north central part of the state) maybe an hour after dawn. I’ve always wanted a shot of that stretch of river, and was very surprised to find a break in the fog between the bridges when I drove by… and man, did I botch that shoot! 😆 Got in a rush and shot in AV instead of manual. There’s a massive gradient across all the subs. Still, tho, there may be some contest material in there… the singles look pretty decent, especially the sun streaking through the fog behind the RR trestle.

[chupathingie]

w00t, indeed! Congrats! 🙂

[chupathingie]

Oh, and how do the exposures look on the camera’s display?

[chupathingie]

That does not sound normal. Losing the IR block should only upset your color balance and increase the overall brightness of any IR source or reflectors… you should not see any additional noise.

Dumb question, but is your PC treating files from your other camera properly? (just wanna get that outta the way early on! :lol:)

[chupathingie]

You’re gonna love not having that IR block in place for astro… if you spring for an HA-pass filter you’ll be able to shoot long exposures even during the full moon in town through light pollution to combine with full-spectrum subs.

[chupathingie]

I dunno…seems really clean, but where are the stars?

The comments thread for that review brought the same issue up with a number of comparison shots (the shot showing the hot pixel reduction is really impressive). One poster said it removed the fainter stars, but the comparison shots showed little difference on that count that I could see. The samples that showed the sky were obviously high f-stop or short exposures (by astrophotography standards). M42 barely showed as a fuzzy. The stars were gravy, I’m thinking; bonus background to the night shot of the architecture and trees. The shot was already overexposed for the highlights on the building, any longer would have ruined it.

[chupathingie]

Oh—reminds me… one technique that gets a lot of use is to nudge the scope in a random direction slightly between shots. This moves the hot pixels against the star field so they don’t reinforce themselves when stacked. Dark frame subtraction will leave a black spot behind in one of the color channels if the hot pixel saturates. Moving the field around distributes that dark spot and mixes it in with good data from other pixels during stacking. A sigma combine will remove that dark pixel entirely, but only if it shows up in different spots.

[chupathingie]

I shoot with a Canon, so not much use to me (also using Linux, so even the Canon tools are of no use to me), but this looks like a gret addition to their software for folks dealing with single images. Those shooting a stack will be (or should be) using dark frames to accomplish the same thing. I’d love to see a comparison between the new routine and dark frames; if it can actually replace dark frames, that would free up a great deal of time for imaging that normally gets used snapping off frames with the lens cap on… I spend an hour or more acquiring darks for each set of lights I collect.

[chupathingie]

Canon sold a version of the 20D sans IR block labeled as a 20DA specifically to cater to astrophotographers. A lot of folks are using the 20D/20DA.

My last run of astrophotos was shot with a 70-200mm F2.8L. I’m impresed with the color correction, I can only imagine it being better with a prime lens. I’ve got Canon’s 2X extender that I did some playing with over vacation; can’t wait to try it out on my next astro-trip. It will reduce my lens to F5.6, but I shot my last batch of pics at ISO1600. I may see what I can manage with ISO6400… if the noise isn’t too objectionable it will make shooting at F5.6 bearable.

[chupathingie]

I am SOOOO tempted to do the removal on my old 300D. The only things keeping me from it are A) max usable ISO of 800 and B) no live view makes focusing a monumental chore (I’ve spent almost an hour just achieving focus before).

[chupathingie]

See, that’s my biggest worry about flying… I’m afraid I would wax smart-ass with one of the badged drop-outs and wind up in a cell somewhere.

[chupathingie]

Wait till you get to the bottom of the bag, staplermofo 😛 😈 💡 😀 8) 😆 😉

😯

LAWL

[Author]

Posts