[ennuipoet]

The way I interpret the theme, that shot (while gorgeous) wouldn’t qualify as the sun isn’t visible. The theme description says it can be partially obscured, but must be visible.

However, I’ve been known to overinterpret, so hopefully U-Man can give a more definitive clarification on what he’d like to see allowed/disallowed.

I will wait on U-Man’s final call, but do have a ton of Bees for this one, so I am not worried.

I’ll also bow to U-Man‘s discretion but I would agree with

Elsinore that there’s not enough sun visible in that shot for this theme.

/ennuipoet rushes to the Themes forum to suggest “Sun Behind Buildings”

No, but I am about to submit a Classic for Skylines!

[ennuipoet]

I need a clarification on the Sun may be obscured difficulty. I have a shot where the rising Sun is above the horizon but directly behind a building, the light is breaking around the building making it clear the Sun is up and in frame but not all visible as the big round ball of exploding gas.

(Better give the image so a clearer judgement is made:

http://freeversephotography.com/fark/IMG_2218.jpg

Is this within the parameters of the theme?

Gray See Ass!

[ennuipoet]

Just finished voting for this week…god, there were a lot of REALLY good entries. Kudos to all!

[ennuipoet]

In the end, I really expect them to say no, but I truly feel to many magazines and newspapers feel they shouldn’t have to pay for photography anymore. I don’t take shots expecting to be paid for them, I take them because I like them. If, however, even anyone over and above the Penny Saver wants a shot, then I needs to get paid. 😀

[ennuipoet]

I was surprised to see how many subjects chosen by other photographers I have also photographed. I did consider a U505 picture and I’ve got pictures of Alcatraz, the Staten Island ferry, cargo ships, etc. etc. I should have figured sleeping would use the Nautilus too since our pictures were taken at the same time 😛

I would’ve added my own, but my keepers were all HDR so were right out for this thread.

[ennuipoet]

Yeah most of the Instagrammers were already on FB – but I thought of something else today too. It’s not just the acquisition that”s surprising but the $1B price tag attached to it. Why would they be willing to pay so much for an app that’s probably just a fad? Well, instagram *just* released to Android last week. It was only on iPhones previously. So, perhaps they had to outbid Apple to acquire Instagram since Apple is a fan of acquiring things like that. Say what you will about the “quality” of photos put out by Instagram, it’s a powerful photo editor that is probably better than Picknik (now a Google product) or Aviary (the yahoo replacement for Picknik on Flickr). FB didn’t have much of a photo editor before, now they have access to one of the most sophisticated entry level user ones available.

Several pundits have said FB moved to pick up to head off Google or Microsoft from snatching Instagram. I hadn’t thought about the editor portion of the app, which has to have some real bones to do some of the filters. (Yeah, I kinda gave IG a compliment there, I could replicate all the filters in Photoshop, but it would take real work.)

[ennuipoet]

The acquisition isn’t merely about instagram. Its about now having their software engineers and knocking outs minor social networking rival in the face of their IPO. Also, perhaps trying to lure the vibrant photo community from G+ since FB changed their photo viewer and photo sharing to be exactly like G+’s (ironic since the photo community hated the G+ viewer when it was new).

Not to mention acquiring the Instagram user base. That’s probably the most valuable asset in the transaction.

I can’t believe for a moment that well over 90% of the Instagram user base are not mutually on Facebook. Sure, you will have a few die hards that grumble and perhaps drop off the service, but most are already vigorously…god, how vigorously…sharing their Instagram “photos” via Facebook.

[ennuipoet]

I’m working tonight. I expect to be home around 8-ish. I’ll get your OBO ennuipoet.

If something happens and nobody sees me by 9, someone else can step in. I can’t imagine what would keep me that long, though… gonna be cold, and risk of rain… I ain’t stickin’ around any longer than I has to…

Gray See Ass!

[ennuipoet]

Can someone hit me up with an OBO tonight? I have a Game of Thrones Season 2 Marathon Watching Event which will leave me late to the par-tay?

Here is the relevant code:

Click for Flickr^
“Photo Finish: Hudson River Tugboat Races”

Click For Flickr^
“I’m Sailing Away, Set An Open Course for the Virgin Sea”

Click for Flickr^
“Where it all ends I can’t fathom my friends, If I knew I might toss out my anchor”

Thanks in Advance!

[ennuipoet]

When it becomes available, check out tonight’s Daily Show (April 10). Stewart did a whole segment on the acquisition and “WTF is Instagram?”

Snerk! “A Billion dollars for something to make your photos worse?” Well played Daily Show writers!

[ennuipoet]

I’m likely (given enough chances) to try all 3 of my current lenses, but the biggest difference between your shots and what I’m shooting is the fact that you appear to have been hundreds of yards away, if not more than a mile away from the fireworks. Frontier Field is only 400something feet deep at center. I’ll be shooting from maybe 100 yards away from the launching pads. Likely I’ll be needing the wide angle to get context, as well as to have more field of view and not have to guess at where they’re going to explode.

But, you’ve given me a starting point. My manual lens allows me to make the f-stop “stick” unlike the digitals (which are obviously controlled by the camera), so the 28-70 may be my best bet in this instance, once I get the settings figured out.

I would love the chance to be right up on the Fireworks when they detonate! To be able to shoot the lift off to the explosion would be awesome!

Like Farktographer said, if you can meter before the show it will help. The context works with some shots, but the beauty is in the fire. I was lucky on the first set to be about half a mile from the barges where the launch was happening, so I could get a lot of foreground detail. The long shots over the SoL are nice, but I find them less appealing than the close shots of the first set.

Oh, and one more thing: either use a remote release or a wireless trigger, I also suggest using Mirror Lock Up if you camera has it. Even the explosion can cause a vibration visible in the final shot, so use every precaution for maximum steadiness.

[ennuipoet]

I don’t understand how you can put the value of $1 billion on something like that. Seeing as it’s not a patented idea to have digitized filters, couldn’t a second company do *exactly* the same thing and completely sink instagram by next month?

The tide rises and falls quickly on all these apps and sharing services. I wouldn’t bother investing in one or the other because some will stick around for good, but just as frequently (or even moreso) you see something rise to get bought out for a cool half-million, only to disappear under the surface after the novelty has worn off.

The money isn’t so much in the filters but in the mechanism for sharing the photos on a single click and the intergration with the smart phones. Much as I hate on the HisptaInsta the simplicity for sharing the poorly composed, badly lit photos of people’s breakfast is moderatley brilliant.

It takes three to five steps for me to post something on Flickr or Facebook, on Instagram it takes one, two if you caption. So, that is why Facebook wanted it. Is it a game changer…no, someone else could come along and do it and do it better, but I guess Zuck has money to burn.

[ennuipoet]

I used my 55-200 and just walked right up to the front row, crouched down (to minimize people’s complaints) and shot away. The super close-up shot is the guy on deck. When I shot that one, I cropped out the weight on the bat in-camera so it looked like he was batting. Fortunately, it’s been sunny enough that I could use high shutter speeds.

BTW – Starting in May, every Friday game (and some Saturdays) is followed by fireworks. Does anybody remember which thread it was where somebody posted suggestions for how to shoot them successfully? TIA

Shoot at f8 through f11, ISO 100-200, pull your exposure about 1/2 to full stop below the meter, your exposure time for optimal effect is around 3-4 seconds. I like to shoot on a short tele depending on my vantage point, these were all 24-70 (on an APSC):
http://www.flickr.com/photos/ennuipoet/sets/72157626997124677/

While these were all 70-200,

[ennuipoet]

“inanimate” would eliminate dead leaves floating on the water?

I believe we are trying to rule out swimmers, ducks, people on floats (though maybe not that one) basically, I think we want to rule out life forms under their own power. A leaf, though technically a life form is definitely not under it own’s power.

/Actualy submitters mileage may vary, see you dealer for details.

[ennuipoet]

It seems like the Canon and Nikon have different size sensors since the width of view id slightly different between the two of them even though they’re supposed to have the same lense on both. Also why spend so much time comparing the video modes, when you can get a decent video camera for much less than $3k. I will say that the Canon makes the dancer look much better. The Nikon seems to have added about 80 pounds, at least.

Re video on DSLR’s in general: One gets a three thousand dollar swiss army knife. Yes, the tool is “there” but can you actually use it for anything other than small jobs? Use to the tool appropriate for the job, leave video on a videocamera and let my still camera do it’s job.

[Author]

Posts