It's a bird

by Vian Esterhuizen

submit your photo


Hall of Fame
View past winners from this year

Please participate in Meta
and help us grow.

Tag Info

Hot answers tagged

28

The mountain and the valley obviously are static -- even more from that distance. The clouds, however, move. If you chose a low ISO value, e.g., in the range of 50 to 100, the exposure time might be enough to get washy/faded/blurred clouds. If I calculated it correctly, an ISO value of 100 with the other settings (exluding shutter speed) staying the same ...


13

f/16 will give you sharper image than f/1.4. Yes, diffraction does kick-in at f/16, but it's still not as bad as the optical flaws that are pronounced at f/1.4 in pretty much every f/1.4 lens out there. (see: tests of your particular lens, resolution charts) Also lens coma and astigmatism are worse when lens is wide open than when it's stopped-down. That's ...


10

I can't think of any technical reason for this to be the case. Even assuming that he used the lens at 105mm, if he was more than 387 ft from the closest object in the frame, he could have focused at 750 feet and had everything in focus even at f/5.6, so f/22 was completely unnecessary unless intending to get the shutter speed longer. A faster shutter speed ...


8

Then why don't we set the focus distance to be the nearest as possible, as this will achieve the maximum depth of field? Because it won't. If you focus on a point closer than the hyperfocal point, then the depth of field gets shorter. Infinity is no longer in focus. So the best would be to focus on the object at 0.4m, as it will cover 0.2m to ...


7

You didn't explain where you read this, or what the meaning of "big aperture" means to you - so I'll explain. Certainly you can shoot landscape photography at whatever aperture you wish. Shooting with a wide open aperture is not the most common aperture selection for most landscape photography though. By wide open, I of course mean a wide aperture such as ...


7

If so, which would be more advisable? Assuming you don't have stability or motion issues and depth of field is not a concern then f/16 would be more advisable than f/1.4 as ultra-fast lenses show several image degrading aberrations when the aperture is wide open. However f/5.6 would probably be better still, as diffraction starts to kick in past this ...


7

Your options are limited; the fog is an opaque item and post processing can only do so much. You can enhance or reduce the impact of the fog by adjusting contrast. It may or may not help much, it may impact other parts of your image. but effectively, the fog is turning the image into a very low contrast image, so increasing contrast can reduce it's impact. ...


6

There are a few different ways to emphasize crepuscular rays in post production. 1) One of the ways those crepuscular rays can be enhanced is with any tool that can provide volumetric lighting effects. The one I use is a tool called Rays from Digital Film Tools. As you mentioned, this type of tool may be the type to add fake rays to a photo. However, I ...


6

The photographer chose a slightly higher ISO to compensate for using f/22 aperture (small opening = less light). You may ask, so why not make the shutter speed longer? The shutter speed was set to 1/6th of a second, rather than say 10 seconds, so that the image is nice and sharp, it may have been windy and might have shaken the tripod even just a little bit. ...


6

To put it in old-school terms, you have a good negative here. It just needs to be printed properly. That means local manipulation of brightness and contrast. I can give you some suggestions that will allow to to create my picture, but it would be best for all concerned if I gave you some suggestions that will allow you to create your picture. First off, the ...


6

Focusing at a point closer than the hyperfocal point loses the depth of field at infinity. For example, if the hyperfocal point is 1.2m, and you focus at 1.2m, then your depth of field is from .6m to infinity. HOWEVER, if you focus at a point closer than 1.2m, say 1.0m, your depth of fields drop to between .55m and ~6m. You can see the effects subject ...


4

As user32334 notes, there is a lot of personal preference in a photo. It may be easier to change friends or ignore opinions than to try to please everyone :-). I won't start to try to give general advice as '32334 has done. I looked at that and decided that my chances of improving on it were small. Instead I'll take the opposite tack and just comment on ...


4

I'll tell you right away that there is no chance for me to answer without being very technical. Since you're looking for an open source solution it cuts away all of the commonly used programs and leaves us with a bunch of programs that require more from the user. The advanced part has nothing to do with photography though. The technicalities lies in ...


4

You say "I have one small focus point, but if I am shooting the entire skyline, wouldn't it throw the rest out of focus? Or should I change to Manual Focus?" This suggests to me that you have a basic misconception about how focus works, and that understanding that better will help with the whole problem. No matter how it's done, a camera lens can only ...


4

The first thing to know about fog is that its effect is more pronounced with distance. The best is to get as close as possible. Do not zoom in, get closer instead. Don't fall into the cliff though! Second is that fog reflects light. Do not flash it. Shoot it from an angle where the fog receives the least light from other sources, such as street lamps. ...


4

You can either use a flash to expose the subject (you won't be able to see them walking into or out of the frame), or you can, as you suggest, take two shots and blend them in Photoshop - a matter of a few minutes work. Making an exposure blended shot would require the subject to stand preternaturally still between shots for a decent effect.


3

Assuming you are using a tripod, the shutter speed will make little difference in itself. If you are hand-holding, a faster shutter speed will help to eliminate shake. You also have the consideration of any moving objects in the scene, like trees, water, or clouds - a slower shutter speed will blur them. However, image quality is rarely at its best at ...


3

The distance of the objects is not a factor on your decision on the shutter speed. Their relative movement velocity related to the camera as well as your composition intentions and the available light is what really matters. The fact that you ask the question hints that you don't know about the artistic differences between a large aperture and a small one ...


3

I want to corroborate what chuqui said above and add a bit more detail. Fog works like adding white to all pixels, and it reduces both your sharpness and contrast. Any algorithm that tackles one of these two can be helpful to you. The classics are overall contrast, unsharp mask (try a large radius then a small one) and smart sharpen. But there are also more ...


3

Step 1: Duplicate layer As we don't want to do any destructive editing, make sure you duplicate your layer (Layer>Duplicate Layer) and rename it. Quick Selection ToolStep 2: Selection If your foreground detail is out of the fog and it's the background you want to clear up you'll need to do a simple selection so the foreground stays as is. The Quick ...


3

If your objective is to get as much as possible of your subject in focus and you know in advance that most of your subject is beyond the half-hyperfocal distance then this may be helpful advice that simplifies the focusing process in setting up your shot. However, there are at least a couple complicating factors: The hyperfocal distance changes with the ...


3

I wouldn't change the image at all. You could lift the shadows slightly with the shadows slider or even increase the exposure(which would require compensation of highlights to save the sky), but I don't think this image needs either. If you did lift the shadows it would all start to look pretty mute which to me is not desirable. You have more options if ...


3

Without the 70D, you cannot print that image that little bit larger. Without the 10-18mm, you cannot get that image at all. Remember: This does not hold true in general. The 70D might as well be the key equipment required to get a certain shot, but that shot will not be a landscape shot.


3

Sure. Framing is a technique in composition where objects in the photo direct the viewers attention by covering (usually) one or more edges, creating a sort of frame-within-the-frame. In landscape photography, this is usually foreground trees or rocks — but it doesn't have to be. It could be a building, or even people. In Raphael's Sistine Madonna, the ...


3

You don't need waterfalls, beaches, or volcanos to test what exposure length your camera can handle without excessive noise, ISO settings, tripod issues, sunlight versus cloudy, etc. You can test all that in your back yard. The only thing you can't test that way is optimal length of exposure for the effect you are trying to achieve. However, that is ...


3

You could practice getting long exposures of roadways with moving cars, assuming you have some of those available... that's probably my most common reason for messing with an ND filter, since I don't really like the look of moving cars frozen in place. Image below is a 1-second exposure of the Arroyo Seco Parkway. Something that I just thought of to add ...


2

I can't buy the clouds moving being an issue here. However, I can think of one reason that would be invisible: There are mobile objects near the photographer that sometimes get in the frame. He shot quickly to avoid them. He might have shot several, this is just the one that actually worked. I do think it's more likely an oops, though.


2

If the question is meant literally f/1.4 vs f/16, then I would say 16, because there are only handful of lenses that are good enough at f/1.4 to shoot landscape type of photography in great technical quality. But my mindset about setting aperture (for these types of shots or others) is different. In this kind of photography you should set your aperture to: ...


2

Most of the time, a "big" f-number is recommended for landscape photography. But a high f-number such as f/16 or f/22, when dealing with APS-C or FF cameras, means a very narrow or small aperture. The large aperture is at the other end of the scale at f/1.4 or f/2. See What is aperture, and how does it affect my photographs?


2

Zoom lenses have more versatility since they can, well, zoom. If you want to get a picture of a specific portion of the landscape, or if you spot a wild animal, you may consider a zoom. The main disadvantage is that zoom lenses usually have a smaller maximum aperture when compared to prime lenses, and are more susceptible to geometric distortion when you ...



Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible