India Point Park

India Point Park
by matt-ball                

Submit your Photo
Hall of Fame

Please participate in Meta
and help us grow.

Hot answers tagged

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

According to author's annotation to the image at 500px, it was taken in desert of Medina, Kuwait. It was submitted for inclusion with Ubuntu by someone else, and luckily the Albanian photographer Shady S. was happy to give his permission. More generally, you'll need a location with no light pollution from surroundings. Technique-wise, have a look at already ...


7

I have done a bit of climbing with a DSLR, and a lot of hiking with one. If you're climbing with it, you don't want it on your chest, and if you want it accessible, you don't want it on your back. This means that most of your options are holster style bags. I have a tamrac one which happens to be shower proof when closed (in reality it's been more than ...


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

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.


4

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.


4

I've tried to capture the rays of light in the forest many times, and have largely only had middling success. Eventually, however, I realized that the problem is one of contrast. The contrast between the dark forest and the bright light is what makes these scenes interesting. The solution is to increase the contrast between the rays of light and the ...


3

Here's the text from the proposal that's causing the stir, and it's indeed troublesome to say the least: Considers that the commercial use of photographs, video footage or other images of works which are permanently located in physical public places should always be subject to prior authorisation from the authors or any ...


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 ...


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

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

So thinking logically about your question, both the Canon T3i and the 70D are both APS-C cameras and 18mp against the 20mp of the 70D means there's nothing in it, 5472 x 3648 70D against 5184 x 3456 T3i(aka 600D) image resolution. Both cameras are equally capable of taking an excellent quality photograph! After all it's the person behind the camera that ...


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

To capture images like this you will need The night of a new moon (the moon will wash out the image otherwise). You may be able to get away with a sliver of a moon as well. Log exposure, I usually opt for below the 30 second range so that you wont see star trails. Unless you are trying to shoot star trails they are fun as well. A tripod or something to ...


3

The focus on outdoors use and specifically the combination of backpacking and canoeing/kayaking make this a difficult recommendation, I think, if you are focused on learning photography instead of just "taking pictures." For backpacking, I'm not excited about the notion of taking a full-frame DSLR along. Back in the day I carried a film SLR a few times and ...


2

Another disadvantage not mentioned before is: Focus stacking takes a lot of time, in particular in the postprocessing phase. This is a multi-step process, (comprising at least align+stack). You need to get familiar with special-purpose software, and there are countless ways to try different parameter settings at the PC. Tiniest erros add up and must be ...


2

You can use a camera or lens that offers tilt capability. The zone of sharp focus doesn't get any wider, but it tilts. Example: the bottom of the frame is focused a foot away, the top of the frame is focused slightly past infinity. If that matches the way your scene is laid out it can appear you have insanely deep DoF even though the DoF at any given point ...


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 ...


2

The article you cite is not very good advice if you want great sharpness for landscape photography: it’s based on the concepts of depth of field and hyperfocal distance. These concepts are intended to help the photographer find the required aperture for getting barely acceptable sharpness across the relevant parts of the picture. What the author (like many ...


2

There's no sharp limit between in and out of focus. Everything but the focal plane at some exact distance is out of focus, it is just so slightly so that we don't notice it. There are two reasons why somebody would choose focusing further than the hyperfocal distance - the first being that when you focus exactly on something further than hyperfocal distance ...


2

This might sound lame but you could use a hose or tap to make your own "waterfalls". Even putting objects in the way to change the path of the water and see what it does to the water trails. Try it at different times of day or different light to see how it affects the outcome. All my long exposures have always been a very digital age way of doing it. Try ...


2

If you need to have as much as possible including infinity sharp, it's better to focus at the hyperfocal distance instead of infinity. Then everything from half the hyperfocal distance to infinity is acceptably sharp. There are websites and smartphone apps to calculate that distance. I'm not sure what you mean by "It is my understanding that with manual ...


2

Your case is typical problem with high contrast/dynamic range situation. As no sensor can reproduce the dynamic range of the human eye, you can use several ways to create image which somehow represent your view of the light. The first way is to expose based on the metering of sky. This will help you not to lose details in bright areas and still have some ...


2

You could experiment with a graduated neutral-density filter which can partially "block" the light from the sky to bring the entire scene within the dynamic range capabilities of the camera sensor / film.


2

I think the question is mainly about performance of various lenses. Set at 18mm your 18-105 will shoot the same field of view as the 18-55 set at 18mm. However that does not mean the pictures will come out the same. Generally speaking the 18-55 is a sharp lens across the range it servers (I dont own an 18-105 so I cant really comment). A lot of people really ...


2

The problem here is that once you threw in "wildlife at a distance", you pretty much nixed most everything else except for dSLRs as well as the "starter" part of the equation. Wildlife, especially fast-moving wildlife, is a very specialized and equipment-demanding type of shooting that causes some of us to blow thousands of bucks on a lens and a higher-end ...


2

I am no climber, but I'm a big fan of Peak Design's Capture Pro. It's a clip that you can attach to your backpack strap or harness. You use a standard quick release plate on your camera and can quickly slide the camera into the clip. To release it you press a release button (which can also be locked for extra security), and with a smaller camera like a ...


2

I've been struggling with this myself lately. Some things that I've learned include: Using leading lines to direct the eye towards interesting things in your photo Isolating your subject (which can be something interesting in your landscape) using focus, depth, color, or other properties Have some interesting foreground in photos of far away things Use ...


2

First of people have asked this question already before you: What are other popular composition techniques in addition to The Rule of Thirds? Here's my point of view: In painting these tips are the same. Research painting composition techniques instead of photography for composition. Painting's out there for a much longer time. A lot of photography elements ...



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