Not Your Everyday Banana

by Bart Arondson

submit your photo


Hall of Fame
View past winners from this year

Please participate in Meta
and help us grow.

1,901 reputation
415
bio website tangentsoft.net
location Aztec, NM
age 40
visits member for 3 years, 4 months
seen 18 hours ago

Software developer, professional since the early 90s, amateur back to the mid 80s.

Maintainer of MySQL++.

Maintainer of the Winsock Programmer's FAQ.

Pixel pusher for fun, mostly photography, but some 3D (my avatar is one of my pieces) and 2D art.


Jun
30
comment Long exposure photoshop?
@MattGrum: I dunno. Photoshop is awfully powerful in itself, and in the right hands, it is capable of wonders. The new motion blur path feature in Photoshop CC 2014 would help sell a faux water blur in a rocky stream by letting you shape the blur over the rocks. If you're not on the CC train, some judicious liquification should do the trick.
Jun
22
answered Lightroom: Photoshop documents not displaying in catalogue
Jun
18
comment Long exposure photoshop?
+1, but you might add some more detail on the "Replacing the black background with the original photo" step. I'd do that with a blend mode (lighten?) but you might have another technique.
Jun
18
answered Long exposure photoshop?
May
31
comment How to improve sky's saturation and contrast to get a similar result?
I went ahead and tried that experiment. I have the advantage that I could simply load the 8-bit JPEG version of the underexposed original back into Lightroom, then copy over the adjustments. The result was far from identical. There was no banding, due I believe to automatic dithering in Lightroom. It was overly contrasty, though, indicating dynamic range compression. The JPEG artifacts became highly visible, too, especially in the sky.
May
23
comment How to improve sky's saturation and contrast to get a similar result?
@Revious: Some boxes of crayons are bigger than others. Another of my answers here explains the technical aspects. Try this: download the first pic above and try to make it look like the second. You might get fairly close, but the result will have banding, clipping, or both. Why? All three pics above are JPEGs. JPEG is fine for final presentation, but no good if you need to do strong brightness correction.
May
22
revised How to improve sky's saturation and contrast to get a similar result?
replaced polarized photo with a better exemplar; added angle of view commentary
May
22
comment How to improve sky's saturation and contrast to get a similar result?
I don't think we're really disagreeing. You're just making a distinction between light from the sky and light from the haze. To me, it's all skylight. I make a distinction between the sky and the haze, but only in the sense that it's a 3D veil between the camera and distant objects. 3D, because the farther the subject, the deeper the haze.
May
22
revised How to improve sky's saturation and contrast to get a similar result?
given revelation that the cat pic isn't exposure-blended, rewrote para about how the photographer got that result; other minor tweaks
May
22
comment How to improve sky's saturation and contrast to get a similar result?
@Rmano: That's just a way to try to achieve in an automated way what I did by hand. It can work. I occasionally use the "Auto" button in Lightroom to similar effect; it gives me a result I'm happy with about 20% of the time. I think care and taste played a lot in achieving my final result, however. A computer wouldn't know how to strike the balance between "not enough" and "too much."
May
22
answered How to improve sky's saturation and contrast to get a similar result?
May
22
comment How to improve sky's saturation and contrast to get a similar result?
Polarizers don't fix haze. Detail obscured is lost forever. It's no different than trying to take a clear picture through a window with gauzy curtains drawn. (Skylight/haze filters don't remove haze, either; they just bias the colors a smidge to cancel some of the blueness. The detail is still gone.) A polarizer can help the mountain pic, but it works by reducing the amount of light from the sky, by taking advantage of the non-polarized nature of off-axis sky light.
May
22
comment How to improve sky's saturation and contrast to get a similar result?
+1, but a polarizer would have done nothing good for the cat picture. Polarizers have the strongest effect when the sun comes from 90˚ to the lens axis, and the least at 0˚ and 180˚. All a polarizer will do here is increase the risk of flare. (It would do good things to the mountain pic, though.) The cat image has clearly been manipulated out-of-camera. In addition to the oddly-lit space on the shady side of the far building, another telltale is the sky near the window edge above the cat. See the gradient? That's a darkening effect with too much feathering.
May
22
revised How to improve sky's saturation and contrast to get a similar result?
grammar and spelling fixes
May
22
suggested suggested edit on How to improve sky's saturation and contrast to get a similar result?
May
21
comment New head for Bogen tripod
@numberwang: The 3047 is basically a larger 3030. The handles are longer and it uses huge (~3") hex QR plates, which are inappropriate for anything smaller than a medium format camera. The 3047 also has built-in bubble levels, which the 3030 lacks. The X Pro leveling system looks better designed than the 3047's. Based on the pics, the X Pro looks roughly the same size as the 3030, except that the handles can retract to reduce bulk. The X Pro has adjustable friction, which the other two lack. It lets you set a minimum drag on movement; this smooths pans, reduces risk of "dumping" the lens, etc.
May
21
revised New head for Bogen tripod
assorted clarifications
May
21
revised New head for Bogen tripod
added QR plate stuff; added 3030 commentary; noted ⅜-16 standard; other minor improvements
May
21
answered New head for Bogen tripod
Apr
5
awarded  Nice Answer