Decided to make a little project for myself...
The resized version is a pretty typical tourist shot:
but here's a 100% crop of the original:
The original is 23876x10369, or roughly 248MP.
wow, thats very impressive. 248mp !! omg !
how many pics is that ?
Turo, forgot to comment on that shot in Flickr, great colors,
you know, yada yada yada :)
The search function probably had a heart attack trying to figure which of Rooz' 5,200 odd posts you wanted to look at:D A veritable machine gun poster.
Originally Posted by JerBear
Originally Posted by rawpaw18
I found this interesting looking flower while hiking through a mountain in Puerto Rico. I tried to take the picture to give it a a "3D" look (using macro mode on the 35-70 for the shallow DOF).
Thank you Rooz, Accord and Tori for your kind words on the sunrise shot! :)
And, yes Tori, that's Active D-Lighting at work...combined with careful use of spot metering and AE-Lock (thank you Rooz for giving me the keys to setting up the camera for flawless exposure operation). That is how the scene looked as the foregroud was in shadow/silhouette due to the low angle of the sun. No more need for HDR or even graduated ND filters for that matter as far as I'm concerned. ;)
And VisReal...there's no more need to "be careful" with Active D-Lighting than with any other component of setting the exposure or any other setting one may choose when photographing a scene. That shot is with it cranked to the max...and I have had unanimous positive reaction to the shot here and in other quarters. Plus, it is a faithful repesentation of the light at the physical location. But, even if it wasn't, the exposure represents my intention. To me, it's all about knowing the light and knowing your camera and ALL of its settings and their behavior in varying shooting situations.. And that's true across-the-board...not just with Active D. Also, I think you may be confusing Active-D Lighting with the after-the-fact D-Lighting effect...
I know (well, I hope) you’re being facetious but it brings up something that has to be said. The fact that you get any image at all on any camera has nothing to do with "skill" and everything to do with the technology. The camera is a tool. Some tools are better suited to certain jobs than others and do things differently than others and have features that are different than others. The fact that a hammer happens to drive a nail has nothing to do with skill. It is what a hammer does. But, some people can drive nails straight and some can't. That's a matter of skill. So, I don't like it when people confuse the capability of a tool with the practitioner's application of the tool...even in jest. Sermon over. ;)
Originally Posted by K1W1
Hey guys, first post- Comments and suggestions welcomed be kind please :)
And at the risk of breaking the 1 image a day rule, I'd be really interested in what you guys think of this shot: