The Creative Photography Thread - If It Ain't Bokeh, Don't Fix It - General

Newbury racecourse sunrise timelapse up in this bitch. [editline]22nd April 2011[/editline] In an hour.

[QUOTE=Jaanus;29343927]It's not the road - It's smooth as fuck. If it were the road, the bumpyness would be irregular. It's not the camera, because the rest of the scene is in perfect focus. [editline]22nd April 2011[/editline] (no ghosting or blur)[/QUOTE] Was IS on? Looks like very slight camera shake to me.

Sitting here at 4:15 can't sleep because of my late shift last night So what am I going to do? Well I think I'm gonna wait until about 5:00 and go out and take some pics of the beautiful morning.

268/365 - It's hard to choose out of 36 shots. I always go through the roll later and completely change my mind. Here's what I have picked out at first glance, though. [url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/steveotto/5641960615/][img]http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5001/5641960615_1a8b71cdc0_z.jpg[/img][/url] [img]http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5141/5641961575_a3c53df472_z.jpg[/img] [img]http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5265/5642531394_ca4d7b0f5f_z.jpg[/img] [QUOTE=Edthefirst;29347032]these suck, come up with better ones [/QUOTE] I'll give it a whack. "The Creative Photography Thread: [url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H_H8TOKcfjg]Polish My Lens, Girl."[/url]

Timelapse started :dance: The racecourse is misty. s'gon be gooood.

pics will be up soon

snip

My camera froze D: Might've missed the very start of the sunrise. Not that you can see the sun really in the frame. [img]http://i.imgur.com/UjBWv.jpg[/img]

[url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/dannimagn/5642091891/][img]http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5049/5642091891_4df7c2ecfd_z.jpg[/img][/url] [url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/dannimagn/5642091891/]_4224526.jpg[/url] by [url=http://www.flickr.com/people/dannimagn/]Dannimagn[/url], on Flickr [url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/dannimagn/5642661842/][img]http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5145/5642661842_01c93cd4bc_z.jpg[/img][/url] [url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/dannimagn/5642661842/]_4224530.jpg[/url] by [url=http://www.flickr.com/people/dannimagn/]Dannimagn[/url], on Flickr [url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/dannimagn/5642092527/][img]http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5043/5642092527_ab525e67b3_z.jpg[/img][/url] [url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/dannimagn/5642092527/]_4224534.jpg[/url] by [url=http://www.flickr.com/people/dannimagn/]Dannimagn[/url], on Flickr Good morning facepunch staying up til 5 in the morning totally worth it

imma take my camera to school tomorrow. I hear the local park has a kinetic perpetual motion chair. name for new thread: time lapse kills. OR film isn't dead! [editline]21st April 2011[/editline] [url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/7451701@N07/5623204915/][img]http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5145/5623204915_8eec9bce5c_z.jpg[/img][/url] [url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/7451701@N07/5623204915/]DSC_0045[/url] by [url=http://www.flickr.com/people/7451701@N07/]superfunkyjam[/url], on Flickr

[QUOTE=squish;29347864]Was IS on? Looks like very slight camera shake to me.[/QUOTE] the 24-70 f/2.8L doesn't have IS [QUOTE=Roswell34;29344727]dunno, mirror slap? what was the camera situated on? camera to tripod on top of some bridge[/QUOTE] Again, everything else is sharp. If the camera had moved, It'd be blurry

4 seconds is too short for it to be anything on your end, the other lights would be blurred too. it has to be the cars bumpin 'round.

[img]http://img10.imageshack.us/img10/5375/dsc1414c.jpg[/img] I was having brightness issues with this one, thought I could fix it in B&W but I don't think it worked out. Any thoughts?

Jaanus, next time you're at the same spot use the zoom function in movie mode or live view at 10x to see if it's shaking at all. Sucks the 24-70 doesn't have IS. Still an amazing lens nonetheless.

[img]http://dl.dropbox.com/u/2668640/Artisticphotos/TG11/roofsun.jpg[/img] Gettin some sun through the roof. [img]http://dl.dropbox.com/u/2668640/Artisticphotos/TG11/3x.jpg[/img] Tired eh. Not really artistic IMO, but I like to share the stuff either way.

[url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/isaacbrownbridge/5622078028/][img]http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5269/5622078028_7480bd3f3e_z.jpg[/img][/url] [url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/isaacbrownbridge/5622078028/]CNV00029[/url] by [url=http://www.flickr.com/people/isaacbrownbridge/]Isaac Brownbridge[/url], on Flickr [url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/isaacbrownbridge/5621487909/][img]http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5068/5621487909_66637874ef_z.jpg[/img][/url] [url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/isaacbrownbridge/5621487909/]CNV00019[/url] by [url=http://www.flickr.com/people/isaacbrownbridge/]Isaac Brownbridge[/url], on Flickr [url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/isaacbrownbridge/5621486069/][img]http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5264/5621486069_fba8555639_z.jpg[/img][/url] [url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/isaacbrownbridge/5621486069/]CNV00006[/url] by [url=http://www.flickr.com/people/isaacbrownbridge/]Isaac Brownbridge[/url], on Flickr The Zenit 11 is quite a fun camera to use.

[img]http://dl.dropbox.com/u/2668640/Artisticphotos/TG11/sittinhere.jpg[/img] Right is my computer, left is my friend who sometimes likes to post some photos here, but only when I tell him that he should.

Is that a floppy drive?

Where?

I think it's a card reader/fan controller.

The Creative Photography Thread: ~POST 1 COMMENT 3~ ?

If you're talking about the thing on the front of my friends computer with the green light, then it's a card reader indeed.

[QUOTE=Jaanus;29349412]the 24-70 f/2.8L doesn't have IS Again, everything else is sharp. If the camera had moved, It'd be blurry[/QUOTE] it isn't the cars, it's too uniform across all vehicles, and if that's only 4 seconds of exposure then the passengers would have been living through what would feel like an earthquake. Whilst the ground and surrounding area may SEEM sharp, there is a little bounce to it all. It's just because of the sharpness of the car lights that you see the minor variance in them, though admittedly the ground should [i]appear[/i] a little more blurred. The blur of everything in ambient light isn't as harsh as it would seem, if you look at the variance along a line drawn at the center of the 'wave' there's only 2 or so pixels in either direction, and 4 seconds worth of shaking back and forth only a few pixels would probably yield a mostly sharp image, with minute ghosting in either direction. Vibrations are too constant to be shutter slap or whatever you want to call it, it was probably either the result of a steady wind causing a little shake (was your strap dangling from the camera?), from road vibrations if you were on a bridge, or if you were on a building there's obviously a few factors like air systems or reverberations from wind blowing on the building as a whole. Alright done breaking quarantine, back to work for me :slick:

The Creative Photography Thread - Is that a telephoto in your pocket or are you just happy to see me?

[QUOTE=Dierag;29351491]The Creative Photography Thread - Is that a telephoto in your pocket or are you just happy to see me?[/QUOTE] Yes. [img]http://i.imgur.com/h9W4c.jpg[/img]

[url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/58903109@N06/5633770065/][img]http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5186/5633770065_3e7c6af474.jpg[/img][/url] [url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/58903109@N06/5633770065/]DSC03946[/url] by [url=http://www.flickr.com/people/58903109@N06/]/fa/ggot[/url], on Flickr

[QUOTE=The Ninjas;29351423]it isn't the cars, it's too uniform across all vehicles[/QUOTE] It's uniform for each [i]pair[/i] of lights. There is a lot of variation between individual cars, especially between opposing lanes. Also you aren't explaining why the traffic lights are un-touched by these 'vibrations'.

[QUOTE=bopie;29351863]It's uniform for each [i]pair[/i] of lights. There is a lot of variation between individual cars, especially between opposing lanes. Also you aren't explaining why the traffic lights are un-touched by these 'vibrations'.[/QUOTE] [img_thumb]http://www.jaanus.cc/pictures/2011-04-22_0009.png[/img_thumb] bringing it over so people can look without page change the difference in the wavelength in each pair of lights from each other pair of lights is determined by the speed of a car. If we knew the frequency of the vibrations you could give a rough estimate of meters-per-second per vehicle, or you could consider distance traveled over the 4 seconds we know the frame took, but cars A and B run off the edge of the frame [though due to like variables in the vibration frequencies you can estimate their endpoints). Despite not having the vibratory integer and being too lazy to do quick distance estimations to figure out the dimensions of the intersection for cross-reference to the lengths of each car's travel, we can still determine relative speeds through visual approximation using the closeness of each wave's peak. I have rated the rough average speeds on a scale of 0-10 in this picture, along with marking each car for reference. [img]http://gyazo.com/d027858088cbf7cf1b2029c8a1ec0e93.png[/img] D and E have their tail lights noted for sake of position; and D was missing his right tail light but you can tell it was a car and not a motorcycle because you see the reflection of the street light off the rear window (probably a sedan) which starts halfway between D and E's tail lights. As for the stop lights, they ARE actually blurred a bit. Closer inspection shows skewing of the hotspot on every one of them, including car C's tail lights and all of the spot-reflections along the edges of the roof of the car. This provides the angle at which the camera was moving, though that could also be determined by the harshness of each wave as it moved to-and-from based on the angle of the lightsource's movement to the camera, but that's just unnecessary math in this already deep use of applied physics :science: [img]http://gyazo.com/5bf5a324f6362ff68f88a007dbee0d99.png[/img] there IS a slowing of vibration right towards the end (note the bottom end of A's trail, slightly higher up B's [right next to the letter B],and at the top end of E's trail). As shown with B and E, though, the tremor hits back, harder than before. [editline]1:11[/editline] also car E was one of those assholes who gets ALL the way over the line even though the light is still red, then waits there near cross-traffic making everyone feel uncomfortable, and car B was likely a taxi or something, noted by the yellow lit bar that was on top of it making that third streak. I'm not sure what estonian taxis are like, but that one drove SLOWER than the car next to it, [i]AND[/i] in a straight line. If that were in Chicago the taxi would have already cut off car A by the start of the exposure then gotten back into his own lane for no explicable reason. [editline]1:11[/editline] minor addendum, over the course of 4 seconds the camera vibrated approximately 30 times [as counted via B's longest trail plus the end calculated from wave patterns of E's end], equating to 7.5 times per second, slightly faster than the [url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WFphW0tOnpw&feature=related]D7000 can snap pictures [6 per second].[/url] this is a moderately sluggish pace, so I'd attribute it to natural movements of the structure he was on.

[img]http://dl.dropbox.com/u/2668975/Creative%20Photography/Diverse%20for%20deling/Hanne%20og%20nattfari.jpg[/img]

[url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/tacoslut/5643350348/][img]http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5042/5643350348_078ca5c426.jpg[/img][/url] [url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/tacoslut/5643350348/]Pocket contents [10/52][/url] by [url=http://www.flickr.com/people/tacoslut/]tacoslut[/url], on Flickr I really need to get into a routine of taking more photos. Apologies for the really hipster shot.