The "Creative Photography " Thread [v2] In Memoriam

[dai]

[QUOTE=pedroion;26960514]dai's gonna hit you[/QUOTE]

Bokeh rape, it is not. Probably one of the best uses of the effect I've seen in a long while. I actually teach people about bokeh and how to modify the bokeh shapes when talking about aperture. Knowing how to use it right instead of accidentally finding out 'bad focus makes cool shapes' makes an artistic world of difference.

also, found a Canon Photura at the local thrift shop for $3.99, they thought it was broken but I ripped it apart and found there was a roll of film jammed in the roller, seems it got cut away from the main roll canister because that wasn't in there. A little gutting and replacing a spring and it works perfect.

Time to play around :buddy:

[img]http://gyazo.com/ddd40c0550db7fd7b22c3cfe91ffc916.png[/img]

[url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=euoNZKNuTLo&feature=player_embedded]1990's commercial[/url]

[evilking1]

50mm 1.8, dropped mine 1,5 metres to hardwood floor, the rear plastic part came off (the one between the glass and the plastic mount), all I did was snap it into place and worked perfectly.

It's light and good lens with amazing optics for the price, all it has is a crappy focusing motor though. Manual focusing ring sucks but it's well built enough for me if it can stand the drop and not break down as in not working.

[editline]27th December 2010[/editline]

Also is there any other reason to get EX580 over the cheaper one other than the commander ablility and higher power?

[Bek___]

I just picked up the 50mm 1.8 today actually. Was on sale. Got a picture of my friend's dog. I never knew 1.8f could be so shallow.

[url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/bohanpang/5295115821/][img]http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5123/5295115821_f18cda31e8.jpg[/img][/url]
[url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/bohanpang/5295115821/]Marley[/url] by [url=http://www.flickr.com/people/bohanpang/]Bohan Pang[/url], on Flickr

Shot could've been A LOT better.

[evilking1]

Good shot still, far from dull "bokeh on glass of coke and half of it is annoyingly out of focus"

[Bek___]

Yeah that would bother me quite a bit.

[evilking1]

the canon 50mm has quite bad bokeh imho though

[url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/49599407@N03/4549113996/][img]http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4043/4549113996_ff8a854222.jpg[/img][/url]
[url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/49599407@N03/4549113996/]P6242166[/url] by [url=http://www.flickr.com/people/49599407@N03/]OM-1n[/url], on Flickr

This (one of those classic boring shots I've been talking - although not technically composed from the worst end I've seen (and that should tell you a lot from the worst end...), dull still) is with the Olympus Zuiko 50mm 1.8, I should probably run a test between those lenses sometimes...

[mrcsb]

thank god the next 50 up has 8 aperture blades instead of 5

[codenamecueball]

and a giant price difference

[buttspoonce]

Stayed a few days in wine country. When we got there it was rainy for most of the day and i ended up taking only 80 photos. The next day it was sunny and perfect weather to set up my camera and take some landscape shots of the mountains and vine yards. As soon as I turn my camera on, batteries go flat. :smith:

so i couldn't really take any good photos. I did go to the biggest light display in Australia though. Most of the photos i took turned out pretty bad because i had no tripod, but here's what i got

my favourite
[url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/andysp/5296675374/][img]http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5129/5296675374_797bc1be92_z.jpg[/img][/url]

on the way there, took around 2 and a half hours
[url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/andysp/5296106053/][img]http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5162/5296106053_196be1bd30_z.jpg[/img][/url]

hipster b&w wine photo
[url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/andysp/5296704600/][img]http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5085/5296704600_86ff06d2a6_z.jpg[/img][/url]

rave cactus
[url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/andysp/5296711152/][img]http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5049/5296711152_671ab03526_b.jpg[/img][/url]

older brother and my little step brother
[url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/andysp/5296711018/][img]http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5244/5296711018_62409c4e66_z.jpg[/img][/url]

[url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/andysp/5296131585/][img]http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5241/5296131585_f7808f8952_z.jpg[/img][/url]

[Edthefirst]

I really like the first one. I think it would have been better however if it was cropped in a bit more. It's hard to see the detail especially in the scaled down web version.

[editline]27th December 2010[/editline]

Actually scratch that. Just saw a larger size one on your flickr. Good stuff.

[Uber|nooB]

[QUOTE=Khaos-23;26899123]I want to buy a really sharp new lens with a large aperture for my Canon 550D.

[b]Canon EF 28mm f/1.8 USM[/b]
[b]Price:[/b] $509.00 AUD

[img_thumb]http://media.the-digital-picture.com/Images/Review/Canon-EF-28mm-f-1.8-USM-Lens.jpg[/img_thumb]

[b]Canon EF 24mm f/1.4 L II USM[/b]
[b]Price:[/b] $1690.00 AUD

[img_thumb]http://media.the-digital-picture.com/Images/Review/Canon-EF-24mm-f-1.4-L-II-USM-Lens.jpg[/img_thumb]

I know there's a huge price difference between the two. But I am wondering if the L-series is worth it. Is there that much of a difference? Should I stick with the f/1.8 or is there some kind of lens which is 'in-between' these two?[/QUOTE]

You could also consider looking into the Sigma 30mm f/1.4

[that1dude24]

[QUOTE=evilking1;26990809]the canon 50mm has quite bad bokeh imho though
[/QUOTE]

It isn't even "imho", it's quite bad. It's pentagonal, and anything other than very scarce use just looks ugly.
[url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/44506590@N05/5297613496/][img]http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5163/5297613496_f429813e2d_z.jpg[/img][/url]

Taken with my 50mm, and the bokeh seems to be distracting more than anything else.

[mrcsb]

[QUOTE=codenamecueball;26997030]and a giant price difference[/QUOTE]
and AF that doesn't suck, FTM focusing, better-than-a-toy build quality, another half stop of light, etc

it's only $250 more for all that and bokeh that isn't god awful when not shooting wide open

[Bek___]

Can someone explain to me what a double or multiple exposure is? And/or how it is done? I've never quite understood it.

[Roswell34]

[QUOTE=iWumbo;27004308]Can someone explain to me what a double or multiple exposure is? And/or how it is done? I've never quite understood it.[/QUOTE]

basically to superimpose things over each other
can be done with software
example
[img]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/0b/Lunar-eclipse-2004.jpg[/img]
(from wikimedia)

[Ronin]

I did the same thing when the lunar eclipse happened.

[Uber|nooB]

[QUOTE=iWumbo;27004308]Can someone explain to me what a double or multiple exposure is? And/or how it is done? I've never quite understood it.[/QUOTE]

With film, basically you're taking a picture without winding the film forward, so you get superimposed images in one frame. With digital, you can just use photoshop or something to achieve this very easily given two separate images.

[Roll_Program]

[QUOTE=iWumbo;27004308]Can someone explain to me what a double or multiple exposure is? And/or how it is done? I've never quite understood it.[/QUOTE]

Take multiple pictures, overly them in photoshop.

[evilking1]

Or you can put it to super-long exposure, open the lens cap and put it back on (what people did before shutters) and you have taken an image - repeat the opening lens cap and putting it back on to take another image - and when the camera stops taking the exposure you are done.

[squish]

[QUOTE=evilking1;27008059]Or you can put it to super-long exposure, open the lens cap and put it back on (what people did before shutters) and you have taken an image - repeat the opening lens cap and putting it back on to take another image - and when the camera stops taking the exposure you are done.[/QUOTE]
I've heard this is done quite regularly with fireworks shots.

[DemonDog]

Playing with new camera;
(uncompressed pictures)
[img_thumb]http://img210.imageshack.us/img210/8136/dscn0164a.jpg[/img_thumb]
[img_thumb]http://img413.imageshack.us/img413/9563/dscn0120e.jpg[/img_thumb]

[Bek___]

Ahhh. Thanks

[Funny]

[QUOTE=DemonDog;27008449]Playing with new camera;
(uncompressed pictures)
[img_thumb]http://img210.imageshack.us/img210/8136/dscn0164a.jpg[/img_thumb]
[img_thumb]http://img413.imageshack.us/img413/9563/dscn0120e.jpg[/img_thumb][/QUOTE]

A tad noisy, what's the camera?

[DemonDog]

[QUOTE=Funny;27008585]A tad noisy, what's the camera?[/QUOTE]

Nikon Coolpix P100

nothing fancy.

[Roll_Program]

[QUOTE=DemonDog;27008449]Playing with new camera;
(uncompressed pictures)
[img_thumb]http://img210.imageshack.us/img210/8136/dscn0164a.jpg[/img_thumb]
[img_thumb]http://img413.imageshack.us/img413/9563/dscn0120e.jpg[/img_thumb][/QUOTE]

FYI, they're jpegs, they're compressed.

[LuaStoned]

Has anyone who owns a Canon used CHDK / MagicLantern already?

[neurobuster]

[QUOTE=DemonDog;27008638]Nikon Coolpix P100

nothing fancy.[/QUOTE]

Try turning down the ISO. There's no reason they should be that noisy.

[➤◉──────────]

154/365

[img]http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5170/5298888613_619aefa5a8_z.jpg[/img]

In-frame-flash flare is my new experiment.

Edit: ijyt, why do you disagree with me?

[dai]

fancy stuff, I'd like to see what you pull off. I already see the foundation for some good rim-lighting already

[squish]

[QUOTE=bopie;27019023]154/365

[img_thumb]http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5170/5298888613_619aefa5a8_z.jpg[/img_thumb]

In-frame-flash flare is my new experiment.[/QUOTE]
It's so clear it could be real :O

I must get a decent flash. The pop-up is disgusting.