sebboh wrote:
p.s. carsten – what happened to the color on the bottom of your version?
I desaturated it. I was trying to reach something like what I see when I am outside at night (and the orange-light-pollution has been removed), which is that I sense the blue in the sky, but my eyes-brain neutralize any colour cast of the snow. In your version, there is quite a lot of blue on the snow, which leans more towards what a camera would see (again, neutralising the orange cast), I think.
Hmm, my version looks very dark on my monitor at work. I wonder if the additional light in the environment, and the sRGB gamut (my home monitor has 98% Adobe RGB) hurt it here?
philber wrote:
A splendid picture, Phillip! Congrats!
thanks
Personally i am not that happy with it, composition is a bit chaotic and image quality not up to my usual standards.
The main reason for that are the bad shooting-conditions, with the g28 i could see a little bit on the display, focusing was tough.
With the CV15 i could see absolutely nothing on the display so i had to guess focusing and composition.
Next time i will bring a flashlight for focusing.
taran wrote:
@Jim Schemel, that minimalist stuff is out of control. Very enjoyable.
+1 Great stuff, bold and brave processing! taran wrote:
I enjoyed all the urban nightscapes on 512. I don't know how you all get artificial light to look so good, but consider yourself lucky.
Er, just point & click. ;-) Actually, the in-cam jpgs for mine were an orange mess (sodium in fog gets very orange), but on the raws I dialled down towards blue, dialled up the contrast against veiling/flare, and just played about a little until they looked good. More typical night shots from a clearer night, NEX-5 + Canon FDn 35/2:
alan_m wrote:
Er, just point & click. ;-) Actually, the in-cam jpgs for mine were an orange mess (sodium in fog gets very orange), but on the raws I dialled down towards blue, dialled up the contrast against veiling/flare, and just played about a little until they looked good. More typical night shots from a clearer night, NEX-5 + Canon FDn 35/2:
I would still get orange mush.
Again, those are awesome nightscapes alan, high intensity discharge lights are my nemesis, lol
taran wrote:
@Jim Schemel, that minimalist stuff is out of control. Very enjoyable.
alan_m wrote:
+1 Great stuff, bold and brave processing!
Yes, great stuff Jim, looking forward to the next ones.
taran wrote:
I enjoyed all the urban nightscapes on 512. I don't know how you all get artificial light to look so good, but consider yourself lucky.
alan_m wrote:
Er, just point & click. ;-) Actually, the in-cam jpgs for mine were an orange mess (sodium in fog gets very orange), but on the raws I dialled down towards blue, dialled up the contrast against veiling/flare, and just played about a little until they looked good.
taran wrote:
I would still get orange mush.
Again, those are awesome nightscapes alan, high intensity discharge lights are my nemesis, lol
Getting the WB right helps a ton, with mixed lighting I try to stay as natural as possible, make white lights look white, and dial back the orange a bit.
Phillip Reeve wrote:
[my first ever moonshine pics, i am not totally happy with them
freaklikeme wrote:
The obvious answer is to drink more moonshine. Was thinking the same thing....
Getting the WB right helps a ton, with mixed lighting I try to stay as natural as possible, make white lights look white, and dial back the orange a bit.
I'm not a white balance purist, I think sodium-lit scenes should be a little orange for a natural look. But city lights + fog or low cloud can get very orange!
All I have to say to you people is YOU SUCK! You just cost me around 1400 bucks! I couldn't stand it any longer. Bought a Nex7 with kit and free 16mm. Got a 19 and 30 sigma on order as well as a couple of adapters. Time to peruse the pawn shops for lenses and have some fun.
It's hard to decide if this is a lens thread or a nex thread but it does convince me that the nex is about the best platform for manual focus lenses out there. I love primes so this should be fun.
Vaughn, if you've just joined the game, I suggets you get yourself a good 50mm lens, like the Leica 50mm Summicron APO Aspheric. After that, the 1400$ won't hurt at all...
My wife was going hiking with our granddaughter last September and I suggested she take a real camera instead of her "point and shoot." I gave her my NEX 5n with a CV15, set the aperture to f:8, focus near infinity and ISO auto and just told her to point and shoot. These are some of the results.
After trying Minolta 300/5.6 and 300/4.5 on the NEX5N I gave up.Nikon 300/4.5 ED is better of the two,but despite one ED lens it is still too soft wo and has too much CAs either.Rule of the thumb - after a few years of experience:majority of legacy lenses above 28mm and under 200mm can not match contempoprary digital sensors.Without significant amount of PP their images are technically inferior compared to modern lenses.
It is not obvious to me how picture placement works. I don't mind having all my images centered but I would like to know how to place them flush left if desired. Thanks for your help. - Dale
Was thinking the same thing....
