The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

Fun with MF images - ARCHIVED - FOR VIEWING ONLY

Status
Not open for further replies.

Shashin

Well-known member
Hurricane Irma passed through Florida on September 10th and 11th. While we had not suffered the damage other areas had, the effects of the storm are still being felt. This flooding is near the St John River in Brevard County. This was taken this evening.



I thought 24" of snow was bad, but you can shovel snow...
 

Ed Hurst

Well-known member
Ed,

1800 frames????!!!!!! Seriously?:bugeyes:

I am lost for words, I cannot even imagine...

Yes, it's an extreme level of effort for one picture. The actual process of layering loads of files (with layer blending mode set to 'Lighten') is not conceptually complex. But when the files are not clean due to aircraft traffic, it just turns into something requiring lots of stamina. I'm happy with the result though!

By the way, I have looked back at my records and it's "only" something like 1600 frames, not 1800. So easy then!
 

stngoldberg

Well-known member
rarely see these birds still in Newport this late in the year. He/she must be thinking of flying south for the winter
Stanley
 

Craig Stocks

Well-known member
This is (obviously) a composite. The background was done at the Badlands National Park in May using an XF3100 and 28mm lens, 5 frames stacked to reduce noise plus a light painted frame for the foreground. The car was photographed with the same XF3100 using a 150mm lens and combines several frames painting with a light wand in different locations.

One other important tool was Capture Pilot which I used extensively for the car photo. The camera was probably 40 or 50 feet away from the car so I connected the ad hoc WiFi signal to my iPad and took it out by the car. Besides monitoring the exposures and results I frequently varied the shutter speed and ISO for different frames. For instance, the photo with the headlights turned on was at a much lower ISO and much shorter shutter speed. I'm sure I could have made the photo without Capture Pilot but it sure was easier and more convenient.

 

stngoldberg

Well-known member
This scene has been on this thread before with a Nikon and a telephoto lens.
This two image stitch was taken with a P1, 100mpx, H5DX body with mirror up and a HC300mm lens with a 1.7 extender...a total of 510mm.
When using the extender is on the HC300mm, AF is disabled; so these 78 year old eyes have to manually focus....not my strongest suit.
The detail on the tif on my monitor is amazing to me; as I was approximately 400 yards from the house
Stanley
 

Ed Hurst

Well-known member
This is (obviously) a composite. The background was done at the Badlands National Park in May using an XF3100 and 28mm lens, 5 frames stacked to reduce noise plus a light painted frame for the foreground. The car was photographed with the same XF3100 using a 150mm lens and combines several frames painting with a light wand in different locations.

One other important tool was Capture Pilot which I used extensively for the car photo. The camera was probably 40 or 50 feet away from the car so I connected the ad hoc WiFi signal to my iPad and took it out by the car. Besides monitoring the exposures and results I frequently varied the shutter speed and ISO for different frames. For instance, the photo with the headlights turned on was at a much lower ISO and much shorter shutter speed. I'm sure I could have made the photo without Capture Pilot but it sure was easier and more convenient.
Nice result and interesting details. Would you mind sharing the specifics of the sky frames please? (ISO, exposure details, how you masked off the stacked files to avoid blurring of the horizon, etc.). Love to know more :)
 

Craig Stocks

Well-known member
Nice result and interesting details. Would you mind sharing the specifics of the sky frames please? (ISO, exposure details, how you masked off the stacked files to avoid blurring of the horizon, etc.). Love to know more :)
This is the original photo that I used for the sky. The sky portion is 5 frames at ISO 1600, 60 seconds @ f/4.5 tracked with a tracking mount. The foreground is one frame light painted, same settings except the tracking mount was turned off. Even with the tracking mount I still had to tweak the alignment of the stars manually. There were quite a few high thin clouds which magically disappeared when I stacked the frames in median stacking mode in Photoshop but the bright stars still had a diffused quality caused by the clouds. In this case it was very easy to mask for the foreground since the hillside is a hard edge (no trees, grass or bushes).

 

darr

Well-known member
Hurricane Irma passed through Florida on September 10th and 11th. While we had not suffered the damage other areas had, the effects of the storm are still being felt. This flooding is near the St John River in Brevard County. This was taken this evening.

I thought 24" of snow was bad, but you can shovel snow...
I know how you feel. I was living in Redland (Miami-Dade County) when Katrina hit and then weeks later, Wilma hit. We were without power and water for six weeks, and a very expensive clean up followed. Last year my home in Tallahassee had a water oak fall into the roof. This year Irma did not damage my home, but neighbors across the street took two trees into theirs. :(

Where is the "unlike button" when you need it?

Darr
 

darr

Well-known member
Re: KALO NUTS



Made because a friend of mine sent me this challenge: Seven days, seven black and white photos of your life; no humans; no explanation.​

But for you guys a tiny bit of explaining, I mean why kalo nuts? Kalo nuts are poisonous and fall from tung-oil (Vernicia fordii) trees in my backyard. Even though I am outside with my dog, I still feel the need to pick these nuts up when I find them. I do not want to take a chance he might play with one. I lost a puppy in my youth to a poisonous toadstool. :( I picked these nuts up using a paper bag and placed them on my shooting table. Then I used my TC, SK 120 and CFV-50c with one Profoto D1 in an octagon box. Day one of the challenge done. Now what will I find tomorrow ...
 

Ed Hurst

Well-known member
This is the original photo that I used for the sky. The sky portion is 5 frames at ISO 1600, 60 seconds @ f/4.5 tracked with a tracking mount. The foreground is one frame light painted, same settings except the tracking mount was turned off. Even with the tracking mount I still had to tweak the alignment of the stars manually. There were quite a few high thin clouds which magically disappeared when I stacked the frames in median stacking mode in Photoshop but the bright stars still had a diffused quality caused by the clouds. In this case it was very easy to mask for the foreground since the hillside is a hard edge (no trees, grass or bushes).

Many thanks for that, Craig. Very clear explanation - and a great shot just as it was, without the car.

I am comparing your stacked image (based on lower ISO) and the single frames I am getting at ISO 6400 on the 645Z. Although the resolution is lower, of course, the quality is closer than I might have expected.
 

Craig Stocks

Well-known member
Many thanks for that, Craig. Very clear explanation - and a great shot just as it was, without the car.

I am comparing your stacked image (based on lower ISO) and the single frames I am getting at ISO 6400 on the 645Z. Although the resolution is lower, of course, the quality is closer than I might have expected.
I find it's hard for me to make good comparisons. I go back and forth using the P1 or a Sony a7r2. I feel like the P1 has a better sensor but the 29mm lens is crap and has a lot of coma aberration. On the Sony I use a $350 Rokinon 14mm and it performs much better than the P1 28mm. For overall usability the P1 wins hands down. Post processing is also a huge variable. Besides the basic stacking I also do additional stacking and processing to enhance and round out the stars as well as fixing coma aberration. I usually do the processing based on a 30 inch wide print.

I usually shoot either one at ISO 1600 for 30 to 60 seconds. The Rokinon is a f/2.8 lens so I do get brighter files from the Sony. Both are pretty ISO invariant so it doesn't really seem to matter if I push the ISO or push the exposure in C1 or Lightroom.

Star trails are a different story and the P1 does a very noticeably better job there. Star trails with the Sony tend to be more jagged and pixelated.
 

B L

Well-known member
This scene has been on this thread before with a Nikon and a telephoto lens.
This two image stitch was taken with a P1, 100mpx, H5DX body with mirror up and a HC300mm lens with a 1.7 extender...a total of 510mm.
When using the extender is on the HC300mm, AF is disabled; so these 78 year old eyes have to manually focus....not my strongest suit.

I salute you.
 

Ed Hurst

Well-known member
I find it's hard for me to make good comparisons. I go back and forth using the P1 or a Sony a7r2. I feel like the P1 has a better sensor but the 29mm lens is crap and has a lot of coma aberration. On the Sony I use a $350 Rokinon 14mm and it performs much better than the P1 28mm. For overall usability the P1 wins hands down. Post processing is also a huge variable. Besides the basic stacking I also do additional stacking and processing to enhance and round out the stars as well as fixing coma aberration. I usually do the processing based on a 30 inch wide print.

I usually shoot either one at ISO 1600 for 30 to 60 seconds. The Rokinon is a f/2.8 lens so I do get brighter files from the Sony. Both are pretty ISO invariant so it doesn't really seem to matter if I push the ISO or push the exposure in C1 or Lightroom.

Star trails are a different story and the P1 does a very noticeably better job there. Star trails with the Sony tend to be more jagged and pixelated.

Thanks for sharing the story - I echo some of that. My favoured tool is the 645Z with 25mm f4DA lens, which does very well (the files clean up extremely well from a single frame up to around 6400). But I am fighting the f4 lens and there is some coma (not a terrible amount). If I combined it with a tracker, as you do, the results would be extremely good, I suspect. However, I am starting to wonder if the Nikon D850 with Sigma Art 14mm f1.8 would produce better results overall for Milky Way shots; what I 'may' lose on the sensor size I suspect I would more than gain back in being able to use a lower ISO due to the faster lens. Not sure - haven't done side-by-side comparisons - but it seems likely to me. If only there were a fast superwide I could use with the 645Z!
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top