Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 ... 8 9 [10]
 91 
 on: Today at 02:42:15 AM 
Started by nlred - Last post by CptZar
Hi Bernard,

thank you, very interesting. What Tripod head do you use? Do you manually expose new for the sky, or do you use the same exposure as for the landscape.

Thank you for sharing

Jan

 92 
 on: Today at 02:41:25 AM 
Started by Dave (Isle of Skye) - Last post by john beardsworth
No, again, I'm not "buying into marketing semantics". Just because you repeat that doesn't make it any more true, and it may just reveal your own blinkered outlook. And no, I'm not unable to explain, just unwilling to waste my time on those who can't, or won't, distinguish black from white or marketing hype from good practical techniques.

Doing a Save As in your example is just old-fashioned good practice when you open an original and create a derivative. Your question was so simplistic it's inane. What happens afterwards - to the derivative file - is what distinguishes what people mean by working non-destructively.

Traditionally you would reopen the file and do more work, something like transform or Silver Efex, for example. As your adjustment layers have masks (eg simulating a grad filter), you would need to get your pixels on a single layer. To avoid destroying anything, would you now apply your silly method of doing a Save As and Close, before continuing and flattening? Make another derivative file to meet your meaningless definition of non-destructive? You would? OMFG. Not very efficient, are we? But check on the big brain on you - in fact, you do have enough nous to create a new merged pixel layer, apply your Transform to this layer and close the file. The only way you can now fine tune the Transform or those adjustment layers is by discarding (ooh, destroying!) that new layer and repeating the previous steps.

The newer "non destructive" approach would be to convert those layers into a smart object, causing the Transform to apply as a smart filter. I still save and close, but my Transform edits remain fully editable. If I feel I need to edit the adjustment layers, I can do that. If I want to go back into the raw conversion, I can do that too. Infinitely-editable, non-destructive, good practice.

See the difference? Anyone else can.

John

 93 
 on: Today at 02:38:06 AM 
Started by nlred - Last post by BernardLanguillier
when you go in the mountains, the only lens you take with you is the Otus? That is of course a light walking package. But what, if you need longer lenses?

Hi Jan,

I typically pack the Otus and the Leica R 180mm f2.8 APO. It is IMHO the best 35mm long(ish) lens ever for distant landscape. It is also light, compact and easy to focus with live view.

The upcoming article will answer the other questions. Wink

Cheers,
Bernard

 94 
 on: Today at 02:35:42 AM 
Started by leelopez - Last post by BernardLanguillier
My name is Lee Lopez and I'm going to be making the jump into medium format.

Perhaps you can share the reasons why you are considering medium format?

What problem/shortcoming are you trying to fix with your current equipment?

I would think that these information will help the team guide you towards the best option.

Cheers,
Bernard

 95 
 on: Today at 02:31:15 AM 
Started by dreed - Last post by BernardLanguillier
I've been through the complications of selecting appropriate footwear for trekking, and from my experience I would suggest that comfort, flexibility and durability are all that you need to be concerned about, except for very specialized activities such as the ascent of Mt Everest, or treks to the Arctic or Antarctic.

My first revisit to Nepal (after visiting the country 50 years ago as a 22-year-old) was in 2005 with my newly acquired Canon 5D. I was wearing Nike joggers but wasn't sure if they would be adequate for the trekking trip I had organised. After listening to 'so-called' expert advice, I decided to buy some 'proper' trekking boots. They were comfortable and sturdy, so I set off in the confidence that my feet would be protected against all hazards.

I'd hired a personal guide and porter. When we began the trek, I was amazed to see that the porter who was carrying my 20kg backpack, was wearing tennis shoes. What the heck's going on here? I'd deliberated over several days whether I should buy proper trekking boots, and had decided that the consensus of opinion was that I should, only to find that my porter, who had the most onerous task on this trek, was wearing tennis-type shoes.

It turned out that those tennis shoes were sufficient. Whilst my trekking boots were comfortable enough during casual walking, there was a problem during lengthy descents. My big toe tended to rub against the hard cap of the boot. Eventually, one toe started bleeding, which made me feel rather foolish for wasting money on something that was probably less suitable than the Nike joggers I was wearing when I arrived in Nepal.

On subsequent trips to the Himalayas, I've always worn comfortable and flexible Nike joggers, which have proved to be perfectly adequate, even in the snow at altitudes of 5,400 metres. (For the record, I have absolutely no investment in Nike Corporation).

We used trail shoes for the 3+ weeks Gokyo/Chola pass/Everest BC we did 5 years ago and they are, IMHO, the best option.

The famous trails in Kumbhu are highways that are very easy to walk on if you can manage to avoid collisions with yaks. Most day treks around Tokyo are a lot tougher than Nepal trails in terms of trail condition. The main issues in Nepal are:
- altitude: it generates a general lack of comfort, bad nights of sleep that make people very tired after a rew weeks and requires trekkers to drink an incredible amount of water (that is better properly purified, which can be a bit time consuming),
- food: a high percentage of trekkers give up because of stomach issues related to something they ate. We ate fried rice and dalbat for 3 weeks, was probably lucky and more trained than others due to regular visits to India, and experienced zero stomach issues,
- the length of the trek: Many people are in fact unable to behave for 3 weeks in a small group of people in a challenging environment.

Cheers,
Bernard

 96 
 on: Today at 02:17:57 AM 
Started by dreed - Last post by Ray
I've been through the complications of selecting appropriate footwear for trekking, and from my experience I would suggest that comfort, flexibility and durability are all that you need to be concerned about, except for very specialized activities such as the ascent of Mt Everest, or treks to the Arctic or Antarctic.

My first revisit to Nepal (after visiting the country 50 years ago as a 22-year-old) was in 2005 with my newly acquired Canon 5D. I was wearing Nike joggers but wasn't sure if they would be adequate for the trekking trip I had organised. After listening to 'so-called' expert advice, I decided to buy some 'proper' trekking boots. They were comfortable and sturdy, so I set off in the confidence that my feet would be protected against all hazards.

I'd hired a personal guide and porter. When we began the trek, I was amazed to see that the porter who was carrying my 20kg backpack, was wearing tennis shoes. What the heck's going on here? I'd deliberated over several days whether I should buy proper trekking boots, and had decided that the consensus of opinion was that I should, only to find that my porter, who had the most onerous task on this trek, was wearing tennis-type shoes.

It turned out that those tennis shoes were sufficient. Whilst my trekking boots were comfortable enough during casual walking, there was a problem during lengthy descents. My big toe tended to rub against the hard cap of the boot. Eventually, one toe started bleeding, which made me feel rather foolish for wasting money on something that was probably less suitable than the Nike joggers I was wearing when I arrived in Nepal.

On subsequent trips to the Himalayas, I've always worn comfortable and flexible Nike joggers, which have proved to be perfectly adequate, even in the snow at altitudes of 5,400 metres. (For the record, I have absolutely no investment in Nike Corporation).

 97 
 on: Today at 02:17:47 AM 
Started by leelopez - Last post by DanielStone
You're right I did and shame on me!

It's definitely worth a look.

No "shame" implied, just thought I'd add it to your list Smiley

-Dan

 98 
 on: Today at 02:15:08 AM 
Started by Lundberg02 - Last post by Tim Lookingbill
My LG is not a wide gamut display so I have no issues with sRGB or calibration and it only has HDMI, VGA & DVI connects. I'm not having any color or calibration problems with my DVI>2010 Mac Mini HDMI cable.

But I was wondering if there are any screen quality improvements connecting my LG DVI to Mac Mini MiniDisplayPort, but no one yet has provided specifics on this.

 99 
 on: Today at 02:13:57 AM 
Started by Slobodan Blagojevic - Last post by William Walker
Pun intended?!

I agree. A wonderful moment seen well, captured well and processed well.
Thanks for sharing Slobodan.

I agree!

 100 
 on: Today at 01:54:44 AM 
Started by OnlyNorth - Last post by OnlyNorth
Unconsciously or not the builders,of this type of cathedrals,reached the need of the people to raise their souls to the Heaven.

Pages: « 1 ... 8 9 [10]
Ad
Ad
Ad