Photography Shoutbox

[xluben]

Did you take that last one? Or is that what you WANTED to take? lol

I see a couple of like-new 70-200s for $1400 shipped on POTN... I think it may be a good ideaaaaaaaa

I didn't take the last one. There's quite a few like it up on POTN, but I was indoors, in the stands, and behind a net

I saw a pretty beat up 70-200 2.8 IS for that price, but the FS is hard to keep up with on that site. I think with the rebates, people are being forced to sell the used ones cheap right now.

Grr... why does smugmug keep stripping the EXIF info!
What's the data on those images?

And damn, I might need to register on POTN forums.

SmugMug always does, and I can't help it. They have a button you can push while viewing the gallery to look at all the EXIF. It's actually very convenient if your browser doesn't have an EXIF plug in.

FYI, my two "frozen ball" shots that I posted were at ~ISO5000!!!!! (underexposed and pushed)

Should've shot me a PM... I woulda gone.

I try to stay away from POTN... the images on their will make you feel very unskilled an inadequate quickly. And it gets updated so often and has so many members it's hard to become a "regular", unless you're a pro and spend you life between there and behind the camera.

I was thinking of PM'ing you, but not until I was on the way there.

POTN has soooo many posts. Always something new (and I probably miss 90% of what goes on). A lot of "I'm smarter than you" e-fights, though...

 

[Raymond]

ISO5000 on an XTi?

howwwwww

 

[Nismode]

ISO5000 on an XTi?

howwwwww

+1 I wanna know too.

 

[GoldnKnight22]

 

[ryan s]

emmmm...if theyre underexposed, theres a couple things you can do to make em lighter...

or, if you use raw, you have a nice little slider which allows for...i wanna say +/- 5 stops either way.

regardless...if you want to preserve details, dont overexpose cause once the highlights are gone, they stay gone

 

[finch13]

regardless...if you want to preserve details, dont overexpose cause once the highlights are gone, they stay gone

Word, it's amazing how much detail there is in an area that appears "black" at first.

 

[ryan s]

after that, you have to make the choice...let the shadow noise hang out, or use noise reduction software and lose some sharpness.

sucks that digital color photos have colorful noise

 

[xluben]

FYI, my two "frozen ball" shots that I posted were at ~ISO5000!!!!! (underexposed and pushed)

ISO5000 on an XTi?

howwwwww

+1 I wanna know too.

emmmm...if theyre underexposed, theres a couple things you can do to make em lighter...

or, if you use raw, you have a nice little slider which allows for...i wanna say +/- 5 stops either way.

regardless...if you want to preserve details, dont overexpose cause once the highlights are gone, they stay gone

At f4 and ISO1600, my camera was metering the shots at 1/250 sec.

I manually shot the "frozen ball" shots at ISO1600, f4, 1/800sec to stop the motion.

I shot the pictures in JPG, so in Photoshop I adjusted the levels to the
correct exposure. They were originally -1.67 stops underexposed, so bringing
them back up put the equivalent ISO sensitivity at approx 5000. More info
here:

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=668129

^Here I did it using the Curves adjustment, but normally I use Levels now. I
don't really like doing any more than 1 stop of adjustment, but I think ISO3200
equivalent looks pretty decent for web viewing.

On the newer cameras the "expanded" ISO settings (noted with an "H" on
Canon) are doing this entire process within the camera. It is not truly
increasing the sensor's sensitivity to light. Just shooting it underexposed and
lightening it with the internal software.

after that, you have to make the choice...let the shadow noise hang out, or use noise reduction software and lose some sharpness.

sucks that digital color photos have colorful noise

This is the downside. Noise gets REALLY bad when using this method. With
a 1 stop increase it is manageable (IMO), but at 2 stops it is pretty terrible
(at least with my equipment). The baseball shots were all run through Noise
Ninja, and still look quite bad.

 

[ryan s]

the one pic of my phone for sale that i posted was pushed like 2.5 stops from ISO 400...you can see the banding the in the mid-tone areas...

ehh ill just hot link it:

 

[xluben]

the one pic of my phone for sale that i posted was pushed like 2.5 stops from ISO 400...you can see the banding the in the mid-tone areas...

Was there any reason to push from ISO400 other than just for the heck of it?

I've found that increasing sensitivity ALWAYS does a better job than
artificially doing it in post, especially in an image like yours (lots of low-lights).