DIG
Active topics
  1. Originally posted by iTim:[..]

    Whereabouts is that in London? Looks really nice, I'd imagine it's quite something in the winter after it's snowed.

    Sergio, meteors and the like produce spectacular images if captured well. At least with the ISS it's always available, there's another chance to view it tomorrow and each day this week if the weather is good. I'll remember what you said next year, if you go out partying I shall be on your back

    Olof, thank you. Hopefully I can get a longer streak the next time I head out. My other camera has a 30 second limit, as opposed to 8, so should be a little better.

    Friend and me found it accidentally while walking by the Thames, about one kilometer west from the London Eye. It was beautiful little park.
  2. They're pretty hopeless, but have some long exposure shots from the beach. Well, I say long exposure, but in reality I only set it to about 1 second. I'll go for longer next time, but I wanted to see if I could capture some individual droplets whilst still having that LE effect. The results aren't that great.



  3. Originally posted by Ross1441:They're pretty hopeless, but have some long exposure shots from the beach. Well, I say long exposure, but in reality I only set it to about 1 second. I'll go for longer next time, but I wanted to see if I could capture some individual droplets whilst still having that LE effect. The results aren't that great.

    [image]

    [image]

    I really do love these kind of photographs. What do you mean though, when you say 'individual droplets'?
  4. I wanted to take a photograph that had the "long exposure effect" but also captured some detail in the water. For example, the individual drops of water hanging in the sky, but it didn't really work.

    I also took a few more shots that day which I have now finished stitching into a panorama. I've made 3 different versions, so please tell me which one you prefer. #1 is the original shots stitched together. #2 is the same images with a few more stuck on the end. The extra few were shot later in the day, which is what is making the right side of the image look darker. #3 is the same as 2 but I brightened up the right hand side to make it look smoother, at the cost of some detail though.

    WARNING: THE IMAGES ARE HUGE AND NOT PARTICULARLY INTERESTING! THEY ARE IN FACT JUST TYPICAL BORING LANDSCAPE SHOTS!

    Anyway, here they are. Each one took 7 GB of RAM and over 7 minutes of processing to make. I've actually shrunk them down by 50% They're still flipping massive though.
  5. Originally posted by Ross1441:I wanted to take a photograph that had the "long exposure effect" but also captured some detail in the water. For example, the individual drops of water hanging in the sky, but it didn't really work.

    I also took a few more shots that day which I have now finished stitching into a panorama. I've made 3 different versions, so please tell me which one you prefer. #1 is the original shots stitched together. #2 is the same images with a few more stuck on the end. The extra few were shot later in the day, which is what is making the right side of the image look darker. #3 is the same as 2 but I brightened up the right hand side to make it look smoother, at the cost of some detail though.

    WARNING: THE IMAGES ARE HUGE AND NOT PARTICULARLY INTERESTING! THEY ARE IN FACT JUST TYPICAL BORING LANDSCAPE SHOTS!

    Anyway, here they are. Each one took 7 GB of RAM and over 7 minutes of processing to make. I've actually shrunk them down by 50% They're still flipping massive though.

    They are f'king massive! I can't really look at them properly on my iPad, so I'll have to give feedback later
  6. Originally posted by iTim:[..]

    They are f'king massive! I can't really look at them properly on my iPad, so I'll have to give feedback later

    Challenge accepted.

    I don't think those are just typical boring shots
  7. Our concept of "typical boring shots" is pretty different I think. They're pretty much amazing! I choose pic 1, looks more complete to me, starting with people walking at the left and finishing with people walking at the right, and the landscape elements being perfectly stuck around the panorama. Pic 2 doesn't look bad, although there's a noticeable stiching mistake just over the seagull (where the right third of the image starts), the sea line is incorrectly merged there. Pic 3's overexposure to acommodate light levels looks a bit artificial to me, a little less brightness would have been just right.

    PS. Fucking massive falls way short ¬¬
  8. Thanks for the feedback, Sergio. I didn't actually notice all those stitching issues until you pointed them out. If I can spare the RAM later on then I might make another version that irons out some of the stitching and exposure issues. Thanks again!

    Yes, they are huge. Spare a thought for me though! Not only did I have to process them, but the originals (twice the size of the uploaded ones) were too large to store in JPEG, so I have them in 138 MB TIFF format!!
  9. WTF!
  11. UGh, dude, you must really hate your computer xD

  12. Actually I just gave it a lovely SSD and some extra RAM. It's plenty happy. A bit of work now and again keeps its morale up.
Contribute to the U2 community with uploading photos or by telling us which shows you have visited.
Contribute to the U2 community with uploading photos or by telling us which shows you have visited.
Contribute to the U2 community with uploading photos or by telling us which shows you have visited.
Contribute to the U2 community with uploading photos or by telling us which shows you have visited.