The absolute most challenging urban night scene ever!

KoNickon said:
Also to comment on Tuolumne's point, how the heck can you peer at a small screen on the back of a camera and be sure that you have achieved proper focus and are free of the weird light effects? That's one of the things I don't get about digital cameras --it's very hard to make any sort of critical evaluation of an image based on the LCD screen.

OK, sorry the rant. I agree with the others' suggestions -- a lens hood, a slower shutter speed and smaller aperture are what you need. And a tripod is probably best for the purpose, though it does slow things down considerably if you need to beat a hasty retreat.
Click to expand...
I just can't agree with this. I do it all the time. Try using the magnification feature of your digital camera. Focus? Try autofocus. It works, especially in the dark when you can't see. I'll challenge anyone to a focusing contest using auto-focus vs manual focus at night. I'll even bet on the results - how about we do it in the total dark instead of this semi-lit scene?

I really don't understand technology bashers who obviously haven't mastered the use of the tools that they bash. If it doesn't suit you - stick with film. It doesn't mean the rest of us are idiots for knowing how to use the tools that utterly elude you.

BTW, if you want to get a better white balance using a digital camera, just twist the knob to "Tungsten". Oh, what's that, you say you didn't have any tungsten film with you when you came across that scene? Shame..what a shame...

/T
 
uhligfd said:
I wonder what exactly you consider a "Winner".
Click to expand...

You're not talking about Ywentz's pics, are you? think about it... he's a guy with the guts to go into a bad neighborhood after dark, get drunk, drive home, climb the side of a 10-story building and then leap back down to meet a girl... taking pictures all of the time. He's spiderman with a camera if you ask me... a true superhero!

EDIT... oh, now I know who you're critical of. Ignore my first sentene... the question.
 
Last edited:
Tuolumne said:
I really don't understand technology bashers who obviously haven't mastered the use of the tools that they bash. If it doesn't suit you - stick with film. It doesn't mean the rest of us are idiots for knowing how to use the tools that utterly elude you.

BTW, if you want to get a better white balance using a digital camera, just twist the knob to "Tungsten". Oh, what's that, you say you didn't have any tungsten film with you when you came across that scene? Shame..what a shame...
Click to expand...

One word: MSN Web TV

Check the traffic log for RFF.com, I bet you'll see a higher than usual percentage of Web TVs.

_WEBTV.GIF
 
Last edited:
Gumby said:
True to certain degree, but what if not shooting f/16 or smaller? BTW, stars aren't "distortion", they are an element of artistic interpretation :D

p.s. mi nombre es Eduardo, senor.
Click to expand...

Y cual es tu numero?
De donde eres? Quien eres? Que es?
Soy de Ponferrada, hablo Castellan.

Sorry, my spanish classes were of rather basic level. I don't see your point.:)

PS: distortion does not only mean optical distortion by the lens. To me a star filter is a way of distorting the image and they are not really artistic :D
But i lso don't like porcelain cats in the windows, or garden gnomes, and I rarely take sunset shots (and i am mostly ashamed of it, later).
 
Ywenz, mah brotha, why is a Ricoh GRD a POS ???
??????
Well it's a rather expensive piece of sh|t, then. I wish my stomach would be able to produce such.
 
Finder, you're right of course. Sodium lamps have a weird spectrum.
But you're a genius, of course you are right:D
 
Pherdinand said:
Ywenz, mah brotha, why is a Ricoh GRD a POS ???
??????
Well it's a rather expensive piece of sh|t, then. I wish my stomach would be able to produce such.
Click to expand...

Because it being a digital P&S, such as it is. In the eye of the proverbial RFFer, it's a POS. I'm doing my best to be agreeable.
 
LOL, you're slightly overdoin' it, mah brotha.

PS: i just confirmed. Mah stomach makes noting like a digital camera. Oh well. Life's not fah.
 
dmr said:
Any comments as to what to do here?
Click to expand...

Dmr,

I recommend to try:

- tripod
- Fuji Press
- remove any filter
- bracket for exposure
- don't shoot in the middle of the night; either a little after sun-set or before sun-rise. (*)

Some examples of (*):

6722317-M.jpg


121611469-M.jpg


195926643-L.jpg


6725429-L.jpg


Roland.
 
Last edited:
Tuolumne said:
I am totally baffled by the above exchange...and WebTV is a POS.

/T
Click to expand...

me too. Especially about this web tv stuff. About what the heck web tv is, and why is it discussed in this thread.
Let's admit it, the whole thread went a bit funky. Including your post about people being idiots not knowing how to use the "adverbial POS" :D
(the one my stomach cannot produce no matter what i eat)
 
Pherdinand said:
woah Roland, the second shot, that's the best sunset i've seen lately :D
Click to expand...


After, I said, after (like an hour ?). And I was not embarrassed taking it :D
I did fall in the tide pools though ....
 
Magnificient work, Roland. Thanks for showing these. I live the two bridge shots, especially the second.

-Anupam
 
then that's a way overexposed moon, you know!

hehe
i imagine now you fumbling with a heavyweight tripod and a pack of fuji press and - blub! disappearing in the pool
glad you saved the memory card though! :D
 
Anupam Basu said:
Magnificient work, Roland. Thanks for showing these. I live the two bridge shots, especially the second.

-Anupam
Click to expand...

Thanks !

Pherdinand said:
hey have you used a star filter by the way, to get that star effect of the moon highlight?
Click to expand...

You can buy them on ebay: they are called Fresnel filters, to be put
around your subject. Shipping costs will kill you though :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom