Fall colors.

[Sandskimmernewbie]

First shot out of my D50 recently that ive really liked. What do you guys think?



Bigger: http://www.flickr.com/photo_zoom.gne?id=17...7783&size=l

[kylebaz]

like it alot, nice pic. +1

[fireball]

nice. is the blurry water effect obtained with just a slow shutter speed?

[Sandskimmernewbie]

Yeah. I beleive this was F/11 at 1 second. Or something close to that.

[Sac Skimmer]

very relaxing

[flskimboarder]

sick. find a little waterfall or something.

[jake]

looks like ice. great shot

[Sandskimmernewbie]

sick. find a little waterfall or something.

Yeah, definetly my next goal on a weekend. I had found this spot a few days ago, but it was getting way to dark and its still a 30 minute hike back up. So I went down today, shot maybe 10 pictures, and had to leave, again because it was getting too dark.

Im thinking a weekend would be perfect. Spend a few hours walking upstream.

[dpc1192]

Nice shot indeed

[ZapBulletRider]

I love the level of detail with digital photography. When my dad got his second digital SLR (first one was only like 8mp or something), I was absolutely amazed with the clarity of the first shot he showed me. I could see details I could never see in film. I guess I always though film was the ultimate and digital was just trying to catch up. Now I see there's so many more possibilities. Especially when I see some of my dad's huge prints (like 3ft by 5ft or something), and the detail is so crisp compared to what I've come to expect out of film.

Anyway I like the pic a lot, especially the contrast of the crisp detail of the leaves and the soft blur of the water. Would be even better if you could find a spot where you have more of that green moss under a tree with some even more vibrant leaves, even just a few scattered around would be cool. The wider the color range the more striking it will be. Might be tough though considering the dry summer has caused a kind of shitty leaf season. The peak has usually passed by now in most places, anyway. I know in the VA mts it's usually about the 3rd week in Oct.

[bhassan]

that pic looks really cool.
The rock/hill side on the left looks almost like a glich or somthing.

[Sandskimmernewbie]

I love the level of detail with digital photography. When my dad got his second digital SLR (first one was only like 8mp or something), I was absolutely amazed with the clarity of the first shot he showed me. I could see details I could never see in film. I guess I always though film was the ultimate and digital was just trying to catch up. Now I see there's so many more possibilities. Especially when I see some of my dad's huge prints (like 3ft by 5ft or something), and the detail is so crisp compared to what I've come to expect out of film.

Anyway I like the pic a lot, especially the contrast of the crisp detail of the leaves and the soft blur of the water. Would be even better if you could find a spot where you have more of that green moss under a tree with some even more vibrant leaves, even just a few scattered around would be cool. The wider the color range the more striking it will be. Might be tough though considering the dry summer has caused a kind of shitty leaf season. The peak has usually passed by now in most places, anyway. I know in the VA mts it's usually about the 3rd week in Oct.

Film continues to be better, in terms of image quality, than film. 35mm, maybe not, but as you get to larger formats, MF and LF, there is just so much more detail.

You don't print billboards with digi. Thats where you need an 8x10 or even bigger LF camera.

[ZapBulletRider]

Film continues to be better, in terms of image quality, than film. 35mm, maybe not, but as you get to larger formats, MF and LF, there is just so much more detail.

You don't print billboards with digi. Thats where you need an 8x10 or even bigger LF camera.

gotcha. Yeah, my dad always shot 35mm so that's what I had to compare it to. He switched to digital prob. 4 years ago or so. Not familiar w/ some of the higher res film. Eventually digital will surpass it, though. There's just no way around it.

Btw here's my dad's site if you're just interested in looking at some more good shots. http://www.raymatthews.com Some good fall shots in "Travel Photos". Check out "Blowing Rock Autumn (Vertical)"

[Sandskimmernewbie]

gotcha. Yeah, my dad always shot 35mm so that's what I had to compare it to. He switched to digital prob. 4 years ago or so. Not familiar w/ some of the higher res film. Eventually digital will surpass it, though. There's just no way around it.

Btw here's my dad's site if you're just interested in looking at some more good shots. http://www.raymatthews.com Some good fall shots in "Travel Photos". Check out "Blowing Rock Autumn (Vertical)"

Digital Backs for Hasselblads, around 30MP, coupled with Hasselblad's glass is getting dangerously close to passing MF in image quality/big prints. It will take a long while to get up to Large Format standards, especially when you have people make 3 foot by 3 foot NEGATIVES. Were talking about the film, not the size of a print. You could put your nose up to a billboard shot with such a huge negative and see a ton of detail and sharpness. When digital can do that, it will be both impressive and really, really sad. Film is dead, or soon will be. Its really to bad.

Ill check out the site, thanks.

[ZapBulletRider]

yeah on the one hand it's sad and on the other hand it's pretty amazing what possibilities will continue to open up. Eventually the quality from a 3x3 negative will be achievable in a point n' shoot. As outrageous as it sounds now, years from now we'll laugh at how bad digital was now. 4 years ago I paid $650 for a 4mp Canon G3 ON SALE, and a year ago my wife paid like $300 for a 7.1mp SD750. It's crazy, I paid over twice as much and I don't even use mine anymore b/c the quality seems so crappy now.

[Sandskimmernewbie]

yeah on the one hand it's sad and on the other hand it's pretty amazing what possibilities will continue to open up. Eventually the quality from a 3x3 negative will be achievable in a point n' shoot. As outrageous as it sounds now, years from now we'll laugh at how bad digital was now. 4 years ago I paid $650 for a 4mp Canon G3 ON SALE, and just a few months ago my wife paid like $300 for a 7.1mp SD750. It's crazy, I paid over twice as much and I don't even use mine anymore b/c the quality seems so crappy now.

Maybe. But when you can get a 3x3 equivilent in a P&S, photography would be dead to me. Soccer moms would be able to shoot, with no effort, pictures that pros are trying to acheive today. Composition wouldn't be there, but auto metering and such would be so advanced, the only thing left that you would have to put thought into is composition.

I checked out your Dad's stuff, its great. How long has he been shooting? (Including pre-digital)

[ZapBulletRider]

since about 70. He was lucky enough to live on the OBX when it was 90% nature and 10% civilization, when he breaks out some of his old slides I'm always amazed. It looks like another world, completely untouched. Plus the film from back then is badass. One of my faves is the Jockey's Ridge pic from the Notecards set. Check it out if you get a chance, I think it's from the early 70's sometime, and it has kind of an old school feel to me, plus it looks like it's in some desert somewhere.

[ZapBulletRider]

Maybe. But when you can get a 3x3 equivilent in a P&S, photography would be dead to me. Soccer moms would be able to shoot, with no effort, pictures that pros are trying to acheive today. Composition wouldn't be there, but auto metering and such would be so advanced, the only thing left that you would have to put thought into is composition.

I know what you're saying but there's no substitute for talent and having an eye for composition, etc. You can't fake that.