NikonsAndVStroms Photography Thread

Yep. I'd agree with all of that. I find it odd that 4 and 5, that really aren't anything, bother me the least.

1 was a great find at an abandoned farm, but I bunged up the composition.

2 is a too-tight crop with the wrong lens and one of my first attempts at b&w conversion. I'll upload the original for shits and giggles. Converted in PSE8 and tweaked a little by trial and error only.

3, not sure I agree, but there isn't much there anyway.

The original of the b&w conversion.

Thanks for taking the time and helping out

Do you crop and adjust all the pictures you take or at least the better ones, Or do you get to a point when taking pictures you dont need to mess with them. Thanks.

It all depends, none of my cameras have 100% viewfinders so it is always a slight guess, for many there is no crop at all, but I also have no fear of cropping or rotating my images in any way. I actually did a roughly 100 image series last year with no cropping, the series was created with a 2MP camera so every bit counted and it really made me pay attention to framing.

If by adjust you mean process than yes, but almost all my post processing with very few examples can be recreated in the dark room so I don't go too crazy.

What camera were these images taken with they seem a bit fuzzy (I'm just wondering if it is the camera or the jpeg compression).

For the top image I would try and get a more active pose, say the bird looking at you or in the process of eating, this shot just looks very static. Also the right side doesn't have much in it for the viewer so a vertical framing would have worked better.

The bottom one looks to be a bit overexposed but you seem to have most of the information there (not too many areas are blow out so with curves you could possibly get it working). As for the composition that well I am not sure what it is "thing" on the right seems to take away since it grabs the eye and is not too interesting. Now with the tractor I feel there are 2 ways that could have worked better. If you went closer and angled down more to have just this rusted tractor in all the lush growth for the contrast. Or to be on the level of all of it looking out, possibly from behind the tractor since those tires could look great.

Why would anyone choose Nikon over Canon with the 1D Mk IV, 5D Mk II and 7D all available in the Canon line?

INteresting thread... i join in...

1. Was shot on Tmax100 Delorian River, Tasmania


2.Helfsty Castle, Czech Republic


3. Arches National Park

But I'll bite

1D Mk IV does not have as good AF or high ISO performance as the D3s

5D Mk II does not have as good build quality (weather sealing), AF which is one of the 5D's weakest features, high ISO, and can shoot about half as fast (3.9 VS 8 FPS) as the D700

7D is behind the D300s in AF performance but otherwise is a pretty close camera, a great add on for the 50D which lagged behind in many areas.

Nikon's higher end cameras all share very similar AF systems which is a huge plus over the Canon's and have on average higher build quality (the 1D and D3 are similar but below Canon has lagged until the 7D which I hear is close to the D300).

Yeah, Nikon was way behind Canon but they seem to have copied Canon's CMOS technology to the point that the bodies are almost as good as the Canon bodies. Shame about that Nikon glass though

I know you don't get to send it back over and over for a good copy like that Canon glass, it keeps you from getting to know those friendly people at the service department on a 1st name basis

And last I checked Nikon seems to be ahead in high ISO quality

Sony and Canon need to catch up now

I hope you know I'm just pulling your leg. I like them all. Even my old dog of a Canon 40D with the 24-105L attached is better at photography than I am. I hang out over at Fred Miranda trying to improve but it’s a long road.

I know, the scary thing is some people act like Nikon VS Canon was some topic over in CS&M :eek1.

I actually own an EOS 650 (which if IIRC was the first Canon EOS) but don't tell the Nikon faithful The cameras are basically the same now with only minor differences between the brands in each class, hell you can't really find a "bad" DSLR on the market.

I like the foreground focus ones banjo

What aperture is that shot, and is it a wide angle "macro"?

Nice subject isolation

I like the middle one the best, in the top one the 2 elements overlapping really doesn't make it nice and clear. With the 2nd you see this interesting stump//nail and then seeing the out of focus bike in the background is like a nice surprise. I would play with the color/contrast a bit though these seem a pretty middle of the road now and this is another area you can explore.

Learning HDR. This was taken with my Sony Cybershot W290 Point and Shoot. Edited in Corel Paint Shop Pro , Adobe Photoshop and PhotoMatix Pro.

You went overboard but it's all good, that's how you learn in this stuff.

I can see a lot of processing tools but if you could give me a list I can tell you how to use them with a lighter touch.

Also could you post the image straight HDR without any of the other work.

1) I honestly don't know what to say on this image, I will give you my stream of thought. I see a bunch of areas of mostly solid colors with slight textures, with the grass? Making another one on top of the water and shadows shaping this grey area. The large amount of grey bothers me but not sure how you can change this, you could have fun with this as an abstract image, and here I feel playing with the angle shown could help it and push it more in this abstract direction.

2) It is a very interesting location, perhaps a little dark but you do have absolute white in some areas, I just would play with your position especially since the left most 1/4 seems to have much more interesting textures than the rest of the composition.

3) I really like this in that it gives me a feeling of looking at single celled organisms through a microscope, this is right in my comfort zone

1) Amazing location, someone told me I should head out to the southwest and after seeing all these images I might need to go for it.

For this image my main composition concerns are with the right hand crop it seems very much like the image was (cut off). I just played around with it's location in my monitor and if you cropped some off the bottom close to the beginning of the mountain, and a little off the right to the dip it seems to work a lot better. The reason I did the bottom is it this "muddy" area compared to the sun hitting the rocks/sky.

Also were you angling the lens slightly up? I see some distortion and why I mention this is that is how many people take these images. The big thing is you want to have something to differentiate your image from the countless others which have been taken of this scene in either it's composition, look or both.

2) Here we have that up angle which takes away from the architecture. I think a stronger composition would be the part coming out to the left of the tower as well as the tower in the right part of the frame, all done vertically with less of an up angle.

As for the processing play around with the curves function. right now the stone is rather muddy and same with the sky but you have all the visual information in this photo (few absolute blacks where detail is needed, and not much is blown out) so you could bring up the highlights and make this image pop a lot more.


And now I am all caught up

Just curious, Nikon, what do you do for a job? I see "web developer/photographer" in your profile. Do you freelance or are you a staff photographer for a publication? I've seen some of your pics in threads here and I like what I see. Is there a place I can see your professional work?

Nice thread, by the way!