[MaximusJ]

I dont have that much skills with PS yet. It seems like a lot of trouble getting rid of both the screens and the shadow that they produce.

I must admit i'm working mainly with lightroom tho; but I should take some time to learn PS a little better.

[M_Six]

Originally Posted by MaximusJ

I dont have that much skills with PS yet. It seems like a lot of trouble getting rid of both the screens and the shadow that they produce.

I must admit i'm working mainly with lightroom tho; but I should take some time to learn PS a little better.

I'd leave the screens. They'd be a pain to remove and they are part of the church now, so they belong. Although I think the powers-that-be at the church should have thought twice about mounting them.

You lined this image up perfectly so that the center line of the church is the center line of your image. So you could duplicate the layer, flip the bottom layer horizontally, then use a layer mask to take out the guy sitting in the pews and the guy off to the left. Takes about two minutes. Maybe a bit longer if you want to really tidy up.

[M_Six]

BTW, where is that and is it HDR?

[MATT0404]

Originally Posted by M_Six

I'd leave the screens. They'd be a pain to remove and they are part of the church now, so they belong. Although I think the powers-that-be at the church should have thought twice but mounting them.

You lined this image up perfectly so that the center line of the church is the center line of your image. So you could duplicate the layer, flip the bottom layer horizontally, then use a layer mask to take out the guy sitting in the pews and the guy off to the left. Takes about two minutes. Maybe a bit longer if you want to really tidy up.

Nice shot, Mark.

Here are two shots from yesterday. Too tired to process any of the other photos from the weekend.


Go Daddy by mkrepp, on Flickr


Boy Scouts of America by mkrepp, on Flickr

[MaximusJ]

Its in Quebec city and is single shot hand held shot at ISO6400. I used a S curve on it tho. I will definitely go back outside the tourist season for an HDR attempt.

It was very dark in the church except for the hostel. So I boosted the shadows and blacks in LR to get some detail; and to be honest, I didnt think those would turn out that good. I'm impressed every time I use this camera. The DR is very wide and colors are rich.

I got a spare evening in front of me, and I've been talking myself to learn about layering for more then 6 months now. I should give it a try.

I really like the guy sitting in the church because to me it adds to the meaning of the picture. Being completely oof is even better. This place is usually PACKED with tourists and i've been lucky enough to get an almost clear sight after a 5 minutes wait. I got a lot more. In fact I shot from various focals an angles until someone walked through my sight.

[M_Six]

Originally Posted by MATT0404

Nice shot, Mark.

Here are two shots from yesterday. Too tired to process any of the other photos from the weekend.

Not my shot, Matt. I was just editing Maximus's shot. But you're right, it is a nice shot.

I watched that race on TV. Or rather, the qualifying. That is one seriously bumpy street course.

[M_Six]

Originally Posted by MaximusJ

Its in Quebec city and is single shot hand held shot at ISO6400. I used a S curve on it tho. I will definitely go back outside the tourist season for an HDR attempt.

It was very dark in the church except for the hostel. So I boosted the shadows and blacks in LR to get some detail; and to be honest, I didnt think those would turn out that good. I'm impressed every time I use this camera. The DR is very wide and colors are rich.

I got a spare evening in front of me, and I've been talking myself to learn about layering for more then 6 months now. I should give it a try.

I really like the guy sitting in the church because to me it adds to the meaning of the picture. Being completely oof is even better. This place is usually PACKED with tourists and i've been lucky enough to get an almost clear sight after a 5 minutes wait. I got a lot more. In fact I shot from various focals an angles until someone walked through my sight.

The lone guy there does lend a bit of emotional context to the shot, so yeah, there's no reason not to leave him in there.

I ran into the same issue at St. Patrick's in NYC this summer. Very dark inside and people constantly crowding in front of the altar. Tough to get a good shot. If I had brought my tripod with me, I could have done a long exposure shot, but I've found that tripods tend to draw lots of attention very quickly.

[triton3k]

Lovely couple. by Denn-Ice, on Flickr

[MaximusJ]

Originally Posted by M_Six

The lone guy there does lend a bit of emotional context to the shot, so yeah, there's no reason not to leave him in there.

I ran into the same issue at St. Patrick's in NYC this summer. Very dark inside and people constantly crowding in front of the altar. Tough to get a good shot. If I had brought my tripod with me, I could have done a long exposure shot, but I've found that tripods tend to draw lots of attention very quickly.

Thanks for the comments and feedbacks btw.

When I got into that church (Called Notre-Dame de Quebec btw), I was looking for a sign when I got in; looked everywhere... Couldnt see any. I was convinced that it was there, at least to ask not to shoot with flash or at least during the celebrations... nothing.

I tried one up close with flash, but nothing like natural light coming from the pieces of art they call windows.

Closer look at the altar.



I have to go back now that I know they allow pretty much everything. I will wait until September is almost over and the place should be a LOT less crowded.

[M_Six]

Originally Posted by MaximusJ

Thanks for the comments and feedbacks btw.

When I got into that church (Called Notre-Dame de Quebec btw), I was looking for a sign when I got in; looked everywhere... Couldnt see any. I was convinced that it was there, at least to ask not to shoot with flash or at least during the celebrations... nothing.

I tried one up close with flash, but nothing like natural light coming from the pieces of art they call windows.

Closer look at the altar.



I have to go back now that I know they allow pretty much everything. I will wait until September is almost over and the place should be a LOT less crowded.

Another great pic.

When you go back, see if they'll allow a tripod. When we were in Salzburg the Dom had a great light and music show. They wouldn't allow tripods, though. I'm sure some of the reason was that they didn't want anyone getting commercial grade pics or vids. But also because the church was packed and tripods can be a nuisance or even a danger. In an empty church it shouldn't make a difference.

[M_Six]

Originally Posted by triton3k

Lovely couple. by Denn-Ice, on Flickr

Nice shot, Denn. Love that 85 1.8 bokeh. No CA either. I'm surprised. Were you shooting stopped down?

[MaximusJ]

Originally Posted by M_Six

Another great pic.

When you go back, see if they'll allow a tripod. When we were in Salzburg the Dom had a great light and music show. They wouldn't allow tripods, though. I'm sure some of the reason was that they didn't want anyone getting commercial grade pics or vids. But also because the church was packed and tripods can be a nuisance or even a danger. In an empty church it shouldn't make a difference.

From what I saw, they do allow them. Any ways, i'll go when its really not that busy. When they see you making a donation in the box at the entrance, it helps a bit I guess!

[remmib]

Originally Posted by M_Six

Nice shot, Denn. Love that 85 1.8 bokeh. No CA either. I'm surprised. Were you shooting stopped down?

Yes, very nice shot.
Exif says f/1.8

[Chewy734]

Blue Angels Fortus

Canon 1D X, EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS
400mm, f/10, 1/3200s, ISO 800, Tv, RAW

I really had to bump up the ISO for a super-fast shutter speed, because even with IS mode 2, it's amazingly difficult to get a steady shot at 400mm with these ridiculously fast jets. Here they are going just under the speed of sound.

[dcstep]

Originally Posted by Chewy734

I really had to bump up the ISO for a super-fast shutter speed, because even with IS mode 2, it's amazingly difficult to get a steady shot at 400mm with these ridiculously fast jets. Here they are going just under the speed of sound.

That's a pretty small size to evaluate, but I'm not sure it's really sharp. Look at it at 100% and the letters and numbers should be tack sharp. Maybe that's a huge crop or something, but I'm expecting sharper.

You weren't using a tripod were you? Don't use Mode 2 except on a tripod and even then it's debatable. I'd hand hold that kind of shot.

I think that you could have dropped down to 1/2000-sec. and still had plenty of sharpness.

Which AF mode were you in? You should have had AI Servo turned on, multi-shot. I've started using expanded single point (four surrounding one). Using the 61-points is tempting, but I'm finding that the camera might grab onto a wingtip when you really want the cockpit to be the focal point.

It's a learning process. The camera is amazing, but you can't just point it at an object and get consistent, sharp images.

Dave

[dcstep]

Cedar Waxwing... my first by dcstep, on Flickr

[panicos81]

[Chewy734]

Originally Posted by dcstep

That's a pretty small size to evaluate, but I'm not sure it's really sharp. Look at it at 100% and the letters and numbers should be tack sharp. Maybe that's a huge crop or something, but I'm expecting sharper.

You weren't using a tripod were you? Don't use Mode 2 except on a tripod and even then it's debatable. I'd hand hold that kind of shot.

I think that you could have dropped down to 1/2000-sec. and still had plenty of sharpness.

Which AF mode were you in? You should have had AI Servo turned on, multi-shot. I've started using expanded single point (four surrounding one). Using the 61-points is tempting, but I'm finding that the camera might grab onto a wingtip when you really want the cockpit to be the focal point.

It's a learning process. The camera is amazing, but you can't just point it at an object and get consistent, sharp images.

Dave

It was not tack sharp at 100%, and it's shown cropped to about 75%. I was not using a tripod or monopod; it was handheld. I could've dropped down to 1/2000s, but the problem with those shots was that my panning technique wasn't good enough to allow for sharp images.

Most of the day I was practicing, and the towards the end of the day I was exhausted from holding nearly 7 lbs for ~6 hours before the Blue Angels. So, I'm sure I was much shakier.

Also, I was using AI-Servo and 12 fps. Honestly, I wouldn't have been able to catch that maneuver and its apex without the 12 fps capability of the 1D X (unless I was really lucky). I was using the 61-pt auto AF for that shot. Honestly, that AF system is remarkably fast, and I got more keepers with that, instead instead of a single point AF.

edit: Oh yeah, and I forgot it was really hazy with all that smoke too.

[Chewy734]

panicos, your image hosting site sucks

[panicos81]

Originally Posted by Chewy734

panicos, your image hosting site sucks

hahaah i know, i dont really use it, just to post images to the picture game and occasionally here when i dont upload directly from the computer

[dcstep]

Originally Posted by Chewy734

It was not tack sharp at 100%, and it's shown cropped to about 75%. I was not using a tripod or monopod; it was handheld. I could've dropped down to 1/2000s, but the problem with those shots was that my panning technique wasn't good enough to allow for sharp images.

Most of the day I was practicing, and the towards the end of the day I was exhausted from holding nearly 7 lbs for ~6 hours before the Blue Angels. So, I'm sure I was much shakier.

Also, I was using AI-Servo and 12 fps. Honestly, I wouldn't have been able to catch that maneuver and its apex without the 12 fps capability of the 1D X (unless I was really lucky). I was using the 61-pt auto AF for that shot. Honestly, that AF system is remarkably fast, and I got more keepers with that, instead instead of a single point AF.

edit: Oh yeah, and I forgot it was really hazy with all that smoke too.

Hmm, I don't understand the problem I would expect that with that AF system that around 8 out of 10 would be sharp, not necessarily well composed, but sharp. When picking my "keepers" I look at them on my 24" screen at 100 or even 200%. For animals I look at the eyes. For your Blue Angels I'd look at the lettering or the pilot.

When your previewing it's tempting to look for the best composition and peak of action. Ideally that's what you want, but if it's not tack sharp, then it needs to be shit-canned, sometimes you don't see that until you're at 100%. Also, you need to look after-crop and make sure the detail is still there. You've got to be brutal in your self analysis. My goal is for all my images to stand up to a full-screen viewing. I'll often process a heavy crop and then dump it when I see it full-screen.

I've tried 61-point AF for fast moving, flying objects and it DOES NOT WORK. You get too many shit-cans. It works fine for cars driving down the street at normal speeds or runners or bikers coming toward you, but it starts grabbing at parts of birds or planes and doesn't focus exactly where you want. I use the single point with four points surrounding it. I think there's one with 8-points around a single that you might try.

Is there a remote control airplane club in your area? If so, shooting those guys is great, repeatable practice. Try several AF modes and make sure you ask them to fly their planes straight at you a bit. When reviewing results, make note of keeper rates for various modes. With 61-points you'll get some part of the plane in focus most of the time, but you'll find when looking at 100% that it'll be the tail, or a wingtip, etc. Even at f/8, that's often not accurate enough and wide open it'll be way off.

My next step is to work with developing a custom AF program for me and my two normal setups (500/f4 and 700/f5.6). The AF reaction times vary quite a bit between those two and deserve their own programs. I'm approaching 10,000 images with my 5D MkIII and think this extra refinement will improve my keeper rate even more. (I dump tons and tons of pix).

Dave

[Chewy734]

Originally Posted by dcstep

Hmm, I don't understand the problem I would expect that with that AF system that around 8 out of 10 would be sharp, not necessarily well composed, but sharp. When picking my "keepers" I look at them on my 24" screen at 100 or even 200%. For animals I look at the eyes. For your Blue Angels I'd look at the lettering or the pilot.

When your previewing it's tempting to look for the best composition and peak of action. Ideally that's what you want, but if it's not tack sharp, then it needs to be shit-canned, sometimes you don't see that until you're at 100%. Also, you need to look after-crop and make sure the detail is still there. You've got to be brutal in your self analysis. My goal is for all my images to stand up to a full-screen viewing. I'll often process a heavy crop and then dump it when I see it full-screen.

I've tried 61-point AF for fast moving, flying objects and it DOES NOT WORK. You get too many shit-cans. It works fine for cars driving down the street at normal speeds or runners or bikers coming toward you, but it starts grabbing at parts of birds or planes and doesn't focus exactly where you want. I use the single point with four points surrounding it. I think there's one with 8-points around a single that you might try.

Is there a remote control airplane club in your area? If so, shooting those guys is great, repeatable practice. Try several AF modes and make sure you ask them to fly their planes straight at you a bit. When reviewing results, make note of keeper rates for various modes. With 61-points you'll get some part of the plane in focus most of the time, but you'll find when looking at 100% that it'll be the tail, or a wingtip, etc. Even at f/8, that's often not accurate enough and wide open it'll be way off.

My next step is to work with developing a custom AF program for me and my two normal setups (500/f4 and 700/f5.6). The AF reaction times vary quite a bit between those two and deserve their own programs. I'm approaching 10,000 images with my 5D MkIII and think this extra refinement will improve my keeper rate even more. (I dump tons and tons of pix).

Dave

Yeah, neither do I. I haven't had a problem with sharpness on my other lenses, even in similar (but not so extreme) situations. Perhaps the 100-400mm needs some MFA? Or perhaps I just need to practice my skills more. I'll have to see what else is around town that I can practice on, before the winter begins.