Sutton Warrior
-
Posts
679 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Posts posted by Sutton Warrior
-
-
Cant help you Janet, however, had a similar problem with my mates Picasa3 this very day. Came home, downloaded Picasa3 onto my computer, to try to work out the problem, it tried to take over my settings!!! to make it 'Number one'! Now I'm not much at computers either, but I very quickly removed it . . .
The program tries to take over, need to . . . 'uncheck' . . . boxes as it down loads, and still it got hold, nasty!! Wont be going there again.SW
-
Telling us how many fish are there??? . . . been down the marina this pm watched a couple of boats come in
Well there aint much about, unless you count a couple of 2 punders as reward for a 6 hour session! 
It aint worth undoing the mooring ropes at the moment. Better fish might be milessss off but dont look like much is with in easy reach? I'll cary on snaping pritty pictures 
SW
-
Hope you don't mind, but I just a very quick play with it. Just burnt a bit more detail into the sky and sea......
It gets better,
Not to hot on PS'ing, waiting for 'Scott Kelby and Matt Kloskowskis book on Elements 7' to hit the book shelves in late April? Will be my 62nd birthday present! I find all but simple manipulating a problem, hoping a book at my 'ABC' level??? in front of me will help? You may know, I have a low level of dyslexia, its very frustrating, like having parts of a jigsaw puzzle missing in my mind, or bridges missing over ravines, you can see where, but how???
That little extra helps the picture, its the better sea of the two. IMHO
SW
-
Very nice shots SW. Do you think Elements 7 has much to offer over 6?
Thanks DelJ,
I have gon from 4 direct to 7, had 5 but it kept crashing my computer!! Now have new computer so got in at the deep end, found a copy of 'Elements v 7' for £30 on Amazon. The media say, 6 to 7 is not much change, so I would say if you understand and are happy with v.6 probably best stick?
I have ony just started using 7, so still a bit green, getting to like it though . . . waiting for the new 'how to' book covering Elements 7, by Scott Kelby and Matt Kloskowski, due end of April, highly recomended, they say, if their 'Ev.6' offereing is anything to go by?
SW
-
A little more fiddling here in PS Elements 7, compared to the basic untouched proof shots originally posted, tried B&W, what you think? Very minor cropping, a tad of unsharp and some very small adjustments to the curve. O'yes, straightened the horizon, surprising how much difference a straight horizon makes to the viewing? IMHO
1
1A
Same stand, but different camera settings, I like the sky in this one?
2
2A
SW
-
F601, had one of them!
Sigma 70-300mm (APO version), had one of them too, replaced it last year!
When I first went digital with the D70s a few years ago, I was on a mission to become a far better photographer, an arty photographer instead of a snapshot photographer.
Many tens of thousands of images later, I've discovered I don't have an arty bone in my body (which is a little odd as my late father was a very arty), but I can now take a pretty damn good digital snapshot!
I recently went to an extended families Greek Orthodox Baptism. The official photographer was late, so the mother, knowing I like to snap away, asks if I'd stand in and take hundreds of shots. Unlike CofE churches, I had full access anywhere, and luckily flash was allowed. The official photog did eventually arrive, with his D3 and 28mm 1.4AF...about £6,000 worth of gear, and with the D3 having great high ISO quality, no need for him to use flash. How small did I feel with my D200? Well, to cut a long story short, the mother didn't like a single shot of his (he was working for free as extended family too), and loved all mine! I didn't think mine were that good, but what do I know?
I have some of my photos up here: http://www.pbase.com/tuckeruk
more power to your elbow Angly!!!70s, thats what I had befor the D80, fancy a D90 now . .
that will have to be next year!!I'm just like you mate, 'snap happy', Mother was arty, the whole family are very clever with there hands, I've inherited the hands, my Father logical mind, not his brains though, but Mums arty side, I was round the corner when 'art' was given out
SW
-
Be careful of Ken Rockwell: Although he is a very clever chap, he is often read and regurgitated by those who don't really understand his humour or wit. He makes some excellent points, and offers some thought provoking opinions. His site is a little bare of hard sustainable facts though in my opinion.
If you havn't already, read Thom Hogan's D80 review: http://www.bythom.com/d80review.htm
Worth checking our the rest of his site too.
I see where you are coming from, ah, the days of film, I used to hose around with gay abandon with my F601 only ever used a Sigma 70-300, all aircraft shots for a magazine. that was back in the early 90's, only just sold the 70-300, replaced it with a new, Sigma 70-300-HSM motor, Hazel has a D40X! I never used that 601 on anything other than 'auto P', shoot 5-10 rolls of 36 in a day and every one was good enough for publication, exposure wise that is
Auto P, cos I never had time to adjust the camera, made me lazy. Thats why I'm only just learning now . . . got time . . . go back to 'auto P', a simple life You are right, the camera was left to do the job, and yes, I agree, it got it right, although, the -1 adjustment to the 'aWB' make a major difference. What I want now is a day when I can shoot all day, and see how the WB fairs.
I like Ken Rockwells 'matter of fact' way, but I am learning that one needs to spit out the bones, like the D80 and over exposing for instance, a few basic adjustments and mine seems to have it right?
Coincidentally, Ken Hogans site is in my 'favorites list' to be looked at, I will bring him forward and have a gander.
SW
-
Starting to get a bit complicated in my simple mind. What I can see, is that, a little adjustment in the menu will give positive results? By messing about with the working of the lens and camera, it seems we can mess up what the designers have done by introducing a UV filter, or any other filter? although, they are deliberate for effect.This is my final picture for today, light has gone! Just a tad in PS Elements. Its interesting . . . to me, WB is on auto (-1 in menu), no UV filter and no exposure compensation, (Ken Rockwell) whacks on about the D80 needing '-0.7' compensation. He was right I thought, but with the two changes as above, I was happy with the result. Put it into 'Elements Auto tweak' according to 'PS Elements' it needed to be a tad in the '+' direction, I think PSE has looked at the shadows, both are OK, here is Elements version:
SW
-
UV filters have no great effect on later digital bodies, (and the newer the body the more this is true), the manufacturers go to great lens to reduce UV rays reaching the sensor. Just look for information regarding converting your body to a UV camera.
As to using filters for protection, another oft cited reason, I was was firmly in this camp and very aggressively fighting my corner...but I've now changed my mind. Nothing to do with sticking cheap filters on expensive lenses, I used Nikon own recommended filters; just the difficluty of keeping the filters clean. It seemed like everytime I looked there was a smudge, or pieces of dust that needed removing...and you think to yourself, wow, lucky I've got that filter on to protect my lens. But after experimentally removing all my filters I've not once had to clean a front lens element, they don't seem to get as dirty! Bizarre but true, for me at least.
With polarisers I went the whole hog and bought a Nikon one, the only other I'd recommend from experience would be the Hoya multi coated.
Wow Angly, I did not know what I was getting myself into . . . Your comments, "UV filters have no effect . . . " . . . OK I will prove the point?
Nothing don to these at all!!!
UV filter, auto WB
UV filter, shade WB
UV filter removed, auto WB
UV filter removed, shade WB
Come to your own conclusions!!! I have been able to adjust the 'Auto WB' in the menu get rid of some of the blue cast -1, it might stand -2? Not really part of this test but it makes for better pictures in the future? Same adjustments available to all the other WB setting, going to make for some interesting shots of my back garden. Perhaps need +1 on the shade setting? But essentially, making the UV filter unnecessary?
Also got the vivid set a lttle high now? what you think?
SW
-
Here's my thoughts, but I'm a bit of a stickler for quality, as I dont see the point in sticking cheap filters on expensive lenses!
I've actually been shooting more and more without a UV on. I read a good article somewhere from a pro that takes people on courses. One of the fellas was consistently getting poor results. The pro told him to take the UV off and sure enough the pics instantly improved. Nowadays I only bother with one if I'm likely to be shooting in conditions which could result in lens damage - salt spray, etc.
I use a standard Hoya CPLR though and it's been fine. I'm thinking about getting rid of it though and going for their more expensive version (which I've seen on Ebay for the same price as I paid for my standard one).
As for ND Grads, I recently moved over to the Cokin Z pros. Mainly because the Cokin P's are too small for wideangle lenses and a full frame sensor, even then I occasionally get a bit of the holder in the frame if it's not perfectly vertical. The filters are great, but £50 a go, so for a set of 3 ND grads, the holder and a 77mm ring, you can kiss goodbye to £200!
Interesting Chippy, I will try removing the UV filter next time out and see the differance? I like the colouring on the test pics I posted for the Sigma 10-20, that was with a Kenko UV filter fitted.
I'm far from expert in these matters and have always held with 'you get what you pay for'? However there is the other old wives saying, 'cutting the cloth according to the means' and thats how I see things in the present. Self employed, the next 18 months is going to be hard for us all, in truth, perhaps I should have waited a while for the Sigma? But, I made the mental decission, fleeBay prices have gon silly, £280-£300!!! no Gt's etc., £250 seemed about right, I found mine in 'Mifsuds' £249 with Gt. If I had been disapointed, I could have put it on fleesBay and made a profit!!!
Thanks for the 'Cokin Z' info. I thought the normal Cokin holder would be a problem on wide angle. Look closley at pic six in the samples, you will see my sleve in the bottom LH corner!!
The angle on that lens is amazing.Going to have to put some pennies away then, scour the ads and see whats on offer on fleeBay?
SW
-
Any advice on "must have" filters gladly taken on.Bearing in mind 99% of my shots are lanscapes/seascapes.Although I might branch out into a few family/friends portrait shots.
John
Hay Snatcher, Branch out, I thought you were no.1 expert in 'Pubscapes'
Looking at Coking filters for the spring/summer, seems a lot of us are thinking this way?
SW
-
Well I am am virtually a filter virgin
I possess 2 filters,a ND and a grad ND.Just started using them in the last month or so.What a difference it makes. Do not burn out the sky so much now.In fact with my sunrise shots sometimes put both in to get a longer exposure on a lower ISO and I think I am getting better results from it.Way to go Snatcher
may even go for a polaroid filter next and then thats me sorted! I suppose I will need to buy another filter holder then? I assume the polaroid filters will be round? So you using Cokin ND/Grad system Snatcher? More info please
SW
-
I am the last to advise on filters . . .
However, if you want to protect you lens glass a UV filter is worth while, has advantagouse effects on the final picture, eliminates the blue cast see on sunny days. A polerising filter is usefull but depends on how the lens operates, 'internal focusing'? ND and Grads, thats for the more expeianced to go at explaining. I have just posted my experiance so far with 'cheap filters' from fleeBay, definatly 'buyer beware'. By the way Judy, you have a 55mm lens thead, sorry if you already new SW
-
A topic for discussion? Having just purchased a new WA lens, I had to look at the net for at least a UV filter at 77mm. Thats a big filter, and from the likes of Hoya, pricey!! Heard all the horror stories about cheap filters, but I'm a bit strapped at present . . . ain't we all? So, curiosity got the better and I typed in to fleeBay, 'lens filter 77mm' . . . hay-presto, pages of the blighters. Pennies to nearly one hundred pounds . . . all sorts of names, known and unknown. I know that multi coated 'MC' is the way to go, thats a start, reading the blurb, leans coating can a complicated business.
As I say, tight on the hard earned. I looked, made the eyes sore
with looking, and the brain hurt, weighing up the pros and cons I was fairly sure forum advise would be 'quality', advise I would normally give myself.Finally, decided, 'Kenko' is a name I know, cheap but known, less than a 'fiver' inc pp.
if it lasts a year, thats fine, the question, would the coating be up to muster? Well I have posted a few of the first session with the new lens + UV. Not going to worry Sir Davis Baily, but the filter does seem to be doing its job. Still more familiarisation to do but the 'cheap' filter is OK? . . . I think.Whilst looking for the UV filter, I spied 'polarising filters', the circular variety, pricey at the best of times, but at 77mm phew
Another name I have seen 'Sakar',and £5 inc pp??? I speculated, the seller turned out to be a 'dork' but the filter, although not yet tried on lens, is certainly doing a job held to the light and turned, worth a fiver???Next, looking at 'grad and ND' filters, to fleebay or not to fleeBay . . . ??? Any advise on the values that are most useful?
A topic for views and discussion . . .
SW
-
With new (thats new to me but 'used') Sigma 10-20mm lens clamped on, I had to brave the weather, looks nice but thats an Easterly blowing at least 20mph +! with the wind chill factor = no more than +1C
The hands were like ice blocks in minutes. However I had to test the lens.
Moved down the road to the relative shelter of the river Deben and the Felixstowe Ferry boat yard.
I have done nothing to these shots, other than reduce them to 800px. I wanted to see how the camera/lens coped, I think I've messed up on the 'WB', but despite my efforts to mess things up, the D80 has still don a job? When its warmer I'll be able to play more.
I became aware very quickly of the beguiling effect the wide angle lens can have on the photographer. I also came to the conclusion that a 10 or 12mm fixed primary would do as well, with the advantages that the fixed glass can bring in quality?
So, I think I've got something to work with and improve on. Despite the cold we . . . 'the Royal we', Hazel, and the dog enjoyed the walk too. Back to the car, ham roll and a flask of hot coffee to warm us up
SW
-
Being a Canon man, I cant comment on the Nikon softwares. I use Photoshop - camera RAW to open my Photos straight into Photoshop for Processing. I could spend hours tweaking this 'n that in Camera RAW, but I still work on the adage of "less is more" and post process my shots very little. I still prefer to get shots right in camera, so I dont have to adjust exposure or crop in post processing. So I open the RAW in Adobe camera RAW, then open into Photoshop as a 16 bit file RGB 300ppi (saved preset) then I make any post processing from there in Photoshop which normally includes just adding a frame. Then I convert to 8 bit mode, save and I'm done..Post processing time..around 30 seconds...simples!
Dont overcomplicate RAW and it wont control you, its there to use if you have a shot that for whatever reason went slightly wrong for example a cloud covering the sun so your exposure on that important shot was wrong or similar cicumstances.
Steve...
Good advise, which I try to work to, colour, I'm usualy OK on, but I do like my 'croping' . . . Mmmm, need to get better at spoting the shot and allowing a bit more time . . . time, never enough 'time'
I will try harder SW
-
A bit late? going down to Felixstowe to 'get a few in the can'. Its a bit cold
but need to test the new 10-20, 77mm UV arived this morning so I can evaluate properly. Hazels raring to go as well, D40X in hand, and the dog he aint got a camera but hes looking forwaed to the walk Got to get my old bag out!!! the new smaller KATA, is a bit tight, and I said I would not fill it!!!
SW
-
I have to agree about the quality from Photobox, they have only done a few for me [30 x 20 and A2s] but they were outstanding quality.
I have trouble getting my head round NOT printing my own 7 x 5 images, so persevere with my Epson rightly or wrongly.
My other problem is my wife saying we have too many photographs around the walls and cupboards of our house.
I would have the walls covered in them!!
:DColin, there is the argument of not needing wallpaper . . .
SW
-
I shoot in RAW, batch process every photo to jpeg (with sharpening) for web viewing e-mailing and such like, and save both RAW and jpegs by date on a NAS drive, backed up to archival quality media (Taiyo Yuden DVD+R). As you say, critical shots, or shots for printing, can then be reworked from the RAW file as needed.
I'm a Nikonian, so I use Capture NX both to initially adjust the RAW file honouring camera settings, and to batch process into jpegs. If I want to do further work on the photo, I first open in Capture NX then work in Photoshop on the Tiff file. I find Capture far better than ACR at handling Nikon's colours.
Had a look at 'Nikonian', lowest level 25 days trial . . . they want money to continue at silver level! I can be a tight old git, got my 'tight old git head on at present'.
Have the trial version of NX supplied with the D80, tried it for a few days. Superb presentation, be even better I suspect with the new computer and 22" monitor. But I found it a little overwhelming at the time, had my 'numpty head' on those days, and its not cheap to buy either.
SW
-
Aha, I see now, "bespoke personalised configuration" is that the same as "it floats my boat" ?
Glad you are pleased with it all
Den
Yes Den, I'm a fussy 'bleeder', back fires on me sometimes, I can get in over the head, depends on which head I'm wearing
But you lot on here help, as you say 'hands on floats my boat' 
SW
-
Played fine for me.
SW
-
But why all the "messing about" SW? I set my camera on auto, take a pic and maybe tweak the shadows a bit, then look at it on my Samsung 22" which installed itself
I have fiddled with the settings (there is a preview option) but always came back to the default.
I did tell you that you would be "blown away" by the image quality though, and when measured it is almost exactly double the viewing area of a 15" screen.
I have also put the same images,one RAW and one converted to JPG, side by side, but I can't see any difference. This is from an 8mpx camera.
And I have also ressurected a lot of the pics taken with my (now ancient) Olympus C3000 3.3mpx, and they look just as good!
Den
Thats good then aint it Den, we are both happy. My HP monitor installed its self, I chose to go the extra mile with the bespoke personalised configuration . . . personal preferance and all that.
SW
-
Well folks, I'm looking at some RAW v JPG pictures I took a few weeks ago, but have not had time to make any comparisons because of the computer problems around that time. The new computer is now working 'tickerty-boo'. But, befor I go any further, Westie asked me for my thoughts on the 22" screen, originaly this was a PM request, however, the experiance has been so elitening, perhaps its worth the airing publicaly?
I looked at a few screens, PC world is not the best place to view them, they use a splitter to drive 8 or 10 at one time, all requiring diferent settings, therefore the whole display was a compromise, but thats PC World for you. I had the assitants carting screens all around the shop to plug in to dedicated computers. Any how, cut a long story short(ish)
. . . I plumped for the HPw2216, the decision was between it and a Samsung. Final choice was made with the head, the Samsung 'black rose' finish had the heart. HP have been at the leading edge of colour reproduction for many years, I spent considerable time on the web sorting through reviews, forum coments etc. That was Saturday night, after I had disrupted PC World for a couple of hours and puchased nothing!The clinching fact was a review that made a piont to mention the CD that comes with the HP screen, and the fully dedicated configuration that can be achived using this set up disc. Not to mention the high score it recieved compared with the other units they were reviewing.
So, Sunday had PC World, again, disrupted to finaly decide between the two screens, the rest is history? Well not quite, a week went by befor the new computer arived, it took some time to get to grips with the HP set up disc, however, its don now, 'CJS preferd setup' > 'use as defalt'.
The big change, one has noticed is 'space', and I thought 17" was a big'un . . . ?
The colour is more dynamic and subtle, plus much more detail. The extra avaliable space on a 22" wide monitor means I can put two pictures on screen side by side, as I have this evening for comparison, they would have been impossibly small on my 17" 'old ratio' monitor. If you are still using the old style square(er) type monitor, its a no brainer, if you do PS'ing and like to compare, 'befor and after'.Having now finaly done this, with a couple of test shots, totaly un tampered with, the diferances between RAW and JPG can be seen just. I can see the advantages to both formats, the time factor is my concern. I dont want to have to apportion time to RAW reworking just for monitor viewing on every shot, however, the ability to take RAW/JPG, and view them on the 'windows viewer' as one used to with film proof sheets. Ignore the ordinay ones and pick out the shots that stand out that one likes for future RAW 'PS' treatment, the remainder, compress and save on the 500 gig external hard drive. The dulicated JPG shots will be simpler to re work, and save as memory and trophy pictures, album fashon, the JPG's not put in to folders or albums, can be deleted, there is a compresed RAW backup!
So thats my thoughts so far on RAW for the present. I'm sure there are other angles, which can be put forward
SW
-
You'd think so wouldnt you. I certainly wont be buying anything else from them anymore, despite spending £10K plus there over the years.
Mifsuds are quite pricey on the lens - £479. Bristol cameras have them for £372 with £10 postage!
Yes, I looked at Mifsuds 'New equipment' prices, seem to be average to a little high, but the used stuff, that seems much better.
I bought my brand new, 'Sigma 70-300HSM-Apo' last year from Bristol cameras, best price by a mile at the time, and got £72 for the old (very old!) non 'HSM 70-300' one on fleeBay! Its a matter of shopping around these days, find out who is desperate and wants to shift some gear . . . cynical . . . its a tough world at the moment
SW
Reflections . . .
in Photography
Posted
Had a bit of time recently to reflect on past and recent happenings . . . Happily Hazel looks like she is out of the wood health wise? still got a few och-es and ouch-es . . . but that part of being in the trainee classes for OAP's
We (the Royal 'we') are looking forward to spring, Hazel is itching to get going with the D40X. I'm waiting patiently for the bass to come in the river. We are both looking forward to spending quality time on the boat, warm balmy evenings, glass of wine in hand watching the world go by, heaven. The new computer is doing its thing brilliantly and my new toy Sigma 10-20 is tickling my fancy.
New year resolution; get to grips with RAW? . . .
. . . for the time being, I'm happy with JPG, life is to short . . . 
These are a few more pics from the three 50 frame sessions that I have had with the Sigma. Had a little bit of a fiddle in 'Elements 7'.
Reflections:
Lobster pots
Surf:
Old Wood:
I'm enjoying the New lense, still plenty of issues with my handling
SW