File :-(, x, )
Anonymous
is this a cool shot? i love the water effect
EXIF data available. Clickhereto show/hide.
Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeSONYCamera ModelDSLR-A200Camera SoftwareDSLR-A200 v1.00Maximum Lens Aperturef/5.6Focal Length (35mm Equiv)105 mmImage-Specific Properties:Horizontal Resolution240 dpiVertical Resolution240 dpiImage Created2008:10:22 16:46:30Exposure Time1/4000 secF-Numberf/5.6Exposure ProgramShutter PriorityISO Speed Rating400Lens Aperturef/5.6Brightness8.5 EVExposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternLight SourceUnknownFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryFocal Length70.00 mmRenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandardContrastNormalSaturationNormalSharpnessNormal
>> Anonymous
looks pretty neat, the black background is nice. It's pretty generic, but I assume you are just experimenting. Also you don't need INSANE SHUTTER to capture water falling out of a faucet, about 1/200 would do.
>> Project !dashI8UpO.
>>280570
>Exposure Time 1/4000 sec
>Flash No Flash, Compulsory

In this case, he would. It's either extrem shuttar with no flash or quick flash with minimum sync speed.
>> Anonymous
damn that shit is extrem
>> Anonymous
too extrem
>> Anonymous
noob here, how did you get the blackground so dark?
photoshopped or ???^^
>> Anonymous
nice shot, very conceptual and well composed, considering it's not a still-life. also, resize and DON'T EVER UDE THE 18-70 FULLY OPEN, stop it down to f8 at least.
>> Anonymous
>>280656
It's simply darker than the rest of the scene and wasn't able to appear on the exposure.
>> Anonymous
>>280669

ah alright. i thought of that too, but the rest of the image didnt appear so dark to me that the aperture/shutter setting would be enough to darken it so much


>>280668

quick question, resize picture simply for bandwith-reasongs ?
>> Project !dashI8UpO.
>>280671
Not just for bandwidth but also for viewing. If I were to ask you to look at a 3x2 feet print, would you stand a few inches away from it or take a few steps back. Not everyone has massive monitors that can fit a whole 10 megapixels, highest resolution now on a single screen is only 2 megapixels. If we were to let our browsers resize it on the other hand, it would use some fast but ugly sampling algorithm and result in being highly pixelated.
>> Anonymous
>>280656

background is so dark because of the high shutter speed i used. i took this picture in sunlight up by my pool. (i think sunlight is the key)

>>280668

What would be the benefits to resizing? And why would i want to take up my f-stop?
>> Anonyfag of Borneo !bHymOqU5YY
>>What would be the benefits to resizing?
see>>280675. Also, I can't be arsed to wait for the 2.3 MB of JPEG that can be viewed the same at a smaller size.
>> Anonymous
>>If we were to let our browsers resize it on the other hand, it would use some fast but ugly sampling algorithm and result in being highly pixelated.


aha, thanks for iluminating me ;)
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
is this any better?

is there an easy program to resize stuff?
>> Anonymous
>>280864

MS PAINT YOU DUMB BITCH
>> Anonymous
>>280740
We don't mind illuminating you :)

and yeah, its a good pic
>> Anonymous
Any other suggestions that could make this picture way better?
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
Nice. This is pretty much what I tried to do here, and failed. You captured it better.
>> Anonymous
>>281765

i agree
>> dumbduck anon
>>280864
use mspaint or irfanview. fucking stupid anon i swear.
>> Anonymous
>>280677
all lenses, expecially cheap zooms achieve best sharpness stopped down 2 o 3 f-stops from fully open. in this case you woultnd't have missed the low Depth of field, you're shooting at 105 mm equivalent so a f8 would have sufficed.
>> Anonymous
OP LEARN TO RESIZE FAGGOT