File :-(, x, )
Venus(?) Shot Krasnovolk !!bmRBc7XP24d
Was doing some night shots (mostly moon w/ landscape stuff) and decided to take this random photo just to see if my CoolPix would do it. I think the bright spot is Venus.

Full photo stuff and comment at http://www.deviantart.com/deviation/54554068/

Yes, that is my dA page.
EXIF data available. Clickhereto show/hide.
Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeNIKONCamera ModelE7600Camera SoftwareE7600v1.0Maximum Lens Aperturef/2.8Focal Length (35mm Equiv)38 mmImage-Specific Properties:Horizontal Resolution300 dpiVertical Resolution300 dpiImage Created2007:05:03 12:55:17Exposure Time2 secF-Numberf/2.8Exposure ProgramNormal ProgramISO Speed Rating200Exposure Bias2 EVMetering ModePatternLight SourceUnknownFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryFocal Length7.80 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width600Image Height800RenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoScene Capture TypeStandardGain ControlLow Gain UpContrastNormalSharpnessNormalSubject Distance RangeUnknownColor ModeCOLORImage QualityFINEWhite BalanceAUTOImage SharpeningAUTOFocus ModeAF-SISO SelectionAUTOImage AdjustmentNORMALLens AdapterOFFAuto FocusCenterSaturationNormalNoise ReductionOFF
>> ac
Are you aware that you just posted a small white dot on a field of blank blackness to a photo community that would flame Ansel Adams for picking boring subjects?
>> Anonymous
also, nice watermark. because this picture is so awesome someone's gonna steal it.
>> Krasnovolk !!bmRBc7XP24d
Sarcasm noted, Anonymous. It's something I do on all photos. I just do it. I don't care.

I wasn't asking for critique, either. I was just impressed that a damn "cheap" digital (it ran me $350 when I bought it) can actually photograph celestial objects that film can't without a LOT of time. I just wanted to share my enthusiasm and amazement that the little bugger could do it.

If you guys feel the need to critique or criticize, be my guest. BTW, if you look at the photo, it has trees in it and power lines I didn't feel like editing out. Your criticism, ac, would be more appropriate had it been cropped down more. Apparently you should adjust your monitor settings.
>> ac
>>44871
What makes you think film would take more than 2 seconds to capture this shot?

The reason you hear about people taking really long exposures for astrophotography is because they're taking pictures of things a hell of a lot dimmer than Venus. I'm guessing you could probably capture this particular shot on ISO200 film with a roughly 2 second exposure at f/2.8.
>> Anonymous
>>44871
Listen tool, you submitted your shitty ass Black Blobs among other black blobs, with a single white spec, And then don't expect to get critisized?
Your pic sucks, and your watermark makes it an ultimate fail, Even if someone steals your picture BIG DEAL, its not like you were going to make any money from it, and neither are they.
>> Anonymous
>>44871
You're so hardcore. Yeah, it's amazing that your shitty fucking camera can take a shitty fucking picture. Get the fuck back to deviantArt, you fucking deviant.
>> Anonymous
OP = OWNED!
>> boku
lol, out of boredum i scan 4chan outside my usual letters, to find there is a place where the tards are more of an asshole than /b/ and more elitist than /k/.

OP says he put a watermark on his pic cuz he dose it to all his pics, yet even after saying that, some retard still has the stupidity to bitch about him being scared of "theft". good work moron.

i think this a perfect proof to show that you people really are elitist idiots. nice work OP, keep up the photography, you don't need to be perfect and speed $$$$ to do something you enjoy.
>> Anonymous
>>45005
GTFO. This photo is shit and this deviantfag is trying to brag about his totally awesome cheap point and shoot (btw $350 for a p&s is a fucking rip off, I could take this pic with a $50 digital camera). And it doesn't matter why he puts his fucking retarded watermark on there. He still does it and it is epic fail for the simple reason that it's there. Stop being so fucking naive.
>> Anonymous
Posting your DA page during a photo is basically asking for trouble.

Fuck off.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
IM EPIC FAIL GUY
>> Anonymous
Venus is typically the third brightest celestial object visible from Earth. Capturing it with anything is really not amazing.

Even though I think the OP fails on numerous accounts, I believe the hostile attitude here is of similar concern.
>> Anonymous
>>44872
>>ISO200 film with a roughly 2 second exposure at f/2.8.

I fukken lol'd.

also, this pic really fails, celestial shots are fine, but ideally, the celestial object would be distinguishable from a stray bit of dust, and any forground--- well.. this doesn't really have foreground. it has some slightly darker areas that you forgot to cop out. not that cropping it would have made it any more interesting, unless you cropped it out of existence.

gb2/store and return your camera. You'll need the money for food, if tou plan on making a living as an artist.
>> Anonymous
>>44868
That fucking sucks. Seriously. Look how much noise there is, and big whoop, you took a picture of a big bright object that any digital camera could have done. Good thing you watermarked it, otherwise I'd have sold it to "shitty pictures monthly" and made 12¢ off of it.
Get a new camera, or at least realize how shitty yours actually is.
>> ac
>>46108
So didja really need to bump this lame-ass thread just to tell him he sucks in the same exact way that everyone else in the thread already told him he sucked?

Sage goes in the email field.
>> Anonymous
you could've made the samething in microsoft paint at 3pm in the afternoon.