This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
Is the shadow really supposed to be that blue? The iridescent colours of the haematite I understand, but the shadow??. I tried a colour balance adjustment. Is that very different from the real sample? Lycaon17:53, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
Blue effect depends a lot on the light and the orientation. You look at it one way it's very blue, another way almost brown. I took the picture under full day light. Blue shadow seemed to me exaggerated but I will check it when shiny days come back. I prefer the retouched version which seems to me more realistic. Thanks.--B.navez18:39, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
Thanks a lot for GIMP, I've uploaded it. It looks nice making my first steps. I have uploaded a new picture too. --B.navez08:50, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
Be careful using GIMP to scale images, by default on some installs (Ubuntu 7.04 for example) it will not use the highest quality settings. --Ianare06:30, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
The shadow in the third picture looks a lot better and very natural. There is still a slight sharpness problem, but I think it is from the large DOF. You can try merging several photos with smaller DOFs with the free program CombineZM, or try F/14, and that should help with the sharpness. --Digon3talk16:47, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
Jacksonville Night Panorama
This is my first attempt at a night shot. Any suggestion on how I can take a better night panorama the next time I go there? --Digon3talk15:43, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
Some of the input photos show camera shake. Look at ING of "LANDING", or the left of the two blue piers, there you see a diagonal shake. There is some more. On the plus side, your photos seam to be in focus (can be a problem, but then on your camera I presume you control the distance manually); and your lense does not give you halos around bright lights. -- Klaus with K18:16, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
The shake on some of the photos was unavoidable without a remote camera release since just just pushing the button to take the picture would cause camera shake (I was using a 75-300mm lens). Do you have any suggestions about the exposure or how to reduce the noise without having to downsample so much? --Digon3talk15:04, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
Use a solid object to rest your camera on (I rarely carry a tripod with me), and yes, self timer like 2 seconds of delay can help. Or are these hand-held shots? -- Klaus with K15:38, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
I took the pictures with a tripod with a 5 second exposure because there was no place to put the camera that wasn't blocked by trees.
Don't go there at night, go there at twilight, these pictures tend to look better when you have at least some color in the sky. --che21:28, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
I don't take panoramas, so it's hard for me to be confident about whether night or twilight is better. For single shots, I like to look at twilight. However, the Jacksonville panorama shows some blocks of sky that are darker than other blocks. It would be best to avoid brightness mismatches like these, and I'd guess the light changes faster at twilight, making it harder to take photos with matching sky brightnesses. Does anyone have experience with this? Fg211:48, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
With a rather wide-angle image (stitched from several photos) I wonder what would be a proper crop for this view? So far I have tried two versions, with and without most of the mirror image. -- Klaus with K15:57, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
I prefer the middle one, although the tree framing on the left picture is also quite nice. The right one, IMO, is too close up and lacks the reflection. It would also be a shame to put a multiple image together and then only use a small fraction of it. Lycaon16:16, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
I prefer the left one, as I too agree that the tree framing is nice, and I find the composition slightly more attractive than the middle one. Agree with Lycaon concerning the right one, it just isn't right ;-) -- Slaunger10:50, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
The stitch is "exposed to the right", there is slight colour fringing looking at some leafs, sharpness should be ok given the large pixel size (otherwise I'll downsample...). Would these(left, middle) make the grade for QI or even FP? ;-) -- Klaus with K13:57, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
Certainly QI in my opionion. For FP I find the overall impression of the picture too dark. Just my 2 cents! ;-) --Simonizer14:46, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
Agree with Simonizer, and although I think the one to the left is the best photo, I think the one to the right is the most valuable, and it could be a VI (Valuable Image), it is IMO the best illustration of Neuenstein Castle for online use in Wikimedia projects. -- Slaunger20:22, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
Two things I am wondering. What about a portrait crop of castle and reflection? And regarding the dark foreground, how to brighten it up without loosing colour intensity or overexposing the sky. -- Klaus with K15:15, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
(reverted) original version
modified (colour change), now new name as well...
attempt at brightening
