PF Photography: Tips, Tricks, & Photo Sharing

In summary, this thread is for photography. Hosting your photos can be done using http://imageshack.us/", and a maximum image size of 640x480 is recommended. Photos that are too dull can be improved by adjusting the color balance. There is a free Image Manipulation programme called GIMP that can be used to touch up photos. For those interested, there is a link to a tutorial on how to use GIMP in the thread's last post.
  • #1,296
dlgoff said:
Outstanding photo. :!)
If it were the 787, you probably could have smelled these: :devil:

http://www.channelnewsasia.com/components/display_image.php?id=525289?123

Ha ha, so true :)

Having spent nearly 3 years on PF, I've just found about this wonderful subforum. Will take a very active role, i am a photography geek and I've been to a lot of beautiful spots around the world. Stay tuned :)
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #1,297
Shanghai from the highest observation deck in the world:

10seiyu.jpg
 
  • #1,298
Maui said:
Having spent nearly 3 years on PF, I've just found about this wonderful subforum. ...

Says a lot about the depth of PF. There are many subforums I've yet to visit after nearly 10 years. :smile:
 
  • #1,299
Latest batch of MEMS images- the first one was from a broken laptop, the other from a broken Wii controller. The second one was damaged during cleaning- the suspended membranes are little more than solid smoke- a puff of air is enough to smash them to bits:

http://imageshack.us/a/img221/6650/dsc02306o.jpg

http://imageshack.us/a/img198/8981/dsc023111.jpg

http://imageshack.us/a/img546/3788/dsc02317c.jpg

http://imageshack.us/a/img854/2199/dsc02389i.jpg

http://imageshack.us/a/img541/6866/dsc02404ao.jpg

http://imageshack.us/a/img4/5730/dsc02435pd.jpg

Full-sized images (and additional images) are on my lab's website. Enjoy!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #1,300
Maui said:
Jet blast from a B767 taking off in St Maarten(the airport beach) - Jan 2013

Excellent (both photos)!
 
  • #1,301
Maui said:
Shanghai from the highest observation deck in the world:

Maui, that shot made me dizzy!
 
  • #1,302
lisab said:
Maui, that shot made me dizzy!
Hold on, there's higher!

642u50.jpg
120x, hand shot

nnlgea.jpg
The moons of Jupiter(hand shot, no tripod):

w2q7p.jpg
 
Last edited:
  • #1,303
8340593490_0148499618_c.jpg

here's a photo from the jersey shore after sandy tore it up.
 
  • #1,304
jqhjdk.jpg
 
  • #1,305
Finally- the first clear night in (what seems like) months. First image: 15/4, 8s @ ISO 800, background subtraction post-processing. Second image: 1:1 crop of 800/5.6, composite of 1/100s ISO100 and 1/4s ISO400.

http://imageshack.us/a/img191/6586/resultofdsc02785filtere.jpg

http://imageshack.us/a/img826/7623/dsc027793.jpg
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #1,306
Nice photos Andy! I'm curious, can you take such photos from a big city? I ask this because I'd think it's hard to see that many stars in the sky in a big city due to "light pollution".
Also for the second photo, you made a composite of "1/100s ISO100 and 1/4s ISO400". I am curious... shouldn't 1/100s ISO 100 be almost a fully dark photo?!
 
  • #1,307
fluidistic said:
Nice photos Andy! I'm curious, can you take such photos from a big city? I ask this because I'd think it's hard to see that many stars in the sky in a big city due to "light pollution".
Also for the second photo, you made a composite of "1/100s ISO100 and 1/4s ISO400". I am curious... shouldn't 1/100s ISO 100 be almost a fully dark photo?!

Thanks!

To the first question (light pollution): it's all about increasing the signal to noise ratio. What I did here was simply subtract the background- the slowly-varying intensity. Any location with a rapidly-varying intensity (starts, tree branches, etc) is left alone. It's easy to do- duplicate the image, blur one of them (I used a Gaussian blur radius of 100 pixels), and then subtract the blurred image from the original. Another method is 'image stacking', where multiple images are added together. There are lots of subtle details that go into optimizing a particular strategy, and there are folks here with a lot of experience who can help you.

As a point of reference, I have been able to consistently pull out magnitude +15 objects from the background. I think I can do even better once the weather warms up and I can spend more time outside.

To the second question, the answer is that I am using a lens with a large aperture; the lens is a 400/2.8 (with an optional 2x extension tube) which means for astrophotography it's a 6" refractor. This let's me use short shutter speeds, but more practically it let's me aim the camera by eye; I can 'star hop' to a particular faint object fairly quickly.
 
  • #1,308
Andy Resnick said:
To the first question (light pollution): it's all about increasing the signal to noise ratio. What I did here was simply subtract the background- the slowly-varying intensity. Any location with a rapidly-varying intensity (starts, tree branches, etc) is left alone. It's easy to do- duplicate the image, blur one of them (I used a Gaussian blur radius of 100 pixels), and then subtract the blurred image from the original. Another method is 'image stacking', where multiple images are added together. There are lots of subtle details that go into optimizing a particular strategy, and there are folks here with a lot of experience who can help you.

I'm assuming that the background subtraction doesn't actually increase the SN ratio, it just removes the background light from the sky without affecting the abrupt changes where something blocks out the background light, such as the tree limbs you mentioned, along with the sudden increase in signal from stars? That way you can still see the tree limbs and such, thanks to the "glow" around them, and at the same time you can see the stars as well.
 
  • #1,309
Thanks Andy for the explanation.
 
  • #1,310
Drakkith said:
I'm assuming that the background subtraction doesn't actually increase the SN ratio, it just removes the background light from the sky without affecting the abrupt changes where something blocks out the background light, such as the tree limbs you mentioned, along with the sudden increase in signal from stars? That way you can still see the tree limbs and such, thanks to the "glow" around them, and at the same time you can see the stars as well.

That's a good point. My intention was to describe ways to stretch the contrast between star and sky.
 
  • #1,311
Andy Resnick said:
That's a good point. My intention was to describe ways to stretch the contrast between star and sky.

Got it.
 
  • #1,312
Spring is in my backyard. Definitely.

Pelobates_fuscus.jpg
 
  • #1,313
Have you seen this video borek?
:biggrin:
By the way, nice photo. Do you know whether it's a toad or a frog? Probably the former...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #1,314
fluidistic said:
Have you seen this video borek?
:biggrin:


Sigh. I thought I already know what it is about and then... Now I have coffee everywhere.

By the way, nice photo. Do you know whether it's a toad or a frog? Probably the former...

Check the file name.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #1,315
Borek said:
Sigh. I thought I already know what it is about and then... Now I have coffee everywhere.
lol.

Borek said:
Check the file name.
Ah, I didn't know that was possible. Nice... According to wiki:
Wiki the Great said:
When alarmed, it emits a very loud call (alarm call) and it can exude a noxious secretion which smells like garlic, hence the common name "garlic toad".
. So your specimen was around 6 to 8 cm?!
 
  • #1,316
fluidistic said:
So your specimen was around 6 to 8 cm?!

Perhaps even larger.
 
  • #1,317
Borek said:
Perhaps even larger.

Nice :)
 
  • #1,318
Wow, that must be Touchwood from Catweazle

http://www.nostalgie.webpark.cz/wp-content/gallery/caryfuk/cf9.jpg

http://www.nostalgie.webpark.cz/caryfuk-1970-catweazle
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #1,319
This is a chip from the paleolithic era: a circa-1968 RCA CD4012 (dual 4-input NAND gate) device.

http://imageshack.us/a/img835/803/dsc05788i.jpg

I've found a stash of TTL devices (and a lot more) dating from 1962 (!), I will be posting images of these on my lab blog as they become available.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #1,320
M57, the Ring Nebula, is currently in the small patch of sky visible from my backyard:


A 1:1 crop


technical: stack of 800/5.6, 20s, ISO 2000 frames
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #1,321
just a picture i took randomly during a car ride. no preperation at all just with a camera on my phone :) though it looked rather nice.
 

Attachments

  • 1376752776015.jpg
    1376752776015.jpg
    29.6 KB · Views: 368
  • #1,322
A photo montage of a recent ISS flyover. Tech: 800/5.6, 1/1600s ISO800. Maximum elevation angle was 60 degrees, and there is no motion blur.



It looks much cooler as an animated GIF, tho...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #1,323
That's awesome Andy!
 
  • #1,324
Drakkith said:
That's awesome Andy!

Thanks!
 
  • #1,325
The constellation Cygnus is in a favorable position now, and I took some interesting images of the galactic plane using my normal and wide-angle lenses- here are 100% crops.

http://imageshack.us/a/img841/6418/y4ll.jpg

http://imageshack.us/a/img9/7271/sv2w.jpg

Here's a crop using the telephoto for comparision:

http://imageshack.us/a/img46/5808/3dmm.jpg

Shameless self-promotion: full images and analysis on our lab blog.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #1,326
Beautiful, Andy - I especially like the second one, it's so sparkly.

Afraid I don't have enough imagination to see the goose though :redface:.
 
  • #1,327
Nice, Andy.
 
  • #1,328
Just some photos I took...
u4y4a8yq.jpg

uhyvezet.jpg

edamujam.jpg
 
  • #1,329
Beautiful ABD EL HAMEED. I don't know, but I would like to do captions for these photos;

3rd photo: One afternoon in the Middle East.
2nd photo: The sun is back.
1st: Shine on you crazy diamond. :biggrin:
 
  • #1,330
Gad said:
Beautiful ABD EL HAMEED. I don't know, but I would like to do captions for these photos;

3rd photo: One afternoon in the Middle East.
2nd photo: The sun is back.
1st: Shine on you crazy diamond. :biggrin:

Thanks,but it was the sunset in the 2nd picture so I think it should be called "fare away sun" or something like that :p
 

Similar threads

  • General Discussion
Replies
23
Views
2K
  • General Discussion
Replies
21
Views
2K
Replies
23
Views
2K
  • General Discussion
Replies
12
Views
2K
Replies
12
Views
1K
  • General Discussion
Replies
19
Views
1K
  • General Discussion
Replies
12
Views
1K
  • General Discussion
Replies
31
Views
4K
  • General Discussion
Replies
10
Views
1K
  • General Discussion
Replies
13
Views
1K
Back
Top