ZapperZ's Great Outdoors Photo Contest

[drizzle]

Gokul43201, I like climbing mountains, but not that vertical, looks nice and easy though. Was it your first time?

I love Japanese cherry trees, Rhody. Lovely pics, they'd do a good backgrounds.

 

[turbo]

My organic-gardening neighbor zipped down on a golf-cart with his daughter this afternoon to bring us a new tree. He was digging up shoots and suckers from a beautiful Japanese lilac, and picked out the one with the best root-structure to bring to my wife and me. Now, we have to figure out a good place to put it. It can't be planted in the front garden where our peach or cherry trees are, because Japanese lilacs are quite susceptible to winter damage. The fruit trees have wintered a lot of ice and snow shedding off the roof (with some damage) but this candidate needs a quiet place to live.

 

[rhody]

My organic-gardening neighbor zipped down on a golf-cart with his daughter this afternoon to bring us a new tree. He was digging up shoots and suckers from a beautiful Japanese lilac, and picked out the one with the best root-structure to bring to my wife and me. Now, we have to figure out a good place to put it. It can't be planted in the front garden where our peach or cherry trees are, because Japanese lilacs are quite susceptible to winter damage. The fruit trees have wintered a lot of ice and snow shedding off the roof (with some damage) but this candidate needs a quiet place to live.

Pictures ?

Rhody...

 

[turbo]

Pictures ?

Rhody...

As of now, it is a sapling with no redeeming features. I'll try to get out back on his property to get a picture of his tree. It is beautiful.

 

[Gokul43201]

You mean you couldn't find the stairs on the other side of the cliff ?

If only I had a tiny fraction of your wisdom ...

Gokul43201, I like climbing mountains, but not that vertical, looks nice and easy though. Was it your first time?

Not my first time rock climbing. But perhaps the first time with someone that had a camera.

 

[Borek]

Not my first time rock climbing. But perhaps the first time with someone that had a camera.

If memory serves me well last time you got black eye and bruised ribs. This time you get the pictures. You are getting better.

 

[rhody]

Here are a few shots of the Japanese cherry in front, trimmed a ton of branches this spring, truck now has a bonsai type look and it is raining petals in the wind, looks like snow, kind of cool... you can see the petals in the third picture...

Rhody...

 

[Andy Resnick]

*Click*- gotcha!

[PLAIN]http://img6.imageshack.us/img6/5987/slide1uo.jpg

The joke's on me- turns out I have been using Saturn as a guidestar for a couple of months, wondering why the star was always so aberrated...

 

[JNBirDy]

Took this shot of a tree near my house last summer.

 

[lisab]

Took this shot of a tree near my house last summer.

Wow, that's really beautiful!

 

[Andy Resnick]

Took this shot of a tree near my house last summer.

That's really excellent!

 

[Andre]

This is the river Dinkel in the eastermost part of the Netherlands. Been on expotition there today, but I couldn't find the north pole.

Those steep sandy banks are for some just a heap of dirt - or for others a biotope for kingfishers and damselflies, yet for geologists it's a revealing open book, covering the last 25,000 years including the last glacial maximum, which is what and why?

A close up of another part of the bank.

Just a pile of sand?

A earth-scientist friend however needed half an hour to explain what we are seeing here.

 

[rhody]

Took this shot of a tree near my house last summer.

JN,

Nice composition and moment to hit the shutter, was this by chance, or do you take pics before sunset, etc... ? Were you in burst mode perhaps ?

Rhody...

 

[Andy Resnick]

Went for another stroll with the 15mm yesterday- trees remain excellent subjects:

[PLAIN]http://img98.imageshack.us/img98/8392/dsc7325.jpg

[PLAIN]http://img716.imageshack.us/img716/9707/dsc7331j.jpg

[PLAIN]http://img638.imageshack.us/img638/6980/dsc7375j.jpg

and the perspective-warping ability of the lens was put to good use here:

[PLAIN]http://img560.imageshack.us/img560/3760/dsc7341.jpg

I find the uneven lighting to be a distraction, I wanted to capture the shape of the brick wall- maybe on an overcast day I'll stop by to get a 'finished' image.

A landscape:

[PLAIN]http://img803.imageshack.us/img803/7554/dsc7358.jpg

Because the hyperfocal distance for this image was 3 feet, *everything* in the image is in focus. Also, the way the lens accentuates blue at the edges helps emphasize the sky.

Finally, a few "problem" images, and I'd appreciate any thoughts/ideas- I found a HDR (High Dynamic Range) plugin for ImageJ and wanted to try it out. In case you are not familiar with the idea of HDR, it's a relatively new image processing algorithm that (among other things) 'converts' a set of 7-9 bit dynamic range images to a single image that more closely matches human vision (12 bits which can slide over a total of 24 bits):

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_dynamic_range_imaging

I took bracketed images of two high-contrast scenes, but was not happy with the results at all for two reasons.

First, since I didn't use a tripod, the bracketed images were all displaced from each other resulting a big blurry mess (I know some programs can correct for this, but I'm a big fan of free software).

Second, the plugin let's me operate on a single image, but the results were very disappointing- I'm not sure how to describe the results as anything other than "metallic". It could simply be that I'm overprocessing the images, I'm not sure.

This set of images shows my best attempt at using an HDR routine- the first is straight from the camera, the second my best attempt at HDR processing on a single image

[PLAIN]http://img219.imageshack.us/img219/6052/dsc7368.jpg

[PLAIN]http://img806.imageshack.us/img806/183/rgbd.jpg

With my rotten eyes, it's tough for me to tell, but the processed image seems to be too red in the shadows. Here's the result of combining bracketed images:

[PLAIN]http://img98.imageshack.us/img98/3769/rgb2.jpg

The color balance is better, but the leaves are blurry (motion artifacts), and the sky is totally blown out.

 

[Borek]

[PLAIN]http://img806.imageshack.us/img806/183/rgbd.jpg

With my rotten eyes, it's tough for me to tell, but the processed image seems to be too red in the shadows.

It is completely red for me

HDR with anything that moves (trees, water) is always problematic. I did some testing in the past and decided one needs a well selected object for good effects.

 

[Andy Resnick]

Since the 400mm isn't agile enough for flying birds, I was hoping to try and catch another type of bird:

[PLAIN]http://img18.imageshack.us/img18/293/dsc74492.jpg

IIRC, this was a 1/320s exposure at ISO 100.

This was tough- even though the rate it moves across the frame is much lower than (biological) birds, it's moving at a decent clip and the viewing angle is very inconvenient. Also, even though the contrails are high-contrast, the plane is very low contrast with the sky. Two or three iterations of contrast enhancement and lowering the gamma helped pull the plane out of the background while not blowing out the exhaust trails.

[PLAIN]http://img546.imageshack.us/img546/1526/dsc74491.jpg

 

[Borek]

Is it at 400mm, or with the converter? And is the bottom one 1:1 crop?

 

[Andy Resnick]

sorry- yes, it was taken with the 2x converter, lens wide open (800mm f/5.6), and the bottom is a 1:1 crop.

Here's the full frame, unprocessed:

[PLAIN]http://img819.imageshack.us/img819/4400/dsc7449r.jpg

 

[Andy Resnick]

Another good night of seeing last night- here's two photos of Saturn, one overexposed (ISO 1600) to show Titan, the other (ISO 100) shows the ring's shadow:

[PLAIN]http://img687.imageshack.us/img687/407/dsc7590y.jpg

[PLAIN]http://img51.imageshack.us/img51/4291/dsc7591q.jpg

And a shot of Mizar A & B- they are separated by 14.5".

[PLAIN]http://img29.imageshack.us/img29/3295/dsc7599h.jpg

Mizar A is clearly non-spherical; it's not clear if that's lens aberration or atmospheric aberration.

All images taken at 800mm f/5.6, 1/10s exposure.

 

[Borek]

Wow. It doesn't make much sense to try to get any pictures where I live, but I may try while on vacations. I never thought it makes sense to even try astrophotography with standard lens.

 

[Andy Resnick]

I've been very pleased- with an 85mm lens, I could easily image M42 (Orion nebula). I don't have enough 'room', but on vacation I hope to take some star-trail images with the ultrawide.

 

[drizzle]

Nice shots people.

 

[Andy Resnick]

Went for a stroll with the ultrawide today- this time I tried to pay attention (!) to what I was photographing- either an interesting texture:

[PLAIN]http://img121.imageshack.us/img121/9656/dsc7723f.jpg

[PLAIN]http://img823.imageshack.us/img823/337/dsc7724.jpg

[PLAIN]http://img855.imageshack.us/img855/8827/dsc7731.jpg

[PLAIN]http://img204.imageshack.us/img204/6299/dsc7747l.jpg

or if there was a 'story' I wanted the image to tell:

[PLAIN]http://img96.imageshack.us/img96/6038/dsc7737n.jpg

[PLAIN]http://img232.imageshack.us/img232/443/dsc7728.jpg

[PLAIN]http://img37.imageshack.us/img37/9966/dsc7742.jpg

And finally, a 'trick' photo- the original problem was how to prevent under- or oversaturation of the building or sky. In the end, I duplicated the image- one was used for the sky and the other for the building, and both combined in ImageJ with "transparent- zero" to provide this:

[PLAIN]http://img231.imageshack.us/img231/6003/resultofdsc7749.jpg

It looks a little sloppy around the edges, which could be helped by doing a blur or smoothing operation on the combined image.

 

[Borek]

It looks a little sloppy around the edges, which could be helped by doing a blur or smoothing operation on the combined image.

Why not use some HDR software?

Speaking of wide lens - my latest contest entry (meatballs) was done with a wide lens, to get a large DOF.

 

[Andy Resnick]

Why not use some HDR software?

I tried an HDR plugin and wasn't that excited with the results. I'm not really sure what I was expecting for this image-it looks very unnatural. Not exactly a failure, but not something worth printing.

Speaking of wide lens - my latest contest entry (meatballs) was done with a wide lens, to get a large DOF.

That's what I figured :) I have to admit, shooting the ultrawide is really fun- everything looks really dramatic and over-the-top.

 

[Andy Resnick]

bad day at work + nice weather = leave early. Today I wandered around downtown Cleveland with the ultrawide, which presented very different challenges than 'the backwoods'.

For me, the biggest challenge was to prevent images from looking like this:

[PLAIN]http://img837.imageshack.us/img837/6408/dsc7834.jpg

Personally, I can't abide the perspective distortion. Buildings and streets consist of parallel lines, and those lines *have* to be carefully controlled, otherwise everything looks off-kilter (to me).

Here's another example of poorly-controlled perspective distortion:

[PLAIN]http://img839.imageshack.us/img839/8832/dsc7814u.jpg

I got the horizon line level (or close to it), but the railroad tracks are not parallel to the horizon line. If I had moved to my left a few feet while rotating to keep the Rock Hall and Browns Stadium in the frame, I would have rotated the tracks into alignment.

Sometimes I got lucky- everything lined up:

[PLAIN]http://img593.imageshack.us/img593/2449/dsc7830.jpg

And more, the perspective distortion made the image *better* (IMO) by making the cars smaller, so the focus is on the buildings and sidewalk instead.

I can also use the perspective distortion to my advantage, by making sculptures look gigantic:

[PLAIN]http://img820.imageshack.us/img820/8606/dsc7821.jpg

I can also make buildings look enormous:

[PLAIN]http://img69.imageshack.us/img69/791/dsc7808.jpg

An image like this really needs to be printed at full size (poster-sized) to be appreciated- here's a 1:1 crop from the very upper left corner, showing the amount of detail that is captured:

[PLAIN]http://img708.imageshack.us/img708/8310/unledsxo.jpg

But my favorite image today was one I took of a construction site- ground was broken for a huge "medical mart" complex recently, and I was able to skulk around the screened barrier until I found a spot for a clear photo:

[PLAIN]http://img546.imageshack.us/img546/7573/dsc7816.jpg

It may not look like much, but the amount of detail captured in this shot is *amazing*- here are a bunch of 1:1 crops from around the frame:

[PLAIN]http://img718.imageshack.us/img718/5382/94104576.jpg

[PLAIN]http://img860.imageshack.us/img860/986/21028016.jpg

[PLAIN]http://img861.imageshack.us/img861/3791/14281369.jpg

[PLAIN]http://img16.imageshack.us/img16/636/72233415.jpg

[PLAIN]http://img685.imageshack.us/img685/8675/57798099.jpg

[PLAIN]http://img197.imageshack.us/img197/1345/41323114.jpg

[PLAIN]http://img27.imageshack.us/img27/1033/22098768.jpg

 

[Borek]

Dirty sensor? You have a dark spot visible in the left upper corner on some pictures (look on the blue sky) - best visible on the construction site picture, just right to the cloud.

Distortions are a funny thing. I am more than sure my meatballs are heavily distorted, but somehow it is hard to spot

 

[Andy Resnick]

Dirty sensor? You have a dark spot visible in the left upper corner on some pictures (look on the blue sky) - best visible on the construction site picture, just right to the cloud.

Probably dust on the lens; dust on the sensor is usually very sharp and in-focus.

 

[Borek]

Probably dust on the lens; dust on the sensor is usually very sharp and in-focus.

Not necessarily:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/wyciorr/5556044355/in/photostream/

Magnify and look at the (coincidence) upper left corner. There are two spots there (there are more in different places as well, these two are pretty easy to spot). I know for sure it was some kind of dirt on the sensor.

 

[Andy Resnick]

Not necessarily:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/wyciorr/5556044355/in/photostream/

Magnify and look at the (coincidence) upper left corner. There are two spots there (there are more in different places as well, these two are pretty easy to spot). I know for sure it was some kind of dirt on the sensor.

Does that mean you are wyciorr (no real name given)? :)

When I have a dirty sensor, it looks like this (1:1 crops of a Rogue's gallery of dirt):

[PLAIN]http://img848.imageshack.us/img848/5115/unleduaa.jpg

But the blobs on the image look like this (also 1:1):

[PLAIN]http://img828.imageshack.us/img828/3566/unled2yy.jpg

The different appearance (e.g. well-defined edges on the upper collection), combined with the observations that 1) I blew a bunch of dust off the lens this morning and 2) those blobs appear only with that particular lens, provide additional evidence that the lens needs some light cleaning.

 

[Borek]

Does that mean you are wyciorr (no real name given)? :)

No, these are not my pictures, but I have a first hand information

 

[Andy Resnick]

Change of pace- here's some spots on a star:

[PLAIN]http://img695.imageshack.us/img695/4422/dsc7842p.jpg

I've been unable to get a UV image (so far)...

 

[Andre]

Talking about staying on topic, the sun, this is how it set today

closing in a bit:

Ah, there it is..

see you tomorrow

Nowadays our sunsets are incredibly crisp and sharp, so much better than 30 years ago with all the air pollution.

Anyway, at Montcru you can't see the sun set, but sometimes the clouds are giving a hint that it's happening:

 

[Andy Resnick]

First successful (for me) UV image of the sun:

[PLAIN]http://img228.imageshack.us/img228/364/dsc7868j.jpg

This was full aperture (800mm, f/5.6) with a polarizer + OD 2 ND filter inserted (needed to align and focus using a blue filter), ISO 6400 and 1/4 second exposure through a 365 +/- 12 nm filter.

The filter is close to the calcium line, but I can't see any detail- I may try a 380 nm filter next time. This was more of an exercise to determine if the sensor is UV sensitive.

I also tracked down (I think) the origin of that spot on my 15mm images. Shining a light through the back of the lens illuminated all the dust/scratches/etc. There's a blob of something located deep inside the lens:

[PLAIN]http://img828.imageshack.us/img828/8503/dsc7860h.jpg

I've 'highlighted' the blob. From another angle, shadows cast by the blob are visible, and there's also a small scratch (also well in the interior) visible:

[PLAIN]http://img11.imageshack.us/img11/2681/dsc7862f.jpg

I have the tools to disassemble, clean, and reassemble the lens, but not the nerve. Plus, I'm not sure the location of those defects correlate with the spot in the images. So for now I'll just live with it- if we get a long stretch of bad weather I may send it out for repair.

 

[Andy Resnick]

A montage of shots taken during this evening's ISS fly-by:

[PLAIN]http://img535.imageshack.us/img535/408/montagec.jpg

The first two images are Saturn, then the images follow the ISS as it rose in the NW, reaching 52 degrees and set into the SE. Images taken at 400mm f/4, 1/100 s shutter (no mirror lockup), and the ISO 400. There's clearly motion blur- I was not locking down the tripod to more easily track the object, but there's a few really clear shots, and the sequence clearly shows the major components of the station (two solar panels and the main truss) and how it rotates (relative to me) as it passes.