why feel embarrassed?

[jet_tilton]

Doug,

 

What Pentax dslr did you get for your great photos? I too am at a crossroads, and I am thinking about going the Pentax way, instead of

going back to either Canon or Nikon.

 

Jet

[personalphotos]

Well everyone, Hard to add much to what everyone has said so far. I agree with all of it. I'm only commenting because after reading all the salient points, then Godfrey posts that wonderful image. Doesn't that nail the argument right there? Incredible shot with wonderful imagination and vision to create it. Tells a great "without words" story. Always enjoy your work.

 

As my father always says, "I'll judge you by your actions [results] not by what you say you can do.

 

Like so many of the posts above, I don't give this subject a second thought.

It's not about the gear as others have said. Use your camera, enjoy what it produces and hang your favourites on the wall. Who gives a tinkers damn about what camera produced the shot if it works?

[godfrey]

Peter, <br>

<br>

Thank you for the compliment! :-)<br>

<br>

Justin, <br>

<br>

I didn't see it as an insult at all, no worries there. <br>

<br>

<i>> I have a few filters that when I combine (and do a good job <br>

> with masking) can do similar results.</i><br>

<br>

I'm sure. What I was curious about was the fact that you ascribed the rendering as having a "very digital filter feel" ... I'm

wondering if you can articulate what that means to you more precisely. <br>

<br>

Since nearly everything I've posted in the past six years has been digital capture to inkjet print process, it is certainly the

product of digital image processing. I've been fooled a few times looking at other people's work as to its capture medium

and printing, I find it a good exercise to articulate precisely what led me to think one or the other. <br>

<br>

Godfrey<br>

[mcmanamey]

I know I'm obviously a couple days behind here, but Godfrey, I was going to ask what you did to that particular pic above.

 

To me it looks like the background - or even most of the picture - was given a "Diffuse Glow" filter from PS, but the 3 boys

had the glow "erased" from them, or they were masked from it. I like that part of the pic has the glow, and some is very

sharp.

 

I was just trying to do that w/ one of our wedding pics, and wasn't having any luck. I do know one of my problems is that I

don't really understand masks (how to get one & the situations it's most useful in, that is). Need to work on that.

[godfrey]

Maria,

 

The photo is actually pretty sharp throughout as it was made with the Oly 25/2.8 lens stopped down to f/5.6 and the

principle focus plane was at about 18 feet distance. That's about a 60 foot zone of focus for good sharpness. (Yes, the

image that you see is a substantial crop from the full captured frame. :-)

 

The technique I used was to build up several layers on the base image, each with a certain amount of blur, and then

successively mask and graduate the transparency in screen mode until I got what I wanted, which was a center core of

sharp detailing with a glow surrounding it, focusing the viewer's perceptions on the boys as the focus of the photograph.

 

That was my concept and what I saw as I observed the scene. It's pretty much done, in image processing terms, in

much the same what I'd consider doing it in the darkroom with dodging and burning tools, diffusers, although the process

is curiously reversed due to the different nature of how the image processing tools work compared to an enlarger and

printing paper.. :-)

 

Godfrey

[hal_a]

Godfrey: I feel I have to echo Miserere: Holy Cow. I had a Calc 1 teacher who worked with Paul Erdos, I thought that was pretty cool, but this.... this is amazing. I'm reading some Feynman too, and look at the Feynman lecture series whenever I find my text too confusing.

 

Don: When I ride my cycle to school, and its rush hour, and I see a Ferrari stuck in traffic, I want that car (if there is a hot girl in it, I want her too) but I can just squeeze through between the cars on my bike. It certainly gets me to my destination faster than the Ferrari would, and it cost me $40.00 used. I feel pretty good that I'm getting to my classes on time.

 

Choosing Pentax over Canon or Nikon is something like riding a bicycle instead of a Car in heavy downtown traffic. There's no shame in it. Old Pentax lenses are cheap, and sharp enough, so I'm actually better prepared for some situations than my Nikonian friend who dished out on a 'superior' camera but then ran out of money to invest in lenses.

[garry_young1]

Haleemur - I have a very good friend with an Erdos 1 rating too! Amazing guy. Now that Paul ERdos is dead, the best anyone can do is an Erdos 2. So I guess I'll give up before I get started then!

[chapelcross]

Hi folks, here's a photo of Feynman I took as a student, using a Pentax SV:

 

[garry_young1]

Chapel - great shot!! Great opportunity! Thanks for sharing.

[godfrey]

Very neat, thanks for posting that Chapel!

 

G