HUMMERS LIKE IT UP CLOSE !!!

Here's another full-sized image from the Totally Digital D60.

http://www.pbase.com/image/31886686/original

That's 6.3 REAL Megapixels, baby! Chew on that, Sigma lovers!
I'm just glad that the bird isn't shown actual size. I wouldn't leave the
house!

Thanks again I get to use my single roller remote mouse scroll horazontal
single click on this one.

AWSOME PHOTO !

However my A80 keeps on doing this same thing in Exif and making my photo's
very large files.
Well about 3.8 MPix is max on mine.
I wonder if they call that RAW?

Am I correct in calling Exif files RAW? Opt.mistic

Am I wrong in calling Exif files RAW? Pes.mistic

Is it warm fuzzy or cold prickley?

Could someone please help me out here?

Thanks

Annika1980 wrote:

Here's another full-sized image from the Totally Digital D60.

http://www.pbase.com/image/31886686/original

That's 6.3 REAL Megapixels, baby! Chew on that, Sigma lovers!
I'm just glad that the bird isn't shown actual size. I wouldn't leave the
house!


Hello

Looks pretty sharp, but there is some evidence of posterisation(noise?)

Also what is the shadow effect below the head?
Has the effect of a drop shadow againt a close background.

Mike Engles

Annika1980 wrote:

Here's another full-sized image from the Totally Digital D60.

http://www.pbase.com/image/31886686/original

That's 6.3 REAL Megapixels, baby! Chew on that, Sigma lovers!
I'm just glad that the bird isn't shown actual size. I wouldn't leave the
house!


Hello

Looks pretty sharp, but there is some evidence of posterisation(noise?)

Also what is the shadow effect below the head?
Has the effect of a drop shadow againt a close background.

Mike Engles

In article ,
says...
Looks pretty sharp, but there is some evidence of posterisation(noise?)

No posterization (ramp to single color), but there is some noise in the
green areas of the image. The background likely was underexposed and
the exposure corrected later.

Also what is the shadow effect below the head?
Has the effect of a drop shadow againt a close background.

Flash artifact.
--
http://www.pbase.com/bcbaird/

In article ,
says...
Looks pretty sharp, but there is some evidence of posterisation(noise?)

No posterization (ramp to single color), but there is some noise in the
green areas of the image. The background likely was underexposed and
the exposure corrected later.

Also what is the shadow effect below the head?
Has the effect of a drop shadow againt a close background.

Flash artifact.
--
http://www.pbase.com/bcbaird/

(Annika1980) wrote:

http://www.pbase.com/image/31886686/original

A bit underexposed and a bit soft (emphasis on 'bit'). But hey, it's
better than all of my hummingbird pictures. Alas, I can only claim to
have zero such images ... ;(

I'm just glad that the bird isn't shown actual size. I wouldn't leave the
house!

Hummingbirds are pussycats compared to robber flies, damsel flies, or
dragonflies. If there were dragonflies the size of a dog ... well,
let's not think about that, shall we?

From: Mike Engles

http://www.pbase.com/image/31886686/original

what is the shadow effect below the head?
Has the effect of a drop shadow againt a close background.

Probably motion blur from the swallowing.

From: Mike Engles

http://www.pbase.com/image/31886686/original

what is the shadow effect below the head?
Has the effect of a drop shadow againt a close background.

Probably motion blur from the swallowing.