Nora

Blog post:
http://jonaseklundh.se/pages/Nora12?lang=en


My and my family went to the small town of Nora, Sweden to go on a
real steam train. Very beautiful!

Machinery
http://jonaseklundh.se/aimg201279.jpg
NIKON D3S, 50.0 mm, f/1.4, 1/1000 sec., ISO 200




Steam
http://jonaseklundh.se/aimg201280.jpg
NIKON D3S, 50.0 mm, f/1.4, 1/6400 sec., ISO 200




Old timer
http://jonaseklundh.se/aimg201281.jpg
NIKON D3S, 28.0 mm, f/2.5, 1/1000 sec., ISO 320




Fountain
http://jonaseklundh.se/aimg201282.jpg
NIKON D3S, 120.0 mm, f/4.0, 1/1600 sec., ISO 320




Water drops
http://jonaseklundh.se/aimg201283.jpg
NIKON D3S, 120.0 mm, f/4.0, 1/8000 sec., ISO 1000






--
Sandman[.net]

On 2013-08-18 13:03:57 +0000, Sandman said:

Blog post:
http://jonaseklundh.se/pages/Nora12?lang=en


My and my family went to the small town of Nora, Sweden to go on a
real steam train. Very beautiful!

Machinery
http://jonaseklundh.se/aimg201279.jpg
NIKON D3S, 50.0 mm, f/1.4, 1/1000 sec., ISO 200




Steam
http://jonaseklundh.se/aimg201280.jpg
NIKON D3S, 50.0 mm, f/1.4, 1/6400 sec., ISO 200




Old timer
http://jonaseklundh.se/aimg201281.jpg
NIKON D3S, 28.0 mm, f/2.5, 1/1000 sec., ISO 320




Fountain
http://jonaseklundh.se/aimg201282.jpg
NIKON D3S, 120.0 mm, f/4.0, 1/1600 sec., ISO 320




Water drops
http://jonaseklundh.se/aimg201283.jpg
NIKON D3S, 120.0 mm, f/4.0, 1/8000 sec., ISO 1000







I like the engine with the steam. If only it were Kodachrome.
--
Michael

On 18 Aug 2013 13:03:57 GMT, Sandman wrote:
: Blog post:
: http://jonaseklundh.se/pages/Nora12?lang=en
:
:
: My and my family went to the small town of Nora, Sweden to go on a
: real steam train. Very beautiful!
:
: Machinery
: http://jonaseklundh.se/aimg201279.jpg
: NIKON D3S, 50.0 mm, f/1.4, 1/1000 sec., ISO 200
:
:
:
:
: Steam
: http://jonaseklundh.se/aimg201280.jpg
: NIKON D3S, 50.0 mm, f/1.4, 1/6400 sec., ISO 200
:
:
:
:
: Old timer
: http://jonaseklundh.se/aimg201281.jpg
: NIKON D3S, 28.0 mm, f/2.5, 1/1000 sec., ISO 320
:
:
:
:
: Fountain
: http://jonaseklundh.se/aimg201282.jpg
: NIKON D3S, 120.0 mm, f/4.0, 1/1600 sec., ISO 320
:
:
:
:
: Water drops
: http://jonaseklundh.se/aimg201283.jpg
: NIKON D3S, 120.0 mm, f/4.0, 1/8000 sec., ISO 1000

Nice shots. I'm a little puzzled, though, by your insistence on such wide
apertures at the inevitable cost in depth of field. (You certainly had plenty
of latitude in the shutter speed.) This is particularly noticeable in the
first picture, where the manufacturer's nameplate could have been sharper.

In the fourth picture I might have tried to show a little more of the fountain
at which the girl was looking. But I guess it would have resulted in an
awkwardly wide image.

Note that I've not criticized the blown-highlight background in the third
picture. Somebody probably will, but I won't. ;^)

Bob

On Sun, 18 Aug 2013 17:06:47 -0400, Robert Coe wrote:

On 18 Aug 2013 13:03:57 GMT, Sandman wrote:
: Blog post:
: http://jonaseklundh.se/pages/Nora12?lang=en
:
:
: My and my family went to the small town of Nora, Sweden to go on a
: real steam train. Very beautiful!
:
: Machinery
: http://jonaseklundh.se/aimg201279.jpg
: NIKON D3S, 50.0 mm, f/1.4, 1/1000 sec., ISO 200
:
:
:
:
: Steam
: http://jonaseklundh.se/aimg201280.jpg
: NIKON D3S, 50.0 mm, f/1.4, 1/6400 sec., ISO 200
:
:
:
:
: Old timer
: http://jonaseklundh.se/aimg201281.jpg
: NIKON D3S, 28.0 mm, f/2.5, 1/1000 sec., ISO 320
:
:
:
:
: Fountain
: http://jonaseklundh.se/aimg201282.jpg
: NIKON D3S, 120.0 mm, f/4.0, 1/1600 sec., ISO 320
:
:
:
:
: Water drops
: http://jonaseklundh.se/aimg201283.jpg
: NIKON D3S, 120.0 mm, f/4.0, 1/8000 sec., ISO 1000

Nice shots. I'm a little puzzled, though, by your insistence on such wide
apertures at the inevitable cost in depth of field. (You certainly had plenty
of latitude in the shutter speed.) This is particularly noticeable in the
first picture, where the manufacturer's nameplate could have been sharper.

What worried me most about the first picture was the perspective
distortion caused by taking the photo from close range. I'm sure it's
correctable in post processing and this would improve the image in my
mind.

In the fourth picture I might have tried to show a little more of the fountain
at which the girl was looking. But I guess it would have resulted in an
awkwardly wide image.

Note that I've not criticized the blown-highlight background in the third
picture. Somebody probably will, but I won't. ;^)

Bob
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

On 2013-08-18 16:18:46 -0700, Tony Cooper said:

On Sun, 18 Aug 2013 17:06:47 -0400, Robert Coe wrote:

On 18 Aug 2013 13:03:57 GMT, Sandman wrote:
: Blog post:
: http://jonaseklundh.se/pages/Nora12?lang=en
:
:
: My and my family went to the small town of Nora, Sweden to go on a
: real steam train. Very beautiful!
:
: Machinery
: http://jonaseklundh.se/aimg201279.jpg
: NIKON D3S, 50.0 mm, f/1.4, 1/1000 sec., ISO 200
:
: Steam
: http://jonaseklundh.se/aimg201280.jpg
: NIKON D3S, 50.0 mm, f/1.4, 1/6400 sec., ISO 200
:
: Old timer
: http://jonaseklundh.se/aimg201281.jpg
: NIKON D3S, 28.0 mm, f/2.5, 1/1000 sec., ISO 320
:
: Fountain
: http://jonaseklundh.se/aimg201282.jpg
: NIKON D3S, 120.0 mm, f/4.0, 1/1600 sec., ISO 320
:
: Water drops
: http://jonaseklundh.se/aimg201283.jpg
: NIKON D3S, 120.0 mm, f/4.0, 1/8000 sec., ISO 1000

Nice shots. I'm a little puzzled, though, by your insistence on such wide
apertures at the inevitable cost in depth of field. (You certainly had plenty
of latitude in the shutter speed.) This is particularly noticeable in the
first picture, where the manufacturer's nameplate could have been sharper.

In the fourth picture I might have tried to show a little more of the fountain
at which the girl was looking. But I guess it would have resulted in an
awkwardly wide image.

Agreed. It's a difficult choice, though. I'd want the water drops to
show what the girl is looking at, but there's not enough of the statue
in the image.

Note that I've not criticized the blown-highlight background in the third
picture. Somebody probably will, but I won't. ;^)

The top of that image really detracts because the lower part of the
image is good. The smoke from the front of the engine is weird. The
problem with the image is that the top left wedge demands attention
and takes it away from what is good.

Yup! I agree, nice shots with some issues. I know that Jonas favors
shooting manual exposure, and I don't think he got everything quite
right here.

I agree with Bob that for some of these the decision to shoot with wide
apertures was not the best of choices. I can see no need to have shot
the first one wide open. I would have wanted more defined detail, not
the shallow DoF shown. The same applies to #2, there seems to be little
point to the shallow DoF.

#3 is a great shot with the exception of the blown upper left. The DoF
is much better with this shot as he didn't push the lens wide open to
f/1.8, but here going to f/4-/f6.3 might have been better. Otherwise,
here is where an ND Grad would have been nice to have handy.

#4 is a great capture with compositional needs. It needs to either show
the full context of the fountain, or it needs to be cropped to isolate
the girl. As it is one asks, is it a shot of the fountain, the girl
relative to the entire fountain, or just the girl. In my mind the girl
is the subject, so make her the subject.

#5 seems to be just an exercise shot. The water drops have been
captured, but I am not particularly taken with this shot.


--
Regards,

Savageduck

In article ,
Robert Coe wrote:

: Machinery
: http://jonaseklundh.se/aimg201279.jpg
: NIKON D3S, 50.0 mm, f/1.4, 1/1000 sec., ISO 200
:
: Steam
: http://jonaseklundh.se/aimg201280.jpg
: NIKON D3S, 50.0 mm, f/1.4, 1/6400 sec., ISO 200
:
: Old timer
: http://jonaseklundh.se/aimg201281.jpg
: NIKON D3S, 28.0 mm, f/2.5, 1/1000 sec., ISO 320
:
: Fountain
: http://jonaseklundh.se/aimg201282.jpg
: NIKON D3S, 120.0 mm, f/4.0, 1/1600 sec., ISO 320
:
: Water drops
: http://jonaseklundh.se/aimg201283.jpg
: NIKON D3S, 120.0 mm, f/4.0, 1/8000 sec., ISO 1000

Nice shots. I'm a little puzzled, though, by your insistence on such wide
apertures at the inevitable cost in depth of field. (You certainly had plenty
of latitude in the shutter speed.) This is particularly noticeable in the
first picture, where the manufacturer's nameplate could have been sharper.

I know what you mean. I am a sucker for short focal planes, and it
sometimes gets ahead of me and I stick my aperture as large as possible
and just adjust the shutter. I'm not that bothered with the nameplate
myself, but I know lots of images I've taken where the short depth of
field more or less ruined the shot.

In the fourth picture I might have tried to show a little more of the fountain
at which the girl was looking. But I guess it would have resulted in an
awkwardly wide image.

I had a wider version of this, but it was neither here nor there. This
one just felt better.

Note that I've not criticized the blown-highlight background in the third
picture. Somebody probably will, but I won't. ;^)

Haha, yeah that sucked. I had this perfect shot of the engine from
another angle, but it was out of focus... :/


Thanks for your comments, though



--
Sandman[.net]

In article 2013081817052646882-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom,
Savageduck wrote:

: Machinery
: http://jonaseklundh.se/aimg201279.jpg
: NIKON D3S, 50.0 mm, f/1.4, 1/1000 sec., ISO 200
:
: Steam
: http://jonaseklundh.se/aimg201280.jpg
: NIKON D3S, 50.0 mm, f/1.4, 1/6400 sec., ISO 200
:
: Old timer
: http://jonaseklundh.se/aimg201281.jpg
: NIKON D3S, 28.0 mm, f/2.5, 1/1000 sec., ISO 320
:
: Fountain
: http://jonaseklundh.se/aimg201282.jpg
: NIKON D3S, 120.0 mm, f/4.0, 1/1600 sec., ISO 320
:
: Water drops
: http://jonaseklundh.se/aimg201283.jpg
: NIKON D3S, 120.0 mm, f/4.0, 1/8000 sec., ISO 1000

snip

Yup! I agree, nice shots with some issues. I know that Jonas favors
shooting manual exposure, and I don't think he got everything quite
right here.

Certainly not. #1 is a good example. I'm not as bothered with it as Rob,
but I can certainly understand and agree with his points.

I agree with Bob that for some of these the decision to shoot with wide
apertures was not the best of choices. I can see no need to have shot
the first one wide open. I would have wanted more defined detail, not
the shallow DoF shown. The same applies to #2, there seems to be little
point to the shallow DoF.

Huh, yeah maybe. I felt that the DOF separated the train slightly form
the background, but maybe not enough. Maybe it becomes a strange middle
way that's not working as clearly as it could.

#3 is a great shot with the exception of the blown upper left. The DoF
is much better with this shot as he didn't push the lens wide open to
f/1.8, but here going to f/4-/f6.3 might have been better. Otherwise,
here is where an ND Grad would have been nice to have handy.

Indeed. But the horizon is hidden far behind and the grad would have
probably affected the engine as well, don't you think? ND grad's are so
cumbersome to work with as well (at least on a casual family trip as
this one). I've never seen a circular one that would fit on the lens
directly, so I haven't used them much. I usually go with a polarizing
filter, but that's not exactly the same effect.

#4 is a great capture with compositional needs. It needs to either show
the full context of the fountain, or it needs to be cropped to isolate
the girl. As it is one asks, is it a shot of the fountain, the girl
relative to the entire fountain, or just the girl. In my mind the girl
is the subject, so make her the subject.

Well, tastes differ I suppose. I dislike putting subject in the center,
especially people. While I can certainly agree that the composition
could be improved, I rarely end up improving it by centering more on one
specific thing. Showing more of the fountain would have been good,
though.

#5 seems to be just an exercise shot. The water drops have been
captured, but I am not particularly taken with this shot.




--
Sandman[.net]

In article ,
Whisky-dave wrote:

On Sunday, 18 August 2013 14:03:57 UTC+1, Sandman wrote:
Blog post:

http://jonaseklundh.se/pages/Nora12?lang=en





My and my family went to the small town of Nora, Sweden to go on a

real steam train. Very beautiful!

Surely it should be, My family and I.................

Nice pics pity you don't speak proper english like what me and the queen do
;-)

Haha, drunk Dave tries to make a spelling flame! That's HILARIOUS!

And, as usual when making a spelling flame, you messed up the grammar:

"like what me and the queen do".

Ironic.


--
Sandman[.net]

Sandman wrote:

In article ,
Whisky-dave wrote:


My and my family went to the small town of Nora, Sweden to go on a

real steam train. Very beautiful!

Surely it should be, My family and I.................

Nice pics pity you don't speak proper english like what me and the queen
do ;-)

Haha, drunk Dave tries to make a spelling flame! That's HILARIOUS!

And, as usual when making a spelling flame, you messed up the grammar:

"like what me and the queen do".

Ironic.

The trouble with setting your self up as an English expert is that as a non
native English speaker you just do not "get" the jist, not for the first
time, of what is being said to you.
For starters it was not a spelling flame but a grammar flame and secondly
Dave wrote perfectly correctly for the meaning he was conveying.


--
sid

In article ,
sid wrote:

Nice pics pity you don't speak proper english like what me and the queen
do ;-)

Haha, drunk Dave tries to make a spelling flame! That's HILARIOUS!

And, as usual when making a spelling flame, you messed up the grammar:

"like what me and the queen do".

Ironic.

The trouble with setting your self up as an English expert is that as a non
native English speaker you just do not "get" the jist, not for the first
time, of what is being said to you.
For starters it was not a spelling flame but a grammar flame and secondly
Dave wrote perfectly correctly for the meaning he was conveying.

Not only have I set myself up as an "expert" of anything, but you're
also incorrect. Removing non-qualifying parts of the sentence:

"you don't speak English like what I do"

Is not a properly formatted English sentence. "What" is a relative
pronoun here that does not relate to anything else in the sentence as
constructed. "Speak" is a verb, and is referenced with an adverb, like
"how".

"you don't speak English like I do"
"you don't speak English how I do"
"you don't speak English the way I do"

Are all correct. And thus the correct version would be:

"You don't speak proper English like me and the Queen"

No adverb or pronoun is even needed. But if you insist:

"You don't speak proper English like how me and the Queen does it"

Also note the punctuation and capitalisation:

Drunk Dave:
"Nice pics pity you don't speak proper english like what me and the
queen do"

Actual English:
"Nice pics. Pity you don't speak proper English like me and the
Queen"

I'm not an expert, but I'm not stupid either. There is a middle road



--
Sandman[.net]