If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Action shot few like to see
I went to the polo matches, earlier. This is not the type of action shot
I was seeking. Fortunately, both the pony and layer are OK. https://www.dropbox.com/s/kfgkk5be8yl3m2v/20180624_polo_7896.jpg?dl=0 -- PeterN |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Action shot few like to see
On Jun 24, 2018, PeterN wrote
(in article ): I went to the polo matches, earlier. This is not the type of action shot I was seeking. Fortunately, both the pony and layer are OK. https://www.dropbox.com/s/kfgkk5be8yl3m2v/20180624_polo_7896.jpg?dl=0 I gather that you meant “player” not “layer” which implies something very different. Nice capture.It could be a adjusted a tad brighter in post, but that is just my opinion. That is an image which deserves to be seen as a larger version. Unless of course it has fallen victim to the PeterN crop process. -- Regards, Savageduck |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Action shot few like to see
On 6/24/2018 6:32 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On Jun 24, 2018, PeterN wrote (in article ): I went to the polo matches, earlier. This is not the type of action shot I was seeking. Fortunately, both the pony and layer are OK. https://www.dropbox.com/s/kfgkk5be8yl3m2v/20180624_polo_7896.jpg?dl=0 I gather that you meant “player” not “layer” which implies something very different. Nice capture.It could be a adjusted a tad brighter in post, but that is just my opinion. That is an image which deserves to be seen as a larger version. Unless of course it has fallen victim to the PeterN crop process. I may do some work on the polo shots. This is not the kind of action I like to work on. Just happy no one was hurt. I just did a quick auto adjustment in post. -- PeterN |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Action shot few like to see
On 6/24/18 PDT 3:32 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On Jun 24, 2018, PeterN wrote (in article ): I went to the polo matches, earlier. This is not the type of action shot I was seeking. Fortunately, both the pony and layer are OK. https://www.dropbox.com/s/kfgkk5be8yl3m2v/20180624_polo_7896.jpg?dl=0 I gather that you meant “player” not “layer” which implies something very different. Nice capture.It could be a adjusted a tad brighter in post, but that is just my opinion. That is an image which deserves to be seen as a larger version. Unless of course it has fallen victim to the PeterN crop process. I'd say quite underexposed/developed. But good shot! |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Action shot few like to see
On 6/24/2018 8:03 PM, John McWilliams wrote:
On 6/24/18** PDT 3:32 PM, Savageduck wrote: On Jun 24, 2018, PeterN wrote (in article ): I went to the polo matches, earlier. This is not the type of action shot I was seeking. Fortunately, both the pony and layer are OK. https://www.dropbox.com/s/kfgkk5be8yl3m2v/20180624_polo_7896.jpg?dl=0 I gather that you meant “player” not “layer” which implies something very different. Nice capture.It could be a adjusted a tad brighter in post, but that is just my opinion. That is an image which deserves to be seen as a larger version. Unless of course it has fallen victim to the PeterN crop process. I'd say quite underexposed/developed. But good shot! Thanks for your comments. That image was one of a series that I took setting the camera in manual, with auto ISO. In post I also decreased white and light, while slightly increasing the shadows. Is this better? I applied a levels adjustment, sharpened a tad, and cropped. https://www.dropbox.com/s/cif6pwbum1aydjd/20180624_polo_7896-Edit.%20cropped.jpg?dl=0 from the same series. To avoid the obvious comment from the Duck, I ran it through NIK DeNoise.;-) https://www.dropbox.com/s/2q1dm4lalkvoove/20180624_polo_7894-Edit.jpg?dl=0 -- PeterN |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Action shot few like to see
On Jun 25, 2018, PeterN wrote
(in article ): On 6/24/2018 8:03 PM, John McWilliams wrote: On 6/24/18 PDT 3:32 PM, Savageduck wrote: On Jun 24, 2018, PeterN wrote (in article ): I went to the polo matches, earlier. This is not the type of action shot I was seeking. Fortunately, both the pony and layer are OK. https://www.dropbox.com/s/kfgkk5be8yl3m2v/20180624_polo_7896.jpg?dl=0 I gather that you meant “player” not “layer” which implies something very different. Nice capture.It could be a adjusted a tad brighter in post, but that is just my opinion. That is an image which deserves to be seen as a larger version. Unless of course it has fallen victim to the PeterN crop process. I'd say quite underexposed/developed. But good shot! Thanks for your comments. That image was one of a series that I took setting the camera in manual, with auto ISO. In post I also decreased white and light, while slightly increasing the shadows. Is this better? I applied a levels adjustment, sharpened a tad, and cropped. https://www.dropbox.com/s/cif6pwbum1...dit.%20cropped. jpg?dl=0 from the same series. To avoid the obvious comment from the Duck, I ran it through NIK DeNoise.;-) https://www.dropbox.com/s/2q1dm4lalkvoove/20180624_polo_7894-Edit.jpg?dl=0 Which obvious Duck comment? “I see noise”? or “That seems to be strangely sharpened”? or “What were you thinking with those crops”? -- Regards, Savageduck |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Action shot few like to see
On 6/25/2018 5:04 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On Jun 25, 2018, PeterN wrote (in article ): On 6/24/2018 8:03 PM, John McWilliams wrote: On 6/24/18 PDT 3:32 PM, Savageduck wrote: On Jun 24, 2018, PeterN wrote (in article ): I went to the polo matches, earlier. This is not the type of action shot I was seeking. Fortunately, both the pony and layer are OK. https://www.dropbox.com/s/kfgkk5be8yl3m2v/20180624_polo_7896.jpg?dl=0 I gather that you meant “player” not “layer” which implies something very different. Nice capture.It could be a adjusted a tad brighter in post, but that is just my opinion. That is an image which deserves to be seen as a larger version. Unless of course it has fallen victim to the PeterN crop process. I'd say quite underexposed/developed. But good shot! Thanks for your comments. That image was one of a series that I took setting the camera in manual, with auto ISO. In post I also decreased white and light, while slightly increasing the shadows. Is this better? I applied a levels adjustment, sharpened a tad, and cropped. https://www.dropbox.com/s/cif6pwbum1...dit.%20cropped. jpg?dl=0 from the same series. To avoid the obvious comment from the Duck, I ran it through NIK DeNoise.;-) https://www.dropbox.com/s/2q1dm4lalkvoove/20180624_polo_7894-Edit.jpg?dl=0 Which obvious Duck comment? “I see noise”? or “That seems to be strangely sharpened”? or “What were you thinking with those crops”? The sharpening was done in high pass @ 3.9 pixels, which is very mild. The image is a large crop, There was some noise on the bright areas, so I ran it through NIK. In this case the noise was distracting to me. -- PeterN |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Kodak C613 Shot-to-shot time | arifi | Digital Point & Shoot Cameras | 0 | February 27th 08 07:35 AM |
Metz 402 - great for 1st shot but will not recycle for 2nd shot | Pat[_7_] | 35mm Photo Equipment | 1 | September 16th 07 07:26 PM |
Action shot with new D40 | [email protected] | Digital SLR Cameras | 10 | March 4th 07 05:15 AM |
Shot to shot speed | Tass | Digital Photography | 2 | February 13th 06 07:52 PM |
Faster SD card cuts shot-to-shot time | bk | Digital Photography | 3 | September 11th 04 05:11 AM |