Weekly Photo Challenge #4

Any ideas?  Someone pick something they can do even if the weather's crappy, your time is limited, etc. Or you can even 'cheat' by pulling something from your archives.  Or if you're a rebel, post something that has nothing to do with the challenge.  :-)

--Terry


Thought it was going to be indoors

This was this Saturday.

http://www.wetleather.com/node/461

I see I am screwing up the images area so may have to figure something else out.

 

--bjet


Indoor people pictures

That's right we were going to do that after the roads theme.  So that's it....  indoor people shots, any kind of lighting.  I'm going to try both (natural and fill flash).

--Terry


OK, you probably meant HUMANS

Here's an old one that I like pretty well

Rhonda and DogsRhonda and Dogs


Warm laptop otherwise uninteresting


Very Nice

I decided to see what my Qimage printing alogrithm would create from a cropped version of the cat picture.  (I hope you all don't mind me messing with your photos).  Anywho from a very small file after cropping, Qimage created a 66.7mb file.  I think it would generate a very nice 8X10 print.  Here is the internet version chopped back to 72 dpi and 204kb.

http://www.tkpowell.com/wetphoto/carlscat3qimage.jpg

--Terry


No, of course I don't mind.

No, of course I don't mind. Feel free! That's a very pretty version.

However, the original shot I posted is much truer to the cat's actual color. 

- Carl


Cat's color

I didn't actually mess with the color.  What I did was use the levels adjustment to darken the cat.  The graph indicated it was overexposed.  But since I don't really know what the cat looks like I got it wrong.

I might have mentioned this before but the camera meter can be fooled if there is too much contrast or difference between the light and dark areas of an image.  In this case, I believe the dark background told the meter to open up too much.  One thing I've taken to doing on almost all my shots now is to point my camera at that area of the photo I want perfectly exposed and then lock that exposure in.  Reposition or reframe the image and shoot.  If your camera doesn't have this feature you can still do it by pressing the shutter half way down, reframe if necessary and then shoot.  The downside to this technique is your focus is also locked in.  More expensive cameras allow you to lock focus or exposure, a very useful thing.

You'll see this overexposure problem a lot when people take scenic pictures that include land and sky.  Unless it is overcast with even light, invariably the sky will get overexposed if your camera is oriented too much toward the darker areas of the scene.  One technique is to lock in the correct exposure for the sky and let the land be darker and possibly fix it with photoshop.  To my eye a blown out sky is way worse than an underexposed bunch of trees etc.  YMMV.

I uploaded a Qimage enhanced (pixels added) of the original.  I did this because the original is necessarily small for net usage.  If you're camera shoots only jpgs and you want to make changes using photoshop, PSP etc., you should convert it to tiff format first.  Then when you make changes and save, you will not be degrading the image via the jpg algorithm. 

http://www.tkpowell.com/wetphoto/cat.htm

If you have PS or PSP and are so inclined, download these and play around with the levels adjustment etc. and see what happens.

 --Terry

 


late entries

I was able to catch up on most of the challenges while we were in E Wa for Turkey Day. Here is my indoor portrait:

 http://picasaweb.google.com/tfmktm/Photography/photo#5136953026862455330


Excellent color

 

Your original has great color. The composition is good but I think the background might be a distraction, so I'm going to crop it a bit...here's your original. Note the 'extra' space and visually busy background.

 

I'm one of those folk who likes most of my portraits to resemble a head-shot. If there's extra distractions in the background - I'd rather cut them out unless they add some artistic element to the photo. Here's my first crop:

Tighter, less distraction going on but I'm not nuts about the proportions.

 

Here's an even tighter crop:

Woo

Notice how in the original and even my first cropped version of this piortrait, there's a certain element of distraction going on with background stuff.

I really like how the super-tight crop keeps the viewers attention focused on her skin and eyes. I also like how her eyes are now in the proper area of the image to draw the viewer into the image.

What do you think?

Michael


red "x"s again

I would love to see what you did, but the images you posted are not coming through on IE7. :(

Fixed Michael's post

Something decidedly weird is happening with Drupal's WSYIWYG editor and images. I can't explain it. I don't know HOW I fixed it, because the sequence I had to go through for 3 photos didn't make sense.

Michael, are you using Firefox? I am - and I'm beginning to suspect that may be part of the problem.

Or no, as I had no trouble posting THIS with the img tag embedded. But now Michael's post is "un-fixed" again! I swear it looked fine for a minute there. Sheesh. I hate computers.

 The problem appears to be with the site that's hosting those pictures you used Michael. Can you please tell me exactly how you got the URL for those? I assume they're on Picasa - what steps did you take, starting from the main "procameraman" page display, to drill down into the album pages and how did you extract the URL for the image file? Because Google doesn't appear to like them referred from inside a web page, but WILL display them if I type the URL directly into Firefox - and will then display them ONCE in the web page in another Firefox tab. But if I wait and refresh the page (this page), they go away again. Some kind of odd behavior by the Google server(s). Don't know how to get around it until you tell me more detail about what you're doing.

- Carl


broken images fix

So I right clicked on Michael's images, selected the URL where the images are hosted, then pasted that URL into the address bar and opened the image. I did this for each one. Now when I go back to this thread, the images are appearing in within the conversation.

image posting process

I use firefox and picasa to host the images.

I had the same strange 'worked, then un-worked' problem the other night when I was posting the cropped images.

I thought I had it fixed but obviously I didn't.

 

I do my thing with the image, add it to the web-album in Picasa, then right click on the image and select "copy image location" which puts the image location on my clip-board.

In the forum, as I format my post, I click on the little 'add image' icon and then 'paste' the image location into the pop-up box.

That's worked in the past, it's a recent problem. I did note that Firefox has updated to 2.0.0.2 just today.

Hey, I'll try posting an image in here, see if it 'sticks'.

ok...the image showed up in my draft.

Let's see if it 'sticks' in the posted reply.

 

Michael 


Firefox

FWIW, I use Firefox to post stuff here (v. 2.0.0.10 at the moment) and haven't had any trouble with image posting.

Testing another way to post..

Well now. My previous attempt didn't 'stick'. Lets' see if this one works. 

This one was done by going to my public gallery first, then going to

the outdoor portraits and copying the image location.

 

The only difference from the previous attempt is that I went to my photos direct from gmail on that try.

 

We'll see.

 

Michael 


Test #2

This time I'll try to do it with the intent to fail.


huh...this's just wierd

There should be an image above this thumbnail. It doesn't seem to work though.


Note:

The image that's 'sticking' is a thumbnail, not the actual gallery image.

 

I are verry confuzzed.

 


I'm 52% sure it's only the

I'm 52% sure it's only the ones from you Public Gallery that will "stick". It's NOT a Drupal/micapeak problem. You can view the source of this web page, and it's perfectly fine. It's just that Google server won't let it get downloaded via an embedded link - SOMETIMES.  

- Carl


links work sometimes

It sounds to me like a load balancing issue at google.

(note: google does NOT use f5's equipment. Maybe that's their problem :-)

 


cropping

Personally, I feel that the last crop is a bit too tight. I agree that the background can be distracting, but I think I should use a process similar to what Keith(?) did with the yawning cat, or what Terry does to remove objects from the background. If I find time, I'll see what I can come up with. Thanks for the feedback!

Some more indoor peeps (and critters)

I am teaching my son CJ (age 15) some photography fundamentals, and he shot his first roll of film this weekend using our Canon QL17 rangefinder. I think he has a good eye and he definitely got some interesting shots:

And yes, the hairless cat IS an endless source of jokes. Innocent