Return to the Test Forum

 o
Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

Posted by luvtosharedivs 5a WI (My Page) on
Tue, Mar 11, 08 at 23:32

....with a question about editing photos.
I was experimenting with darkening this photo by using the brightness slider vs using the gamma filter feature to darken it. I seem to like the gamma version a little better, but I can't describe why. I can darken with the gamma slider as well as using the "brightness" slider, but the result w/the gamma seems richer.

With your experience in editing photos, have you used this gamma adjustment with good success, or do you simply use a brightness feature if you want to darken a picture....OR do you use something else?

Excuse the blurriness of this pic.....it was COLD outside when I was running around the yard snapping shots.

No need to answer right away, I know it's late.

Sunset

Julie


Follow-Up Postings:

 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

I am not Kt ;-) but I use the gamma correction on Irfanview.

Here is a link that might be useful: Gamma Correction Explained


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

O.K. thanks, Terra...

A lot of that stuff went right over my head, but if I understand it correctly, using the Gamma correction matters mostly if I'm displaying images on the computer screen, but not necessarily if I want to print a picture from my own computer. (My printer often prints differently than what I see on my monitor anyway.) The richness that I see is indeed due to the correct balance of red, green, and blue.

Oh, and BTW, I have on a couple occasions browsed through your pics in your journal, (but not all gazillion of them).....Good Lord, it must have taken ages to put that collection together! Is that what a person does when they're a Master Gardener?

Thanks again!

Julie


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

Sorry, I just now read your post.

I guess it's a matter of taste. I always adjust the brightness first, then the contrast, and then, if needed, the gamma.

At work, where we use photography for our records, I will usually bring the photo up in Microsoft Photo Editor, then click on autobalance. Then, I click on balance, and it will show the sliders location after autobalancing. Then I can adjust each to the desired spot, for the best photo.

Using PhotoStudio, I have a much wider range of devices to change even colours, but I can't remember the last time that I used it.

So, if I use anything at all, I would say I use the autobalance first, and most. If I like the way it looks, I keep it, but sometimes it needs a bit more adjusting, so I will then adjust the brightness, then the contrast, and lastly, the gamma, but on many occassions, I never mess with the gamma after adjusting the other two.....confused yet?

Kt


 o
RE: Ktn, It's your pesty photography student...

Oh, and last night, I thought about asking you a question while I played(practiced) Malegeuna(sp?). The problem is, I don't know which part of the music to let you know where I'm at:)

So anyway, I changed my fingerings, and can play faster and much easier, whereas before, I kept getting finger-tied. I learned by watching someone play it and copied their playing, but I have to change things sometimes to suit my fingers.

I don't think I can explain it any better, or which notes they actually are, but sometimes a little re-arranging of the fingers makes a huge difference, as you surely know.

Kt


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

Kt,
Thanks for explaining your process of adjustments on photos. And no, you didn't confuse me at all. I was just confused about the gamma, and had not used it very much. Now I realize, with Terra's help that I can use it when I post pics on the internet.

Now about the fingering in Maleguena, yes, I do that too, often changing fingering in printed music that suits my short fingers. Some of the stretching that is required is virtually impossible for me. I even change entire notes sometimes, or leave some out, or add a few to my own arrangement.

I have a solution to your dilemma of trying to describe which part of the song your're playing. When you get comfortable with the whole song, put yourself on YouTube! then I can critique your playing, huh, whatcha think!?!?

Jule


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

When you get comfortable with the whole song, put yourself on YouTube! then I can critique your playing, huh, whatcha think!?!? ...Hehehe... yeah right.

Although, it has crossed my mind, so who knows, maybe one of these days.

Here's a much different(and simple) way of playing 'You Are My Sunshine', from the way that I taught myself to play it on the guitar, many many many years ago...It was the first song that I ever learned.

Kt

Here is a link that might be useful: You Are My Sunshine by C Mitchell


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

  • Posted by bob414 USDA 9, Sunset 15 (My Page) on
    Thu, Mar 13, 08 at 10:48

That doesn't sound like I remember Gov. Jimmie Davis sounding when he sang the song he co-wrote.


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

Re: 'You Are My Sunshine'
C. Mitchell does a nice strumming job, but have to be a little nit-picky about something. He plays all of the strings all of the time for all of the three chords. The A and E chords are 6-string chords, but the D chord is only a 5-string chord. He shouldn't be playing the 6th (thickest) string while playing the D chord. Makes the chord sound muddy. Here's why:

An "A" chord is made up of the notes A, C sharp, and E. That's the chord where he was using a full bar with his index finger. (You can add as many A's, C sharps, and E's as you want to in a chord, in any octave.) His "A" chord had three A's, two E's, and one C sharp.

An "E" chord is made up of E, G sharp, and B. His "E" chord had three E's, two B's and one G sharp.

A "D" chord is made up of D, F sharp, and A. His "D" chord had two D's, two A's, one F sharp, and one E (which doesn't belong.) If you play the 6th (E) string with a D chord, it makes the chord sound dissonant. The only way you can play the 6th string with a D chord is if you change it to an F sharp by adding another finger (or your thumb) to the second fret of the 6th string.

Music Theory 101

Sorry, I couldn't help myself.
(Hope I didn't give you a headache.)

Julie


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

I have that website saved somewhere with all the chords on it, but can't find it. I'm not sure which chord is the D chord.

I did notice one chord having a cruddy sound to it, or muddy, if you will, so I guess that is the D chord, but want to be sure.

One of these days I will get the chords that I know in my mind, matched with the letters A, B, C, etc.

Thanks for the explanation.

One thing I noticed is that he appears to be lifting his index finger every so often during his strumming. I'm not sure though, if he is actually strumming while his finger is lifted and maybe he is just keeping beat in a strange way?

I forget what you call it when you press the whole fret of strings with the index finger(I always called it capo-ing the strings, since I use a capo sometimes). Yes, I'm real guitar literate, but I can play much better than I can explain what I'm doing.

I presently use a spring capo, but used to have one that wrapped around and tied in the back, but it took a bit longer to attach it.

Many years ago, we used to go to a spot out at the river, about 15 miles from here and out in the middle of nowhere, and have gatherings and play music by the light of the fire. One guy didn't have a capo, so he made one from a pecan stick and some rubber bands. It worked just fine...

That's my 'Capo' story.

Kt


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

I was browsing the net, looking for the site that I originally shared with you, but now I can't find it. But I found another that shows a few basic chords, that may help you:

Chords

The "A" chord that C Mitchell was playing is not on the above site. He is playing a full bar "A" chord. (That's what you call a chord when you lay your index finger across all six strings - bar, or full bar.) The "A" chords diagramed in the above site only show 5-string chords, but you can still play the 6th string and sound O.K.

You will find the D chord there also, as a 5-string chord. Some diagrams show the D chord as only a 4-string chord. I could go into a long explanation why you sometimes see D as a 5-string chord, and other times as a 4-string chord, using music theory talk, but for all practical purposes, the D chord sounds fine as either a 4-string or 5-string chord, but NOT a 6 string chord.

One thing I noticed is that he appears to be lifting his index finger every so often during his strumming. I'm not sure though, if he is actually strumming while his finger is lifted and maybe he is just keeping beat in a strange way?
It's a way of varying your strumming style, and there is no term for it that I know of. He is actually lifting all of his fingers together off the fingerboard, yet still maintaining a hold on the strings,which momentarily stops the vibrations of the strings, while keeping the strumming pattern going.

If you could see and hear him play in slow motion, you would hear a "percussion" effect when he lifts his hand ever so slightly off the fingerboard. (Are you still with me? This is very hard to explain.) This effect only works with chords that don't contain "open" (not fingered) strings.

You can try it with the first three fingered strings of a D chord. Strum the chord once, then immediately lift your left hand fingers off the fingerboard, but NOT off the strings. You've just stopped the vibration of the strings, thus stopping the sound. If you keep your fingers suspended on the strings, strum the strings again, and you get a percussion sound, like hitting your fingernails on a table. (Hope I haven't lost you.)
Anyway, when you speed up this whole process, you can get varying rhythmic effects. I do it all the time without realizing it.

I have also used a capo in my time, but find they don't work well on a 12-string. With such a difference of string thicknesses, a capo can't always press them all tight enough, and there's always one string that buzzes annoyingly.

Happy strumming, and let me know if you tried the strumming technique I described.

Jule


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

Thanks for finding that chord chart for me, I can't find the one you posted earlier.

Thanks for explaining the 'percussion effect' as he lifts his fingers. I'm surprised I didn't catch what he was doing sooner. I couldn't tell if he was strumming while lifting the capo finger(as I call it) or doing something else, but you explained it perfectly and it makes sense...See, you taught me something new again! If this keeps up, I'll have to start paying you!

That's why I use a spring capo, which works like a clothes pin. It has a very strong spring holding the capo against the fretboard. It is almost difficult to press it hard enough to open it wide enough to put over the strings. The old 'tie' capo didn't seem to hold the strings down tight enough.

Thanks again for the info and I'll give it a try this weekend, if time permits.

Kt

Here's one I found on You Tube, and a very easy one to play.
The only trouble I have is with the third part, with the strumming. I can play it easier by not using my thumb, but using my middle and index fingers, though it doesn't sound the same.

The first part is similar to some notes I played some years ago and the second maleguena is easier since I changed the way I finger the strings.

I like the third part, but I need a bit more practice to get used to using my thumb and making it sound OK.

For Beginners


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

If this keeps up, I'll have to start paying you!
Nonsense! I'm glad to share freely!

Watched the Spanish song video.... He explains fingering and demonstrates well. The strumming pattern at the end is new to me. I'll have to try that style. Pictures speak a thousand words. That's why it's frustrating for me to tell you how to play something w/o showing you! I use a lot of the flamenco-type stroke he uses at the very end of his demonstration (using the backs of the ring, middle, and index fingers - like flicking water off your fingertips.)

I have two versions of Maleguena - the first is "in my head" from one of the first "rote" songs my first teacher taught me, the second is a piece of sheet music in a different key than what is my head. I've wanted for years to transcribe the sheet music to the same key that's in my head, and write it in notation. I have a song writing program on my computer that I downloaded a few years ago, for FREE! It's just a basic program that is limited. Of course I could pay a hefty fee and get a more advanced version that would print out what I play on a keyboard, but don't need that right now. Before the age of home computers (here I go again, showing my age), I used to write all music notation on staff paper by hand. It took hours and hours, BUT it kept me off the streets!

Well, I'll practice more tonight. Right now - off to do errands!

Julie


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

"When you get comfortable with the whole song, put yourself on YouTube!" Maybe, then, you should follow your own advice.
-Jmcat


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

Jmcat,

You first!

Julie


 o
misspelled

I have been spelling the song wrong - It's Malaguena....with an extra "a", not an extra "e"......working on it right now, transposing it to a different key....which will take me weeks and weeks to perfect....can't seem to stay at it on a regular basis....I've got this gardening addiction now!

Julie


 o
Oooops!

Jmcat,
Just realized that probably didn't make sense!
I didn't mean to say, "You first," in response to your saying, "...follow your own advice," but rather, I meant to say, "You first, put yourself on YouTube!" (Don't you play piano?)

Julie


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

Ladies first. Plus, I don't have a (currently working) video camera.
-Jmcat


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

Speaking of piano, I finally can play Imagine by John Lennon.

I am still working on the much harder, Last Date as played by Floyd Cramer.

It's hard to learn, when you only practice 10 or 15 minutes every second night or so...

Kt


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

Jmcat,
My camera only takes silent movies.

Kt,
Do you have a piano or an electric keyboard?
I had a Kimball piano that was about 100 years old that I bought from my Aunt, who beautifully restored the finish. My daughter has it now, plus an electric keyboard. I sent away for two versions of 'Last Date', and easy one for me, and the harder version for my daughter. She's got 10 years of piano lessons under her belt and plays 10 times better than I can! Some time in her future she'd like to make a living playing for weddings, dinner parties, restaurants, etc. I told her 'Last Date' is a classic that people never get tired of hearing.

Are you playing 'Imagine' by ear, or do you read off sheet music?

Julie


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

'Imagine', I learned from a sheet of notes written down by a friend some years ago, and by notes, I mean the letters A, B, D...etc and not picture notes on a scale. At first, I had to go back and label the keys so I knew which ones were which. Now, I know the keys, but it's quicker to see the note 'A' 'B' etc written down for faster learning. Once I learn it, I don't need to know what keys they are, just which ones to press. Matching the notes to the keys is for my learning only.

For me, it is easier to change the letters to numbers on the music and on the piano(A=1,B=2,G=7 etc). Numbers register better in my head than letters do for some reason. But what works even better for me, is to have the number '1' be the 'C' or either the 'F' keys. I know this may sound strange, but that way the full seven letters are contained evenly in the seven keys. I picture the piano as three keys, then four keys, then three keys, then four keys, and so on. The 'three' keys, are the three surrounding the two black keys, and the 'four' keys are the four surrounding the three black keys...am I confusing you again??

I have a difficult time learning piano by ear, unless it is a single key song, where you press only a single key at a time, like we used to do as kids. Ding-ding-ding, ding-ding-ding...etc

As a kid growing up, we had a piano that was also about 100 years old. I don't remember the brand. I was very upset years later when my Dad sold it, since I wanted it.

Anyway, I presently have an electric keyboard, but have a couple of friends that actually have pianos, one has a grand piano, and it's very nice.

One of these days(years) I'd like to play Last Date on it.

Kt


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

Kt,

No you didn't confuse me. I understand what you're explaining about using numbers instead of letters - whatever makes it easier/more fun - is what counts if you're just playing for yourself and not making a living at it. But now, I have to ask, (since you said once or twice that the trumpet/cornet is easy for you to play), do you read music staff notation when you play the trumpet? I only say that, because I think you once said you could read the notes of 'El Choclo' just fine with your trumpet.

Julie


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

The only lessons I have ever taken in my life were on Cornet. I still don't know the names of the notes(music staff notation?) but know which keys to press on the cornet, that correspond to the musical notes. Does that make sense?

I was good on the cornet, (if I may brag a little). I could hear a note played by someone else, and I could play it first try on my cornet. Music seems to be in my ears.

Numbers are easier than letters for me to follow, for some reason. I found Last date on YouTube where it shows the entire song keyed on the piano. I may be able to learn it from that video. To learn it from a music sheet, I would first have to learn the notes, and which set of keys to use on the piano(as they repeat over and over), and then learn how to read what plays with the left and right hands.

I can follow numbers easier, if I could only find Last Date numbered somewhere, or one that I could change to numbers.

I guess that I am just different that way. Photography is the same way...I never took lessons. To me, teaching myself and learning myself, is part of the joy of doing things.

Kt


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty guitar/piano student...

I can probably learn 'Last Date' from this video, that is, when I have the time to sit down and study it: Last Date Keyed

Here is a good lesson although short. I like the boxes for the notes: Last Date Lessons

Kt


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

Nice videos there, Kt!

It's a good thing that you can click the 'pause' button and practice short phrases over and over until you master them, then click 'play' to see/hear another phrase to practice that. Now to me that "rote" method worked when I was much younger. My first guitar teacher taught me many parts of songs which I had to retain in my memory and practice each night, so that at the next lesson he could teach me more of the song etc.

With my memory not being as good as it used to be, I'm much better at reading notation. I have the easy and harder piano versions of Last Date, which I'd like to transcribe to guitar some day (in all my spare time - Ha!)

Well, have fun playing piano/guitar/trumpet....what a great gift music is, whether played on an instrument or for listening/singing...it soothes the soul.

Jules


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

Did I make sense to you in my first post(at 20:34)?

Kt


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

Did I make sense to you in my first post(at 20:34)?

Well you said a lot in that post, so I don't know which part of it you're referring to, but I understood all of what you said. I remember when I used to give guitar lessons that many students could finger the notes by what they saw on the music staff, but for some reason, couldn't remember the names of the notes.

As far as hearing a note played by someone else, and being able to duplicate it on your trumpet on the first try, yes, I understand you have an "ear" for music. I can do that type of listening then playing what I hear on my guitar or violin.

As far as numbers are concerned, versus letters, I remember making it easier for some of my students, by writing fingering above some notes - it was like turning on a light bulb for them. They just had to remember what string to play!

Learning by self-teaching is a great way to progress at your own speed, taking as much time as to want/need to perfect a skill...which is what I will have to do with my camera this summer when I have more time to experiment!

BTW, you seem to underestimate yourself when you try and explain yourself to me, when it comes to musical talk. I understand more than you realize. Now did that sentence even make sense? I don't think I said that right. I can understand what you're trying to say (musically) more than you think I can. Oh, never mind. If I don't understand what you're trying to say, I'll come right out and ask you to rephrase it, or I'll rephrase your statement myself, and ask if this or that or whatever is what you meant to say. Now I'M having trouble trying to explain myself!

I think it's time to call it a night!

Until next time...

Jule


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

Bumping up this thread to talk about photos again.

Just now realized that photo talk and guitar talk both seem to come up often in any thread no matter if it starts outs with photography or guitar stuff.

So any way....

YOU HAVE JUST UNDER 40,OOO PHOTOS?!?!?
Good gravey! I don't know how you keep track of all of them! Yes, I could see where transfering them using a flashcard would be mind-boggling. I don't have anywhere close to that many in my total collection. (I probably have that many songs in guitar notation though, if I count up all the books I have.)

About three times each year I move all my pics to disks, as a back up. I didn't realize you could back them up with an external harddrive. What a great idea! I briefly browsed the internet and I see they have quite a wide price range, but most are very affordable. I will definitely look into that - Thanks!!!

I have succeded(sp?) in moving all my pics from the "injured" computer. I can't imagine how that felt when your harddrive crashed! I hope ours can be fixed before that happens.

Julie


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

I never used an external harddrive until my computer crashed that time. That's what they sent my retrieved data back to me on.

I recently bought another one which is a Maxtor OneTouch 4 Plus. It has 1 TB of storage/size. Cost $250 after rebate. Kind of pricey, but a lot less than the cost of retrieving the photographs like before.

It should last me quite a while, and I screen my photos and only store the most 'desireable' ones, or the ones that in my eyes are priceless.

I also make copies of vacation pictures, and pictures that I make enlargements of, onto cd's.

I have double copies of photos that I really like, and that's not including the originals on my computer. Can't be too safe!

Kt


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

Well, now I had to go googling to find out what the heck a TB of storage space was:

A terabyte = 1000 gigabytes

That's a lot of photos!

J


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

I was going to buy one with less storage, but sooner or later, I would have to get another one, so I just spent the money now and got the largest they had in the store.

I like them also because I can download photos(or any other info) from another computer, then view it or copy it to a different computer.

When I bought my digital camera several years ago, the largest memory card they had available was a 128MB. Shortly thereafter, the 256MB came out then the 512MB.

We were vacation and I needed another card, so I stopped to buy one and found that they had 1 Gig cards. Last I looked, which was several months ago, they had 2 Gig cards...don't know what they have now or when the increasing memory size will stop.

Kt


 o
Bar-Be-Que Sunset

Photobucket

Kt


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

That is one gorgeous photo! It reminds me of some of the pics I used to take with my old 35 mm Minolta with a STAR filter.

I assume you took that while you were waiting for your meat to get done on the grill?
Julie


 o
Guess what I just did!

I copied your sunset and saved it into one of my picture folders on my laptop, THEN set it as a desktop background.
Now it's bigger and better!

j.


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

Didn't need a star filter for this one, it had rays of it's own.

Again, my 'titles' aren't accurate representatives of what they say.

I actually came out of the BBQ restaurant in Ellinger, with two chop beef sandwiches and a large glass of tea in my hands, when I spotted this sunset.

I don't have time to BBQ during the week.

I should have brushed out the telephone wires if I knew you were going to desktop it.

I'll see what I can do, when I get some time and then repost.

Kt.


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

Telephone wires?
I had to go back and look, since I didn't see them the first time! (Me and my untrained eye).

The average person without photo critique experience wouldn't see the wires, because the eye is naturally drawn to the center cloud with radiating sunrays!

Now here's a question from your photography student:
The following photo was a "zoom in". Can you tell me why it's grainy? I didn't get that grainy look before I zoomed in. It's been edited (contrast & saturated for a richer look). No matter what I tried with a dozen photos, I couldn't capture the real sunset. I'm sure it's my limited camera functions!

Photobucket

Julie


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

First of all, that's a very nice photo! You have just enough of the horizon in the photo for size comparison and the limbs dangling from the top add a very nice touch!

I don't think it's too grainy, but I understand your complaint. Low light has a tendency to give graininess as compared to bright daylight photos.

Any time that you zoom, it will add noise(gaininess) to a photo and it usually increases with the more zoom you use.

Optical zoom produces less noise, sometimes almost un-noticeable, but a digital zoom can, and usually will, create a lot of noise even with a small amount of zoom.

Also, the graininess can be from using a fast ISO(ASA). I try to take all photos(day or night) with around ISO 100. I couldn't determine what ISO your photo was taken at.

ISO 800 or higher is great for nighttime or anywhere else that a longer exposure might be needed, but the photos will be very grainy. I found that out the hard way by taking pictures of the comet Hale-Bopp(?) a few years ago...the photos composition was OK, but they were all very very grainy.

One other thing that sometimes makes a difference is the f-stop which you had at f/4.4 for the photo above. I don't worry much about it and usually let the camera choose the correct f-stop, but it is something to consider later on if you have time to play with it some.

After setting the camera on ISO 100, I tend to adjust the shutter speed more than anything else, and let the camera do the rest(AUTO) for most of my pictures. I would try that first and go from there.

Hope this isn't confusing you.

Kt


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

First of all, thanks for the compliment.

Yes, it was optical zoom. I seldom use digital zoom.

I had to go back to my software program that came with my Olympus camera to find the properties of that photo. ISO was 200. Shutter speed was 1/100 sec.

How in the world did you know the f-stop was 4.4? If I click on properties for the above photo, I don't see any f-stop reading. I only see it if I'm back in my original photo program (Camedia Master).

No, you're not confusing me, it's just a lot to take in, and a lot to try to remember when I'm actually running out the door to capture a sunset that changes by the second, while the sun sinks like a rock. This summer I will have some time off work and I will write myself a set of instructions that I can learn/memorize, or just grab and take with me. I can't set the aperature speed - the camera is automatic in that respect, but I think I can set the ISO.

I went back to study some of my sunset photos, and I found one from March, that the camera automatically set itself to a low ISO of 97, shutter speed 1/30 sec, and f2.9. I don't think I used optical zoom on that one. I don't see the graininess that is in the May sunset.
Here's the March sunset:
Photobucket

I really must learn to take my camera with me wherever I go!
My Dad says there are some beaver homes and dams on his former property (which was sliced in half by highway progress.) I hope to get over there one of these days and snap some photos.

Oh----Hey! I just picked up a "Free Agent" external hard drive for $89.99 + tax, 500 GB. It was on sale at an office supply store.

Boy, I sure have my work cut out for me when I move all my pics from disks to Ex hard drive!

Thanks for the photo lesson!

Julie, rambling too much...


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

Yes, I remember you posting that photo a while back,...very nice!

I remember taking a picture a few years ago in Colorado of a sunflower field and it was very grainy even though it was bright light outside. You have peaked my interest and I will have to do more research on this. I'll look back at my photo and see what settings the camera was set on.

Digital cameras hold a lot of surprises, or at least differences, from my older 35mm cams.

My camera has 4 preset programs on it that you can preset to any desired camera settings. I like this for ease in getting a quick photo. I don't like to use a flash so I have them all turned off. One program I have set for video, Another is set for ISO 100 and manual 'speed' and the third is set for close-ups. One other setting is totally automatic which I rarely use.

Each has different settings for light metering, etc, which goes into a lot of detail and would take forever for me to explain in this post, so, some other time.

Yak yak yak...I know I'm starting to ramble, so again, in short, I basically use ISO 100(or less) for all photos and mainly adjust the speed manually.

Aperture is fun to play with when you like specific depth of field in your photos, and that too is another whole topic.

I bring my camera with me everywhere I go. There have been too many missed, once in a lifetime shots...never again. Once, back in 1993, I went hunting in Colorado with some friends. Everywhere I went I had my Canon A-1 hanging around my neck. Everyone kept joking that I looked like I was on a National Geographic expedition. But when the trip was over, everyone wanted copies of my photos since they brought no cameras and had nothing to remember the countryside by. I have a couple enlargements from that trip on my livingroom wall.

We have beavers at our home place out in the country. Nutrias are very common here but beavers are very rare.

Sounds like a great deal on the external HD. It will copy faster from your computer to the EHD, than it will from the discs to the EHD, which I'm sure you know.

How in the world did you know the f-stop was 4.4?

Hey, I have a good eye for photograghy! NOT! Actually, I open the photo in Nikon viewer and it tells me the settings used, except it did not tell me the ISO for some reason.

How about this for long-winded?

Kt


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...!

Does this look a little better?
Photobucket

A different photo taken of the BBQ setting sun, with some colour adjustments. Sorry, didn't have time to remove the telephone wires.
Photobucket

See the buzzards? There are at least 8 buzzards in the first BBQ sunset pic, and a couple in the one above.

Kt


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

How about this for long-winded?
It's O.K. to talk passionately about your hobbies, especially when you're willing to share tips with those of us who are still learning. You never know how many people you will reach and teach on these forums. I often wonder how many people lurk on the test forums. I bet there are more than we can imagine!

But when the trip was over, everyone wanted copies of my photos since they brought no cameras and had nothing to remember the countryside by.
There have been times when I too, forget to bring my camera to an event, and ask for copies of photos taken by others, or vice versa. The mind just can't remember a beautiful or exciting scene after many years have passed. But photos capture a scene forever, and what fun it is to go back in time and re-live the trip, event, experience, etc. all over again!

I open the photo in Nikon viewer and it tells me the settings used, except it did not tell me the ISO for some reason.
I don't know whether to think that's fascinating or scary!
I just opened my own picture in Microsoft Picture Manager, which was installed on this computer, and in "properties" I see listed:
Camera Model: C300Z, D550Z
Equipment Make: Olympus Optical Co., LTD
Date taken: 5/23/2008 9:04:27 PM (I think PM should be AM!)
Color Representation: sRGB
Focal Length: 15.7 mm
F-number: F4.4
Exposure time: 1/100 sec
and some other stuff

Interesting how a photo file carries all that info with it when you move it around!

So, what did you do with my May sunset to get rid of the graininess? It looks smoother!

Your second BBQ setting sun is awesome with the bluer sky!
This is what I see in your camera properties:
Camera Model: E5700
Equipment Make: NIKON
Date Taken: 5/28/2008 6:55:14 PM
Focal Length: 14.7 mm
Exposure Time: 5/13812 sec.
Metering Mode: Partial (I have no clue what that means!)
Exposure compensation: 0 step (again, no clue)

No, I don't see your buzzards in either picture. I didn't even see your telephone wires the first time! So how do you expect me to find buzzards? I even tried adjusting the brightness & colors in my picture editing program, and still can't find them.

You are quite an experienced photographer!

Jule


 o
forgot something..

The F-number on your second BBQ setting sun: F/7.9
(Fascinating AND scary that MY computer can read YOUR camera properties!)

J.


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

Metering mode is the light metering that I was talking about earlier. The viewer can be set to read amount of light in the center of the viewing screen, or the corners, or the whole screen, etc.

'Partial' is just that, just 'part' of the viewer screen.

I don't use the 'viewer compensation' especially since it can be done with the computer photo adjusters with similar results. You can 'over' expose or 'under' expose a picture which is nice when you want to enhance lighting conditions. They are incremented in -2, -1, 0, +1, +2, etc. for over or underexposures.

The first photo buzzards, are harder to see, but the second photo has one in the upper right hand corner that is easily visible.

So, what did you do with my May sunset to get rid of the graininess? It looks smoother!

My Photostudio5 has an "ENHANCE" button which has 14 different adjusters listed under it, one being "SMOOTH FILTERS" which has another six under it. I pressed "DESPECKLE" to get rid of some of the grains.

There may be a filter that even gets better results, I'll check later, I need to get back to work.

Kt


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

OK, I'm back. Did all of that make sense?

Here are some pics I took this morning on my way to work. I took several on AUTO, then several with the time(manual SPEED) setting,

The first five pics are taken at speeds of 1/250, 1/500, 1/1000, 1/2000, & 1/4000th of a second.

The last two were taken on AUTO so the speeds were 1/2212.3 sec & 1/3378.3 sec. The camera takes the photos at odd numbers like that. The different light metering is the cause of the different speeds when set on AUTO.

1/250
Photobucket

1/500
Photobucket

1/1000
Photobucket

1/2000
Photobucket

1/4000
Photobucket

1/2212.3(AUTO)
Photobucket

1/3378.3(AUTO)
Photobucket

Notice how the sun is 'bleached out' in the longer/slower speed photos, but darker in the shorter/faster speed photos...a result of less/more light being let in.

The f-stop was 7.2 in all photos except the 1/2000sec pic where it was 6.4, and you can see the light difference if you look closely, the sun is a bit less defined or less sharp in that pic, a result of the f-stop.

Oh, did you see the bird in the second(1/500) photo?? Probably not a buzzard. Most likely a crane of some sort. Also, the pics above weren't taken in that order. I posted them that way for ease of viewing, that is why the sun is lower in the two AUTO photos, in case you were wondering.

Kt


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

How fascinating!

I like the one with 1/4000 speed the best. It looks like a painting on my monitor.

I'll have to study my camera's manual again, but I don't think I can set the speeds, everything is auto programed. I'm almost ready for a newer camera, but will have to wait till work slows down, so I can shop carefully.

I am now on my laptop, and I believe I see your buzzards/cranes, but they only show up as very small faint black dots. I would not have recognized them as birds.

It looks like there's a bird in your 1/500 photo above - am I right?

Julie


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

Metering mode is the light metering that I was talking about earlier. The viewer can be set to read amount of light in the center of the viewing screen, or the corners, or the whole screen, etc.

Still confused, but at this stage of learning, maybe I don't need to be concerned about metering, esp. since I prob'ly can't set it anyway on this automatic-programed camera.

I looked up the metering property on a photo I took last summer, and it said, "Metering Mode: Pattern". Soooooo, does that mean the viewer is reading different amounts of light for the whole screen? Here's the photo I'm talking about:
Photobucket

Julie


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

Mine doesn't show that I have one called 'pattern' but yes, that is probably what that means. Different brand cameras have different names for the light meterings.

Notice the tree is darker. If you wanted the tree brighter, then the sky would also be lighter and probably be too bleached out. I like the photo the way it is...very nice.

My camera has four basic meterings, Matrix, Spot, Center-weighted, and Spot AF Area.

Matrix is the best for overall picture taking as it reads 256 areas of the frame which produces optimal exposure for the whole image.

Spot does just the center, which is good for taking pictures of peoples faces for example.

Center-weighted meters the whole frame, but the central 1/4 has 80 percent of the weighting for metering.

Spot AF measures light in current focus area only.

I had mine set on Spot the other evening when I took a photo out in the country. The photo showed the sky OK, but the woods was what I wanted to see, so on the next photo, I lowered the camera to where there was only a very little sky in the viewer, then I held down the shutter button "halfway" down which locks in the meter readings and holds them until you completely press the shutter button.

Then I turned the camera upward to get more of the sky in the photo and pressed the shutter button all the way down to take the photo. This made the woods more visible (brighter), but made the sky also lighter,which wasn't the main focus of the picture anyway.

Does that make sense? Anyway, most digital cameras will let you depress the shutter button 1/2 down to lock in the desired light settings.

Kt


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

First of all, it sounds like you have quite a wonderful camera, Kt! And it sounds like you know how to use all the different shooting modes along with all the various settings.

I got a little dizzy trying to understand all your different meterings, and I'll tell you why. I'm the kind of person that learns and remembers best by hands-on repetition (like practicing a musical instrument).

However, I DO appreciate your taking the time to try and explain things to your VERY GRATEFUL photography student here!

I studied my camera manual and camera settings, and it appears I have two meter settings: ESP and spot. My manual isn't very goot at explaining things, so I had to Google search to find out what ESP means, and found this explanation: "ESP metering tries to come up with a balance of the subject and the surrounding area. This is the default setting." I know a little about spot metering, because I remember trying it out when I first got the camera several years ago. I just keep forgetting to use it!

I certainly do understand about pressing the shutter button half-way. I use it all the time to focus on something and then move the camera so that the "in focus" subject is a little off center, surrounded by a background that may be somewhat out of focus. What I didn't realize was that the light settings would be locked in too! So right there you taught me something new again!

Thanks!

Your dizzy photography student,

Jule

P.S. While Googling, I found a site that should be helpful to me while using my Olympus camera, (at least until I get a different one.) It's olympusdigitalschool.com


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

I'm the kind of person that learns and remembers best by hands-on repetition...

Yep, me too. Sorry for rambling. I get that way when I'm trying to explain something, which I am not the best at:)

The only thing I've ever taken lessons for, was playing the cornet. Everything else I learn by 'hands on-repetition'(I like that term), including photography, which is why I don't know all the terminology that is used.

Trying guitar for 'Honky Tonk Women' but need thicker callouses...

Kt


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

Sorry for rambling. I get that way when I'm trying to explain something

No need to appologize. You're explaining things well. Not everything sinks in to this novice brain, that's all.

Trying guitar for 'Honky Tonk Women' but need thicker callouses...

What do you mean? (I know the song, but have never desired to learn to play it.) Are you trying to slide, or use some other technique?

Julie


 o
I did it, I did it, I did it!!!!

A-hah!
I learned how to store photos on my bran-nitty-new external hard drive. For the longest time, my XP computer wouldn't "read" old CD-R disks that were written by different editing programs from my dinosaur computer that used to have Windows Me installed.

However, my laptop, with VISTA, can read all the old disks....how odd. I was confused at first, about how to use the back-up feature of the ex hard drive. I hit the wrong "button" once, and it backed up every single photo on my laptop from the C drive. Oooooops! Good thing I can delete mistakes.

Anyway, I transfered some old 2003 pics from when I first got my digital camera. I had to laugh at how awful some of them were, lighting-wise.

Here's one from Feb. 2003, during our winter drought:
Cornfield
If you look on the far right horizon, you'll see the water tower (about 3 miles away) where we get our wireless signal from.

Julie


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

Are you trying to slide...

Yes, I guess that's what you call it when you 'slide' the stings, or 'stretch' them to make a higher pitched sound?

Hurts a little bit, but I need to practice on the nylons before using the steel.

I'm learning at the request of a friend, who wants to play it with me. She's just learning to play...about like me, still learning...;)

I learned how to store photos on my bran-nitty-new external hard drive.

Good for you! They give great peace of mind.

I don't use any backup feature. I simply cut and paste them or press the 'Send To...' button. I'll copy as many as a few hundred at a time. I put them all in folders then copy the whole folder.

The water tower that I get my internet service from is about that far away also. What 'makes' that picture, at least in my opinion, is that dill looking weed in the foreground on the left. Very nice!

Is that the farmer's place in the background with the silo there?

Is the ground naturally sloped? I thought it was more 'level' there...for some reason.

I don't see any buffalo stampeding.

Kt


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

O.K. Now I understand what you're doing with the strings. It's not a slide, but rather a "bend", when you stretch the string at right angles to the direction of the string. A side would be actually sliding your finger along the length of the string without bending it (also causing the pitch to change - higher or lower.)
Have fun!

that dill looking weed in the foreground on the left. in the photo is dried "Queen Ann's Lace" frozen in time. (Thanks, BTW.) The farmer that grew corn to the East of us actually lives a few miles away, across the Interstate from us. The farmer with the silo that you see, farms the land farther East.

No, that ground in the photo is not sloped. It's fairly level. I was standing at the back of my property, where a hill slopes up to our house. So, that was surely ME standing a little off balance. Gosh, you sure have an eye for detail!

No buffalo here, but I hope that cougar doesn't show up that Wisconsinites keep spotting!

Julie


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

A cougar killed a calf just across the fence out at my place in the country. The game warden was out to look at the tracks and the kill.

Cougars are rare here.

I've only seen one in this area and that was back in '80 or '81.

Staying out in those thick woods till the wee hours of the morning, well, it kind of makes you think about things and the mind starts to hear and imagine things.

If I'm outside the cougars are after me, and if I'm inside, the aliens are peeping through the windows at me...what next?

Kn


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

Sorry to hear about your calf getting killed!

There was a cougar thread on the Wisconsin forum a few weeks ago. Aparantly cougars are native to Wisconsin, along with wolves, bison, elk, deer and moose (according to a Wisconsin Wildlife Primer.) They flourished here from the 1700 to 1800s, but hunters caused their numbers to decline.

Mike, from Wisconsin had this to say:
Oh, and the procedure if you ever meet a cougar is to try to scare it away. It's pretty much just a big kitty. Puff yourself up, hold your hands over your head, yell, and throw things. This is very different from a bear encounter, where you're supposed to make yourself small, avoid eye contact, and back away slowly. But the odds of even seeing either is so low, I don't think you have anything to worry about. You're much much more likely to get crushed by an SUV. ;)

Speaking about getting crushed, (and this is quite a ways off topic from Photography) but I had a very difficult time getting out of my own driveway this morning, away out here in the sticks. The Interstate was at a standstill, and traffic was being re-routed down the frontage roads, both in the north and southbound lanes, stretching for miles. I heard there was a fatal accident, but not until I got home did I hear (from DH) about the horrific details. Around 3 A.M. a man left his broken down vehicle, ran across the interstate, and was hit by a Semi truck. The trucker couldn't see what he hit, because of heavy fog. I won't go into gory details, but body parts were found scattered along the road and in ditches.

The truck driver heard, but didn't see what he hit, so he turned off on the next exit, backtracked south, re-entered the Interstate, to try and find out what he hit. The poor guy is quite shook. DH's towing crew picked up the Semi, after hours of investigation, and towed it somewhere where it will sit for a long time before the owners decide what to do with it. It will never be drived again, at least not around here - maybe it will be sent to California, where it's history won't follow it, or maybe it will be torched apart, then the motor, transmission and other parts can be salvaged and sold.

Boy, am I rambling.

Julie


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

Thanks, but the calf belonged to my neighbour. Cougars(also known by many other names) were also native here until about the 1870's. They are occasionally seen but of the hundreds of people I know here, I know of three, not counting myself, that have seen one.

There is supposedly no such thing as a black cougar, but there are black jaguars and leopards.

However, large black cats supposedly have been seen south of here near Sheridan. The one next to my property was supposedly black, but I still don't know who saw it.

I could tell you about some wrecks here, some with trains, that I encountered over the years. They are pretty gory.

You're much much more likely to get crushed by an SUV.

I don't think those type of comparisons are accurate. A person who lives in the wild outdoors may never drive but may see cougars daily whereas the person who visits the woods only once or twice a month, or less, will likely never see a cougar, but probably spends more time in the city and thus more likely crushed by an SUV. So...

Cougars are usually not heard nor seen before an attack on a human. Those that survive rarely know until just a split second before they're pounced on that they were even being stalked.

That girl that was attacked in California was riding her bike in a newly cleared remote area where cougars roam, so 'we' invaded their territory. A day of so before, another biker was killed and eaten by a cougar...his bike was found by the road.

Kt


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

Cougars are usually not heard nor seen before an attack on a human. Those that survive rarely know until just a split second before they're pounced on that they were even being stalked.

Geeze, now you're scarin' me! Actually, I am rarely outside w/o my ferocious Fox Terrier/Smooth Collie, who will take on anything with four legs, even if she dies trying to protect me.......all 26 pounds of her! I just wish she could talk and tell me of her encounters. I think she has taken off across the fields a couple times in hot pursuit of whatever excites her.

If I have nightmares, it's all YOUR fault!

Julie


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

I wouldn't worry. Cougars rarely get a taste for human flesh. They are usually as scared of us as we are of them. In fact, there are many more cougars that see humans than humans that see cougars.

However, it's that one rare occasion when a cougar gets overly curious or has sever hunger, where it crosses that line and attacks a human. Sadly, once a cougar does get a taste of a human, it then realizes that it is an easy kill and a good source of food, and they will most definitely kill(humans) again.

Since that calf was killed, I can't help but think that every shadow I see in the dark is something that shouldn't be there. I did once find tracks that I thought were a very large cat since they differ from canines by having the retracted claws when walking, which I noticed immediately, but now I wish I would have looked around more and try and find some more distinct tracks. What I saw was probably bobcat tracks since they weren't real large, but bigger than a domestic cat.

I was out there the last few nights watering plants(we are in a drought here) and I don't enjoy the darkness as much as I used to...every sound makes the hair on the back of my neck stand up.

I know there's not much to worry about, but I have been known to have not the best of luck.

Kt


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

We have been hit by heavy rains, and more are on the way.
Milwaukee got hit hard, with hail, strong winds, and power outages. Tornado watches, flash flood watches, T-storm watches will continue Sunday, and into early next week.

The field south of us has a low spot that often floods, then eventually drains off. Soybeans have been planted there this year. I took many photos early this evening of the "river" that ought not to be there.

I focused in on two different areas (held the shutter button down half way), then moved the camera to include one of my gardens. What fun - I'm learning!

I focused on the lightest part of the sky for this first one:
South field

Then I focused on the darker area of the trees. I'm actually surprised it turned out fairly well focused, considering the shutter speed was slow...
South field 2

Julie


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

Very nice! Yes, it is fun playing with the settings, isn't it?

I like both photos, they both convey the mood, setting and a message.

The second one looks like it has some very nice hostas and daylilies planted around those trees. What kind of trees?

Looks almost like a small clumping bamboo off to the right;).

That water looks nice also...;O

Kt


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

Thanks!

We're getting hit with the fourth round of severe T-storms right now. I expect the power to go out any time now.

Yes, I have a lot of Hostas and daylilies planted in that lower shade garden. Right now the garden looks a bit ragged, because the daffodil foliage hasn't died down yet. When it does, (and when I get the weeds pulled), the garden looks much better. There are also ferns, Brunnera, Allium, Trillium, Astilbe, Columbine, and various other shade lovers there. What you see that looks like Bamboo is really native Tiger Lilies off to the right, and they will get much taller.

You may wonder why I have daylilies planted in the shade. They were bought a long time ago before I knew much about daylily care. But they do well, since they are "groundcover" daylilies. So wherever I bought them from (can't remember), they came as a package deal, and most likely were chosen for their ability to grown in sun/part shade. They are actually planted on the south and west edges, where they do get bright sun for part of the day.

Wish I could ship some water your way! Our lawn has some spongy areas.

Julie


 o
Forgot something....

Lots of thunder, lightning & heavy rain distracting me right now.

You asked about the trees....
Black Walnut, Honey Locust, Burr Oak, and a different Oak - I think it's a Red Oak, and it's slowly dying.

I don't think bamboo would do well there - too shady, too windy, and too much root competition from big trees!

Julie


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

Here is another good site for Hosta lovers, and also for many other plants.

You may already have visitied there.

I have noticed that in different parts of the country, 'full' sun plants do very differently. I have bought several different plants in the past, and they were all listed as 'full' sun, but that apparently doesn't apply to Texas' full sun. Even after giving the plants a chance to get some size to them before putting in full sun or protecting until they are full size, the sun still kills them. I have some daylilies in the shade here also.

The dry and especially the heat is unbearable here. I don't know how much longer I will keep watering out at the country.

Here at my house, I have the sprinklers going daily for several hours. I do it mainly as a fire break just in case the field in front of me catches fire from a stray cigarette from the road. We have strong south winds, and a fire would almost be unstopable(is that a word?).

I have three different 'bamboo' friends that have been wanting to come and see my yard and do some trading here but I can't get off long enough. I was sick with something the last couple of weeks and I'm still not over it, but it makes it harder on me to be stretched out so thin.

I have been putting them off for several weeks. Looks like I may have to spend my vacation time in August with them.

Sometimes it's a delicate orchestrated balance between what I want to do and what I need to do.

Never time to rest...

Kt


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student..7.

I didn't see your last post before I posted above. You were posting while I was typing.

All those trees grow down here also, I find that interesting.

Now's a great time to be trying your luck at taking some lightning photos! It's alot of fun. We haven't had close lightning here in quite a while, but I always try getting some photos.

Photobucket

Kt


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

Ooooooo, that is awesome!
I wouldn't know how to set my automatic camera in order to capture lightning! Right now, I don't feel like standing out in the rain. I bet you have to keep snapping photo after photo in order to get just the right capture!

Sometimes it's a delicate orchestrated balance between what I want to do and what I need to do.

I know exactly what you're talking about. You have to prioritize, and do what's most important at the time. just be careful not to stress yourself out to the point where it affects your health. (I've been there/done that!) I'm in a similar situation right now, with work, but in another week I'll be able to slow down.

Take care of yourself, for goodness sake!

Julie


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

Thanks and yes, I'm doing the best I can to take care of myself.

Sometimes when taking pics of lightning, I might take a hundred or more and only get a few with actual lightning in them, which is nice with the digital camera cause it's not costing anything in lost developed pics with nothing on them. I learned to count between lightning flashes.

Usually there will be a 'set' time between large lightning strikes(although there may be several smaller flashes from lightning farther away) like every ten seconds. When I establish a time pattern, and I see a strike, I count out to that time and press the shutter button.

Set the camera for long exposure and use a tripod(windowpod). My digital only can be set for 8 second exposures, unlike my A-1 which could be set indefinitely by manual cable release, or 30 minutes by camera timer.

I like to set the A-1 at no more than 30 seconds, and if no lightning occurs, I could always re-expose(double-expose) the picture, which unfortunately I can't do with my digital camera. Double or even triple exposure kept me from spending too much money on wasted film and pictures of nothing.

Of course if it's raining while lightning, it's hard to get a good photo. You need to attempt a photo while the lightning is a ways off and before the rain starts.

Try it some time, it's fun.

Kt


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

The kind of lightning we had last night was the kind that lit up the whole sky. I didn't actually see flashes. The clouds were very dark blue, with swatches of feathery images reaching toward the ground once in a while. A tornado warning was in effect for about an hour. As I get older, I don't get too excited hearing about tornadoes, as much as I wished I could have seen one as a kid.

Julie


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

I really like the colour in those clouds. Very cool looking.

The trees are a very nice touch. The one on the close right is a black walnut? I guess the one on the left might also be, but looks a bit different, perhaps locust?

Kt


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

Thanks, but those cool looking dk. blue clouds quickly turned grey, then black, which was very scary.

Yes, the tree on the right is a Black Walnut. There's a whole grove of young BWs just past that big one, planted by squirrels, I'm sure. I'll have to look tomorrow morn to see about the H. Locust, can't remember right now.

The middle of the state was hit very hard, with 12" of rain in a three day period. Lake Delton, near Wisconsin Dells, is no longer a lake. With all the rushing waters, a dam broke, resulting in water flowing wherever it could seek lower ground. That is a big resort area where million dollar homes are built along the river's edge. We just saw, on the news, a few of those expensive homes break apart and literally float down the river.

Raging water - what a powerful force!

Julie


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

They showed the house's washing away on the TV news here today.

Sad that we can't store all that raging water and ration it out during times of need...

Kt


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

Backtracking a little bit.....I forgot to mention that I have visited the Hosta link you shared about 8 posts above. Whenever I google-search a particular plant, 'Plant Delights Nursery' often shows a picture of that plant. I believe I have ordered from them in the past. I've kept records during the last couple of years where I buy a particular plant from, but I didn't do that for the first few years. I've really tried to buy from Northern growers lately, to make sure plants are conditioned for our harsh climate.

Sad that we can't store all that raging water and ration it out during times of need...
I agree! Nature and its extremes....there you Southerners are in your drought situation, and here we are, with more torrential rains predicted for Thursday and Friday. I couldn't stand the tall grass anymore today, so I mowed, even though there were a few low spots that were squishey. Wet wheels, wet deck, but my trusty Sabre kept right on going!

Hope you get rain soon!

Julie


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

Areas all around us got rain today, although not very much. It moved all around our county then rained some just south of here.

We live in a 'dead' area as far as rain is concerned.

We desperately need a good general rain. These 'spot' showers dry up in a day or so.

I have cracks in the ground big enough to put my hand down in. I remember some of the 'old-timers' always talking about how their wagon wheels would get stuck in these cracks.

Wouldn't want to drop your keys or anything else of value in one...you'd never get it out.

Kt


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

Here's a pic I took a couple of days ago on my way to work, looking away from the sun.

Photobucket

...and here's a pic of the foggy sunrise this morning looking toward the sun.

It's the same tree, just taken from the opposite side. The first one facing west and the second one facing east.

Photobucket

Kt


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

Beautiful photos! I like the first one best.

We had pink clouds against a blue sky just like that last Fri. night, as I was driving home with Sub sandwiches. But by the time I would have driven home, ran in the house to get my camera, and then try and figure out the best setting with this limited function camera of mine, the pink clouds would have faded to gray.
(Another reason I need to take my camera with me wherever I go!)

I like the effect of the clouds covering part of the sun in your 2nd photo. A couple of flying bats would complete that picture for a nice spooky scene!

Thanks for sharing!

Julie


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...P

Thank You, Jule!

A couple of flying bats would complete that picture for a nice spooky scene!

That's the exact respnse that I get every time I post a pic of that tree over on the Photograghy Forum.

Three more pics of some of my yard plants.

Colocasia esculenta var. antiquorum 'Illustris' (Imperial Taro). Usually very densely leaved, but moisture is scarce so foliage is also scarce.
Photobucket

Shiro plums...ready to eat.
Photobucket

Papaya leaves. One of this years papaya trees still in a pot.
Photobucket

Kt


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

The top photo of I Taro looks like tropical plants sold in greenhouses around here for use as potted patio plants, or house plants. I had one many years ago, but it was much darker. Lost it over winter, probably because I couldn't provide the proper level of humidity or something.

Mmmmmmmm....plums. Do you have to spray them for bugs like we spray apples here?

Papaya is a fruit my Dad enjoyed eating when he was stationed in Hawaii during WWII. I myself don't care for the taste. Now that's what I call deeply lobed leaves!

Thanks for sharing!

Julie


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

I didn't spray the plums this year but have an excellent crop for what little is left of the tree.

What do you spray(apple trees) with up there?

I don't particularly care for papayas either but some family members do. I just like the look of the plant. They do well in a pot(something else you might try way up there:)).

Kt


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

I will ask my Dad what the apple trees are sprayed with when I see him tomorrow, if I remember (remember - I have a good memory, but short - I should write that question down.)
He can't do the spraying anymore, but my son said he'd do it for him.

Now what would I do w/a papaya tree, esp. if I don't like them, plus I don't have a greenhouse to keep it in?

I'm having a difficult time just caring for my Panda (see bamboo thread, if you haven't already.)

Julie


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

Here's one of several lightning photos that I took tonight.

I got home from watering(as usual) around 9:10pm and saw the lightning.

Going by radar, the lightning was around Inez, about 60 miles south of here. The lightning streaks were all kind of reddish or deep yellow coloured instread of the bright white or yellow of most lightning that I see.

I guess the colour was due to the distance away from here. It was too far for any sound to be heard.

Photobucket

Kt


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

You continue to amaze me, Kt, with your photographic talent!

Besides the unique coloring of the lightning, I think "depth" is added to the photo with the dark strip of cloud floating in the upper right corner, making for a mysterious mood.

Now how's that for critiquing?

Here's one I took today, just goofing around at the spur of the moment. I had been taking flower photos, waiting for clouds to pass under the sun, since photos of blooms taken in bright sunlight turn out bleached-looking.

This was taken looking straight up, hurting my neck, at high noon....

Photobucket

I know it's nothing special, but it was fun fiddling with the brightness feature in my photo editing program, trying to tone it down a bit.

Jules


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

Thanks, Jule and that's a nice pic you took also! I like the way the cloud is lit up in the middle like there's a light inside of it.

Yes, it's fun to just play sometimes with the adjustments to see what can be done.

Like this,
Photobucket

Here are some more from last night.
Photobucket

Photobucket

Photobucket

The last one is blurred from camera movement(my cat) but I liked the numerous strikes all at once.

Kt


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...y

I should have made them larger for posting, but it's getting late. Oh well...

Kt


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

Boy, am I glad I have wireless! With all the photos on this thread, I'd have to wait for an hour to see all the pics!

Anyway, you sure do have fun with the lightnin' shots ~ and so does your cat, maybe trying to get your attention.

Is that a radio tower I see in the bottom two?

Cool blue in the top photo.

I actually like your second one best of all, with the ligntning strikes going in two different directions.

Great job, cowboy!

Julie


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

Same place...different morning...

Photobucket

Another morning, same place(again) with zoom...The sun resting on a tree before rising...

Photobucket

Fog

Photobucket

Kt


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

Wow!!!

Are you sure you're not a photographer by profession?

No, I still think you're a vet.

Love all three pics, but the bottom is awesome - looks like somewere along Lake Michigan on a foggy morning.

Fantastic job!

Jule


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

I bet you're out capturing some fireworks right about now.
I'd like to see a photo or two if you have any.

I wanted to show you this "undoctored" photo to see if you can guess how I got the glow:

Photobucket
I suppose you'll guess right away, being the experienced photographer that you are!

Julie


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

Nice photo! I used to use pantyhose, that's right, pantyhose, to give a 'fog' appearance such as the glow in your photo.

Some cameras/lenses come with a special effect mode that allows the object in the center to be blurred or hazed.

Adjustment of the aperture can also cause similar effects. Other possibilites could be from shining a very bright light on the blurred object, or as one person that I know used to do, put someting on the lense(which I personally wouldn't do nor recommend). That something being grease or camera lens oil, or even a finger print.

In your case, it's hard to say. Thanks for the compliment, but I'm not that good of a photographer. I would guess it is from adjusting the aperture and timing.

Here are some photos from last nights fireworks show in Eagle Lake, and some from tonights show on the other side of town, about 4 miles away from here where I took the photos. In the first Eagle Lake show photos, you can see the people standing at the bottom of some of the fireworks for size comparison.

Also, the sunset from last night before the fireworks...looks like the cloud reaches around the sun like a big hand, which is impossible.

And a moonset from after tonights show here.

Photobucket Photobucket
Photobucket Photobucket
Photobucket Photobucket
Photobucket Photobucket
Photobucket Photobucket

From Tonight:

Photobucket
Photobucket
Photobucket

Photobucket

Photobucket

I tried to get them all side-by-side for easier viewing, but it's getting late and work comes early tomorrow. I need to do some colour adjustments which would bring out more of the different hues. They're not the best, but I didn't set the camera like I wanted. Most were just point and shoot, adjusting only the timer.

Kt


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

Fabulous, fantastic fireworks photography!
Gosh, I didn't expect you to stay up (past your bedtime?) to resize, upload, and post all those wonderful pics!
But I sure do appreciate the time you took to do that.

Now let me guess, from what you've taught me:
You used a tripod?
You set the timer for a long exposure - maybe 2 seconds?
(BTW, is that the same as a slow shutter speed?)
Question: How did you set your aperture opening?

What I like about most of those shots is how you captured the "line of fire" from the ground up, plus the explosion.
It makes them look like palm trees!
Were there other people like you, taking photos at the same time?

You have quite a vivid imagination, describing the sunset w/reaching hand photo. Absolutely lovely crescent moon!

DH gave me the OK to get a new camera. Now, since I'm off work for a little while, I should have time to shop. I have a folder with info I need to review before I venture out to the stores.

Now, about my glowing flower~
One of your guesses was correct.
It happened quite by accident. I took some landscape pictures last week of the cornfields around here, and the middle of some photos turned out blurry. I couldn't figure out what was wrong, other than the fact I was standing in the woods, after a rain. I thought the lens had moisture on it, so I wiped it clean, and that took care of the problem.

When I took the daisy pic, there was no previous rain, and no wet foliage was nearby. So I looked at the lens closely and noticed it was smudged, and realized it had to be from my fingerprint! I immediately wiped it clean, and pics were clear from then on. I learned a lesson there, to watch carefully how I carry my camera from now on!

Well, I'm temporarily setting one of your fireworks pics as wallpaper for my laptop. It was hard to find one that worked w/o looking too blurry on my large screen. Seems that when they're enlarged, something happens to the resolution, and they don't look as nice as when they were small. But the first one turned out reasonably well. I like to change my wallpaper often on my laptop. It's fun experimenting.

This is the photo I've had on my desktop computer screen for the past month:
Painted Daisies
The image you see is actually a little wider on my screen. I cut off a little of the sides where the icons are located. The pink shading is created by my Camedia Master editing program.

O.K. enough chatting for now. I've got chores to do, and more garden pictures to take!

Julie


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

Thank you.

I used a window-pod at Eagle Lake and a tripod for the fireworks here.

Depending on the specific speed of the particular fireworks, a setting from 1 to 8 seconds was used. I used 2 second exposures for most of the photos. Yes, these are considered 'slow' shutter speeds.

I let the camera set the aperture for the first few photos, then I set it for a small aperture, or one with a large number. ie. f/1.4 is a large aperture and f/8 is a small aperture. The larger the number, the smaller the aperture and vice versa.

I like the smaller aperture since the depth-of-field increases, allowing for a better chance to get an 'in-focus' shot.

Normally, a large aperture will require a faster shutter speed, and a smaller aperture will require a slower shutter speed in order to allow enough light in to get a photo.

Yes, I also call them palm tree fireworks, and some I call willow tree fireworks. I posted some under the title 'Palm Trees' a few years ago on the Photography Forum.

There were a few people who took photos of the fireworks using tripods, and I saw several camera flashes going off throughout the show. A flash doesn't help nor hurt a photo of this type since the subject is too far away to be affected by the flash. I rarely, rarely, if ever, use a flash, even indoors.

I make the photos smaller before I post them so that no one can copy them and enlarge them and thus possibly sell them as their own.

If you let me know which one you want for your desktop, I can post it full size so it doesn't lose it's clarity.

That's a nice photo of the painted daisies. I like the way you put the border around them. I have seen you do this on many photos in the past also...very nice touch!

Those daisies look like they just got watered or perhaps some rain... We were lucky enough to get rain here yesterday, and a small shower now, which is why I am on the computer now.

Unfortunately, it is still bone-dry out in the country and I'm still watering daily. I skipped watering two nights ago to go to the fireworks show in Eagle Lake, but went there early yesterday morning and again last night. I will be headed down there again shortly...

Kt


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

I used to have all those aperture opening facts in my head when I used my 35mm camera. But now, since most everything is programmed on my digital, I've forgotten most of what you were describing. (a little dizzy here)
I'm sure it will all come back to me as soon as I start playing with different speeds and f-stops, as soon as I get a new camera, that is.

I make the photos smaller before I post them so that no one can copy them and enlarge them and thus possibly sell them as their own.
I didn't realize people did that sort of stuff!
There are some posters on the daylily forum who have their names, or a garden name on all their photos. I forget what the technique is called (I'm sure I printed it and it's in a folder somewhere,) but it looks like opaque embossed text, that you can see through to still enjoy the photo.

Oh, Yes, I'd very much like to use one of your photos for wallpaper for my laptop!
Let's see - which one.....hmmmmmm....this is hard to choose!......I keep changing my mind....picky, ain't I?
O.K. How 'bout the photo directly above the words, "From Tonight."

My photo of Painted Daisies was surely taken after a rain shower, back in early June during the deluge we got. The original photo file size is huge, thus shows much clearer on my desktop, than what you see in the sized-down image.

You sure are dedicated to keeping your plants watered! I don't blame you....I'd do the same. Around here the yard is drying out to the point that I've started using the sprinkler on my gardens. And I also pay close attention to all the newly planted things (that aren's established yet) to make sure they don't dry out. Just watered Green Panda, which still looks good, but doesn't seem to be growing much (probably IS underground though!)

Thanks again for sharing your photos!

Jule


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

This one?

Photobucket

or

Photobucket

Here are some more from Eagle lake...

Photobucket

Photobucket

Photobucket

Photobucket

Photobucket

Photobucket

Kt


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

That one, I mean two (that you resized bigger) is/are very pretty, but I meant the photo to the left of it.
BUT......I've changed my mind again (women do that a LOT, you know!)

When you get time (not tonight - get some rest!) Can you enlarge the second one down from "Here are some more from Eagle lake... "
( the one with the two 'white' willows and the higher pink fireworks in between?)
Take your time - no hurry!

Thanks for sharing more colorful pics!

Julie


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

...but I meant the photo to the left of it.

On my computer, the one that I posted is the one directly above the words, 'From tomight'. I guess that would explain why the pics didn't show 'side-by-side' like I intended them to, at least on my computer screen. Sorry...

Here, I'll try again...

Photobucket

Photobucket

Or like these, after some tone adjustments...

Photobucket

Photobucket

I hope I got them right this time.:) Well, I'm off to work. I'll be home in a few hours and check back in.

Something that I just noticed...I have a bunch of little 'specks' in the dark part of the photos. I need to go back and remove them for you, but don't have time right now. I'll repost later...

Kt


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

Ooooooooooo, I like!!!!!

Especially after the color adjustments!
The "palm tree" photo looks like the "trees" have leaves on them - not palm leaves, but some kind of little round leaves - nice effect!

The second "willow tree" photo is just awesome! (That's why I changed my mind, after you posted that second set.....and you prob'ly shouldn't post any more, or I'm likely to change my mind again.)

I will save those last two to my pictures album on my laptop, and occasionally use them as wallpaper. Hey maybe I can make some big money by selling them, too! JUST KIDDING!
You really don't have to brush out those little specks in the dark backgrounds. I just think of them as left over fireworks embers suspended in the sky. That's too much work - time consuming, I mean, esp. when you've got all that watering to do.

Thank you so much for letting me use your photos for my laptop decoration!

Jules


 o
Are you angry?

Kt,

I hope you realize that I was truly JUST KIDDING in the post above. Good Lord, I would never do anything like that, to you or anyone else.

You just seemed so strangely silent.....

Julie


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

I never thought twice about what you said. I know it was in fun. I have been just really busy here lately.

Still waiting on rain. I get up at 5:30 am, go to work, come home and water till dark. Last night I was leveling my driveway at 9:30pm by the light of the moon.

Firetrucks went out three times this morning, that I know of anyway.

Temp is now 98F here...I'm thinking of taking my next vacation on planet Mercury?

Anyway, don't worry. I know you well enough to know when you are joking, which like me, is most of the time...

Send us any extra rain and some cooler temps...

Kt


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

O.K. thanks for your response. I never know if I've sometimes gone too far with my joking. I'm paranoid about offending people, unless I'm flaming mad at them. Right now I'm furious with the U.S. Census Bureau, but I can't talk about it here.

I don't know how you can work those long hours in that high heat and humidity. You sure are dedicated to keeping your place looking good (I can only imagine), and keeping everything in good working condition.

Don't travel to Mercury - It'll take too long - besides, you'll melt before you reach Venus.

To make it rain, set your sprinkler out as soon as you see those clouds rolling in. Then when it starts to rain, keep that sprinker going! That's exactly what I just did about half an hour ago. Got a nice soft 15 minute rainfall out of the process.

As far as cooler temps, even if I bought the biggest fan I could at Farm & Fleet, brought it home, plugged it in, and pointed it in your direction, chances are that the prevailing westerlies would catch it and send it Sue's way.

Gotta make supper....

Julie


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

Hey, we actually got rain here around 6 o'clock. I decided to go to the country first to water since it was sprinkling here at the time, and when I returned, there was approximately 1/2 inch in the rain gauge, and that's including the little spiderweb that was already in there.

Can't tell it though...no water standing anywhere.

It thundered all around me at the country and lightning struck less than half a mile from me on a couple of occasions, but we only got a sprinkle. It poured on me twice on the way out there, so at least someone is getting it.

I hate to give up watering now and let everything die. That would mean that everything that I did everyday for the last two months would have been done for no reason. I keep thinking...just a couple more days...

It's been a very long two days.

Kt


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

Well, I'm a firm believer in "You reap what you sow."
So you have a good attitude not to give up your watering, as long as you don't collapse in the process! You will reap some beautiful established plants in the long run.

Say, sometime in the future, after you get some rain, or whenever you might have time, how 'bout photographing some of those plants you're watering out in the country (since this IS the "pesty photography student" post!)

Take care of yourself too!

Julie


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

Still bone dry...everything is turning to dust. It rains in small areas all around here, sometimes up to an inch, but usually less.

At my house, the grass is green again, at least for a while, but out at the country, I'm losing ground. Some native plants are dying everywhere which is extremely rare. I have lost countless oaks, many over 100 years old.

I can take some pics, but it's not like I have a victory garden or anything, just plants scattered here and there. Most are bamboos, the rest are palms, bananas, and trees.

Looks like we may have a hurricane in the gulf by the middle of next week, so maybe it will give us some rain.

Gotta go for now...I wonder how many posts are allowed. 100 or 150?

We'll see...

Kt


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

Glad to see you are still alive!
(I was beginning to wonder.) But I guess everyone's very busy during these summer months, doing whatever they can outdoors.

The "other side" of the test forum is very slow moving lately. I, myself, have been very busy posting pics with all the other hemeroholics on the daylily forum. Looking at everyone's pics is better than browsing through a catalog, because they all give tips on how well (or not) particular cultivars do in their gardens.....but I'd better not get started talking about daylilies....getting off track here.

I'm continuously baffled WHY you Southerners are suffering from this horrible extremely devistating drought, while we, in the midwest, (at least some people) have still not fully recovered from flooding. It rained here last night, misted on & off all day, and another round of severe T-storms is threatening to deluge us again tomorrow. Rain is nice, but the mosquitoes are not! I don't think the birds can eat them fast enough.

I have lost countless oaks, many over 100 years old.
That has to be heart-wrenching, to see a mighty oak lose it's foliage and die a slow death. Our neighbors have an almost dead Burr Oak next to their home. The neighbor lady is related to grandparents that used to farm about 80 acres and the old homestead is where we live now. She used to play under that Oak as a child. It's like losing a family member.

I wonder how many posts are allowed. 100 or 150?
I know on the discussion side we all got up to 150 once, but I don't know about this side. I'm sure we'll find out soon enough!

If you don't care to photograph your plants right now, I'd go for another moonscape (but only if you have some spare time.) I never tire of moon pics!

Julia


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

Storm(Dolly) in the Gulf, headed for Brownsville, giving us an 80 percent chance of rain here on Wednesday! I just hope I'm not in that dreaded 20 percent area.

Here is a pic I took this evening out at the country of one of my bamboos. I just watered it so you can see some water around the base of the plant. Notice the grass is all dead.
Photobucket

Here is one behind me as I took the first pic. You can see the water standing around the plant. Both of these are plants that I have to carry water to.
Photobucket

Here is one that I have planted near the front of my property. I carry water from the tank, in tubs, on my pickup to water these. You can see some green grass on the left that I have also been watering.
Photobucket

It's been sooo hot here, it appears that even the sun rising this morning was wearing a hat.
Photobucket

Here is a moon rise a few nights ago from the entrance to my place at the country.
Photobucket

Here is another taken the very next evening at the same time. The moon had a strange 'pink' colour to it.
Photobucket

And here's one taken the very next morning as I backed out of my driveway. It was just above the fence and between my cow pens and a tree. I knew it would be set before I drove down the road to get a good pic,...and it was.
Photobucket

Here's one taken of a thunderhead as I was watering the other evening. There was a lot of lightning inside the thunderhead and I could hear an occasional faint rumble.
Photobucket

Here's is one of the queen palms that I am watering in front of the same thunderhead.
Photobucket

Here is the thunderhead a few minutes later.
Photobucket

And again, even later.
Photobucket

See I never stop taking pictures. I constantly see something and grab my camera...then it's back to business. Kind of like a mini vacation, even though it only lasts for a few seconds.

Oh, and here's one more. I took this one earlier last week. It is taken through the limbs of one of those recently drought-killed 100+ year old oaks.
Photobucket

Kt


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

Well, Kt, you posted #101, so I guess this thread could go to 150! That scroll bar on the right is gettin' mighty small;)

Now to comment~
Wow, what a show you've put on!
Your Bamboo in the first picture makes a nice accent against the forest of trees. Looks like a person could get lost in those thick woods. Is the grass really dead, or has it just gone dormant? Around here, when we have hot, dry spells (usually in August) the grass turns brown and goes dormant, but comes back with the fall rains.

2nd pic ~ I think you told me once you have sandy soil there?

3rd pic ~ You need a bucket brigade!
You know, it's great that you're taking photos of these conditions, while your plants are young. When they're mature and established, you can be pleased with yourself for giving them the best care during the worst conditions, in order to nurture them along. I bet someday those bamboos will show off as great specimens.

"Hot" sun ~ There you go again with that vivid imagination!
Well, you're quite the HOT shot! (Impressive photo)

Moon shots ~ How very pretty, esp the Pink hue!
Ya, it seems that when the sun or moon gets close to the horizon, it sinks like a rock!

That thunderhead is nature's work of art, and you sure captured it well. Palm tree looks really tall!

Last photo ~ It's both pretty, and sad. The shining moon reminds me that the cycle of the heavenly bodies continues on and on, while the killed tree reminds me that the cycle of life experiences death and decomposition in nature, which is necessary in a mysterious sort of way.

Thanks for taking all that time to put that "slide" show together....you give me inspiration to get my act together and get going on getting a new camera and doing some practicing on landscapes, moon & sun shots, etc.

Here's a couple I'll share with you. I just got these cans free, and thought they'd make great garden accents. Do you know what kind of cans they are? I do.
Photobucket
Photobucket

Julie


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

Milk cans?
Super photos!!!
Victory Garden........yes, for wildlife ;-)


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

Terra,
No, not milk cans.
I like your comment about Kt's woods:
Victory Garden........yes, for wildlife

J.


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

They look like old semen storage tanks, used in cryogenics. Usually filled with liquid nitrogen and semen ampules, or more modern day straws.

Milk cans would have been my second guess also.

Kt


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

Semen tanks!?!?
Never heard of them, but then I never grew up on a farm....
Had to Google and found: Semen tanks
Now that makes sense.

Anyway, No, not old semen tanks.

Think: mechanics' garage.

J.


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

Think: mechanics' garage.

Well, if you're talking about mechanics down here, then I would have to say some type of beer storage tank...

Kt

P.S. Oil cans?


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...hot

...sandy soil there?

Some sandy but mostly hard clay. I have sandy soil here at my house.

...the grass really dead, or has it just gone dormant?

Well, some dies completely but comes back from seed. The rest goes dormant underground, but dies above ground. Almost everything there is native grass.

In the third photo, the grass is St. Augustine, which I water when I have some to spare after watering my other plants. That's the green patches around the green 5-gallon bucket.

To the left of the bamboo, are two stakes with green grass around them. The left stake is where I have an American Agave planted and the other is a Red Yucca, both are too small to see.

To the far right there is a black 25-gallon tub and another white 5-gallon bucket. Just to the left of them is an Afghan Pine Tree(again surrounded by green grass) and just out of the picture on the right is a small shrub that I got from the tree nursery across the creek from here.

The queen palm in the thunderhead photo, is about 14 feet tall now. I planted it last year when it was about 5 feet tall.

In your first pic of the 'mystery' can, I recognize the hostas but am not sure of the plant in the bottom middle,...looks kind of like a butterfly bush.

What is the tree in the second pic with the beautiful red/maroon leaves?

Kt


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

some type of beer storage tank...
Ha! I can believe that!

You're right, and they were made in the good ole' USA!!!!
Stamped on the top of the can that's not rusted out yet, are these words:
Columbian Steel Tank Co.
Screw Top Lube Oil Can
Kansas City, U.S.A.
Capacity 10 liquid gallons

History

There is no year stamped, that I can find, but it's very old. My B-in-law said they used to store kerosene in one of them. They've been sitting in storage at hubby's business, and when I found out they had 'em and weren't usin' 'em, I snatched 'em up!

Julie


 o
Watch the second hand.

It now takes 31 seconds to load this thread.
Imagine if I were still on dial-up!
How long does it take all of you who are reading this thread?

J.


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

Hit: post a follow-up and I am there.......cable :)
1/2" of rain.....= :)


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

Oh goodness! Terra! You are so lucky to hit: post a follow-up and you're there...lucky you!
I see you're smiling over the 1/2" of rain.
I'm tired of rain!

Oh goodness, KT!
I just now came back to see what's going on here, and realize that I was busy typing while you posted just three minutes before me (at 14:18, which is really 2:18, which is really 1:18 CST.) Anyway, you must think I ignored your post when I posted at 14:21, when in reality, I didn't see it until NOW! Talk about slow reaction on my part! Geeezze...

I never heard of an Afghan Pine Tree. Must be a variety that doesn't survive up here in zone 5. Hope you get some rain soon to give you a break from all that watering!

In my first photo w/the rusty can, that indeed is a butterfly bush, new this year. I've never had a butterfly bush before, because they're somewhat tender in windy sites. But the local nursery I bought it from said it's a hardy variety that behaves like a perennial, dying to the ground in the winter, then sending up new growth in the Spring. That whole section of garden is new, except for the three Burning Bushes (the ones with the dark green leaves.) The Hostas are all new this year, that's why they look so small. I have learned to give Hostas the space they need because when they mature, they will overlap, if not given ample room.

The tree with purple leaves in the second photo is an Ornamental Plum. No idea which variety...Prunus something or other...it was already planted there when we bought the house. In Spring the flowers are VERY fragrant, and perfume the air around the outside of the house - marvelous!
You can see all the suckers coming up around the ground near the trunk. I cut them back once, but with all the rain we've had, they're springing up again!

Here's an example of Hostas planted too close. They're overlapping each other, and some of the smaller ones are being smothered:
Photobucket

This garden is more properly planted:
Photobucket

So in a couple of years, the photo w/the rusty oil can will be filled in nicely, with no crowding. It took me several years to figure out how to give plenty of space between newly planted Hostas.

Julie


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

Nice hostas! I like them planted too close like that.

I found only one house in town that possibly has hostas in their garden. I will get a closer look one day when I have more time.

The Afghan Pine was a gift from a fellow bamboo grower. I had never heard of it before either. I had it in a pot for about three years but finally put it in the ground and it has started to really take off. It should prove to be an interesting tree.

Butterfly bushes freeze to the ground here each year also, at least the varieties that I have/had.

I tried a burning bush here but it must have been too hot, and it eventually died. Strange...too hot for a burning bush...that sounds kind of funny.

That ornamental plum might survive here, I will have to research the exact type.

Kt


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

Finally bought my new toy. A friend of mine's hubby had a Canon Rebel which I saw last summer and liked, so decided to get one myself. I can't remember exactly which model he had, but I did a little research, and decided to get the Canon EOS XS, since it was right around my price range that I was willing to spend.

However, things seldom go as planned in my life. The store where I was shopping didn't have the XS in yet, because it's a new version, which they will have in stock some time in the future. the XTi has been discontinued, according to the sales man (gosh he was young!) They also didn't have the XT, which is supposedly very light weight, and I would have been happy with.

So guess what was left - the Canon EOS Rebel XSi. It was a little more than I intended to pay, but DH gave me an "I don't care if you pay $------" limit, so that's exactly what I did. I also didn't feel like shopping around.

Anyway, this new piece of technology is a little overwhelming, so I'm taking it very slow. The first day I brought it home, all I managed to do was attach the strap. The second day I did a lot of reading, charged up the battery, inserted the memory card, and got the software loaded. I then followed the manual in the first basic picture taking instructions, and set the camera to fully automatic. Then went out and took a whole lotta pics around the yard, just to get the feel of the camera. The pics are not good enough to show anyone, because it was very sunny, and my photos were full of unwanted shadows. But my intention was, like I said, to get the feel of the camera. It actually reminds me a little of my old Minolta 35 mm film camera. I was surprised at the loud shutter "click" compared to my Olympus.

It's so very hard to take the needed time to learn all the different features of this camera, when I have so many other obligations that take top priority right now, so I will have to practice in little steps.

It came with a basic generic/beginner lens. Let me see...it says EFS 18-55 mm...whatever that means.

Question for you: Do I need to purchase a zoom lens...wait a minute, I think I mean telephoto lens, to take photos of the moon? I can still afford to purchase another lens.

Appreciate any advice you can give me,

Julie


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

WOW! Congratulations! That is a very nice camera.

I haven't researched that one in a lot of detail, but from what I've read, it is very nice! I put camera research on the back burner for a while. It seems to be a very easy to use camera for point and shoot ease.

Over 12 megapixels?...WOW! I like the 3 inch LCD monitor.

Canon EOS Rebel XSi

Seems that it only has a 1/60 minimum shutter speed? Is that right? That might be a restraint for some extreme photography.

Do I need to purchase a zoom lens...

Yes, you might consider getting a good one.

I have a 28-200mm and a 75-200mm lens that I used more than anything else, with my Canon A-1s. They were the most versatile. One had a macro setting, which allowed extreme close-ups, and also did great for all around photography.

It was good for moon shots, but you might want a stronger lens for real close-ups, but with 12+ megapixels, you should be able to crop and enlarge the picture and get a crisp clear photo.

I think I mentioned before here, or on another forum, that an SLR requires too many lenses for me to take with me everyday, which is why I bought the camera that I have, which allows good zoom and semi-pro adjustments.

Things may be different now with all of the new technology out there, but I think that a telephoto zoom lens, somewhere in the 28 - 200mm range with a macro ring, would be a great investment. The reason being, that way you can take extreme close-ups, you can take normal range photos, and also take zoomed in photos, although the zoom capability is not real strong, but satisfactory.

I think they now have 28-300 zoom available, but I could be wrong. I will have to research that.

I have a dozen or more lenses for my old Canon A-1s, but used the 28-200 lens the most. I used them in combination with extension tubes and magnifying lens covers for some real interesting photography. Filters, such as a polarizing filter) are also a must with my old A-1s, but with digital cameras, they may not be a necessity. The new digitals seem to allow and compensate for color, tone, and contrast adjustments.

I will look into the lenses more tomorrow and get back with you. It was another very long day here and I'm a bit worn out at the moment. I think that if you get a good zoom lens, in the 28 to 200+ range, that you will be very satisfied. My lenses are both very long and bulky, but I saw where they had new ones out that were much more compact and lightweight, but then I got away from SLR's and haven't kept up, but I imagine that there are some nice ones out there. I'll let you know what I find.

Once again, congratulations...now I don't only have Green Panda envy...I have camera envy! Enjoy!

Kt


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

Thanks for your response, Kt!
You sure gave a lot of valuable info, and I appreciate you doing that, especially after a long day.

That link you supplied is very thorough in its description of the Xsi! Didn't read all of it, but browsed through most of it.

Seems that it only has a 1/60 minimum shutter speed? Is that right? That might be a restraint for some extreme photography.
You had me scared there for a minute. I just browsed through my manual, and found some info under "shooting tips." There is a small dial on top of the camera which, when turned to the right, sets a faster shutter speed.....left = slower. They gave examples of setting the shutter speed to 1/15 sec. or slower for blurring a water fountain, or setting the speed to 1/500 to 1/4000 for freezing a moving subject. So I think I've got a satisfactory range of shutter speeds.

They also talk about ISO speed, which at this point is still over my head. Good Lord, what have I gotten myself into?

I should have lots of time this winter to study this camera, and practice, then maybe be able to photograph the moon. BTW, I can't even SEE the moon lately! I know there was a total solar eclipse a few days ago that could only be seen in Northern Canada, Siberia, etc., so that means that the moon is still quite close to the sun, as viewed in the sky. I couldn't even see it set last night, because of the cloud cover. But supposedly, yesterday, only 2% of the moon crescent is visible anyway.

Alrighty now, you lost me when you were talking about lenses. I'm going to have to read all that again a little later. Is a zoom lens the same thing as a telephoto lens, or are they two different things? And why do you need a macro ring if you can already zoom?

I guess what I'm asking is, what's the difference between zoom, telephoto, and macro?

And take your time answering, esp. if you've had long, hard-working days! I haven't even figured out how to download the pics I took onto my computer yet!

OH! One more question (sorry)....does your camera have a battery that you have to recharge? This one does, and it takes about two hours to recharge it if it's totally exhausted. If you do have a rechargeable battery, how long does it last, and (one last question from your pest-of-a-student), do you remove your battery from your camera when you're not using it?

There. I'm finished asking all these beginner questions, at least for the time being.

Julie


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

A telephoto lens has a set focal length, whether it be 28mm or 200mm. It is set at that particular strength and cannot be changed.

A zoom lens allows for varying focal lengths.

A lens that is 50mm usually takes photos close to actual size. A 28mm will give you a wide-angle shot, kind of like looking through a pair of binoculars backwards, the image is smaller and farther away allowing more in the photo.

A 200mm lens will make the subject look closer than it is in real life. The image is magnified.

A zoom lens, ie. 28mm - 200mm, will allow you to set the focal length anywhere in that range, without changing lenses. Am I explaining that OK?

I used to use a 400mm lens also, but had to use a tripod.

My old 28 - 200mm lens is about 7 inches long but varies as I zoom it. It was quite bulky. They make them much shorter now, probably half that length.

A neat little device that I purchased is a 2X multiplier. It is put between the camera and any lens, and it doubles the magnification of that lens. It saves a lot of money as compared to buying many extra lenses.

So your 18 - 55mm would be like having a 36 - 110mm lens, without the cost of buying a whole new lens. The only drawback to the 2X multiplier is that it decreases the amount of light passing though the lens and may make some late evening shots just a hair darker so you will have to compensate and lengthen your shutter speed, if you're not using the auto setting.

The ISO(aka ASA) is your film speed. ISO 50 is for really bright conditions or for fast shots such as freezing something that is moving really fast. ISO 800 is for nighttime and slow shots.

The drawback of using ISO 800 is it makes the picture 'noisey' or have graininess in it. It is fun to experiment with, but you might want to set this feature to AUTO until you get comfortable with the rest of the camera.

I almost always set mine on ISO 100, for the reason of having sharp pictures under all conditions. Some disagree, but many years ago I took some pics of a comet, and when I got the pics developed, they were all grainy, and the comet had long passed, so I could not get anymore pics. If I would have used ISO100, I could have adjusted my aperture and shutter speed and gotten a crisp picture...oh well, live and learn.

Since there was a solar ecilpse, that means that the moon was 'New', so we should start to see a thin slice of the moon late in the evening just around sundown starting tonight. Each night it will be a bit fuller and higher in the sky until it is full and rises in the east as the sun sets in the west.

So, back to lenses. A macro setting or ring as I called it before, is for taking extreme close-ups, like looking through a microscope, but maybe not that powerful. It is not just a lens taking a photo a few inches from the subject, but it also magnifies it some giving crisp magnified photos, such as a photo of an entire insect's head, etc.

Extention tubes are also great for getting extreme close-ups.

Here is a macro photo that I saved from somewhere a while back.
Photobucket

Here are some pics taken with different focal length lenses just to give you an idea. It looks like the 210 is a powerful zoom, but it looks that way since the 28mm pic is actally making the pic look farther away, so don't think that a 210mm is going to give you powerful zoom capabilites, but it will increase your magnification.

28mm
Photobucket

50mm
Photobucket

70mm
Photobucket

210mm
Photobucket

Yes, I have rechargeable batteries. It is a good idea to have more than one so that your photography session doesn't get interrupted. I had as many as five, when we went on vacation several years ago, and I purchased a recharger that plugs into the auto cigarette lighter, that way I could be charging while we drove from one place to another and always have a battery that was ready.

I made a mistake and bought some cheaper, off-brand batteries that worked great for about three charges, then they only lasted about 20 minutes. Even the original Nikon batteries lasted only about 30 minutes after they were used and charged many times. One battery went bad and didn't work at all.

I recently purchased two new ones and they last days under normal use. I guess the technology has gotten much better since my original purchase some years ago.

Yes, they take around 2 hours to charge.

Well, gotta go back to work...

I'll check back later.

Kt


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

First of all, Kt, I think you could very well write a book on photography, or at least a manual for "Dummies" like me!

You are very kind to take time out of your busy schedule to type all that info, plus the great photo examples! I transfered all of your post to a document (4 pages worth!) and printed it to keep in my Photography folder for easy reference.

Now, I think I finally understand the different types of lenses. Will I remember all you described enough to explain it to someone else? No, but at least I have it all copied to go back over it when I need to. So then, I should look for a zoom lens somewhere in the range of 28 mm - 200 mm, and I should be happy as a clam with that range, if I understood you correctly. The zoom lens that the salesman briefly showed me was aprox. 4" high, roughly, but I'm sure it will still be somewhat bulky in my hands. Might have to get a better tripod. I only bought a cheap one, and it doesn't even extend up to my height!

The ISO (film speed) is something I look forward to experimenting with, as soon as I figure out how to change the settings.

Macro rings, 2x Multipliers, and Extension tubes, huh?
I can understand why a lot of money can be tied up in good equipment for a serious photographer!

Thanks for the photo examples! Love the macro-bug!

Will probably add an extra battery to my shopping list too!

Finally downloaded all my experiment photos to my computer. That's another thing I will need practice with - It's so different than my Olympus camera photo program.

I'll show you a couple of my quick shots I took of two of my gardens. I was actually impressed that they turned out sort-of-O.K. with the crazy combination of sun and shade.

This first photo was originally over 5 MB. I think I first focused on the sky for light, then lowered the cameral to snap the yard:
Photobucket

This next one was originally over 8MB (huge! - must be because of the 12.2 MB camera?)
Photobucket
A little blurry, but not bad for auto focus and auto everything else, huh?

My eyeballs are about ready to fall out from reading the tiny print in the tiny manual.

Thanks again for all your expert help!

Jule


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

You're welcome but I hardly consider it 'expert' help;)

I try to explain it in a way easier to understand. Most manuals that I read are very difficult to comprehend, at least for me, and I wind up reading them over and over before it soaks in.

Nice pictures! Looks like walnut trees in the first pic. What is the small tree/shrub to the left center of the first pic?

Your flowers are beautiful! You have them planted in a nice arrangement. The colours are mixed evenly which must have taken some time to carefully place them that way. Very nice.

Yes, if you don't want to spend a lot of money on a bunch of different lenses, then buy one good zoom lens, like the 28-200mm we talked about above. I could have saved myself some money if I would have done that. I bought my zoom lens after I purchased a few other lenses, which I rarely, if ever, used after buying the zoom lens.

They may have stronger zooms available now, such as 28-300mm, or somewhere in that range, which would be a much better buy, but remember, a stronger zoom makes the lens longer. Now I'm interested in a new camera...I will have to start doing more research on cams and what lenses are available these days.

Don't forget the 2X multiplier. There may even be a 3X multiplier out there, that's something else I'll have to research.

I'll keep you posted if i find anything new out.

Have fun with that camera!

Kt


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

OK, I just looked at a few lenses on the Canaon website, they do have a 28-300mm zoom.

How cool would it be to have a 10-22mm, a 24-105mm and a 100-400mm zoom? That way you could have the full range from 10mm to 400mm, plus using the 2X multiplier, you could have a range from 10 to 800mm! Sadly, though, the stronger lenses get quite expensive, or at least they used to be.

Canon Lenses

Something else to think about, be sure that the lens you buy will fit your particular camera.

I purchased a couple of different brand lens since the price was much cheaper than the Canon lenses, which is also something you might want to look into, as long as the lenses are compatible with your camera.

Kt


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

It is now taking long enough to load this thread, for me to go to the kitchen and get a snack to bring back!

Anyway, the more you teach me, the more questions I have (I've said that before.) Does Canon sell its own brand of the 2X Multiplier, or can you get a generic type? Not that I want to get one right away, but just thought I'd ask, for future reference.

Thanks for the link to the Canon lenses! The 28-300mm lens looks to small of a diameter to fit my camera, but the 28-200mm lens looks about the right size. I did a search as to where I could buy one, and was surprised that Sam's Club carries them, along with Wal Mart. Sam's Club would probably be the cheapest, if they actually have it in stock.

Now for a couple more photos, since I ran out of time last night. (I did send them to a photo editing program to upgrade the contrast a little, since it looses some color when I downsize for posting here.)

Since this camera is heavier than my Olympus, I feel I have some camera shake. To me, this pic could be clearer:
Photobucket
This one's a little better, but of course, it's closer, and I think that makes a difference:
Photobucket
I wanted to show you one more with a crazy light situation. With the sun shining, there are many bright spots, which my Olympus wouldn't have handled as well as the Canon.
Photobucket
With a view like that, I would normally wait for a cloudy day, but I was just experimenting, so these are all just test pics.

Julie


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

I'm picky about 'off' brands so I make sure they are up to par before I purchase anything.

I'll look what brand mine is tonight, along with some of the other lenses, etc.

You're doing fine with taking those photos. You will learn to adjust the lighting and colour as you take more pics. A lot can be done with the computer also.

Still wondering what kind of shrub/tree that is...? Did you miss my first post...maybe...?

Kt


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

Just got back from "window shopping" for lenses.
So now this pest has more questions.

But first and foremost, STAY SAFE! I just read your post over on the other side about Hurricane E. headed your way. I hope you get lots of rain out of it w/o any damage to your home, yourself, your cattle, or your plants!

Secondly, I assume you will be taking "hurricane" precautions, boarding things up and all, so PLEASE, don't feel you need to answer me right away!

Thirdly, about the shrub - Sorry, I just plum forgot about that (too much camera stuff buzzin' around in my head.) There are actually three of them planted in sort of a triangle, but my picture only shows one. It's a Viburnum dentatum, 'Ralph Senior' Autumn Jazz. The leaves turn a beautiful combination of gold, orange, and red in the fall. They are extremely hardy, growing in rather poor soil. I had to water heavily the first couple of years to get them established, but rarely water them anymore, so they're pretty much on their own. The shrubs are supposed to produce white flowers in the Spring, followed by blue berries, but I seldom see that, prob'ly since they don't get as much sun as they should.

Fourthly - (1st question) Where would I shop for a 2X Multiplier ring if I were to get one? The guys at the stores I visited today never heard of such a thing. I suppose I'd have to visit a regular camera shop?

Fifthly - (2nd question) Concerning lenses, what's better for long shots, such as landsacpes, sunsets, moon shots, etc., a Telephoto lens, or a Zoom Telephoto lens? This is what I found at two stores (haven't gone to Wal Mart yet - I hate our Wal Mart, but that's a whole different subject.)....

Best Buy:
Canon EF-S 55-250mm telephoto zoom lens $349, w/image stabalizer.
The sales person said that this one would be better for photographing the moon than this next one:

Canon EF 28-135 zoom lens, $585. (yikes!)
Better for close-ups, according to salesperson.

Circiut City:
Canon EF-S 55-250mm telephoto zoom $329 (same one Best Buy has, only $20 cheaper.)

Canon EF 75-300mm zoom w/o image stabalizer $229.
(I really think I need an image stabalizer!)

And they (Circuit City) said they could order the one you suggested, 28-200 zoom w/image stabalizer for $449. (yikes again!)

That first one at Best Buy looks pretty good to me, but,
(Third question) what would I be missing by not having that 28-200mm range, instead of the 55-250mm range?

O.K. enough questions for now. Thanks so much for being patient with me and all my beginner questions.

Again, don't be in a hurry to answer me when you've got a hurricane on the way.....take care of your protection needs first!

Julie


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

Thanks for the concern, but I really don't think the storm will be much and will probably turn away from here although they are still predicting the eye to pass directly over us here. They are predicting 4+ inches of rain for here, but as I said, I won't believe it until it's raining.

We need 6 to 8 inches a month from June to August and at the country, we have only had 3/10ths, and that's exaggerating a bit. It is dust dry out at the country but we did have some rain here a week or so ago, but it has since dried up again.

I spent the evening covering the outside of my house where the walls haven't been replaced yet, and covering my shed out at the country. I only watered a few very needy plants there, so I hope it rains tomorrow, or they will be gone by the time I get down there tomorrow evening.

I have 100 gallons of fresh water for drinking and such in case the electricity goes out for a lengthy period of time, oh, and I have plenty of peanut butter and crackers:)

Thanks for the answer on the plant(s). No wonder I couldn't id it,...it was more than one plant! I used to have some Viburnums here, but don't remember the variety. I think we have some at work in our flower bed. I want to try something like that one day. I used to have three different coloured butterfly bushes growing together, they bloomed red, white, and blue. Very neat looking.

OK, back to cameras.

I looked them up on the net and I think they may call them converters, sorry for the confusion. Multiplier is a better term since it multiplies, or doubles the focal length of the lens.

Mine is a Soligar 2X. I bought most of my equipment from a man that worked at a Ritz Camera Store in College Station many years ago. He moved to Houston, so I started going there, then he was transferred to somewhere up north. Anyway, he really knew his camera equipment, and I trusted him to sell me only the best.

I always wanted to get second 2x multiplier, oooops, I mean 2X converter, and use them together and double a second time, but that would change the f-stop and allow less light in and make the picture a bit more blurry, but on a bright day, it should work fine.

...what's better for long shots, such as landsacpes, sunsets, moon shots, etc...

Well, like I mentioned above, I really liked the 28-200mm zoom, and once I put it on my camera, I rarely took it off to use other lenses. I only used other lenses for some extreme photography. I preferred it for everything, moonshots, sunrises & sunsets, day and night photos, etc.

Something to remember---> The thing about a telephoto lens as compared to a zoom lens, is that the zoom lens has more lenses inside of it which cuts back on the amount of light that reaches the camera. In most cases, the difference is undetectable or can be compensated for by longer exposures or larger aperture settings.

A 2X multi...er, converter is another lens added, so it will also do the same, just something to think about.

I did use my 135mm telephoto lens for some of the comet photos that I took, since I was using 800 ISO and thought that it might help with lighting, but there was no difference between the photos taken with the zoom or the telephoto, probably since they were longer exposures, some 8 seconds.

Something to remember---> The wider the outside lense, the better f-stop you will have. My camera came with a 52mm(standard) size lens, that's the width of the outside lens(does that make sense?). My zoom has a 72mm outside lens which allows in more light for shorter exposures. I may have to explain this more later.

I also have a Canon 100-300mm zoom lens. I bought it toward the end of my SLR film camera usage, so I didn't use it as much, and when walking though the woods, and I would want to take a close-up of a flower or insect, etc., then the lens was too strong. I would have to change to a shorter focal length,...like the 28-200mm zoom. So you see what I mean by the 28-200mm being quite versatile.

The 100-300mm has a smaller outside lens size(diameter) so it needs a longer exposure to let in more light in low light situations as compared to the 28-200mm with the 72mm diameter. Again, I will have to talk about this more later on.

Lens covers, such as polarizing filters, are something that we might need to talk about later. The digital SLR's may compensate for this though.

OK, back to your question on telephoto and zoom telephoto lenses. A zoom, gives you the capability to bring your subject in closer, thus cutting from view something unwanted, or the zoom can be 'zoomed-out' to bring more of the surroundings into your photo. With a telephoto lens, you are stuck at that power, what you see through the camera is what you get, it cannot be changed. However, having said all of that, now that you have a digital, some cropping can be done on your computer, which I could not do with my 35mm camera, that makes up some for NOT having a zoom. (Now that HAD to confuse you, yes?)

...what would I be missing by not having that 28-200mm range, instead of the 55-250mm range?

Actually, the 55-250mm might be better since you have a more powerful zoom, but I liked the 28mm on the low end, since it gave me the opportunity for a wide angle shot, which I sometimes needed in a tight area where there is not much distance between the camera and the subject. That decision will have to be yours.

I like powerful lenses, so the stronger, the better, but I also need a good short lens such as a 28mm for those tight shots, so it's always a delicate balance of what you will take pics of the most. So, now, if I had to have just two lenses out of the ones that I own, I would pick the 28-200mm zoom and the 100-300mm zoom. That way, along with the 2X converter/multiplier, I have a full range from 28mm to 600mm, all with just two lenses. To get that range with plain telephoto lenses, you would have to have several, and you still might not get the photo just like you want it.

You mentioned an image stabilizer on the lens from CC,...I was wondering if your camera had an image stabilizer on it?

I like the new digital cameras that aren't SLR for the reason that they tell you exactly what power the camera lens is. I bought mine with a device similar to a 2X conv./mult. but it fits on the end of the lens and it also doubles the power of the camera lens. I always had a problem knowing what 'power' a 200mm lens was. Apparently there is no set comparison. It must vary a bit, so what power is a 200mm lens?...I still don't know.

Lastly, don't jump into buying a lens, as you know, they can be quite pricey. Make sure you find the right lens for your needs, then look maybe for an off brand that is of equal quality that might be lower in price. Personally, I like Canon and all of their products, but sometimes money needs to be considered.

After reading this, you are probably totally confused...sorry. Just re-ask me on the parts that I confused you on and I'll try to explain it in more detail.

This, by far, has been my longest post ever! I wanted to respond since I may lose contact with the net for a while and didn't want to keep you waiting.

Whew...I need some ice cream...

Kt


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

My cup runneth over!
You're giving me so much good info, I can't take it all in, in one reading! I read it last night, but my head started swimming, so decided to read it again this morning.

First of all, about the Viburnum ~ I didn't mean that the three shrubs were planted CLOSELY together in a triangle. There's about 10 feet between each one of them. The photo I took showed only one of them.

2X Converter ~ thanks for that info, I'll do some research on that.

At this point, as I re-read your post, I don't know what size my lens is, as far as the outside lens measurement. No separate booklet for that particular lens came with the camera kit. All I know is, it's an EFS 18-55mm zoom lens, w/image stabilizer. A product overview lens booklet was included, briefly describing features of many different lenses - single focal-length and zoom. I see that mine has a filter size of 58 mm. Is that the size the lens is when you talk about outside measurement?

I now understand your explanation of zoom (bringing the subject closer/farther), and telephoto (stuck w/that power).
BUT, what confuses me is why a lens can be called a telephoto zoom lens. (Instead of just a zoom lens, or just a telephoto lens.) As I said before, the lens that somewhat attracted me was the first one I listed in my previous post, the Canon EF-S 55-250mm telephoto zoom lens $349, w/image stabalizer. So is that lens a combination of both zoom and telephoto features?

I realize I wouldn't be able to take close-up photos with that one, but I still have my 18-55 for close-ups. And yes, I realize I'd have to change lenses back and forth.

I just don't know if hubby would let me pay $449+tax for a 28-200mm lens. The 55-250mm lens for $349 is a little easier to swallow.

You mentioned an image stabilizer on the lens from CC,...I was wondering if your camera had an image stabilizer on it?
I don't think so. The image stabilizer is on the lens, and there's an on/off switch for it on the lens.

I understamd your advise about not jumping into buying a lens until I decide exactly what I want, then shop around for an off brand of equal quality w/lower price. BUT I'm still confused about lens sizes (diameters?) so I wouldn't know if an off brand's lens size is compatible with my camera. I don't even know if I said that right!

Well, Kt, thanks for taking all that time last night to post your valuable info. I realize Hurricane E is on its way, so you may not be able to respond for a while. That's quite alright. Just take care of yourself and your household!

Julia


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

Just a quick post...

All I know is, it's an EFS 18-55mm zoom lens...

I see, so you already have the lower end zoom covered, so a 55-250mm WOULD be better than a 28-200mm lens. Understand? 18-55, then 55-250, so 18 to 250.

Telephoto lens is like being compared to a pair of binoculars(that aren't zoom). They bring the subject closer(telephoto), but are fixed at that power. Does that help any?

Gotta go for now.

No wind or rain here yet, but things are really quiet...

Kt


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

OK, back again for a bit.

Continuing with my previous post from this morning,...With a 2X converter, you could have up to a 500mm lens...not too shabby. Defintitely get a 55-250 before you get a 28-200, since you already have the lower end covered with the 18-55mm.

The outside or external lens size (52mm, 58mm, 72mm, etc) does not matter except for the amount of light entering the lens. The bigger the opening, the more light coming in allowing for a better sharper and quicker photo.

I think some of the Olympus lenses will fit directly to Canon SLR cameras. Sometimes an adapter is needed to use different brand lenses, but mine fit like a regular Canon lens.

I looked at my 28-200mm lens and it is a Sears brand and has done very well for me and if I remember correctly, it was a little over half of what the similar Canon lens cost at that time.

I also have a Vivitar telephoto lens that worked well for me.

Oh, and a lens can be a zoom lens, but not necessarily telephoto, but it can be a zoom and telephoto. If it doesn't magnify, then it's not telephoto but can still zoom from wide-angle to normal for example. I hope that didn't confuse you more.

Kt


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

Sorry to hear you didn't get the rain you hoped for (read the temp post on the other side.)

Now then, back to lenses. I was reading about teleconverters here, and it blew my mind away, with all the technical stuff it talked about. I think that may be something to look at down the road.

Yes, it makes sense to me, to get the 55-250 telephoto zoom lens. It's affordable, in fact it just went on sale at Best Buy. Ha! guess what...I just went to Sears' site and they have the same lens for $15 cheaper! Maybe I oughta try WalMart - the store I hate!

Now then, my brain still can't comprehend the difference between zoom and telephoto. Well, I get it a little bit. So, telephoto brings an object closer. I get that. But don't understand what you mean by "fixed at that power." And Zoom in means you can sort of crop out unwanted surroundings, or zoom out to include them?

Question: When I take off the outside lens cap, I see 58mm printed on the lens. Is that the lens size?

Oh, and I don't have any extra lenses that came with my Olympus camera, in fact that type of camera won't take other lenses at all. I dug out my old Minolta to see if I could use any of the filters with my Canon, but not a chance - different sizes altogether.

DH suggested I look on Ebay for lenses. Hmmmmmmm, I've never bought anything off Ebay before, and don't know if I want something that's used when it comes to camera stuff.

O.K. that's all for now.
Thanks for your patience in trying to get throught this thick skull of mine to my slow working brain!

Jule


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

The pics from the Wikipedia page that I posted the other night, also has an explanation of telephoto lenses but it even confused me, but here is a worded definition that makes sense..."Telephoto and other long-focal-length lenses are best known for making distant objects appear magnified Does that help?

That teleconverter site, that you posted, explains exactly what I was trying to say yesterday, but I noticed that the 2X converter shown there, is larger than mine, looks twice as thick as mine, but then mine is not a Canon.

Now, the 55-250mm that you show is shorter than my 28-200mm, but then mine has a much wider lens(72mm) and also has a macro setting. I think mine has a different f-stop number, which is no big deal, especially since yours will have an image stabilizer.

Be sure and put a lens filter on ALL your lenses for protection. I have an adjustable polarizing filter on my 28-200mm zoom, but since your camera is a digital, I don't think you will need a polarizing filter, just a plain clear one for lens protection.

The reason being, if the lens gets scratched, it is basically ruined, particularly if the scratch is deep enough. If you scratch the lens filter,then it is much cheaper to replace it than the whole lens.

I have heard bad things about stuff bought on Ebay but not about camera lenses, and like you said, a camera lens is something that you want to be sure and get a good one especially if you are dishing out a lot of money for it, plus you may not get a warranty with an Ebay lens.

I don't mind answering your questions at all, I just don't have a talent for explaining what my brain is thinking. Putting my thoughts into understandable words for others to comprehend sometimes is a problem for me.

You are always welcome to ask more questions. Heck, I owe you more for your professional online guitar lessons!

Kt


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography studeMnt...

...continued...Sorry to hear you didn't get the rain you hoped for (read the temp post on the other side.)

???????

Kt


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

Be sure and put a lens filter on ALL your lenses for protection
Makes sense! I seem to remember puting a lens filter on my Minolta camera lens. I'll add that to my next shopping list. I already bought an extra battery. Pricey darn thing!

Thanks for clearing up the telephoto/zoom feature. I'm getting it now.

O.K. wise one, thanks for all your info, but you forgot to answer my question from my last post:
When I take off the outside lens cap, I see 58mm printed on the lens. Is that the lens size?
You're getting as forgetful as me, forgetting to answer your first question about the shrubs!
(Just messin' with ya.)

Julie


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

Top o' the mornin' here.
I must have been typing while you were posting your last message last night.

Not sure what you mean by ???????
But I'll take a shot at it. The trouble with cyber space is that you can't HEAR a person talk. I think that you thought I said, "(You) read the 'What's your temp?' post on the discussion side on the test forum."
What I was actually saying (in a slang sort of way) was, "I read (past tense) your message in the 'What's your temp?' post"
Sorry! I sometimes get caught in a mind frame of talking with a person as if they're sitting in the same room with me.

Oh, and BTW, Re: You are always welcome to ask more questions. Heck, I owe you more for your professional online guitar lessons!
I hardly think so! I think it's the other way around. I owe YOU more, because you're coaching me in TWO areas: Bamboo care & photography.

So, anyway, back to my original question, is the lens filter size the same as the outside or external lens size?

Julie


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

Yes, you are correct. You meant 'read' and I thought you meant 'read':)

Kt


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

O.K. Glad we got the 'read' straightened out.

Now back to my question:
Is the lens filter size the same as the outside or external lens size? Mine says 58mm.

Julie


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

Yes, that is your lens diameter, and that is the size filter you will need to buy to use as a lens protector.

I don't know that you will need any filters for special effects since you have a digital SLR. My digital does a lot of special filtering on it's own and also manually.

I have several for my old 35mm cameras. Starburst, polarizing, non-glare, and oh, I used pantyhose for a 'fog' effect, and it worked great!

Sorry for the late reply. I kept getting side-tracked and then I would forget. The watering is taking up too much of my time. I have muscles in my arms and shoulders, that I forgot that I had, and my stamina has gotten somewhat better, so I'm getting a workout at the same time, but I'd still rather be doing something else.

Kt


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

I have muscles in my arms and shoulders, that I forgot that I had, and my stamina has gotten somewhat better, so I'm getting a workout at the same time
Similar situation here, except the muscles in my arms and shoulders aren't the ones getting the workout, it's my leg muscles that are getting stronger from all the walking uphill with a full load in my wheelbarrow. I can go up and down stairs almost as if I were still a teenager!

Back to camera stuff~
I should be all set for the time being. Bought the lens I had my eye on, the 55-250mm (on sale, too!) Also got two UV filters, one for the lens that came w/the camera, and one for the new lens. Also, I absolutely had to have a star filter. It was my favorite filter when I used my old Milolta 35mm film camera.

It will be slow going, learning how to use the functions on this camera. I feel like I'm working on a mini computer. I have so many irons in the fire right now, so it may be quite a while before I'm ready to shoot the moon.

Well, thanks again Kt, for all the great info you've shared with me. If I get stumped on something, I'll be sure to pester you some time in the near future for advise and tips!

Julie


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

You're welcome.

It's no problem, I just hope I was able to really help. It is easier sometimes, at least for me, to learn from talking with someone than from reading it from a manual.

One thing, does the new lens that you ordered have the same size diameter as your present lens?

Kt


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

One thing, does the new lens that you ordered have the same size diameter as your present lens?
Yes, sir! 58mm
J.


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

Great. Remember, different lenses can have different size diameters.

Kt


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

Yes, I remember you saying that before. One thing about my camera, is that it is compatible with all Canon lenses in the EF and EF-S lineup. For example, this one would fit on my camera, too....82mm filter size - wow!

Oh, and remember my famous last words?
I should be all set for the time being.
Thought I wouldn't buy another thing for my camera.
BUT I just realized I had nothing to carry all that stuff in! Well, I could have used my old Minolta bag, but then where would I put my Minolta and all its accessories?
So I ordered a bag on line for my Canon and all its acc's. Should be here in a couple of weeks.

NOW I should definitely be all set, and not have to buy anything more for a long time. I'm still reading the little booklet. It's very slow going, because I'm still digging out sod to make more room for daylily seedlings, and THAT's very slow going.

One thing I'm eager to try is the continuous shooting, by holding the shutter button down. I should be able to get about 3 pics/second that way. Ha! I bet it uses a lot of battery power that way!

Julie


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

Excellent macro and beautiful dahlia! You have the flower itself in perfect focus, then the picture blurs as you look toward the parts that aren't of interest.

Very nice! Show some more.

Oh, have you thought about taking some pics of the meteors tonight using the 3 per second setting? That would be cool.

Kt


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

There are quite a few meteors tonight, but it should be better later(earlier) on and after the waxing moon sets.

Maybe a 4 to 8-second exposure after it gets really dark, would be better than the 3 per second.

Kt


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

Almost to the 150 limit on this thread before the "powers that be" say, "no more postings allowed," or whatever it is they say.
It's interesting that this photography conversation has lasted 5 months!

Thanks for your compliment on the Dahlia. I feel very comfortable taking close-ups. After all, that's what I've done every day this summer with my daylilies. It's a little tricky with the Canon, because it's much heavier than the Olympus. I could hold my folder and pencil/pen with my left arm & hand while I shot with the Olympus since it is so light, and I have a fairly steady right hand. Can't do that with the Canon! Have to set everything down and use both hands, especially if I want to zoom!

I happened to wake up and look at the clock at 1:58 this morning, so went outside to look, and look, and look. It was a very fine, clear, moonless night, and I knew where to look this year, compared to last year when I missed the meteors.

I finally saw the first "shooting star" directly overhead, which lasted only a split second. I only saw 4 before my neck started aching from looking up, then went in and back to bed. They were about one minute apart. Ideally, if I wanted to stay up all night, I should have thrown a sleeping bag on the ground in order to lay down and stare up, and save my neck!
Oh, have you thought about taking some pics of the meteors tonight using the 3 per second setting? That would be cool.
"Whoa, cowboy, hold your horses," was my first reaction!
LOL! ME?!?! Take pics of meteors? I can't even figured out how to take pics of a still sky object (the moon, for example) yet! Haven't even tried out my new 55-250 zoom lens yet! (See what I mean by learning slowly?)

So, cowboy, did YOU take pics of the meteors?

Julie


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

...did YOU take pics of the meteors?

No, but I had my camera ready, just in case. By the time the moon set, the clouds set in and it was wasn't clear enough to see them through the clouds. I'll try again tonight.

I did see several before the moon went down. A few streaked across the whole sky. Very nice.

Kt


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

A few streaked across the whole sky.
I bet that was awesome!

Took a few odd shots around the yard today with the Canon, since it's a partly cloudy day.

This first one is a disaster, as far as I'm concerned. I just thought it would be interesting to take a shot of the billboard from the ground up. It borders our property on the south side. I can't figure out if the sign is faded (they just re-did it last year - not painted, but panels of wall-papery stuff.)....Or, since it's hazy around here, maybe the lighting is off? Anyway, I didn't edit this one at all, but notice at the bottom of the sign, how much clearer the boards are?
Billboard

Next, my goal was to show everything in the photo in fairly good focus. That's hard to do unless everything is at an equal distance from the camera. I think I used landscape mode on this shot. The field corn is almost ripe, and the Goldenrod is close to flowering.
Corn

Now I'm moving into more familiar territory - closeups, where I feel more comfortable. The Canon does a much better job than my Olympus did. In this next shot, the background is so blurry, you can't recognize my fingers holding the stem of the Japanese Kerria.
Japanese Beetle on Japanese Kerria flower

And finally, a bee on a purple cone flower, (cropped photo)
Not bad for not using an expensive macro lens, if I may brag a little:)))

Looking forward to seeing some meteor photos of yours - hope it's not too cloudy - and yet, I bet you'd welcome some much needed rain!

Julie


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

bump


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

bumping up since it was about to fly into cyber space...


 o
RE: Kt, It's your pesty photography student...

And the last post....


 o Post a Follow-Up

Please Note: This thread has reached the upper limit for the number follow-ups allowed (150). If you would like to continue this discussion, please begin a new thread using the form on the main forum page.


Return to the Test Forum

Information about Posting

  • You must be logged in to post a message. Once you are logged in, a posting window will appear at the bottom of the messages. If you are not a member, please register for an account.
  • Please review our Rules of Play before posting.
  • Posting is a two-step process. Once you have composed your message, you will be taken to the preview page. You will then have a chance to review your post, make changes and upload photos.
  • After posting your message, you may need to refresh the forum page in order to see it.
  • Before posting copyrighted material, please read about Copyright and Fair Use.
  • We have a strict no-advertising policy!
  • If you would like to practice posting or uploading photos, please visit our Test forum.
  • If you need assistance, please Contact Us and we will be happy to help.


Learn more about in-text links on this page here