It's been a while since I've been to Sydney, wish I had time to stay a few hours longer for the night light.
Interesting view. Not the standard sideways view. I like this one.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Photo of the Day - April 2010
- Thread starter Designer Dale
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Interesting view. Not the standard sideways view. I like this one.
Just what I was thinking. For the 'standard' shot there must be three holes in the pavement, so photographers know where to put the tripod...
Maryport, Cumbria...
It's been a while since I've been to Sydney, wish I had time to stay a few hours longer for the night light.
Pentax K10D - 1/90s - f/8.0 - ISO100 - 33mm (49mm equiv)
Reminds me strangely of Finding Nemo or any other Pixar movie... The colours and the lightning are great!
Ams.
It's been a while since I've been to Sydney, wish I had time to stay a few hours longer for the night light.
Pentax K10D - 1/90s - f/8.0 - ISO100 - 33mm (49mm equiv)
Nice man, I love the colors on this one
What good is the POTD without a duck...
Shot on the way to the store yesterday... very happy with the PP from the RAW. 70-200mm f4L IS glass.
Shot on the way to the store yesterday... very happy with the PP from the RAW. 70-200mm f4L IS glass.
Very nice! Looks like an awesome place to practice some yoga.
Thanks for taking the time. I was thinking the same, I was just a tad too close. There were sooo many people though, most completely oblivious to those of use with cameras. I was trying not to get too many random people in my photos, but most are lacking something. There is another car show this tomorrow that i might attend. Perhaps i wont worry so much about the people, but focus more on my shooting.
Nice Kitchen, I'd imagine its very nice to cook in.
As long as you're enjoying the photography, it's all GOOD.
I'll add my next POTD as a URL, rather than an img tag, as it's 1.9mb in size. I won't say what it is, so you'll have to click on it to enjoy (well, hopefully). And not, it's not more macro, which is my primary genre.
http://www.ecn.net.au/~dpastern/images/CRW_1779panorama.jpg
If the mods think it's OK to do it as a timg, let me know and I'll change it.
Dave
edit: when I get the 16mb Mark IV, I'm gonna give this another crack. A EOS D60 just doesn't have enough resolution...
As long as you're enjoying the photography, it's all GOOD.
I'll add my next POTD as a URL, rather than an img tag, as it's 1.9mb in size. I won't say what it is, so you'll have to click on it to enjoy (well, hopefully). And not, it's not more macro, which is my primary genre.
http://www.ecn.net.au/~dpastern/images/CRW_1779panorama.jpg
If the mods think it's OK to do it as a timg, let me know and I'll change it.
Dave
Oh believe me, if i didnt enjoy it i would not be trying as hard as i am. I hope to someday supplement whatever job i may have by selling some of my photos.
that pano is beautiful! I have been scouting locations to shoot from, im trying to get one like that of the Las Vegas strip. Mine for today, another from the Cadillac Car Show:
Clickable....
EXIF Info:
Exposure: 0.001 sec (1/800)
Aperture: f/5.0
Focal Length: 39 mm
ISO Speed: 100
And when you do give this another crack you might consider doing it a bit earlier in the evening, when the sky is not all black.
I don't think I've posted this shot of the Bay bridge before:
Camera: Pentax K20D
Lens: Pentax SMC M 200mm f/4
Exposure: 1/3s
Aperture: f/8
ISO: 200
And when you do give this another crack you might consider doing it a bit earlier in the evening, when the sky is not all black.
I don't think I've posted this shot of the Bay bridge before:
Camera: Pentax K20D
Lens: Pentax SMC M 200mm f/4
Exposure: 1/3s
Aperture: f/8
ISO: 200
Berkeley on the foreground? Nice shot.
Liquor
Liquor
Camera: Canon EOS REBEL T2i
Exposure: 0.017 sec (1/60)
Aperture: f/22.0
Focal Length: 39 mm
ISO Speed: 500
Exposure Bias: 0 EV
Flash: Off, Did not fire
Liquor
Camera: Canon EOS REBEL T2i
Exposure: 0.017 sec (1/60)
Aperture: f/22.0
Focal Length: 39 mm
ISO Speed: 500
Exposure Bias: 0 EV
Flash: Off, Did not fire
Duck of the Day
Took this in Richmond Park today. Dunno what sort of duck it is, but it's cute.
Update: It's a Mandarin Duck - thanks Designer Dale!
Camera: Canon EOS 1000D
Exposure: 0.005 sec (1/200)
Aperture: f/6.3
Focal Length: 200 mm
ISO Speed: 800
Exposure Bias: 0 EV
Flash: Off, Did not fire
Took this in Richmond Park today. Dunno what sort of duck it is, but it's cute.
Update: It's a Mandarin Duck - thanks Designer Dale!
Camera: Canon EOS 1000D
Exposure: 0.005 sec (1/200)
Aperture: f/6.3
Focal Length: 200 mm
ISO Speed: 800
Exposure Bias: 0 EV
Flash: Off, Did not fire
Lacy
...more experimentation in black and white...and LR3 beta2.
Camera: Nikon D300 w/ Nikkor 17-55 f/2.8
Exposure: 1/125
Aperture: f/2.8
Focal Length: 55mm
ISO Speed: 800
Exposure Bias: -1 EV
...more experimentation in black and white...and LR3 beta2.
Camera: Nikon D300 w/ Nikkor 17-55 f/2.8
Exposure: 1/125
Aperture: f/2.8
Focal Length: 55mm
ISO Speed: 800
Exposure Bias: -1 EV
Took this in Richmond Park today. Dunno what sort of duck it is, but it's cute.
Very nice photo of a Mandarin Duck. Related to the US Wood Duck. It's not native to the British Isles. The Wicki page is below.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mandarin_Duck
Dale
EXIF:
Post Processed: corrected exposure
Lens: EF50mm f/1.8
ISO: 1600
Focal Length: 50mm
Exposure Bias: 0 ev
Aperture: f/3.5
Shutter Speed: 1/60
Flash: Fired
Focus: On the railing
Camera: Canon EOS 1000D
Aperture: f/7.1
Exposure: 3.2
Focal Length: 24 mm
ISO Speed: 100
Near to where I live there's an old tunnel that was built in the mid 90's as a means of getting across the main road, it was closed about 5 or so years ago because of drainage problems, but it's still somewhat accessible.
This photo is of the first foot stone that lead up to the entrance, reading "Where water once flowed". It was fun going back down there, but it's a shame the tunnel is now filled with needles and rubbish, guess that's what happens when something becomes abandoned.
Love it, awesome concept.
...more experimentation in black and white...and LR3 beta2.
I like it too. Nice b/w and lighting.
Yeah, I've had a few people say that. My first time doing long exposure shots. Not living in Sydney anymore, but will try it at dusk when I get the next opportunity! Thanks for the CC, much appreciated.
Mine for today, another from the Cadillac Car Show:
Thanks! I like this shot, although it's a bit dark.
Dave
Here it goes again... a mod coming in and just changing every original post with an img tag to timg tags... every several months for some reason one mod or another, who doesn't offer an explanation, just drops in and lays down some invisible law. We've gone to great trouble to discuss this openly several times over the last two years, and it finally seemed solved with common agreement.
Now, we've even gotten some informal system of self-policing, including instructions and photo forum POTD posting guides (thanks Dale, and for all who offered feedback during the process.) Yet, this issue keeps popping up (a random mod dropping in with no warning and changing everyone's original posts.) It's not really a big deal, but it's irritating to to again run right into the same thing, just when you think it's a thing of the past. I changed my tags back to the way they originally were because they are acceptable according to our forum guidelines, and have been acceptable as a whole for 99.99% of the time, and quite frankly...those tags are actually created by this website when I click on an icon to link to an image. If the tags are illegal, then they shouldn't be there in the first place. The very fact that we take it upon ourselves to change built-in tags by adding a "t" when quoting posts with images should demonstrate a willingness to be reasonable. If I get demerits, then I'll take them on principle.
If a mod wants to change the reply img tags to timg tags... or merge consecutive posts... that's what I'd expect. Just don't keep changing the "rules" as to what's acceptable on original posts. If you can honestly explain the reasons for doing so, what the rationale is (other than just that you can because you're a mod) then I invite you to please step up to the plate, and explain. The terse little explanations in changed posts don't do anything other than spell out the obvious--you changed tags because the image was, by your judgment, too large. How exactly do you come to that judgment? This issue has always been a muddy one here, and there are no site-suggested limitations on image sizes that anyone would notice when posting a reply with an image. I've looked, and the only limitations I could actually find had to do with avatar pics. Did you participate in the weeks of discussion in the digital photography forum about this very subject as we were putting our forum/POTD thread posting guide together? Somehow I must have missed that, so now's the time to fill us in...
--respectfully waiting to hear.
-pdxflint
PS: Dale, any ideas?
Now, we've even gotten some informal system of self-policing, including instructions and photo forum POTD posting guides (thanks Dale, and for all who offered feedback during the process.) Yet, this issue keeps popping up (a random mod dropping in with no warning and changing everyone's original posts.) It's not really a big deal, but it's irritating to to again run right into the same thing, just when you think it's a thing of the past. I changed my tags back to the way they originally were because they are acceptable according to our forum guidelines, and have been acceptable as a whole for 99.99% of the time, and quite frankly...those tags are actually created by this website when I click on an icon to link to an image. If the tags are illegal, then they shouldn't be there in the first place. The very fact that we take it upon ourselves to change built-in tags by adding a "t" when quoting posts with images should demonstrate a willingness to be reasonable. If I get demerits, then I'll take them on principle.
If a mod wants to change the reply img tags to timg tags... or merge consecutive posts... that's what I'd expect. Just don't keep changing the "rules" as to what's acceptable on original posts. If you can honestly explain the reasons for doing so, what the rationale is (other than just that you can because you're a mod) then I invite you to please step up to the plate, and explain. The terse little explanations in changed posts don't do anything other than spell out the obvious--you changed tags because the image was, by your judgment, too large. How exactly do you come to that judgment? This issue has always been a muddy one here, and there are no site-suggested limitations on image sizes that anyone would notice when posting a reply with an image. I've looked, and the only limitations I could actually find had to do with avatar pics. Did you participate in the weeks of discussion in the digital photography forum about this very subject as we were putting our forum/POTD thread posting guide together? Somehow I must have missed that, so now's the time to fill us in...
--respectfully waiting to hear.
-pdxflint
PS: Dale, any ideas?