|
|
 | | Re: Natural Lighting
|
| (...) Sounds good. I'll try it out. Good thing shadows are useful, 'cause my driveway is boardered by trees and there's only a small amount of light in the center. (...) Yeah. I guess I'll have to deal with it tommorow when I take pictures of my new (...) (23 years ago, 12-Jun-03, to lugnet.publish.photography, FTX)
| | | | | Re: Natural Lighting
|
| (...) Try taking your pictures in the shade or on overcast days. Even in the shade, it's still far brighter outdoors than it is inside, so you'll still get good results, without the stark shadows. I have a hard time getting good backgrounds for (...) (23 years ago, 12-Jun-03, to lugnet.publish.photography, FTX)
| | | | | Re: Natural Lighting
|
| (...) <snip> (...) hey john. not that i'm all that good in either photography or lego photography, but i do know that time of day has everything to do with shadow effects. usually, early in the morning or late in the day gives the "best" soft (...) (23 years ago, 11-Jun-03, to lugnet.publish.photography, FTX)
| | | | | Natural Lighting
|
| Hello, all. I've been experimenting with natural lighting today in the bright Florida sun. I've got very good results, much better then with artificial lighting. (9 URLs) Pictures are also easy to edit. (URL) I have two questions for you'all. (...) (23 years ago, 11-Jun-03, to lugnet.publish.photography, FTX)
| | | | | Re: taking good photos
|
| (...) While there is more color fideltiy at higher bit-depths, above a certain point the human eye can't tell the difference. 24-bit is also termed "true color" because it's 16.7 million color range is close to the limit of what the human eye can (...) (23 years ago, 2-Jun-03, to lugnet.space, lugnet.publish.photography)
| | | | | Re: taking good photos
|
| (...) I don't think I am. :-) I'm not saying that the end result of a 2x-downsampled 10x digital zoom will look any better in 24-bit color than a native 5x optical zoom would look in 24-bit color. It won't. What I'm saying is that a 2x-downsampled (...) (23 years ago, 2-Jun-03, to lugnet.space, lugnet.publish.photography)
| | | | | Re: What I made from the 4099 Robobots Designer Set
|
| (...) Yeah! These are nice! Dang fleebnorks ruin everything! stuart (23 years ago, 1-Jun-03, to lugnet.publish.photography, FTX)
| | | | | Re: taking good photos
|
| (...) I didn't think that sounded right, but I couldn't figure out why. This sounds an awful lot like how LCD laptop screens work, where they look fine if you set the screen size according to the actual physical pixelation of the screen, but if you (...) (23 years ago, 22-May-03, to lugnet.space, lugnet.publish.photography)
| | | | | Re: taking good photos
|
| (...) I think you are confusing color depth with image area resolution. If the CCD chip has an area of X-by-Y pixels and you are at maximum optical zoom, then any form of digital zoom requires interpolating between adjacent real pixels. The color (...) (23 years ago, 22-May-03, to lugnet.space, lugnet.publish.photography)
| | | | | Re: taking good photos
|
| (...) I tried using thick white paper tape over my flash...and all I got was a blurry large glare spot where previously I'd been getting a crisp large glare spot. The problem is not so much in the quality of light as it is in the direction. If the (...) (23 years ago, 21-May-03, to lugnet.publish.photography)
|
|
