Last Light

Here is white Achilliea (The Pearl) after several years from seed. The
orange is Asclepias tuberose and the stand in the back is Agastache
("Golden Jubilee"). Obviously, this is the "A"-section of my garden
(someone misfiled those Cosmos poking their heads up in the middle).
JD
Canon 1D-mkIII
EXIF Data Included
e-mail: blissful-wind(at)usa.net

Additional images at;
http://www.flickr.com/photos/john-pa/

A wonderful set of photographs John.
What size are the pics from the camera?
What software do you use to edit?
Do you compress & crop?
Always curious.
Cheers Wendy
"John - Pa." wrote in message
...
Last Light

Here is white Achilliea (The Pearl) after several years from seed. The
orange is Asclepias tuberose and the stand in the back is Agastache
("Golden Jubilee"). Obviously, this is the "A"-section of my garden
(someone misfiled those Cosmos poking their heads up in the middle).
JD
Canon 1D-mkIII
EXIF Data Included
e-mail: blissful-wind(at)usa.net

Additional images at;
http://www.flickr.com/photos/john-pa/

Thanks for asking. I'm always happy to share, but I don't like to be
pushy (most of the time).

The Canon 1D-Mark III is listed as a 10-megapixel camera. It is a 1.3x
"Field of View Crop" camera, which is an indication of sensor size and
this means that the image view appears 1.3-times larger than the same
focal length on a traditional 35mm film camera. This "crop" happens
because the light sensor is smaller than a 35mm film negative and so
we are only capturing a portion of the image cast by the lens, making
it appear closer (by comparison). Most dSLR (like the 40D/Rebel
family) have a 1.6x sized sensor (making it smaller than the 1D),
and a few like the Canon 5D have "Full Frame" sensors, which mean that
they are the same physical size as a 35mm film negative. Altogether,
the sensor's physical dimensions are a lot more important than
megapixel count, and in fact more MP can sometimes even mean a
lower-quality image. But enough of that.

For the last few years I have made it a habit of taking pictures in
RAW format. Most "pros" think that they have better control over the
end results this way, and I think that this may be true.

I use Adobe Lightroom as a RAW converter (to 16-bit TIFF intermediate
format) and as the initial processor. Lightroom also functions as a
photographic library management tool, and with over 70gig of pictures
on my HD, I'm getting to really need that. I usually use Photoshop
CS3 for secondary processing after Lightroom, including size reduction
and sometimes cropping and always as the very last step, conversion to
JPG. Another piece of software that I use from time-to-time is called
Noise Ninja, which does a great job (better than PS) at reducing
noise, or those colored speckles that look like film grain.

I do tend to do a lot of messing around with my pictures before I post
them. I did some darkroom work in my youth, and to me Photoshop is
just a darkroom-in-a-box and an integral part of the image-creation
process. Some people may think of it as "cheating", but the fact is
that if your camera puts out JPG it is doing the same processing, just
based on what some engineer in Japan thinks you should want instead of
what you really want. I can describe my typical workflow sometime if
anyone is interested, but this post is starting to get carried away.

Bye
JD



On Tue, 1 Jul 2008 15:34:44 -0700, "Wendy7" wrote:

A wonderful set of photographs John.
What size are the pics from the camera?
What software do you use to edit?
Do you compress & crop?
Always curious.
Cheers Wendy

In article , John - Pa.
wrote:

Last Light

Here is white Achilliea (The Pearl) after several years from seed. The
orange is Asclepias tuberose and the stand in the back is Agastache
("Golden Jubilee"). Obviously, this is the "A"-section of my garden
(someone misfiled those Cosmos poking their heads up in the middle).
JD
Canon 1D-mkIII
EXIF Data Included
e-mail: blissful-wind(at)usa.net

Additional images at;
http://www.flickr.com/photos/john-pa/

begin 644 20084151.jpg
[Image]

end


Enjoyed all your pix!

--
8^)~ Sue (remove the x to email)
~~~~
http://wacvet.blogspot.com/
http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=wacvet
http://www.myspace.com/wacvet22

John, Thanks for your camera and digital darkroom input. It was very
interesting and well presented.
BTW your garden is beautiful as well as your photographs. I use a Canon
Rebel XT and photoshop CS2.

Bill



John - Pa. wrote in message
...
Thanks for asking. I'm always happy to share, but I don't like to be
pushy (most of the time).

The Canon 1D-Mark III is listed as a 10-megapixel camera. It is a 1.3x
"Field of View Crop" camera, which is an indication of sensor size and
this means that the image view appears 1.3-times larger than the same
focal length on a traditional 35mm film camera. This "crop" happens
because the light sensor is smaller than a 35mm film negative and so
we are only capturing a portion of the image cast by the lens, making
it appear closer (by comparison). Most dSLR (like the 40D/Rebel
family) have a 1.6x sized sensor (making it smaller than the 1D),
and a few like the Canon 5D have "Full Frame" sensors, which mean that
they are the same physical size as a 35mm film negative. Altogether,
the sensor's physical dimensions are a lot more important than
megapixel count, and in fact more MP can sometimes even mean a
lower-quality image. But enough of that.

For the last few years I have made it a habit of taking pictures in
RAW format. Most "pros" think that they have better control over the
end results this way, and I think that this may be true.

I use Adobe Lightroom as a RAW converter (to 16-bit TIFF intermediate
format) and as the initial processor. Lightroom also functions as a
photographic library management tool, and with over 70gig of pictures
on my HD, I'm getting to really need that. I usually use Photoshop
CS3 for secondary processing after Lightroom, including size reduction
and sometimes cropping and always as the very last step, conversion to
JPG. Another piece of software that I use from time-to-time is called
Noise Ninja, which does a great job (better than PS) at reducing
noise, or those colored speckles that look like film grain.

I do tend to do a lot of messing around with my pictures before I post
them. I did some darkroom work in my youth, and to me Photoshop is
just a darkroom-in-a-box and an integral part of the image-creation
process. Some people may think of it as "cheating", but the fact is
that if your camera puts out JPG it is doing the same processing, just
based on what some engineer in Japan thinks you should want instead of
what you really want. I can describe my typical workflow sometime if
anyone is interested, but this post is starting to get carried away.

Bye
JD



On Tue, 1 Jul 2008 15:34:44 -0700, "Wendy7" wrote:

A wonderful set of photographs John.
What size are the pics from the camera?
What software do you use to edit?
Do you compress & crop?
Always curious.
Cheers Wendy

seriJohn - Pa. wrote:
Last Light

Here is white Achilliea (The Pearl) after several years from seed. The
orange is Asclepias tuberose and the stand in the back is Agastache
("Golden Jubilee"). Obviously, this is the "A"-section of my garden
(someone misfiled those Cosmos poking their heads up in the middle).
JD
Canon 1D-mkIII
EXIF Data Included
e-mail: blissful-wind(at)usa.net

Additional images at;
http://www.flickr.com/photos/john-pa/



Nice series.

Thanks for explaining John, have saved this for the future.
I have a Sony DSLR A100 & just use automatic!!! I just point & click!!! Yes
I know, it's a shame especially
when my father was a photographer back in 1930 in Africa & he gave me a
little Kodak box camera.
I am looking to be able to take better closeups of my flowers?
Any tips?
Cheers Wendy

"John - Pa." wrote in message
...
Thanks for asking. I'm always happy to share, but I don't like to be
pushy (most of the time).

The Canon 1D-Mark III is listed as a 10-megapixel camera. It is a 1.3x
"Field of View Crop" camera, which is an indication of sensor size and
this means that the image view appears 1.3-times larger than the same
focal length on a traditional 35mm film camera. This "crop" happens
because the light sensor is smaller than a 35mm film negative and so
we are only capturing a portion of the image cast by the lens, making
it appear closer (by comparison). Most dSLR (like the 40D/Rebel
family) have a 1.6x sized sensor (making it smaller than the 1D),
and a few like the Canon 5D have "Full Frame" sensors, which mean that
they are the same physical size as a 35mm film negative. Altogether,
the sensor's physical dimensions are a lot more important than
megapixel count, and in fact more MP can sometimes even mean a
lower-quality image. But enough of that.

For the last few years I have made it a habit of taking pictures in
RAW format. Most "pros" think that they have better control over the
end results this way, and I think that this may be true.

I use Adobe Lightroom as a RAW converter (to 16-bit TIFF intermediate
format) and as the initial processor. Lightroom also functions as a
photographic library management tool, and with over 70gig of pictures
on my HD, I'm getting to really need that. I usually use Photoshop
CS3 for secondary processing after Lightroom, including size reduction
and sometimes cropping and always as the very last step, conversion to
JPG. Another piece of software that I use from time-to-time is called
Noise Ninja, which does a great job (better than PS) at reducing
noise, or those colored speckles that look like film grain.

I do tend to do a lot of messing around with my pictures before I post
them. I did some darkroom work in my youth, and to me Photoshop is
just a darkroom-in-a-box and an integral part of the image-creation
process. Some people may think of it as "cheating", but the fact is
that if your camera puts out JPG it is doing the same processing, just
based on what some engineer in Japan thinks you should want instead of
what you really want. I can describe my typical workflow sometime if
anyone is interested, but this post is starting to get carried away.

Bye
JD



On Tue, 1 Jul 2008 15:34:44 -0700, "Wendy7" wrote:

A wonderful set of photographs John.
What size are the pics from the camera?
What software do you use to edit?
Do you compress & crop?
Always curious.
Cheers Wendy