Filtered or unfiltered goldie M

[Goldie M]

Thanks again everyone, looks like I've got plenty of things to look into

Mike I'll try that photoshop elements, as long as it's not too cofusing I ,like you ( badgerbob) am abit of a thicko with computers Also i'll try Gimp, it's good to experiment
Jack, I'm bad enough when I do paint at making a mess, if I try it on computer
WELL!
Grunditch, I agree the more I've messed about with my Photo's the worse they've been, I must admit to sharping them a little with Samsung Master, that's the soft ware I got with my very small pocket camera. The camera I've got is Nikon coolpix p90 now, It takes good shots but I've to darken it some manually in very bright sunshine and lighten it M on dark days anyway, I'm still working at it I do like the micro shots it takes though and they're supposed to be noise few ? question mark there I think. Also when it's in micro focus the BF should be quite still are as near as can be, which is abit impossible with BF. Press on regardless!

I've resized my photo's and lightened and darkened them with Microsoft Picture Manager which comes with Vista this is very good for resizing which is mainly what I use it for and that is that really, still learning.

I must admit to liking photo's with some back ground like the one I've put in here and with more than one Butterfly, although I know this is not exceptable to judge's etc It's the Photo's I like best, and it has some depth in it.

Thanks everyone lets hope this Spring and Summer are better than last year Goldie

[Jack Harrison]

I can't recall what the picture was but I fooled a REAL artist who was most impressed with my skills I did subsequently confess.

Anyway, Guy will recognise this masterpiece from his Cambridge days.



And I have to wonder who left these shoes in the middle of the Milton Park & Ride



On a slightly more serious note, I saw a supposed oil-on-canvas print in a gallery here on Mull with an asking price in the hundreds. There were so many clues as to the fact that it was a computer image (eg the texture). It is tempting to make "artisitic" picures to sale but I would NEVER attempt to fool: it would have to be "Oil-on-Canvas Effect"

Jack

[JohnR]

I just wish I could take butterfly photos that stand out at well as yours does.
Apart from the noisy/messy wording which Gary explains I am completely puzzled by "filter." In the days of film cameras a filter was a piece of glass that we put in front of the lens, usually UV. Nowadays with digital I seem to use my UV filter just to protect the lens; the only other filter that I have tried is the circular polariser to enhance colour (English summers don't seem to produce glare). Can I throw away my filters and do it all in post processing, or is there another filter that is the trade secret of master photographers?

[MikeOxon]

Can I throw away my filters and do it all in post processing

I find no need for lens filters apart from the two you mention. I do everything else in software. For noise filtration of high-ISO images, I use 'Neat Image' software but there are many alternatives.

Mike

[David M]

I must admit to liking photo's with some back ground like the one I've put in here and with more than one Butterfly, although I know this is not exceptable to judge's etc It's the Photo's I like best, and it has some depth in it.

It may not be a competition winner, but your photo has lots of value nonetheless. Personally, my very favourite images of all on this site are of the butterflies Guy Padfield photographs with an extensive landscape in the background.

None of them will ever win a prize on here but to me they are redolent with the essence of what you experience when you are out in the field and simply enjoying the natural world on a warm, sunny day.

[Gruditch]

Don't throw out your filters John. For macro work filters are of limited use, but for scenic/landscape work, lens filters are an essential bit of kit. So often I see what should be a cracking image, ruined by a blown out featureless white mess in the sky. These should of course be fluffy white clouds, but the camera struggles with a bright sky, and the darker foreground. This can be overcome with a graduated neutral density filter. I usually keep two of these in my bag, along with a couple of NDs, a big blocker, a star filter, and a polariser. Some filters like the big blocker, allow you to use a much longer exposure, and this can have a dramatic effect on a image.



Below is a rather drab picture of Godrevy lighthouse, but add a big blocker filter (as in the second image) and open the shutter for 130 seconds, and the results are very different.

Regards Gruditch

[Jack Harrison]

Gruditch:

This can be overcome with a graduated neutral density filter.

I can now come out of the closet and confess that I too use a graduated filer ON OCCASIONS for exactly the same reason as Gary. Competely blown highlights, eg very bright sky above dark foreground can NEVER be recovered with post processing. But using a graduated filter when taking might retain enough detail in that otherwise-washed out sky,

For example, this early morning into light shot would have had a blank sky had I not used the graduated filter.



Jack

[MikeOxon]

great pics - Jack and Gruditch - I shall have to mend my ways!

Mike

[Goldie M]

So much for my camera, I can't change lenses on it so I'll have to save up and buy a differant camera

Seriously though Jack and Grunditch your picture's are really great, what a differance it made using the filter. I don't think I'm quite into stuff like that (yet) i'm content to potter along I will try to get back the soft ware I lost" Neat Image" which you recommended to me Mike before I lost it, that was ok

Jack your computer painting supprised me I didn't think you could get Pictures like that with a Computer
I'm not into painting now , I did alot at one time, people wanted me to do some for them, but I just did it for relaxing and for fun no way could I paint to order.
The picture I did of the Moutain was done in Acrylics, that was great fun, you have to paint very quickly as the paint dries so quickly. My Wolves I didn't get to finish properly because we moved from Canada at the time, they were done in oil's.
I'm not much good at drawing so I traced their outline first then painted, how I'd go on with a computer I've no Idea. It sounds good fun so I may try to down load Photo shop.

In a way I think that's why I like taking Photo's now rather than painting I don't have to draw any thing the Pictures there already. I just want to know the in's and out's of improving it, so thanks every one for your input.Goldie

[Jack Harrison]

Goldie M

So much for my camera, I can't change lenses on it so I'll have to save up and buy a differant camera

You don't have to change lenses. You put a graduated filer in front of the lens. But not all cameras can take a filter, ie if there is no screw thread. So what camera do you have and I'll have a look at the spec to see if you could fit a filter? They are cheap at about a fiver for an adequate quality filter; DSLR users would doubless want a more optically perfect one that might cost up to ten times as much.

Jack

[Goldie M]

Hi! Jack, mine is a Nikon Coolpix p90 it's kind of an inbetween camera , that's what I think any way. Goldie

[Gruditch]

DSLR users would doubless want a more optically perfect one that might cost up to ten times as much

Twenty times although there are plenty of cheap, and nasty filters out there, as you say most DSLR users should go for top end filters. There is little point spending big bucks on a lens, then putting a shoddy piece of plastic infront of it. Most of my lenses take a 77mm screw on circular filter, which is one of the larger sizes, hence very expensive.

Regards Gruditch

[Jack Harrison]

Sadly for that Coolix (from a review):

There are no lens threads for filters on the lens, a missed opportunity. It would be marvelous to screw a circular polarizer on this to shoot landscapes

Jack

[Goldie M]

Thought has much Jack, I'll carry on regardless, it didn't do too badly when I took the Small White PBF, (Alba ) lets hope I can catch some thing else similar this year I'll settle for that Goldie

[Paul Wetton]

If you want to use a graduated or plain neutral density filter or coloured filter to reduce light to a certain part of a picture I suppose you could just use the Cokin type plastic filters which are large square and plastic and could eaily be held in front of the lens. You could probably even manufacture a filter holder that would screw into the tripod mount screw underneath the camera. I assume it has one. There are some cheap Cokin replacement on EBay that would probably work.

Just a thought.

[MikeOxon]

... or you 'cheat' (like me ) by using Layers in Photoshop/GIMP/etc. to combine differently exposed photos:

Some cameras will even do this sort of thing automatically, by taking several photos in quick succession and then combining them into a single photo.

Mike

[Jack Harrison]

Just had some intermittent computer problems and missed part of the thread. I think Paul said to Goldie:

..screw underneath the camera..

but the context wasn't quite clear.

Jack

[Gruditch]

In front would make more sense.

Regards Gruditch

[Jack Harrison]

Computer now working fine again. Sorry about the earlier misunderstanding

Jack

[Goldie M]

I tried down loading GIMP Mike but some how ended up with this tool Bar which tended to take over, so I just got rid of the lot, I must have done some thing wrong as usual
I've down loaded other things instead like "Neat Image"
I think my Camera does things in quick succession like that, I know for sure it gives differant images in differant light's and you can pick out the best. I tried it once or twice but it still didn't give me what I wanted.
Thanks Paul, my camera does have a place for a tripod but I've only got a Hand held tripod which isn't much good I was told to buy a tripod for a better picture I got the other one given, I think he was glad to get rid of it Goldie