A few shots from the Medieval event near Caboolture this weekend....

Discussion in 'Australia Photography' started by POTD.com.au, Jul 3, 2005.

  1. POTD.com.au

    POTD.com.au Guest

    POTD.com.au, Jul 3, 2005
    1. Advertisements

  2. David Springthorpe, Jul 3, 2005
    1. Advertisements

  3. POTD.com.au

    [BnH] Guest

    [BnH], Jul 3, 2005
  4. POTD.com.au

    POTD.com.au Guest

    Thanks... Did you click the image for the larger view? Coppermine gives
    you the thumb index display, then the intermediate image on it's own page,
    then if you would still like to see larger you can then click that image and
    it will open in a new window at the size uploaded.
    POTD.com.au, Jul 3, 2005
  5. POTD.com.au

    POTD.com.au Guest

    Actually yes.... there were some BIG boys there! lol :)
    POTD.com.au, Jul 3, 2005
  6. POTD.com.au

    [BnH] Guest

    I did. But after a 2nd look , maybe its your framing method :)
    A friend also uses cu-mine engine www.khoman.com and at his . the images
    seems a little bigger.

    [BnH], Jul 3, 2005
  7. POTD.com.au

    POTD.com.au Guest

    I can set the thumb size and intermediate image size in coppermine, these I
    have elected to run at 100 & 400 pixels for fast viewing & bandwidth
    conservation.... your friend may have chosen larger.

    .....as you say, the framework does use a bit of the size up, but the "new
    window" images are usually large enough for web viewing IMO, as they stay at
    the original uploaded size.
    POTD.com.au, Jul 3, 2005
  8. Nice shots there Russell. I was there as well - what were you using? Also,
    did you jazz up the colours a bit in postprocessing - the jouster really
    look quite different to my memory and my photos!

    Robert McArthur, Jul 4, 2005
  9. POTD.com.au

    POTD.com.au Guest

    Thanks Robert,

    I was using a 20D and 70-200 2.8 L IS mostly.

    The images were shot in RAW and I processed with Capture One using the "ETC
    Hi Sat" profile (which is only marginally different from the Low Sat version
    and only effects the reds & yellows), plus I ran a 3% saturation boost as a


    POTD.com.au, Jul 4, 2005
  10. I was using a 20D and 70-200 2.8 L IS mostly.

    Whoa. Didn't see you. I was using a 350D and the same lens, so I would have
    thought it would stick out enough :)
    Interesting. I'll have to try that. I've got my raws coming out of RSE at
    the moment but haven't been back to C1 for a while (and, because of RSE,
    haven't bought the ETC profiles). Thanks for the info! I'll post a couple of
    mine in a (shortish) while.

    Robert McArthur, Jul 6, 2005
  11. Are all these terms something I'll have to learn about when I eventually take up
    digital photography ?

    David Springthorpe, Jul 7, 2005
  12. POTD.com.au

    Ryadia Guest

    Nah. This is just geek speak, David.
    PhotoShop is the only word you'll absolutely have to know the meaning of
    if you go digital. Everything else revolves around it. The honcho's at
    Adobe must be laughing all the way to the bank lately!

    Ryadia, Jul 7, 2005
  13. POTD.com.au

    POTD.com.au Guest

    Yes Photoshop does everything the best and all these other applications are
    just for us "geeks"........ NOT!
    POTD.com.au, Jul 7, 2005
  14. POTD.com.au

    Ryadia Guest

    Let me get this right Russell...
    If you want totally unnatural, over saturated colours and you absolutely
    must spend your time in front of a computer instead of behind a
    viewfinder and you have a digital SLR camera...

    You are advocating the spending over $700 on a program from a developer
    who is so with-it they don't release a version for your new camera for 6
    months after it's released, instead of the software the Camera makers
    provide for decoding their image data... Do I have that right or have I
    missed something in your sarcasm? Incidently... What did you use when C1
    couldn't decode your camera's files?

    Photoshop (elements to be precise) and digital Photo Professional or
    it's equal, comes with most DSLR cameras. And so it should too for the
    price of them. Nothing at all wrong with these 'applications' for
    producing award winning images (not up to "Digital Photo Of the day"
    standards) but quite OK for such insignificant publications as National
    Geographic and Harper's Bazaar both of whom reject over saturated images
    you seem so obsessed with producing.

    So now suddenly "all these other applications" need to be purchased just
    so David can produce totally unnatural looking photos like you do. It
    might surprise you to discover so late in life that not everyone wants
    photographs that look nothing like the scene they are supposed to

    Ryadia, Jul 8, 2005
  15. I have PS Elements and a couple of freebies for playing around with the flat-bed
    scans I've been producing from some of my 35mm slides, and I'd say for this
    purpose they are invaluable.

    David Springthorpe, Jul 8, 2005
  16. Interesting. I'll have to try that. I've got my raws coming out of RSE
    Hi David,
    My answer would be "no". Certainly not "have to". Like pretty much anything,
    you can start with a little knowledge and go a long way. You'll get
    inculcated in the arcane nonsense by osmosis when you've spent some time.
    Lots of great images are created with little knowledge. Lots of cr*p too :)

    RSE = raw shooter essentials; a currently free raw converter that's very
    C1 = capture one; an older, good raw converter with, IMHO, the best workflow
    ETC = C1 camera profiles created by Magne Nilsen to get a better raw

    There's a reasonable glossary at

    Robert McArthur, Jul 8, 2005
  17. POTD.com.au

    POTD.com.au Guest

    The images discusses in this thread are my own personal images and I will
    produce them to a level of staturation of my liking.
    I simply answered a question and explained what my workflow was. If someone
    was to ask "What program should I use", then I would explain that C1 is my
    preference, but suggest that they try all available options and see what is
    right for them.

    ....and just for the record, you don't have to spend over $700 to get C1.
    You rarely get anything right.
    I used the older version of C1 with a code mod, while waiting for the full
    update. During that period I did try Dribble, DPP & the early RSE but C1
    was still my preference.
    nothing wrong with those aps for you, but us "Geeks" prefer to use
    applications that provide us with greater control, better workflow and
    improved results (to our liking)..... but I guess you really need to be a
    "Geek" to understand that.
    again, the images in question are produced for my own personal benefit and I
    will produce what ever I like. Do I complain when you produce poorly
    composed, boring images of frangipanis or tractors on footpaths?

    Plus, if NatGeo wanted something a particular way, I would produce it as per
    their wishes.... no big deal with that!
    Hmm?? Let me look again... where did I tell David that he had to purchase
    those aps??? Well I'll be... I didn't!! I simply answered his question.
    Again, I will produce what ever the client wants and do what ever I want
    with my own stuff.
    POTD.com.au, Jul 8, 2005
  18. Thanks - I actually was not trying to be a smartarse (for once).....

    David Springthorpe, Jul 8, 2005
  19. POTD.com.au

    Ryadia Guest

    I must be getting better. I struck that ego nerve first hit! Wash the
    bulls eye off your forehead or learn to duck quicker.
    Not quite $700 but close enough...Straight off the C1 web site:
    Capture One PRO
    For Windows 2000/XP and Mac OS X 10.2.8 and later USD 499.00 Hardly a
    consumer application, is it?
    Today's currency conversion is $672.552AUD By the time the card sharks
    get through with the transaction it'll be so close $700 it won't buy you
    a latte and BLT.
    Arghhh Give me a break, Russ!
    I made a Photoshop 'droplet' (5 minutes work) to increase the saturation,
    sharpen the image, dampen the highlights then save it to a new folder.
    I dropped the directory of my last year's medieval images into it and
    they came out fresh and clean, looking just like yours! Of course I
    didn't have the sunlight like you did but I managed to get the reds up
    to your level. The thumbnails are as shot but the pics are hit with my
    idea of your idea of "workflow".

    This is a real geek word I've never quite gotten my head around until I
    saw one of your mate's PCs in getting fixed at our computer store. I
    suddenly realised then, the full implication of "workflow" for a geek.

    600 image of a wedding. 5 of each shot. Amazing stuff you geeks are into
    with digital cameras, absolutely amazing. Who would have thought to
    cover your arse by taking 4 backup shots and have 'em on the same card?

    I never thought you could take five shots, one after the other of a
    bride in the same pose and have her eyes closed or nearly so, in all of
    them ...but then I guess that's the speed of a 20D for you! And then in
    the next block ...she moved her head and like magic, another 5 shots...
    All out of focus this time! Don't these new fangled digital cameras have
    auto focus either or is that part of the workflow thing too?

    This is what I figure you probably looked like after getting through
    your "workflow" after the festival.. Ha,ha,ha.
    http://www.ryadia.com/medievil/IMG_2133.html. ROTFL.
    Arhh yes. The tractor and the flowers!
    Poster sales to date of the steam traction engine = 97 since 2003.
    Frangipani on canvas (600x600) sales this year = 430, last year = 260
    Poster sales from the 2004 Medieval festival (all subjects) = 0
    Great way to make money, shooting people reliving the past... NOT!
    Sorry, I didn't realize you were intimating he should pirate the stuff.
    No other way to get them but buy 'em or steal 'em, Russ.
    You are probably right... How taxing is producing pics for a web site
    You probably wouldn't have much time for anything else...
    After you get through massarging your ego, that is! LOL!

    Ryadia, Jul 9, 2005
  20. POTD.com.au

    POTD.com.au Guest

    Who says you have to buy PRO? The perfectly capable LE is only USD99....
    plenty of cups of coffee after that!

    Just like mine hey?

    "It might surprise you to discover so late in life that not everyone wants
    photographs that look nothing like the scene they are supposed to

    ....now I wonder who said that??

    As for the whole quality thing, you have no idea what the other applications
    have to offer, but looking at your images it is obvious that you have set
    your standards very low.

    What the **** are you on about and what has this got to do with the topic?
    Am I now responsible for every other photographer that I know. You must be
    on drugs or just a total looney and not taking the ones you should??
    Again you should your lack of knowledge of the RAW workflow. But, then
    what's it matter if people do things different? Are we all 'spose to run
    out and buy into your crappy franchise that will be soon sweeping the nation
    (LMFAO!!!) and do things your way?
    There is no accounting for taste.

    Plus, I was never at the medieval festival to make money... I shoot for fun
    most of the time.
    again you better start popping your pills, as you are in looney mode again!

    Again, I shoot for fun.
    What is your problem... an inferiority complex perhaps?
    http://www.technoaussie.com/gallery/ ROTFL!!!!
    POTD.com.au, Jul 9, 2005
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.