Carl Zeiss photo contest winner (what took it, a camera phone?)

Discussion in 'Digital SLR' started by RichA, Mar 6, 2009.

  1. RichA

    RichA Guest

    RichA, Mar 6, 2009
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. RichA

    Bigguy Guest

    Bigguy, Mar 6, 2009
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. RichA

    Nomen Nescio Guest

    Since you asked, Re: Carl Zeiss photo contest winner (what took it, a camera
    phone?)

    Exif IFD0

    * Camera Make = Canon
    * Camera Model = Canon PowerShot A700
    * Picture Orientation = normal (1)
    * X-Resolution = 180/1 = 180
    * Y-Resolution = 180/1 = 180
    * X/Y-Resolution Unit = inch (2)
    * Last Modified Date/Time = 2006:03:14 11:05:15
    * Y/Cb/Cr Positioning (Subsampling) = centered / center of pixel array
    (1)

    Exif Sub IFD

    * Exposure Time (1 / Shutter Speed) = 1/60 second = 0.01667 second
    * Lens F-Number/F-Stop = 35/10 = F3.5
    * Exif Version = 0220
    * Original Date/Time = 2006:03:14 11:05:15
    * Digitization Date/Time = 2006:03:14 11:05:15
    * Components Configuration = 0x01,0x02,0x03,0x00 / YCbCr
    * Compressed Bits per Pixel = 5/1 = 5
    * Shutter Speed Value (APEX) = 189/32
    Shutter Speed (Exposure Time) = 1/59.97 second
    * Aperture Value (APEX) = 116/32
    Aperture = F3.51
    * Exposure Bias (EV) = 0/3 = 0
    * Max Aperture Value (APEX) = 116/32 = 3.63
    Max Aperture = F3.51
    * Metering Mode = pattern / multi-segment (5)
    * Flash = Flash fired, auto mode, red-eye reduction mode
    * Focal Length = 13159/1000 mm = 13.16 mm
    * Maker Note =
     
    Nomen Nescio, Mar 6, 2009
    #3
  4. RichA

    Charlie Groh Guest

    Charlie Groh, Mar 6, 2009
    #4
  5. RichA

    Paul Furman Guest

    Try this link:
    http://www.zeiss.com/c12567a8003b58b9/Contents-Frame/c9027d13d4f33842c12575600048b4b1
    "Picture taken with: Analogue rangefinder camera with
    Planar T* 2/50 ZM"


    --
    Paul Furman
    www.edgehill.net
    www.baynatives.com

    all google groups messages filtered due to spam
     
    Paul Furman, Mar 6, 2009
    #5
  6. RichA

    John A. Guest

    John A., Mar 7, 2009
    #6
  7. RichA

    DRS Guest

    Moreover, I couldn't find the EXIF data given earlier in the image itself.
     
    DRS, Mar 7, 2009
    #7
  8. RichA

    John A. Guest

    Huh! You're right!

    Compression - 1 (None)
    ImageDescription - Das Gewinnerbild von Colin Jones, USA.
    Winning image of Mr. Colin Jones, USA.
    Orientation - Top left
    XResolution - 72
    YResolution - 72
    ResolutionUnit - Inch
    Software - Adobe Photoshop 7.0
    DateTime - 2009:02:23 13:34:34
    YCbCrPositioning - Centered
    Copyright - Foto: Carl Zeiss/Photo: Courtesy of Carl Zeiss
    ExifOffset - 328
    SubsecTime - 406
    ColorSpace - sRGB
    ExifImageWidth - 1818
    ExifImageHeight - 1228

    Thumbnail: -
    Compression - 6 (JPG)
    XResolution - 72
    YResolution - 72
    ResolutionUnit - Inch
    JpegIFOffset - 478
    JpegIFByteCount - 3561

    I wonder what image Nomen was reading.
     
    John A., Mar 7, 2009
    #8
  9. It doesn't explain it. The "noise" being discussed, if that's what it
    is, doesn't look at all like digital camera noise.
     
    Chris Malcolm, Mar 7, 2009
    #9
  10. RichA

    Charlie Groh Guest

    ....you're right...I normally run my NEF stuff through DXO, and their
    noise compensation software sometimes (usually when I shooting 2000 or
    higher ISO) looks something like this at 100%...when it's backed off
    it ain't bad...

    cg
     
    Charlie Groh, Mar 7, 2009
    #10
  11. RichA

    avotius

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2013
    Messages:
    1
    Likes Received:
    0
    Sorry to bring this very old thread back to life but I thought I just found this and wanted to comment. The things you find in google....

    I took the photo in question here and I can answer most of whats going on here.

    The photo was taken with a Leica M6 and a Zeiss lens on film. Fuji Superia 200 if I remember right. The photo shown online was a scanned negative and not a very high resolution scan at that. I offered to product a higher quality scan for them but they said it was not nessesary. When I scan my negatives I would do it quick and fast to get previews and basic small photos that would look ok online at 800x600 or whatever. Just so happens that is what this picture was.

    As for the EXIF info, you got me. The scanner was a Fuji dont think it added anything to the bmp files and yes it was photoshopped, its a scanned negative after all.
     
    avotius, Mar 13, 2013
    #11
    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.