Nora

Discussion in 'Digital Cameras' started by Sandman, Aug 18, 2013.

  1. Sandman

    Sandman Guest

    Blog post:
    <http://jonaseklundh.se/pages/Nora12?lang=en>


    My and my family went to the small town of Nora, Sweden to go on a
    real steam train. Very beautiful!

    Machinery
    <http://jonaseklundh.se/aimg201279.jpg>
    NIKON D3S, 50.0 mm, f/1.4, 1/1000 sec., ISO 200




    Steam
    <http://jonaseklundh.se/aimg201280.jpg>
    NIKON D3S, 50.0 mm, f/1.4, 1/6400 sec., ISO 200




    Old timer
    <http://jonaseklundh.se/aimg201281.jpg>
    NIKON D3S, 28.0 mm, f/2.5, 1/1000 sec., ISO 320




    Fountain
    <http://jonaseklundh.se/aimg201282.jpg>
    NIKON D3S, 120.0 mm, f/4.0, 1/1600 sec., ISO 320




    Water drops
    <http://jonaseklundh.se/aimg201283.jpg>
    NIKON D3S, 120.0 mm, f/4.0, 1/8000 sec., ISO 1000
     
    Sandman, Aug 18, 2013
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. Sandman

    Michael Guest

    I like the engine with the steam. If only it were Kodachrome.
     
    Michael, Aug 18, 2013
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. Sandman

    Robert Coe Guest

    : Blog post:
    : <http://jonaseklundh.se/pages/Nora12?lang=en>
    :
    :
    : My and my family went to the small town of Nora, Sweden to go on a
    : real steam train. Very beautiful!
    :
    : Machinery
    : <http://jonaseklundh.se/aimg201279.jpg>
    : NIKON D3S, 50.0 mm, f/1.4, 1/1000 sec., ISO 200
    :
    :
    :
    :
    : Steam
    : <http://jonaseklundh.se/aimg201280.jpg>
    : NIKON D3S, 50.0 mm, f/1.4, 1/6400 sec., ISO 200
    :
    :
    :
    :
    : Old timer
    : <http://jonaseklundh.se/aimg201281.jpg>
    : NIKON D3S, 28.0 mm, f/2.5, 1/1000 sec., ISO 320
    :
    :
    :
    :
    : Fountain
    : <http://jonaseklundh.se/aimg201282.jpg>
    : NIKON D3S, 120.0 mm, f/4.0, 1/1600 sec., ISO 320
    :
    :
    :
    :
    : Water drops
    : <http://jonaseklundh.se/aimg201283.jpg>
    : NIKON D3S, 120.0 mm, f/4.0, 1/8000 sec., ISO 1000

    Nice shots. I'm a little puzzled, though, by your insistence on such wide
    apertures at the inevitable cost in depth of field. (You certainly had plenty
    of latitude in the shutter speed.) This is particularly noticeable in the
    first picture, where the manufacturer's nameplate could have been sharper.

    In the fourth picture I might have tried to show a little more of the fountain
    at which the girl was looking. But I guess it would have resulted in an
    awkwardly wide image.

    Note that I've not criticized the blown-highlight background in the third
    picture. Somebody probably will, but I won't. ;^)

    Bob
     
    Robert Coe, Aug 18, 2013
    #3
  4. Sandman

    Eric Stevens Guest

    What worried me most about the first picture was the perspective
    distortion caused by taking the photo from close range. I'm sure it's
    correctable in post processing and this would improve the image in my
    mind.
     
    Eric Stevens, Aug 18, 2013
    #4
  5. Sandman

    Tony Cooper Guest

    Agreed. It's a difficult choice, though. I'd want the water drops to
    show what the girl is looking at, but there's not enough of the statue
    in the image.
    The top of that image really detracts because the lower part of the
    image is good. The smoke from the front of the engine is weird. The
    problem with the image is that the top left wedge demands attention
    and takes it away from what is good.
     
    Tony Cooper, Aug 19, 2013
    #5
  6. Sandman

    Savageduck Guest

    Yup! I agree, nice shots with some issues. I know that Jonas favors
    shooting manual exposure, and I don't think he got everything quite
    right here.

    I agree with Bob that for some of these the decision to shoot with wide
    apertures was not the best of choices. I can see no need to have shot
    the first one wide open. I would have wanted more defined detail, not
    the shallow DoF shown. The same applies to #2, there seems to be little
    point to the shallow DoF.

    #3 is a great shot with the exception of the blown upper left. The DoF
    is much better with this shot as he didn't push the lens wide open to
    f/1.8, but here going to f/4-/f6.3 might have been better. Otherwise,
    here is where an ND Grad would have been nice to have handy.

    #4 is a great capture with compositional needs. It needs to either show
    the full context of the fountain, or it needs to be cropped to isolate
    the girl. As it is one asks, is it a shot of the fountain, the girl
    relative to the entire fountain, or just the girl. In my mind the girl
    is the subject, so make her the subject.

    #5 seems to be just an exercise shot. The water drops have been
    captured, but I am not particularly taken with this shot.
     
    Savageduck, Aug 19, 2013
    #6
  7. Sandman

    Sandman Guest

    I know what you mean. I am a sucker for short focal planes, and it
    sometimes gets ahead of me and I stick my aperture as large as possible
    and just adjust the shutter. I'm not that bothered with the nameplate
    myself, but I know lots of images I've taken where the short depth of
    field more or less ruined the shot.
    I had a wider version of this, but it was neither here nor there. This
    one just felt better. :)
    Haha, yeah that sucked. I had this perfect shot of the engine from
    another angle, but it was out of focus... :/


    Thanks for your comments, though :)
     
    Sandman, Aug 19, 2013
    #7
  8. Sandman

    Sandman Guest

    [/QUOTE]

    Certainly not. #1 is a good example. I'm not as bothered with it as Rob,
    but I can certainly understand and agree with his points. :)
    Huh, yeah maybe. I felt that the DOF separated the train slightly form
    the background, but maybe not enough. Maybe it becomes a strange middle
    way that's not working as clearly as it could.
    Indeed. But the horizon is hidden far behind and the grad would have
    probably affected the engine as well, don't you think? ND grad's are so
    cumbersome to work with as well (at least on a casual family trip as
    this one). I've never seen a circular one that would fit on the lens
    directly, so I haven't used them much. I usually go with a polarizing
    filter, but that's not exactly the same effect.
    Well, tastes differ I suppose. I dislike putting subject in the center,
    especially people. While I can certainly agree that the composition
    could be improved, I rarely end up improving it by centering more on one
    specific thing. Showing more of the fountain would have been good,
    though.
    :)
     
    Sandman, Aug 19, 2013
    #8
  9. Sandman

    Whisky-dave Guest

    Surely it should be, My family and I.................

    Nice pics pity you don't speak proper english like what me and the queen do ;-)
     
    Whisky-dave, Aug 19, 2013
    #9
  10. Sandman

    Sandman Guest

    Haha, drunk Dave tries to make a spelling flame! That's HILARIOUS!

    And, as usual when making a spelling flame, you messed up the grammar:

    "like what me and the queen do".

    Ironic. :)
     
    Sandman, Aug 19, 2013
    #10
  11. Sandman

    Tony Cooper Guest

    We need to export some irony meters to Sweden.
     
    Tony Cooper, Aug 19, 2013
    #11
  12. Sandman

    sid Guest

     
    sid, Aug 19, 2013
    #12
  13. Sandman

    Sandman Guest

    The trouble with setting your self up as an English expert is that as a non
    native English speaker you just do not "get" the jist, not for the first
    time, of what is being said to you.
    For starters it was not a spelling flame but a grammar flame and secondly
    Dave wrote perfectly correctly for the meaning he was conveying.[/QUOTE]

    Not only have I set myself up as an "expert" of anything, but you're
    also incorrect. Removing non-qualifying parts of the sentence:

    "you don't speak English like what I do"

    Is not a properly formatted English sentence. "What" is a relative
    pronoun here that does not relate to anything else in the sentence as
    constructed. "Speak" is a verb, and is referenced with an adverb, like
    "how".

    "you don't speak English like I do"
    "you don't speak English how I do"
    "you don't speak English the way I do"

    Are all correct. And thus the correct version would be:

    "You don't speak proper English like me and the Queen"

    No adverb or pronoun is even needed. But if you insist:

    "You don't speak proper English like how me and the Queen does it"

    Also note the punctuation and capitalisation:

    Drunk Dave:
    "Nice pics pity you don't speak proper english like what me and the
    queen do"

    Actual English:
    "Nice pics. Pity you don't speak proper English like me and the
    Queen"

    I'm not an expert, but I'm not stupid either. There is a middle road :)
     
    Sandman, Aug 19, 2013
    #13
  14. Sandman

    Savageduck Guest

    Not only have I set myself up as an "expert" of anything, but you're
    also incorrect. Removing non-qualifying parts of the sentence:

    "you don't speak English like what I do"

    Is not a properly formatted English sentence. "What" is a relative
    pronoun here that does not relate to anything else in the sentence as
    constructed. "Speak" is a verb, and is referenced with an adverb, like
    "how".

    "you don't speak English like I do"
    "you don't speak English how I do"
    "you don't speak English the way I do"

    Are all correct. And thus the correct version would be:

    "You don't speak proper English like me and the Queen"

    No adverb or pronoun is even needed. But if you insist:

    "You don't speak proper English like how me and the Queen does it"

    Also note the punctuation and capitalisation:

    Drunk Dave:
    "Nice pics pity you don't speak proper english like what me and the
    queen do"

    Actual English:
    "Nice pics. Pity you don't speak proper English like me and the
    Queen"

    I'm not an expert, but I'm not stupid either. There is a middle road :)[/QUOTE]

    That was an obvious joke and play on words by Dave.
    ....and what is obvious is you didn't get the joke.
     
    Savageduck, Aug 19, 2013
    #14
  15. Sandman

    Tony Cooper Guest

    Not only have I set myself up as an "expert" of anything, but you're
    also incorrect. Removing non-qualifying parts of the sentence:

    "you don't speak English like what I do"

    Is not a properly formatted English sentence. "What" is a relative
    pronoun here that does not relate to anything else in the sentence as
    constructed. "Speak" is a verb, and is referenced with an adverb, like
    "how".

    "you don't speak English like I do"
    "you don't speak English how I do"
    "you don't speak English the way I do"

    Are all correct. And thus the correct version would be:

    "You don't speak proper English like me and the Queen"

    No adverb or pronoun is even needed. But if you insist:

    "You don't speak proper English like how me and the Queen does it"[/QUOTE]

    My God. "Like how"? "Like me"? "Does it"?

    "Like", in that context, is acceptable only in very informal speech.
    "As" would be used in "proper" English.

    What I would insist on is "You don't speak proper English as the Queen
    and I do". Some might dislike "do" at the end of the sentence, but
    I've never liked "as do the Queen and I". It sounds pompous.

    The use of "me" or "I" is easily determined by dropping the words "and
    the Queen".
    If you are going to be that informal and use "pics", then a comma
    instead of a full stop and lowercase "pity" is OK. Normally, we put
    the Queen first and make that "the Queen and I".

    He still doesn't "get it". Nohow. The sentence was written as
    sarcastic commentary with the structure and grammar fully intended as
    it appears.
     
    Tony Cooper, Aug 19, 2013
    #15
  16. Usenet is the perfect medium for international mis-communication.
     
    pensive hamster, Aug 19, 2013
    #16
  17. ]
    Its not a spelling flame.

    He's taking the mickey out of the UK Queen, who quite often
    says, in official speeches,'My family and I ...' or 'My husband and I ...'
    and contrasting it with (a stereotype) of lower class speech, which
    would be something like 'like wot me and the missus does'.

    Call us class-obsessed if you like, but spelling flamers, never!
     
    pensive hamster, Aug 19, 2013
    #17
  18. Sandman

    Sandman Guest

    That was an obvious joke and play on words by Dave.
    ...and what is obvious is you didn't get the joke.[/QUOTE]

    Uh, Drunk Dave can't write a proper English sentence to save his life.
    Surely you've read his posts? They are a mess, and you need some form of
    decoding key in order to understand them.

    The spelling and grammar mistakes he makes are NOT intentional, or he
    does it in every single post he ever makes.

    I sincerely think he's drunk when he posts. :)
     
    Sandman, Aug 19, 2013
    #18
  19. Sandman

    Tony Cooper Guest

    Uh, Drunk Dave can't write a proper English sentence to save his life.
    Surely you've read his posts? They are a mess, and you need some form of
    decoding key in order to understand them.

    The spelling and grammar mistakes he makes are NOT intentional, or he
    does it in every single post he ever makes.

    I sincerely think he's drunk when he posts. :)[/QUOTE]

    We've been edumacated. While Dave does make mistakes, this was
    obviously not one of them. Jonas' "corrections", though, were rife
    with errors.
     
    Tony Cooper, Aug 19, 2013
    #19
  20. Sandman

    Savageduck Guest

     
    Savageduck, Aug 19, 2013
    #20
    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.
Similar Threads
There are no similar threads yet.
Loading...