Cool! I discovered by accident a lot of effects in my ancient version of Photoshop. This is Filter/Edges and then convert to B&W. It makes it look like an engraving:
Of course, it could be improved by editing the photo first, but I did this quickly, just to show the principle.
David
An older one this time
Shot with the Magic drainpipe
Canon EOS 5D Mark IV - Canon EF 80-200mm f/2.8L
Seagull and a left over apple core by Photobygms, on Flickr
David,
It's nice to see the rose flowers and the work around your city. We have the same situation in Oregon where work on our roadways seem to progress very slowly.
David,
I'm glad you found a way with your old version of Photoshop to convert your photos into drawings. To my liking, it works well for certain things like people, roads and buildings.
Photobygjms,
The photo of the seagull and the apple core remind me where I took a similar picture of a seagull who was picking apart a dead crab on the beach. I got a lot of pictures of that seagull that day.
I do have a few more also, but similar, it took about 15 minutes before it realized the core did not fit in it's beak.😂
OpenCube,
That's an interesting choice of colors. How did you create that? Is that a cornfield?
"I'm just doing time inside my mind and all I've got is Hank to keep me company."
Full spectrum camera, color pushing in post. No idea what was growing in the field. It was shot out out a window passing by in Julyish. Could be soy beans or wheat.
OpenCube,
That's a nice countryside. I often take pictures of fields like that from my car window also.
I've been practicing keeping my ISO at 100, no matter what, just to learn better how exposure works.
I think these were in Av mode.
I caught a glimpse of the sky through the trees.
In the first one, I center-weighted metering off the white clouds, turning the trees into silhouettes:
It was one of those days when the sky was a deep blue and the edges of the clouds were real white
You can see where it kicked up the shutter speed.
In the second, I metered off the dark wood of the trees. It softened the blue of the sky.
I thought the little window of sky it was kind of mesmerizing. There's a little bit of a sun flare in the bottom left.
Steve Thomas
Steve,
Using ISO 100 for everything will be more challenging. When I was faced with using lower ISO levels in my older cameras, I had the choice to lower shutter speeds, reduce focal lengths and open the aperture more. It was tough to do sometimes when there were things moving and I wanted enough depth of field. So we looked for that balance with all the settings to achieve what we wanted. Now, with high ISO levels that we can use with modern cameras, we don't have to work at it as hard.
@stevet1 you should try analog photography, Shooting film means to keep the ISO (or ASA/DIN) the same (most of the time)😁
Shooting at 100 ISO is just what I had to do with this film. it's sold as a 100 ISO film, but has some latitude (up to 400ISO is possible)
Canon Eos 3 - Canon EF 24-70mm f/4L IS USM
Film Washi X 100 developed with Cinestillfilm Cs41 kit at 39c and 3.5 minutes
Dragonfly by Photobygms, on Flickr
Photobygms,
That's fascinating that you used film at ISO100 (with some latitude to ISO400). Yes, thinking about what Steve wrote, a person could set their ISO to 100 on their digital cameras all of the time in different lighting and see what they could get. That might be fun and difficult in dark settings where there's motion. It's interesting that the dragonfly blends in naturally with the plant.
Opinions on this approach seem to vary widely.
Some people advocate that you should set your ISO as low as possible to begin with and set your shutter speed to satisfy your motion requirements and your aperture to satisfy your depth of field requirements. Only raise your ISO if you need to.
Lower ISO, they say, has less noise issues, and a greater dynamic range between the darks and the lights.
Other people put their camera in manual mode with Auto ISO, and if your photo is too under or over exposed, use exposure compensation to raise or lower your ISO to raise or lower your exposure. Others start out in manual with a fixed ISO, and using Live View, raise or lower their ISO until they are happy with the look in front of them (although exposure simulation may be unreliable based on how high you have the brightness level set on your LCD screen).
I'm still trying to work things out. What I am seeing, I think, is that lower ISO's seem to produce richer, fuller photos.
Steve Thomas
Steve,
Yes, lower ISO levels work well and is what we should try to use. The problem I have living in a rainy and cloudy climate, is that the lighting can dramatically change and it is quite dark sometimes. I'm also taking a lot of pictures of people and wildlife that move a lot. The other day, it was interesting when I was taking street scenes in the city with building shadows. Using Auto ISO, one photo was ISO8000. I was shocked. My eye/brain didn't tell me it was that dark, but the camera knew better. I have only a very short time to make a decision like within seconds or fractions of seconds to make a decision. Now, if a person was taking photos of a landscape scene where everything was stationary and time was not a factor, then a person could use a tripod and take those photos at ISO100.
Dig,
Yes. Handling motion in dim light is a tough nut to crack.
Steve
