Welcome to Laser Pointer Forums - discuss green laser pointers, blue laser pointers, and all types of lasers

Buy Site Supporter Role (remove some ads) | LPF Donations

Links below open in new window

FrozenGate by Avery

A tough subject to photograph!

beautiful pic, too much noise though.

Your focus is dead on.

Either drop the ISO or run it through a program like noise ninja to clean it up. Otherwise it's top notch.

NOTE: if the noise is only on the jpeg and not on the raw, I apologize in advance.
 





icecruncher said:
beautiful pic, too much noise though.

Your focus is dead on.

Either drop the ISO or run it through a program like noise ninja to clean it up. Otherwise it's top notch.

NOTE: if the noise is only on the jpeg and not on the raw, I apologize in advance.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the comments. However this is a low quality jpeg and there is more noise to the shot because of that. Thanks for the critique.

-T
 
RA_pierce said:
Awesome photos! I'm always impressed by your pictures. If I wasn't so poor I'd invest in a good camera... that's just amazing.
Click to expand...

Thank you.....however it is not the camera quality that is responsible for the photos....it does help. A good photographer can get great shots with just about any camera. It just takes practice.

-Todd
 
Yes, VERY nice shots. nice and crisp. would make one hell of a desktop background...ecspecialy if you had turned off the lights so we can see the beam!

Dark
 
Emc2 said:
Thank you.....however it is not the camera quality that is responsible for the photos....it does help. A good photographer can get great shots with just about any camera. It just takes practice.

-Todd
Click to expand...

This is very true. Nice pics though. :)
 
abadcaffeinetrip said:
The noise is a non-issue. Have you ever looked at a real silver print?

Because it is a good photograph and we all wish we had captured it :)

Nice shot, Mr. Hargis!
Click to expand...

I agree with it being a very, very good shot, and I wish I had captured it.

But the noise IS an issue. I used to do professional photography, weddings, etc. 30 years ago with a Minolta SRT-101 (FULLY MANUAL). You had one chance at the pictures and if they were wrong or grainy, you didn't know until you got them back from the developer.

I currently have a D70 and a few basic lenses, including the 18-70 and a 80-400VR. Nikons sometimes have an issue with noise. D70's don't even have an ISO100, ISO200 is the lowest they go. Same on a D3 in the standard ISO.

Don't get me wrong, I love Nikons, but when I first switched from film to digital I found it easy to "bump" the ISO up. I ended up with more noise on some shots than they should have had.

So, I defend my statement about the noise. On here (LPF) they are great shots, on the dpreview forums, others would say the same thing about the noise.
 
icecruncher said:
I agree with it being a very, very good shot, and I wish I had captured it.

But the noise IS an issue. I used to do professional photography, weddings, etc. 30 years ago with a Minolta SRT-101 (FULLY MANUAL). You had one chance at the pictures and if they were wrong or grainy, you didn't know until you got them back from the developer.

I currently have a D70 and a few basic lenses, including the 18-70 and a 80-400VR. Nikons sometimes have an issue with noise. D70's don't even have an ISO100, ISO200 is the lowest they go. Same on a D3 in the standard ISO.

Don't get me wrong, I love Nikons, but when I first switched from film to digital I found it easy to "bump" the ISO up. I ended up with more noise on some shots than they should have had.

So, I defend my statement about the noise. On here (LPF) they are great shots, on the dpreview forums, others would say the same thing about the noise.
Click to expand...


Well the noise is from the fiant smoke in the air as the jpeg is lowered in quality for the web. ISO 640 on the D3, noise is non existant. Heck ISO 4000 is clean. So the only way noise is going to be in this photo is from the downgrading and stretching the gamma of the photo to bring out subtle details. On the D3 there is no difference in IQ from 200 ~800 ISO. In this photo, the noise is from lowering the IQ of the jpeg for the web.

-T
 
Emc2 said:
Well the noise is from the fiant smoke in the air as the jpeg is lowered in quality for the web. ISO 640 on the D3, noise is non existant. Heck ISO 4000 is clean. So the only way noise is going to be in this photo is from the downgrading and stretching the gamma of the photo to bring out subtle details. On the D3 there is no difference in IQ from 200 ~800 ISO. In this photo, the noise is from lowering the IQ of the jpeg for the web.

-T
Click to expand...

I'm still fuzzy on the IQ vs MP stuff in relation to the photo sites of the camera. But jpeg compression noise is very typical on web shots and not on the originals. I thought this might be the case.

And I will say again, It is a beautiful shot. I'd love to see the original!
 
Last edited:
Awesome shots! Nikons do well with fire, don't they? (I have a D90).

Can't capture blu-ray at all though.

-Mark
 
Brilliant pictures! The solo picture with smoke curling down the match is astounding..
 
rocketparrotlet said:
Awesome shots! Nikons do well with fire, don't they? (I have a D90).

Can't capture blu-ray at all though.

-Mark
Click to expand...

Why can't you photograph the blue ray laser? Is the color balance off or is it too far in the blue spectrum to where the cameras sensore renders it a different color?

Thanks for you comments.......

AND FOR THE RECORD, I CLICKED THE LINK! Oh man that so funny...you got me.

-T
 
Awesome quality for a jpeg, don't worry.
They must look awesome in .raw


I salute you fellow Nikon user!

Oh, did you use any artificial lighting? Doesn't seem like it, so I'm guessing you erased the background with PS :)



I don't know how you even thought about using a D3 with an RPL :P I don't let my D90 get anywhere near lasers.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


Back
Top