mangogrooveworkshop
|
| posted on 2/1/06 at 08:51 PM |
|
|
Wow what a jump! Dakar man JLS
http://www.schlesser-aventures.org/
|
|
|
|
|
mangogrooveworkshop
|
| posted on 2/1/06 at 08:53 PM |
|
|
|
|
|
Avoneer
|
| posted on 2/1/06 at 10:30 PM |
|
|
Never mind the jump - what a picture.
So clear.
Pat...
No trees were killed in the sending of this message.
However a large number of electrons were terribly inconvenienced.
|
|
|
JoelP
|
| posted on 2/1/06 at 11:35 PM |
|
|
you know he's used a damned fast shutter speed!  which probably explains the fairly narrow depth of field - you compensate a fast shutter with
a large aperture 
|
|
|
mangogrooveworkshop
|
| posted on 3/1/06 at 12:46 AM |
|
|
Makes a great desktop
|
|
|
Genesis
|
| posted on 3/1/06 at 12:51 AM |
|
|
The depth of field in those pictures is deep... considering the conditions (full sun) a 125mm lens, shutter speed of 1/1000th sec will capture that at
f4.0... depth of field is set to infinate. If the aperture is any more open in those conditions it will require a slower speed film say ISO80 to
enable the shutter to cope without overexposing. Todays mid-range digital 'point and shoot' camera's are able to step down easily to
accomodate that picture... the shadow of the photographer in the first one gives it away alittle. Second on is a good one if an easy shot... focus on
brow of hill and wait.
Going fishin'
|
|
|
MkIndy7
|
| posted on 3/1/06 at 12:57 AM |
|
|
Banished to the Dakar,
Am sure I read that ....
He did a short stint in F1 but was sacked for taking Senna off whilst trying to un-lap himself in McLarens dominant year,
think he was the only reason that McLaren didn't have a 100% finish record 
|
|
|
JoelP
|
| posted on 3/1/06 at 08:15 AM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Genesis
If the aperture is any more open in those conditions it will require a slower speed film say ISO80 to enable the shutter to cope without
overexposing.
whilst i hate to argue with someone who knows what they're on about, especially when its so long since i did any photography, surely a wide
aperture (low numerically) lets in more light and hence requires either a slower film or a faster shutter speed?
|
|
|
Genesis
|
| posted on 3/1/06 at 11:55 AM |
|
|
Hi Joel - you're right, isn't that what I put? Maybe I wrote it wrong or you read it wrong... or both
After re-reading it - maybe it would be more detailed to have written overexposure due to the limits of the speed of the shutter at say 1/2000 of a
second, thereby limiting aperture size. I love photography me... went to Tech for a few years to learn about it - developed 1000's of pictures
and now thats all gone I have files to show for it.
Due to financial restrictions I now only have a point and shoot (albeit a good one) but you dont need an expensive camera to take a good picture - an
expensive one could make it better, that's all. Best camera I've had a Bronica LF cracking hi-res images... now I get a similar image from
my Fuji 6.3MP
That's progress for you...
Going fishin'
|
|
|
%20(WinCE).JPG)
