Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Out of Focus & Off Topic MkIII...

14748495153

Comments

  • Moderators, Arts Moderators Posts: 3,550 Mod ✭✭✭✭Myksyk


    Guys, we'll have a look at this. Due to set up a new thread soon enough probably. I'll discuss with other mods.


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,325 ✭✭✭iLikeWaffles


    AnCatDubh wrote: »
    Is it time to revisit the 800px on longest side thing on the random photo thread?

    Some cracking shots in there which aren't really being allowed showcase their visual merit. Loads of examples recently but for example that one of Little Skellig is a cracking image dwarfed by the restriction.

    I recall when 800px was the thing (and the lively debate around it). But i'm thinking the days of 800x600 displays being the norm may have shifted.

    Of course it would be the photographers perogative to display it whatever way they want but maybe as a forum, it would be worth revisiting?

    One could argue that having the size increased could make photo's susceptible to being used outside of the photographers control of their IP or even be plagiarised. JPG's don't scale up very well.


  • Registered Users Posts: 6,664 ✭✭✭CelticRambler


    With my coding hat on, I'd say ... well, you can break it if you want to! :D

    The 800px limit has to do with the layout of the page, not the resolution of your screen. If you increase the size of photo allowed, you will probably have to change the whole boards.ie template, for every page and for both desktop and touch versions. I would argue that's a heck of a lot of work for little gain. Yes, the Skelligs photo suffers terribly from the 800px limit - but giving it an extra 200px won't change the fact that it really needs to be on a horizontal wall in a big room.

    In addition, if the 800px limit is increased to (say) 1000px, then don't forget that that also applies to the vertical side (unless some poor tech is forced to write yet more code to limit the y-axis dimensions). As it is, 800px already exceeds the display area of boards.ie on a standard "landscape" screen, unless you're browsing in full-screen mode with toolbars and other screen furniture reduced to the minimum.

    The simplest solution would be to remind contributors to post their images on an external (specifically photo-hosting) site and link to that with what is essentially a giant thumbnail on the Random Photos thread. That would allow all of us to appreciate these pictures in the best possible format.


  • Registered Users Posts: 6,392 ✭✭✭AnCatDubh


    The 800px limit has to do with the layout of the page, not the resolution of your screen.

    I don't think that is the case if my memory of the thing's genesis is correct - 800 if i recall correctly was more an expressed preference to do with the majority of photo forum boardsie's screens in use at that time (a loooooong time ago) - i'd expect that to have changed considerably. It may be a bad idea for other reasons but I don't think it will break the site. I mean i can post a new thread at a resolution of 1024 on longest side and it doesn't break the site. I may be wrong but I think the boards mobile template is responsive in its rendering of content.
    One could argue that having the size increased could make photo's susceptible to being used outside of the photographers control of their IP or even be plagiarised. JPG's don't scale up very well.

    Not suggesting everyone must post larger images - just that the restriction of 800px be revisited. I suspect it would be fine for anyone who wants to post at 800px to continue to do so, or if they were only happy with 400px - fire ahead. No worries.


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,325 ✭✭✭iLikeWaffles


    AnCatDubh wrote: »

    Not suggesting everyone must post larger images - just that the restriction of 800px be revisited. I suspect it would be fine for anyone who wants to post at 800px to continue to do so, or if they were only happy with 400px - fire ahead. No worries.

    That is exactly what you are suggesting. The 800px is just a guideline, if the guideline was 1920 largest side everyone would be posting this! As the title would suggest.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 8,087 ✭✭✭dinneenp




  • Registered Users Posts: 8,087 ✭✭✭dinneenp


    Not a chance! (even though it's probably not as dangerous as it looks).
    From The Atlantic photos of the week

    original.jpg


  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 47,998 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder


    i hope those chancers are disqualified from the TdF for that. blatant cheating.


  • Registered Users Posts: 6,392 ✭✭✭AnCatDubh


    For the odd days that are in it, if you follow American Presidential politics you might find this interesting. A few cracking shots in there too.

    https://widerimage.reuters.com/story/the-stories-behind-the-standout-images-from-the-us-election


  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 47,998 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder




  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 47,998 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder


    anyone have any tips or plugins they know of for photoshop which could remove or mitigate degradation of a photo that really only exists in one channel?

    it's a family photo i'd like to clean up - here's a crop which might show the issue - the issue exists 80-90% in the blue channel, but a little in the green channel too. was wondering if there's any process which uses what remains in the other channels to help fix the blue channel? a bit like ICE in scanning, i guess.

    532249.jpg


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,325 ✭✭✭iLikeWaffles


    Do you now the way you can connect a DSLR to a telescope.... T2 adaptor. T-Ring / T-adaptor... What about connecting a camera lens to a different format such as a dedicated astro camera (for example a ZWO ASI120MC-S USB 3.0 M42 0.75mm female thread). Am I understanding crop factor correctly; a smaller sensor such as the one mentioned would give a crop factor of 7.21, meaning a prime lens of 50mm will be the equivalent focal length of 360mm on a 1/3 sensor (4.8² x 3.6² = 6mm diagonal, 43.27/ 6 = 7.21). Is this completely wrong and wishful thinking?!

    Would require an m42 0.75 to EF adaptor to work (the reverse of a T2 adaptor). Now there are other adaptors that fit non canon lenses on canon bodies and vice versa. Even macro reverse adaptors, is there any way for this to work?? :eek:

    would be this but can't seem to find one...
    ss_tmle_L.jpg

    Closest I can find is this... https://www.ebay.ie/i/283849784747 but it is M42 with a 1mm thread pitch not 0.75


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,325 ✭✭✭iLikeWaffles


    Well I found that the above adaptor does exist but it is pricey about £45-70 depending on where you buy. There is a couple catches with using the larger lenses on a small sensor. Firstly the crop factor is also applied to the f/stop and secondly the back focus space required for the above mentioned camera is 12.5mm, there isn't any 12.5mm m42 0.75mm or sometimes named T2 spacers available so you have to buy a T2 extension set that includes 7.5 + 5 for the lower priced one (£45). ZWO have a specific adaptor (Canon or Nikon) that also includes the required 5mm spacer plus there is threads on the inside for 2" astro filters, this one is about $80 including delivery from the ZWO website, works out about €63 which all in all works out a bit cheaper than buying the separate adaptor and required spacers when you include delivery.

    There is probably another work around, using a 58mm reverse macro adaptor protection ring and a 58mm to t2 and the extenders but it is hard to find info on it that working and the spacing could be trial and error. Again though delivery cost will bring it into the territory of pricey.


  • Registered Users Posts: 6,671 ✭✭✭DaireQuinlan


    Firstly the crop factor is also applied to the f/stop
    :confused:

    f/stop is f/stop is f/stop. A f/2.8 50mm is an f/2.8 50mm whether it's attached to medium format (6x6cm) or 35mm (FF in digital terms) or APS or whatever. The thing that people get confused about is that in order to get an equivalent FOV on, say, a 6mm sensor, you would have to be considerably further away than if you were shooting with a FF sensor, and be focused at a greater distance, and have a correspondingly larger DOF. Is that what you meant ?


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,325 ✭✭✭iLikeWaffles


    :confused:

    f/stop is f/stop is f/stop. A f/2.8 50mm is an f/2.8 50mm whether it's attached to medium format (6x6cm) or 35mm (FF in digital terms) or APS or whatever. The thing that people get confused about is that in order to get an equivalent FOV on, say, a 6mm sensor, you would have to be considerably further away than if you were shooting with a FF sensor, and be focused at a greater distance, and have a correspondingly larger DOF. Is that what you meant ?

    yes, I would imagine that the larger lens on such a tiny sensor 6mm would mean that on a high f/stop it would be the equivalent of say 3.5 or something low like this it is also in the centre of the lens so any coma or telephoto lens distortions would be dealt with, with the crop to a certain degree at least.


  • Registered Users Posts: 6,283 ✭✭✭fixXxer


    Boards related, anyone else having trouble with the flickr BB code? I'm trying to share but keep getting a cloudfare message saying im blocked from posting.


  • Registered Users Posts: 694 ✭✭✭barryribs


    This doesn't really require a thread of it's own, but did anyone see the cameras they were using at the superbowl? I noticed it also at last weekend's UFC event. I read a little about it and they are using the new Sony A1 and the A7R IV at the superbowl and they really struggled to hold the focus. It worked much better during the HT show and the UFC, I guess primarily because there wasn't as much action in the frame.

    I think its interesting to see it in sports, although I'm not a fan of the jarring switch between the standard and shallow DOF. I'll try to get some screenshots later if anyone is interested.


  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 47,998 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder


    this is great:

    A Wexford Street Photo Shop Survives 50 Years
    https://dublininquirer.com/2021/02/24/a-wexford-street-photo-shop-survives-50-years


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,109 ✭✭✭Ben D Bus


    this is great:

    A Wexford Street Photo Shop Survives 50 Years
    https://dublininquirer.com/2021/02/24/a-wexford-street-photo-shop-survives-50-years

    A fabulous place.

    They're doing a street exhibition starting today. It's just inside my 5km too :)


  • Registered Users Posts: 362 ✭✭Night owl gal


    Hi all :)

    So in the last few months, I have been doing a clear-out at home. During the clear-out, I found a book, which is the photography yearbook from 2009. I put it up on Facebook marketplace/eBay/adverts/done deal, with little interest. Just wondering if anyone here would like it?

    I'm offering it for €5 but it is negotiable as I'm conscious not everyone can afford this, in today's hard times. I can post it for €9 (tracked) or meet the buyer if within 5km

    Thanks :)


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 8,087 ✭✭✭dinneenp


    Hi,

    Shimano have a photo competition (no major prize)- https://www.shimano.com/en/100th/contest/

    Please tell us when your mind and body was exhilarated while cycling, fishing, or rowing

    Shimano centennial novelty goods will be presented to award winners.
    Grand prize winners will be selected from among award winners. For them, Shimano’s anniversary photo book will be presented.


  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 47,998 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder


    i've been landed with a canon 350D with a flat battery and no charger; a friend's son would be interested in it, but i would like to avoid them taking it, buying a charger, and discovering it's a brick.
    does anyone living on the northside of dublin have a charger i could drop the battery into for ten minutes to check the camera works before they buy a new charger (and possibly new battery)?

    the battery is an nb-2lh.
    thanks!


  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 47,998 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder


    not sure if anyone else is following this car crash of a story, but someone (i think based in ireland) has been colorising photos of victims of the cambodian genocide and *adding smiles* to their faces:

    https://twitter.com/vinkjohn/status/1380876964467249156

    the museum which seems to be the repository of the photos has reacted, and they are unhappy:

    https://twitter.com/TuolSlengMuseum/status/1381170912028860419


  • Registered Users Posts: 7,577 ✭✭✭Mr Crispy


    Jesus. What were they thinking?


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,325 ✭✭✭iLikeWaffles


    In a camera lens or optical tube does the aperture have to be at the back of the lens or closest to the sensor?

    If it was at the front what disadvantage would there be.


  • Registered Users Posts: 6,671 ✭✭✭DaireQuinlan


    In a camera lens or optical tube does the aperture have to be at the back of the lens or closest to the sensor?

    If it was at the front what disadvantage would there be.

    It's a bit complicated :-D
    Only in very simple optical systems can you put the aperture at the front and not get aberrations of one form or another. In general, for best performance the aperture should be in the center of the optical system. It's an integral part of the design of the lens.


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,325 ✭✭✭iLikeWaffles


    It's a bit complicated :-D
    Only in very simple optical systems can you put the aperture at the front and not get aberrations of one form or another. In general, for best performance the aperture should be in the center of the optical system. It's an integral part of the design of the lens.

    Define simple. Prime lens simple?

    Thinking on 3d printing an Iris for a 1000/102mm telescope (f10), would need to go on the front though. Could probably add it between the focus somewhere but would need more tinkering. There is very little aberrations with the optics. I printed a Scheiner Disk for it already; 2 equally spaced holes split the aperture allowing you to easily find focus on a full disk object like the Sun or Moon. I did notice that the 2 holes are in multiple points on an out of focus image and the obvious softer image because of the lower aperture, I think I put the 2 holes 27% of inner diameter. The fringing in the photo's here are from the eyepiece connected to the DSLR. On prime focus with no eyepiece there is very little aberrations.

    Sciener disk out of focus / in / off
    551379.jpg

    Can't quiet get a good exposure on the moon with the general settings on the camera and because it always changes in luminance it is never the same, always need just a tad bit more or less shutter speed. I always end up under exposing and correcting later. Be a fun experiment.


  • Registered Users Posts: 6,671 ✭✭✭DaireQuinlan


    Define simple. Prime lens simple?
    .

    I was thinking simple as in 'single element meniscus' simple. No idea how it would work with your setup, refractor / reflector ? I'd imagine normal telescope optics aren't corrected anywhere near as much as even a simple prime lens for a camera. Sounds like an interesting experiment though.


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,325 ✭✭✭iLikeWaffles


    I was thinking simple as in 'single element meniscus' simple. No idea how it would work with your setup, refractor / reflector ? I'd imagine normal telescope optics aren't corrected anywhere near as much as even a simple prime lens for a camera. Sounds like an interesting experiment though.

    Yeah refractor would be this, have both types though so will be interesting to compare. Front/rear element in a refractor with the focus mechanism in the rear, which is rack and pinion as opposed to helicoid in a lens. Refractor just has higher focal length than a smaller camera lens but it is still a prime lens. Follows the same physics as any lenses focal plane etc.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 4,325 ✭✭✭iLikeWaffles


    There's an Astrophotography competition being run by Dublin Institute for Advanced Studies that just opened for public voting. I have a few shortlisted images in it myself but there is much better shots in there compared to my own so I have little hope for winning: €500 voucher 1 year sub to a newspaper and a personalised tour of Dunsink Observatory

    If you want to have a look at the images and vote for your favourite you can to so here:
    https://www.dias.ie/astrophotography-competition-public-vote/

    Only 1 vote per person and subject to email verification.


Advertisement