A Photography forum. PhotoBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PhotoBanter.com forum » Digital Photography » Digital Photography
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Action shot few like to see



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old June 24th 18, 11:09 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
PeterN[_7_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,065
Default Action shot few like to see

I went to the polo matches, earlier. This is not the type of action shot
I was seeking.
Fortunately, both the pony and layer are OK.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/kfgkk5be8yl3m2v/20180624_polo_7896.jpg?dl=0



--
PeterN
  #2  
Old June 24th 18, 11:32 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
Savageduck[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 15,584
Default Action shot few like to see

On Jun 24, 2018, PeterN wrote
(in article ):

I went to the polo matches, earlier. This is not the type of action shot
I was seeking.
Fortunately, both the pony and layer are OK.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/kfgkk5be8yl3m2v/20180624_polo_7896.jpg?dl=0


I gather that you meant “player” not “layer” which implies something
very different.

Nice capture.It could be a adjusted a tad brighter in post, but that is just
my opinion. That is an image which deserves to be seen as a larger version.
Unless of course it has fallen victim to the PeterN crop process.

--

Regards,
Savageduck

  #3  
Old June 24th 18, 11:40 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
PeterN[_7_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,065
Default Action shot few like to see

On 6/24/2018 6:32 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On Jun 24, 2018, PeterN wrote
(in article ):

I went to the polo matches, earlier. This is not the type of action shot
I was seeking.
Fortunately, both the pony and layer are OK.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/kfgkk5be8yl3m2v/20180624_polo_7896.jpg?dl=0


I gather that you meant “player” not “layer” which implies something
very different.

Nice capture.It could be a adjusted a tad brighter in post, but that is just
my opinion. That is an image which deserves to be seen as a larger version.
Unless of course it has fallen victim to the PeterN crop process.


I may do some work on the polo shots.
This is not the kind of action I like to work on. Just happy no one was
hurt.
I just did a quick auto adjustment in post.

--
PeterN
  #4  
Old June 25th 18, 01:03 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
John McWilliams
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 6,857
Default Action shot few like to see

On 6/24/18 PDT 3:32 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On Jun 24, 2018, PeterN wrote
(in article ):

I went to the polo matches, earlier. This is not the type of action shot
I was seeking.
Fortunately, both the pony and layer are OK.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/kfgkk5be8yl3m2v/20180624_polo_7896.jpg?dl=0


I gather that you meant “player” not “layer” which implies something
very different.

Nice capture.It could be a adjusted a tad brighter in post, but that is just
my opinion. That is an image which deserves to be seen as a larger version.
Unless of course it has fallen victim to the PeterN crop process.

I'd say quite underexposed/developed. But good shot!

  #5  
Old June 25th 18, 09:12 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
PeterN[_7_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,065
Default Action shot few like to see

On 6/24/2018 8:03 PM, John McWilliams wrote:
On 6/24/18** PDT 3:32 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On Jun 24, 2018, PeterN wrote
(in article ):

I went to the polo matches, earlier. This is not the type of action shot
I was seeking.
Fortunately, both the pony and layer are OK.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/kfgkk5be8yl3m2v/20180624_polo_7896.jpg?dl=0


I gather that you meant “player” not “layer” which implies something
very different.

Nice capture.It could be a adjusted a tad brighter in post, but that
is just
my opinion. That is an image which deserves to be seen as a larger
version.
Unless of course it has fallen victim to the PeterN crop process.

I'd say quite underexposed/developed. But good shot!


Thanks for your comments. That image was one of a series that I took
setting the camera in manual, with auto ISO. In post I also decreased
white and light, while slightly increasing the shadows. Is this better?
I applied a levels adjustment, sharpened a tad, and cropped.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/cif6pwbum1aydjd/20180624_polo_7896-Edit.%20cropped.jpg?dl=0

from the same series. To avoid the obvious comment from the Duck, I ran
it through NIK DeNoise.;-)

https://www.dropbox.com/s/2q1dm4lalkvoove/20180624_polo_7894-Edit.jpg?dl=0

--
PeterN
  #6  
Old June 25th 18, 10:04 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
Savageduck[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 15,584
Default Action shot few like to see

On Jun 25, 2018, PeterN wrote
(in article ):

On 6/24/2018 8:03 PM, John McWilliams wrote:
On 6/24/18 PDT 3:32 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On Jun 24, 2018, PeterN wrote
(in article ):

I went to the polo matches, earlier. This is not the type of action shot
I was seeking.
Fortunately, both the pony and layer are OK.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/kfgkk5be8yl3m2v/20180624_polo_7896.jpg?dl=0

I gather that you meant “player” not “layer” which implies
something
very different.

Nice capture.It could be a adjusted a tad brighter in post, but that
is just
my opinion. That is an image which deserves to be seen as a larger
version.
Unless of course it has fallen victim to the PeterN crop process.

I'd say quite underexposed/developed. But good shot!


Thanks for your comments. That image was one of a series that I took
setting the camera in manual, with auto ISO. In post I also decreased
white and light, while slightly increasing the shadows. Is this better?
I applied a levels adjustment, sharpened a tad, and cropped.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/cif6pwbum1...dit.%20cropped.
jpg?dl=0

from the same series. To avoid the obvious comment from the Duck, I ran
it through NIK DeNoise.;-)

https://www.dropbox.com/s/2q1dm4lalkvoove/20180624_polo_7894-Edit.jpg?dl=0


Which obvious Duck comment?

“I see noise”? or “That seems to be strangely sharpened”? or “What
were you thinking with those crops”?

--

Regards,
Savageduck

  #7  
Old June 25th 18, 10:57 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
PeterN[_7_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,065
Default Action shot few like to see

On 6/25/2018 5:04 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On Jun 25, 2018, PeterN wrote
(in article ):

On 6/24/2018 8:03 PM, John McWilliams wrote:
On 6/24/18 PDT 3:32 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On Jun 24, 2018, PeterN wrote
(in article ):

I went to the polo matches, earlier. This is not the type of action shot
I was seeking.
Fortunately, both the pony and layer are OK.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/kfgkk5be8yl3m2v/20180624_polo_7896.jpg?dl=0

I gather that you meant “player” not “layer” which implies
something
very different.

Nice capture.It could be a adjusted a tad brighter in post, but that
is just
my opinion. That is an image which deserves to be seen as a larger
version.
Unless of course it has fallen victim to the PeterN crop process.
I'd say quite underexposed/developed. But good shot!


Thanks for your comments. That image was one of a series that I took
setting the camera in manual, with auto ISO. In post I also decreased
white and light, while slightly increasing the shadows. Is this better?
I applied a levels adjustment, sharpened a tad, and cropped.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/cif6pwbum1...dit.%20cropped.
jpg?dl=0

from the same series. To avoid the obvious comment from the Duck, I ran
it through NIK DeNoise.;-)

https://www.dropbox.com/s/2q1dm4lalkvoove/20180624_polo_7894-Edit.jpg?dl=0


Which obvious Duck comment?

“I see noise”? or “That seems to be strangely sharpened”? or “What
were you thinking with those crops”?


The sharpening was done in high pass @ 3.9 pixels, which is very mild.
The image is a large crop, There was some noise on the bright areas, so
I ran it through NIK. In this case the noise was distracting to me.



--
PeterN
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Kodak C613 Shot-to-shot time arifi Digital Point & Shoot Cameras 0 February 27th 08 08:35 AM
Metz 402 - great for 1st shot but will not recycle for 2nd shot Pat[_7_] 35mm Photo Equipment 1 September 16th 07 07:26 PM
Action shot with new D40 [email protected] Digital SLR Cameras 10 March 4th 07 06:15 AM
Shot to shot speed Tass Digital Photography 2 February 13th 06 08:52 PM
Faster SD card cuts shot-to-shot time bk Digital Photography 3 September 11th 04 05:11 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:09 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2018 PhotoBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.