Home

Please support mflenses.com if you need any graphic related work order it from us, click on above banner to order!

SearchSearch MemberlistMemberlist RegisterRegister ProfileProfile Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages Log inLog in

nonsense
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Tue Oct 26, 2010 6:51 pm    Post subject: nonsense Reply with quote

This was shot today at a nice autumn/winter walk. I was just looking through my shots from today on the laptop and discovered this one which
made me think: why the hack did I made this photograph ? Smile


If you had once the same situation you're warmly welcome to post your nonsense-shots here in the thread Wink ...


S.M.C. Takumar 85/1.8 @ f2







Cheers
Tobias


PostPosted: Tue Oct 26, 2010 7:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Snow already - we just got our first of the season at 1200m. Actually quite like it Embarassed




patrickh


PostPosted: Tue Oct 26, 2010 7:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

wow... Shocked
I really like the "isolation"


PostPosted: Tue Oct 26, 2010 7:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Liquid manure transporter converted to a mobile water container and resting place for the crows. Didn´t know why I took this pic.

AF shot with ef 4/300





Wink


PostPosted: Tue Oct 26, 2010 9:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I like it for the snow it looks like icing sugar just dusted over the ground instead of the usual total whiteness? and the focal point on the cart is interesting. Very Happy
Love yours too Rolf.I would not call these "nonsense" photos. Very Happy


PostPosted: Tue Oct 26, 2010 10:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

More than the "why" (only you can reply), I am struck by another apparent nonsense: the foreground and background appear to be (more or less) focused, while the middle ground appears blurred. This can not happen with a normal lens (nor probably with any lens). So I am puzzled now.


PostPosted: Tue Oct 26, 2010 10:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Orio wrote:
More than the "why" (only you can reply), I am struck by another apparent nonsense: the foreground and background appear to be (more or less) focused, while the middle ground appears blurred. This can not happen with a normal lens (nor probably with any lens). So I am puzzled now.

+1 something wrong with this tak or pp


PostPosted: Wed Oct 27, 2010 12:07 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Here's my contribution, I hate to think this is a manure transporter converted into a Barbecue Trailer Wink


bbq trailer by Nesster, on Flickr


PostPosted: Wed Oct 27, 2010 1:29 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Now another subtle psycho-analytical pattern surfaces: why all people who contribute their nonsense pictures here post images of containers? Laughing Laughing


PostPosted: Wed Oct 27, 2010 8:18 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Nice to see that this turned into a slurry-container thread. I like yours very much too, Rolf. And Nesster, I was just thinking how delicious will taste the barbecue chicken if this container was once full of liquid manure Wink

Quote:
This can not happen with a normal lens (nor probably with any lens)

Orio, it can because Tak 85/1.8 isn't just a normal lens Laughing Laughing

Seriously, this was developed from Raw and just some minor Unsharp Mask was applied.
With shooting I had the focus ring about 2-3 mm away from infinity. lens was @ f2.

Cheers
Tobias


PostPosted: Wed Oct 27, 2010 10:00 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

tobbsman wrote:

Seriously, this was developed from Raw and just some minor Unsharp Mask was applied.
With shooting I had the focus ring about 2-3 mm away from infinity. lens was @ f2.


Then how could this happen? Going from plane to plane this is what I see:

- foreground is sharpest (container is where obviously the focus is)

- leftmost middle ground trees are sharp (ok)

- middle ground right house is strongly blurred (but it's not that far away from the leftmost trees)

- lefthand middle ground houses are sharper than the right house, which is closer than them (how could that be?)

- right side of the hill (behind the right house) is strongly blurred

- left side of the hill, behind the leftmost houses, is visibly sharper than the right side of hill and right house (how could that be?)

- second hill (with large fir trees) is visibly sharper than the first hill (how could that be?)

Seriously, there is a big focus mess going on with your picture. I am unable to explain the reason. If you did not post-produce,
the only possible explaination that I can find is that your lens has a serious decentering problem on the right of visual field.

-


PostPosted: Wed Oct 27, 2010 11:52 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yes, really true. Very massy all the sharp and oof areas. I neither can't see a regularity in the strange effect. Only that everything gets more blured towards the upper right corner.


Yesterday I did nearly all shots on f2, so will have a look at the other samples and analyze if the focus-mass-effect appears there too. I'll post them lateron.

Cheers
Tobias


PostPosted: Fri Oct 29, 2010 8:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

all those pics in this thread doesn't make sense to me
here is one of mine, I hope it will make sense for you
flektogon 20:4 on 5DII


PostPosted: Fri Oct 29, 2010 8:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Haha, great flektogonisation Wink you made there !

Is it flektonized with tripod ? (I am just wondering because I don't see it next to your feet; should have been a small apperture I guess)


Cheers
Tobias


PostPosted: Sat Oct 30, 2010 2:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Just to show y'all something about myself: I like all of these shots, and understand completely why I would have made them, if not y'all ... Wink


PostPosted: Sat Oct 30, 2010 10:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

tobbs wrote:
Is it flektonized with tripod ?

no tripod, it was f8 - 1/50s - 400 iso


PostPosted: Sat Oct 30, 2010 10:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

poilu wrote:
tobbs wrote:
Is it flektonized with tripod ?

no tripod, it was f8 - 1/50s - 400 iso


Mediterranean light, Tobias. When you are near to the sea, it seems to shine from everywhere. You need to add at least 1 f/stop to the sunny 16 rule Very Happy
Tripod is almost unknown there Wink


PostPosted: Sun Oct 31, 2010 3:27 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

poilu wrote:
all those pics in this thread doesn't make sense to me
here is one of mine, I hope it will make sense for you
flektogon 20:4 on 5DII


I don't worry much about making "photographic sense". To quote David Byrne, "Stop Making Sense".