Mine was taken July 2007 and it was cold, wet and blowing a gale.Originally Posted by clubbyr8
Mine was taken July 2007 and it was cold, wet and blowing a gale.
While clubbies pic is obviously much better overall, your pic shows the lower centre rock better, I didn't realise it was a separate rock at all, so thanks for posting as now I see it a little different.
The London Bridge collapsed, when was that ?
It collapsed January 15th 1990 trapping two people. Apparently it's known as London Arch now.....
The London Bridge collapsed, when was that ?[/QUOTE]
04OFF (21st May 2014)
Rainbow Lorikeet taken on a Canon 350D with a cheap Sigma lens, before I started shooting RAW......
IMG_2765_1-Edit-2 by Bob Howard Photography, on Flickr
Avo (17th May 2014), DX grunt (31st August 2014), growler2058 (26th July 2014), threedogs (17th October 2015), Winnie (21st May 2014)
scared the shit out of me..loaded up while I had turned away...neeed new heart...
Watch this space, as there maybe a comment added soon
threedogs (17th October 2015)
Could lead to a movie called "Birds"...... Oh wait, that's been done........
GROOVY GUVII
2" Toughdog Lift, Ctek D250S, 152AH AGM Battery, Homemade Battery Box, Duel Rear Cameras, GME TX3510W UHF, Alloy Roof Rack, Kings 2.5m Awning, Titan Drawers.
Why is it you like to shoot in RAW ?
Haha , taking up the whole frame, its IN YOUR FACE ! thats for sure
[QUOTE=04OFF;508266]Why is it you like to shoot in RAW ?
Several reasons. Much more detail than compressed jpeg, I don't have to worry about setting white balance (set to AWB) as it's easily corrected in software if needed, I don't have to rely on the camera to convert images to jpeg, more levels of brightness in the image than jpeg, non-destructive editing. My image size in RAW is approximately 22-25Mb, sounds a lot, but I have a 64Gb compact flash card, so I don't care too much...lol.
It has it's drawbacks too, you have to edit or convert them to a usable format, but it doesn't take too long once you used to it, slows the camera down as the files are much bigger (never been an issue for me), and it's a proprietary format (each manufacture has their own).
Seems to work for me, might not for others...
Cool ,Yeh, i only ask as i found it a royal pain shooting any high speed stuff in RAW ,although, i only have a 32 card and my camera is waaaay outdated (Canon 50D, first release 2008)
I do like to take pics as they are direct from camera, and not have to generate images using the computer, especially as i mostly use a little 11'' netbook for viewing (convenient, but not very fast)
Perhaps when i can afford a new camera (as you know this means glass as well so not cheap) i may try RAW again, but then ill most likley need a new PC as well
View from Pulpit Rock Lookout.......
IMG_8460 by Bob Howard Photography, on Flickr
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote