Brands BSB Or the Mad Aussie Show

Messages
6,039
Name
Graham
Edit My Images
Yes
Went along to Brands with one or two others. As the title suggest first we have the Josh show.

1. Its another camera again.. I'll hide behind the screen

7661054588_9a82b01930_o.jpg


2. If I go faster prehaps he wont catch me.

7661090102_89e8427613_o.jpg


3. Damm I think he got me that time

7658715320_30106cfe2a_o.jpg


4. A Rare Josh shot.. with the front wheel on the ground
7661156366_779f8051f3_o.jpg


5. I know I've just come off, but Im sure my bike was No 3 (Lucky Stuart was ok)

7661093216_ca4743a93e_o.jpg


6. An older one doing raher well

7661091358_e9c49c6380_o.jpg


More to come yet
 
Last edited:
Graham bud,have you changed something with your workflow as they dont look as sharp as normal bud :thinking:
 
Aye, he wasn't going to drawn when I was trying to get shots of him in the pit walk at Knockhill either:|

I love 3 and 8 but they all look a wee bit different from your usual threads.
 

Cheers Gary

Graham bud,have you changed something with your workflow as they dont look as sharp as normal bud :thinking:

Looking at them do agree with you have been messing about a bit:thinking:

wow! i love every image!

Thanks Steven


That shot of Peter Hickman is fantastic!

Thanks Sam

Lovely set

Cheers Ray

1 & 8 for me but all good stuff

Thanks Michael

Good stuff. #1 & #9 for me.

Thanks Niel

Always look forward to seeing your shots Graham. Stunning as usual.
Gary

Cheers Gary
Superb set 9+11 for me cracking shots
Thanks Gaz

Aye, he wasn't going to drawn when I was trying to get shots of him in the pit walk at Knockhill either:|

I love 3 and 8 but they all look a wee bit different from your usual threads.


Cheers Mike & Glen. Gone back close to my normal workflow although hosting in a different place still not sure if they look any better. They do look fine in Lightroom. If you get chance to look again value your opions.



Thanks Steve
 
Cracking shots mate , but agree something doesn't look quite right with PP . Have you saved for web as exif is missing in a few?
 
Cracking shots mate , but agree something doesn't look quite right with PP . Have you saved for web as exif is missing in a few?

Cheers buddy, No I use LR4 but I have been for months, the missing EXIF data is strange. Agree something is missing, they do look very good in LR but something is going astray:thinking::shrug:
Will have to look into it. Hopefully see you at WSBK
 
Graham, the Exif was there when I replied, but not there this morning?

Strangely enough, I thought the pics looked better this morning on my iPad.
 
Graham, the Exif was there when I replied, but not there this morning?

Strangely enough, I thought the pics looked better this morning on my iPad.

Appreciate you looking again Mike, I did upload them again late last night but I thought the exif data should still be there as I didn't touch that setting :thinking:
Have you had chance to look on your computer today?

Do appreciate all the help, its got me puzzled really. Looking in LR I think there are better quality than the one I took at Oulton last time:shrug:
 
That Man Brooks again in your first set #1 he really does give it 100% and I think we all got some excellent shots from the exit of stirling's......all excellent 'superbike' Images Graham........cheers Bazza
 
Thanks for the mention regarding #8 (y) you definately got that one nailed,think I will rename that spot "Coopers mount"....:LOL::LOL:
A cracking set with # 9 and 10 being my faves :)

Clive..
 
Thanks for the mention regarding #8 (y) you definately got that one nailed,think I will rename that spot "Coopers mount"....:LOL::LOL:
A cracking set with # 9 and 10 being my faves :)

Clive..

Cheers Clive, love the idea of renaming it but I think Coopers Crest has more of a ring to it:D

Graham, what colour space are you saving the images with? I read (http://wonkyhorizons.blogspot.co.uk/2012/07/why-colour-space-is-important-on-web.html) recently that Chrome & Safari use their own inbuilt sRGB colour space for rending images, and thus if you saved your images with for example Adobe RGB they could look a bit different in the above mentioned browsers.


Cheers Ian didn't know that. Will check it out but the thing that has me puzzled as far as I know I'm using the same settings I normally do. :shrug:


That Man Brooks again in your first set #1 he really does give it 100% and I think we all got some excellent shots from the exit of stirling's......all excellent 'superbike' Images Graham........cheers Bazza

Thanks Bazza - you got to love Stirilings I suppose thats why you get one or two camers around there. How long before they put fences up there I wonder:thinking:
 
Cheers Clive, love the idea of renaming it but I think Coopers Crest has more of a ring to it:D

Sounds even better...:LOL:

Just a thought,but its no T/P thats messing somehow with your images,only say this because (and maybe its just me) but I have found the forum post pages extremely slow to load this last week :shrug:....

Clive.
 
Appreciate you looking again Mike, I did upload them again late last night but I thought the exif data should still be there as I didn't touch that setting :thinking:
Have you had chance to look on your computer today?

Do appreciate all the help, its got me puzzled really. Looking in LR I think there are better quality than the one I took at Oulton last time:shrug:

This is very strange, I think 1 and 3 are better (in fact 3 leaps off the screen at me).

However, they are the only ones in the first group with exif?

Only 9 and 11 of the second group have exif but hard to say if they are better or not, the old memory cells are away for a wander:LOL:

I must admit I never checked all the exif first time round.
 
Cheers Clive, love the idea of renaming it but I think Coopers Crest has more of a ring to it:D

Sounds even better...:LOL:

Just a thought,but its no T/P thats messing somehow with your images,only say this because (and maybe its just me) but I have found the forum post pages extremely slow to load this last week :shrug:....

Clive.



This is very strange, I think 1 and 3 are better (in fact 3 leaps off the screen at me).

However, they are the only ones in the first group with exif?

Only 9 and 11 of the second group have exif but hard to say if they are better or not, the old memory cells are away for a wander:LOL:

I must admit I never checked all the exif first time round.

Thanks again for all the help.

Well I stareted again from scratch from the importing stage.
Trouble is going bossed eyed at looking at them now, at least all the exif data is now intact:)

If any one gets a chance to have a look again and let me know what they think be grateful. Hate it when I can't work out whats going wrong:bonk:
 
Thats better mate,think #2 and #7 you missed focus on unless that was what you were going for but nailed the rest mate (y)

Exposures look a lot more spot on than mine mate,took over 3000 pics and ended up throwing 2600 away :bang: worst weekends shooting ive had in the last two years.
 
Thats better mate,think #2 and #7 you missed focus on unless that was what you were going for but nailed the rest mate (y)

Exposures look a lot more spot on than mine mate,took over 3000 pics and ended up throwing 2600 away :bang: worst weekends shooting ive had in the last two years.


Cheers mate appreciate you having another look. Funny thing is as far as I am aware just did what I did last time :shrug::thinking:

Agree with you that the focus could be better on 2 & 7,
2 was on race day where you have a split second to pick the rider due to people stood by you and while I agree with that the focus on the number could be better I do quite like it:) Plus the fact I remebr how much my knees hurt when I stood up I thought *** im using it:D

7 was my attmept on a slow pan:)
 
Seem to remember them being 800px before with no outer box as on these to expand to full size.

Did you export before with longest edge set to 800px by any chance or a different DPI setting as i have had a similar problem before and now export everything at 2000px and 240dpi with do not enlarge enabled in LR export then resize through Smugmug,just need to make sure that if you crop you dont go mad as upscaling via softwares not good for quality.

Wasnt being funny bud about them just wasnt what i expected from you before but these are back up with your other work now (y)
 
Seem to remember them being 800px before with no outer box as on these to expand to full size.

Did you export before with longest edge set to 800px by any chance or a different DPI setting as i have had a similar problem before and now export everything at 2000px and 240dpi with do not enlarge enabled in LR export then resize through Smugmug,just need to make sure that if you crop you dont go mad as upscaling via softwares not good for quality.

Wasnt being funny bud about them just wasnt what i expected from you before but these are back up with your other work now (y)

Mate I appreciate the feedback much prefer a honest opinion so grateful to you. I just uploaded them last thing weds and didn't check them. Whe I looked at them Thurs morning thought the same thing bud:)
Think I will pinch your idea about exporting and smugmug sounds a cracking idea thanks for the tip.
As to them being 800px... I muct confess now just found out what was wrong I have 2 P&P workflow one for Jpeg - which I use for my bike stuff - and one for Raw - rest of my stuff.
I thought I would shout in Raw for a change and then promply used the Jpeg workflow settings and to top it out I hade changed my defualt export settings to 800px. Just relised a couple of hours ago, talk about being a plonker:bonk::wacky::wacky:
A case of not seeing the wood because of the trees.

Meant to say on my last post you might have had only 400 photos you where happy with but they where total quaility bud:notworthy::notworthy:
 
Back
Top