1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  1. mickledore

    mickledore

    Messages:
    8,306
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Thanks stephen.
    That took some setting up.
    Our friend the Nikon fetishist aka @minnnt says the bottle should be twisted slightly towards the glass. Damn it, he's right. But that's the way it is and that's the way it's staying.
     
    Phiggys likes this.
  2. Mr Perceptive

    Mr Perceptive

    Messages:
    2,943
    Name:
    David
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    With your photoshop skills, I would have thought that would be easy, or maybe we'd end up with 3 glasses!!!
     
    Phiggys likes this.
  3. mickledore

    mickledore

    Messages:
    8,306
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    I know you won't believe this but there is minimal photoshopping in that image. A little bit of work to lighten the labels but that's about all.
    No levels or curves, no sharpening, no cloning, no cutting and pasting. Just pure unadulterated skill.
    I was shooting RAW/JPEG but only used the JPEG.
    DR100 cancelled which with auto white balance has removed the painterly effect.
    Corduroy effect is only noticeable once the contents have been drunk.
     
    Phiggys likes this.
  4. Stephen L

    Stephen L

    Messages:
    1,893
    Name:
    Stephen
    Edit My Images:
    No
    Or when the viewer is drunk.
     
  5. mickledore

    mickledore

    Messages:
    8,306
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Corduroy effect, painterly effect. Lots of otherwise unseen effects suddenly come into focus!
     
  6. Mr Perceptive

    Mr Perceptive

    Messages:
    2,943
    Name:
    David
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Its the beer googles effect :D
     
  7. mickledore

    mickledore

    Messages:
    8,306
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    I'd better Google what googles are!
     
  8. tijuana taxi

    tijuana taxi

    Messages:
    8,189
    Name:
    Rich
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    They have publicly stated they have no intention of producing a body with IBIS, I agree with you its a shame. Following on from that makes you wonder why they produced the 16-55mm without OIS, shaky old gits like me need it.

    One of the main reasons I shy away from prime lenses although the zooms with OIS are more than capable I'm glad to say.
     
  9. Mr Perceptive

    Mr Perceptive

    Messages:
    2,943
    Name:
    David
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    macvisual likes this.
  10. mickledore

    mickledore

    Messages:
    8,306
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Here's an interesting question re the bottle shot.
    Obviously I used a flash but EXIF says no flash used. I fired the flash via a YN622C sat atop a YN 603 used as a remote trigger. Not sure what power; not full but about 1/8 or 1/16 power.
    Anyone know why EXIF doesn't recognise this?
     
  11. mickledore

    mickledore

    Messages:
    8,306
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Mr Perceptive and Stephen L like this.
  12. Riz_Guru

    Riz_Guru

    Messages:
    3,275
    Name:
    Riz
    Edit My Images:
    No
    They built it without OIS to get the best possible IQ out of it, apparently it's supposed to be equal to primes at certain focal lengthens. :)
     
  13. G.K.Jnr.

    G.K.Jnr.

    Messages:
    9,847
    Name:
    George.
    Edit My Images:
    No
    Just a shot of a local Church Tower that I messed about with in LR & PS.

    X-T2, 18-55mm Lens, 1/500th @ F5.6, ISO-200, Handheld.
    [​IMG]Church Bell Tower-03708M by G.K.Jnr., on Flickr

    :ty: for looking., (y):fuji:

    George.
     
  14. Nod

    Nod Ethel Prescott

    Messages:
    28,240
    Name:
    Nod (NOT Ethel!!!)
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    A Googol is a one with a hundred zeros after it so googols are a 2 or higher number with a hundred (or more!) zeros after it.
     
  15. mickledore

    mickledore

    Messages:
    8,306
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Have you been on the pop?
     
    SsSsSsSsSnake and twist like this.
  16. Idlefrog

    Idlefrog

    Messages:
    1,005
    Name:
    Andrew
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
  17. Greggster

    Greggster Edward Woodward

    Messages:
    1,700
    Name:
    Gregg
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    I love that George, the processing works really really well
     
    G.K.Jnr. likes this.
  18. G.K.Jnr.

    G.K.Jnr.

    Messages:
    9,847
    Name:
    George.
    Edit My Images:
    No

    Many thanks for that Sir, much appreciated.(y)

    George.
     
  19. yamahatdm900

    yamahatdm900

    Messages:
    4,501
    Name:
    Graham
    Edit My Images:
    Yes

    Very nicely done George
     
    G.K.Jnr. likes this.
  20. G.K.Jnr.

    G.K.Jnr.

    Messages:
    9,847
    Name:
    George.
    Edit My Images:
    No

    Many thanks for that Sir, much appreciated.(y)

    George.
     
  21. yamahatdm900

    yamahatdm900

    Messages:
    4,501
    Name:
    Graham
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
  22. Phiggys

    Phiggys

    Messages:
    2,049
    Name:
    Phil aka Phiggys
    Edit My Images:
    No
    (y)
    Love the detail and crispness in this shot George (y)
     
    G.K.Jnr. likes this.
  23. Phiggys

    Phiggys

    Messages:
    2,049
    Name:
    Phil aka Phiggys
    Edit My Images:
    No

    Beautifully done and great lighting I not sure if you used dark light technique but it's an amazing use of light well executed (y)
    Just send me the rest of the bottle if there is any left ;)
     
    Last edited: Jan 12, 2017
  24. Phiggys

    Phiggys

    Messages:
    2,049
    Name:
    Phil aka Phiggys
    Edit My Images:
    No
    Beautiful image love the simplicity of it and the way the copper coloured leaves stand out (y)
     
    yamahatdm900 likes this.
  25. mickledore

    mickledore

    Messages:
    8,306
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Yes that's more or less what I did albeit with one or two adaptions.
    Any left in the bottle? There was none left before I started. You don't seriously believe that's real wine in the glass do you?
     
  26. ashtennisguru

    ashtennisguru

    Messages:
    743
    Edit My Images:
    No
  27. yamahatdm900

    yamahatdm900

    Messages:
    4,501
    Name:
    Graham
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Thank you very much:)

    And why not it's a lovely conversion.
     
    Phiggys likes this.
  28. G.K.Jnr.

    G.K.Jnr.

    Messages:
    9,847
    Name:
    George.
    Edit My Images:
    No

    Many thanks for that Sir, much appreciated.(y)

    George.
     
  29. Peter123

    Peter123

    Messages:
    537
    Name:
    Peter
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    So, with all the XT-1''s for sale what are your thoughts on image quality v. XT-2?
    I know AF is better and it has 2 cards slots etc, but just on image quality alone?
     
  30. Stephen L

    Stephen L

    Messages:
    1,893
    Name:
    Stephen
    Edit My Images:
    No
    There is an improvement in resolution which can definitely be seen, but there was not a lot wrong with the X-T1, if I'm honest. An in my opinion, totally unscientific but just an impression I get as a T2 owner who has also owned the T1, the T2 high-ISO noise is slightly worse and/or less easily managed. My main reason for getting and keeping the T2 is down to ergonomics, especially the joystick.
     
    Peter123 likes this.
  31. Mr Perceptive

    Mr Perceptive

    Messages:
    2,943
    Name:
    David
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Peter, this is my personal view, there is very little difference but I think:-

    1) There is better shadow and highlight recovery available
    2) Noise is handled better at high ISO - though some disagree on this.
    3) To me the images seem just a little sharper

    The X-T1 is still a very good camera, and at around £400 a bit of a bargain, the X-T2 is better but whether you think it is £900+ better is really personal preference. I'm very pleased with my X-T2 and don't regret the upgrade.
     
    Phiggys and Peter123 like this.
  32. Peter123

    Peter123

    Messages:
    537
    Name:
    Peter
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Thank you. Joystick I'm not too bothered about.
     
  33. Mr Perceptive

    Mr Perceptive

    Messages:
    2,943
    Name:
    David
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    I thought that until I used it!

    Maybe I should have said that at high ISO the JPGs are better, because I've had great results at 25600
     
    Last edited: Jan 12, 2017
    Phiggys and Peter123 like this.
  34. Peter123

    Peter123

    Messages:
    537
    Name:
    Peter
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Again thanks. To me the T2 premium is too much.
     
  35. rjbell

    rjbell

    Messages:
    4,238
    Name:
    Robert
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    From studying studio shots in dpreview before buying. I can not see any difference in ISO performance between the two.
     
    Peter123 likes this.
  36. Cagey75

    Cagey75

    Messages:
    5,561
    Name:
    Keith
    Edit My Images:
    No
    Same here. Nor general image quality differences either. The differences are pretty much better controls and faster AF, plus 4K video that still photographers never make use of.
     
    rjbell, Phiggys and Peter123 like this.
  37. Phiggys

    Phiggys

    Messages:
    2,049
    Name:
    Phil aka Phiggys
    Edit My Images:
    No
    I would settle on a bottle of Blackcurrent ;)
    I would have felt let down if there was a drop of wine left after you photo session :naughty::beer:
     
  38. mickledore

    mickledore

    Messages:
    8,306
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Strewth mate! We drank the wine before the session. Just like the home made porno movies!!!
    (Not that I know owt about them:confused:)
    The"wine" is just coloured water.
     
    Phiggys likes this.
  39. ASH

    ASH

    Messages:
    555
    Name:
    Peter
    Edit My Images:
    No
  40. Ian W

    Ian W

    Messages:
    2,554
    Name:
    Ian
    Edit My Images:
    Yes

Share This Page