HOME | DD
yatesmon — Horton fields mono 2012
Published: 2012-05-17 07:42:37 +0000 UTC; Views: 332; Favourites: 15; Downloads: 0
Redirect to original
Description
The full pano image in mono
Previously cropped to this
Related content
Comments: 37
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
How's shit going for you?
I'm merely asking as a friend...not your mine
But seriously...
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Meh... Same shit, different day. Hopefully things are starting to head in the right direction. Still tons of pictures that I'll probably never get around to uploading. Working on a bunch of books, a possible comic book project and some art. Keeping myself busy.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Hmmm...sounds familiar, albeit in a different situ
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Cheers my Joseph
It's a very long story indeed, but after finally getting a dslr...I've switched back to a fuji HS20. It has a bloody fantastic pano feature, rather than take 3 shots & merge them...It almost videos the scene, with many shots,maybe 40 or so, so there's very little distortion, even better it can do vertical panos which is great if you turn the camera on it's side, as I've done in this to capture more detail
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I have a cool program that can take side shots and up and down shots and do two or even three layers up and down panos. Haven't fully tested it yet, but it's really easy to use.
It's called panorama studio 2 pro.
So you went to dslr and then back to non dslr? Must be a good camera. I'll look that one up. I'm not happy with my recent canon purchase, but I've had it too long to send it back.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Well the reviews for mine are a mixed bag, I wanted the XS-1...but me & ebay have this deal going, what ever I put up for sale goes for a pittance. So when my pentax & everything that went with it sold for £400, after charges etc, I could only go for the HS20.
It has a EXR sensor, kind of hard to explain too...takes a bit of messing to achieve the best results too. It's a 16 mp at full resolution, but by switching back to 8 mp it pixel bins or something ??? to achieve a better photo ( although not for printing lol ) Anyway, I think I'm learning how to use it, & it has my loved flippable lcd screen...I missed that alot, my eyelashes are really long...they are a joke when trying to use a viewfinder!!!
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
lol. I looking at some of the mirrorless cameras w/ the micro 4/3 lenses that are said to be as good in quality as a dslr, but I'm not 100% sold yet.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Ah yes...I think the mirrorless are called CSC's alot smaller without all mirror action going on, from what I'm reading in magazines, apparently everyones going mad for them over here
I think one day I'll go & get another either CSC like your thinking... or a DSLR. But the main off-putter was the cost of the lenses!!! & you need a different lens for each type of shot, & with me wanting to randomly do this, that & the other types of photography...my finances were questioning my logic!!!
Plus alot of my stuff is taken out on trips, with my camera bag weighing in near the 17 lb, with the body 3 lenses + extension tubes + tripods & everything else ...not including the kitchen sink 
About 2 months ago, it totally ruined our last trip out, it broke the camels back & I decided enough was enough...Hence "welcome back my lovely Fuji"..."my what lovely smooth action from zoom to macro in 2 twists"
But having seen those CSC cameras being used...they do look rather cool
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I liked that the micro four thirds lenses, though there aren't that many manufacturers at the moment, are supposed to be interchangeable between models and brands, and I liked the idea that a somewhat compact camera could do what a dslr could without all of the extra weight and unnecessary features. But they still have a way to go before the price range will be where I need it to be. I may look into that one you have. Or go with the idea have before and find a halfway decent dslr at 10 to 12 MP and just use that to learn. The old point and shoot canon I had was 8 mp and it was fine, aside from not being able to do large prints. I'm finding that with point and shoots - most of them - the higher megapixel rating doesn't really mean much. At the bigger sizes the pictures are crappier and not worth printing anyway.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
That's pretty much mine to, they squeeze as many pixels in as they can to boost the appeal...but quality goes...I need to show test mine at 8/16 mp
The zoom on mine is truly impressive though, up to 35mm equivilent of 720mm...have you seen a lens that big on a dslr? check out youtube
Here's a quick handheld 2shot I did last night, a balloon was in the sky....you need to download to get full, if you can...is your net still no good? I can downsize it, you'll get the idea,but I did it full to let to try to see the originals. let me know asap if you can't download
[link]
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Yah the zoom is impressive, but the quality is horrible when you use it. My question is, what's that zoom worth, if you can't take a decent photo with it? I got that Nikon for the zoom, but it was worthless. Couldn't even get a good 4x6 print out of it at full zoom. Too pixelated. Checked out your pic. I see the same problems I was having with all that noise. If all else fails, I may just say screw it and pick up a used SLR film camera. Still can't be beat by digital in ways of image quality as I understand. .
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Yep...it's why I showed you the pics...but in my cameras favour, I guess, this is at its worst, full size, bad light, handheld & full zoom. It gets better from here on lol...hopefully. I've shot on full zoom at zoos & gardens etc, no noise what so ever...it is all to do with the program you set it on, complicated too...you have to throw out all the basic principles of photography. I mean how can i shoot a landscape at f5.6 & it shows more focused detail than on manual at f11? 
Films always been the best, till you get back, & after developing, see every shot of kilter or just missing that needed focus/ exposure...
An on going situation for sure
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I stopped trying to figure out how the point and shoots get half the shots they do. It's a learning process, but once you get used to it, I'm sure it will be second hand gut instinct for what works with that one. yah, that dose suck about film. They need to invent a film camera with digital memory or something. Don't even know if that's possible. But it would be cool if you could take a shot and see how it was going to look on film on a screen before you moved on to the next one. Basic digital sensor in there or something with a two or three picture memory. Then you could take a few shots, check them out, take a few more, look at them, etc. Then go get them developed. Of course, there's a lot you don't see on those little screens, but I'm probably just dreaming anyway. I couldn't afford it, I'm sure, if they did come out with such a thing.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
lovely panorama shot! ...somehow I like this one way better than the coloured version
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I kept looking at it after I'd posted the colour version...
although it breaks the general rules of composition, I decided it was kinda better
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Thank you Kaleigh. It was well worth the mess I got into..to snap this
I've been hunting a lone tree of this manner for ages
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Haha what happened? Was it very muddy?
Id love a picture of a lone tree- but the shot i have in mind wont be easy to get
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
follow the link to the other piccy in my description
I guess shots of this nature are never gonna be easy....I had to trek a far old way into the field. just on our way back from Salcey forest's 'tree walk'...spotted it & pulled over...so I was lucky to have had my eyes peeled to spot it
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Cheers mate
It doesn't follow much of the "rules of thirds"..but as you have told me...rules are for breaking
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Your advice is always great mate
When I fell in that Horton field, pheasants flapping etc, I kept my camera up in the air, upside down with tripod aloft...like a shot from excalibur
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
haha happened to me to mate 
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
