What do you think about this photo?Do you have questions or curiosities about this image? Do you want to ask something to the author, give him suggestions for improvement, or congratulate for a photo that you really like?
You can do it by joining JuzaPhoto, it is easy and free!
There is more: by registering you can create your personal page, publish photos, receive comments and you can use all the features of JuzaPhoto. With more than 242000 members, there is space for everyone, from the beginner to the professional.
| sent on July 07, 2012 (21:39) | This comment has been automatically translated (show/hide original)
Very nice background but I do not see razor sharp.
greetings ale Molto bello lo sfondo ma non la vedo nitidissima.
saluti ale |
user1338 | sent on July 07, 2012 (22:26) | This comment has been automatically translated (show/hide original)
Agree with Ale73, also known missing detail on a green butterfly.
Nice background but watch the noise. ;-)
Hello. Daccordo con Ale73, manca dettaglio inoltre noto una dominante verde sulla farfalla.
Bello lo sfondo ma occhio al rumore.
Ciao. |
| sent on July 08, 2012 (12:37) | This comment has been automatically translated (show/hide original)
Raffaeletrek if you enter shooting data maybe you can understand where the problem of sharpness, maybe the lens. Hello Ivan Raffaeletrek se inserisci i dati di scatto forse si riesce a capire da dove viene il problema della nitidezza, forse dalla lente. Ciao Ivan |
| sent on July 08, 2012 (13:17) | This comment has been automatically translated (show/hide original)
Is totally lacking in sharpness as if it depended on a shake not controlled by the shutter speed ... expect complete data mancanti.Fornire these elements useful to others allows them to get better in the spirit of photography posted and understand your choices at the stage of pre-release as well as allow us to make a more reasoned and objective comment.
hello, laurel Manca completamente di nitidezza come se dipendesse da un micromosso non controllato dal tempo di scatto... attendiamo i dati completi mancanti.Fornire questi elementi utili agli altri utenti permette loro di entrare meglio nello spirito della fotografia postata e comprendere le tue scelte nella fase del pre-scatto oltre a permetterci di fare un commento più ragionato e oggettivo.
ciao, lauro |
| sent on July 10, 2012 (12:16) | This comment has been automatically translated (show/hide original)
Hello everyone, first of all thanks for the comments, sorry if only now I enter shooting data.
Shooting data, Pentax K7, Sigma 70-300 F4-5, 6 DG Macro, 1/25, 5.6.
You are right the picture is not clear ... but did not want to drive it because of the background that seemed interesting.
Likely that the shutter speed is a little too long and this perhaps justifies a little lack of sharpness.
In this output I have chosen to use the function of the area of ??focus at a point and not that in areas (11), as think to obtain more details at that point a little blurring everything else.
But these are the first shots of the kind that I have to say I'm fascinated.
Raffaele Ciao a tutti, prima di tutto grazie per i commenti, scusate se solo oggi inserisco i dati di scatto.
Dati di scatto, Pentax K7, Sigma 70-300 F4-5,6 DG Macro, 1/25, 5,6.
Avete ragione la foto non è nitida... ma non volevo cacciarla per via dello sfondo che mi sembrava interessante.
Probabile che il tempo di scatto sia un pò troppo lungo e questo forse giustifica un pò la mancanza di nitidezza.
In questa uscita ho scelto di utilizzare la funzione dell'area di messa a fuoco in un punto e non quello a zone (11), in quanto penso di ottenere maggiori dettagli in quel punto sfuocando un pò tutto il resto.
Ma questi sono i primi scatti del genere che devo dire mi affascina moltissimo.
Raffaele |
| sent on October 31, 2012 (19:21) | This comment has been automatically translated (show/hide original)
not so much for the time, but as for the diaphragm, is just 5.6. between f8 and 11 to13, is ideal but it certainly takes the stand and parallelism.
hello roberto non è tanto per il tempo ma quanto per il diaframma, 5,6 è poco. tra f8 e 11, a13,è ideale ma certo ci vuole il cavalletto e paralellismo.
ciao roberto |
| sent on April 18, 2014 (21:59) | This comment has been automatically translated (show/hide original)
Thanks Steve!
Thank you for the information and sorry for my delay ...!
Hello Raffaele Grazie Roberto!
Grazie delle indicazioni e scusa per il mio ritardo... !
Ciao Raffaele |
|
Publish your advertisement on JuzaPhoto (info) |
JuzaPhoto contains affiliate links from Amazon and Ebay and JuzaPhoto earn a commission in case of purchase through affiliate links.
Resize to fit window
