Belgarion

it'd be interesting to see this as a source map

yeah, i know i post a lot of conservatory pics. i don't care i really like taking pics there. i just need to go at different times of the year so there are new varieties of flora.

but they'll never have the full res file. sorry, I just won't post full-res files. Photography is quite personal to me and something I don't give out lightly. I don't have a problem with 1280 or less, but I like to keep my full-res files exclusive.

no way man. that's the full res image. people could swipe it and call it their own.

oook here you go. as you can see, it is almost half a meg. It's at level 8 compression from photoshop too. the full size image saved at lvl12 compression through PS is about ten megs.

I would LOVE to! Suuure. I can give you a wallpaper shot. 1280x1024?

thanks. ^_~ and yep. Digital reacts pretty much exactly the same way film does to my knowledge. I havn't had much experience with film, but I havn't found any major discrepencies. about the only difference is that digital (SLR) sensors have significantly less noise. i've heard more than one person who grew up on film say how surprised they were at how smooth the images are on digital bodies compared to film. Thanks, I'm glad you like them too. I've never taken shots like this before, but I certainly like the results. I've been taking new kinds of photos a lot these last few months and I'm really loving pushing the boundaries of my photographic experience/knowledge.

a Canon 20D. <3 my 20D. I love this camera to death. I was going to get a 350D, but after using a 20D for about 2 minutes I swore I'd never buy a rebel. btw spellbinder, tripods = mega useful ^_^ try to avoid getting a flimsy one. you'll spend more money, but if you're serious about it, the extra money is worth it.

the wheel is 1/640, then in order : 8 seconds, 20 seconds, 10 seconds (x2 since it is a combination of two photos), and 8 seconds. naturally, all except the wheel are on a tripod. I also use a cheap remote shutter button so i don't have to use the 10 second timer. at 5 bucks, it's easily the cheapest, most useful time-saving accessory for night photos. tripods don't count since they're like 50-500 bucks. ^_^

I made a visit down to Wheaton Illinois to see my brother this past weekend. Took some great shots of the trains that go by his appartment almost continually. I got some very strange looks from people while standing outside, at 10:30 pm, in 35 degree weather, next to a railroad crossing with a tripod/camera. I think i scared the crap out of a train conductor too. All of these have some level editing, and one has a bit of curve editing, otherwise they're pretty true to the originals (except the light trails one. that's two shots together) This is without a doubt my favorite of all the(artistic) photos from the weekend. I waited for a LONG time for that stupid train to come back. and then it came up too fast and I almost missed the shot (framing is a bit.. eh). and then I thought the exposure was all messed up when i previewed it on the screen. But when i looked on my laptop the next day my jaw just dropped. I can't believe how well it turned out. I'm quite happy with it. and a random shot of an '04 STi wheel. I'm definitely uploading the last train shot, probably the STi wheel, and the light trails. Not sure about the other two. opinions and critique are welcome.

I was just wondering last week if this project had died or something, not having heard about it for a really long time. (like half a year? a year?) I'm glad to see it isn't. Still, I'm not overly impressed either. The textures don't seem quite as detailed as they might have. It seems they're concentrating more on geometry detail, rather than textures. It'd be nice if they could shift some attention to the details so they might accentuate the nice geometry. Then it'd look better. btw mino, that link isn't working. not for me at least.

shot 2 is frickin sweet. 6 and 9 are close seconds. i'll have to check it out tomorrow.

lol warby is gonna have a hernia i'm pretty interested too actually. painkiller is a sweet game. it's always fun learning how to edit for a new engine.

it depends on the feeling you want to produce in the movie. every engine feels distinctly different to eachother. I think the most "real" feeling is probably Source, but if you want a slight fantasy-type feeling, I think FarCry or Unreal would be good. for a horror/suspense feeling maybe D3/Q4? know what feeling you want and sample engines with maps similar to what you want.

maybe your lack of enthusiasm for life-like textures comes from the more disconnected nature of them? you're not involved in drawing it, it's a photo you manipulate, more or less, and is therefore less of a reflection of what you wanted or created. I can't speak authoritatively, since I don't make textures, but that's what it looks like.

no kidding.. how many people live in just ONE of those buildings?! unbelievable. china is probably the only place you can find pics like that. craziness. a12 a39 and a56 are my favorites.

depending on how far you are zoomed, you should be just fine with shutter speeds between 1/60 and 1/250. Set your ISO to 100, maybe 200, and you can get a higher shutter speed, but I wouldn't go higher with a point and shoot cam. They use CCD sensors which produce a lot of noise.

I hope i translated that english properly. The last shot would actually have been just fine at 5.6. He shot it at 2.8 with a shutter of 400. even if we bring it down two-thirds of a stop to 250, he could still have attained a 1/60 shutter at F/5.6, nevermind the two-thirds overexposure. so he could even have had a 7.1 Fstop. minus the flash which is probably a stop or two, that's easily 1/60th at F2.8, or F/7.1 with the flash. Of course, he's already gotten the shot, and we can't just change the exposure and take a new one. I'm just trying to help him think about it a little so next time he's more prepared. :edit: freak, i was talking about the last shot, 401.

you should avoid using flash in nature photos at all costs. get a tripod if you need. it's definitely worth it if you want to take your photos further. you should also learn about exposure and depth of field. those two things can take your photos those extra few feet towards awesome photos instead of "automatic mode point, shoot, flash" photos. I think they'd be good if you'd put more effort into them, but right now they're only average. the flash creates flat borring lighting, which is the most important aspect of photography. tweaked it can be good and very useful, but in nature photos as you have, avoid. I liked the first and last best. water shots are neat, and the last one is an interesting subject. the last in particular i think could improve with a little bit of technique on your part. if you could narrow the F stop (higher numbers. you shot at F/2.8, which is pretty fast, and provides shallow depth of field) you would get a much deeper depth of field, making more of the photo in focus. Try again with F/5.6 or 8.

lol no. not full resolution anyway. that's like 10 megs for #1 and 5 for #4. I'll give you 1600x1200 though, and even that is 560kb for #4 and almost a meg for #1 at acceptable compression. if you wanna use them somewhere just credit me. http://img135.imageshack.us/img135/8859/img0321levelssj4.jpg http://img301.imageshack.us/img301/7357/img0011levelsunsharpvw8.jpg

i could reinstall it. i'm quite tempted just for this map. you really should get this to a finished state. i hate to be repetative, but it really looks amazing. amazing has lost a lot of its punch, but it truely does amaze me at how good it looks.

another spotlight map today?

i certainly hope so.

thanks everyone. I was contemplating putting 1 and 4 up on my DA. what do you think, yes or no?

*sob* omg it's amazing. If I could map like that, I'd do nothing else. Simply fantastic. This is spotlight work.