C coldzephyr New Member Dec 4, 2005 24 0 0 Feb 22, 2007 #1 Just got my 400D recently, and one of many photos that i've taken. C & C would be good. Thanks.
R raymond350 New Member Mar 19, 2006 241 0 0 North East www.flickr.com Feb 22, 2007 #2 I like how the background looks like an oil painting. Was any PS done to make it look like that?
C coldzephyr New Member Dec 4, 2005 24 0 0 Feb 22, 2007 #3 raymond350 said: I like how the background looks like an oil painting. Was any PS done to make it look like that? Click to expand... nope. purely taken from the camera. Thanks.
raymond350 said: I like how the background looks like an oil painting. Was any PS done to make it look like that? Click to expand... nope. purely taken from the camera. Thanks.
R Rashkae Senior Member Nov 28, 2005 19,085 14 0 Feb 22, 2007 #4 raymond350 said: I like how the background looks like an oil painting. Was any PS done to make it look like that? Click to expand... Judging by the relatively poor bokeh, that looks like it was taken with the standard canon kit lens at a large aperture. Or, he convolved the image with a circular box blur integral transform in PS.
raymond350 said: I like how the background looks like an oil painting. Was any PS done to make it look like that? Click to expand... Judging by the relatively poor bokeh, that looks like it was taken with the standard canon kit lens at a large aperture. Or, he convolved the image with a circular box blur integral transform in PS.
C coldzephyr New Member Dec 4, 2005 24 0 0 Feb 22, 2007 #5 No PS done. Taken with a Sigma 17-50 f2.8 EX DC @ focal length 50mm
C chewraisins New Member Dec 28, 2006 170 0 0 Feb 22, 2007 #6 Rashkae said: Judging by the relatively poor bokeh, that looks like it was taken with the standard canon kit lens at a large aperture. Or, he convolved the image with a circular box blur integral transform in PS. Click to expand... If the watermark on bottom-left of image is accurate.. then this pic is not taken with the kit-lens.. it states f2.8 there..
Rashkae said: Judging by the relatively poor bokeh, that looks like it was taken with the standard canon kit lens at a large aperture. Or, he convolved the image with a circular box blur integral transform in PS. Click to expand... If the watermark on bottom-left of image is accurate.. then this pic is not taken with the kit-lens.. it states f2.8 there..
C chewraisins New Member Dec 28, 2006 170 0 0 Feb 22, 2007 #7 Opps.. posted just a tad bit too late..:embrass: TS already clarified.. Cheers, Andrew
R Rashkae Senior Member Nov 28, 2005 19,085 14 0 Feb 22, 2007 #8 chewraisins said: Opps.. posted just a tad bit too late..:embrass: TS already clarified.. Cheers, Andrew Click to expand... Yah, just saw that too. Sigma, huh? Relatively poor bokeh, but nice DOF. Price not too ex too, so I guess good deal!
chewraisins said: Opps.. posted just a tad bit too late..:embrass: TS already clarified.. Cheers, Andrew Click to expand... Yah, just saw that too. Sigma, huh? Relatively poor bokeh, but nice DOF. Price not too ex too, so I guess good deal!
E espion Deregistered Aug 25, 2005 1,524 0 36 Feb 22, 2007 #9 a technical demostration of f2.8, nothing compelling as a picture: urban decay, so?
redstone Senior Member Aug 6, 2005 2,894 0 0 Beyond the outer limits redstonean.deviantart.com Feb 22, 2007 #10 Fire hydrant against old house, a bit odd comparision? By the way, is this in Singapore?
C coldzephyr New Member Dec 4, 2005 24 0 0 Feb 22, 2007 #11 redstone said: Fire hydrant against old house, a bit odd comparision? By the way, is this in Singapore? Click to expand... nope, not in singapore.
redstone said: Fire hydrant against old house, a bit odd comparision? By the way, is this in Singapore? Click to expand... nope, not in singapore.