wow what a trip. It's to bad they don't give some pf the details such as lens, shutter speed, aperture etc . . .
awesome just sent to my gf who does graphic design, she'll love these, the rest of the site looks pretty good as well
wow, that is stunning shots. customer once came in to have card for that kinda camera installed, had to find computer that card could actually fit. i think camera was about $65k, not cheap, card was couple grand as well. me and my coworker later went to his work to set it up, they were doing high speed golf shots for training golfers or something, studio had nice set up in it, screens in floor, on walls, tons of equipment
You click on the pic, and it brings you to the flickr page. You can pull all the info from there. I clicked on the last pic as an example. Here is the flickr info: Camera: Canon EOS 50D Exposure: 0.05 sec (1/20) Aperture: f/20.0 Focal Length: 100 mm ISO Speed: 400 Exposure Bias: 0 EV Flash: On, Fired File Size: 610 kB File Type: JPEG MIME Type: image/jpeg Image Width: 4752 Image Height: 3168 Encoding Process: Baseline DCT, Huffman coding Bits Per Sample: 8 Color Components: 3 X-Resolution: 72 dpi Y-Resolution: 72 dpi Orientation: Horizontal (normal) Software: Adobe Photoshop Elements 7.0 Windows Date and Time (Modified): 2009:10:21 20:38:05 YCbCr Positioning: Co-sited Exposure Program: Manual Date and Time (Original): 2009:09:18 10:31:56-04:00 Date and Time (Digitized): 2009:09:18 10:31:56 Metering Mode: Center-weighted average Sub Sec Time: 14 Sub Sec Time Original: 14 Sub Sec Time Digitized: 14 Color Space: sRGB Focal Plane X-Resolution: 5315.43624161074 dpi Focal Plane Y-Resolution: 5306.53266331658 dpi Custom Rendered: Normal Exposure Mode: Manual White Balance: Auto Scene Capture Type: Standard GPSVersion ID: 2.2.0.0 Compression: JPEG (old-style) Global Angle: 30 Global Altitude: 30 Copyright Flag: False Photoshop Quality: 9 Photoshop Format: Standard Progressive Scans: 3 Scans XMPToolkit: Adobe XMP Core 4.1.3-c001 49.282696, Mon Apr 02 2007 21:16:10 Orientation: Horizontal (normal) Metadata Date: 2009:10:21 20:38:05-04:00 Creator Tool: Adobe Photoshop Elements 7.0 Windows Format: image/jpeg Color Mode: 3 ICCProfile Name: sRGB IEC61966-2.1 Viewing Conditions Illuminant Type: D50 Measurement Observer: CIE 1931 Measurement Flare: 0.999% Measurement Illuminant: D65 Color Transform: YCbCr GPSVersion ID: 2.2.0.0 Flash Return: No return detection Flash Mode: On Flash Function: False Flash Red Eye Mode: False
Its unbelievable that you can capture shots like that in such great detail, especially when you would never regard something as simple as water droplets producing shots like that! It will be cool to see your take on them Scott.
Actually, those really aren't that hard to do. Granted, you have to have a dSLR and a decent lens/tripod, and it helps to have off-camera flash. But if you have the equipment, it's actually pretty easy. If you are into photography, check out photography-on-the.net/forums. Amazing forum for photography, and in their "click & brag" type section, the stuff they post is unreal. This stuff is common over there lol. I did these myself about a year ago over spring break when I got my wisdom teeth removed. Had a pretty ghetto setup in my basement but it worked. What I did was get a bowl of water, put blue food coloring in, put a black binder behind it for a background, get a microphone stand (my dad plays guitar/sings) make it so the end hung over the bowl, then I had a eye-drop container and poked a hole in the bottom so it would drip, and filled it with water. Then set up the camera on a tripod and manually prefocused it to where the drops were landing, tinker around with the exposure settings, and wa-lah! I have like 100+ more, but they all look pretty similar. Didn't get around to playing with different colors very much. And these are the only ones I uploaded to Flickr lol.
wow sickness . . . . . . how close was the camera to the bowl of water and what type of lens was used? It looks like the camera is pretty close along with the lens being zoomed in a fair amount.
Ehh, not too close. I was using a 55-250mm lens, at 250. So the zoom was pretty close. But at that focal length, the minimum focus distance of the lens is like 3 ft, so it was just a little further than 3 ft from the drops.
