i got my mad camera know, i got a sick vivatar tripod for xmas too. :D:D:D:D
Miscellaneous Pictures
a plant....getting a sexual vibe off this pic for some reason...
...
and last one...
part of my back yard
,
this is one of my dogs, theres just something about it that i really like
mm my bfs mum's kitten. got killed recently r.i.p 
this is one i took out the car window, theres a little bit of reflection
ekipkcorb27 Dec 2004
just took a random pic of a leaf out the back. n i'm getting an underwater housing soon so i'll post up sum pics of fishysben k wrote - "does anyone ever here shoot .raw? i never have and was just wondering why the file sizes are so diff
lhigh quality - jpeg - 3.1 mb
raw - 7.0 mb"
First up, a computerdigi camera records colour info as rgb in pair values, so its #RED,GREEN,BLUE
examples:
#ff0000 (red) #00ff00 (green) #0000ff (blue) #ffffff (white) #000000 (black), and it mixes them accordingly to make the different shades.
(Hex data is counting in lots of 16 intead of 10, so its
0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,a,b,c,d,e,f
0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16
)
A raw image is the equivalent of a windows bitmap, it records every bit of info for every colour, so it captures the x,y values for each pixel, along with a colour value.
A jpeg image takes a look at the data and says to itself, well I've got all these hex values for colour, and it says to itself, well hey, Ive got half the picture here with a blue sky, which are all #0000ff, so what if instead of capturing every pixel value, I can just say that on this line every pixel from here to there is #0000ff, so if you had a 600 pix wide image, for that line, it saves one lot of #0000ff instead of 600 lots of #0000ff. Then it goes and does the next thing for the next line. So for jpeg images the more solid blocks of colour in the image the greater the reduction in file size.
umm, thats the short version anyway.
Look up Joint Photographics Expert Group compression.
lhigh quality - jpeg - 3.1 mb
raw - 7.0 mb"
First up, a computerdigi camera records colour info as rgb in pair values, so its #RED,GREEN,BLUE
examples:
#ff0000 (red) #00ff00 (green) #0000ff (blue) #ffffff (white) #000000 (black), and it mixes them accordingly to make the different shades.
(Hex data is counting in lots of 16 intead of 10, so its
0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,a,b,c,d,e,f
0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16
)
A raw image is the equivalent of a windows bitmap, it records every bit of info for every colour, so it captures the x,y values for each pixel, along with a colour value.
A jpeg image takes a look at the data and says to itself, well I've got all these hex values for colour, and it says to itself, well hey, Ive got half the picture here with a blue sky, which are all #0000ff, so what if instead of capturing every pixel value, I can just say that on this line every pixel from here to there is #0000ff, so if you had a 600 pix wide image, for that line, it saves one lot of #0000ff instead of 600 lots of #0000ff. Then it goes and does the next thing for the next line. So for jpeg images the more solid blocks of colour in the image the greater the reduction in file size.
umm, thats the short version anyway.
Look up Joint Photographics Expert Group compression.
ha....thanks
didn't expect such a good answer but yer i get the idea....thanks!
didn't expect such a good answer but yer i get the idea....thanks!
i really like the leaf pic brock and the kitty photo karmen
good answer but ...
"(Hex data is counting in lots of 16 intead of 10, so its
0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,a,b,c,d,e,f
0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16
"
that is just jibberish to me... its relevent... but it wasn't really needed... just confuses me ... :S haha
but yeah... what he said.
RAW is uncompressed (true image)
JPEG is compressed... (uses techniques to make size smaller... in this process, quality is sacrificed)
"(Hex data is counting in lots of 16 intead of 10, so its
0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,a,b,c,d,e,f
0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16
"
that is just jibberish to me... its relevent... but it wasn't really needed... just confuses me ... :S haha
but yeah... what he said.
RAW is uncompressed (true image)
JPEG is compressed... (uses techniques to make size smaller... in this process, quality is sacrificed)
I just figured that giving an example of a number being equivalent to f would make less sense than taking the time to throw that in.
sorry, wasn't meant to confuse.
sorry, wasn't meant to confuse.
no worries man, u filled out the rest of the info pretty good too.. so its all good
Frank.C29 Dec 2004bump. nice pics ben, its good to see your puting yuor cam to good use. im going to healsville sanctuary tomorrow so i might take a few photos.
cheers mna....good luck there
had probs with framin on this next pic....had a perfect frame but would have me standing on road so i put the thumbs down to that idea...but fuck it was good
had probs with framin on this next pic....had a perfect frame but would have me standing on road so i put the thumbs down to that idea...but fuck it was good
and ze photo...
a freshened up old photo.wat was the shutter speed on that pic Ben K
y freshin up that foto?? lol
can we please put a ban on taking photos of flowers in this thread.
haha ok....unless macro is involved
thank you homas =P
ben k. - nobody on this forum has REAL macro... they just have "consumer macro" which is what companies like to claim is "macro".
all this "consumer macro" is... is like... allowing for a closer minimum focusing distance. (which is probably 10cm).
go out and buy a 2000$ macro setup and then get back to me :P (haha i dont know how much the crazy macro lenses are, but yeah... oh well)
ben k. - nobody on this forum has REAL macro... they just have "consumer macro" which is what companies like to claim is "macro".
all this "consumer macro" is... is like... allowing for a closer minimum focusing distance. (which is probably 10cm).
go out and buy a 2000$ macro setup and then get back to me :P (haha i dont know how much the crazy macro lenses are, but yeah... oh well)