Actually I don't think they have a permit for that location and it now has temporary fence. Of course there's a big difference between photographers turning up to take a few shots as a hobby vs. a van full of people paying a tour operator big bucks.

I'm not exaggerating, within 20 seconds they were all lined up like military shoulder to shoulder. They all had what looked like the same composition and were all using grad filters even though a filter would cut into the subject. The instructor assumes what she thinks is the best spot and they all stand off to the side. No idea how that could be enjoyable. Did a little research and they're paying $2500+ for 3-4 day tours.

On a positive note it was a pretty spectacular sunrise with intense reds although that's not really my thing. My favorite time is just before sunrise when you can still see stars and there's a blue tint to the sky or soft even light with pastel colors in the sky. I prefer sunrise because I'm usually the only one there whereas sunset is easy because you're not driving and setting up in the dark.

Probably my favorite experience was being at a frozen lake at the foot of NZ's tallest mountain a couple of hours before sunrise with a crescent moon directly above reflecting on the ice with no one else around. Walking in the dark for a couple of hours crossing swing bridges over rushing water and through a valley surrounded by snow capped mountains under the stars was pretty special. Here's a phone shot of the location after sunrise before it shut off from the cold just as I was leaving.

It really is a nice thing to dot about the place at night when no one's around. See things most people don't see. Gives you a feeling nothing else does. Nice shot.

Today's effort. Work in progress, can't be bothered with fiddling with it any more today, editing can truly drive a man mad.
Will check back on it in week or so,when I can see it with fresh eyes..

I took this yesterday with my A7R III and 24-70mm G-Master.

I have a question about this. Where do you focus? Do you focus stack multiple ranges? My photos with rocks in the foreground ALWAYS look blurry as phuck when I get home and load them in lightroom.

It's your depth of field. You either need to shoot wider (wide angle lens reach infinity focus at close distances), or you will have to increase your DOF by stopping down (increasing your aperture will increase how much is in focus/DOF).

Adding to what acrawlingchaos said you might also have the camera positioned too low. Print out a DOF chart with hyperfocal distances for reference but keep in mind these are typically calculated for smaller prints viewed from about a foot away and not pixel peeping at full res. Stopping down beyond f/8 with a higher MP camera will also make something know as diffraction more noticeable but the tradeoff of overall acuity for everything in focus is often worth it in these situations. Also worth mentioning is in dakensta's photo the background is soft cloudy sky. If you're slightly shifting the focus away from hyperfocal to bring the immediate foreground into sharper focus this will be less noticeable than if you have mountains or stars in the shot for example or anything in silhouette like trees in the distance where you're scrutinizing the edges.

Many photographers perpetuate the myth wider lenses have more DOF at a given f-stop. They don't. It's just that the areas outside the range of sharp focus are less noticeably soft because they're magnified less with the wider lens at a given print/viewing size — if you cropped an area of a wide lens shot and enlarged it you'd see the same DOF. So an 11mm lens has the same DOF as an 800mm. Everything is a compromise to some degree. Focus stacking and applying some tilt with tilt-shift lenses (which only works with certain compositions) are the only ways around it. With focus stacking you need everything to be perfectly still or be prepared to spend some time with the masking/retouching brush in Helicon, etc.

Anyway to summarize you have to ask yourself how close do you need the lens to the extreme foreground to capture the desired image. Some photographers love to distort the size of the foreground which can have a lot of impact by making rocks, flowers, etc. inches from the lens look massive with an ultra wide angle but is that the shot you want? I generally prefer a viewpoint that is more natural and in line with what I saw so mountains in the distance for example don't look small. Maybe that's boring to some but it's just what I prefer. As a result of a higher tripod/camera position I have fewer DOF issues.

Awesome shot. Belongs on the cover of a car magazine/10.

Took this out on the Aleutian island of Adak. Its the northern part of the island, right where it meets the Bering Sea.

This is pure truth. And even more so true today with the very capable cameras on high end phones. I'm honestly often impressed how good of pictures my friends take with their high end phones, and that with zero photo training or education.
Practice truly makes perfect.

Your phone shot of the lake is promising, very nice location. You are happy with your camera shots? Care to share some?

Very nice shot!
Do you happen to know the name of the motion blur software that is specifically intended for such car shots?
I remember seeing it in action in a making of video, you can control the blur direction with curves I believe. Was pretty cool.

This. Was floored when I found out my S9 shoots RAW.

If there is nothing in particular in your shot that requires to be sharper, you could use the hyperfocal distance.

It's a technical subject and the focus point depends on your aperture, focal length and sensor size. There are phone apps to calculate that for you.

If you want to read about it, I find that cambridge in color is a good website with good explanations on photography techniques:
https://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tu...l-distance.htm

Plenty of videos on the subject on youtube as well.

(Now don't ask me for any explanation about it, I read about it but I never used it and I don't master it.)

Well said. Not a fan of attitude from photographers. It's never been easier to take a photo because we get instant feedback and you can often see the exact GPS coordinates where someone took a shot. There's no mystery. Lots of apps and sites make it easy to scout locations ahead of time from the comfort of your hotel room with a phone. I've got an app that shows me exactly where the Milky Way will be in the night sky at a given time. Weather sites will show detailed cloud maps and so on. There's far less hit and miss. If you gave some of these Instagram era "gurus" an old film camera and a light meter they'd be lost. No idea where the attitude comes from.

It actually shut off at the end of that shot. Was around -15 at that lake so it didn't last long outside my pocket. I mainly use the pano mode in vertical to do a quick sweep of the location and often include my camera setup for a behind the scenes shot. Plus I shoot panos almost exclusively now so without a phone shot I can't really show anyone what a place looked like until I stitch the frames together.

I'd like to get back to composing shots for a single frame but I find myself obsessed with trying to capture what I saw without too much distortion so I lean toward the pano format trying to duplicate 6x17 and 4x5. I see a lot of photographers walking around with a camera on a strap but I don't even have a strap on mine anymore because it was getting in the way shooting on a tripod with a multirow pano rig so I will stick to one or two compositions for a location and just wait for the right light. That means there isn't much variety but the goal is to get at least one image that I'd want to print everywhere I go. I just got back so I haven't edited a single shot yet however I will share some. I was fortunate to experience some really nice light. I have zero interest in producing heavily edited images. I'd work on them more in the past but these days either the light is beautiful and does it all for me or I just enjoy the memory of being there and don't bother showing anyone the images.

Better yet….they would go cry to their Mothers….

16mm lens which has a very deep DOF, f8 and focus about 1/3rd of the way into the shot and pretty much everything is in focus. Unless, as Dominik said, you are close to the ground, then focus closer, and stop down to ~f11.

Speaking on experiencing the beautiful sunrises ans sunsets in NZ…they felt unreal….amaizng.

That's a poopy situation dom. You have more patience than I do…i would of went and said I like my shot the way it is hun.


Im not sure if instagram is to blame rather than the instructors awful sense of arrogance.

Last year there was more snow but I never saw Mount Cook so I'm happy I got clear skies. The hardest part is you can only be in one place for a sunrise or sunset since that beautiful light might only last a couple of minutes. Got it wrong a couple of times but overall more hits than misses.

V where did you visit while you were there and what were the highlights for you?

Instagram isn't the problem — it's the way it turns some photographers into an overnight success who then let that success go to their head instead of being humble. Of course there were arrogant pros way before all this stuff and while it's still not an excuse at least you could say they'd probably invested many years to achieve some success.

Anyway I prefer to focus on positives and it's always rewarding talking to people out there who enjoy it as much as I do. For me the experience of being in a beautiful location transcends photography. Being at that frozen lake in the dark with moonlight reflecting off the ice with no one else around… hands down the best moment for me.

I can only imagine how incredible it must feel to hike for days somewhere remote to capture beautiful scenery very few people get to see. This was only a couple of hours away from where I was staying but it still felt great.

Thanks man.

I'm not sure but I'd love to know what it was. My shot was done with a rig that attaches via suction cups and is then cloned out in post. So all the blur is straight out of the camera.

I completely understand. Landscape photography can get very artificial very fast, hdr heavy editing, lots of landscape shots even have skies from completely different spots added in.
I'm not against it, as I appreciate the wow factor that those type of images have and the artistic craft behind them. But I can definitively understand why you want to keep it real and true to what you experienced.

I found it, it's called virtualrig. Basically you can shoot a non moving car and then add an extremely convincing blur afterwards.
Aside of all the practical advantages of not having to shoot a moving car and the logistics it requires it is also extremely useful for lighting.
Take your time and use strobe lights to light the car from all possible angles to your liking and then make it look like the car was actually racing.

Very cool software but of course very specialized.

https://vimeo.com/122418089
https://www.virtualrig-studio.com/#features

I hate that bish now.

Sorry you didn't drop kick her arrogant ass.

this is the issue I have with people "teaching art".
You can't teach art. You can teach basics, you can teach techniques, but I just cannot fathom paying this much for some person to tell me where and when to shoot.

Microspot,

there are are few applications on the market that do the same thins.
Bleex is another one i've used.
Also, with CC 2014, there is a real time blur feature available https://helpx.adobe.com/photoshop/us...html#Path_blur

I was actually thinking about seeing I could enroll in a local JC and take a photography class, just so I can learn the numbers aspect of everything. I have fun just winging it, and always shoot on manual, but because of my lack of knowledge I ended up having to take a hundred photos before I get it right lol.

I have been watching a ton of youtube lately for photography/video. Never been interested in video but they make it look like fun, have gone through some shot ideas in my head, thought about trying a blog where I restore an axe from start to finish and take it to the woods, with nice b-roll. There are enough restoration videos and guys online that it's not a new idea itself, but most of them lack video or photography skills, so it could work out well, but I'm not a fan of being infront of a camera, let alone video.

If you need some time to kill check out these guys on Youtube;
James Popsys
Evan Ranft
Peter McKinnon
Nigel Danson
Thomas Heaton
First Man Photography
Matti Haapoja

Here are some product shots, switched from a Samsung phone, to bringing out my Nikon with me, more steps along the way to getting it on Instagram and my shop, but I think the nicer images will pay off. Still not doing any processing with them, just the auto-process via phone or instagram.

No idea what they charge for workshops over there but here they're getting around $20K from 8 people for 3-4 days driving a van around and providing shared accommodation. Profit must be ridiculous.

The question is how much can you really learn like that? Surely you've got to get out there on your own, make mistakes, and learn from them. Scout a location, explore, seek out interesting compositions, spend time thinking about what you want to capture rather than some "expert" telling you where to point the camera and which settings to use. Sometimes a great shot is years in the making where you return several times to get it right but that makes it all the more rewarding when it finally pays off. You feel like you earned it.

After a while your brain knows what's real and what isn't. It goes beyond "you had to be there" — you know a sky doesn't look like that and that the photographer spent an hour in Photoshop with luminosity masks to create that look. It's flawless, looks incredible, I can appreciate the work that went into processing it as much as the next person, but at some point it's more digital art than a photograph in the conventional sense. I'm at a point where I just want to document what I experienced. Refine it enough so it prints well but not distort reality. That's why I love the pano format: capture enough detail, print it large enough, and you're going to feel like you're standing there.

With that phone shot I posted absolutely nothing happened with the light at sunrise. There was no warm alpenglow hitting Mt Cook and no colors in the sky. It was as vanilla as a sunrise could be. Fortunately I was there well before sunrise and got twilight shots I was really happy with. However I still wanted one with pastel colors in the sky so I came back for sunset and it delivered. Would have been a lot easier to just Photoshop the boring sunrise and call it a day but then every time I saw that image it's going to look artificial to me.

After a little digging I found the person in question.

200K followers on Instagram.

I was actually aware of the path blur filter in PS but after watching the video on the link you provided I realized it is more capable than what I thought.
Thanks for that good to know!

this one is awesome. Real good product shot.

Completely understand your reasoning and your photographic process. cheers

By the way since we are talking about panoramas.

If you shoot panoramas and use lightroom, the "auto stack by capture time" feature is a very useful organisational tool.

You specify how many seconds went by between the shots you took, and lightroom organizes all those shots within that time frame together in a stack automatically for you.

Very useful to keep your library tidy. See here:

Ugh. Tonne of CA all over the place.
v.2

Thx for the feedback regarding blurry rocks on last page. I'll try again next week, I'm starting to dislike dealing with rocks/grainy textures tho.

Shot from this morning. I have an urge to get a good bokeh lens for more shots like this, at the ocean, street, architecture etc.