Comments on: Mysterious Cut Stones in the Mountains of Kyoto http://regex.info/blog/2009-11-30/1381 Not a photo blog. A personal blog with photos. Tue, 07 Feb 2012 15:03:59 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: parv http://regex.info/blog/2009-11-30/1381#comment-37431 parv Tue, 01 Dec 2009 08:19:04 +0000 http://regex.info/blog/2009-11-30/1381#comment-37431 I liked the fourth (JF7_027133.jpg ) the most. If the stones were bit more prominent, say about 1/3 of the bottom, that would have been even better. (i think for that one might have to shoot with a wide angle lens looking upward & closer to the stone & the ground.) I liked the fourth (JF7_027133.jpg ) the most. If the stones were bit more prominent, say about 1/3 of the bottom, that would have been even better. (i think for that one might have to shoot with a wide angle lens looking upward & closer to the stone & the ground.)

]]> By: Marcina, USA http://regex.info/blog/2009-11-30/1381#comment-37429 Marcina, USA Tue, 01 Dec 2009 03:13:31 +0000 http://regex.info/blog/2009-11-30/1381#comment-37429 Mom said "I love stone and rocks" Ya think? :-) My first thought on seeing the photos of that tumble of rocks was "Uh oh - Mom's going to try to get you to ship those to Ohio, see if she doesn't! Mom said “I love stone and rocks”

Ya think? :-)

My first thought on seeing the photos of that tumble of rocks was “Uh oh – Mom’s going to try to get you to ship those to Ohio, see if she doesn’t!

]]> By: Grandma Friedl, Ohio, USA http://regex.info/blog/2009-11-30/1381#comment-37420 Grandma Friedl, Ohio, USA Mon, 30 Nov 2009 16:41:06 +0000 http://regex.info/blog/2009-11-30/1381#comment-37420 My guess is that one time this roadway was much smaller and less traveled with a small shrine next to it. When the road was widened and paved, the temple had to be moved out of the way of "progress" The stones were only moved aside, not dumped. Perhaps someone will take them and rebuild elsewhere someday. Seems so poignant...tugs at me. They seem very old..if only they could talk. I love stone and rocks My guess is that one time this roadway was much smaller and less traveled with a small shrine next to it. When the road was widened and paved, the temple had to be moved out of the way of “progress” The stones were only moved aside, not dumped. Perhaps someone will take them and rebuild elsewhere someday. Seems so poignant…tugs at me. They seem very old..if only they could talk. I love stone and rocks

]]> By: Ron Evans http://regex.info/blog/2009-11-30/1381#comment-37418 Ron Evans Mon, 30 Nov 2009 15:12:45 +0000 http://regex.info/blog/2009-11-30/1381#comment-37418 I've been playing around with the lightroom3 Beta and specifically trying to get the hang of white balance feature. I was just thinking over the weekend that I should probably get a gray card because I'm having a hard time trusting the balancing I'm seeing in LR3. I took some textural pics of tree bark and stones in the woods (rural NJ elm trees). When I try to use the eyedropper in LR3 even on the most neutral gray tone I can find it renders the image a little too warm. I find that I like the 'As Shot' white balance the best. (I'm shooting with a dinky Ricoh R8... it scares me to trust that camera's judgement) Your COLOR CHECK photo is a great lesson: 1. Carry a grey card. 2. Wear /bring something in your test photo that you can easily remember its true color. For your eizo monitor did you have to get a calibration tool for that? Also it looks like your grey card is slightly angled to maybe catch the daylight. After you get that gray card shot do you eye drop in LR for white balance or do you do something else that you find works better? <span class='jfriedl'>I have an Eye-One calibration tool for my monitors. The gray card is indeed angled up to catch the same light illuminating the scene. In LR, I eye-drop on the brightest part of the card that's not blown out (though with the WhiBal, I watch out for direct reflections in the little white patch) . More often than not I'll not care for the technically correct white balance because it doesn't match what I remember and/or because it doesn't match what I want to remember, so I'll use it as a starting point and go from there. If I don't have the card and don't notice something neutral in the shot, I'll try to find something that is and take a picture of it, though one must realize that the many things we consider "white" are not white. In a picture with lots of "white" things (my boy's socks, the white parts of some superhero sticker on his backpack, the white of a business man's shirt, the white paper on a <i>shoji</i> screen, the white stripe on a road, etc.) clicking around with the white-balance eyedropper will often cause wildly different interpretations, some of which (though wildly different) may seem reasonable, and some that are not reasonable at all. The mind is easily tricked, both when out and about and in front of the Lightroom window. In the end, if your goal is to share some pretty photos, play around with gray cards and semi-dirty socks, but in the end just pick what you think looks nice. :-) —Jeffrey</span> I’ve been playing around with the lightroom3 Beta and specifically trying to get the hang of white balance feature. I was just thinking over the weekend that I should probably get a gray card because I’m having a hard time trusting the balancing I’m seeing in LR3.

I took some textural pics of tree bark and stones in the woods (rural NJ elm trees). When I try to use the eyedropper in LR3 even on the most neutral gray tone I can find it renders the image a little too warm. I find that I like the ‘As Shot’ white balance the best. (I’m shooting with a dinky Ricoh R8… it scares me to trust that camera’s judgement)

Your COLOR CHECK photo is a great lesson: 1. Carry a grey card. 2. Wear /bring something in your test photo that you can easily remember its true color.

For your eizo monitor did you have to get a calibration tool for that? Also it looks like your grey card is slightly angled to maybe catch the daylight. After you get that gray card shot do you eye drop in LR for white balance or do you do something else that you find works better?

I have an Eye-One calibration tool for my monitors. The gray card is indeed angled up to catch the same light illuminating the scene. In LR, I eye-drop on the brightest part of the card that’s not blown out (though with the WhiBal, I watch out for direct reflections in the little white patch) . More often than not I’ll not care for the technically correct white balance because it doesn’t match what I remember and/or because it doesn’t match what I want to remember, so I’ll use it as a starting point and go from there. If I don’t have the card and don’t notice something neutral in the shot, I’ll try to find something that is and take a picture of it, though one must realize that the many things we consider “white” are not white. In a picture with lots of “white” things (my boy’s socks, the white parts of some superhero sticker on his backpack, the white of a business man’s shirt, the white paper on a shoji screen, the white stripe on a road, etc.) clicking around with the white-balance eyedropper will often cause wildly different interpretations, some of which (though wildly different) may seem reasonable, and some that are not reasonable at all. The mind is easily tricked, both when out and about and in front of the Lightroom window. In the end, if your goal is to share some pretty photos, play around with gray cards and semi-dirty socks, but in the end just pick what you think looks nice. :-) —Jeffrey

]]>