Quote from mcintyrej :

Do some side-by-side comparisons of NX2/ACR!

Look what you made me do!

Promised myself not to write a blog but damnit let's try dis.

Btw here's some live shots from January. Had completely forgot ever shooting this night.

first rally of the season
http://rallyphotos.cz/photos/valasska_rally_2010/

Quote from Tomba(FIN) :

Thanks for the info, I rather not post process at all

Some pictures from a enduro race.

Those images are 1200x800. Sorry, you've post processed

Quote from mrodgers :

Those images are 1200x800. Sorry, you've post processed

By what name can you separate the ones that has been just resized and the ones that has been "edited" then?

Quote from Tomba(FIN) :

By what name can you separate the ones that has been just resized and the ones that has been "edited" then?

Hey, note the smiley.... But since you asked, in my definition, post processing is any processing done after taking a photo. In actuality, every photo is post processed as either you shoot RAW and convert and process yourself, or you shoot JPEG and the camera does the processing.

Resizing, or anything else would be post processing

Editing on the other hand, in my opinion, is more specific than "post processing". Editing is modifying the image. I look at post processing as sharpening, color correction, white balance correction, cropping and resizing. I look at editing as completely changing a photo beyond those listed above.

I was just having a dig at ya anyways.

I looked over the tussle between Ken Rockwell and Petteri Sulonen. I came down firmly on Sulonen's side. If you think your unedited straight-from-your-camera photos aren't post-processed, it's because you don't understand how a digital image is captured.

[edit] for info, Rockwell shoots in JPG and Sulonen shoots in RAW.

Rockwell: http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/raw.htm

Sulonen: http://www.prime-junta.net/pon ... rkflow/_RAW_workflow.html

I may have posted these links before.. can't remember.

Rockwell is unquestionably a charlatan and a fool.

I've benefited from his advice once or twice, so I'm reticent in agreeing.. but yeah, he can be a bit of a twonk. On JPG vs RAW, he's clearly a plonker.

He reviews gear he's never used. Also he's a really shitty photographer. End of credibility for me.

If you need a Nikon "guru," Hogan's the guy to go with. Or that one Scandinavian dude.

On another note, here's a few shots from the last week or so:

Trip to Rome.

Meh

Looks pretty damn good to me.

those ferraris

They were standing right outside the Ferrari Factory in Modena. You can even Test drive them. 60€ for 10 Minutes F430, 100€ for 10 Minutes in the California.

what one is the yellow and black one, that one looks great

Quote from logitekg25 :

what one is the yellow and black one, that one looks great

430 Scuderia.

Anyway, i was lucky to come across this sick Wiesmann Roadster, too it was parked in a really busy street.






And this.

Pffff check out what kind of head turners we have here in Finland.

Quote from Highsider9 :

Meh

That is pretty damn funky. The white body could maybe use some more highlights (couple of strobe blinks from the back?) but very futuristic indeed.

Quote from Highsider9 :

Meh

God, that Mustang. So smexy

Just some pics I have taken.

Holy large images batman.

Quote from Velociround :

Just some pics I have taken.

Could you make them a bit bigger for me?

@ Highsider: Beautiful photos. Although I don't generally like faux blur on the background, I must admit it works on these and gives the images some pop. That shot that spanky quoted is brilliant. What shutter speed was used? And where do you find a car park with such clean, white floors?!

Here's one of my own taken recently.



Pretty decent panning attempt, if I may so myself (at least, compared to my other efforts. :shy Unfortunately I seem to twist the camera as I pan, giving them all wonky horizons, and upon straightening the shot, the tail has just crept out the frame.

Quote from Velociround :

Just some pics I have taken.

Whilst your computer screen may be 2592 pixels wide, mine isn't.

Sorry
Opera automaticaly makes pictures fit to the screen so I hadn't noticed that.
I've removed the links now. Click on thumbnails to see the pics.

few photos ive made for my friend

http://sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hp ... 2245_291095_8345262_n.jpg

http://sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hp ... 2245_291096_2727612_n.jpg

http://sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hp ... 2245_291097_7563811_n.jpg

http://sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hp ... 2245_291098_2597307_n.jpg

Quote from spankmeyer :

That is pretty damn funky. The white body could maybe use some more highlights (couple of strobe blinks from the back?)

Will try that next time. Thanks.

Quote from STROBE :

@ Highsider: Beautiful photos. Although I don't generally like faux blur on the background, I must admit it works on these and gives the images some pop. That shot that spanky quoted is brilliant. What shutter speed was used? And where do you find a car park with such clean, white floors?!

Thanks. Here's the original Ferrari Shot . The Camper in the Background distracts too much from the main Subject, hence the fake (and badly done) blur. The Shutter Speed on the Rigshot was 0.8 Seconds, shot at about 10 km/h. The Car Park belongs to a local Airport Hotel.


EDIT: Here's the Setup. Generic Window Suction Handle, Manfrotto 035 Superclamp, Manfrotto Magic Arm 244RC.