Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Regret to inform, Matthew, but those last four photos are not black and white...

:P

Great minds..

5412199395_ab04ab9e03_b.jpg

CC the hell out of me. Pretty new to working this look so ideas/tips/hates/loves will be useful. cheers!

Only thing I don't like about this is the floor - I would have blurred/unsharpened/something it a little..

CC: I don't like that little square in the middle. if you remove it I think it will be a heaps better shot ;)

+1 :D

MaikuL, perhaps if you put something bright red just offset from the centre as a focus point? It'd look great with those minimal colours I reckon :)

Hmm something red, possibly a flower of some sort with a tad more life leaning to right of the white tub, that would be pretty nice.

i was trying to a problem (flaking paint) into a feature and trying to tie into the urban look of the little beast. i would extend the floor and blur more gradually if I were to do it again.

i missed the sunset. pretty sure i was outside around that time too. :/ maybe we have a different sun out in the desert.

that croc shot is cool.

Here's some Evo shots fo yo assez.

In action

5464750886_3e37251a30_z.jpg

5464750268_ecf711a2c4_z.jpg

5444949652_3a6bf56a1b_z.jpg

Static

There's something about this first shot that bugs me but i can't work out what...

5464749954_6a0e3c684a_z.jpg

5464151311_422dffe99c_z.jpg

5452657825_0136a3f465_z.jpg

Taken in the pitch black in the rain :(

It was good to test out such high iso's.. oh and too see if the 5dm2 will survive in the rain lol. Thank god it did coz it was pretty wet!!

ISO 3200 i think. No PP or noise reduction.

IMG_1066_resize.jpg

ISO 6400, f2.8, 1/100th in the rain, hand held. That street light in the back was the only light I could see. Looks close in the pic but it was pretty far away. No PP. just as is image from camera.

IMG_1100_resize.jpg

spotted this little guy hanging around on a bridge i walk under to get home...

181939_1672616328354_1025781561_31467541_3562979_n.jpg

i have a new found respect for masters of macro photography. to get real good you would need to be looking at tons of creepy crawly things very close up very often.

stuff. that.

lol.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • For once a good news  It needed to be adjusted by that one nut and it is ok  At least something was easy But thank you very much for help. But a small issue is now(gearbox) that when the car is stationary you can hear "clinking" from gearbox so some of the bearing is 100% not that happy... It goes away once you push clutch so it is 100% gearbox. Just if you know...what that bearing could be? It sounding like "spun bearing" but it is louder.
    • Yeah, that's fine**. But the numbers you came up with are just wrong. Try it for yourself. Put in any voltage from the possible range and see what result you get. You get nonsense. ** When I say "fine", I mean, it's still shit. The very simple linear formula (slope & intercept) is shit for a sensor with a non-linear response. This is the curve, from your data above. Look at the CURVE! It's only really linear between about 30 and 90 °C. And if you used only that range to define a curve, it would be great. But you would go more and more wrong as you went to higher temps. And that is why the slope & intercept found when you use 50 and 150 as the end points is so bad halfway between those points. The real curve is a long way below the linear curve which just zips straight between the end points, like this one. You could probably use the same slope and a lower intercept, to move that straight line down, and spread the error out. But you would 5-10°C off in a lot of places. You'd need to say what temperature range you really wanted to be most right - say, 100 to 130, and plop the line closest to teh real curve in that region, which would make it quite wrong down at the lower temperatures. Let me just say that HPTuners are not being realistic in only allowing for a simple linear curve. 
    • I feel I should re-iterate. The above picture is the only option available in the software and the blurb from HP Tuners I quoted earlier is the only way to add data to it and that's the description they offer as to how to figure it out. The only fields available is the blank box after (Input/ ) and the box right before = Output. Those are the only numbers that can be entered.
    • No, your formula is arse backwards. Mine is totally different to yours, and is the one I said was bang on at 50 and 150. I'll put your data into Excel (actually it already is, chart it and fit a linear fit to it, aiming to make it evenly wrong across the whole span. But not now. Other things to do first.
    • God damnit. The only option I actually have in the software is the one that is screenshotted. I am glad that I at least got it right... for those two points. Would it actually change anything if I chose/used 80C and 120C as the two points instead? My brain wants to imagine the formula put into HPtuners would be the same equation, otherwise none of this makes sense to me, unless: 1) The formula you put into VCM Scanner/HPTuners is always linear 2) The two points/input pairs are only arbitrary to choose (as the documentation implies) IF the actual scaling of the sensor is linear. then 3) If the scaling is not linear, the two points you choose matter a great deal, because the formula will draw a line between those two points only.
×
×
  • Create New...