great, failed again to get last place
Thank you!I shot it at a zoo (http://www.zookrefeld.de/faq.html -- I noted that in my gallery, but somehow can't change it to public at the moment), so I guess it was just de-sensitized (there were hundreds of butterflies, and most of them were not shy, seems to be depending on the species).Most of them didn't even notice the flash, only a big, blue one did.And, as this is a 1360×1700 crop of a 16mp photo, I wasn't quite that close as it seems to be.And for comfortable -- I think I tried for nearly 10 minutes to get as close as possible to this one (it felt longer), got cramps in my back and thought I was losing my eyesight (it was rather dark, and I had to manual focus -- more guess work and many tries). And the climate was tropical, while I was dressed for a german autumn...
Clueless Wanderer: ..The body position and everything about the shot seem to not be staged and genuine.BUT. The guy is pretty damn clean to say he has just risen out of a trench held down by gun fire. Not even a spot of dirt on his knees or shirt. Hmm...
There is dirt on his knees, if you look carefully. It's just that the trouser legs move up (sorry, don't know how to say that better), because of the bending of his knees, so the dirt is on the trouser a little above his knees.And there is dirt on the end of the trouser legs. I guess the earth was drier then at the somme or the other places better known for trench warfare, so it doesn't show as much as we're are used to from war movies.
And out of characters...Continued:
This created the outlines on the right side (and there is a reason besides composition that the left side is cut off...)If that isn't clear: it's the same effect as here: http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/1017157792/photos/1157027/glasinglas?inalbum=glasses(just inverted and smaller, and here I had to hold it diagonally, so that the line width for all glasses would be more or less the same)Oh, and I used an external monitor for liveview, so I could see if I was holding the sheet correctly.
Please excuse me if I don't reply to each of you seperatly, with that out of the way:
Uh, too many compliments, it's neither a masterpiece or that awesome.In fact, it is only I would say 80% of what I wanted to achieve, and only after (for me) too much postprocessing (to eliminate the reflections between the glasses and some other lightspots). But afterwards I knew how I could make it to, say 98%, and that this would be too much hassle (I'd need a different polarized light for each glass I think)It was also the fourth or fifth try, so it's not as I knew how to do it from pure genius or so...
How to: well, just put the glasses in a row on a non reflective (as good as possible at least) surface, in a as dark as workable room.I had single LED Light on the right front side (not so sure), and a cpl on the lens.The white outlines are not all reflections of the light, but partly refractions of a middle grey plastic sheet I was holding to the upper left of the row.(continued above...)
Shot at Zoo Krefeld (http://www.zookrefeld.de/faq.html)
DougSchuch: By the way, H2O is the designation for common water. Am I missing something?
yes, the joke:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dihydrogen_monoxide_hoax
Hmm, some entrants have a strange definition of "very distinct"...
barb_s: Sorry to do this, but I got such an odd variety of entries, that I decided not to go through with the challenge. There were a couple of street art type photo's , not really still life. A few that were traditional still life's , a few that stretched the definition, and a few where you'd debate whether the net some objects were arranged on, or a plate that held fruit should be counted.
So, because there was already much discussion on day 2, I decided to end the challenge. I'll do a better job with a second version later on. Sometimes a simple rule set isn't a good rule set.
Again, I apologize,
And I just shot my would be entry (which may have also stretched the definition a little, but that's what definitions and boundaries are good for.. -- and I waited to see if you would dq the one entry slighty similar to mine). Well, still had fun.
Better luck with your next challenge!
fathernature: The old Photosuite program I used didn't record the EXIF data can I still use the photo.Thx Randy
http://thomer.com/howtos/copy_exif.html -- if you still have a version with the exif
maxola67: One more entity to disappear(together with mail).
There are more bullwhips made today than ever before; neither technologies or forms of communication ever vanish completely, they just get overshadowed by newer toys.
tko: Loved your photo, gave it 4 or 5 stars myself.
Thank you.I think yours is better, btw.