What version do you like?

Keith · Jul 24, 2005

Just back from holidays this past week, in was very intriguing, tons of wildlife but did manage a few landscapes, going to try panoramas when Im bored. 10GB's of images to play with so dont see it in the near future. LOL This was my first real go with the D2x, mixed reactions at the moment........

here is one where I did color, infrared and worked with the colors the IR filter gave me and last one infrared in B&W.......not a great pic, but was fun to play. These were shot with the 12-24mm and Nikon D2x on tripod,
roughly 25 second exposure, no noise reduction in camera and no
noise reduction software, ISO 320. The D2x handles long exposures
very nicely.........not a great IR camera because it is not
suspectible to IR and takes long exposures, but it is definitely
do-able!

NIKON D2X    ---    17mm    f/10.0    1/45s    ISO 100

NIKON D2X    ---    17mm    f/10.0    24s    ISO 320

NIKON D2X    ---    17mm    f/10.0    24s    ISO 320

Kevin Scott · Jul 24, 2005

Oooooo....that 2nd one is really different! I think I like it. Have to come back and look again later but it's really interesting. I like the bottom one, too. The top on I like except for the clouds. Something about them is bothering me.

The chemist · Jul 24, 2005

I love number 2 as well. Altough its hard for me not to like IR. I also like number 3 as a good second. Number one doesent doesent do it for me. HTH

RFCGRAPHICS · Jul 24, 2005

Guess I am a purist....I prefer the first one.

However, I must say all are very nice

Regards

RFC

Gale · Jul 24, 2005

Wow Keith...
What can I say........

Super great stuff... WOW

10 GIGS geeeeezzzzz

F15Todd · Jul 24, 2005

I like number 2.

Ken-L · Jul 25, 2005

I also am "traditionalist" so I favor #1. Next I would pick #3. But #2 has a nice feel to it for what it is.

So, good job......one shot satisfies three perspectives!

manzico · Jul 25, 2005

gotta go with #3

For me, #3 is the winner. The other two are great as well, but I like the sense of motion in the second two, and, while the color treatment in #2 is very nice, I'm still a sucker for b&w.

Dave

mike mac · Jul 25, 2005

Number one for me liek RFC I am a purist, so what are your mixed reactiosn regardign the D2X, jsut curious

Keith · Jul 25, 2005

Thanks everyone!

Im leaning towards #2 , if the water wasnt so flat on the b&w I think that would have been my fav, tough on these long exposures........

thanks
Keith

czechmark · Jul 28, 2005

Keith,

I vote for #3. Very smoonth.

Regards,

catalyst · Jul 29, 2005

Keith -

All of them are impressive.

My fave is the first - not sure whether that means I'm a purist or not, but the first is stunning.

Eric

Keith · Jul 29, 2005

Thanks for looking Paul and Eric......... allot of purists, that is not a bad thing ;-)

clew · Jul 29, 2005

IR

Keith,

I like the first one the best. It appears that you may have over exposed (or overprocessed) the IR images. Which IR filter were you using? I have some experience shooting IR with the D2X, primarily with an 87 Harrison. You may be able to go back and fix the overexposure issue in PS or NC. When exposing, always check your RGB histogram and make sure you didn't blow the red channel. If you did all of this and it came out this way, my apologies, I don't know what it could be.

Chris

Keith · Jul 29, 2005

Welcome!

thanks for your comments Chris, I have played with IR a bit. I would luv to see your IR gallery

these were shot with the hoya r72 ...........btw wasnt over exposed, its the way I post processed, that is the neat thing with IR, you get to do it to taste :wink: . Welcome to the cafe!!

sfoxjohn · Jul 29, 2005

Keith,

I like the first.

I usually like black and white and like soft water and "hard?" water. But here I find the water way too soft. Looks like snow to me.

The second is intriguing and I think the soft water adds to that in this case.

John

clew · Jul 29, 2005

Thanks, Keith! No disrespect meant. I just thought there was some detail lost in the water on the BW conversion. I have a shot (Pennybacker Thread) in this forum that is IR.

Chris

Keith · Jul 29, 2005

HI Chris

Absolutely none taken, no worries. I am always open to new ideas or ways of trying things. live long learning. LOL..............thanks

As far as the water being flat, as you can see from the color, the water was relatively flat, now add 25 seconds on to it and voila. Would have helped if their was atleast 1 ft falls or greater but notta......

will take a peek at your thread. I find the D2x is not comparible to my D2h or D100 for IR sensitivity, but it is still do-able....takes approx 4x times longer to get a properly exposed pic..........

clew · Jul 29, 2005

ahh...i forgot about the long exposure...DOH! It still looks like a little loss of detail between the color IR and the BW shot. The 25 second exposure goes a long way towards making sense...sorry for my brain spasm.

chris

Log in / Register

Welcome to NikonCafe.com—a friendly Nikon camera & photography discussion forum!

What version do you like?

Keith

Kevin Scott

The chemist

RFCGRAPHICS

Gale

F15Todd

Ken-L Guest

manzico

mike mac

Keith

czechmark

catalyst Subscribing Member

Keith

clew Guest

Keith

sfoxjohn

clew Guest

Keith

clew Guest