OneGuyFromBarlick

The camera I'm using now doesn't shoot RAW. A few years back I dabbled with an SLR and tried out RAW but found it was a step too far for me. Also the software for handling RAW in Linux isn't user-friendly. I still find myself astonished at what a standard digital compact camera can do now - it's one of the great inventions!

You could take lots of close ups and stitch them together afterwards

Tiz's question raises a question in my mind..... With a 35mm camera if you use a longer lens you still use all the negative so theoretically you have the same resolution and grain size. Are you saying that if you zoom digital to 10% of the normal image it only uses 10% of the available pixels on the sensor?

Stanley wrote:Tiz's question raises a question in my mind..... With a 35mm camera if you use a longer lens you still use all the negative so theoretically you have the same resolution and grain size. Are you saying that if you zoom digital to 10% of the normal image it only uses 10% of the available pixels on the sensor?

No, if you're using lens zoom it's still the same principle. It's once you start zooming into the image once you've captured it. Further to this, some compact and bridge cameras have a "digital zoom" function, this uses a portion of the ccd so it appears you've zoomed in but it's just a crop.

Thanks Kev. That was what I understood..... I was just checking!

I was very pleased to be one of the 12 winners of the P&O Cruises 2017 calendar competition with this image. It's the MV Azura in Skjolden, Norway.

Nice one Kev.

And a nice pic as well.....

Thank you, it's hard to go wrong with pictures of the Fjords.

Not as simple as that Kev as you well know......

My 2016 Christmas card. A nice easy bit of Photoshop trickery this year.

Nice one..... I still treasure this one.....



( His face has gone grey now.....)

Stanley wrote:Nice one..... I still treasure this one.....



( His face has gone grey now.....)

I enjoyed creating it.

Universally admired Kev......

There's another `supermoon' coming. Have you noticed how the news media always illustrate it with that photo of a gigantic moon behind Glastonbury Tor? That was probably taken when it was a normal full moon and the effect is simply down to relative distances and use of lenses. The supermoon is only slightly larger than normal.

I noticed there is a very nice full moon this morning.....

Stanley wrote:I noticed there is a very nice full moon this morning.....

It looked huge on the way into work this morning.

Later, on our walk it was possibly the best full moon I have ever seen. There were rainbow colours in the halo as thin cloud drifted across.... You could read the paper outside at midnight last night.

This web page has a lot of useful information about supermoons and a picture comparing a supermoon with the smallest moon of the year.
LINK

Treated myself to a new background for the studio, a mate of mine is selling off some of his kit. Too good a bargain to miss, it's one of these www.manfrotto.co.uk/knitted-ezycare-3-x-7m-washington

How's this for a background......

A bit of sky going on there, very nice.

A lucky moment at Glenfinnan. It didn't reach us but we could hear the thunder.

This cheeky small boy wanted to help me with the new background...