# D800E City Scapes. D800E Is Just Plain Amazing! King Of The Hill If You Ask Me!



## FaymusMedia

So I was giving landscape tutorials in NYC and when I finished I just had to put the camera to work. So here are some images.

Also, take part in the poll to help me decide which photo is best, as I am entering a landscape/cityscape photo competition and I want to know what you guys think is my best photo to possibly win. 

Thanks!



*Photo A*









*Photo B*







*Photo C*








*Photo D*








*Photo E*








*Photo F*








*Photo G
*







*Photo H*








*Photo I*








*Photo J*


----------



## FaymusMedia

*PHOTO K*








*PHOTO L*






*PHOTO M*








*PHOTO N*


----------



## FaymusMedia

Here are some extras that I snapped, these are more or less "street photography" Enjoy!


----------



## gsgary

Only like the B+W rest are over HDR for me


----------



## manaheim

You don't need a D800 to come up with these... trust me.


----------



## FaymusMedia

manaheim said:


> You don't need a D800 to come up with these... trust me.




I have been doing photography for 12+ years, I am aware any camera can take a photo. This isnt a "debate" thread. Its my work, and poll.


----------



## Scuba

My phone only loaded one of the b&w so can't say much there but the HDRs or way overdone.  How can you tell the camera takes good images when they are that cooked?


----------



## SCraig

gsgary said:


> Only like the B+W rest are over HDR for me


I have to agree.  Too heavily tone-mapped for my tastes, and too much keystone distortion in several of them.  And since I also don't care for B&W that doesn't leave much.  Sorry, just not my cup of tea.


----------



## manaheim

FaymusMedia said:


> manaheim said:
> 
> 
> 
> You don't need a D800 to come up with these... trust me.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have been doing photography for 12+ years, I am aware any camera can take a photo. This isnt a "debate" thread. Its my work, and poll.
Click to expand...


Oh, I'm sorry I didn't realize you were the Governor of the Internet.  Forgive me for violating the zoning codes for this particular thread.  I didn't see them posted.



Here's a tip for you, sparky... the second you throw down a gauntlet like that, it BECOMES a debate thread.  I'll try to be something of a better man and not bother to pick it up, but I'll bet you your lance that someone else will.

Good luck with it.


----------



## FaymusMedia

manaheim said:


> FaymusMedia said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> manaheim said:
> 
> 
> 
> You don't need a D800 to come up with these... trust me.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have been doing photography for 12+ years, I am aware any camera can take a photo. This isnt a "debate" thread. Its my work, and poll.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Oh, I'm sorry I didn't realize you were the Governor of the Internet.  Forgive me for violating the zoning codes for this particular thread.  I didn't see them posted.
> 
> 
> 
> Here's a tip for you, sparky... the second you throw down a gauntlet like that, it BECOMES a debate thread.  I'll try to be something of a better man and not bother to pick it up, but I'll bet you your lance that someone else will.
> 
> Good luck with it.
Click to expand...



hmmm. so I post some photos, and thats asking for people to come in here and become smart asses? Where does that come into play? 



I have been on this forum for a little bit, and there really has been nothing but drama and dicks the whole time. I am dead serious too.


----------



## manaheim

Ok, I fail to be a better man.  My new years resolution is shot.  I didn't even make it out of January...

Have you been on the internet before today?  Or did you just get wired up last week?

Look, you come onto a photography forum and say "the D800 is amazing blah blah blah" and I look expecting to see someone really showcasing what the D800 can do... incredibly sharp, good dynamic range, etc... and you post pictures I could have made with an iPhone.  It's not that the D800 isn't amazing, it's that you chose to demonstrate the abilities of an amazing professional kitchen in a 5 star restaurant... by making twinkies.  It just... to me... says quite a bit about you and what you think is amazing.  A quick trip to your site (cough) faymousmedia, sort of confirms that for me.

Oh and by the way the VERY first paragraph in your "Photography" section...

"Photography should eye catching creativity, that follows no real set of rules, aside from the basics. Unique blend of realism combined with a touch of in depth intesity. Breath taking, nostelgic, and comforting. Memories that last forever. "

Missing words, spelling errors and all sorts of issues there.  You might want to at least have your site proof read by someone.  

Free advice.  I mean, I've only been a photographer for 10 years, so you've got 2 on me... but I was an editor of books for a few years way back when... oh and I do have that high school diploma...


----------



## FaymusMedia

manaheim said:


> Ok, I fail to be a better man.  My new years resolution is shot.  I didn't even make it out of January...
> 
> Have you been on the internet before today?  Or did you just get wired up last week?
> 
> Look, you come onto a photography forum and say "the D800 is amazing blah blah blah" and I look expecting to see someone really showcasing what the D800 can do... incredibly sharp, good dynamic range, etc... and you post pictures I could have made with an iPhone.  It's not that the D800 isn't amazing, it's that you chose to demonstrate the abilities of an amazing professional kitchen in a 5 star restaurant... by making twinkies.  It just... to me... says quite a bit about you and what you think is amazing.  A quick trip to your site (cough) faymousmedia, sort of confirms that for me.
> 
> Oh and by the way the VERY first paragraph in your "Photography" section...
> 
> "Photography should eye catching creativity, that follows no real set of rules, aside from the basics. Unique blend of realism combined with a touch of in depth intesity. Breath taking, nostelgic, and comforting. Memories that last forever. "
> 
> Missing words, spelling errors and all sorts of issues there.  You might want to at least have your site proof read by someone.
> 
> Free advice.  I mean, I've only been a photographer for 10 years, so you've got 2 on me... but I was an editor of books for a few years way back when... oh and I do have that high school diploma...




This is just the kind of nonsense I expected from this board. There is people like you on every board that think they know everything. Why are we talking about high school diploma? I have a BA in business management. So I am pretty sure that I have a high school diploma as well.


----------



## SCraig

FaymusMedia said:


> This is just the kind of nonsense I expected from this board. There is people like you on every board that think they know everything. Why are we talking about high school diploma? I have a BA in business management. So I am pretty sure that I have a high school diploma as well.


The point is that there is nothing in those photographs that screams



> D800E Is Just Plain Amazing! King Of The Hill If You Ask Me!



as your title indicated.  As a matter of fact there is nothing in them that indicates ANY kind of high-grade camera since the tone-mapping pretty much wiped out everything the camera was capable of showing.  There is nothing that shows the exceptional dynamic range of the D800, the tone-mapping killed that.  There is nothing that shows the exceptional detail of the D800, the distortion of a 16mm lens on a full-frame body killed that.  These could have come from ANYTHING and don't show off the abilities of the D800 at all.

Oh, and 12 years experience doesn't go very far around here.  There are a lot of people around here who can nearly quadruple that.

Rabbit-Man, the Hostess Bakery is gone.  Twinkies are dead.  Long live Twinkies!


----------



## FaymusMedia

SCraig said:


> FaymusMedia said:
> 
> 
> 
> This is just the kind of nonsense I expected from this board. There is people like you on every board that think they know everything. Why are we talking about high school diploma? I have a BA in business management. So I am pretty sure that I have a high school diploma as well.
> 
> 
> 
> The point is that there is nothing in those photographs that screams
> 
> 
> 
> 
> D800E Is Just Plain Amazing! King Of The Hill If You Ask Me!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> as your title indicated.  As a matter of fact there is nothing in them that indicates ANY kind of high-grade camera since the tone-mapping pretty much wiped out everything the camera was capable of showing.  There is nothing that shows the exceptional dynamic range of the D800, the tone-mapping killed that.  There is nothing that shows the exceptional detail of the D800, the distortion of a 16mm lens on a full-frame body killed that.  These could have come from ANYTHING and don't show off the abilities of the D800 at all.
> 
> Oh, and 12 years experience doesn't go very far around here.  There are a lot of people around here who can nearly quadruple that.
> 
> Rabbit-Man, the Hostess Bakery is gone.  Twinkies are dead.  Long live Twinkies!
Click to expand...


Again more nonsense. Its all trash talk, gimmicks, and redundant posts. There is no tact on this board at all.


----------



## SCraig

FaymusMedia said:


> Again more nonsense. Its all trash talk, gimmicks, and redundant posts. There is no tact on this board at all.



OK, as far as I'm concerned you're on your own.  Another entry to my ignore list.


----------



## FaymusMedia

SCraig said:


> FaymusMedia said:
> 
> 
> 
> Again more nonsense. Its all trash talk, gimmicks, and redundant posts. There is no tact on this board at all.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> OK, as far as I'm concerned you're on your own.  Another entry to my ignore list.
Click to expand...


If you plan on giving advice, I am pretty sure being a smart ass and making jokes at someone isn't the way to do it. Period.


----------



## Buckster

The first two images look VERY familiar to me, like I've seen them on a blog post or here in the forum somewhere.  I can't quite place where though...


----------



## ceeboy14

I am less than a great fan of HDR, and overcooked HDR is even worse. Most of the images you presented, as a regular D800 shot should and could have held their own in any forum. I have to agree with most of the remarks on here regarding the imagery you chose to present as proof of the D800's superiority, yet as was stated several times, any camera with a 12 year competent photographer could have easily shot these. Repost these as "normal" D800 shots and show us the crispness, sharpness, superior color and range and then we can comment accordingly. 

You brought a knife to a gunfight then got all pissy your knife was too small. It is quite unbecoming of a "professional." I don't have a web page and a fancy watermark so I guess my 54 years in photography don't mean squat to you, but I can assure you, the work you presented here is far more representative of a newbie with more camera and PP tools than experience. Good luck.


----------



## manaheim

FaymusMedia said:


> manaheim said:
> 
> 
> 
> Ok, I fail to be a better man.  My new years resolution is shot.  I didn't even make it out of January...
> 
> Have you been on the internet before today?  Or did you just get wired up last week?
> 
> Look, you come onto a photography forum and say "the D800 is amazing blah blah blah" and I look expecting to see someone really showcasing what the D800 can do... incredibly sharp, good dynamic range, etc... and you post pictures I could have made with an iPhone.  It's not that the D800 isn't amazing, it's that you chose to demonstrate the abilities of an amazing professional kitchen in a 5 star restaurant... by making twinkies.  It just... to me... says quite a bit about you and what you think is amazing.  A quick trip to your site (cough) faymousmedia, sort of confirms that for me.
> 
> Oh and by the way the VERY first paragraph in your "Photography" section...
> 
> "Photography should eye catching creativity, that follows no real set of rules, aside from the basics. Unique blend of realism combined with a touch of in depth intesity. Breath taking, nostelgic, and comforting. Memories that last forever. "
> 
> Missing words, spelling errors and all sorts of issues there.  You might want to at least have your site proof read by someone.
> 
> Free advice.  I mean, I've only been a photographer for 10 years, so you've got 2 on me... but I was an editor of books for a few years way back when... oh and I do have that high school diploma...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is just the kind of nonsense I expected from this board. There is people like you on every board that think they know everything. Why are we talking about high school diploma? I have a BA in business management. So I am pretty sure that I have a high school diploma as well.
Click to expand...


I know that was probably a bit too subtle for someone who intentionally mis-spells "famous" as a part of their company name.

Here, let me be a bit more direct: Having mis-spellings, gramatical errors and missing words in the text of your website is very amateurish and you should probably fix that before puffing up your chest and saying how great you are.  It sort of undermines your position.

Anyway... you're just silly, so I'm done with this other than watching you continue to thrash.

Good luck.


----------



## FaymusMedia

Buckster said:


> The first two images look VERY familiar to me, like I've seen them on a blog post or here in the forum somewhere.  I can't quite place where though...



I have done other photos in similar locations and poster here, most likely that's why.



ceeboy14 said:


> I am less than a great fan of HDR, and overcooked HDR is even worse. Most of the images you presented, as a regular D800 shot should and could have held their own in any forum. I have to agree with most of the remarks on here regarding the imagery you chose to present as proof of the D800's superiority, yet as was stated several times, any camera with a 12 year competent photographer could have easily shot these. Repost these as "normal" D800 shots and show us the crispness, sharpness, superior color and range and then we can comment accordingly.
> 
> You brought a knife to a gunfight then got all pissy your knife was too small. It is quite unbecoming of a "professional." I don't have a web page and a fancy watermark so I guess my 54 years in photography don't mean squat to you, but I can assure you, the work you presented here is far more representative of a newbie with more camera and PP tools than experience. Good luck.




Im not getting pissy. This isn't a gun fight or knife fight. That's what I am having trouble understanding why this has I be a fight, or a battle? I just poste these for fun, not to fight and battle. Seriously. I don't get it.


----------



## FaymusMedia

manaheim said:


> FaymusMedia said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> manaheim said:
> 
> 
> 
> Ok, I fail to be a better man.  My new years resolution is shot.  I didn't even make it out of January...
> 
> Have you been on the internet before today?  Or did you just get wired up last week?
> 
> Look, you come onto a photography forum and say "the D800 is amazing blah blah blah" and I look expecting to see someone really showcasing what the D800 can do... incredibly sharp, good dynamic range, etc... and you post pictures I could have made with an iPhone.  It's not that the D800 isn't amazing, it's that you chose to demonstrate the abilities of an amazing professional kitchen in a 5 star restaurant... by making twinkies.  It just... to me... says quite a bit about you and what you think is amazing.  A quick trip to your site (cough) faymousmedia, sort of confirms that for me.
> 
> Oh and by the way the VERY first paragraph in your "Photography" section...
> 
> "Photography should eye catching creativity, that follows no real set of rules, aside from the basics. Unique blend of realism combined with a touch of in depth intesity. Breath taking, nostelgic, and comforting. Memories that last forever. "
> 
> Missing words, spelling errors and all sorts of issues there.  You might want to at least have your site proof read by someone.
> 
> Free advice.  I mean, I've only been a photographer for 10 years, so you've got 2 on me... but I was an editor of books for a few years way back when... oh and I do have that high school diploma...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is just the kind of nonsense I expected from this board. There is people like you on every board that think they know everything. Why are we talking about high school diploma? I have a BA in business management. So I am pretty sure that I have a high school diploma as well.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I know that was probably a bit too subtle for someone who intentionally mis-spells "famous" as a part of their company name.
> 
> Here, let me be a bit more direct: Having mis-spellings, gramatical errors and missing words in the text of your website is very amateurish and you should probably fix that before puffing up your chest and saying how great you are.  It sort of undermines your position.
> 
> Anyway... you're just silly, so I'm done with this other than watching you continue to thrash.
> 
> Good luck.
Click to expand...


I never intentionally misspelled famous as part of my company. It has nothing to do with the word "famous" at all. That's you assuming and running your mouth about it. Ignorance.

You just prove again that your just trying to stir **** up. You need to find something to do.


----------



## ceeboy14

FaymusMedia said:


> Buckster said:
> 
> 
> 
> The first two images look VERY familiar to me, like I've seen them on a blog post or here in the forum somewhere.  I can't quite place where though...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have done other photos in similar locations and poster here, most likely that's why.
> 
> 
> 
> ceeboy14 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I am less than a great fan of HDR, and overcooked HDR is even worse. Most of the images you presented, as a regular D800 shot should and could have held their own in any forum. I have to agree with most of the remarks on here regarding the imagery you chose to present as proof of the D800's superiority, yet as was stated several times, any camera with a 12 year competent photographer could have easily shot these. Repost these as "normal" D800 shots and show us the crispness, sharpness, superior color and range and then we can comment accordingly.
> 
> You brought a knife to a gunfight then got all pissy your knife was too small. It is quite unbecoming of a "professional." I don't have a web page and a fancy watermark so I guess my 54 years in photography don't mean squat to you, but I can assure you, the work you presented here is far more representative of a newbie with more camera and PP tools than experience. Good luck.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Im not getting pissy. This isn't a gun fight or knife fight. That's what I am having trouble understanding why this has I be a fight, or a battle? I just poste these for fun, not to fight and battle. Seriously. I don't get it.
Click to expand...


This is before I made any comments at all...

This is just the kind of nonsense I expected from this board. There is people like you on every board that think they know everything. Why are we talking about high school diploma? I have a BA in business management. So I am pretty sure that I have a high school diploma as well.
The point is that there is nothing in those photographs that screams


							D800E Is Just Plain Amazing! King Of The Hill If You Ask Me!					


as your title indicated.  As a matter of fact there is nothing in them that indicates ANY kind of high-grade camera since the tone-mapping pretty much wiped out everything the camera was capable of showing.  There is nothing that shows the exceptional dynamic range of the D800, the tone-mapping killed that.  There is nothing that shows the exceptional detail of the D800, the distortion of a 16mm lens on a full-frame body killed that.  These could have come from ANYTHING and don't show off the abilities of the D800 at all.

Oh, and 12 years experience doesn't go very far around here.  There are a lot of people around here who can nearly quadruple that.

Rabbit-Man, the Hostess Bakery is gone.  Twinkies are dead.  Long live Twinkies!

*Again more nonsense. Its all trash talk, gimmicks, and redundant posts. There is no tact on this board at all.

*Me thinks there were plenty of strong arguments as to the lack of presentation to prove your point to the D800's superiority and you chose to comment on other stuff rather than make a case for the D800. I've shot it and it is nice as is the D600 but I can hold court with both on my D7000. Were I you, I'd go back to the RAW files on each of these images and reprocess as representative D800 superiority and let this argument go by the wayside...just my opinion.


----------



## Buckster

FaymusMedia said:


> Buckster said:
> 
> 
> 
> The first two images look VERY familiar to me, like I've seen them on a blog post or here in the forum somewhere.  I can't quite place where though...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have done other photos in similar locations and poster here, most likely that's why.
Click to expand...

Nope, it's the same location.  Not sure if you've shot it before and posted it, or if it was a different photographer...  It's right on the tip of my memory...


----------



## pixmedic

the color shots are way over saturated. I dont know if they are actually multi shot HDR, or just tone mapped, but I wouldn't enter any of them into a competition. many of them are crooked and/or tilted. you either need to use a tripod with a level, or fix it in post.  I would like to see the originals. 

the B&W white shots don't really show the great tonal range that the D800 is capable of.  Furthermore, they appear very "random", with very little thought given to composition. At a glance, they would appear to be shots of whatever happened to be in front of the camera when you decided to take a picture.  I would call them "street photography" only by virtue that they were shot from the street.  

If I was forced to pick a photo that I felt was the strongest of the set....I would pick photo N since it appears to be the most natural looking and least processed of the group. 

Hope this has been helpful to you.


----------



## LaFoto

We used to have a member on board who started the whole HDR story (here), having to explain the meaning of the word over and again at the time (here), and making them his speciality, something like his "trademark" (here). And everyone praised him and liked him a lot - he still decided not to come round any longer, but that was for other reasons, surely. His speciality were "overcooked" HDR photos just like the ones we get to see here. And everyone loved him and loved his photography (here) - back at that time. I'm afraid, that self-same member would no longer stand a chance with the crowd we get today, as tastes have changed ever so much in the course of time. 

While many of you might think, "overcooked" HDR is just a fad that "good photographers" must not like (!), I see no reason why you should pick some member apart who shows his photos (too many in one thread, admittedly!) in the way you're doing here... Makes me sad to read.


----------



## ceeboy14

I don't think anyone was taking him apart for showing his photos, much more so that he was making claims to a camera's superiority with images which didn't support the claim. It did get into a bit of a "he said, she said bicker," but if you are going to put yourself in front of your peers, ask for an opinion then get "pissy" when you don't like the opinions, my thinking is you're fair game for reprisal.

The suggestion was made several times for him to present these images processed to show the capabilities of the D800 which may or may not show superiority, yet we've not seen any of these yet. I don't like it when threads get personal any more than anyone else but I also don't like hearing great self-praise without any substance. He could have handled this much better...as I guess, we all could have.


----------



## Buckster

LaFoto said:


> We used to have a member on board who started the whole HDR story (here), having to explain the meaning of the word over and again at the time (here), and making them his speciality, something like his "trademark" (here). And everyone praised him and liked him a lot - he still decided not to come round any longer, but that was for other reasons, surely. His speciality were "overcooked" HDR photos just like the ones we get to see here. And everyone loved him and loved his photography (here) - back at that time. I'm afraid, that self-same member would no longer stand a chance with the crowd we get today, as tastes have changed ever so much in the course of time.
> 
> While many of you might think, "overcooked" HDR is just a fad that "good photographers" must not like (!), I see no reason why you should pick some member apart who shows his photos (too many in one thread, admittedly!) in the way you're doing here... Makes me sad to read.


He's not getting flak over his overcooked photos so much, but over his reactions to people whose OPINION is that they're overcooked; OPINIONS to which they're fully entitled.

It's a standard model of human interaction around here, so there really should be no surprise.  Let me help you suss it out:

Folks who can't take the opinions they asked for unless they're positive opinions, get the snot kicked out of them for lashing out over it when it happens.  Folks who do that while appearing to have a big chip on their shoulder, citing their bona fides in how long they've been shooting, degrees they have, praise they've gotten from others, etc., get even MORE snot kicked out of them.  And if they go on to include disparaging remarks about how they expected what they got because they've been observing for some time and have come to the conclusion that the members here are basically @$$holes who wouldn't know a great image if it bit them on the nose, MORE SNOT flies.

Really, how many times does it need to happen and be observed before it'll stop being a surprise, especially to the mods and admins?

Human nature.  Interesting stuff.  And fairly predictable.


----------



## SCraig

FaymusMedia said:


> Im not getting pissy. This isn't a gun fight or knife fight. That's what I am having trouble understanding why this has I be a fight, or a battle? I just poste these for fun, not to fight and battle. Seriously. I don't get it.



How about this. Rather than:



> This is just the kind of nonsense I expected from this board. There is  people like you on every board that think they know everything....



Which, for obvious reasons, I perceived as an insult to everyone who frequents this forum, something along the lines of:

_Perhaps my choice of title wasn't the best but the intent was to determine which image was best.  Could we focus on that, please?_​
It would go a long way towards getting you assistance rather than annoyance.

Now I'm out of here as well.


----------



## pixmedic

LaFoto said:


> We used to have a member on board who started the whole HDR story (here), having to explain the meaning of the word over and again at the time (here), and making them his speciality, something like his "trademark" (here). And everyone praised him and liked him a lot - he still decided not to come round any longer, but that was for other reasons, surely. His speciality were "overcooked" HDR photos just like the ones we get to see here. And everyone loved him and loved his photography (here) - back at that time. I'm afraid, that self-same member would no longer stand a chance with the crowd we get today, as tastes have changed ever so much in the course of time.
> 
> While many of you might think, "overcooked" HDR is just a fad that "good photographers" must not like (!), I see no reason why you should pick some member apart who shows his photos (too many in one thread, admittedly!) in the way you're doing here... Makes me sad to read.



maybe there was some other reason people loved his HDR work, OTHER than the fact that it was heavily processed. maybe it was just done better. 

when you post on the forum, you are asking for critique, feedback, ways to improve...maybe just showcasing photos. either way, you open yourself up to the opinions of the members, for better or for worse.   you cant expect people to "like" and "praise" a certain processing style, (or any style) just because it has worked well for others in the past. 

what we see here far to often, (and im not referencing anyone in particular here) is people that post pictures thinking they are Gods gift to photography, and expect nothing but high praise and adoration for whatever random snapshot they throw up here and get totally butthurt when that doesn't immediately happen.  you can blame the forum for being "rude", but in my limited experience here, ive found that typically it is the OP that  jumps in with the insults first with "how long they have been shooting", or how many "clients" they get, or how we just dont "get" their artistic style when someone tells them what is wrong with a photo.

the debate on how to properly critique a photo is never ending. but if anyone is a fan of this processing style, or these photos, there is NOTHING stopping them from posting how great they are. they have the same opportunity to post their opinion here as the rest of the group.


----------



## amolitor

I dislike all of them about equally.

The HDRs are drawing from a tired bag of tricks - DRAMATIC ANGLE OF VIEW - mostly, together with overdone HDR to "pep up" the images to the point that all you see is pep, not the underlying image. The bridge you like so much is in fact quite good, but the overdone visual drama detracts from it too much.

The b&w "street" shots are trite and uninteresting. Everyone shoots these things when they discover the b&w setting on their camera. Street signs? Seriously?

Technically, there's some good things in here. The HDRs are not a mess of ugly halos and crud, although I don't like the choice to let moving objects simply blur out. It's a choice you made, so, ok.

The last image of the tonemapped taxi's side/door might well be the best of the lot. It's a look I really really hate, personally, but a) it's well done b) it's appropriate (the metallic/gritty feel works well here) and c) it's a very popular look now in, oddly, both fashion and a certain style of photojournalism.


----------



## O'Rork

FamusMedia, Yes you cooked them and hard at that. I wanted to see great, straight out of the box beautifulness. 

I like photo "I".

Please post some straight out of the box beauty.


----------



## gsgary

FaymusMedia said:


> I have been doing photography for 12+ years, I am aware any camera can take a photo. This isnt a "debate" thread. Its my work, and poll.



If its a poll i didnt get a chioce of none


----------



## pab

What lens were ya using?   I enjoy that very last photo of the taxi from the drivers side.

I myself enjoy a nice HDR at times, but they were a littttle over done for my taste.


----------



## manaheim

To be fair, my remark (which he originally reacted to) was hardly helpful.  

That said, his remarks in response showed all the hallmarks of what Buckster is talking about, and I expect they would have come out either way, and yeah.., the forum is pretty intolerant of this kind of attitude.

I'm still frankly amused that he hasn't addressed how unprofessional his site is with the spelling errors and such.


----------



## snowbear

I like these two:


FaymusMedia said:


> Here are some extras that I snapped, these are more or less "street photography" Enjoy!


----------



## 2WheelPhoto

I'll be glad when HDR goes the way of "selective coloring"


----------



## tirediron

IMO, the majority of these have transcended photography and by virtue of their extreme processing become "graphic art".  Not that there's anything wrong with that, in an of itself.  It's not too my taste, but then neither is French Onion soup, and plenty of people like that.  What does puzzle me are (1) As already stated, how do these images show anything about the "superiority" of the D800 and (2) more importantly, HOW could these images POSSIBLY relate to a landscape tutorial????


----------



## invisible

I'm glad I found the drama thread of the day before turning in. I was getting worried I'd be disappointed.


----------



## Majeed Badizadegan

1. Make grand assertions about the capabilities of a camera
2. Never substantiate any of those claims with anything measurable
3. Post between 70 and 400 images of similar quality and look and create a poll asking which one is best 
4. ?????
5. Profit


----------



## Mully

What ....the other forums did not like them either so you dragged those images here


----------



## tirediron

Mully said:


> What ....the other forums did not like them either so you dragged those images here


They're making the rounds are they?


----------



## leeroix

what other forums?


----------



## Robin_Usagani

Wow.. Im the only one who has voted. You guys are brutal. You are given a choice.  Even if you dont like all of them, there's got to be one you like more than the rest.


----------



## Parker219

lol...As of right now, he has 1 vote for his poll.

Tip of the Day: MOST TPF members dont fall for the "which photo is best" poll, thinking, even if they dont like ANY of them, they still will vote on which one is the best of the worst.

We simply dont vote for any of them!


----------



## cgipson1

There wasn't a "NONE" choice... so I felt limited...


----------



## baturn

Please keep this thread going. There's nothing on TV.


----------



## snowbear

I like two from the second post, as I stated; I'm just not a fan of the heavy tone mapped thing.  "L" seems OK  to me, but I think the lens flare is distracting.


----------



## Parker219

Or maybe we vote, but not by using the easy to read poll....lol


----------



## Robin_Usagani

If you are not a fan of this type of photo, then just ignore the whole thread. No need to keep piling on the OP. The OP asked which one is best. He didnt ask for a CC.  Just sayin....


----------



## thereyougo!

Robin_Usagani said:


> If you are not a fan of this type of photo, then just ignore the whole thread. No need to keep piling on the OP. The OP asked which one is best. He didnt ask for a CC.  Just sayin....



Maybe he didn't ask for critique but the header of the forum states that that is what the gallery is for:

"A gallery for sharing your landscape/cityscape photos and getting feedback, including general critique.



​




I have to say I agree with the majority view here that they are over processed to really show off the very able qualities of the D800/E.  Very much a taste thing.  Would have been a more honest poll had the OP had a button saying "not to my taste".


----------



## cwcaesar

I actually like the One Way signs the best, but that wasn't an option, so I voted for 'B'.  Best composition IMO.


----------



## FaymusMedia

I understand many want to see some images that are untouched so here is a couple pictures that are not toned mapped or edited in any way other than some raw tweaks. I just reduced some highlights and increased the shadows. Which shows how much DR there is. I could have went much further but I am keeping these as clean as possible.

There is so much headroom on the highlights and the shadows.


----------



## Parker219

These are a million, billion times better than the ones you posted first.


----------



## pab

Muchos Buenos

Sent from my SCH-I605 using Tapatalk 2


----------



## ceeboy14

Infinitely, infinitely better. It's so much more graphic than I think you might realize purely because of the over-the-top lens distortion...for the images presented, the distortion fits. They might could stand a bit more contrast, but with a light hand.

In this presentation, i would pick #2 over #1 because of the action shown. #1 is a little too sedate and I'm not sure the left side of the frame where the trash is shown is necessary, any more so than the right corner.


----------



## thereyougo!

I'm in agreement with *ceeboy14.  *No 2 is better, just a pity you couldn't have stood a little further back and got the whole of the Chrysler building in to the shot.

Edited to add - These *DO* show off the dynamic range of the D800/E.  A million times better than the originals.


----------



## FaymusMedia

thereyougo! said:


> I'm in agreement with *ceeboy14.  *No 2 is better, just a pity you couldn't have stood a little further back and got the whole of the Chrysler building in to the shot.
> 
> Edited to add - These *DO* show off the dynamic range of the D800/E.  A million times better than the originals.



I feel the dynamic range in the D800E is so great. It can take a beating as far as editing. I can pull shadows and defeat highlights like crazy and its so sharp.


----------



## Mach0

FaymusMedia said:
			
		

> I understand many want to see some images that are untouched so here is a couple pictures that are not toned mapped or edited in any way other than some raw tweaks. I just reduced some highlights and increased the shadows. Which shows how much DR there is. I could have went much further but I am keeping these as clean as possible.
> 
> There is so much headroom on the highlights and the shadows.



I like #2


----------



## O'Rork

@ FaymusMedia, Miles and leagues better, almost SOOC goodness. Given the res capability of the 36MP D800, fundamental operator skills become critical. The camera's ability to graph light includes errant discoveries, front and center. That said, mastering the D800 will make one a better photographer.


----------



## amolitor

Comparing one of the "originals" with the HDR, what is striking is how little shadow and highlight detail is recovered in the HDR. The HDR version appears to be simply the "original" with a tonemapping effect applied.


----------



## FaymusMedia

amolitor said:


> Comparing one of the "originals" with the HDR, what is striking is how little shadow and highlight detail is recovered in the HDR. The HDR version appears to be simply the "original" with a tonemapping effect applied.



Correct, they are tone mapped. That is what I meant by the D800E has insane Dynamic Range. It can produce HDR looking images in one shot. I can pull 4-5 stops worth of shadows or highlights in either direction.


----------



## cwcaesar

I voted for Image #2 originally as the best of the litter.  I like it even better now.  Great photo!


----------



## amolitor

4-5 stops each way? So it has, what, a 17 bit sensor?


----------



## leeroix

i didn't think it was possible to get HDR from one shot. i thought you still needed the info from the different exposures? i often wonder how its done when there is obvious movement in the scene (people, cars, etc) and you can't have the bracketed shots, -with time in between each shot. is it a "cheated" method of achieving HDR?


----------



## amolitor

Actually, with a 14 bit sensor you get 2-3 stops either way, depending on how fussy you are, but, interestingly, if you add in enough noise, and then discard resolution, you can extend that. Maybe that's what the OP is doing? You'd need a lot of noise to get 4-5 stops either way, though.


----------



## jwbryson1

God, this is FUN!


----------



## amolitor

leeroix said:


> i didn't think it was possible to get HDR from one shot. i thought you still needed the info from the different exposures? i often wonder how its done when there is obvious movement in the scene (people, cars, etc) and you can't have the bracketed shots, -with time in between each shot. is it a "cheated" method of achieving HDR?



This is an ongoing issue, leeroix. If you think HDR means High Dynamic Range then it doesn't matter where you get the range. If you think HDR is using one of some little list of image stacking tools, then you think HDR is about stacking up multiple exposure to create images with High Dynamic Range. The language continues to evolve..


----------



## KmH

leeroix said:


> i often wonder how its done when there is obvious movement in the scene (people, cars, etc) and you can't have the bracketed shots, -with time in between each shot.


Movement between exposures makes for additional editing tasks.

High quality HDRs are made by using HDR software like Photomatix Pro, and Photoshop both.
The image(s) is often moved back and forth between the 2 editing applications several times to touch up various artifacts that result from the edits.

Doing HDR really well takes an amazing amount of post process work.


----------



## ghache

HRD, not my cup of tea..  you were giving tutorial to who?


----------



## FaymusMedia

Here is another I figured I would post.


----------

