# Night Photo



## chantal7 (Aug 11, 2008)

Well, this one is my favourite. I don't know why but I just liked the way it all went together. I might not like it so much after I see some c/c (lol). But hey, it makes my next photos better. I didn't do any post processing either, yet. So, what cha think? Yay or nay?


----------



## Hobbes (Aug 11, 2008)

it looks like a cemetery or a park lol well the composition is good and the whole pic kinda look mysterious and a lil bit scary with the dark woods in the background but is it me or is the archway not very straight. it kinda looks like its leaning to the right. lol with some post processing this one would look great! nice shot!


----------



## rjackjames (Aug 11, 2008)

I seems a little lean to the right great compostion though.


----------



## chantal7 (Aug 11, 2008)

rjackjames said:


> I seems a little lean to the right great compostion though.



Yes, yes it does! Won't be able to edit it until I get a working photoshop, in which it doesn't close itself on me all the time. I have to work fast before it decides it wants to close. I'll try to edit it, but it's going to be frustrating! Thanks for the comments.

I've edited the photo in the first post, took me two tries before photoshop closed on me. lol. I think it's better. Not crooked anymore! :thumbup:


----------



## Hobbes (Aug 11, 2008)

chantal7 said:


> Yes, yes it does! Won't be able to edit it until I get a working photoshop, in which it doesn't close itself on me all the time. I have to work fast before it decides it wants to close. I'll try to edit it, but it's going to be frustrating! Thanks for the comments.



sounds like you need to reinstall photoshop. or maybe downgrade to CS2, its just as good and I doubt you need all the features in CS3 anyway lol I am still using Photoshop 7.0 with a few plugins and it works just fine for me. cant really upgrade to later version because of slow computer  
hope you will get it working soon


----------



## chantal7 (Aug 11, 2008)

Hobbes said:


> sounds like you need to reinstall photoshop. or maybe downgrade to CS2, its just as good and I doubt you need all the features in CS3 anyway lol I am still using Photoshop 7.0 with a few plugins and it works just fine for me. cant really upgrade to later version because of slow computer
> hope you will get it working soon



Well - I tried CS2 and couldn't get it working either. I'm not sure if we're allowed to talk about this kind of thing here so I won't go into details. The K#$ G%^ would not work, other wise it would have been fine. I'm trying another one out to see if I get the same problem.


----------



## Hobbes (Aug 11, 2008)

chantal7 said:


> Well - I tried CS2 and couldn't get it working either. I'm not sure if we're allowed to talk about this kind of thing here so I won't go into details. The K#$ G%^ would not work, other wise it would have been fine. I'm trying another one out to see if I get the same problem.



hahaha your carefulness and the K#$ G%^ made me laugh lol sorry 
well I sent you a pm on d2jsp with link to certain site and if you have already tried that one you may want to try it. It could be a lil bit complicated but I think its worth the trouble course otherwise you'd have to pay BIG money for it lol heh I have a working CS3 on dvd and I will check the K#$ G%^ on it lol lmao


----------



## chantal7 (Aug 11, 2008)

Hobbes said:


> hahaha your carefulness and the K#$ G%^ made me laugh lol sorry
> well I sent you a pm on d2jsp with link to certain site and if you have already tried that one you may want to try it. It could be a lil bit complicated but I think its worth the trouble course otherwise you'd have to pay BIG money for it lol heh I have a working CS3 on dvd and I will check the K#$ G%^ on it lol lmao



I used the C$%^ for the CS3, but I think it has technical issues. I got the photoshop working now, so before I get banned, we'll stop talking about this.


----------



## Hobbes (Aug 11, 2008)

chantal7 said:


> I used the C$%^ for the CS3, but I think it has technical issues. I got the photoshop working now, so before I get banned, we'll stop talking about this.



ok I was about to tell you the C#¤" thing. I believe you didn't disconnect from the internet when you used the K@#% G%¤&& thing lmao well glad you fixed it. and to whoever reading this we are talking about the photos Chantal took and nothing else :mrgreen:

hey did you just uploaded a post processed photo? course the arch way isn't leaning anymore  you cheater lol jk


----------



## chantal7 (Aug 11, 2008)

Hobbes said:


> ok I was about to tell you the C#¤" thing. I believe you didn't disconnect from the internet when you used the K@#% G%¤&& thing lmao well glad you fixed it. and to whoever reading this we are talking about the photos Chantal took and nothing else :mrgreen:
> 
> hey did you just uploaded a post processed photo? course the arch way isn't leaning anymore  you cheater lol jk



I didn't say anything about disconnecting from the internet??? Where did that come from???

And yes, I did upload it. I edited my last post saying I uploaded a different one... man you gotta open your eyes more lol.


----------



## Hobbes (Aug 12, 2008)

chantal7 said:


> I didn't say anything about disconnecting from the internet??? Where did that come from???
> 
> And yes, I did upload it. I edited my last post saying I uploaded a different one... man you gotta open your eyes more lol.



hmm lol It doesnt say that you've uploaded a different one in your previous post  oh well lol guess I was too occupied to figure out why the hell photoshop didnt work for ya which is waaay weird. Well if you read the Read me file or whatever it does say that when you apply the K@# you have to disconnect from the internet  anyway lol glad it works for you now.  Btw the new version of your photo looks perfect! I guess you dont have to live in a big city to take good night photos


----------



## chantal7 (Aug 12, 2008)

Hobbes said:


> hmm lol It doesnt say that you've uploaded a different one in your previous post  oh well lol guess I was too occupied to figure out why the hell photoshop didnt work for ya which is waaay weird. Well if you read the Read me file or whatever it does say that when you apply the K@# you have to disconnect from the internet  anyway lol glad it works for you now.  Btw the new version of your photo looks perfect! I guess you dont have to live in a big city to take good night photos



That's weird. lol. I was in the process of downloading something, so who knows what happened. I figured out what I did wrong about photoshop so I'm good now. And it's also been a while with that kind of stuff. 

And no, you don't have to be in a big city, but in a big city, you have a lot more options ... and possibly some water in the middle of it to have a cool reflection.


----------



## Hobbes (Aug 12, 2008)

chantal7 said:


> That's weird. lol. I was in the process of downloading something, so who knows what happened. I figured out what I did wrong about photoshop so I'm good now. And it's also been a while with that kind of stuff.
> 
> And no, you don't have to be in a big city, but in a big city, you have a lot more options ... and possibly some water in the middle of it to have a cool reflection.



lol guess you have been too lazy to fix it until recently huh 

yeah you do have a lot more stuff to take pics of here but hmm lmao don't you guys got a lake or pond of some kind there too? maybe there's nothing interesting around it you would like to take a pic of oh well lol you can always drive to a nearby big city :mrgreen: or even better lol fly to Vancouver and spend a weekend there, yeah I know it would cost quite a bit but sometimes it may worth it


----------



## chantal7 (Aug 12, 2008)

Hobbes said:


> lol guess you have been too lazy to fix it until recently huh
> 
> yeah you do have a lot more stuff to take pics of here but hmm lmao don't you guys got a lake or pond of some kind there too? maybe there's nothing interesting around it you would like to take a pic of oh well lol you can always drive to a nearby big city :mrgreen: or even better lol fly to Vancouver and spend a weekend there, yeah I know it would cost quite a bit but sometimes it may worth it



Hmm... no thanks :greenpbl:


----------



## Hobbes (Aug 12, 2008)

chantal7 said:


> Hmm... no thanks :greenpbl:



lol it was just a suggestion i mean you were the one who was saying that there are a lot less stuff to take pic of where you live :greenpbl:


----------



## chantal7 (Aug 12, 2008)

Hobbes said:


> lol it was just a suggestion i mean you were the one who was saying that there are a lot less stuff to take pic of where you live :greenpbl:



I know, but I didn't mean it as I hate taking pics here, it's just a fact  and I do know that I can go to mexico-china to get better pics, there is always better.


----------



## Hobbes (Aug 12, 2008)

chantal7 said:


> I know, but I didn't mean it as I hate taking pics here, it's just a fact  and I do know that I can go to mexico-china to get better pics, there is always better.



lmao geez stop exaggerating lol I didnt say that you should fly thousands of miles just to take some pics lol what I meant is that you could just drive to some bigger city near where you live like Regina or even Saskatoon. Well I dont know how much it cost to fly inside Canada but here in Europe you can actually fly from Stockholm to London or even Rome, Italy for less than 200 dollars and certain travel agencies sell weekend getaways to many major European cities with hotel and plane tickets for less than 400 bucks which are quite cheap heh lol I only discovered that lately actually. oh well enough about travelling. As I mentioned in your other thread small cities are interesting and charming in their own ways


----------



## chantal7 (Aug 12, 2008)

Hobbes said:


> lmao geez stop exaggerating lol I didnt say that you should fly thousands of miles just to take some pics lol what I meant is that you could just drive to some bigger city near where you live like Regina or even Saskatoon. Well I dont know how much it cost to fly inside Canada but here in Europe you can actually fly from Stockholm to London or even Rome, Italy for less than 200 dollars and certain travel agencies sell weekend getaways to many major European cities with hotel and plane tickets for less than 400 bucks which are quite cheap heh lol I only discovered that lately actually. oh well enough about travelling. As I mentioned in your other thread small cities are interesting and charming in their own ways



You knew I was exaggerating, so why did you take my post seriously? lol.

It costs a lot to fly inside of Canada, I've already figured that one out.


----------



## Hobbes (Aug 12, 2008)

chantal7 said:


> You knew I was exaggerating, so why did you take my post seriously? lol.
> 
> It costs a lot to fly inside of Canada, I've already figured that one out.



lol nah I was only taking it HALF seriously because I didnt know if you were being serious or not course it almost sounded like you were being sarcastic :greenpbl:
yeah I have learned that flying inside or to Canada cost a lot compared to everywhere else lol I think it has to do with the fact that there are so few airlines in Canada so theres no real competition lol yeah boring economics again


----------



## Alex_B (Aug 12, 2008)

the curve of that wall really adds to it. I think this makes the shot.

but maybe showing a bit more of the wall on the right hand side would give it a more complete look?


Oh, and stop flirting you two


----------



## chantal7 (Aug 12, 2008)

Alex_B said:


> the curve of that wall really adds to it. I think this makes the shot.
> 
> but maybe showing a bit more of the wall on the right hand side would give it a more complete look?
> 
> ...



Hmm.. yes I see what you mean. Haha. Thanks 

And oh, I'm not flirting, he's flirting and he won't stop ... :thumbdown: (He's posted in all the topics I've posted in... :O


----------



## Hobbes (Aug 13, 2008)

chantal7 said:


> Hmm.. yes I see what you mean. Haha. Thanks
> 
> And oh, I'm not flirting, he's flirting and he won't stop ... :thumbdown: (He's posted in all the topics I've posted in... :O



uh ok I was not "flirting" or whatever. was just replying to what you said well if I made you uncomfortable with certain things I said Im sorry. heh didnt know you would get that edgy because some weird immature dude all of the sudden made some silly comment on our posts on here :greenpbl: geez its an online forum not a junior high class

I just dont like to have a very serious conversation and I sometimes act like that around my friends in real life too and I dont see them accusing me of being gay and trying to flirt with them, its just me lol


----------



## chantal7 (Aug 13, 2008)

Well excuse me for being edgy. I never said you were flirting either so don't accuse me of that. I was only defending myself of what he said (but it's really no big deal?). It's kinda funny; how it's obvious you've searched what posts I've posted in... cause the next day I find you're reply after mine. I mean how do you know what sub-forum I went into, etc. Just my theory.. Kinda weird if you ask me. End of discussion?


----------



## Hobbes (Aug 14, 2008)

chantal7 said:


> Well excuse me for being edgy. I never said you were flirting either so don't accuse me of that. I was only defending myself of what he said (but it's really no big deal?). It's kinda funny; how it's obvious you've searched what posts I've posted in... cause the next day I find you're reply after mine. I mean how do you know what sub-forum I went into, etc. Just my theory.. Kinda weird if you ask me. End of discussion?



sorry but you did sound like you were edgy and in this reply it sounds like you were grumpy lol jk and I apologize again if i made you uncomfortable. I don't think we need to defend ourselves or explain our "actions" to that guy on here lol   sigh well yes I did do a search on what you have posted but the reason was that I just wanted to see if you have posted any other photos on here so I am sorry if I made you feel uncomfortable again but I just thought it was an easier way. I won't do that again though. you probably have some trust issues because of the past and I know gaining trust again will be hard and takes time and I do not wish to make the same mistakes twice.

yes end of discussion course I'd rather talk about something else, like photography maybe lol


----------



## chantal7 (Aug 14, 2008)

Hobbes said:


> sorry but you did sound like you were edgy and in this reply it sounds like you were grumpy lol jk and I apologize again if i made you uncomfortable. I don't think we need to defend ourselves or explain our "actions" to that guy on here lol   sigh well yes I did do a search on what you have posted but the reason was that I just wanted to see if you have posted any other photos on here so I am sorry if I made you feel uncomfortable again but I just thought it was an easier way. I won't do that again though. you probably have some trust issues because of the past and I know gaining trust again will be hard and takes time and I do not wish to make the same mistakes twice.
> 
> yes end of discussion course I'd rather talk about something else, like photography maybe lol



lol - well do what you please don't let me control what you do. Anyways! Moving on! :O


----------



## Hobbes (Aug 14, 2008)

chantal7 said:


> lol - well do what you please don't let me control what you do. Anyways! Moving on! :O



lol nah you weren't controlling or anything I just dont want people to think less of me or misunderstand my intentions. I personally despise people who seem to be controlling and obsessive because I have seen quite a bit of them lately, among my friends and I know what kind of damage these kind of behavior can do. 

ANYWAYS lol say what kind of setting did you use when you took those night shots?? When I took mine hand held I used f/4.0 and iso 800 and higher and let the camera decide which shutter speed it want to use. I just want to know because sooner or later I will get a tripod and I'd like to know how to take pics using that equipment.


----------



## chantal7 (Aug 14, 2008)

Hobbes said:


> lol nah you weren't controlling or anything I just dont want people to think less of me or misunderstand my intentions. I personally despise people who seem to be controlling and obsessive because I have seen quite a bit of them lately, among my friends and I know what kind of damage these kind of behavior can do.
> 
> ANYWAYS lol say what kind of setting did you use when you took those night shots?? When I took mine hand held I used f/4.0 and iso 800 and higher and let the camera decide which shutter speed it want to use. I just want to know because sooner or later I will get a tripod and I'd like to know how to take pics using that equipment.



5 Second exposure
13Fstop (I think?) I see a 13 on the settings of the photo on my cam, and I think it's the F stop.
ISO 400

I use the TV mode with these kinds of pictures, where I only have to change shutter speed and ISO, and not F stop.


----------



## Hobbes (Aug 14, 2008)

chantal7 said:


> 5 Second exposure
> 13Fstop (I think?) I see a 13 on the settings of the photo on my cam, and I think it's the F stop.
> ISO 400
> 
> I use the TV mode with these kinds of pictures, where I only have to change shutter speed and ISO, and not F stop.



I think I used the P mode lol so I only have to change F stop and ISO. I guess with a tripod it would be whole a lot better using the TV mode and use long exposure time. thanks for the info


----------



## chantal7 (Aug 17, 2008)

Hobbes said:


> I think I used the P mode lol so I only have to change F stop and ISO. I guess with a tripod it would be whole a lot better using the TV mode and use long exposure time. thanks for the info



Fstop is too weird right now for me. I think some cameras can only go so low when it comes to Fstop? Sometimes I can get like 4.0f stop, and other times when I'm at 5.6 I can't seem to go lower, and I don't know why. If I use iso 1600 the picture is waaaaaay too noisy. So therefore I'm stuck. I get a low light picture, or a nice light picture with NOISE. So I have not used the Av mode because of that. Never seems to work out for me and I always find myself fussing with it.


----------



## Hobbes (Aug 17, 2008)

chantal7 said:


> Fstop is too weird right now for me. I think some cameras can only go so low when it comes to Fstop? Sometimes I can get like 4.0f stop, and other times when I'm at 5.6 I can't seem to go lower, and I don't know why. If I use iso 1600 the picture is waaaaaay too noisy. So therefore I'm stuck. I get a low light picture, or a nice light picture with NOISE. So I have not used the Av mode because of that. Never seems to work out for me and I always find myself fussing with it.



I think it has to do which focal length you use... 

http://www.dpreview.com/learn/?/Glossary/Exposure/Aperture_01.htm

"Because of basic optical principles, the absolute aperture sizes and diameters depend on the focal length. For instance, a 25mm aperture diameter on a 100mm lens has the same effect as a 50mm aperture diameter on a 200mm lens."

lol It is a bit confusing and very technical and I still don't really understand it. anyway yeah I usually use the AV mode when I taking night photos without tripod and use f/4.0 which is the highest I could go on my lens. well I dont usually notice whole a lot of noise until like ISO 1250 or higher and even then I can often reduce it in Photoshop using a plug in called Noise Ninja.

here is a pic I took at ISO 3200 and post processed in Photoshop






and this is the original pic:


----------



## chantal7 (Aug 18, 2008)

All the focal length stuff you sent me doesn't go through in my head, so I'll have to find somewhere not so technical in it's words to read. Actually, I didn't even bother reading the link you gave - lol. But in my photography journey's, I'd rather try and do as less as possible in photoshop as I can (simply because I'm still learning about SLR cameras). I don't want to be taking blurry pictures, editing them in photoshop, and be okay with that. It doesn't teach me how to actually take a non-blurry picture, no offense. I don't want to get too used to using photoashop just yet, as you can tell already; I'm still learning.


----------



## Hobbes (Aug 18, 2008)

chantal7 said:


> All the focal length stuff you sent me doesn't go through in my head, so I'll have to find somewhere not so technical in it's words to read. Actually, I didn't even bother reading the link you gave - lol. But in my photography journey's, I'd rather try and do as less as possible in photoshop as I can (simply because I'm still learning about SLR cameras). I don't want to be taking blurry pictures, editing them in photoshop, and be okay with that. It doesn't teach me how to actually take a non-blurry picture, no offense. I don't want to get too used to using photoashop just yet, as you can tell already; I'm still learning.



lol yeah I know exactly what you mean. I mean about the use of photoshop and get too dependent on it. well lol I do admit that I sometimes take some blurry pics even with my expensive and constantly malfuncitioning camera lmao but I am learning as well in fact some of the photos I uploaded on here are almost original except for some cropping and resizing. hmm but the weirdest thing is when I try to take a pic of something afar and with some other stuff nearby if that makes sense. I think it would be easier to just show you: 







well first of all this one is a complete failure not only because my camera focused on the bridge instead of the ship but also I couldn't take a clear shot at all from where I was standing lol but you see how blurry the background is... thats something you could "fix" in photoshop but of course then you would never learn how to use your camera to focus on the background object instead. anyway lol I know that I have just too much to learn thats why I have been taking quite a lot of photos lately with different settings and next time I think i am going to shoot in Tv mode instead of the usual P mode I use for day light photography. 

lmao sorry about the link hahaha I couldn't understand half of what it said either but I thought you would understand better lol sorry!!! :mrgreen:


----------



## chantal7 (Aug 18, 2008)

Well, in TV mode, you might want to set your camera down before taking a picture. You won't get any decent photos in the night with holding it.


----------



## Hobbes (Aug 18, 2008)

chantal7 said:


> Well, in TV mode, you might want to set your camera down before taking a picture. You won't get any decent photos in the night with holding it.



hmm I think my camera will be able to handle it down to 1/3s shutter speed hand held thanks to the Image stabilizer in the lens. so I will probably try 1/3s, and f4.0 with ISO at 800 or higher lol hmm you should get one for your camera I think the Canon EFS 55-250 IS lens will be great for landscape photography or night photography and its cheap (compared to other IS lenses) too

http://www.thecamerastore.com/ProductDetails.aspx?productID=32965


----------



## Arran Lomas (Aug 18, 2008)

Fantastic, great use of lead in lines!


----------



## chantal7 (Aug 19, 2008)

Hobbes said:


> hmm I think my camera will be able to handle it down to 1/3s shutter speed hand held thanks to the Image stabilizer in the lens. so I will probably try 1/3s, and f4.0 with ISO at 800 or higher lol hmm you should get one for your camera I think the Canon EFS 55-250 IS lens will be great for landscape photography or night photography and its cheap (compared to other IS lenses) too
> 
> http://www.thecamerastore.com/ProductDetails.aspx?productID=32965



I can't afford anything right now, I've already checked into the lenses and I couldn't decide what one I wanted. Instead I bought a computer which was the same damn price as one of those lenses, pretty sad.



Arran Lomas said:


> Fantastic, great use of lead in lines!



Thank you


----------



## Hobbes (Aug 19, 2008)

chantal7 said:


> I can't afford anything right now, I've already checked into the lenses and I couldn't decide what one I wanted. Instead I bought a computer which was the same damn price as one of those lenses, pretty sad.



yeah I do agree that the lenses for DSLRs cost too much lol many of them cost even more than the cameras we bought lmao hmm you only paid 400 dollars for your computer??  well I dont have money to buy a lens either but it still doesnt hurt to start looking lol course money is like water in a river it comes and goes


----------



## chantal7 (Aug 19, 2008)

Hobbes said:


> yeah I do agree that the lenses for DSLRs cost too much lol many of them cost even more than the cameras we bought lmao hmm you only paid 400 dollars for your computer??  well I dont have money to buy a lens either but it still doesnt hurt to start looking lol course money is like water in a river it comes and goes



No haha. More than 400. The lens I was steering more towards is more than 400. I don't want to get the lens that most can afford, they made it for that reason. I'd like something a little bit better... I my as well buy good if I'm going to spend hundreds on the damn thing.


----------



## Hobbes (Aug 19, 2008)

chantal7 said:


> No haha. More than 400. The lens I was steering more towards is more than 400. I don't want to get the lens that most can afford, they made it for that reason. I'd like something a little bit better... I my as well buy good if I'm going to spend hundreds on the damn thing.



lol yeah I guess you are like me i mean dont want to buy the cheapest crap lmao well you can actually tell difference in image quality taken buy different lenses. The one I want to get is one of those expensive L lenses made by Canon http://www.thecamerastore.com/ProductDetails.aspx?productID=31647

which lens were you looking at?? oh btw thecamerastore seems to be a cheaper online store than Henry's and its easier to find items you are looking for too


----------

