Camera Labs

This is massively downsized from the original 23-frame 13739 x 7896 pixel image:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/12801949@N02/5759927794/

Greg

_________________
Nexstar 11 GPS, 2 x Sky 90, M25C, MaximDL, Photshop CS3, Noel Carboni's Photoshop actions, 7 foot Pulsar fibreglass dome, Canon 40D, 100mm macro lens, 28-200mm zoom lens, 17-55mm f#2.8 zoom lens, 100-400mm zoom lens, 1.4x converter, 2x converter.
http://www.newforestobservatory.com/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/12801949@N02/

You need a way to give a sense of the scale of the image. How much sky can we see? If you were to make a hard copy of the image and display it how much wall space would do it justice?

_________________
Nikon D90
Nikkor AF-S DX; 18-105 f/3.5-5.6G VR, 55-300 f/4.5-5.6G VR, 35mm f/1.8G
Speedlight SB-700

http://keystrokesukimages.com

Totally agree with keystrokesuk

_________________
Camera: Canon 550D with battery grip
Lenses: Canon 24-105mm f/4L, Canon 50mm f1.4, Canon 18-55mm, Tamron 70-300mm,
Accessories: Manfrotto 055XPROB with 808RC4 head, Canon 430ex II speedlite, Lowepro Nova 180AW and Lowepro Pro Runner 450AW

Oh that is so lame, every hot girl who can aim a camera thinks she’s a photographer -Stewie Griffin

You can see 23 overlapping frames worth of a full frame camera with a 50mm lens on the front. That makes it quite big. I did have house rooftops at the edge of the image to show the image scale but it detracted from the image. The idea is to enjoy the structure and form of the clouds - not to wonder how big it is.

_________________
Nexstar 11 GPS, 2 x Sky 90, M25C, MaximDL, Photshop CS3, Noel Carboni's Photoshop actions, 7 foot Pulsar fibreglass dome, Canon 40D, 100mm macro lens, 28-200mm zoom lens, 17-55mm f#2.8 zoom lens, 100-400mm zoom lens, 1.4x converter, 2x converter.
http://www.newforestobservatory.com/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/12801949@N02/

Fair enough, I suppose I was distracted by the title of the post and your initial comments about how many pixels were in the image.

Have now been to the flickr link and had a look at the image at different sizes to see how it modified my overall feel for the clouds and lighting. I liked how it looked between the 240 x 138 and 640 x 368 sizes.

I suppose it is like most images the overall feel depends on canvas size and the surrounding space (looking on a screen or a gallery wall).

_________________
Nikon D90
Nikkor AF-S DX; 18-105 f/3.5-5.6G VR, 55-300 f/4.5-5.6G VR, 35mm f/1.8G
Speedlight SB-700

http://keystrokesukimages.com

I don't get the point either. I don't think anyone is so keen on discovering details in clouds.

Take some shots of buildings, landscapes, etc.

_________________
Karol Mozdzierz
__________________________________________

Nikon D5000, 18-55 DX 3.5-5.6, 70-300 4.5-5.6

Hi Greg,

The stats are very impressive a little lost in the picture as I can not see the impressiveness of those stats and I do agree that it would have been nice to see the perspective you are describing as it sounds like you have put in a lot of effort...

I love the picture and it makes a friggin awesome desktop backdrop on my LED screen!! Good work!

Al

_________________
Nikon D300S
My Photography Website
My Flickr

The patterns look great - would've liked to see some sense of scale, but looks great nonetheless.

_________________
Flickr