Comments for Huge Depth of Field http://www.hugedof.com The photoblog of Eric S Knape Sat, 05 Jun 2010 13:06:26 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0 Comment on CHROME, part 1 by Dan Wiese http://www.hugedof.com/?p=310&cpage=1#comment-519 Dan Wiese Sat, 05 Jun 2010 13:06:26 +0000 http://www.hugedof.com/?p=310#comment-519 Great picture! My bike stands out even though it is in the back of the pack Great picture! My bike stands out even though it is in the back of the pack

]]> Comment on Prison Windows by Jake http://www.hugedof.com/?p=220&cpage=1#comment-493 Jake Thu, 29 Apr 2010 05:13:02 +0000 http://www.hugedof.com/?p=220#comment-493 I'm also fond of this one, but I'm a sucker for peeling paint for some reason... I’m also fond of this one, but I’m a sucker for peeling paint for some reason…

]]> Comment on Suburban Wasteland by Jake http://www.hugedof.com/?p=235&cpage=1#comment-492 Jake Thu, 29 Apr 2010 05:12:13 +0000 http://www.hugedof.com/?p=235#comment-492 NICE! I think this one is my favorite to date. There's so much appeal in the every day world (even abandoned trash) that we miss. Good one! NICE! I think this one is my favorite to date. There’s so much appeal in the every day world (even abandoned trash) that we miss. Good one!

]]> Comment on Urban by Kevin Auger(Subanez) http://www.hugedof.com/?p=229&cpage=1#comment-340 Kevin Auger(Subanez) Thu, 15 Apr 2010 02:55:12 +0000 http://www.hugedof.com/?p=229#comment-340 Eric, Thanks again for helping out during the photo shoot...especially our little foray into the "prohibited" area. The video is excellent! Great way to end it...that's actually pretty neat and very candid. I looked through your stuff here, and I really like the work you're doing. You can really tell that you're pausing and actually LOOKING at the world. That's righteous. You've got some great talent! I'll keep stopping by here from time to time. Thanks again! -Kevin Eric,

Thanks again for helping out during the photo shoot…especially our little foray into the “prohibited” area. The video is excellent! Great way to end it…that’s actually pretty neat and very candid.

I looked through your stuff here, and I really like the work you’re doing. You can really tell that you’re pausing and actually LOOKING at the world. That’s righteous. You’ve got some great talent! I’ll keep stopping by here from time to time.

Thanks again!
-Kevin

]]> Comment on Bird that thinks it’s a duck … or makes us think it is. by pharmacy technician http://www.hugedof.com/?p=205&cpage=1#comment-233 pharmacy technician Sat, 10 Apr 2010 11:55:32 +0000 http://www.hugedof.com/?p=205#comment-233 found your site on del.icio.us today and really liked it.. i bookmarked it and will be back to check it out some more later found your site on del.icio.us today and really liked it.. i bookmarked it and will be back to check it out some more later

]]> Comment on Blackbird Singing in the Dead of … afternooooooon. by Jake http://www.hugedof.com/?p=202&cpage=1#comment-217 Jake Fri, 09 Apr 2010 04:50:44 +0000 http://www.hugedof.com/?p=202#comment-217 I love this photo. You suck, mostly because you don't hang out. I love this photo.

You suck, mostly because you don’t hang out.

]]> Comment on HDR Lovin’ part 1 by Eric Knape http://www.hugedof.com/?p=175&cpage=1#comment-147 Eric Knape Sun, 04 Apr 2010 05:29:31 +0000 http://www.hugedof.com/?p=175#comment-147 Quick update. I was confusing contrast ratios between multiple digital devices when compared to the human eye. After a quick review it seem like the consensus is that newer cameras, those with 16-bit digital conversion, display between 50% and 60% of the range of the human eye. An HDR image is 32-bit floating-point, apparently meaning capable of practically an infinite range of tonal values. I think it's a great tool to have available in scenes that are either high-key or low-key that the photographer wants to be more balanced - this being the case with the two that I posted. Quick update. I was confusing contrast ratios between multiple digital devices when compared to the human eye. After a quick review it seem like the consensus is that newer cameras, those with 16-bit digital conversion, display between 50% and 60% of the range of the human eye. An HDR image is 32-bit floating-point, apparently meaning capable of practically an infinite range of tonal values.

I think it’s a great tool to have available in scenes that are either high-key or low-key that the photographer wants to be more balanced – this being the case with the two that I posted.

]]> Comment on HDR Lovin’ part 1 by Eric Knape http://www.hugedof.com/?p=175&cpage=1#comment-145 Eric Knape Sun, 04 Apr 2010 05:13:00 +0000 http://www.hugedof.com/?p=175#comment-145 I will have to check my sources on the 10%. Right now I can't fully remember where I read that. The method I used on these was auto-bracketing on my 7D: three photos with 2 stops difference between them. I've been meaning to try greater differences, but haven't had the chance to just yet. In terms of the HDR "look," much of what I see online is a very surreal look. My goal was to bring out as much detail in the highlights and blacks of each scene. The HDR photo has more detail in those areas than any of the three that it was made from. I will have to check my sources on the 10%. Right now I can’t fully remember where I read that. The method I used on these was auto-bracketing on my 7D: three photos with 2 stops difference between them. I’ve been meaning to try greater differences, but haven’t had the chance to just yet. In terms of the HDR “look,” much of what I see online is a very surreal look. My goal was to bring out as much detail in the highlights and blacks of each scene. The HDR photo has more detail in those areas than any of the three that it was made from.

]]> Comment on HDR Lovin’ part 1 by Pierre La Blanc http://www.hugedof.com/?p=175&cpage=1#comment-116 Pierre La Blanc Fri, 02 Apr 2010 00:50:19 +0000 http://www.hugedof.com/?p=175#comment-116 Hmm, interesting. I've been looking at some of these "HDR" photo's and I'll have to reserve judgement for now. The statement about digital camera's capturing only 10% the DR of the human eye? I'm not buying that one. If that were true, 90% of the dynamic range would be missing. That's just not logical. Even if you're talking about the average point and shoot producing jpeg images, it would still be better than 70% in my view. To loose 90% of the effective DR of a photo would render it useless. Add in high resolution sensor cameras, fine optics and the added DR of RAW imaging, and I'd say you'll bring the percentage up even further. I've seen quite a few so called "HDR" photo's and still haven't seen one that exceeds many of the photo's I've taken in the traditional fashion using a good dslr and lenses, and simply exposing properly, and using the appropriate filters. Hmm, interesting. I’ve been looking at some of these “HDR” photo’s and I’ll have to reserve judgement for now. The statement about digital camera’s capturing only 10% the DR of the human eye? I’m not buying that one. If that were true, 90% of the dynamic range would be missing. That’s just not logical. Even if you’re talking about the average point and shoot producing jpeg images, it would still be better than 70% in my view. To loose 90% of the effective DR of a photo would render it useless. Add in high resolution sensor cameras, fine optics and the added DR of RAW imaging, and I’d say you’ll bring the percentage up even further. I’ve seen quite a few so called “HDR” photo’s and still haven’t seen one that exceeds many of the photo’s I’ve taken in the traditional fashion using a good dslr and lenses, and simply exposing properly, and using the appropriate filters.

]]> Comment on Nampa Idaho by Haline http://www.hugedof.com/?p=143&cpage=1#comment-49 Haline Fri, 26 Mar 2010 03:38:01 +0000 http://www.hugedof.com/?p=143#comment-49 Eric I'm telling you, you have an amazing artistic eye... this is beautiful!!!! Eric I’m telling you, you have an amazing artistic eye… this is beautiful!!!!

]]>