Post Your Best Nature Shots!

[Mike Coulter]

Bob,


Did you use a filter on this shot?


-mc

[bob williams]

[img]/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.23.23/Tmber-Wolf-2.JPG[/img]

[bob williams]

Nope, But the shade helped with the snow

[ArnsteinB]

I have now reduced the image width to 800px. Hope they are displayed correctly now..


This one took me 9 months to finish...(a "4-season-panorama"). Have anyone seen anything like this on the web...?


Perfect stitching is ofcourse impossible. One have to comprimise.





Three mushroms.. a little bit tweaked in PS...and som PS-plugins...





An image shot with my Canon EOS 30D IR (converted to infrared, by LifePixel)

[Rodger]

ArnsteinB,


Welcome to the forums!


They look like they are great images, but they need to be resized to display properly in the forum. I believe it's a 600px width.


One of the easiest ways I find to do this resizing is uploading my pictures to Flickr, and then grabbing the HTML and putting it in the HTML editor of the new post screen.


Interested in seeing them once they are resized!!


-Rodger

[Rodger]

I was wrong and right. They're fine at 800px.


I was right in the fact that they're great!


I've never seen anything like the first one. Great stuff!


-Rodger

[Fast Glass]

Hey Guys


Here is another one of those Robin shots, and no braches in front either! It was taken with my Minolta 600mm f/6.3 with a 2x extender, I can tell ya for a fact that 1920mm is hard to hand-hold without any support! I must have looked like a sight sitting on my belly taking this shot![]


[img]/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.28.86/205-reduced.JPG[/img]





Anyway, hope you all enjoy it.


John.

[wickerprints]

I have now reduced the image width to 800px. Hope they are displayed correctly now..


This one took me 9 months to finish...(a "4-season-panorama"). Have anyone seen anything like this on the web...?


Perfect stitching is ofcourse impossible. One have to comprimise.
<div style="clear: both;"]</div>

See, now if I did that where I lived, you wouldn't be able to see any difference in seasons... LOL

[btaylor]

Me too! It would just show different shades of brown grass []


Great idea though - works well.

[George Slusher]

It was taken with my Minolta 600mm f/6.3 with a 2x extender, I can tell ya for a fact that 1920mm is hard to hand-hold without any support! I must have looked like a sight sitting on my belly taking this shot!

I can imagine--it's hard enough holding my 100-400mm still. I usually use either a monopod (assuming that I don't have time or the energy to lug a tripod around) if I'm elevated, or a "bean bag" support if I'm on my stomach. If the lens has a collar, using a monopod is easy--just screw it into the lens collar's foot or get an Arca-Swiss-type clamp (Kirk, Really Right Stuff &amp; Wimberley make good clamps; Kirk often puts discontinued clamps on eBay) and install a lens plate on the foot. (I use Wimberley plates, but Kirk &amp; RRS also make good plates.) If the lens does not have a collar, you can use a monopod with a shooting rest, like hunters do. Trek-Tech makes the Versa-Rest that supposedly fits on a 1/4" stud, which most monopods have.


An alternative to a monopod is a "string-pod." Basically, you tie a nylon cord to a 1/4"-20 eye bolt, screw the eyebolt into the camera's tripod socket, then step on the cord and pull up. (It's a good idea to use two nuts and a lockwasher on the eyebolt to keep it from being screwed in too far.) The tension on the cord helps stabilize the camera. Kirk sells a fancy version, the Strap Pod, but the DIY method works quite well. Many years ago (about 1978), I attended a Nikon School session in Los Angeles. They suggested using a window sash chain instead of the cord.


There are lots of bean bag supports around--I have several. Some are flat, others can be tied onto something, or draped over a car window, etc. The one I use the most is Kirk's Fat Bag, a saddle-shaped bag which is just about the right height for resting a lens while on my stomach. I also use it on top of my car or over the car door/window. I've also tried the Op/Tech OmniPod, the Trek-Tech MagBag I &amp; II and the Kinesis SafariSack. They are more versatile (especially the SafariSack, which can be tied so that it stands up on its own) and easier to carry around, but not quite as stable as the Fat Bag. Filled, the FatBag and SafariSack are not light--about 6 lbs. The SafariSack is relatively cheap, though. (Arthur Morris' "BLUBB" is decidedly NOT cheap, at $100.) For most of us, I suspect, a good bean bag would be a good investment.


If you're doing a lot of ground-level shooting where you want to be able to pan/tilt the camera quickly, there are supports to which you can mount a ballhead or gimbal head. The OmniPod had a 1/4" bolt, but it's not very heavy duty. There are more solid ground-level devices available, including Kirk's Low Pod and, in a pinch, their Window Mount; Jobu Design's Skorpion; and Naturescape's Skimmer II. The Kirk devices have rubber feet. The Skorpion can be flipped one way to sit on rubber feet or turned over to ride on metal skids. The Skimmer is like a medium-sized frying pan without a handle. (In fact, I've seen a DIY project where someone made a similar device from a cheap aluminum frying pan.) These all need a ballhead or gimbal head.


There are also low-level tripods, but they are often too light-weight to handle such a big lens. Two exceptions (alas, rather expensive!) are Kirk's Mighty Low Boy ($190)--a modified Manfrotto tripod--and Really Right Stuff's TP-243 Ground Level Tripod ($375!). Some full-size tripods can also get quite low (especially if you can remove the center column), but their legs may get in the way.


In summary, if you don't have them, a good monopod (has to be able to handle the weight!) and a bean bag might be very useful investments, if you don't have them already.