New portfolio collection...

This is the first in a series of shots I'm putting together that will eventually make up my professional portfolio. I bought my first pro f/2.8 zoom lens today, the 17-50mm from Tamron. So far it seems to produce very sharp images with good saturation and no aberrations I can see. I will be using it as my main lens and will likely not take it off, so in the next couple of months I will be writing a review of this lens and adding more to my portfolio. I hope you enjoy what's next to come...

Peace

New...

A high contrast portrait of Querida, kinda artsy. I like it...
Lovely Querida...
Pretty shoes...
I have no idea....when I look at it, I want to go fast.
Jingles....

Chevy Nomad

A shot I did in downtown Norcross. No, it is not mine (I wish). One of my favorites.

Tattered...

HDR Pontiac

My car done in HDR.

First, notice the difference between the two images, both have been HDR'd. The contrast goes to illuminate the differences in tone mapping technique. The first illustrates a more liberal approach, thus creating a more artistic aesthetic. Much like a painting. A more practical use and a bit more conservative adjustment to luminance and subsequent contrast adjustment is shown in the latter.

And I digress....

For those who don't know, HDR means High Dynamic Range. A process by which the combining of digital images taken at different exposures will, in theory, produce an image with a wider dynamic range than a standard JPEG. Dynamic range is the space that exists between shadow and highlight detail. Because of the nature of a digital image sensor, the same dynamic range found in a tone curve of film cannot be duplicated easily because film contains silver halide crystals which have a gradual response to light. Digital sensors have a much sharper response rendering a tone curve more like a straight line rather than a curve. The photosites of a digital image sensor, the body that captures light or photodiode has either an on or off state. When light hits one, it sends a 1 bit or on state to the A/D converter, while sensors that see no light stay at a off state sending a 0 bit to the A/D converter. The number of photosites on a digital image sensor determines the dynamic range so typically full frame digital sensors perform better than APS-C, DX, or crop sensors do because they have greater pixel pitch (photosite physical size) and more pixels. Since most DSLR's on the market are crop sensors of varying sizes, the inherent loss of shadow detail to hightlights and vise versa will remain an issue until better technology is made available. Until then, we have photomatix or photoshop which use programs that merge the images taken at different exposures then average them across the tone curve allowing for tweaking of detail in those critical areas.

This photo, along with the Chattahoochie Shallows shot in my first post are my first attempts at HDR. Enjoy.

My beef with yahoo answers

Originally posted by me in one of my other photography groups on yahoo. It's mostly a rant, but still quite pertinent. Please excuse the word wrap, I can't fix it.

Hi all, this topic is a departure from the usual banter of the group. I
didn't really feel like asking in Y!A, but this is something that I've
been thinking about a lot lately, especially as my 6 year old reaches an
age where what he learns will carry him through the rest of his life.
So please, excuse the digression.

I've always wondered about just what Yahoo Answers [and perhaps even
wikipedia] should choose to accomplish, in society. In wondering, I've
often found myself asking the question, what is the purpose of Yahoo
Answers? Is it for the satisfaction of a fleeting interest, or
curiosity? Is it just for fun, not to be taken in a literal capacity?
Or is it a way for an uncreative or otherwise lazy person to skip his or
her own creative processes in favor of a quick solution to very real
problem solving activities? Are we cultivating an atmosphere of
mediocrity in successive generations of our youth? I ask becuase of the
continually growing amount of questions regarding homework and study
assignments asked many young people, on Yahoo Answers, and we've all
seen them.

Not that anything should be "done" about it in a specific way [I'm
guilty of answering], but how should we, as responsible members of
society, answer these questions? I know the purpose of Yahoo Answers is
to provide information, and the internet has vastly changed the
information gathering process, but my Dad always told me that a quick
solution to a problem is often not the best. In my youth, I found
myself "asking" my Dad for the answers to questions I could not answer
myself. And due to my Father's Steally approach to the upbringing of my
brother and I, there wasn't much luck. And sure, answering a person's
question is prudent to a degree, but it's always better to point a
person in the right direction, rather than just giving them an out of
doing the work to learn things on their own. I don't know, maybe my
approach or opinion on the matter is somewhat biased, or baseless. But
the one thing I am sure of is that with the advent and further
development of information technology [as a whole], I have found it is
easier to visit a web page to learn something than it is to visit a
library and use the Dewey decimal system to find information the "old
school" way. Or is it the same? Does a person excercise his or her
brain in the same way? I mean, even internet searches take a degree of
patience and skill to properly execute. So now, all a person has to do
is "ask", and they can get the "answer" to anything they need to know,
with a minimal committment of time or brain power. Sometimes, a person
can learn other things not related to what they seek, in the process of
looking for the answer. I view that as a good thing.

So to conclude, I just think we're somehow "dumbing" down society with
Yahoo Answers. It's already bad enough that the United States is ranked
17th among the worlds free nations in education. Is it really a wonder
why US companies hire more foriegn talent at a lower wage? Honestly, it
doesn't surprise me, for one. After all, there was a recent report on
the ABC evening news that revealed 7 out of 10 US high school students
could not find Iraq on a map [even though, if you watch the evening
news, they will end up showing a graphic of Iraq on a map, ironically].
But, 3 out of 4 of them have STD's. Perhaps they're too busy with
myspace to have even picked it up, in 5th grade geography. Together
with the fact that parents seem to preoccupied with their own endeavors
to even be concerned with the affairs of their children [since when did
that start, anyway?] it seems the "ME" generation of young people are
more and more ill-equipped to compete in a world where what you can
prove you can do is more important than actually doing it, or what you
can do it for. I do not often put too much of my faith in the system
responsible for educating my son and I don't know how so many people do,
in truth. So, I think about the old saying, "If you want something done
right, do it yourself". Perhaps if I decide the education of my son is
more important than social networking, television, or running the
streets with equally uneducated peers, maybe he will make something of
himself and not aspire to work as a busboy.

I apologize if this isn't what any of you wanted to read [call it a
ramble, if you will], or if I have offended anyone, but it's just been
on my mind [mostly what I see, where I live, and being my opinion], and
I wanted to share it. I welcome any opinions, eithre pro or con of
mine.

Peace,
Joe