If this was a flash job you'd probably spot it by glints of certain
portions of the branch underneath the bird.
But I don't agree with Paul either. I think this is done by selective
dodging. The main reason I think so is that the contrast in the plumage
looks unnaturally harsh, as it would be if pulled up, like, two or three
stops.
Jostein
Den 28.07.2016 21.34, skrev John:
You could probably do it with a Better Beamer.
http://www.digitalcamerareview.com/review/better-beamer-flash-extender-review/
On 7/27/2016 5:07 PM, Paul Stenquist wrote:
Great pics. But a fork, a spoon and a moon appears to be a photoshop
job. The tree branches are seen in silhouette but the bird is nicely
illuminated. By what? Especially against the moon background, which
would have required a sunny 16 exposure. Ain't gonna happen. Paul
Paul via phone
On Jul 27, 2016, at 4:58 PM, Henk Terhell <hterh...@chello.nl>
wrote:
Stunning pictures!
Henk
PS: (the other one of course is 2x "will be"" )
Op 2016-07-27 om 22:26 schreef Mark Roberts:
Gonz wrote:
On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 1:58 PM, Mark Roberts
<postmas...@robertstech.com> wrote:
The photographs on the short list for this year's Astronomy
Photographer of the Year:
https://www.theguardian.com/science/gallery/2016/jul/27/astronomy-photographer-of-the-year-2016-shortlist-in-pictures
(Trivia: Find the mistake in the captions on that web page.)
The shadow of Mauna Kea (they misspelled it) is my favorite.
I missed that one! There's another...
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
