Posts Tagged Woodland Park
July 18, 2011 – Yellow Rose
Posted by Dave in - Best of Dave's POTD -, Flowers, Macro, Picture of the Day on July 18, 2011
Yellow Rose
Monday, July 18, 2011
Man, I really thought I had already posted this picture before, but my rudimentary method for keeping track of this stuff suggests that I haven’t. So, maybe it’s a re-post, maybe not. Doesn’t really matter, I’m sure even if it is, you don’t remember it from last time. In fact, I could probably replay the first 250 pictures that I posted and nobody would say a thing. Perhaps I’ll do that someday. But not today. No sir, this is not that day.
This is a rose. It’s yellow. Thus, the title of the post. I took it on a cloudy day last year, in the rose garden at Woodland Park. I’ve found that cloudy days work a lot better for rose pictures than sunny days, because you get a truer representation of the color than when you’ve got bright sunshine everywhere. It can be a bit challenging because of the lack of light, but it can make for some nice shots.
This one was taken with my Minolta-mount Kiron 105 macro that I found on eBay. If you’re the kind of person that likes to scour eBay for old lenses, I *highly* recommend trying to track one of these guys down. I’m always amazed at how nice the shots come out of this guy. It’s been awhile since I’ve busted it out, probably since around the time I took this picture. 
Man, I gotta get on that.
Notes: Canon EOS Rebel T1i, Kiron 105mm macro (Minolta mount). 1/160s, ISO 200. Aperture unknown.
Subscribe to the Picture of the Day via: Popularity: 18%
March 11, 2011 – Rose
Posted by Dave in Flowers, Macro, Picture of the Day on March 11, 2011
Rose
Friday, March 11, 2011
http://davefry.net/rate/index.php?viewimage=1590
Wow, busy week, what can I say? Here’s a shot of a rose, in just under the wire on Friday.
Notes: Canon EOS Rebel T1i, Kiron 105mm Macro lens. 1/250s, aperture unknown, ISO 200.
Popularity: 11%
January 7, 2011 – Bee and Flower
Posted by Dave in Animals, Flowers, Macro, Picture of the Day on January 7, 2011
Bee and Daisy
Friday, January 7, 2011
http://davefry.net/rate/index.php?viewimage=1718
Wait, what?? This blog is still getting posted to? Man, I thought it was dead there for awhile. But then, BAM, just like that, a new post.
That’s right, folks, I’m getting back on the horse! The horse meaning, of course, the habit of occasionally posting pictures, maybe a few times a week if you’re lucky. I spent some time out of town over the holidays and all that, but I’m back now. Perhaps eventually I’ll even toss up a couple photos from that trip. But, not today. I haven’t even downloaded them from the camera yet, honestly. Hopefully soon, we’ll see.
In the meantime, here’s another insect and a flower. It’s true, this one is very similar to a photo I posted a long time ago. But, while it was taken at the same location (the Rose Garden in Woodland Park), it was taken about a year later, using different equipment. So it’s totally fair game. Because, you know, it’s all a game, with rules and stuff. And I hate breaking the rules.
Have a great weekend everyone! I’ll try and put up at least two posts next week, but I totally want to ease everyone back into this, so I’ll definitely take it slow.
Notes: Canon EOS Rebel T1i, Tamron 90mm macro lens, Phoenix macro ring flash. 1/160s, f/20.0, ISO 100.
Popularity: 19%
December 2, 2010 – Roses
Posted by Dave in Flowers, Macro, Picture of the Day on December 2, 2010
Roses
Thursday, December 2, 2010
http://davefry.net/rate/index.php?viewimage=1593
Welcome to December! Hope you didn’t have any trouble getting here. I’m kind of breaking one of my sort-of quasi rules today, in that I’m already posting another picture of some roses from across the street, when I already just posted one a couple weeks ago.
But!! There’s a reason for it. Somebody asked me recently about mounting non-Canon lenses on a modern Canon dSLR. It’s true that I talked about it the last time I posted a shot from this particular camera/lens combination (as well as a couple other times over the years), but it never hurts to cover it again. To recap: this was taken with an old Kiron 105mm macro lens that was built with an old Minolta mount. When I say “old”, I mean really old, back when they used actual physical actuators to control the aperture, none of this electronic craziness. I mean GOSH.
I won’t bore you with the full description of why that’s interesting again, especially when I already linked to a whole post talking about it. BUT, I whipped up a little illustration of some of the points I was talking about when I was talking to the reader that was asking, so I figured that was of general enough interest that I should share it here as well. I was talking about how lenses that are built for different camera mounts are expecting to have different distances between the rear end of the lens and the sensor or film. But that’s the kind of thing that is much easier to visualize if you’re looking at a picture of it. So, I made a picture of it. The first section shows the normal situation, using a lens designed for the mount that your camera uses. The next section shows what happens when you use a lens that expects a LONGER lens-to-sensor distance (ie, Nikon lens on Canon mount), and when you attach a mount adapter to it. And, the last section shows a lens that wants a SHORTER distance (ie, Minolta lens on Canon mount), using an adaptor either with or without glass. When I shrunk the image down to a reasonable size, some of the text became too small to read, but the labels for the adapters say “Adapter (no glass)” and “Adapter (cheap glass)”.
Nikon and Minolta lenses on Canon mount
So, there you go. Now you all get it, right? Yay!
Notes: Canon EOS Rebel T1i, Kiron 105mm macro lens. 1/250s, ISO 200. Aperture unknown.
Popularity: 11%
November 23, 2010 – Autumn Leaves
Posted by Dave in Fall Color, Picture of the Day, Washington State on November 23, 2010
Autumn Leaves, Woodland Park Rose Garden
Tuesday, November 23, 2010
http://davefry.net/rate/index.php?viewimage=2185
You’d think that, given that it’s a short week this week (Thanksgiving is this Thursday for those of us in the states – which means that a lot of folks get Thursday and Friday off) that I’d make sure to post every day that I could, so I could at least get in three posts this week. But no, you’d be way wrong. Waaaaaay wrong. Wow, how’s it feel to be so wrong? I bet it stings, just a bit.
We got some snow here in Seattle, so it’s definitely winter now, but I’m still going to keep tossing some fall color pics your way for awhile. Like this one. This came (like a lot of other pics I post here) from the Woodland Park Rose Garden, across the street. Just like the last post, this picture was also edited 100% in Lightroom, instead of Picasa. My feelings about lightroom haven’t changed a whole lot since then. It’s still fairly powerful, but DOG slow. Whereas in Picasa I can take a picture from zero to processed in less than a minute, I find myself taking 10 or 20 minutes for each one in Lightroom. Not because I’m doing anything crazy (I’m still just tweaking the exposure) but just because it’s so dang unresponsive. Garr, it’s frustrating. But, all that being said, I’m leaning toward buying it, because it does have one killer feature that isn’t in Picasa: noise reduction. For those times when you just can’t get around using a high ISO, being able to smooth the noise right out is really really nice. Granted, there are a lot of other choices for noise reduction as well, and in fact I already own an old copy of some software called NeatImage, which works really well. But, the interface to it is a bit kludgy (the newer versions may very well be better, I’ve had this one for several years), and it’s completely external to my workflow and doesn’t fit in nicely, so I find myself very rarely using it. But the way it’s implemented in Lightroom is really nice and intuitive and useful (other than the maddening slowness), so I think it’d be a nice tool to have. But, if I find out that Picasa adds a noise reduction filter that works even reasonably well (or if Picnik adds one!) Lightroom would be gone. I guess I should do some research to see if something like that is coming, before I drop the cash, huh? Hmmm..
Okay, that’s it for today. Tomorrow I’m going to post a mountainy picture, then you’re on your own until AT LEAST next Monday. Man oh man, how are you going to get by??
Notes: Canon EOS Rebel T1i, Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 lens. 1/100s, f/3.2, ISO 800. Focal length: 50mm.
Popularity: 11%
November 17, 2010 – Rose
Posted by Dave in Flowers, Macro, Picture of the Day on November 17, 2010
Rose, Woodland Park Rose Garden
Wednesday, November 17, 2010
http://davefry.net/rate/index.php?viewimage=1595
Hey, look at that, you all got lucky today! Just when you had given up on your dreams of seeing a new post on this lovely Wednesday, a picture of a rose appears. I of course took this one across the street, in the Woodland Park Rose Garden, earlier this summer. I took it using the old 105mm Kiron macro lens (with a Minolta mount!) that I picked up (very) used on Ebay earlier this year. It’s a tough lens to use, for a number of reasons (which I’ll detail out here in a bit), but every time I come across a picture I took with it, it just takes my breath away. I keep trying to justify not using it, and instead using a lens that’s easier (again, see the list below), but man, this lens takes nice shots.
So, what’s so tough about using this guy? Well, mostly stuff that I’ve mentioned several times before. First of all, it’s manual focus. Which I know, is a lame thing to complain about. But, seriously, it’s really easy to get wrong. Especially when you factor in part 2, which is that the aperture control is totally manual. Meaning, it has a physical actuator that can be used to automatically control the aperture (so that it’s wide open while you’re focusing, but then it steps down when you hit the shutter button), but new, modern, electronically controlled cameras don’t know what to do with a little spring-loaded knob that you need to push aside to open the aperture. So, you have to deal with trying to focus with the aperture stepped down, which (obviously) greatly reduces the amount of light you have to, you know, focus with. Also, (somewhat less obviously), stepping down the aperture has the expected effect of lengthening your depth of field, so whereas it’s really easy to see exactly where the point of focus is when the aperture is wide open, it can be really tough when just about everything LOOKS in focus through the view finder, especially when everything is also very very dark.
Then, to top it all off, the range of stuff you can even focus on with this lens is pretty limited. Meaning, you can’t focus to infinity. Why that is has to do with the difference between the lens that uses an old Minolta mount, and the camera that uses a Canon EF-S mount. So, you see, the lens expects there to be a very specific distance between the rear of the lens and the sensor. If you have a lens that has the same mount as your camera, this isn’t an issue, since the mount points are designed to put the lens at exactly the right distance. But, different mounts require different distances. Some longer, some shorter. Canon’s EF mount is generally pretty convenient, because it requires a shorter distance than most others. Meaning, the mount points on the camera will put the lens CLOSER to the sensor than most non-Canon-mount lenses want. Why is this convenient? Well, because you can’t just attach a non-Canon-mount lens to a Canon. You need an adapter. So if the lens wants to be further away than the camera wants the lens to be, then you just make the adapter the correct width to make everybody happy. The camera doesn’t actually care about how far away the lens is, it just has it’s mount points at a certain location. But the lens DOES care, so you can make the adapter the right width. But, as I mentioned, that only works if the lens wants to be FURTHER than the camera’s mount wants it to be. If the distance is the same, or the lens’s ideal distance is shorter… well then it doesn’t quite work. And the way that the “not quite working” is manifested is that the range of stuff you can focus on moves closer. To completely make up numbers, let’s say a lens would normally be able to focus on anything between 10 feet away and infinity. If you mount it (using an adapter) on a camera who’s mount needs a shorter distance, you’ll instead be able to focus on things that are (again using made up numbers) 5 feet away to 20 feet away. It moves the window closer, and makes it smaller. It’s exactly the same thing that happens when you use macro extension tubes. In fact, that’s the whole idea behind macro extension tubes – you move the nearest focus distance much closer to the camera at the expense of being able to focus on things that are more than a couple inches away. So, the old Minolta mount is one of those few exceptions to the “Canon EF is a convenient mount” rule. It actually wants a shorter distance than the Canon EF/EF-S mount. So, if you’re using it as a macro lens (and you’re thinking about tossing an extension tube on anyway) it’s not really an issue. But if you want to use it as a general-purpose lens, well, then you’re out of luck.
Phew, that was a lot more words than I was intending to use today. That wiped me out.
On a completely unrelated note, I’ve started reading more and more the blog of a guy named Bill Hess who lives in Wasilla, Alaska. He’s been a professional photographer for quite awhile, and his blog is regularly updated and is a joy to read. Today’s post in particular was about being invited onto the set of a film they’re filming up in Alaska, so if you haven’t visited his blog before, it’s a great time to start. Click here to visit.
Notes: Canon EOS Rebel T1i, Kiron 105mm macro lens. 1/200s, aperture unknown. ISO: 400.
Popularity: 16%
November 4, 2010 – Bee and Flowers – 300th Post!
Posted by Dave in - Best of Dave's POTD -, Animals, Flowers, Macro, Picture of the Day on November 4, 2010
Bee and Flowers
Thursday, November 4, 2010
http://davefry.net/rate/index.php?viewimage=1960
Hey! Guess what! Here’s a hint: it says in the title. Yeah, this is the 300th Picture of the Day! (Or is it the Picture of the 300th Day?) Woooooooo!!! Crazy, right?? This blog has been going for just under 18 months now. I honestly didn’t think I’d still be sticking with it for this long. But, here we are, for whatever that’s worth.
Since you all stuck with me this far, I’ll go ahead and make a promise to continue posting the most awesome pictures you’ve ever seen paired with hilarious commentary at least until we get to post number 600. Those will be on my other blog, but I’ll keep posting stuff here too, just so you guys don’t feel left out.
Notes: Canon EOS Rebel T1i, Tamron 90mm f/2.8 lens. 1/200s, f/5.0, ISO 400. Focal length: 90mm.
Popularity: 14%
November 2, 2010 – Fallen Leaves
Posted by Dave in Fall Color, Picture of the Day, Washington State on November 2, 2010
Fallen Leaves - Woodland Park, Seattle, WA
Tuesday, November 2, 2010
http://davefry.net/rate/index.php?viewimage=2122
Oh no, fall color season isn’t over yet, it’s just getting to the peak here in Seattle! (Hmm, today’s post is off to a great start. “Fall color season”?? Really, Dave? Wouldn’t another name for that be, umm, “fall”?) Sadly, I’m stuck sitting here inside rather than playing around outside taking pictures. I can think of several places I’d like to go if I had the chance. Like, Discovery park or Carkeek park here in town, or up on Highway 9 north of Everett. But, not today. And by the time I get a chance, the gorgeous weather we’ve got today will probably be gone. Sigh.
Today’s picture was taken just a few days ago, in Woodland Park. Not the part that’s taken up by the zoo, but the other half, on the east side of 99. You all obviously know what I’m talking about, because you all obviously live in Seattle. Right? Hmm, maybe not. But, that’s where it is.
Now, stop reading and go vote! (If you’re not in the US, then instead of voting, go pursue your normal daily activities!)
Notes: Canon EOS Rebel T1i, Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 lens. 1/320s, f/7.1, ISO 200. Focal length: 17mm.
Popularity: 10%
September 20, 2010 – Some Weird Plant
Posted by Dave in Flowers, Macro, Picture of the Day on September 20, 2010
Some Weird Plant
Monday, September 20, 2010
http://www.davefry.net/rate/index.php?viewimage=1059
Anyone have any idea what the heck this thing is? I found it earlier this summer in the Rose Garden. I’m going to call it a “flower”, but I don’t even know if that’s true. I like the texture though. That’s it for today, short post, eh?
UPDATE: Somebody identified the plant as an “Astilbe”. Now I (and you) know!
Notes: Canon EOS Rebel T1i, Quantaray 70-300mm lens. 1/100s, f/6.3, ISO 800. Focal length: 183mm.
Popularity: 10%
August 26, 2010 – Bee or Wasp? No! A fly!
Posted by Dave in - Best of Dave's POTD -, Animals, Macro, Picture of the Day on August 26, 2010
Fly, Genus Spilomyia
Thursday, August 26, 2010
http://www.davefry.net/rate/index.php?viewimage=1652
Anybody know if this is a bee or wasp? I think the answer would lie in what the stinger looked like, or if there even was one. Unfortunately, you can’t see it. Sigh.
UPDATE: A reader named Joan Knapp (see her blog here) pointed out that this is actually a fly, “Genus Spilomyia”. So there you go!
What do you mean that flower looks familiar? Umm, right. This may or may not have been taken at about the same time as yesterday’s picture. Actually, all three pictures I’ve posted this week came from last weekend. I think that’s actually the first time I’ve ever done that. Normally I try to spread things out so as to not saturate the blog with one subject. Plus, then I can post two pictures that are really similar but yet a little bit different months apart, and nobody says anything. Oh, wait, nobody says anything anyway. Right.
Notice how the eyeball patterns are different? Weird. Have I mentioned lately that you guys should all sign up for Flattr?
Notes: Canon EOS Rebel T1i, Tamron 90mm f/2.8 macro lens, cheap macro ring flash. 1/160s, f/18.0, ISO 100.
Popularity: 16%
August 25, 2010 – Orange Daisies
Posted by Dave in Flowers, Macro, Picture of the Day on August 25, 2010
Orange Daisies
Wednesday, August 25, 2010
http://www.davefry.net/rate/index.php?viewimage=1649
Well, okay, whatever, maybe they’re not daisies. Seriously though, what are they?? I don’t know, and none of you ever feel like telling me. So, eff it, they’re daisies.
I like a lot of the elements of this picture. But I’m only posting it today so I can talk about what I *don’t* like about it. Because not only do I feel that it didn’t live up to its potential, I don’t even think it’s a particularly good picture. Why? Well, it’s too dark, and there’s not enough contrast.
For whatever reason, things that are really strongly red or orange really play tricks with the camera sensor. The redness maxes out way too early, leaving the rest of the image a bit dark. I tried to brighten this one up, but when I was able to get it to the point where I was happy with the overall illumination, the deep red and orange petals were way beyond blown out. So, the only way to be able to maintain ANY of that red vs. orange details (which is the most interesting part of those flowers, if you ask me), was to keep it kind of dark like this. And I guess if you’re not looking at it in the context of any other pictures, it’s not too bad. But I’m not super happy with it.
Then, there’s the contrast. I was trying to go for the effect of having those two flowers in front really pop out, but I also wanted to create the idea of them being in the middle of a huge flower bed full of them. Unfortunately, in this result, it’s hard to catch the difference. There’s just not enough of a difference between the in-focus ones and the out-of-focus ones for your eye to grab on to. A lot of times, you can use focus vs. bokeh to provide that contrast that I was going for, but with the strong reds and the lack of a sharp edge on the far petals, in this case they just blend together. Another option would have been to put a little bit of green just above that close flower, I should have gone with that. It’s of course easy to say that now, I just wish I had thought of it then.
Oh well, maybe next time, huh?
Notes: Canon EOS Rebel T1i. Tamron 90mm f/2.8 macro lens. 1/320s, f/9.0, ISO 400.
Popularity: 13%
August 5, 2010 – Star of Persia
Posted by Dave in - Best of Dave's POTD -, Flowers, Macro, Picture of the Day on August 5, 2010
Star of Persia
Thursday, August 5, 2010
http://www.davefry.net/rate/index.php?viewimage=1587
I realize that a lot of you reading this blog don’t get quite as jazzed up about pictures of flowers as I do, but the reality of the situation is that I have a whole crap-ton of them. Because, quite frankly, it’s a lot easier to go across the street to the rose garden or to take a walk around the neighborhood than it is to go on some crazy hike. I try to space them out at least a little bit so I don’t scare you all away, but if I keep burning through the non-flower shots, I’ll eventually be left with nothing but a huge pile of crazy flowers and bugs to inundate you with. But, it’s been more than a week since I tossed one out there, so it’s well overdue.
Based on the results of my normal flower-identification routine (which is to say, spending 5 minutes looking for flowers on Google), I’m fairly sure these flowers are called “stars of Persia”, so that’s what I went with. (Are there any Persians out there? Do these look like your stars??) These were, not surprisingly, in the rose garden. Taking pictures of flowers like these is somewhat counter intuitive to me. Normally, overcast Seattle days tend to make for uninteresting pictures (clouds aren’t bad in and of themselves, but around here we get these completely featureless grey skies that can make just about any picture into a real snoozer.) So generally I look for sunny days (or, even better, “mostly sunny” days with nice fluffy clouds), and stay inside when it’s featureless-ly overcast. But, I’ve found that I like my flower pictures better (in general) on overcast days. It feels like it allows the true colors of the flower to take center stage, and it means there aren’t any harsh shadows to worry about (since the light kind of comes from everywhere). You of course have less total light to work with, so you have to jack up the ISO and open up the aperture, but other than that you can get some nice results. At least that’s how I’m feeling today, anyway. Basically, I’m just trying to say that just because the weather’s not what you were hoping for, you should still get out there and take some pics. I always have to remind myself of that, because I’m HORRIBLE about getting lazy and blaming it on the weather. Somebody should totally send me a link to this post so I can read that.
Notes: Canon EOS Rebel T1i, Kiron 105mm f/2.8 macro lens. 1/160s, aperture unknown, ISO 200. Focal length: 105mm (duh!).
Popularity: 13%