First (usable?) 10D shots

[vvizard]

Ok, I've had my 10D for just over one week now. This is my first SLR (and actually just second camera no matter what type), and I have to say: Even though I'm in the learning-process of photography, I do understand that this thing is impressive =) At least beats my first camera (Minolta DiMage 7i) in every aspect except price =)

I've asked some questions on this forum about what equipment to buy next etc, and I got the replies: GO OUT AND SHOOT! :-D And so I've done. And I love it :) Here's a few of the pics (taken the last week) that I like a lot, and got some positive feedback on. You judge. Are they 10D worthy, or am I just another Measurebator who blew to much money for a result I could have gotten with a powershot? :) Anyway, here they are:

http://vvizard.net/pics/vvizard/

And I know this isn't the right forum for picture-criticism, but I've seen other guys post their first-shots, and haven't seen anybody complain. Pics in the futuwith it that I feelre will be posted to the criticism-forum..

Greetings from Norway (And yeah, we got the fastest rally-driver now :-D)

[David Wild]

Your first two pictures (numbers 1 and 3, came here as a completely black screen. The other three arrived correctly.

[thomascanty]

David Wild wrote:
Your first two pictures (numbers 1 and 3, came here as a completely black screen. The other three arrived correctly.


Not completely black for me, but very close to it. I can see there's something there, but I can't make out what it is.

[vvizard]

Ok. They're meant to be almost completly dark. It have worked out OK on the screens of others who have watched them, but I don't have a calibrated screen, so I'm afraid I can't guarantee that there's enough light for them to be usable on a calibrated monitor.

[MiG82]

I have my screen roughly calibrated in terms of brightness, contrast and gamma and I can see the two dark pics. I think the first one is quite nice. If the clouds/fog was a bit brighter it would be even better.

BTW, displays don't do particularly well with much ambient light around. If you have a window shining onto your screen you might as well forget about seeing low key photos properly.

[w10d]

vvizard wrote:
Ok. They're meant to be almost completly dark. It have worked out OK on the screens of others who have watched them, but I don't have a calibrated screen, so I'm afraid I can't guarantee that there's enough light for them to be usable on a calibrated monitor.

Dark, but perfectly visable on my profiled 2.2 Gamma monitor...

In fact, No. 1 is pretty cool

Where is No. 6 taken?

[CyberDyneSystems]

The mist in the valleys of the first two pics is really cool. It would be nice of they were more visible,. I really like the numer 0006 Image with the lights showing through the mist!... was this taken the same day?

[thomascanty]

I just checked them again on my home computer with a profiled monitor, and can see the detail much better. I was viewing them earlier on my computer at work, which I also profiled a while ago, but that's a shared PC, and apparently somebody's been screwing around with the settings.

[vvizard]

Here are answers for the questions so far:

0001 and 0006 are taken from the same spot (though the camera don't face the same way), but not the same day. When 0001 was taken, there was _VERY_ thick fog. On 0006, there was little fog, and it was laying very low. 0006 is taken the day of the moon-eclipse. The moon-pics sucked, but I thought that I could get a nice shot of the place I live. Yeah, I live on one of those "lights" down there :)

[justme_dc]

Image 5 is a thing of beauty. Shoot more like that.

[phidong]

love #6, i love lights.. ;) beautiful