Come On Folks Let's See Some Eye Candy! Here's Some For Ya

20230922_175951.jpg

20230922_175928.jpg

20230922_175814.jpg

20230922_175834.jpg
 
There are some real quality photos of some real quality plants here. :nerd-with-glasses:

Just a reminder there's Photo of the Month and Plant of the Month in our contests. Voting is now, but the October contests will be open for entries on the 1st.
 
SensibleSal66 said:
Really nice Pix! How did you get so close up? :ganjamon:
Click to expand...

It happens 2 ways. One is with my lens by zooming as tight as possible. Two is when I process the RAW files.

My camera sensor creates 24MB+ images, so there is plenty of RAW data to crop out unneeded areas of the image. Sometimes I crop too much and there isn't much left, so when the photo is upsized it isn't as sharp as I would like.

I also have a macro lens that allows me to shoot full-frame. Meaning, I don't have to cut data out.

The downside to macro is the depth of field is shit. Only a fraction of what you are looking at is in focus. Even if I light up the scene bright enough to shoot at F22 (small aperture hole but good depth of field), the change is minimal.

Of course, all of my photos are "hopped up" glamour shots. That is unless I need help diagnosing an issue. Then I try to stay as true to light as I can.
 
ExNavyInSTL said:
It happens 2 ways. One is with my lens by zooming as tight as possible. Two is when I process the RAW files.

My camera sensor creates 24MB+ images, so there is plenty of RAW data to crop out unneeded areas of the image. Sometimes I crop too much and there isn't much left, so when the photo is upsized it isn't as sharp as I would like.

I also have a macro lens that allows me to shoot full-frame. Meaning, I don't have to cut data out.

The downside to macro is the depth of field is shit. Only a fraction of what you are looking at is in focus. Even if I light up the scene bright enough to shoot at F22 (small aperture hole but good depth of field), the change is minimal.

Of course, all of my photos are "hopped up" glamour shots. That is unless I need help diagnosing an issue. Then I try to stay as true to light as I can.
Click to expand...


I wanted to add:

White Balancing your camera against a Gray or White Card in these intense lights is critical.
Much of the time you can correct colors in post-production. Even so, it is best to start out with images as close to true colors.

There are other ways to do this. For one, most of my environmental gear (humidifier, heater) I only buy in white. That way if it is in the shot I can white balance off of it when I am processing the photos later.

When I SCROG my PVC circling the tent is all white so that helps as well.

These are the white and grey cards I am talking about:

Amazon Link to Gray Cards

Every camera seems to have a different technique to set the WB. So, you'll have to go to your manual for those settings.

With my Canon RP, I take a photo with the setting at AWB (Avg White Balance). Then change the setting to what looks like a straight-down view of a camera (sort of) and take a shot again.

Eye Candy is Dandy! :snowboating:

1695485698611.png
 
AgedMaster said:
Its a auto ive had it on 18/6 its on about day 84 the top bud is loads of swollen calyx its not revegging I think its to much N thats caused it to grow like that my nutes are 2 part so I cant lower N without lowering everything else
Click to expand...
Ya got a pic of the whole plant?
All the leaves with no serrations means reveg!
Seen a few autos looking like this lately. Having trouble flowering properly on higher light hours.
 
Back
Top Bottom