Let's see your Tacos in scenic places!

Love it. We all just missed each other.

@Digiratus admiring, as he, Zane @Speedytech7 and I drove by.

 

more autumn colors for you

 

@Digiratus and @turbodb already hit all the points, but I'll repeat them with my own phrasing in great detail... which by the way is how I avoid getting invited to lots of work meetings. (Him? He never shuts up!)

It seems we can split the challenge of producing appealing photos into three general categories, which I'll address in the order I perceive their importance, starting with the least important:

1. Hardware: Having a dedicated camera can give you better optics and a better sensor, but the gap is rapidly closing. For example, my camera has a ~9 cm2 sensor, and my favorite lenses have ~30 cm2 of front glass. My cellphone has 0.3 cm2 sensor and a 0.2 cm2 front lens. So obviously, the camera is better for pulling in light, and you can really tell at night. But, that doesn't make the camera 30 or 150x better than the cellphone. And honestly, with a camera, there's lots more to mess up too, and there can be some drawbacks associated with big sensors too, at least for entry-level cameras, such as rolling shutter artifacts, and limited framerate /cropped video recording. My camera can't even stitch together a panorama, for example! Having all these options at your fingertips can present a fun and potentially rewarding challenge when you set out to take pictures with a dedicated camera. But, you can manually focus and expose shots on a cellphone too, and most let you shoot raw files as well. Various algorithms are now standard on cellphone cameras as well, such as fake bokeh filters that simulate the shallow depth-of-focus of a big lens. I had a lot of fun trying to get the best out of my cellphone before I decided to buy a camera, and recommend you try it out before you conclude you need or would even want to lug around a dedicated camera.

2. Software / processing: Sometimes you'll wind up with a photo that looks great right off the camera... but I don't think I've ever taken a photo I couldn't improve in software. And sometimes it's a strict necessity. Some cameras, especially cellphone cameras, employ software automatically to produce better-looking shots. With a dedicated camera, you typically take the opposite approach and shoot raw files to intentionally delay the processing of the exposure until you're sitting at home and ready to waste even more time doing it yourself. Perhaps the automatic on-camera software or "AI" (sigh) will soon become better than me at processing most photos. But it has a long way to go, and even when it's objectively superior, I'll still be a smug ass-hole about it and proclaim that it's all fake bullshit to appease no-talent ass-clowns. So my recommendation is to try shooting raw files on your cellphone, and find some software to develop your photos. I believe you can find free software for this, but I use the paid Adobe stuff. If that sounds tedious... well, it is. A good time to try it out is when you find a scene that looks spectacular to your eyes, but bland on your camera screen.

3. Effort: Sometimes you stumble upon the perfect photo op, but that's pretty rare. More typically, it takes dedicated effort to find the right angle, and to get the right right lighting. I like night photography, so I plan my trips for moonless nights when possible, and I'll stay up until dawn if conditions are good. When the sun is getting low in the sky, I'm looking for a spot to capitalize on those golden sun-rays. If I see something cool looking in the distance, I might embark on a lengthy hike to photograph it from up close. No amount of equipment or processing is as critical as being at the right place at the right time. Jesus, hope I don't sound like a self-righteous elitist here... I just like taking pictures, and even though I'm not very good at it, I find that trying really hard to find good photo spots is often worth the effort. And in general, it can be rewarding to set time aside for photography, if you enjoy it. I typically take 1000+ photos on a day of adventuring, and might get a dozen or two good ones.



Finally, I have to come clean. My photos are fake bullshit, and I'm a no-talent ass-clown. It's all deep-fried, man... just loaded with sugar and doused in ranch.

Here's an example from earlier this year, showing the difference between as-shot jpeg and processed raw... a lousy photo taken in terrible lighting conditions, this won't be easy to salvage!

JPEG from the camera:

A terrible picture, shot straight into the sun.

JPEG, but processed in photoshop as best I could:

A dramatic improvement, but also a train wreck. The color information just isn't present for most of the photo. Which is kind of how jpegs work.

Unprocessed raw from the camera:

Somehow even worse than the JPEG!

Just adjusting the exposure:

Probably the most faithful image

Adjusting the shadows and highlights a bit:

Starting to look better, but nowhere near as spectacular as met the eye...

Adjusting the color profile / temperature, and throwing in some spatial filtering...

A reasonable photo, given the starting point, but you'll notice the tell-tale glow of fakery around the tree branches and ridgelines, and a fair amount of color noise emerging where we're we've hit this noise floor of the exposure... I'd probably call this good enough after removing the color noise and dust spots.

BUT WHY STOP THERE? Let's batter and deep-fry it, and serve it with ranch.

MAKE SURE TO LIKE AND SUBSCRIBE!!!



Ooh, here's another one fresh off the camera--err... fresh out of photoshop:

The sky is literally black. It'S aLL sKiLL, MaN!!!

 

The problem with camera's these days is they're never as good as what your eyes and brain can accomplish.

 

great astro shots . what's your lens & camera ?

 

A few from a special trip with my dad a few weeks ago...

Taco in beautiful place, check.


I happened to wake up at 3am and the moon was out. Can confirm, still beautiful at night.


The following evening, pre-moonrise. @mk5 style, albeit poorly executed.


I ended up liking this one the best. If only I'd closed my door.


"Jeep"

 

You sir need your personal AdventureTaco calendar!

 

With some of the shots here, I'd unironically get a "Best of TacomaWorld Calendar" if it were like a fundraiser.

 

I went with a Sony A7C, and at night I shoot with a manual 12mm/2.8 (Rokinon). I kind of reviewed it on a different thread.

I like the camera, but I'm pretty sure any modern full-frame camera can deliver similar performance.

I really love that lens though -- manual is the way to go at night. I wouldn't trade it for the best electric-focus lens on earth. I mean, of course I would, but then I'd buy another manual lens for night photography.

I believe that's already a thing... or at least was in the past. There's a contest at the end of each year to pick the top 12 for the next year.



Mandatory truck photo:




And dammit, Dan, I just read or re-read your North Rim blurb. Came to see what this "pivot" thing was, left pissed off because you once again were more observant and took better pictures the whole time.

That fucking light hanging over the lounge in the lodge... some awesome architecture there and I never even looked up!


Hey can you pass the ranch?

 

Well I'll be damned...hope a 2024 is slated.

Also nice truck and beautiful lodge.

 

Yea, but you know how to manipulate what the world sees. So, you are a politician IRL?

 

Glamping in the Uncompahgre National Forest

 

Regarding taking great pictures… lots of talk of equipment, and it does make a big difference, but I would argue that composition is even more important. Look at these great photos, see how the truck is positioned against the background, look at the lighting, close or far, etc.

 

“I work where people vacation”

 

Not quite the fantastic location as so many posted, but still relaxing! Southern Indiana…

 

Digging the regular cab.

 

Thanks, the single cab is great, I just wish the thing had the 6-cylinder in it. It has been a fabulous truck though!

 

If your phone's camera isn't very good and good place to start is getting a phone with a nice camera next time you update. It'll cost more but it'll still be allot less then the DSLR when you consider the other things you can do with it and the lenses you'll prob want for the DSLR. Lets face it, not everyone is a photographer, some just want to point and click. If that's you a nice cell is the best option if you ask me. If the DSLR interests you it's a great hobby, my wife's into it and that type of setup can do allot. Plan on spending some $$ though. Phone pics won't be as good as a dedicated DSLR in the hands of someone who knows how to use it but you can still get some good pictures, esp if you edit them later.

These days there's cell phones with 50 mega pixel sensors, most of the DSLR settings, multiple lenses, raw capability. Some even include AI functions to improve the picture quality after it's been shot which is excellent if you're not into all the technical aspects of photography. Best of all it fits into your pocket and is available anytime. I can't haul around a DSLR rig much of the time and I don't want to, many of things I do might damage it w/o extra precautions.

Recently I upgraded to a Pixel 8 Pro and it's a better photographer then I am technically. Of course there's an entire aspect to setting up the shot, the 1/3rd rule of photography etc... Those take practice to learn. If you currently own a pretty decent handset with a good phone camera there's lots of tips on the web. Far more then I could describe here. Good luck!

 

You'll get use to the "little tank" like performance...maybe.