woolie
-
Posts
820 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
17
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Everything posted by woolie
-
http://cafeluzhouston.com/
-
I feel the opposite; aperture has a big affect on DOF in typical real world use, and the differences between f/1.4, f/2.0, f/2.8, and f/4 are extremely significant in how a photo will look. And yes, focus distance is one of the factors in DOF (focus distance, focal length, aperture, sensor size). You can move closer to your subject to create a shallower DOF. But this also changes your perspective. Sensor size is also really important. Given the same perspective and field of view, you'll get very different DOFs with different cameras. Let's take 40 degrees FOV as an example. On a "full frame' 35mm camera, this is a 50mm lens. On a "APS-C" camera, about 35mm. And on compact cameras, it could go down to something like 8mm. If each of these lenses was at f/2.0 and photographing the same subject (same distance), they would all produce roughly the same photograph and require roughly the same exposure time for a given ISO. But the DOF between them be very different. The full frame camera would have the shallowest, increasing to the compact camera which would have the widest. What you're describing is CCD blooming. CCDs are analog devices. Photons are converted to an electrical charge, and this charge is amplified and converted to a digital value during read out using an analog to digital converter. Each pixel can hold a certain amount of charge, and if a pixel overflows with charge, it can spill out into adjacent wells causing bright spots across relatively large areas. However, most digital cameras have anti-blooming devices to keep this fairly well controlled; it's rare to see examples of blooming except in extreme exposures. The "star bursts" in Ricco's photograph are diffraction effects caused by point sources of light interacting with the physical shape of the aperture blades. In a typical camera aperture diaphragm, there are a number of curved aperture blades. At large apertures (or wide open), the rounded parts of the blades are OK at forming a circular aperture. However, when you step down quite low (say, f/16 and higher), the aperture starts to have harder corners. These corners cause a diffraction pattern, and to a rough approximation the "star bursts" will have the same number of points as the blades in the aperture. You can reduce the effect by using a larger aperture, which will have a more round aperture. Film requires low ISO because high ISO film is terrible. But most good digital cameras are nearly as good at ISO 800 as they are at ISO 100. At higher ISO you get less dynamic range and higher noise, but given a reasonable exposure (not underexposed) it isn't a problem until 800, 1600, or higher. Higher ISOs do give you much less post processing room, though, which is why getting the right exposure becomes much more important. I'm not sure what you're talking about with how long it takes light to travel.
-
Here is my current setup Nikon D700 17-35mm f/2.8 50mm f/1.4 24mm f/2.8 105mm f/2.8 VR Plus flashes, tripods, etc. Previously I used a Nikon D70. I like night photography. Here are a couple of my favorite pics that I've taken in Houston. Untitled by wools, on Flickr Construction Worker by wools, on Flickr The Machines Rest At Night by wools, on Flickr flower by wools, on Flickr
-
I was out on a bike ride Saturday night and took my camera with me. I wound up at Discovery Green at about 10pm and caught the end of a movie they were showing -- "Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs" -- with easily hundreds of families on the field. Anyway, here are some photos. Untitled by wools, on Flickr Untitled by wools, on Flickr Untitled by wools, on Flickr Untitled by wools, on Flickr Untitled by wools, on Flickr Untitled by wools, on Flickr Untitled by wools, on Flickr Untitled by wools, on Flickr Untitled by wools, on Flickr Untitled by wools, on Flickr And here's a couple more from the night. Untitled by wools, on Flickr Untitled by wools, on Flickr Untitled by wools, on Flickr Untitled by wools, on Flickr Untitled by wools, on Flickr Untitled by wools, on Flickr Untitled by wools, on Flickr Untitled by wools, on Flickr
-
See. This is what people should build in midtown. Someone inform Capital Retail.
-
No. 50 story tower is the most anyone could ever hope for on any downtown lot for the foreseeable future.
-
Can we put a freestanding McDonalds on the site? With a drive through.
-
No one on this forum has a drone with a camera? Regular old realtors are using them on frequently on HAR listings now.
-
It will be wonderful for all these employees to never have to interact with outsiders, and Exxon never have to worry about anything happening near their site. I'm sure it will be a beautiul hamster cage.
-
I work mostly from home, because it's my office that is too distracting. I am also a night person and my most productive hours are 12am-6am.
-
Haha.. Ok, revising my prediction. 1 story, 9 million square feet. Maybe an office tower next year, then. Sounds like Nancy's article is the "big announcement." Or I could wake up and be wrong (a common occurrence.)
-
Most people who know for sure probably don't work evenings. Just us building geeks think it's breaking news.
-
I don't think 600+ ft is that common. It would make it #1 or 2 in Houston since the 80s.
-
I guess we'll get pictures after this thing is over, or tomorrow.
-
14,000sf building on a whole city block? What a waste. And the McGowen side will be a concrete wall with no entrances? Might as well have built another CVS. In 2012, this is embarrassing for midtown. This is 2 blocks from a light rail station.
-
Having the retail stores is one of the main things I like about using Apple products. I can talk to someone IN PERSON for warranty and service issues. I'm ordering a new MacBook Air this week. It will be the fourth Apple laptop I've had, and like the seventh or eighth Mac I've had. However, Best Buy also sells the power adapters They close at 10.
-
So, I suppose garage floors have less height than office floors? 811 Main is 46 stories (9 parking) and 630ft. This is rumored to be 48 stories (12 parking). So probably net about the same.
-
I'm joking, but yeah, sneak in to the conference with your camera
-
Pics or it didn't happen.
-
It was just my prediction. I'm a pessimist We'll know in 30 minutes...
-
My Price is Right: 25 stories office (no residential, no hotel), one side of retail.
-
Texas Medical Center Restaurant And Bar Market
woolie replied to pineda's topic in Texas Medical Center
Nothing really good. The banh mi at Go Fish is OK but doesn't compare to Les Givrals or others. I had it for lunch today, in fact. Miller's Cafe has pretty good burgers. Trevisio. Beyond that it's chains and cafeterias: Au Bon Pain Chipotle Murphy's Deli -
Haha, well, my username refers to my wild hair and great big bushy red beard. I love the stares when I'm in "the right kinds of places." Although I usually get hassled by the police when I'm out taking pictures
-
I spend so much time daydreaming because it's my every day surroundings. I've been interested in these urban issues since I was a kid, and I pay close attention to the streetscape. I love to walk and ride my bike around midtown and downtown, and stare out the train windows several times per week. It's why I live where I do, and why I read this forum. Speaking of empty buildings -- Houston's economy has always been on a different cycle than the rest of the country; we're up right now, but we've been down before. And back then, there were even more surface lots. Anyway, I'm not going to derail this thread any more. I've been drafting a post in my head about these issues for a while; I'll keep them collected until it's a cogent narrative, and stop spilling them into random threads.
-
Large parts of downtown are surface lots, even areas directly adjacent to current or planned LRT stations. I travel frequently and can't help but make comparisons. Downtown has a fantastic skyline, but beyond that... I'm not criticizing this project, just grumbling about the overall state of things.
