Nature Photographers Network
This is the preserved archive of the original Nature Photographers Network. The community continues at naturephotographers.network.

Yorke's Folley

Discussion

6 replies
Posted by Tristan Campbell on July 4, 2008 at 8:44 AM
This is a very well known local landmark that I'd like to create a good 'touristy' photograph of. There is not much space for movement due to a wall which means that the tree shown in the upper right corner is almost impossible to avoid getting in the frame. Do the branches spoil this image? Any thoughts or suggestions? Thanks, Tristan
Posted by Graeme Lee on July 4, 2008 at 11:36 AM
Chop it down then :wink: Looks good to me Tristan. Be interested in your techs though. Can just see it in a book somewhere!
Posted by Tristan Campbell on July 4, 2008 at 11:47 AM
The techs are actually bit different from usual. It is two vertically stitched frames, both a blend of two exposures as a grad wouldn’t work well here. 24mm TSE @f/16.
Posted by Tom_W on July 4, 2008 at 1:23 PM
how do you find the TSE-24. I have to admit that i sold mine as my copy had just too much chromo abberation and was a tad too soft in the corner - do you rate yours?

I have been looking for a Zeiss 35mm PC - but don't want to pay the asking price of most advertised :wink:
Posted by Tristan Campbell on July 4, 2008 at 5:33 PM
I've not had it long and have only taken a few images with it but so far I'm very impressed - especially seeing as it is a quite well used second hand copy.

It does have chromatic aberration though on this image there is virtually none. It does get softer out from the centre of the image circle and towards the very edges it loses it. It is certainly more than good enough for what I'm doing and I just love the 5x4 shape of two vertical frames stitched.
Posted by Tristan Campbell on July 4, 2008 at 5:33 PM
Forgot the attachment. Left is centre, right is edge (but not very edge as in a pano stitch). It was very windy at the time so foliage has motion blur.
Posted by Tom_W on July 5, 2008 at 4:09 AM
Thats a lot better than the one I had.

T