­
Showing posts with label Photo. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Photo. Show all posts

Monday, December 08, 2014

The Travel Series: Putting the Give Back into Your Picture Taking


C'est ça !
Je trippe !!
Voilà!!
C'est CE qu'il faut faire, c'est ce que nous avons fait à petite échelle et c'est l'équipement qu'il nous faut pour notre prochain voyage.

Autour du monde en 2002-2003 nous avons promis des photos à plein de gens.  Nous avons pris note des adresses.  À notre retour nous avons envoyé les photos papiers promises à tous, partout où nous sommes allés.  J'aurais tant aimé pouvoir les regarder recevoir et ouvrir leurs enveloppes.  De beaux moments authentiques avec les populations locales.

Aujourd'hui les contrées éloignées, c'est-à-dire n'ayant pas encore accès aux technologies numériques, se font plus rare et plus distantes.  Mais si vous pensez un jour en franchir les barrières... équipez-vous et suivez les conseils ci-bas... où tenez les promesses que vous prendrez, quelles qu'elles soient.

(il a tellement de talent en plus ! :-)

Le lien (ICI)



Forestwoodward
website

Twitter @forestwoodward

Fujifilm Instax 58 US$   (bte de film 17 US$)


Saturday, September 14, 2013

Terre depuis Saturne

Un tout petit post, 
retrouvé des "draft" non publiés...

Un photo qui montre bien notre insignifiance dans tout cet espace !


Photo de la NASA : À cette distance, alors que les anneaux de Saturne sont très reconnaissables, la Terre n'est qu'un petit point lumineux en arrière-plan.

La presse, 19 juillet 2013

L'Agence spatiale américaine a rendu publique mardi des photos de la Terre et de la Lune prises d'un point de vue inédit, tout près de Saturne et de ses anneaux, des clichés uniques et rares.

Les images, en couleur, ont été prises par la sonde Cassini à environ 1,4 milliard de kilomètres de la Terre, selon la NASA. À cette distance, alors que les anneaux de Saturne sont très reconnaissables, la Terre n'est qu'un petit point lumineux en arrière-plan.

«C'est la première fois, avec ces photos datant du 19 juillet, qu'on savait à l'avance que la Terre serait prise en photo depuis une distance interplanétaire», a indiqué la NASA.

«C'est également la première fois que l'appareil photo à plus haute résolution de Cassini prend la Terre et la Lune comme deux objets bien distincts», ajoute l'Agence spatiale américaine.

L'angle de vue inhabituel a été rendu possible grâce au fait que le Soleil était placé derrière Saturne, depuis le point de vue de la sonde. La planète a ainsi bloqué presque toute la lumière, qui aurait sinon été tellement vive qu'elle aurait endommagé le capteur de l'appareil photo.

Ces photos sont d'autant plus incroyables qu'elles ont été prises avec un appareil datant des années 1990 (la sonde a été lancée en 1997), loin d'être aussi perfectionné et pointu que les instruments optiques actuels.

«On peut ne pas voir les continents ou les gens sur ce portrait de la Terre, mais ce petit point bleu est un résumé succinct de là où nous étions le 19 juillet», a déclaré Linda Spilker, scientifique qui travaille sur la sonde Cassini.

«Les images de Cassini nous rappellent combien notre planète est minuscule dans l'univers», a-t-elle ajouté.

La sonde Cassini a été lancée le 15 octobre 1997 pour étudier Saturne et ses nombreux satellites. Elle est arrivée près de la planète aux anneaux en 2004, après être aussi passée à proximité de Jupiter.

Thursday, October 25, 2012

Lytro camera



Go check it out

Lytro Camera, it records the entire light field so you can REFOCUS on any point in the picture after the shot has been taken !

I've never seen anything like that !  If you visit the web site you can text different sample and it is quite amazing.

It comes with a major drawback though, as explained by our independent reviewer here, the camera lacks 
resolution. 

More information on the technology here : 
The science inside
The CEO's Thesis on Digital Light Field Photography  dense, difficult, but quite interesting.

Conclusion: For web sharing this will be quite a cool tool.


Saturday, May 12, 2012

Sensor size and image quality

L'été dernier je discutais avec un ami, photographe professionnel.
Je lui demandais de m'expliquer la différence entre un senseur "APS-C" et un "Full Frame" si les 2 produisaient une photo de 20 Mpixels.
Pour moi un pixel était un pixel, peut importe sa taille.
Lui m'expliquait qu'un "gros" pixel était mieux qu'un "petit".
Mais... je ne comprenais pas.
Ça m'est resté en tête... Puis je suis tombé sur cet article, TRÈS intéressant où la différence est expliquée:

Taille du capteur et qualité de l'image

Il avait raison !  ;-)  C'est instructif !   Vous souhaitez savoir qui c'est : Marc Dussault

et pour nourrir la discussion concernant les méga pixels :

Est-ce que plus de mega pixels c'est mieux ?


Je me permets de recopier ici l'article pour prévenir le cas, trop fréquent, où l'article est effacé du contenu libre du cyberespace.



Sensor Size and Image Quality

 013More...
When it comes to digital camera sensors, bigger is DEFINITELY better.
Instead of a sophisticated piece of electronics, think of a digital sensor for a moment as a collection of hollow cylinders arranged in a rectangular grid.
Also imagine - for the sake of simplicity - that the grid consists of 30 horizontal cylinders and 20 vertical ones for a total of 600 cylinders.
The purpose of each one of these cylinders is to gather light so that the light can be converted into an image.
First, let's place all of these cylinders in a rectangle that is limited in width to 120 pixels (I'm using pixels as a unit of measurement to avoid any references to inches vs. millimeters). At only 120 pixels wide, each cylinder can only measure 4 pixels across.
But if we expand the width of the rectangle that contains the cylinders to 240 pixels, then each cylinder can be twice as wide (8 pixels across). Increasing the surface area for the cylinders without increasing their number means that each cylinder can be physically larger.
4 Pixel Cylinders8 Pixel Cylinders
small sensorlarge sensor

Digital Sensors and Photosites

Instead of cylinders, digital camera sensors contain millions of individual light-gathering elements calledphotosites (where a photosite is like the cylinders in the example above).
When a manufacturer creates a camera with a larger sensor, they have two choices:
  1. They can keep the same number of megapixels as on a smaller sensor and increase the SIZE of each photosite
  2. They can keep the size of the photosites constant, and just cram MORE of them into the larger sensor (thereby increasing the megapixel count)
As I discuss on my page on megapixels, more megapixels are really only necessary if you want to make giant prints. Having more megapixels does NOT make your photos look better.
But why would a manufacter choose to increase the size of the photosites rather than upping the megapixel count?
Once you know the answer, the real benefit of larger sensors becomes apparent: larger photosites DO capture images with higher quality, especially at high ISO settings.
Large photosites produce less noise at high ISO settings, while small photosites produce a ton of noise even at relatively low ISO settings.
Take a look at these two photos.
Compact Camera (Small Sensor)Digital SLR (Large Sensor)
small sensor noiselarge sensor noise
The photo on the left was captured with a compact camera with a small sensor at ISO 800. Notice the level of speckling - also called image noise - that is visible. The photo on the right was captured with a digital SLR with a large sensor at ISO 800.
Even though the ISO value is the same for both photos, the larger sensor in the DSLR produces less noise.

Sensor Sizes - From Compact to DSLR

Now that you know that the size of a digital sensor can have an impact on the quality of your photos, let's take a look at the different options that are available to you.
There are currently five main sensor sizes in digital cameras:
TypeDimensionsDescription
Compact8.8 x 6.6mmThis is the type of sensor that's used in many compact digital cameras.
Micro 4/3rds17.3 x 13mmThis sensor is used in mirrorless digital SLRs made by Panasonic and Olympus.
4/3rds18 x 13.5mmAll Olympus digital SLR cameras include this size sensor.
APS-C23.7 x 15.7mmThis is the most common sensor size in digital SLR cameras, and is also used in some mirrorless DSLRs.
Full Frame36 x 24mmUsed in high-end digital SLRs, this sensor is the same size as a frame of 35mm film.
Since just looking at the numbers is not enough to see the difference in size, the following diagram illustrates the differences (note: these are not the actual sizes of the sensors, but the relative proportions are correct). Since 4/3 and micro 4/3 sensors are so close in size, I have not included regular 4/3 in the diagram.
digital sensor sizes
Remember: the larger the sensor, the less noise you get at high ISO settings. Put another way, you get BETTER image quality across all ISO values when you use a camera with a larger sensor.

Bottom Line

The reason that mirrorless DSLR cameras are appealing is because on the outside they have the same size and shape as a compact camera, but on the inside they're hiding sensors that are significantly larger.
This means that you don't need to lug around a giant camera if you want to capture higher-quality photos. It's especially nice to know that you can take pictures in relatively dim light without having to compromise image quality too much.
Great image quality in a small, light package — it's the best of two worlds.

Saturday, February 05, 2011

Dominic Thuot


Dominic Thuot
I don't know how many pictures he takes, how many hours he spends working on them, ... how many he takes... but I know that he uses a Canon; a very good start ;-)  For the other details, I'll take time when he comes back to chat, for a while, with him.

I know I like what he displays on his blog.  I like how it is framed, the depth of field, the subjects, the color; so crisp, so bright !  And for those of you who tried it... taking shots of people at night making sure you get all the ambient light, the smoke blown while preserving sharpness... could be quite challenging.

He cannot claim to be an amateur anymore.

You'll find the site he updates while he runs through the world with Eli : dominiquethuot.com





Wednesday, September 29, 2010

22 incredible photos of faraway places

Découverte d'images qui parlent,...
pour le plaisir des yeux et le brassage de la soupe à souvenir qui fait remonter les bons morceaux ;-)

Trouvé sur le Blog d'Alice
pour la suite suivre ce lien




Monday, August 30, 2010

Free Hugs

Creepy?
Sarcastique?
... comique!

Friday, August 13, 2010

Hurry Up, Vote for Ria's book !

Hey,
If you have never met Ria, here is an opportunity to do so through her work.


We must all agree that she does see things from a different angle.  And it's pretty.  Stunning pictures taken from Montreal's subway... I bet that all of us, who uses it on a daily basis, have never seen it that way.

So please, do one thing, go online and vote for this book.  She is the runner up for a contest, and she has the talent to win it.  But she needs you and your vote before August 20th !!  To vote

GO !

And to appreciate her portfolio

Wednesday, June 23, 2010

Canon vs Nikon

A friend of mine posted this yesterday.
I loved it soo much, I had no choice but to publish it too.

A fresh look at the war between the Canon mob and the Nikon street gang.


Nikon Girl music video, the Photo Club from Joey L on Vimeo.


"Ouh, Ah, Polish my lense girl !"   LOL !!!!!

If you're interested in seeing more of Joey L.'s work, follow this link.


Thanks Celine

Monday, June 21, 2010

Dubaï 45 Gigapixels

Bon, ça y est, le record est battu, déjà. J'ai bien l'impression que même celui-ci ne tiendra pas très longtemps.

Il demeure que c'est une façon intéressante de cybervoyager ;-)


Cyberpresse.ca
Une photo de Dubaï... en 45 Gigapixels
RelaxNews
14 mai 2010 | 13 h 25

Record battu pour la plus grande photo panoramique du monde. Moins de deux mois après la mise en ligne de «Paris 26 Gigapixels», constituée de 2300 photos haute résolution de la capitale, une nouvelle photo, prise à Dubaï, vient de fixer la barre à 45 Gigapixels.

Ce nouveau record est l'oeuvre du photographe Gerald Donovan, qui a utilisé un appareil Canon 7D monté sur un support robotisé GigaPan. Cet accessoire reprend la technologie employée par la Nasa pour son véhicule d'exploration du sol martien, le Mars Rover. Au total, 4250 photos de la ville de Dubaï ont été prises en 3 heures et demie.

Un logiciel spécial a par la suite permis d'assembler tous les clichés pour réaliser une photo unique de près de 45 Gigapixels, soit 45 milliards de pixels. Cette résolution record permettrait d'imprimer la photo sur une surface couvrant pas moins de 1200 panneaux d'affichage.

Ce gigantesque panoramique est consultable en ligne, sur le site de GigaPan. En utilisant la fonction zoom, les internautes peuvent s'approcher du Burj Khalifa, la plus haute tour du monde, ou reconnaître le logo de la marque d'un véhicule situé à plusieurs kilomètres de l'endroit où la photo a été prise.

Le précédent record pour une photo panoramique avait été établi en septembre 2009 par deux photographes français. Leur cliché, «Paris 26 Gigapixels», se compose de 2346 photos de Paris prises depuis le haut d'une tour de l'église Saint-Sulpice. Ces images avaient ensuite été traitées puis assemblées par une société savoyarde, Kolor.

le lien vers mon ancien "post" à ce sujet.
Merci Eric D. d'avoir pensé à m'en informer ;-)

Wednesday, May 19, 2010

Filtering in Real-Time

It comes from a newsletter issued by B&H Photo Video.
I had problems editing it so sorry for the way it looks.
In short, you must have
- a UV filter
- a circular polarization filter
- a IR filter handy
and, I would add,
I remote trigger + a Flash controller, Canon ST-E2 (to be able to move the Fre...kin flash out of its shoe).

... because it cannot be corrected in post processing (Photoshop).


Filtering in Real-Time
By Allan Weitz
In a perfect world you don't need a filter. Your lens, even the most basic of kit lenses, comes pre-coated to minimize flare and color aberration. And when not in use, every lens comes with a lens cap that protects the front element of your lens and never everunknowingly falls off your camera as you stroll down the boulevard. But we don't live in a perfect world so forget about all of the above. (And by the way, I think you just lost your lens cap)
Unlike film cameras, which are limited to an ever-dwindling choice of Daylight, Tungsten, or B&W film stocks, most all digital cameras can be programmed to a number of (usually) accurate preset color parameters. Custom white balance is a simple, menu-driven chore for most digicams, and there's no shortage of affordable, easy-to-use white-balancing devices.
And while I'm a big proponent of getting things right the first time, in-camera, it's still reassuring to know you can tweak your efforts days, weeks, months, or years after the fact in Photoshop, especially if you shoot RAW or better yet, RAW+JPEG. As for color and other 'creative' filters, many of these filters can be easily mimicked electronically using any number of digital filter kits we carry at B&H. So the question of the day is, in a digital world, who needs glass filters?
The simple answer is … you, me, and everybody else running around with a camera. And the reason we need filters is because most unfiltered images fall short of what they can and should be in terms of clarity, contrast, saturation, and overall detail. But before we get into the details, let's cover a few of the basics.
Filters 101 - The Basics
Do filters diminish image quality? Anything placed in front of a lens diminishes image quality. The question is to what degree is image quality affected and is it even noticeable? What brand filters are you currently using (if any)? The generic brand or the 'same' filter costing several times the price but made by a company whose name you've actually heard of? To paraphraseTownsend T. Stith, 'You get what you pay for'.
Filters consist of 2 components — the glass filter itself and the threaded ring that secures the glass filter to the lens. Glass quality varies from brand-to-brand, and usually (but not always) goes up hand-in-hand with the price. Clarity and color neutrality are the basis for determining the quality of a filter. Glass thickness is also a factor. The thicker the glass, the more 'interference' the image must traverse before reaching the camera sensor, which means clear, neutral, and thin filters tend to be the best for transmitting a sharp, accurately rendered image to the sensor. (FYI, the thinnest filters are made by Leica)
Another aspect of filter-quality has to do with the filter's coatings. Most filter manufacturers offer their goods in a choice of coatings — single and multi-coated. The differences have to do with cost (single-coated filters are less expensive) and image quality (multi-coated filters deliver cleaner, better-saturated imagery). And if you plan on shooting in extreme climates, you might want to invest in a set of weather-sealed filters such as B+W Kaeseman-series filters, which will not delaminate in the hottest, coldest, or dampest environments.
The 2nd component of the filter — the threaded ring — should also be a consideration when purchasing filters. Less expensive filters have aluminum rings, which do the job but tend to jam if you inadvertently screw the filter into the lens flange at a cockeyed angle. Brass rings, aside from being less prone to jamming also offer a greater degree of crash protection if you should accidentally bump the leading edge of your lens into a hard surface (and we've all had this happen… haven't we?) As you might have guessed, brass rings cost more, but again…
UV, Skylight, & Basic Protection Filters
The most basic of filters addresses the most basic of filter functions (and a function that cannot be performed digitally after the fact), which is to protect the front element of your lens. Though 'purists' consider placing a filter in front of a lens an act of blaspheme, watch how fast they crumble into a pool of tears when they inadvertently scratch the front element of their favorite lens. UV (ultra-violet) filters, sometimes called Protection filters (which may or may not have UV-reduction coatings), perform dual functions.
Aside from keeping dust and smudges away from the surface of the front element, UV help eliminate the visual effects of UV radiation, which while invisible to our eyes, degrades distant details and overall image quality when taking photographs outdoors. (Note- ordinary window glass eliminates a great deal of UV radiation. UV filters contain additional coatings designed to finish the job).
UV and Skylight filters perform parallel functions and the differences from a digital standpoint are relatively insignificant. In the days of film your choice of UV or Skylight was determined by your preference of film — color or black and white. UV filters, which tend to have a warm cast, were suitable for color or black and white, while pink-tinged Skylight filters were better suited for eliminating the bluish cast that was common to color slide films, especially when shooting landscapes.
For shooting in higher altitudes, in snow, or around large bodies of water (which contain higher concentrated levels of UV radiation), stronger UV filters (Haze-UV2A, UV17, etc) are highly recommended for countering the detail-robbing effects of dense atmospheric haze. And for the record, the image-enhancing benefits of shooting through UV and Skylight filters cannot be replicated digitally. UV reduction can only be accomplished in-camera at the time of capture.
Polarizing Filters
The effects of Polarizing filters are also all but impossible to emulate post-capture. While many electronic filter kits tout 'Polarizing' filters, all they are really doing is buggering color saturation levels to make white clouds seemingly 'pop' from darker blue skies and the greens of summer foliage pop from the landscape. But this is an illusion. What electronic polarizing filters cannot do is eliminate reflections and extraneous glare from shiny surfaces, which is the reason colors pop off the screen when you open the file. Glass Polarizing filters on the other hand, do a swell job at eliminating window reflections and any number of distracting reflections going on in your pictures.
Polarizing filters are available in 2 formats — Linear and Circular, which look and function identically but are designed for use with manual lenses (Linear) or autofocus lenses (Circular). And while Circular Polarizers can be used with both AF and non-AF optics, Linear Polarizers can cause false meter readings and/or balky AF operation under certain lighting conditions.
Polarizing filters are available in Neutral as well as Warm-toned variations. Designed primarily for film, warm-toned Polarizers come in handy when shooting mid-day during the higher Kelvin-degree days of summer. Warm-toned Polarizers are equally useful when shooting digital as long as you're not shooting in Auto WB mode.
Note — Polarizing filters eat up 3-4 stops of light and as such you should take extra precautions when shooting under lower lighting conditions, especially when using kit lenses and other optics with maximum apertures of f/3.5 or slower.
IR (infrared) Filters
If shooting infrared landscapes is your thing, here too IR blocking glass filters (e.g. 87c) are your only choice. While many digital filter kits showcase 'IR' filters, there's simply no way you can differentiate and record heat waves from JPEG, TIFF, or RAW files. You can fake the look of IR, but you can't record true IR images after the fact.
Neutral Density (ND) Filters
ND filters are another class of filtration that cannot be emulated through the use of software-based 'filter kits'. Neutral Density filters are essentially neutral grey filters that depending on the manufacturer, are available in 1/3, ½, and full-stop increments. ND filters enable you to reduce the amount of light entering the lens opening without affecting the aperture and/or shutter settings, which is useful on several fronts.
For studio shooters, ND filters allow you to further reduce the light output of your strobes even after you've lowered to power setting to the unit's minimum output levels. ND filters also allow you to shoot at very low shutter speeds under bright lighting conditions, which can be a challenge if you want to blur the movement of tumbling waterfalls and the lowest ISO setting on your digicam is 200 and the sun is blazing down on you from a cloudless sky. Conversely, ND filters also allow you to shoot at wider apertures when you want to employ selective focus techniques under bright, sunny lighting conditions.
If you plan on shooting video with a VSLR, ND filters enable you to go beyond the limits of aperture and frame-rates in order to shoot at wider apertures under any lighting condition by simply placing more or less ND filtration in front of the lens.
Star filters are another type of creative filter that, while possible to emulate electronically via digital filter plug-ins, is more-often-than-not easier to manipulate on-camera, and in real time. And the same can be said for many electronic filters. If you have the filter, why not get things the way you want them at the time of exposure rather than spend additional time down the line to accomplish the same goal.
Step-down Rings
If you own more than 1 lens there's a high probability you own lenses with differing filter sizes. Rather than purchasing multiple filters to satisfy your filter needs, you can save money and storage space by investing in step-down rings. As an example, if you own 3 lenses, each with a different filter thread size - say 72mm, 67mm, and 52mm — you can purchase a 72mm filter and 2 step-down rings, say a 72 to 67mm and a 72 to 52mm (or 67 to 52mm) and your home free with a lighter bag and more money remaining in your bank account.
Like filters, step-down rings are available in aluminum and brass, and while the aluminum rings are less expensive, the brass ones are less prone to jam and certainly last longer.
Other Filters
The abovementioned filters represent only a sampling of the various types of filters we sell at B&H. While I think these filters remain the better option when comparing the advantages of 'real' filters to their digital counterparts, there are those who will rail endlessly about the advantages of one approach over the other. And while it's true many filter choices, i.e., color temperature, primary colors (red, blue, green, etc), warming and cooling filters (80 and 81-series filters) can be dropped in effortlessly in Photoshop and similar photo editing apps; others, such as graduated filters can also be applied post capture, but will need more time and patience on your part.
So the question in these cases is, is it worth my time to diddle around later or simply shoot through glass filters at the moment of capture? There is no right or wrong answer here. It's simply a matter of what works best for you.
Parting Notes
If you wish to retain the color qualities of glass filters, avoid setting your camera to Auto WB, which by design will do everything in its power to neutralize everything in its path. So if you're shooting in bright sunlight, set the camera to Bright Sunlight. Do the same when photographing in Open Shade, Overcast, or other lighting conditions — match the ambient light to best match a WB setting on your digicam. Optimally you should create a custom WB to most accurately match the ambient light values regardless of your working light source.
And one last thing — with the exception of graduated filters, which are often combined to darken the top and bottom of the image separately, never stack filters. Stacking filters almost always degrades image quality and usually causes vignetting at the corners of the image frame. In 2 words, it's a lose/lose situation.

Monday, May 17, 2010

3D Photo 3D

Tristan, s'est amusé avec une photo qu'il a transformée pour faire de la 3D.  En fait, il avait prévu le coup, il a fait deux photos à 3 pouces de distance.

Il s'est inspiré d'un "open tutorial" pour la démarche.



Le résultat est hallucinant.  Ça me fait tellement penser à l'Hydre de Lerne.  C'est cool, ça nous a bien fait jaser au bureau.

Il a été bien sympa et m'a permis de vous la montrer :



Si vous voulez le joindre pour le féliciter, faites-le via un commentaire, je les lui ferai suivre.
Merci vieux, tu fais maintenant parti des "buddy" de mon blog sans prétention ;-)

Sunday, May 02, 2010

Les sillons d'un disque sous le microscope électronique
Vinyl record grooves under electron microscope

Agrandi / Magnified 1000x

Suivez le lien pour plus de détails, un vidéo "How it's made" et une vue en 3D.

Follow the link for more details, a "How it's made" video and a 3D view ;-)

Saturday, April 17, 2010

Paris // Dresden // Chicago

La photo en large format.
C'est plutôt impressionnant.  C'est même renversant pour le curieux.

Maxime Gilbert m'a envoyé ce lien


Paris_26Gigapixels (2009)






Pour avoir le "making of" : Lien
Technique : Paris 26 Gigapixels est un assemblage de 2346 photos individuelles représentant une vue panoramique de très haute résolution de la capitale (354159x75570 px). Plongez dans l'image et visitez Paris comme jamais auparavant !

Mais en fouillant un peu, j'ai aussi trouvé :

Dresden_26Gpixel  (décembre 2009)

En fait ce sont des collages de photo, 1665 photo de 21.4 Mp prises par un robot en un peu moins de 3 heures.

Technical characteristics

The picture was made with the Canon 5D mark II and a 400mm-lens. It consists of 1.665 full format pictures with 21.4 megapixel, which was recorded by a photo-robot in 172 minutes. The converting of 102 GB raw data by a computer with a main memory cache of 48 GB and 16 processors took 94 hours. With a resolution of 297.500 x 87.500 pixel (26 gigapixel) the picture is the largest in the world. (stand December 2009)


L'idée avait déjà été réalisée en 2007 à Chicago




Technique : 7 Gigabites, 1 Gigapixel, 194 photos prises en 58 minutes.


Aussi du même photographe : Machu picchu_1,5Gpixel  (2006)


Et j'ajoute ici un lien hyper intéressant sur la photo digitale qui explique les bases (pixel, compression, etc)


De plus, j'ai trouvé sur Wikipédia, une liste des plus larges photo au monde : Lien

40 Stunning Examples of High Speed Photography


Basically high speed photography is a technique of capturing images with a remarkably quick shutter speed and mostly used for the scenes which cannot be seen with naked eyes. For high speed photography, you can use more or less any SLR camera, but an expensive camera can reach a much faster shutter speed and high speed photography is the game of shutter speed. Today, we will show you 40 Stunning Examples of High Speed Photography. In this post, you'll find some very impressive photographs that will show you how high speed photography can freeze time setting you aside to view scenes that we would normally struggle to capture.

Shower Cap
High Speed Photos
Galaxia
High Speed Photos
Starmag
High Speed Photos
Summer time
High Speed Photos
Popping Soap Bubble
High Speed Photos
Tenía los pies diminutos..
High Speed Photos
Triple Impact
High Speed Photos
High Speed Water Photography
High Speed Photos
High Speed Water Photography
High Speed Photos
Egg shot
High Speed Photos
Pabst + Hollow Point
High Speed Photos
Heartbreaker
High Speed Photos
Marbles
High Speed Photos
Water Figures workflow
High Speed Photos
A Splash
High Speed Photos
Astro-Science Workshop
High Speed Photos
Liquify
High Speed Photos
Water Sphere
High Speed Photos
light explosion
High Speed Photos
Water sound figures
High Speed Photos
Yoda
High Speed Photos
Strange Brew
High Speed Photos
Water on Face
High Speed Photos
3 Waterballons + Bullet
High Speed Photos
Fan of Milk…and coffee
High Speed Photos
Red light bulb
High Speed Photos
Strawberry
High Speed Photos
Bullet through balloon in high speed
High Speed Photos
Paintball Blast
High Speed Photos
Bathroom monster…
High Speed Photos
Bullet
High Speed Photos
P o w e r !
High Speed Photos
Boxer
High Speed Photos
Boxing
High Speed Photos
Fetch Red
High Speed Photos
Aguamaníaca!
High Speed Photos
Water
High Speed Photos
Blue Water
High Speed Photos
Lights out
High Speed Photos
Split Orange Splash, Explored!
High Speed Photos