User talk:Wilfredor/Archive 50

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Generosity Crowdfunding Campaign

Generosity Crowd-funding Campaign: NN3 MKII Starter Package for Wilfredo. This campaign is to get the kit required so The Photographer can create 180 × 360° panorama for Commons:

These images look odd and require a special viewer to appreciate them. But using the correct viewer, they provide an experience that no normal photo can match.

The Photographer, I think you'll certainly find the NN3 pano head to be a very useful tool for creating large size stitched photographs, wide-angle panorama, building interiors. But your intention is also to use it to create 180 × 360° panoramas. I think you will struggle to achieve that with your 35mm lens (which is equivalent to a 50mm lens on full-frame camera). It will require too many frames, a lot of computing power and disc space, and take a long time to make. Both Code and Diliff use a Samyang 14mm ultra-wide angle lens to create their 180 × 360° panoramas. For example, many of Code's HDR images are 12 frames × 5 bracketed exposures per frame = 60 photos. For non-HDR he only needs 12 frames. The equivalent of a 14mm lens on full-frame camera for your crop camera would be a lens at 8mm or 10mm. A very popular choice is the Samyang 8mm fisheye. I have this lens and it is very sharp and very easy to use -- you just set the aperture to f/8 and the focus to 2 or 3 metres and everything is sharp. The Samyang 8mm fisheye for your Nikon costs about $249. It is also available in a Rokinon brand which is the same price and identical lens, just different branding.

In addition to being great for taking 180 × 360° panoramas, the fisheye is my favourite lens. Here's a gallery of some of my successful images taken with it:

We saw with Jee's crowd-funding campaign that it can rapidly exceed original estimates and goals. We set a low goal for that campaign because there were high fees if the goal was not met. This doesn't apply for the new "Generosity" crowd-funding site, which has no feeds. So I suggest you increase your goal and add some more things to wish for. For example:

I assume you already have a tripod with ball-head. Do you have a remote-release? That helps avoid camera shake. Is there anything else you will find useful, such as a camera bag, memory cards, etc? -- Colin (talk) 11:41, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

Hi @Colin: , before to all, thanks so much for your help. In this moment the crowdfunding is running and I can't change the goal, however, I added you recomendation lens and nadir adapter in the list, I have a tripod with ball-head and I will buy here a chinese remote-release and I have a improvised camera bag (It's a kid's bag to go to school). I very much doubt that the money for the lens can be met, however, spending hours taking a picture is something that is normal for me today. --The Photographer 13:17, 20 November 2016 (UTC)
Ok. Perhaps up the top of your "story" put a summary e.g. "Goal 1: Panoramic head $xxx // Goal 2: Fisheye lens $yyy". Then people can see quickly that there is a higher goal to aim for if possible. -- Colin (talk) 13:48, 20 November 2016 (UTC)
✓ Done I added the additional information. Please, let me know what I need to do --The Photographer 16:01, 20 November 2016 (UTC)
I would just mention that the nadir adapter is not strictly necessary. You can achieve a decent nadir shot from an angle - you just move the tripod about 1 metre to the side and shoot diagonially down so that the field of view is centred on the middle of where your tripod was for the other shots (and try to keep the tripod legs out of the way of where they were in the previous shot so there's no overlap, otherwise you end up with a small patch where the tripod legs were in both shots). The trick is then to tell PTGui that this particular shot does not match the other images in terms of the viewpoint. It will of course fail if PTGui treats it the same as all the other images, because the viewpoint has shifted so much, but if you tell PTGui to use 'viewpoint correction', it won't assume it was taken from the same viewpoint and will transform it to fit the scene properly. This will only work properly if the floor (nadir) is flat though. So it's not quite as good as a nadir adapter, but hey, it works 99% of the time (most scenes are flat) and it doesn't require extra equipment. So it's worth keeping that in mind. a basic tutorial on how to do this is on the PTGui website. And I would recommend a fisheye lens over a 14mm rectilinear lens, unless of course you think you would have a good use for the 14mm lens outside of panoramic photography. A fisheye lens can do 360x180 panoramas with similar resolution but with less frames and with less distortion. Diliff (talk) 09:23, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for the info. At $15 the nodal adaptor isn't the most expensive component here. The 8mm fisheye has additional advantages in that the 14mm rectilinear on a crop camera becomes equivalent to a 21mm lens on full-frame, and so not nearly so wide-angle and needing much more than the 12 frames Code tends to use for his 180 × 360° panorama. It is also cheaper. The Photographer, I recommend you post your campaign on social media too, and also send a mail to appropriate contacts in WMF -- they can then put it on their blog and perhaps some WMF staff will chip in. Also might be worth seeing if it can be mentioned on Signpost on Wikipedia (they've mentioned previous campaigns). -- Colin (talk) 09:55, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
You can also consider applying for a WMF grant under the RapidGrants program for this. Any requests of up to $2,000 are considered and given your contributions to Commons, it's worth a shot. Kalliope (WMF) (talk) 12:18, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
Wilfredo, how can it be that a $250 lens will cost $275 in shipping and importation fees? That seems crazy, 100% tax/duties?? With a system like that, it'd be no surprise to see an active black market... What you need is a friend visiting the US... ;-) Diliff (talk) 13:32, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
Diliff, There is a blackmarket very reduced and constantly pursued by the police here in São Paulo downtown. Usually I can see some informal vendors together to sell smuggled or stolen goods in São Paulo downtown called "rua Santa Ifigenia", however, the products they sell are, in general, well-known things like low-range or chineses copies of samsung galaxy phones and I have never seen any contraband products like a basic camera lens. It is allowed to travel and bring with you some product for personal consumption. --The Photographer 15:32, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
Diliff, this is what UK will be like after Brexit!! Good job we can buy British cameras. Oh, wait, ... -- Colin (talk) 13:35, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
Colin I've been spamming most of the day with no results, possibly something seems to be not working well with the wording or the message. In case of not collecting the money, I thought of selling my 35mm lens to pay for the other fisheye lens. --The Photographer 15:32, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
Oh I certainly wouldn't sell the 35mm. Despite me loving my fisheye, the effect is not to everyone's taste and it is only a minority of photos that can use it. Nobody would appreciate a fisheye portrait! The 180 × 360° panorama is also a niche photo opportunity that I don't see you using all the time. Unless your 360 surrounds are clear of wandering tourists, it is likely to be a frustrating experience to photograph. I think the combination of a 35mm lens + pano will let you create some great high-resolution photos which will compensate for the relatively low resolution of your sensor and permit some modest downsizing + sharpening that will give your images better chance at FP with all the pixel peepers. Hopefully you raise enough for the pano head. Then perhaps approach WMF for a grant for the lens. I think you could easily demonstrate to them that it would be used well, and that sort of money is peanuts for them -- it's a really cheap lens. -- Colin (talk) 15:56, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
I don't know why there's so little activity on the campaign. You could try personal emails or messages on-wiki to your wikifriends. If everyone at FP gave $10 you'd pass it easily -- so make a suggestion like that and people might get their wallets out. -- Colin (talk) 16:06, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
Lucky for me that I'm leaving the UK in 2 weeks, I'm moving back to Australia where the sun actually shines. ;-) Will be visiting Hong Kong for a week on the way, I'm wondering I should splurge on the 5D Mk IV while there, as it's significantly cheaper than either the UK or Australia. I really don't want to reward Canon for their lack of innovation, but I can't face changing system completely, and the poor autofocus with the adapters and Sony cameras is off-putting. Canon's sensor tech is still miles behind Sony/Nikon and the Mk IV is only a minor incremental upgrade in many ways, but as always, they add just enough features (GPS, faster FPS, slightly better dynamic range, etc) to tempt me. Judging by their glacier-slow updates, it'll be another 3-4 years before there's a Mk V, so I'll probably eventually want one anyway. ;-) Am also very much tempted by the DJI Phantom 4 Pro quadcopter that just got announced. It's got a camera that is really starting to approach DSLR quality. Not nearly there really, but probably 'good enough' for most purposes. Unlikely to be able to justify buying both... Anyway, sorry Wilfredo, didn't mean to hijack your page to discuss my fantasies! Diliff (talk) 14:26, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
My recommendation is to leave HK and purchase these products in China. --The Photographer 15:32, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
A bit insensitive Diliff!! Buy a Sony body for all the photos you will take for Commons that don't require fast autofocus. Last time I checked, cathedrals didn't move much. Keep your Canon for photographing tennis players and use your smartphone for the family. Time to make the move away from Canon I think. Sigma have dedicated adaptors just for your Art lenses.
Anway, back to The Photographer, I would also like to know why the import is so high. I could understand anything up to 40% but not more. You are in Brazil now? -- Colin (talk) 14:52, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
Colin Yes, I recently came to Brazil fleeing from Venezuela crisis because the situation there was/is very difficult, however, a few months of me being in Brazil began a crisis here. Despite having one of the highest taxation regimes in the world, public investment levels in Brazil is one of the lowest. One of the main causes for the increase in the Brazilian tax burden and the high tax rates in Brazil is the increase in public spending. After the stabilization of the Real in 1994, Brazil reduced the issue of currency and in order to bring down inflation, fiscal adjustment resulted in tax increases. The stability of the currency brought high costs to the taxpayer.[1] --The Photographer 00:45, 22 November 2016 (UTC)
Diliff, this website says there is a "Simplified Import Regime" for certain goods by post, which is a flat 60% import duty. I assume that other methods are more expensive, otherwise this flat tax wouldn't be attractive option. In addition there is a sales tax which varies by state but can be 18%. So that would make 78%, but not the 100% quoted for the lens. Also the $50 shipping for the NN3 seems rather high, but the fee for the lens rather low (is it available locally?). The Photographer, I don't wish to evade customs duty as I know taxes are necessary, but if it is possible for a friend to purchase these in the US and bring back to Brazil legally without incurring the 60% penalty, it would be worth investigating. Is there a Wikimedia Brazil who can help? Could we get Poco a poco to visit you :-)? -- Colin (talk) 08:35, 22 November 2016 (UTC)
Colin Yes you are Welcome and Poco, Diliff... everybody can come here in any moment, however, it's important comment that I live in a room (I don't have a house) and it will be a bit uncomfortable for Poco. I sent a e-mail to Wikimedia Brasil list and facebook group. BTW, I have asked several friends here, however, most have not even traveled to USA, For the moment, I'm asking to everybody here --The Photographer 11:47, 22 November 2016 (UTC)
I only mentioned Poco as he is always jet-setting across the world, vising lots of countries each year. I'm afraid my travels are usually much more limited. Are there any photographic retailers in Brazil that sell these items, or do you have to purchase from the US and import? Is it any cheaper to import the lens from an Asian retailer? -- Colin (talk) 12:30, 22 November 2016 (UTC)
Colin Photographic retailers in Brazil are more expensive than buying it directly from the United States. Btw, here in nikon Brazil a AF-S NIKKOR 50mm f/1.8G is 400 $ usd, however in nikon USA the price is 180 $ usd. São Paulo and Brazil have a blackmarket, however, some smuggling products are usually things that are sold en masse and not very specific things like a nodal ninja, for example. This is a well-known situation in Brazil, cars, computers in general and electronic things are very expensive. I have managed to bring some things from Venezuela. --The Photographer 12:45, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

I've made a request at The Signpost on Wikipedia. -- Colin (talk) 10:08, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

Thanks Colin, maybe you could send a e-mail to commons list too. --The Photographer 11:47, 22 November 2016 (UTC)
Do you mean the mailing list? I don't really know anything about it and don't use it. Perhaps someone else can post there. -- Colin (talk) 12:30, 22 November 2016 (UTC)
I could ask for someone, however, FYI i's the link --The Photographer 12:45, 22 November 2016 (UTC)
@Colin: I will buy nodal ninja with the current fundraising and I will ask to WMF to buy the lens, what do you think?. Maybe do something like this --The Photographer 13:25, 22 November 2016 (UTC)
Perhaps. Have patience. The campaign has only been running a short while. Let's see what it raises. -- Colin (talk) 13:28, 22 November 2016 (UTC)
Has a quick look at that grant. Why does RTA's grant say tax/shipping "free"? Is RTA able to get equipment for you? Have good think about reasonable goals wrt number of FP/QI/VI -- look at your current rate of promotions. If the Generosity campaign pays for some/all of the lens, then you may want to consider applying to WMF for a grant for a new camera. Note that the 8mm fisheye is designed for APC-C crop sensors but can be used on full frame without the hood, though I have no experience as to how good the image is on full frame. Perhaps a D7200 or D500 is suitable to ask for? -- Colin (talk) 13:56, 22 November 2016 (UTC)
Colin Excellent idea, however, I need solve firs the tax problem, I'm waiting for Rodrigo answer --The Photographer 15:52, 22 November 2016 (UTC)
@Rodrigo.Argenton: Please, could you help me what i need to do to not pay the tax/shippings?. Por favor Rodrigo, você poderia me explicar que tenho que fazer para trazer esas coisas sem pagar a taixas? --The Photographer 15:47, 22 November 2016 (UTC)
@Bluerasberry: Please, could you add + Goal 2 (Goal 2: The Samyang SYHD8M-N 8mm f/3.5 HD Fisheye to use with it ($ 515)=

$ 953.90)?[more details. Thanks --The Photographer 15:51, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

I just copied what the campaign page itself said. Right now it says "$425 goal". Feel free to edit the list page yourself if you think something is incorrect. Thanks for doing the campaign. Blue Rasberry (talk) 16:10, 22 November 2016 (UTC)
✓ Done I updated the information about the quantity. Thanks --The Photographer 16:25, 22 November 2016 (UTC)
@PetarM: I don't know why but generosity not accept PayPal :( --The Photographer 15:47, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

Current total is $505. So enough for the panoramic head and $80 of the way towards the 8mm fisheye. Only been running 3 days! -- Colin (talk) 15:59, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

Colin I believe that nobody will donate more, it is very difficult to see the fisheye lens goal. --The Photographer 16:05, 22 November 2016 (UTC)
Colin i could use your text to send it to another people? --The Photographer 16:25, 22 November 2016 (UTC)
Sure you can use/adapt my text if you want to send to more people. I just looked at the contributors to Featured Candidate List page, but there are lots more active at FP as reviewers or who haven't nominated anything recently, so there are more people to spam! -- Colin (talk) 19:58, 22 November 2016 (UTC)
:I would be happy to help. D Logan 17:35, 22 November 2016 (UTC)
  • Thanks Colin for the information about the campaign on my talk page. I really appreciate Wilfredo's work. We often forget that a lot of the high quality contributors are monetary highly privileged and can buy expensive equipment - that is not the case with Wilfredo - I would like to support him.  Question On generosity.com I must enter my credit card number. Where can I enter a name which is later on shown on the donation page? I would like to use my nickname Tuxyso (as Steinsplitter did it for example) which is clearly not my credit card number name :) --Tuxyso (talk) 18:42, 22 November 2016 (UTC)
@Tuxyso: In the last page of the donation you can change the name you want the donation to be attributed to. here is the FAQ. The Photographer 19:18, 22 November 2016 (UTC)
✓ Done I also posted the crowd-funding action on the German EB site. Let's see what will happen. --Tuxyso (talk) 20:07, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

Sorry to disappoint you, but the only way to not pay tax is bringing with a person. And it just work for cameras, as it's considerate item of personal use (as books, clocks..). Even video cameras receive a different attention. We knew that one trustful community member would do the San Francisco - São Paulo trip, and we asked him to bring it, you lost that window :/

Two tips about it, first one, most of the times buying via Brazilian stores are cheaper than a direct importation. And sometimes its cheaper take a trip to Miami or Panama to buy equipment, comparing to buy here.

About WMF grant, it's not something like that... they do not allow buying personal equipment, for example, the equipment that I acquire via Grant are not in my possession, it's held in a department that I'll run the project. This equipment is booked for this project, however the idea is that after the conclusion, the WUGCBR will open for volunteers apply projects to have temporary access to the camera. And see that WUGCBR had to be the helders after the conclusion. If you have questions about it, just ask.

Sorry for not being able to help more, but hooray! You already reach the stablish goal! (I didn't read all text, I'm exhausted today) -- Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton m 01:02, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

I don't usually give money to the WMF stuff the last couple years but I donated. I noticed that the amount gathered when I donated was over 200% above the target (I think it was like 220 something but can't remember). I'm glad to see so many people helping out. You do a great job and its nice to see others appreciate your work as well. Congratulations and keep up the great work. I think someone also posted on the Wikipedia review site on Facebook as well BTW. Cheers! Reguyla (talk) 14:05, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
Thanks Reguyla --The Photographer 15:24, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

Hey The Photographer, watch you don't spam people that I already hit yesterday. There's a bunch of people with two messages. -- Colin (talk) 14:52, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

@Colin: Yes and maybe it could be illegal [2] --The Photographer 15:24, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
Nah. There are a couple of people who forgot to take their mellow pill today. And the photo he mentions has nothing close so parallax issues are not a concern -- he doesn't know what he's talking about. However, I suspect you have probably sent enough messages -- anyone who hasn't got a message will have seen one on someone else's watchlist by now! -- Colin (talk) 15:32, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
Well, perhaps it didn't need to be done, but I bit. Diliff (talk) 16:02, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

Camera

I see on your campaign page you are thinking of upgrading to a D750. That's a really great FX camera and a good choice if going FX on Nikon. However your existing 35mm lens is a DX lens and so will engage "crop mode" which is only 10MP. If you tried to shoot FX with it, you'd get a vignette at the corners and with a small aperture the corners would be black. Also your sigma 18-50 f/2.8 is a DX lens and if you can get it repaired, then that's a cheap way to a "standard zoom". Your Sigma 70-300mm f/4-5.6 DG is a FX lens but you say it has focus issues (can it be manual focused?). As I said elsewhere, the 8mm fisheye is designed for DX and although it will work on FX the corners will be soft and likely have some vignette and I don't know how useful it will be for creating the 180x360 panoramas -- certainly it offers no advantage on full-frame.

The problem with going FX is that everything becomes much more expensive. If you can't repair your Sigma 18-50 then a Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 costs $499 and a new Sigma 17-50 costs $369 with optical stabilisations. That's a good price for a "standard zoom". The equivalent for full frame costs another $1000! For example the Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 costs $1299. Your 35mm DX lens costs £196 but a 35mm FX lens costs $526.

So although a full-frame camera has superior ISO noise capability, and the D750 is a great camera, I think it isn't a wise choice if you are on a budget! It is a shame Nikon don't have a camera in between the D7200 and the D500. The latter has been designed more for sports and wildlife shooters who appreciate the 1.5x multiplier. So it has capabilities you probably don't need. But the D7200 has a few limitations and not as solidly built. However both would be significant upgrades on your D300 and both flexible enough for your kinds of photography. Staying DX will offer you a better choice of good value lenses. -- Colin (talk) 15:29, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

I agree completely. I'm a long time Nikon user (2 Nikon F, 3 Nikon F3, 2 Nikon F4, a D1, and a D7100), and many lenses ranging from an early 8mm fisheye to a 500mm mirror. At first I thought I would stick with FX, but the price difference is enormous and I can't see much need for more than 12 megapixels. More important than price, though, is size, weight, and features of the lenses. It is much easier to build a lens of a given quality to cover the DX frame than the FX frame. For much less money, a DX lens will weigh half as much, and have a wider zoom range, yet deliver the same quality. Finally, there is a second aspect to cost -- because DX is far more common than FX, it is far more likely that you will find what you want used on eBay or elsewhere. Virtually all of my equipment over the years has been purchased used at half the price of new. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:53, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

If it helps, my wife has a D750 and it takes awesome pictures. I don't know all the technical jargon cause photography is more her thing than mine but I can say she had bought a D5 on sale for about $3500 (she tells me that was a bargain) but took it back within a couple weeks because the image quality difference was so slight it wasn't worth the cost difference. She also has another camera she uses most of the time and I think (although I am not sure) that it is a D7100 and she really likes that as well. Reguyla (talk) 18:12, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
I was thinking in a used D750 with a limited number of cheaper lens, also there is D610 (Anyway I haven't the money to buy it). In this moment my main problem is to find someone who is comming to Brazil and ask him to bring the nodal ninja and the fisheye lens. BTW, If the money raised increases, I could sell my current camera D300 to buy another. Thanks guys --The Photographer 23:58, 25 November 2016 (UTC)

Your talk page mass message

Hi Wilfredo. On my and Jim's talk pages, I have been rather harsh in criticizing your recent mass-message regarding donations, and in the spirit of trying to be constructive rather than purely negative, I'd like to suggest some wording that would have caused me to perceive your message much less negatively. The key is in the personalization and in making the amount of time and care taken obvious, rather than in using correct grammar:

Hi, <NAME>. You may have read Colin's recent <LINK TO VP POST>, but I wanted to reach out to you personally because <PERSONAL REASON>. My contributions cover the architecture and culture of Brazil and Venezuela. I have basic photographic equipment: an old D300 camera and 35mm lens, and it is very expensive for me to acquire this equipment <REASON2>. I have recently taken several images using the technique where multiple frames are stitched together to create a high-resolution panorama. However, many times there are stitching errors that result from trying to take such photos without a proper panoramic head for his tripod. This special equipment permits the camera to be rotated around the entrance pupil of the lens, and eliminates such errors. I am also trying to buy a fisheye lens that would enable 180 × 360° panoramas to be taken, which are a great way to explore a scene as though one is really there.

Please consider visiting the Generosity Crowd-funding Campaign page to donate. Thank you for your time and generosity.

The most important part here are the four substitutions, and <PERSONAL REASON> should be personal for each person you send the message. You are asking people to give you money, I think it pretty reasonable to spend 5 or 10 minutes on each request. REASON2 is also important... you should mention why it may be more expensive for you than for most people: Venezuela has crazy import taxes. Mentioning and linking to the VP post shows you care about the recipient's time.

Anyway, you can take or leave these suggestions. I still would have objected to an unsolicited message, but my objections would have been greatly decreased. Best wishes, Storkk (talk) 18:19, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

Storkk, your text is better. While a "personal reason" would be wonderful, it is very hard to pick one while also sounding sincere. The folk at Featured Pictures don't need The Photographer to spell out why he or I are asking for contributions -- they know him and his work and his background and as fellow photographers know how important it is to get the right equipment and how expensive that equipment is. Perhaps we were wrong in thinking the non-photographer users on Commons might similarly be motivated to contribute to a highly-cost-effective method of procuring high-quality images in a poor area of the world. Yes spending more time on each and every message might produce a more targeted and personal advert. But frankly, those who wanted to give didn't need much persuading: it's a no-brainer, and given the time you have wasted complaining about this, and your comments elsewhere, I suspect you were never interested and never likely to be persuaded. Anyway, before you feel any urge to waste more time on this, please don't. We get the message you are Mr Grumpy today. -- Colin (talk) 19:04, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

Trick for less noise

Stacking to reduce noise
Stacking to reduce noise with person moving

I saw that you have some problem with noise in some of your pics. Here is a little trick that Colin showed me. I get a lot of noise in dark areas with my smaller camera, but I use it often since I carry it around all the time. The trick is to set the camera to take three pics in rapid order instead of one. That way you get three exactly similar photos of the subject, BUT the noise in each photo is different so when you put them in layers on top of each other and let the two top layers be transparent at only 33% the resulting photo will have much less noise. I used this technique when I took this photo. It is actually three photos on top of each other. See explanation. Look at the pic at full size and you'll see the difference between the three original shots and the final result.

You can use the same technique even if there is movement in the pic, if you hold the camera steady and do not merge the parts where there is movement between the shots. I made this example from your pic to illustrate. This is in theory how you could do if her hair was flying and both moved their heads and hands a bit. The rest of the pic could look better without any other NR. Just thought I'd let you know if you didn't already. I always have my camera on three-shot now. Sometimes only two of them are necessary and if they don't line up you have three photos to choose from, maybe some pieces can be merged. cart-Talk 14:44, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

@W.carter: Very interesting trick, please, could you answer the follow questions:
  1. Do you need use a tripod and remote shooter?
  2. I could use this trick with hight ISO images?
  3. This result apply too to pictures taken with the different light?

Thanks --The Photographer 16:16, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

The good thing is that you can use this trick with any light, ISO or setting you like. :) You get the best result if you use a tripod since the photos align exactly then. You don't need a remote shooter or control. I have a setting on my camera that is a so called "self timer". I use that very often when I shoot since that eliminates the small camera shake you get when pushing the button. For normal photos, I use a 2 sek delay, and if I want to I can use a setting for 10 sek delay that takes three photos after each other. If you have a steady hand you can use this when handheld, try not to move the camera when the three pics are taken. In any case, the three photos are separate and you can use one if only one was good, or two or three just as you like when mixing. Like you, I don't have a lot of money for expensive equipment so I like these tricks that can improve pics without any cost. I did buy a very small tripod (like this) for about $4. I put it on a chair, a car or any surface and I can carry it in my pocket if I want to.

Just test taking three pics of anything and you will see. :) cart-Talk 16:39, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

Even if the images are hand-held, you can use Photoshop's ability to automatically align layers. Without Photoshop, if you download Hugin then you can use align_image_stack.exe to align frames with pixel accuracy and enfuse to blend them. See http://wiki.panotools.org/Noise_reduction_with_enfuse. Enfuse won't handle movement in the scene, though. -- Colin (talk) 17:19, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
Usually I use the camera strap as a tripod, however, this is very limited. My other tripod is too big and call attention of the people. This trick is amazing thanks so mucho @W.carter: I'll try making images with ISO 3000 :p. Thanks Colin too, please, let me know some other technique like this. --The Photographer 17:25, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
De nada. With ISO 3000 you may perhaps need six photos! (one at 100% and the rest at 17%) --cart-Talk 17:26, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
I can't wait to try this trick that could be a alternative to long exposure, for example a night sky photography where the time is important to prevent the stars movement effect --The Photographer 17:34, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
I hadn't thought about that. It might work, don't know. cart-Talk 17:38, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
A common technique to generate star trails is to combine multiple exposures over a long period of time but the merge mode used is "Lighten" which selects the brighest pixels from each layer. It can also be used to enhance light trails from traffic such as in File:Big Ben at sunset - 2014-10-27 17-30.jpg. For noise reduction, you'd use "Median" (see this and this). The more frames you add with median, the fainter your stars will get until they will disappear along with the noise. -- Colin (talk) 08:57, 2 December 2016 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Wilfredor/Archive_50&oldid=340618802"