Photo of the Day, Boston Style - Part Deux

Status
Not open for further replies.
Wow! I love the way you got the dome of the Rowe's Wharf ferry terminal to nestle within the big signature arch.

For better or worse, I do love Boston's stone/rock/brick based skyscraper facades vs. New York's largely glass/steel based facades.
 
ablarc said:
Glad to hear it. How far back do you remember?
Click to expand...

I only remember back about 10-12 years, so it's a small sampling, but I can't complain about what I saw this year.

Nice photo, castevens.
 
IMG_9522a-IMG_9525a.jpg
 
kennedy -- It's called High Dynamic Range photography. I did touch it up a tad, but the original picture -- as a result of the HDR technique -- is remarkably similar to the finished result. What HDR does is it puts together dark and light versions (different exposure levels) of an image to create an image closer to what the eye actually sees. Then I made the dark areas a bit darker to make the clouds more imposing.

So, to answer your question: yes, it was photoshopped, but probably not as much as you might think just by looking at it.

Thanks for the compliments
 
Last edited:
Ok now that I've dug up the original file, maybe it's a little more photoshopped than I gave it credit for. Here's the two versions side-by-side:

0DSC_5901.png

1DSC_5901.jpg
 
That's pretty awesome...I know just about nothing about photography, but I like taking pictures. Do you need a special camera, or just photoshop, or both?
 
To create the top picture, you *may* be able to capture that using complicated manual settings on a point-and-shoot ("cheap") camera -- but it helps to have an expensive camera (moreso for the LENS than the actual Camera).

To create the bottom of the two pictures, you would need photoshop, or some other image editing software.

I have a pretty old Nikon d70 (about 4 years old now) digital SLR camera, with some really nice lenses for it. I'm overdue for a new camera or a dust cleaning at the very least.

nikon%20d70.jpg
 
A rule of thumb my father taught me is that the camera only records what the lens sees. That is why most good lenses are more expensive than the camera itself. The CCD sensor inside my camera ("digital film") is the EXACT SAME as the CCD sensor inside your camera, and all it does is record what the lens sees.

The camera body went for about $1,000 at the time, but I have over $2,000 in lenses. And trust me, I have the CHEAP lenses. The ones I drool over go for well over $5,000. Each.

It's a very very very expensive hobby. But I don't drink much, buy many movies, or do anything like that so I put most of that money toward camera equipment.

Then again, I haven't bought anything for my camera in over 2 years due to college loans and the sort.
 
ooo is the new bus stop finished yet? (and can we finally walk on the sidewalks instead of the streets?)
 
^
^ The view under the Rowes Wharf arch was more exciting when it didn't contain a clear line of sight to the first floor of International Place. Blegh.

Would that there were a thriving square on the other side of it rather than some empty brick sidewalk and suburban lawnscape, too.
 
I'd rather an open view of International Place than a hulking, rusting, central artery. Come on, give it a break, the Greenway really isn't that bad!
 
I have a lot of catching up to do to compete with kz, van et al. in the photo competition:

3026712096_b30a71b868_b.jpg
 
Rowes Wharf arch looks really great from a few blocks north on the Greenway, at the crossing from Faneuil Hall Marketplace to Christopher Columbus park. I appreciate this new vista every day.
 
Rowes Wharf was certainly a huge beneficiary to the Greenway Project, as was Quincy Market.
 
Too bad the Greenway wasn't quite the beneficiary OF Quincy Market, given the blank wall of Marketplace Center.
 
Give the Greenway time. With this economy, unfortunately, a lot of time.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top