Glen Affric (1x3) +4 -1 =4

[MarilynMunro]

Great tale and jaw dropping photos, thanks for sharing. Must say the standard of photography on this site is immense and at times makes me wonder why I even bother posting my pics, I might as well draw piccies with some crayons
Keep em coming
Cheers

[Frogwell]

Thanks for all the comments

Gorgeous pictures, brought back some old memories Mam Sodhail was my first Munro, but I was unlucky to do it in cloud...

It was actually your report of Toll Creagach and Tom a'Choinich from earlier this year that helped me decide to do this walk.

stunning photos! what kind of camera do you use? i assume its a top end one by the look of the pics

Thanks A Nikon D90. Somewhere around mid-range. It really is a great camera though.

I noticed you posted elsewhere that you use a D90. What lens do you use?

Just the standard 18-70 kit lens. Although there's nothing "just" about it, superb piece of optics!

Absolutely stunning

Excellent report. I tried to pick out a favourite photo, but gave up as they are all just amazing This looks like a fantastic area to explore

I've been reading your Kintail adventures, and if you like Kintail, you're going to like Affric. They are neighbours after all. Affric has better low level views though I think.

A most entertaining read too.

It was my stated intention to get to this area this year but I've singularly failed. I'll need to redouble my efforts next year as it all looks stunning. No doubt the good weather helps but I'm confident we'll get another good weekend next year.

BTW I keep my remote release elastic-banded to one of the legs of my tripod. I figure I only ever use it with a tripod so that it where it stays.

There are some scrambly bits that might be problematic in snow and ice, but I think this would be a stunning area for you to play with your winter photography skills.

Good idea about the remote. Although I tend to use three different tripods, so I know I'd end up leaving it tied to the one left in the hallway at home!

[spiderwebb]

Glad I didn't rush straight to the pics (as usual), brilliant read, highly entertaining, held me to the end.

As for the pics its already been said ! They seem incredibly sharp, is this just a result straight from the camera or sharpening in Photoshop or similar. I can get similar results but only by applying sharpening and always worry that too much may not be any good printed (although never experimented).

Feel free to send me answer by message to avoid given away the secret.

If the answer is (a) then I'll have to swop my Olympus E620 for the Nikon !!!

[Frogwell]

Glad I didn't rush straight to the pics (as usual), brilliant read, highly entertaining, held me to the end.

As for the pics its already been said ! They seem incredibly sharp, is this just a result straight from the camera or sharpening in Photoshop or similar. I can get similar results but only by applying sharpening and always worry that too much may not be any good printed (although never experimented).

Feel free to send me answer by message to avoid given away the secret.

If the answer is (a) then I'll have to swop my Olympus E620 for the Nikon !!!

Answer A and B. The camera and lens obviously has to be good enough to record the detail, but by the time they're re-sized down to 800 pixels wide they need sharpening. I actually tend to use the reduce noise feature in photoshop with the noise slider set to about 3 or 4 and the sharpen about 50 or 60%. The nikon can be a bit "noisy" as the ISO only goes down to 200. If you keep the RAW files then you can always go back to them for printing anyway. And always shoot in RAW format too - if you let the camera convert it to jpg it will frequently get it wrong and make it look either flat or unnatural. You will go through hard drives quickly, but the extra detail recorded in RAW is worth it I think.

[Fudgie]

Cheers for the reply. With the forecast looking favourable I'm planning to take my D300 with me on Sunday and as for the lens, I'll probably go with my Sigma 10-20mm and put a polariser on the front. It does weight a ton though

[Frogwell]

That would be the lens to take! I had the polariser and ND grad on pretty much all day. As for the weight, get yourself one of these: hands free camera harness. Best spent £18 in a long time I think!

[Fudgie]

That would be the lens to take! I had the polariser and ND grad on pretty much all day. As for the weight, get yourself one of these: hands free camera harness. Best spent £18 in a long time I think!

That looks excellent. Thanks for that. Hopefully I get some decent light on Sunday.

[pollyh33]

This is by far the best report (in my humble opinion) that you have ever submitted

I absolutely loved it! Lo and behold, you're a very funny guy

Please tell me that you did 'copy and paste' for all of the Squiz references? (where was Mrs Squiz?)


PS your photographs could NEVER be described as SNAPS!!!!

[pollyh33]

Oh yeah, forgot to say....don't understand your equation!!!!!

[Frogwell]

This is by far the best report (in my humble opinion) that you have ever submitted

I absolutely loved it! Lo and behold, you're a very funny guy

Please tell me that you did 'copy and paste' for all of the Squiz references? (where was Mrs Squiz?)


PS your photographs could NEVER be described as SNAPS!!!!

Thank you, thank you very much. (three guesses what I'm listening to)

Yup on the copy and paste, although the downside to that is I copied the same spelling mistake over and over again.

Oh yeah, forgot to say....don't understand your equation!!!!!

Really? Just what kind of accountant are you anyway?

[Gable Gable End]

jesus

[pollyh33]

I'm not an accountant!!!

You have to explain this one to me or I will send a team of beetles with full bladders up to Comrie!!!

Oh yeah and I don't know what you are listening to, you'll need to turn up the volume!

[Frogwell]

You're profile says you're an accountant though.

How can you not work out who I'm listening to from that? Not that I'm listening to him anymore, I can't think of what to listen to now.

I had been planning on doing five munros, but dropped one and did another three times. It actually makes sense in my head.

[pollyh33]

No its doesn't, it says I'm a biomedical scientist!!!

Kind of understand your equation now but I still get it to come to 6!

Please please tell me what you were listening to. The beetle threat still holds, only this time their colons will be full as well!!!

[Frogwell]

bet you checked your profile though didn't you? Anyway, a biomedical chemistry has got to be pretty similar to accountancy I'd have thought.

The trick to the equation is not to think about it logically. In fact, the easiest way is to ignore everything apart from the last number. I tell you, It's a mystery how I failed my maths O level. Administrative error I suspect.

Music - think white, sequinned flares, big sun glasses and then say thank you, thank you very much in a semi mid-west accent.