Newbie's picts - Comments?
Marco
SRL,please have a look at the following address:
<http://www.flickr.com/photos/64871475@N00/>
any suggestion will be more than welcome!
Thanks
marco
--
Posso insegnare ad un uomo a navigare
ma non potro' mai spiegargliene il perche'
cjcampbell
Marco wrote:
> If you'd like to help in my first steps in my first time with a digital
> SRL,please have a look at the following address:
>
> <http://www.flickr.com/photos/64871475@N00/>
>
> any suggestion will be more than welcome!
> Thanks
You are welcome.
These are not terrible as pictures, but there is room for improvement
in many areas.
When you photograph buildings in black and white, for example, you
might look for some aspect of the building that makes it interesting
and then emphasize that. Monochrome pictures are highly dependent on
the play of light and shadow and texture. The subjects here are not
terribly interesting the way they are depicted, but I think you know
that -- what you want to look for in an abandoned building, for
example, is some feature that really says "ABANDONED," or maybe even
haunted.
The family photos are more interesting, but you want to work on your
lighting, such as using fill flash with backlit subjects. Also, too
many of the pictures seem to be looking down at sitting people.
Overall, I think that composition needs the most work. That can come
only with practice and long study of pictures taken by other people
whose work you like. I suspect that you would benefit and become
excited by studying the works of Impressionist painters. That seems to
be the style you are leaning towards, so look at their composition and
use of light, and try to duplicate a little of it in camera.
Much of your shooting is in the middle of the day, too. Try to
emphasize the hours just before sunrise and just after sunset more.
Marco
> These are not terrible as pictures, but there is room for improvement
> in many areas.
that's why I'masking for help :-)
>
> When you photograph buildings in black and white, for example, you
> might look for some aspect of the building that makes it interesting
> and then emphasize that. Monochrome pictures are highly dependent on
> the play of light and shadow and texture. The subjects here are not
> terribly interesting the way they are depicted, but I think you know
> that -- what you want to look for in an abandoned building, for
> example, is some feature that really says "ABANDONED," or maybe even
> haunted.
i understand you're right in what you say.This is the first time I make
B&W pictures with a digital camera and I'm a little bit lost as I don't
know which way to follow:
a. shooting as usual with RAW format and than convert the pict (as I
did),but in this case how to manage the shoot as you are not using a B&W
roll.
b. shooting with JPG format to have direct control over the pict but
loosing quality?
>
> The family photos are more interesting, but you want to work on your
> lighting, such as using fill flash with backlit subjects. Also, too
> many of the pictures seem to be looking down at sitting people.
I am a tall lazy guy...flash is something I have to work with I know..as
for the composition as you mention forward
>
> Overall, I think that composition needs the most work. That can come
> only with practice and long study of pictures taken by other people
> whose work you like. I suspect that you would benefit and become
> excited by studying the works of Impressionist painters. That seems to
> be the style you are leaning towards, so look at their composition and
> use of light, and try to duplicate a little of it in camera.
you have a good eye,I love Impressionist painters..maybe unconsciously I
tried to reproduce something my brain likes from experience.I'll work on
that.
>
> Much of your shooting is in the middle of the day, too. Try to
> emphasize the hours just before sunrise and just after sunset more.
I swear I knew that,but when I have a new camera I tend to shoot
randomly and continuosly..:-)
Apart from jokes I really appreciate your comments,it's exactly the kind
of help I was looking for.
Thanks again
Marco
Clive
"Marco" <dpleas...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1hk62n1.s2o20s16b92m6N%dpleas...@gmail.com...
I agree with previous poster. Although the B&W pictures are technically ok,
a lot of your B&W subjects are not ideally suited to B&W.
With B&W pictures you need to replace the color with something else - either
great composition, or atmosphere.
Clive
Adrian Boliston
> If you'd like to help in my first steps in my first time with a digital
> SRL,please have a look at the following address:
>
> <http://www.flickr.com/photos/64871475@N00/>
>
> any suggestion will be more than welcome!
I've been using DSLR for about 4 months now and mainly do landscapes &
scenery. One of the first mistakes I made was setting too wide an aperture
and getting bad results. I now usually aim for f11 or higher if light
permits (and I'm shooting handheld), but in low light I'd seriously consider
a tripod to be able to get f11+ with a longer shutter speed. I much prefer
shooting handheld as there is less faffing about and it's more spontanious,
but I will lug a tripod if I'm shooting low light eg woodland scenes.
Cheers - Adrian www.boliston.co.uk
Marco
>
> I agree with previous poster. Although the B&W pictures are technically ok,
> a lot of your B&W subjects are not ideally suited to B&W.
>
> With B&W pictures you need to replace the color with something else - either
> great composition, or atmosphere.
>
> Clive
you're perfectly right...
I'll work on that,tks
marco
Marco
>
> I've been using DSLR for about 4 months now and mainly do landscapes &
> scenery. One of the first mistakes I made was setting too wide an aperture
> and getting bad results. I now usually aim for f11 or higher if light
> permits (and I'm shooting handheld), but in low light I'd seriously consider
> a tripod to be able to get f11+ with a longer shutter speed. I much prefer
> shooting handheld as there is less faffing about and it's more spontanious,
> but I will lug a tripod if I'm shooting low light eg woodland scenes.
>
> Cheers - Adrian www.boliston.co.uk
tks Adrian,good point to think about
cjcampbell
Marco wrote:
> cjcampbell <christoph...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> i understand you're right in what you say.This is the first time I make
> B&W pictures with a digital camera and I'm a little bit lost as I don't
> know which way to follow:
> a. shooting as usual with RAW format and than convert the pict (as I
> did),but in this case how to manage the shoot as you are not using a B&W
> roll.
> b. shooting with JPG format to have direct control over the pict but
> loosing quality?
I would recommend that you try both ways and see what works best for
you. Personally, I prefer to shoot RAW and convert later.
You really do not lose much quality shooting JPG. Just be sure to work
only on a copy of the file, because each time you save a JPG it loses a
little more quality. Some pros shoot nothing but JPG simply because
they do not have time to deal with RAW files (I have noticed this
particularly with guys who use Nikon NEF files, which seem to take
forever to import, especially with some popular management software
such as iView and Extensis).
If you do shoot RAW and convert later, consider using other techniques
to convert to B&W. Most software simply desaturates the picture, which
is rarely the best way. It leaves the image looking like it lacks
something -- no punch or crispness. Instead, try adjusting the red,
green, and blue channels individually on a grayscale version of the
picture. You can achieve some excellent effects. You want an Ansel
Adams look? Increase the red and green sliders almost all the way, and
drop the blue slider way back. Then slide the green slider back until
it looks right. Now you will have a dramatic, dark sky, sharp texture,
dramatic clouds, etc. Adjust contrast until the whole thing looks like
it was printed on hard paper and you have Ansel Adams.
You have a new camera and want to shoot everything continuously. I
think most of us would encourage that. There are those who insist that
if the light is bad, don't take the picture. I would change that to: if
the light is bad, don't show the picture to anyone else (except
possibly in a workshop). Instead, try practicing various techniques of
fixing the lighting in editing. You will never make a silk purse out of
a sow's ear, but you can learn an awful lot by trying.
> >
> > The family photos are more interesting, but you want to work on your
> > lighting, such as using fill flash with backlit subjects. Also, too
> > many of the pictures seem to be looking down at sitting people.
> I am a tall lazy guy...flash is something I have to work with I know..as
> for the composition as you mention forward
> >
Lazy I can relate to. Yeah, I don't like to get down on my knees or
belly or climb ladders. No matter. Who says you have to be looking
through the viewfinder to take a picture? Practice composing and aiming
without looking at the camera. Hold the camera low and shoot. Hold it
high over your head and shoot. You will learn a lot from that, too, and
it will help you to begin seeing pictures without having the viewfinder
in front of you. With enough practice, your mind's eye will start to
frame everything you see, even when you don't have your camera with
you. Keep practicing until you know exactly what the picture is going
to look like before ever you look in the viewfinder.
Marco
> I would recommend that you try both ways and see what works best for
> you. Personally, I prefer to shoot RAW and convert later.
but shooting RAW adn knowing it will be converted to b&w do you have any
special procedure?
>
> You really do not lose much quality shooting JPG. Just be sure to work
> only on a copy of the file, because each time you save a JPG it loses a
> little more quality. Some pros shoot nothing but JPG simply because
> they do not have time to deal with RAW files (I have noticed this
> particularly with guys who use Nikon NEF files, which seem to take
> forever to import, especially with some popular management software
> such as iView and Extensis).
that's true,it's very very long..
>
> If you do shoot RAW and convert later, consider using other techniques
> to convert to B&W. Most software simply desaturates the picture, which
> is rarely the best way. It leaves the image looking like it lacks
> something -- no punch or crispness. Instead, try adjusting the red,
> green, and blue channels individually on a grayscale version of the
> picture. You can achieve some excellent effects. You want an Ansel
> Adams look? Increase the red and green sliders almost all the way, and
> drop the blue slider way back. Then slide the green slider back until
> it looks right. Now you will have a dramatic, dark sky, sharp texture,
> dramatic clouds, etc. Adjust contrast until the whole thing looks like
> it was printed on hard paper and you have Ansel Adams.
I definetly will try this!tks a lot for suggesting
>
> You have a new camera and want to shoot everything continuously. I
> think most of us would encourage that. There are those who insist that
> if the light is bad, don't take the picture. I would change that to: if
> the light is bad, don't show the picture to anyone else (except
> possibly in a workshop). Instead, try practicing various techniques of
> fixing the lighting in editing. You will never make a silk purse out of
> a sow's ear, but you can learn an awful lot by trying.
I agree,the picts I posted are actually my very first ones with the new
camera and I orginally publied them for my family...but than I took the
oportunity to ask for comments from the comunity..:-))
Next time i'll be more careful,i promise!
>
>
> Lazy I can relate to. Yeah, I don't like to get down on my knees or
> belly or climb ladders. No matter. Who says you have to be looking
> through the viewfinder to take a picture? Practice composing and aiming
> without looking at the camera. Hold the camera low and shoot. Hold it
> high over your head and shoot. You will learn a lot from that, too, and
> it will help you to begin seeing pictures without having the viewfinder
> in front of you. With enough practice, your mind's eye will start to
> frame everything you see, even when you don't have your camera with
> you. Keep practicing until you know exactly what the picture is going
> to look like before ever you look in the viewfinder.
i do this normaly with my video camera,never thought about doing it with
photo..I'll try.
Tks for all suggestions