Overwhelmed

[Thompsunshine]

I am feeling increasingly overwhelmed when I visit here. I see all the incredible images and magnificent photography that everyone posts on here. I read the discussions and a good deal of what everyone is talking about goes right over my head. :-( What ever happened to just plain ol' photography?

Now you have to deal with ratios, post editing and be a computer whizkid to accomplish anything it seems. When I bought my digital camera I was hoping to get really nice photographs with a minimum of effort. I realized at the time though, that it would take a while to improve my ability, but gee whiz...

I thought it would be grand to be able to tweak a photograph here and there, but dealing with everything on photoshop...layers? I keep coming back because everyone here seems to be very knowledgeable and willing to share their knowledge with only the occasional curmudgeon to throw a wrinkle into things. But their knowledge just seems to be so far beyond what I am capable of, at least at this point in time. I doubt I will ever get to the point where most of you are.

I'm sorry for the whining, but can I be the only one who feels like this? sigh

[AmericanFirst]

Hey... you have decent enough equipment... just GET THE SHOT and don't sweat the details... yet. You can always post-process, later. Composition is the first order of business. Realizing what makes a good image and what doesn't. My advice... be a photographer, first... and then worry about what you are going to do to it, later.

PhotoShop should be the very last order of business. I feel you should craft your shots so that PS is usually unnecessary.

93244

[misspix]

You are not alone <hug>:)
There is definately tons of talent/knowhow in this forum! I think, though, instead of thinking "I'll never be/do (insert whatever here)" what I plan on doing is utilizing every bit of knowledge I find so that I can improve on what I already do-I may never reach the levels that are displayed here, but I can go broke:rolleyes: buying lenses and have a blast trying:lol:

[misspix]

Hey... you have decent enough equipment... just GET THE SHOT and don't sweat the details... yet. You can always post-process, later. Composition is the first order of business. Realizing what makes a good image and what doesn't. My advice... be a photographer, first... and then worry about what you are going to do to it, later.

93244

Hear, hear8)

[Thompsunshine]

Aww. I need the hug. Thanks! [sniff sniff]

I hear what you are saying but therein lies the problem. I can't utilize what I don't yet understand. [sigh]

Maybe I just need lots more hugs.

[misspix]

I am no expert (just a rookie, myself) but what is it that you are having troubles with? I have found several books that have helped with things like lighting, exposure etc. Haven't mastered any of it yet:rolleyes: but I feel like I'm getting an understanding of it all. Not EVEN ready for the pp yet:lol:

[AmericanFirst]

I'd throw you a "cry towel", but why bother? Your tears already ruined my printer paper.

Produce some effort... post for critique... and keep posting. Get sharper with each attempt... and it will come. Constant improvement... examine your work... decide on the adjustment... and GET THE SHOT. ;)

93254
Don't BLIND yourself to the possibilities! I sense
confusion within you...

[Skrim17]

<hug>
I was feeling a tad overwhelmed yesterday, then today as I was on the floor of my livingroom with my 5 year old on my back asking me over and over "what are you doing mommy?" as I propped my camera on one of his toys to shoot the cat I finally understood HOW to adjust my settings manually to get enough light in the shot and it made me feel SOOOOO much better!! I even packed him (the kid not the cat) and my tripod up in the car to attempt a night shot but it was too cloudy out so we got smoothies and came home...I was STILL happy!!

<hug>

[misspix]

[quote=Skrim17I finally understood HOW to adjust my settings manually to get enough light in the shot and it made me feel SOOOOO much better!!
quote]

:lol: I will celebrate with you if you don't mind. I am determined to make "light" my friend! He (light) sure is an arrogant ba%*#d:lol:

[Thompsunshine]

Ok. My first problem that seems to be bugging the living crap out of me...WHY ON EARTH can I not get sharper images? It just seems to me that it was easier to get crisp clear images on film SLRs. Crisp clear images seems so rudimentary.

AmericanFirst....grow a pair? ROFL I can't...I'm a girrrrrlllllll LMAO!

[PhotoJourno]

I just posted some photos in another thread, but I spent the last two days reading so avidly from this forum, and working, that I had neglected to take photos. It was a feeling that had to be corrected.

It's like having your car broken and be forced to walk to work. I did not enjoy not having anything to take photos of. I ended up driving most of the afternoon, until I found a little fair. I ended up taking 100 images in an hour, and about 10-12 that I like. I am not sure any of those will make it to my official gallery or portfolio, but man did it feel better to look through the viewfinder.

Don't let moments like these stop you from doing the things you love the most. If you do not love to take photographs, then do not worry about not being a Pro. I am an awfully bad singer, but thankfully I do not have to make a living out of it.

Think of it this way: Discovering where we are, is the most important part of the journey that takes us where we want to be.

So shed a tear, count on us, and then go out to photograph something or someone. It will make you feel better, if you love it.

Cheers and keep on posting !

(Just an example from today... See the photo below? it was the perfect setup, great composition, all the elements combined for a great photograph, and then I focused on the center of the image, leaving the main subject completely out of focus !! This is bad, silly bad. But oh well, more motivation to go again sometime and do-over !!)

[misspix]

[quote=Thompsunshine]Ok. My first problem that seems to be bugging the living crap out of me...WHY ON EARTH can I not get sharper images? It just seems to me that it was easier to get crisp clear images on film SLRs. Crisp clear images seems so rudimentary.

quote]

I feel your pain:evil: . I am trying to use my tripod more, and get ahold of the technically correct exposure issue. I have only been shooting digital for about a year, and just got my 20D about a month ago (thinking, of course that this would be the solution to my creative problems:rolleyes: ). Nope, just a new crop to overcome:lol: So, meanwhile, it's back to the KISS series on photog.

[misspix]

mjgravina-aarrgh! i hate it when that happens :) Also, glad to know that I am not the only one that gets sucked into the POTN hole;)

[AmericanFirst]

First off... sorry about the "pair" remark... didn't know the gender. Nothing personal.

Secondly, though, sharp focus can be elusive with dSLRs. Especially with low cost lensing. I elected to go with TAmROn lensing for the bulk of my efforts... and have met with considerable success. Obviously... with Canon lenses... if you don't shoot "L"... you will see the difference. They can almost guaranty it. LOL :rolleyes:

My only Canon Zoom is an EF 70~200mm f/2.8L IS USM. It is currently a range that TAmROn has not addressed (That may change in September, at Fotokina.). You could call the Canon a $1700 investment in sharp, accurate photographs. Could I have done it with less... perhaps, but after many hours of stewing over the issue... I resigned myself to purchasing this lens... and forcing myself to live with relatively great, sharp photographs. It is 'spot on', everytime. All I have to do is compose a shot worthy of pointing it at.

I recommend you run yourself down to the local camera shop... acquire one of these lenses and fire off a couple dozen shots of whatever you like. Check that "sharp focus" issue you are complaining of... and just see if that lens does not clear that right up! :lol:

[ssim]

I doubt I will ever get to the point where most of you are.


I beg to differ. Everyone has had this feeling at one time or another. It's a matter of practise and experimentation.

I worked part time at a studio for a few years and one thing the owner taught me is to visualize the finished print hanging on the wall as you are taking it. This was an invaluable lesson for me.

Everyone has there own way of getting "there". Some people say not to worry about the photoshop portion of getting the image in the first place. I, on the other hand, quite often mentally note to myself what post processing might be required to turn a mediocre image into a good one.

Don't be afraid to lean on the resources that you have here. I don't think that anyone here will say "Aw he isn't going to make it".

[Michaelmjc]

all this crazy stuff we talk about is really secret code, you can only understand it once you have over 3000 posts ;)

[misspix]

all this crazy stuff we talk about is really secret code, you can only understand it once you have over 3000 posts ;)

:eek: I knew it!

[Thompsunshine]

It does seem to me on the digital front, that getting a good focus just isn't the same as in film. I must be missing something in transferring from film to digital. argh! I think that somehow shooting digital seems to focus differently somehow.

[AmericanFirst]

It does seem to me on the digital front, that getting a good focus just isn't the same as in film. I must be missing something in transferring from film to digital. argh! I think that somehow shooting digital seems to focus differently somehow.

I have a 4-year old "film" lens that mounts on both the Canon EOS-3 (35mm film) and the EOS 20D (digital). It's a TAmROn SP AF28~105mm f/2.8 LD. Sounds like a killer lens, doesn't it? It was a razor on the EOS-3... and an entirely different lens on the EOS 20D. I could not get it to sharply focus when mounted on the 20D. It was disturbing. After I took it in to the repair facility, it required that I have it "updated" with new circuitry to be able to work properly with the digital. This was a warranty update, so it cost nothing but the time to have it done (TAmROn has a 6-year warranty on every lens). It was well worth the time and here is a link to the alteration:

http://www.dcresource.com/forums/showthread.php?t=20215

It may be worth noting if you have focus issues... especially with older or film-based lenses.

My nickel's worth... :D

[Thompsunshine]

AmericanFirst...the "pair" remark didn't bother me in the slightest and I figured you didn't know the gender or it wouldn't have been mentioned to begin with. I have a rather sick sense of humor and I thought it quite funny! :-D

[AmericanFirst]

Well... I am going to assume that the Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM that you have has the "portrait problem" and needs to be corrected. Talk about focus issues. :rolleyes:

There is a "service bulletin (http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/controller?act=PgComSmModDisplayAct&fcategoryid=216&modelid=11922&keycode=2112&id=28468)" out on this lens to have it corrected. Click on the service bulletin hyperlink to see if you qualify.

Once that is corrected, you should begin to see clearly with that lens.

[Thompsunshine]

It does appear that mine is one of those lenses. Thank you very much. And that is the lens that I have on my camera 85 percent of the time. Maybe it isn't all me. I see a glimmer of hope!

[Thompsunshine]

Note: Interesting that I just emailed them at the requested email address listed and my email "permanently failed".

[AmericanFirst]

I can only figure out so much... LOL

Get 'er fixed... then post again!

Good luck... :D

[Thompsunshine]

Ahhh mannnn I thought maybe I could sent it to you to fix! No such luck I guess. LOL

But a truly heartfelt thank you to you AmericanFirst.

[Woolburr]

Note: Interesting that I just emailed them at the requested email address listed and my email "permanently failed".

Could be because they aren't online yet. Says that the call center doesn't go active until the 18th. Just a thought.

[Thompsunshine]

:oops: :oops: Oops :oops: :oops: Silly me :rolleyes:

[Mark_Cohran]

I really do think that it is your lens. I have all EF mount lenses and I use them on my digital SLR's as well as my film SLR's and sharpness is comparable between formats. It's been my experience that sharpness issues are typically a matter of user technique, some post processing (due to the Bayer filter on digital cameras), and rarely the cause of the camera.

Mark

[AmericanFirst]

The Canon EF 70-300 f/4-5.6 IS USM (http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/canon_70300_456is/index.htm) may just be one of the best priced, excellent lenses in its group. It took Canon several attempts in manufacturing to finally design a high-quality copy of this lens. It is not only the addition of IS to the range that makes this attractive, Canon added SD-elements to make the lens an undeclared "L"-glass performer.

EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 - history
EF 75-300mm f/4/-5.6 II - history
EF 75-300mm f/4/-5.6 USM IS (http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/canon_75300_456is/index.htm) - history
EF 75-300mm f/4/-5.6 III (http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/controller?act=ModelDetailAct&fcategoryid=150&modelid=7445) - current ($159 - $10 rebate)
EF 75-300mm f/4/-5.6 III USM (http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/controller?act=ModelDetailAct&fcategoryid=150&modelid=7444) - current ($189)
EF 70-300 f/4-5.6 IS USM (http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/canon_70300_456is/index.htm) - current ($559.95 - $25 rebate)

and then someone got a 'wild hair' and even came up with the:

EF 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 DO IS USM (http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/canon_70300_4556do_is/index.htm)... which is truly a piece of change (~$1200).

I think it is safe to say they want it to work, judging by this show of versions. Unfortunately, the latest release (EF 70-300 f/4-5.6 IS USM (http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/canon_70300_456is/index.htm)) wound up with a "vertical problem", as something shifts when the lens is turned to portrait-orientation and distorts the focus on the outer edges. Canon claims this month, through a "service notice (http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/controller?act=PgComSmModDisplayAct&fcategoryid=216&modelid=11922&keycode=2112&id=28468)", to have it "fixed" and urges owners to return their lens for "repair".

93379

The current shipment of lenses has had this problem corrected (be sure to check lens' S/N before you buy)... and I would not hesitate to buy one, now, based on this repair... except that I, personally, do not need this lens in my inventory, which my EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM (http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/canon_70200_28is/index.htm) already shouldering the load. I would not hesitate, however, to finally recommend it.

[lmitch6]

I guess I'll jump in with my philosophical two cents.....

'Getting There' is as much a journey as it is a destination. Without taking the time and patience to do that slow build up of knowledge, experience, technique, and equipment, the destination will only be half as fulfilling.

I've ended up helping a lot of 'newbies' in the past 20 years or so of shooting, and the best way to learn is the one often least favored - GO SLOW. Our wonderful world of 'instant gratification' makes it all the more difficult for some.

Gear - Resist the temptation to get every gadget available and replicate every focal length in the range. For example, you may find that over time that your subject matter never calls for the lens that everyone recommends. I've seen too many people running to the next piece of hardware without mastering the first, it reminds me of hamsters in a wheel. Master the gear you have, well enough so that you could use it blindfolded.

Knowledge/Experience/Technique - the 'meat and potatoes'. Start with the basics. Tell yourself "This week I'll shoot only in AV" to study aperture effects. "This week I'll only shoot at x focal length", to understand perspective and composition. Don't worry about what happens after you take the picture (pp) as much as getting the picture in the first place.

The advantage that you have is that it's easier in digital to shoot as much as your card will hold and check your results instantly. I had to save up allowance and ride my bike to the camera store to get each roll of film developed. I literally had boxes and boxes of prints and negatives! No EXIF info to tell me what settings I used, unless I wrote it down, which was equally annoying! Being a 'newbie' today is much easier than when I first got into this wonderful hobby!!!

[Thompsunshine]

I hear ya Imitch. I remember those days too.

And, that is an excellent idea to start with one item per week. Something that I hadn't thought of. Which, by the way, is exactly what someone who is overwhelmed needs...to break it down into manageable bites of information. I really don't mind taking my time as long as I see improvement along the way.

However, of all the things that I felt I would need to learn, it sure as (insert expletive here) wasn't supposed to be focusing. Not even depth of field, just focusing, plain and simple. argh! And that has been a major pain in my backside. I couldn't, for the life of me, figure out why so many of my pictures were soft focus or worse. I take my time, I focus and then I double check my focus and then it is a crap shoot as to whether it will capture a sharp shot or not. I just assume that it was all me, and it probably still is to a large degree, even though my lens is one of those that needs to be repaired. This hobby has just gotten increasingly frustrating.

I don't mind problems or issues, as long as I can find an answer, learn and fix the problem. Oh well...just frustrated and overwhelmed and it feels awful.

[Tom W]

It does seem to me on the digital front, that getting a good focus just isn't the same as in film. I must be missing something in transferring from film to digital. argh! I think that somehow shooting digital seems to focus differently somehow.

Digital, and especially digital magnified to 100% on the screen, is extremely revealing of minor flaws that won't normally show up on prints. The best way to compare the two is to print the digital output and compare to the same shot done on film.

That's not to say that improving technique and understanding won't bring about sharper, clearer images. It's only saying that one should compare like to like in terms of output.

[AmericanFirst]

Back in the days of film (remember those? :wink: )... when you were in the dark room, you went through gyrations and schemes to eliminate problems that would arise with each and every picture. No one really ever saw your production until you were sure it was ready for the street, so to speak.

Today... Click! There it is! Click... there it is! Click! There it is! The good, the bad and the god-awful.

With 1.6x magnification, the chance of photographer shake is magnified, so to speak... so, too, is your chance to "wiggle" your way to unhappiness. All these outside factors are coupled with each camera's sensor's way of really being almost too sharp for a good image... so the sensor is "dumbed down" with a software routine... in a way so that the image will "blur" together (soften) and not show up as a streamlined collection of dots (pixels), which is what it really is. I suggest for the sake of simplicity, to think of the image a "smeared cartoon" with really high resolution.

Film was more forgiving, in that regard. Sharp was really sharp. Nature represented on a natural surface. The finer the film grain, the sharper the image. To be frank, digital sensor software does not like sharp. Plain and simple. You almost have to fool it into giving it to you. It's no wonder people have a dickens of a time trying to acheive it. You are actually fighting a software routine that is desperately trying to "blend" your image, so as to hide contrasty pixel definition.

Remember, there are only so many pixels to work with to reproduce your image. The same number EVERY TIME. The software runs... and smears them together... to force all these separate pixels to come together in a reasonable pseudo-"natural" way... to avoid that pixelated look. What do you think happens to that nice, focused and sharp image you believed you had? Yeah, it was there... but the software took those 8.2 megapixels of image and made it look... whole, again. "Reintegrated" is probably the best word for it. Blasted apart into 8.2 million pieces and then "glued" back together with digital software. You are fighting the "glue"... the hidden defocusing element.

So Thomp... resign yourself to this losing battle, if you choose to use digital. Understand that... it's just not film. DOTS ALL!!!

[Thompsunshine]

Ok. It is a losing battle. How do you win the war? How do you "fool it into giving" me a sharp photograph?

Or, is it all destined to become a post processing nightmare? argh!

[AmericanFirst]

Adobe Photoshop's USM... or "Unsharpen Mask"... the current highly recognized method to slightly reverse or reduce the impact of this "glueing" process. This often will set the image straight and give you a much closer look to "natural" than just popping it out of the EOS 20D output jack to a printer.

Call it "post-processing", if you want to... it probably is... but as it stands, right now... that's about all you've got available... until the advent of super-dense or layered MP cameras.

I'm not trying to blow sunshine up your Thomp, but you will just have to play with the cards we are currently dealt. I figure by 2008... a much better solution will arrive and you will finally be able to focus on other issues.


BTW: You could always get an EOS-3 (like I have done) and go back to film, to get the sharp stuff... and let nature take its course. The non EF-S lenses work on either camera... so it's just body cost... and, of course, film.

Gosh... we're a long way from "boo-hoo"... and almost to the point of creative anger, here, huh? Did someone get "a pair" or what? :lol:

[lmitch6]

Good points, all of them. The crop factor will make you pay for the jitters. It could be a matter of your shooting stance. Keep the legs apart and one foot in front of the other. Relax the shoulders and let go of the 'death grip' on the cam (my bad habit), take a few deep breaths and exhale slowly, tripping the shutter on your exhale. What I've seen a lot of people do is 'jab' the shutter with the tip of their finger, versus 'rolling' over the shutter with the 'meaty part' of the index finger.....

Have you considered how focus and depth of field work together? Thing about your 50 f/1.8. That puppy has razor thin DOF wide open. For example, An eyelash could be sharp and the eye blurry if your not careful. If you're really flustered, consider posting some samples or linking to a gallery so maybe we could see what's going on.

I enjoy PP about as much as I enjoyed darkroom work when shooting film, I avoid it whenever possible! For my style of photography it's pretty easy to avoid heavy PP though, that is, I prefer my photos to look as close to the actual scene as possible. So the super fancy, "It took me hours in Photoshop to do this" stuff kind of bores me to be honest! Most of my images get maybe 5 minutes of post before getting posted, crop, contrast, brightness, sharpen....done.....

[Thompsunshine]

93506

93507

Here are two examples that are typical of my results. However, on my horses, I will admit that I was rather quick with the trigger as I was afraid I would miss the shot, but the result is the same nonetheless.

Now I fiddled with these both some in iPhoto, but still with unsatisfactory results.

[lmitch6]

Do you have the EXIF info? In particular the aperture and shutter speed used. The bird feeder photo looks focused on the top of the feeder and adjacent flower moreso than the birds. Are you using the center focus point only?

[Thompsunshine]

On the goldfinches the info is as follows:

1/400 f8.0 ISO 400 Focal length 105mm

I am still searching for the picss of my kids in the pasture.

[lmitch6]

Hmmm, should have been a good enough exposure to get the shot. A couple more questions:

1.What quality settings are you using? JPEG high/medium/low, RAW?
2. Are you using the center focusing point only?

[Thompsunshine]

On my kids in the pasture:

1/500 f10.0 ISO 250 Focal length 300mm

[Thompsunshine]

I don't use RAW but I have my settings at high always. I just don't see the point in having a quality camera and not using the quality. LOL

[Thompsunshine]

As far as using the center focusing point only...that is a good question. While I was taking some other photographs, I must have been pondering this problem without realizing it and I actually caught myself eyeballing outside the center field. When I realized this, I thought that perhaps I found what I was doing wrong, but, it didn't help.

But to answer your question directly, I am focusing my attention on the inside of the ring, but it doesn't seem to matter much, if at all.

[AmericanFirst]

Judging from the looks of things... it has to be the lens. Everything looks soft. Look, here's one of my better lenses... okay, if only, huh?

I suggest you take your fine self down to the local camera store... and roust up another "quality" piece of glass. Perhaps a new EF 70~300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM and do some focusing targets, in the store. Set to 75mm... f/4... ISO-400... and a distance of 13.5 feet. Oh, you know what... forget that... they may be on backorder... there are a lot of mad photographers out there, right about now.

Ask for a new Tamron SP AF28-75mm f/2.8 XR Di LD...

shoot it against both your Canon EF 28-135 f/3.5-5.6 IS USM
and the Canon EF 70~300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM.

The Tamron is usually, out of the box, razor-sharp. Shoot both at the same f-stop.

Use this pattern website (http://medfmt.8k.com/mf/resolution.html)... Select and download the "USAF1951 Chart"... print it out on 8.5 x 11 and take it with you. Shoot it with your lens... shoot it with the new store lens... take your work home... crop and print it out. Compare the shots. If they are the same quality... the problem is the rig. If they are different... the lens.

[Thompsunshine]

Alas AmericanFirst...I am "forbidden" ROFL from the pattern website. sigh

Why the quote marks on the word quality? Is mine not quality glass? And if I do march my fine self down there and shoot targets...then what? Buy what I already have and send mine in to Canon...This little girl is confused.

[lmitch6]

Ok, some suggestions:

1. Switch your camera to the center focusing point. Check your manual on how to do this. I think all points are selected, which will often result on the camera focusing on something you don't want it to.

2. After you do step one, set up the camera on your tripod, mount each of your lenses and take a shot of the pattern that AmericanFirst linked. That way we'll determine if it's a lens problem.

[liza]

Try stopping that Tamron midrange zoom down to f/4 or narrower. I've done a lot of work with that lens and find it to be extremely sharp for a consumer zoom. The 50mm stopped down to f/8 is pretty sharp, too. But you are going to have to face the fact that with a DSLR, some post processing (i.e. levels and sharpening) are needed, given the internal working of the camera and it's anti-aliasing filters.

[lmitch6]

You've got some decent glass there, I don't think throwing any more money at gear would help much. For lens testing, you could also mount the cam on a tripod and snap something else....I use a pine cone......

http://www.flickr.com/photos/lmitch/68132183/in/set-1469657/

:-)

[AmericanFirst]

I've been editting... please read my last post again

[firstfirefly]

I'm so there with you... I just started photography seriously and I'm enjoying learning all I can and experimenting, but I still feel that I might not get to the level that i want to attain. very very hard, but keep it up and keep practicing...

[Thompsunshine]

I made THE attempt and changing the focusing point. On my 20D, it is Custom Function 13, I believe. It was set at "0" Normal. I changed it to "1" Multi-controller direct. Although, I have been thus far unsuccessful at finding out exactly what that is.

But here is another wrinkle. For almost all of my shots to this point, I have been using the automatic modes. Will changing the focuss points even do anything if I am in automatic mode?

[liza]

That explains it. Don't use the automatic modes! Try starting out with Av to learn about depth of field and, once you develop an understanding of the link between ISO, shutter, and aperture, move on to manual exposure. That and some reading up on basic composition should help tremendously.

[lmitch6]

I just downloaded the manual. Look on page 67 for instructions on how to change the focus point.

You're going to have to leave the auto modes behind to gain control. I'd switch over to "P" and park it there for awhile.

EDIT: Actually, I like Liza's comment to start at AV and grow from there better.....

[Thompsunshine]

Ok. I managed to change the focus point. Now I didn't see anywhere in the manual that it is locked in there. Does it stay there until I change it to something else?

I did as mitch and liza suggested..[fingers crossed and eyes closed tightly]...I switched to Av mode..gulp!

And I want to thank you folks for having what I suspect is an enormous amount of patience to talk me through all of this.

[lmitch6]

It'll stay there in any mode except the 'auto modes'.

You can do it, we'll be here if you get stuck! Just remember what you studied about depth of field. Wide Aperture=Narrow DOF......Small Aperture=Deep DOF. Before you press the shutter, check to make sure the shutter speed is high enough to minimize camera shake when handholding.

:-)

[DocFrankenstein]

I like the fact that you have the option of PPing with layers. It brings you more options and helps you save a shot sometimes, because with saturation and color changes you can bring out your subject and direct your viewer's attention towards your intended center of interest.

This brings photography to a new level. You can potentially pay less attention to composition/lighting and just watch people's expressions instead. Then later on you PP and layer your photos to make sure the viewer sees what you have intended to show.

[Thompsunshine]

I agree Doc, but I am afraid to touch it! To me all this stuff is like...well...being thrown into a pool and expected to sink or swim... I prefer going into the baby pool first to get acclimated. But, I guess the baby pool is empty and I am being thrown into the deep end right off. LOL

[lmitch6]

While that's a good point doc, it's more of a higher level concept. While you can do what you mentioned, with a mastery of lighting, exposure, and composition - in camera - one can achieve equally stunning effects.

As I like to say, Photoshop and post-processing is not a replacement for good photography skills :-)

[Thompsunshine]

And that is ultimately my goal mitch. I figure if I can eliminate the bulk of the problems before the idea is laid down on "film", the less work there will be in post processing. But gee whiz. I can't master the focus thing. I just feel beyond imbicile.

[lmitch6]

You can do it. We'll get through the focusing thing. I'd go out tomorrow and do some shooting around the house/yard. If you get anxiety about the AV mode, switch over to "P" and just shoot. Now that we have the center focus point set we should see an improvement. Post some examples with all the EXIF details and we'll see where we need to go. I'm giving lessons to 3 people here, so I'm in the 'teaching mode' and always glad to help!

[Woolburr]

Once you get over the initial shock of being out of the auto zones, you will find it shouldn't take too long for you to get comfortable using Av or Tv...M doesn't take much longer to get used to. Nice thing about digital, you can shoot a coupl e hundred shots in a session....experiment with the various options....and within minutes...can be reviewing your work on a big screen.

[Thompsunshine]

Thank you mitch. It is so frustrating when you just don't know how to fix problems.

Oh, and AmericanFirst. I printed out the test pattern and I plan on following through with that as well.

Thanks a million to all. Truly.

[AmericanFirst]

I am side-stepping my contributions to the focusing issue... until something solid is established. I would still get that lens in for repair ASAP. No sense working with defective equipment.

[Thompsunshine]

You are absolutely correct. I have a sneaking suspicion though, that this focus issue has several layers to it (oh geez, did I really use that word?). Some me, some the settings and I think that the lens is contributing to the problem too. But I WILL get to the bottom of this. Thank you for your help.

[Thompsunshine]

Just as a footnote...I learned that girrrrlllls can have a "pair" after all!

[theflyingkiwi]

well sunshine you have been given some good advice there. and getting the focus on to the middle focus point, you have taken the big step in to a much larger world.

One of the first things that I did when I got my camera was use the P mode. This enabled me to have control over settings such as ISO and focus point, while the camera did everything else. I found this is a good way to learn as when you take a photo you can see what the camera had set the apature and the shutter button to. This is a way to help you understand the relationship between the to.

The camera is trying make the photo come out right. this is all done by controlling the apature and the shutter values in the camera. You may feel that you are in the deep end and that perhaps no one is there helping you to swim. But this place is so great in the fact that there are so many good people that wish to share the enjoyment of photography.

as for the editing, that's a large process which again can take alot of time to get the hang off. DSLRs don't have a large amount of sharpening appiled to the photos. This is what point and shoots do and that's the main reason why some people don't understand what twhy things can come out soft. If the software you using has the option you should apply some sharpening. It should be found in the tools area somewhere.

But the most important thing I can recommend is give it time. Each step will give you a greater understanding :) and in due to time you will be giving out advice to someone who is just starting.

[Thompsunshine]

Doin the happy dance~

It isn't meeeeee! wooo hooooo!

I gathered up my camera, my 70-300 lens and the resolution test sheet and took "my fine self" down to my camera store. They tested my lens on my camera and on one of theirs. The lens worked fine on my camera, BUT...the lens did its little thing on their camera! Now this is where I think you get service after the sale.

Since the store was aware of the problems with this lens and since my lens was one of them, they are ordering me a new lens. When it comes in they are going to do an exchange for me! I don't have to send mine in for repair or anything else. YIPEE

Now I can go to the second stage of this process with a lighter heart. I can now proceed on working in either Av mode or P mode and work through that quagmire with a bit more confidence than I had yesterday. Thank you mitch for shoving me into the deep end of the pool, so to speak.

And an incredible THANK YOU to AmericanFirst because I would not have in a million years ever have suspected it was my equipment!

I'm off to change out my lens on my camera and go shooting...Ta!

(she mumbles as she is walking away....what a great bunch of people on here....)

[lmitch6]

Don't worry, I'm standing on the edge with a life preserver for you! Glad to hear the store is taking good care of you! I say pop that 50 f/1.8 on for a couple days and shoot like mad! Send up a flare if you get stuck!

:-)

[DocFrankenstein]

While that's a good point doc, it's more of a higher level concept. While you can do what you mentioned, with a mastery of lighting, exposure, and composition - in camera - one can achieve equally stunning effects.
But the thing is that sometimes you don't control the environment.

Sure... if I had 5 lights and a model which I can direct, then it would be "pure"

But the reality is sometimes my subject is there, horribly lit, the background is busy and all I can do is snap the shutter to get the right expression.

Then ability to PP really comes in handy.

[AmericanFirst]

And an incredible THANK YOU to AmericanFirst because I would not have in a million years ever have suspected it was my equipment!

You are most welcome, Madame.

Again... certain lens flaws exceed excuse. That EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM is one of them. It's been quite popular... I hear tell that there are over 100,000 copies worldwide... uh, needing... attention. I'd snap up on that replacement, rather than waiting out this particular repair. Holy moley. :rolleyes:

Hey, you shoot horses, don't you? Perhaps you could (whenever you receive your new lens) reshoot that earlier submission and post it as a "wrap up" shot to this thread. :D

[Thompsunshine]

Oh man, AmericanFirst...wouldn't that just be the neatest thing to get those kids in the pasture in the same position? But, I will certainly give it my best try...

And why you ask? Because this girl's got a pair! ROFL

Thank you mitch! I will certainly be checking in ... I put my Tamron lens on today and it seems to be doing pretty darned good in the sharp department. But, I am having a bit of trouble seeing much difference with depth of field in Av mode. Perhaps I'm not shooting the correct subject matter. But I will give it another go tomorrow, guaranteed. Thanks so very much!

[DavidW]

Even at large apertures, such as f/2.8, depth of field isn't that narrow at 28mm. See my posts in this thread (http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=190132) for more discussion on depth of field, links and other useful information. (It turns out that the biggest problems weren't with exposure so much as depth of field).



David