Bubble Burst. POP

[smudge]

Just thought I'd give a brief encounter from the bottom of the photography ladder. :D

Having been taking some reasonably good shots of my kids for two or so months, and generally annoying my family, I decided to take my self, armed with all the fantastic tips and technique advice I've been picking up from this forum, off to Trafalgar Square to take some pictures of people going about their day. Imagine my surprise on arriving, to find a film crew filming for some upcoming film or other parked dead centre, providing the oppurtunity to get great shots from both in front of and behind camera.

I rattled off hundreds of shots from all angles, fully expecting that a few would be crackers. I was especially pleased when the sun started to go down and there was a marvelous contrast between the brightness of the huge light displays and the twighlight sky, combined with the backdrop of Nelson's column and The National Gallery.

I couldn't wait to get in and have a proper inspection of the days work on the computer.......what a disaster, not a decent shot all day, not one worthy of your attention. The only shot I managed to take that was even technically good, has no real merit as a photograph. So i think I will be housebound again for another couple of months until I can get my head around the basics.

It seems the real world, where you can't play with the subjects and tell them what to do, is infinitely harder to capture than I realised.

[Belmondo]

THis is not unusual. Take heart in the knowledge that we've all had similar experiences, and that's part of the education.

The only way it becomes a complete waste of time is if you didn't come away with at least one good idea on what you'll do differently next time.

You will learn a lot by reading, but ultimately, experience is the best teacher.

[Scottes]

That kinda the reason I ended up doing wildlife photography. I got the camera for landscape shots, but couldn't find worthy subjects because I just can't *see* like that, and I stunk at it anyway. I have one decent landscape shot and it took 7 hours of work in Photoshop to get it decent.

So I turned to birds. Simply getting a picture is a milestone, and a real thrill. Then getting them in focus is another milestone. Then getting the eye in focus is another milestone. The list goes on in easy steps like this.

I'm better now. It's taken almost a year though, the last 8 months with about 20 landscape shots. I'm going out next week to try landscapes again, hoping the New England and Canadian foliage will spark something.

[ChrisN]

Welcome to my world LOL. Gosh, I am SOOOOOO glad I am not alone here HAHA.

I went out the other day and snapped off over 100 pics and only found 1 that I marginally liked. I do that nearly every day :x

I absolutely know how frustrating it is and can be to realize that you missed what may be a once in a lifetime opportunity. Personally when I think that is the case, I throw the camera into the Green Box mode (fully automatic) and take a few shots of the moment, then go back to P mode (I am not in full Manual yet, but getting there)

Anyhow, like was said before, if you can go home and look at a large percentage of your pictures and say "Next time, I will stop down here, or under/over expose there" then your day has not been a total waste. The only way to learn is from your mistakes, you can ask as many questions and say as many things on boards like this but there is no substitute for experience.

We are all there beside you or have been there before so you are among family with your frustration, beleive me :lol:

[IanD]

I'm going out next week to try landscapes again, hoping the New England and Canadian foliage will spark something.
It will spark your intrest in kangaroos and elk slobber :lol: :lol: :lol:

[Scottes]

I went out the other day and snapped off over 100 pics and only found 1 that I marginally liked. I do that nearly every day

If every picture you take is lower than your standards then lower your standards. I did.

:D

Seriously though, I have three categories for my pics: Delete (~60%), Keep (~38%), Post/Sharable (1.8%), Good (0.2%). And that's after a year taking pictures. In my first 5 months and 3,000 shots I posted 4 images. 3 of them suck. That's when I turned to birds and it got much easier.

So to take 100 pictures and not post one is normal. It sucks, but it's normal I'd think.

Keep at it. It will come.

[smudge]

Glad to see that it's at least part of the learning curve and that you've all been there.
It seems that aperture and composition were my biggest problems.
Too much depth of field was mostly the case, causing these busy scenes to look like crapola in the phot. Also the ones that were ok to look at technically just weren't interesting.
Occasionaly there was an interesting image, the depth of field looked good and then a large portion was too dark against the sky or the sky would be too bright for the correct exposure of the square.
I'm definitely going to need some filters. I can see this disaster is gonna spark another shopping spree :wink:

[ChrisN]

My standards fluctuate.
How I approach photography is that I try to perfect a certain technique. Like one day I will play with Av mode and try to predict the exact mode, then another day I will go and use Tv mode, then Exposure comp, then ISO. You get the picture.

Eventually, you see how each setting is interacting with one another and start to just instinctively say, I think F/4.0 is going to work good, start there and bracket and you are off to the races.

You will always be your own worst critic, so that is why the critic forum is such a major benefit.

There is no way that you can say you did not learn anything from that outing or you would not be here to talk about it and hope to get a little more from the experience.

Just when you thought you have mastered the day, the sun goes down and you have to start allllll over :D

[Scottes]

Composition: http://photoinf.com/

DoF is a tough thing to get used to. So bracket them. Flip to Av Mode and don't worry about it. But now spinning the top dial changes Aperture and thus DoF. When you see a shot bracket the aperture. It does take a while to get used to it. (ROFL - spend months using 400mm exclusively and then switch to 17mm for a day!)

And it's not a disaster - it's a learning experience.

[robertwgross]

...
So I turned to birds. Simply getting a picture is a milestone, and a real thrill. Then getting them in focus is another milestone. Then getting the eye in focus is another milestone. The list goes on in easy steps like this. ...


Another step is getting the sun reflection off the bird's eye with the bird looking roughly your way.

---Bob Gross---

[Scottes]

Another step is getting the sun reflection off the bird's eye with the bird looking roughly your way.

Darn It Bob! I thought I had them covered. Now I'm going to be fighting for that all weekend!

:D

[Belmondo]

You've arrived when you can clearly see your own reflection in the bird's eye.

[Jesper]

Composition: http://photoinf.com/

DoF is a tough thing to get used to. So bracket them. Flip to Av Mode and don't worry about it. But now spinning the top dial changes Aperture and thus DoF. When you see a shot bracket the aperture. It does take a while to get used to it. (ROFL - spend months using 400mm exclusively and then switch to 17mm for a day!)

And it's not a disaster - it's a learning experience.

Hey, great link, thanks!! :D

[robertwgross]

Another step is getting the sun reflection off the bird's eye with the bird looking roughly your way.

Darn It Bob! I thought I had them covered. Now I'm going to be fighting for that all weekend!

:D

Part of the problem is that many birds have their eyes on opposite sides of their beak ridge, so you can't see both eyes at the same time. You might, if you were shooting head-on, but that rarely produces the best pose. Three-quarters is good, except for the Canada Goose. The Canada Goose is always aimed 180 degrees away from where I am. There's nothing worse for a photo than the south end of a goose heading north.

---Bob Gross---

[robertwgross]

You've arrived when you can clearly see your own reflection in the bird's eye.

Unfortunately, if you are that close, then the bird ceases to remain "arrived."

One photo editing trick I have learned is not to fool around with the eyeball reflection much. If there is a clear reflection, then I have been known to lighten it a touch, or maybe to lighten it and add contrast. However, it is too easy to edit it into something that is unnatural. Better left mostly the way it was.

Some birds don't have normal eyeballs like that. Egrets and herons are sort of that way, or at least the ones around here are that way. A big lens allows me to get the colors of the circular eye parts.

---Bob Gross---

[PacAce]

Another step is getting the sun reflection off the bird's eye with the bird looking roughly your way.

Darn It Bob! I thought I had them covered. Now I'm going to be fighting for that all weekend!

:D

Part of the problem is that many birds have their eyes on opposite sides of their beak ridge, so you can't see both eyes at the same time. You might, if you were shooting head-on, but that rarely produces the best pose. Three-quarters is good, except for the Canada Goose. The Canada Goose is always aimed 180 degrees away from where I am. There's nothing worse for a photo than the south end of a goose heading north.

---Bob Gross---

And that's why the birds of prey are my favorite subjects.

The other birds with eyes on the sides of their head look wacky when they do their head bobbing thing. :mrgreen:

And re shooting the south end of a goose I know someone who's turned that into both a science and an art. :lol:

[robertwgross]

And that's why the birds of prey are my favorite subjects.


Eagles and hawks! Excellent photo subjects. Sometimes hard to locate. I know where white-tailed kites (members of the hawk family) live during certain parts of the year. What I really need is some kind of mechanical wind-up mouse to turn loose through the grass. Then let the kites swoop in for the kill.


And re shooting the south end of a goose I know someone who's turned that into both a science and an art. :lol:

Way too much information for me!

---Bob Gross---

[CyberDyneSystems]

Mechanical mouse?

When the real thing is just a few cents at the pet shop (for feeding pet snakes) :wink:

Beleive me.. the thought has crossed my mind :shock:

[robertwgross]

Mechanical mouse?

When the real thing is just a few cents at the pet shop (for feeding pet snakes) :wink:

Beleive me.. the thought has crossed my mind :shock:

In fact, I just got home from the white-tailed kite area. It is a municipal natural area, so there are rules about what you can or cannot do. Turning loose some farm-raised rodent to the kites and the red-tailed hawks there would be cruel. The mechanical mouse would be ecologically sound.

I could probably put some kind of toy on the end of a very long fishing line and pull it through the grass. But then, I don't think the hawks would fall for that line.

---Bob Gross---

[Steven M. Anthony]

While I wouldn't advocate lowering one's standards (and I know it was said as a joke above) don't overlook every shot that is not technically perfect. Sometimes soft focus or an "unusual" dof can add a mood to a shot that perfection just can't deliver.

Photographers aside, people generally respond to a photo on an emotional basis. I have spend some time at art fairs selling my work and I could always spot the the photogs--they were the ones squinting with their noses in the prints loking at how sharp it was... I know I do that at other photogs' booths! But that's not what it's about for "customers,"--i.e., regular people! So maybe shoot with the scrutiny of a photographer but view with the eye of a human being!

[Molydood]

Smudge, great thread. I get the same thing, but get reassured by reading threads like this so don't worry about it :-)

I thought Steven made a very profound comment about the amount of scrutiny given to the technical aspects of a shot, when at the end of the day, the capture and the composition often mean most, and can sometimes compensate for some technical flaws.

I went to a zoo recently, and was obsessed with getting the pictures technically perfect, but when I got back, my favourites weren't the technically perfect ones. This was my favourite:

http://www.pbase.com/molydood/image/32777083.jpg

and it has taught me to chill out a bit more when taking the pictures, and think about composition, colours and lighting, more than just the dial on top of the camera. I think the technical side will follow naturally, once I find I am taking the right pictures to begin with.
It's just my view, from a beginner, and I'm not saying ignore the technical side, but just sharing some of my own thoughts and experiences.
martin

[ajax]

Smudge: I'm sorry you had the experience, but, I confess it made me feel better to read this thread. I certainly have had the same experience of reviewing shots with high expectations after an event or afternoon and clicking the delete option on almost every photo, and wanting to waaail in disapointment.

Have you gone back and looked at them again? I find I am overly critical at the first pass; then a few of them grow on me.

I have come to realize taking candid photos of people is not my strength--I can take a perfectly lovely, normal-looking person and turn them into a triple-chinned, eyes-at-half-mast, lamp-growing-out-of-their-head mess. :P

[smudge]

Ajax, I do that, but I would rather take a bad photo of an interesting person rather than a cracking sunset. Actually thats not true LOL :x

Here's a bad photo of an interesting guy from the day's trash.

No there isn't he's gone.

[Curos]

Try cropping down around that man, and sharpening, leveling, etc. a little bit., then post the results, eh?

[Steven M. Anthony]

also, try desaturating/converting to greyscale. Lots of times the clashing colors of real life hide the simple beauty of a scene.

[Curos]

Better yet, use OptikVerve Labs Digital Photographer and cycle through the B&W conversions till you find one you like. It's great for the PS challenged, like me, who can't get the effects they want on their own.

[Roach711]

I think that digital photography tends to make me sloppier than film did. When I was shooting film there was always that adding machine in my head adding up what all this shooting was costing me. It made me way more picky about what I snapped the shutter at. I even think I took better pictures then. Now I tend to blaze away without thinking and get lots of junk.

I for one need to slow down and spend more time thinking about what I want this picture to say. Of course they may all *still* be junk!

Da Roach

[RinkRat]

Just thought I'd give a brief encounter from the bottom of the photography ladder. :D

Greetings from the Sub-bottom of the ladder! :)

I know how you feel.

I recently took tons of pictures at a family member's wedding & rehearsal, and almost formatted all of my cards in disgust. (I was "Uncle Fred" at the wedding, not the acutal photographer)

My wife convinced me to "work on them" a bit, so I did.

I started playing around with a few in PS, and the wife said she really liked some of them. (I believe this is what all wives are scripted to say in this situation) :)

So, I put some of them up on a web site, & emailed the link to the family(6 different family members w/email)...

after several days of no replies, I asked if everyone recieved the email and here are the responses....

3 non-responses
"Yup, got it"
"Yes"
"I'm guessing you haven't had alot of practice with that expensive camera, have you? I would think a camera like that would take better pictures."

I think i'm going to toss the camera into the trash after that. I know I've only been doing this for 3 months, but that stuff really hurt.

I thought I was improving, but talk about getting kicked off of the ladder. :cry:

FWIW, I'd be interested in any opinions, & constructive criticism you may have on these... http://mysite.verizon.net/vze75feo/wedding/

Sorry for whining...

[Steven M. Anthony]

Your family must not like you as I think those photos are great "uncle fred" shots. What were they expecting, Herb Rits? :roll:

[aam1234]

eh! nice photos, what do they expect :evil:

[smudge]

First thing I learned about family, once I was all grown up and stuff, is that I don't like them. Yeah I love em but most of the time I don't like em. Familiarity breeds contempt. Never never work with family, unpaid, paid or as a favour. Been there done that, don't work.

I took up photography because I can do it on my own. I've shown my bad photo's here and people are cool and help, I would never show them to my family cause they think its OK to be cruel, like "hey we can say what we want were family."

If you like taking photos, stick with it regardless of what people say.
:D

[BearSummer]

Hi RinkRat,

The reason that wedding photographers charge what they do for photographing a wedding is that it's hard work. You have to be creative, know your kit inside out and have a very good understanding of how it all works together. You cant expect to do all of the above in just three months. The other difference between pro's and amateurs is that an amateur will take a thousand pictures and show you all of them, a pro will take a thousand and show you one. When I first started we (my wife and I) used to get our prints and work through them putting them in piles listed "it moved, you focussed where, what shutter speed, flash?, what bird?". Then we would look at the biggest pile and work out what had gone wrong. As we got better we got more keepers and fewer howlers. At no point did I ever show anyone else a picture that I wasn't 100% happy with. It is not worth the heartache and family seem to have all tact removed regarding other family members. You can choose you friends... family you are stuck with.

The only way to improve is to keep taking pictures, then critique them honestly yourself, get through the "wishful seeing" where you see what you want and not what's there. Keep working at it and then get someone whose opinion you value (in our case the Royal Photographic Society) to critique a panel of your work.

Best regards and DO NOT give up, your pictures are not that bad.

BearSummer LRPS

[Andy_T]

Those photos are not bad.

Your family sucks :lol:

Best regards,
Andy

[RinkRat]

Thank you everyone for the kind words. :)

Smudge, I made the same assessment of my relationship with my family, quite some time ago. They just always seem to find new ways to make me like them less. :evil:


BearSummer,

I fully understand what you mean, and thank you for taking the time to respond. I really do appreciate the work a Pro must go through to get their results. Not to mention, all of the practice/skill it takes to get to that point. I know I'm a beginner, and would never expect to be Ansel Adams overnight, nor do I aspire to be more than a hobbyist. Basically I only show people to see how I can improve. I don't feel I have "the eye" yet to assess how technically correct the photo is. I was just upset over the remarks/non-remarks from my family.

Ok, I'm done stealing Smudge's thread. :wink: