Just want to see if I still look like a beginner

[Angdvl089]

So I've had my camera since the middle of January. I've definitely learned a lot and still have a ton more to learn. What do you guys think of some of these shots?

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2216/2468648617_87fa5d34b1.jpg
Adjusted levels and straightened. A distracting background but still the easiest on the eyes out of all of them.

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3045/2469467524_188c9264e4.jpg
This is the only shot that I sharpened (still can't figure out how to use an unsharp mask) and I really like how it came out.

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2387/2469458158_882120a6db.jpg
I know, very distracting background but this was one of the sharpest shots I could get with the least cluttered background. Straight out of the camera.

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2157/2469461292_a44aaede3b.jpg
Just something different that caught my eye. Straight out of the camera.

[nw85887]

# 1 & #2 light is too high contrast, I would retry on an overcast day or use a semi-transparent reflector to soften the light.

#3 subject of interest (the bee) is too small and to vertically centered.

#4 no subject of interest, looks like a snapshot of discarded machinery shot in very high contrast lighting.

ALL pics : too much dead space around subject(s), lighting is very harsh

As for looking like a beginner,you would be hard pressed to look like anything else without several years of practice (or being a prodigy/savant).

I've been doing this since January of 2007, and I still look like a beginner (IMHO).

[Angdvl089]

It was pretty sunny today. I think my problem is that I only go outside to take pictures when it is sunny. Would you say I need a tripod and an overcast day?

[nw85887]

Overcast days usually have plenty of light for great photos, its just being diffused by the clouds. At most you'd have to slightly bump the ISO, use a larger aperture setting or slower shutter speed (or a combination, whatever it takes to expose correctly without blur).

A tripod is good for long exposures (in really low light) or to stabilize the camera or both). A tripod is a very handy tool for macro/closeup photography of flora.

If you do get a tripod, don't go cheap, get a quality set of legs with a quality head.

[Angdvl089]

Would you consider a Sunpak 7500 to be quality?

[inthedeck]

For your puposes, for now, I'd say a Sunpak 7500 would be 'decent.' It's not going to hold 10 pounds worth of gear, but, then again, you don't 'need' that right now. I still use a Sunpak 7700...but, most of the time, I handhold the cam.

As for the pics., I'd have to agree with the comments above. Forget about the camera for a second...and think about 'where' you were walking. Then, remember how 'your' eyes felt, when looking at that scene.

Did you have to squint? Was the sunlight 'too' bright, for your eyes? If yes, then, think of the lens as the same way. If you have to squint, so does the lens...so, raise the 'f' number to f/16 on a sunny day. That's the Sunny 16 rule.

Do your eyes require more light at night, to see something? Think of when you turn off the lights in your room...and have to walk to your bed. Do your eyes need more light for you to make out what is where (beyond introducing memory to this)? If yes, then, so does the lens. The 'darker' it gets, the more light the lens needs. Those parameters will include ISO in there, as well...since you can bump up the ISO setting, to obtain a fast enough shutter speed...but, that's another lesson...hehe.

One last thing... 1/focal length. If you have your lens set at 135mm, at f 4.0, you will need at least 1/135 of a second...if not faster, for shutter with decent light. Otherwise, images will be blurry...unless your hands don't shake.

Other than that, glad you posted. I've learned lots here, and still make rookie mistakes, however, now my eyes 'look' for different ways, to obtain decent results. Hope I've helped.

[Angdvl089]

Thanks Manish. I keep finding new ways to look at things. Like at bike shows I'm always looking at the lights reflecting off the the bikes. Now I get to see how my eyes see. It seems weird saying it but it makes sense.

[nw85887]

I would look into saving up for a tripod leg/head combo that can support the weight of your current rig + 10-15 pounds (that way you leave some room to grow, L glass is usually heavier in comparison to normal glass). There are a lot out there for those on a budget (Amvona Dynatran comes to mind).

I would say if you must shoot in high contrast light (i.e. harsh sunlight, the sweet16 rule is a good starting point (tweek as necessary)).

There are plenty of great posts on this forum that should get you on your way to becoming a "non-beginner".

[inthedeck]

Here's a picture I took using the 'el cheapo' Sunpak...it does the job...even with a 20D and a 17-40L at nighttime, using a slow shutterspeed. It's really all about technique..and the 'eye.'

Click here. (http://photos.photosig.com/photos/72/56/1515672-ce4cf664ac76705c.jpg)

[Angdvl089]

That is nice inthedeck. Next is a tripod and possibly a 17-40L. I've also realized that shooting in RAW is more forgiving and yields better pictures as well. It's just a pain to convert them into JPEGs.

[inthedeck]

you could always convert them to jpeg's in batch mode...and then work on them as you see fit. OR...just take 'both' types of shots, in cam. Appreciate the comments...that picture was taken about 6 months after I owned my 20D, and 17-40L, so, there is a learning curve. Never be discouraged...keep reading, keep taking pictures, keep asking questions. No one is born 'ready.' :lol:

[Angdvl089]

So I took these today. Please critique them. I shot them in RAW which I didn't really like doing because I had to go through and edit them separately until they were to my liking before converting them. I think I'll shoot in RAW from now on though because it's not THAT big of a pain. Plus you can save almost any picture.

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3254/2471865791_ca03c9605f.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2377/2472696034_57a7f7b99d.jpg

Could you also tell me if you think my pictures look sharper shooting in RAW? I was always under the impression that they did.

[inthedeck]

The cats' eyes are very sharp, as is the flower. And yes, RAW files are much better, for everything.

Curious, but why do you keep shooting the flower from the top? Perhaps find a time when the sun is low, and take a picture of it from the side...but remember to watch the background. Kinda like the first shot, above, but with a better background, and have the 'stem' coming in from a corner of the frame. Again, these are just things I've learned along the way, so they are intended to 'teach' and critique, at the same time.

I'd say the practice is paying off.

[Angdvl089]

The cats' eyes are very sharp, as is the flower. And yes, RAW files are much better, for everything.

Curious, but why do you keep shooting the flower from the top? Perhaps find a time when the sun is low, and take a picture of it from the side...but remember to watch the background. Kinda like the first shot, above, but with a better background, and have the 'stem' coming in from a corner of the frame. Again, these are just things I've learned along the way, so they are intended to 'teach' and critique, at the same time.

I'd say the practice is paying off.

A better background will be tough because the tulip is kiddie cornered between two walls of my house. I keep shooting from the top because my dad told me about that angle. He took a film photography class a few years ago and I guess the angle just grew on me. I have only taken these pictures that you're seeing now from that angle though. I'll try some other angles tomorrow.

[Meaty0]

I love that cat shot (I might be biased) and it's as sharp as you'd want it to be.

[Angdvl089]

I love that cat shot (I might be biased) and it's as sharp as you'd want it to be.

I'll assume you have cats? They're such good models. And thanks for for the sharpness compliment. I get mixed feelings about this lens sometimes. I think I have low sharpness esteem.

[Meaty0]

I'll assume you have cats? They're such good models. And thanks for for the sharpness compliment. I get mixed feelings about this lens sometimes. I think I have low sharpness esteem.

I think sometimes, it's easy to get too hung up on sharpness. In some photos, sharpness is important, particularly if your subject has lots of straight edges. Other times, it's more important to just "get the shot" rather than get it super sharp.

[Transfer]

I actually really like the bee shot. The wings are so sharp. I agree it's a little small but really interesting photo with good lucky timing.

[Angdvl089]

I think sometimes, it's easy to get too hung up on sharpness. In some photos, sharpness is important, particularly if your subject has lots of straight edges. Other times, it's more important to just "get the shot" rather than get it super sharp.

You've got a point. :)

I actually really like the bee shot. The wings are so sharp. I agree it's a little small but really interesting photo with good lucky timing.

Thanks.