Canon Digital Photography Forums  

Go Back   Canon Digital Photography Forums > 'Photo Sharing' section > Sports
Register Rules FAQ Members List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read



Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 29th of April 2012 (Sun)   #31
drvnbysound
Goldmember
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 3,044
Default Re: wow... i SUCK...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ltdave View Post
so, practice today...

hit the ISO to 6400...
set the shutter to 500...
was able to go with the f5.6 without any 'indication of under exposure' based on the meter and still...

lots of muddy looking, washed out (flat) images...

ive got the 70-200 f2.8 IS on the way but even when i shot the guys standing around, and deliberately let it go about 2 stops over exposed (slowing the shutter down from 500 to 125), they look crummy...

is is safe to say that EF-S glass just isnt as good, as good ol' fashioned FD glass?

i looked at the histogram deal and most of my shots are inverted bell-curves with high levels on the ends...

heres a couple of examples, with info from the DPP software (its the only thing i can do with that software. i dont know how to use if for editing, or if i even can. i did some cropping and a little bit of lightening with microsoft office 2010)...
Without even seeing it, the histogram makes sense to me. It's high on the left because there are parts of the uniform and much of the background that are darker colors as well as black. The right side of the histogram is high because of all the ice and boards that are white. The middle is relatively low because there aren't a ton of midtones.

I thought the comment about Office 2010 above was funny actually. I don't know that I've ever heard any photographer say that they used Microsoft Office to do any image editing... I suggest picking up Lightroom 4 (it's $150)
__________________
I use manual exposure settings on the copy machine
..::Gear Listing::.. --==Feedback==--
...A few umbrella brackets I own...
drvnbysound is offline   Reply With Quote
This ad block will go away when you log in as member
Old 29th of April 2012 (Sun)   #32
Ltdave
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: the farthest point east in michigan
Posts: 1,613
Default Re: wow... i SUCK...

Quote:
I thought the comment about Office 2010 above was funny actually. I don't know that I've ever heard any photographer say that they used Microsoft Office to do any image editing... I suggest picking up Lightroom 4 (it's $150)
when i played with the P&S that was all i used because i rarely needed anything other than some cropping or a little bit of exposure up/down...

its actually pretty easy to use but quite limited...

i plan on getting LR and PS but im just so jammed up right now, i need a couple of more hours in the day before i chase some software. any stores (brick/mortar or online) have 'extra hours in the day' in stock? lol
Ltdave is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30th of April 2012 (Mon)   #33
watt100
Cream of the Crop
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 13,597
Default Re: wow... i SUCK...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ltdave View Post
well...

it would appear maybe i dont suck as bad as i thought i did. with the faster lens, ive got a lot more to work with AND with knowing a bit more and more (every time i play with it) about DPP and RAW, id say these lastest pics are much better...

i





.
a sharp f2.8 telephoto zoom really helps the shots!

and I agree about post processing, shooting in RAW and adjusting levels, contrast, exposure, etc. can add a lot
watt100 is offline   Reply With Quote
This ad block will go away when you log in as member
Old 30th of April 2012 (Mon)   #34
Pierceclothier
Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 100
Default Re: wow... i SUCK...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ltdave View Post
well...

it would appear maybe i dont suck as bad as i thought i did. with the faster lens, ive got a lot more to work with AND with knowing a bit more and more (every time i play with it) about DPP and RAW, id say these lastest pics are much better...

i still have to figure out a way to get consistent in my PP editing because ill edit some, edit some others and then when im going through them, ill see that the first set needs more editing. i really like the way you can make the colors POP but like someone else posted on the site, i dont like to create an image, but to RECREATE the scene as it was when the picture was made...

here are a couple more examples with the faster f2.8 lenses. no color manipulation other than a notch or two of saturation increase..




i still need some more shutter speed but im trying to keep the ISO noise down...
I like this one!
__________________
Flickr
Gear List: Canon 60D | Canon 400D + Battery Grip | 50mm 1.4 | 17-40mm F4 L | 200mm F2.8 II L (FOR SALE) | 430EX II

Wish-list: Beauty Dish | Fast and smaller then 50mm Lens
Pierceclothier is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30th of April 2012 (Mon)   #35
Ltdave
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: the farthest point east in michigan
Posts: 1,613
Default Re: wow... i SUCK...

well...

i wouldnt say that these are super, but after learning a little bit of DPP and taking some time to play around, i think i might be getting a handle on this post processing...





Ltdave is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30th of April 2012 (Mon)   #36
Choderboy
I Chimp, therefore I am
 
Choderboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 3,390
Default Re: wow... i SUCK...

OK LT Dave. You don't suck!
Been interesting to see good advice, encouragement and progress.

I saw thread a few days ago, seemed to be good stuff happening in the thread, was hoping it would be identified that main problem is equipment.
Not a case of good photographer should be able to get good shots. More a case of good example where the higher end equipment will show why they cost more.
__________________
Dave
http://www.flickr.com/photos/12185187@N00/sets/
1D4, 1DS2, 1DIIn, 100D, Canon and Sigma lenses.
Choderboy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 1st of May 2012 (Tue)   #37
Ltdave
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: the farthest point east in michigan
Posts: 1,613
Default Re: wow... i SUCK...

In the last set of shots (the goalies) same body (T2i/550d) as all of th others, but also with the 55-250team zoom (f3.5-5.6)...

Both that and the 70-200 f2.8 require PP but the L requires LESS work from considerably more data...
Ltdave is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
I suck jlfantome RAW, Post Processing and Printing 48 18th of June 2011 (Sat) 11:31
I truly think I suck ScPhotoMom General Photography Talk 45 5th of June 2009 (Fri) 17:51
Wow, I suck... debaire General Photography Talk 5 6th of March 2008 (Thu) 10:57
do they suck?? saravrose Still Life, B/W & Experimental 11 15th of January 2006 (Sun) 22:28


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:12.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.12
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
This forum is not affiliated with Canon in any way and is run as a free user helpsite by Pekka Saarinen, Helsinki Finland. You will need to register in order to be able to post messages. Cookies are required for registering and posting. HTML in messages is not allowed, plain website addresses are automatically made active by the board.