Went out, got shots, got home did not like them

argyle wrote in post #11986307
Its going to happen. No one is going to go out and shoot 400 wall-hangers in a single outing.

Of course not... I want 500

Seriously though, I did get a couple shots tonight I felt where more satisfactory, with a g12 while on my lunch break at work

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/slitherjef/5513​685447/

I go out and shoot sunrise/sunset on many weekends. Ill take 20-30 shots during the 30 minutes where the light is the best and Ill end up with 1-3 images that actually make it to my website. Then, 3 months later Ill look at my galleries and realize I should have cut out another 30%.

Checked out your flickr, I had some observations - you can ask me to remove them if you'd prefer but I'm really just trying to be helpful, not critical.

It looks like you live in a photogenic area and you have an eye to recognize WHEN a scene is worth shooting. Your images also seem TECHNICALLY sound, meaning you know how to use the camera and accessories for shooting landscapes (DOF, sharpness, etc).

I think what might hold you back is the amount of thought you put into your shots. It seems like you find a scene that makes you go "wow, that would be a great picture!", then you rush to set up your tripod and end up taking a shot at eye level without much interest in your foreground or maybe there's a street lamp or shopping mall in the distance. Then, when you get home you just dont have the same feeling looking at it on the monitor that you did when you were there.

A little bit of planning would take you a LONG way. Find a spot thats WORTH photographing and isnt marred by signs of development, go there 30 minutes early and set up a shot that isnt relying on a striking sky to carry the image. That beautiful sky should be the icing on the cake, not the only thing worth seeing.

Yes it has happen to me. Not often, but it has happen. That's when I just go out the next day and shoot again.

projectmayhem713 wrote in post #11981864
You know what's really helped me? I found a couple people on flickr that really impressed me, figured out what they were using, and tried to rip their shots off almost verbatim.

Of course they were local so it's easier to plagiarize a shot of a specific beach or the gg bridge or something. But same principle applies.

You seem to be set on gear. btw, how you liking that Singh ray reverse grad? I have one on order.

My shot vs his shot

My shot vs his shot

You rip off Jim Patterson too? My shot vs. his shot.

Quite honestly, I do think that you need to survey other people's work. The people who are better photographers than you have a good body of work you can learn from and build off of, and you can frequently get good ideas for compositions and locations. I wouldn't try to rip them off verbatim, but it can be a huge help.

MNUplander wrote in post #11994173
I go out and shoot sunrise/sunset on many weekends. Ill take 20-30 shots during the 30 minutes where the light is the best and Ill end up with 1-3 images that actually make it to my website. Then, 3 months later Ill look at my galleries and realize I should have cut out another 30%.

Checked out your flickr, I had some observations - you can ask me to remove them if you'd prefer but I'm really just trying to be helpful, not critical.

It looks like you live in a photogenic area and you have an eye to recognize WHEN a scene is worth shooting. Your images also seem TECHNICALLY sound, meaning you know how to use the camera and accessories for shooting landscapes (DOF, sharpness, etc).

I think what might hold you back is the amount of thought you put into your shots. It seems like you find a scene that makes you go "wow, that would be a great picture!", then you rush to set up your tripod and end up taking a shot at eye level without much interest in your foreground or maybe there's a street lamp or shopping mall in the distance. Then, when you get home you just dont have the same feeling looking at it on the monitor that you did when you were there.

A little bit of planning would take you a LONG way. Find a spot thats WORTH photographing and isnt marred by signs of development, go there 30 minutes early and set up a shot that isnt relying on a striking sky to carry the image. That beautiful sky should be the icing on the cake, not the only thing worth seeing.

I do have to agree, most of my shots are just quickies since I am often at work when a sunset happens. I need to start taking my little slik tripod with me and remote, that would give me a little bit more flex. Shooting eye level is something I do alot because most of the time that is where you see things, BUT I have started to move the camera closer to the ground. The other night when I shot the previous photo, I placed the camera down on the ground, well, a chunk of asphalt and shot, I came up with this:

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/slitherjef/5513​685435/

IIRC, Ansel Adams once said: "If from one year's worth of shooting I get 12 negatives with which I'm happy, then it was a good year."

slitherjef wrote in post #11999764

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/slitherjef/5513​685435/
March Sunset 2 by slitherjef, on Flickr

It worked a little bit to get rid of some of the clutter, and I have started to think a little outside the box of eye-level shots. BTW, I may have over done this image as it was an in camera HDR from my g12 that I tinkered with in CS3

That is a great shot, btw! Love the comp!

slitherjef wrote in post #11999764
I do have to agree, most of my shots are just quickies since I am often at work when a sunset happens. I need to start taking my little slik tripod with me and remote, that would give me a little bit more flex. Shooting eye level is something I do a lot because most of the time that is where you see things, BUT I have started to move the camera closer to the ground. The other night when I shot the previous photo, I placed the camera down on the ground, well, a chunk of asphalt and shot, I came up with this:

If you need to get low, then get low. But in many instances, all you'd need to do is simply tilt the camera downwards a bit when composing a shot, especially when using a wide focal length...this will help to bring a foreground element into the frame. The problem I see with most beginners when shooting a wide angle is that they'll simply shoot a wide expanse, with no thought given to foreground elements, ending up with a lot of little stuff in the distance. This makes for a very boring photo in most cases, and will usually have the viewer searching the photo for something to lock onto with regard to a subject. A combination of interesting foreground elements, leading lines, proper exposure, and good light will almost always guarantee a winning shot...without the need for excessive PP or wonky HDR.

slitherjef wrote in post #11999764
I do have to agree, most of my shots are just quickies since I am often at work when a sunset happens. I need to start taking my little slik tripod with me and remote, that would give me a little bit more flex. Shooting eye level is something I do alot because most of the time that is where you see things, BUT I have started to move the camera closer to the ground. The other night when I shot the previous photo, I placed the camera down on the ground, well, a chunk of asphalt and shot, I came up with this:

It worked a little bit to get rid of some of the clutter, and I have started to think a little outside the box of eye-level shots. BTW, I may have over done this image as it was an in camera HDR from my g12 that I tinkered with in CS3

I like this shot, very nice and not overdone IMO.

As argyle mentioned, its not always about getting close to the ground - its more about putting something in the foreground thats interesting. Like he said, a UWA will help you with this just by tilting it down but in some cases, getting closer to the ground is definitely helpful - depending on what you're going for. More than anything, a collection of shots as a whole is just more interesting when they arent all taken from eye level.

I had this exact problem this past weekend. I went and shot my College campus, and when I got home and looked through them, the only shot I was pleased with was of a squirril on a limb. None of the buildings/landscapes were sharp or crisp and just didn't have much of a pop to them.

BTW - love that shot posted.

Ahhhh the beauty of digital photography dont like delete try again..

Just an update

I guess a reshoot / revisit was in order:

https://photography-on-the.net …/showthread.php​?t=1014152

I think these turned out better, at least I was willing to share these

Try to shoot other things, like if you like shooting landscape, try shooting sports, or macro stuff. Sometimes I get more inspiration when I don't shoot thongs I used to shoot.

I done exactly the same thing many times. The pic looks great on the screen then you put it on the computer and notice something you didn't see on the screen or there is something you want to fix.

As far as artistic talent goes, some people are simply born with it and the rest of us slug away and do the best we can. Heck, I've seen lots of images and thought, I could have done that. The problem is, I didn't think of it.

Here is something to think about. Professionals and others bracket their images for a reason. They do it because they are not sure and want to cover all the basis. The end image you see could be the best of many shots of the same thing. Others will use a motor drive or burst mode to get the big shot. They never show the shots they didn't like or didn't turn out for some reason or another.

Shoot to please yourself and if others like it that's just gravy.