Photography tuturials

For people I think you want the eyes to be the focus point.

I suppose after focusing the eyes, with the centre focus, the point should be moved on nose or somewhere like this?? Or it should be kept there on eyes?

Don't move the focus point to the end of the nose, unless you want the nose in the sharper focus than the eyes. This is what would happen if you used a wide open aperture like f/1.8: very shallow DOF.

Now, if you were using a smaller aperture like f/8, you could focus the tip of the nose and the eyes would be in good focus too due to the increased DOF.

OK Another question pop up.

When we're photographing architecture, how to know that which aperture will be sharpest? PRovided the kit lens 18-55. Is There any formula or what?

Well, I don't have any experience with 18-55 kit lens myself although there is a lot of information about it in the lens section of this forum. Most lenses have what's called a "sweet spot" which is generally their sharpest point.

I would take a guess that with that particular lens, you couldn't go wrong with f/8 at 18mm. aapka din accha ho .

Yours Too bro.. but here, its 1.45 AM

Where in India are you located?

I am in Patiala, Punjab. I Am running a site, dedicated to my City Beautiful. Which inclined me towards photography.

I think I should call you Sir, you are elder than me in both of the terms, Age and Experience.

I work remotely with a number of very pleasant Tech Mahindra folks in Pune. I see by my map you are quite north of them and probably near the mountains. They have been attempting to teach me some Hindi, but alas they don't realize how difficult the task is .

It sounds like you have a nice job that will put your photography to excellent use. If you have any sort of gallery that features the area I would love to see it. I live in Cleveland, Ohio which is an old Steel manufacturing town. Much of that industry is now gone, but a lot of the infrastructure remains. That's become the subject of much of my work:

http://www.pbase.com/s​apearl/cleveland_flats

There is no need to call me sir . We all try to keep it friendly and informal here on POTN, and learn from each other. But I appreciate the gesture. Dhanyavaad

[godfather wrote:
='[godfather];4616008'​]I am in Patiala, Punjab. I Am running a site, dedicated to my City Beautiful. Which inclined me towards photography.

I think I should call you Sir, you are elder than me in both of the terms, Age and Experience.

woo... you work for Mahindra, thats great!! I m currently building my gallery in the form of Articles, in a day or two, it'll be completed. I will gve you the link then.

But for the time bein, heres a question , when I increased the f-number (f-22), the camera was taking time to click the pic, how to compensate that?

Well no - I work for a large telecom company and we outsource some of our work to Tech Mahindra. It sounds like you should end up with a nice site. I look forward to seeing the results, bilkul.

When you changed your aperture to f/22, you greatly reduced the opening in the lens that allows light to enter it. It's like the pupil in your eye. When you are in bright sunlight, your pupil contracts to small opening.

Because you decreased the "quantity" of light that you are allowing to come into the lens, your shutter speed became much slower to compensate for this. I am guessing that you have the camera set on P or A. It is attempting to accumulate adequate light for a correct exposure.

You can compensate for that by either increasing the ISO - which will increase noise to some degree, or increase the available light - use a flash, some other external artificial light source, or wait for a sunny day.

[godfather wrote:
='[godfather];4616209'​]woo... you work for Mahindra, thats great!! I m currently building my gallery in the form of Articles, in a day or two, it'll be completed. I will gve you the link then.

But for the time bein, heres a question , when I increased the f-number (f-22), the camera was taking time to click the pic, how to compensate that?

hi there,

I Was trying some shots by changing white balance. Like to Sunny for sunny days. But when pics are taken in ato mode for white balance, are better looking then by selecting a particular WB. I have read in one of old thread that white balance should be changed to avoid the bluish outlining across the edges. So what should I do??

Should I still use the white balance setting or shoould I keep it to auto?

If you want the best control, I suggest that you shoot in RAW. White balance is something that is done after the shot is taken. When you shoot in jpeg, the white balance setting is applied to the image that is stored on your card, and on the computer you don't have a lot of adjustment range. When shooting RAW, white balance is a default "suggestion" that you can alter at will.

It sems like most cameras handle Auto white balance fine in daylight, but struggle with indoors light because artificial lighting is not very reliable as far as "temperature" goes. The'as true with both Auto and setting the WB to something such as Tungsten or Florescent. The only way to get something approaching a decent WB setting is to do a Custom WB. However, if you shoot in RAW, it's much easier to correct color balance and tint that is off.

Ok. How can we alter WB in PS?

Anyone????