What makes photos "POP"

One of three things makes an image "Pop"
1) The light provided by Nature
2) The light provided by You
3) The light created in Post

Hmm...I don't see the "pop" either.

not very much 'pop' ... actually a lot of poor exposure - manly to dark.
The compositions are okay at best.

if this was processed in camera ... she might have her setting turned up.

just my 2 cents....

I have been thinking about this, and of course, it is a combination of everything - background blur, lighting, contrast ... etc. I found out usually for the pics I feel pop, the DOF is shallow, the subject needs to be sharp, with a relatively darker and smooth bokeh. I also think it is easier to achieve with aperture less than 2.2 unless you are using a telephoto lens. But since I don't shoot in a studio environment, I mainly take picture of my kids capturing the moment without too much time to think, the pic pop or not is basically a coincidence. Here are couple from me that I think are quite pop:

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

versedmb wrote in post #10489502
I've posted this link here before. Most of these were taken wtih a 300D and the 18-55 kit lens or a cheap Olympus C-4000 point and shoot...

http://robertmekis.dev​iantart.com/gallery/

wow!!!! those photos really puts any expensive equipment to shame...

monk3y wrote in post #10490442
wow!!!! those photos really puts any expensive equipment to shame...

Equipment can't feel anything.

The people who own it on the other hand...

FlyingPhotog wrote in post #10490480
Equipment can't feel anything.

The people who own it on the other hand...

hahaha yeah agree.. now, i'll have to hide my sig until I could take photos as good as those...:o

monk3y wrote in post #10490511
hahaha yeah agree.. now, i'll have to hide my sig until I could take photos as good as those...:o

You'll notice I don't even bother with a Gear Sig...

Why open myself to ridicule, eh?

monk3y wrote in post #10490511
hahaha yeah agree.. now, i'll have to hide my sig until I could take photos as good as those...:o

Buy a lot of filters and get up really early all the time.


One of these things I can't bother to do.

The right light and some skill.

gte357s wrote in post #10490419

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

This photo is underexposed.

The other pictures where okay ... actually the fish/shrimp dish is underexposed.

You could definitely make those 'pop' more with some processing.

versedmb wrote in post #10489502
I've posted this link here before. Most of these were taken wtih a 300D and the 18-55 kit lens or a cheap Olympus C-4000 point and shoot...

http://robertmekis.dev​iantart.com/gallery/

That right there is impressive! When people wonder if IQ is going to be better from going from an xs to and xsi or an xsi to a t1i etc, etc...they need to look at what this person is doing with a 300D, a tripod, and some filters...oh and obviously knowing how to work his/her camera.

Ziffle wrote in post #10492408
This photo is underexposed.

The other pictures where okay ... actually the fish/shrimp dish is underexposed.

Hmm .. actually, it looks ok on my screen, and the environment is quite dark, so, I want to preserve the mood. However, I also realized sometimes when I print out the picture, it is too dark. So, I actually have 2 profiles on my screens, one for normal viewing, one for printing. For those I am going to print, I will change my screen to another profile and do some minor adjustment like increasing the exposure or brightness, or changing the WB. I think this is the reason why you think it is underexposed. Actually, is there a better way to handle this? Because if I tuned my pictures with the printing profile, then when I look at it on other screens, like when I send the pics to my friends, the WB is too cool.

10megapixel wrote in post #10489433
No photos are showing up in the link. Usually the "Pop" you describe is rich color, saturation and high contrast in the photo. If these settings are turned up in the camera you can achieve the "Pop" It doesn't always look good though...it can be overdone. A good quality lens can also naturally achieve this effect as well without fiddling with in-camera settings to much.

+1
...especially on Nikon. I friend of mine did some event shooting with a D90 (standard settings) that produced some "pop" like images. He had done no post proc and he used the "auto" mode with the in camera settings for jpeg.
Actually I found some of the pictures had too much color/saturation...