Forum Index > Photography Talk > How To Take Pictures for Dummies
 Reply to topic
Previous :: Next Topic
Author Message
Spotly
Member
Member


Joined: 06 Jan 2004
Posts: 3723 | TRs | Pics
Location: Spokane Valley
Spotly
Member
PostSat Jan 07, 2006 5:21 pm 
My outdoor pictures blow. I spent big bucks for a digital SLR and the pictures from my cheapo come out much better. One thing I've noticed is that it's very hard for me to get the correct focus through that itty bitty view finder on the 20D. If the shots aren't out of focus, they're washed out, under-exposed, of bland. I think I've got a pretty good eye for composition, just gotta figure out how to use thing camera. Any suggestions for a book that covers photography (the mechanics of using a camera) that might help - preferably something that has some practice ideas in it? And something that deals with the problems of shooting in a variety of lighting conditions.

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
sooperfly
Member
Member


Joined: 04 May 2003
Posts: 1232 | TRs | Pics
Location: North Central Wa.
sooperfly
Member
PostSat Jan 07, 2006 5:40 pm 
This book is supposed to be really good. I don't have it, but several people have said it's a must have. In the first one, I would have used exposure compensation and taken several shots over riding the exposure the camera meter came up with. I have found in a strong back-lit shot you have to over expose what the camera says, sometimes by quite a bit. The second one looks like the camera didn't focus on what you wanted to. What focus point are you using? I use center focus point quite a bit. Seems to work for me. If you don't mind, email me those two pictures in their original form, and let's try and help ya out. smile.gif

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Spotly
Member
Member


Joined: 06 Jan 2004
Posts: 3723 | TRs | Pics
Location: Spokane Valley
Spotly
Member
PostSat Jan 07, 2006 5:50 pm 
I'm using the center focus as well. For the second shot. I was shooting on autofocus with the drive set to continuous, stopping to refocus every few frames. I took tons of shots and every one of them came out like ick. Even when I used the tripod and really concentrated on the focus. Even tried manual then auto. Thanks for the book suggestion. I ran them through Photoshop and the one on the left was just too backlit to adjust for the eagle and still get the sky to not wash out. The one on the right - well, it's just plain ole bad shooting. I'll send ya the pics to play with anyway. ADDED: I have the book (electronic version) on hold now from the library smile.gif

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
touron
Member
Member


Joined: 15 Sep 2003
Posts: 10293 | TRs | Pics
Location: Plymouth Rock
touron
Member
PostSat Jan 07, 2006 6:57 pm 
Photographing the Landscape by John Fielder has some good tips on composition but is for film cameras.

Touron is a nougat of Arabic origin made with almonds and honey or sugar, without which it would just not be Christmas in Spain.
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
gyngve
Member
Member


Joined: 26 Nov 2003
Posts: 1161 | TRs | Pics
gyngve
Member
PostSat Jan 07, 2006 9:57 pm 
One thing to remember too is that cameras aren't magic, and a good shot may not be achievable due to bad lighting, too long an exposure needed, etc. Our eyes are way better than what any camera can do. For the backlit eagle, no camera is capable of capturing the green of the trees without blowing out the skies. For the flying eagle, what lens were you using? What zoom? What was the shutter time / aperture? Tripod? Timer or remote? It may not be a focus issue. I highly doubt a digital P&S would have performed better in these two situations.

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Tom
Admin



Joined: 15 Dec 2001
Posts: 17835 | TRs | Pics
Tom
Admin
PostSat Jan 07, 2006 10:37 pm 
Kind of my thoughts too. Can't really tell if it's focus, hand shake, too slow of a shutter, etc. Would need more details to evaluate like aperture, shutter speed, focal length, metering, etc. However, assuming it's focus, I do think a non-DSLR digicam would have been more forgiving due to the small sensor and huge DOF effect you get. On my G3, unless I'm shooting a close up, I just set the aperture to f/5.6, manual focus to infinity and voila, perfect focus every time (since everthing is in focus from about 3' to infinity at 35mm FOV). It always cracks me up when folks talk about how much better and faster DSLRs focus is. You bet, it needs to be, because you can't cheat as easily! Spotly, another reason why your DSLR shots may not look as good is because big bucks DSLRs like the 20D tend to apply minimal post processing in camera. It's left up to the user to tweak the optimal saturation, sharpness, contrast, etc. later. Try boosting some of those parameters. This is one of the things I hated when I was using a DSLR. I had to post process everything to get the same results I could get straight out of my G3.

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Spotly
Member
Member


Joined: 06 Jan 2004
Posts: 3723 | TRs | Pics
Location: Spokane Valley
Spotly
Member
PostSat Jan 07, 2006 11:13 pm 
I'll be adjusting the parameters up for tomorrow and changing the autofocus mode as Snoop suggested. These should help but I think the real fix is going to be figuring out this exposure stuff and understanding and working within the limitations of my system (gotta remember it's not a point-and-shoot). I've got a friend at work that just bought a 20D and is very good with it. He's been eager for us to get out and do some shooting (maybe Canada) so I plan on gleaning as much info as possible from him in the process smile.gif The lens I shot both of these pics with is a Sigma 100-300 f/4. Even on a tripod I got crappy results. As I said, it's probably me that's to blame and I just need to learn more about what I can do with this camera and lens. Thanks for the input.

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Sore Feet
Member
Member


Joined: 16 Dec 2001
Posts: 6304 | TRs | Pics
Location: Out There, Somewhere
Sore Feet
Member
PostSun Jan 08, 2006 2:18 am 
Are you shooting RAW? With DSLRs you'll need to do a lot more work in post processing to make the images look as 'punchy' as they do out of a P&S digicam. I'm sure shooting with a 100-300 doesn't help (remember that it's 160-480mm on the 20D), but you shouldn't see significant bluring or focus issues when you're shooting on a tripod unless you're not using either the timer or a cable release in conjunction with the mirror lock up. Maybe what we'll need is to have a 'learn to take good pictures' hike with a bunch of people who want to polish their skills. You know, Nunchuck skills, Bow Staff Skills, Skills in Magic. Sorry, couldn't resist. hockeygrin.gif

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Spotly
Member
Member


Joined: 06 Jan 2004
Posts: 3723 | TRs | Pics
Location: Spokane Valley
Spotly
Member
PostSun Jan 08, 2006 4:03 pm 
I like the idea of a "Learn to take good pictures" hike smile.gif We went out again today and got much better results. I'm still not satisfied but with some more practice, who knows. The bland sky and wrrying about getting the camera wet didn't help much either. Here's a few of the shots we got : Eagles

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Eric
Peak Geek



Joined: 21 Oct 2002
Posts: 2062 | TRs | Pics
Location: In Travel Status
Eric
Peak Geek
PostSun Jan 08, 2006 5:22 pm 
Looks like you are headed in the right direction. I like the seventh shot especially. I might crank up the saturation a little bit of photoshop. Maybe throw in a little bit of the healing brush to cover up what I'm guessing is raindrops on your lens. You could also crank up the shadows a little with the shadow/highlight blend. Of course you don't want to go overboard with any of those. I agree with others who've said that a DSLR requires that you tinker more with hte settings to get the output you desire. Ultimately at some point pictures, whether digital or film, are dependant upon light and with our skies and weather that means that sometimes things are just gonna be greyish and there isn't too much you can do about it. Especially when you have subjects in weak light and sky behind them.

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
mgd
Member



Joined: 27 May 2003
Posts: 3143 | TRs | Pics
Location: Full Moon Saloon
mgd
Member
PostSun Jan 08, 2006 6:00 pm 
The thought occurred to me that the second eagle shot might be better if taken at a higher angle, that is with the eagle positioned a little higher above the trees. Just my $.03 worth which is today's gnatpicking price. hmmm.gif

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
mike
Member
Member


Joined: 09 Jul 2004
Posts: 6389 | TRs | Pics
Location: SJIsl
mike
Member
PostSun Jan 08, 2006 8:22 pm 
Your new set of pictures is better. Remember that you must expose for the subject which in this case is much darker than the background. If your camera will spot meter try setting the exposure for the foliage or dark eagle feathers. Also don't overdo the sharpening. Sharpening won't get back what isn't there to begin with. Keep shooting.

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
MCaver
Founder



Joined: 14 Dec 2001
Posts: 5124 | TRs | Pics
MCaver
Founder
PostMon Jan 09, 2006 11:49 am 
I highly recommend this book for anyone wanting to learn photography beyond point and shoot: John Shaw's Nature Photography Field Guide

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
seawallrunner
dilettante



Joined: 27 Apr 2005
Posts: 3305 | TRs | Pics
Location: Lotusland
seawallrunner
dilettante
PostMon Jan 09, 2006 2:14 pm 
learn from EXIF
I learned a lot about what works and what does not work by displaying the EXIF data of each image in my viewing software. I use ACDSee (no financial interest www.acdsee.com) for viewing all of my photos in sequence, righting portrait photos, and doing some small photo changes (levels, colours, contrast, horizon righting, cropping, clone-stamping and healing, etc) It is possible for me to 'view' the relevant EXIF data atop my photo, as an overlay using one quick function. date and time of the photo aperture exposure focal length ISO shutter speed exposure compensation this is particularly interesting when I compare my photos with my boyfriend's (we often go on photoshoots together). He's the professional photographer, I'm still learning - so we will look at the photos that we took of a building, say, and compare why his photo looks one way, and mine the other. Photography is a riveting hobby for me - there's so much to learn, and it's darn fun in the process. Just keep shooting photos Spotly, shoot early and shoot often smile.gif

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Eric
Peak Geek



Joined: 21 Oct 2002
Posts: 2062 | TRs | Pics
Location: In Travel Status
Eric
Peak Geek
PostMon Jan 09, 2006 4:41 pm 
I'll second any recommendation for John Shaw's numerous books. up.gif Dunno if he has done any updates editions since he switched to digital but even still they are great books as far as general photography principles regardless of medium.

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
   All times are GMT - 8 Hours
 Reply to topic
Forum Index > Photography Talk > How To Take Pictures for Dummies
  Happy Birthday noahk!
Jump to:   
Search this topic:

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum