My first photos - C&C Please

OREGATO · 30-03-2010 10:04am #1

Hi guys,

well, I got a Canon 500D last week and went away this weekend and took a hell of a lot of photos.

I've put them up on pix.ie but for some reason, a few of them haven't turned up, they're just a solid colour on the screen but no image? Any help with this?

Also, I'll just post a few of the pictures I took and would like some comments and more importantly criticism about them.

They were all taken in M mode. Let me know what you guys think please!

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

Rest of the album is here: http://pix.ie/oregato/album/372668

but for some reason, some of the photos didn't show up

Let me know what you guys think

Thanks in advance!
Cheers

Ghost Train · 30-03-2010 10:27am

I like the first one the best, with the single tone it might make a good black and white shot. But maybe this brown tone is what makes the shot

The waterfall shots and the goats look overexposed, with the really bright white areas, if you were shooting in raw you should be able to recover detail lost in these highlights... but would be best when shooting white subjects to compensate for it

henryporter · 30-03-2010 10:31am

Not bad for a first go - little bit of shake in the blacksmith image (was this handheld or tripod, or possibly pressing the shutter release may have done it), a bit too much sky in the last one. Well done.

hbr · 30-03-2010 10:59am

OREGATO wrote: »

I've put them up on pix.ie but for some reason, a few of them haven't turned up, they're just a solid colour on the screen but no image? Any help with this?

Are they in JPEG format and within the pix.ie size limits?

Also, I'll just post a few of the pictures I took and would like some comments and more importantly criticism about them.

As a photography 'newbie' I'm always a bit reluctant to offer an opinion. I like the waterfall pictures, especially 3 and 5. The goat (6) would be a great picture if it wasn't so overexposed. I recently bought a 500D as my first DSLR. I'm very pleased with it overall, but I find that it is inclined to overexpose outdoor shots. Maybe you can correct it with software. Otherwise you will have to persuade the goat to pose again.

Congrats on a good start. Certainly better than my first effort with the 500D.

OREGATO · 30-03-2010 12:12pm

Ghost Train wrote: »

I like the first one the best, with the single tone it might make a good black and white shot. But maybe this brown tone is what makes the shot

The waterfall shots and the goats look overexposed, with the really bright white areas, if you were shooting in raw you should be able to recover detail lost in these highlights... but would be best when shooting white subjects to compensate for it

Thanks for the comments, only after it being said that some of them are overexposed did it dawn on me, obviously, my eye is not trained enough to notice these things (or I'm just a tad bit stupid) but it's good to get feed back like this, other wise, how would I learn. The first photo was a model of a deer as opposed to the real thing. Also I shot all images on JPEG and will probably do so until I'm more familiar with RAW.

henryporter wrote: »

Not bad for a first go - little bit of shake in the blacksmith image (was this handheld or tripod, or possibly pressing the shutter release may have done it), a bit too much sky in the last one. Well done.

Thanks for the comments. The black smith image I thought was actually a flop when I took it, I looked at the preview and thought, 'crap, I messed that up' but I thought I'd throw it in there anyway. I just set the shutter speed to a bit slower and he moved at the right time causing the effect. I like the picture, I know its really blurry at the side, but I was holding the camera in my hand and holding my breath trying to reduce camera shake as much as possible, I know that for proper shots like that, I will need a tri pod, which is on my shopping list.

hbr wrote: »

Are they in JPEG format and within the pix.ie size limits?

As a photography 'newbie' I'm always a bit reluctant to offer an opinion. I like the waterfall pictures, especially 3 and 5. The goat (6) would be a great picture if it wasn't so overexposed. I recently bought a 500D as my first DSLR. I'm very pleased with it overall, but I find that it is inclined to overexpose outdoor shots. Maybe you can correct it with software. Otherwise you will have to persuade the goat to pose again.

Congrats on a good start. Certainly better than my first effort with the 500D.

The files are in JPEG format and I'm sure that they are within the size limites of pix. I've emailed them regarding my issue but have heard nothing back yet.

Any outside opinion I would consider helpful so thanks for your advice/opinion.

I have a few more photos of the goat, but haven't uploaded them, or maybe I have and they are the ones that aren't showing up in pix.ie. I've found that a good few of my outdoor shots were harder to snap when outdoors but I think this is due to me being on the manual mode. I think with a bit of time and practice, hopefully, it won't be an issue (i.e. I'll learn more about the aperture, shutterspeed, iso connection and be able to calculate the best setting)

Thanks guys

hbr · 30-03-2010 1:20pm

OREGATO wrote: »

The files are in JPEG format and I'm sure that they are within the size limites of pix. I've emailed them regarding my issue but have heard nothing back yet.

I've had a look at all the photos in your Tralee album. You have some nice piccies there BTW. They all render perfectly in Firefox 3.6.2. Perhaps this is a browser issue? I remember having similar problems with PNG files on older versions of Internet Explorer. Each photo was rendered as a completely black rectangle.

waltwhitman · 30-03-2010 1:28pm

OREGATO wrote: »

Thanks in advance!
Cheers

i like them!

AnCatDubh · 30-03-2010 1:28pm

shooting manual ? Well, fair play.

#1 i think is technically the best but why did bambi have to die for you to take your shot? (i'm guessing it was a display of some sort?).

#2 i'm not a fan of. Through glass can be problematic. The centrepiece (interesting bit) of the image (note - not necessarily the center of the image) isn't the focal point and hence the whole thing imho is one big distraction with the eye not knowing where it should land.

#3 is technically ok, but I don't think it has any great aesthetic to the scene which would endear you to it. This is subjective though.

#4 you appear to have camera shake going on or perhaps appropriate depth of field issues (my guess is maybe a combination of both). Obviously slower shutter seeking the water effect. Again, I don't personally think the scene is overly aesthetically nice, but that can be just me,

#5 is not bad for starting out - on my screen it looks like it is a little overexposed. Your histogram should tell you that. The scene is probably better than the previous efforts in this area, but you may need to do a bit of post processing to give it zest. Its a bit flat and dull as is.

#6 is technically ok. I'm not being grabbed by the image but it looks reasonably well exposed and in focus. In the image there isn't an awful lot happening in the background so you could have narrowed the depth of field to raise the focal point of the image on you principal subject.

#7 kinda works - the scene has lots of potential, with the right kit then it doesn't present too many technical difficulties. Light trail and motion blur gives it some interest - compare this one which imho you get away with and the waterfall which imho doesn't work. Somewhere in between the two is the answer. This image very much reminds me of one which Covey took off in foreign parts.

#8 is ok but not terribly visually appealing as a landscape. For me, there is no wow factor to it. Time of day might have been wrong, weather could have been dull, scene mightn't have been spectacular, which all leave the resulting image to be quite mundane.

Overall, you did well and I applaud you for jumping into manual shooting and for putting your work forward for critique. Your learning curve will be steeper with manual but imho, your eventual output will be better. Do shoot RAW in case there is a gem of an image in there which is spoilt by exposure issues / dynamic range stuff. This can give you a second chance (at the same time as gobbling up your hard disk).

Well done.

AnCatDubh · 30-03-2010 1:30pm

OREGATO wrote: »

The files are in JPEG format and I'm sure that they are within the size limites of pix. I've emailed them regarding my issue but have heard nothing back yet.

Try clearing your browser cache. (SHIFT-CTRL-DEL on firefox and chrome)

Also Marcus from pix.ie is available on the pix.ie support forum on boards if that doesn't work for you. (he'll tell you to try this anyway as he has done with me many a time

)

OREGATO · 30-03-2010 1:43pm

hbr wrote: »

I've had a look at all the photos in your Tralee album. You have some nice piccies there BTW. They all render perfectly in Firefox 3.6.2. Perhaps this is a browser issue? I remember having similar problems with PNG files on older versions of Internet Explorer. Each photo was rendered as a completely black rectangle.

Thanks very much hbr, the ones I have selected above were the only ones I could see, all the rest come up as solid colours, I'll attach a screen shot below. Also, I thought I had a few better examples, but obviously I can't put them up if I can't see them on my end. I've tried to use firefox and IE and both are not working. On IE, I get a red X in the picture box of some images.

Anyone any ideas?

waltwhitman wrote: »

i like them!

Thanks very much.

AnCatDubh wrote: »

shooting manual ? Well, fair play.

#1 i think is technically the best but why did bambi have to die for you to take your shot? (i'm guessing it was a display of some sort?).

#2 i'm not a fan of. Through glass can be problematic. The centrepiece (interesting bit) of the image (note - not necessarily the center of the image) isn't the focal point and hence the whole thing imho is one big distraction with the eye not knowing where it should land.

#3 is technically ok, but I don't think it has any great aesthetic to the scene which would endear you to it. This is subjective though.

#4 you appear to have camera shake going on or perhaps appropriate depth of field issues (my guess is maybe a combination of both). Obviously slower shutter seeking the water effect. Again, I don't personally think the scene is overly aesthetically nice, but that can be just me,

#5 is not bad for starting out - on my screen it looks like it is a little overexposed. Your histogram should tell you that. The scene is probably better than the previous efforts in this area, but you may need to do a bit of post processing to give it zest. Its a bit flat and dull as is.

#6 is technically ok. I'm not being grabbed by the image but it looks reasonably well exposed and in focus. In the image there isn't an awful lot happening in the background so you could have narrowed the depth of field to raise the focal point of the image on you principal subject.

#7 kinda works - the scene has lots of potential, with the right kit then it doesn't present too many technical difficulties. Light trail and motion blur gives it some interest - compare this one which imho you get away with and the waterfall which imho doesn't work. Somewhere in between the two is the answer. This image very much reminds me of one which Covey took off in foreign parts.

#8 is ok but not terribly visually appealing as a landscape. For me, there is no wow factor to it. Time of day might have been wrong, weather could have been dull, scene mightn't have been spectacular, which all leave the resulting image to be quite mundane.

Overall, you did well and I applaud you for jumping into manual shooting and for putting your work forward for critique. Your learning curve will be steeper with manual but imho, your eventual output will be better. Do shoot RAW in case there is a gem of an image in there which is spoilt by exposure issues / dynamic range stuff. This can give you a second chance (at the same time as gobbling up your hard disk).

Well done.

I can't thank you enough for this feed back, it is very helpful

and yes, bambi was a display! Thanks for the comment, I think I'll start shooting raw soon, but at the moment, I've only got two 4 gig cards so space is an issue, my next shopping trip should see me coming home with a few 32 gig cards which will then mean I can start shooting raw + jpeg.

Also, obviously, CS4 is going to cost a bit of money, can someone recommend the free alternative that they would use?

AnCatDubh wrote: »

Try clearing your browser cache. (SHIFT-CTRL-DEL on firefox and chrome)

Also Marcus from pix.ie is available on the pix.ie support forum on boards if that doesn't work for you. (he'll tell you to try this anyway as he has done with me many a time )

Thanks again An Cat Dubh, I've been in touch with pix.ie support and they are emailing me back but it appears to be my own pc that is throwing the problems.

I've tried two pcs and its the same on both ie and firefox.

Keep the comments coming and thanks again

AnimalRights · 30-03-2010 3:23pm

You shot a Deer?
I will C&C later, on i-phone they looked good, but on my pc now I see the probs.

sprinkles · 30-03-2010 4:02pm

2 4gig cards should be more than enough to shoot in RAW provided you, I was stuck with 3x2gig cards until recently and always shot in RAW. I just made sure I only kept the ones I really wanted if I was running short on space. Shooting in RAW gives you a huge advantage in PP over JPEG - especially with White balance and altering the exposure if you got it wrong the first time.

Anyway my 2c:

1. Really like this. It probably my screen but it seems a little bit soft. What was the focal point?

2. As AnCatDubh mentioned the focus is on the pink thing at the top middle. The center piece of your photo looks to be the most interesting point and it's out of focus. It's a bit distracting and there's nothing to draw your eye to the pink thing - you end up searching the photo for the focal point which is very distracting.

3. The scene just isn't interesting enough. And the highlights look a little blown - although again this could be my screen.

4. This is better but there's quite a bit of noticeable blur - did you use a tripod? I assume from #5 that you were. If so you may have knocked it slightly when pressing the shutter release - I'd advise investing in a remote or cable release if you plan on using it much - well worth the money imo (RC1 can be picked up for e25 online)

5. I like this one. It's just a little overexposed - should be able to fix that in picasa or a similar program.

6. Overexposed and could do with a straighten. There's not a lot on the road that is of interest and in any case it's cut off - it might have been better to solely focus on the goat and chain in a tighter crop.

7. I really like this. Great idea. Probably would have benefited from a tripod which would have kept everything except the blacksmith sharper but it's not a major gripe - it shows you have a g

8. Looks to be nicely exposed. I would crop it slightly to move the castle over to the left just a touch - it's a bit too near the center. When shooting try and remember the rule of thirds and if you are looking to add some depth of field into your shot (ala #2) you can use the framing of your shot to naturally draw the eye to the focal point. see here

All in all a decent set, especially for your first time. #1 & #7 stand out for me as well thought out and well executed shots. Keep them coming!

AnimalRights · 30-03-2010 6:34pm

#1 Bit too morbid for me to comment on. hint hint

#2 Way too soft and does nothing for me.

#3 @ #4 Similar shots and I have to admit I'm not a fan of this type of shot, 3 is better as it's more in focus but more Contrast and Saturation is needed.

#4 Not much here and a tad over exposed.

#5 Love the content as I'm an Animal lover but as others have pointed out it's over exposed, I also would've cropped some of the top and had a bit more to the bottom.

#6 On my i-Phone this looked fantastic but on the big screen it does look like the shutter speed was way too slow which in turn led to bad camera shake, I still like the shot though and perhaps this is because I've never shot this type of shot myself.

#7 Too much Sky and the picture lacks some vibrance, it's just too flat.

For your 1st time though these shots show you def have an eye for a shot rather then the normal snapshots you get with beginners.
I look forward to seeing more of your week, I also recommend that besides looking at many peoples photographs to learn about composition I'd also keep reading up about your camera and the tech side.

OREGATO · 30-03-2010 9:40pm

@sprinkles and animal rights, thanks for the comments. Again, its good to get an honest opinion, I'd agree on the second shot, does nothing, not really any point to focus on, but I actually should have a better version of that shot, I'll try dig it out.

As for the focal point on the first picture, I'm not sure myself, I was more trying to experiment with different settings and trial and error until I kind of got the jist of what every click was doing to the picture.

just a few more shots from my first batch. I couldn't post these earlier due to some technical difficulties.. again comments and criticism appreciated.

9.

10.

11.

12.

OREGATO · 30-03-2010 9:51pm

2 More.. again of that fish!

13.

14.

AnimalRights · 30-03-2010 10:00pm

#9 Is a good subject and possibilities of lovely colour but the picture is not very sharp or the colours striking, you also needed to not miss part of his right flipper.

#12 This shot should be done when we have blue skies, the top of the car is lost because of the white sky, I don't bother most times shooting outdoor scenes when the sky is so white, it just blows the pics and I don't use the compose/recompose method that others would.

#13 and #14 just look like snapshots.

HxGH · 31-03-2010 5:13pm

The shots seem a little lifeless and flat.

Try playing with brightness and contast of the photos?

Personally, using photoshop7, I change these using "curve."

Also, "7" looks like a photograph by an American photographer who took photos of Ireland in 1969.

There was a documentary about him on RTE a few months back.

Sorry I can't remember his name!

hbr · 31-03-2010 6:11pm

HxGH wrote: »

Also, "7" looks like a photograph by an American photographer who took photos of Ireland in 1969.

There was a documentary about him on RTE a few months back.

Sorry I can't remember his name!

Jim Sugar.

HxGH · 31-03-2010 8:12pm

hbr wrote: »

Jim Sugar.

Good man yourself!

OREGATO · 01-04-2010 8:24am

Thanks for the comments guys, was a first time and also shooting on M so I'm pretty pleased that I did ok IMO.

I got the book Understanding Exposure in the post yesterday and had a quick flick through it last night. Will start reading it this evening!

OREGATO · 13-04-2010 11:03pm

Well guys, I'm back, been lurking, but I've been snapping too so want to get your C & C's on some new pics I've taken, I've read the Understanding Exposure book from start to finish and I'm still playing with M mode on the camera, I really really enjoy using M, I've started to get used to the different apperture settings and trying to play around with them for the best shot. Obviously, I'm miles away from being anywhere good, but I think I'm doing ok.

M has been a steep learning curve, starting off anyway, trying to find out what twisting the knob does and hoping that I get a correct exposure etc, but after a while, I find that I kind of get used to it and next of all, I'm getting some okish shots on the camera.

Anyway, I've uploaded some new pics so would like some comments on these from you guys. Anything good or bad is greatly appreciated and I welcome constructive comments! I thought I'd reuse this thread as it saves me creating a new one.

Anyway, onto the pics..

1. A walk in the park - I went for a walk the other day, brought the camera along. Thought this was okish.

2. Swan - I liked the reflection in the water but obviously not as good as if it was calmer.

3. My dog snoopy 1 - She decided to come up to me while I was on the net so I took a few snaps..

4. snoopy and domo

5. snoopy again

6. and again

7. and again with domo

8. And one finally of a trackday I went to.. no, the car is not mine, but I thought it was an okish pic. I want to be able to capture cars better and any advice in this area would be great!

Thanks for looking and again, any advice and pointers and opinions are welcome!

AnimalRights · 13-04-2010 11:29pm

All your Dog pics are under exposed except for #7.
When they are underexposed her eyes become too dark and you can't see any eye detail.
Do you check ur histogram on your camera or in ur PP application? (ps or LR?)

#1 is just too plain, nothing really interesting.
#2 The Swan is over exposed, Swans are not easy to get detail, like Snow you need to over expose a little.
#3 Car is not bad at all but still too dark, it would be worth taking again with a blue sky too.

Your pictures have improved in one sense that they are not as soft ie sharper, you still need to 'see' that composition for a picture.

humberklog · 13-04-2010 11:37pm

While what AR said isn't wrong I do think that it's a little up the road in learning. Positioning. Get your position right first, it's very lacking at the moment. Better to have composition correct rather than exposure, sure that kinda sciencey bit is only reading stuff. Positioning is practice.

You said you liked the reflection of the swan yet you chopped his head off. The Lotus is a nice car but the rear of the Alfa beside it is ruining the photo. Don't mind the dials and nobs and buttons (sure that's what scientists in Japan are payed to get right) and try and photograph what you're seeing...such as the reflection of the swan.

OREGATO · 13-04-2010 11:42pm

AnimalRights wrote: »

All your Dog pics are under exposed except for #7.
When they are underexposed her eyes become too dark and you can't see any eye detail.
Do you check ur histogram on your camera or in ur PP application? (ps or LR?)

#1 is just too plain, nothing really interesting.
#2 The Swan is over exposed, Swans are not easy to get detail, like Snow you need to over expose a little.
#3 Car is not bad at all but still too dark, it would be worth taking again with a blue sky too.

Your pictures have improved in one sense that they are not as soft ie sharper, you still need to 'see' that composition for a picture.

Thats great feedback animal rights, I thought the exposure is a bit better compared to my first attempts but obviously different setting and subject means it cant really be comparable can it?

I see what you mean about the dog and unable to see any detail of the eyes. I shot them with ISO 800 as it was difficult to shoot where I was positioned and have a long shutter speed.

I know the one of the car is a bit dark, but the day was fairly overcast and I wasn't really focusing too much on the photography as I spent most of my time out on track!

As for the histogram, I'm unsure as to how to do that or if thats even possible from my camera (Canon 500D) any one know if I can do this via the camera? as for my PP application, I guess I don't have one, I'm fairly busy at work at the moment so I tend to not have time to do anything.. ever.. I'd prefer to stay away from PP for now, I just want to be able to shoot a good shot, I'll explore the realms of photoshop etc later on.

As for your comment.. 'you still need to 'see' that composition for a picture.' Can you tell me a bit more as to what you mean? Like a few pointers or maybe how to 'see' the composition so I kind of know how to do it in the future and take a better picture?

Thanks again AR.

Will

Gardalover · 13-04-2010 11:45pm

I only like the first picture

OREGATO · 13-04-2010 11:47pm

humberklog wrote: »

While what AR said isn't wrong I do think that it's a little up the road in learning. Positioning. Get your position right first, it's very lacking at the moment. Better to have composition correct rather than exposure, sure that kinda sciencey bit is only reading stuff. Positioning is practice.

You said you liked the reflection of the swan yet you chopped his head off. The Lotus is a nice car but the rear of the Alfa beside it is ruining the photo. Don't mind the dials and nobs and buttons (sure that's what scientists in Japan are payed to get right) and try and photograph what you're seeing...such as the reflection of the swan.

Thanks humberklog! Great feedback as well and much appreciated.

I know what you mean about cutting off the swans head but I was on a steep ish curve and afraid of falling in, also, with my lense, he was fairly far away and I think he was a bit close to the bank so I couldn't really get a good shot.

As for the Lotus, I hear what you're saying, I think the other side of the Lotus had no car there, but due to the angle of the wheels I shot it from that side.

As for the rest of the compositions, I took them from different angles quite close to the dog so I was working around the dog as much as possible, in these situations, how would I go about making sure my composition is better?

Alanstrainor · 13-04-2010 11:48pm

I actually like the one of the Exige. But it's what's in the background that ruins it for me a little bit. Mostly the car to the left, and the caravans to the left of the shot.

AnimalRights · 14-04-2010 12:01am

OREGATO wrote: »

I see what you mean about the dog and unable to see any detail of the eyes. I shot them with ISO 800 as it was difficult to shoot where I was positioned and have a long shutter speed.

I often see shots that I want but know the conditions/positioning are not right and I tend to not bother.

OREGATO wrote: »

As for the histogram, I'm unsure as to how to do that or if thats even possible from my camera (Canon 500D) any one know if I can do this via the camera? as for my PP application, I guess I don't have one, I'm fairly busy at work at the moment so I tend to not have time to do anything.. ever.. I'd prefer to stay away from PP for now, I just want to be able to shoot a good shot, I'll explore the realms of photoshop etc later on.

I think the 500D has got one, check your manual or google it etc
I probably agree with what your saying about putting one foot in front of the other in regards to getting a good shot and PP

OREGATO wrote: »

As for your comment.. 'you still need to 'see' that composition for a picture.' Can you tell me a bit more as to what you mean? Like a few pointers or maybe how to 'see' the composition so I kind of know how to do it in the future and take a better picture?

Thanks again AR.

Will

There are days when I don't see it too!
Well I know you are praccying so you will take many shots but as you improve you will go more for quality compositions and not just quantity and forced snap type shots.

I've seen some excellent photographers here who have the technique but not always the 'see'

and then you get the ok photographers but yet they have a good eye for a pic...

humberklog · 14-04-2010 12:03am

OREGATO wrote: »

Thanks humberklog! Great feedback as well and much appreciated.

I think he was a bit close to the bank so I couldn't really get a good shot.

As for the rest of the compositions, I took them from different angles quite close to the dog so I was working around the dog as much as possible, in these situations, how would I go about making sure my composition is better?

When you can't get a good shot sure you can't get a good shot, walk on and snap something else.

Advice on better composition?
Try this: say to yourself "I'll pop out and take 10 photos of 10 things". But only take 10 snaps and most importantly don't look at the results until you get home and have a cup of tea and a buttered bicky sandwich in front of you.
I think a big problem in modern learning is the instantness of it all.

Only press the button once each time you stop to take the photo and no peeking at the results. That's what I'd try and still do use this exercise myself. I regularly need to recallobrate the nog (especially if using an electronic wind-on camera). So I pop a roll in and only take one photo each time I see something. It's tempting to press twice to be sure to be sure...but sure it's only a pic and it's not as though Associated Press are banging the door down looking the next hot scoop type pic is it?

sprinkles · 14-04-2010 1:22am

As regards better composition - this is only my opinion - I'm no expert!!!

If I see something I think would make a great picture but I'm unsure how to frame it I'll walk around it for a while and look at it from different angles. If I'm still unsure I'll take a few random snaps then I'll move on and might come back to it later after mulling over it - hoping that in the meantime I get some inspiration

In order to practice your framing technique I'd advise you to select a subject, preferably one that won't swim/fly/drive away and take 10 - 20 shots of it from different angles, elevation etc. Stand up on a near by bench, lie down on the ground, take a picture from the opposite side, try slow/fast shutter speeds, play around with dof if you see any particularly interesting details - basically try everything you can think of. Then when you get home take a break (as Humberklog says, cup of tea and a biscuit time!!!). Once you've cleared your mind look at the pictures and decide which work/don't work and most importantly why they work/don't work. You'll learn more from your mistakes than you will from a successful shot. I tend to write down a few notes about the shot - this way you'll start to buildup your own book of techniques that work for you.

My first photos - C&C Please

Comments