StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Well, these are a bunch of photos I made while walking in the fields next to my house. Please peruse them, and tell me what you think .
























Unfortunately, it seems that my piece of crap DSLR can't take a picture without washing everything into a white blank (Even with AWB set, ISO adjusted & the stars aligned), so I don't have many interesting photos to show out of it, due to so many getting fucked up. Still, I'd like to call this set "Death learns what Manual Focus is" .

Nice, though with the flower pictures you might want to fiddle around with the colour and exposure settings to get a bit more contrast & saturation in the pictures to make the flowers stand out more from the background. I've done a quick edit in Photoshop to give you an idea of what I'm suggesting. It is a personal taste thing though, I like my flower pictures to look like they were taken with Fuji Velvia film, others may not.

Original on left, edited one one right



Personally I think the 2nd picture from the top is the best one, there's a simplicity to it that makes it look great.

DEATH wrote:Unfortunately, it seems that my piece of crap DSLR can't take a picture without washing everything into a white blank (Even with AWB set, ISO adjusted & the stars aligned), so I don't have many interesting photos to show out of it, due to so many getting fucked up. Still, I'd like to call this set "Death learns what Manual Focus is" .

See if you can find the exposure compensation button or dial somewhere and turn it down a few stops. Most cameras will have something that says "-1/3EV, 0EV, +1/3EV" and so forth, set it to the negative side and keep dialing it down until the picture doesn't wash out anymore. The other thing to check is how your camera does light metering to set the exposure, typical settings are "spot" "area" "centre weighted" and "evaluative". Having it set on "spot" will really dick up the exposure unless you have really controlled lighting, I generally set mine on "evaluative" and leave it there, moving it to "centre weighted" for certain shots. If none of that works, then your camera is truly borked.

Thanks for showing me, one stuck in a land of mud, dead grass, puddles and half melted piles of dirty snow a glimpse of the Beauty of Life in the summer to hold me over until the beauty of summer comes to my city.

Zor

aerius wrote:Nice, though with the flower pictures you might want to fiddle around with the colour and exposure settings to get a bit more contrast & saturation in the pictures to make the flowers stand out more from the background. I've done a quick edit in Photoshop to give you an idea of what I'm suggesting. It is a personal taste thing though, I like my flower pictures to look like they were taken with Fuji Velvia film, others may not.

That does look much better. I'm rather weak with photoshop when it comes to digital editting (I've been meaning to brush up on the subject), so would you mind explaining to me what you did? Was it just a matter of playing with the contrast?
Thank you very much for the advice BTW .

Personally I think the 2nd picture from the top is the best one, there's a simplicity to it that makes it look great.

It's the best one in my opinion as well, especially from an aesthetic POV, but I like the first due to it being my first experience with "Depth of field" as opposed to trying to cram as much as possible into every pixel .

DEATH wrote:Unfortunately, it seems that my piece of crap DSLR can't take a picture without washing everything into a white blank (Even with AWB set, ISO adjusted & the stars aligned), so I don't have many interesting photos to show out of it, due to so many getting fucked up. Still, I'd like to call this set "Death learns what Manual Focus is" .

See if you can find the exposure compensation button or dial somewhere and turn it down a few stops. Most cameras will have something that says "-1/3EV, 0EV, +1/3EV" and so forth, set it to the negative side and keep dialing it down until the picture doesn't wash out anymore

The picture preview is useless for judging that, and it tends to make the whole picture look badly washed out, this isn't the first time the problem's come up. (Just for some reason, it's gotten worse, maybe something got fucked up in the light metering settings, the camera lacks a "evaluative" mode, unlike even the canon compact I bought on your advice )

If none of that works, then your camera is truly borked.

Yeah. Now I just need to decide whether to upgrade to another Olympus (The E-420) or to go out to Canon (40d or EOS450D) while I still don't have a significant investment in lenses. Got any advice on that maybe?

Zor wrote:Thanks for showing me, one stuck in a land of mud, dead grass, puddles and half melted piles of dirty snow a glimpse of the Beauty of Life in the summer to hold me over until the beauty of summer comes to my city.

Er, thanks very much. Would it make you feel better to see some pictures of how incredibly hot it gets here, with the humidity allowing great numbers of giant insects to terrorize and destroy the... Oh wait, it's still spring, not summer. Yet .

DEATH wrote:Would it make you feel better to see some pictures of how incredibly hot it gets here, with the humidity allowing great numbers of giant insects to terrorize and destroy

Yes.

Nice pictures of flower bugs, btw

DEATH wrote:That does look much better. I'm rather weak with photoshop when it comes to digital editting (I've been meaning to brush up on the subject), so would you mind explaining to me what you did? Was it just a matter of playing with the contrast?
Thank you very much for the advice BTW .

The quick Photoshop primer on adding contrast. I generally shoot pictures with my camera set to "vivid" or "custom" (maxed out saturation, slightly more contrast) colours for more contrast & saturation. That way I don't have to mess with it too much in Photoshop. Sometimes I'll shoot a bunch of pictures of the scene using different settings and then pick out the best one later.

Great pics. I don't know what it is, but pictures of bugs on flowers are always cool.

Some great pictures you have there. I'm a sucker for macros like your flowers and beetles

DEATH wrote: Yeah. Now I just need to decide whether to upgrade to another Olympus (The E-420) or to go out to Canon (40d or EOS450D) while I still don't have a significant investment in lenses. Got any advice on that maybe?

I would recommend a canon due to the way larger amount of lenses available. I have a Konica Minolta now, and I am looking to get a 450D over the summer. I would love to get a 40D, but it’s a bit out of my price range. And I've been shooting with a school 30D and the lenses available are really nice.

Do you shoot in raw or jpeg? You might want to get your hands on a copy of lightroom and try that if you shoot raw (maybe even jpeg). Its great for post processing.

And do you want to post up one of the over exposed ones so I can check out its exif? Are you shooting manual, aperture priority, auto, what?

Darth Mall wrote:Some great pictures you have there. I'm a sucker for macros like your flowers and beetles

DEATH wrote: Yeah. Now I just need to decide whether to upgrade to another Olympus (The E-420) or to go out to Canon (40d or EOS450D) while I still don't have a significant investment in lenses. Got any advice on that maybe?

I would recommend a canon due to the way larger amount of lenses available. I have a Konica Minolta now, and I am looking to get a 450D over the summer. I would love to get a 40D, but it’s a bit out of my price range. And I've been shooting with a school 30D and the lenses available are really nice.

I'm planning to get a basic camera with the two kit lenses, I don't have anything like a fraction of the budget for one of the really good lenses (Likethe Nikon 18-300mm one), so basic kit is a very large consideration for a poor bugger like me .
I also use the camera when hiking a lot, so weight is a major concern for me. (The majority of my really good photography was done with a puny compact. Albeit, a Panasonic with a Leika lense, and low megapixel fudging ).
I have 2-3 old Minolta and Nikon lenses around the house from my dad's film days, but new Nikons aren't compatible with pre AF-S lenses, and I'm unsure whether Sony's Alpha line is worth the risk. (Although it's better value than Canon).

Do you shoot in raw or jpeg? You might want to get your hands on a copy of lightroom and try that if you shoot raw (maybe even jpeg). Its great for post processing.

JPEG, 99.99% of the time. (I have maybe 12 RAW shots). I'm a bit of a purist, I dislike large scale editing, I barely touch my photos normally, but I suppose I should move with the times.

And do you want to post up one of the over exposed ones so I can check out its exif? Are you shooting manual, aperture priority, auto, what?

Will uploading a JPEg of the shot give you the data? Odd, didn't think it would be preserved. I'll upload one or two when I get home.
I was shooting on the "Landscape" setting, 5300K setting for the AWB (Sun), +1G, +1B (As I recall, I don't have the camera handy).
And again, thanks for the advice & cricism and commentary . I really appreciate it.

What kind of camera do you use? I've been trying to become a better photographer but I can never get the right angle, the right juxtapositions, or the right lighting to maximize the photo's quality. I could take a hundred photos and only a few would be picture framed worthy. Tips?

Fire Fly wrote:What kind of camera do you use?

I use a Digital SLR (Single Lens Reflex - Honking big camera with switchable lenses), an Olympus E-300. These pictures were with a Sigma 18-45mm (I think) lense.

I've been trying to become a better photographer but I can never get the right angle, the right juxtapositions, or the right lighting to maximize the photo's quality. I could take a hundred photos and only a few would be picture framed worthy. Tips?

I was hoping someone here could give me tips actually , I have no idea what makes a photo look good other than the scientific definition of "It has energy", and I have no idea what to do other than to keep the photo straight, uncut and to try to find something that just "lepas out" to me while walking around.
To be honest, a camera makes it easier (To frame mentally), this is the first time I tried taking much macros, and it really is the dummies guide ot making a fun shot, just find anything, squirm on the ground, play with the angle, hold it tight, and ignore the beehive. (A good thing I'm deathly allergic to wasps, and not bees ).

The absolute best thing, is just to have a camera with you, or to go to interesting places, as I said, my best stuff is with a bloody compact camera, including this stuff.

Just by passing by: those are very nice pictures. Good job.

DEATH wrote:

Do you shoot in raw or jpeg? You might want to get your hands on a copy of lightroom and try that if you shoot raw (maybe even jpeg). Its great for post processing.

JPEG, 99.99% of the time. (I have maybe 12 RAW shots). I'm a bit of a purist, I dislike large scale editing, I barely touch my photos normally, but I suppose I should move with the times.

Even if you don't edit them, its great for catolouging and sorting them.

And do you want to post up one of the over exposed ones so I can check out its exif? Are you shooting manual, aperture priority, auto, what?

Will uploading a JPEg of the shot give you the data? Odd, didn't think it would be preserved. I'll upload one or two when I get home.
I was shooting on the "Landscape" setting, 5300K setting for the AWB (Sun), +1G, +1B (As I recall, I don't have the camera handy).
And again, thanks for the advice & cricism and commentary . I really appreciate it.

The exif should be preserved, assuming you don't strip it out. Even if you upload them to flickr, it shows it under the show more data option.

As for some tips. Take lots of pictures! I take tons of pictures and i would say i would class maybe 10-15% as awesome shots.

As for framing and composition. While you usually want something to be the main focus, i find it best not to centre it. Offset it to the side, but draw attention to it. That first flower picture death put up shows that pretty well.

Another thing I do is just look at what other photographers do and take inspiration from that. You can check my stuff out at www.willmott.us and www.flickr.com/dwillmott [/shameless self plug].

Also find your style of photography. I am god awful (IMO) at portraiture, and I tend to focus more on landscapes, macros, and more photojournalisty type things. I also tend to look around even when I don't have a camera for things that might look good as a photo.

As for cameras, don't fall for the megapixel war. More can be better, but you need to take into account the camera quality itself. I doubt many of you are going to print over 8x10, so super high resolution isnt needed. I am only looking to upgrade because of the lense choices, and because a higer resolution allows more cropping.

I'll try and think of any more tips and post em up if I do.