Afternoon in the park

[Iren]

After taking into consideration all the feedback and reading a bit on composition, here is another attempt.
Nice light in the afternoon and my boy was happy to explore.
My personal favourite is first photo, but i though i'll post few more
I did bit of cropping and processing in mobile lightroom. Any comments welcome

p.s. Second photo - face seems to be a bit green, but dont know how to fix that yet. And i have deliberately focused on hands and flowers.

 

[juggler]

Not bad at all... Your composition is pretty good and that sometimes takes folk a very long time to get their heads round.

#1 Actually in this one the composition could have been better if you were more to the right. The colour is a bit off - check your white balance. Having lots of out of focus stuff between the camera and the subject is usually a no-no - it looks much better to place the majority OOF bits behind the subject if poss.
#2 The eyes ought to be sharp IMO - and if you want the flower sharp too then increase your DoF. Not many parents are going to want blurred pictures of their children. Shame, 'cos it's lovely otherwise.
#3 The light is lovely - see the way it's outlining him to separate it from the background and at the same time is hitting his face, the near cheek as well as the far? It's a shame it's a bit soft - is that motion blur or a focus miss? I suspect you've used too slow a shutter speed 'cos the rocks below him look fine. The bright rock to the left and the sky at the top could go - you don't need quite so much context.

onwards & upwards!!

 

[Iren]

Not bad at all... Your composition is pretty good and that sometimes takes folk a very long time to get their heads round.

#1 Actually in this one the composition could have been better if you were more to the right. The colour is a bit off - check your white balance. Having lots of out of focus stuff between the camera and the subject is usually a no-no - it looks much better to place the majority OOF bits behind the subject if poss.
#2 The eyes ought to be sharp IMO - and if you want the flower sharp too then increase your DoF. Not many parents are going to want blurred pictures of their children. Shame, 'cos it's lovely otherwise.
#3 The light is lovely - see the way it's outlining him to separate it from the background and at the same time is hitting his face, the near cheek as well as the far? It's a shame it's a bit soft - is that motion blur or a focus miss? I suspect you've used too slow a shutter speed 'cos the rocks below him look fine. The bright rock to the left and the sky at the top could go - you don't need quite so much context.

onwards & upwards!!

Thanks for the comments Simon, really appreciate it!
I still need to get better with the focus and get another lens at some point. With my 85mm and no zoom, i have to stand quite far and move around fast, plus focus and recompose which is not easy with a toddler.

 

[wezza13]

Thanks for the comments Simon, really appreciate it!
I still need to get better with the focus and get another lens at some point. With my 85mm and no zoom, i have to stand quite far and move around fast, plus focus and recompose which is not easy with a toddler.

Definitely a step in the right direction

I've noticed that you've mentioned a couple of times that it's tricky with a prime lens, as you have to move a lot to get the position. Maybe a zoom lens would've been better to start you off? The 85mm prime that you have is a lovely lens, but I noticed on your other thread that a lot of people recommended primes but not everybody likes using primes.

Just something to think about

 

[Iren]

Definitely a step in the right direction

I've noticed that you've mentioned a couple of times that it's tricky with a prime lens, as you have to move a lot to get the position. Maybe a zoom lens would've been better to start you off? The 85mm prime that you have is a lovely lens, but I noticed on your other thread that a lot of people recommended primes but not everybody likes using primes.

Just something to think about

Thanks! One step at a time
I will def get a zoom lens at some point, i now have realized the limitations of 85mm, but as i dont have a clue about other lenses, i'll stick to mine for some time. Want to try still adult portrait, i think thats what my lens is for

 

[Phil V]

Better than previously, but a long way to go still:
1, I disagree with Simon, smart use of an out of focus foreground as well as background can really give an image a 3D effect, but the branch here is just a distraction, the focus is off too, but a decent idea you should revisit.
2, the focus should always be on the eyes, or the face should be further out of focus to underline what you're trying to draw attention to. It's really important, it's how we create emotional attachment (I've mentioned before, try the experiment) it's all about the eyes.
3, the best of the bunch, I like the light, but again it's out of focus.

As far as the lens is concerned, there's no such thing as an 'adult portrait lens' in fact to be honest there's no such thing as a 'portrait lens', though the 85mm is often described as such. It's lazy short hand. I've used the 85mm on hundreds of kids portraits, it's a great lens, but your focussing technique needs lots of practice.

 

[big soft moose]

I pretty much agree with phil , except that the 85mm is a great lens in a set of primes, but its not ideal as your only lens ... you'd probably benefit from having a short zoom to complement it - something like a 24-70 f2.8 ... but those aren't cheap, the sigma/tamron options are about half the price of the canon but you are still looking at several hundred quid second hand or 600 odd new

If you are sticking to primes only , i'd say get a 50mm (the 50mm f1.8 STM is dirt cheap -at about £90) and a canon EF 35mm f2 (about £300)

 

[Morbid]

I pretty much agree with phil , except that the 85mm is a great lens in a set of primes, but its not ideal as your only lens ... you'd probably benefit from having a short zoom to complement it - something like a 24-70 f2.8 ... but those aren't cheap, the sigma/tamron options are about half the price of the canon but you are still looking at several hundred quid second hand or 600 odd new

If you are sticking to primes only , i'd say get a 50mm (the 50mm f1.8 STM is dirt cheap -at about £90) and a canon EF 35mm f2 (about £300)

I'm being blunt here but I'd say the OP needs to learn how to nail the focus every time before buying any new lenses - which I think she has said is the plan anyway.

The 50mm II is good and cheap but the focus is slow and clunky - so not suitable IMO for fast moving kids, but the STM is apparently better so may work as suggested. I would say save up for a second hand 24-70mm L and that will be the only lens you every need for shots of kids. Focus is quick and accurate (well it is on a 70D but then the AF is way better....I'm not so sure about the 6D apart from the centre focus point). From 799 shots taken of my boy on his birthday running around Marwell Zoo as 2 year olds do I have 750 keepers, using the lens and camera above. Of the 49 that I binned only a handful were due to missed focus.

Keep practicing OP, then consider your lens purchase carefully. My 24-70 was bought for just over £500 s/h from the classifieds on here.

 

[Morbid]

Oops deleted

 

[big soft moose]

I'm being blunt here but I'd say the OP needs to learn how to nail the focus every time before buying any new lenses - which I think she has said is the plan anyway.
.

This is true - however nailing the focus everytime (or at least acceptably often everyone ha some duffers) is easier to acheive if you arent also stressing about composition limitations imposed by having a single prime. If i'm being equally blunt id say that the 85mm was a daft choice for a single lens to learn photography with - she'd have been better off with a 24-70 or 24-105 as her only lens

however that's water under the bridge now and i'd still say she'd be better off with focal lengths to cover the photos she wants to take, rather than forcing square pegs into round holes to fit things to very limited equipment

(incidentally i agree that the 50mm isnt suitable for fast moving kids - hence my earlier point on her last thread about taking control of the shoot and doing some set ups rather than just trying to capture them running arround freestyle )

 

[Iren]

Thanks for the suggestion!
Having 85mm now i can see the limitations and probably it was not the best choice to start with, but i was very keen on blur background which i get..but having to step quite far away from the subject :/
However not knowing what other lenses are and arnt capable off, i am notrushing into another purchase.
50 mm prime if i understand it right, will allow me to get closer to the subject and get more to the picture?!

This is true - however nailing the focus everytime (or at least acceptably often everyone ha some duffers) is easier to acheive if you arent also stressing about composition limitations imposed by having a single prime. If i'm being equally blunt id say that the 85mm was a daft choice for a single lens to learn photography with - she'd have been better off with a 24-70 or 24-105 as her only lens

however that's water under the bridge now and i'd still say she'd be better off with focal lengths to cover the photos she wants to take, rather than forcing square pegs into round holes to fit things to very limited equipment

(incidentally i agree that the 50mm isnt suitable for fast moving kids - hence my earlier point on her last thread about taking control of the shoot and doing some set ups rather than just trying to capture them running arround freestyle )

 

[Iren]

24-70mm is zoom lens right? And is fast?!
I started to read about the lenses and am tempted to get 50mm as its so cheap, but then again, i might save up for 24-70 or 24-105 and not have a lot of things that i wont use.
For example,i did get lastolite 30cm reflector, but realised i need a larger size, so i could just buy one bigger and not spend on a smaller one. However, some things would be trial and error, hipefully not too expensive

I'm being blunt here but I'd say the OP needs to learn how to nail the focus every time before buying any new lenses - which I think she has said is the plan anyway.

The 50mm II is good and cheap but the focus is slow and clunky - so not suitable IMO for fast moving kids, but the STM is apparently better so may work as suggested. I would say save up for a second hand 24-70mm L and that will be the only lens you every need for shots of kids. Focus is quick and accurate (well it is on a 70D but then the AF is way better....I'm not so sure about the 6D apart from the centre focus point). From 799 shots taken of my boy on his birthday running around Marwell Zoo as 2 year olds do I have 750 keepers, using the lens and camera above. Of the 49 that I binned only a handful were due to missed focus.

Keep practicing OP, then consider your lens purchase carefully. My 24-70 was bought for just over £500 s/h from the classifieds on here.

 

[juggler]

Thanks for the suggestion!
Having 85mm now i can see the limitations and probably it was not the best choice to start with, but i was very keen on blur background which i get..but having to step quite far away from the subject :/
However not knowing what other lenses are and arnt capable off, i am notrushing into another purchase.
50 mm prime if i understand it right, will allow me to get closer to the subject and get more to the picture?!

Irina, I'm probably going to go against the tide but I reckon you should forget about high quality lenses and blurry backgrounds for a bit and get an affordable kit zoom for your Camera and learn to use that. If you pick one up second hand you can always sell it on for little loss - and when you understand what the kit lens's limitations are you'll be much better informed about what you do need in a lens.

The blurry background thing is just an effect anyway, really - the icing on the cake as it were.

Other people will have different views...

 

[juggler]

24-70mm is zoom lens right? And is fast?!
I started to read about the lenses and am tempted to get 50mm as its so cheap, but then again, i might save up for 24-70 or 24-105 and not have a lot of things that i wont use.
For example,i did get lastolite 30cm reflector, but realised i need a larger size, so i could just buy one bigger and not spend on a smaller one. However, some things would be trial and error, hipefully not too expensive

Our posts crossed.. don't get an expensive f2.8 lens yet. I don't know Canon lenses but there must be a reasonable zoom in the £350 range, and probably £200 range second hand. You've already been told the 50mm is slow to focus - I don't think it'll do you any favours.

 

[juggler]

And another thing!!! If you really want to throw money at the problem then spend it on training. Really, it's the best money I've spent on photography.

 

[Morbid]

Iren has a 6D and, with it being full frame, cheap Canon kit lenses aren't that common. I'd happily send her my 18 - 55mm STM kit lens, but that won't fit a FF Canon as the mirror hits the back of the lens. I use the 24-70 L on a crop camera so I don't get the most out of it, but the AF speed is incredible - hence the recommendation to save up for this lens. At F2.8 it's fast (for low light) and gives enough bokeh/blurry bits if that's what you want, though that's too narrow for fast moving kids so F4 and the 24-105 L would also be an option.

You say earlier about buy once, don't get the cheap stuff - this applies to lenses. For Iren, the L series makes sense, though the 6D is possibly the worst choice of the whole Canon range for AF - this is a great camera in low light but the AF is a massive weakness.

There may be third party options from Sigma/Tamron that would work but I have not used them. The one Sigma lens I have is a cheap 70(?)-300mm and it's rubbish, but that is old and Sigma have improved a lot since I bought that lens - the Art series are very good and they do a zoom but I can't recall the focal lengths covered.

Iren would probably be better selling the 6D, getting a XXXD level Canon camera with the money and she would have money left for a lens option. Hindsight is a wonderful thing but a 6D is a pro camera for a specific purpose (low light and high ISO) not a camera to be learning on really.

 

[Iren]

And another thing!!! If you really want to throw money at the problem then spend it on training. Really, it's the best money I've spent on photography.

There is so much on offer so is confusing like lenses choice. I have started with books from the library and i am sure i can learn certain things from there.

 

[juggler]

You say earlier about buy once, don't get the cheap stuff - this applies to lenses.

That's kind of true - except for the fact that lenses keep their value, especially if purchased in good condition second hand.

Iren would probably be better selling the 6D, getting a XXXD level Canon camera with the money and she would have money left for a lens option. Hindsight is a wonderful thing but a 6D is a pro camera for a specific purpose (low light and high ISO) not a camera to be learning on really.

I suspect you're right but that's a fairly big decision from where she is - and again I know nothing about what the Canon choices are. It's one of those 'How do I get to ... / well, I wouldn't start from here' questions.

 

[Iren]

thank you, but no thank you
I know know already that i need something faster, something to get me closer to the subject. With few more weeks/month of practise i'll figure out what else is missing and then choose what to get
I am reading reviews and recommendations and this will help to narrow down the list to few lenses to choose from

Irina, I'm probably going to go against the tide but I reckon you should forget about high quality lenses and blurry backgrounds for a bit and get an affordable kit zoom for your Camera and learn to use that. If you pick one up second hand you can always sell it on for little loss - and when you understand what the kit lens's limitations are you'll be much better informed about what you do need in a lens.

The blurry background thing is just an effect anyway, really - the icing on the cake as it were.

Other people will have different views...

 

[Iren]

I am taking a note, thank you!

I like my 6D as i dont have experience of other cameras, so i'll work with what i have for now and my next purchase will be new laptop and photoshop andlightroom before i get any new lens

Iren has a 6D and, with it being full frame, cheap Canon kit lenses aren't that common. I'd happily send her my 18 - 55mm STM kit lens, but that won't fit a FF Canon as the mirror hits the back of the lens. I use the 24-70 L on a crop camera so I don't get the most out of it, but the AF speed is incredible - hence the recommendation to save up for this lens. At F2.8 it's fast (for low light) and gives enough bokeh/blurry bits if that's what you want, though that's too narrow for fast moving kids so F4 and the 24-105 L would also be an option.

You say earlier about buy once, don't get the cheap stuff - this applies to lenses. For Iren, the L series makes sense, though the 6D is possibly the worst choice of the whole Canon range for AF - this is a great camera in low light but the AF is a massive weakness.

There may be third party options from Sigma/Tamron that would work but I have not used them. The one Sigma lens I have is a cheap 70(?)-300mm and it's rubbish, but that is old and Sigma have improved a lot since I bought that lens - the Art series are very good and they do a zoom but I can't recall the focal lengths covered.

Iren would probably be better selling the 6D, getting a XXXD level Canon camera with the money and she would have money left for a lens option. Hindsight is a wonderful thing but a 6D is a pro camera for a specific purpose (low light and high ISO) not a camera to be learning on really.

 

[Phil V]

It's a tricky one, as I've said previously, the traditional route is 'photographer starts a business' whereas were looking at 'marketing expert starts photography business'.
Unfortunately this is being judged by photographers, who will fall into the habit of discussing gear. So it's difficult to work out what's going on.

The bottom line though; @Iren will have to learn a lot about photography, and realise that she needs a lot more gear. In a 2hr studio session I might use one camera and lens, but in a 2hr lifestyle shoot it's likely to be 2 or 3 lenses and a couple of bodies. I wouldn't leave home without OCF (not everyone uses it though), reflectors etc.

So as above, training and investment, neither will do without the other. Without a 4 figure budget there's no way this can work (5 figures might be necessary).

That said, in the grand scheme of things, it's still a cheap entry into business.

 

[Iren]

This one taken few days ago (same place, same model
However, i finally managed to get focus on the eyes and they really stand out (with little help of lightroom
Natural light on the left, soft gold reflector on the right, blur background and crop of the photo.
All the feedback that i receive here helps me to see what i could improve/change and its really valuable

 

[Iren]

It's a tricky one, as I've said previously, the traditional route is 'photographer starts a business' whereas were looking at 'marketing expert starts photography business'.
Unfortunately this is being judged by photographers, who will fall into the habit of discussing gear. So it's difficult to work out what's going on.

The bottom line though; @Iren will have to learn a lot about photography, and realise that she needs a lot more gear. In a 2hr studio session I might use one camera and lens, but in a 2hr lifestyle shoot it's likely to be 2 or 3 lenses and a couple of bodies. I wouldn't leave home without OCF (not everyone uses it though), reflectors etc.

So as above, training and investment, neither will do without the other. Without a 4 figure budget there's no way this can work (5 figures might be necessary).

That said, in the grand scheme of things, it's still a cheap entry into business.

I was reading different articles about gear and it all ranges from "3 lenses you'll ever need" to "37 essentials for professional photographer"
Regarding the business, we had photographer (they work with a lot of nurseries) taken pictures at our son's nursery and they were on offer for £15 each..when i went to the website to have a look..hmmm, the quality, crop, poses etc were not great at all, so we did not get anything. So may be this is something for myself as i think i can do better than that already now

 

[Phil V]

I was reading different articles about gear and it all ranges from "3 lenses you'll ever need" to "37 essentials for professional photographer"
Regarding the business, we had photographer (they work with a lot of nurseries) taken pictures at our son's nursery and they were on offer for £15 each..when i went to the website to have a look..hmmm, the quality, crop, poses etc were not great at all, so we did not get anything. So may be this is something for myself as i think i can do better than that already now

Just for a reality check:
Do not believe those kind of articles are any use whatsoever. Seriously, get some real training from a respected source.

2ndly, that 'photographer' has already gone out of business, but he'll be replaced by another 2 next week. If you want to be like him, there's plenty of options, but if you want to create a meaningful business, do it properly.

Investing nothing gives you no inherent value, creates images with little value, and customers therefore won't want them. Invest in quality training, quality gear and quality marketing strategy and you'll create images with a high perceived value.

It's literally either /or. And the bottom feeders never ever believe us when we tell them there's no future in it, they accuse us of protectionism, of being snobs, of not understanding that some people can't afford top prices. When they finally give up, they'll blame the people who undercut them rather than the obvious.

The first rule is: Photography is a luxury, lowering our prices doesn't necessarily make us more attractive. We have to sell the sizzle, not the steak. But we have to know how to cook a steak.

 

[Morbid]

Just for a reality check:
Do not believe those kind of articles are any use whatsoever. Seriously, get some real training from a respected source.

2ndly, that 'photographer' has already gone out of business, but he'll be replaced by another 2 next week. If you want to be like him, there's plenty of options, but if you want to create a meaningful business, do it properly.

Investing nothing gives you no inherent value, creates images with little value, and customers therefore won't want them. Invest in quality training, quality gear and quality marketing strategy and you'll create images with a high perceived value.

It's literally either /or. And the bottom feeders never ever believe us when we tell them there's no future in it, they accuse us of protectionism, of being snobs, of not understanding that some people can't afford top prices. When they finally give up, they'll blame the people who undercut them rather than the obvious.

The first rule is: Photography is a luxury, lowering our prices doesn't necessarily make us more attractive. We have to sell the sizzle, not the steak. But we have to know how to cook a steak.

As Phil would normally do....this ^

I've been down this road Iren, I have put in the practice, listened to the advice, set up a website, registered with HMRC, etc. I have had a few paid jobs out of it, but not enough to feed my family or contemplate giving up the day job with the steady income and other benefits a regular job provide. It was a dream, but people do not sit at home wondering where they can get a photographer to take a shot of their kids - they take them on their phones and for most that is all they want.

The pros out there making the money do so because as Phil says they sell the sizzle, and have the photography skills to back it up. Peter Hurley, is one like this. Great shots and a nice guy, he started off in an apartment in NY with one window for his lighting. He now charges $1k per head shot season - but he didn't get there in two weeks! He could sell ice to the polar bears (can we say Eskimos...). He sells lighting kit, he sells cruises to go on to learn photography, he has many sponsors such as Canon USA - because he is a salesman who can use a camera.

Please do the research of your local area and see how many people already offer what you WANT to do - as I have already said in another thread you will be astounded by the numbers, the low prices they charge and the quality of the work (from truly awful to pretty damn good).

Please think about this, and realise before I did that putting a lot of effort / money into trying to start a business where the market is so oversaturated, discounted prices prevail and many will do it for free or 'for the experience' or for the fun of it is not the best business plan in the world. You know business, you say, do the market research then see if your plan stacks up.

 

[Iren]

All my posts end up with the discussion on why i should not do it

Thanks for sharing your experience Ian, do you still do paid work in your spare time?

I realize that being photographer is one man business and you cant really create a brand or outsource, so it starts work for you (with few exceptions of cource)
I am doing research in the area and as you say, some are really good, some are really not my taste and the prices vary.

As Phil would normally do....this ^

I've been down this road Iren, I have put in the practice, listened to the advice, set up a website, registered with HMRC, etc. I have had a few paid jobs out of it, but not enough to feed my family or contemplate giving up the day job with the steady income and other benefits a regular job provide. It was a dream, but people do not sit at home wondering where they can get a photographer to take a shot of their kids - they take them on their phones and for most that is all they want.

The pros out there making the money do so because as Phil says they sell the sizzle, and have the photography skills to back it up. Peter Hurley, is one like this. Great shots and a nice guy, he started off in an apartment in NY with one window for his lighting. He now charges $1k per head shot season - but he didn't get there in two weeks! He could sell ice to the polar bears (can we say Eskimos...). He sells lighting kit, he sells cruises to go on to learn photography, he has many sponsors such as Canon USA - because he is a salesman who can use a camera.

Please do the research of your local area and see how many people already offer what you WANT to do - as I have already said in another thread you will be astounded by the numbers, the low prices they charge and the quality of the work (from truly awful to pretty damn good).

Please think about this, and realise before I did that putting a lot of effort / money into trying to start a business where the market is so oversaturated, discounted prices prevail and many will do it for free or 'for the experience' or for the fun of it is not the best business plan in the world. You know business, you say, do the market research then see if your plan stacks up.

 

[Iren]

Thanks Phil!
Steak and sizzle, excellent comparison!
Photographers offer services, so you have to sell the experience and not just end product, i get it.

Every time i post here we end up discussing why i should not start this business, however all i ask is the feedback on my progress and some advice, so shall we pretend i am doing this just for the love of photography and want to learn how to take good shots of family and friends?!

Just for a reality check:
Do not believe those kind of articles are any use whatsoever. Seriously, get some real training from a respected source.

2ndly, that 'photographer' has already gone out of business, but he'll be replaced by another 2 next week. If you want to be like him, there's plenty of options, but if you want to create a meaningful business, do it properly.

Investing nothing gives you no inherent value, creates images with little value, and customers therefore won't want them. Invest in quality training, quality gear and quality marketing strategy and you'll create images with a high perceived value.

It's literally either /or. And the bottom feeders never ever believe us when we tell them there's no future in it, they accuse us of protectionism, of being snobs, of not understanding that some people can't afford top prices. When they finally give up, they'll blame the people who undercut them rather than the obvious.

The first rule is: Photography is a luxury, lowering our prices doesn't necessarily make us more attractive. We have to sell the sizzle, not the steak. But we have to know how to cook a steak.

 

[juggler]

Thanks Phil!
Steak and sizzle, excellent comparison!
Photographers offer services, so you have to sell the experience and not just end product, i get it.

Every time i post here we end up discussing why i should not start this business, however all i ask is the feedback on my progress and some advice, so shall we pretend i am doing this just for the love of photography and want to learn how to take good shots of family and friends?!

We can, but the advice you get should reflect what you're trying to achieve. Wanting to improve your family snaps is different from creating images that your clients won't be able to resist hanging on their walls. With family snaps you can afford a high failure rate and it doesn't matter if you've only got one inflexible lens. And wanting to learn a particular skill in an extremely limited time is different from incrementally improving what you're doing now.

Either way, training is the quickest route to improvement, even if that training is simply attending a camera club. I've never been to one btw and their reputation tells me that they vary hugely - but there is a huge amount of experience available to be tapped.

That said - the new shot is a big step in the right direction. One skill you need to develop to improve your work is self-critique. What do you think could be better?

 

[Phil V]

Thanks Phil!
Steak and sizzle, excellent comparison!
Photographers offer services, so you have to sell the experience and not just end product, i get it.

Every time i post here we end up discussing why i should not start this business, however all i ask is the feedback on my progress and some advice, so shall we pretend i am doing this just for the love of photography and want to learn how to take good shots of family and friends?!

If you think I'm saying why you shouldn't, that's a concern. I try to help with the focus (no pun intended). I really think you should do it, but to succeed, you need to be aware of the common pitfalls, and the most common one is aiming too low.
Your description of being better than the £15 photographer is a common one, my view is forget the £15 guy, you need to be as good as the £250 guy to make any money. So your task IMHO is to aim for that, otherwise you are doomed to a future of frustration.

I'm old, and if I had a £ for every £25 portrait photographer or £200 wedding photographer I've seen come and go I'd be able to retire happy.
My aim is to help you properly evaluate s business venture, not to tell you what the best lens is. Proper tuition is the best investment you can make.

 

[big soft moose]

Our posts crossed.. don't get an expensive f2.8 lens yet. I don't know Canon lenses but there must be a reasonable zoom in the £350 range, and probably £200 range second hand. You've already been told the 50mm is slow to focus - I don't think it'll do you any favours.

The 50mm isnt that slow to focus , its not great for action but it would be fine for portraits - I use mine for inside dark churches and it copes fine with 'bride walking up the aisle' type shots

that aside id say the 24-105 f3.5- f5.6 would fit the bill as a cheap but FF compatible zoom to learn with - you can get them for about £300 second hand and they hold their value pretty well if you look after it

once she's learnt whats what she could swap it in for a 24-105 f4 which are about 600 odd second hand (£800 ish new)

 

[Iren]

I will definetelly get some training, probably online and some one to one at the later stage. At the moment my time is limited to early morning and late evening as i have no childcare for my little one.
I am reading book before 7am, doing few shots during the day if i can and analysing/solving problems/doing my market research instead of evening tv. It might not get me there at the greater speed, but i really enjoy the process
Today i finally got to the bottom of the problem with my focus issues. I dont have to hold af-on button while recomposing

The last photo - i could do with less shadows on the face, remove sheep skin that covers her hand and might be do better at processing the photo to make it slightly lighter

We can, but the advice you get should reflect what you're trying to achieve. Wanting to improve your family snaps is different from creating images that your clients won't be able to resist hanging on their walls. With family snaps you can afford a high failure rate and it doesn't matter if you've only got one inflexible lens. And wanting to learn a particular skill in an extremely limited time is different from incrementally improving what you're doing now.

Either way, training is the quickest route to improvement, even if that training is simply attending a camera club. I've never been to one btw and their reputation tells me that they vary hugely - but there is a huge amount of experience available to be tapped.

That said - the new shot is a big step in the right direction. One skill you need to develop to improve your work is self-critique. What do you think could be better?

 

[Iren]

Thanks!
I will try to find someone who is using one of the lenses and see if i can try it out first

The 50mm isnt that slow to focus , its not great for action but it would be fine for portraits - I use mine for inside dark churches and it copes fine with 'bride walking up the aisle' type shots

that aside id say the 24-105 f3.5- f5.6 would fit the bill as a cheap but FF compatible zoom to learn with - you can get them for about £300 second hand and they hold their value pretty well if you look after it

once she's learnt whats what she could swap it in for a 24-105 f4 which are about 600 odd second hand (£800 ish new)

 

[Iren]

Thanks to your advice, i gave up standard modes and moved straight to Av, plus managed to set my camera to perform and it would probably take me much longer to figure that myself, so i really appreciate all the wise words i get on here regarding the technical stuff

I am aiming high, but we all have to start somewhere and i am sure in a month or two i'll be looking at the photos that i have posted now and see quite a difference.
I would love to do a course or find a mentor, but the reality is for now i rely on library books, this forum and youtube show how videos.
I am sure i can cover basics myself and then will get some tuition in the area that i need the most

If you think I'm saying why you shouldn't, that's a concern. I try to help with the focus (no pun intended). I really think you should do it, but to succeed, you need to be aware of the common pitfalls, and the most common one is aiming too low.
Your description of being better than the £15 photographer is a common one, my view is forget the £15 guy, you need to be as good as the £250 guy to make any money. So your task IMHO is to aim for that, otherwise you are doomed to a future of frustration.

I'm old, and if I had a £ for every £25 portrait photographer or £200 wedding photographer I've seen come and go I'd be able to retire happy.
My aim is to help you properly evaluate s business venture, not to tell you what the best lens is. Proper tuition is the best investment you can make.

 

[Phil V]

Please think about this, and realise before I did that putting a lot of effort / money into trying to start a business where the market is so oversaturated, discounted prices prevail and many will do it for free or 'for the experience' or for the fun of it is not the best business plan in the world. You know business, you say, do the market research then see if your plan stacks up.

Use your marketing nouse, how many customers, what's the budget? Projected income? Then investment required to provide the service.
Then return on investment and you can find a break even point.

Once you've worked that out, you'll know what skill/quality level will give you a chance to succeed. Frankly few of the people giving photography advice grasp the above concept. They have a 'rough idea' though which comes to the surface as 'you need to improve'.

I rarely (never) usually recommend this, but some of the photography societies / guilds have cheap training and brilliant mentoring schemes, which make them a good buy.

 

[Morbid]

...Thanks for sharing your experience Ian, do you still do paid work in your spare time?....

The problem I have is no spare time. I work around 45 hours a week, during March - October when our workload is extremely high. The winter months are quieter and and this winter I spent practicing lighting indoors. On top of this we have a 2 year old so play time with him is important and my other half works on a Sunday. The only day we have together is Saturday.

My last shoot was a maternity shoot for my other half's uncle and his girlfriend. They are family so no charge from me, but since then he has 'detailed' a car I bought so he's paid in trade I suppose. A day and a half's work on the paintwork with me just paying £65 for materials - he said his normal rate is £1k for this. They want baby shots doing so he now thinks I owe him, but he wanted to do my car for pics for his website so he did more than I would have wanted doing, but the car has a ceramic coat over the paintwork and it was worth doing. I'll do the shots for him but as my day rate is £600 and their shoot was 4 hours excluding processing I don't feel I owe him that much - plus we don't actually get on that well anyway, but that's another story.

Where I work want head shots doing, I quoted for doing a few people then this expanded to 23 people and is a day off work to do it, and they wouldn't increase the price so I've got out of doing it as I will make nothing out of it once I equate the value of a day off to what they were paying less 40% tax. Once I explained the situation the contact agreed to review the budget and do it later in the year when I'm less busy.

This was the defining moment for me, even if I get more paid work coming through I have no time free for doing it. So I'm concentrating on the day job and keeping photography as a hobby and if people want to pay me for the odd gig I'll do it.

Your situation is different to mine, this is just explaining the decision I have reached. I'm happy to have a hobby back and I've been enjoying the day job much more since concentrating my efforts on that - and since telling my boss I am not pursuing photography part-time I have been given more responsibility.

I'm happier since making the decision and not spending all evening, every evening processing shots from half hours worth of practice shots! My wife to be is much happier too, as we spend more quality time together now I'm not on the laptop all the time.

ETA: it's the people like Phil and Simon amongst many others that improved my photography no end in a few months. I'm not claiming to be great by any means but much improved from when I joined TP, and I've been shooting SLRs since I was a teenager using film and all manual cameras back in the 80's. I was posting pics of my son so often it started to annoy a few 'pookeyheaded' people, so I refrain from that now. The home studio room I used has been put back together as a room we use as a family again. I only got the camera out for Finley's birthday day out, have been too busy at work and with wedding stuff to have any time. I'll be taking on our honeymoon though so hope to get some nice shots, but I'm less obsessed by it all now.

 

[Phil V]

This one taken few days ago (same place, same model
However, i finally managed to get focus on the eyes and they really stand out (with little help of lightroom
Natural light on the left, soft gold reflector on the right, blur background and crop of the photo.
All the feedback that i receive here helps me to see what i could improve/change and its really valuable

That's a great 'mum shot', you've finally nailed focus, the light is nice, but you've lost the hand and the background is cluttered. engagement is there though. It's the best yet, but it'd go in the 'maybe' bin round here and just the bin if it was for a customer.

 

[Iren]

Thanks Phil!
Probably will put business plan back to priority list
I found photographer who can give me one to one tutorials, theory and practice in a few sessions as i am keen to learn bit more technical stuff, composition and practice.

Use your marketing nouse, how many customers, what's the budget? Projected income? Then investment required to provide the service.
Then return on investment and you can find a break even point.

Once you've worked that out, you'll know what skill/quality level will give you a chance to succeed. Frankly few of the people giving photography advice grasp the above concept. They have a 'rough idea' though which comes to the surface as 'you need to improve'.

I rarely (never) usually recommend this, but some of the photography societies / guilds have cheap training and brilliant mentoring schemes, which make them a good buy.

 

[Iren]

Thanks for sharing your story Ian!
I guess its tricky when it comes to friends and family, even more if you exchange some kind of services.
Its a great balance enjoying your job and having a hobby that you love!
If things wont work out for me, at least i will have a hobby

The problem I have is no spare time. I work around 45 hours a week, during March - October when our workload is extremely high. The winter months are quieter and and this winter I spent practicing lighting indoors. On top of this we have a 2 year old so play time with him is important and my other half works on a Sunday. The only day we have together is Saturday.

My last shoot was a maternity shoot for my other half's uncle and his girlfriend. They are family so no charge from me, but since then he has 'detailed' a car I bought so he's paid in trade I suppose. A day and a half's work on the paintwork with me just paying £65 for materials - he said his normal rate is £1k for this. They want baby shots doing so he now thinks I owe him, but he wanted to do my car for pics for his website so he did more than I would have wanted doing, but the car has a ceramic coat over the paintwork and it was worth doing. I'll do the shots for him but as my day rate is £600 and their shoot was 4 hours excluding processing I don't feel I owe him that much - plus we don't actually get on that well anyway, but that's another story.

Where I work want head shots doing, I quoted for doing a few people then this expanded to 23 people and is a day off work to do it, and they wouldn't increase the price so I've got out of doing it as I will make nothing out of it once I equate the value of a day off to what they were paying less 40% tax. Once I explained the situation the contact agreed to review the budget and do it later in the year when I'm less busy.

This was the defining moment for me, even if I get more paid work coming through I have no time free for doing it. So I'm concentrating on the day job and keeping photography as a hobby and if people want to pay me for the odd gig I'll do it.

Your situation is different to mine, this is just explaining the decision I have reached. I'm happy to have a hobby back and I've been enjoying the day job much more since concentrating my efforts on that - and since telling my boss I am not pursuing photography part-time I have been given more responsibility.

I'm happier since making the decision and not spending all evening, every evening processing shots from half hours worth of practice shots! My wife to be is much happier too, as we spend more quality time together now I'm not on the laptop all the time.

ETA: it's the people like Phil and Simon amongst many others that improved my photography no end in a few months. I'm not claiming to be great by any means but much improved from when I joined TP, and I've been shooting SLRs since I was a teenager using film and all manual cameras back in the 80's. I was posting pics of my son so often it started to annoy a few 'pookeyheaded' people, so I refrain from that now. The home studio room I used has been put back together as a room we use as a family again. I only got the camera out for Finley's birthday day out, have been too busy at work and with wedding stuff to have any time. I'll be taking on our honeymoon though so hope to get some nice shots, but I'm less obsessed by it all now.

The problem I have is no spare time. I work around 45 hours a week, during March - October when our workload is extremely high. The winter months are quieter and and this winter I spent practicing lighting indoors. On top of this we have a 2 year old so play time with him is important and my other half works on a Sunday. The only day we have together is Saturday.

My last shoot was a maternity shoot for my other half's uncle and his girlfriend. They are family so no charge from me, but since then he has 'detailed' a car I bought so he's paid in trade I suppose. A day and a half's work on the paintwork with me just paying £65 for materials - he said his normal rate is £1k for this. They want baby shots doing so he now thinks I owe him, but he wanted to do my car for pics for his website so he did more than I would have wanted doing, but the car has a ceramic coat over the paintwork and it was worth doing. I'll do the shots for him but as my day rate is £600 and their shoot was 4 hours excluding processing I don't feel I owe him that much - plus we don't actually get on that well anyway, but that's another story.

Where I work want head shots doing, I quoted for doing a few people then this expanded to 23 people and is a day off work to do it, and they wouldn't increase the price so I've got out of doing it as I will make nothing out of it once I equate the value of a day off to what they were paying less 40% tax. Once I explained the situation the contact agreed to review the budget and do it later in the year when I'm less busy.

This was the defining moment for me, even if I get more paid work coming through I have no time free for doing it. So I'm concentrating on the day job and keeping photography as a hobby and if people want to pay me for the odd gig I'll do it.

Your situation is different to mine, this is just explaining the decision I have reached. I'm happy to have a hobby back and I've been enjoying the day job much more since concentrating my efforts on that - and since telling my boss I am not pursuing photography part-time I have been given more responsibility.

I'm happier since making the decision and not spending all evening, every evening processing shots from half hours worth of practice shots! My wife to be is much happier too, as we spend more quality time together now I'm not on the laptop all the time.

ETA: it's the people like Phil and Simon amongst many others that improved my photography no end in a few months. I'm not claiming to be great by any means but much improved from when I joined TP, and I've been shooting SLRs since I was a teenager using film and all manual cameras back in the 80's. I was posting pics of my son so often it started to annoy a few 'pookeyheaded' people, so I refrain from that now. The home studio room I used has been put back together as a room we use as a family again. I only got the camera out for Finley's birthday day out, have been too busy at work and with wedding stuff to have any time. I'll be taking on our honeymoon though so hope to get some nice shots, but I'm less obsessed by it all now.

 

[juggler]

I found photographer who can give me one to one tutorials, theory and practice in a few sessions as i am keen to learn bit more technical stuff, composition and practice.

etc..

 

[cargo]

Hey stop with the 6d bashing mines crying in the corner now

That aside I enjoyed reading this and wish Irene the best of luck. I am sure she will do ok.


Gaz