Best Equipment for Portraits??

Also on the two examples you link to, if you look at the catchlights in the eyes they are nice regular shapes filling approx 1/5 the area of the iris and I think have been created by the use of big 'softbox' located befhind and above the photographers head??? In portraiture catchlights rule :)

Continuing to compare your nicely creditable efforts to those taken under different conditions with different kit by other photographers with different camera and post processing skills is not going to take you to a happy place! Yes, by all means aspire to create images of the same quality but do not beat yourself up all the time because your efforts have yet to get to that 'place'.

There are oodles of books and web pages about taking portraits using natural light and equally many I have no doubt about the same subject using just a single light/flashgun ~ you could do worse than reading up about how to do this, that in itself will improve the images you create and also learn about post processing. The edits I did were very simple steps.........there are more in depth methods used by portrait togs (and other genres) that can do much much more to an image!
 
kira said:
I don't know.... it's better than when I first tried I guess

But it's not this...
http://www.flickr.com/photos/sundustphotos/5642978868/in/set-72157625916636086

I just do not know how to get that sharpness or that clear

And look at these eyes....
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5036/5887042053_b351ab742f_z.jpg

:crying:
Click to expand...

I'm thinking I prefer your's; Much nicer, natural expression :) although I'd agree about cropping the top of the fence.
Those blue eyes are amazing, and I'd expect a fair enhancement has been done in post production.
Have a look at some of the videos on youtube covering photoshop, you'll be amazed what can be done. Who says a picture never lies :)
(Search youtube under: photoshop, enhancement, retouching, makeover, slimming etc...)

As for the Tamron 70-300, I've got this lens on my Canon 500D, so similar to yours. It can be tricky to get spot focus set on a small objects but it is capable of taking sharp images.
Elle Auto Focus: http://www.flickr.com/photos/56025993@N03/5976262400/
Robin Manual Focus: http://www.flickr.com/photos/56025993@N03/5976261890/
Rose Auto: http://www.flickr.com/photos/56025993@N03/5382077559/
Ladybird Manual Focus: http://www.flickr.com/photos/56025993@N03/5971490057/
Some of the more recent shots of my friends and the animals were taken on my Sigma 50mm 1.4 for comparison. (I should start a critique thread :) )
Also, take a look at your last photo of the girl and compare it to what you were taking a week or 2 ago. It's well lit, in focus, not blurred (y) Learning the technical stuff will take a little while but you will get there.
 
Look at the catchlights in the eyes of the two examples you linked to. They are even and make a big difference to the overall look of the portrait.

Kira, one piece of advice I would give you is this. When you have finished shooting and uploaded you images, go through and delete anything that at first sight is obviously crap. Then, unless there is any real urgency, leave them for a couple of days. I have found it quite difficult to be objective about the images when I am still emotionally close to the taking process. I know pros don't need to do this but then they have a lot more experience and as amateurs we have the luxury of a bit more time.

It takes time and experience to be really objective about your pictures, and by that I mean positively objective. It's too easy to go "bin it, bin it, bin it" when in fact many of the shots are perfectly acceptable.
 
Box Brownie said:
And as Bidz asks just like I did about the edits posted "what do you think of the images..............???" How pleasing are they to you?
[/B]
Click to expand...

Hello, sorry I have only been brief on here last few days as I've been getting quite stressed out

The ones you edited for me.... are they sharper? I do prefer them but it's still MY picture that I'm not happy with.

My next door neighbour does photography as a hobby and photographs things like birds and butterfly's. He let me borrow his Canon 60mm lens yesterday so I had a little go on that and I guess some of the shots came out ok BUT I still found the focus not brilliant and I do now realise it must be me and not the equipment, as when I was trying to focus close up I realise how unsteady I was and as said previously - even slight movement can make something out of focus (although I do use the AI servo)

There are 6 I've put up http://www.flickr.com/photos/kira_farrow/sets/72157627289468454/

I also think I still do not understand all the shutter speed talk

Like someone said you shouldn't go lower than the length of your lens
and putting the ISO up high can create noise.... so I try to stick by all these tips but a lot of the time the picture can still seem dark and I'm like well what do I do now? If I can't go lower than this or higher than that..... It just gets so frustrating

The thing I'm mostly upset about though is the focusing.... especially when I'm taking photo's of Izzy.... I just want her eyes to be really sharp and I can't achieve that

Plus I have yet to take some pictures of her with mum and dad and I am dreading it as I do not think I am going to be able to do the whole 3 of them in focus.... I just cannot seem to ever get it right!

I have now also been asked to take some photo's of a pink taxi cab!? :thinking:

My partners mum has a friend who is starting up a bit of a business and needs to make cards and flyers. Well his mum keeps telling me, I should "start charging and I'll get some people who want pictures done"

Me being me am too scared, and do not think I am good enough to do that.... (which is also a lot of the reason I am desperately trying to learn as I have had a few people ask me to do some photo's for them.... God knows why!!)

Anyway.... I have my standard kit lens and my 50mm and I have absolutely no idea how to take these photo's of a cab?!


I would like to scream right about now but it's 1.30 in the morning and I don't think it's such a good idea!
 
Andy_S said:
I'm thinking I prefer your's; Much nicer, natural expression :) although I'd agree about cropping the top of the fence.
Those blue eyes are amazing, and I'd expect a fair enhancement has been done in post production.
Have a look at some of the videos on youtube covering photoshop, you'll be amazed what can be done. Who says a picture never lies :)
(Search youtube under: photoshop, enhancement, retouching, makeover, slimming etc...)

As for the Tamron 70-300, I've got this lens on my Canon 500D, so similar to yours. It can be tricky to get spot focus set on a small objects but it is capable of taking sharp images.
Elle Auto Focus: http://www.flickr.com/photos/56025993@N03/5976262400/
Robin Manual Focus: http://www.flickr.com/photos/56025993@N03/5976261890/
Rose Auto: http://www.flickr.com/photos/56025993@N03/5382077559/
Ladybird Manual Focus: http://www.flickr.com/photos/56025993@N03/5971490057/
Some of the more recent shots of my friends and the animals were taken on my Sigma 50mm 1.4 for comparison. (I should start a critique thread :) )
Also, take a look at your last photo of the girl and compare it to what you were taking a week or 2 ago. It's well lit, in focus, not blurred (y) Learning the technical stuff will take a little while but you will get there.
Click to expand...

Why am I not getting sharp focused Images like this?! I really am trying everything I am being told :crying:
 
Hi Kira

:) Well, a few thoughts in haste before I fall over asleep on the PC!

Granted the poster on the other thread said he did not PP that image in any way ~ well I have not checked what camera he said he used but the Sigma lens I think he mentioned does appear to be stellar if he is achieving such out of camera sharpness, though another question to ask him (?) is what incamera settings has he used for contrast & sharpness???

Edit ~ I have just checked and he says he uses the Sony A700 camera, now apart from this having a few more MP on the sensor (12.1MP compared to your 400D at 10MP) it has maybe more significantly Anti Camera Shake builtin to the body so every lens benefits from image stabilisation = greater potential for sharper images because it removes the very slight wobble of the photographer! So not so much "best equiment" but more a case of the A700 & Sigma 85mm f1.4 lens in his hands yields those results.

As for still relying on AI Servo when trying to capture static people subjects IMO you are creating a rod for your own back as any movement on your part or the subject will cause the camera to refocus and as mentioned AI Servo lets you fire the shutter whether it has attained focus lock or not!!!!

As for my edits ~ well Izzy Sleeping the eyelashes and her fringe have come up very nicely and are sharp IMO, based on your incamera settings that create YOUR (not shouting, just making the same emphasis you did ;) ) image will never be crisp because it needs Post Processing as evidenced by my edits. You need to accept that PP'ing will be required for the vast majority of images. Having said try setting the incamera sharpening to very close the max level and see how you like the sharpness at that level?

Holding the camera steady is 100% key to making sure a picture is in focus ~ getting the right choice of ISO and aperture etc is needed but without a steady hold and even pressure when you fire the shutter it will all be to nowt. I'll ask the daft question that no one has asked ~ just how are you holding the camera??? I tell what take a picture of yourself looking into a mirror, a very quick way to show us your holding technique.

Catchlights ~ they are the "lights" you see reflected in the subjects eyes :)

So just to re-emphasis the "why am I not getting sharp photographs like other folk..." good technique holding with ensuring the AF point is on the eyes together with choice of aperture to make sure the other parts of the face are also in focus (DoF) & gently pressing the shutter button will avoid camera shake, good exposure which by the way in the main you seem to have nailed (y) , and last but not least the need to Post Process to yield that sharpness you crave.
 
Last edited:
dupe again :(
 
Last edited:
Kira, if you don't think your pictures of the caterpillar and ladybird are sharp, then you need your eyes testing. They are.

It is frustrating when you want a certain shutter speed or ISO or whatever, but you can't always get that - it depends on the light. You just have to choose the best compromise settings and work around problems. One of the options would be flash and, as mentioned before, if you can get that working it will almost certainly give your images the pop and sparkle you want, but it's maybe a bridge to far right now.

What picture styles settings are you using? Try Sharpness at 5, Contrast on +1, and Saturation on +1, Colour tone on zero.

Talk to your neighbour. A bit of one to one would be good and he should be able to explain the basics (y)
 
Good morning Kira & all :)

I have only just looked at the set HoppyUK refers to and I 100% agree with him the Macro shots of the catapillar and the ladybird do you credit and as you can see the DoF is razor thin using the lens so close in to the subjects ~ nothing in those immediately suggests an issue with your handholding technique of the camera, so as I asked above just how are you holding the camera with those pictures compared to the portraits you have previously posted? And indeed what were your other settings for example were they using AI Servo or One Shot???

In respect to the two of Izzy ~ the first one close in you seem to have missed the critical focus as it look like her fringe and eyebrow over her right eye nearer the end is sharper than the eyes (though it might sharpen up AOK in post) the DoF is razor thin but the other one with the wall in the background, again like the catapillar & ladybird it does look like you nailled it (y)

So the sort of self question you should be asking and indeed 'talking out loud to us' is what did I do differently on those that gave me such nice results compared to the previous ones :)

Oh, she certainly seems to be more co-operative posing for you now than you have indicated in the past :LOL:

Edit - as for Hoppy's suggestion about an eye test, please do not be offended but if you are not seeing what we are then it is either that and/or your computer screen that is misleading you??? And for the record - the Canon 60mm Macro lens is considered to be a very contrasty & sharp lens and it focal length does make it suitable for portraiture but I have heard folk say that it will show all sorts of blemishes that other lens may leave soft i.e. not very flattering ;)
 
Last edited:
Well, one thing that is different is that the photos of the insect are shot at 1/100 or faster, whilst the two of the child are shot at 1/60th and 1/80th. With a 60mm lens, you really should be at a shutter speed of 1/EFFECTIVE focal length which for a 60mm and your camera (effective focal length = focal length x 1.6) is faster than 1/96 (call that 1/100). It may be your shutter speed is too low.

Try again with your 50mm or your neighbours 60mm and change to Tv mode and set the shutter speed to 1/100 or faster (1/125, 1/160...).

I assume with the pictures of the child, you are using centre point focusing only and focusing on the inner corner of the right eye?
 
How are you selecting the central focus point? Are you 100% sure you have ONLY the centre focus point selected? To select centre point only, you press the button on the far right of the back of the camera to activate the focus point selection. Once the manual focus point selection is activated you can change the active focus point by using the four direction buttons on the rear of the camera. The active point is shown in yellow on the rear LCD screen, and also indicated in the viewfinder.

If you have all points selected, it won't lock onto what you think it will lock onto. It will lock to the thing closest to you.
 
kira said:
There are 6 I've put up http://www.flickr.com/photos/kira_farrow/sets/72157627289468454/


The thing I'm mostly upset about though is the focusing.... especially when I'm taking photo's of Izzy.... I just want her eyes to be really sharp and I can't achieve that
Click to expand...

Hi Kira

I have selected just this part of your earlier post so this reply should be read in combination with my earlier one as well!

Just what were you doing differentlly apart from the shutter speed dropping a tad too much maybe, as noted by arad85, between the insect pictures and those last two of Izzy??? And why equally do you not think at least in the second one of her that her eyes are not sharp enough?

For you to not be able to see the insects and those two of Izzy are way better than some of your earlier ones and also though you say you liked the edits I did for you but you did say ".....are they sharper?" what did you mean with the question mark, do they not appear sharper to you at all compared to the original I also posted??? Just what are you viewing them on? I am concerned about the quality of your PC monitor and its setup if you cannot 'see' how sharp your own images and also you say they (some you have not posted?) look too dark?

Oh as for the requests by friends to take pictures ~ be happy that they think your pictures are good enough.....................but ask yourself are you happy and ready to do so, if not politely decline and tell them next year when you have perfected your techniques :D
 
Last edited:
HoppyUK said:
Kira, if you don't think your pictures of the caterpillar and ladybird are sharp, then you need your eyes testing. They are.

It is frustrating when you want a certain shutter speed or ISO or whatever, but you can't always get that - it depends on the light. You just have to choose the best compromise settings and work around problems. One of the options would be flash and, as mentioned before, if you can get that working it will almost certainly give your images the pop and sparkle you want, but it's maybe a bridge to far right now.

What picture styles settings are you using? Try Sharpness at 5, Contrast on +1, and Saturation on +1, Colour tone on zero.

Talk to your neighbour. A bit of one to one would be good and he should be able to explain the basics (y)
Click to expand...

I did sharpen them a little bit.... I only have a free download version of a program called Photoscape and it seems ok for me to understand and use.... Only thing Is on the computer it seems ok but if I print it out and I have sharpened too much I can see the noise quite a bit so I have to be subtle.

I usually just use standard as I guess it's easiest to work around if needed but I haven't changed the other bits much as I wasn't sure if I would ruin or mess up the colours and stuff.

As for my neighbour, I have spoke to him a few times but to be honest I think you guys know more about this than him, he obviously knows a far amount.... He uses a 7D and some Sigma 105 lens or something like that he said but I asked him a few questions before and he didn't really give an answer that really helped much. He said to try taking shots on the continuous setting as he said at least 1 of them should come out ok :thinking:
 
Box Brownie said:
Good morning Kira & all :)

I have only just looked at the set HoppyUK refers to and I 100% agree with him the Macro shots of the catapillar and the ladybird do you credit and as you can see the DoF is razor thin using the lens so close in to the subjects ~ nothing in those immediately suggests an issue with your handholding technique of the camera, so as I asked above just how are you holding the camera with those pictures compared to the portraits you have previously posted? And indeed what were your other settings for example were they using AI Servo or One Shot???

In respect to the two of Izzy ~ the first one close in you seem to have missed the critical focus as it look like her fringe and eyebrow over her right eye nearer the end is sharper than the eyes (though it might sharpen up AOK in post) the DoF is razor thin but the other one with the wall in the background, again like the catapillar & ladybird it does look like you nailled it (y)

So the sort of self question you should be asking and indeed 'talking out loud to us' is what did I do differently on those that gave me such nice results compared to the previous ones :)

Oh, she certainly seems to be more co-operative posing for you now than you have indicated in the past :LOL:

Edit - as for Hoppy's suggestion about an eye test, please do not be offended but if you are not seeing what we are then it is either that and/or your computer screen that is misleading you??? And for the record - the Canon 60mm Macro lens is considered to be a very contrasty & sharp lens and it focal length does make it suitable for portraiture but I have heard folk say that it will show all sorts of blemishes that other lens may leave soft i.e. not very flattering ;)
Click to expand...

I think I actually used both so I actually am not sure on the specific until I check (how bad is that) Because I assume with maybe the wind and my slight movement that the AI servo may of been a better choice?

The camera holding, I have my right hand on the side with my finger on the button - obviously lol and my left hand is usually holding the bottom of the camera and the lens

Izzy isn't more co-operative as such, I had my mum behind me trying to make funny faces and we also had to try and play some kind of musical status where we would get her to jump and then stand still which Is when I would take my shot.... Maybe why I couldn't nail focus as it had to be quick... I don't know!
 
arad85 said:
Well, one thing that is different is that the photos of the insect are shot at 1/100 or faster, whilst the two of the child are shot at 1/60th and 1/80th. With a 60mm lens, you really should be at a shutter speed of 1/EFFECTIVE focal length which for a 60mm and your camera (effective focal length = focal length x 1.6) is faster than 1/96 (call that 1/100). It may be your shutter speed is too low.

Try again with your 50mm or your neighbours 60mm and change to Tv mode and set the shutter speed to 1/100 or faster (1/125, 1/160...).

I assume with the pictures of the child, you are using centre point focusing only and focusing on the inner corner of the right eye?
Click to expand...

Thank you, I will give it a go.... I had to give the 60 back yesterday but will try it on my 50

Only reason the shutter speed would of been at 1/80 or 60 is that it possibly would of been coming out darker.... which is why I was frustrated as I know the advice I was given was not to go lower than the lens focal length
 
arad85 said:
How are you selecting the central focus point? Are you 100% sure you have ONLY the centre focus point selected? To select centre point only, you press the button on the far right of the back of the camera to activate the focus point selection. Once the manual focus point selection is activated you can change the active focus point by using the four direction buttons on the rear of the camera. The active point is shown in yellow on the rear LCD screen, and also indicated in the viewfinder.

If you have all points selected, it won't lock onto what you think it will lock onto. It will lock to the thing closest to you.
Click to expand...

Yeah I do know how to do this..... probably why I find it even more frustrating
 
kira said:
Only reason the shutter speed would of been at 1/80 or 60 is that it possibly would of been coming out darker.... which is why I was frustrated as I know the advice I was given was not to go lower than the lens focal length
Click to expand...
You need to not go lower than lens length x crop factor. Your crop factor is 1.6 so you need to be multiplying lens lengths by 1.6 to get the magic shutter speed. The way to increase shutter speed is open the aperture a bit. For example, using f5.6 instead of f8 in the last shot of the sequence would have doubled your shutter speed to 1/125th.

For your 50mm, aim to set the aperture so you have a shutter speed of at least 1/80th, better would be 1/100th. For the 60mm, aim for at least 1/100th, better would be 1/125th
 
kira said:
Thank you, I will give it a go.... I had to give the 60 back yesterday but will try it on my 50

Only reason the shutter speed would of been at 1/80 or 60 is that it possibly would of been coming out darker.... which is why I was frustrated as I know the advice I was given was not to go lower than the lens focal length
Click to expand...

Hi Kira

I am puzzled as to your statement that lowering the shutter speed gave you darker images???

What setting are you using?

Can I state what is frankly the obvious ~ to create a correct exposure requires a certain amount of light to hit the sensor. That amount of light will always be the same (and hopefully I now descibe correctly because it has been many years since I used my Weston Lught Meter) the value is callled EV (Exposure Value) and for correct exposure this would be EV0, if you went EV-1 that would be underexposure and EV+1 would of course be overexposure. I do not outline that to confuse you but expand my statement that the amount of light hitting the sensor for a correct exposure will always be the same. By example for a specific ISO the meter may say if you have set f8 in Av mode a shutter speed of 1/250 but if suddenly the clouds draken the sky the shutter speed will fall quickly to say under 1/100 to make sure the same amount of light hits the sensor conversely if the sun comes out from behind a cloud and shines on you subject the shutter speed will rise to maybe 1/500, in other words in this case the shutter is open more briefly to let the same amount of light in!

In actual practice your control over said exposure if the Shutter Speed & the Aperture either/both of tghese being influenced by in simple terms how sunny it i.e. the choice you make of the ISO. Therefore with Matrix (Evaluative) Metering the whole scene is metered and the camera depending on whther you have selected Aperture Av or Shutter Tv priority will determine the setting(s). Yes it is possible to uder or overexpose but this can be in part mitigated for by using Centre Weighted Metering, this tells the meter to mainly meter off of the subject you have focused on :) Clever eh! Having said that there are situations where deliberate over or under exposure is good but again this needs to be done based on knowing why you need to do it!!!

If however you are using Manual Settings ~ it is very easy if you do not understand exactly what you are doing to underexpose very easily.

Broadly speaking a well exposed image even at higher ISO should be fairly noise free but each camera body will handle noise differently and I am unsure about the 400D at higher ISO's

PS Elements is not a fortune so do please get it if you can as you are more likely to get supportive help for that than Photoscape which until I Google it I have never heard of ???
 
Last edited:
kira said:
I think I actually used both so I actually am not sure on the specific until I check (how bad is that) Because I assume with maybe the wind and my slight movement that the AI servo may of been a better choice?

The camera holding, I have my right hand on the side with my finger on the button - obviously lol and my left hand is usually holding the bottom of the camera and the lens

Izzy isn't more co-operative as such, I had my mum behind me trying to make funny faces and we also had to try and play some kind of musical status where we would get her to jump and then stand still which Is when I would take my shot.... Maybe why I couldn't nail focus as it had to be quick... I don't know!
Click to expand...

This is why I asked the question ~ your left hand should always not just usually support the base of the camera and the lens that hand carries the weight and the right hand is for control and lateral support thus with very little of the weight loading in/on the right hand the pressing of the shutter should be smooth & not jerky :)
 
kira said:
Why am I not getting sharp focused Images like this?! I really am trying everything I am being told :crying:
Click to expand...

With the execption of my robin, mine were shot at 1/250 second, using strong sunlight/flash. The robin was 1/80 @300mm on a crop sensor, 480mm effective!!! (y) Full sized it's even better.

I will add there were many failed attempts at both outdoor shots getting everything spot on. I'm still learning. Remember people on here, and other photographic sites, usually only post their best shots. Not the blury out of focus, 'I look awful' type shots I keep getting taged in on Facebook :D
Your insect shots are perfect for sharpness, looking at the exif data you've upped the shuter speed which has helped greatly. If you look at the thickness of a hair, or detail in an iris, your camera only need move a fraction of this while the shutter is open to blur slightly and give a soft image.
To compare the 70-300 Tamron with the 60mm which costs 3x as much is a little unfair, but it I'll agree it's the resuts that count. I do want a proper macro lens but can't justify it on top of recent purchases :)

Box Brownie said:
Hi Kira

I am puzzled as to your statement that lowering the shutter speed gave you darker images???
Click to expand...
I'm guessing she meant 1/100 is lower than 1/50. Yes in terms of shutter/exposure duration, but speed relates to how fast it happens, 1/100 is faster than 1/50. Using a slower shutter speed means it takes longer for the shutter to open & close which will allow in more light and give a brighter image.
 
Last edited:
Andy_S said:
With the execption of my robin, mine were shot at 1/250 second, using strong sunlight/flash. The robin was 1/80 @300mm on a crop sensor, 480mm effective!!! (y) Full sized it's even better.

I will add there were many failed attempts at both outdoor shots getting everything spot on. I'm still learning. Remember people on here, and other photographic sites, usually only post their best shots. Not the blury out of focus, 'I look awful' type shots I keep getting taged in on Facebook :D
Your insect shots are perfect for sharpness, looking at the exif data you've upped the shuter speed which has helped greatly. If you look at the thickness of a hair, or detail in an iris, your camera only need move a fraction of this while the shutter is open to blur slightly and give a soft image.
To compare the 70-300 Tamron with the 60mm which costs 3x as much is a little unfair, but it I'll agree it's the resuts that count. I do want a proper macro lens but can't justify it on top of recent purchases :)


I'm guessing she meant 1/100 is lower than 1/50. Yes in terms of shutter/exposure duration, but speed relates to how fast it happens, 1/100 is faster than 1/50. Using a slower shutter speed means it takes longer for the shutter to open & close which will allow in more light and give a brighter image.
Click to expand...

Hi Andy

What you say will only apply if you are deliberately over exposing ~ as I say above a properly exposed image will be achieved on the basis of the shutter speed & aperture combination (in respect of the ISO chosen) being balanced for want of a better word, if you are in Av mode and you setup the camera in a controlled environment i.e. the light is even and fixed in intensity as you alter the aperture the shutter speed will change in coresponding manner to ensure the same amount of light always reaches the sensor as I stated above :) If you use exposure compensation (EC) to actively over or underexpose yes that is the same as using Manual mode where you are using the "meter" in the viewfinder to to go off the central 'match point'.

Thus your statement when applied to Tv mode allows no more light to hit the sensor as the aperture will open to compensate for the faster shutter speed! Go test it and tell me what you get ;)
 
Last edited:
For the record ~ when shooting at airshows you have aircraft against a bright sky even if overcast it is very bright in relation to the plane thus to ensure the subject is correctly exposed you need to dial a +EC of up to 2 stops depending on how bright the sky is i.e. overcast to bright sun. This setting not withstanding that with propellor driven aircraft you are aiming for a shutter speed of approx 1/320 or lower and in very bright sun blue sky conditions that can sometimes mean an aperture of f16 at ISO100 and boy you had better have dust free sensor to avoid seeing dust bunnies :(

That method also applies when you have a backlit portrait where flash is not available to do a fill flash, you over expose and sacrifice the background to (in many cases) a dramatic overexposure to make sure the persons face is well enough exposed!
 
I forgot to say ~ that the various metering modes and the function to actively over or under expose are there for a reason in that real life is not uniform all subjects & scenes have the potential to lead to the metering resulting in a slightly under or over image, that is when either by experience or experimentation the photographer uses a different metering setting and/or as appropriate uses the EC control ~ now we have dSLRs we get a histogram and that is your friend.

But one thing for sure we all have bad images caused by a variety of reasons but all being well the number of good images (keepers) increase over time as experience builds the knowledge of how to interpret errors and msitakes to then reduce the chance of happening next time ~ when I am perfect I will let you know but it will not be in this lifetime :LOL:
 
Box Brownie said:
Hi Andy

What you say will only apply if you are deliberately over exposing...
Click to expand...

It applies to whatever exposure you are getting. If the original shot is too dark a longer shutter speed can result in the correct exposure. Or conversely using a faster shutter speed to get a darker image.
Given a constant aperture and iso: Using a faster shutter speed lets less light in so you get a darker image, a longer shutter speed lets more light in giving a brighter image. Getting the correct exposure is a balencing act of each.
We are not arguing on the basics, but in using Shutter Priority (Tv) mode you, (the camera) are also changing the aperture size and I was only commenting on the confusion about shutter speeds and their effect on the exposure.
 
The max ISO on auto ISO on the 400D is 400. The last pic in the set is set at F8, ISO 400, +1EV and shutter 1/80th with Av mode selected. Have to say that with an ISO value that autos so low (auto ISO max 400), I'd be tempted to shoot in Tv mode or even M to make sure I got the shutter speed right... A flash would help here enormously - as would the selective use of higher ISOs - assuming image noise isn't an issue...
 
At the moment, i am too scared to take the camera off Auto!! So you are doing really well Kira.
 
Right..only just seen this thread.:)



The shot of my daughter has only had exposure & Contrast tweeked....nothing else at all Box Brownie.The catchlights in her eyes are from the bedroom window not from a softbox..(I don't even own a softbox yet).It's just good old natural light..the best imo. ;)

Here is the shot straight of the camera...no tweeking at all.
5982985658_0e6be40f20_z.jpg


Kira the new lens that I got made a whole lot of difference to getting the shots but you can bet for every shot that I get in focus I have another 10 out of focus.Especially with the kids running round all over the place like lunatics.Also my daughter really has big blue stunning eyes which helps getting the eyes as the main focus point.

This shot is with my Sony 30mm macro lens and this pic has had sharpening done to her eyes but shows that you can get good shots with even cheapish lenses.

connieresized.jpg


Like I said Kira for every pic that is in focus I get plent that are out of focus..especially at 1.4.

5982462695_05fdac5288_z.jpg




P.S

I didn't chop my sons foot of in processing Box Brownie.That was my mistake when taking the shot and rushing it as he was all over the place running about.Would have loved to have got the shot fully composed but the little ens are quite quick. :D
 
Last edited:
Hi Dean :wave:

Great that you 'called in here' with the backstory to that stunner of an image ~ a tweak in contrast does have an effect when it comes to edge sharpness i.e. boundaries of areas of light & dark will be enhanced ~ that is the effect when using Local Contrast Enhancement "settings" in the Unsharp Mask sharpening tool but you certainly nailed it with that image.

As for the use of natural light ~ I am a complete novice when it comes to flash so could not agree more. The light you have looks quite soft & even and its size made me think it was a softbox but though you said you tweaked the exposure such softness makes me think the day was slightly overcast and the window is on the north'ing side of the house :thinking:

Cannot recall exactly what I said re the chopped off foot ~ but did surmise it was at the time of the shot hence the 'oh why did he chop it off....'

[intermission on] On a side note, how do find the Sony. I have heard/read good reports (y) they got a good deal when they bought out the Minolta name and technology "book" ~ the image stabilisation on my old Konica Minolta A2 was great as I continue to like testing how long I do handheld long exposures, using my Canon gear I think it is 1.3seconds! This one http://www.flickr.com/photos/8068474@N05/5727693403/sizes/o/in/photostream/ and believe me I had a goodly number of rubbish ones :bang: And when I started the exposure the lady in the forground had both feet in shot ;) [/intermission off]
 
Do any of you get your photos printed out?

I downloaded a free trial of Elements 9 by the way but do not really have a clue what to do with it!

I don't think it is my eyes or laptop lol, Yes the insect ones come out quite sharp but I don't think they are spot on focused, well the caterpillar ones aren't

I've taken a bit of a break to be honest, been getting headaches with it stressing me out (I tend to get stressed quite a lot)

And now I am trying to think of how to photograph this taxi next week!
 
I did a Google for anyting about "car photography" and top of the page is http://www.carphototutorials.com/tutorials.html maybe that will give you some pointers???

If you check Flickr out for cars I also think you will find some to inspire you :) Above all have fun ~ a pink taxi sounds.................er kind of strange, whatever happened to the Black Cab ;) :LOL:
 
DEANSUPREME said:
Right..only just seen this thread.:)



The shot of my daughter has only had exposure & Contrast tweeked....nothing else at all Box Brownie.The catchlights in her eyes are from the bedroom window not from a softbox..(I don't even own a softbox yet).It's just good old natural light..the best imo. ;)

Here is the shot straight of the camera...no tweeking at all.
5982985658_0e6be40f20_z.jpg
Click to expand...

Do you remember what settings you used for this shot?
 
Also.... one more thing

with this pic http://www.flickr.com/photos/sundust...57625916636086 (I love it)
was taken at F2?

If I tried to take one with that F number I would not get the amount in focus that this guy did which is another thing I do not understand?

I practised on my mum briefly when I had the 60mm

Using ISO 100
Shutter speed 1/100
F5.6

And they no where near came out as clear and focused.... and I was outside in daylight :shrug:

I just don't get it
 
kira said:
Also.... one more thing

with this pic http://www.flickr.com/photos/sundust...57625916636086 (I love it)
was taken at F2?

If I tried to take one with that F number I would not get the amount in focus that this guy did which is another thing I do not understand?

I practised on my mum briefly when I had the 60mm

Using ISO 100
Shutter speed 1/100
F5.6

And they no where near came out as clear and focused.... and I was outside in daylight :shrug:

I just don't get it
Click to expand...

The linky not working so no idea what the image looks like to even offer feedback ;)
 
kira said:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/sundustphotos/5642978868/in/set-72157625916636086

better?
Click to expand...

Yes, hmmm! well without knowing whether the person did any PP'ing and sharpened the image possibly selectively on the eyes and indeed not seeing yours a simple side by side comparison it is is a little like apples and oranges :thinking:

Looking at that picture the eyes are sharp and the nose/hair and to a lesser degree are soft, another example of a very narrow DoF as one would expect at f2
 
He said it had been sharpened

here is my mum, bless her she said it was pretty bright out so she was squinting

http://www.flickr.com/photos/kira_farrow/5985694383/

But I just wanted to show you the quality is just bad compared

And like I said, My settings were....

Using ISO 100
Shutter speed 1/100
F5.6

So why is it that less of mine is focused if the other was on F/2? :thinking:
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top