Beginner First Images

M

Mark65

Messages
110
Name
Mark
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi All,
I took a few images tonight of my wife and new grand daughter but they are no better than my camera phone, I know this camera can take much better images so it must be down to me.
Would you please have a mooch at the raw files I've attached by drop box, even the 1080p @60fps came out very soft
.
Could it be the Hoyer lens protector I put on or is it just down to light? the image of my dog was made with the filter on, 0140 was full auto. Should I have used a flash maybe, removed the lens hood?.
I would be very grateful if you could tell what's wrong.

Thanks
Mark



Dropbox - File Deleted - Simplify your life

www.dropbox.com www.dropbox.com

Camera: Nikon Z6, Firmware 3.40
Flash: Godox TT685ii N
 
What is it about the pictures that is disappointing? If you’re comparing with professional new born images, that is a very specialist thing and involves a lot of retouching.
 
Hi, they are not very sharp, I was a meter away with room light on, the 1080p video was the same very soft. The images seem noisy like with tiny speckles when you zoom in.
I know the camera can do it, so it must be me .

Thanks
Mark
 
I'm not familiar with the Z6 hopefully someone will be along soon. In the meantime, I'd experiment with the different autofocus modes and options to see what works best.
 
Hi, hopefully, I've sorted the 1080p problem, it had moved off autofocus doh!,
 
They seem pretty sharp and clean to me...keep in mind the Z6 is a full frame sensor so you need to stop down the aperture to get a large depth of field. The baby images especially look to have been taken with a razor thin depth of field (but the bits within focus look sharp).

What iso and f stop were you shooting at?
 
Hi,
The stop was f4@50mm, maybe f5@35mm would have been better according to my DOF calculator, ISO was 2200, 1/100s (Electronic front-curtain).
 
Mark65 said:
Hi,
The stop was f4@50mm, maybe f5@35mm would have been better according to my DOF calculator, ISO was 2200, 1/100s (Electronic front-curtain).
Click to expand...
Hi Mark
From what I’ve seen of the images, the issues aren’t about f numbers or focal length.

The difference between a ‘photograph’ and a snapshot isn’t the camera, the settings or the lens.

You’ve picked up your camera and done exactly what you’d have done with your phone and you’re surprised that you’ve got the same result.

How to improve on it?
Light! If you can’t reshoot in good window light, you’re gonna have to learn to make the best of the available (led?) lighting or add your own.

Yes the image is noisy (the speckles) but it’s shot in low light and it’s underexposed. But even if it wasn’t noisy, the shadows and composition are not ideal.

If I had been asked to shoot the swaddled baby, this would be my approach:
I’d use window light, so I’d want baby on a large cushion covered in a fabric that compliments the swaddling. The window at an angle but ‘above’ the babies head. Maybe a simple reflector to manage the shadows.

Here’s a phone pic from a shoot Of my latest granddaughter.
You probably wouldn’t notice, but a lot of planning went into this, and it’s that which makes the difference
0476E8E0-3DAA-4056-80A7-1A1B66117755.jpeg

The actual shot from the dslr would have been a bit better, using an 85mm lens at about 2.8 or 4, and with a bit more fill from a reflector.

But just to underline, props, blankets etc were all purchased specifically, and arrangements for a suitable time, siblings out of the way etc. heating cranked up, baby well fed, lots of time available.

90% of the elements that make up this image are in the planning. The camera gear and settings are throwaway incidentals. Shot at f2.8 or f8 there’d be little difference, shot at 1/60 or 1/4000 there’d be no difference. There’d be a barely discernible difference if shot at 50 not 85 (there’s not even that much difference for the 24ish of the phone shot)
 
Last edited:
Many thanks Phil for your advice, I thought it was down to light, I hoped the living room light would be enough but obviously not, would my flash have helped if I have more of that scenario?.
My last decent camera was my Canon S45 which is in a drawer and still works fine so its been crappy phone cameras for years.
Thanks again
Mark
 
Mark65 said:
Many thanks Phil for your advice, I thought it was down to light, I hoped the living room light would be enough but obviously not, would my flash have helped if I have more of that scenario?.
My last decent camera was my Canon S45 which is in a drawer and still works fine so its been crappy phone cameras for years.
Thanks again
Mark
Click to expand...
This is part of the same problem all newbie photographers have.

‘Light’ isn’t about ‘enough light’, the IQ in your images is largely down to the lack of light. But if the light had been ten times brighter, the image would still have been the same, but without the noise.

My image is lit by a massive patio door, if I hadn’t had that window light I’d have used the largest softbox at my disposal with a bare bulb flash to illuminate it. The result would be pretty similar.

If you’d added an on camera flash to your camera, you’d have got a different ugly light source and a slightly different set of ugly shadows playing across your image.

If you’d spun the flash head to bounce off the ceiling, you’d have softer shadows, but the light would still have come from an ‘unnatural’ position.

The first principal of lighting is that in nature there’s one sun, it’s above your subjects head (at a variety of angles, but always above). So that’s what the human brain expects to see.

So if you want to create a simple pleasing image, that’s what you need to replicate.

And for composition; you have to remember that every element in the frame is part of your picture, and therefore fighting for the viewers attention, so you need to be acutely aware for instance that those shadows will dominate, that the patterned sheet will vie for attention, etc.

Every element in my image was chosen to be there, that’s the key to ‘photography’. It’s not the settings, it’s thinking about exactly what’s in your image. Every element and how they interact with each other.

I’m beginning to feel like a scratched record.
 
Phil, no, I appreciate your time and advice, I realise theirs a steep learning curve but I'm older and have time, I also know the camera is more advanced maybe than I need but I think better too have than to need and Panamoz was a great price compared to lower priced models in the uk. The images I took were a quick visit with limited time as she's not long been at home after a bad birth so I will have to arrange a longer session lol, maybe get one of those reflectors I've seen as I don't have the soft box, I will buy bits as the months roll on. I know my test shots outside are great and much clearer so that's why I was thinking it was the light, more videos to watch lol.

Mark
 
Mark65 said:
The images I took were a quick visit with limited time as she's not long been at home after a bad birth so I will have to arrange a longer session lol, maybe get one of those reflectors I've seen as I don't have the soft box,

Mark
Click to expand...
My take on that is that you intend to do your experimentation and practice on the baby while you are visiting. That doesn’t seem to me to be ideal, shouldn’t you get it right before you go maybe by practising on something similar at home?
 
As I posted originally, there’s lots to learn, but the important thing is that getting stuck into focal length v Aperture etc is a rabbit hole.

Photography is literally, both scientifically and artistically drawing (painting) with light.

So obviously you need ‘some’ light, but the whole point of the light is that the the nature of the light source (soft hard) and its relation to the subject is what creates your picture. Light creates shadow, shadow is what allows the viewers brain to turn a 2d representation into a 3D object.
The last consideration of light is it’s colour (or temperature).

So you will in time learn to ‘see’ light, to help you do that, you can study pictures (paintings or photos) and learn to read the light, which will lead to you learning how to replicate an image.

While you’re looking at the pictures, you can also learn how composition works. What lines are leading your eye through the image, where has the artist positioned the subject in relation to other elements. Etc etc. what is lit to emphasise it, what colours demand attention etc

It’s a great journey, it’s not about lenses and f stops and shutter speeds though, it’s about making pictures.

You have the greatest starting point, you’re photographing something you love.
 
Hi sphexx, yes I will, she's only 5 days old, but I will have to try, I just took some4 images with my s45, dear lord there not great lol.
Phil, that's true, we have a spare Moses basket here so i will put it in front of our windows and borrow a doll for practice :), I will order one of those reflectors as well as they seem handy.
 
Last edited:
Just one more thing, I'm assuming my kit lens is good for this? or should I be looking at something else whether the z lens or a Nikon lens with the adapter I have.
I'm just watching this at the moment, which reminds me is a tripod needed?.

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rJXeXbVNQH4


Thanks
 
Mark65 said:
Just one more thing, I'm assuming my kit lens is good for this? or should I be looking at something else whether the z lens or a Nikon lens with the adapter I have.
I'm just watching this at the moment, which reminds me is a tripod needed?.

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rJXeXbVNQH4


Thanks
Click to expand...
It’s not the worst ‘instruction’ video I’ve seen, but he does emphasise some points that are unimportant and ignores some genuine issues.
For instance, the tripod and remote are pointless (they can get in the way, but some people like to use them). And he ignores the actual ‘difference’ between a silver and white reflector and just mentions the size difference.

I could do a video just as long nit-picking at everything he said, but the takeaway is ignore his poncing around settings and gear. Take note that he just set up a backlit high key image and never even mentioned that’s what he was doing. Which could lead you to believe that’s ‘normal’ I’d argue it’s not normal at all.
My setup would have the baby lower (to shoot from above) the head angled toward the window (rotate the foot of the table into the room), so the baby is more naturally lit.

Nowt wrong with his shot, but the video is only useful to recreate it exactly, as he never explained why it looked like it did, and what you might change.
 
Last edited:
Mark, if you don't mind me saying... I think this is one thing that mirrorless can possibly do better than an SLR/DSLR as with mirrorless you can compose the shot and focus with the babies eyes/face away from the centre of the frame where the DSLR focus points are clustered and so hopefully get a better composition. I'd be looking to get the baby bigger in the frame with less empty cot space.
 
Hi woof woof, yes I can use the focus tracking or move the focus point to the sides, I've ordered a 5-1 reflector to try.
 
I think its a lot better after playing with it in NX Studio and cropping a bit, raw is very good. Next time more light :)




MPT_0146.JPG
 
I think that Phil (who I'm guessing has just bought a new keyboard and wants to practice with it:)) has given you first-class advice, but just a couple of minor extra points.

1. With more and better light you can either reduce the ISO setting or use a smaller lens aperture to get greater depth of field, or both.
2. There is, inevitably, a colour cast from the cot interior. This is simply the colour reflected from the interior and the only way of avoiding it is to move the baby elsewhere. This unwanted colour reflection is always present but our brains automatically filter it out and we only notice it when it's extremely strong - but our cameras aren't as clever as our brains and so these colour casts jump out and hit us in photos.
3. Shooting in raw is good (I'm not good enough to shoot in jpeg) but jpeg has the (sometimes doubtful) advantage of automatically applying a level of image sharpening. This doesn't happen with raw files and we generally need to add a bit of sharpening in post-production.
 
Hi Garry,
Yes the Moses basket was all pink, I set the camera for raw and jpeg as it has a 128gb card in it so plenty space.
I welcome all advice lol, I have some reflectors coming and have been watching plenty of you tube videos on lighting, lower iso seems to be a common theme, see how we go.
Mark
 
You can of course adjust the colour bias in post-processing, changing
MPT_0146.JPG
To
MPT_0146_colour.jpg
 
Hi , yes I tried it a few ways, I kind of like the warmer side of things.
Thanks
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top