Luminous Landscape Forum
The Art of Photography => User Critiques => Topic started by: MR.FEESH on May 14, 2009, 06:12:36 pm
-
Don't know what this is.
Any-hoo, I like it.
Any suggestions on color or cropping? (...etc)
(http://i593.photobucket.com/albums/tt18/MR-FEESH/Plants/DSCN0026-2.jpg)
Elby
-
I don't know what it is, but it reminds me of the number of times I've taken macro shots only to be surprised at the number of spider web filaments, dust and other imperfections that I didn't see when I took the photographs!
I like the shot, and it makes me wonder what else is further down the branch...
-
Don't know what this is.
Any-hoo, I like it.
Any suggestions on color or cropping? (...etc)
(http://i593.photobucket.com/albums/tt18/MR-FEESH/Plants/DSCN0026-2.jpg)
Elby
Lovely! Unfortunately, the lower-left fungus is cropped at the left, and tha is a real sore point for me. But, otherwise terrific.
When I go mushroom hunting, I usually have the frying pan and not the camera in mind!
-
With a little cloning, you could make the bottom mushroom look like it's totally in the frame. Then you could reduce the extent of or eliminate that thing above the bottom mushroom, which breaks up the rather good flow of the mushrooms going up the branch.
Here's my crude example of the clone.
-
This is loosely called a polypore, or a flat timber fungus. I don't know the species, though.
Mike.
-
How'd you do that!!?!
Pretty neat stuff. Yes, I agree that the one portion going out of the picture does subtract from it.
Thanks for the ID Mike! I feel like it's the quintessential photography fungus.
Thanks for the nice/helpful words guys!
Elby
-
This version I increased local contrast (Clarity slider in LR) and lightened the yellow channel to counteract some of the luminosity. I think this could be done with the channel splitter in LR but I used PS HSL layer.
-
How'd you do that!!?!
If you're asking about the clone, it just takes a lot of practice, so your fingers can move quickly while changing the brush size quite a few times to get around the tight spots.
-
Don't know what this is.
Any-hoo, I like it.
Any suggestions on color or cropping? (...etc)
Elby
Elby, Yes, a re-shoot would be in order. You need considerably more depth of field for this kind of thing. It might be okay to let the farthest out mushroom slip out of focus, but as you've shot it, only the second mushroom and a very small part of the tree (log?) are in focus. Again, this isn't exactly street photography. You probably can do it over and improve it.
-
This version I increased local contrast (Clarity slider in LR) and lightened the yellow channel to counteract some of the luminosity. I think this could be done with the channel splitter in LR but I used PS HSL layer.
Wow- this, I like. I'll def play around with that, thanks.
If you're asking about the clone, it just takes a lot of practice, so your fingers can move quickly while changing the brush size quite a few times to get around the tight spots.
Geez. Bravo!
Elby, Yes, a re-shoot would be in order. You need considerably more depth of field for this kind of thing. It might be okay to let the farthest out mushroom slip out of focus, but as you've shot it, only the second mushroom and a very small part of the tree (log?) are in focus. Again, this isn't exactly street photography. You probably can do it over and improve it.
I'm have a < $100 p&s. I have no control of DOF. I took this picture while on a hike in another state, no chance of ever getting this again. Thanks though.
I'm willing to take DSLR donations, if you're feeling magnanimous.
-
I'm have a < $100 p&s. I have no control of DOF. I took this picture while on a hike in another state, no chance of ever getting this again. Thanks though.
I'm willing to take DSLR donations, if you're feeling magnanimous.
You'd be extremely disappointed if you invested a thousand or two in a DSLR and then found it didn't do some magic to improve your photos. There are specific things the DSLR's do, but more typically they provide *less* DOF on shots like this, not more. Your P&S is a better bet for DOF - you just have to recognize what the factors are - probably just more light. Try setting the flash to forced on, or always on, too add some fill light.
When you do invest some more cash in a newer/bigger camera, you'll get more and better pixels, more controls, etc., but you still have to do the work.
-
I was referring to the comment in that it was suggested I change the DOF, a setting which my camera doesn't have whereas I know you have some more options as to what's in focus by changing the aperture (given the right conditions yaduhyaduhyaduh)-- I'm quite aware and have heard many times that it's the person behind the camera that makes the difference, not the instrument itself. I've been doing my studying and know what to expect when my saving finally amounts to the camera I have in mind. I like your suggestion with the flash. I've been experimenting putting tissues/tissue paper over the flash to help in situations that require a little manipulation-- the bare flash tends to ruin the sh*t out of most things ahah.
-
I was referring to the comment in that it was suggested I change the DOF, a setting which my camera doesn't have whereas I know you have some more options as to what's in focus by changing the aperture (given the right conditions yaduhyaduhyaduh)-- I'm quite aware and have heard many times that it's the person behind the camera that makes the difference, not the instrument itself. I've been doing my studying and know what to expect when my saving finally amounts to the camera I have in mind. I like your suggestion with the flash. I've been experimenting putting tissues/tissue paper over the flash to help in situations that require a little manipulation-- the bare flash tends to ruin the sh*t out of most things ahah.
Your improvising is inspiring.
-
I was referring to the comment in that it was suggested I change the DOF, a setting which my camera doesn't have whereas I know you have some more options as to what's in focus by changing the aperture (given the right conditions yaduhyaduhyaduh)-- I'm quite aware and have heard many times that it's the person behind the camera that makes the difference, not the instrument itself. I've been doing my studying and know what to expect when my saving finally amounts to the camera I have in mind. I like your suggestion with the flash. I've been experimenting putting tissues/tissue paper over the flash to help in situations that require a little manipulation-- the bare flash tends to ruin the sh*t out of most things ahah.
If you can change the aperture on your camera you change the depth of field. Depth of field is a factor of the f/stop used; i.e. f/8 has a larger depth of field than f/3.5 for example.
Mike.
-
Try setting the flash to forced on, or always on, too add some fill light.
Whatever you do, don't follow this recommendation. On-camera flash utterly destroys the ambient light. What you get from on-camera flash is not what you saw.
If your camera has an aperture priority setting, using that and cranking down the aperture (increasing the aperture number) will let you increase depth of field, at the expense of shutter speed of course. To overcome some of the shutter speed loss you can increase ISO, though that'll introduce more noise. It's always a trade-off between these three things.
-
Your improvising is inspiring.
Sarcasm...?
If you can change the aperture on your camera you change the depth of field. Depth of field is a factor of the f/stop used; i.e. f/8 has a larger depth of field than f/3.5 for example.
Mike.
That's exactly what I mean. My doesn't have aperture manipulation, whereas most or all DSLRs do.
Whatever you do, don't follow this recommendation. On-camera flash utterly destroys the ambient light. What you get from on-camera flash is not what you saw.
If your camera has an aperture priority setting, using that and cranking down the aperture (increasing the aperture number) will let you increase depth of field, at the expense of shutter speed of course. To overcome some of the shutter speed loss you can increase ISO, though that'll introduce more noise. It's always a trade-off between these three things.
Yeah I know all of this 'theory'-- unfortunately my p&s basically only has auto EVERYTHING. You might as well just eliminate me and let the camera walk around and take pics for itself.
-
Yeah I know all of this 'theory'-- unfortunately my p&s basically only has auto EVERYTHING. You might as well just eliminate me and let the camera walk around and take pics for itself.
Actually, that's not "theory." But you're right, if you can't control aperture you're out of luck. That seems strange, though. I've had a raft of point and shoots over the past ten or so years and all of them would let you shift into aperture priority mode, though often with difficulty.
-
Sarcasm...?
I doubt it - many on this forum come here with issues with their gear asking advice on which company they should throw their money at. You come to the forum with a camera so crippled it needs an iron lung and manage to make pictures better than some with many $$$$$ of kit. Your perseverance certainly gains my respect.
The recommendation was that you use a smaller aperture to gain depth of field. I've been reading your camera manual and the dummy (scene) modes can't help you I'm afraid. However, if you turn off anti shake, it will decrease the shutter speed, increasing the aperture (hopefully!) This might well mean that you need a tripod. My favorite is http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/2837...ripod_with.html (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/283757-REG/Manfrotto_by_Bogen_Imaging_709B_709_Tabletop_Tripod_with.html) and it will keep you sweet with even a DSLR. Using a tripod would also allow your hands to hold a reflector (white foamboard is the cheap answer) that would force mre light and therefore hopefully a tighter aperture.
FWIW though, is disagree entirely with RSL and think that were it all to be in focus, the subject would become rather lost. None of this changes the fact that you could use a new camera like few others right now. Perhaps have a root around your local second hand shops or try KEH.
-
Actually, that's not "theory." But you're right, if you can't control aperture you're out of luck. That seems strange, though. I've had a raft of point and shoots over the past ten or so years and all of them would let you shift into aperture priority mode, though often with difficulty.
By theory, I meant...I've learned everything there is to learn without actually having one to experiment with. Like I've researched aperture and f stops and know what all the numbers on lenses mean, shooting modes like raw, lens flaws like geometry and vignetting...the list go on forever. I called it theory just because I mean I've never actually had the chance to see that when I set a lens to f/2.8, less of the background will be in focus than if I were shooting with f/32.
And I'm sure a lot of p&s cams have those sort of settings, but Im using an L18-- the L standing for "life", meaning it's just supposed to be used to take pictures of people at parties etc and has a strong enough flash to white out their face ahah. AND it's even pretty low on the spectrum within the "Life" series. So I figure I'm making out like a bandit with some of my pics
I doubt it - many on this forum come here with issues with their gear asking advice on which company they should throw their money at. You come to the forum with a camera so crippled it needs an iron lung and manage to make pictures better than some with many $$$$$ of kit. Your perseverance certainly gains my respect.
The recommendation was that you use a smaller aperture to gain depth of field. I've been reading your camera manual and the dummy (scene) modes can't help you I'm afraid. However, if you turn off anti shake, it will decrease the shutter speed, increasing the aperture (hopefully!) This might well mean that you need a tripod. My favorite is http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/2837...ripod_with.html (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/283757-REG/Manfrotto_by_Bogen_Imaging_709B_709_Tabletop_Tripod_with.html) and it will keep you sweet with even a DSLR. Using a tripod would also allow your hands to hold a reflector (white foamboard is the cheap answer) that would force mre light and therefore hopefully a tighter aperture.
FWIW though, is disagree entirely with RSL and think that were it all to be in focus, the subject would become rather lost. None of this changes the fact that you could use a new camera like few others right now. Perhaps have a root around your local second hand shops or try KEH.
1rst paragraph: WOW, perhaps the nicest thing anyone in the hobby has told me since I started.
2nd: Hmm, that does make sense. I really like the reflecting board idea, I think I'm going to start incorporating that-- I really like flower shots and that could definitely help. As for a tripod, that seems nice. Right now all of my money is in an envelope with the intention of getting a new camera, however. I'm fairly surprised at the cost of "really good" tripods (seems like people here like gitzo). Just astounding.
3rd: Hmm perhaps it just comes down to a matter of personal preference...
Elby
-
3rd: Hmm perhaps it just comes down to a matter of personal preference...
Elby
Yes, it does. But situgrrl didn't read my comment carefully enough. I wouldn't suggest the whole thing be in focus, but I do think more of it needs to be in focus -- especially the nearest part. I think I'd let the focus soften at the third mushroom and go all the way out by the third, but I have to admit I don't much care for fungus pictures, even though I've shot my share of them.
-
RSL - I stand by what I said - but it is only opinion - and I'm sure we can agree to disagree about focus points, especially if we can both agree to get Elby pointing his camera on the street!
I really enjoyed looking at your site. Comparing your shots of Thailand in '64 with mine in 07/08 it's amazing both how much - and yet how little has changed!
-
RSL - I stand by what I said - but it is only opinion - and I'm sure we can agree to disagree about focus points, especially if we can both agree to get Elby pointing his camera on the street!
I really enjoyed looking at your site. Comparing your shots of Thailand in '64 with mine in 07/08 it's amazing both how much - and yet how little has changed!
Charly, I like what I see on your site too. You're right, Thailand hasn't changed all that much. I don't often give out this url, but there's a whole lot more from Asia on my personal site at www.russ-lewis.com. I don't put the rest on my commercial site because most of them are tourist snapshots. I wish I could see some pictures of Ubon and Udon Thani nowadays. I spent six months in Ubon and a year in Udon Thani, with many trips to Bangkok. Outside of the fact that there was a war going on, I really enjoyed both tours.
I'm sure we could reach a depth of field on the fungi that would satisfy both of us, and yes, Elby should get out on the street with that camera.
-
Are you guys say 'the street' because things like dof don't come into play as much? Or what...?
-
Are you guys say 'the street' because things like dof don't come into play as much? Or what...?
Based on what I saw on Charly's site I suspect we're both saying what's out on the street is a lot more interesting than fungi, though I'll have to let Charly speak for himself on that point. But, yes, if you work at it a bit, your point and shoot should do fine on the street. Here's an example. I shot this in 2000 with a 3 megapixel Casio. The camera had the capability to switch to aperture mode, but I shot this, and a bunch more like it, in straight point and shoot mode -- letting the camera make the decisions for me. You can do that if the light is right and the situation lends itself to the camera's defaults.
[attachment=13755:Wedding.jpg]
-
Gotcha. I do okay (I think at least) with what I've got right now. I try, at least ahah
These are some of my favorites:
http://s593.photobucket.com/albums/tt18/MR...mview=slideshow (http://s593.photobucket.com/albums/tt18/MR-FEESH/The%20Best%20of/?albumview=slideshow)
-
Sarcasm...?
No.
-
I'm have a < $100 p&s. I have no control of DOF. I took this picture while on a hike in another state, no chance of ever getting this again. Thanks though.
I'm willing to take DSLR donations, if you're feeling magnanimous.
I can't contribute a DSLR, and I don't actually *feel* magnanimous, but I have a Panasonic G1, LX3, ZS3, and FZ50, and I no longer use the FZ50. You can have the FZ50 for the cost of the shipping. It's like new more or less, has two batteries, Aperture and shutter priority, manual focus and zoom, 35 - 420 mm zoom range (35mm equiv.), etc. It's quite good, not as good as the G1, but not bad. I was going to donate it to one of the three photo clubs I belong to, but it's difficult to get any of those people interested. Elitists, I suppose. Send private message with C.O.D. ship-to if you want it.
-
Based on what I saw on Charly's site I suspect we're both saying what's out on the street is a lot more interesting than fungi, though I'll have to let Charly speak for himself on that point.
Or even herself!
Elby - check both of our sites and you will see that despite being separated by at least 40 years, thousands of miles and a gender, our subject matter is very similar.
Russ is right in me thinking street photography is much more interesting than fungus or indeed, landscapes but again, this is all opinion.
if you don't bite Dalethorn's hand off with that offer - I will. I've used one of a friend's from time to time - they are very capable cameras.
-
I can't contribute a DSLR, and I don't actually *feel* magnanimous, but I have a Panasonic G1, LX3, ZS3, and FZ50, and I no longer use the FZ50. You can have the FZ50 for the cost of the shipping. It's like new more or less, has two batteries, Aperture and shutter priority, manual focus and zoom, 35 - 420 mm zoom range (35mm equiv.), etc. It's quite good, not as good as the G1, but not bad. I was going to donate it to one of the three photo clubs I belong to, but it's difficult to get any of those people interested. Elitists, I suppose. Send private message with C.O.D. ship-to if you want it.
I'm very interested- will PM later tonight!!!