Printable View
http://i45.tinypic.com/27yda53.jpg
here's a picture I took of my son last year when I first started using DSLR with 50mm, it's one of my first attempts. Below is a more recent attempt (last week).
http://i47.tinypic.com/6h1188.jpg
I just wanted to know if I am improving? Any advice.
Welcome to the forum;
I don't think any one can tell you that by just looking at two photo's. Although your son seems to be improving his camera technique in the bottom picture.
should I post more?
Looking at just the 2 pictures I personally think you have improved.
your second image focuses on the subject, nicer composition.
- I almost never take pictures of people but some advice can be applied to all subjects
You chopped off part of your sons head, I think your second image could have been improve by stepping back just a bit getting his whole head in the shot and maybe his one elbow.
Try and compose your pictures with the 'story' you want to tell with your picture. If the background isn't part of the same story you don't really want to see it.
I think your lighting in both captures the mood nicely
the first looks gray almost sad like he did something he shouldn't have..
the second brighter colours and warmer tones you can tell he is smiling behind his camera.
Welcome to the forums and thank you fro sharing.
A couple more samples would helpQuote:
Originally Posted by FM1981
^ thank you
The first shot was actually shot near a sliding door. That day it was raining and he wanted to go outside and couldn't.
The second shot was taking last week again near a sliding door very sunny and hot day. Actually too sunny and hot and he couldn't go outside again haha.
on the older pictures I was using more of the AV setting on my Canon D60. The newer ones I've used manual setting. I just wanted to know if the composition and lighting were ok. Is there anything I can do to enhance them?
I do have one comment, the bathtub shot seems a bit hot. AWB, auto white balance on canon cameras sometimes isn't the best in low light indoors. If you shoot in RAW format (which you probably should) you can adjust the temperature.
just wondering what temperature do you think would make the picture better?
Hi,
adjust the temp until the bathtub is white or a bit warmer if you like it that way. Also, if you use Lightroom, you can select directly something that must be neutral grey and the software will find out which temp and tint are best. Then, you adjust to your taste.
Cheers,
S.
I'll offer my input on the 4 pictures you've posted. White balance seems to be a consistent issue for you. The first photo is too green, for sure. Shooting RAW is the easiest way to correct odd white balances in post, but just because it's a JPEG does not mean it's beyond saving. Below is how I have altered the colour balance using Photoshop, the difference should be quite striking. Sometimes you'll want a portrait to have a cool white balance if you're trying to convey a particular mood, but very rarely will you want a green portrait. If you want me to go through the Photoshop adjustments in more detail, let me know.
Original
http://i45.tinypic.com/27yda53.jpg
Edited
http://img854.imageshack.us/img854/7...louredited.jpg
Had a break for some lunch... continuing with the critique. Pay attention to your backgrounds; if they are cluttered and/or colourful they can distract from your subject. They can also provide context and add to your pictures. The green hosepipe in the third photo is an example of a distracting background element. I know it's not always convenient to run outside and tidy up... but sometimes it's an easy way to improve a photo. I like your second photo but beware of taking photos of children when you are standing, it can make your subject looks diminutive and prevent the viewer from connecting with the photo. More often than not, squatting down or kneeling to get a lower angle will provide a more pleasing photo. I also notice that in most of these photos there are no catchlights in the eyes. Catchlights make your subject seem more "alive" and can be provided by a tiny bit of fill flash, on or off camera. If you don't have a flash, you can use a small hand-held reflector.
I do like the soft light provided by your sliding glass doors and you have done well to abide roughly by the 'rule of thirds'. Keep at it and feel free to ask more questions. I think taking better family photos is an excellent reason to learn more about photography.
While I was thinking about white balance it occurred to me that up to ten percent of men are red-green colour blind. If the before/after example I posted isn't completely night and day this might be you. If that's the case we just need to talk about setting custom white balances in camera.
If you're not sure, you might try an online Ishihara plate test. A quick google search reveals one here: http://colorvisiontesting.com/ishihara.htm#plate
Using a computer monitor isn't ideal for this kind of test but it should give you a rough idea.
There is no magic number, but from experience if you were not using a flash I am guessing the ambient light in the bathroom to be between 3200-3800K. If you shoot in RAW format adjusting the temperature is quite simple in DPP. If you shoot in JPEG it is not so simple. This is one of the biggest reasons to use RAW format, it gives you the ability to simply adjust your picture at a later date.Quote:
Originally Posted by FM1981
oh wow thanks, that is a big difference. I think the green color of that picture might be from the lighting. It was a rainy and gloomy day and the only light I was using was from a sliding door window. I do shoot in JPEG. I guess I will switch to RAW.Quote:
Originally Posted by w349
Also another question what is DPP?
would this picture be a good example of catchlighting in the eyes?
http://i48.tinypic.com/353ctqr.jpg
I know this picture isn't great because his head is cut off.
Digital Photo Profesional; this software came with your camera. It is from Canon.Quote:
Originally Posted by FM1981
Yes, those are decent catchlights. I noticed you said you have D60 - do you actually mean the 60D? (Canon made both but the D60 is significantly older).
yes I have the OLD canon D60. (didn't canon recently make a newer d60 also?)
http://3.static.img-dpreview.com/rev...001.jpg?v=1529
I bought it used off ebay many years ago. I just started using it since my son was born. So I'm still on the dslr learning curve. The point and shoot pictures didn't really do it for me. It's an old camera but gets the job done.
Ah I see, yes the newer version is called the 60D. I'm afraid I don't know anything about the D60 but as long as it shoots RAW and the files are supported, the advice above is the same. :)
yes it shoots in raw and the files are supported. I noticed that I was previously using the auto white balance setting.
These are the white balance modes that the camera gives me:
White Balance Mode
• Auto (3000 - 7000 K)
• Daylight (approx. 5200 K)
• Cloudy (approx. 6000 K)
• Tungsten (approx. 3200 K)
• Fluorescent (approx. 4000 K)
• Flash (approx. 6000 K)
• Custom (2000 - 10000 K)
should I chose the mode based on what my shooting conditions are?
I tend to shoot in AWB (auto white balance) most of the time because that way, in post, I get all of the pre-set white balances, and the raw converter's auto white balance option, and the camera's auto white balance option. Usually if I'm shooting with flash though I'll set it (Daylight, Cloudy or fluorescent ... ironically not flash).
This is up to you though. I'll usually tweak all of my white balances in post regardless of what I shoot.
^ I'll give that a try. I was just wondering if they pictures would come out the same if I originally had my settings with AWB and JPG images but changed the settings to AWB and RAW.
If you shoot in RAW and AWB the camera will still do the same thing it does now as far as white balance goes. The only diffrence is with RAW format you have to convert your images to JPG and when you do convert you can adjust the white balance at the computer if it is wrong.
If you are going to use JPG you can work out the white balance using those settings you described.
Depends on the light source .... try somewhere around 5400KQuote:
Originally Posted by FM1981
thank you for all the input and information, I will be taking more pictures this weekend since we are taking him to county fair in our area. I only have a 50mm lens. What lens would you guys recommend for shooting at a theme park or carnival/fair?
1st, I didn't see anything off w/ the metering and exposure of your shots. Check off 1 of the 3 primary elements (Exposure, focus, framing - shooting in RAW we do white balance later)
As to the lens for street/carnival/fair. Outside the 15-85 is the #1 choice, great image quality (IQ), decent price - little slow f stop wise. #2 choice is the 17-55, better IQ, f2.8, pricey. #3 18-55 "kit lens" for the current for Canon rebel line up - OK IQ, little slow f stop wise, super cheap. Although having said this, I am not sure they will fit on your camera and not have very dark corners. I did the look up on DPReview to get the specs. If these are unacceptable/won't fit the mirror movements, the discontinued 24-85 might be a good solution, the step would be the 24-105 L series or the 28-135 (which might not be wide enough).
This was released in 2002 - and priced basically where the 5D Mark II is priced new today. It has 3 focusing points, ISO up to 1000, and 6.3 JPG 7.4 Raw?? megapixels. Sensor looks like APS-H size.Quote:
Originally Posted by FM1981
This might sound odd.... but..... rather than buy a lens, I would consider a more recent body something like a t2i or 50d - the focusing, image quality, ISO gains are rather substantial. Looks like these are going for the low $550 w/ the 18-55 kit lens. For the extra $100 the T3i is available.
much improved focusing, ISO up to 6400 and 12800 in a "push", and 2-3x pixels and access to the EF-S series of lenses that are pretty darn good image wise and less expensive than their counterparts built for the full frame/APS-H sensor.
I don't want to push hardware, but the reasonably current stuff has features/capabilities that just makes things easier, etc.
Mike
Yea it doesn't sound odd. I will eventually upgrade to a newer camera body. This old camera is mainly for practice. Thank you for the lens & camera model suggestions, I will look into those options.
One thing I did notice is that the shots are dominated by the landscape orientation of the camera. When you are wanting a person, or any other mostly vertical subject, to fill the frame and be the dominant, perhaps only, item shown in the photo it can be very helpful to rotate the camera around when taking the shot so that the photo is in portrait mode for viewing. It is a little thing that can sometimes make a big difference in certain situations.
I could never get a decent picture in the portrait view. But I will try to get more.
I actually like the first picture better as the off-center composition and the darker background helps me focus on your son. In the second example, the camera is too bright and I focus on that. Also, he is just enough off center to make me feel uncomfortable about it, but not far enough to really create a tension (google "rule of thirds"). What you have done well in the first and fourth pictures is to get at his level to see the world from his view. The other two have a "parental", down-looking view which I think is not as good. In terms of what white balance to use, in the third example, you probably needed a tungsten WB, or AWB. As you are shooting raw (you mentioned in your first post), you can correct this in Post. In general, what will be best for a photo is to avoid mixed light sources (like daylight and tungsten or fluorescent and tungsten, etc.).
In terms of your original question about whether you are getting better, try submitting your very best shot from when you first started and then your very best from recently.