My first pics. Feebcak please

[huntere]

Ok juts back from France on business. Hotel was right next to the Seine so thought I would try a couple of pics.

Using Sony DSC-P200 in manual mode.

http://img134.imageshack.us/img134/7...00169sm0zg.jpg

This is just trying to emulate "Auto" so balanced sot I guess



This I was trying to get an image of depth (faster shutter, wide aperture) but it doesn't seem to have worked! Subject too short?

http://img134.imageshack.us/img134/7...00172sm1sq.jpg

This was deliberately underexposed to try and get moody look. Other half loves it but to me it looks underexposed!

Any tips very welcome! Also first ever use of imageshack so any tipe for that welcome too!

[huntere]

They're huge!

How to rezise please

Just pasted the imageshack code in!

[PmSonic]

Try this windows xp add-in, works a treat for me.

got for 800x600 for the best results..

http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/u...t_03may19.mspx

[Bristol Pete]

NOooooooooooooooooooooooooooo, dont use that XP add on as it adds loads of noise and compression to your image. Down load something called irfanview and actually resize the image with it, you will not get any noise and a great freeware editing file to boot.

Pete.

[geoffcb]

Originally Posted by Bristol Pete

NOooooooooooooooooooooooooooo, dont use that XP add on as it adds loads of noise and compression to your image. Down load something called irfanview and actually resize the image with it, you will not get any noise and a great freeware editing file to boot.

Pete.

Looks ok.

http://www.irfanview.com/

[bibamus]

Ah, I see you suffer from the same sloping horizon syndrome as I do. Everything looks perfect in the viewfinder, then on screen the horizons dip down at one edge. Wonder how that happens.

Anyway, apart from the HUGE pictures, they look good. On the second one you were looking for a good depth of field? You need to do it the other way round to what you have done,...the smaller the aperture, the more extensive the depth-of-field. If you want to concentrate attention on just one part of the scene, and have the rest out-of-focus, you should use a large aperture.

Keep up the good work.

Allan

[M-C-P-M]

its been that sort of weather everything is a bit foggy for everyone, I really like the 3rd one if you cropped it losing the boat and just had the reflection of the branch in the water that would be a great photo. IMHO.
great start though.

[senu]

Well done for "going public" with your pics

Maybe its the size but to me the Pics seem to lack a primary subject that grabs my attention and draws the eye of the viewer to it

While Pics dont nessesarily need to have to be a caterogy as such, Im unsure whether the foreground, the object in the distance or the Seine river as such is what you are trying to show.

Dont take the comments as disparaging. Most of us have to pick a few good shots from a large bunch of good, so so, and simply unusable ones.

Even with the good ones some cropping, correcting perspective/ horizon colour ,contrast ( exposure) and then a bit of sharpening before " allowing" anybody else to see them: ( hint: get Photoshop elements or its like)
To be sure some pics simply cannot be redeemed but a good shot with an intersting subject can always be enhanced from ok to really good or from good to great:
Keep posting

[Bristol Pete]

I think that sloping pictures may have something to do with the curve of the earth. When I was up in Cairns last year, my apartment looked out towards the great barrier reef and I took shot upon shot with my camera pointed out to sea and everyone came out on the wonk, despite concerted effort to keep the horizon straight.

Odd indeed.

Pete.

[SSB]

Your pics don't really convey the romance of the Seine to me ... or was that the intention?

[stevegreen]

Links to the pictures broken. Far too large!

Please keep them 800 pixels on the longest side and under 200kb please.

Cheers

[RimBlock]

Originally Posted by bibamus

...You need to do it the other way round to what you have done,...the smaller the aperture, the more extensive the depth-of-field. If you want to concentrate attention on just one part of the scene, and have the rest out-of-focus, you should use a large aperture.

...and of course this means that for more depth you need to use a higher f-stop number and lower depth of field (i.e. blurred backgrounds) require a lower f-stop number. The thing that certianly got me to start with is that for a larger aperture (bigger hole for more light and thinner depth of field) you needed a smaller number and vice versa.

What you can go to depends on the spec of the lens on your camera.

Hope this helps and sorry if I am stating the obvious but I do not know your experience and like I said it was one of the less logical things that took me a while to get in my head .

RB

[huntere]

Guys

Thanks for all the feedback. Usefull stuff there!

Firstly apologies for the size! First effort and nbot what was intended!

Regarding sloping horizon, I never even noticed that!. Will stand up straight in future (is that my mother I can hear?)

As for the depth of field attempt of the jetty, I did use large aperture and fast shutter. Maybe my camera doesn't have enough options to do this on such a short object. I had left film speed at auto so maybe if I played with that it may open up some aperture settings etc. I will see.

While Pics dont nessesarily need to have to be a caterogy as such, Im unsure whether the foreground, the object in the distance or the Seine river as such is what you are trying to show.

This is a really intersting point which I can't answer! The views there were lovely and I was just playing around, so no real composition - especially the first one. I guess I was trying to see what would come out and take feed back from there so apprecaite this point.

As for "editing" photos, I am a REAL beginner so one step at a time me thinks! Get the camera end right first the start playing PC wise - or is this a bad approach?

As for romance of Seine, its a fair point, I suppose thats maybe tied into lack of subject for "focus". I took a load of pics, the weeping willows etc, but just popped up these 3 as these were the least embarrassing!

Anyway thanks for the feedback guys, I will keep trying!

(Note to self, stand up straight and understand the focus of the pic!)

[bibamus]

Its a steep learming curve when you go into manual mode. Not sure what sort of settings or information your camera displays, but I understand it is capable of taking very good pictures with manual setting.
To get a good depth of field you need a small aperture ( higher f stop) and slower shutter. This has the effect of allowing a smaller amount of light for a longer time allowing for more of the scene to be in focus ( thats how I remember it anyway) A larger aperture ( smaller f stop) requires a faster shutter speed and allows a quick blast of light in allowing the main subejct to be in focus and the rest blurred. Bit simplistic I know, but the analogy works for me!

If you have the time, you could take a series of pictures of the same subject with different settings ( dont forget to write down the settings you use for each shot). That way, you will see for yourself what results you get and it makes it easier to understand the process involved.

As for composition, you will soon get used to what makes a good artistic picture, but sometimes, you just want to remember the scene as you saw it and the rules go out the window!

A good way to compose a good picture is to use the Rule of Thirds ( Google it for an explanation) your second picture of the jetty almost has these qualities. If you crop about 5 planks off the bottom of the jetty, it works much better.

I had a quick go at your image using Photoshop CS2 and curves.



Its probably a bit overdone, but it brings out the water surface a bit more.

Allan