Picture taking Guru's, how do you take great pics?

[bubbrubb]

some of my recent work:

1.

^actually an HDR, but don't tell the people that like cartoon HDRs that :burnout:

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

gotta sneak in a few of the 10th
7.

8.

9.

I'm far from a guru, but here are a few things that work for me:
-DSLR. I've had a Canon Rebel XT and a have a Canon 40D now. Everything just comes out better on a DSLR (digital - single lens reflex)
-photoshop. You can save a some pretty crappy pics with it, and make some nice ones really pop.
-tripod. If you can shoot around sunrise/sunset when the shadows are softer and the colors pop, you'll get better pictures but in my experiences you'll need a tripod.
-understanding aperture values. Sometimes, its all about the bokeh.
-understanding ISO values. You can make or break a shot with your ISO settings. Too low for the light/zoom & handheld shots = blurry, too high = grainy
-HDR/tonemapping. I'm putting this at the bottom because people abuse this so badly. a lot of times, I get annoyed when I see an HDR that is blatantly such. It's neat to fool around with and make some ridiculous looking pictures at first to explore what you can do with the programs, but once that novelty wears off....


Things I want to learn about:
-macro (coming later this week I hope)
-external lighting/strobes
-lensbabys. They intrigue me.

 

[bubbrubb]

Thanks man. Greatly appreciated. As for the camera....neither. lol. I shoot with a Sony A200. People always seem real surprised when I tell them that. :shrug: As for lenses, the ones above were shot with the 18-70 kit lens and a 75-300. I also have a 50mm f/1.7 and am working on getting a Sigma APO HSM 70-200 f/2.8. :rockon:

what!! sony!? oke: j/k bro, clearly its working!! It's just surprising because its EITHER canon OR nikon, and everybody else gets left out of the conversation for the most part.

Is that a full frame? I can't stand the 1.6x crop on my 40D because I shoot pretty close to my subjects. it always seems that way at least. I'd rather crop something down than miss something entirely. On the brighter side of the 1.6x, it turns the $100 canon 50f1.8 into a beast of a bargain portrait lens though :lol1:

My next lens is either going to be a super wide angle or a sigma 35mm f1.4 I think... but that's not for a while. I wish photography equipment prices took a dive like the car market did :lol1:

 

[98 svt]

this backround does your car no justice....you don't want ANYTHING taking the viewers eyes away from the car

Your car done yet?
i was following it on Corral (i think). PM me some pics!

 

[bigdave03svt]

some of my recent work:

1.

^actually an HDR, but don't tell the people that like cartoon HDRs that :burnout:

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

gotta sneak in a few of the 10th
7.

8.

9.

I'm far from a guru, but here are a few things that work for me:
-DSLR. I've had a Canon Rebel XT and a have a Canon 40D now. Everything just comes out better on a DSLR (digital - single lens reflex)
-photoshop. You can save a some pretty crappy pics with it, and make some nice ones really pop.
-tripod. If you can shoot around sunrise/sunset when the shadows are softer and the colors pop, you'll get better pictures but in my experiences you'll need a tripod.
-understanding aperture values. Sometimes, its all about the bokeh.
-understanding ISO values. You can make or break a shot with your ISO settings. Too low for the light/zoom & handheld shots = blurry, too high = grainy
-HDR/tonemapping. I'm putting this at the bottom because people abuse this so badly. a lot of times, I get annoyed when I see an HDR that is blatantly such. It's neat to fool around with and make some ridiculous looking pictures at first to explore what you can do with the programs, but once that novelty wears off....


Things I want to learn about:
-macro (coming later this week I hope)
-external lighting/strobes
-lensbabys. They intrigue me.

good post

and im in the same boat on the HDR abuse, though im guilty of doing it too , i like them better more natural

here is one from the other night.. 5 exposure -2 ,-1.5, 0 ,+1.5, +2

 

[4fit?]

what!! sony!? oke: j/k bro, clearly its working!! It's just surprising because its EITHER canon OR nikon, and everybody else gets left out of the conversation for the most part.

Is that a full frame? I can't stand the 1.6x crop on my 40D because I shoot pretty close to my subjects. it always seems that way at least. I'd rather crop something down than miss something entirely. On the brighter side of the 1.6x, it turns the $100 canon 50f1.8 into a beast of a bargain portrait lens though :lol1:

My next lens is either going to be a super wide angle or a sigma 35mm f1.4 I think... but that's not for a while. I wish photography equipment prices took a dive like the car market did :lol1:

Yup....a Sony. lol. I wanted a Nikon D80, but just didn't have the coin at the time. Now, I kinda like telling people I shoot with a lowly Sony. Always seems to throw them for a loop.

The A200 is has a 1.6x crop factor just like your 40D. A FF camera would be nice, but I haven't been in the situation yet were I thought "I could get a better show of this with a FF rig". When that situation arises, I may break down and go FF. Until then, I get along alright with the A200.

I would love to have a Sigma 10-20. I'm really into landscape photography, so a wide angle will be coming on board soon or later.

I'm with you on the prices! Would be very nice if they took a dive. That Sigma 70-200 f/2.8 that I'm wanting is $799. One good thing about my Sony is that I don't have to spend the extra coin on IS or VR since the image stabilization is built into the body.:banana:

 

[4fit?]

Here's a few from a recent beach trip. And, yes, I know there's a few sensor dust spots in a few of them. Need to clean it.

experimenting

 

[bubbrubb]

good post

and im in the same boat on the HDR abuse, though im guilty of doing it too , i like them better more natural

here is one from the other night.. 5 exposure -2 ,-1.5, 0 ,+1.5, +2

that's what I'm talking about, pics where it just makes it look more natural as opposed to surreal, although there are some cases where over-the-top just works, no doubt. You know the kind I'm talking about, where 95% of the people try to post up their first HDRs or have their pic "HDRed" and they come out looking crazy :lol1:

 

[bubbrubb]

Yup....a Sony. lol. I wanted a Nikon D80, but just didn't have the coin at the time. Now, I kinda like telling people I shoot with a lowly Sony. Always seems to throw them for a loop.

The A200 is has a 1.6x crop factor just like your 40D. A FF camera would be nice, but I haven't been in the situation yet were I thought "I could get a better show of this with a FF rig". When that situation arises, I may break down and go FF. Until then, I get along alright with the A200.

I would love to have a Sigma 10-20. I'm really into landscape photography, so a wide angle will be coming on board soon or later.

I'm with you on the prices! Would be very nice if they took a dive. That Sigma 70-200 f/2.8 that I'm wanting is $799. One good thing about my Sony is that I don't have to spend the extra coin on IS or VR since the image stabilization is built into the body.:banana:

lmao you bastard and your built in image stabilizer.... the sigma 10-20 is supposed to have something weird with it. shoot I forget what it was, its been a while. but there is definitely a quirk with it in terms of image quality (iirc of course)

I'd love a FF and I'm in the same boat as you - not worth the huge coin IMO. I'm just a noob & my pics come out alright every now and again.

BTW beach pics look sick! :rockon::rockon:

 

[TurdFerguson]

my brother and his son:

Just got a D60 a few weeks ago, and am slowly learning.

some 30 sec. exposures(thumbnails):

First is too bright because i forgot my ISO was at 800:

 

[SnkBit]

Ive had this thread bookmarked for a while now, just went through and read all 53 pages. So I decided to revive this dead horse and see if anyone has any new updates to share. op:

 

[SnkBit]

I am just getting into photography some. Dont have a nice DSLR yet, but I have a pretty nice point and shoot, a Canon SX10IS. I took this pic of my brothers fox saturday afternoon, pic was taken in full manual mode, dont remember what settings i used tho :shrug:. I touched it up in PhotoShop CS5 using the unsharp mask.

I had the ISO set too high, so it is a little grainy, but I welcome any comments or suggestions the "gurus" can send my way. :beer:

 

[Tabres]

Certainly not a pro - just a guy with a 40D, some cheap lenses and a lot to learn still. A couple crummy quality ones I threw up on photobucket a while ago from some trips I've taken, most of them from a trip I took to China last fall.

This is called Pearl Waterfall, found in Jui Zhai Gou national park in the Sichuan province of China. Shot this hand-held (with literally thousands of people crashing down the wooden steps I was shooting from making them bounce). This is by a HUGE margin the most beautiful place I have ever been. Nothing in the United States comes remotely close to comparing.

A lion outside the Gates of Supreme Harmony in the Forbidden City in Beijing, China.

The Hall of Prayer at the Temple of Heaven in Beijing, China.

Found this at a lookout point on a mountain in Tibet. No idea what it says, but thought it made for an interesting photograph.

One of the first inner courtyards at the Forbidden City in Beijing, China.

These were all over the gigantic doors in the Forbidden City in Beijing. They're made of solid gold, too.

This was of neat old planter I saw in the Forbidden City. Suspect it would hold flowers or something, right? Nope. It had a several hundred year old, massive tree in it.

This Dragon was carved into solid marble. These sorts of carvings went down the center of almost all stair cases that you would find in the royal palaces in China.

Can't recall off of the top of my head the significance of this building.

Buddhist prayer wheels, found lining the outside of an old temple at the summit of a mountain in Tibet.

Took this at a California State Park area where tens of thousands of elephant seals beach twice every year, once to mate and once to molt. Was a really neat place. It felt like I was standing in the pages of a National Geographic.

Took this on an early morning boat ride out to Alcatraz Island while in San Francisco. You can see the Golden Gate in the background.

 

[SnkBit]

ttt

 

[mstg46]

Thanks man. Greatly appreciated. As for the camera....neither. lol. I shoot with a Sony A200. People always seem real surprised when I tell them that. :shrug: As for lenses, the ones above were shot with the 18-70 kit lens and a 75-300. I also have a 50mm f/1.7 and am working on getting a Sigma APO HSM 70-200 f/2.8. :rockon:

4fit?

I also shoot with an A200 so I understand the surprise when you tell people that. I feel like there is a lot of hate for anything not Nikon or Canon. I'm cool with that though. I take it as a challenge.

A few shots:

 

[mustangmike02]

I am just getting into photography some. Dont have a nice DSLR yet, but I have a pretty nice point and shoot, a Canon SX10IS. I took this pic of my brothers fox saturday afternoon, pic was taken in full manual mode, dont remember what settings i used tho :shrug:. I touched it up in PhotoShop CS5 using the unsharp mask.

I had the ISO set too high, so it is a little grainy, but I welcome any comments or suggestions the "gurus" can send my way. :beer:

Looks like it was decent light out, why did you have the ISO high? accident? looks good though i like the picture.

 

[SnkBit]

Looks like it was decent light out, why did you have the ISO high? accident? looks good though i like the picture.

Thanks. Light wasnt too bad at all. It was around 2 hours before sunset. As for the ISO, Im still learning what all the camera settings do. So i was playing around a good bit. Is there a common rule for ISO I can follow? Im prolly waaaaay off here by thinking "set it high as possible without causing grainy noise" in the photo? :shrug:

 

[HYBRED]

Thanks. Light wasnt too bad at all. It was around 2 hours before sunset. As for the ISO, Im still learning what all the camera settings do. So i was playing around a good bit. Is there a common rule for ISO I can follow? Im prolly waaaaay off here by thinking "set it high as possible without causing grainy noise" in the photo? :shrug:

ISO is basically the camera's sensitivity to light. High ISO means you can use shorter shutter speeds for low light, because the camera can do more with the available light in a shorter amount of time. Good when you have to hand-hold, but also increases grain or "noise." My camera is permanently set at an ISO of 100, and if the light is low, the camera is on a tripod for a long exposure.

Here's a shot I flubbed by having the ISO too high from a previous shoot; you can see the graininess, especially in the color gradients across the hood. You really can't fix grain in PS, unfortunately.

Luckily I was just tagging along, as the car was being shot for a magazine.

 

[SnkBit]

Thanks Hybred. So I should keep the ISO low unless otherwise needed. Clears it up a bit. Now I need to grab my camera and see if I can put this knowledge to use.

 

[QuickV8]

good info, thanks

 

[chrisheltra]

Im sure its been posted but I love the following site it a great starting point.

Ken says to leave your ISO, White balance and a few other setting in automatic if you can. Using his techniques as a guideline have helped my pics improve recently.

KenRockwell.com: Photography, Cameras and Taking Better Pictures