My ongoing- I really do need advice thread.

Lilikoi the cat · 08:50 PM

I am not a pro or even close to being an amateur, I like to shoot and know some concepts but when pressing the button I fail.
Hints,suggestions,composure even abuse is welcome
PP consists of the disk Canon gives with the camera and I have photoshop but scratch my head when using it.
Thanks.
I saw this tree and thought "That's an interesting trunk."

RaceImages · 04-30-2009, 04:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lilikoi the cat

I have photoshop but scratch my head when using it.

I hear ya, I just installed PSE on mine and I just really don't have much of a clue about using it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lilikoi the cat

I saw this tree and thought "That's an interesting trunk."

I agree, although my reaction would have been a lot stronger....lol

Lilikoi the cat · 04-30-2009, 05:09 PM

The most notable thing when I first saw it was the big square hole in the middle.

RogerAylstock · 04-30-2009, 05:59 PM

Kevin,
Since you asked for comments.....

Your tree is pretty much placed in the center of the frame. It really doesn't have a focal point for me. You might try cropping it to one side, shooting down low, or maybe shooting right up one branch so it has a lead in line. My eyes wander around the picture looking for a point of interest. The square hole just looks like a shadow to me. The branch on the left side is more interesting--it looks like a person's legs and body. I don't know if this tree is local but if it is, you might go reshoot and concentrate on that side and try lots of different angles, close in, shoot from down low, etc. I switched it to black and white and pulled a little tighter crop.

Lilikoi the cat · 04-30-2009, 08:25 PM

Yes Roger it is close by and I did notice the "legs" too. There was nothing I saw either that grabbed me as a focal point and I chose this angle as the one with what I thought as the best lighting and background. How about a soccer ball down on the ground, as if the trees were playing soccer?
The location is the end of Marshall in Walnut creek,park and walk straight in 1/4 mi. the tree is 100' off of the path on the right where the trees are close to the path. Alan, it is calling your expertise.
Thanks for the advise Roger

BrassPremier · 04-30-2009, 10:10 PM

The first thing I noticed is that there are some plants at the very bottom of the picture that are out of focus. It is somewhat 'unnatural' to have something out of focus in front of the subject, sort of throws people off. Maybe try shooting a little higher off the ground, or in a clearing that wouldn't have the distractions.

I also do agree with Roger that I'm not sure what to look at first. You could try shooting it at different angles or different perspectives.

Abel · 05-01-2009, 05:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lilikoi the cat

There was nothing I saw either that grabbed me as a focal point and I chose this angle as the one with what I thought as the best lighting and background.

Bingo...

Kevin, what you saw (or didnt see in this case) when you shot the photograph is exactly what your viewing audience will (or will not) see as well. You said you did not see anything that grabbed you as a focal point when you shot the photo... hence the reason we as your audience isnt seeing anything that grabs us either.

So keep in mind if you cant find anything of interest in the shot while youre taking the image, then neither will the people that view your photo later. While youre shooting keep in mind that you want something in the frame for your viewers to gravitate to... something to catch their interest.

I would also suggest like roger has done to get closer, shoot the tree branches tighter, shoot from low angles and such to find a great composition that DOES create something for your viewer to gravitate to.

One way to also influence a viewer's eye and control where it is they will look first is the amount of depth of field you have in your shot. This current shot EVERYTHING is in focus (except of course the flowers in the foreground) and with trees, branches and leaves etc it can make the photo VERY busy and VERY distracting.

My suggestion it to shoot with a larger aperture like f2.8 or f4 etc in order to really blow all of that added distraction in the background etc out of focus. then your viewer wont find themselves wandering the entire image looking for something to snap to... you control what it is they snap to first by controlling what is in focus and what is out of focus.

For example, here's a quick photo i found that i shot last year...

In that photo I used a wide aperture of f1.4 in order to really blur out the background as not to be a distraction to its viewers. Sure the background is blurred but you can still make out the fact that its a bicycle...

I also utilized the Rule of Thirds (links further below explaining what it is) in order to set my composition.

The focal point of the image that I wanted to set was the piece of artwork that was intertwined in the bicycle spokes. By utilizing a shallow depth of field (wide f1.4 aperture) i now determine what is in focus in my photograph and in turn control what my audience viewing this photo will be drawn too automatically without them even thinking it.

Think of it as being able to manipulate what it is your viewer will automatically be drawn to without them even knowing it... pretty creepy huh. The human eye will always be drawn to what is in focus first and then the viewer will explore the rest of the photo.. Now if EVERYTHING is in focus like your tree photo, the the viewer's eye will wander the entire image looking for the main focal point of the image... not good in this instance.

Just think in the photo i posted above, because of how i composed it and because i used a shallow depth of field people that may look at that photo 100 years from now long after im dead and gone will STILL be drawn to what it was that I wanted them to be drawn to.... the artwork in the bicycle spokes.. now that is cool... and creepy. hehe.

Here at two links that can help in regards to composition and the Rule Of Thirds:
http://www.californiaphotoforum.com/...of-thirds.html
http://www.californiaphotoforum.com/...of-thirds.html

hope this helps somewhat..

best thing to do is to challenge yourself to MAKE a photo out of something that seems un photo worthy... early on i had a wall mounted bike rack in my apartment where my mountain bike hung. I made myself photograph that bike for an hour... yes... just the bike hanging on the wall for a whole hour. It forced me to spend time on that one subject finding different angles, detail shots, different compositions etc. heck i think i spent 20 minutes just on the rear gear assemblies... it really teaches you to think about your shots and to try different things hence becoming a better photographer..

its easy to look at a subject and not find it interesting only to move on to another subject that may be more photogenic. but the ideal frame of mind is to be able to find SOMETHING in EVERYTHING that is worth taking a photo of.. that my friend is the golden ticket.

Lilikoi the cat · 05-01-2009, 09:26 AM

Steve,
I had purposely put the foreground items in thinking it would give some OOF depth but didn't realize that only a few weeds were sticking up like that which messed it up. The effect I was looking for would have been better if they were all exactly the same height like a freshly cut lawn. In this one you are correct that it is distracting.
Thanks.

Abel,
I think that if I did shoot it wide open and lose the leaves and grass it may be what I was looking for. Offhand I couldn't think of a quick way to make the 1/3 rule work for me, so I tried to get the "legs" to angle toward the lower corners using that rule.
Thank you for the advice. I will have to visit it again next week before the weeds grow too much.

CNelson · 05-03-2009, 02:48 PM

I can see what caught your eye with these trees. I see them in a desperate struggle - a wrestling match. You have received some good advice about composition and distractions. Before you dump the image, you might want to tinker with it to see what works. I think converting it to black and white and cloning out distractions might help. I suspect high contrast where the bark texture is emphasized might also be helpful. Not having a central point of interest is a bit of a problem but if you can subdue the follage and clutter and emphasize the trunks in struggle you may be able to provide a center of interest - expecially if you give it a title like "Gladiators." The name will suggest the point of interest. Play with it to see what you can come up with. If the tree is still accessable to you, there may be another angle where you can still depict the struggle and create an interesting photo.

Your eye told you there is an interesting picture here. The difficulty is finding the angle and lighting to make it work. Sometimes we can compensate in post processing and sometimes we just remain frustrated because we can't make it work like we can see in our mind. Keep this location in mind and come back in the winter when the leaves are gone...that might be where the picture is.

(My advice or opinion is always worth what you pay for it.)

Chuck

Lilikoi the cat · 05-03-2009, 03:39 PM

Chuck,
It is in Walnut Creek if you are interested, just off of Ygnacio at the end of Marshall Dr. in the park.
I didn't think of it in winter with the leaves gone, that would help it quite a bit. Or early in the morning to get the light on the "legs" and bark. Every time I go near Photoshop I give up and turn it off. I am still tinkering around with DPP and trying to get somewhere with that.

Thank you.

CNelson · 05-04-2009, 06:21 AM

Hi Kevin:

I didn't realize the tree was that "close." As for photoshop, you should play with it, experiment until you become familiar with it. I find Photoshop a bit intimidating but I can still do wonderful things with it. As with many software applications, I only use a fraction of its total capability but I am able to do what I want to do.

Actually, I am more fond of Corel's Paint Shop Pro Photo X2. It does much of what photoshop does and is more intuitive. It's a fraction of the price and I use it more than CS3. Far more images on my website have been processed with PSPP than with CS3. You can find "free" tutorials on the internet for Photoshop and PSPP...these are good to practice with. There is a learning curve with any significant post processing software but your desire to learn and create will get you through it.

Chuck

Lilikoi the cat · 05-04-2009, 08:59 AM

things are always closer than they appear when looking through/at glass. ;-)

Lilikoi the cat · 11-15-2009, 11:03 PM

Didn't know how to get a photo without HDR to expose the ocean background and keep the lighthouse decent.
What thinks thee?

Killjoy · 11-16-2009, 07:32 AM

Yup. A prime candidate for an HDR. The sky is too blown out in this one.
Also, the position of the sun (early afternoon by the look of the shadows?) is on the wrong side of the building for this image.
Almost everything of the buildings are in the shade.

Lilikoi the cat · 11-16-2009, 08:07 AM

You have seen the dark side, now come into the light.

Lilikoi the cat · 06:40 PM

My next victim of lightroom carnage.

What do you think? Please be very critical.

BrassPremier · 11-18-2009, 08:59 PM

looks a little dark? lots of out of focus stuff, and 3 things in good focus, so takes a sec to figure out what to look at

cbrunberg · 01-22-2010, 05:47 PM

Hey, I like the trees they look like a rugby scrum. Someone wrote it looks like a wrestling match. I agree. Did you ever go back and shoot it again?

Lilikoi the cat · 01-22-2010, 07:01 PM

Very soon Carl, the leaves should have fallen and the weeds should be short.

kitoi · 02-12-2010, 05:34 AM

Kevin,
What settings did you use for the lighthouse shot?

Here's my shot of the same place, I tried to get as little sky as possible since I knew it would probably be blown out.

f8 1/500s iso 100

Lilikoi the cat · 02-12-2010, 10:35 AM

Kitoi,
It was about the same as yours, 100mm 2.8 lens 1/750th F 6.7 @ 320ISO for the top one. Yours came out much better than mine, I couldn't get rid of the haze in mine. Eventually I will get the settings right in Lightroom.
Since you checked off the "Can others edit my photos", I did this to yours.
In Lightroom I just learned how to make the sky blue but in your case it did not work. It did on the picture of Mt. Diablo I took the other day.
You use a graduated filter in LR and color it blue. In your case I just played with the exposure, saturation, brightness and contrast. It can bring out the blue and the clouds as you can see. If you drag the filter down some more than what I did the clouds may show up down to the horizon.
LR3 is a beta right now and will be free for another month or two. You may want to try it unless you are using Photoshop.

Lilikoi the cat · 02-12-2010, 10:58 AM

The sky in this post was just like your original picture but I dragged down a blue graduated filter to make the sky blue again.
postcount=425

kitoi · 02-12-2010, 11:11 AM

Looks good! I'll have to try lightroom, use acdsee pro now. PS once in a while when I need to major tweaking.

Lilikoi the cat · 02-12-2010, 12:29 PM

I used to use the regular version of Acdsee prior to DSLR, then moved on to Canon's DPP. I only tried the LR3 beta because the LR2 trial version is only good for 30 days and the LR3 beta is good until they release it. My learning curve is more like a flat slope, I need the extra time to evaluate it. It look great so far and will be looking forward for it to come out.
All my photos need some major tweaking somewhere.