Page 46 of 47 FirstFirst ... 3644454647 LastLast
Results 1,351 to 1,380 of 1389

Thread: Official Photography Thread

  1. #1351

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by swampfrog View Post
    Thanks for this, it was helpful. Enrolling in some kind of art class would be interesting if I could find the time. All of the different ways compositions can be influenced could likely take a lifetime of learning.



    I really like the first one, it illustrates my previous question. There are several actual lines leading into the picture, are the lines stronger if the enter the picture precisely at the corner as in the lower right? Or from the sides or bottom?

    Attachment 8309
    Guess I didn't directly answer your question—sorry. Yes, generally the lines are stronger if they enter from the bottom, right or left, approximate to the intersection point of the rule of thirds grid your are using in your composition. Why? Because we are earth bound creatures. We see the world from the bottom up, not the top down. That's one of the reasons drone footage is often mesmerizing—for the first time it truly gives us a view of the world from a vantage point that is approximate in size and speed and movement to that of a small bird.

    There is the issue of visual field to consider. Visual field, both mechanically and philosophically, refers to the limits of the frame only showing what is intended to be seen or illustrated within the boundary of the frame, but there of course is a much larger world outside that boundary that is left to the viewer to construct using their imagination. Looking at my image you attached above it is easy for the viewer to imagine they are standing on earth looking up at the tree, because prior experience tells the viewer that that is typically how an earth bound creature often (yearly) experiences such a scene. Positioning the trunk of the tree (actual lines) where I did (bottom left corner leading to a rule of thirds intersection point) allow me as artist to manipulate the viewer's eye to follow the trunk (lines) and get lost in the yellow field of colour, leaving and returning again and again via the branches, as you have noted with your drawn lines.

    In your night image of the scaffolding you have expertly done the same, whether or not you knew you were doing it. The most important lines in that image are the seam lines in the sidewalk. Everything else just accentuates those lines leading the eye off to the gateway, which happens (it was planned by your great photographic eye) to sit exactly at a rule of thirds grid intersection point. Simply, our head spends much more time looking down at where our feet can take us, as opposed to looking up or even straight ahead, precisely because walking is our standard mode of mobility.
    Last edited by tooblue; 10-22-2017 at 07:26 PM.

  2. #1352

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tooblue View Post
    Guess I didn't directly answer your question—sorry. Yes, generally the lines are stronger if they enter from the bottom, right or left, approximate to the intersection point of the rule of thirds grid your are using in your composition. Why? Because we are earth bound creatures. We see the world from the bottom up, not the top down. That's one of the reasons drone footage is often mesmerizing—for the first time it truly gives us a view of the world from a vantage point that is approximate in size and speed and movement to a small bird.

    There is the issue of visual field to consider. Visual field, both mechanically and philosophically, refers to the limits of the frame only showing what is intended to be seen or illustrated within the boundary of the frame, but there of course is a much larger world outside that boundary that is left to the viewer to construct using their imagination. Looking at my image you attached above it is easy for the viewer to imagine they are standing on earth looking up at the tree, because prior experience tells the viewer that that is typically how an earth bound creature often (yearly) experiences such a scene. Positioning the trunk of the tree (actual lines) where I did (bottom left corner leading to a rule of thirds intersection point) allow me as artist to manipulate the viewer's eye to follow the trunk (lines) and get lost in the yellow field of colour, leaving and returning again and again via the branches, as you have noted with your drawn lines.

    In your night image of the scaffolding you have expertly done the same, whether or not you knew you were doing it. The most important lines in that image are the seam lines in the sidewalk. Everything else just accentuates those lines leading the eye off to the gateway, which happens (it was planned by your great photographic eye) to sit exactly at a rule of thirds grid intersection point. Simply, our head spends much more time looking down at where our feet can take us, as opposed to looking up or even straight ahead, precisely because walking is our standard mode of mobility.
    Thanks for the clarification. I generally try to leave the bottom edge unbroken by lines (but not always), and as uniform in color and texture as I can. As far as the scaffolding shot, I think I mentioned previously that I came around a corner, saw it, and knew there was a great image there somewhere. I almost cloned out the yellow texture in the lower left corner, but decided it provided interest and a bit of a visual anchor. Wanted the blue light against the orange, wanted the other end of the tunnel to have its lines square to the image frame. As I was standing there trying different compositions, left and right, back and forth, the square opening was always on the upper third line (more or less) making the sidewalk take up much of the image (bottom 2/3rds). The line of lights kept bothering me, didn't feel right. Then I sat down, inched backwards and there it was, the lights were now a prominent element. I knew I had to tone them down via HDR merge, so I setup the tripod and lowered it to the same height as I was sitting, and took several series of 3 frames which I later merged in Lightroom. It's in my top 10 favorite images I've made.

  3. #1353

    Default

    Some more senior photos from Seaside, OR.


    1C2A9517-Edit.jpg


    1C2A9558-Edit.jpg

  4. #1354
    it's all a blur mtnbiker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    1,980

    Default

    Interesting processing. On the top image, why not darken that white rectangle near her right hand? On first glance, I thought it was a cigarette. The brightness of it drew my eye there.

  5. #1355

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mtnbiker View Post
    Interesting processing. On the top image, why not darken that white rectangle near her right hand? On first glance, I thought it was a cigarette. The brightness of it drew my eye there.
    You are right, in other ones, I did take the time to do just that, in this one, I may just remove it completely. Thanks.

  6. #1356

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mtnbiker View Post
    Interesting processing. On the top image, why not darken that white rectangle near her right hand? On first glance, I thought it was a cigarette. The brightness of it drew my eye there.
    What rectangle?


    1C2A9517-Edit.jpg
    , on Flickr

  7. #1357

    Default

    Strong shots of your daughter Swamp, though I find the one with her arms crossed a little too dark. Also, I really like your black and white cathedral shot and how it tricks the eye in terms of depth perception.

    I was out with my son today, and the only shot I really liked is this one:


  8. #1358

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tooblue View Post
    Strong shots of your daughter Swamp, though I find the one with her arms crossed a little too dark. Also, I really like your black and white cathedral shot and how it tricks the eye in terms of depth perception.

    I was out with my son today, and the only shot I really liked is this one:

    Like that a lot, both the path and the line of brown trees leading to the yellow. is there anything in the sky worth recovering?

  9. #1359

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by swampfrog View Post
    Like that a lot, both the path and the line of brown trees leading to the yellow. is there anything in the sky worth recovering?
    I tried, but it was such a solid grey sky with no cloud definition, and the shot was around 2:00 pm. We wanted to get out before the rain came, otherwise there might have been something I could do.

  10. #1360

    Default

    It's week 4 of the strike. So, when I am need of a break from writing I often go on a hike. I like this still shot I took with my drone today. It's not a high end drone, but not a low-end one either. It's shoots stills in RAW and video in 4k, it's just the lens is very small:


  11. #1361

    Default

    Happy Veterans Day. Haven't been out much for personal stuff. Been shooting events for a local online magazine. Mostly sports and theatre. Out to shoot local Veteran's day parade and shot these.












  12. #1362

    Default

    Quick question. How do you decide which photos to process and which to just discard. I'm having a hard time prioritizing, so I wind up ignoring.
    “Every player dreams of being a Yankee, and if they don’t it’s because they never got the chance.” Aroldis Chapman

  13. #1363

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Copelius View Post
    Quick question. How do you decide which photos to process and which to just discard. I'm having a hard time prioritizing, so I wind up ignoring.
    The easy answer is I buy a bigger hard drive. I have over 3 terabytes of photos at this point. I keep intending to take the time to clean up the catalog, but so far it hasn't happened. I get better with each passing month, but I still keep too many.

    Luckily, if I'm shooting in the same light or situation, the basic processing is quite simple for all of the pictures, I use Lightroom to process the first photo to where I have it balanced for color, sharpness, and lighting the way I want it, and then apply those edits to the entire batch with a few clicks of the mouse. I can then revisit each individually if the results weren't quite right for that specific image. I can run through several hundred sports images in an hour that way.

    There's a process I go through when I'm culling a shoot for the "keepers", I run through the first pass and flag any blurry or obvious instant deletes (because I cut off an arm, wing, bird flew away, etc.), on the same pass I also mark those that are obviously better than average.

    I then delete all of the ones flagged. I then visit each specific scene I photographed. For instance shooting I-5 bridge between Vancouver and Portland. I had several dozen tries at this. The ones that I ended up choosing had no blurry cars, no cars cut by the bottom edge, and the fewest cars cut by or touching the side edges. Also had some color with the two red vehicles that I liked. I will also compare for sharpness between shots and keep only the sharpest ones. It's rare that I will delete every shot of a scene, though it does happen when I am mostly looking at it and can't remember why I shot it in the first place.

    With the I-5 image, there are two things I don't like, one which I should have fixed easily, and the second just a timing thing. The first is I should have moved a couple of feet to my left, and the other is the truck that intersects with the lamppost, if it was an important shot I wanted to print, I would take out that truck.

    I takes time and reviewing lots of photographs before some things become obvious insta-deletes. While I don't agree with everything Mr. Rockwell has to say, there is something to his contention that if you are strolling along and something catches your eye, stop and figure out what it is that caught your eye, and then make sure that is prioritized. When deciding distance, aperture, exposure, etc.--you should be doing that knowing what it is that should be receiving the emphasis. Sometimes that something interesting is because of the setting it is in, sometimes not, so deciding how much of the surroundings to include varies.

    I've also learned to simply stop shooting a lot of stuff because I'm already aware nothing very good is going to come of it. Like bright sun, my wife has to twist my are before I'll shoot the kids in that kind of light.

    I'll stop rambling now, but some of it is also determined by the purpose of the photo, is it art, or just capturing something I want a permanent record of.

  14. #1364

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by swampfrog View Post
    The easy answer is I buy a bigger hard drive. I have over 3 terabytes of photos at this point. I keep intending to take the time to clean up the catalog, but so far it hasn't happened. I get better with each passing month, but I still keep too many.

    Luckily, if I'm shooting in the same light or situation, the basic processing is quite simple for all of the pictures, I use Lightroom to process the first photo to where I have it balanced for color, sharpness, and lighting the way I want it, and then apply those edits to the entire batch with a few clicks of the mouse. I can then revisit each individually if the results weren't quite right for that specific image. I can run through several hundred sports images in an hour that way.

    There's a process I go through when I'm culling a shoot for the "keepers", I run through the first pass and flag any blurry or obvious instant deletes (because I cut off an arm, wing, bird flew away, etc.), on the same pass I also mark those that are obviously better than average.

    I then delete all of the ones flagged. I then visit each specific scene I photographed. For instance shooting I-5 bridge between Vancouver and Portland. I had several dozen tries at this. The ones that I ended up choosing had no blurry cars, no cars cut by the bottom edge, and the fewest cars cut by or touching the side edges. Also had some color with the two red vehicles that I liked. I will also compare for sharpness between shots and keep only the sharpest ones. It's rare that I will delete every shot of a scene, though it does happen when I am mostly looking at it and can't remember why I shot it in the first place.

    With the I-5 image, there are two things I don't like, one which I should have fixed easily, and the second just a timing thing. The first is I should have moved a couple of feet to my left, and the other is the truck that intersects with the lamppost, if it was an important shot I wanted to print, I would take out that truck.

    I takes time and reviewing lots of photographs before some things become obvious insta-deletes. While I don't agree with everything Mr. Rockwell has to say, there is something to his contention that if you are strolling along and something catches your eye, stop and figure out what it is that caught your eye, and then make sure that is prioritized. When deciding distance, aperture, exposure, etc.--you should be doing that knowing what it is that should be receiving the emphasis. Sometimes that something interesting is because of the setting it is in, sometimes not, so deciding how much of the surroundings to include varies.

    I've also learned to simply stop shooting a lot of stuff because I'm already aware nothing very good is going to come of it. Like bright sun, my wife has to twist my are before I'll shoot the kids in that kind of light.

    I'll stop rambling now, but some of it is also determined by the purpose of the photo, is it art, or just capturing something I want a permanent record of.
    Quite like the band photo. I need to get better at organizing and culling my photos—just not enough hours in a day.

  15. #1365

    Default

    Nice thoughts. Thanks.
    “Every player dreams of being a Yankee, and if they don’t it’s because they never got the chance.” Aroldis Chapman

  16. #1366
    Soul Plumber wuapinmon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Hartsville, South Carolina
    Posts
    27,613

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by swampfrog View Post
    The easy answer is I buy a bigger hard drive. I have over 3 terabytes of photos at this point.
    Pretty soon you're gonna have a Roymoores worth of photos.
    "Yeah, but never trust a Ph.D who has an MBA as well. The PhD symbolizes intelligence and discipline. The MBA symbolizes lust for power." -- Katy Lied

  17. #1367

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by wuapinmon View Post
    Pretty soon you're gonna have a Roymoores worth of photos.
    Great. I can't unread that.

  18. #1368
    Soul Plumber wuapinmon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Hartsville, South Carolina
    Posts
    27,613

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by swampfrog View Post
    Great. I can't unread that.
    My wife said we should get a kids-level camera for them to make pictures and videos with for Christmas. I'd love to know your recommendation. Maybe Nikon 3000-level?
    "Yeah, but never trust a Ph.D who has an MBA as well. The PhD symbolizes intelligence and discipline. The MBA symbolizes lust for power." -- Katy Lied

  19. #1369

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by wuapinmon View Post
    My wife said we should get a kids-level camera for them to make pictures and videos with for Christmas. I'd love to know your recommendation. Maybe Nikon 3000-level?
    DSLR? Point-and-shoot? Budget?

  20. #1370
    Soul Plumber wuapinmon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Hartsville, South Carolina
    Posts
    27,613

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by swampfrog View Post
    DSLR? Point-and-shoot? Budget?
    DSLR, under $1000.
    "Yeah, but never trust a Ph.D who has an MBA as well. The PhD symbolizes intelligence and discipline. The MBA symbolizes lust for power." -- Katy Lied

  21. #1371

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by wuapinmon View Post
    DSLR, under $1000.
    Probably just look for a good package at Costco, etc. Stick with whatever brand you use so you can exchange lenses. I know Canon has regular package deal with printers, flashes, or other accessories that are usually very price competitive. I assume Nikon does the same. We have bought around the $500 kit for 3 our kids as they turned 16. It stuck with the last one as a hobby, and even making some money doing senior pictures (she borrows my lenses).

    The D3400 Triple Lens Parent's kit looks like a nice package. A 35mm 1.8 would be a nice lens to have once they move beyond the basics. The telephoto is useful, but the image quality of the basic telephotos are usually suspect.

    Every single entry level DSLR that Nikon or Canon makes are fantastic cameras when it comes to basic landscape photography or non-moving subjects. The technology has simply evolved to the point where reviewers are having to make much ado about nothing to differentiate them.

    The next step up (D5600) is the sweet spot for me if you expect your kid to continue as a hobby. You get a tilt touch screen, better auto-focusing options, and more frames per second. It's a more versatile body. Can shoot sports or wildlife more readily and the tilt screen is great for video, or getting the "above the crowd" shot. I wish I had one (The Canon 7D mkII doesn't have the tilt or touch screen).

  22. #1372

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by wuapinmon View Post
    DSLR, under $1000.
    I shoot with a Cannon EOS 6D. I bought it used about four years ago for $750.00. That is a great price, but I picked it up from a disillusioned former photography student who came to the realization that a diploma in Photography wasn't what they were looking for.
    Last edited by tooblue; Yesterday at 09:40 AM.

  23. #1373

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tooblue View Post
    I shoot with a Cannon EOS 6D. I bought it used about four years ago for $750.00. That is a great price, but I picked it up from a disillusioned former photography student who came to the realization that a diploma in Photography wasn't what they were looking for.
    Did that include the 24-105? If so, that's a fantastic deal.

    Wuap owns and shoots Nikon already, so he probably would want to stay in the family--I think he also has DX lenses, so going to a full frame camera is probably not the best option. Used is always an interesting option, while good glass holds value well, bodies don't at all. I could point at numerous used Canon sites (I follow Canon gear pretty closely), but I don't follow Nikon at all. Two years ago, for my youngest daughter, I was able to pick up a new T5i, 18-55, 70-300, and a PRO-100 printer for around $500. I kept the printer, but people do try to sell them. It's a fairly common package so there are a ton of the printers for sale on ebay/craigslist.

    I shoot the 7DII for it's speed and focusing capability (it really is a sports and wildlife body), if I shot a lot more portrait and landscape, I would move to full frame. If I could afford the 5D IV + lenses, I would be there now.

  24. #1374

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by swampfrog View Post
    Did that include the 24-105? If so, that's a fantastic deal.

    Wuap owns and shoots Nikon already, so he probably would want to stay in the family--I think he also has DX lenses, so going to a full frame camera is probably not the best option. Used is always an interesting option, while good glass holds value well, bodies don't at all. I could point at numerous used Canon sites (I follow Canon gear pretty closely), but I don't follow Nikon at all. Two years ago, for my youngest daughter, I was able to pick up a new T5i, 18-55, 70-300, and a PRO-100 printer for around $500. I kept the printer, but people do try to sell them. It's a fairly common package so there are a ton of the printers for sale on ebay/craigslist.

    I shoot the 7DII for it's speed and focusing capability (it really is a sports and wildlife body), if I shot a lot more portrait and landscape, I would move to full frame. If I could afford the 5D IV + lenses, I would be there now.
    Yes, it included the 24-105. I felt like I was taking advantage of the student and tried to pay more, but they just wanted to recoup whatever they could as fast as they could. It was barely used. Where I teach I have access to any Cannon I want. I have shot with the 7D and didn't like it, especially the auto zoom—it just wasn't responsive like I was used to. All the 5D's are in high demand. We have a couple of massive lenses. Maybe I'll post some shots of my son playing football from years ago taken with the big telephoto lens you commonly see on football sidelines—if I can find them.
    Last edited by tooblue; Yesterday at 11:25 AM.

  25. #1375

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tooblue View Post
    I have shot with the 7D and didn't like it, especially the auto zoom—it just wasn't responsive like I was used to.
    What's the auto zoom? The 7D mark II has the focusing system of the original 1DX, it's very responsive and precise even in low light.



    Quote Originally Posted by tooblue View Post
    We have a couple of massive lenses. Maybe I'll post some shots of my son playing football from years ago taken with the big telephoto lens you commonly see on football sidelines—if I can find them.
    The Canon big glass is out of reach for me unfortunately, I would love to have one of the 400mm options and the 600mm mark II. Some day.

  26. #1376

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by swampfrog View Post
    What's the auto zoom? The 7D mark II has the focusing system of the original 1DX, it's very responsive and precise even in low light.





    The Canon big glass is out of reach for me unfortunately, I would love to have one of the 400mm options and the 600mm mark II. Some day.
    I just struggled with the 7D. Great game shot. I'm looking for my shots right now, but before I post anything understand at the time all I had was a rebel to attach the big glass to. The lens needed it's own post to rest it on ... wait for it, think my search just found them ...
    Last edited by tooblue; Yesterday at 11:50 AM.

  27. #1377

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tooblue View Post
    I just struggled with the 7D.
    The original 7D and the 7D mark II are completely different animals. The 7D II with the 70-200 2.8 USM mark II with both the 1.4x and 2.0x teleconverters is arguably the most versatile sports and large wildlife combination you can get for less than $5K.

  28. #1378

    Default

    I don't think I've shared many sport/activity shots:
















  29. #1379

    Default

    These are from 2014. My son was in grade 10. Age wise, if we lived in the states, he would've been in grade 9. I processed them too quickly with a little too much sharpening, but here they are:



















    Last edited by tooblue; Yesterday at 12:34 PM.

  30. #1380
    Huge Member BigPiney's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    CA
    Posts
    4,795

    Default

    the Papermakers? Terrible mascot.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •