The "Post your pictures here" thread.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Hi guys, I've just picked up a dslr and would really appreciate some feedback. These photos are unprocessed unless you count resizing them, so any tips you would like to share would be awesome. I did post these in flora and fauna, but nobody seems interested in updating that thread.

Anyway:
fish.jpg


IMG_0133.jpg


IMG_0134.jpg


IMG_0135.jpg


IMG_0136.jpg


IMG_0284.jpg


I am experimenting with night photography tonight and took this:
moon.jpg


The night portrait mode on the 700d isn't very good, so I put it into manual. The above picture I cropped to remove a little of the sky.
 
Hi guys, I've just picked up a dslr and would really appreciate some feedback. These photos are unprocessed unless you count resizing them, so any tips you would like to share would be awesome. I did post these in flora and fauna, but nobody seems interested in updating that thread.

Anyway:
http://www.markgerry.plus.com/ocuk/photos/fish.jpg[IMG]

[IMG]http://www.markgerry.plus.com/ocuk/photos/IMG_0133.jpg[IMG]

[IMG]http://www.markgerry.plus.com/ocuk/photos/IMG_0134.jpg[IMG]

[IMG]http://www.markgerry.plus.com/ocuk/photos/IMG_0135.jpg[/MG]

[IMG]http://www.markgerry.plus.com/ocuk/photos/IMG_0136.jpg[IMG]

[IMG]http://www.markgerry.plus.com/ocuk/photos/IMG_0284.jpg[IMG]

I am experimenting with night photography tonight and took this:
[IMG]http://www.markgerry.plus.com/ocuk/photos/moon.jpg[IMG]

The night portrait mode on the 700d isn't very good, so I put it into manual. The above picture I cropped to remove a little of the sky.[/QUOTE]

There are a few issues that you would wan to address before looking at processing for these shots.

fish: it's a little bit blurred, and it looks like you were trying to catch the fish mid-jump, so keep an eye on your shutter speed (try shutter priority and set a fast shutter speed of 1/200 or higher) to help you freeze the fish. Also, the rest of the scene doesn't add much so try cropping out the extra water to make the fish more of a focal point in the frame, or get closer if you can.

flowers: a couple of these are out of focus, but mainly the issue is the distracting grass and twigs that detract from the main subject. You've used a wide aperture to try to remove that clutter, which is good, but it wasn't wide enough. If your lens doesn't open up any wider, try getting closer to the subject to minimise depth of field and increase the blurring effect, or ideally remove the distracting objects (nothing wrong with flattening down a bit of grass or holding a twig out of the way while you shoot). Also, the stems of the flower aren't particularly attractive, so maybe try an angle that capitalises on the good bit (again, getting closer would help). If it's windy, erect a shield out of a jacket etc to stop the flower blowing out of your field of focus or use a twig to prop it up.

moon: that's actually very good. It looks like you've hit the limitations of your lens here, but you could try applying some sharpening to bring out some more detail. Your exposure is solid though, which is the hardest part when shooting the moon.
 
Been a while since i posted in here...Been a while since I've done any serious shooting to be honest! Been enjoying myself for summer though so I don't mind too much. Here's a couple of the new addition to the family.

Qh7HiP5.jpg
jOexYyy.jpg
f4oPEhh.jpg

Gorgeous dog!
 
It's a bit of a trend at the moment, that style of processing. I've seen a hell of a lot of wedding/event photographers using that in the last year. It seems to be a cleaner version of the 70s style of photos you used to see.

Personally it's not my cuppa but it must be making people money as it's so popular currently. Not sure why but it seems kind of odd to me, as if the processing went wonky in a lab :D
 
It's a bit of a trend at the moment, that style of processing. I've seen a hell of a lot of wedding/event photographers using that in the last year. It seems to be a cleaner version of the 70s style of photos you used to see.

Personally it's not my cuppa but it must be making people money as it's so popular currently. Not sure why but it seems kind of odd to me, as if the processing went wonky in a lab :D

True, VSCO pack 3 etc
 
VSCO is amazing. I've got all 4 packs and fine tuned my most used presets from each one. Big fan of the 70s and 80s film colour.
 
Thanks for the comments. Since getting the 35L a month ago I've found I don't really have to do that much processing, it just gives a beautiful image SOOC. I used to have a tendency go all out with loads of local adjustments, too much clarity etc.

That image wasn't VSCO, just -100 Saturation, +20 contrast and some curves to push the shadows and pull the highlights down a bit, 1 minute job really.

I do agree the pushed shadow w/ curves look is very cliché at the moment but I still think it looks nice, so until I develop something more original I'll probably stick with it.

I like the way the 35L renders colour as well, gives the images a nice pop. As I said, this was just practice shooting people ahead of my first wedding. Hopefully I'll be able to get some nice images for the couple in 3 weeks! -

9644780164_4078256c86_c.jpg


9641544417_fcc10d27c0_c.jpg
 
Last edited:
VSCO is amazing. I've got all 4 packs and fine tuned my most used presets from each one. Big fan of the 70s and 80s film colour.

Yup, I quite like pack 3 too.. However I do wonder if we will look back in 20 years and cringe at the results.

VSCO 3 examples:

dobbies%252520%25252830%252520of%25252044%252529.jpg


dobbies%252520%25252824%252520of%25252044%252529.jpg


dobbies%252520%25252822%252520of%25252044%252529.jpg
 
Just a couple from my visit to Nevada and Arizona recently, valley of fire was just too hit to be out of the car for more than 2 minutes so taking pics was tricky!

9635841001_a176954a49_b.jpg


9643934223_99bb37fa02_b.jpg


9639079140_f9a49213b1_b.jpg


9638752620_43a454a2a5_b.jpg


9635840313_31fb6068ae_b.jpg
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom