What do you see?

[AmberC]

Is there anything wrong with this photo? Please be honest.

Thanks!

[Loupey]

I see a centered bird. Is that what you mean?

Are you looking for a "critique" or post processing improvement?

[AmberC]

I'm looking for not critique of whether or not the picture is pretty, but is the exposure good, are the settings right etc. know what I mean?

I have had someone (a very mean spirited person I might add) make a few comments recently and he says that all of my photos are bad. The white balance is always off, exposure is always wrong yadayada.

He didn't tell me what particular photos, but I'd like to know about this one. What makes it a good or a bad photo.
Thanks

[Copy_Kot]

What makes it a good or a bad photo.
Thanks

Did you have fun taking it? Do you like it? If you answered yes, then it is a good p h o t o (dumb green links).

I think the i m a g e is just a little dark, and for wildlife, the rule of thirds should be followed. I like it though

[AmberC]

lol.. well personally I LOVE the photo. I am very proud of it. I think I did a darn good job. Esp considering this guy popped in out of nowhere right next to me and surprised me.

But right now, thats not what matters. I want to know what other people see when they look at the photograph. Like say I consider selling it.

Ok.. a little dark. That is the only thing you find "wrong" with it? I dont know what the rule of thirds is. Can you explain?

Thanks

edit to add: On the darkness... Ok.. so I would correct that by adjusting my aperture correct? Make it lower to allow more light correct?

[Copy_Kot]

The rule of thirds is simple

See how the chipmunk is in the center of the frame… not good!



When you look through your v-i-e-w-finde-r pretend there is a grid of nine equal rectangles and try to place your subject where two lines would cross each other. The bottom p I c t u r e has been cropped trying to use the rule of thirds. It can even be just the animals head.



You can adjust your exposure by increasing or decreasing your shutter speed, ISO speed, or aperture.

[AmberC]

Ok.. so should that rule always be applied or are there exceptions?

Like say this image:


There really isn't anything else in the photo. Or should it be cropped?

[Copy_Kot]

Ok.. so should that rule always be applied or are there exceptions?

Like say this image:

There really isn't anything else in the photo. Or should it be cropped?

I hope Loupey will answer this one I don't think it always applies, just most of the time lol. I think in the egret image, the head should be at one of the points where two imaginary lines would cross.

[AmberC]

Ok..

Is this any better? (and this was just eyeballing.. I didn't do squares lol) Or is it still really off? And how about other general appearance of this photo? exposure etc.

[Loupey]

This thread brings up the "next level" of photography.

The first step is mastering the fundamentals (exposure, focus, DOF) - the techie stuff. Easy and black and white.

The really fun stuff comes with composition, subject selection, and lighting - the artsy stuff . What even better is that there is no set standard so everyone can go off exploring and honing their "style".

The rule of thirds that Copy brings up is a good place to start. There are many other underlying "rules" which also must be considered simultaneously, the direction the subject is looking being the main one. I also use the rule of halves if the subject is very symmetrical. Most of what I photograph and post here and in my web site use these generalities.

It is very rare that I place anything directly in the center of the frame. It is ironic because all the sensors are there (metering and AF). In the field, I avoid placing the subject in the center at all costs. Another reason why I am such a fan of manual focusing.

Here are your examples and how I would have cropped them in-camera. If a subject is large in the frame, place the point of main emphasis on the intersecting points.

[SmartWombat]

Ah now that's looking Japanese, like a late Edo period woodcut I saw on TV.
When it reached us in the west, that composition with the subject cut by the frame was new and exciting.

[AmberC]

Ok.. so I am going to wrap my brain around all that for a bit Thanks for all the input guys! Its very much appreciated!!

[paulnj]

Whoever told you those things is a very sad individual, so don't let them get to you!

Yes your mockingbird is under exposed a bit for that scene(to me) , but the image isn't bad.

[Jaedon]

Amber,

I hear similar things from people all the time that really don't know much about photography but they are trying to sound like they do. The WB in your images is very close to how it would end up if I had done it. The cropping takes a little bit of practice and once you have it figured out you will find yourself doing it in camera and saving yourself the few seconds it takes later in post processing.

The first image may be a bit on the dark side but that happens when shooting wildlife and you only have a few seconds to compose and shoot and cross your fingers that the exposure is correct. There are a few ways to fix it with photoshop (exposure adjustment, levels adjustment, etc) and once you find the one that works best for you it'll help a lot in the end.

When I first looked at the first image my thoughts were:

I like that shot, but there's a bit too much sky, and the exposure needs a small bump. I like the darkness of it personally as it looks more natural. The reds in it are briliant and the sky is perfectly exposed for. You have nothing to worry about. Just chalk it up the the fact that the person who said the mean spirited comments is jealous of the shots you got and is building himself up by making you feel bad.

Jay

[AmberC]

Thanks you guys. That means a lot. The guy who said those things to me claims to have 30 years experience in photography, but I have yet to see one photograph from him. He is on one of my fish forums and I post some of my photos over there from time to time. This guy has never posted one picture. Some of us think he doesn't even have any fish. He never says anything nice to anyone, the only time he posts is to correct someone or make them feel like a fool. I dont know why I let him get to me. But I did.

So this was encouraging Thanks.

[payn817]

Keep working at it, and let those type of people just pass on by. Try using the information in the thread "the 4 basics", and just as Loupey stated, do everything you can in the field to keep it off center.

In my experience, real photographers will try to help anyone they can. If it makes you feel any better, these are better than any bird photos I've ever taken. :smilewinkgrin:

Just as a side note, I did end up getting the Alpha today, my 5D died yesterday!

[AmberC]

Thank you! Yes Loupey's Basics post is awesome.

Congrats on your new alpha!! I really love mine!

[Loupey]

Amber, getting back to your question about selling images: images which are sellable are sometimes completely different than those which we, as photographers, may actually like or are especially proud of. When scouting, I usually work both sides of my brain: one side says "hey I bet someone would buy that one" while the other side says "hey, I bet that's one hard bugger to capture well".

As much as I like shooting macros, they don't sell as well as others. I do it mostly because I like it and I know a good macro image when I see it. Others I shoot mainly because I know other people will like it enough to shell out their hard-earned money for it. Generally, nature images will sell if it meets at least one of these criteria (more the better):

1) the subject or the action captured is very rare
2) the subject is very likable (the cuteness factor - spiders don't score well here)
3) the scene is universally pleasing to a wide range of people (again, bugs and spiders don't do well)
4) the subject is somewhat familiar to the region but somewhat difficult to photograph by the casual shooter

It's great to be proud of an image for its artistic quality or for your capturing ability. But that doesn't necessarily mean that it will sell well. I'm not trying to put you off from trying it - quite the opposite

[AmberC]

Thanks Loupey I would never think you were trying to put me off from it. I know you are just trying to help and I appreciate that. PR has been very helpful to me. You guys are great