Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Digital Photography > Tasmania (or, how am I doing with my first DSLR?)

Reply
Thread Tools

Tasmania (or, how am I doing with my first DSLR?)

 
 
jmc
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-12-2007
http://tinyurl.com/yq7g8e (using tinyurl to avoid spam)

Just got back from our vacation in Tasmania. Took over 1200 pictures
with my new Canon Digital Rebel XTi (EOS 400D for you non-US folk!).
This is my first DSLR, and my first major picture-taking expedition with it.

I'd love to hear comments both of my photos (constructive criticism
appreciated!), and of my website!

Although I try to create a good photo with every picture I take, some of
'em are more to document moments or some item of interest. I'm not a
good enough photographer to be able to make even a mundane image a
masterpiece

Just out of curiosity, do you think my photos are good enough to sell?
*I* don't think so, but I've had a couple people say, "you should sell
your photos", one is a graphic artist...

Thanks for visiting!

jmc
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
MarkČ
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-12-2007
jmc wrote:
> http://tinyurl.com/yq7g8e (using tinyurl to avoid spam)
>
> Just got back from our vacation in Tasmania. Took over 1200 pictures
> with my new Canon Digital Rebel XTi (EOS 400D for you non-US folk!).
> This is my first DSLR, and my first major picture-taking expedition
> with it.
> I'd love to hear comments both of my photos (constructive criticism
> appreciated!), and of my website!
>
> Although I try to create a good photo with every picture I take, some
> of 'em are more to document moments or some item of interest. I'm
> not a good enough photographer to be able to make even a mundane image a
> masterpiece
>
> Just out of curiosity, do you think my photos are good enough to sell?
> *I* don't think so, but I've had a couple people say, "you should sell
> your photos", one is a graphic artist...
>
> Thanks for visiting!
>
> jmc


I think you're doing fine for your first round of photos.
However, a large proportion of these shots are underexposed. Not all...but
some very much so. Have a look at the histogram for these images, and get
aquainted with the "info" view on your camera's LCD review (which shows a
smaller image, but with histrogram also diaplayed after each shot, or during
playback review). This will help you identify exposure issues in the field.

--
Images (Plus Snaps & Grabs) by MarkČ at:
www.pbase.com/markuson


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
jmc
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-12-2007
Suddenly, without warning, MarkČ exclaimed (12-Feb-07 6:40 PM):
> jmc wrote:
>> http://tinyurl.com/yq7g8e (using tinyurl to avoid spam)
>>
>> Just got back from our vacation in Tasmania. Took over 1200 pictures
>> with my new Canon Digital Rebel XTi (EOS 400D for you non-US folk!).
>> This is my first DSLR, and my first major picture-taking expedition
>> with it.
>> I'd love to hear comments both of my photos (constructive criticism
>> appreciated!), and of my website!
>>
>> Although I try to create a good photo with every picture I take, some
>> of 'em are more to document moments or some item of interest. I'm
>> not a good enough photographer to be able to make even a mundane image a
>> masterpiece
>>
>> Just out of curiosity, do you think my photos are good enough to sell?
>> *I* don't think so, but I've had a couple people say, "you should sell
>> your photos", one is a graphic artist...
>>
>> Thanks for visiting!
>>
>> jmc

>
> I think you're doing fine for your first round of photos.
> However, a large proportion of these shots are underexposed. Not all...but
> some very much so. Have a look at the histogram for these images, and get
> aquainted with the "info" view on your camera's LCD review (which shows a
> smaller image, but with histrogram also diaplayed after each shot, or during
> playback review). This will help you identify exposure issues in the field.
>


Underexposed? Really? They look fine on my screen, and on my camera's
LCD, and on the screen of the computer at work. Can you give me an
example of one that is underexposed? Maybe my eyes are overexposed

jmc
 
Reply With Quote
 
jmc
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-12-2007
Suddenly, without warning, jmc exclaimed (12-Feb-07 7:08 PM):
> Suddenly, without warning, MarkČ exclaimed (12-Feb-07 6:40 PM):
>> jmc wrote:
>>> http://tinyurl.com/yq7g8e (using tinyurl to avoid spam)
>>>
>>> Just got back from our vacation in Tasmania. Took over 1200 pictures
>>> with my new Canon Digital Rebel XTi (EOS 400D for you non-US folk!).
>>> This is my first DSLR, and my first major picture-taking expedition
>>> with it.
>>> I'd love to hear comments both of my photos (constructive criticism
>>> appreciated!), and of my website!
>>>
>>> Although I try to create a good photo with every picture I take, some
>>> of 'em are more to document moments or some item of interest. I'm
>>> not a good enough photographer to be able to make even a mundane image a
>>> masterpiece
>>>
>>> Just out of curiosity, do you think my photos are good enough to sell?
>>> *I* don't think so, but I've had a couple people say, "you should sell
>>> your photos", one is a graphic artist...
>>>
>>> Thanks for visiting!
>>>
>>> jmc

>>
>> I think you're doing fine for your first round of photos.
>> However, a large proportion of these shots are underexposed. Not
>> all...but some very much so. Have a look at the histogram for these
>> images, and get aquainted with the "info" view on your camera's LCD
>> review (which shows a smaller image, but with histrogram also
>> diaplayed after each shot, or during playback review). This will help
>> you identify exposure issues in the field.
>>

>
> Underexposed? Really? They look fine on my screen, and on my camera's
> LCD, and on the screen of the computer at work. Can you give me an
> example of one that is underexposed? Maybe my eyes are overexposed
>
> jmc


In looking at the histograms (after refamiliarizing myself with the
histogram article on Luminous Landscape) and though I see your point,
they're not pushed up against the dark side of the scale, so I thought
this is OK. I was trying hard to keep from blowing out the highlights,
though I see sometimes I've managed both

I'm not yet in the habit of using histograms while taking my shots,
though I know I need to learn that. I'd still like to know which pics
you think are underexposed, so I can ask further questions...

I've been taking photos for, lessee, 30 years now, but do it mostly by
"feel" and some of the more basic rules. Now that I have a real camera,
I *am* trying to improve my photography, so really appreciate your comments!

jmc
 
Reply With Quote
 
MarkČ
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-12-2007
jmc wrote:
> Suddenly, without warning, MarkČ exclaimed (12-Feb-07 6:40 PM):
>> jmc wrote:
>>> http://tinyurl.com/yq7g8e (using tinyurl to avoid spam)
>>>
>>> Just got back from our vacation in Tasmania. Took over 1200
>>> pictures with my new Canon Digital Rebel XTi (EOS 400D for you
>>> non-US folk!). This is my first DSLR, and my first major
>>> picture-taking expedition with it.
>>> I'd love to hear comments both of my photos (constructive criticism
>>> appreciated!), and of my website!
>>>
>>> Although I try to create a good photo with every picture I take,
>>> some of 'em are more to document moments or some item of interest. I'm
>>> not a good enough photographer to be able to make even a mundane
>>> image a masterpiece
>>>
>>> Just out of curiosity, do you think my photos are good enough to
>>> sell? *I* don't think so, but I've had a couple people say, "you
>>> should sell your photos", one is a graphic artist...
>>>
>>> Thanks for visiting!
>>>
>>> jmc

>>
>> I think you're doing fine for your first round of photos.
>> However, a large proportion of these shots are underexposed. Not
>> all...but some very much so. Have a look at the histogram for these
>> images, and get aquainted with the "info" view on your camera's LCD
>> review (which shows a smaller image, but with histrogram also
>> diaplayed after each shot, or during playback review). This will
>> help you identify exposure issues in the field.

>
> Underexposed? Really? They look fine on my screen, and on my
> camera's LCD, and on the screen of the computer at work. Can you
> give me an example of one that is underexposed? Maybe my eyes are
> overexposed


Are you looking at a flat-sceen LCD? If so, they are almost universally too
bright at out-of-teh-box settings. Many of these shots are about a full
stop under-exposed according to my histograms in photoshop. Not all, but
quite a few. Particularly landscapes and seascapes.

--
Images (Plus Snaps & Grabs) by MarkČ at:
www.pbase.com/markuson


 
Reply With Quote
 
frederick
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-12-2007
MarkČ wrote:
> jmc wrote:
>> Suddenly, without warning, MarkČ exclaimed (12-Feb-07 6:40 PM):
>>> jmc wrote:
>>>> http://tinyurl.com/yq7g8e (using tinyurl to avoid spam)
>>>>
>>>> Just got back from our vacation in Tasmania. Took over 1200
>>>> pictures with my new Canon Digital Rebel XTi (EOS 400D for you
>>>> non-US folk!). This is my first DSLR, and my first major
>>>> picture-taking expedition with it.
>>>> I'd love to hear comments both of my photos (constructive criticism
>>>> appreciated!), and of my website!
>>>>
>>>> Although I try to create a good photo with every picture I take,
>>>> some of 'em are more to document moments or some item of interest. I'm
>>>> not a good enough photographer to be able to make even a mundane
>>>> image a masterpiece
>>>>
>>>> Just out of curiosity, do you think my photos are good enough to
>>>> sell? *I* don't think so, but I've had a couple people say, "you
>>>> should sell your photos", one is a graphic artist...
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for visiting!
>>>>
>>>> jmc
>>> I think you're doing fine for your first round of photos.
>>> However, a large proportion of these shots are underexposed. Not
>>> all...but some very much so. Have a look at the histogram for these
>>> images, and get aquainted with the "info" view on your camera's LCD
>>> review (which shows a smaller image, but with histrogram also
>>> diaplayed after each shot, or during playback review). This will
>>> help you identify exposure issues in the field.

>> Underexposed? Really? They look fine on my screen, and on my
>> camera's LCD, and on the screen of the computer at work. Can you
>> give me an example of one that is underexposed? Maybe my eyes are
>> overexposed

>
> Are you looking at a flat-sceen LCD? If so, they are almost universally too
> bright at out-of-teh-box settings. Many of these shots are about a full
> stop under-exposed according to my histograms in photoshop. Not all, but
> quite a few. Particularly landscapes and seascapes.
>

I agree with you.
They are able to be adjusted without too many problems (levels).
One example image is IMG_0692.jpg, which with a tweak in levels can look
well exposed, while increasing the dramatic effect of the clouds. As it
is, it (IMHO) is a little flat and also underexposed by perhaps a stop.
Unfortunately, the now ubiquitous over-bright LCDs mean that correctly
exposed images look all washed out to probably the majority of punters
on the www. Another side effect is a continuous stream of questions on
printing forums as to why home inkjet prints look too dark.
 
Reply With Quote
 
jmc
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-12-2007
Suddenly, without warning, frederick exclaimed (12-Feb-07 8:01 PM):
> MarkČ wrote:
>> jmc wrote:
>>> Suddenly, without warning, MarkČ exclaimed (12-Feb-07 6:40 PM):
>>>> jmc wrote:
>>>>> http://tinyurl.com/yq7g8e (using tinyurl to avoid spam)
>>>>>
>>>>> Just got back from our vacation in Tasmania. Took over 1200
>>>>> pictures with my new Canon Digital Rebel XTi (EOS 400D for you
>>>>> non-US folk!). This is my first DSLR, and my first major
>>>>> picture-taking expedition with it.
>>>>> I'd love to hear comments both of my photos (constructive criticism
>>>>> appreciated!), and of my website!
>>>>>
>>>>> Although I try to create a good photo with every picture I take,
>>>>> some of 'em are more to document moments or some item of interest.
>>>>> I'm not a good enough photographer to be able to make even a mundane
>>>>> image a masterpiece
>>>>>
>>>>> Just out of curiosity, do you think my photos are good enough to
>>>>> sell? *I* don't think so, but I've had a couple people say, "you
>>>>> should sell your photos", one is a graphic artist...
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks for visiting!
>>>>>
>>>>> jmc
>>>> I think you're doing fine for your first round of photos.
>>>> However, a large proportion of these shots are underexposed. Not
>>>> all...but some very much so. Have a look at the histogram for these
>>>> images, and get aquainted with the "info" view on your camera's LCD
>>>> review (which shows a smaller image, but with histrogram also
>>>> diaplayed after each shot, or during playback review). This will
>>>> help you identify exposure issues in the field.
>>> Underexposed? Really? They look fine on my screen, and on my
>>> camera's LCD, and on the screen of the computer at work. Can you
>>> give me an example of one that is underexposed? Maybe my eyes are
>>> overexposed

>>
>> Are you looking at a flat-sceen LCD? If so, they are almost
>> universally too bright at out-of-teh-box settings. Many of these
>> shots are about a full stop under-exposed according to my histograms
>> in photoshop. Not all, but quite a few. Particularly landscapes and
>> seascapes.
>>

> I agree with you.
> They are able to be adjusted without too many problems (levels).
> One example image is IMG_0692.jpg, which with a tweak in levels can look
> well exposed, while increasing the dramatic effect of the clouds. As it
> is, it (IMHO) is a little flat and also underexposed by perhaps a stop.
> Unfortunately, the now ubiquitous over-bright LCDs mean that correctly
> exposed images look all washed out to probably the majority of punters
> on the www. Another side effect is a continuous stream of questions on
> printing forums as to why home inkjet prints look too dark.


Actually, I keep the brightness of my LCD down, but point taken - this
is an exceptionally bright monitor. I used the monitor's software to
calibrate brightness and colors.

I agree with you that 0692 could be brighter (I missed that one,
apparently). On many though, when I try to brighten, I start to wash
out the sky, or something else. I'm still learning how to use curves
correctly, as opposed to brightness/contrast controls.

The brightness on my prints pretty much matches what I see on the
screen, they're just slightly darker - but not by much.

I've just darkened my screen down a bit more though, I'll have to go
through the pictures again with an eye to the histogram and then repost
them.

Thanks for the comments!

 
Reply With Quote
 
jmc
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-12-2007
Suddenly, without warning, MarkČ exclaimed (12-Feb-07 6:40 PM):
> jmc wrote:
>> http://tinyurl.com/yq7g8e (using tinyurl to avoid spam)
>>

> I think you're doing fine for your first round of photos.
> However, a large proportion of these shots are underexposed. Not all...but
> some very much so. Have a look at the histogram for these images, and get
> aquainted with the "info" view on your camera's LCD review (which shows a
> smaller image, but with histrogram also diaplayed after each shot, or during
> playback review). This will help you identify exposure issues in the field.
>


Ok. I darkened my LCD screen a bit, then adjusted the first few images
- 0546-0585, and 0636. Better, or worse? Where can I get a good primer
on how to use the tone curve adjustments better?

Thanks for the comments, keep 'em coming. How's my composition skills?
Aside from them being underexposed, what else do I need to work on,
overall, to improve my skills? Is there anything I'm good at, that
doesn't need as much improvement?

Thanks again for the help.

Jodi
 
Reply With Quote
 
jmc
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-12-2007
Suddenly, without warning, jmc exclaimed (12-Feb-07 9:25 PM):
> Suddenly, without warning, MarkČ exclaimed (12-Feb-07 6:40 PM):
>> jmc wrote:
>>> http://tinyurl.com/yq7g8e (using tinyurl to avoid spam)
>>>

>> I think you're doing fine for your first round of photos.
>> However, a large proportion of these shots are underexposed. Not
>> all...but some very much so. Have a look at the histogram for these
>> images, and get aquainted with the "info" view on your camera's LCD
>> review (which shows a smaller image, but with histrogram also
>> diaplayed after each shot, or during playback review). This will help
>> you identify exposure issues in the field.
>>

>
> Ok. I darkened my LCD screen a bit, then adjusted the first few images
> - 0546-0585, and 0636. Better, or worse? Where can I get a good primer
> on how to use the tone curve adjustments better?
>
> Thanks for the comments, keep 'em coming. How's my composition skills?
> Aside from them being underexposed, what else do I need to work on,
> overall, to improve my skills? Is there anything I'm good at, that
> doesn't need as much improvement?
>
> Thanks again for the help.
>
> Jodi


oh, btw, I adjusted only the images, not the thumbnails. Once I get a
feel for what I need to do, I'll go back and do the originals, then redo
all the images and thumbs...

jmc
 
Reply With Quote
 
David J Taylor
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-12-2007
jmc wrote:
[]
> Ok. I darkened my LCD screen a bit, then adjusted the first few
> images - 0546-0585, and 0636. Better, or worse? Where can I get a
> good primer on how to use the tone curve adjustments better?


Jodi,

For monitor settings, look at the top three-row chart here:

http://www.jasc.com/support/kb/articles/monitor.asp

You should be able to distinguish the darkest and the lightest 3 boxes.

David


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Re: How include a large array? Edward A. Falk C Programming 1 04-04-2013 08:07 PM
Doing my first wedding in less than two weeks Cynicor Digital Photography 93 12-30-2006 03:54 AM
[OT] Tasmania Luigi Donatello Asero HTML 0 09-23-2006 12:59 AM
Tasmania - Canon 20D - panoramas chris_real Digital Photography 6 04-25-2005 10:57 AM
First argument lost when doing exec Goh, Yong Kwang C Programming 4 02-10-2004 04:39 AM



Advertisments