Take a picture once a day, whether you need to or not

[Count Nerfedalot]

Well, I had high hopes for a foggy morning (LOL who ever says that!) which didn't pan out, but the afternoon was plenty hazy to make up for it.   

yuk.  But then I took a side road on the way home and this happened ...


I stopped my car about 40 feet from them. They spooked a little when the tires crossed the rumble strips (flighty thoroughbreds) so I didn't dare open the door or anything. So I turned off the car (I learned that lesson when most of my Denali pics taken from a bus were rubbish due to the engine vibration!) and shot through the open window.  Cropping isn't perfect, it could use more grass under the bottom nose, but there was a fence there, just visible as a blurry edge in the bottom left corner, so that just wasn't an option this time. And as soon as I started the car up, even though it's a deathly silent Prius, they spooked again and took off paralleling me.  Beautiful creatures, especially while running, but no way to get a pic while driving a narrow windy road!

There were several more horses, but they were all moving slowly and either too close together or too far apart.  The pic with 5 horse's asses in a row is probably better saved for the Funny Pictures thread, if I ever think of a good caption.

So my other favorite pic today was of a tree stump, even with the bird droppings. For some reason the words "tree stump" remind me of camping some super rare drop for a vital priest quest in Kithikor Forest with the Countess in EQ! 


One of these days I'll stop being so lazy and actually bust out the tripod, but then nothing will be there to take a picture of once I get everything set up.    hm, maybe the stump will stick around for a picture!  But then I'd need at least a 3 foot boom out from the tripod to get the camera centered and parallel to the top of the stump. drat.

[Lantyssa]

There were several more horses, but they were all moving slowly and either too close together or too far apart.  The pic with 5 horse's asses in a row is probably better saved for the Funny Pictures thread, if I ever think of a good caption.

"What happens when you get five f13ers together?"

"They all turn into asses."

[Khaldun]

Nice horses shot!

I like the textures in the stump.

[Count Nerfedalot]

Yeah the stump was a wonderful serendipitous find. I'm not completely satisfied with that image though. Something's a little off but I'm not sure what. Focus maybe isn't quite what it should be? I'll have to try again and force some smaller aperture settings for deeper DOF  to make up for not being able to get perfectly Parallel to it. Of course then I'll have to hold it still for longer. Still can't figure out a wAy to tripod this shot!

I'm having to completely rely on autofocus, sadly. Tired old eyes just can't cut it anymore and I'm lucky if I can even frame the image right through the viewFinder with my bifocals! 

[Count Nerfedalot]

I was going to try for a star trails pic this evening, but a storm blew in so I decided to go for lightning instead. Trying to get some night practice before the total eclipse later this month. But by the time I finished figuring out half a dozen new (for me) settings on the camera it was pouring, mostly horizontally. So here's a pair of shots from a couple days ago. I can't decide which of these is better.  I was a bit surprised that I was able to get the camera to autofocus on the image in the reflection in the second one, which is basically infinity, even though the reflection surface was just 3 feet away. 




Often, perhaps even usually, it seems my best pictures are of something completely unexpected rather than what I set out intending to photograph. These are from the same outing as the horses and stump which was actually an attempt to get some wildflowers, none of which came out anything special.   One of several reasons I don't think I could stand being a professional photographer. "We need a picture of subject X, by Friday." Well, X and the weather and the light and my mood all conspired to produce crap, but this other completely unrelated thing along the way came out wonderfully, want that instead? "No. You're fired."  My creativity is way too shy and untrained to be forced or summoned on demand.  Sometimes I don't even see it for weeks at a time, especially if I'm trying too hard to force it out of hiding.

[Khaldun]

I find that roots and for that matter trees which catch my eye are very nearly impossible to frame in a way that makes for an interesting picture. I like the bottom shot particularly--it's a good contrast of multiple textures, light, color, etc.

One thing I've never even tried to do is lightning shots. I think it takes either having access to a balcony high up where you can see a big storm coming at night and shoot at that, or being ballsy enough to go out into a high, open spot and shoot at the horizon when a big T-storm is coming. I sometimes think of doing it when I see one is coming but it's hard to even figure out where to go, and to be sure to be there at the right time.

[apocrypha]

One of several reasons I don't think I could stand being a professional photographer. "We need a picture of subject X, by Friday." Well, X and the weather and the light and my mood all conspired to produce crap, but this other completely unrelated thing along the way came out wonderfully, want that instead? "No. You're fired."  My creativity is way too shy and untrained to be forced or summoned on demand.  Sometimes I don't even see it for weeks at a time, especially if I'm trying too hard to force it out of hiding.

This is very true. I've found that my hobby photography has all but disappeared as I do more work photography. Partly though that's because the bulk of the work I do is product shots, where the brief is usually so tight and specific that there's very little room for creativity. One of the things I like about this thread is seeing people's images taken just for the joy of taking them. I really want to get back into doing that more myself

Some constructive criticism Nerfdalot: you've definitely got a focus/camera shake issue. Try dropping your ISO a bunch and seeing if that gives you more leeway with shutter speed and aperture to sharpen things up a bit. You'll probably find ISO 800 fine on a D7100, and you could even try 1600 or 3200 and see what the noise is like. Using a tripod is another option, as you say, but that's not always practical. Also some of your shots could do with what I call a punctum - a point of interest, something extra to create more of a 'story'. For example, the tree stump photo - you could have stepped back a bit and shown some of the location in the shot too, or if you'd used it as a background to a flower or some wildlife or a person, etc. Without that it's just a texture, albeit a nice one

None of that's meant negatively, it's great to see you enjoying photography, as with all of the images in this thread.

[Khaldun]

I find that if I can't get shutter speed to at least 1/125 that some of my shots are going to have focus softness. Below 1/60 I'm almost guaranteed to have it. That's on my prime lens. On my 70-300 it's more like 1/250 and maybe even 1/500 if I'm zoomed all the way out. (Though at 300mm it's kind of soft no matter what.)  I used to be obsessed with keeping the ISO low and that's still a good thing, but focus sharpness is more important for most shots, so that's the first thing to change.

[Merusk]

My sister was taught, and in turn taught me, that you can't handhold below 1/60 because that's where your pulse will start to affect things no matter how still you are.  Another rule of thumb someone here mentioned is also never go below your focal length on shutter speed. Using a 1:200 zoom, your shutter speed better be over 200. They've both worked well for me.

I also suffer from, "Keep the noise out" low-ISO disease. I think it's a byproduct of so much online time and mass consumption of digital imagery that's been retouched. I go back and look at shots I think were great or famous and realize they have a lot of noise sometimes. It's about the image more than the technique and I try to keep that in mind now.0

[apocrypha]

The rough rule of thumb is 1/focal length. So yeah, 1/300th second at 300mm. You can practice hand holding steadiness, a lot of it is to do with stance, basically you want to turn your body into a tripod and pull the camera tight into yourself, but the faster you can get that shutter speed the better. I'm pretty terrible at low shutter speed shooting, so I try to use a tripod as much as possible

[Count Nerfedalot]

Excellent advice and accurate criticisms, thanks!  I knew the 1/60th rule from last century with film, but I'd forgotten the 1/focal length formula so thanks for that, I might even be able to remember it!

The problem with the shake is I'm 55, with high blood pressure, and pulse 70-90.  I'm still learning (the hard way) that I can't hold the camera still like I could when I was 30! LOL and 
Believe me when I say these shots are still FAR better than what I could do without image stabilization, while still being far blurrier than I want.
/excuses

So, my next homework assignment is figuring out how to control the ISO. :)  I was trying that last night but couldn't find it anywhere while in M mode.

I'm thinking at 24Megapixels I've got room to shrink the image for anything but large prints, and shrinking gets rid of noise FAR better than it improves focus!

I did spend a couple hours today back at the creek trying some stuff with the tripod, learning how to do bracketing - I have to press the shutter for each frame? wtf? oh, select burst mode. but still my finger has to press the shutter (and shake the camera) the whole time? ick - and using aperture priority to get the water to streak. But there was too much sunshine for really good steaked water shots, need a cloudy day to get the nicer effects. Maybe the ISO homework will help with some of that too, or a neutral lens of course. A couple came out pleasant in spite of all that, but suffer from Apocrypha's point about lack of a point.   

I eyed the stump again, still trying to figure out how to get a tripod set up for that one. Plus near noon sun meant no shadows, and now it's covered with dirt and debris from my 8-yr old grandson!    Lost a couple of shots of him clowning around on the stump due to still being in A mode with minimum aperture for the water shots.

So next time I set up the tripod, I'll try using the phone app to do the shutter release. I was just overwhelmed with getting all the other new stuff figured out while keeping an eye on the grandson to make sure he didn't get TOO wet.    Plus the adventure ended prematurely when he snagged a lovely rusty barb wire and barely avoided an emergency trip to the clinic for a tetanus shot! Only scraped the dead skin layer, no blood, thoroughly scrubbed out with sanitizer (I'm sure that's a word, spellcheck isn't though?) within a couple minutes.

So anywho, I think there's a separate wireless shutter release I can get? Will it work for bracketing and eventually HDR bracketing and bulb mode and all as well?  Phone app is nice but I'm kinda overwhelmed with all the complicated gadgets and options and technical considerations already, and the phone app looks almost as complicated as the camera. Every time I shoot I'm learning 2 to 4 new buttons/controls, and then promptly forgetting 2 or 3 of them! It would be nice to be able to do everything needed to set everything up on the camera and then be able to just calmly press a simple button (not connected to the camera!) to take the shot. Of course even if its just a simple clicker it's yet another loose piece of kit to keep track of and not drop in the creek/weeds/ditch/whatever! 

[Merusk]

On Nikons of our series you hold the ISO button dowon and turn the command wheel at the same time to adjust ISO.

If you don't want to use your finger or a remote button, you can also set the self-timers to do a burst of 3 shots 2-5s after you've hit the button. That's more complicated than a simple description, so here's a YouTube for the 7100, yours should be similar.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4SsVttUCIhI

The Remote should work for all your bracketing & bulb-mode needs. Mine just uses a simple min-usb remote so I didn't have to pay extra for a branded version. I can't imagine yours is any different.

Get a bag for your kit. I love mine when I'm hauling stuff around. I just tend to take TOO much stuff. (why did I take the charger INTO the park.. was I going to find an outlet? Ditto the USB hookup..)

[Mosesandstick]

Photography is complicated. Unless you shoot very regularly you'll forget things. I took this photo on holiday and I should've lowered my aperture as I was shooting directly into the sun (to get the pointy effect) and I completely forgot. It didn't occur to me until months after when I was post processing.


#2014-12 Christmas in New York 012 by Aled Moses, on Flickr

[Khaldun]

It's a lovely image in any event. Has a really nice feel to it.

[IainC]

I was at the Pechersk Lavra a few weeks ago but I just got around to processing the photos.


Lavra-33.jpg by Iain Compton, on Flickr


Lavra-26.jpg by Iain Compton, on Flickr


Lavra-25.jpg by Iain Compton, on Flickr

[Count Nerfedalot]

I especially like the one with the woman walking under the buttresses.  Would you need to get a consent/release form signed by her if you were to sell that image (in Western Europe or North America anyway)?

[IainC]

I especially like the one with the woman walking under the buttresses.  Would you need to get a consent/release form signed by her if you were to sell that image (in Western Europe or North America anyway)?

Legally yes, because she is clearly identifiable. Realistically no because she is a homeless lady in a very poor country who's unlikely to sue. I did show her the photo that I took and I gave her some money by the way. I generally do that (the showing the picture part anyway) if I take a spontaneous photo of someone who hasn't already agreed to be in my photos.

I might go back to that image later and see if I can do some clever editing to make the sky more contrasty with the white buttresses. I may dial down the definition on the walls too.

[Khaldun]

Agree that the woman walking shot is great--really nice look to it.

[apocrypha]

Yeah very nice, and what a gorgeous building too.

[RhyssaFireheart]

I like the sand/glass shot a lot in particular.


Just back from a camping trip. Got some good blue hour shots--much easier to do when you're in a tent in a remote area!

So I finished this painting finally.  I'm doing a 30-in-30 painting challenge for September and decided to include this one as Day 17 (so you're all getting an early sneak peek).  And technically, I had to take a photo of this painting (and edit it) so it sort of does fit into the overall thread.  Also, I'm categorically incapable of doing a really dark painting.  I've tried.

"Ethereal Lights"
Watercolor on paper, 8" x 6"

[Paelos]

I like it, reminds me of both the road and danger.

[apocrypha]

That's really nice Rhyssa!

Also, I'm categorically incapable of doing a really dark painting.  I've tried.

Start with black paper? 

[RhyssaFireheart]

I like it, reminds me of both the road and danger.

That's really nice Rhyssa!

Thank you both!

Also, I'm categorically incapable of doing a really dark painting.  I've tried.

Start with black paper? 

 

That.. doesn't work so well with watercolors, you know.

[apocrypha]

That.. doesn't work so well with watercolors, you know.

All I'm hearing is problems. Bring me solutions people!

[Lantyssa]

Use charcoal instead of watercolors.

[IainC]

That.. doesn't work so well with watercolors, you know.

Black!

[RhyssaFireheart]

 

I don't know you people.

[Khaldun]

Very cool.

[Signe]

It's beautiful!

[Khaldun]

It's beautiful!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9u5uMLi0ghg

[Count Nerfedalot]

 

learning to paint with watercolors is on my post-retirement bucket list.  now, to survive long enough to retire!  

On the photography front, I went hiking with the grandson weekend before this past one, got some practice in with tripod (working out nice), the android remote app (sucks), a close-up using a telephoto with no macro setting of a wild-looking caterpillar that was ravaging my parsley (meh, need macro and better composition), exposure bracketing + self-timer (works great!) , a field full of wildflowers (mixed results), and manual aperture control to control depth of field and get effects like flowing water making smooth white streaks (good results).  


The best shot of the lot was one taken by the grandson though (after I fiddled and futzed and took a dozen or so shots in the same area, but his own composition), maybe the first picture he's ever taken with a real camera!  


Edit: And yeah, the sky washed out. Need to add HDR to my toolbox now, but it's JPG only if done in the camera, so need a third-party app to use to combine RAW pics plus for alignment adjustments. Anything free or do I need to buy something, and if so what?
Second Edit to add next bracket frame since it's better!


I had an almost-but-not-quite photo op yesterday when two wild turkeys landed in our back yard. I managed to grab the camera and get outside without scaring them off but they were on the other side of a tree that I couldn't get the camera NOT to focus on (dead willow with hundreds of those little wispy trailing sticks between me and the birds) and before I could do anything about it like move or fiddle with the camera controls to manual focus or anything our stooopid cat decided they looked yummy and scared them off.    I had no idea just how FAST those critters are. WOW!  They looked like ugly dog-sized roadrunners zipping across the back yard at least twice the speed of the cat and with their legs moving so fast they were blurred.  And then they achieved sufficient speed for take-off and transformed into graceful flying creatures kind of like muddy brownish swans with ugly heads.

[IainC]

You can do HDR composites natively in Photoshop if you have that. I've also used Photomatix which can be used as a stand alone program or as a plugin for Aperture or Lightroom. It is possible to do it in GIMP too apparently but if you are using GIMP then you are already making your life harder than it needs to be.

Regarding the photos, water is always a good subject. For the top one, I'd be minded to crop it tighter. The rocks and trees aroudn the waterfall aren't adding anythign to the composition. I'd also probably have left the exposure to cook a bit longer for a mistier, smoother water effect. Generally I find that an exposure of about 1-1.5 seconds is about right for smoother water.

The bottom one is a better composition but the rocks are blown out and distract from the water which should be the focus. That photo really needed a dark ND filter to give you a longer exposure without blowing things out. It would look fantastic with the water being the brightest part of the photo. You might be able to fix it with judicious dodging and burning after you've dropped the exposure a few stops.

[Khaldun]

ND filters are cheap but necessary for a lot of long exposures.

I like both shots, though--the water in question is visually interesting. Top one shows it's a place that could really yield a memorable image.

[RhyssaFireheart]

Yeah, I like the top one partly because of the rocks shown, but I also happen to like looking at rock walls with plants growing on them, looking for the shapes and stuff.  I think I'm weird like that.

Both are nice pics but the bottom one looks washed out to me.

[Khaldun]

One thing that's damn cool about the top one is that green area just under where the waterfall starts--maybe moss or vegetation, though it's actually really bright for that?

I would be really tempted to mess around trying to shine some kind of targeted light on that in long exposure.