PF Photography: Tips, Tricks, & Photo Sharing

In summary, PF Photography offers valuable tips and tricks for improving photography skills and techniques. They also provide a platform for photo sharing, allowing photographers to showcase their work and receive feedback from others in the community. From beginner tips to advanced techniques, PF Photography has something for every level of photographer. Additionally, their photo sharing feature encourages collaboration and growth among photographers. With a focus on education and community, PF Photography is a valuable resource for anyone looking to improve their photography skills and connect with other photographers.
  • #106
neutrino said:
Thanks for the feedback, Astro and larkspur. I actually made an error in my earlier post. This was taken in manual mode, but 1/1000s wasn't fast enough.

larkspur, I had trouble focussing due to the glare from the sun. The flower was bright and the tightly-packed stamens didn't help much. :(
In manual mode, it's best to increase the f/stop (reduce aperture size) to get a greater depth of field as turbo mentioned. For that reason, I prefer manual as opposed to autofocus. I still have to get around to using my new DSLR.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #107
I was really just going to pick it up for some fun (and maybe profit by selling individual parts) My Evolt E-500 does just fine, and the lens I want to get next will be at least $500.
 
  • #108
neutrino, with my camera, you can half-way depress the shutter button to set the autofocus, then re-frame your shot while holding the button, then fully depress to get the shot. I tend to use autofocus a lot more than I thought I would for that feature alone.
 
  • #109
Yeah, my camera does that too, its nice, except when the AF is trying to focus on the wrong thing.
 
  • #110
turbo-1 said:
It is a bit on the pricey side, but the image quality is great over all of its focal length range, and I have noticed that a lot of nature photographers are using this lens instead of (or along with) primes. Critters tend to move around, and since they aren't posing for you (most of the time) you often need to be able to change focal length on the fly. The built-in image stabilization (with 2 modes available) and very fast auto-focus capabilities make this a very versatile lens in fast-changing situations. I've got another 30D that pretty much stays mounted to a 28-135mm zoom, so two cameras can cover a LOT of ground. When I was shooting film, I used to tote 3-4 Olympus bodies, all with prime lenses.

Hm..I like those expensive prime lens' but I don't think I'd be willing to shell out the money for them, especially since I could use it for something else. The 2 lens' I have now don't have stabalization but the one I want does have it (70-300).
 
  • #111
turbo-1 said:
I went to a park along the Kennebec river looking for raptors one day last summer, but the only interesting character I found was this fellow.

groundhog.jpg

It's a either a groundhog or a marmot..but I'm leaning toward groundhog.
 
  • #112
Playing with my light tent. Here are a few shots:
2273437934_2c367ef68b_o.jpg


2273445332_09c710a828_o.jpg


The other one is posted in the still life thread.
 
  • #113
Photo shopped Tulips:
2272602121_1b61e0419f.jpg
 
  • #114
That'd be a groundhog.
Nice shots Larkspur.
 
  • #115
turbo-1 said:
It may help to reduce the aperture on shots like this to get the depth of field a little larger so that more of the flower is in focus. This will increase the exposure time, so flying bees will be blurred. I like to catch them when they're working, so blur won't be as much of a problem.

http://i183.photobucket.com/albums/x318/turbo-1/thistle_bee.jpg

Astronuc said:
In manual mode, it's best to increase the f/stop (reduce aperture size) to get a greater depth of field as turbo mentioned. For that reason, I prefer manual as opposed to autofocus. I still have to get around to using my new DSLR.


turbo-1 said:
neutrino, with my camera, you can half-way depress the shutter button to set the autofocus, then re-frame your shot while holding the button, then fully depress to get the shot. I tend to use autofocus a lot more than I thought I would for that feature alone.

Thanks, guys. I guess I took the macro+larger aperture=shallower DOF too seriously.(all were taken at F2.7) Next time, I'll reduce the aperture size and use the AF. :)
 
  • #116
Here's another shot from the same batch as the previous photo. (please wear a pair of sunglasses before viewing the flower. :blushing: :biggrin:)

2275036578_b53d9d4a09.jpg


Crop and unsharp mask. Does any of you think the background stuff on top is distracting?
 
  • #117
That one is nice. The diagonal border adds a bit of a dynamic to the shot, the DOF is just about perfect, with the fly and the sexual organs of the blossom in good focus. The proportions of the shot are pleasing to me. (border delineates upper 1/3rd, blossom occupies bottom 2/3rds, fly is almost dead center of the shot, yet off-centered with respect to the blossom)
 
  • #118
neutrino said:
Here's another shot from the same batch as the previous photo. (please wear a pair of sunglasses before viewing the flower. :blushing: :biggrin:)

2275036578_b53d9d4a09.jpg


Crop and unsharp mask. Does any of you think the background stuff on top is distracting?
It seems the detail in the petals have been lost somewhat. Needs a tiny bit of yellow in the reds(selective color).
[edit] I like this shot much better than the other. Nice job! [/edit]
 
Last edited:
  • #119
To add to larkspur's comments - I tried to to concentrate on composition, focus, DOF - the mechanics of getting the shot. If you have some post-processing software like Photoshop or The Gimp you may be able to improve the range of colors in the petals and increase the sharpness of the veins by playing with color curves or other adjustments or filters.

Edit: I am NOT good at post-processing, nor do I have the patience for tweaking over and over again, so I really can't be helpful in advising you how to get more detail out of the petals. OK I'm hooked on photography, but I'm a pretty lazy Photoshopper.
 
Last edited:
  • #120
I'll post some when i get home :)
 
  • #121
neutrino said:
Here's another shot from the same batch as the previous photo. (please wear a pair of sunglasses before viewing the flower. :blushing: :biggrin:)

2275036578_b53d9d4a09.jpg


Crop and unsharp mask. Does any of you think the background stuff on top is distracting?
Very nice again!

I'd crop the top third just above the top petal.

Try darkening the background. I'm not as adept or skilfull as larkspur, but it would be interesting to darken the background, as if the flower was on a dark table.
 
  • #122
binzing said:
Nice shots Larkspur.
Thanks binzing!
 
  • #123
larkspur said:
Playing with my light tent. Here are a few shots:
2273437934_2c367ef68b_o.jpg


2273445332_09c710a828_o.jpg


The other one is posted in the still life thread.
WOW! Those are really super images.
 
  • #124
Astronuc said:
WOW! Those are really super images.

Thanks Astro!
 
  • #126
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #127
larkspur said:
It seems the detail in the petals have been lost somewhat. Needs a tiny bit of yellow in the reds(selective color).
turbo-1 said:
If you have some post-processing software like Photoshop or The Gimp you may be able to improve the range of colors in the petals and increase the sharpness of the veins by playing with color curves or other adjustments or filters.

I'd try, but I won't know where to stop. :confused:

Edit: I am NOT good at post-processing, nor do I have the patience for tweaking over and over again... OK I'm hooked on photography, but I'm a pretty lazy Photoshopper.

That sounds like a description of me. Especially the part in bold. :biggrin:

As you say, the "tweaking over and over again" part really bugs me.
Astronuc said:
Very nice again!

I'd crop the top third just above the top petal.

Try darkening the background. I'm not as adept or skilfull as larkspur, but it would be interesting to darken the background, as if the flower was on a dark table.

Thanks, Astro. That's a nice idea about darkening the background! Doesn't it have something to do with layers and stuff? (I haven't ventured beyond the very basic techniques of post-processing.)
 
  • #128
neutrino said:
Thanks, Astro. That's a nice idea about darkening the background! Doesn't it have something to do with layers and stuff? (I haven't ventured beyond the very basic techniques of post-processing.)
Yeah, I believe it has to do with layers, but I am not proficient at editing pictures. I defer to larkspur as to the technique.

Take the plunge! I was thinking about how larkspur takes flowers and places them against dark backgrounds.
 
  • #129
Astronuc said:
Yeah, I believe it has to do with layers, but I am not proficient at editing pictures. I defer to larkspur as to the technique.

Take the plunge! I was thinking about how larkspur takes flowers and places them against dark backgrounds.
The way I do that is to put a sheet of black felt behind it when I take the shot...:smile: Don't know how to do it with photoShop yet. That would be a question for one of those forums I listed in an earlier post.
The selective color is an easy one but I need PS in front of me(I'm at work now) to step by step it.
 
  • #130
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #131
Astronuc said:
Nice pic vincent. It evokes a warm feeling.

Thanks man, I'm debating on whether to by a more expensive camera, i don't do much photography, but the more i play with taking pictures the more i can see myself purchasing something higher end.


turbo-1 said:
That's an interesting perspective and DOF. It works for me.

Yea, i was bored, i also have a black and white version, i'll post it when i get home. :smile:
 
  • #132
larkspur said:
The way I do that is to put a sheet of black felt behind it when I take the shot...:smile: Don't know how to do it with photoShop yet. That would be a question for one of those forums I listed in an earlier post.
The selective color is an easy one but I need PS in front of me(I'm at work now) to step by step it.
In PS -----Edit, Adjustments, Selective color, Yellow---lighten, Red add yellow.
 
  • #133
vincentm said:
Christmas Table setting taken at home with 6 megapixel Sanyo camera i picked up at Wal-mart.

http://img204.imageshack.us/img204/9209/sany0197ou4.th.jpg

An interesting idea an nice colors. Would be neat to do a close up of those red shoes using aperture priority wide open(lower f number).

Take lots of photos with your point and shoot before deciding on a digital SLR because once you take the plunge you will find so many more must have add ons. I have sunk lots of $$ on add'l lenses, filters, flash modules, light tent, lights...the list goes on...:cry:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #134
Goddam dial-up. I'd love to post some of my best, but yeah.
 
  • #135
neutrino said:
Here's another shot from the same batch as the previous photo. (please wear a pair of sunglasses before viewing the flower. :blushing: :biggrin:)

2275036578_b53d9d4a09.jpg


Crop and unsharp mask. Does any of you think the background stuff on top is distracting?

As to darkening the background in this shot, its all layers and selection. Your flower is definitely in a different color range to the background, so use a color selection method to select most of the flower (I found the Magic Wand with a tolerance of 112 to be fine), then switch to QuickMask mode and paint in the green parts near the pistil and erase the little part of the background that is in range (use soft edges). You could also use standard selection tools with "additive selection" turned on. Switch back out when you're done to get back your selection, then go to Layer > New > Layer via Copy. On the Layers palette, switch to the Background layer and go to Layer > New Adjustment Layer > Hue/Saturation and adjust the saturation/lightness sliders until you get the darkened effect you want. Since this is a layer, the original background image is still untouched and you can keep changing the properties however you want. (If you notice glaring errors in your flower layer, you can further refine your edges by Ctrl+clicking on that layer to "select visible" then either using Select>Modify>Feather..., feathering the edge by 3 or more pixels then Select > Inverse and deleting the feathered inverse, or by manual correction using any of the selection tools (although QuickMask does a very good job of making sure your edges are not unrealistically sharp since you can use soft brushes and erasers and you are able to see your soft selection before committing to it).
 
  • #136
_Mayday_ said:
L]

Here is a photo I took a bit earlier, I am having so much trouble with my focus, I keep getting it slightly wrong, the flowers themselves may not look spectacular but I wanted a simple shot of the flower and the rain drops. :smile:

http://img444.imageshack.us/img444/1827/flower10in4.jpg
[/URL]

Please tell me a little about your method for this photo. Was the camera set on Program, Aperture priority, Shutter priority etc? I have found that for still life a tripod is a must use for pin sharp focus. Also, use the shutter delay option(self timer) or shutter release cable so no hands are on the camera when the the shot is taken. Play around with the manual focus and see if you can get more reliable results. When shooting with a wide aperture get the camera as close to the subject as possible to get the best background blur. I love the colors Fuji cameras are able to produce.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #137
neutrino said:
Here's one from Sunday last.

2267252946_f515aef895.jpg


I just increased the contrast a little bit and used unsharp mask. I didn't crop the picture, since I couldn't get the nice portrait dimensions with just the flower.

And yeah, the focus is a bit away from the centre of the flower. :(
This is a nice shot but you are right it would be better if the whole flower were in focus for this angle. What f stop was used?
 
  • #138
binzing said:
Goddam dial-up. I'd love to post some of my best, but yeah.
If you ever get them uploaded I would love to see them!
 
  • #139
larkspur said:
In PS -----Edit, Adjustments, Selective color, Yellow---lighten, Red add yellow.

slider142 said:
As to darkening the background in this shot, its all layers and selection. Your flower is definitely in a different color range to the background, so use a color selection method to select most of the flower (I found the Magic Wand with a tolerance of 112 to be fine), then switch to QuickMask mode and paint in the green parts near the pistil and erase the little part of the background that is in range (use soft edges). You could also use standard selection tools with "additive selection" turned on. Switch back out when you're done to get back your selection, then go to Layer > New > Layer via Copy. On the Layers palette, switch to the Background layer and go to Layer > New Adjustment Layer > Hue/Saturation and adjust the saturation/lightness sliders until you get the darkened effect you want. Since this is a layer, the original background image is still untouched and you can keep changing the properties however you want. (If you notice glaring errors in your flower layer, you can further refine your edges by Ctrl+clicking on that layer to "select visible" then either using Select>Modify>Feather..., feathering the edge by 3 or more pixels then Select > Inverse and deleting the feathered inverse, or by manual correction using any of the selection tools (although QuickMask does a very good job of making sure your edges are not unrealistically sharp since you can use soft brushes and erasers and you are able to see your soft selection before committing to it).

Thank you very much. Now I've just got to translate those instructions to the GIMP. :)

larkspur said:
This is a nice shot but you are right it would be better if the whole flower were in focus for this angle. What f stop was used?

F3.2
 
  • #140
neutrino said:
Thank you very much. Now I've just got to translate those instructions to the GIMP. :)



F3.2

http://www.mydamnchannel.com/Big_Fat_Brain/You_Suck_at_Photoshop/YouSuckatPhotoshop1_398.aspx" :biggrin:
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Similar threads

Replies
23
Views
2K
Replies
21
Views
2K
Replies
12
Views
2K
Replies
12
Views
2K
Replies
19
Views
2K
Replies
12
Views
2K
Replies
10
Views
2K
Replies
31
Views
4K
Replies
13
Views
2K
Back
Top