Project 52 by Ron (ronlane)

[ronlane]

Other than a point and shoot and my iPhone, I really haven't taken a lot of pictures until mid-April when I got my first DSLR. A Canon T3i with Canon kit lenses of 18-55 mm 3.5-5.6 IS II and 55-250 mm 4.5-5.6 IS II. I use a Rocketfish RF-UVF 58 filter and a Zeikos 58 mm circular polarizer.

Photography is a new hobby that I would also like to make some extra income from as well.

With this project, I am looking to improve my skills and knowledge to get things really rolling for me. I will also use this to determine what other things that I will need to acquire to be successful.

I use the software from Canon and Photoshop Elements 10 to do my editing and add my watermarks.

I look forward to learning and hearing any suggestions that you may have to my work.

[Dave Humphries]

Hi Ron,

I have added you to the Index as promised.

All you need do now is post a photo and some words about it.
How to Get Effective Feedback for your Posted Images - if you haven't seen this, it may prove helpful, but I think you have the general idea already!

Good luck,

[ronlane]

I'm going to cheat on this first one and post a picture from the week before last when I was at the Lake.

I was trying to catch this hummingbird at the feeder but I thought this one turned out pretty good. I was using my EF-S55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS II, focal length 250.0mm, 1/20, 5.6, ISO 100.

Any and all C&C would be welcomed.

[Andrew1]

A little far away from the subject Ron. You'll get them in closer if you put a feeder up with some bare branches nearby for them to rest on. I've got them in my back yard constantly all day and they sometimes try to get at the feeder while I'm still carrying it. Once you've got them in-range, your camera on a tripod with that lens will be able to fill the frame.

[ronlane]

Thanks Andrew. We had the feed on the porch but this little guy was playing games. He would hide up ther and then dive bomb any other hummingbird that would come up to the feeder. I got a couple of shots of him on lower branches but they weren't keepers.

My major concern or issue with this photo is that the whites look blown out and I can't seem to correct it.

[ronlane]

Okay, I'll try one from this week. After looking and seeing all the wonderful pictures, I took this last night at a nearby lake. I'm just starting to understand the long exposure with running water. I also used layers and effects from Elements 10.

Please let me know what you think and/or how I could improve it.

This is my originaly PP photo after converting the raw file.



Here is the edited version with the layers and effects.

[ronlane]

So here is the next week shot that I've gotten. I walked out to go to work this morning and the clouds and sun rays were coming through. I had to run in and get my camera.

[ronlane]

Here is one from this week, c&c is welcomed.

[Geoff F]

There doesn't appear to have been many replies so far, Ron.

Going back to the running water. Just a personal taste, but I like my water to run at the intended speed and to sparkle.

But forgetting that, there doesn't seem to be anything interesting about that scene. If there was a duck sitting in the water or some unusual stonework etc I think it would work better.

Not really your fault but I find the scene somewhat bland.

With the sky, my normal thoughts would be to remove any items like telephone wires etc; but this is the exception, and they really add interest/balance to the image this time.

I'm not sure about the last image. At the moment it doesn't quite work for me. Maybe a different crop or, just a thought, having the candle actually burning. Tricky to photograph well though.

The background wall also has lighting problems. I would like to see it all the same colour or a gradual fade in light intensity. In fact, I suspect that different lighting would give this scene a lot more 'pop'.

[ronlane]

Thanks for the comments Geoff.

On the running water, I wasn't able to get to the level that would have made this less bland.

Thanks for the comment on the sky. I have to remember that about the power lines and need to work on Elements on how to clone them out.

On the last one, I had two different types of light going, so that may be part of it.

All of these pictures I am trying different things as I continue to learn and get better.

[FrankMi]

Hi Ron, Geoff has some good points to think about. Here are a few items I noticed.

In the first image, the main subject is sufficiently blurred to appear to be out of focus so my eye tends to look for something that is in focus. This might work better with a faster shutter speed then 10 seconds, say somewhere around 1/5th second. That would still give you the smooth water but a bit less fuzzy. It might be worthwhile experimenting with several shutter speeds to see which one look best to you.

The leading lines of the diagonals lead me to the top left but there isn't much detail there either so my gaze wants to leave the frame at the top left. For some reason most folks prefer to follow leading lines from right to left so you might try flipping the image horizontally to see if that helps.

The second image is more interesting in that we don’t often see the sunbeams pointing up and you have some very interesting clouds. The tree on the right helps add a frame. Usually you want to avoid the subject being right in the center unless the image is symmetrical so having the left or right of center should help as well.

The third image feels off balance as the cross on the right is cut by the frame but the left side has lots of space. It also has a ‘tight’ feel, particularly with the crop at the bottom. There may be too many objects to avoid a busy feeling. I would try with an odd number of objects that are completely within the frame.

Hope this helps!

[ronlane]

Okay here is week 4, picture. I was reading about taking photos in Sunlight and someone mentioned using 1/200 with f22 and 200 ISO, stand 4-6 feet from your subject and use the flash with it at +2. I thought that it turned out pretty well.

[Geoff F]

That works fine, Ron.

I assume you set your camera using the Manual settings option then let the flash auto find it's own value. That is what usually works best for me.

But because you are actually adding 'fill flash' to the darker areas; the amount of flash compensation will vary depending on the actual conditions and subject. A bit of experimentation is always useful before the 'real shooting' starts.

However, after some practice you should be able to simply look at the scene and estimate your settings fairly closely. Sometimes, when shooting insects for example, I work with the flash compensation at -2 or even less.

If you need to blur out the background for instance, you might have to shoot with your aperture at F8 or wider, in which case you would need a different flash exposure compensation to suit those conditions.

[ronlane]

Thanks Geoff. I was just trying the settings as they were suggested to me from another site. Since I only have the flash that is on the camera, I don't think that it worked as well as it could have. I need to invest in a better flash. So I will add that to the LONG list of things that I want to get.

[ronlane]

Here are some pictures from a wonderful Sunday afternoon. C&C please.

1.



2.

[Geoff F]

To me, Ron, your clouds seem to have a bit of 'noise' in the darker areas; although that could be the result of resizing and uploading. Was there any reason for such a fast shutter speed?

In an ideal world, I would have liked to cut the Iso by half and possibly use a slightly narrower aperture.

[ronlane]

To me, Ron, your clouds seem to have a bit of 'noise' in the darker areas; although that could be the result of resizing and uploading. Was there any reason for such a fast shutter speed?

In an ideal world, I would have liked to cut the Iso by half and possibly use a slightly narrower aperture.

I am not sure what caused the noise. The fast ss was so that the sky didn't blow out, but I guess since I was not looking toward the sun on that one, I could have used a lower ISO.

Thanks for the cc.

Just a note: I sent that picture to be printed at 4x6 and it came out great without noise. Actually looked good for that size.

[ronlane]

Here are a couple of more that I took yesterday with a lens that I rented for the weekend. (Canon 24-105mm f/4L)

1.



2.

[ronlane]

I've been meaning to stop and take some pictures of this area for some time and finally just did it this week. Here are a couple of different angles.

[Geoff F]

Obviously, a nice blue sky would have helped. But not always available to order.

My thoughts are about trying to make the railway track look 'longer'.

I suspect that the first shot would have been improved by getting the foreground sharper then allowing the far distance to gradually blur. Maybe a good subject for two shots with different focus points then stack/combine the shots together.

The second image can probably be 'lengthened' by cropping a little from the top and right side. About 10% should be sufficient. Although I also wonder about cropping a little from the bottom as well; plus a similar amount from the right side.

I think this might tend to make the rails more 'even/balanced'. If the sky was a 'better blue' I suspect that a little less cropping would be required.

But I would want to experiment with these crops before finally deciding. There is a good photo there; it just needs a little tweak.

ps. Week 6. That 24-105 L lens is a handy size and I often use mine for flower photos. It has a fairly close minimum focusing distance so also works well for semi macro shots. But, unfortunately, it isn't cheap.