2017 Project 52 - 1st QTR - Sandy(Skitterbug)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Goldcoastgolfer

My main PP tool is Lightroom - which is still a very capable tool - I rarely feel a need to venture into Photoshop. Presets are a great way to learn how to do adjustments in Lightroom by looking good one the panels on the right and seeing what's changed.

---

I'm more comfortable with Lightroom than when I first purchased the program. I'd like to get a stacking software yet and then I think I'll have enough to keep me entertained! :) Now the trick is trying to figure out what might be acceptable to others. I wasn't going to focus on PP much this year but now I think I am going to have to do so because even the smaller easier changes can made a difference in presentation.

I appreciate your words of encouragement and your suggestions! Thank you for sharing them!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by skitterbug

I'm more comfortable with Lightroom than when I first purchased the program. I'd like to get a stacking software yet and then I think I'll have enough to keep me entertained! :) Now the trick is trying to figure out what might be acceptable to others. I wasn't going to focus on PP much this year but now I think I am going to have to do so because even the smaller easier changes can made a difference in presentation.

I appreciate your words of encouragement and your suggestions! Thank you for sharing them!

---

While it's great to get the feedback of others, I think it's actually more important to develop your own style of photography to be truly happy with what you do. The critique of others will open your eyes to potential directions you can go you're never going to be able to please everyone. Out of a group of people you'll always have those that really enjoy your photography, and ones that don't. So long as you are happy with the result of what you created - that's the important thing.

As for PP - can I say that when I look for a photographic opportunity I actually have the PP in mind as well. When I first started I didn't pay too much attention to PP however after doing some research on some well known photographer I realised that in the days of film, dark room developing could alter the image as well - and that many photographers would shoot knowing how they would also develop their film.

These days I'll look at a scene and think to myself "what can I do with the light in this scene after the photo has been taken" which really affects how the photo comes out. It helps speed up the process of processing as well because I already have an idea of what I wanted to do. I view the PP as an essential part of creating a photo.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Goldcoastgolfer

While it's great to get the feedback of others, I think it's actually more important to develop your own style of photography to be truly happy with what you do. The critique of others will open your eyes to potential directions you can go you're never going to be able to please everyone. Out of a group of people you'll always have those that really enjoy your photography, and ones that don't. So long as you are happy with the result of what you created - that's the important thing.

As for PP - can I say that when I look for a photographic opportunity I actually have the PP in mind as well. When I first started I didn't pay too much attention to PP however after doing some research on some well known photographer I realised that in the days of film, dark room developing could alter the image as well - and that many photographers would shoot knowing how they would also develop their film.

These days I'll look at a scene and think to myself "what can I do with the light in this scene after the photo has been taken" which really affects how the photo comes out. It helps speed up the process of processing as well because I already have an idea of what I wanted to do. I view the PP as an essential part of creating a photo.

---

+1 to Mal. I spent last year focused on post processing skills. This year is back to capture skills and integrating the two.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Goldcoastgolfer

While it's great to get the feedback of others, I think it's actually more important to develop your own style of photography to be truly happy with what you do. The critique of others will open your eyes to potential directions you can go you're never going to be able to please everyone. Out of a group of people you'll always have those that really enjoy your photography, and ones that don't. So long as you are happy with the result of what you created - that's the important thing.

---

I do have those that I like that I know wouldn't pass muster in a photo class! But I keep them anyway because I like the way they turned out and the memory they invoke when I look at them!

Quote:

---

As for PP - can I say that when I look for a photographic opportunity I actually have the PP in mind as well. When I first started I didn't pay too much attention to PP however after doing some research on some well known photographer I realised that in the days of film, dark room developing could alter the image as well - and that many photographers would shoot knowing how they would also develop their film.

---

I guess when it comes to PP, so far I only like to use it to maybe clean up the exposure, crop a bit, etc. I am not especially a fan of removing objects and making a pic into something more than it was. I know this is the choice of the photographer and what s/he is trying to convey but if the scene was the way it was when I took the pic, I will more than likely leave it that way. Now as my talent improves I may explore further but not for now.

Quote:

---

These days I'll look at a scene and think to myself "what can I do with the light in this scene after the photo has been taken" which really affects how the photo comes out. It helps speed up the process of processing as well because I already have an idea of what I wanted to do. I view the PP as an essential part of creating a photo.

---

Yes, if we can capture a scene with as few problems as possible, then there is lots less to go wrong! That's the trick, isn't it? :D
Thanks for offering your thoughts!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Urbanflyer

+1 to Mal. I spent last year focused on post processing skills. This year is back to capture skills and integrating the two.

---

Hi Judith ~ I figure that I'll end up needing to learn to use some PP skills as I progress through this year. And too, I am going to see if I can find your thread and see how you progressed! These P52 projects have lots of info that are like "gold mines" full of wonderful nuggets - of information in this case!
Smiles to you! Enjoy the day!

For this week, I wanted to experiment with two lenses and see what difference it would make.

Both pics were taken with my camera mounted on a tripod – no flash used. At first these may look like duplicates but they are not. I was interested in trying the wide angle lens against the EF S18-55.

I found I had to crop the WAL pic to have the knives fill the viewing area. There wasn’t any need to crop the second one but I did take a little off the outside edge to balance the photo.

Cropping affects file size, (right?) so if I wanted to print my results, it would be a consideration to think about.

In this instance, I believe the Lens EF-S18-55mm would be a better choice to use.

#1 – taken with a wide angle lens
1.0ss – f/6.3 – ISO100 – 16mm

http://i67.tinypic.com/zlq15w.jpg



#2 – taken with lens EF – S18-55mm
settings 1.0 ss – f/6.3 – ISO100 – 27mm


http://i68.tinypic.com/eklzbm.jpg

I think you would notice more of a difference in the scenario if you move the WAL closer to fill the frame of your scene - that's where you'd probably appreciate the difference (apologies if you already knew that).

The closer I am to a subject with a wide angle, the more fish eye a scene gets. I believe at about 50mm on a full frame (or around 35mm on a crop sensor) you get close to seeing what the naked eye actually sees. Increasing the zoom beyond that tends to compress the depth of a scene (I think - can't remember if that's exactly right - and again apologies if you already knew that!)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Goldcoastgolfer

I think you would notice more of a difference in the scenario if you move the WAL closer to fill the frame of your scene - that's where you'd probably appreciate the difference (apologies if you already knew that).

The closer I am to a subject with a wide angle, the more fish eye a scene gets. I believe at about 50mm on a full frame (or around 35mm on a crop sensor) you get close to seeing what the naked eye actually sees. Increasing the zoom beyond that tends to compress the depth of a scene (I think - can't remember if that's exactly right - and again apologies if you already knew that!)

---

Hi Mal ~ I wasn't sure what would be produced with either lens in this set up. I was hunting for an idea to post for my 7th week. The weather here hasn't been ideal for outside work and there isn't much of interest to capture. It has been dismal really.

I haven't noticed that being closer produces the effect of fish eye. I notice that more if I am further away from my subject and at an angle to it. In the two 'knives' pics, the tripod I was using wouldn't allow me to get any closer to my subject. I kept getting the "feet" of the tripod in my pic..... And I couldn't hold the camera steady enough to handhold it over the knives to shoot the pic I wanted. So with the WAL, that was as close to the subject as I could get and still keep everything in focus.

I will have to "play" with your ideas more and see if I can understand the thoughts you are offering! :) Can't do it today though. I have a 5 year old running around in the house and a table full of knives probably wouldn't be the ideal thing to have out! :p

And never worry about giving me information whether it is praise or critiquing. I'm here to learn! So if something is awful, let me know it! LOL

Brutally Majestic :cool:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wavelength

Brutally Majestic :cool:

---

I really like your thought! Excellent title! :D

We do use all of those knives throughout our week - for food preparation! ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by skitterbug

So with the WAL, that was as close to the subject as I could get and still keep everything in focus.

---

Admittedly my WAL is also a pretend macro lens so I can pretty close to to the objects I take photos of - that might be the difference. And yes, having 5 year olds running around knives - they probably don't mix!

Nice knife shots.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shadowman

Nice knife shots.

---

Thank you John! I appreciate your comments!

It all started when I was cleaning up our dishware, etc. and I had the knives drying on a towel. I thought maybe it would make an interesting pic since I couldn't go outside that day. Miserable weather really puts a crimp in my style! LOL I did get out today and I'll post them next! :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Goldcoastgolfer

Admittedly my WAL is also a pretend macro lens so I can pretty close to to the objects I take photos of - that might be the difference. And yes, having 5 year olds running around knives - they probably don't mix!

---

Hi Mal ~ I think using the WAL is a challenge and will keep my interest going for a very long time! <grin> The 5 year old has come and returned to his home so the day is a lot calmer now! Thank you for taking interest in my efforts! I appreciate it lots!

Fortunately we had a beautiful day to enjoy while entertaining our 5 year old! And I took advantage!
I usually am on the move trying to catch pics of him and that’s always a challenge. So since he is always in motion, I set my camera to ISO1600 to try and avoid blurred pics. I also used the P setting on my camera and let it regulate the shutter speed and the aperture so I didn’t have to think too hard.
And then after he went home, I took a few more. Here are three from today that I liked.

#1 Where’d He Go

1/200ss – f/6.3 – 55mm – ISO1600

Used Lens EF S55-250 since I had some long shots to try and capture. He has a 4-wheeler that he rides all over the place but this made me laugh and I had to take a pic! There are times when he just likes to climb off and run “fast”.

http://i65.tinypic.com/ftoenb.jpg

#2 – New Life

Switched to EF 18-55 - 1/200 – f/9.0 – 33mm – ISO1600
We have milkweed and these are the seeds that are now blowing in the wind. The monarch butterfly likes to lay its eggs on this plant so we let it grow in our yard. I liked the way the evening sun was shining on it.

http://i64.tinypic.com/24mue78.jpg

#3 – Pin Oak

EF 18-55 – 1/160 – F/8.0 – 18 mm – ISO200 (since it wasn’t moving!)
My favorite tree on our property. The tree does have a bit of a leaning stature since the prevailing winds are from west to east! I left it as is.
This is one of the first trees that we planted when we moved here 30+ years ago. It is a very slow growing tree. My hope is that lightning never finds it. The sun was fading when I came to it but I thought I’d give it a try. I don't think it turned out too badly so I’ll post it for opinions!



http://i63.tinypic.com/acad7k.jpg

Unfortunately you have a problem with foreground items getting in the way of the first bike image.

The second (seedhead) photo looks OK. There is a bit of background noise but noting overly serious.

The last one is another of those extremely difficult scenes, but it has worked out well with plenty of fine detail in the tree.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Geoff F

Unfortunately you have a problem with foreground items getting in the way of the first bike image.

The second (seedhead) photo looks OK. There is a bit of background noise but noting overly serious.

The last one is another of those extremely difficult scenes, but it has worked out well with plenty of fine detail in the tree.

---

Hi Geoff ~ My idea with the little 4-wheeler is that the 5 y.o. jumped off and left it stranded among the thicket! So I wanted to show that he wasn't on the thing and it wasn't parked where it ought to be. He was GONE! I realize if I wanted to showcase the 4-wheeler, I would need to have it someplace where it could be seen in its entirety. I also needed a different lens! It was a "spur of the moment" thing. :)

Out of these I liked the milkweed pod because of the reflection of the sun on it and the shine that is produced. Not sure what you mean about the background noise? DOF?

The tree is another story since it was late and the detail was going to be difficult to show. I had to lighten it a bit to even have it be as visible as it is.

But anyway, that is what I was thinking about each of these pics. I appreciate your perspective! Thanks for sharing!

By the term image 'noise' we mean a bit on the 'grainy' side, particularly in the shadows. This often happens when a high Iso is used. I like to keep my Iso as low as possible and rarely go above 800; although it is possible to use much higher settings when shooting in good light and the increase is to obtain faster shutter speeds etc.

Your shot has come out well for 1600 Iso and the 'noise' or 'grain' like faint very small speckling in the shadow areas is only just noticeable.

I often get a lot of problems with noise in the shadows of my high contrast shots; which is made worse when some under exposure is used to prevent highlights over exposing. But some people tend to deliberately produce images which have a lot of very noticeable noise as a main item of the scene.

There are noise reduction options in many editing programmes but using these methods tends to also reduce image sharpness when used to excess. Sometimes, I will create a selection around my main subject area and only sharpen that area; then reverse the selection and only apply noise reduction to the unimportant background areas. However, we are getting into specialist use territory now. :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Geoff F

By the term image 'noise' we mean a bit on the 'grainy' side, particularly in the shadows. This often happens when a high Iso is used. I like to keep my Iso as low as possible and rarely go above 800; although it is possible to use much higher settings when shooting in good light and the increase is to obtain faster shutter speeds etc.

Your shot has come out well for 1600 Iso and the 'noise' or 'grain' like faint very small speckling in the shadow areas is only just noticeable.

I often get a lot of problems with noise in the shadows of my high contrast shots; which is made worse when some under exposure is used to prevent highlights over exposing. But some people tend to deliberately produce images which have a lot of very noticeable noise as a main item of the scene.

There are noise reduction options in many editing programmes but using these methods tends to also reduce image sharpness when used to excess. Sometimes, I will create a selection around my main subject area and only sharpen that area; then reverse the selection and only apply noise reduction to the unimportant background areas. However, we are getting into specialist use territory now. :D

---

Hi Geoff ~ I enlarged my milkweed shot on my home screen just now and see what I think you are explaining. I guess since my milkweed was in focus, I didn't worry about the background. At the time of the shot, I was mainly thinking about how the light was shining on the seeds. I wouldn't have needed to have the ISO that high I reckon but I used that setting because that's what it was and I hadn't changed it. (wasn't thinking) I don't think I can have a "do over" because I think the wind has taken those seeds off and away. So hopefully, I remember better technique for the next time!

As for post-processing...... I'm not there at all yet! That's definitely a work in process!

Thanks for the added information! :)

Very nice milkweed shot! The background is nicely out of focus and the foreground sharp. Nice work!