PDA

View Full Version : Photography - it's a start



Empty_of_Clouds
January 6th, 2021, 12:20 AM
Snapped

elaineb
January 6th, 2021, 08:29 AM
EoC, these are beautiful photographs. I'm a painter, not a photographer, but there are commonalities between the two media, especially in terms of composition. So, I have a couple of observations to throw out. They are not meant as criticisms or judgments. I was just looking at these images as if they were one of my paintings, and then had some thoughts about what I saw.

You have caught a wide range of tonality. There are dark darks, bright highlights, and a nice juicy range of greys. Contrast is the living breath of visual arts. The rhythm of contrasts is like the heartbeat of an image. In these pictures you have been able to create a lot of rhythmic interest with dark areas against light, lights against greys, and greys against dark areas. The 3rd picture, of the pier, is particularly striking. It uses trolley tracks and boards to create interesting patterns as a backdrop to the stark, heavy shape of the thing you wrap ropes around. (Sorry, don't know the name of it.)

However, the biggest problem is that you have put the main motif of each picture directly in the center of the image. That is a natural choice, and it is a common design for simple portraits. In anything that is not a portrait, however, centering deadens the composition. In the third picture, for instance, the big black shape of the rope thing sucks all the air out of the linear patterns you caught, and reduces their music to a whisper. It's as if someone mixed a recording so that the singer is really really loud, and you can barely hear the backup band.

I think you'd do really well to start looking into composition for 2D images. Composition is a vast field of study, and there are endless books, web tutorials, and courses on the subject. But basically, it boils down to this principle: keep the most important part of your image away from the center of the canvas, and then find a way to balance it with other elements in your picture.

Some teachers point out optimal places for focal points (often citing geometry and systems like the "golden mean"), as practiced in Western art traditions. But then when you look at Japanese woodcuts, you'll see an entirely different system to organize visual compositions. They are all interesting and valid ideas, but ultimately -- composition is a bit of black magic that every artist needs to conjure on their own. Show me a compositional rule, and I'll show you a very successful painting that ignores it.

So, I guess, I'm saying maybe head to the library or a bookstore, and look for a simple primer on composition for photography. Read through the "do's" and "don't" and try editing/cropping/rearranging your own images in response. See if you find anything that looks better to you. It's all just a way to generate ideas. Oh, and don't forget: cropping away parts of a motif is a very powerful compositional tool. You don't need to show something in its entirety to make it recognizable.

Enjoy! You're off to a great start.

penwash
January 6th, 2021, 09:03 AM
I like these.

I love B&W photos, any B&W photos that don't try too hard to be "edgy" or screaming "i am a rebel, look at me".

Unlike painting or drawing or sketching, you can't just take stuff in and out of the image, so photography, to me, has that added challenge to strike the balance and harmony given elements that you can't do anything about, and the cool thing is, sometimes you can use the "offending" element to your advantage to give your photo just a touch of interesting-ness.

I think you have a good sense for composition to start with.
So the best encouragement I can give you is: Don't stop, hone your eyes and brain and find your own style (after many, many, many reject shots).

Dreck
January 6th, 2021, 10:02 AM
Very nice! I think the choice of vintage subjects pairs well with the B/W photos

RobJohnson
January 6th, 2021, 12:56 PM
Black and white images always work for me.

You might want to experiment with some of the settings on Manual, especially the ISO settings.

Great depth of field on the wooden planks, is it a pier?

An old bloke
January 6th, 2021, 01:41 PM
ISO has to do with film speed (think sensitivity to light. The higher the ISO the faster the film.

I am not a photographer, although there was a time I explored photography as a hobby. That was in half a century ago learning the mysteries of the dark room, shutter and film speed, and light and shading using black and white, colour, and slide films of different makes (Kodak and Ilford for instance). What attracted me then, and amazes me even now, is light and shadow and how it can be captured to create -- I call it -- 'dramatic effect'.

An example by Harold Cazneaux:
https://monovisions.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/harold-cazneaux-pictorial-australia-photographer-06.jpg

And another:
https://cdn.newsapi.com.au/image/v1/2e7116c2d4fb6b1f30300fc1adea0f26

RobJohnson
January 6th, 2021, 02:07 PM
As advised by AOB, ISO means sensitity, the higher the number means that you can have a faster shutter speed for low light conditions or when your object is moving. I am not an expert but I think that the higher the ISO is aslo a trade off on grain, for NZ in summer you shouldnt have too much in the way of poor light so if you are experimenting and learning the craft I would try a lowish ISO but brace yourself when you are taking the shot or rest the camera on something to avoid movement/vibrations.

The Panasonic TZ camera is a cracking little camera with a good electronic brain in Intelligent Mode and sports a very good Lumix lens, you could do a lot worse than leave the difficult stuff to the camera and just concentrate on composition and getting the light in the right place.

An experienced photographer gave me some tips, I worked as an assistant at his studio for a year, take your pics at a time when there is no one else around taking pics and don't take pics that everyone else takes, be out around dawn and sunset, don't take pics of the sun or the sea and you have to be really good to do a good landscape, try not to take pics at 1.8 metres from the ground, which is what everyone does, 0.8 and 2.8 metres is much more interesting.

Look at how you can make light work for you, for close ups switch the flash off on the camera, it's boring.

manoeuver
January 6th, 2021, 02:38 PM
The first one is my favorite. What a cool building!

An old bloke
January 6th, 2021, 03:13 PM
As advised by AOB, ISO means sensitity, the higher the number means that you can have a faster shutter speed for low light conditions or when your object is moving. I am not an expert but I think that the higher the ISO is aslo a trade off on grain, for NZ in summer you shouldnt have too much in the way of poor light so if you are experimenting and learning the craft I would try a lowish ISO but brace yourself when you are taking the shot or rest the camera on something to avoid movement/vibrations.

The Panasonic TZ camera is a cracking little camera with a good electronic brain in Intelligent Mode and sports a very good Lumix lens, you could do a lot worse than leave the difficult stuff to the camera and just concentrate on composition and getting the light in the right place.

An experienced photographer gave me some tips, I worked as an assistant at his studio for a year, take your pics at a time when there is no one else around taking pics and don't take pics that everyone else takes, be out around dawn and sunset, don't take pics of the sun or the sea and you have to be really good to do a good landscape, try not to take pics at 1.8 metres from the ground, which is what everyone does, 0.8 and 2.8 metres is much more interesting.

Look at how you can make light work for you, for close ups switch the flash off on the camera, it's boring.

It is surprising at times to realise that 'stuff' --facts and skills -- you haven't used in nearly half a century is still neatly catalogued and ready for recall in the deep depths of the mind.

Just to confuse matters slightly, I suddenly remembered that ISO and ASA are similar in that they are both indicators of film speed or sensitivity. I believe, but have not confirmed, that ASA is an older, possibly out-dated now, version of ISO. I remember seeing on Kodak films in particular.

Back in the day 'when dinosaurs roamed the earth', ASA of 60 and 80 were what I remember bog standard (general purpose) Kodak film was rated at since it allowed a slow shutter speed. We considered ISOs of 200 and 400 as high speed film back then for 35 mm film cameras. Today's digital cameras allow ISOs that were only available for the rarest of uses with film in the 1960 and '70s. Shutter speeds allow more or less light to expose the film, and was an issue film and film cameras. As memory serves, time lapse photos back then were taken with high speed film and very slow shutter speeds.

All of this is probably more than anybody cares to know, but there you have it.

Robert
January 6th, 2021, 04:44 PM
Beautiful work, E-o-C - - As I've said before, in photography Black & White rules!

An old bloke
January 6th, 2021, 04:54 PM
I would suggest deciding if you want to use film only, digital only, or film and digital. That is a big decision since film and digital have much that are unique while doing both allows you to fully explore the art that is photography. To assist with that decision, have a look here: https://istillshootfilm.org/post/110901745797/10-professional-photographers-who-still-shoot-film and this: https://www.shutterbug.com/

An old bloke
January 6th, 2021, 05:38 PM
Fair point, but I think at this exploratory stage I should stick with digital, as that's what I've got. Interesting though is that I have a Yashika FX-3 on my ebay watchlist, though I haven't plunged in as I am not sure I can bear the cost of film processing right now.

DIY film processing is simple and easy. It doesn't really require any expensive equipment either. You do need a complelely light free space to work in -- an unlighted windowless bathroom will do -- and a red light. The red light allows you to see what you are doing without over exposing the film. Making prints does require a bit of an outlay for an enlarger, but it isn't beyond most people's budgets (cheaper than a new camera).

penwash
January 6th, 2021, 06:16 PM
I would suggest deciding if you want to use film only, digital only, or film and digital. That is a big decision since film and digital have much that are unique while doing both allows you to fully explore the art that is photography. To assist with that decision, have a look here: https://istillshootfilm.org/post/110901745797/10-professional-photographers-who-still-shoot-film and this: https://www.shutterbug.com/

Whoa! Film vs digital is indeed a BIG decision.

I spent almost a decade in learning and exploring film photography.

Suffice to say, tons of things to absorb and learn, a lot of very rewarding moments, but man, the investments are deep and wide. :)

RobJohnson
January 6th, 2021, 08:11 PM
I you are not an experienced photographer I would learn your craft first of all and let your camera do all the technical stuff.

Take many pics and learn about composition and light, leave the tele function alone, that is just cropping that you can do on the computer

I used film stock for years, I can understand the appeal o the old ways but digital works well, brilliantly well.

There is one expert wildlife photographer who is a keen advocate of camera phones being very easy and give good results, here is his site

https://www.simonkingwildlife.com/

I know that you enjoy Christofs pics, he is very adept at how he uses light. A still life pic though has a different light requirement, you may be looking for something dramatic.

I would look at youtube vids for your camera and just enjoy it, you already have an artists eye and have made a good start.


It really is so much about light and making it work for you

https://fpgeeks.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=58179&d=1609989652

Yazeh
January 7th, 2021, 12:21 PM
Lovely photos.
EOC, my wife is an artist and if my photos are dead centre she'll lecture me in length about what Elaine mentioned above. :D
They both have a point...
So, we've found a simple way to remedy my photographic shortcoming by using a simple photo editor to crop photos...
Here is your photo cropped different ways:

Cropped to the right
58189

Cropped to the left

58190

catbert
January 7th, 2021, 12:53 PM
Consider crouching or standing on something to alter your point of view. In the case of the rail lines and wooden planking, a lower perspective would emphasize interesting surface textures.
Or go in close when there are strong patterns of light and shade, as on the wall of the steampunk building.

penwash
January 7th, 2021, 01:14 PM
I don't want to make this a photo-critic thread, but this is an interesting exercise which shows why a single photo can be taken (presented) in different ways.

I disagree that photos with centered subject are *always* undesirable.

In this particular case, David's photo works as it was presented in the original post, because in addition to the "almost" centered rails, it has other elements that strengthen the composition.

Element #1: The two people in the "background". They provide a good "anchor" for the viewer's eyes.
Element #2: The square metal plate (with 4 rivets or bolts) near the foreground.

The rail now becomes the connector between these two "anchors" and overall the composition makes for an interesting (as opposed to boring) image.

Another factor in composition is image ratio, which is how tall or wide a photograph is. If I were to present this photo, I'd crop it to 3:2 or maybe even 4:3, so it won't look as "tall".

RobJohnson
January 7th, 2021, 01:39 PM
Have a look at this vid, I am sure that there are many others but this is an 8 minute worthwhile watch

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UM2fAvEYTAU

catbert
January 7th, 2021, 02:15 PM
Consider crouching or standing on something to alter your point of view. In the case of the rail lines and wooden planking, a lower perspective would emphasize interesting surface textures.
Or go in close when there are strong patterns of light and shade, as on the wall of the steampunk building.

I shall endeavour to engage my inner Federico Fellini :dance3:

Looking forward to it.

https://madisonmovie.files.wordpress.com/2014/12/la-dolce-vita.jpeg

Or whatever exponent of light, shade and composition inspires you. :)

Sphere
January 11th, 2021, 09:37 AM
What are you trying to show in your photos? Do you have specific idea of what you want your images to look like? Are you shooting film or digital? Why do you work in black and white? Which is more important to you, the image or the process? These are fundamental questions to try and answer before you worry too much about the technical end of photography. Also, stop apologizing for your mistakes, just resolve to do better, and be honestly self-critical.

ISO _ International Standards Organization.
ASA - American Standards Association
Both organizations cerify that the sensitivity of the film/chip is accurately stated by the manufacturer.

RobJohnson
January 11th, 2021, 12:17 PM
It might be an idea to find a pic that you like, think about why you like it and then try and recreate it.

https://fpgeeks.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=58183&d=1610017699

Sphere
February 14th, 2021, 04:05 PM
You need to keep shooting what you find interesting. The questions i posed earlier are meant to make you think about why you are taking the photo. Once you have a clear objective then you can make the image in the manner you want. Accept that you are learning without apologizing. You are obviously showing work you think has merit. One of the best explanations regarding color or black and white I have found... I shoot color when I want to show you something. I shoot black and white when I want to tell you something. For street work, (if you are shooting at ISO 400) I would suggest f/8 for better depth-of-field. In street work you often do not have time for pinpoint focusing, so a little extra d-o-f can be helpful.

Seattleite
March 13th, 2021, 11:13 AM
Some nice shots. Very nice when an image speaks. Breaking your photos down and deciding what you like and what you might change is pretty easy to do with multiple shots in the field. See the impact of small compositional changes, side by side. Decide what you like and why.

One thing that I kind of miss is the limiting factor of a roll of film and a manual camera. Forced me to put more thought into each shot, to look for the shot. One learned to be aware of light, as once you chose a certain ASA/IPO film, you had to choose your other locations accordingly (until the film was used up). Working within limitations often forces one to be more conscious of their creative choices, I think. I still have some old pre and post-war Contax rangefinders, as much as collector items as anything, and got rid of my electronic film cameras a while ago. Juggling film speed choice, shutter speed, aperture, and a handful of Zeiss lenses and filters with a manual focus rangefinder was a challenge for me. Getting back a good photo a week later from the Photo-Counter at the Drug Store really felt magical. I still take a few rolls and the camera bag out, every once in a while. If anything, it makes me "see" more.

Mostly, now, I take a gazillion shots on my phone and later move most of them into the "bin" and leave a few that stand out. There is something to be said for the immediate feedback that a digital camera can provide, on location and in the moment. The editing that is at your finger tips is really empowering as well. I should take advantage of these features more, but just clicking off a zillion shots is kind of addicting.

Bob

PhillipDine
March 24th, 2021, 02:26 AM
Not having any specific subject to pursue, I took a shot of my feet.

https://i.imgur.com/3fCh06Hl.jpg

Amazing photo, seems like nothing special, but the picture came out wonderful!

An old bloke
April 7th, 2021, 04:25 PM
Apparently, Changi Airport has changed a lot from the last time I was there almost to the day in April 1969. I was on my way back from Sydney to Saigon for another year of fun in the sun.

Fifty two years allows a lot of change.

Chip
September 3rd, 2021, 05:10 PM
So the university pictured is Otago? Reminded me of the old university area in Christchurch, the same Scottish gothic with all its virtues and faults.

We lived in Grafton, Auckland and moved to Lyttelton Harbour near Christchurch, while my law prof spouse taught and did research. Spent days off on driving tours, and have returned four times to visit friends and see parts we missed.

Here are a couple from Cathedral Cove at the base of the Coromandel. Hard to take a bad photo there.

https://i.imgur.com/Rj93dg2.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/42l8imF.jpg

South shore, Hokianga Harbour.

https://i.imgur.com/aizfV7T.jpg

Here's a close-up from the bird refuge on Tiritiri Matangi.

https://i.imgur.com/xpUgIr0.jpg

Always a pleasure to look through my New Zealand photos.

Chip
September 3rd, 2021, 11:26 PM
The upper harbour is quite tidal, with gleaming mudflats at the low. The round concretions are similar to the famous ones at Moeraki on South Island.

Here's one from Te Reinga, looking at the meeting of the South Pacific and the Tasman Sea.

https://i.imgur.com/zbfYtWi.jpg

A white-faced heron in the Ahuriri estuary, north of Napier.

https://i.imgur.com/YzFkJx3.jpg

TSherbs
September 19th, 2021, 06:21 AM
Just seeing these. Nice pics. You're way better than I am at this! Although, truth be told, I have never owned a camera, really. My wife has owned some, but not me. I do take some pictures, but if it were not for my wife, there would be no photos in my house.

Radonactionservices
September 19th, 2021, 08:13 AM
Awesome photos! I am a fan of a little older camera called a Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ300 / FZ-330. While not the latest technology, it’s got a 25-600mm Leica lens with f/2.8 throughout the entire range. This means that even in darker conditions, like in a forest, the photos come out amazing. The 12.8mp sensor I’ve found to be plenty for anything but poster sized prints. It is also weather and dust sealed, which makes me more comfortable with where I take the camera.

Photography and fountain pens I’ve found go hand in hand very nicely.

Just a note, Panasonic made the electronics for a lot of the earlier Leica digital cameras.

Hope this helps. The FZ-80 is also a nice camera, but can’t withstand weather and dust. I also like the PowerShot G series, although the 10x zoom and 10mp sensor are a little long in the tooth.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Chip
September 30th, 2021, 01:24 PM
Some time ago, I got a Panasonic Lumix DMC-ZS60, compact with a wide zoom range and Leica optics.

https://i.imgur.com/ZmFGsG8.jpg

I pop it in my pocket for walks close to home and have also taken it to the west of Ireland, New Zealand, and Newfoundland and used it in the wet, snow, windstorms, and on whitewater and sailing trips. Besides occasional cleaning with a soft brush and lens cloth, it's needed zero maintenance.

https://i.imgur.com/2PLiAsI.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/n8Oo9hL.jpg

I'd recommend it or an updated model without reservations.

Pokatal
September 26th, 2022, 04:10 AM
I could use it