Here's another with the Omni-bounce, this one with the flash aimed at the ceiling... diffused AND lighting mostly from above. Notice the shadow under the washcloth behind him. A straight on flash, either onboard or external would have thrown a HARD shadow behind him, an un-natural, "flash" look.
I'd like to say thanks to the Digi Cam Gurus!
- Thread starter Green Horn
- Start date
- Jun 20, 1999
- 2,563
- 0
- Thread starter
- #77
Yeah mine was with the onboard flash. I'm assuming that's why it got so bright. I know I mentioned that I've got an external flash, so I guess I'll just have to stop being lazy and put it on when I need a flash. There's an obvious difference between my pic and your pics. $21.95 for that flash diffuser??? I thought it was illegal to sell SLR camera accessories for under a gazillion dollars. :rotfl:
It is just a piece of plastic... so even it's over priced, but worth it. You can actually make one out of a milk jug if you don't mind looking like a goober with a milk jug on your camera :)
I ordered one of these ( http://store.garyfonginc.com/liiido.html ) as well... check it out, shows some good examples.
I ordered one of these ( http://store.garyfonginc.com/liiido.html ) as well... check it out, shows some good examples.
- Jun 20, 1999
- 2,563
- 0
- Thread starter
- #79
Let's see how fire ant bites look on the new camera. LOL
EDITED FOR CONTENT :yikes:
EDITED FOR CONTENT :yikes:
Last edited:
- Jun 20, 1999
- 2,563
- 0
- Thread starter
- #80
The 2nd pic shows where I was scratching in my sleep.
Okiewan said:
LOL, I ordered the same thing (the cloud version) :)
- Jun 20, 1999
- 2,563
- 0
- Thread starter
- #83
Ok, I pulled them. Not because you were eating but because Pred thinks I'm a Hobbit with those hairy feet. :(
- Jun 20, 1999
- 2,563
- 0
- Thread starter
- #84
So just for fun I'm still reading reviews on all the different digital SLR's. A handful of consumers actually put "Pricey" as a Con when filling out their reviews. Not saying they're wrong but c'mon now...Is Canon supposed to sell 'em for a hunnert bucks a pop? :) If you're gonna do the digital SLR thing, you can't be concerned with "pricey" items all at the same time...
- Jun 20, 1999
- 2,563
- 0
- Thread starter
- #85
- Jun 20, 1999
- 2,563
- 0
- Thread starter
- #86
- Jun 20, 1999
- 2,563
- 0
- Thread starter
- #87
- Jun 20, 1999
- 2,563
- 0
- Thread starter
- #90
Wow...once again I am humbled! :worship:
- Jun 20, 1999
- 2,563
- 0
- Thread starter
- #91
Okiewan said:
...Must have one...where to get?...Must get second job to afford more camera stuff. :laugh:
Don't be humbled, be inspired :) Trust me, there are a zillon photogs that could post a pic and make me wish I hadn't!
BTW, that fist shot a page ago was pretty damn good! Like the composition. The baby... feet are out of frame, needed to be tighter on the subject. Larger aperture on the boy would have made the bground more "blurry" (DOF) and he would pop more out of the image. Overall that image is just a little soft. Check out (google) The "Rule of Thirds" for composition.
2nd squirrel shot? Highlights are blown and distracting. Fixable in photoshop, but still...
Just keep shooting and trying different stuff! over time, you'll be in manual mode and take real control of your images.
BTW, that fist shot a page ago was pretty damn good! Like the composition. The baby... feet are out of frame, needed to be tighter on the subject. Larger aperture on the boy would have made the bground more "blurry" (DOF) and he would pop more out of the image. Overall that image is just a little soft. Check out (google) The "Rule of Thirds" for composition.
2nd squirrel shot? Highlights are blown and distracting. Fixable in photoshop, but still...
Just keep shooting and trying different stuff! over time, you'll be in manual mode and take real control of your images.
As everyone told me... the camera body is the cheapest part of the hobby. Fortunately, I get paid to take pictures. Tomorrow, I'm at a ranch in Denton, shooting the big ol BBQ setup of the world champion "Texas Rib Rangers" for a "major retailer" 's magazine.
Those (the squirrel.. his name is Bill) were shot an hour ago with a Sigma 70-200 2.8 DG HSM (HUGE thanks to Chili and Lou for the scoop on that lens, the Canon L version that most say doesn't shoot any better is $1,800 the Sigma = $700.
Those (the squirrel.. his name is Bill) were shot an hour ago with a Sigma 70-200 2.8 DG HSM (HUGE thanks to Chili and Lou for the scoop on that lens, the Canon L version that most say doesn't shoot any better is $1,800 the Sigma = $700.
- Jun 20, 1999
- 2,563
- 0
- Thread starter
- #94
Okiewan said:
Yeah, I'll admit that I'm going for the trial and error method right now. I get like one decent pic for every 8 or so I take. Then I'm left scratching my head and wondering why that ONE came out decent. LOL Rich was in the chatroom about an hr ago and he gave me some links to find more info. as well. That's the other thing I need to spend time doing is reading/ learning more about the "Rule of Thirds", aperature, shutter speed etc... and knowing what I need to do for certain types of photos. None-the-less, it's still fun playing around with "toys". :cool:
You gettin' paid? Way cool! :)
- Jun 20, 1999
- 2,563
- 0
- Thread starter
- #95
- Jun 20, 1999
- 2,563
- 0
- Thread starter
- #96
- Jun 20, 1999
- 2,563
- 0
- Thread starter
- #97
That may not change substancially no matter how good you get :)
Good stuff.
Keep in mind, photographs are like art, everyone has an opinion.
The tiger. Shooting thru the fence will be a little better if you go with a larger aperture, but only to a point, it's not that bad the way you shot it, don't know how much better you could get it.
The kids. I would have probably shot that one in portrait, getting fairly close to them and all of them in the frame.
- Jun 20, 1999
- 2,563
- 0
- Thread starter
- #99
Okiewan said:
Thank you, sir. :) I gotta give credit where credit is due though. My wife was reading this thread last night with me and says "Hey, thanks for mentioning that I took the pics of the animals at the zoo." LOL I think if we were keeping score she's in the lead now for having better pics. After talking to her some more about how she shot the tiger through the chain link she did mention that she did use auto focus and kept hitting the button halfway until she got the auto focus where she liked it. Basically getting the tiger really focused good and barely being able to see the chain link. I'm assuming the AF was taking care of the aperature thing that you mentioned above. Here's another one she did as well using the same concept with the AF. I might just have to tell her to switch it to MF and go for it.
Attachments
- Jun 20, 1999
- 2,563
- 0
- Thread starter
- #100
Apparently I didn't go through all the pics that she took of my daughter in the bouncy seat either. LOL She pointed out that she took one as a portrait shot to get her in the pic because she did infact know that the first one didn't come out right. Leave it to the wife to show me how it's done. :rotfl:
[note: I did crop it down a shade to get rid of the "wasted space" around her.]
[note: I did crop it down a shade to get rid of the "wasted space" around her.]
