Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main Photography Discussion
Naming the camera and settings
Page 1 of 8 next> last>>
Jun 6, 2013 12:29:42   #
cloverleaf Loc: Ft. Lauderdale
 
Why can't the type of camera and the settings used be part of the posting for everything in the photo gallery? I so admire some of the incredible pictures I see, and some just don't loo sharp enough but are still pleasing, but I always want to know, what kind of camera, and what were the settings, even is it was just "auto". Can't that be a stipulation for every published picture?

Reply
Jun 6, 2013 14:21:52   #
Aldebaran Loc: Florida
 
It seems UHHers don't care about technical matters. I have faced strong resistance to the idea and I don't know why. It would be a valuable source of information to include this info but it seems people don't care or think that is giving away too much. That is something you see in more advanced forums where people have above average knowledge of cameras and like to share the settings, either as a means of educating or for improvement of their own practices and habits. I started, but since no one cares, I just stopped. I have to go somewhere else for that. I usually search on flickr.com where that information is automatically uploaded with each photo and I have learned a lot. I use an app on my ipad where I can search on flickr and look at the settings. Tons of information there!

Favorite pass time? Search for a camera or lens model and see what can be produced with them. Priceless!

Reply
Jun 6, 2013 15:05:51   #
TerryC Loc: Winter Springs, FL
 
I think that is a Great Idea! I am in the learning mode always, so would help me tremendously! :thumbup:

Reply
 
 
Jun 6, 2013 15:08:21   #
wilsondl2 Loc: Lincoln, Nebraska
 
cloverleaf wrote:
Why can't the type of camera and the settings used be part of the posting for everything in the photo gallery? I so admire some of the incredible pictures I see, and some just don't loo sharp enough but are still pleasing, but I always want to know, what kind of camera, and what were the settings, even is it was just "auto". Can't that be a stipulation for every published picture?


Why do you want to know the camera make and settings? Unless you have the same lighting conditions they will not tell you anything. Give me an example of a picture that can be taken by a Nikon and can not be with a Canon. It just dosn't matter what brand you use. - Dave

Reply
Jun 6, 2013 15:34:09   #
Kingmapix Loc: Mesa, Arizona
 
I agree. Do we want to learn, or just look?

Reply
Jun 6, 2013 16:01:59   #
Aldebaran Loc: Florida
 
I told you, that is the attitude.

Reply
Jun 6, 2013 16:12:03   #
Aldebaran Loc: Florida
 
It's like looking at the moon and wanting to know how many miles away it is, what is its circumference, how much light it reflects, what is in the other side, etc... Some people don't care to find out. Lack of curiosity... or what? Some others enrich the experience with more knowledge.

If you want the other type of discussion go to photo.net or other site. They will tell you everything you want to now and some more; they critique your photos and give advice all in an environment of technical collaboration.

If you want to receive just a "well done", "great set" or thumbs up now and then and occasionally a rude comment, stay here.But... There are also lots of good people with ample expertise that like to share some more if you ask them and they provide lots of advice also. There is the joker, the whiner, the always political and cynical, the newbie that is lost and knows nothing, the arrogant... You name it. Just life.

Reply
 
 
Jun 6, 2013 16:12:07   #
TerryC Loc: Winter Springs, FL
 
:thumbdown: Really? I have no problems with other sites! This is why I visit these places along with joining as many learning experiences available. Maybe some are beyond learning? Just a thought not a fight~ ;-)

Reply
Jun 6, 2013 16:22:55   #
Aldebaran Loc: Florida
 
TerryC wrote:
:thumbdown: Really? I have no problems with other sites! This is why I visit these places along with joining as many learning experiences available. Maybe some are beyond learning? Just a thought not a fight~ ;-)


Me too. Not responding to a fight. We R in agreement, I think

Reply
Jun 6, 2013 16:40:11   #
CaptainC Loc: Colorado, south of Denver
 
I think many people think if they just knew the "settings" they could take the same picture. The problem, as wilsondl2 indicated, is that unless you have the same subject in the same lighting with the same lens, what is the point? The information is virtually useless.


For my portrait work I will give you the bulk of my settings settings right now:
Nikon D3 with the 70-200 usually at f/5.6 to f/11 and light is metered with an incident meter. If the DOF is shallow, maybe I was at f/4 to f/5.6. There you go- all my secret settings. Now go duplicate my images. :-)

I can see in some macro work or long-exposure night photography where specific settings can be helpful, but in most images I don't think they mean a thing.

If you REALLY think it matters, just ask the person. Maybe they will take the time to go look it up.

Reply
Jun 6, 2013 16:43:09   #
Jason-X Loc: Central Mississippi
 
I try to list my settings with my posted pics, just in case someone wants to know. But I see both sides of the argument.

Reply
 
 
Jun 6, 2013 17:31:34   #
Wahawk Loc: NE IA
 
CaptainC wrote:
I think many people think if they just knew the "settings" they could take the same picture. The problem, as wilsondl2 indicated, is that unless you have the same subject in the same lighting with the same lens, what is the point? The information is virtually useless.


For my portrait work I will give you the bulk of my settings settings right now:
Nikon D3 with the 70-200 usually at f/5.6 to f/11 and light is metered with an incident meter. If the DOF is shallow, maybe I was at f/4 to f/5.6. There you go- all my secret settings. Now go duplicate my images. :-)

I can see in some macro work or long-exposure night photography where specific settings can be helpful, but in most images I don't think they mean a thing.

If you REALLY think it matters, just ask the person. Maybe they will take the time to go look it up.
I think many people think if they just knew the &q... (show quote)


:thumbup: :thumbup:

Reply
Jun 6, 2013 17:43:12   #
minniev Loc: MIssissippi
 
Aldebaran wrote:
Me too. Not responding to a fight. We R in agreement, I think


I agree with those who are interested in cameras and settings. I wish the site itself retained that info automatically with the images as some other sites do, but if it does that, I can't figure out where it's hidden. Settings are an interesting part of the learning process. I don't mind sharing mine, but it's a hassle to look it up and add it manually and I probably would forget more times than I remembered. I'm also interested in how photos are processed to get certain looks. I am probably more curious than most, though, a bad habit of mine, wanting to find out everything about everything.

Reply
Jun 6, 2013 17:50:18   #
CaptainC Loc: Colorado, south of Denver
 
minniev wrote:
I agree with those who are interested in cameras and settings. I wish the site itself retained that info automatically with the images as some other sites do, but if it does that, I can't figure out where it's hidden. Settings are an interesting part of the learning process. I don't mind sharing mine, but it's a hassle to look it up and add it manually and I probably would forget more times than I remembered. I'm also interested in how photos are processed to get certain looks. I am probably more curious than most, though, a bad habit of mine, wanting to find out everything about everything.
I agree with those who are interested in cameras a... (show quote)


So...I just told you EVERYTHING about mine. ;-)

I can see how knowing more about the processing can be interesting. But again, the processing is applicable to that image and ONLY that image. What worked there may not have any relevance to anything else.

I could tell you I used ACR to adjust color and contrast and burned in an area and used NIK Viveza to saturate the sky, and NIK Color Efex (Tonal Contrast) to pull detail, and Topaz (Spicify) to add detail to a part of the image, and Portraiture to help with the lady's skin, and on and on. What would all that tell you? That you had better pony up for a ton of plug-ins? And just because I did that to one image has NO bearing on any other image in the universe.

There is only one way to get good at this stuff: shoot a lot, be critical of your images and ask for the honest stuff - please do not say "be gentle," Screw be gentle - ask someone to make you cry they are so honest! :-)

I spent a few hours yesterday with a Master Photographer to go over my proposed images for this year's International Print Competition (through the PPA). I got great feed back that was not always what I wanted to hear, but I can correct my errors now.

You have to read books and attend workshops on Photoshop or whatever your software is. Shoot some more. Learn what the processing tools DO so you can apply them in creative ways.

There IS no shortcut - only hours of practice and critical evaluation by yourself and others - NO, NOT your family.

Being told the camera settings won't teach you much.

Reply
Jun 6, 2013 17:59:55   #
Bruce with a Canon Loc: Islip
 
I just put the blinkie thingie one line below the middle and FIRE

Reply
Page 1 of 8 next> last>>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main Photography Discussion
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.