I agree with the crop suggestion. Here is a simple crop for what it's worth.

As a side note, when shooting 1 to 3 people it is adviseable to shoot in a vertical format. Unless they are all lying down :roll:

Looks upside down to me... :)

An ND filter will not solve the problem, only reduce the amount of light by X stops and you would then need to compensate by slowing the shutter or opening the aperture. Leaving the original problem untouched.

You say you were up and down the field but could you not go to the other side of the field effectively putting the sun at your back and front lighting the players.

When it comes to sport photography the general consensus is wide open aperture and fastest shutter speed resulting in very shallow DOF, freezing the action with critical focus on the subject. Not to mention the need for a good telephoto lens. Capturing the whole field with some action somewhere in the shot is...well, just a snap shot. Zooming in to get a good close up of THE action including expressions is priceless.

Just my 2 cents worth.

You are correct about your camera (and all others) not being able to capture the high dynamic range of a sunrise or sunset. (providing the bright sky and dark foreground are included)

The simplest (and cheapest) way to over come this is to shoot HDR. Take 3 shots, the first exposed for the bright sky, the second for the foreground and the third somewhere in between the first two. Then use a program such as PhotoMatix (currently considered the best) which costs from $40 to $100 depending on version. This will give you the results you are looking for virtually everytime. Using the grad ND filters are both time consuming and approximations of what your trying to achieve. Not to mention the cost involved with each different filter variation. I have attached a hand held HDR photo I turned on the auto exposure bracketing mode and placed the shutter in machine gun mode. Three shots later and about 5 minutes in PP I had this result. (not my best work but it shows the results)

If you use Lightroom, it has a built in grad ND filter that works very well for the most part. I believe Aperture also has this feature but don't quote me on that. Although for extremes like sunrise and sunsets it may be pushing things.

Good luck.

Hand held HDR +2, 0, -2

Sorry, too many quotes. Need another coffee.

[quote=rts2568]

My friend, I take exception to the inference that Canadian photographers are inept. We have our good ones and not so good ones just as you do in your country. The photographer you refer to was certainly not a professional if they gave away the raw images. Also, if you had raw images to work with what difference did the brand of camera have to do with anything. I must assume you are a Nikon-o-maniac and belittle all other brands. With the hostility you present to the world maybe it a good thing that you are retired.

I am a proud Canadian and a professional wedding photographer. If you are such a fine photographer then why do you place yourself (and your Nikon) as "in hiding"?

I have no intention of responding to your anticipated reply, just wanted to point out your ill chosen words.

And proud of it.

With over 25 years as a wedding photographer I have no problem with your rules. In fact I follow them even if I get permission (always ask before the ceremony) to hang from the rafters while photographing the ceremony. Let's be honest here, the ceremony is THE most boring thing to take photos of. How many shots of the bride and groom standing there can you make to look different? My own schedule has only 4 to 5 shots during the ceremony. To clarify, the ceremony happens after the hand off to the presentation of the newly married couple. Signing the register is not a part of the ceremony either. So my shot list has
1. the bride and groom from the back facing front and
2. each other,
3. a shot from the balcony if available or from the back getting the entire crowd, (maybe that low floor shot if conducive)
4. the ring going on the groom (with flash if approved) as this is the only shot that shows the ring (when the groom places the ring on the bride the ring is away from you and most times is hidden),
5. the first kiss (with flash if approved)
Most of the ceremony I am hidden at the back waiting for the next opportunity which I walk quietly up just before it happens and then retreat to the back again. People do expect the photographer to be seen but not as a chimpanzee flitting here there and everywhere taking a gazillion shots that are all the same.

Bottom line here is with so many nub wedding photographers running rampant, reign them in by signing the rule sheet. More power to you.

Sleepy Dog Hopkins :thumbup:

If you are a serious photographer you need a program designed and built by photographers. :thumbup: Lightroom fits this category. If you adopt this strategy you will find you use it about 99% of the time. As well you can batch process files which is a god send. It utilizes a nondestructive approach so your originals are never altered, even by accident. On the rare occasion you need a little something more you can send the file out from Lightroom into the other program such as Elements and when finished a simple "save" will bring the final result right back into LR. No fuss, no muss.

If you are a casual photographer you can use Elements but be prepared to operate on a single file at any given time which means longer PP times.

If you are computer illiterate then use Picassa. It is very simple to use but lacks as a robust program compared to your other choices. For those neat toys such as face recognition read the last part of the first paragraph.

Good luck with your decision.

My friend, we share the same affliction. As engineers we deal with specifics and truisms. In our realm there is no room for playing around. My guess is that as a whole, your photos are very technically correct but lack artistic value. When you think of your equipment as precision tools you end up with precision results for better or worse. When you can make the switch to thinking of your precision tools as toys your artistic side will start to shine through.

In my case I spent a good 5 to 10 years perfecting (tongue in cheek) the technical aspect and then I had the opportunity of having my work critiqued by a panel and was told my work was technically correct but lacked any real artistic value. Since then I have spent almost 25 years learning to play and it shows. At least when I remember to not think like an engineer. Good luck my friend and if it helps remember that 1 plus 1 can equal a bouquet of roses. :-D

How about, "Capturing the Essence of the Minds Eye" or "Capturing the Essence of the Subliminal"

Good luck.

Do I use it to send messages to myself?? What is it's purpose? Nothing about it in the help section.

Does anybody use this feature?

oorah.

Thanks, I was actually stunned by their response. No such thing as a bad scene, just bad attitudes.