Way overexposed in my opinion. Expose to the right is good for getting all the detail possible, but rarely, if printed, would it look good. The face is over-exposed by a stop or a stop and a half. Try redoing it and see if you like it. Try making the exposure on the face about a Zone 5 or 6 in brightness.
I used to get "Professional Photographer Magazine" and the cover frequently would have portraits of black people. It really made me aware that you don't have to print what the histogram shows.
Just my opinion, which doesn't mean a damn thing.
Kozan
I don't know if you are using auto focus, but most of your images are not in focus. I suggest you try manual focus and possibly an F-stop with a higher number, such as F8 or higher. Pretty bird and good composition, but the bird deserves proper focus.
Blow up your images to at least 100% magnification and you will see it is out of focus.
Do an HDR image. Now, I have a D850 which does in-camera HDR combining two images into one automatically.
The results is not the greatest. But I have been successful shooting about 5 frames at high speed with different exposures on each frame (set your camera for Continuous High-Speed). Use -2EV, -1EV, 0EV, +1EV, and +2EV. Shoot. Then combining in Photoshop (or any good editing program) you can get a nice HDR picture that has good cloud exposure and the general non-cloud exposure. Takes about 1/2" to take 5 frames.
Once you practice the technique, it becomes easy to do.
Good luck on your adventures!
WirtzWorld wrote:
This is another shot of my studio rats Katie and Amanda. Studio rats is an affectionate name for them because I really loved that they liked to hang around the studio and get shot. I wish I had twenty models like that.
Shot on 120 roll film and scanned.
Absolutely beautiful work.
jackm1943 wrote:
If you know before pushing the shutter button the finished image will be square (or some other non-2x3) format, shooting in the square format could help in composing the image in-camera to possibly reduce cropping in post. There are some of us that used square medium format film cameras and have learned to like that format.
Have you ever tried filling the frame on a 2x3 format image. You can not crop to 4x5 format. You will wind up with a 10x6 image. Now the only solution is to shoot so loose that you have plenty of room to crop. But, that wastes pixels. Maybe that doesn't really matter. I'm sure for commercial photographers, it would matter.
The only problem i see is that if you want to print 8 x 10 but your in-camera settings are for 3 x 2 format, you may not be able to crop to 8 x 10. Some camera clubs require 8 x 10 format. It is frustrating trying to print a 8 x 10 picture and being able to crop properly is just not there. I have since marked my 3x2 screen with the 8 x 10 lines so I know where to take the image so I can crop.
In a modern digital camera, you are always capturing color, even if the camera is set to show you B & W.
Edit the color photo by using the color channels. By far this is the best method because grass may not be as green as you like or the sky not as blue, etc.
windshoppe wrote:
Needing a wide-angle zoom lens in the 16 - 28mm range and after doing some research I purchased the Tokina 16-28. Knowing that it would be returnable if unsatisfactory I purchased it from Amazon. It proved to be quite satisfactory for my purposes both times that I used it. The third time out it failed giving me an error message at any F stop smaller than 3.5. Given the fact that it had been 3 months since purchasing it, I was unable to return it to Amazon and discovered that the Tokina warranty applied only to lenses purchased from authorized Tokina dealers. Subsequently, I took it to a highly regarded local repair shop that informed me that Tokina does not sell repair parts to independent repair facilities and so it would have to be sent to the Tokina factory for an estimate. I suspect that the estimate will be more than I care to spend for this particular lens given the fact that it failed after two shoots. Lesson learned. No more Tokina.
Needing a wide-angle zoom lens in the 16 - 28mm ra... (
show quote)
And you probably don't know the person or company that sold the lens. Why blame Tokina for your carelessness. I have bought a couple of remanufactured lenses from Tokina. Excellent quality! And with a 90-day warranty.
If you buy from Amazon, take notice of who the seller is. It's not Amazon.
JohnFrim wrote:
Nope!!! If you are trying to tell a story you have missed the mark. The theme is clear, but the background and setting do not support the message.
Why does there have to be a "message"? It's just a damn picture. The girl wants to get naked. The lighting is good and it's in focus. Nothing else to it.
BebuLamar wrote:
Using flash in daylight the flash has to be powerful and built in flash isn't powerful enough.
I disagree. Daylight flash does not have to be powerful at all if you are just trying to fill in shadows. Many times I have used flash in the daylight at -2 or -3 EV. That's just enough to lighten the subject so that it looks good.
There's a big difference in the quality of the image with daylight flash. I almost always use it.
The trick to using daylight flash is to use it so that it doesn't look like you used flash. If you do that you will have a great photo. It's like makeup on a woman. If you notice it, there's too much.
saminpa2001 wrote:
Thanks BigDaddy, I did a quick search it's still $ 25.00. Looks like that's what will fill my need. Do you know if I can install on 2 laptops. I always have a PC for a back up.
Thanks for the tip.
You can install multiple copies, but they have to have different KEYS. I have Affinity installed on my main computer and a laptop. You don't have to pay for two copies, just that you can't download a copy then copy to another computer. I had to download the file by using the laptop. Not really a problem.
By the way, I took a wedding a couple of years ago. My girlfriend at the time was helping me. She had no idea what she was doing. She was taking photos of the bride and groom while she was in the middle of the bridesmaids. I wanted to scream. But Affinity photo removed her in 3 or 4 pictures that I shot. With a fireplace and brick background. I couldn't believe how well Affinity photo got rid of her. I thought replacing bricks would have been a problem, but it wasn't.
Silverrails wrote:
Do any of Our many Experienced and even the Still Progressing Photographers here at UHH Edit B&W Images?
If So, What aspect of a B&W Image would you feel would Require Editing?..... Definitely NOT the Color.!!
Please provide Specifics for the members of UHH that want to be more informed in Photo Editing.
Thank You.
Absolutely YES. And the reason is that the individual colors can be tweaked for brightness. You may want a green to be darker, or lighter. You may want to emphasize a RED in the scene. You can also change cyan and magenta. So, yes, colors are important in that they can be manipulated.
Always shoot in color and post process so you can get the exact image you want.
Urnst wrote:
I wonder why they don't focus on one or the other. I never use video, and some probably never use still. Perhaps if manufacturers concentrated on one of the two functions they could develop better products. I appreciate any input you may offer.
The answer to your question is very simple. Because 1) it is profitable, and 2) they can.
End of story!
nervous2 wrote:
Looks to be a nice location. I'm half Italian but have never been there. My loss I'm sure.
The Italian women are soooooo beautiful. When in the Navy, I stayed in Sicily at the navy base. We were put up in an old hotel on the base. The 35 year-old maid that cleaned the room every day was drop-dead gorgeous!
The Puerto Rican women are a close second.
aquadiver wrote:
On desolation row
Not that it really matters to me, but you are not doing the copyright correctly. You have to include the year...
Post an official copyright notice along with your images. First, write the © (the letter “c,” circumscribed), the word “Copyright,” or its abbreviation, “Copr.” Then, include the year in which the photograph was first published. Finally, add your name – the owner of the copyright: e.g. © 2016 Joseph Bustamante.
Great image BTW.