How to start improving?

[Seafood]

Have owned my first DSLR for over a year now. (Pentax K100d with kit lens and 70-300 zoom…I know you all don’t like Pentax but hang with me will ya) I would consider myself between a novice and intermediate. I understand a good deal of the technical side of things. Tv, Av, M, DOF, etc etc. Shoot mostly in Av unless Tv is required to show motion. I have read Bryan Peterson’s EXPOSURE and found it very helpful. Follow a few message boards and photography forums and try to pick up what I can.

However, I continually find myself producing extremely average photographs. Nothing that comes out of my camera really separates itself from the Point and Shoot Mom filling a family photo album. (if you get what I mean)

For instance, I take a photo of a really cool looking tree (in winter) against and interesting sky from a low vantage point. The idea is a good one (artistically) but the actual photo just comes out blaaahhhh. Now, I have seen the same kind of shot taken by someone else and it is VERY vivid, sharp, and really good looking.

I don’t have tons of time to devote to just shooting photos. And the often given advice “just go shoot tons of photos” hasn’t really worked for me. I usually get outside for an hour for lunch and think I can start using this time to work on my stuff. I have tried taking night pictures…blahh. Indoor shots of kids stink (some of this due to Pentax issues I know). Landscapes are drab and dreary. Etc etc etc.

So…questions.

1. Would anyone be willing to layout some thoughts/ideas on some “baby steps” that I can take (short term goals) that will begin to get me taking better photos?

2. I don’t really have the desire/interest to do lots of PP on the computer. I know that some may be required (I don’t have photoshop by the way) but I really want to focus on getting good pictures out of the camera instead of creating them on the PC.

3. How can I start “seeing” better photographs and understanding what will make a good composition or photo. I spent all day Monday in a beautiful spring fed trout stream and my “eyes” didn’t see anything really outstanding to take some shots of. But I am sure a good photographer could have taken hundreds of photos that day.


Any thoughts would be appreciated! Thanks.

[griptape]

Post some pictures you're taking that you're not happy with, and maybe a couple examples of what you'd like to achieve that you're not.

[fotogmarc]

I can give you a few suggestions that have worked for me.

The book 'Perception and Imaging' by Richard Zakia. A dry text, but very helpful on how to frame an image without the technical push and images of exotic locations we'll never go to.

I close one eye when looking at a scene to get the 2 dimensional perspective, giving me a better idea how it will look on the monitor or in print.

Not tons of photos, but a good number of a subject from all angles and distances to see what works for you.

If you've mastered the technical side of your camera then you won't need too much pp, but it always helps.

Photo critique sites have helped me quite a bit as well. Popphoto.com on their blog, has critiques. I'm sure other members know some others.

Hope this helps


P.S. Don't be too sensitive with the Pentax. If they're putting down the gear, it's because they can't get it on with the talent. ;)

[JTL]

Have owned my first DSLR for over a year now. (Pentax K100d with kit lens and 70-300 zoom…I know you all don’t like Pentax but hang with me will ya) I would consider myself between a novice and intermediate. I understand a good deal of the technical side of things. Tv, Av, M, DOF, etc etc. Shoot mostly in Av unless Tv is required to show motion. I have read Bryan Peterson’s EXPOSURE and found it very helpful. Follow a few message boards and photography forums and try to pick up what I can.

However, I continually find myself producing extremely average photographs. Nothing that comes out of my camera really separates itself from the Point and Shoot Mom filling a family photo album. (if you get what I mean)

For instance, I take a photo of a really cool looking tree (in winter) against and interesting sky from a low vantage point. The idea is a good one (artistically) but the actual photo just comes out blaaahhhh. Now, I have seen the same kind of shot taken by someone else and it is VERY vivid, sharp, and really good looking.

I don’t have tons of time to devote to just shooting photos. And the often given advice “just go shoot tons of photos” hasn’t really worked for me. I usually get outside for an hour for lunch and think I can start using this time to work on my stuff. I have tried taking night pictures…blahh. Indoor shots of kids stink (some of this due to Pentax issues I know). Landscapes are drab and dreary. Etc etc etc.

So…questions.

1. Would anyone be willing to layout some thoughts/ideas on some “baby steps” that I can take (short term goals) that will begin to get me taking better photos?

2. I don’t really have the desire/interest to do lots of PP on the computer. I know that some may be required (I don’t have photoshop by the way) but I really want to focus on getting good pictures out of the camera instead of creating them on the PC.

3. How can I start “seeing” better photographs and understanding what will make a good composition or photo. I spent all day Monday in a beautiful spring fed trout stream and my “eyes” didn’t see anything really outstanding to take some shots of. But I am sure a good photographer could have taken hundreds of photos that day.

Any thoughts would be appreciated! Thanks.
"Learning to See Creatively" by Bryan Peterson is another book to get you thinking about "seeing" images before you press the button.

http://www.amazon.com/Learning-See-Creatively-Composition-Photography/dp/0817441816/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1206557037&sr=8-1

And Grippy's suggestion about posting some images for us to examine is a great idea. Usually we can spot things pretty quickly.

Also, have you ever considered a “hands on” photography course? Some people who don't have a natural feel for it can still get pretty good at it after learning the basics and having some constructive feedback.

But, there is one possibility that you may have to face. Just like any activity requiring skill and talent...some people have it and some people don't. Not everyone can be a great writer, composer, artist, sculptor, architect or designer. It's the same with photography. I have tried to teach some people who just don't get it...and never will...even though they want to be a "photographer". They know all the theory and all the technical aspects but simply don't know what to take a picture of. Even when they manage to take the occasional great shot, they don't know it. Because they do not have the ability to distinguish. I've taught others who pick up the camera and get amazing results immediately (one of them is nine years old...and a photographic genius). Those are the same people who can go through a stack of their images and know which shots work and which shots don't and why.

Photography (like any form of expression) requires a "point of view" to be meningful. You have to be able to "say something" in order for your images to resonate and have meaning. What is it that you want to say? What story do you want to tell? What do you want the viewer to see? And, most importantly, what do want the viewer to feel? Thinking about this is just as important as any technical aspect when it comes to anything more than snapshot photography. Unlike some (including Peterson) I do not believe you can actually "teach" someone to have vision. Vision is something that people either internally develop or don't. Reading, classes, feedback, practice can help you develop your vision...but it has to be your vision. Then again, some never develop it. That's just the way it is.

But there's another possibility as well. Maybe you're being too hard on yourself. Maybe you are actually already on the road to taking great images.

So, I’d take Grippy's advice, post some of your work here and on some other sites and start soliciting some feedback. :)

[Lloyd]

Just my 10 c worth, Start using the different modes of your camera ie A-prior to narrow your depth of field select smallest number give that blurred background look, and Shutter prior to freeze waterfall at high speed, try some macro photography if your lense can do macro, use a tripod to keep that camera from shaking at slow shutter speeds, slow down and contemplate the photo as if it was expensive film you were using and not the I can shoot a 100 shots at no cost of todays digital cameras, Not that im complaining . Enjoy Jonathan.

[fionndruinne]

Well, you may need to do a little bit of rethinking of what you want to do. PP, for instance... I know it's more enjoyable to pull a great photo out of the camera, but, say, given the limited dynamic range of digital sensors, your interesting tree against an interesting sky isn't going to amount to much without post-processing. Try shooting in raw, as it allows for both better dynamic range and sharper images (the processing algorithms used in-camera to produce a jpeg tend to soften the image; I've gotten sharper photos when I developed them from raw). Within limits, of course, you will be able to pull off a sky that's not so overexposed or a tree that's not so underexposed as to render it uninteresting.

Also know your gear. Indoor kid shots are going to be awful with a standard kit lens because of the slow maximum aperture. If you want to expand in that area, get one of the good Pentax primes; even old ones will work on your camera.

I know what you mean, though. I pull off a lot of average photographs as well, and that's even with the fact that I can nearly instantly separate good from bad in photography. I have a critic's skill, but the artist's is much slower to develop. It will, though. Hang in there.

[faisal]

Dunno about the books, havent read them, I prefer forums anyways.

Here's my 2c worth.
My 430EX gave me a new life in indoor photography. Its improved the way my pictures look indoors even with a not soo great kit lens. The DOF is surprising creamy when I bounce the flash off the ceiling as compared to direct flash from the on board flash. So maybe you should invest in a external flash if you cant get those fast prime lens for indoor stuff.

Sometimes our pictures are great but they just lack the vibrant colour and contrast which can be fixed by PP. When I dont want to PP, I bumped up the Saturation and contrast in my camera that gives my landscape picture a new feel to it. You could do the same.

If you dont want to carry around a Tripod, use other contraption to fulfill your need. Like I've shot a fireworks display with the help of my Wallet. I kept my Camera carefully on the ground, placed me wallet under the lens that would give me a 45' angle and 75% of my pics came perfect and well exposed (the rest were either spoiled by passing cars, or my hand shake on the shutter button). You can use walls, rocks, cars...anything stable as a tripod where handheld is a big No.....
NOTE: you'll get one hell of a stare from people passing you when you do this....

Hope this was any help.....

[Dread Pirate Roberts]

If your wallets thick enough to angle the lens at 45deg you could just buy a tripod and lens and..:D

I borrow photography mags from my local library that have a critique the shot section. It's helped me avoid others mistakes a bit. I'd second the think about your shot, get it from various angles and appertures till you get a feel for what you're good at.

I found simply sticking my cam on a tripod is very cathartic, it makes me slow down and at least think about what I want to achieve and various possibilities to achieve it.

Think about some of the rules of thumb like:
getting in close on the subject
using DOF to make the subject stand out
use lines to show perspective (did someone say jetty)
subject features on the rule of thirds

[faisal]

If your wallets thick enough to angle the lens at 45deg you could just buy a tripod and lens and..:D



It might be thick...but not with cash....just ID's, License, health cards, bills etc... :(

[Rooz]

I understand a good deal of the technical side of things. Tv, Av, M, DOF, etc etc.

DOF is more of a creative, not a technical side of things.

Shoot mostly in Av unless Tv is required to show motion. I have read Bryan Peterson’s EXPOSURE and found it very helpful. Follow a few message boards and photography forums and try to pick up what I can.

read it again. petersons book is more focussed on the creative side than the tehcnical side. he teaches you to be creative with shutter speed and aperture. ie: there are many different exposure values but only one correct exposure.

For instance, I take a photo of a really cool looking tree (in winter) against and interesting sky from a low vantage point. The idea is a good one (artistically) but the actual photo just comes out blaaahhhh. Now, I have seen the same kind of shot taken by someone else and it is VERY vivid, sharp, and really good looking.

did you see it out of their camera before they PP it ? what sort of in-cam settings were they using/ you using ? maybe yiou need to increase the contrast and vividness of your pics in cam.

I usually get outside for an hour for lunch and think I can start using this time to work on my stuff.

sorry, this is not gonna work. you cant expect to churn out creative pics in a lunch break at your work with one eye on the clock and your mind thinking "i gotta be creative." it just doesnt work that way. if thats the ONLY chance you really get to shoot, then think about street photography at least to give you a fighting chance.

Indoor shots of kids stink (some of this due to Pentax issues I know).

its got nothing to do with pentax. its the fact you dont have a flash or you dont have a fast lens.

How can I start “seeing” better photographs and understanding what will make a good composition or photo. I spent all day Monday in a beautiful spring fed trout stream and my “eyes” didn’t see anything really outstanding to take some shots of. But I am sure a good photographer could have taken hundreds of photos that day.

JT recommended a great book. i hate to break this to you but the only real way to see things better is to take more pictures. cos you see something and think..."hmm could've made that better if only i had done xyz."

my recommendation to you is the same one i gave to chili when she was thinking of dumping pentax, buy yourself the pentax 50mm f1.4 which is pretty cheap. why ? because the lens gives you much more creative control over your photos, it has great colour and contrast right out of the box and is very sharp.

trust me on this, if you like taking pics of your kids, night shots, portraits etc this lens is just kick ass.

most improtantly of all post heaps of pics, even if you think they suck, and get people to give you some feedback on how to improve.

[Nickcanada]

I've improved most by just posting images and getting a feel for what people think of them. You have to have an idea of who is posting to your images though. Some people take more time to think about what they write then others.

I've often gotten dud threads going where no one wanted to comment on a set of photos I've made, don't take stuff like that personally. I always looked at as a challenge. I'd love to make a photo that makes people unable to resist commenting on it.

Also I don't always get what people are saying right away. For the longest time I would underexpose my photos and the focus would be off and the picture would be unsharp etc. I didn't understand at the time but now I look back and I don't understand why I didn't see it!!! It's amazing how your eye will develop!

I can look at an image and have an idea as to why I like it. I can pick the different components apart and understand why it works.... now I just need to transfer that into my pictures.

[Seafood]

Some great responses and thoughts! Thank you very much. Now I must uphold my end of the deal and supply some examples. I have deleted alot of my stuff so these arent really that good, nor can I comapare a something I have done to something I like. I will see if I can find some comparisons. But for now here are 5 of mine. Sorry the photos are so big....feel free to fix if you want.

Sort of an average shot but colors turned out OK.

http://i241.photobucket.com/albums/ff260/tfenchel7/IMGP1800.jpg

A very average macro

http://i241.photobucket.com/albums/ff260/tfenchel7/IMGP1324.jpg

Here is one I am proud of...but if I knew how to do better PP I might get some more contrast out of it.

http://i241.photobucket.com/albums/ff260/tfenchel7/IMGP2382-2.jpg

These next two are examples of NO POP. The train photo has been done a thousand times by others but the sky is aweful and the rest of it pretty blah.

The last one looked really cool in real life. The white side of the barn against a storm sky...but again it came out pretty washed out.

http://i241.photobucket.com/albums/ff260/tfenchel7/IMGP1234.jpg

http://i241.photobucket.com/albums/ff260/tfenchel7/IMGP1977.jpg

[faisal]

What I think...

1. I really like the first one....

2. A smaller Aperture [as a part of the butterfly is blurry] and more contrast/saturation would be great...

3. Not into B/W shots so wont comment on it.....though I like it

4. Not too sure what to say on this one so will leave it to the others

5. I think this picture hardly has any stormy sky so it really does not make it a special picture......and for proper exposure...an HDR would have been right...IMO

[TenD]

One thing that immediately jumps to my mind is the time of day you are saying you are shooting in, and the light I see in the actual photographs. I speak from the perspective of a landscape photographer, but good light applies to everything.

Shoot the light. You generally have about 5-10 minutes every morning and every evening when the light is the best. After that, usually the first hour of light in the morning and last hour of light in the evening is the best for photography. I have had many disappointing mornings and evenings waiting for light that has never come. Now and then I get pretty spectacular light and that's worth it.

Prepare for your photographs. Find a subject, a frame for that subject, think about the light for that subject(where it will be coming from, etc.). I will hike out to a location I've scouted out previously, set up my rig, and then wait for the light. I will fire off a frame or two as the light changes every minute or so. Sometimes I am disappointed, but when the light's right, the results are downright fun.

Late evening light Chatanika river, Alaska. I had set up at this location probably an hour before this one was taken. I metered the scene and used a 2 stop GND filter to control the relatively bright light in the sky and bring out the foreground. I probably snapped 15 or so frames that look very similar to this one, each one subtly different, with this one having the best light of the bunch.
http://i99.photobucket.com/albums/l287/Casaflyr/Distantdredge.jpg

[griptape]

I'm certainly not the most talented person on these forums, but from my perspective:

1. Could use some different framing. Nothing really stands out to the eye and says "oh, there's the subject". It also doesn't seem very sharp.

2. Looking at your exif:

Exposure Time = 1/1000"
F Number = F4.5
Exposure Program = Shutter priority
ISO Value = 400

There's simply no reason to be shooting at 1/1000. You could have dropped your ISO down to 100, maybe stopped down the lens to f/6.3 or even 8, and gotten the same shot without the noise, and a little sharper. It's also underexposed quite a bit. This one can be reasonably saved in post processing.

http://i105.photobucket.com/albums/m235/nothingisworking/02.jpg


3. Not 100% what you're after for the "more contrast", but a little brightness/level/contrast adjustment will do the trick:

http://i105.photobucket.com/albums/m235/nothingisworking/03.jpg


4. Again, reading the exif:

Exposure Time = 1/3000"
F Number = F5.6
ISO Speed Ratings = 800
Exposure Mode = Auto exposure

Again, this shutter speed is just insane. Time to get out of auto mode. This could have been shot at your lowest ISO, giving you the least amount of noise, and a smaller aperture, so that more than just a few of the rocks are in focus. With the only thing in focus being the rocks, it's hard to make rocks "pop".

5. Again with the EXIF:

Exposure Time = 1/350"
F Number = F19
Exposure Program = Aperture priority
ISO Speed Ratings = 1600

F/19 is a little excessive, and 1/350 could be dropped down to around 1/60 (even further if you used a tripod, but most people can shoot 1/60 hand held with little problem), and your detail killing and noise inducing ISO 1600 could have been lowered dramatically. And again, what is your subject here? But some post processing can do a lot here also.

http://i105.photobucket.com/albums/m235/nothingisworking/04.jpg


Overall, it looks like your camera underexposes a lot, and uses ridiculous shutter speeds when it doesn't need to. I would flip the wheel to manual and learn the settings and take more control over what the camera is thinking.

[JTL]

Now I must uphold my end of the deal and supply some examples

Seafood, thanks for posting! :)

O.K...

The fist image is a perfect example of what I was talking about. What's the story of the original image? Is it the person walking on the tracks? Because that's what it should be. Which means:

You could have zoomed in more or been closer to your subject (the sky and most of the foliage is irrelevant/unnecessary and the oppressive amount of dark foreground shadow does nothing but ruin the shot).
You could have metered for the scene based on a tighter framing of the subject providing for a better overall exposure.
You could have timed your shot better so that there was less shadow in the foreground (there was plenty of sunlight in front of your subject so that if you a had waited a few seconds, you could have had more even illumination across the frame).
You could have applied the oldest compositional tool in the book...the rule of thirds. More specifically, you could have framed the shot in a landscape orientation to begin with and have postioned the subject on the right third of the frame with the tracks leading to the left edge of the frame. This would have been much more compelling from a graphical/compositonal standpoint and would have/could have been an almost perfect execution of the "Golden Mean".The end result, IMO, should have been something more like this from a compositional standpoint:

http://JTL.smugmug.com/photos/271358020_jzX98-L.jpg

We now know we should be looking at the person and asking: Where is the subject going? Where do those tracks lead? It gives us a reason to look at the picture! See how the line of the track on the right drags the eye across the entire frame? Do you see how the position of the subject in the frame leaves the subject room to "travel" thorugh the frame in the mind of the viewer? Do you see/understand why this compositional approach works better?

This composition also lends itself nicely to a monochrome treatment, e.g...

http://JTL.smugmug.com/photos/271409681_hMArE-L.jpg

It could have been taken during the Great Depression, or it could have been taken yesterday. More things for the veiwer to ponder. More reasons to look and wonder.

The second image should have been shot at maybe f/6.3 (absolutely agree with Grippy here) so that the entire subject would be in focus (at ISO 400 it would have resulted in a shutter speed of 1/250...plenty fast enough even it the subject moved a little). You could have even probably gotten away with 1/125 and been able to lower your ISO to 200 for a cleaner image. It also could have been framed much more carefully...once again employing the rule of thirds. My question is...why didn't you try shooting at several different apertures to begin with?

The third image is really very nice and I think the soft focus and low-contrast actually makes this picture more compelling than the typical B&W close portrait...although I get the distinct feeling the end result was entirely unintentional. This is the best of the lot and shows that you have some promise!

The fourth image is a nice attempt at creativity that just plain old doesn't work. Once again...what is the subject? A blurry track? What is the viewer supposed to take away from this shot?

The fifth image, to me, looks like the shutter mis-fired and a random scene was captured. Once again, I don't know what the viewer is supposed to take way from this image. Grippy's high-contrast B&W edit helped bring out a strong sense of the lines in the image juxtaposed with the circular cloud shapes...which added some graphical punch to it...but once again, the result seems definitely totally unintentional based on the original.

You seem to need help with both the technical aspects and creative aspects of photography...so my recommendation, if you have a sincere interest in pursuing this as a hobby, is spend a lot more time at it. Get the basics of exposure down (you don't have it down!). But it's more than just correct exposure...it's decisions about achieving correct exposure and really understanding the relationship between aperture, shutter speed and ISO and really knowing the ramifications of your settings choices and being able to apply that knowledge in real-time. Your exposure settings, IMO, seem totally random and inappropriate for the shooting situations. You are clearly not completely comfortable with your gear (in terms of functions, capabilities and limitations). Next, practice framing your shots. Only show the viewer what is necessary to convey the meaning of the image (which, of course, implies that you've thought about conveying the meaning of the image or at least started with a concept in mind and had intention while shooting). Keep extraneous elements out of the frame...and, in general, follow the rule of thirds for now (with experience, you'll learn when to break it). Then go out and try to tell stories with your camera. The stories can be about anything...an acorn or a structure or a group of people at a party...but find what's compelling in the scene and shoot it.

Also, since you don’t have a lot of time during the day, you should seriously consider a weekend class as this may accelerate your learning.

I know some of this may have sounded harsh…but I believe that the direct and honest approach is the best approach if you really want to improve your skills. :)

[raven15]

First: I like the "tell a story" version by JTL. My own opinion is not framing, but the technical aspects. It seems underexposed, you have room left at the bright end, but the shadow in the tracks is too dark. Download a free program called Irfanview (best free picture program out there) and do fast post processing with gamma correction, saturation, and contrast. That would perk the picture right up. My version is at the bottom (in Irfanview) as a comparison.

Second: It is also under exposed, and lacks contrast and color (fixable with Irfanview). Maybe more of the butterfly should be in focus via aperture control.

Third: Try shooting a wider angle, or stepping back a bit. It seems like the parts that make this picture interesting aren't in the frame. You can always crop later (as JTL demonstrated with #1). I think it would also maybe look better taken from a crouch.

Fourth: The focus of the picture is the rocks, which are pretty boring. Maybe move to the next rail over, to get a better perspective of the train. Still, not too sure. Sucks being in a flat place with high humidity, the background is pretty boring. Maybe if the track led somewhere, and was more in focus (ie smaller aperture again)..

Fifth: Again, I think a wider angle would be appropriate. I can't see enough of the barn or sky to tell the character of either, so chose one and make it the focus of the picture. If the sky is the focus, put more of it in the picture and have the barn framing the bottom and left corner. If you take it too wide, you can still crop later.

These are just my opinions, I know little or nothing about photography. Your ownership of a DSLR has been far longer than mine. Just trying to emphasize the extent to which these are opinions.

#1: This is my idea, I made the trees too bright maybe. Reduce the contrast on your camera for this scene, or as JTL suggested choose a more specific subject.

[T06]

To me I think you need to look at HDR as mentioned earlier, this I have gathered from some of your 'pop' comments etc.
http://http://www.dcresource.com/forums/showthread.php?t=24206 (http://www.dcresource.com/forums/showthread.php?t=24206")
;)

[Nickcanada]

Those shots have a lot of potential. I think you have good vision, you just need to focus on the details. To improve on a detail like exposure I often go out to shoot focusing only on that one thing once I feel like I've got a hold on that I move to the next thing to work on.

Sometimes you just need to do some tweaking on the computer. I think there are very few people who get stunning images out of the camera. Even the old masters who worked with film spent a ton of time in the dark room tweaking their images.

One of my favorite pictures, that I have taken, is a good example of this....

http://i91.photobucket.com/albums/k320/livelifelivepics/IMG_3117.jpg

After a little spit shine...

http://i91.photobucket.com/albums/k320/livelifelivepics/The%20Second%20Glance/IMG_3118-Edit-3.jpg

[mugsisme]

You've gotten some fantastic suggestions, OP. I would do two things (I think they were already mentioned). Take more pictures. If you take 100 pictures, and get one keeper, then it was worth it. (If you take 25 and don't have good pictures, then you feel like you wasted your time.)

You also need to try and take pictures at different times of the day. I have read repeatedly that early morning or late afternoon is best. I didn't believe it until I tried it. (Not a morning person.) I shot at dusk, and WOW. What a difference. Give it a whirl and see if that doesn't help as well.

I think that the comments made on the pictures you took were excellent. Read through them carefully.

[Seafood]

Thanks to all for your feedback. Lots of good stuff has been communicated.

I definately need to get up early once in a while when the weather gets better and get some morning light shots.

Will post more pics in the future as I get some.

Would welcome more feedback if anyone has any.

[Supermel]

I am just a beginner (only had camera two weeks) and will make good use of some of these suggestions too. I really like the zipper/child photograph.