[NeObliviscaris]

all viewable on my photostream: Flickr: FeedMeTrance's Photostream

please offer me some feedback, as i am starting out, would love some critique and guidance

 

[Towert7]

The background is a little distracting in the bottom 4 for me. If it were blurred more it would be less distracting to me. I noticed F/7.1 was used. If you moved it to a smaller F stop number you would have a more blurred background.

Color in the top two flowers is very nice. The bottom two flowers / leaves are a little bit over-exposed, for better or worse you can decide.

I like your middle picture the best of the 5.

 

[NeObliviscaris]

how does one move to a smaller f stop?

 

[balderon]

Nice kitty!
Nikon D2H 80-200mm/F2.8D
1/350 @ F9.5

Nikon D2H 80-200mm/F2.8D
1/250 @ F8

 

[onform]

Quote:

Originally Posted by FeedMeTrance /img/forum/go_quote.gif how does one move to a smaller f stop?

Feedmetrance Forgive me if you know most of this but judging by your post it seems that you are unsure..the F stop is another word for the aperture number, by increasing the aperture number you reduce the size of the hole, (aperture), that lets the light through to the sensor or film depending on which you are using enabling you to use a slower shutter speed or get more of the scene in focus, ( put another way a great depth of field);

On the other hand if you decrease the aperture number the hole increases and the amount of light the hits the sensor increases so a faster shutter speed is needed so that the scene does not get over exposed, this also gives the picture a shallower depth of field so only the subject you are focusing on remains sharp and the foreground and background go blurry, (Bokeh);

The best way to get used to this effect is to use aperture priority mode found on the command dial, because the shutter speed and aperture work hand in hand it's best to use this mode as it works everything out for you, all you do is choose the F-stop!

There are other factors that come into play like sensor size, type of lens and even focal length but that's for another rainy day go have a play and show us the results.

Hope this helps so that i have not just wasted the time typing that out, i,m a one finger typer, lol

 

[raptor84]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Maxvla /img/forum/go_quote.gif Not Mine: Found this on deviantart and am considering buying a print. It is really an amazing piece. Anyone ever bought a print of a deviantart work? Anyone sell their prints?

The paper they use for the photoprints is quite ok (same one used in most photolabs) but not as good as the real premium papers. The last print i bought form them in 2007 was printed on fuji digital premium but the best is the crystal archive supreme for digital which supposedly lasts longer and is what my lab uses. Those are the prints I make for my clients as well.

 

[Maxvla]

Quote:

Originally Posted by raptor84 /img/forum/go_quote.gif The paper they use for the photoprints is quite ok (same one used in most photolabs) but not as good as the real premium papers. The last print i bought form them in 2007 was printed on fuji digital premium but the best is the crystal archive supreme for digital which supposedly lasts longer and is what my lab uses. Those are the prints I make for my clients as well.

Cool, thanks.

 

[Towert7]

Quote:

Originally Posted by FeedMeTrance /img/forum/go_quote.gif how does one move to a smaller f stop?

On the D90 you have a little LCD window on top. That displays the F/#. It might also display in the viewfinder.
If you move the 'command dial' to "A" mode (which stands for aperture priority), then you have control of the aperture (F-stop).

So, in "A" mode, you move the other dial (either the front or back one next to the shutter release button) left and right to change the F/#.

Going to a high F-stop number, like F/16, creates more depth of Field. Going to the smallest F-stop number will provide the least amount of DOF (most background blur). F/3.5 would be the lowest your lens can go down to at wide angle.

A google search for DOF, or depth of field, will yield lots of information between the interplay of aperture, DOF, isolation, shutter speed, etc.

This is also the reason why some lenses cost a LOT of money, because they can open their aperture up past F/3.5, some all the way up to F/1.2.

Example:

 

[Baines93]

How do you get water drops to look more white like I have seen in other pics? This was nearer summer, maybe that is why?

EDIT: Ekkk. Wonky border!

Matt

 

[Agnostic]

Wow, lots of great shots again!

@Baines93
It depends on what the drop are reflecting, in this photo they are reflecting mostly other green leaves. If the drops had been exposed to more sky or direct sunlight they might look whiter.

 

[digitalfrog]

That last picture is great ^^^^
I would cut off the top and bottom 1/3 and only keep the middle to make an amazing panoramic shoot !

 

[Towert7]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Agnostic /img/forum/go_quote.gif Wow, lots of great shots again! @Baines93 It depends on what the drop are reflecting, in this photo they are reflecting mostly other green leaves. If the drops had been exposed to more sky or direct sunlight they might look whiter.

x2

And if you are using a polarizer to cut down on leaf reflections you will need to angle yourself / fool around with the polarizer so that the leafs reflections are cut but the water is not.

 

[Baines93]

Thanks for the tips!

Still toying with the idea of getting a D40 or Sony A200K.

If I do, leaning towards the sony, the kit lens seems to be suitable for a larger range of stuff (I wont be buying a macro/telephoto lens for at least 6 months) its got more mp's, which is useful when editing, AF is built in, so you can use any lens that fits, not just Nikon/AF lenses. I also read CF cards are faster, but I do have a spare 8gb SDHC class six I would stick in the Nikon, dont have any CF's.

Some say the image quality is better, but in the pics i've seen its hard to judge, mainly cos alot of photos from the sony are just bad snaps... My C770 can make nice shots, even with me behind it, compared to some i've seen off of the Sony. I guess what i'm saying is they are pretty close IQ wise, it really depends on the photographer & style, edited or not etc.

Matt

 

[Towert7]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Baines93 /img/forum/go_quote.gif Thanks for the tips! Still toying with the idea of getting a D40 or Sony A200K. If I do, leaning towards the sony, the kit lens seems to be suitable for a larger range of stuff (I wont be buying a macro/telephoto lens for at least 6 months) its got more mp's, which is useful when editing, AF is built in, so you can use any lens that fits, not just Nikon/AF lenses. I also read CF cards are faster, but I do have a spare 8gb SDHC class six I would stick in the Nikon, dont have any CF's. Some say the image quality is better, but in the pics i've seen its hard to judge, mainly cos alot of photos from the sony are just bad snaps... My C770 can make nice shots, even with me behind it, compared to some i've seen off of the Sony. I guess what i'm saying is they are pretty close IQ wise, it really depends on the photographer & style, edited or not etc. Matt

Cough, D90, cough.
Cough, sony sucks, cough cough.
Either that or a Canon.

 

[Baines93]

COUGH, £700+, COUGH, 16y/o, COUGH.