Do I need a upgrade to take better photos?

[Advanced Photo]

You get more good shots by taking more pictures.
Also rules are made to be broken, try not to get too caught up in creating formula photos that everyone else makes.
Most important is enjoy the shooting. If it's not really fun to do, do something more fun.
Good luck.

 

[The_Traveler]

I know this has probably already been answered but I have a very slow connection and can't read all the others.
Resize photos to max 900 high and 1200 wide.
That will allow the viewers actually to see the detail.
Post one or two, may be three. Otherwise comments get scattered and the comments won't be detailed.
Get down at subjects' eye level.

Try reading this 11 Tips for Beginning Photographers - How to Start Taking Pictures

Buy an upgrade when you know where your current gear is falling short.

 

[Designer]

You get more good shots by taking more pictures.
Also rules are made to be broken, try not to get too caught up in creating formula photos that everyone else makes.

Yeah, I'm just going to go on ahead and disagree with that. No red "X" though.

1. This could be true in the statistical sense, but on its face, that statement is analogous to the "infinite number of monkeys typing at random" meme. I think you get more good shots by getting better. If winning the lottery was simple, everyone would be doing it. Most professionals don't have the time to take many thousands of shots in the vain hope that one or two will be "money" shots. They have learned how to maximize their success rate, and can usually succeed in fewer shots, not more.

2. The threadbare saying "rules are made to be broken" leaves out one very important aspect, that of delight in the unexpected. IMO, this will only occur if someone has actually learned the rules in the first place, and knows what rule and how to break it will lead to delight. To simply break rules at random in the hope that something, someday will be precious, is very similar to playing the lottery and is another illustration of the infinite monkeys methodology.

 

[alfanoc]

I know this has probably already been answered but I have a very slow connection and can't read all the others.
Resize photos to max 900 high and 1200 wide.
That will allow the viewers actually to see the detail.
Post one or two, may be three. Otherwise comments get scattered and the comments won't be detailed.
Get down at subjects' eye level.

Try reading this 11 Tips for Beginning Photographers - How to Start Taking Pictures

Buy an upgrade when you know where your current gear is falling short.

Thank you, i'm having a little issues understanding that as well about resizing.. the pictures look horrible that i uploaded but obviously a lot more clear on my end.. i'll have to figure it out and try again... thank you again

 

[alfanoc]

I'm testing if I did this right this time, is this photo more clear?

Noe, if I had to edit this photo, to make it better, I would do what?

 

[alfanoc]

 

[The_Traveler]

much better.
Notice how much empty space there was and how cold (blue-tinged) the scene was.
Start learning the exposure triangle and stop using the 'modes'.
Learn to use Aperture or Shutter preferred so you can get either the depth of field or the shutter speed you want.

Stop using on-camera flash. It blows out texture in the faces and makes hot spots.

 

[petrochemist]

2. The threadbare saying "rules are made to be broken" leaves out one very important aspect, that of delight in the unexpected. IMO, this will only occur if someone has actually learned the rules in the first place, and knows what rule and how to break it will lead to delight. To simply break rules at random in the hope that something, someday will be precious, is very similar to playing the lottery and is another illustration of the infinite monkeys methodology.

Exactly

There are no rules in photography that must never be broken, but there are many that are hard to break. How do you break the rule that says the brightest parts of the image tend to draw the eye? Making an image with all parts having the same luminosity is not going to work well - you live with the rule & work with it where appropriate. Breaking the rules effectively is done by understanding them & their effects.

Many are probably better reworded with the effect in mind, to say things like 'strong diagonal lines make an image look more dynamic'. Much more useful than the 'use strong diagonals' I've often seen in print. In making the rule punchy they've lost it's meaning.
With a proper understanding of this 'rule' a photographer might deliberately avoid strong diagonals if they want a peaceful/relaxed image.
Including them & avoiding them are both using the rule. A dynamic image does need strong diagonals it's just one aspect that goes towards a dynamic composition.

 

[alfanoc]

much better.
Notice how much empty space there was and how cold (blue-tinged) the scene was.
Start learning the exposure triangle and stop using the 'modes'.
Learn to use Aperture or Shutter preferred so you can get either the depth of field or the shutter speed you want.

Stop using on-camera flash. It blows out texture in the faces and makes hot spots.


View attachment 129108

View attachment 129109

Thanks for that.. absolutely see the difference now that you put the two side by side. I do see the cold tinge. The photo edited on the right, is a lot warmer, is that what I would get if I learned the Aperture modes oppose to the AF mode? Also, I don't think my flash was on, at least I hope it wasn't because I was outside, and don't recall the flash coming up. It shouldn't right?

 

[Designer]

Noe, if I had to edit this photo, to make it better, I would do what?

The example posted (on post # 20) is a nice group pose, but you should have gotten down a lot lower, like on your knees or even lower. If the background was an issue, then move the group, but I think the shot would have been much better if you had lowered the camera position.

Also, I don't think my flash was on, at least I hope it wasn't because I was outside, and don't recall the flash coming up. It shouldn't right?

IMO, this would be about the only place I would say to go ahead and use the built-in flash for a little bit of fill light. Actually, when taking photos outdoors in sunlight, using a flash is a very good way to compensate for the sun's brightness. What you want to do is manipulate the light/shadows to eliminate hot spots and shadows. A flash in sunlight is the way to do that.

If your built-in flash is too strong, then you get washed-out features instead of light/shade modeling light.

 

[The_Traveler]

I wish people would stop referring to the 'Rules' and following them or breaking them.
The Rules don't matter.
The photographer is taking pictures in an attempt to communicate with viewers and thus must make her/his pictures understandable.
Pictures must have visual cues to tell the viewer how to understand what the photographer is saying visually.
Thus the important things must go in important places, the distracting elements should be downplayed and the elements that support the 'message' should be emphasized.
If the photog breaks a 'rule' by doing something that is not usual, any breaking of the 'rules' should be an overt attempt to emphasize something and the picture must still be understandable.

This picture has the subject in the center (no Rule of Thirds) but I think it works because it emphasizes that he is in the center and people are walking around him. Everything in the image should work towards the desired impression. The 'Rules' are useful but only trivial ways to express how people typically understand things in pictures (horizons are flat, poles are upright, lines should lead to something, bright things attract) but the Rules as a group don't make good pictures.

 

[Advanced Photo]

You get more good shots by taking more pictures.
Also rules are made to be broken, try not to get too caught up in creating formula photos that everyone else makes.

Yeah, I'm just going to go on ahead and disagree with that. No red "X" though.

1. This could be true in the statistical sense, but on its face, that statement is analogous to the "infinite number of monkeys typing at random" meme. I think you get more good shots by getting better. If winning the lottery was simple, everyone would be doing it. Most professionals don't have the time to take many thousands of shots in the vain hope that one or two will be "money" shots. They have learned how to maximize their success rate, and can usually succeed in fewer shots, not more.

2. The threadbare saying "rules are made to be broken" leaves out one very important aspect, that of delight in the unexpected. IMO, this will only occur if someone has actually learned the rules in the first place, and knows what rule and how to break it will lead to delight. To simply break rules at random in the hope that something, someday will be precious, is very similar to playing the lottery and is another illustration of the infinite monkeys methodology.

I was quoting a famous photographer on this point, you may have heard of Winogrand? I think it bears repeating as it rings true. It's not to say that you don't need to be discerning in choosing and framing subjects at all if that how you took it. I don't think random monkeys taking pictures would be remotely close, but a photographer with a good eye and good equipment and good skills will get more good pictures by taking more pictures, it's a simple concept and one I think has merit. I do see your point though, so I figured I'd just make it clearer what was intended. Thanks.

 

[The_Traveler]

is a lot warmer, is that what I would get if I learned the Aperture modes oppose to the AF mode?

No, the warmth or coldness is the white balance. That is adjustable both in the camera if you are shooting jpegs or in editing when you shoot raw.
Adjusting aperture affects the depth of field.
Read about the exposure triangle.
Read your manual.

 

[Advanced Photo]

2. The threadbare saying "rules are made to be broken" leaves out one very important aspect, that of delight in the unexpected. IMO, this will only occur if someone has actually learned the rules in the first place, and knows what rule and how to break it will lead to delight. To simply break rules at random in the hope that something, someday will be precious, is very similar to playing the lottery and is another illustration of the infinite monkeys methodology.

Exactly

There are no rules in photography that must never be broken, but there are many that are hard to break. How do you break the rule that says the brightest parts of the image tend to draw the eye?

You can easily have a painting or photograph that is mostly white or very light colors and a single point of much darker contrasting color as the focal point which will draw the eye to it just a a contrasting light area does in a darker image.

 

[Designer]

You can easily have a painting or photograph that is mostly white or very light colors and a single point of much darker contrasting color as the focal point which will draw the eye to it just a a contrasting light area does in a darker image.

How is that breaking any rules?