New camera, C&C

[setboy]

An old, overweight italian greyhound.

That's what i thought. But it does not look that over wight to me. I have a italian greyhound that could be the sumo wrestler of italian greyhounds. I would love to see more of him/her if you ever take more shots.

 

[Brutus]

Oh, I probably will, but it's hard to get photos of him standing still. I have to wait until he's laying down somewhere and zoom in, otherwise he moves around far too much. I don't really want to have a bunch of very standard and dull pictures of dogs, but here's the ones I've taken so far (4 not pictured here): http://flickr.com/photos/29682929@N08/sets/72157608184512249/

Also, yet another picture in the lightbox:

 

[manaheim]

^^^ still looks kinda dark. Either your monitor settings may be off a bit or you're exposing your pictures wrong or... something.

 

[Brutus]

Or I'm just partial to dark photos. Who knows. Regardless, changing the brightness of a picture is very easy to do, so I'm not too worried about it.

 

[manaheim]

Or I'm just partial to dark photos. Who knows. Regardless, changing the brightness of a picture is very easy to do, so I'm not too worried about it.

Well, I think the problem is that it appears that your photos are underexposed... not dark. I have some city skylines at night that are dark... but they're not underexposed. I don't think I'd call underexposure a choice so much as an error in capture.

 

[50two]

the only difference bettween 3,4,5 and 6 is the flower. in other words if you took pictures of the same flower, youd end up with 6 almost identical photos. i get that 4 and 5 are actually the same flower but with different settings but the composition is identical.with 5 and 6, youve changed the flower but not the settings or composition, which makes the two very similar and so more of a cliche photo.
i suggest working on composition

but i do like 4 the most the depth of focus is nice and someone above said the white balance was off? well personally i like the blueness, it goes well with the picture

 

[Brutus]

All of the images I've deleted were either too close to another or have been replaced by improved versions. That last knife some of you saw, the Case Sodbuster Jr, is kind of hard to photograph because the etching on the blade only shows if lit at the correct angle. The one I had was quite bad, the blade was way brighter than the rest of the knife, here's an improved version:

Is the exposure on that better? In the lightbox I think it's harder to underexpose because the lighting is so easy to control, and is diffused nicely.

 

[manaheim]

Yes, better I think. But pop it into photoshop and try brightening it by 12-15 points.

 

[maulrat]

Okay. This is starting to look like an Ebay photo.

 

[maulrat]

.... why is it that 90% of peoples first pics are either pets or flowers.. or both... just strikes me as odd..

I feel the same way bro. Honestly, I have no photos of either. I tried taking photos at an orchid show once. I deleted every single RAW of that event. And I always keep my RAWs for backup... well, almost always now. No offense to all the flower and pet lovers out there. I really dislike with a passion, photos of flowers and pets. My first shots with a DSLR were of a woman. But I guess I'm just weird like that.

 

[Brutus]

I honestly don't have much to photograph besides small objects, mostly knives, in lightboxes, the occasional flower, and the occasional small bug. I don't have a car, so I can't really reach out too far for stuff to photograph, but I have an idea next time it's foggy. Long exposure in thick fog of a hopefully decently busy street. It's only like half a mile walk from here. Oh well. I'll keep trying to find interesting things around the house for now.

 

[Brutus]

Well, I found something interesting to take pictures of: