Does anyone know of a blog that...

[lizzmc4]

shows professional pictures and the lens and other specifications used to capture that picture? Thanks!!!!!!

 

[jowensphoto]

Many people leave their EXIF attached to Flickr photos.

There are ways to view it on just about any photo that hasn't had the info stripped, but it's complicated and I can't begin to remember how to do it (I know that Google Chrome is the easiest browser to do it with, though).

 

[ratssass]

Mark J Rebilas Photograpy on Mark J. Rebilas Blog its sports,and heavily into drag racing

 

[Braineack]

Over a million full-size sample photos from SLR and mirrorless cameras combined with different lenses

 

[amolitor]

Professionals may not be that in to sharing, but you can peruse many photo sharing sites and get EXIF data easily. Flickr's interface lets you get to that data.. sort of easily, for instance.

I would poke through flickr's Explore looking for pictures I was interested in, and then go examine the EXIF data on them. Pretty soon you'll learn to recognize most of the important features, and you won't need to look it up. I assume this is your goal, you want to know what technical things do what, visually? It's not too hard to learn, good luck!

 

[leeroix]

Over a million full-size sample photos from SLR and mirrorless cameras combined with different lenses

Brainiak beat me to it

 

[amolitor]

Or you could just do the pixel peeper thing, which appears to be a sweet interface on top of flickr! Nice!

 

[Braineack]

Hello guys! I'm Erika and I would like to become a professional photographer but I don't konw how do. What do you think?

Buy an entry level consumer grade DSLR. Take really poor pictures around your house. Put a huge copyright on them with your name + photography at the end. Create a professional looking website to put them on and start selling your services as a pro-photographer.

 

[lawrencek328]

Over a million full-size sample photos from SLR and mirrorless cameras combined with different lenses

 

[lambertpix]

I think what you're going to find pretty quickly is that the EXIF-type stuff is pretty easy to come by, and it's also completely insufficient to understand what really went into making the photo. It's a start -- just don't expect to crack the code that easily.

 

[vintagesnaps]

What he said. It's more a matter of learning how to set your camera and use your meter to be able to use it in a variety of situations. And practice.

Not a blog but I was looking up something and ran across this.
http://www.artsmia.org/get-the-picture/index.html

 

[photospherix]

See, you learn something everyday. Thanks guys, I wasted way to much time with that link. It has now been saved in the bookmarks though.

 

[Derrel]

As to learning what you are seeing, lizz: there are various "types" of pictures. Selective focus pictures, which use shallow depth of field. Deep depth of field aka "pan-focus" images, which have everything in clear, sharp focus. You've got your wide-angle lens shots, which show wide angles and which tend to make the foreground loom big and large, and make the mid-ground and background "fall away", and also make the mid-and background both wide in angle of view, but with objects that are physically SMALLER on-film or smaller in the print or smaller on-screen, than with normal and telephoto lenses. Telephoto lenses actually appear to make the mid-ground and background appear "closer" to the foreground,m and telephoto lens shots also physically MAGNIFY the size (height) of background objects. Normal lens pictures render distance and size relationships in a "normal" manner.

Super-tele images magnify background object size, and make distances appear very compressed. On the opposite end are fisheye and rectilinear fisheye lens pictures, which make things appear in a very,very wide-angle manner, with extremely distorted shapes on things that are close to the camera.