first few shots with d200

[inTempus]

The point of the picture was to show the childish destruction of the flowers. I had been telling her all day to quit picking all the flowers or the park would look ugly without them. So it was supposed to draw you into the flowers. Which she did pick every last one of them and then threw them at me :lmao:

It looks like the focus is on her elbow area. The flower she's picking is out of focus too.

 

[blash]

3 is conceptually fine, but as with all people photos, the focus needs to be on the eyes. Also, there is no pure white in the photo - the arms are exposed OK but the grass and treeline are definitely underexposed. I would increase exposure probably by a 1/3 to 1/2 stop? The face also pretty much REQUIRES a fill flash.

 

[PhotoXopher]

The worst thing you can do on a photography forum when you post a photo is to get defensive about the responses you receive. Thicker skin and the ability to absorb what you read and the reasoning behind it, even if you don't agree - try to see the other perspective.

If you end up agreeing or not, at least it'll make you see things you may have missed. After all, it's your photograph - all anyone can do is tell you how they perceive it - nobody is right or wrong.

Right now I see both sides of the argument so now I'm confused and don't know what I think lol... I believe it's a cute photo that could possibly have been better off at ISO 200 (where the D200 shines by the way).

You've got a great tool there, congrats and enjoy learning it... take what you read with a grain of salt and try to apply some of it to your next attempts.

Above all, have fun!

 

[ANDS!]

Hey! Anyone notice that the photo with the little girl is underexposed! LOLROFLCAKES!

 

[LisaMarie]

Word up RHALL, i say for a brand new camera, still learning the settings (which i can tell as you still dont understand proper iso) you did a good job. Mostly the point right now is to take your camera out and shoot lots and learn everything you can about it! And i know what you mean about some of the people in this forum being harsh, everyone is entitled to there opinion, but they dont have to make some one feel like **** over it! If you want private message me, i can add you on flikr or hotmail and give you some un-hatin advice!

 

[DScience]

The problem with this forum in many ways is that people here are not artists, nor do they care about creativity. RULES, commonality, blandness. That's what is popular.

 

[DScience]

Hey! Anyone notice that the photo with the little girl is underexposed! LOLROFLCAKES!

.....desperate much?

 

[ANDS!]

The problem with this forum in many ways is that people here are not artists, nor do they care about creativity.

Haha - wow. Are you serious guy? For realio? Seriously, you need to get over it. Please do not swagger like you shiz don't stank. The initial advice you gave, was wrong. Period. Do not get over excited and butthurt and accuse folks of lacking an artistic bent, because you do not have a clear understanding of what it is you are talking about.

 

[djacobox372]

Hey! Anyone notice that the photo with the little girl is underexposed! LOLROFLCAKES!

There's a difference between proper exposure and proper lighting... the exposure is fine, it's the lighting that could use improvement via some fill-flash like others have mentioned.

Blowing out skin tones in color photos is not usually received well, which is what would have happened if the exposure was increased.