What's new

Had a shoot today! C&C welcome :)

I think, you were using a 50mm f/1.8 50mm prime lens. That is why you were having problem composing the shots. Try 18-55mm or something similar.
 
I think, you were using a 50mm f/1.8 50mm prime lens. That is why you were having problem composing the shots. Try 18-55mm or something similar.

Huh? What's the difference between that and taking a few steps back or forward? I could be wrong the the major difference would be more or less compression.
 
I think, you were using a 50mm f/1.8 50mm prime lens. That is why you were having problem composing the shots. Try 18-55mm or something similar.

Huh? What's the difference between that and taking a few steps back or forward? I could be wrong the the major difference would be more or less compression.

Only difference is with the 18-55mm zoom, she'd get to that desired f/5.6 aperture, and not be tempted to use f/2 or another ill-advised wide aperture that the prime lens would offer as a choice. SOmetimes less choice is a good thing...
 
I think, you were using a 50mm f/1.8 50mm prime lens. That is why you were having problem composing the shots. Try 18-55mm or something similar.

Huh? What's the difference between that and taking a few steps back or forward? I could be wrong the the major difference would be more or less compression.

Only difference is with the 18-55mm zoom, she'd get to that desired f/5.6 aperture, and not be tempted to use f/2 or another ill-advised wide aperture that the prime lens would offer as a choice. SOmetimes less choice is a good thing...

Okay, then there's that too. ;)
 
I think, you were using a 50mm f/1.8 50mm prime lens. That is why you were having problem composing the shots. Try 18-55mm or something similar.

Huh? What's the difference between that and taking a few steps back or forward? I could be wrong the the major difference would be more or less compression.

When I use a 50mm prime lens, I couldn't stand back, because there was a bush, tree, or bench behind me. Standard zoom is just easier, that's all.
 
Yeah, you can move your feet! lol I use prime lenses, I tend to roam. So I think about my vantage point and if I need to adjust it before I take the picture. (But there's not a right or wrong it's more figuring out what works for what situation.)

I agree it looks awkward to crop people at the joints - I don't know the technical explanation but did you ever take drawing classes where you learned how to use a pencil to measure the proportions of your subject? it's been years so I don't know how to explain it but I think having taken enough art in school I learned proportion and use that in taking photos. I've done sports not formal portraits but I usually crop/end the photo just above or below the waist, mid-thigh, etc. - in one of yours the subject's fingertips are cut off. You don't want your subjects looking like mannequins that someone forgot to attach all the parts!

I think your background in art/design shows in the way you used the background, the skirt she's wearing with that graffiti, the one where she's imitating the graffiti'd drawing with its tongue out (that's a fun one). It looks like you need to think about your framing and perspective before you release the shutter - in that one the artwork figure's ear is cut off, when I shoot signage I include entire words/designs, or if I use part of a word I make sure it's straight and not cut off mid letter. (I did photos for marketing for a local team so took lots of photos of signage.)

I guess doing sports too I watch for lines like in the cement block wall, whether or not it's the perspective or making sure the camera's straight, I find that crooked lines especially near an edge of the frame can make the whole picture look crooked. I'd also think about the space, you probably don't want too much above the head and hands cropped off, as well as the backgrounds, that there aren't distractions in the shot.

To me it seems like you might benefit from a lot more practice with your camera and getting it set and focused and framing shots etc. before you get into doing portraits. Early on I used to make my eye move around the entire viewfinder, now I think it's automatic and I take in the entire scene, but I also try to watch to make sure nothing's cut off or sticking part way into the side or corner of the frame - I feel like either something should be part of the picture or I move around or reframe and get it out of my picture.

I do think you're right that you did pretty well, I just think it all takes a lot of practice, and it takes time to be able to keep all of the technical aspects as well as framing and composition in mind, til it becomes second nature.
 
the 50 is my only fx lens and so i use it all the time, exclusively and i don't feel like i struggle with composing because of it.
 
Derrel, that's some serious voodoo you've worked on the unsharp one - respect sir.
 
Derrel, that's some serious voodoo you've worked on the unsharp one - respect sir.

I've actually had published a few sports shots where I used either my 300mm or 400mm lenses, and it turned out my depth of field was not quite deep enough, so I would manually select the OOF players and perform the same basic voodoo ritual on them, creating artificial "focus"...and when shrunk DOWN, for publication, and printed two or three columns wide on newsprint with a lo-rez halftone screen, the effect was basically undetectable. So.....I've actually done this a bit on field sports...

Like I said, this woild not look super-good at 8x10 inches or 11x14 inches, but if you keep hammering away at the selected area with the Sharpen command, then fading, then re-applying, then fading, and chipping away at the stone,well...you know...that's how they carve sculptures out of blocks of granite...
 
Yeah, you can move your feet! lol I use prime lenses, I tend to roam. So I think about my vantage point and if I need to adjust it before I take the picture. (But there's not a right or wrong it's more figuring out what works for what situation.)

I agree it looks awkward to crop people at the joints - I don't know the technical explanation but did you ever take drawing classes where you learned how to use a pencil to measure the proportions of your subject? it's been years so I don't know how to explain it but I think having taken enough art in school I learned proportion and use that in taking photos. I've done sports not formal portraits but I usually crop/end the photo just above or below the waist, mid-thigh, etc. - in one of yours the subject's fingertips are cut off. You don't want your subjects looking like mannequins that someone forgot to attach all the parts!

I think your background in art/design shows in the way you used the background, the skirt she's wearing with that graffiti, the one where she's imitating the graffiti'd drawing with its tongue out (that's a fun one). It looks like you need to think about your framing and perspective before you release the shutter - in that one the artwork figure's ear is cut off, when I shoot signage I include entire words/designs, or if I use part of a word I make sure it's straight and not cut off mid letter. (I did photos for marketing for a local team so took lots of photos of signage.)

I guess doing sports too I watch for lines like in the cement block wall, whether or not it's the perspective or making sure the camera's straight, I find that crooked lines especially near an edge of the frame can make the whole picture look crooked. I'd also think about the space, you probably don't want too much above the head and hands cropped off, as well as the backgrounds, that there aren't distractions in the shot.

To me it seems like you might benefit from a lot more practice with your camera and getting it set and focused and framing shots etc. before you get into doing portraits. Early on I used to make my eye move around the entire viewfinder, now I think it's automatic and I take in the entire scene, but I also try to watch to make sure nothing's cut off or sticking part way into the side or corner of the frame - I feel like either something should be part of the picture or I move around or reframe and get it out of my picture.

I do think you're right that you did pretty well, I just think it all takes a lot of practice, and it takes time to be able to keep all of the technical aspects as well as framing and composition in mind, til it becomes second nature.

Yeah, I definitely agree with you on that I need more practice and the points you brought up. That's another reason why I'm doing free [or reduced price] shoots right now. It takes a lot of practice to actually be good. I don't really have a background in art/design, despite my Bachelor's in Telecommunications (Mass Media Arts).. so I guess I do have background. Proved myself wrong there, ha.

I tried to focus more on what I was shooting this time, so that's why I think I did slightly better than I did in my previous portrait shoots. However, I still have a loooong way to go, and I know that. But it makes me feel good though that I might possibly be getting better with more technical things :)
 

Create an account or login to comment

You must be a member in order to leave a comment

Create account

Create an account on our community. It's easy!

Log in

Already have an account? Log in here.

New Topics

Back
Top Bottom