Just getting into this. Want CC

[dustin746]

Hey guys, I'm just getting into photography and I know some of the basics. I was out practicing today and I figured I'd post some of the pics that I got for you all to comment on. I feel like I'm doing something wrong but I can't quite figure out what it is. Anyone mind helping? Thanks

Shooting with a 55-300mm lens as that's all that I have at the moment.

 

[qleak]

All except 3 seem underexposed to me. You could probably fix them in post, but if these are straight out of camera it could indicate some technique problems.

What's the EXIF info for these?

 

[dustin746]

I did a real quick touch up on them, they were more underexposed than that. I didn't have my tripod with me and the sun was going down.
1. 1/20 F4.5 ISO800
2. 1/30 F4.0 ISO800
3. 1/20 F4.0 ISO800
4.1/20 F4.5 ISO800

They were all a little darker than the ones that I posted. I need to work on my exposure obviously haha

 

[qleak]

I did a real quick touch up on them, they were more underexposed than that. I didn't have my tripod with me and the sun was going down.
1. 1/20 F4.5 ISO800
2. 1/30 F4.0 ISO800
3. 1/20 F4.0 ISO800
4.1/20 F4.5 ISO800

They were all a little darker than the ones that I posted. I need to work on my exposure obviously haha

What are you shooting with?

 

[dustin746]

Pentax K10D with a 55-300mm 4-5.8 lens

 

[qleak]

For a Pentax K10 that's pushing things pretty far exposure wise. So if you want to take properly exposed pictures under this sort of light you have a few options:

1. New equipment. Faster lenses a newer back ( a K5 IIs is fairly affordable right now).
2. Use a flash. Off camera typically looks better.
3. Use a tripod or an improvised camera stabilization device: ledge, beanbag, ground, etc...
   
4. Push all the way up to ISO 1600 and use noise reduction. It probably won't be great.

My vote is on 2) It's what the pros would do unless they had some reason not to.

 

[dustin746]

For a Pentax K10 that's pushing things pretty far exposure wise. So if you want to take properly exposed pictures under this sort of light you have a few options:

1. New equipment. Faster lenses a newer back ( a K5 IIs is fairly affordable right now).
2. Use a flash. Off camera typically looks better.
3. Use a tripod or an improvised camera stabilization device: ledge, beanbag, ground, etc...
   
4. Push all the way up to ISO 1600 and use noise reduction. It probably won't be great.

My vote is on 2) It's what the pros would do unless they had some reason not to.

Alright. I'll think about the flash next time. Money doesn't permit new equipment right now.

I should be getting a new lens sometime soon so I'll try that one out. Thanks for the tips!

 

[Benjo255]

Do you want only technical C&C or also general about the photos?

 

[BrickHouse]

The cheap and easy method, as mentioned above, is to stabilize your camera and drop your shutter speed. A couple bucks and a sewing machine and you can make yourself a bean bag that you can throw in your bag and take out with you.

 

[dustin746]

Just anything to make me better. So both I guess.

I have a tripod so I can bring that with me. But the bean bag is a good idea too. I may try to do something like that.

 

[Benjo255]

Ok, so I'll tell you my opinion as a beginner-companion of travel on this path through photography.
I like photo n. 1. Because even if with some technical issues (green background a little confusing with the pine leaves), it tells me something. Let some emotions rise in my heart. It reminds me of nature, of beauty of life, of the movie E.T. and how few is the time I spend outdoor (and I would love to spend more). So, that's why IMHO it works as a photograph. It gives me some kind of emotion (positive or negative doesn't matter). It tells me something.

For the same reason that's why (jmo) ther other pics doesn't work as good. They don't tell me anything. They don't give me emotion. I think it's important to understand technical rules (exposure, composition, etc), but it's important because they're the language to say something. But you must want to tell something.
N. 2 has a weak/not so interesting subject.
N. 3 and 4 are almost meaningless to me. Do you agree without getting offended if I say that seems that you shooted them randomly on the ground (most of my shots seem so, randomly taken, that's why I dare to say that) ? Do they deliver to you the same emotion of n. 1? I don't think so.

So the MAIN issue in photography, to me, is having something to say.
You can be a master in grammar, but that doesn't automatically transform you in J.R.R. Tolkien.
So knowing the technical rules of photography is a must, but that doesn't automatically makes you Robert Capa.

The first thing is having something to say with your shoot and then learning how to say it with the language of photography.
It's been prooven through years and years that almost everything can be said with photography.
Love. Sadness. War. Cruelty. Age. Tenderness. The sex appeal of a model or the beauty of a sunset. It's up to you. Scan your soul for what would you love to say with your shot and then take the camera and have fun.
I'm sure you'll get a lot of n. 1s and les and less 2,3 and 4s.
Can't wait to see your next shots.

 

[dustin746]

Ok, so I'll tell you my opinion as a beginner-companion of travel on this path through photography.
I like photo n. 1. Because even if with some technical issues (green background a little confusing with the pine leaves), it tells me something. Let some emotions rise in my heart. It reminds me of nature, of beauty of life, of the movie E.T. and how few is the time I spend outdoor (and I would love to spend more). So, that's why IMHO it works as a photograph. It gives me some kind of emotion (positive or negative doesn't matter). It tells me something.

For the same reason that's why (jmo) ther other pics doesn't work as good. They don't tell me anything. They don't give me emotion. I think it's important to understand technical rules (exposure, composition, etc), but it's important because they're the language to say something. But you must want to tell something.
N. 2 has a weak/not so interesting subject.
N. 3 and 4 are almost meaningless to me. Do you agree without getting offended if I say that seems that you shooted them randomly on the ground (most of my shots seem so, randomly taken, that's why I dare to say that) ? Do they deliver to you the same emotion of n. 1? I don't think so.

So the MAIN issue in photography, to me, is having something to say.
You can be a master in grammar, but that doesn't automatically transform you in J.R.R. Tolkien.
So knowing the technical rules of photography is a must, but that doesn't automatically makes you Robert Capa.

The first thing is having something to say with your shoot and then learning how to say it with the language of photography.
It's been prooven through years and years that almost everything can be said with photography.
Love. Sadness. War. Cruelty. Age. Tenderness. The sex appeal of a model or the beauty of a sunset. It's up to you. Scan your soul for what would you love to say with your shot and then take the camera and have fun.
I'm sure you'll get a lot of n. 1s and les and less 2,3 and 4s.
Can't wait to see your next shots.

I agree with everything you said. These were mainly just random shots because I didn't have too many subjects and I was just trying to practice exposure haha. But #1 is my favorite, too, because of the same reason. Thanks for the input!