People and Pets

mooimeisie · Jun 14, 2009

Pictures of people and pets are something I don't do alot and looking at the followng photos I can see that this is an area I really need some work. These were taken this weekend as an excercise for C&C Group 2 but all C&C is certainly welcome. I'll start off with posting the pictures and a little C&C of my own.

#1. D & 162-1 Shot with Sigma 105mm, Aperture setting f/8, 1/160 ISO auto, polarizer filter. This was shot mid afternoon on a very bright sunny day. I like the fact that I got both of them looking at the camera but very much dislike the little calf is so out of focus. Considering the bright sun, I think the exposure is OK.

#2. D & 162-2 This was taken seconds later than the one above. Unfortunately the calf decided he would no longer pose. I don't know why he is in focus now when he wasn't before.

#3 M & T - 1 Shot with Sigma 105mm, Aperture setting f/8, 1/125 ISO auto, polarizer filter. This was a candid shot taken of the little girl and her new puppy. I like this as I think it shows the relationship these two have.

#4 M & T - 2 Shot with Sigma 105mm, Aperture setting f/8, 1/8 ISO auto, polarizer filter. So badly OOF. I only posted this one because I really liked the lighting. This was taken in the barn with the light coming through the door. If I would have held the camera steady or taken more than one shot I think it would have turned out very well.

tirediron · Jun 14, 2009

I think you've nailed pretty much everything already. With respect to the issue of focuse, I think you need to be more careful about where your camera is focusing, and perhaps understand DoF a litte more thoroughly. Try playing with this on-line DoF calculator for instance, under the circumstances in #1, your DoF is only about 9"; knowing where to focus is critical in circumtances like these.

Samanax · Jun 14, 2009

The first and fourth images aren't out-of-focus, they're suffering from motion blur because the subjects were moving (or from camera shake). For the last shot it might also be from camera shake...1/8th second is pretty slow and if you were hand-holding the camera the shutter speed should have been at least 1/100 because of the focal length used.

kundalini · Jun 14, 2009

I'm with Samanax, motion blur or camera shake. I have loads of experience with each. The CPOL will lose you about 1-1/2 stops, so open your aperture to increase your shutter speed. I don't think f/8 is necessary with these types of shots either....., but that's me. I'm not a fan of Auto ISO, I'd rather control that.

Just my 2¢.

mooimeisie · Jun 14, 2009

Camera shake makes sense. My speciality. Auto ISO, I can now see the benefit of not using it. As far as f/8 on all the shots, I can see that I should take more time setting up for each shot, not treating the camera as an expensive P&S.

Thanks for all the comments. This is how I learn.

farmerj · Jun 15, 2009

I don't think it's so much a matter of your camera shake, as it's a matter of the shooting parameters.

I am not aware of anyone that could hand-hold 1/8 second shutter. If they can, they are a ROCK.

DOF is what I see in the first one. f/11 or even f/16 would have been better if you wanted both the calf and the person in focus.

As to #4, probably should have used flash on that one.

Rich Ardt · Jun 15, 2009

There are 3 main uses for a polarizer:

1. To enhance a sky - i.e. to saturate a blue sky and to give cloudy skies definition.
2. To give a scene more saturated colors - and this is more appropriate in nature photography and landscapes.
3. To lessen reflections (such as in windows).

What I'm saying here is that I don't see any particular reason for you using the polarizing filter (or was there?). By NOT using it, you would have allowed yourself those extra two stops of light that kundalini mentions, which would have allowed you a faster shutter speed, which in turn would have eliminated camera shake.

Important to focus on the eyes, and to lock that focus while you recompose the picture. Otherwise the compositions are nice. Maybe try different angles, shoot more frames. That would have allowed you to perhaps get a shot without the calf's ear in front of the "calf wranglers" face. Or would have allowed you to move in closer to get a humorous wide angle shot of the calf's face with the woman more separated in the background. Experimenting with different angles would have also maybe allowed you to lower yourself to the height of the child, and getting more of her face, and a lesser feeling of her having to look up into camera.

I'm not criticizing, just giving you some food for thought. Mooimeisie

mooimeisie · Jun 15, 2009

Thank you all for the comments. Don't worry about feeling that you are critizing as this is an excellent oportunity for learning. I thought that a polarizer filter helped in the bright sunshine, something like sunglasses, as I'm always worried about over exposing the shots. It was a very bright day. When I look at the shots from the weekend I held the camera very steady on the long shots, but the close ups are shakey. Didn't realise that the filter was slowing down the lens and not letting me take as many pictures.

DOF is something I'm not yet understanding in the mid range and higher numbers. 2.8, 4 and 5.6 on flowers and bugs I understand because I use them alot. Looks like this could be something our group does in the future.

mrodgers · Jun 15, 2009

farmerj said:
I don't think it's so much a matter of your camera shake, as it's a matter of the shooting parameters.
....

DOF is what I see in the first one. f/11 or even f/16 would have been better if you wanted both the calf and the person in focus.

Shot #1, girl is somewhat in focus, next in line closer to the camera is the cow out of focus, then in front of cow is a fence rail somewhat in focus. It's not DOF, it's motion blur.

Is shot #2 at the same aperture? The cow is back in focus again because it is not moving as much.

marcpro · Jun 16, 2009

How come no one else is posting pics?
Did I miss something?

Can the assignments be longer than one week? Like maybe one month instead?

I don't know.. one week seems rush for more than one person to come up with pics to post.

Cheers,
Marc

mooimeisie · Jun 16, 2009

I've been thinking the same about others posting pictures as well. Seems to be a very lively group. My opinion regarding time would be maybe a two week period, a week is a little short but a month seems a little long unless your going for an in depth study. Really would like to hear from the rest of the group on this. Also would like to find out if the rest of the group really wants to be in a group.

Samanax · Jun 16, 2009

marcpro said:
How come no one else is posting pics?
Did I miss something?

Can the assignments be longer than one week? Like maybe one month instead?

I don't know.. one week seems rush for more than one person to come up with pics to post.

Assignments? What assignments?