Photography help...what am I doing wrong?

[HeatherStrella]

I've been practicing with my new Nikon D300 and haven't really been producing very good images. They're ok but nothing spectacular. I'll post a few pictures followed by the exif info...all you pros out there, can you tell me what I'm doing wrong??

 

 

 

 

Exif Info:

Compression JPEG compression

Make NIKON CORPORATION

Model NIKON D300

Orientation top, left side

X Resolution 300 dots per inch

Y Resolution 300 dots per inch

Resolution Unit Inch

Software Paint Shop Pro Photo 12.01

Date/Time 2008:01:05 19:00:57

Thumbnail Offset 1042 bytes

Thumbnail Length 6181 bytes

YCbCr Positioning Datum point

Exposure Time 1/60 sec

F-Number F5.6

Exposure Program Program normal

ISO Speed Ratings 400

Exif Version 2.21

Date/Time Original 2008:01:05 18:52:50

Date/Time Digitized 2008:01:05 18:52:50

Components Configuration YCbCr

Compressed Bits Per Pixel 4 bits/pixel

Exposure Bias Value -1

Max Aperture Value F2.9

Metering Mode Multi-segment

Light Source Unknown

Flash Flash fired, compulsory flash mode, return light detected

Focal Length 105.0 mm

User Comment ASCII

Sub-Sec Time 50

Sub-Sec Time Original 50

Sub-Sec Time Digitized 50

FlashPix Version 1.00

Color Space sRGB

Exif Image Width 2325 pixels

Exif Image Height 1769 pixels

Sensing Method One-chip color area sensor

File Source Digital Still Camera (DSC)

Scene Type Directly photographed image

Custom Image Processing Normal

Exposure Mode Auto

White Balance Mode Auto

Digital Zoom Ratio 1/1

Focal Length in 35mm Film 157.0 mm

Scene Capture Type Standard

Gain Control Low gain up

Contrast Normal

Saturation Normal

Sharpness Normal

[Guest]

My opinion doesn't count because I am no prof in photography, but I just wanted to say that I think these photos are totally beautiful. Why do you think they are not?

[dblhelix]

Hi Heather,

 

The photos are nice. Did you do any post processing on them?

 

I am no expert, but how close were you to the subject? If I interpret the EXIF data correctly it looks like you had the lens pretty well zoomed in at 105mm. Depending on the glass this can result in some distortion. Most lenses will produce the best images somewhere in the middle of the focal range. Also, the ISO is at 400. I am not sure of the specs on your camera off hand, but lower ISO will result in crisper images. 400 is not that high, but lowering to 200 or 100 in good lighting will be better. Lastly, play with the aperature (F stop). The EXIF shows it was taken at F5.6. Lower the F value (open the aperature) for less depth of field and raise it if you want more. Practice with different values. I would not go below a shutter speed of 1/60 with hand held shots and that may be slow if the subject moves at all. I bet Frank would have more feedback as may others. Much as anything, practice with different settings etc.

 

Happy shooting. Keep em coming! B)

[twogreys]

I see nothing wrong with these photographs. A couple of points. Always focus on the eye(s), and remember that because of the size of the sensor any lens will effectively be 1.5x longer than the focal length engraved on the barrel, unless it is a lens designed for APS size sensors. If I could comment on dblhelix, I think you may be a bit confused. Lenses work best in the mid-f stop range, that is, about f8, f11, although with today's highly corrected lenses this may not be an issue. Dead right about the depth of field, though.

[dblhelix]

Just to clarify what I meant about the lens focal length range, many lenses that are say 17-85 etc will produce the best images in the 35-65 range (middle) of focal length range. Aperature extremes also push the lens as you use more or less width of the glass. Unless you have quite expensive glass, there can be fringing, vignetting (sp?) and other distortions around the edges when you operate at the extreme ends of the range of the lens. Specifically regarding optics and the effect of focal length see below:

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chromatic_aberration

 

In any case, I agree these pics are quite nice and was only providing some general tips. Heather, dont be too tough on yourself! What specifically are you looking to improve about the images? <br><br>Post edited by: dblhelix, at: 2008/01/07 03:16

[HeatherStrella]

Hello...sorry I haven't replied...we had a big storm pass through here and our internet was out. I will try your suggestions, thanks!!

[Kaedyn]

Heather,

 

Your photos look nice. Were you shooting with a 105mm macro? I've always liked that lens. The only thing you might consider changing is your depth of field. I typically shoot in aperture priority mode, especially with flash.

 

If you aren't happy with these images, you could try playing with some creative composition and lighting angles. I personally am not particularly fond of the solid blue background, but it does provide plenty of contrast.

[HeatherStrella]

Kaedyn, thanks so much. Yes, I'm shooting with that lens. I really like it...I've been shooting in Program or Manual modes. As far as the blue background, it's just a fleece blanket I hung on the wall. Do you think I should use one that has a design on it or another solid one? I tried it once with a towel I had that had palm trees on it and it seemed to take away from the subject. Maybe something in between...like polka dots or stripes? Thanks!!

[twogreys]

hi everyone

 

Would like to add to previous post. The vignetting dblhelix mentioned is not a function of the lens, but an inherent characteristic of the sensor. Whether CCD or CMOS, a digital sensor, unlike film, is not good with oblique incident light. If you want a wide angle shot, then the amount of acceptable vignetting is a personal choice. If the result is right to you, the photographer, then it is right. Not everyone likes the same picture, whether it be oils on canvas, watercolour on paper, or a photograph.

 

Lastly, I personally like the photographs of your Greys, you have captured their beauty, intelligence, curiosity and their sheer zest for life.

[TalonSis]

Heather, those pictures look great! Did you set any lights up, or just use the flash on the camera?

 

You'll want to use a plain background, when I was shooting my brother's senior picture, CD had me use a light blue sheet. (If you use white, you'll have to put a light shining at the sheet, otherwise it would look gray.

 

Melissa

[dblhelix]

I agree. I think these shots look nice and each capture is unique. What looks pleasing to one may be somehow displeasing to another. Each capture is art! B) Now, not to beat a dead horse, but the vignetting and distortion I was referring to is caused by "chromatic abberation" and in fact a function of the LENS having a different refractive index for different wavelengths of light. No doubt this type of problem is magnified with digital sensors that are "tuned" to certain color channels and/or the interpolation technique used. This is usually referred to as "lens flare". To say these phenomenon have nothing to do with the lens is not accurate. The optical distortions caused by chromatic abberration are inherent in film cameras, telescopes and any optical device. B) I am by no means an optics expert, but I think it is important we interpret/share the information properly. If you think I have this wrong, lets discuss more, cuz I'd like to know and think its an interesting issue about photography! This discussion may be info overload for some, but I like digging into the details. :silly: :side: The write up in the link I provided from Wikipedia seems pretty straighforward that the lens plays a major role in the chromatic abberration (which I originally referred to as vignetting) as do other information sources. <br><br>Post edited by: dblhelix, at: 2008/01/09 07:40

[HeatherStrella]

I know I should know this, but what is 'vignetting'?...and what is 'chromatic abberation'?

[dblhelix]

Well, w/o going into too much detail, the vignetting is a term used to describe irregularities that may be seen on images, usually around the edges. Perhaps I am not using the term 100% accurately, but as a general term the definition of "vignetting" as used to describe photographs is:

- an engraving, drawing, photograph, or the like that is shaded off gradually at the edges so as to leave no definite line at the border.

 

"Chromatic abberration" is a term used to describe distortion that specifically has to do with lenses having different refractive indexes for different wavelengths of light. Therefore in my attemtp to explain, this equates to the properties of light waves and different colors being different wavelengths. No lens is perfect and some light waves (colors) will not be refracted or focused identically and this can result in image quality issues, loss of true color rendition etc. Every lens has a "sweet" spot where this tendency will be minimized. When zooming way in or out (adjusting focal length) each lens will begin to experience more chromatic abberation.

 

There is also a real issue as pointed out by twogreys with digital image sensors and the tendecy for them to also suffer certain image distortion. I am in no way claiming to be totally correct, but I did take several photography courses. I am just communicating what I have been taught and aware of by reading and researching. Its an interesting discussion (to me anyways) B) Understanding these factors can help us get better images and perhaps undersand when they do not turn out quite the way we want them to. Of course, each capture is a function of so many variables..but the more we know the better I say!

[twogreys]

Vignetting in digital cameras is due to the photoreceptors being slightly recessed in pits - the photosites - to prevent crosstalk. As a result, those photosites at the edges of the sensor are bad at collecting oblique incident light. The light misses the photoreceptors. To counteract this tendancy, convex microlenses are fitted onto each photosite, and this helps capture oblique incident light and channel it to the photoreceptors. There are a couple of ways to create vignetting deliberately - with a mask on the lens, post shot processing with Photoshop or similar, or by mounting say a lens designed for 35mm format on a monorail camera (Linhoff, Sinar etc.) and this will produce a circular image fading away on all sides, insofar as a circle can be said to have sides. Spot on with chromatic aberration. However, lens flare is caused by specular highlights, and is non image forming light bouncing about in the lens and camera, and reaching the sensor/film. If you shoot with a flash into glass, mirror or the television, the light will be bounced right back, causing flare.

[twogreys]

ps to last post...

Like dblhelix, I enjoy "digging into the details", particularly when it comes to digital photography, as I am fairly new to this medium. I come from a film background, becoming qualified in the 1980's, when "affordable" digital imaging was merely a twinkle in someone's eye, and I think this helps somewhat. I still use my film cameras, by the by. I still take great care (I am not suggesting for one moment that no-one else does)in composition and exposure, as with film, you only get one chance, unlike digital. I do very little post-shot processing, preferring to capture the image I am looking for in camera, another hang-over from film. After all, with digital, if you do not like the result it is possible to delete the image, and, if possible, depending on the circumstances, re-shoot. (A great advantage!) Not always possible, I will agree in advance. The main thing, I think, is to enjoy your photography, irrespective of the medium.

Now the question is, how deep would you like to delve, dblhelix? I think we could discuss this subject almost forever! I look forward to your reply, and lots of interesting discussion.

[dblhelix]

I think we dug pretty deep on this and its clear to me at this point! There are 2 separate issues and we have more or less covered the main causes of each. I initially referenced "vignetting" when I really meant "chromatic abberation". The former a product of photoreceptor limitations and the latter a function of lens refraction and focal length. Both can produce distortion in an image capture. I am sure my misuse of the term added confusion to the discussion, but in the end provided even more useful information! Thanks for the clarification on "lens flare".

 

I also like to try and capture images "as is" with little to no post processsing. Learn the properties of camera and how to adjust parameters available to get the image desired. However, the digital medium is so flexible it is tough not to make use of the powerful options available in post processing. One step at a time I guess! Photography is fun and digital cameras really have made it much more accessible to people. Once you have the gear you can practice away and view your images w/o development cost until you really have an image you like! :side:<br><br>Post edited by: dblhelix, at: 2008/01/16 02:42

[twogreys]

Last post by dblhelix. Could not agree more.

 

.end