 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| PhotoKB HomeDiscussion Groups Digital Photography Digital PhotoDSLR CamerasZLR CamerasPoint & Shoot CamerasFilm Photography 35 mmLarge FormatMedium formatDarkroomFilm and LabsOther EquipmentPhoto Technique Nature PhotographyPeople PhotographyTechnique GeneralGeneral Photo Topics General TopicsAustralian PhotographyUK PhotographyDirectoryPhoto Clubs |
Photo Forum / Photo Technique / Nature Photography / January 2006Nature Pictures
Hello, I just finished designing a new site called http://www.forestwander.com and am interested in what the photohraphy community thinks about it. I am just an amateur getting started so please don't be to harsh. I think that some folks may appreciate these pictures I have on here. By the way I am looking for anew camera has anyone used or heard of how one of these perform? Canon S2 IS Digital Camera?? Thanks I just wanted you to know that I really like your website. I'm bookmarking it and will visit again very soon. I especially liked your quote from How Great Thou Art. I still use the Nikon Coolpix 8700 so can't help you with your query on the Canon S2 IS Photog * * * * * Join us at the Cafe! http://photography-cafe.com >I just wanted you to know that I really like your website. Funny, most people didn't on other NGs. Just being honest here but the quality of the images is terrible and not very well composed and exposed. I suspect many didn't utilise a tripod in their making? The layout is plain and simple which isn't a bad thing but it is quite old in its styling. There is nothing to impact on getting people to buy anything, least of all the images themselves. > I'm bookmarking it and will visit again very soon. If you look up to poor work, you'll never achieve better than poor yourself. I especially liked > your quote from How Great Thou Art. > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > Join us at the Cafe! > http://photography-cafe.com > Hello, > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > Thanks Look at other websites for design ideas. Yours is a little static. It's also a bit repetitious in some places, seven images in a row of almost the same scene (top of page 4); nine skylines (page 3) with very little variation. Pick the best and make it a larger image, then link to the others as alternatives. Let the images speak for themselves. The font is too small and the text doesn't do much for the images, yet it's the primary feature on the page. Also include a link on the larger image page to move from one image to the next or back to the page where the thumbnails are located. Thank you for the nice comment about the site and than you for your honesty. I shot all of the photos with a Canon A50 1 Mega pixel camera You probably have not heard of one of those. Well that is because it is about 6 years old. The good news is the Good Lord allowed me to recently purchase a New Canon 350d rebel Which should be a dramatic improvement. Need less to say I will be composing more photos this year beginning with winter shots this late winter (once some snow finally falls) and then other shots throughout the seasons. Again thanks for the comments. Positive or Negative. ><> > > Hello, > > [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > Also include a link on the larger image page to move from one image to > the next or back to the page where the thumbnails are located. > Thank you for the nice comment about the site and than you for your > honesty. No problem, all comments I make I do so with complete honesty with no disrespect for the recipient. > I shot all of the photos with a Canon A50 1 Mega pixel camera This explains a lot. > You probably have not heard of one of those. Well that is because it is > about 6 years old. > > The good news is the Good Lord allowed me to recently purchase a New > Canon 350d rebel You will do a heck of a lot better with that camera. Glad to hear of your purchase. It will make a massive quality improvement! > Which should be a dramatic improvement. Need less to say I will be > composing more photos this year beginning with winter shots this late > winter (once some snow finally falls) and then other shots throughout > the seasons. Just remember the slogan, "Keep it simple stupid", as it works very well for most photography abd I use it all the time when looking at any scene or subject I want to capture. The other rule is that of "thirds". It is probably the most important part of basic photographic technique. Keep out irrelevant material from an image that detracts from the subject. Keep out "noise" from the image that makes the image lose impact. Make sure the colours are pleasing to the eye and try and capture the essence of why you visited a place or studied a subject, whether flower, insect or animal. Then you will do well and people will want to buy what you have to share with them. Good luck. Seriously, buy yourself a book or two on nature photography. I invested in a few of John Shaw's books which I highly recommend to be able to learn the basics of composition and exposure. cheers Jasen > Again thanks for the comments. Positive or Negative. > [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] >> Also include a link on the larger image page to move from one image to >> the next or back to the page where the thumbnails are located. great photos whish i could do that, i might be able to if i had been to a place like that, you luck, great job. i am also a new photographer please check out my website. www.the-photo-place.piczo.com > great photos whish i could do that, i might be able to if i had been to > a place like that, you luck, great job. i am also a new photographer > please check out my website. > > www.the-photo-place.piczo.com Ok, you need to learn quite a lot about how to take an interesting photo. I'm no pro but I have sold and been pubished and my style of photography was learnt through short courses and reading photography books such as John Shaw's nature photography series of books for instance. Unfortunately the images you have on your site are lacking colour, sharpness and interesting composition styles. You can read about how to take a good simple photo by looking up such site via Google. Here's a sample of my photos: http://www.photographersplace.com/pic_member.asp?Member=Jasen1970 > Ok, you need to learn quite a lot about how to take an interesting photo. Jasen, did you not notice Joe's age? Perhaps a little more encouragement eh? Your photo's aren't exactly ground-breaking in composition themselves (though I love the butterfly on the nose!), and 'being honest' is not a justification of unbalanced criticism. I like your website Joe. I think the in-your-face way you've presented your portfolio goes really well with the sense of jungle chaos I get from your pictures. It's all a bit mad - I like that. Good job mate :) Anyone who thinks a photo needs to be in focus to be any good should look at http://www.toycamera.com. Obviously this sort of artistic angle wouldn't be appropriate for a lot of nature photography, but maybe chilling out about the technical side of things would open up new opportunities for evoking a broader range of emotions than awe at nature. Anybody have any examples of nature photography that's weird? freaky? funny? bizarre? Sure, nature photography is classically about themes of beauty, simplicity, peace, eternity, awe, but this can be a comfy human viewpoint. For creatures living out there, nature is full of constant change and upheaval, fear and hunger, redness of tooth and claw. It's a jungle out there. And one which is even more unnerving when it's not in focus. Cheers, Phil >> Ok, you need to learn quite a lot about how to take an interesting photo. > [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > > Cheers, Phil Sorry, no I didn't..am tired. As I said, I'm no pro, but I do have a point. >> Ok, you need to learn quite a lot about how to take an interesting photo. > [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > > Cheers, Phil Butterfly on the nose? No, that is another photographer. If you followed the link I gave, only those are my shots. I have heaps more but not on the web yet. Hehe, ok - in that case we're both guilty of not paying attention! Sorry. But I like your other pictures too. > Hehe, ok - in that case we're both guilty of not paying attention! > Sorry. But I like your other pictures too. Yeah, and thanks. BTW, I get grumpy when tired, if you hadn't noticed :-{ > Anyone who thinks a photo needs to be in focus to be any good should > look at http://www.toycamera.com. There's a difference between intentional "un-focus" and carelessness. > Obviously this sort of artistic angle > wouldn't be appropriate for a lot of nature photography, but maybe > chilling out about the technical side of things would open up new > opportunities for evoking a broader range of emotions than awe at > nature. Anybody have any examples of nature photography that's weird? I don't know about weird, I've been experimenting with this: http://www.photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=556781  SignatureAngela M. Cable Paint Shop Pro 8, 9, X Private Beta Tester Neocognition, digital scrapbooking source: http://www.neocognition.com/ PSP Tutorial Links: http://www.psplinks.com/ 5th Street Studio, free graphics, websets and more: http://www.fortunecity.com/westwood/alaia/354/ >> Anyone who thinks a photo needs to be in focus to be any good should >> look at http://www.toycamera.com. [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > I don't know about weird, I've been experimenting with this: > http://www.photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=556781 Now that sort of work IS what I would expect with someone who knows a thing or two about photography. Nice! > There's a difference between intentional "un-focus" and carelessness. Absolutely! But in that post I was more interested in the difference between slamming a young photographer and encouraging him. > I don't know about weird, I've been experimenting with this: > http://www.photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=556781 Love it! I'm assuming this is done in the 'processing'? I particularly like the Impressionist Trees. Lack of detail puts the emphasis on light. Which is, after all, what the Impressionists were all about. Thanks Angela, I'm inspired! >>There's a difference between intentional "un-focus" and carelessness. > > Absolutely! But in that post I was more interested in the difference > between slamming a young photographer and encouraging him. Yes, I did see what you were doing. I think though that it would probably be more helpful to say something like, "while blur can be an interesting photographic technique, these images show that you've not got the hang of it". Perhaps then explaining about shutter speed and appropriate blurring. Praising bad work rarely helps anybody. I do agree that it is also unhelpful to hit and run slam a person's work. If a person doesn't have the time to say anything more than, "Gee this really sucks", then probably they ought to be taking the advice that their mother undoubtedly gave them as a child, "If you don't have anything nice to say, say nothing at all". >>I don't know about weird, I've been experimenting with this: >>http://www.photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=556781 > > Love it! I'm assuming this is done in the 'processing'? No, it was done in camera. The only post-processing done were some curves adjustments (I didn't have an ND at the time and some were over exposed due to the long shutter speed), some saturation enhancement to recover color lost with curves, and some cloning (I've evidently got dust specks on my sensor and I'll be damned if I can get them off of the thing.) > I particularly > like the Impressionist Trees. Lack of detail puts the emphasis on > light. Which is, after all, what the Impressionists were all about. > Thanks Angela, I'm inspired! This is what I was going for, thanks for the kind words :-) SignatureAngela M. Cable Paint Shop Pro 8, 9, X Private Beta Tester Neocognition, digital scrapbooking source: http://www.neocognition.com/ PSP Tutorial Links: http://www.psplinks.com/ 5th Street Studio, free graphics, websets and more: http://www.fortunecity.com/westwood/alaia/354/ > No, it was done in camera. Wow, ok, it just seemed very 'even', particularly in the way the foreground tree's bark pattern is so clear still, but I guess this must just be the difference in distance from the lens, and I guess it was your tripod keeping the blur nice and vertical? Was this a fairly wide angle lens? Definitely gonna give this a go. It made me think of Klimt's paintings of birch trees, like this one: http://www.expo-klimt.com/1_3.cfm?ID=1627840557 Although now I've looked at the paintings again, they're quite dark. I think Klimt would have like the amount of gold in your picture though! >>No, it was done in camera. > > Wow, ok, it just seemed very 'even', particularly in the way the > foreground tree's bark pattern is so clear still, but I guess this must > just be the difference in distance from the lens, and I guess it was > your tripod keeping the blur nice and vertical? Oh, there's no tripod, just hand held, long shutter speed. I found 1 second to be good outdoors and 1.5-2 seconds for the indoor stuff. If it's bright out, you're gonna have to use an ND or two to bring the shutter speed down far enough or just deal with the over exposure as best you can in your image editor. > Was this a fairly wide > angle lens? No, it's a 35-80 mm, which on the digital body is 56-128mm. On the florals (indoors) I used close up diopters. > Definitely gonna give this a go. It made me think of > Klimt's paintings of birch trees, like this one: > http://www.expo-klimt.com/1_3.cfm?ID=1627840557 Although now I've > looked at the paintings again, they're quite dark. I think Klimt would > have like the amount of gold in your picture though! I think light and bright colors overall work best for it. I did a couple of just tree trunks and they came out as just kinda blobby. Ditto with some taken at the cemetery, but we've got a very boring cemetery here. SignatureAngela M. Cable Paint Shop Pro 8, 9, X Private Beta Tester Neocognition, digital scrapbooking source: http://www.neocognition.com/ PSP Tutorial Links: http://www.psplinks.com/ 5th Street Studio, free graphics, websets and more: http://www.fortunecity.com/westwood/alaia/354/ > No, it was done in camera. Wow, ok, it just seemed very 'even', particularly in the way the foreground tree's bark pattern is so clear still, but I guess this must just be the difference in distance from the lens, and I guess it was your tripod keeping the blur nice and vertical? Was this a fairly wide angle lens? Definitely gonna give this a go. It made me think of Klimt's paintings of birch trees, like this one: http://www.expo-klimt.com/1_3.cfm?ID=1627840557 Although now I've looked at the paintings again, they're quite dark. I think Klimt would have like the amount of gold in your picture though! >>There's a difference between intentional "un-focus" and carelessness. > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > light. Which is, after all, what the Impressionists were all about. > Thanks Angela, I'm inspired! Looks like moving the camera while making the image; hand-held with a very slow shutter speed. >>I don't know about weird, I've been experimenting with this: >>http://www.photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=556781 > > Now that sort of work IS what I would expect with someone who knows a thing > or two about photography. Nice! Thank you. I don't think that I'm particularly knowledgeable about photography though. I think I've probably read the same books as everybody else here and looked at the online portfolios of the same "biggies" as everybody else for inspiration. SignatureAngela M. Cable Paint Shop Pro 8, 9, X Private Beta Tester Neocognition, digital scrapbooking source: http://www.neocognition.com/ PSP Tutorial Links: http://www.psplinks.com/ 5th Street Studio, free graphics, websets and more: http://www.fortunecity.com/westwood/alaia/354/ > Praising bad work rarely helps anybody Agreed, but sorry, I don't think his work was bad - not for someone his age, and not within the context of his site. I run photo workshops for kids, so I know how 'bad' work can be (very!) 8) In my experience, kids like what's *in* the pictures, and get bored pretty quickly with f numbers and shutter speeds. So the full programme and autofocus misses sometimes - so what? When it comes to 'beginners', especially kids, their enthusiasm can be very fragile. Focusing on the positive is what gets them on to the next stage. What I see in Joe's site is a young lad, agog at the exhuberance of nature, enthusiastically snapping right left and centre, and wanting to share this with as many people as possible. I enjoyed looking at it (in context), and isn't the basic definition of a good portfolio one that one enjoys looking at? You're quite right of course, that criticism needs to be balanced. My own post was deliberately not, because some of the other reaction was excessively scornful. So many posters seem to give up as soon as they see a bit of dodgy focussing or exposure; they make these easy critisisms and don't bother to do the much harder part of looking for good content. My aim was to balance the thread as a whole. I know that posting about how to post is dull, but I think we could do with occasional reminding that photo critisism is about finding the good points in any picture, as well as the bad. >> Praising bad work rarely helps anybody > [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > with occasional reminding that photo critisism is about finding the > good points in any picture, as well as the bad. Yeah, I can attest for what you say here. I remember when I got my first camera. All I wanted to do was click the shutter and then see what I'd done and show others, no matter how bad it was. I guess this posting was a bit of an eye opener. You do have to admire the enthusiasm I suppose if not anything else, and this kid does have that at least. Apologies for scornful grumpy behaviour on my part. > great photos whish i could do that, i might be able to if i had been to > a place like that, you luck, great job. i am also a new photographer > please check out my website. > > www.the-photo-place.piczo.com I think you did a great job. You very well could be a professional one day. Persistence is the key, never give up. I think its great that you have a website that you built yourself. When I was you age I didn't even own a camera or know what a computer was! Thanks for the reply. Keep it up and God Bless you! Pss.37:4 Delight thyself also in the LORD; and he shall give thee the desires of thine heart. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.