Saw an opportunity to shoot my daughter after school today in a park by our house. Unfortunately, by the time I got her home and changed the sun had fallen just below the rooftops and was no longer lighting the area I was wanting to shoot.
These were all taken handheld in ambient light. I feel I've missed something because it seems like none of the images I got were sharp or exposed correctly. I edited them in LR3. C&C welcome!
I'm hoping to go back earlier tomorrow. One thing I did notice though is how long and hard the shadows were and will be when I try again.
Dec 09, 2011 at 09:08 PM
Jonathan Huynh Offline • • • • • • Upload & Sell: Off
Tparich wrote:
I really like the shots. If your unhappy with the sharpness though just wondering why you didn't up your ISO to get a faster shutter speed.
Probably because I have tunnel vision. Would a faster shutter provide a sharper image? I guess a higher ISO would not have produced any noticeable noise until maybe around 400 or so...good call. I think I was concentrating more on trying to find a decent background to shoot her in front of and keeping her attention than focusing on my settings and making sure I was changing it up to see what produced the best results.
Yeah...slower shutter will cause some motion blur. Some people are rock solid when holding the camera. I am not.
Rule of thumb which is a good starting point would be to not let the shutter speed drop below the focal length.
So in shot #3 you were at 200mm but at 1/60 sec. If you raise your ISO then you can also go to a faster shutter speed (something above 1/200)and that should help some. LR3 is very good with noise reduction.
Tparich wrote:
Yeah...slower shutter will cause some motion blur. Some people are rock solid when holding the camera. I am not.
Rule of thumb which is a good starting point would be to not let the shutter speed drop below the focal length.
So in shot #3 you were at 200mm but at 1/60 sec. If you raise your ISO then you can also go to a faster shutter speed (something above 1/200)and that should help some. LR3 is very good with noise reduction.
I generally abide by that rule, but was kind of purposely breaking it because I was using IS which is supposed to work for up to 4 stops. 1/60 should be within that 4 stop range, correct?
I think you can improve the pictures with a little post. I quickly did a curves adjustment and added some sharpening and here is a side by side of # 1. HTH, Keith
#1 The best of the 3 - but why? I find the background separation, or to put it another way, the 3 D look is strongest in this shot. You have two things going for you here. One is the blurred background and the other is the different light levels of background and subject - subject being brighter. Very well done.
What I don't like about #1 is the composition that cuts off the bottom of her dress.
#2. This shot doesn't have the crisp, sharp focus and clear skin tones. It's a good composition, save for once again having the feet cut off.
#3 This one is also very nice. I don't think it's as sharp and compelling as #1, but still very good. I do find the rock, that occupies so much of the composition, is a bit too much. A crop will fix that easily.
In all three of these, you show a talent for placing the subject in an interesting setting for your pictures. Very impressive.
1: Very nice. I like the light on her. I just really notice the bright spot to the right (her left) of her head.
2: I can't fathom why it looks a bit soft; it shouldn't be camera shake at 1/250 & 70mm, but I don't see anything clearly in focus and sharp. This is a mystery to me. Also, I find the fairly bright areas behind her to be a distraction, and the light on her is somehow not quite as pleasing.
3: I'd rather see the open area be in front of her instead of behind. And it looks like camera movement was a factor in this one.
I think you can improve the pictures with a little post. I quickly did a curves adjustment and added some sharpening and here is a side by side of # 1. HTH, Keith
Keith, thanks for the insight. I do like the skin tones better in your version. I've got to get better with my post work. Well, I've got to get better shooting as well.
Jim Rickards wrote:
#1 The best of the 3 - but why? I find the background separation, or to put it another way, the 3 D look is strongest in this shot. You have two things going for you here. One is the blurred background and the other is the different light levels of background and subject - subject being brighter. Very well done.
What I don't like about #1 is the composition that cuts off the bottom of her dress.
#2. This shot doesn't have the crisp, sharp focus and clear skin tones. It's a good composition, save for once again having the feet cut off.
#3 This one is also very nice. I don't think it's as sharp and compelling as #1, but still very good. I do find the rock, that occupies so much of the composition, is a bit too much. A crop will fix that easily.
In all three of these, you show a talent for placing the subject in an interesting setting for your pictures. Very impressive....Show more →
Jim, thanks for the C&C.
1 - I was really focusing on the background separation throughout the shoot. That's really what I was going for in the first place. Since this was sort of a test run of the location, composition wasn't exactly my priority. I shot it again yesterday, but haven't edited anything yet. More to come!
2 - Don't worry, I was definitely paying more attention during the second shoot to hands and feet.
3 - Sharpness is another area I've been struggling with. A tripod was used for the second shoot in which I'll post images later today if I have time. I see your point with the rock and need for cropping. Thanks for pointing that out. One thing I'm not crazy about in this one is there appears to be a horizontal line from something in the background. Can't put my finger on it, but it looks odd. Overall, I like it though.
Thanks for the kind words. I'm really trying hard to improve my weak areas, which seems to be all of them! Haha
Ernie Aubert wrote:
I'll add my non-expert observations:
1: Very nice. I like the light on her. I just really notice the bright spot to the right (her left) of her head.
2: I can't fathom why it looks a bit soft; it shouldn't be camera shake at 1/250 & 70mm, but I don't see anything clearly in focus and sharp. This is a mystery to me. Also, I find the fairly bright areas behind her to be a distraction, and the light on her is somehow not quite as pleasing.
3: I'd rather see the open area be in front of her instead of behind. And it looks like camera movement was a factor in this one.
Not sure if my camera has a focusing problem or if it's me. More than likely, it's me but I haven't figured out what I'm doing wrong. I always focus on the eye. I'm curious if when I re-compose the frame after focusing if that's the issue. Normally, I shoot in One Shot AF. Since the outer focus points aren't as sharp as using the center focus point I pretty much always use the center point and re-compose.
As far as #3, I read your post yesterday before I did the re-shoot and made a point to frame my daughter with more foreground in some shots and as you already saw in other shots, trying to keep the rule of thirds in mind while I shoot.
Later this afternoon when I have some time I'll go back through that second session and post a few. I have a lot to go through because I shot my girls' dance recital yesterday morning, then the girls against a white seamless paper background at a friend's house THEN did the outdoor session. In other words, 1200 images to look through.
Holy smokes - 1200!!! It took me most of the afternoon and well into the evening today to process 41 shots from an event this morning. I think I'm glad I don't have to do this for a living!
