[Curious]

keeping in mind that fark doesn’t allow for gore.

[Curious]

can i get a special dispensation to post say 30 pictures that week?

has more tools than sears

or it seems like it. small sample here

[Curious]

Anology thanks for posting those examples. they were interesting. especially the keystoning one.

[Curious]

Going to be playing with gunpowder, XenPix? 😛

My wife and I were in Oban, Scotland on that date in 2007. Good times… good times.

2007? good trick also 🙂

[Curious]

For now though my little PowerShot is what I have to use. It’s frustrating when you have ideas for your camera and it can’t perform. Again that is blaming my equipment and not myself.

therein lies the crux of your problem. and it’s not a matter of blaming. you wouldn’t “blame” your car if it failed to win a nascar race. the frustrating thing for the time being will be not being able to do some of the things you see done in the contests. lately there has been an emphasis on shooting close. next week that won’t be an issue.

oh and btw you will never ever get all the equipment you “need” for the shots you can imagine. never. trust me on this.

[Curious]

there’s focus and there’s DOF (depth of field) and while the actual focus on the lettering is ok the back of the rim is soft. a quick glance at the specs on your camera Manual mode is also fully automatic, as the camera selects both the shutter speed and the aperture values. However, now you have access to camera settings, like ISO, Exposure compensation, White balance, My Colors, and Metering. tells me you have little control over DOF.

frankly i like the first one best. yeah even with the light on the right. the new ones run downhill and i expect the fluid to run out. i wasn’t panning the accent light just the amount and placing of it.

and i’m not trying to be harsh here but you ask for criticism so i’m being critical. i’m not sure if that particular camera will do what you’re asking it to. more light overall should get the aperture to stop down giving you more DOF (hopefully) and backing up slightly (a la ray of wrath) with help with the DOF also. as a general rule the closer you are the shallower it is.

and caradoc has point about being unable to see the original. whatever resizing is done by you or flickr makes evaluating the photo harder.

[Curious]

hey it’s your photo. my sister, who taught photography, used to hammer me about the rule of thirds but i just went on shooting what i liked. still do.

[Curious]

ok. you see what i was talking about with the right side? between all the space and the light it tends to draw you up and out.

[Curious]

set your camera to the largest image size it has. set the quality to the finest setting it has. i.e. extra fine, super fine, etc. all will still be .jpg and easily manipulated later.

I wouldn’t bet on that.

The A560 has a nasty reputation for optical fringing and artifacting in compression according to the reading I was doing earlier (trying to help him out, here.)

Given what I’ve just finished reading about the camera, I wouldn’t put any bets on scaling to print higher than 8″x10″ on a full-sized image, let alone a crop.

that would a be a darned shame for a 7MP camera.

Jakevol12 i downloaded your first image and cropped it 2:3 in PS and you can get most of what you want it the finished result/print ok. the right side tends to dominate however. so when you re shoot you might want to leave more room to the left.

[Curious]

Learning is good. Even Ansel Adams had to practice.

that’s a damn lie. the man was in the zone.

🙂

[Curious]

if that linked photo is the largest you’re hosed. link you flickr page(s) please.

yes you could crop it. cropping to 16×20 would mean losing the very top or the bottom shadow. either would spoil it. cropping to 16×16 makes the picture work better. learn to think in formats other than strictly rectangular. square can be very effective some times. so can rectangular other than the 2:3 ratio. panorama isn’t 2:3 for instance. when shooting vertically you don’t have to stay in the 3:2 ratio either. cropping off the side of a vertical can add height and interest.

set your camera to the largest image size it has. set the quality to the finest setting it has. i.e. extra fine, super fine, etc. all will still be .jpg and easily manipulated later. RAW is good if you are really going to do a lot of post processing. and don’t tell me that you can’t then get enough shots on your storage media. buy more, media is cheap. always shot for the biggest image and biggest file size then if you want you can reduce the results. you CAN NOT effectively blow up a small image.

or what you and caradoc have been discussing 🙂

[Curious]

artifacts on wiki not a great article but it will give you a general outline. then google ignoring photos of old stuff.

unless the image and files size for the first one is really big you won’t like it at 16×20. digital isn’t like film. it doesn’t scale up anywhere near as well. also not to be too picky or anything but the first one is the wrong ratio to be 16×20 since it looks to be square.

other than that A+ 🙂

[Curious]

damn you millera9 i have said repeatedly that i wasn’t buying any more photo stuff.

monkeybort what i had in mind was a close up of the ring(s) and a suitable photo of the happy couple and combining the two in PS. use the ring as a border/frame and the happy couple ™ as an insert.

yes i know what you are talking about with your style but i was thinking long term when you are making your living as a photographer and have to eat. the only (very few) photographers i’ve know have either been 1)on staff and moonlighting to be creative 2)just getting started and wanting to maintain their style and working non photo to eat 3)working folks who do whatever sells.

just as an aside: our staff guy got sick one day and we had to get the shots so hired a local photographer. we’re on location and he starts with: “now as i see it the model is here and then …..” our VP for advertising told him in no uncertain terms that he would be shooting from point A, framed as B and no original thought was expected. he did make the whole day but never worked for us again although that may well have been a mutual decision.

my sister took a sabbatical from teaching and worked for a complete hack. she hated it. but the guy was successful enough to hire an assistant. had you seen his work you would have to wonder how.

[Curious]

i did the shallow DOF with the flower thing again for that one but i was having a hard time coming up with new angles/ideas when it was just three people standing in one spot for a half hour.

looking at your pictures it seems you do some film and digital. in either case you might be able to do some post processing to include frames/borders. the heart type stuff. some folks (not me) love that stuff.

and while i’m thinking of it if you’re shooting the rings you might be able to combine two shots. ring vertical and 3/4 from the side and folks inside of it. would work better if the ring was distinctive or shot where the engraving showed. assuming there is some inside engraving.

[Curious]

and that’s as it should be. this r serious 4um not aol.

joking aside i’d rather not have them.

and get off my lawn.

[Author]

Posts