looking for a little guidance

[basinbum]

alright so im kinda new to the photography and havent quite got what im doin figured out like some of the top dog photogs here so im just looking for a little guidance to get my stuff lookin a little better cuz as you can see below it looks like shit.







sad thing is these were the best i could find. thanks for any guidance that follows. thanks bb

[basinbum]

oh and one other question i thought i would add on here i have been using a nikon d80 for all these is this a good, decent, crap camera as far as photography goes???

[mavrick]

And yo gramma is like horrible brah might wanna finna learn to use punctuation foo

[AstroPax]

as you can see below it looks like shit.

First thing, you need to take the lens cap off.

[basinbum]

First thing, you need to take the lens cap off.

oh is that what that is... shit got it fixed

[Chainsaw_Willie]

First and easiest tip: Shooting in the mid-day sun usually produces disappointing results. The light is too harsh, it washes out the colors and the sun being high also reduces contrast, hiding the texture and details in things like those rocks.

Try to wait for the good lighting if you can. The "magic hour", or the hour around sunrise and sunset when the sun is low in the sky which highlights terrain features and gives a warmer, less harsh light is the best time to shoot.

Mid-day shooting can work too if there are clouds or some other circumstances that cause the light to not be so harsh.

The D80 is a fine camera and you have some really good lenses available. However, the best camera in the world can't help you compose an interesting, eye-catching photo. Being in the right place at the right time is not necessarily a random occurence or luck (though luck often plays a big role in some of the best pictures), and a solid understanding of technique also really helps.

[Keegan]

First and easiest tip: Shooting in the mid-day sun usually produces disappointing results. The light is too harsh, it washes out the colors and the sun being high also reduces contrast, hiding the texture and details in things like those rocks.

Try to wait for the good lighting if you can. The "magic hour", or the hour around sunrise and sunset when the sun is low in the sky which highlights terrain features and gives a warmer, less harsh light is the best time to shoot.

Mid-day shooting can work too if there are clouds or some other circumstances that cause the light to not be so harsh.

Beat me to it.
When shooting landscapes, try to use the Rule of Thirds.
If you think you'll be getting into photography more, read up on post processing tips. I recommend learning the basic skills in Photoshop, Lightroom, or another program. They won't completely fix bad photos, but will enhance well taken ones.
I'm not saying steal someone else's ideas... but if you need inspiration, look around on the internet, or in some books, find shots you like, and try that approach to your own work.

[AstroPax]

oh is that what that is... shit got it fixed

The fact that you are using a Tamron AF 28-80mm F3.5-5.6 Aspherical lens at 2:00 in the afternoon when the light is really harsh isn't helping the cause. Just saying...

I hate to bust your bubble, but all of those pretty pictures you see in Arizona Highways Magazine were shot with large format cameras...



...and ported to digital via very, very expensive drum scanners.

35mm film, and DSLR's in general are about the worst platform to shoot landscapes. Great for sports action and PJ work...but basically suck for high rez, high dynamic range work

Regardless, you need more "Rayleigh Scattering" effect.

Now, read this:

http://www.ronbigelow.com/articles/magic/magic.htm

-Astro

[Gunder]

Your exposures look fine, but you NEED better glass. Better glass will make light years of improvements in the technical aspect of your images.

Also, work a bit on your composure, you need to draw the viewer in.

[pointedem]

You can get a great Nikkor lens for <125usd brand new that has great IQ.

Nikkor 50mm 1.8.

and +1 what everyone already said about light.

[basinbum]

thanks all for the tips

[basinbum]

Your exposures look fine, but you NEED better glass. Better glass will make light years of improvements in the technical aspect of your images.

Also, work a bit on your composure, you need to draw the viewer in.

sorry im a big time jong here im assuming better glass=better lense??

[Gunder]

sorry im a big time jong here im assuming better glass=better lense??

Correct.

[basinbum]

Correct.

any suggestions on a better lense??

the one that point suggested?

[Gunder]

any suggestions on a better lense??

the one that point suggested?

Stick with Nikon. Only buy fixed aperture lenses F4 and up. There expensive but the picture quality and build quality are worth every cent.... plus glass doesn't get outdated and will be a much better investment than a camera body.

[dipstik]

The lens you have is perfectly fine.

As a beginner, spending lots of money on new gear will just make you think your photos are better.

Save your money for now, and instead go to the library/local bookstore/google like others have mentioned and learn the fundamentals of photography. Don't sweat the technical stuff yet, just focus on composition like Gunder mentioned.

The day that you begin to feel limited by your gear is the day you should upgrade. Until then, just practice with the equipment you already have, and you will be surprised how quickly you improve.

Also, check this video!: http://tetongravity.com/forums/showthread.php?t=134581

[basinbum]

ok gang thanks for the tips went out this after noon and got some more these are a ton better but im sure there is still room for some improvement.

[Gunder]

The lens you have is perfectly fine.

As a beginner, spending lots of money on new gear will just make you think your photos are better.

Save your money for now, and instead go to the library/local bookstore/google like others have mentioned and learn the fundamentals of photography. Don't sweat the technical stuff yet, just focus on composition like Gunder mentioned.

The day that you begin to feel limited by your gear is the day you should upgrade. Until then, just practice with the equipment you already have, and you will be surprised how quickly you improve.

Also, check this video!: http://tetongravity.com/forums/showthread.php?t=134581

The lack of sharpness in those pics will only be fixed by better glass.

[Damon]

That second one down of the new batch is pretty good, I think. If it were mine, I'd probably print it. I might crop a little more of the left off though, it's not really adding anything.

What ISO are you shooting at? My EXIF viewer says 5760... haha. Stay around 100-200 for landscapes. You might already be doing that, but your EXIF's are all screwy. (is anyone else seeing strange info?)

For the next round, go get a $20 tripod (no sense in getting something expensive yet) and keep your aperture closer to F/11. You are shooting in a manual mode correct? Don't worry about a cable release either, use the timer with mirror lockup... for now.

Grant - Those last two look sharp. Of course we're looking at downsized web examples though. Basin, you should post a little bit larger pictures, try 8x10 or 8x12. When your uploading you don't have to have your DPI at 300, keep it at 72. I don't know if TGR's uploader likes 300, but I haven't used it.

[pointedem]

For the next round, go get a $20 tripod (no sense in getting something expensive yet) and keep your aperture closer to F/11. You are shooting in a manual mode correct? Don't worry about a cable release either, use the timer with mirror lockup... for now.

A tripod may help him compose frames better, but @ f/11, ISO 200 in daylight you don't need a pod- your shutter speed shouldn't be below 125 anyway you cut it- unless you are using a high-stop filter.

I was messing around the other day and shot f/20 at 200, 200iso, daylight, and the shot was maybe 1/3 stop underexposed, tops. Any shutter speed where you would need a pod to minimize shake would have resulted in 99% blown image... and that was f20 ( I was testing a new lens).

I'm not sure what you are getting at here.

[Damon]

Well we already told him to stop shooting during the middle of the day right?

Edit- I guess I'm just saying it might open up his options a little bit more. I mean yeah, maybe I'm going past the basics, but I feel like I'm adding a little bit more info that hadn't been covered yet by the rest of the group.

[Grizz]

[QUOTE=basinbum;2022746]ok gang thanks for the tips went out this after noon and got some more these are a ton better but im sure there is still room for some improvement.



Here's a question from another photo jong and I'm sure the answer will help basinbum.

I've frequently run into the situation in this photo. Blown out sky and mountain in the background, tops of the trees overexposed. I'm guessing the exposure on the rocks in the riverbed and the shaded foliage is close to correct.

Is there a way to get everything in photo close to the proper exposure by only manipulating camera settings (iso, white balance, etc) or is this a situation where only post processing can get the job done?

[JimLad]

A graduated neutral density filter would do the job. I usually just cheat in the processing and make fake some hdr to get the sky looking right. It may be cheap and nasty for a pro photographer, but it works for me (and I dont own a filter)

Here is a shot I took that by default had the sky blown out and trees were too dark. A little tweaking and you can balance it all out. If the lighting is really bright I would take a few shots at different exposures and then create an hdr image.

[Chainsaw_Willie]

[QUOTE=Grizz;2023074]

ok gang thanks for the tips went out this after noon and got some more these are a ton better but im sure there is still room for some improvement.



Here's a question from another photo jong and I'm sure the answer will help basinbum.

I've frequently run into the situation in this photo. Blown out sky and mountain in the background, tops of the trees overexposed. I'm guessing the exposure on the rocks in the riverbed and the shaded foliage is close to correct.

Is there a way to get everything in photo close to the proper exposure by only manipulating camera settings (iso, white balance, etc) or is this a situation where only post processing can get the job done?

As JimLad said, a Graduated Neutral Density filter is the only way to get a proper exposure of that shot. This has been a problem for photographers for as long as there has been photography. Neither film nor digital cameras have as much dynamic range as a human eye, plus the eye automatically adjusts for varying brightness as you look around the scene, something that obviously can't be done in a static image.

If I was shooting that scene I'd have exposed for the sky, maybe over-expose by 1/3 or 2/3 of a stop at most and let the rocks & bushes be a little dark. Then in post-processing it's real easy to bring up the darker areas of the image. With a tripod it'd be real easy to bracket that image at different exposures then create a composite in post.