Login or Join Now

Upload your photos, chat, win prizes and much more

Username:
Password:
Remember Me

Can't Access your Account?

New to ePHOTOzine? Join ePHOTOzine for free!

Join Now

Join ePHOTOzine, the friendliest photography community.

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more for free!

Connect to User

loading
25/09/2008 - 8:51 PM

Lion with attitude ?

Lion with attitude ?Well timed! Love the look he's giving you.

I'm not sure what happened when you took this, as the lions face looks quite soft but the grass to the left behind the lion looks sharper. There are many possibilites:
1 - You prefocused (half pressed the shutter) and then moved closed to the lion, pushing the POF behind the lion - avoid this by releasing the shutter button and then applying it in one go.
2 - The lens overshot on its focusing or has a back focus problem - you check a back focus problem easy with a ruler...
3. You had multi point focussing selected and the camera picked something other than the lion to focus on - easy fix, manually select the centre point, if possible.

Anyhow well done capturing the lion in such a compromising pose!
Karl.
16/09/2008 - 8:52 AM

Early Christmas

Early ChristmasHi Tim, These a lovely flowers and would make a great still life macro shot with a dark background in portrait format. I like the flowers in 1 and 2 but find the background rather distracting, the backgrounds of 3 and 4 are better. If you've still got the flowers then some light on the flowers themselves with a darkish background (hold anything dark about 3ft behind, even a jumper - ut you can experiment with different colours, maybe complimentary ones like green) and using portrait will accentuate the longness of the flowers with their long stamens.
Thanks for the CC's BTW, Karl.
15/09/2008 - 5:49 PM

1

1Shame to hide the face! Looked a pretty one too.

Otherwise, it looks a underexposed - did you use auto exposure mode on the camera? If so it could be that the scene was quite bright and the camera chose an exposure that underexposed it.

If your camera can display a exposure histogram you;ll find this a most useful guide to a correct exposure. In general the distribution of the histogram should be bunched around the middle. If it's to one side you can use the exposure compensation facility (if you have one) to compensate - this is usually a problem with dark or bright scenes as the camera will try and make the exposure match a mid grey (18% grey)...

Hope I'm not preaching the converted... Karl.
11/09/2008 - 8:41 PM

Morning Fog

Morning FogI love the idea of this but I think the image is underexposed. What happened with auto exposure on the camera is that it tries to evaluate an exposure so that the overall scene aproaches mid-grey (18% grey actually). When you've lots of mist or light subject you'll need to dial in some exposure compensation, maybe +1EV to +1.5EV to maintain the whiteness you saw in real life, if your camera can do that. Karl.
09/09/2008 - 1:30 PM

"YOUNG TIT"

"YOUNG TIT"Hi Jim, I like the composition and super out of focus background - but I'm a little suprised that the image appears so soft for a 100-400 capture. I checked out your PF and quite a few of the images taken with the 100-400 appear also fairly soft. I think you should be able to get much sharper images if you try some or all of the following tips:
1) Make sure the shutter speed is fast enough - for 400mm on a 350D that would normally be more than 1/640s but since your lens has IS you should be able to get away with 1/160s with a steady hand - but I'd still strive for at least 1/500s. You can always boost the ISO for more speed...
2) Use a tripod or monopod - I'm finding a monopod a great compromise as I can still walk about with it attached, try that with a tripod!
3) Stop the lens down a bit, even the 100-400 works better at f8 than wide open at f5.6 - this will give you slightly more depth of field but at 400mm the background will still be nice and smooth (unless it's close to the subject).
4) Shoot RAW - You won't believe how much detail you've been missing using JPG and also how much flexibility you'll have - I hardly every use JPG now - only for quick snaphots to pass on to someone...
5) And finally, after you resize to 600px for EPZ apply a little sharpening to the small image as resampling will blur the image slightly as pixels are averaged together to make the smaller image.

Hope I'm not teaching you to suck eggs here, Karl.
07/09/2008 - 11:21 PM

drone fly

drone flyWoa! Extreme close up! Bet you had fun playing with the x2 on a 150mm macro! I've done aphids this way (using flash to get an exposure). Have you tried using extension tubes on the macro yet? You will lose AF (back to rocking back'n'forth) and a stop or two of light but you'll get much better image quality. Also, if you haven't already, switch to RAW and you'll really see an increase in sharpness and clarity compared to JPG. Karl.
07/09/2008 - 10:08 PM

Egmont from Hawera

Egmont from HaweraHi Luke, I like your pano (and the other pano's in your PF). I'm wondering if you've found that after stitching you come to crop it and find that alot of the top and bottom get cropped off that you'd rather keep in the picture? If so I've found the following two methods help:
1) Don't crop so agressively and allow some white areas in the final crop - then use PS to clone these area out - they're usually on the periphery and won't be noticed if they're not perfect.
2) Shoot in portrait to maximise the vertical pixel available. To do this I made an L bracket using a 3.49 roofing timber L bracket from B&Q to which I attached a tripod plate and plate adapter for the camera. Worked a treat (see Wast Water Stitch in my PF).
Hope I'm not teaching you to suck eggs, Karl.
07/09/2008 - 9:30 PM

Dahlia

DahliaI love the backlighting and the multi-colour background. Normally you'd try for a less busy background but somehow this works, for me at least.

With all that bright light from behind, the centre front of the flower is a bit dull. This could possibly have been improved by using a reflector to bound some light back onto the flower (or if you haven't got one then a sheet of paper or card works just as good).

Checked out your PF, you obviously have an eye for a good picture, keep up the good work, Karl.
05/09/2008 - 11:25 PM

Clips

ClipsJennifer, you've picked a subject that has plenty of scope - colour, white background, silver metal, shadows - so well done on 'seeing' that potential. The image is currently let down by the rather flat lighting - why not have another go and get a desk lamp to provide some side lighting, or maybe use two lamps either side and overexpose for a washed out white background? I can spend hours taking pictures like this on a table top - the beauty is that you have 100% control of the subject and lighting. Keep up the good work and enjoy it, Karl.
05/09/2008 - 11:18 PM

Snow Leopard

Snow LeopardGreat timing to catch the snarl!

I'm sure there is a much better image crying to burst forth from this - try brighting up the snowlepeod with a brightness brush and maybe boost the saturation of the eyes, mouth and nose (I tried it quickly and it looks 10x better, but this is not a modification post so I can't upload it). Try it yourself, you'll be surprised.

The image is not quite as sharp as I know this lens is capable of - of course the setting must have been quite dim so I reckon you did well, especially if it was handheld - A monopod would help immensley in these situation. Keep up the good work, Karl.
05/09/2008 - 9:35 PM

Succulent Flower

Succulent FlowerI love the shape and colours and square format works well here.

The DOF here is slightly too far back IMHO and so the green furry buds are in focus but the flower petals are out of focus. Bringing it forward slighty and the flower would have lept out! (I think). Only other minor point is the pink and red blodges in the background are slightly distracting - however this image overall is a real cracker, well done! Click!
05/09/2008 - 8:55 PM

red dragong fly

red dragong flyYou've managed to get an excellent balance in the DOF here - it is often hard get the wings at this angle.
However, I feel that you may have overcooked the saturation and contrast at the expense of some of the detail in the body, at least on my monitor the red looks oversaturated. I reckon there is an even better image lurking somewhere in your original RAW file.
It looks like it was taken in full sun - so I'm suprised it didn't fly off having warmed up in the sun - any ow I like the picture and it gets my vote - Click!
05/09/2008 - 7:33 PM

Bluetit

BluetitComposition is good, exposure is ok but it looks like there might be some camera shake? If it was taken with a 300mm prime then it should be tack sharp - it's worth remembering the 1/focal length rule for shutter means you need at least 1/420th sec on the 400D at 300mm, unless you have image stablisation Wink Of course you can use a tripod/monopod too..