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
14/04/2015 - 8:16 AM

A Glance

A GlanceThe lens EXIF is not there. I assume you were at 200mm, thus 300mm effective. Unfortunately everything is unsharp which is a real pity as this could have been impressive. The animals head must be sharp.

I guess camera shake due to a grab shot and no support. The shutter speed is just not fast enough. Do not assume VR gives you a sharp result, it helps dampen vibration. Depends how much movement there is. No system can correct shake completely, it's relative.

Paul
14/04/2015 - 8:04 AM

Dont get to close!!

Dont get to close!!No, use the central point all the time. It looses too much time choosing different points. Leave the camera set to the central focus point for most purposes. Place that on the eye, take half pressure on the release button to lock focus, keep that pressure, recompose then finish the exposure.

With practice, takes just a second, literally.

This is not sharp anywhere and thus looses impact.

Paul
03/04/2015 - 7:13 PM

Portrait

PortraitYou are missing something on the manual focus front. You shouldn't be in reading buttons as such but you are using a compact, so manual focus in the classical sense may be difficult or near impossible.

Use focus lock. Place the focus point on the eye, half press the shutter button causing the camera to focus. Keep the pressure on the shutter button to hold that focus point, recompose and complete the pressure to take the shot.

This is quite good. Looks sharp enough to me and I like you tight composition. Cropping the top of the head is totally acceptable.

A nice portrait.

Paul
25/03/2015 - 8:07 AM

Her Eyes!

Her Eyes!A nice shot. I would have composed with less to the left and more to the right to move the eyes, in effect, to the left. then a more balanced composition.

Paul
13/03/2015 - 9:18 AM

Stella

StellaVery well done. I might just increase the eye density a touch with the burning in tool to increase impact. Not sure the hand was needed in shot for this one.

Nice.

Paul
11/03/2015 - 7:16 AM

Sleeping beauty

Sleeping beautyDecent image. The problem is not the harsh light it is where it is falling. The Leopard has got into shade to keep cool so the light is lower on the subject than the background. Thus a slightly flat effect. You could try increasing contrast a little, then run the burning in tool over the brighter background.

Paul
11/03/2015 - 7:13 AM

rotting hulk minus vignette

rotting hulk minus vignetteSepia is good and suggests age. You did not need that vignette. A good phone image. You may not have appropriate editing software. If you do I would run the burning in tool along the background and bottom left corner to emphasise the barge.

Paul
10/03/2015 - 3:23 PM

Lights - Cork Salon

Lights - Cork SalonThis is a fine piece of portraiture and, for once, looks really good in mono. It is technically excellent but very formal indeed. For some purposes, that is great, but she does look rather stand off'ish and aloof.

In my portraiture days, almost always on a one to one basis, I would set up such a shot, then try variations. Tilt the head, turn the head, smile, half smile and so on. That was with film, too. In these days, you can shoot as many as you like virtually free.

The trick is to keep talking to the model. Have a bit of banter, a joke. Whatever. Anything to keep the model relaxed and happy. I see so many photographers, especially in group sessions, run up at their turn, shoot a few frames, then run away without even speaking to the girl.

Not the way to do it.

Chat, smile, compliment and so on.

Paul
05/03/2015 - 4:56 PM

Mia

MiaYou need to consider both lighting and pose. You are under exposed and her hair has completely gone. I suspect just one light here with diffuser. You need more light on her face and hair and possibly a rim light if you must have a dense black background.

The elbow on the right as viewed is a bit unattractive. The idea is there, but turn her a bit to correct the elbow, then think lighting.

Paul
04/03/2015 - 8:45 PM

Rancho Meadow

Rancho MeadowNice shot and mono works here. I think I would crop top and bottom to a letterbox. You loose nothing and concentrate the eye on the real image, the central part.

Paul
02/03/2015 - 9:49 AM

Fruit

FruitOther than fruit I have no idea what this is and, without your one word title, would not have guessed fruit either. Therin lies your problem. Shooting at f20, even with an 'L' lens, is not going to give the best quality.

Nothing suggests how big this fruit is? If it is very small requiring depth of field, then a fixed focal length macro lens will be a much better bet.

You need to rethink lighting and presentation. The dramatic lighting is more for an effect image. Possibly cut the fruit? Arrange with softer lighting and a suitable blurred but varigated background?

Depends what end product you, or your client if it was a job, wanted, but this image doesn't make me want to eat the fruit of have anything to do with it.

Your text suggests you were in business and hope to be again. You must fully master your gear and the techniques your customers require. You must satisfy your customers requirements, not your own likes and dislikes.

Not easy. Give us more details of what you want to do for advice.

Paul
26/02/2015 - 8:04 AM

Flash forward

Flash forwardTechnically covered above. You are significantly under exposed on the flowers.

You need to learn to analyse results from the Histogram and visually. Look at other efforts, possibly in the main gallery rather than critique, but do not assume they are correct either. This immediately appears under exposed and you must learn to see that, then correct the lighting.

On manual, the guns will not talk to the camera, but experiment. Experience is the way to learn, and you must master two things at the start of any photographic career.

Exposure and focusing. Very wide statements, but what is the correct exposure? How do I achieve it? Is auto focus the right way to go, or should it be manual, as here.

Paul
13/02/2015 - 7:50 PM

flash struggling

flash strugglingYou have some underexposure here and that is why you have a light grey background. Did you use a tripod? If not the slightly weird effect could be a sharp flash image and a slightly blurred ambient image.

I often mix flash and ambient. The skill is for it to appear natural.

Fotpr me, the composition is not too good. One bloom does stand out as subject, and is quite sharp, but otherwise there is just a mass of yellow. I would come in rather closer, still with one bloom dominant, but all the background cropped out.

Actually, not too bad, though.


Paul
12/02/2015 - 7:01 PM

I should have tried harder

I should have tried harderThe crop is unusual and different. Going to be a Marmite one. It's not for me. A bit too much in a corner. I would keep with the left hand position, but go for a landscape image. Just me.

What I'm not sure about is the overall quality. If you intended this look, OK, but it looks rather over exposed to me. You don't mention flash or any light source, but I'm guessing there is flash in there somewhere. The colour looks wrong.

Paul
12/02/2015 - 2:50 PM

The Shopping Monk

The Shopping MonkFor me, a fine image in there, but you need all the woman in, or, better, not there at all. Then fill the frame along the lines of the shop doorway. A very strong, colourful and interest image would result.

You would then need to be sure the monk was full sharp.

Paul
10/02/2015 - 2:23 PM

AZ fence

AZ fenceIt needs to be dark to act as a silhouette. As a record of the fence, OK. AS A GENERALLY PICTORIAL IMAGE IT SCREAMS FOR SOMETHING MORE. A PERSON AND DOG, WALKING ON THE SKYLINE AND SILHOUETTED FOR EXAMPLE.

It needs more.

Paul
07/02/2015 - 8:25 AM

He dosn't know it's not loaded

He dosn't know it's not loadedIn general, I like it a lot. I'm quite happy with presentation but the lighting is just a touch out. A tiny bit under exposed, maybe, or in need of a weak flash fill? A bi of work with the dodge tool on the heavy shadows of his uniform, but with great care or contrast will suffer.

I just wonder if the edge is off the sharpness. Did you use a tripod? Even with full frame the shutter speed might be a bit low.

paul
03/02/2015 - 2:14 PM

Inch Strand, Co. Kerry

Inch Strand, Co. KerryThe other way is just to use the crop tool freehand and your eye. A nice enough scene but tones seem a little weak. I suspect a little over exposure. I assume the small aperture was for depth of field, but f8 and focus on the foreground would have done the job.

Compositionally the rocks lead across the image to the right side where there is nothing really to stop on. I know I keep saying this on many images, and it is a personal issue, I know, but it needs a subject.

The rocks fail to do that because there are a number of them acting as a lead in. But they lead to the frame edge which is, indeed, a rule breaker, but it jars here.

Paul
02/02/2015 - 9:36 AM

Spread your wings

Spread your wingsYou are blowing v1 up. Any imperfections are thus greater. You need a bit more depth of field as insurance and that means more light.

A tripod does not guarantee sharpness. Was it on solid ground? Was a wind blowing. You are applying huge magnification and thus magnifying any movement.

Macro is not easy and a lot of practice is needed and there is always a high failure rate. I use a minimum of f8 unless after minimal depth of field, which is rare. I am more likely to be at f16.

The problem then is enough light and a low ISO for quality. It means, invariably, a dedicated macro flash unit.

Paul
01/02/2015 - 11:16 AM

East Twice Brewed

East Twice BrewedNot sure about this one, Nige. I expect moonlight to be clear, bright and have a blue cast. The effect here is a very muddy brown and I don't think it works. I know it's dark and moonlit, but I think the problem is under exposure. The positive correction will have no effect on a manual exposure of course.

It is effective, but not terribly natural.

Paul