Luxury4Play.com banner

1 - 20 of 23 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,954 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Looking to getting back in to photography, so i dug up my old works. Please judge the camera work and not the subject cars

first set: DAILY DRIVER WHEN NEW














 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,954 Posts
Discussion Starter #6
What was your camera/ lens setup?
i am a noob to photography, trying to improve with every shot. All shots in this threads where taken with point n shoot cameras. Shots of the Mitsubishi Galant and Chevy Aveo5 where taken with a Vizio DC630c (6.3 mega pixel), and Chrysler 300 was shoot with Samsung WB200F (14 mega pixel).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,131 Posts
To me it looks like since you've began this thread until now there hasn't been much change in the shots. Point and shoots aren't the greatest when it comes to photography, they're great for capturing a quick moment but if you're looking some well shots I'd suggest getting an entry level DSLR. There are a bunch of choices out there now and if you want to continue photography I'd highly suggest picking up one of them and playing around with it for a few months so you get to know your way around the camera. The locations and compositions of most of the shots are awesome.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
172 Posts
i am a noob to photography, trying to improve with every shot. All shots in this threads where taken with point n shoot cameras. Shots of the Mitsubishi Galant and Chevy Aveo5 where taken with a Vizio DC630c (6.3 mega pixel), and Chrysler 300 was shoot with Samsung WB200F (14 mega pixel).
I see alot of issues with white balance, exposure, levels, ISO noise and chromatic aberration. Even with good framing choices...or concepts..however you want to call them, ultimately what determines a photograph is how you choose to expose the sensor and what you do with that information afterwards.

Have you taken any photography classes or anything?

If you want to improve very quickly, that's your best bet. You can even take a class on gear you don't own- some classes let you share gear or borrow it for just the class.

Point and shoot = no control other than the framing, which is just one of many aspects to photography. Do you want to get better shots or you just want feedback on the framing of your point and shoots?

This is a good place to start...you're on the right path.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,954 Posts
Discussion Starter #9
I see alot of issues with white balance, exposure, levels, ISO noise and chromatic aberration. Even with good framing choices...or concepts..however you want to call them, ultimately what determines a photograph is how you choose to expose the sensor and what you do with that information afterwards.

Have you taken any photography classes or anything?

If you want to improve very quickly, that's your best bet. You can even take a class on gear you don't own- some classes let you share gear or borrow it for just the class.

Point and shoot = no control other than the framing, which is just one of many aspects to photography. Do you want to get better shots or you just want feedback on the framing of your point and shoots?

This is a good place to start...you're on the right path.
i have no formal photography education

i will defiantly be playing around in a full manual mode on my camera. Any and all feedback is welcome as well as examples of how it could of been done better
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
172 Posts
Here I found an article that might be helpful for you: DSLR vs Point and Shoot Camera

If you don't want to upgrade to a DSLR just yet, I totally understand. I shoot with a Nikon D800 and each image is 40MB. That's a huge amount of data (the resulting image is 8K) and information. It also shoots full HD uncompressed video. Not everyone needs that much data or wants to deal with...I have to have it for my work, no way around it.

But for personal shots, I have a Nikon Coolpix P340 P&S that takes stills and video. It fits in a pocket and is great for photos on the go. I would never bother to learn to use the manual controls on it because Nikon designed it with a great set of features that do everything automatically. On the other hand, I only shoot full manual on the D800, and I generally have the D800 mounted on a battery pack with wireless shutter all mounted to a tripod and sturdy head. The P&S doesn't require any of that- just point the camera, gently press to focus, then hold down to take the shot...done.

So the main problem is AFTER you take the photo. With a P&S you really should not be editing anything. Most likely you're shooting JPG compressed images, not NEF RAW or fine quality tiff or something. Why does that matter? Because compression determines how your camera processes the data it captures. The lower the compression (RAW = uncompressed) the better control you have after you shoot the image. This is especially critical for blacks and whites, which are the first to equal 0 and 1 respectively. Black should never be perfectly 0 and white should never be 1 (for example). The range in your image when you edit it after should allow you to pull up or crush the blacks without destroying the image.

So compression is your main enemy with P&S, in addition to the overall issues of noisy ISO and sometimes wrong white balance, chroma, and lack of depth-of-field. You also get no vignette. While that may be desirable on some photos, on others you may want a natural vignette to help add depth to the image, and depth of field obviously changes things significantly. The photos of your 300M next to the water would be particularly served well by having depth of field applied to the FG vs BG.

Finally, things like bokeh and the way light reacts to your glass can play a big part in your "look". I can recognize canon glass, for example vs. zeiss primes. My zeiss are sharp edge to edge and have a creamy finish, whereas canon glass typically is more milky and smooth. This is a personal preference of what I like vs. what someone else likes. I like the way zeiss deals with light, lens flares, and bokeh...

With a P&S you can't even really do anything about the bokeh at all, because you pretty much won't get any...so it's one more thing you won't be able to learn about as a result. I think that's where manual focus and a large set of glass to choose from can really educate a photographer on how the camera works. Things like focus, F stop and ISO all change how the camera reacts to light (regardless of exposure).

Sorry this got a bit long...but the point is you can only go so far with the P&S, even in manual.

On the other hand, some people buy a Nikon or Canon and a full set of glass and they never improve...so equipment is only a part of the equation.

Why not at least try out a few cameras and see what you think?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,954 Posts
Discussion Starter #11 (Edited)
Here I found an article that might be helpful for you: DSLR vs Point and Shoot Camera

If you don't want to upgrade to a DSLR just yet, I totally understand. I shoot with a Nikon D800 and each image is 40MB. That's a huge amount of data (the resulting image is 8K) and information. It also shoots full HD uncompressed video. Not everyone needs that much data or wants to deal with...I have to have it for my work, no way around it.

But for personal shots, I have a Nikon Coolpix P340 P&S that takes stills and video. It fits in a pocket and is great for photos on the go. I would never bother to learn to use the manual controls on it because Nikon designed it with a great set of features that do everything automatically. On the other hand, I only shoot full manual on the D800, and I generally have the D800 mounted on a battery pack with wireless shutter all mounted to a tripod and sturdy head. The P&S doesn't require any of that- just point the camera, gently press to focus, then hold down to take the shot...done.

So the main problem is AFTER you take the photo. With a P&S you really should not be editing anything. Most likely you're shooting JPG compressed images, not NEF RAW or fine quality tiff or something. Why does that matter? Because compression determines how your camera processes the data it captures. The lower the compression (RAW = uncompressed) the better control you have after you shoot the image. This is especially critical for blacks and whites, which are the first to equal 0 and 1 respectively. Black should never be perfectly 0 and white should never be 1 (for example). The range in your image when you edit it after should allow you to pull up or crush the blacks without destroying the image.

So compression is your main enemy with P&S, in addition to the overall issues of noisy ISO and sometimes wrong white balance, chroma, and lack of depth-of-field. You also get no vignette. While that may be desirable on some photos, on others you may want a natural vignette to help add depth to the image, and depth of field obviously changes things significantly. The photos of your 300M next to the water would be particularly served well by having depth of field applied to the FG vs BG.

Finally, things like bokeh and the way light reacts to your glass can play a big part in your "look". I can recognize canon glass, for example vs. zeiss primes. My zeiss are sharp edge to edge and have a creamy finish, whereas canon glass typically is more milky and smooth. This is a personal preference of what I like vs. what someone else likes. I like the way zeiss deals with light, lens flares, and bokeh...

With a P&S you can't even really do anything about the bokeh at all, because you pretty much won't get any...so it's one more thing you won't be able to learn about as a result. I think that's where manual focus and a large set of glass to choose from can really educate a photographer on how the camera works. Things like focus, F stop and ISO all change how the camera reacts to light (regardless of exposure).

Sorry this got a bit long...but the point is you can only go so far with the P&S, even in manual.

On the other hand, some people buy a Nikon or Canon and a full set of glass and they never improve...so equipment is only a part of the equation.

Why not at least try out a few cameras and see what you think?

now say i shot in RAW, edit in photoshop and save as JPEG, would i have similar image degradation as when having the camera compress image to jpeg?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
172 Posts
Also, are you a Mac or PC guy?

I don't recommend photoshop for photos. Try Aperture or Lightroom. I use Aperture even on professional work. Will make your life so much easier for doing post.

If you need to clean up an image beyond that, as in paint or composite, then Photoshop comes into play...or Nuke or similar.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,954 Posts
Discussion Starter #14
Also, are you a Mac or PC guy?

I don't recommend photoshop for photos. Try Aperture or Lightroom. I use Aperture even on professional work. Will make your life so much easier for doing post.

If you need to clean up an image beyond that, as in paint or composite, then Photoshop comes into play...or Nuke or similar.
i use a 27" iMac and Photoshop CS5
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,954 Posts
Discussion Starter #17 (Edited)
Also, are you a Mac or PC guy?

I don't recommend photoshop for photos. Try Aperture or Lightroom. I use Aperture even on professional work. Will make your life so much easier for doing post.

If you need to clean up an image beyond that, as in paint or composite, then Photoshop comes into play...or Nuke or similar.
i Took your advice and got my hands on Adobe Lightroom 5. It seems to be working great so far.

PS: you and i have our disagreements in the past, with me questioning your motivations and expertise as well as motivational content in your thread. Just want to say Thank You for your suggestions and sharing your experience when it comes to Photography regardless of what was said in the past.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
172 Posts
i Took your advice and got my hands on Adobe Lightroom 5. It seems to be working great so far.

PS: you and i have our disagreements in the past, with me questioning your motivations and expertise as well as motivational content in your thread. Just want to say Thank You for your suggestions and sharing your experience when it comes to Photography regardless of what was said in the past.
All good, I am just here to help people...

I agree with the above comment about the frames not being needed, and also to shoot more during the day at first...it helps. One other thing I'd add is your choice of aspect ratio. If you want your images to feel more cinematic or lifelike, try cropping to HD or 2.40, or even wider. It will add more appeal to your shots.

This is a quick example of how I think you could improve an existing shot...

View attachment 130073
 
1 - 20 of 23 Posts
Top