nicola inglis Posted February 26, 2006 Share Posted February 26, 2006 I'd like to be in too. Can you add me to the list? I can't see a link to get your email address, Lauren. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
katieo Posted February 27, 2006 Share Posted February 27, 2006 Well, I did a wedding on Saturday and I think this is the best processional shot. (Below) I posted a few more in my photo.net portfolio. What do I need to improve? My exposure was 1/60 2.8 400 ISO 28mm with flash comp -1<div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
laurenm Posted February 27, 2006 Share Posted February 27, 2006 I thought we were all going to post closer to the deadline in 2 weeks, but actualle Anne just said 4 weeks or before so anyway, I'll take a stab at it Katie. I'm thinking this is where we can really all learn as I usually have no clue what to say except "nice shot" But by having to critique other's shots beyond that, we all learn. So, I'll offer my thoughts and someone can tell me if I'm even right. 1) looking at your other shots, it doesn't look like you were getting consistent results as in "nailing ten shots" I guess we have to figure out why?(I'll have to look and think more to say anymore than that) 2) this example looks like a bit too much light to me (?). 3) I like how you framed it to include the windows and the alter and the people in background looking at the couple. A question this brings up for me is... I would have thought at 2.8, the background would have been more blurred - is it not because of the 28mm lens vs a narrower lens? Or if shutter was faster would it have blurred more of background? Then another question... Is the assignment to have a lighted detailed background? just wondering because then Anne you said to choose aperture depending on whether we want blur and I assume if there is blur it can't be detailed, or am I wrong? Well, looking forward to other's comments. Katie thanks for being the first to post! Mine will be at least another week. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kari douma Posted February 28, 2006 Share Posted February 28, 2006 You were daring to shoot at 2.8 on the post sessional! I always shoot at least 5.6, because if they are moving fast, I'm afraid I won't get an acurate focus. That is what I hope to practice tomorrow! Any one elso comment on this? I like the idea of letting in the natural light, but 2.8 scares me when they are moving so fast! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anner Posted February 28, 2006 Author Share Posted February 28, 2006 I agree about the aperture. I would go for a higher f-stop and lower shutter speed for the ambient light, especially with the use of flash which will freeze the subject. I might be more wide open with the processional because they move slower, but recessionals are often too quick for a shallow DoF and faster shutter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anner Posted February 28, 2006 Author Share Posted February 28, 2006 I think an out of focus background is a preference that each photographer decides for him or herself. You have to consider that guests may be following the important people down the aisle with their eyes and decide whether those reactions are going to be part of your image or not. I think that a good balance of available light with flash is what sets a professional image apart from a snapshot, but again, this is only my personal opinion! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
katieo Posted February 28, 2006 Share Posted February 28, 2006 Trying to step out of the box, I guess. Also, this was just a quick RAW conversion. I am starting my edits tomorrow. I want to practice a few more next week also. Just got my new 2.8 lens, so I guess I was trying to take advantage of it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anner Posted February 28, 2006 Author Share Posted February 28, 2006 I would be pushing it too if I had that available! I'd love one of the canon f2.8 L lenses... I just need to save up 175,000 pennies. I think that 28 mm was a great choice in focal length because we get quite a bit of the background without distorting the subject. There really aren't any right or wrong answers here.. just experiments and preferences. I hope that no one takes anyone else's preferences as some kind of rule or precedent. This is about finding out more about your own style and how you like to see things through your lens. I can't wait to see more assignments come in!! Mine won't be in for a few weeks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
laurenm Posted February 28, 2006 Share Posted February 28, 2006 Katie, I guess that's why some of your other shots seem a bit out of focus. Where you shooting all 2.8? This is such a great learning experience for all of us! I too look forward to all our discussions!4 people have "signed up" for an email list to get reminders sent. I will only send occassional ones, so no fear of lengthy frequent emails (even though I talk here a lot!) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
katieo Posted February 28, 2006 Share Posted February 28, 2006 Yes, Lauren, I was shooting mostly 2.8. I didn't want to up the ISO to 800, but probably should have dragged the shutter more with a higher f-stop. Finding the right balance is the key. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
laurenm Posted February 28, 2006 Share Posted February 28, 2006 Dumb question to most but what the heck everyone knows I'm new and that's what this little group is for...so... what does flash comp-1 mean? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anner Posted February 28, 2006 Author Share Posted February 28, 2006 If you can manually adjust your flash compensation up or down, it means that she adjusted it to basically under-expose by a full stop from what her camera thought it needed to properly expose the image with flash. Often times if you find that your flash is consistently too bright, you get used to "dialing it down" hence the (-)comp for a more natural look, or "dialing it up" (+)comp if your camera tends to under-expose images. At least this is what I understand to be true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
laurenm Posted March 1, 2006 Share Posted March 1, 2006 so if she was shooting at 2.8, she set flash to think it was shooting at a lower f stop so it wouldn't give as much light? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
katieo Posted March 1, 2006 Share Posted March 1, 2006 Lauren, I like to include as much natural light as possible. The flash I have is the 420EX which is controlled only by the camera. So I just dialed in -1 on flash compensation to decrease the amount of flash output since I personally like less flash. I also use the Pro Max bounce attachment with diffuser. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anner Posted March 2, 2006 Author Share Posted March 2, 2006 http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00FUFt&tag= Click on the link above to visit the Week #1 Progress Report Discussion! Completed assignments should still be posted here, but weekly discussions can take place in the above post! I'm looking forward to giving you my results from this weekend's wedding! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
picturesque Posted March 2, 2006 Share Posted March 2, 2006 Katie, I think you have too much shutter drag going in your recessional photos. I agree with the others re using a smaller aperture for safety but your sample does not suffer from focus error. Look at the pews to the left of the frame. They are right at the subjects' plane and they are in focus. You may have a slight amount of motion blur here, definitely in the photo of the little boy. That's because the background exposure was too close to the flash exposure. In order for the flash to freeze your subjects while still avoiding dark/black backgrounds, a good rule of thumb is to underexpose the background/ambient by at least 1.5 to 2 stops. If you wanted to use the flash as fill only, you would expose for the ambient and be mindful of the rules of stopping motion and handholding shake due to focal length choice. If that were the case, 1/60th is too slow to completely stop even fairly slow walking. You would have needed at least 1/125th if they were walking fairly slowly and walking toward you as they are. That is also why the couple looks a little overexposed, because even a -1 flash compensation was still too much light layered on top of the almost correct ambient exposure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
katieo Posted March 3, 2006 Share Posted March 3, 2006 Nadine, Thanks for your thoughts and advice! This was my first time trying to drag the shutter. I have always just gone the safe way and used full flash. Thanks for telling me how to improve! Katie<div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now