Making photos look good? Please help.

[kelly_brown2]

<p>Hello everyone. I just got a Nikon D3100 for Christmas and I love it! It's my first DSLR. I love taking pictures and I've taken so many already. However, my pictures never seem to look good. I think what I'm getting at is that they lack a professional look. I see so many pictures on Flickr that look good and I would like to know what it is that I can do to make my pictures look good as well. For example, I tried doing something as simple as taking pictures of colored pencils and my pictures just didn't stand out. Here's an example of one I found on Flickr that I like ( ). It's simple but it looks good. I suspect that lighting has a lot to do with it, so any tips on that would definitely help. I know it's probably difficult to give advice without me posting one of my attempts but I really just don't feel comfortable showing my pictures right now. Thanks for any help you can give, I really appreciate it.</p>

[Tim_Lookingbill]

<p>For us to advise you on how to make your photos look good we have to know what you are doing that doesn't make them look good. And the only way to do that is to see one of your images that doesn't look good to you.</p>

<p>It'll help us narrow down what you're doing wrong so we don't have to cover the entire subject of photography helping you.</p>

[NetR]

<p>Hi Kelly<br>

The particular example you linked to is an example of a very narrow depth of focus - lighting had almost nothing to do with it. To achieve a lot of the special effects like this you need to control something on the camera instead of setting it on automatic. For example, to do something like this you would need a lens like a 50mm f1.8 that will give you a narrow depth of focus at f1.8. What depth of focus means is that <em>only</em> the thing you focus on is shown sharply, and everything before and behind is shown fuzzy because it is not in focus - like the pencils are. To do this, you need to have the camera set so that you set the aperture (called A mode for some cameras). <br>

But as noted above, it will really help if you post your best effort at something and tell us what you were trying to achieve, so people can suggest what you need to do differently to achieve your vision. And don't expect to become an expert overnight - there are a lot of things you can adjust on the camera before you get anywhere near photoshop.</p>

[rapyke]

<p>Hi Kelly welcome to photo.net and congratulations on your great Christmas gift! You're going to have a whole lot of fun with it I am sure. </p>

<p>I think the reason the picture you link to is so appealing is because of the very shallow depth of field. Now, I am no technical wizard - there are many of them here on photo.net though, so I will not try to explain the science and engineering of depth of field ( try this article for that kind of help: <a href="../column/jonsienkiewicz/missing-pages-column/depth-of-field/">http://www.photo.net/column/jonsienkiewicz/missing-pages-column/depth-of-field/</a>). </p>

<p>Instead, I would say that your camera likely came with the 18 - 55mm, <em><strong>f 3.5 - 5-6</strong></em> kit lens. It is the 'f' numbers that tell you how much control you will have over depth of field with any particular lens. Depth of field is simply how narrow or broad the band of focus is in an image. The pencil picture you have linked to is very narrowly focused on the brown and yellow pencils with the pencils closer to the viewer being blurry and those further away being blurry. This effect is often thought of as a <em>professional </em>look largely because simple or 'amateur' cameras and lenses do not have the same abilities as much more expensive lenses and cameras... equipment only 'professionals' or advanced hobbyists are normally willing to pay for in money and in time to learn how to use these tools....</p>

<p>Simply, your lens could not likely take this picture. I looked at the EXIF data for the picture you point to and see that it was taken at a focal length (how long the lens is) of 50mm and an aperture of 1.8. So, I would guess, the photographer was using a 50mm, <em >f 1.8</em> lens. The lighting in the picture is unspectacular, probably a table lamp off to the side... </p>

<p>A 50mm lens with what is called a fast aperture, is often thought of as a great portrait lens for crop sensor cameras because it allows you to get that control of 'focus' in the way that caught your eye here. Here is one example of extremely shallow depth of field (DoF) in action... if I did this insert thing properly.</p>

<p><img src=" alt="" /> </p>

<p>I took it with a 50mm, f1.8 lens set at 1.8.</p>

<p><img src=" alt="" /></p>

<p>This one was also taken with the same lens, but because the subject is further away, the effect of the shallow DoF is much reduced and far less obvious. </p>

<p>But, don't despair! You <em>can</em> get your lens to do some of this in a different way... set your camera into aperture priority mode and set your aperture at the lowest number possible, then take pictures of things focusing at various distances (fences work well for this) until the effect appears.</p>

<p>Experiment, take many, many pictures and have fun!</p>

[rapyke]

<p>So, I messed up the link thing... here is the first image I talk about with very shallow Dof</p><div></div>

[rapyke]

<p>Same lens, same aperture much further away...</p><div></div>

[Christopher Sperry Photogr]

<p>Since you just got your camera, relax and have fun with it as you have been. But also, read and understand the manual. Browse the menus, and know how to find your way around. Your camera shoots RAW and jpegs. Shooting jpegs is fine for now, but understand that you can control the saturation of colors in your jpegs with Picture Controls.</p>

<p>I Looked at the flickr photo of the colored pencils. The shot was made in good light, and it also looks like flash was used.The photo also has a shallow depth of field -- that is the photographer used a wide aperture (a small f-stop number) which for you may be f/3.5. The photographer carefully focused on the center pencils, allowing the pencils in the foreground and background to be progressively out of focus. That takes a tripod, or a steady hand, perhaps steadied on a chair back with something soft under your camera.<br>

Did you know that you can add "fill flash" to a photo, and turn down the flash intensity using the flash compensation feature. You can have a lot of successful shots using Auto White Balance, and have your colors look good. You can use Picture Controls to select "Vivid", giving you bright, saturated colors.</p>

<p>Please line up your pencils on a table with good indirect window light. Indirect light eliminates the harsh shadows you get in direct sunlight. Use matrix metering, auto white balance, ISO 200, or auto ISO, vivid picture control, close-up scene mode, or Aperture priority. When using scene modes, you may lose control of some of the user defined functions, but you will learn just from these types of exercises. If in doubt, read your manual for tips.<br>

When you have your new pencil shot, post it to this forum. You may have to shoot your picture in jpeg small if you don't have photoshop to prepare your photo for the web. You can read about posting to the forums by doing a search on photo.net. There are file size limits for the forums. You add a photo after you hit submit.</p>

<p>Here is a link I found for some free lessons:</p>

<p>http://www.geofflawrence.com/photography_tutorial_shutter_speeds_and_apertures.php#aperture</p>

 

[dan_south]

<p>Kelly, you have asked a wonderful question, but it's not one that can be answered in a few paragraphs. Nor can a handful of hints improve your photos dramatically. There is a lot that you need to learn. You can learn from books, classes, online articles and tutorials, and from other photographers, but it's going to take some time and some effort.</p>

<p>For now, shoot as much as possible and review your results.</p>

 

<ul>

<li>Try shooting things from different distances and at different focal lengths (zoom settings on your lens).</li>

<li>Try several of the different camera settings listed in the manual.</li>

<li>Try all of your camera's presets to see what they do.</li>

<li>Learn about exposure (i.e. under what conditions will the camera over or under expose the shot and how can you prevent these errors?).</li>

<li>Learn about white balance and why it's necessary.</li>

<li>Learn how light changes with weather, direction, time of day and time of year.</li>

<li>Learn compositional tips such as eliminating anything from the frame that has no purpose in your photo.</li>

<li>Figure out what subjects look better in direct sunlight and which look better in the shade or under a cloudy sky.</li>

<li>Determine when flash makes a photo look better and when it makes the photo look worse.</li>

<li>Learn what ISO means. Think about when and why you might want to use different values.</li>

<li>Learn how shutter speed affects moving subjects.</li>

<li>Learn how different aperture (f-stop) settings can alter the look of an image.</li>

<li>Learn what RAW format means and what advantages it can offer.</li>

</ul>

<p>Try, review, learn, and then try again. And if you have the time, please consider signing up for a photography class in you local area. A good class will accelerate your improvement by leaps and bounds.</p>

<p>And most of all, ignore the advice of people who tell you that you need to run out and buy a particular kind of lens or filter or other piece of gear. You can make great photos with just the camera and lens that you have today if you KNOW HOW. Knowledge and experience are the most important tools in your camera bag.</p>

[kelly_brown2]

<p>Thank you everyone for all the positive and encouraging remarks and advice!<br>

Let me try to clarify my question, because I think the sample picture I referred to was confusing. I really could have used any number of pictures, I just grabbed that one because I had tried shooting colored pencils last night. But, I actually was not asking about DOF/aperture (I think I have a pretty good handle on that for a beginner), I am talking more about the quality of the photo. And I <strong>think</strong> more specifically I am talking about lighting but I am not quite sure. What it comes down to is, how do I make my photo look like more than just a snapshot, if that makes sense? For example, I was trying different things and I took this picture ( http://www.flickr.com/photos/57740693@N08/5308736493/ ) and it just looks like I took a random picture of shoes on my bedroom floor. Ok, that's kind of what I did. But I've seen similar pictures that actually look good, and professional (at least to me). It seems many photos are just random shots but they still LOOK good. Like, I said before, I think better lighting would help in many cases but I don't know what kind of lighting is best. Or is lighting not really as big of a deal as I make it out to be?<br>

I have to admit I have been a bit discouraged because I've been experimenting with this camera (different subjects, different lighting, different camera settings, etc) sooo much since I got it and I feel like I'm not getting any good results. I hope that my persistence will eventually pay off. And I think taking a photography course would be a great idea. My college has 2 classes: "35mm Black and White Photography" and "Digital Photography." The second course is what I'm looking for and I really hope that when I take it that it is helpful. But again, thanks so much for all your help everyone!</p>

[Wouter Willemse]

<p>Kelly,<br>

With your own example, it becomes a bit more easy to understand.... And first off, I find it a very nice photo actually. Not all that snapshot.<br>

Lighting does have to do with it, it looks like your photo is taken under somewhat diffuse soft lighting. Which helps avoiding too strong highlights, but which causes the sharpness to appear less. What you could do, I think, with this photo, is add a bit of contrast and sharpen it a little. Part of getting the best from DSLRs really does happen behind the PC/Mac, no different as film had to be developed properly. So, the second course you envision may certainly be of help there.<br>

I think, based on the first example you gave, and your own example, that you miss sharpness. Sharpness comes with good lenses at their best aperture (for the kitlens, f/8 will yield the best results), and from good post processing (and I would recommend: shoot RAW and use a good piece of software to 'develop' your photos).<br>

<em>(for what it's worth, I think the picture of the pencils is over-sharpened, by the way)</em></p>

[jaydesi]

<p>Also, part of the problem with the picture you show as an example is that they're your shoes on your bedroom floor, both of which convey a whole range of things to you that no one else will feel when they look at this picture. You see them all the time, and it's hard to feel that something so ordinary is interesting. It helps to focus on evaluating the technical merits of your shot, because that can be objective regardless of the subject matter.</p>

[lachaine]

<p>It has absolutely nothing to do with your lens.</p>

<p>When it comes to these kinds of pictures... presumably indoors, it definitely is about lighting.</p>

<p>The lighting is almost never advantageous if you only use the lighting as it is, or you use your camera's flash. The really beautiful photographs you see on flickr and elsewhere have most likely been lit effectively by the photographer, using perhaps some light from a window, a reflector, and perhaps even studio type lighting. Sometimes you get lucky, but realistically, lighting is what makes pictures stand out.</p>

<p>The best way, in my opinion, is to read up on studio lighting using lights and strobes. Good wedding photographers often have a few things to say about this as well. Even if you use only available light, it will help you to understand the concept of how light affects a picture. Otherwise, if you just stand there and take a picture with the camera as it is, flash or no flash, you're just not going to get the kinds of results you're looking for these kinds of subjects. It can never be more than just a good snapshot.</p>

<p>Outside, you may not use special lighting, or you may use fill flash sometimes, but when we're talking about artistic type pictures (as opposed to more documentary or reportage pictures), the photographer probably paid attention to the lighting as well, ie, time of day, where the sun was or direction and angle of the light, what is and what isn't in shadow, etc.</p>

<p>It's when you don't pay any attention at all to lighting that it's a snapshot. It's when you do pay attention to it that you can make beautiful pictures even with just a camera phone or in the film world, a cheap plastic toy camera.</p>

<p>I'm not an expert at this myself, even after decades of photography, because I always had the idea that a real photographer uses only available light. Since you're just starting out, don't make the same mistake I did. Acquire lightng skills early on.</p>

[Andrew Garrard]

<p>Hi Kelly. I'm not sure I'm qualified to judge, but from an amateur perspective, I like your shoe shot. The lead-in from the heel of the front shoe to the sole of the rear (and, to a lesser extent, the link back from the heel of the upper shoe to the sole of the lower) is a nice touch.<br />

<br />

If I was going to give a critique - and I'm sure not everyone will agree with me - I'd say, in increasing order of importance and of difficulty:<br />

1) Don't feel you have to fill the frame absolutely with the subject - a little breathing space around it stops it feeling so crowded. In this case, I'd leave a little more carpet visible either side of the front shoe. Especially because the lines of the lower shoe tend to lead the eye out of the frame a bit.<br />

2) The shot feels like it has two subjects, which is a little awkward, especially since the rear shoe is slightly soft (because focus is on the front one). All the lead-in lines - the walls and the heel of the front shoe - are getting the viewer to look at the shoe in the back, but it's not the focus point. It might be hard to fix this, at least simply by focus on the rear shoe, because the front shoe is so much larger in the frame, and out-of-focus foregrounds often look less natural than out-of-focus backgrounds.<br />

3) I'm not totally sure whether you're trying to tell a story with the shoes (as Jay says) - although my fiancée will probably have more emotions about pink shoes than I do. If you want some emotion in the shot, it perhaps needs to be more explicit. Is there a reason one shoe has been neatly stood up and the other looks discarded? Have they been shed in a hurry? Has a cat had a go at one? Has some movement in the background caused a shoe to be knocked over? Are they lovingly cared-for, or work shoes? There's an imbalance between one being arranged but soft, and one lying on its side but sharp - it feels as though that should be saying something, but I can't tell what.<br />

<br />

Not that my own photos are in any way an improvement on this, but at least it might be something to think about, even if I'd have thought about it too late in my own shots. It's much easier to criticise than to get the shot right in the first place, especially with a fairly abstract still life. It's also easy to be pretentious when criticising, and highly likely that no two critics will agree, so I wouldn't pay too much attention to what anyone says - especially me. Just to prove that: I don't have an issue with the lighting in your shoe photo (it looks reasonably natural and I don't think you need more); there's a slighly odd mix between the yellow beam on the centre of the floor and the cooler edges, but I don't think it detracts from the image - if anything, it adds interest. Lighting is very important, but I don't think you've done badly here.<br />

<br />

Otherwise: practise, read, analyse the photos you like, and have fun. Good luck!</p>

[Tim_Lookingbill]

<p>Thanks for providing an image sample, Kelly. </p>

<p>Since you're starting out with a new camera and shooting jpegs, I'ld suggest you get to know the image rendering settings like Picture Styles if applicable, saturation, contrast and sharpening within the camera's menu system. These settings will affect the final rendering regardless of exposure and lighting used.</p>

<p>For instance your image shows over saturation in the pink of the shoes to the point where there's just large areas of flat color while the overall exposure of the scene looks correct. This look is sometimes desirable for stylized renderings, but I'm guessing it's not what you intended. I get this shooting jpegs with my camera as well on similar colored objects. This over saturation can be corrected somewhat by changing the saturation and contrast settings in the camera's menu.</p>

<p>Shooting Raw would give a wider range of adjustments to where all you had to concentrate on is lighting and exposure. The pink may still appear over saturated in the Raw preview on the computer but there's plenty of data to work with to correct in post where as the data has been lost shooting jpegs.</p>

<p>With regards to composition I'ld suggest when you look to shoot objects like this that you try playing with creating the scene with negative and positive shapes by filling the frame moving in and out and around and at different angles and just see what grabs you. Those shoes are very interesting looking on their own so either getting up close to form intimate overlapping shapes or really pulling back to show individuality and isolation communicates different attitudes of image language.</p>

[Christopher Sperry Photogr]

<p>Kelly, here are some more ideas for studio and still life photography. The flowers were shot years ago at a friend's house. The camera was a Canon G2, a 4 megapixel point & shoot, on a tripod. The studio consisted of a small table placed near a window, and a piece of black poster board for a back drop. The light is natural, indirect window light.</p>

<p>You could use a similar idea with your shoe photograph, and use a black fabric for your backdrop. You don't have to use a tripod, but an inexpensive tripod will work indoors -- even a table top tripod. Just be careful and pay extra attention to your camera while it's on a tripod, so there are no accidents.</p>

<p>Also, here is a link for a home-made light tent:</p>

<p>http://www.digital-photography-school.com/how-to-make-a-inexpensive-light-tent</p><div></div>

[James G. Dainis]

Composition-wise, I think the rear shoe should be closer to the front shoe. That is one of those things you can play around with and never be completely happy. Or, you can be happy with the composition one day and then on another day, when you are in a different mood, be unhappy with it. Welcome to the wonderful world of photography and trying to get that perfect shot. Persevere!

[Christopher Sperry Photogr]

<p>Another flower</p><div></div>

[charlesheckel]

<p>Post here and you'll have more opportunities to share your work and get feedback. There are many aspects to getting a professional-looking shot, and you'll need to learn them bit by bit. One part of your picture that might be improved is the sharpness, and that's a whole subject in itself. Another is the color scheme: you were working with black and a cool, very saturated pink, and the color of the rug was a warm tan, which looked a bit out of place. You can change that color (or indeed any color in the picture) to a color of your choice in post-processing, which is another whole subject in itself. By posting here or uploading a sample of the work in question you can get a Digital Darkroom maven to demonstrate what's possible by actually making the changes for you.</p>

[Stock-Photos]

<p>Kelly, consider reading my <a href="http://www.saugus.net/Photos/photography_tips.shtml"><strong>digital photography tips</strong></a> which I wrote several years ago.</p>

[raymondborg]

<p>First of all, you have to show out your pictures in order to enable someone spotting out what's wrong with yours. Adding some details to your posting, such as shutter speed, lighting used etc would help experienced photographers to guide you to the right way. You have also to keep in mind that most of the picture you see online were somehow enhanced by photoshop or any other software. Hope you achieved the standard you are looking for. Wishing you all the best for the new year 2011 full of many artistic photos. Congrats.</p>

[accystan]

<p>Kelly:</p>

<p>I'm just wondering how you've got your camera set up. I note that you're shooting in jpeg mode but are you aware that the output of most dslr's can be adjusted. i.e. you can go into the menu and modify the picture controls. You can adjust the sharpness, brightness, saturation, hue etc. such that the pic is to your liking. This doesn't apply to shots taken in RAW of course.</p>

<p>I'm not familiar with the D3100 but you might want to look in your manual index under 'picture controls'.</p>

<p>Good luck, Dave D</p>

<p>p.s. I haven't read through all the previous responses so maybe this point has been covered.</p>

[stinshoff]

<p>I tend to think that Christopher's critique is dead on. The foreground and background of your shoe picture needs to be simplified. Try the same shot with non distacting background and the picture will be immediately improved.</p>

[mattwelsh]

<p>Kelly,<br>

I've written a free eBook designed to help beginners that you may want to read. If you're interested you can get it by <a href="http://bit.ly/hyFu2H">clicking here</a><br>

Hope it helps,<br>

Matt</p>

[callyolson]

<p>Here is my advice (this is how I work on improving):<br>

Set up a project (like a homework assignment), outline what you want the end results to look like.<br>

Look at the results and analize the 1 biggest area you failed.<br>

Research that 1 area specifically using library/books, this forum, online google searches anything you can get info from.<br>

Identify a new technique or method to fix in your work flow.<br>

Try again, the same project but this time implementing what you learned.<br>

Compare results... Repeat!</p>

[sonia_sonia1]

<p>Hi Kelly,<br>

Don't be disheartened with your results. Photography is an art and definitely requires practice to get the desired professional results. Just get started with the basics of lighting and exposure; the tips and guide for which are freely available online. The most reliable source for learning how to make great photographs is kenrockwell.com. Read the articles at ken rockwell before finally registering for any courses. It is all do it yourself stuff. You have to experiment and experience photography for getting hold of the right thing.<br>

I don't find anything wrong with the sample photograph taken by you. The only element which is missing is the sharpness; which can be corrected through digital retouching in the image editor.</p>