Jump to content

allklier

Members
  • Posts

    54
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by allklier

  1. One thing I find with street shots is that you want to capture the scene with authenticity, which works best if your subjects don't know they're being photographed. So you either don't hold the camera in front of your face, or you use a tele lens so you keep your distance.

     

    <p>One recent shoot which I enjoyed was just sitting on a bench in downtown Manhattan, keeping my camera aimed in my lap and taking some 300+ exposures of everyone who walked by over a period of 30 min. Then you spend a lot of time sorting through to find the few that are good. This is where digital is just so much more affordable.

     

    <p>Here are some of the better results from that shoot: <a href="http://www.photo.net/photodb/edit-presentation?presentation_id=346689">Manhattan Street</a>.

  2. I was curious about the same topic, and did what an earlier response suggested: got a book and read up on the topic. I'm still getting ready to put it to use, but liked the book I picked as it had comprehensive coverage of technique and equipment, including lighting and the make up of specific basic and starter kits: <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Digital-Portrait-Photography-Lighting-Memorable/dp/0471781282">Digital Portrait Photography</a>. You can see the table of contents and a few select pages on Amazon's website before you buy the book.
  3. Thanks for everyone's thoughtful replies.

     

    Emily - your version doesn't overcome the haze, but by making it more sunset like looking it does make the haze less noticeable as the added red tones balance out the mostly blue haze.

     

    Edward - I will try it with different filters next time and compare. For this shot I used a polarizing filter. Is it possible, and a valid technique, to take the shot multiple times with different filters and then overlay them?

     

    Mike - I didn't realize that the f-stop made such a big difference re: sharpness and contrast in this case. On my next opportunity I will take the shot with a range of f-stops so that I can learn the difference it has. Thanks to you and Michael to pointing this out.

  4. Good points. My logic on these points was:

     

    Having the software is a good tool to save a shot, but aspiring to get it right in the camera encourages me to improve technique and avoid getting sloppy because I have the software to back me up. So where the tool can enhance the range of the camera beyond its limitation, I think it's a fine choice to use the software.

     

    Regarding the F/18 - from a creative exposure point of view I considered it a don't care on aperture, and set the shutter priority to allow me to hand-hold the camera given the heavy lens. But that is a fair question: does the sharpness / depth of field really come into question on a subject that is literally 100 miles distant?

  5. Living in WA there are many exciting mountain ranges to shoot. But I find that

    my pictures turn out with too much haze. What is the correct technique for a

    shot like this to come out well?

     

    <p>Here's a shot I took of Mt. Hood from Portland: <a

    href="http://www.photo.net/photo/5547348">original</a>

     

    <p>I later post-processed the picture in software and increased the contrast,

    which helped it a bit, but still didn't really bring it out: <a

    href="http://www.photo.net/photo/5547347">adjusted

    contrast</a>. Plus, ideally I'd like to take the shot so that post processing

    is unnecessary or minimal.

     

    <p>The picture was taken with a Canon EOS 400D, 70-200mm L lens at 200mm, with

    circ polarizing filter, ISO 400, F/18, 1/160, shutter priority and 0.33

    exposure comp.

×
×
  • Create New...