c_k17

<p>I want to get a lighting kit so I can start taking photos inside but I don't know what to get. Should I get the one with the umbrellas or softboxes? How many watts will create an acceptable amount of light, I think most importantly what type of light is right? I want to be able to also create the green screen effect, I would say that the most important questions are how much and or how many lights are enough?</p>

<p>Hello, I have a 450D camera with a 18mm - 55mm kit lens, pictures turn out nice, however can I produce better photos with a 50mm 1.8 lens? I heard it does quite well in lowlight, but thats not really what I need to know. My question is if it does better in portraits lets say in a studio setup with plain backgrounds and softboxes, and or outdoor portraits, landscapes? I've read that it does a wonderful job when you want to achieve the blurry background (gaussian blur) ? Please tell me anything you want about this, I'd really appreciate it.</p>

<p>Hello, I'm having problems taking photos in where people wear white clothes because the photo ends up too bright. I think its called over exposed. The overall picture looks unevenly brighter, and the white clothes look extra bright almost to the point where it looses detail. Is there a way that this can be avoided? Its also very random, sometimes it happens, and sometimes it does not. I'm beginning to think there's a way around this, but I can't figure it out.</p>

<p>I printed a photo at a lab, and printed another copy of the same photo on an inkjet printer. Both prints came from the exact same file. The print from the lab while darker and more saturated, showed accuracy when it came to the overall color tone. The inkjet print looked lighter and also nice, but only until I compare it with the lab print. I see that the colors on the inkjet print weren't as accurate and when you expose it in flourescent or daylight, it shows a green cast and gives it a washed out dull look. The the lab print was more consistent in different lights and had no cast plus it was sharp and detailed. Why is there a difference if the original file for both prints is the same? I use the best possible settings for the inkjet print. I should stick to the lab, but I just felt like asking. Thanks. </p>

<p>I want to take photos of people and change the background with a different image in photoshop, but I'm not so sure of what I really need to achieve that, All I have right now is a Canon Rebel with a 18 to 55mm lens. I saw these entry level systems that include umbrellas with flourescent daylight bulbs and muslins, but I don't know if its the right choice. How do big studios get those sparkly detailed eyes and sharp skin tones? I'm thinking its all about the light, but maybe I'm wrong?</p>

<p>Hi I started printing some pictures with my printer at home. The thing is that I use a Brother printer with HP photo paper, and when I choose the best settings for the type of paper to print, the output isn't quite right.</p>

<p>I did a test print with regular copy paper at its regular settings and it seems to get the the colors about right, the quality is bad, but the colors are right. Now its the opposite with the photo paper and its specific settings, good quality but there are some color shifts.</p>

<p>For example the color gray, on the regular sheet it looks well, gray, and on the photo paper it looks gray with a hint of blueish green. side by side comparisons and they differ, Does anyone know what's going on?</p>

<p>I tried printing on the photo paper with the regular paper setting, and while colors look darker but about right, the only color that is printed properly is black in quality. All other colors are printed with a series of horizontal lines, like when you try to print as draft quality, though its not setup as draft quality to print. Its annoying. haha.</p>

<p>To make a long story short, is there any hope?, or should I go back to my lab? .. maybe change paper type? The lab does quite the job most of the time, but the results vary, while I was thinking of a more "controlled" situation with my printer, it seems to be giving me a headache.</p>

<p>Thanks in advance for your advice.</p>

<p>I have 12 MP available, though I have to do some cropping like maybe reducing it to 7MP to make a print up to 20X30, I have been dissatisfied with previous prints, color problem, pixels, etc. it just looks bad. I know I'm not a professional, but does it have to be so difficult to get at least some type of good result?<br>

I've seen these wedding photos that look just as nice as its small 4X6 version, do I need a different lab? Photoshop upsizing? I'm sort of tired of playing around with megapixels only to receive similar results.<br>

I don't expect in depth info about this, but pointing me to the right direction would be very helpful so I can do better research.<br>

Thanks.</p>

<p>Its the type of paper which DVD covers are made, the one with a glossy finish, but a regular paper feel.<br>

It's not the memorex pack or thick photo paper type, its like the kind you get from DVD movies you buy from store.</p>

<p>I took an outdoor photo and had it printed at home. The picture looks very nice under the typical light bulb in the room, but the pictures shifts appeal when I put it under fluorescent lighting, it goes greenish and odd.<br>

Why is that? Ive noticed other pictures that look equally acceptable in all types of light, did I do something wrong?<br>

I just did a little softening, and then printed. Can I adjust an image to look acceptable in all types of light?<br>

Thanks.</p>

 

<p>I appreciate everyone's input, though Danny's response cleared up what I wanted to know. Should I buy a 5D? maybe, not unless I'm going to shoot pro photos in the arctic, (as an example when it comes to one of the intended uses of a 5D camera) Will the Xsi produce similar results without spending more? well, maybe, if I use the proper lens, with the proper settings. To make a long story short, I don't need a 5D, an Xsi will do fine. I feel much better, and I didn't have to read a whole book on something so simple. Thanks. =)</p>

<p>I've been noticing that Canon cameras tend to look the same, though they differ in price.<br>

For example, what are some major differences between a Canon 5D and a Canon Xsi camera? aren't they the same thing in the end?<br>

The specs just differ in where different vocabulary is used, though I'd like to particularly understand what makes them different aside from the lets say megapixel difference which are evident facts. Is the 5D intentionally suppost to take better photos because its more expensive?<br>

Aside from the lens prices, the 5D body is more expensive than the Xsi body.</p>

<p>I've began to do some experiments with a light I have and my photo camera. The light I'm using is a camcorder light that is used for video. Since it emits lots of light I tried it out with the photo camera. It does give lots of light, but the pictures and skin tones look very yellowish. It looks fine in video, but in pictures it looks kind of bad, a note I should add is that sometimes that light messes up some photos by making them blurry and sticky looking (shutter speed problem I'm supposing)<br>

My question is, what is the name of the lighting that gives even natural color? I've noticed that different types of lights and reflectors transmit different tones, but I'm don't know their names. To give you a better idea of what I mean with even and natural colors.. what kind of light do professional photo studios use?</p>

<p>I recorded a widescreen format video with my HD cam, I also created a widescreen format photo slideshow with ProShow, I rendered the photo clip in .AVI and widescreen format, but when I try to combine the rendered photo clip with the recorded video in the timeline of another video editor, the program says it can not mix widescreen video with non widescreen video.<br />What gives?<br />I first inserted the video recorded from the video camera, and then I tried to insert the photo clip but it doesn't accept it. I noticed in Windows Media Player that the video from the HD cam looks a bit more wider than the photo clip.<br />Did I do something wrong?</p>

<p>An example is this picture .. <a href="http://img69.imageshack.us/img69/7500/image10q.jpg">http://img69.imageshack.us/img69/7500/image10q.jpg</a><br>

it was taken with a Canon 30D.<br>

It looks nice, this is what I'm really looking for. Personally the colors are sharp and well balanced. The detail of her shirt and skin is what I mean when I say clean and organized. No muddy feel to it. Tell me what you think.</p>

<p>Ok, so there's more to a photo than considering new lenses when one thinks a more expensive one will do better photos. First you have to know your camera, how it responds to different situations and understanding that with even the most limited lens you can get good results as long as you know what you're doing. Then comes photoshop, its used to enhance a photo, to make it look clean and organized when needed, but what is that process called so I can read about it?<br />I've seen some great photos, clean sharp look and even skin tones. Taking into account the first step is how the camera takes the photo, how can I learn how to use photoshop tools to its best?<br />Just one keyword will help me so much.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>I just received a Canon Xsi camera with the pre-included 18-55mm EFS lens with an external flash. Most pictures come out great, but by looking at the camera, I feel like there is more to know than just using it as it is.<br>

Even though I have to learn alot about lens and cameras, I can't get past the idea that there are other lenses than can produce better results. The photos look nice but somewhat look alike like a point and shoot camera. Maybe my lack of experience in tweaking the settings, or a mix of knowledge with lens, but I've seen these great photos that are very crisp and well balanced. Taking into account that photoshop is used for fine tuning, I know that a better lens will produce that crisp organized look.<br>

I read somewhere about prime lenses, but I'm clueless. I would like to take great outdoor portraits and achieve the blurry background. What camera settings are the best? lens? are there camera limitations? people tell me to use AV mode because of the light. I don't like auto because of the difficulty with focusing.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>I have a tough time getting pictures to print close to what I see on screen. The pictures look awesome on the computer monitor and on the camera LCD but on paper they tend to look flat. In add, I have to many variations, like some pics look somewhat ok on the paper, and some look dark and slightly off tone, yet all of the pictures look fine on the computer and camera LCD. How can I improve this?</p>