I've had my Olympus a few weeks now and so far I haven't produced much that I'm actually happy with, so I thought I'd post a few thumbnails here, with the hope that people either comment on my images, or just reply here.
I think you did a good job. Just remember the third rule when it applies. I really like the 4th shot but it had a few distractions. I hope you don't mind but I did an edit on it to tone down the distractions (yellow trucks, angled walkway at bottom, center horizon, and cleaned the beach a little).
With a different crop and a little selective editing here is what your shot looks like.
[thumb]720381[/thumb]
What ya think?
The macro shot #3 looks great. Very good detail considering you don't have a macro lens. The color and lighting is good as well.
well here on dpc, so much of it is the editing. I mean you have to have a good photo in the first place, but the editing is what gives it that extra oomf. Of course everyone has their own take on stuff.
Here are a couple versions I tried for your moth!
Things you can always play around with... gradient maps, selective colors, shadows/highlights, and the DPC favorite: Unsharpen Mask. And in advanced editing, dodging and burning, blurring the edges with guassian blur. And always play with cropping. Sometimes there is something new waiting to be discovered and all it takes is a little bit of looking. I usually crop my images 5-6 times before I decide.
Also... snapshots on your friend. In the history palette, you'll see a little camera icon at the bottom next to the trash can. I always take snapshots along the way so I can see if I like the direction I'm going. Sometimes I get to carried away with a feature or color and don't realized it until I compare it to the original and so Woah! And then usually kick the effects back a bit.
ETA: Did this one too for fun. I liked the texture of the berries.
Thanks for the comments, I shall have a play around in Lightroom and Photoshop, see how far I get.
I'm never sure how much to post process, and I think that's one of my problems with submitting competitive images.
I look at some entries here and literally think "There's noway that photo came out the camera looking like that" - I admire that people are able to bring an "ok" image into Photoshop and make it look great, but for me personally, I don't think that's going to improve my technical skill whilst out taking the shots.
Oh, and I like the adjustments you have made for me, they are nice :D
Thanks for the comments, I shall have a play around in Lightroom and Photoshop, see how far I get.
I'm never sure how much to post process, and I think that's one of my problems with submitting competitive images.
I look at some entries here and literally think "There's noway that photo came out the camera looking like that" - I admire that people are able to bring an "ok" image into Photoshop and make it look great, but for me personally, I don't think that's going to improve my technical skill whilst out taking the shots.
Oh, and I like the adjustments you have made for me, they are nice :D
Dan.
Well actually... for me I find, the longer I spend editing, the more I notice what I don't and do like about a shot itself along the way. It's the different between picking and submitting in a few mins for example, or spending a good half an hour-2 hours critiquing the shot. So... perhaps if you aren't into the editing part as much, just try looking at your photos a long time, and that will take you a long way too! My boyfriend is a painter and he was always taught you should spend at least as much time looking at a painting as you do painting it (which is a very hard rule to keep up with in painting, photography not so much! but just trying is better than nothing!)
If you are accustomed to shooting with a P&S, and this is your first DSLR, you will notice right away that the camera does not produce "finished" looking images without some settings being adjusted. This is a sort of universal "oops" kind of thing, and it happened to me too.
Most DSLR's produce images that need to be edited some to look better than the P&S ones because the DSLR is not set by default to process the images to the degree that the P&S cameras do. This allows more flexibility in post processing. For instance, on a very detailed and high contrast subject shot, the P&S may sharpen the image a bit too much using the default software in the camera. The DSLR does not do that, so you can adjust the parameters exactly as you want them in processing.
More $ can = better photos, but you will also have to work at it some in learning how to use the lenses available, and in processing the resulting camera files.
You will be a lot happier with the results when you get your own system for that worked out to your satisfaction.
If you like higher saturation, you may try shooting the landscape shots using a "cloudy day" white balance and see how they look.
A few of you have pointed out my seeming inability to take a photograph that's straight with the horizon (I guess I need to work on that, carry the tripod etc) However, would you recommend I *use* my camera to help me with this.
My camera can superimpose various grids and guidelines onto the Live lCD screen, think it would be a good idea to use or not?
A few of you have pointed out my seeming inability to take a photograph that's straight with the horizon (I guess I need to work on that, carry the tripod etc) However, would you recommend I *use* my camera to help me with this.
My camera can superimpose various grids and guidelines onto the Live lCD screen, think it would be a good idea to use or not?
Assuming your camera has a viewfinder, just look through it and make sure the horizon line is parallel with the top or bottom edge of the viewfinder. There's really nothing to it other than remembering to check it.
