Noob phtographer : Need critics and helps please

[haa72]

Hi ,
I didn't really have a background about photography though I get a nice camera . I read about everything and I am using the Manual settings instead of auto .... . I set the shutter and all these stuffs . in the picture below I used cloudy options.

I would appreciate your critics to this picture , what did i do wrong ?

http://www.flickr.com/photos/48983936@N07/4490287382/

you can click on the file to enlarge it .

I dont really know if i missed the convenient thread for my topic

10x

 

[Pikemann Urge]

Okay, some quick observations:

- The branches in the lower left corner of the frame distract from the subject. That is, there is no need for the foliage to be there.

- Your composition could be tighter. Either your lens is not long enough or you are too far away.

- Because of the brightness of the sky, the bird (most of its body is facing the ground, not the sky) is underexposed.

- The sky is too pale, thanks to the wispy cloud. You should take these photos with a more dramatic sky (either thick, puffy clouds or blue sky).

I hope that was of some help.

 

[Edge100]

Hi ,
I didn't really have a background about photography though I get a nice camera . I read about everything and I am using the Manual settings instead of auto .... . I set the shutter and all these stuffs . in the picture below I used cloudy options.

I would appreciate your critics to this picture , what did i do wrong ?

http://www.flickr.com/photos/48983936@N07/4490287382/

you can click on the file to enlarge it .

I dont really know if i missed the convenient thread for my topic

10x

Your question indicates to me that you know there is something "wrong" with the photo. While there are any number of technical problems with the shot (underexposed main subject, branches are distracting, crappy light, very poor sharpness, focal length not long enough, awkward perspective), the real problem is that the photograph is simply boring. Are you excited by it? Does it say something to you, other than "I finally have a nice camera and I'm able to take a photograph with it"?

We all have to go through this phase of learning our equipment. But that's only one part of the story; you have to learn how to "see" a photograph. As the old saying goes: the beginner sees the subject, the intermediate sees the composition, and the master sees the light. You clearly wanted to take a picture of a bird; next time, I would suggest thinking a bit more about the composition. Is the background busy? Is the bird doing something interesting? What else is going on in the shot? Is the light interesting or flat and boring?

I don't mean to be too critical; it's great to see so many people getting into photography. But one downside of digital photography is that photos are cheap; when you had to pay for film to be developed, you were more careful about your photographs; you'd wait for the right composition and light, and only then would you use up a precious exposure. Now, one can simply snap away and hope for the best. My advice would be to think of each photograph as having a cost; save your money, and only take those photographs that are valuable to you.

 

[Pikemann Urge]

But one downside of digital photography is that photos are cheap; when you had to pay for film to be developed, you were more careful about your photographs; you'd wait for the right composition and light, and only then would you use up a precious exposure. Now, one can simply snap away and hope for the best. My advice would be to think of each photograph as having a cost; save your money, and only take those photographs that are valuable to you.

I don't disrespect your POV. However, I do think that there is a better POV regarding digital photography. I think haa72 should be taking heaps and heaps of photos. This is a great way to learn. Editing will be more time consuming, which will be one more lesson to learn along the way. And eventually, when he becomes more experienced, he will become more disciplined.

But for now, he should feel comfortable with taking lots of exposures.

 

[Edge100]

I don't disrespect your POV. However, I do think that there is a better POV regarding digital photography. I think haa72 should be taking heaps and heaps of photos. This is a great way to learn. Editing will be more time consuming, which will be one more lesson to learn along the way. And eventually, when he becomes more experienced, he will become more disciplined.

But for now, he should feel comfortable with taking lots of exposures.

Yes, this is the flip side of the argument, and it's equally valid. Taking loads of photos is a good way to learn, but only if you're actually learning from them; taking the time to see what you did right and wrong.

The downside of digital photography is that it's much too easy to just snap away without thinking about it. That was one of the benefits of film; you were forced to carefully consider what you were doing.

The person who puts these two skills together (taking lots of photographs AND carefully considering what to photograph) is the person who will excel at this craft.

 

[SayCheese]

Yes, this is the flip side of the argument, and it's equally valid. Taking loads of photos is a good way to learn, but only if you're actually learning from them; taking the time to see what you did right and wrong.

but only if you're actually learning from them; taking the time to see what you did right and wrong.
I have to agree with this statement. IMO this is where a lot of new photographers go wrong. They take a 'not so great image' and then fail to learn from it. As long as you are learning from your photography then you will be fine.

 

[HBOC]

As far as the photo goes, you don't have enough reach to get close. The branches are a distraction and too many shadows. It is fairly sharp, however.

 

[haa72]

Okay, some quick observations:

- The branches in the lower left corner of the frame distract from the subject. That is, there is no need for the foliage to be there.

- Your composition could be tighter. Either your lens is not long enough or you are too far away.

- Because of the brightness of the sky, the bird (most of its body is facing the ground, not the sky) is underexposed.

- The sky is too pale, thanks to the wispy cloud. You should take these photos with a more dramatic sky (either thick, puffy clouds or blue sky).

I hope that was of some help.

I am really thankful for your helpful comment . yeah my Lens is 55mm , and the subject was out of my reach but i gave it a try . I thought including the branches would make the picture better. I read today about setting the EV in a way to focus only on the subject to avoid underexposed in such a case .

Your question indicates to me that you know there is something "wrong" with the photo. While there are any number of technical problems with the shot (underexposed main subject, branches are distracting, crappy light, very poor sharpness, focal length not long enough, awkward perspective), the real problem is that the photograph is simply boring. Are you excited by it? Does it say something to you, other than "I finally have a nice camera and I'm able to take a photograph with it"?

We all have to go through this phase of learning our equipment. But that's only one part of the story; you have to learn how to "see" a photograph. As the old saying goes: the beginner sees the subject, the intermediate sees the composition, and the master sees the light. You clearly wanted to take a picture of a bird; next time, I would suggest thinking a bit more about the composition. Is the background busy? Is the bird doing something interesting? What else is going on in the shot? Is the light interesting or flat and boring?

I don't mean to be too critical; it's great to see so many people getting into photography. But one downside of digital photography is that photos are cheap; when you had to pay for film to be developed, you were more careful about your photographs; you'd wait for the right composition and light, and only then would you use up a precious exposure. Now, one can simply snap away and hope for the best. My advice would be to think of each photograph as having a cost; save your money, and only take those photographs that are valuable to you.

Frankly , that' what the picture meant to me :I finally have a nice camera and I'm able to take a photograph with it but I should make it look good . I know the pic look poor , for this reason i added the branches . It seems that i made it look worse . hahaha .
Thank you for your long and helpful comment as well . I found it interesting especially that I ma now reading a book about photography and exposure .

I don't disrespect your POV. However, I do think that there is a better POV regarding digital photography. I think haa72 should be taking heaps and heaps of photos. This is a great way to learn. Editing will be more time consuming, which will be one more lesson to learn along the way. And eventually, when he becomes more experienced, he will become more disciplined.

But for now, he should feel comfortable with taking lots of exposures.

Thank u for ur advice

Yes, this is the flip side of the argument, and it's equally valid. Taking loads of photos is a good way to learn, but only if you're actually learning from them; taking the time to see what you did right and wrong.

The downside of digital photography is that it's much too easy to just snap away without thinking about it. That was one of the benefits of film; you were forced to carefully consider what you were doing.

The person who puts these two skills together (taking lots of photographs AND carefully considering what to photograph) is the person who will excel at this craft.

exactlly ths is the main point : taking the time to see what you did right and wrong.

but only if you're actually learning from them; taking the time to see what you did right and wrong.
I have to agree with this statement. IMO this is where a lot of new photographers go wrong. They take a 'not so great image' and then fail to learn from it. As long as you are learning from your photography then you will be fine.

As far as the photo goes, you don't have enough reach to get close. The branches are a distraction and too many shadows. It is fairly sharp, however.

yeah I think it was failry sharp .

Thank you all for your comments
if u want you can check the other picture in my flickr account and add some more comments .
always comments are welcomed .

 

[Kelly the Dude]

Before I tell you what I think I would have done, I'll tell you what I think you did do well. You did nail the focus (from what I can see, the texture on the bird is very crisp, although it's impossible to tell from a picture with this low of resolution) and the shutter (the bird looks solid, like he's frozen in motion).

I guess what I would have done is adjusted the exposure. It's often hard to get two items in a photo exposed exactly how you want them, but a little more range in contrast would be nice. Shooting in Raw, and then adjusting the different areas in something like photoshop can be very useful.

It's true, the composition does kind of suck, but its hard to get a good composition shooting birds flying like this out of a 55mm lens from the ground. Here's an idea: maybe try getting a little higher, like off a parking ramp err something-- shooting down. A bird's eye view of a bird. It might work and it might be completely stupid since I haven't tried it. I do know if I want to get an overhead look of something I always look for parking ramps.

Remember the rule of thirds too. It really helps!

 

[flosseR]

Ok my 2cents.
I agree with nailing the focus and the shutter. while these are minor points in the overall photo, they do represent a part and at least you configured your camera if you shot in manual.
Everyone wants to shoot birds when they get a nice shiny camera. why? because they are generally hard to "freeze" and expose well.
exposing a subject imposed on an overcast sky is hard, nearly impossible without filters or re-adjustments.

About the comment of learning from photos you shoot. My argument would be: ok so you have a photo you know SOMETHING is wrong but as a beginner you just cant see it. How are you learning when you cant "see" what is wrong?

//f