Recommended Posts

Quite looking forward to seeing your work when you finally get some on

Alamy, good luck.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I'm now familiar with all the settings on the camera, and understand the exposure triangle and shooting in manual mode 100% of the time. I'm finding setting things a bit time consuming for anything except still objects and predictable subjects so I'm sure there will be times I use auto, but I'm really loving shooting in full manual. Sharp, clear and using minimum ISO rather than letting auto jack the ISO extremely high keeps pictures from getting grainy.

 

I've done a lot of reading (I read very quickly and have a high comprehension rate so I've done an enormous amount of studying for the short time I've done this so far) and I can now read the histogram and understand how to use it to avoid over or under exposure and I know what long exposure is and how to take night shots, use long exposure to make some cool motion and lighting effects.

 

I've learned about the rule of thirds and researched every composition technique I could find and learned a great deal, as well as different hacks to achieve things with a camera that otherwise would take expensive equipment to achieve.

 

I plan on getting a 50mm prime lens when I get some money as well as a macro and a tripod. I tried flipping my current lens backward to use that as a macro and it worked, I just couldn't take a picture as the camera didn't detect a lens attached because I was holding it. Bummer...

 

I understand the nature of aperture and depth of field, shutter speed and how faster shutter speeds stop motion and slower shutter speeds allow motion blur depending on the length and how anything above 800 ISO is very grainy, but 800 and below is ok. Of course the lower the better but I've also learned how to remove the grain using the raw photoshop plugin without removing too much detail, if there is indeed grain.

 

I have a long way to go, and a lot more practice but I'm taking much better photo's in just the amount of time I've spent learning thus far and am very happy with my progress even in this short amount of time. Like I said, I'm passionate and dedicated when it comes to acquiring new skills and I'm a fast learner. Passion can really drive a person to learn things quickly!

 

Here's one of my recent photo's so you can see my progress. The child in one of them is my son.

37294513_10215149301698937_1289992143158

 

37300460_10215148894328753_2484738799502

 

37283365_10215157507264071_2127668966703

 

Edited by wolfcry044
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sounds like you are having fun learning photography but you don't need to do it all at once even if you have a high comprehension rate. Ultimately it is all about practicing what you learn from reading and learning from your mistakes. After a while the basics become second nature but it does not happen instantly even if you are highly intelligent.

 

My advice is take it easy - there is no hurry and you are most probably not going to make your fortune from stock photography. I am self taught and I made just about every mistake it is possible to make over the years. The trick is to not make the same mistake again. Mistakes can be very positive but you don't want to make mistakes if working for a client.

 

I can't comment in detail on the images you have posted as it is not really possible to judge an image properly for technical quality without seeing it full size. However, one little tip I will throw your way: when you are photographing children and dogs, get down to their level - don't shoot down onto them - get down.

 

It also looks like you are losing detail in the highlights of the dog shot. Shoot raw and pull back the highlights on the raw file. If you are really able to read the histo, then your image should be showing a lot more highlight detail.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks, I will. The dog I purposefully raised the exposure in raw to drown out the background and make it cleaner. I really need to get that 50mm lens for better background blur.

 

Thanks for your tips! I am having a lot of fun, and practicing a lot is helping me get comfortable with shooting manually so it's all good. Can't wait to go back to the province of Pangasinan and out of the city. A lot more good stuff to shoot there. Still shy about pulling the camera out in the city but I imagine being shy about pulling it out is something that will pass with time.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, wolfcry044 said:

Thanks, I will. The dog I purposefully raised the exposure in raw to drown out the background and make it cleaner. I really need to get that 50mm lens for better background blur.

 

Thanks for your tips! I am having a lot of fun, and practicing a lot is helping me get comfortable with shooting manually so it's all good. Can't wait to go back to the province of Pangasinan and out of the city. A lot more good stuff to shoot there. Still shy about pulling the camera out in the city but I imagine being shy about pulling it out is something that will pass with time.

 

 

There is a general principle in photography that you the eye is attracted to the brightest part of the image so making the background really bright takes the eye away from the main subject which is the dog's face. Of course rules are made to be broken but if that was my pic I would have put a radial filter on the dogs head in LR/ACR and  darkened the background that way. There is also a blue colour cast in the image.

 

I love using a 50mm prime on a FF camera but it is not ideal for blurring backgrounds unless you shoot at wide aperture and get in very close to the subject. Even then it is  not ideal for portraiture including dogs - a medium telephoto would be better for blurring backgrounds and portraits if that is what you are doing - just move back from the subject. A 50mm is great for general purpose photgraphy and you should get excellent image quality at a very good price. I love using a 50 for mountain landscapes.

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I read that 50mm is also much better indoors and allows you to set the ISO lower indoors due to the wider apertures. Really having trouble indoors as I don't have flash (Planning on getting flash and adding a homemade flash diffuser. I read all kinds of useful articles showing how to use a milk carton, calling card and various other things that bounce/diffuse the flash.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But in general lens performance at wide apertures is often not great and image quality will also deteriorate when you increase the ISO so you are playing one thing against another all the time in photography. When using available light indoors all this comes into play: getting the best blend of shutter speed, aperture and ISO for the job is the trick.

 

Enjoy the learning. I love learning even after all the years. The day I can't, don't want to or am afraid to learn something new is the day I will become an old man - but that can happen at any age :)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's a great way to look at it. Photography is awesome, I wish I'd have gotten into it sooner.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, wolfcry044 said:

I read that 50mm is also much better indoors and allows you to set the ISO lower indoors due to the wider apertures. Really having trouble indoors as I don't have flash (Planning on getting flash and adding a homemade flash diffuser. I read all kinds of useful articles showing how to use a milk carton, calling card and various other things that bounce/diffuse the flash.

 

 

I've made a couple of mini soft boxes and diffusers using bits of leftover cardboard, some tin foil and an old bedsheet as a diffuser material - thankfully I found one with only a few stains!!:blink:....eww!....did I just type that out loud? I meant to say I found an unused one!:D....Phew! I think I got away with that!  :lol:

Anyway, they work well enough and cost me nothing.

 

 

Your pics look pretty good, perhaps a tiny bit on the cool side - a quick WB tweak in LR should fix that, although it could be my monitor!

 

3 hours ago, wolfcry044 said:

That's a great way to look at it. Photography is awesome, I wish I'd have gotten into it sooner.

 

 

Agreed, wholeheartedly! :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, wolfcry044 said:

I read that 50mm is also much better indoors and allows you to set the ISO lower indoors due to the wider apertures

 

I must have been reading the wrong books for the past 30 odd years!

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, wolfcry044 said:

I read that 50mm is also much better indoors and allows you to set the ISO lower indoors due to the wider apertures. Really having trouble indoors as I don't have flash (Planning on getting flash and adding a homemade flash diffuser. I read all kinds of useful articles showing how to use a milk carton, calling card and various other things that bounce/diffuse the flash.

 

 

42 minutes ago, Matt Limb said:

 

I must have been reading the wrong books for the past 30 odd years!

 

 

 

 

I think he means that a 50mm is useful indoors because it is likely to have a wider maximum aperture and so can be used more effectively handheld using available light than a lens with a smaller maximum aperture. This would include the ability to use lower ISO. I don't think he means that 50mm lenses work better indoors than outdoors which could be a literal interpretation. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, MDM said:

50mm is useful indoors because it is likely to have a wider maximum aperture

 

I agree, my point also ........... but a wide aperture is not limited to just a standard 50mm - most of us can go from wide to telephoto at 2.8, for me that is 14mm to 200mm - yes, prime lenses may be wider and can go to 1.2

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
6 hours ago, Matt Limb said:

 

.... prime lenses may be wider and can go to 1.2

 

Sometimes even wider....the Zeiss Super Q-Gigantar 40mm for example, which has a staggering f0.33 aperture - though only if your first name is 'King of' or 'Queen of'! :D

 

[**edit**]

OK, not a great example - seems this lens was just a publicity stunt, but the Meyer-Optik-Görlitz 50mm f/0.95 prime is real enough.

Edited by Gareth

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/07/2018 at 19:00, Gareth said:

The D3400 (newest) is an excellent camera, and is perfectly suitable.

Crop sensor Nikons or Canons, are much cheaper to buy if you look for used ones however.

 

You can pick up a suitable, used DSLR for under £100, and then get a decent standard zoom lens.

By suitable I mean 6 megapixels or better, and a standard zoom lens is about 18-50mm - get the best one you can afford - good lenses trump good cameras!

The bigger the sensor, the better the quality, which is why smartphones are not suitable for Alamy, due to their tiny sensor.

Those sharp images you've seen were doubtless taken on very expensive super sharp lenses, by photographers with decades of experience.

You don't need to spend huge amounts, and don't worry too much about the competition, just practice and develop a good technique.

Use a tripod at first, to keep camera shake to a minimum, possibly a shutter release cable - these cost very little - then practice, practice, practice!

 

 

Here is a link to Alamys 'How to pass QC' - it's a pdf file, and it outlines all the dos and don'ts.

 

If you're not ready for DSLR stock yet, then look at Stockimo, it's the place for mobile phone stock photography here at Alamy.

 

As for post processing, always shoot RAW, keep ISO as low as possible, don't over sharpen and don't use too much noise reduction - if you're having to apply too much, you should probably bin the image.

 

What Alamy wants are clean, decently sharp, well exposed images, nothing more, just make sure your initial QC of three images, informs your future workflow and when accepted, stick to it - check images at 100%, clean up dust spots etc.

 

Best of luck from one newcomer to another :)

 

Gareth.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Was good having that PDF to look through - but there is something in there I'm not sure I agree with. Their example of camera shake, is probably more of an example of subject movement, which in the example photo I'm not sure is necessarily a "problem". Wouldn't it be preferable to have some motion blur in that case?

 

Also, Chromatic aberration. In certain situations this can be almost impossible to remove 100%, even with some very good lenses. Is no amount acceptable, or is it OK if it's only minor?

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, CA, even minor, is very risky. One of mine (a long time ago) failed for a tiny bit of CA, very upper left corner, leaves against bright sky.

I usually will try to crop it out. Or I will take the sponge tool in PS and carefully swipe it off.

That said, CA is often found on Alamy’s choice of a daily home page images. Whether these are old images before QC became stricter, I don’t know.

Whatever, I wouldn’t upload any image with CA. When I haven’t had success removing it, I bin the image. That’s why I have 3 stars, now! :D

Betty

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll try to be careful.

 

I am sure another point I am going to bump heads with here is noise in image at 100%. Because I use A7Rii/A7Riii, I tend to worry less in general where noise is concerned due to the high res files, which when viewed at most sizes, clean up quite nicely.

 

I'm also a little bit baffled by there 17mb requirement.... pure file size is not necessarily an indication of quality. So, do I literally need to make sure my files are larger than 17mb? 

 

I appear to be hijacking this thread - apologies OP!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, chris_rabe said:

I'll try to be careful.

 

I am sure another point I am going to bump heads with here is noise in image at 100%. Because I use A7Rii/A7Riii, I tend to worry less in general where noise is concerned due to the high res files, which when viewed at most sizes, clean up quite nicely.

 

I'm also a little bit baffled by there 17mb requirement.... pure file size is not necessarily an indication of quality. So, do I literally need to make sure my files are larger than 17mb? 

 

I appear to be hijacking this thread - apologies OP!

 

The 17mb file requirement is the size of thew RAW file, not the jpg you submit to Alamy. JPG's vary depending on detail.  a 6mp shot (3000x200) is the minimum.  So your submitted images need to be at least that or more.

 

Jill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Image of girl salable, IMO.

Would be more salable if less tightly cropped

to include more surroundings, especially skewered

food on stick.  Wouldn't hurt to see bit more detail

in shadowed alley, too...?  Those two red devil horns

growing out of girl's head could be "deadened"

via selecting them & reducing saturation...

 

Assuming no QC issues, decent tagging, no reason

IMO not to start uploading immediately...

Edited by JeffGreenberg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now