# Sexiest model ever...



## KevinPutman (May 6, 2011)

So this was mostly just a lighting experiment. Sources were 2 indirect lights behind me to the left, and the on-board flash..I would have liked the flash to be brighter..but my camera only has high, med. and low. These were on low, medium was too bright.

Also, no PP was done to any of these.


Whatchathink?

Her name is nibbles, btw ^-^
1






2





3





4






Edit:
Took someone's advice, this is a pic from the reshoot.


----------



## Geaux (May 6, 2011)

They look underexposes, but I'm also on my phone...


----------



## Matata (May 6, 2011)

Which one is your favorite and why?


----------



## KevinPutman (May 6, 2011)

@ Geaux, they probably are, I'm not sure what the proper exposure techniques are for shooting like this..I also couldn't up my shutter speed too much, she's a wiggly bunny. Same with ISO, didn't want too much noise. I'll take then into PS and see if I can get them looking better. 

I like 2 the best, 
I just feel composition on that one is the best (rule of thirds wise), and it just strikes me as the most appealing.


Edited original post with updated, better exposed photos.


----------



## shmne (May 6, 2011)

I really can't tell what exactly you were trying to achieve with these, so having said that I really can't say anything about them. I understand that it is meant to be a lighting experiment, however what type of experiment / what style you were trying to achieve / what look you wanted are all still a mystery  

It appears the light is very soft, and very low. You could have increased the flash to medium and increased your shutter speed to compensate.


----------



## KevinPutman (May 6, 2011)

shmne said:


> You could have increased the flash to medium and increased your shutter speed to compensate.


 
I'm glad there are people here on this site to think for me, I never would have come up with that myself, hahaha. thanks!

And I guess just a starter for lighting in general. I've never done anything outside of natural lighting, so just any feedback on it (such as what you provided) is great. ^-^


----------



## KevinPutman (May 6, 2011)

Took your advice shmne, 
although I had to drop my ISO all the way down to 80, my Fstop up to 8 (as high as it goes), and my shutter speed to 1/1600  (although it wouldn't shoot at that speed, it kept bouncing to 1/500 for the pictures..I'm guessing because of flash sync?

But anyways, I still had some photos that were blown out =p
But I think they came out much better, and she was being much more photogenic this time around.


----------



## shmne (May 7, 2011)

Much better! Just keep playing with light... it takes a very long time to master, and the more you experiment the easier the process becomes in time.


----------



## Formatted (May 7, 2011)

Bestiality. Not cool.


----------



## SabrinaO (May 7, 2011)

You really need to learn how to focus and know about the exposure triangle before you start playing with flash and lighting!


----------



## Mississippigal21 (May 7, 2011)

That is the cutest bunny ever! That being said, I like the second one best.


----------



## gsgary (May 7, 2011)

Try again with your 2 lights coming from behind at 45 degs from each side and pop some flash you should be able to get some seperation from the back ground
like this on, i onl used 2 lights 1 camera left with a shoot through brolly and 1 from behind with a 7" reflector fitted with a honeycomb


----------



## kundalini (May 7, 2011)

KevinPutman said:


> So this was mostly just a lighting experiment. Sources were 2 indirect lights behind me to the left, and the on-board flash..I would have liked the flash to be brighter..but my camera only has high, med. and low. These were on low, medium was too bright.
> 
> Also, no PP was done to any of these.
> 
> ...


You need more light. For starters, take the two indirect light sources and direct them. Have one as your main light for the bunny, one lighting the background and use your on-board for fill. If needed, flag your background light to prevent spill. Bring the main light in close to increase its size, creating softer light source.  This may also require you to use some difussion material.  You'll also want to have your lights at a color temperature of around 5500K. You should be able to find typical bulbs for house lamps at that rating or labeled "daylight".



 
You are also fighting yourself for exposure by using that black "thing" for a background. Black subtracts light. Try finding a lighter color or white material for the background.


----------



## KevinPutman (May 7, 2011)

SabrinaO said:


> You really need to learn how to focus and know about the exposure triangle before you start playing with flash and lighting!


 I know both.
If any focus in that picture is off, it's not my fault. I set the focus on the bunny's eyes every time, then composed the shot. I also know the exposure triangle..as I said earlier, I just totally didn't think about increasing the shutter speed, lowering the ISO, raising the aperture, in order to brigten my flash..


@ Kudalini, 
when using a lighting setup like that, what will the outcome be? What will the picture look like, lol.
Also, you said diffusion material..how would I go about getting something like that for my camera's onboard flash? 
Maybe like a scrap of white cloth held over the flash?


and @ gsgary, 
for lighting I was using a light stand, with regular 60w house bulbs in them..it has 3 lights on the one stand, so it's more for decorative purposes..
although I'd be willing to turn my basement into a studio, if someone could recommend cheap gear..
for a reflector..I can use like, a white sheet of paper correct? or tinfoil for silver, gold, etc? 
No idea what a honeycomb is.


----------



## kundalini (May 7, 2011)

KevinPutman said:


> @ Kudalini,
> when using a lighting setup like that, what will the outcome be? What will the picture look like, lol.
> Also, you said diffusion material..how would I go about getting something like that for my camera's onboard flash?
> Maybe like a scrap of white cloth held over the flash?


The outcome should be a better exposed image than the one here.
I was referring to diffuse the main light, although you could also diffuse or bounce the on-board flash.  A white bed sheet, tee shirt, clear shower curtain......  anything really that doesn't give off a color cast, unless you want a particular color cast.


----------



## RauschPhotography (May 7, 2011)

KevinPutman said:


> SabrinaO said:
> 
> 
> > You really need to learn how to focus and know about the exposure triangle before you start playing with flash and lighting!
> ...


 
If you know both, I don't think the shot would have turned out this way, honestly. If the focus is off, it really is your fault--you _can_ control your focus on the camera, or re-shoot if these shots didn't work out. It's just user error.  I'm not trying to be rude, but I've seen your other shots and it looks like you still have a lot to learn before throwing lighting into the mix. Just my two cents.


----------



## KevinPutman (May 7, 2011)

I was just saying, since I focused correctly on the bunny's eyes each time, there shouldn't be any focus issues.


----------



## FranDaMan (May 7, 2011)

Well, there obviously still is, now isn't there ?
First get your basics down before you start adding extra's to the mix.


----------



## KevinPutman (May 7, 2011)

Such as?
No one's pointed out any problems with the focus on these pictures.
Soooo


----------



## FranDaMan (May 7, 2011)

Well, I am pointing it out, so did Sabrina and Rauschphotography. You're focus is off, and you can keep telling us that you focussed on the eyes till you are blue in the face.......but the focus is still off.


----------



## RedWylder (May 7, 2011)

You keep saying that you know your exposure triangle and all I have to say to that is a clarification: you need to know it so well that it becomes automatic.  The very fact that you didn't think of something until someone suggested it means you don't know it as well as you should.  So quit defending yourself and go practice more.


----------



## SabrinaO (May 7, 2011)

KevinPutman said:


> SabrinaO said:
> 
> 
> > You really need to learn how to focus and know about the exposure triangle before you start playing with flash and lighting!
> ...



I don't think you do because someone had to explain it to you. And you said that you have a "wiggly bunny so you couldn't up your shutter speed". That statement right there is saying you don't know much about shutter speeds. You are supposed to use a high shutter speed if your subject is moving or..."wiggly".  And also you shoot landscapes at 1/10 handheld. WOW. 
I'm not trying to be rude im just trying to be helpful. Once you know the exposure triangle and know how to focus, working with lighting should come easier. Just at least learn how to shoot. How are you focusing? What do you do.. step by step?


----------



## KevinPutman (May 7, 2011)

SabrinaO said:


> KevinPutman said:
> 
> 
> > SabrinaO said:
> ...


 
I meant I couldn't up the speed as in lenghten the exposure, to let more light into the picture because he was wiggly. I used a high shutter speed. 
How am I focusing? I put the little box that's in my viewfinder on the bunny's eye, halfpress my shutter button, then compose the picture and shoot.


----------



## Overread (May 7, 2011)

KevinPutman said:


> How am I focusing? I put the little box that's in my viewfinder on the bunny's eye, halfpress my shutter button, then compose the picture and shoot.


 
Focus and recompose can work, but you have to understand its limitations and how its working.
First off lets understand focusing. When you point the viewfinder at the subject and get the focus lock on (I'm assuming with the middle focusing point) the camera has then locked on the focus. It has however no idea what it is looking at, it just focuses the lens onto the closest point to the camera (at the AF point of course) which shows a contrast difference it can lock onto. It has no idea its looking at a face/eye or anything else. 
Once set imagine you focus as a single flat sheet of paper held out parallel to the front of your lens. When you move the lens side to side (to recompose) the sheet of paper remains in the same position relative to the front of the lens, not to the subject at all. The result is that you can move the composition and as a result the sheet of paper will end up no longer covering the part of the photo you want in focus.

This is why with focus and recompose you also have to re-adjust the focus after recomposing the shot to ensure that it is still correct (focus and recompose works best with USM lenses that have all the time manual focusing - otherwise you have to remember to turn AF on and off between stages). Once done you can then take the shot knowing that you've adjusted the focus to remain correct.

The other options is to use a smaller aperture (bigger f number) so that you have a greater depth of field (your sheet of paper is thicker) so that even when it moves as you recompose the depth of field is still covering your original focus point.


----------



## SabrinaO (May 7, 2011)

KevinPutman said:


> SabrinaO said:
> 
> 
> > KevinPutman said:
> ...



OK great! When you recompose... are you moving away or moving closer at all? You can move the camera around side to side to compose the pic, but stay on the same plane and don't move forward or back. Once you hit that shutter halfway... you (the camera) and the bunny/the subject have to stay on the same plane. If the bunny moves forward or back... you have to refocus. If you compose a shot and move closer to the subject you have to refocus.


----------



## KevinPutman (May 7, 2011)

Yeah, I just move the camera a tad bit to get into the rule of thirds. 
As for Overread, I understand that, but how do I need to recompose it, if all I did was move it slightly to the side?

And again, are any of these picture actually out of focus?


----------



## Overread (May 7, 2011)

KevinPutman said:


> Yeah, I just move the camera a tad bit to get into the rule of thirds.
> As for Overread, I understand that, but how do I need to recompose it, if all I did was move it slightly to the side?
> 
> And again, are any of these picture actually out of focus?


 
It is hard to say - as far as I can see shots 1 and 4 of your original set look soft on the eye - however they also look soft overall which lends me to think that they are suffering from motion shake from your hands holding the setup. Furthermore in some cases the bunnies nose looks a little sharper than the eye itself - this might just be local contrast differences, but might well also be the result of the fast moving rabbit shifting as you are recomposing the photo and moving slightly out of focus from the original focus position.

When it comes to animals many people with lower end DSLRs in more tricky situations will only use the middle focusing point and will then crop the photo to get the composition = or they will use manual focusing and compose the photo. Higher end DSLRs have better edge AF sensors and so users of them can more reliably compose the photo and use the edge AF sensors to get the lock onto a shifting living subject.


----------



## SabrinaO (May 7, 2011)

KevinPutman said:


> Yeah, I just move the camera a tad bit to get into the rule of thirds.
> As for Overread, I understand that, but how do I need to recompose it, if all I did was move it slightly to the side?
> 
> And again, are any of these picture actually out of focus?


 
Its hard to tell because they are so underexposed. But the eyes and the fur around the mouth do look soft. What was your aperture at? your shutter? If you had a shallow DOF that will do it too, or a slow shutter speed.


----------



## KevinPutman (May 7, 2011)

I would go off the last picture I took, I used smhne's advice and reshot, that was the best of the set. 
That one was shot on F8, 1/500.

And @overread, keep in mind, I don't quite have a DSLR, =p
but thanks for that, I see what you're saying now..
The manual focus on my camera is practically impossible to use, and doesn't really work as well as the manual, especially for a fast moving bunny.


----------



## gsgary (May 7, 2011)

Your doing my ****ing head in but i still want to help you


----------



## kundalini (May 7, 2011)

gsgary said:


> Your doing my ****ing head in but i still want to help you


  The male version of erose.  Look at where she has developed.  Miracles do happen.


----------



## RauschPhotography (May 7, 2011)

KevinPutman said:


> I would go off the last picture I took, I used smhne's advice and reshot, that was the best of the set.
> That one was shot on F8, 1/500.
> 
> And @overread, keep in mind, I don't quite have a DSLR, =p
> ...


 
I didn't really know what camera you were shooting with. The camera you have isn't close to a DSLR, it's a beefed point and shoot. Definition of DSLR: digital cameras that use a mechanical mirror system and pentaprism to direct light from the lens to an optical viewfinder on the back of the camera.

You've got a lot to learn, as stated previously. I really do encourage you to pick up Understanding Exposure by Bryan Peterson and take the advice given by the TPF members. We're just trying to help you out. Progress isn't going to come overnight, but you know what they say..Rome wasn't built in a day!


----------



## Geaux (May 7, 2011)

kundalini said:


> gsgary said:
> 
> 
> > Your doing my ****ing head in but i still want to help you
> ...


 

NO NO NO, No way near Erose.  She listened and understood.  Only thing they have in common is creating threads that go on for 5+ pages and a high post count in little time.

You ask for CC, yet there is a sense of 'argue' in your responses.  Telling people you know the triangle and focusing, yet not ....but still sticking to your guns and telling us over and over you understand it, is getting tiring (along with telling us there is nothing interesting to shoot around you over and over and over).


----------



## vtf (May 7, 2011)

Geaux said:


> kundalini said:
> 
> 
> > gsgary said:
> ...


 
Ring a bell....newphotographer


----------



## vtf (May 7, 2011)

In a month's time you have 445 posts. If you continue to say I can't, we will start to say we won't.
BTW light bulb is your most interesting subject so far. 

ibtl​


----------



## KevinPutman (May 7, 2011)

I do listen and I do understand. I apply everything that's said to me into my photos.
If I post up a picture, and it may be missing part of something that was previously said to me, then that's my own fault, yes. But it might just be something I forgot, or simply missed.
 It's not like I'm taking soft pictures, or messing up the exposure on purpose. It's called learning, correct? And you learn from your mistakes, correct again?
and before someone says "But you aren't learning from your mistakes", yes, I am. As I said, It may just be something that slips past me. Or I may not notice.

And before someone brings up a tripod, 
I'm 17. I work 15 hours a week at a retail store for minimum wage. Unlike those of you who can go out and buy $2000 cameras and such, I can barely afford my insurance from month to month, and have money to spare. Also, I don't buy myself stuff..I never have. I find it a waste of money. I'd by a homeless person a $6 combo meal at McDonalds before I got myself a double cheeseburger. I know I NEED a tripod. But I also know I can manage without, and still get some decent photos.


I DO understand the exposure triangle. But sometimes things just slip my mind. It happens to everyone I'm sure, 
I'm a newbie so it just happens to me more. I apologize for not being as advanced as everyone else, or maybe not learn as fast and apply that knowledge as well as everyone..but AT LEAST I'M TRYING.
Would you rather me post 1 picture a week and ask for a comment, 
or take as many pictures as I can, and post them up every single day to get feedback?


----------



## RedWylder (May 7, 2011)

Definitely one picture a week.  Everyday is overhwhelming especially if the same advice is needed over and over.  Try focusing on seeing the things that we would say in your pictures.  Give yourself a critique and then post your best shot every week.


----------



## Matata (May 7, 2011)

RedWylder said:


> Definitely one picture a week.  Everyday is overhwhelming especially if the same advice is needed over and over.  Try focusing on seeing the things that we would say in your pictures.  Give yourself a critique and then post your best shot every week.


Kevin, this is exactly why I was asking what was your favorite and why. I want to know that you are thinking about your photos rather than posting quantity for TPF members to sift through. Not to say you are just posting quantity, but you have a lot of posts for C&C and I think many photos have recurring problems (the softness issue for one) so it helps sometimes to take a step back and just C&C your own photos before posting based on feedback you have had before.


----------



## KevinPutman (May 8, 2011)

I think I'll just stop posting stuff altogether, since all I seem to get are 5 pages of people saying "you're doing it wrong, you don't listen, you suck, etc etc etc."
I. Am. A. Slow. Learner.
I. Make. Mistakes.
I. Don't. Even. Have. A. Proper. DSLR.

Those aren't excuses.
they're facts.


----------



## SabrinaO (May 8, 2011)

RedWylder said:


> Definitely one picture a week. Everyday is overhwhelming especially if the same advice is needed over and over. Try focusing on seeing the things that we would say in your pictures. Give yourself a critique and then post your best shot every week.


 
:thumbdown:
One picture a week? Sorry.. but who are you? He shouldn't have to limit himself. If he wants to show off 50 pics a week he should have the option to. Just like how you have the option to not look or respond to his posts. 
I like his drive.  He just needs to listen to constructive criticism and open his eyes.


----------



## SabrinaO (May 8, 2011)

KevinPutman said:


> I think I'll just stop posting stuff altogether, since all I seem to get are 5 pages of people saying "you're doing it wrong, you don't listen, you suck, etc etc etc."
> I. Am. A. Slow. Learner.
> I. Make. Mistakes.
> I. Don't. Even. Have. A. Proper. DSLR.
> ...



Whats a "proper" DSLR? You don't need a DSLR to take great pics. If you are a slow learner... take it one step at a time. Learn the aperture, shutter and ISO. Learn how they all work together. Don't bring other things into the equation (working with artificial lighting) until you know all of that. And if you make mistakes.. learn from them.


----------



## OrionsByte (May 8, 2011)

There's a difference between understanding something "in theory" and understanding something "in practice." I know you say you understand the exposure triangle, and I believe you, but I also believe that your understanding is currently more theory-based than experience-based. It HAS to be, because you don't have much experience yet. Be truthful with yourself, and accept that you're still building up that understanding; don't check it off the list and refuse to realize there's still more to learn; there's always more to learn. 

Don't stop posting here, but do start self-filtering a little. You say you're a slow learner but you're kinda drinking through a fire hose here. There's a LOT of advice coming at you, from exposure to lighting to equipment to technique, and if you're only able to absorb some of it at a time (because you are a self-proclaimed slow learner), then all the great advice is being wasted, and folks are gonna get tired of helping you because they're always giving the same advice. Especially with the frequency you've been asking for it. 

So coming back to the slow learner thing; if you're a slow learner, you need to go slow. Don't rush out to buy a DSLR, because there is plenty you can learn with what you have. Here's a radical suggestion: put your camera in Full Auto and work SOLELY on your focus and composition, your eye. Post a few shots up here and explain that they were shot in auto because you're working on finding interesting subjects and good composition, and ask for feedback specifically along those lines. And please, please, please don't get defensive when people tell you it's off. If they're more abrasive than they need to be, take whatever truths you can from them and then let it go. 

Take some art classes at school. Even if they're not specifically photography-related, they will help tune your eye. 

Don't give up, man, but don't try to force yourself to turn pro in six months either. And don't start a wedding post; that would not go well.


----------



## Geaux (May 8, 2011)

OrionsByte said:


> ...Don't stop posting here, but do start self-filtering a little....


 

Best advice given so far.


----------



## fokker (May 8, 2011)

KevinPutman said:


> And before someone brings up a tripod,
> I'm 17. I work 15 hours a week at a retail store for minimum wage. Unlike those of you who can go out and buy $2000 cameras and such, I can barely afford my insurance from month to month, and have money to spare. Also, I don't buy myself stuff..I never have. I find it a waste of money. I'd by a homeless person a $6 combo meal at McDonalds before I got myself a double cheeseburger. I know I NEED a tripod. But I also know I can manage without, and still get some decent photos.


 
Stop buying cheeseburgers for homeless people and start saving your cash, photography is an expensive hobby.


----------



## FranDaMan (May 8, 2011)

You don;t have a DSLR. Well, neither did I untill september last year.
I owned a sony DSC-H2. An even less advanced superzoom cam than yours.
Still, here is a few shots I pulled off with that camera, simply by trying to get to grips with stuff like shutterspeed, ISO and nifty tricks like zooming in from far to try and create some sort of bokeh.

Not saying my shots are awesome in any way, just trying to point out that if you look around, there is always something nice to shoot and even a superzoom cam could do that job for you


----------



## kundalini (May 8, 2011)

OrionsByte said:


> ......Don't stop posting here, but do start self-filtering a little. You say you're a slow learner but you're kinda drinking through a fire hose here. .....
> 
> ...... Here's a radical suggestion: put your camera in Full Auto and work SOLELY on your focus and composition, your eye. Post a few shots up here and explain that they were shot in auto because you're working on finding interesting subjects and good composition, and ask for feedback specifically along those lines. ......
> 
> .......Take some art classes at school. Even if they're not specifically photography-related, they will help tune your eye. .......


Some sage advice in OrionByte's post.


----------



## e.rose (May 8, 2011)

kundalini said:


> gsgary said:
> 
> 
> > Your doing my ****ing head in but i still want to help you
> ...



I'm not *COMPLETELY* hopeless!    :hug::



Geaux said:


> NO NO NO, No way near Erose.  She listened and understood.



That's because I knew that I sucked... and STILL suck, compared to a lot of your (meaning everyone on the forum) work, and ESPECIALLY compared to the level I want to be at... but the only way I'm going to get there is by learning from those that are better than me. :sillysmi:



Geaux said:


> Only thing they have in common is creating threads that go on for 5+ pages and a high post count in little time.



What can I say?  I'm talented. :lmao:



Geaux said:


> You ask for CC, yet there is a sense of 'argue' in your responses.  Telling people you know the triangle and focusing, yet not ....but still sticking to your guns and telling us over and over you understand it, is getting tiring (along with telling us there is nothing interesting to shoot around you over and over and over).



Exactly.  If people are telling you there's something wrong with the image, that pertains to something you *thought* you knew... then you *don't* know it as well as you thought.  Maybe you were *completely* confident in thinking you knew how it worked when you read it somewhere, but trying to make it HAPPEN is much more difficult than that.  The best thing to do when someone tells you something is wrong, is to stay humble, say thank you, and go back and assess what they're telling you and practice with a few hundred thousand times. 



KevinPutman said:


> I do listen and I do understand. I apply everything that's said to me into my photos.
> If I post up a picture, and it may be missing part of something that was previously said to me, then that's my own fault, yes. But it might just be something I forgot, or simply missed.



So then don't argue with them about it if they say you missed your focus or don't know your exposure triangle.  If you "forget" to use your exposure triangle, then they're right in the sense that you don't know it as well as you do.  You can't forget something like that... it's one of the most fundamental things in photography... so if you're forgetting pieces of that... go back and studying and practice with it more.



KevinPutman said:


> It's not like I'm taking soft pictures, or messing up the exposure on purpose. It's called learning, correct? And you learn from your mistakes, correct again?
> and before someone says "But you aren't learning from your mistakes", yes, I am. As I said, It may just be something that slips past me. Or I may not notice.



And part of learning is just being humble when someone tells you that you did something wrong.  No, you didn't do it on *purpose*, but it's clearly an issue in your images, so rather than fighting to the death that you understand everything, be grateful that people are taking the time to help you and point out your mistakes SO THAT you can learn from them.    If someone says your focus is off... but you know that you "put the AF point right over the bunny's eye" so you don't understand why there *would* be focusing issues... your response shouldn't be, "I know I did it right, so there shouldn't be a problem."  Your response should be, "Okay, so here's how I did it... what do you think I did wrong?"



KevinPutman said:


> And before someone brings up a tripod,
> I'm 17. I work 15 hours a week at a retail store for minimum wage.



I'm 24.  I work 40+ hours a week doing data entry in a warehouse and my husband and I still live with his parents.



KevinPutman said:


> Unlike those of you who can go out and buy $2000 cameras and such, I can barely afford my insurance from month to month, and have money to spare.



I didn't go out and buy a $2,000 camera... and I would KILL to be able to afford insurance.  We have none.  We have bills coming out our asses that we have to pay for... what do you think adulthood is?  All cookies and cream, rainbows and butterflies, where people can suddenly afford to buy whatever they want, whenever they want?  ****, I need to find me the tree that's growing money because apparently everyone ELSE knows where it is except for me...

Someone send me a PM with directions!  :lmao:



KevinPutman said:


> Also, I don't buy myself stuff..I never have. I find it a waste of money. I'd by a homeless person a $6 combo meal at McDonalds before I got myself a double cheeseburger. I know I NEED a tripod. But I also know I can manage without, and still get some decent photos.



Something tells me that you've bought yourself a COUPLE of things in life.  No one has *never* bought themselves stuff... and I'm really glad that you'd be willing to buy a homeless person a $6 combo meal at McDonalds, but how many homeless people are knocking at your door everyday?  I'm willing to be it's not EVERY day... so... every day... put away the $6 you haven't spent on a homeless person that day (unless that particular day you *have* bought a homeless person a combo meal), and before you know it you will have your tripod.



KevinPutman said:


> I think I'll just stop posting stuff altogether, since all I seem to get are 5 pages of people saying "you're doing it wrong, you don't listen, you suck, etc etc etc."
> I. Am. A. Slow. Learner.
> I. Make. Mistakes.
> I. Don't. Even. Have. A. Proper. DSLR.
> ...



Well dude... fact of the matter is... you *do* suck.  *I* suck.  This **** don't happen over night!  :lmao: :hug::

You should embrace the fact that everyone is trying to help you.  Most people on this site get 1... maybe 2 responses on their threads and they're lucky if those responses are ANYTHING helpful.  You've *many* people in this thread trying to help you out.  SEVERAL which I know *I* learned from and helped to better my work.  Don't argue with them... don't make excuses about being young and poor, or not having equipment.  I used HOUSE LAMPS for lighting when I first started.  I STILL don't own any decent lighting, but I was lucky enough to have networked with someone with a home studio and equipment I'm allowed to borrow any time I want.

Networking is important.

It's also most often times free.  Just keep that in mind.  

And if you're a slow learner, then you need to stop doing 20,000 things at once.

People keep telling you that you need to work on your exposure triangle and focus, right?  So forget the lights.  Go outside on a nice day... go to a park... go to wherever... and practice taking pictures using your exposure triangle and nailing your focus.

KEEP doing that UNTIL you stop forgetting things.

Come back and post those for C&C specifically stating that those are the two things you were working on and get people's feedback to gauge your progress.  Once you've master that, work on you composition.  Once you've gotten good with that, add something else to your plate.

You can't do it all at one time... but ALL of it takes practice.

Keep working at it.


----------



## Stryker (May 8, 2011)

I think you have to face the following facts here:
1.  You may know the exposure triangle but you are not practicing it or if you are, something is very wrong because the results show
2.  You are limited by your resources.  You still dont have a tripod and your camera can only do so much.  Why shoot in low light situations when all you get is camera shake or a soft output despite focusing it at the right spot. 

I suggest you stop shooting in low light, go outside where there is enough ambient light and your camera would have a faster shutter speed, manageable noise, and better image quality.  You have to realize that your present gear can't do what a DSLR is capable of.


----------



## Bitter Jeweler (May 8, 2011)

You could have bought a tripod from a thrift store instead of supporting the forum.  :greenpbl:


----------



## e.rose (May 8, 2011)

Bitter Jeweler said:


> You could have bought a tripod from a thrift store instead of supporting the forum.  :greenpbl:


 
BAHAHAHA!  I didn't even notice that...

TRUE STORY!

How much did that cost?  I bet it was more than $6... and it wasn't for a homeless person either.

You can stop with the excuses now.


----------



## itf (May 8, 2011)

No offense, but I've seen better pictures from an iphone, so don't blame the equipment, blame the user.


----------



## manaheim (May 8, 2011)

mmm... hot bunny.


----------



## KevinPutman (May 8, 2011)

itf said:


> No offense, but I've seen better pictures from an iphone, so don't blame the equipment, blame the user.


 
Lol no offence?
I haven't even seen any of your pictures, and you've been a member for almost a year not.
Gtfo.


----------



## e.rose (May 8, 2011)

KevinPutman said:


> itf said:
> 
> 
> > No offense, but I've seen better pictures from an iphone, so don't blame the equipment, blame the user.
> ...


 
There's that sh*tty attitude again.

Don't be surprised when the help that people are offering to you now starts to quickly dwindle after responses like that.


----------



## Overread (May 8, 2011)

The students that always spend the lesson fighting the teacher nearly always end up failing the class. 

This shouldn't be a fight (but it seems to have partly become one) but rather a discussion. People will raise negative points about your photos and offer solutions, sometimes they will be solutions you can put to good use and other times they won't. The key to getting better suggestions is to always put up More than just your photos. Give your views and opinions - outline you gear and lighting as well as the situation. The more info you put up first the less of the backtracking you'll experience - - furthermore people will be able to give advice more direct toward your specific situation. 

In addition don't focus on the negative side to any posts - you are doing this way too much and its distracting you from that the people are saying about your photos - you're slipping into a battle and trying to fight (against what I don't know). Instead its time to take a slice from the humble pie and accept some critical views and also show maturity in not rising to easy flamebait or idle comments.


----------



## KevinPutman (May 8, 2011)

e.rose said:


> KevinPutman said:
> 
> 
> > itf said:
> ...


 
How exactly was his response "offering help"? My response was appropriate for what he said.




And @ everyone else,
 yes, I understand. I'll adjust me attitude and such. Thanks.


Also @ Kudalini, on the first page or so you posted a lighting set up, 
I tried that last night, (although I kept the black sheet in the background), and the pictures turned out pretty much the same as the ones I posted on here.
I did try a lighter, tan colored background (all I could find to use), but it looked...icky.

Is there some example of a photo that you could post using that setup and a different color background, just to let me know how it should turn out?


----------



## e.rose (May 8, 2011)

KevinPutman said:


> e.rose said:
> 
> 
> > KevinPutman said:
> ...


 
How exactly do his images have anything to do with his statement?  My response was appropriate for what you said. :greenpbl:

He was stating a fact that he's seen better images from an iphone... yet you are complaining that you don't have lights, or a "real" DSLR... so he stated not to blame the equipment... blame the user... which is just another way of him saying that you need to learn more and stop making excuses for your work.



KevinPutman said:


> And @ everyone else,
> yes, I understand. I'll adjust me attitude and such. Thanks.



I hope so.


----------



## KevinPutman (May 8, 2011)

@e.rose, 
not trying to start an argument, rather make a point.

So if someone were to say to you, 
"no offence, but my dog's taken better pictures than that, don't blame the equipment, blame the user"
you'd be perfectly okay with it, and consider it "good C&C?"


----------



## manaheim (May 8, 2011)

Even >I< thought the iPhone and "blame the user" comments were pretty obnoxious.


----------



## e.rose (May 8, 2011)

KevinPutman said:


> @e.rose,
> not trying to start an argument, rather make a point.
> 
> So if someone were to say to you,
> ...


 
I've received WORSE C&C than that, said "Thank you for your feedback" and moved on.  

I've also received various versions of "don't blame the equipment, blame the user"... it's a completely valid point in many cases, including this one.

So again... you need to grow a little thicker skin if you're going to ask for C&C... and just take your camera out and practice.  Practice your triangle, your focus, your composition... and then when you're done, practice some more.


----------



## dxqcanada (May 8, 2011)

KevinPutman said:


> So if someone were to say to you,
> "no offence, but my dog's taken better pictures than that, don't blame the equipment, blame the user"
> you'd be perfectly okay with it, and consider it "good C&C?"


 
If I got a majority of replies that way ... then I would seriously think of getting a dog.
Yes, I would consider it honest C&C. 

"*Your first 10,000 photographs are your worst." &#8211;* _Henri Cartier-Bresson_


----------



## Overread (May 8, 2011)

KevinPutman said:


> So if someone were to say to you,
> "no offence, but my dog's taken better pictures than that, don't blame the equipment, blame the user"
> you'd be perfectly okay with it, and consider it "good C&C?"



Nope - best defence against that though is to ask the person to expand upon their comment. You'll always get people who give short, sharp crits that don't convey any info save that the person comment did/did not like your creation. Asking them to expand upon their point gives them the oppertunity to turn their comment into something more meaningful that you can use -- or they just stay silent and you continue on with your life 

If its someone I know being cheeky they get a smiley face :greenpbl:



manaheim said:


> "blame the user"


 
This is a point on wording - I dislike the idea that one blames the user OR the equipment. In my mind its not a case of assigning blame toward something, but finding the reason for the lack of the ideal result. Finding the reason isn't about blame culture, but about learning and getting an idea of where something has gone less than ideal. This is a less negative approach toward things than "blame"*


* whilst we are not each others mothers online there to give unthinking maternal support - we are all here because we enjoy the same hobby and wish to share that with others of a similar mind. As such whilst we should be honest and critical (when needed of course) we should also seek not to undermine each others personalities nor creations. Its a fine line between critical comments that are critical but supportive and those which are simply more abusive (the excuse that it is the "harsh real world truth" carries no worth in my book).


----------



## itf (May 8, 2011)

manaheim said:


> Even >I< thought the iPhone and "blame the user" comments were pretty obnoxious.


 

I said what I said because in ALMOST every thread that he starts, he keeps bringing up the fact that he doesn't have a dslr, so he can't get good pictures. I wasn't being obnoxious and hey I'M not the one asking for advice, so I have no need to post any of my pictures, nor did I say that my pictures were good. I'm just stating the fact that it's the user not the camera.  

Can I hit someone with my car because I left it in D, and say that oh i forgot to shift it to park, so its not my fault. That's kind of like what he's doing.  You can't blame the car for your mistake.


----------



## fokker (May 9, 2011)

Guns don't kill people, robbers do.


----------



## SabrinaO (May 9, 2011)

Pictures... SOOiP
(Straight out of iphone)


----------



## JWellman (May 9, 2011)

Point & Shoot... until a year ago it's all I had! Don't let your camera be your excuse. :meh:


----------



## Stryker (May 9, 2011)

SabrinaO said:


> Pictures... SOOiP
> (Straight out of iphone)


 
Oh wow!!!  I think I'll get an Iphone as my back up camera.  Shot outdoors and with ample ambient light.  I guess you have to challenge Sabrina with your next post and prove that your camera is better than her Iphone.

Can we just C&C the Iphone shots instead???


----------



## RedWylder (May 9, 2011)

SabrinaO said:


> RedWylder said:
> 
> 
> > Definitely one picture a week. Everyday is overhwhelming especially if the same advice is needed over and over. Try focusing on seeing the things that we would say in your pictures. Give yourself a critique and then post your best shot every week.
> ...



You are of course very right to call me out on this but as others have said he does need to learn to self filter which was my point really.  Self filtering is one of the best tools an artist has and should learn to filter through his photos himself before posting them.  He needs to learn to see his own small improvements in every picture because an outside audience isn't bound to look for the small things he may have been working on.  We just see the overall picture.  

@Kevin-really don't give up, you're doing good work and you ARE making improvements but it seems you need to learn to see these for yourself.  Be proud of the steps you've made this far.


----------



## Stryker (May 9, 2011)

Aw, Red, you are so sweet...


----------



## o hey tyler (May 9, 2011)

SabrinaO said:


> :thumbdown:
> One picture a week? Sorry.. but who are you? He shouldn't have to limit himself. If he wants to show off 50 pics a week he should have the option to. Just like how you have the option to not look or respond to his posts.
> I like his drive. * He just needs to listen to constructive criticism and open his eyes*.



OH WOW.


----------



## RedWylder (May 9, 2011)

Stryker said:


> Aw, Red, you are so sweet...


 
A little too much? haha Must be all that sugary cereal I ate this morning...


----------



## Bitter Jeweler (May 9, 2011)

SabrinaO said:


> He just needs to listen to constructive criticism and open his eyes.


 
*Oh, the IRONY!*


----------



## vtf (May 9, 2011)

Sing along to the tune of Rawhide.
trolling, trolling, trolling 
trolling, trolling, trolling 
trolling, trolling, trolling 
trolling, trolling, trolling 

Runhide 

trolling, trolling, trolling 
Though the streams are swollen 
Keep them doggies trolling 
Runhide


----------



## KevinPutman (May 9, 2011)

How about we get someone with the exact same setup as the images I posted in this thread..same lighting, same backdrop, etc etc etc.
And see what kind of shots they pull off with their iPhone?

Sure, anyone can get better pictures than the ones in this thread, with any type of camera..IF they're taken in the right place/time/setup/composition, etc etc etc. 
A picture of some elegant flowers, will ALWAYS look better than me testing out some lighting on my bunny, in my room, on my blanket, with some crappy house lighting.

So sure, 
you can get better pictures of a beautiful sunset, or the Grand Canyons, or a waterfall on your iPhone.
But in this place, and situation, no. You can't.


----------



## Geaux (May 9, 2011)

KevinPutman said:


> How about we get someone with the exact same setup as the images I posted in this thread..*same lighting, same backdrop, etc etc etc.
> And see what kind of shots they pull off with their iPhone?*
> 
> *Sure, anyone can get better pictures than the ones in this thread, with any type of camera..IF they're taken in the right place/time/setup/composition, etc etc etc*.
> ...


 

lol, dude.

Bold #1:  The shot would still be junk b/c the lighting, etc was not good.  No matter what camera.  Goes back to understanding exposure....which you don't seem to grasp, yet.

Bold #2: "IF they're taken in the right place/time/setup/composition, etc etc etc" ... isn't that what you should strive for on all your images?

And every time I read your attitude driven responses ... I think of this image.


----------



## KevinPutman (May 9, 2011)

I posted the pictures and asked for tips on the lighting.

Did I anywhere say "oh these pictures are God's gift to mankind, I bet no one can take better pictures, blah blah blah"?

I made this thread to ask for advice on lighting. Not to be told that better pictures can be taken with a sh*ttier camera.


----------



## Geaux (May 9, 2011)

*insert "YOU MAD" image* .... again.


But in all serious dude, people aren't getting angry b/c you posted the shots.  They're firing back at you b/c you have a certain attitude (typical 17 yr old imo) in how you respond to others.  Just say "thanks...I'll try that out" instead of "I know the triangle!!"


----------



## Overread (May 9, 2011)

KevinPutman said:


> I made this thread to ask for advice on lighting. Not to be told that better pictures can be taken with a sh*ttier camera.


 
Yes but you are being told that fact - and you are being told it for a reason. The reason being that in the past of this thread you have blamed your equipment for failings in the shot - and whilst your fact on this might be true the attitude you have is that the gear is at a certain level and thus won't get any better. What people are trying to show is that learning to use a camera (any camera from camera phone to the best SLRs) is in part learning its limits and working within them when you get the chance - and when working outside of those limits to improve the lighting/situation as best you can in order to get the best possible result.


----------



## kundalini (May 9, 2011)

KevinPutman said:


> How about we get someone with the exact same setup as the images I posted in this thread..same lighting, same backdrop, etc etc etc.
> And see what kind of shots they pull off with their iPhone?
> 
> Sure, anyone can get better pictures than the ones in this thread, with any type of camera..IF they're taken in the right place/time/setup/composition, etc etc etc.
> ...





KevinPutman said:


> I posted the pictures and asked for tips on the lighting.
> 
> Did I anywhere say "oh these pictures are God's gift to mankind, I bet no one can take better pictures, blah blah blah"?
> 
> I made this thread to ask for advice on lighting. Not to be told that better pictures can be taken with a sh*ttier camera.





Well, that's two people shot down in flames for me today.  And I had such a brilliant weekend to boot.


----------



## KevinPutman (May 9, 2011)

Not sure what you're saying kudalini, 
also, think you might have missed this post, mind reading?



KevinPutman said:


> Also @ Kudalini, on the first page or so you posted a lighting set up,
> I tried that last night, (although I kept the black sheet in the background), and the pictures turned out pretty much the same as the ones I posted on here.
> I did try a lighter, tan colored background (all I could find to use), but it looked...icky.
> 
> Is there some example of a photo that you could post using that setup and a different color background, just to let me know how it should turn out?


----------



## kundalini (May 9, 2011)

KevinPutman said:


> Not sure what you're saying kudalini,
> also, think you might have missed this post, mind reading?


Too late she cried.


----------



## subscuck (May 9, 2011)

Wow, last time I actually read this thread it was one page. Six pages and he doesn't even have a hawt avatar with or without a duck face.

OK, on a more serious note, some great advice was given that you seem to have let slip by. No, you don't have an SLR. I don't have the winning Power Ball ticket. I think in time we'll both get over it. *Stop using your P&S like an SLR and use it where it works best.* The suggestion was you go outside under good light and work on the fundamentals. Have a look at P-Base.com. Do a search on there for photos using various P&S cameras. Some of the pics will blow you away. Here's the thing, the people posting these pics are using their P&S's *within the cameras capabilities.* They're not trying to take hand held low light shots (unless they have a tripod). They're not trying to work with improvised lighting. In short, they're giving their P&S's the light and conditions a P&S needs to excell. So instead of constantly reminding us you don't have an SLR (which sounds more and more like self excusing failure everytime you say it) get your P&S in the environment where you give it the best chance to succeed. And who cares what the photos are of as long as they're sharp and well exposed and show that you're getting the fundamentals of exposure and focus. Once you can start posting pics that are technically good, sans excuses, people will lighten up on you. And take heed of what Emily said (bless her little duck face); understanding a thing and actually being able to implement that thing are two entirely different things. It takes time to ingrain the habit of checking your ss and aperture for every shot. Quit trying to be a student and arteest at the same time. You need to be a student first. Jesus.


----------



## Geaux (May 9, 2011)

I know you said you can't afford a real tripod and you like taking shots close to the ground.  Ever thought of a mini tripod?

Amazon.com: Universal 8 Inch Mini Tripod: Camera & Photo







4 bucks.


----------



## enzodm (May 9, 2011)

Flickr: Canon S5 IS User Group

Flickr: Canon PowerShot S5-IS: macro & super macro


----------



## subscuck (May 9, 2011)

Geaux said:


> I know you said you can't afford a real tripod and you like taking shots close to the ground. Ever thought of a mini tripod?
> 
> Amazon.com: Universal 8 Inch Mini Tripod: Camera & Photo
> 
> ...


 
Do you hate homeless people or something?


----------



## subscuck (May 9, 2011)

enzodm said:


> Flickr: Canon S5 IS User Group
> 
> Flickr: Canon PowerShot S5-IS: macro & super macro



Thank you. This is exactly what I was talking about.


----------



## Bitter Jeweler (May 9, 2011)

Fancy Squidward | Flickr - Photo Sharing!



http://www.flickr.com/photos/kimnixon/4892840764/in/pool-442125@N23


----------



## Geaux (May 9, 2011)

subscuck said:


> Do you hate homeless people or something?



lolwut?

I don't, nor do I think he should stop giving money to them, BUT ... a 4 dollar tripod + his charity money will work besides a 50 dollar tripod + charity money.


----------



## Ginu (May 9, 2011)

Yay... this post was on page 1 and didn't think it was worth my time posting, but seeing how far its gone, I can't help it and will post some of my thoughts...

*@OP* - you need to start showing some respect towards some of the members if want help in the future... honestly your attitude is disrespectful and you seem to blame the results on a number of excuses (camera, light, knowledge etc...). Instead of arguing with the members of this forum, please take some notes and go try their suggestions then post some results so they can tell you how to improve.

At your age you should still be in HS unless you're finished so if you can, take Photography 11 and 12... funnest and best courses I've taken for free... Sure the cameras I got to shoot with were SLR's not DSLR's, but that was over 15 years ago not to mention it was the proper way to learn exposure... Since them, I'm sure schools have upgraded and you can use DSLR's; please do yourself a favor and join one of those classes if you still can.

Remember one thing... photography is all about the light (cant swim in the dessert; so same way you can't shoot in the dark without the proper equipment which is costly, very costly). At your age its understandable you have no money, but seriously you are supporting a website instead of purchasing a 5$ used mini tripod.... yet you complain you cant afford anything. Hell you can still use some books or table to stabilize the camera.
Knowing photography is tied to light, then use a lamp, a window or simply put a white sheet and cover the window to try to get the best natural ambient light... be creative and try different unique techniques which will separate you from the average Joe...

Watch the iPhone photo shoot video really closely. What does the shooter use besides an iPhone and really hot model? Lots and lots of lights and the phone is not even an iPhone 4, its a 3G or 3Gs. 





[/URL] 

Below is a video to one of my first rides down Whistler on my bike to test the capabilities of the iPhone.





*@ the TPH members* - Have you guys heard of the "Boy who cried wolf"?
This type of attitude sure reminds me of exactly that story... I wonder how much you guys will take 

*@ the model* - very cute, we hope to see more and better shots of you.



Edit: totally screwed up the links due to working and typing all this


----------



## Bitter Jeweler (May 9, 2011)

I like the part where you fall off your bike.


----------



## photocist (May 9, 2011)

Bitter Jeweler said:


> I like the part where you fall off your bike.


 LOLOL

Looks like an epic place to ride a bike!


----------



## e.rose (May 9, 2011)

Geaux said:


> KevinPutman said:
> 
> 
> > How about we get someone with the exact same setup as the images I posted in this thread..*same lighting, same backdrop, etc etc etc.
> ...



I agree with everything you said... and I gotta say... I'm very disappointed I can't view the image. 



subscuck said:


> Wow, last time I actually read this thread it was one page. Six pages and he doesn't even have a hawt avatar with or without a duck face.





And to the rest of what you said... I would like to verbally "like" the post again... since I can't click the like button twice.


----------



## Ginu (May 9, 2011)

Bitter Jeweler said:


> I like the part where you fall off your bike.


 

Yup it was fun. 1st ride on that trail and first ride of the year so, I was not expecting that board to be so slippery; just demolished a pair of gloves on the fall, so it wasn't that bad.

Whistler bike park is awesome. 

PS: Normal people would ask hey were you OK? 




For the OP.

Below is a shot of a long exposure taken from the top of my car with the camera resting against a sweater.







I really think you can take long exposures even in the dark if the target is not moving, just have to find the appropriate resting spot and use a remote or use the camera timer.


----------



## Bitter Jeweler (May 9, 2011)

Ginu said:


> PS: Normal people would ask hey were you OK?


Masters of the Obvious wouldn't.


----------



## manaheim (May 9, 2011)

Bitter Jeweler said:


> SabrinaO said:
> 
> 
> > He just needs to listen to constructive criticism and open his eyes.
> ...


 


o hey and bitter win the thread.


----------



## MWG (May 9, 2011)

Geaux said:


> KevinPutman said:
> 
> 
> > How about we get someone with the exact same setup as the images I posted in this thread..*same lighting, same backdrop, etc etc etc.
> ...



:lmao:


----------

