# Just started my photography Biz need C&C PLEASE!



## Elizabeth30

Hi, I just started by business a few months ago and I haven't had any real feedback from experienced photographers. I shoot with a Canon Rebel 2Ti and almost always use my 50mm 1.8. I generally stay in av mode with my a-1.8 and ISO 100-400. I have a general understanding of my camera but still much to learn!! ANY comments are greatly appreciated!

1.






2.




3.




4.


----------



## cannpope

You will learn so much more if you shoot in Manual.   You will understand when you change the ISO, you will also need to change other settings.  I would say that you first need to learn and understand the exposure triangle and get exposure down first.  Then, move on to composition.   If you are shooting in AV mode with your aperture @1.8 for most shots, then you need to understand the basic of photography.  ISO, aperture, and shutter speed needs to be your first lesson.   I like the 4th shot the best although the background is distracting.


----------



## Demers18

#1 I like this image and it works for me in B&W but I would remove the couple of single stray hairs that could be removed in post.

#2 I like the composition but I find it to be underexposed and blue, might to warm it up a bit.

#3 I like the concept but not sure about the composition, I find that the girl is too centered and could cropped a little more and maybe remove some of that white house. Have her in the same spot but show more of the left side, meaning show all of the sun on the grass and fade into the grass.

#4 I like the colours as they standout but I find the coffee travel mug on the dresser to be a little distracting.


----------



## Robin Usagani

Good luck with your business!


----------



## Elizabeth30

Thanks for your advice!!  mainly use av mode with lowest aperture simply because I love the awesome Bokeh it gives me. I used manual at first but liked AV better after I started playing with the settings. How can I learn more in Manual?? Not sure I understand what you mean??


----------



## KmH

I see focus issues, white balance issues, major lighting issues, composition issues.

You will need to understand most of the topics in the tutorials found here: Digital Photography Tutorials

You will also need to understand posing, photographic lighting, and more importantly, business management, marketing, salesmanship.

A blurred background used for selective focus is about achieving a shallow depth-of-field.

Circle of Confusion, often called bokeh, is a fixed property of each lens design and is not adjustable.


----------



## Robin Usagani

as long as you understand what the camera is doing, AV is fine.  I use 95% in AV.


----------



## Elizabeth30

Demers18 said:


> #1 I like this image and it works for me in B&W but I would remove the couple of single stray hairs that could be removed in post.
> 
> #2 I like the composition but I find it to be underexposed and blue, might to warm it up a bit.
> 
> #3 I like the concept but not sure about the composition, I find that the girl is too centered and could cropped a little more and maybe remove some of that white house. Have her in the same spot but show more of the left side, meaning show all of the sun on the grass and fade into the grass.
> 
> #4 I like the colours as they standout but I find the coffee travel mug on the dresser to be a little distracting.


Thank you!! I totally get what you are saying about #3!! never saw that!! And as for #4 it's a polar pop on my kitchen table lol totally random pic. i was not set up for it at all, I just liked it.


----------



## tirediron

Elizabeth30 said:


> Hi, I just started by business a few months ago...


  Really?


----------



## cannpope

A photo is not all about bokeh.  You can't always shoot @1.8 and 2.2 or your images will not be always be in focus or sharp. Do some reading on DOF (depth of field).


----------



## 2WheelPhoto

Bestbuy and FB photogs rule


----------



## Elizabeth30

cannpope said:


> A photo is not all about bokeh.  You can't always shoot @1.8 and 2.2 or your images will not be always be in focus or sharp. Do some reading on DOF (depth of field).


Ok, thanks, will do!!


----------



## Elizabeth30

tirediron said:


> Elizabeth30 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hi, I just started by business a few months ago...
> 
> 
> 
> Really?
Click to expand...


Um, yes........ ??


----------



## Trever1t

So how's business?


----------



## gsgary

There is no way you should be charging for this sort of quality, i wouldn't pay for any you have posted, did you get the camera for Christmas


----------



## o hey tyler

Hi Elizabeth, and welcome to the forum. 

Today, I decided that I needed a haircut. My hair was fairly long, and almost going in my eyes. I guess you'd call it a "shag top" or "mop top". I never really style my hair, other than giving it a good ol' rubdown with a towel when I get out of the shower. For example: 







So in my process of deciding on where to get my hairs cut, I came across this new barber shop that had just opened. I decided to give them a shot, figuring they probably had a good price... and they did. The hair stylist sat me down, and asked how I'd like my hair cut. I told her that I'd like it cut short, so that I might actually look somewhat professional. 

Over the course of the next 30 minutes, the barber did indeed cut my hair. As a matter of fact, she cut far too much of my hair off. She also nicked my ear, and didn't even acknowledge it. I asked her if she's having any "new business jitters" quite politely as I could tell she was a bit nervous...

She said "Well, you're really my 3rd client. I haven't gone to beauticians school, and I've only cut the hair of family members. I'm trying to learn as I go, and not charge that much since I still don't know how to cut hair". 

Well as it turns out. Now I have a bad haircut, bloody ear, and I'm out 20 bucks. I have a feeling that's how a lot of her clients will feel.


----------



## cannpope

I want to start a photography side business of my own one day, but I know I am not yet ready.  Photography isn't something that you learn overnight, in a week, in a year, or even in a couple of years (well maybe).  It takes time to learn to master it and taking phtos is only one small aspect of a business.  A photography business is 90% "business".   Give yourself time to learn the in's and out's and the up's and down's of photography.   I've been shooting a little over a year and still HAVE A TON to learn before I even start to think of starting a side business.


----------



## Robin Usagani

It is still an honest living.  If she delivers the same quality of images she shows on her portfolio, then who cares?  Clients should expect similar photos like her portfolio.


----------



## KmH

cannpope mentions not using the 50 mm f.1.8 at wide open apertures.

The reason is the focus is sharpest when the lens is stopped down 2 or more stops.

A full stop down from f/1.8 is f/2.5. A second full stop down takes you to f/3.5.

An issue the inexpensive Canon 50 mm f/1.8 II lens has is poor quality CoC (Circle of Confusion, or bokeh). A big reason for the poor quality CoC is the lens only has 5 aperture blades, they are not curved, and they have sharp edges.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circle_of_confusion

Lenses that produce a high quality CoC usually have 9 or more aperture blades that are curved so the aperture is closer to being a perfect circle, and the blade edges are also rounded to soften the blur quality of the CoC.


----------



## Elizabeth30

Oh wow, some of you are just down right mean about it. Thanks for the welcome :/


----------



## gsgary

Just being honest, and telling as i see it we see these sort of shots after every Christmas


----------



## Elizabeth30

gsgary said:


> There is no way you should be charging for this sort of quality, i wouldn't pay for any you have posted, did you get the camera for Christmas



Really?? This is "just" being honest? There's no 'hint' of rudeness here? No, I bought this camera myself in Feb 2011. And I posted the photos for some really constructive criticism.


----------



## Demers18

KmH said:


> cannpope mentions not using the 50 mm f.1.8 at wide open apertures.
> 
> The reason is the focus is sharpest when the lens is stopped down 2 or more stops.
> 
> A full stop down from f/1.8 is f/2.5. A second full stop down takes you to f/3.5.
> 
> An issue the inexpensive Canon 50 mm f/1.8 II lens has is poor quality CoC (Circle of Confusion, or bokeh). A big reason for the poor quality CoC is the lens only has 5 aperture blades, they are not curved, and they have sharp edges.  Circle of confusion - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> Lenses that produce a high quality CoC usually have 9 or more aperture blades that are curved so the aperture is closer to being a perfect circle, and the blade edges are also rounded to soften the blur quality of the CoC.



So does this mean that the Canon EF 50mm f1.4 USM with 8 aperture blades be that much of a better option for CoC?[h=2][/h]


----------



## tirediron

Elizabeth30 said:


> tirediron said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Elizabeth30 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hi, I just started by business a few months ago...
> 
> 
> 
> Really?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Um, yes........ ??
Click to expand...

As Gary rather bluntly alluded to, these images really don't seem to be of a quality that I would expect from a professional.  Were you to charge me for these, I would be more than a little bit upset.  They are a start, but there are many basic technical issues which KmH has already mentioned.  

If I may, I would suggest that you put away your shingle for a little while and spend some time learning the basics.  These tutorials are excellent, and will give you a much better grounding in the basics.  As well, spend some time studying this DoF calculator for a better understanding of why shooting wide open is not always the best.

Good luck.


----------



## redessa

So, if I may ask, why have you started a photography business if you only have a "general understanding" of your camera?  How much time have you spent researching and studying photography? Do you understand why you are shooting at f/1.8 or do you just like that it gives you a cool blurred background? You need a good understanding of the exposure triangle, composition, posing, lighting (even when using natural light) and white balance. Do you have a business license and insurance?  Do you understand the tax implications of running a business and how to draw up a contract for clients?  

Your 1st picture is nice but the focus is soft because you are shooting wide open when it was not needed for that shot.  Plus the girl is in her jacket, which indicates to me that she's coming or going somewhere and this is not a thought out photo shoot.

The 2nd pic - the colors are.... well, she's purple.  Not a good look for people.  Your low angle is also not flattering.  It makes her behind look big.

3rd - the pose is awkward and again, the colors are off although this time the subject is green.  Is your monitor calibrated?  

The 4th is a really nice snapshot of a kid in her playroom (a little underexposed and the white balance is a bit warm but not as off as the previous two).  But as a portrait, the junk in the background ruins it.


----------



## gsgary

Elizabeth30 said:


> gsgary said:
> 
> 
> 
> There is no way you should be charging for this sort of quality, i wouldn't pay for any you have posted, did you get the camera for Christmas
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Really?? This is "just" being honest? There's no 'hint' of rudeness here? No, I bought this camera myself in Feb 2011. And I posted the photos for some really constructive criticism.
Click to expand...


That is only 10 months, sorry but i would not know where to start with C+C on these


----------



## jowensphoto

Elizabeth30 said:


> gsgary said:
> 
> 
> 
> There is no way you should be charging for this sort of quality, i wouldn't pay for any you have posted, did you get the camera for Christmas
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Really?? This is "just" being honest? There's no 'hint' of rudeness here? No, I bought this camera myself in Feb 2011. And I posted the photos for some really constructive criticism.
Click to expand...


No. Rude would have been to lie and say that these are technically and artistically perfect photos. 

Welcome to the forum; if you plan on sticking around, you need to be able to take criticisms about your work. If you want C&C, ask for it, but don't expect to have smoke blown up your ass and pats on the back.


----------



## redessa

tirediron said:


> If I may, I would suggest that you put away your shingle for a little while and spend some time learning the basics.



This!  No one is saying you can't get there, just that you aren't there yet and probably jumped the gun in starting a business.


----------



## tirediron

Elizabeth30 said:


> gsgary said:
> 
> 
> 
> There is no way you should be charging for this sort of quality, i wouldn't pay for any you have posted, did you get the camera for Christmas
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Really?? This is "just" being honest? There's no 'hint' of rudeness here? No, I bought this camera myself in Feb 2011. And I posted the photos for some really constructive criticism.
Click to expand...

Yes, it is being honest.  Bluntly honest, but honest nonetheless.  Far too many people seem to think that buying a camera automatically makes them a professional photographer.  There is a great deal more to it...  the technical knowledge alone should represent many months, if not years of study.  The artistic aspects are something else altogether, and require years of practice to hone.  Then there's lighting...  what do you know about lighting?  Can you confidently light a large group in bright, dappled light?


----------



## Robin Usagani

Elizabeth, you will get the same treatment almost at ANY photography forum.  Dont worry about it.  Just keep shooting and proof them wrong.  20 months ago I went trough the same thing.  They were somewhat right, but it pushed me to do a lot better.


----------



## gsgary

Schwettylens said:


> Elizabeth, you will get the same treatment almost at ANY photography forum.  Dont worry about it.  Just keep shooting and proof them wrong.  20 months ago I went trough the same thing.  They were somewhat right, but it pushed me to do a lot better.



We are still waiting


----------



## Elizabeth30

redessa said:


> So, if I may ask, why have you started a photography business if you only have a "general understanding" of your camera?  How much time have you spent researching and studying photography? Do you understand why you are shooting at f/1.8 or do you just like that it gives you a cool blurred background? You need a good understanding of the exposure triangle, composition, posing, lighting (even when using natural light) and white balance. Do you have a business license and insurance?  Do you understand the tax implications of running a business and how to draw up a contract for clients?
> 
> Your 1st picture is nice but the focus is soft because you are shooting wide open when it was not needed for that shot.  Plus the girl is in her jacket, which indicates to me that she's coming or going somewhere and this is not a thought out photo shoot.
> 
> The 2nd pic - the colors are.... well, she's purple.  Not a good look for people.  Your low angle is also not flattering.  It makes her behind look big.
> 
> 3rd - the pose is awkward and again, the colors are off although this time the subject is green.  Is your monitor calibrated?
> 
> The 4th is a really nice snapshot of a kid in her playroom (a little underexposed and the white balance is a bit warm but not as off as the previous two).  But as a portrait, the junk in the background ruins it.



Well I didn't intentionally start a business, I got my first DSLR Feb 2011 and just shot for fun. I have always loved photography but I knew there was a lot to learn. I started reading articles and watching tutorials. In Oct a family member asked if I would take her Senior pics and I agreed. I posted them on FB and got some really good feedback. I had a lot of others come and ask me to do a photo shoot for them so all my shoots (only 5) all together have simply been people coming to me and asking so I do not have a full force biz up and running. I hope to in the future though. 
Ok, on your comments on the photos, well shoot, they are all my children and I was simply snapping them at play for practice but now seeing as all the negative feedback I've had I'm not really sure I want to upload any that I've done for clients. They are pretty similar. I guess my editing is off too huh? I like bold colors, i also like a kind of vintage haze to me editing. Well I feel sunk here. Honestly I know soooooo many photogs that are awesome and never went to school! I thought maybe I had an "eye" for it and could build from there with mentors and articles, tutorials, ect..... but sounds like most of you here talk of schooling.


----------



## Robin Usagani

Gary, your bar is set super high.  It may take me a few more years to proof you wrong .



gsgary said:


> Schwettylens said:
> 
> 
> 
> Elizabeth, you will get the same treatment almost at ANY photography forum.  Dont worry about it.  Just keep shooting and proof them wrong.  20 months ago I went trough the same thing.  They were somewhat right, but it pushed me to do a lot better.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We are still waiting
Click to expand...


----------



## SCraig

Elizabeth30 said:


> Really?? This is "just" being honest? There's no 'hint' of rudeness here? No, I bought this camera myself in Feb 2011. And I posted the photos for some really constructive criticism.


If you are going to open a photography business then you need to develop thick skin.  Honest comment and critique:

#1 - The only thing in focus is her eyelashes.  Her nose and the hair hanging over her eyes is already out of focus.  The composition is decent though.

#2 - Horrendous magenta cast to the photograph.  Highlights to the right of the railroad track and the sky in the background are completely blown out.  Blocked up shadows in places.  Did you look at the histogram?

#3 - About all I can see is the flare from the sun.  If you are going to take shots straight into the sun then the subject needs to be blocking it and you need to meter off of their face.

#4 - At least the floor / horizon (which is nearly dead-center of the photograph) is straight.  Tungsten lighting cast that is not corrected for, busy background (what is that growing out of her back?).  A snapshot.

You can call these comments being rude or dishonest or non-constructive or whatever you want to, but I guarantee that any customer who came in to pick up photographs like this would be asking the exact same questions.  Everything I mentioned is true and it is wrong.  You are asking to be paid for producing PROFESSIONAL results, nothing less.  Anything less than true professional quality is not acceptable.  If you are willing to learn you can get there, but like it or not those examples are not professional quality photographs.

Edit ... I wrote this while you were posting your last post so I didn't see it.  Academic learning is an excellent way to learn since there are instructors who are paid to see that you get some benefit from the classes.  That is not the only way though, and if you apply yourself there are people here and elsewhere who will always be willing to help.  You have to take the first step in the right direction though, and it seems like you are willing to do that.


----------



## KmH

Schwettylens said:


> It is still an honest living.  If she delivers the same quality of images she shows on her portfolio, then who cares?  Clients should expect similar photos like her portfolio.


Absolutely!

Caveat Emptor! 
The buyer decides if the work produced is worth paying for, or not.



> Caveat emptor - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> In addition to the quality of the merchandise, this phrase also applies to the return policy. In most jurisdictions, there is no legal requirement for the vendor to provide a refund or exchange. In many cases, the vendor will not provide a refund but will provide a credit. In the cases of software, movies and other copyrighted material, many vendors will only do a direct exchange for another copy of exactly the same title. Most stores require proof of purchase and impose time limits on exchanges or refunds.


----------



## Elizabeth30

SCraig said:


> Elizabeth30 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Really?? This is "just" being honest? There's no 'hint' of rudeness here? No, I bought this camera myself in Feb 2011. And I posted the photos for some really constructive criticism.
> 
> 
> 
> If you are going to open a photography business then you need to develop thick skin.  Honest comment and critique:
> 
> #1 - The only thing in focus is her eyelashes.  Her nose and the hair hanging over her eyes is already out of focus.  The composition is decent though.
> 
> #2 - Horrendous magenta cast to the photograph.  Highlights to the right of the railroad track and the sky in the background are completely blown out.  Blocked up shadows in places.  Did you look at the histogram?
> 
> #3 - About all I can see is the flare from the sun.  If you are going to take shots straight into the sun then the subject needs to be blocking it and you need to meter off of their face.
> 
> #4 - At least the floor / horizon (which is nearly dead-center of the photograph) is straight.  Tungsten lighting cast that is not corrected for, busy background (what is that growing out of her back?).  A snapshot.
> 
> You can call these comments being rude or dishonest or non-constructive or whatever you want to, but I guarantee that any customer who came in to pick up photographs like this would be asking the exact same questions.  Everything I mentioned is true and it is wrong.  You are asking to be paid for producing PROFESSIONAL results, nothing less.  Anything less than true professional quality is not acceptable.  If you are willing to learn you can get there, but like it or not those examples are not professional quality photographs.
> 
> Edit ... I wrote this while you were posting your last post so I didn't see it.  Academic learning is an excellent way to learn since there are instructors who are paid to see that you get some benefit from the classes.  That is not the only way though, and if you apply yourself there are people here and elsewhere who will always be willing to help.  You have to take the first step in the right direction though, and it seems like you are willing to do that.
Click to expand...

Thank you and I really do want the criticism, I can take it, but this guy and the post after his were just demeaning. If anyone has some true advice I will gladly accept it, that was not advice.


----------



## redessa

School is one way to go but many amazing photographers are largely self taught.  You don't need a degree in photography to be a photographer but having other, more experienced eyes judge and guide your work is a tremendous way to grow.  As you can see from this post alone, facebook friends are not going to give you the kind of feedback you get from a photography critique site.

Personally, I think a basic photography class is a great way to get started.  Whether that be taking some college classes, joining a local photo club, community ed class, or even some classes from a local camera store it will give you the chance to learn and share and get constructive feedback. 

Once you get pointed in the right direction, it's easier to figure out the next step to continue learning on your own.  And helps you develop an eye for critiquing your own work.


----------



## Trever1t

Keep in mind that what friends and family think of your photography is a bit clouded by your relationships and most subjects tend to love pictures of themselves and their close ones. Coming onto a public forum you don't have the benefit of that partialality. We have no atachements to your subjects. 

Here you will get fairly honest critique.


----------



## gsgary

Elizabeth30 said:


> SCraig said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Elizabeth30 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Really?? This is "just" being honest? There's no 'hint' of rudeness here? No, I bought this camera myself in Feb 2011. And I posted the photos for some really constructive criticism.
> 
> 
> 
> If you are going to open a photography business then you need to develop thick skin.  Honest comment and critique:
> 
> #1 - The only thing in focus is her eyelashes.  Her nose and the hair hanging over her eyes is already out of focus.  The composition is decent though.
> 
> #2 - Horrendous magenta cast to the photograph.  Highlights to the right of the railroad track and the sky in the background are completely blown out.  Blocked up shadows in places.  Did you look at the histogram?
> 
> #3 - About all I can see is the flare from the sun.  If you are going to take shots straight into the sun then the subject needs to be blocking it and you need to meter off of their face.
> 
> #4 - At least the floor / horizon (which is nearly dead-center of the photograph) is straight.  Tungsten lighting cast that is not corrected for, busy background (what is that growing out of her back?).  A snapshot.
> 
> You can call these comments being rude or dishonest or non-constructive or whatever you want to, but I guarantee that any customer who came in to pick up photographs like this would be asking the exact same questions.  Everything I mentioned is true and it is wrong.  You are asking to be paid for producing PROFESSIONAL results, nothing less.  Anything less than true professional quality is not acceptable.  If you are willing to learn you can get there, but like it or not those examples are not professional quality photographs.
> 
> Edit ... I wrote this while you were posting your last post so I didn't see it.  Academic learning is an excellent way to learn since there are instructors who are paid to see that you get some benefit from the classes.  That is not the only way though, and if you apply yourself there are people here and elsewhere who will always be willing to help.  You have to take the first step in the right direction though, and it seems like you are willing to do that.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Thank you and I really do want the criticism, I can take it, but this guy and the post after his were just demeaning. If anyone has some true advice I will gladly accept it, that was not advice.
Click to expand...



I don't see anything wrong with the post above, FB is not a place to get honest feed back on photography. Just read, read and read more and practise. As soon as people post "Ive just started a biz" photos have to be good to get a good response


----------



## tirediron

Elizabeth30 said:


> ...I didn't intentionally start a business,


How do you unintentionally apply for a business license, take out liabilty insurance or apply for a sales-tax number?  


Elizabeth30 said:


> ...but sounds like most of you here talk of schooling.


Not at all, we're talking about learning!  There's nothing wrong with formal education, but photography is most definitely a profession where you can, if you have the motivation, learn all you need to without ever setting foot inside a classroom.  It takes a lot of time and practice.  I would suggest that if you seriously want to be a professional photographer and not a Facebook Fauxtographer, then you should be putting several hours every day divided between reading and practicing.  You're lucky - when many of us started, practicing was expensive....  Film, chemicals and paper were not cheap.  Today, almost everyone owns a computer, and once you have your camera, there's almost no additional cost to practice.  You can most definitely do it, but you have to work at it.


----------



## gsgary

tirediron said:


> Elizabeth30 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...I didn't intentionally start a business,
> 
> 
> 
> How do you unintentionally apply for a business license, take out liabilty insurance or apply for a sales-tax number?
> 
> 
> Elizabeth30 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...but sounds like most of you here talk of schooling.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Not at all, we're talking about learning!  There's nothing wrong with formal education, but photography is most definitely a profession where you can, if you have the motivation, learn all you need to without ever setting foot inside a classroom.  It takes a lot of time and practice.  I would suggest that if you seriously want to be a professional photographer and not a Facebook Fauxtographer, then you should be putting several hours every day divided between reading and practicing.  You're lucky - when many of us started, practicing was expensive....  Film, chemicals and paper were not cheap.  Today, almost everyone owns a computer, and once you have your camera, there's almost no additional cost to practice.  You can most definitely do it, but you have to work at it.
Click to expand...



Some of use still shoot film and digital, i don't mind paying you don't get the same buzz shooting digital as you do shooting 120 film


----------



## Robin Usagani

Honest critique up to a certain degree.



Trever1t said:


> Here you will get fairly honest critique.


----------



## Trever1t

Should I have said "no holds barred?"


----------



## Elizabeth30

Trever1t said:


> Keep in mind that what friends and family think of your photography is a bit clouded by your relationships and most subjects tend to love pictures of themselves and their close ones. Coming onto a public forum you don't have the benefit of that partialality. We have no atachements to your subjects.
> 
> Here you will get fairly honest critique.



Good, that's what I was looking for!! It may be hard to hear some times but I am more than ready to take the next step in the learning process! I don't even know where to start?? I feel like I've played and played with my camera and editing tools, and I have a general knowledge of my camera and some of the settings. I some what understand DoF and don't understand light at all! All I know about light is when I'm outside, make sure the light is behind me lol. (although I do like the silhouette look too) ahhhhh! Where should I begin?


----------



## redessa

Elizabeth30 said:


> Ok, on your comments on the photos, well shoot, they are all my children and I was simply snapping them at play for practice but now seeing as all the negative feedback I've had I'm not really sure I want to upload any that I've done for clients. They are pretty similar.



Your children are lovely, it's the photography that needs work.  It's great to snap pics of your kids playing. It's even a great way to see how your camera behaves with different settings. Put that sucker in manual and snap away!  See, and take note, of the various results you get.  

But if you're going to be in business, you need to have moved out of "snapping" mode and developed a sense of purpose and intention behind each shot.  That's not to say you can never take a snapshot.  Snapshots have their place.  My kids' scrapbooks are full of them and they are treasured family memories.  But they are not professional portraits.


----------



## Elizabeth30

tirediron said:


> Elizabeth30 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...I didn't intentionally start a business,
> 
> 
> 
> How do you unintentionally apply for a business license, take out liabilty insurance or apply for a sales-tax number?
> 
> 
> Elizabeth30 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...but sounds like most of you here talk of schooling.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Not at all, we're talking about learning!  There's nothing wrong with formal education, but photography is most definitely a profession where you can, if you have the motivation, learn all you need to without ever setting foot inside a classroom.  It takes a lot of time and practice.  I would suggest that if you seriously want to be a professional photographer and not a Facebook Fauxtographer, then you should be putting several hours every day divided between reading and practicing.  You're lucky - when many of us started, practicing was expensive....  Film, chemicals and paper were not cheap.  Today, almost everyone owns a computer, and once you have your camera, there's almost no additional cost to practice.  You can most definitely do it, but you have to work at it.
Click to expand...

 Good advice, thanks!!!


----------



## 2WheelPhoto

Elizabeth30 said:


> Trever1t said:
> 
> 
> 
> Keep in mind that what friends and family think of your photography is a bit clouded by your relationships and most subjects tend to love pictures of themselves and their close ones. Coming onto a public forum you don't have the benefit of that partialality. We have no atachements to your subjects.
> 
> Here you will get fairly honest critique.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Good, that's what I was looking for!! It may be hard to hear some times but I am more than ready to take the next step in the learning process! *I don't even know where to start??* I feel like I've played and played with my camera and editing tools, and I have a general knowledge of my camera and some of the settings. I some what understand DoF and don't understand light at all! All I know about light is when I'm outside, make sure the light is behind me lol. (although I do like the silhouette look too) ahhhhh! Where should I begin?
Click to expand...


KmH posted a great start here: http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/...allery/267492-info-those-new-photography.html


----------



## MLeeK

OK. Constructive Criticism-
I apologize ahead of time. 
1 is dark grayscale. There is no focus point that I can find in it except maybe on the collar. It is probably the best one of the bunch in glancing at the set.
2. Your subject is PURPLE. And I do mean purple-as in neon. Your overall composition is nicely placed for the rule of thirds, however her looking out of the short side of the image throws the balance a little. You need to make that negative space on the right side having meaning in order for it to balance well. The other track does help with that a bit. Fill flash should have been used here to exposure your subject properly and not have that huge white sky and blown out trees to draw your eye into it. Focus appears to be on the seam along her butt.  The image has potential.
3.that hazy atmosphere is a popular look and it's pretty ok here. Your subject's face is green and her eyes are hidden in shadow. The placement of her feet coming towards the camera causes what is called foreshortening which makes that boot giant when compared to her body and head. Your horizon is tilted which is not always a bad thing, but in this case it makes you want to tilt your head to make it level. 

4. the child's skin is glowing purple/orange. There is way too much of the carpet before your subject and way to many distractions in the background. There is something purple growing out of her head. With the color fixed it is a nice snapshot that would make a great scrapbook page.

All but the black and white are heavily contrasty with a high blacks level making your subjects glow with color, not vibrance. The heavy blacks are making the skin tones look dirty and the eyes disappear. The quality here is definitely not professional, but shows potential. 

Conclusion: you need to get your monitor calibrated and learn about composition, exposure and how it controls the creative aspect of the image. You need to learn about flash, natural light and how to use both to your advantage both in exposure and in the creation of the image creatively.
Are they "professional" quality. Absolutely not. However if someone is willing to pay for them? OK, I guess. I will say that owning a DSLR and having a general idea of "some settings" does not make you ready to become a professional and this can definitely come back to haunt you down the road. If you sell poor quality images now (whether you think you're a pro or not) they are OUT THERE. With YOUR name attached as the creater. That makes you a professional in the eyes of the purchasing public. So... when someone else sees the poor quality you have out there with your name on it... What are the chances they are going to hire you? Down the road after you have seen and learned and are amazing, those can really come back to bite you in the azz. 
It's a LARGE learning curve to create and control the image, but not one you can't do. And it won't take you forever to improve this quality immensely. Take the time to do it before you put yourself out of business with this kind of quality to bite you back.


----------



## tirediron

gsgary said:


> Some of use still shoot film and digital, i don't mind paying you don't get the same buzz shooting digital as you do shooting 120 film


 I couldn't agree with you more... I love getting out on a quiet morning and burning through a couple of rolls of Ilford Delta 100 in the old Mamiya.  I was referring to straight practicing... shooting 2-300 frames just to experiment with DoF.  Today, with digital, that's cheap and cheerful.  When you and I started, that was an expensive process.


----------



## ph0enix

Elizabeth30 said:


> Thank you and I really do want the criticism, I can take it, but this guy and the post after his were just demeaning. If anyone has some true advice I will gladly accept it, that was not advice.



Focus on the content instead of the packaging.  The beauty of gsgary is his brutal honesty!


----------



## sm4him

Elizabeth30 said:


> ..... but sounds like most of you here talk of schooling.



Nobody is talking about schooling; they're talking about LEARNING. 



Elizabeth30 said:


> ... now seeing as all the negative feedback I've had I'm not really sure  I want to upload any that I've done for clients.



Depends. You have to decide: do you want to take pictures that your family loves and your FB friends fawn over? Sounds like you're already there, so if that's your aim, I'd probably not post any of my "client" shots for C&C here, because I can tell you, it's gonna be a wake-up call.
If, on the other hand, you want to stick that shingle back in the closet and make a decision that you are going to LEARN that camera, LEARN about lighting, about composition, about photographic technique and that you are going to PERSIST until your photos are professional quality, then...post away! You will learn quickly if you DO post your BEST efforts here, and then HEED what some of these forum members tell you. Some of them WILL be rude about it. Some will simply be blunt. But even in the bluntness and rudeness, most will stop and say, "try this....you need to understand about this..." and they'll post links, and you'll read OTHER C&Cs, and if you will determine not to bristle and react, but rather to listen and try to learn what they're saying...
well, this time next year, you might just be able to dust that shingle off and hang it up, proudly!


----------



## Elizabeth30

MLeeK said:


> OK. Constructive Criticism-
> I apologize ahead of time.
> 1 is dark grayscale. There is no focus point that I can find in it except maybe on the collar. It is probably the best one of the bunch in glancing at the set.
> 2. Your subject is PURPLE. And I do mean purple-as in neon. Your overall composition is nicely placed for the rule of thirds, however her looking out of the short side of the image throws the balance a little. You need to make that negative space on the right side having meaning in order for it to balance well. The other track does help with that a bit. Fill flash should have been used here to exposure your subject properly and not have that huge white sky and blown out trees to draw your eye into it. Focus appears to be on the seam along her butt.  The image has potential.
> 3.that hazy atmosphere is a popular look and it's pretty ok here. Your subject's face is green and her eyes are hidden in shadow. The placement of her feet coming towards the camera causes what is called foreshortening which makes that boot giant when compared to her body and head. Your horizon is tilted which is not always a bad thing, but in this case it makes you want to tilt your head to make it level.
> 
> 4. the child's skin is glowing purple/orange. There is way too much of the carpet before your subject and way to many distractions in the background. There is something purple growing out of her head. With the color fixed it is a nice snapshot that would make a great scrapbook page.
> 
> All but the black and white are heavily contrasty with a high blacks level making your subjects glow with color, not vibrance. The heavy blacks are making the skin tones look dirty and the eyes disappear. The quality here is definitely not professional, but shows potential.
> 
> Conclusion: you need to get your monitor calibrated and learn about composition, exposure and how it controls the creative aspect of the image. You need to learn about flash, natural light and how to use both to your advantage both in exposure and in the creation of the image creatively.
> Are they "professional" quality. Absolutely not. However if someone is willing to pay for them? OK, I guess. I will say that owning a DSLR and having a general idea of "some settings" does not make you ready to become a professional and this can definitely come back to haunt you down the road. If you sell poor quality images now (whether you think you're a pro or not) they are OUT THERE. With YOUR name attached as the creater. That makes you a professional in the eyes of the purchasing public. So... when someone else sees the poor quality you have out there with your name on it... What are the chances they are going to hire you? Down the road after you have seen and learned and are amazing, those can really come back to bite you in the azz.
> It's a LARGE learning curve to create and control the image, but not one you can't do. And it won't take you forever to improve this quality immensely. Take the time to do it before you put yourself out of business with this kind of quality to bite you back.



Wow! Thank you so much for taking the time. I will defiantly head your advice and start my learning process. I knew I had a lot to learn but never realized how much I still need to learn. I figured if people are askin me to do a shoot then I must be good? Well I never saw what everyone is talking about until now.


----------



## MLeeK

Here is my favorite site on BASIC composition-there is far more to it than this, but these are the very basic rules and will always serve you well. Guidelines for Better Photographic Composition.
Keith (KmH) has some awesome links in his signature to help you get started with exposure and the creative controls of exposure.
You NEED to get a calibrator. The Spyder3 Express is like $60 or something. It's an absolute must if you are working with photos or you have no REAL idea what you are creating until you get a print back from a reputable lab and realize it's horrific. 

Here's my advice when learning: Do not add flash until you understand the exposure triangle and how each piece of it controls the exposure as well as the creative aspects of the image. Flash changes some of the rules and will make it complicated. First learn exposure, then learn flash. 
That doesn't mean don't use flash ever, never... whatever. You will have to use it at times-you aren't going to quit snapping photos of your kids and life. But in your learning practice and work leave it out for now. 
Concentrate on how each of those 3 elements work separately. When you are working on aperture shoot in aperture priority, shutter priority when working on shutter speed. Then start into manual and how to combine them to create the image and the exposure. You don't have to shoot all manual all of the time. MANY photographers are shooting in priority modes almost all of the time. In order to do that you have to understand what that mode is controlling for you and how it will change your photograph-hence learning how to shoot in manual. 

When you have a fair understanding of what each element will do, then move on to flash with an external speedlight.

You can learn post processing through all of this, but do not concentrate on photoshop or gimp or whatever you are using. It's a crutch that can totally ruin your growth in camera if you think "I can fix it in PS." 

Ask questions. This forum is blunt and to the point, but there is an amazing amount of knowledge exchanged here freely every day and they all will help you. If there is someone you just can't stomach-there is an ignore button or simply pay no heed to them. 

Ask for CC. In order to get the best CC back from us you have to give us some info-your settings on the images and what you were working on or trying to do. What you think you screwed up and any questions you have for helping you achieve whatever it is that you think you aren't quite nailing. Be well aware that we aren't going to be like your friends, family  and facebook where you are told you are the Greatest Ever. We are going  to give it to you straight up with no chaser. However it's those wrong things that we are going to help you to change and learn how not to do or how to fix.


----------



## Elizabeth30

MLeeK said:


> Here is my favorite site on BASIC composition-there is far more to it than this, but these are the very basic rules and will always serve you well. Guidelines for Better Photographic Composition.
> Keith (KmH) has some awesome links in his signature to help you get started with exposure and the creative controls of exposure.
> You NEED to get a calibrator. The Spyder3 Express is like $60 or something. It's an absolute must if you are working with photos or you have no REAL idea what you are creating until you get a print back from a reputable lab and realize it's horrific.
> 
> Here's my advice when learning: Do not add flash until you understand the exposure triangle and how each piece of it controls the exposure as well as the creative aspects of the image. Flash changes some of the rules and will make it complicated. First learn exposure, then learn flash.
> That doesn't mean don't use flash ever, never... whatever. You will have to use it at times-you aren't going to quit snapping photos of your kids and life. But in your learning practice and work leave it out for now.
> Concentrate on how each of those 3 elements work separately. When you are working on aperture shoot in aperture priority, shutter priority when working on shutter speed. Then start into manual and how to combine them to create the image and the exposure. You don't have to shoot all manual all of the time. MANY photographers are shooting in priority modes almost all of the time. In order to do that you have to understand what that mode is controlling for you and how it will change your photograph-hence learning how to shoot in manual.
> 
> When you have a fair understanding of what each element will do, then move on to flash with an external speedlight.
> 
> You can learn post processing through all of this, but do not concentrate on photoshop or gimp or whatever you are using. It's a crutch that can totally ruin your growth in camera if you think "I can fix it in PS."
> 
> Ask questions. This forum is blunt and to the point, but there is an amazing amount of knowledge exchanged here freely every day and they all will help you. If there is someone you just can't stomach-there is an ignore button or simply pay no heed to them.
> 
> Ask for CC. In order to get the best CC back from us you have to give us some info-your settings on the images and what you were working on or trying to do. What you think you screwed up and any questions you have for helping you achieve whatever it is that you think you aren't quite nailing. Be well aware that we aren't going to be like your friends, family  and facebook where you are told you are the Greatest Ever. We are going  to give it to you straight up with no chaser. However it's those wrong things that we are going to help you to change and learn how not to do or how to fix.


Than k you so much! I appreciate your feedback and will start learn the exposure triangle as you all call it! I'm sure Im will have many many questions in my journey but I'm glad tom know you are all here to help! Thanks so much!


----------



## gsgary

I'm a FP4/HP5/Tri-X/Fuji Reala kind of guy in my Mamiya C330


----------



## MarkCSmith

Some pretty harsh replies here for sure but take them and learn from them. I was getting paid gigs before I really should have gotten paid gigs too, but who cares? I was honest about my level of experience in what the person wanted to pay me to shoot for them and in all cases they understood they were taking a gamble for a discounted price. 

You do have to work on the basics, as your focus is off, that is THE basic rule of photography, get the proper focus. If you don't get that down, then it doesn't matter how accurate your exposure is or how crafty your lighting. As has been said, don't live at f/1.8, give yourself some room to breathe, you'll still get the bokeh that your clients want.


----------



## Elizabeth30

MarkCSmith said:


> Some pretty harsh replies here for sure but take them and learn from them. I was getting paid gigs before I really should have gotten paid gigs too, but who cares? I was honest about my level of experience in what the person wanted to pay me to shoot for them and in all cases they understood they were taking a gamble for a discounted price.
> 
> You do have to work on the basics, as your focus is off, that is THE basic rule of photography, get the proper focus. If you don't get that down, then it doesn't matter how accurate your exposure is or how crafty your lighting. As has been said, don't live at f/1.8, give yourself some room to breathe, you'll still get the bokeh that your clients want.



My main problem with focus is that I have a hard time telling on the LCD or view finder what actually is in focus...... any tips for that? I mainly shoot  with aperture priority becuase of the good bokeh but it does make my point of focus hard to find. and the lens I'm using doesn't zoom so no luck there.  although I do have another lens it only opens to 3.4 which is a huge difference in DoF, however this one does zoom.


----------



## Robin Usagani

You can achieve good bokeh with ANY mode


----------



## Elizabeth30

Schwettylens said:


> You can achieve good bokeh with ANY mode


ok but the best bokeh I have seen is with the largest aperture.... ??? am 'i wrong??


----------



## ph0enix

Elizabeth30 said:


> MarkCSmith said:
> 
> 
> 
> Some pretty harsh replies here for sure but take them and learn from them. I was getting paid gigs before I really should have gotten paid gigs too, but who cares? I was honest about my level of experience in what the person wanted to pay me to shoot for them and in all cases they understood they were taking a gamble for a discounted price.
> 
> You do have to work on the basics, as your focus is off, that is THE basic rule of photography, get the proper focus. If you don't get that down, then it doesn't matter how accurate your exposure is or how crafty your lighting. As has been said, don't live at f/1.8, give yourself some room to breathe, you'll still get the bokeh that your clients want.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> My main problem with focus is that I have a hard time telling on the LCD or view finder what actually is in focus...... any tips for that? I mainly shoot  with aperture priority becuase of the good bokeh but it does make my point of focus hard to find. and the lens I'm using doesn't zoom so no luck there.  although I do have another lens it only opens to 3.4 which is a huge difference in DoF, however this one does zoom.
Click to expand...


I'm not familiar with Canon but there should be a focus indicator in the viewfinder.  You probably shouldn't use the LCD screen to focus.  Also, what AF mode do you use?


----------



## Elizabeth30

ph0enix said:


> Elizabeth30 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MarkCSmith said:
> 
> 
> 
> Some pretty harsh replies here for sure but take them and learn from them. I was getting paid gigs before I really should have gotten paid gigs too, but who cares? I was honest about my level of experience in what the person wanted to pay me to shoot for them and in all cases they understood they were taking a gamble for a discounted price.
> 
> You do have to work on the basics, as your focus is off, that is THE basic rule of photography, get the proper focus. If you don't get that down, then it doesn't matter how accurate your exposure is or how crafty your lighting. As has been said, don't live at f/1.8, give yourself some room to breathe, you'll still get the bokeh that your clients want.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> My main problem with focus is that I have a hard time telling on the LCD or view finder what actually is in focus...... any tips for that? I mainly shoot  with aperture priority becuase of the good bokeh but it does make my point of focus hard to find. and the lens I'm using doesn't zoom so no luck there.  although I do have another lens it only opens to 3.4 which is a huge difference in DoF, however this one does zoom.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'm not familiar with Canon but there should be a focus indicator in the viewfinder.  You probably shouldn't use the LCD screen to focus.  Also, what AF mode do you use?
Click to expand...


I use MF not AF


----------



## Robin Usagani

Elizabeth30 said:


> Schwettylens said:
> 
> 
> 
> You can achieve good bokeh with ANY mode
> 
> 
> 
> ok but the best bokeh I have seen is with the largest aperture.... ??? am 'i wrong??
Click to expand...


You can have large bokeh with any mode, not only AV mode.  
Just spend a few minutes everyday on this link.

Cambridge in Colour - Photography Tutorials & Learning Community


----------



## jaicatalano

Is your lens 1.8? If so go to it's sweet spot.  Try 2.5 or 2.8. You will notice lenses work better in their sweet spot. 

By the way my favorite photo is the bottom photo.  A bit purple but on the skin but it's cute.


----------



## MLeeK

Yes, achieving bokeh is easiest in the widest aperture, however that isn't the only thing that controls depth of field and bokeh. You also need to be closer to your subject than the subject is to the background. 
If your subject is not fully in focus you have to raise your aperture until you get good focus. No lens is at it's sharpest wide open anyway. Most lenses are sharpest about 2 stops down from their widest aperture. That will allow you the depth of field you need to have a much better focus and STILL give you bokeh if there is distance between the subject and the background. 

Using the LCD screen to focus will make a mess of things. You really need to be using the viewfinder. You will see a great difference in your work.
You also want to only use ONE focus point and lock that on the inside of the eye closest to you. If you use more than one focus point then your camera is allowed to choose and it will choose where it wants to focus based on the most contrast. 

Basically you want to allow your camera to make little to NO decisions on it's own. 

If you try using back button focusing and getting your focus off that shutter button you will also see an improvement. Read here for more information: Canon DLC: Article: Back-Button Auto Focus Explained


----------



## Compaq

That back button changed my life :thumbsup:


----------



## ph0enix

Elizabeth30 said:


> I use MF not AF



Do you have a specific reason for that?  AF is faster and more accurate most of the time.


----------



## photog4life

yeah um how are you starting a business around it when your still learning?


----------



## gsgary

As above try using back button focus i have been using it for everything for years. Using longer focal lengths will give you the bokeh you want and not have to shoot wide open, this shot below was shot at F4.5 300mm, shooting it at F2.8 i would only have a split second to get the shot and it will be out of focus because of the very narrow DOF, your better to have less bokeh and be in focus


----------



## redessa

Elizabeth30 said:


> Schwettylens said:
> 
> 
> 
> You can achieve good bokeh with ANY mode
> 
> 
> 
> ok but the best bokeh I have seen is with the largest aperture.... ??? am 'i wrong??
Click to expand...


I think you are misunderstanding the term bokeh.  Bokeh describes the quality of the blur in the out of focus areas of your picture.  This is a fixed quality for each lens.  By shooting wide open, you have a very shallow depth of field and so you have more of the image out of focus, thus you see more bokeh.  So in a way, you could say shooting wide open gives better bokeh but it does not actually make the quality of the bokeh better, there's just more of it.  

The flip side though is that you are sacrificing sharpness.  Is it worth the tradeoff?  Generally not.  All the best bokeh in the world isn't going to make up for not having the subject in focus.  

The beauty of it is though, that you you don't have to be wide open to get that nice blurred background.  You can stop down the 3.5 or 4 and still get nice bokeh simply by moving the subject further from the background.  

For example, my photographer shot this at f/4 which was necessary to get all of us in focus.  But we were in a clearing far enough from the trees so as to still have that look of a nice shallow depth of field.  




IMG_4493edit1web


----------



## MLeeK

photog4life said:


> yeah um how are you starting a business around it when your still learning?


maybe you should read a few more of the responses.


----------



## Dom6663

I didn't read this thread, because I'm lazy.

If your clients are happy with the photos you are taking, and paying you for them. Then thats all you need.
You don't need the criticism of other photographers to make money, kind of like McDonalds, sure its not the best burger in town, but hey its good enough people are going to pay for it.

I'm not saying your photos are the McDonalds of the photography industry, thats what Walmart family portraits are for. But your starting out, and if people are willing to pay for these photos, more power to you. 

I'm sure as you progress with photography, people will be willing to pay more for your photos as well.


----------



## redessa

photog4life said:


> yeah um how are you starting a business around it when your still learning?



Aren't we all still learning?  I mean yeah, if you want to go into business, at some point you have to decide you know enough and are consistent enough to start charging people. But when you stop learning altogether, it's time to call it quits.


----------



## Elizabeth30

ph0enix said:


> Elizabeth30 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I use MF not AF
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Do you have a specific reason for that?  AF is faster and more accurate most of the time.
Click to expand...


hum well any time i'm set to AF it's slower...... and seems to focus on points I don't like. I guess I need to learn more on how to change my points of focus in the camera settings.


----------



## tirediron

redessa said:


> [I think you are misunderstanding the term bokeh. Bokeh describes the quality of the blur in the out of focus areas of your picture. This is a fixed quality for each lens...


Thank-you!!!!! :thumbup:


----------



## Elizabeth30

jaicatalano said:


> Is your lens 1.8? If so go to it's sweet spot.  Try 2.5 or 2.8. You will notice lenses work better in their sweet spot.
> 
> By the way my favorite photo is the bottom photo.  A bit purple but on the skin but it's cute.


 ok thanks!


----------



## Elizabeth30

redessa said:


> photog4life said:
> 
> 
> 
> yeah um how are you starting a business around it when your still learning?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Aren't we all still learning?  I mean yeah, if you want to go into business, at some point you have to decide you know enough and are consistent enough to start charging people. But when you stop learning altogether, it's time to call it quits.
Click to expand...


Well said and after today I'm not affraid to say I may have jumped the gun just a bit :/ ok ok a lot! But we learn from our mistakes and that's what I'm trying to do.


----------



## ph0enix

Elizabeth30 said:


> ph0enix said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Elizabeth30 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I use MF not AF
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Do you have a specific reason for that?  AF is faster and more accurate most of the time.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I guess I need to learn more on how to change my points of focus in the camera settings.
Click to expand...


Yup, your camera has at least a couple of different AF modes.  Study them.  They should be described in detail in the manual.


----------



## Elizabeth30

MLeeK said:


> Yes, achieving bokeh is easiest in the widest aperture, however that isn't the only thing that controls depth of field and bokeh. You also need to be closer to your subject than the subject is to the background.
> If your subject is not fully in focus you have to raise your aperture until you get good focus. No lens is at it's sharpest wide open anyway. Most lenses are sharpest about 2 stops down from their widest aperture. That will allow you the depth of field you need to have a much better focus and STILL give you bokeh if there is distance between the subject and the background.
> 
> Using the LCD screen to focus will make a mess of things. You really need to be using the viewfinder. You will see a great difference in your work.
> You also want to only use ONE focus point and lock that on the inside of the eye closest to you. If you use more than one focus point then your camera is allowed to choose and it will choose where it wants to focus based on the most contrast.
> 
> Basically you want to allow your camera to make little to NO decisions on it's own.
> 
> If you try using back button focusing and getting your focus off that shutter button you will also see an improvement. Read here for more information: Canon DLC: Article: Back-Button Auto Focus Explained



ah, what is this back button of which you speak?? I'm definantly reading about this one today!!!!


----------



## Elizabeth30

gsgary said:


> As above try using back button focus i have been using it for everything for years. Using longer focal lengths will give you the bokeh you want and not have to shoot wide open, this shot below was shot at F4.5 300mm, shooting it at F2.8 i would only have a split second to get the shot and it will be out of focus because of the very narrow DOF, your better to have less bokeh and be in focus


WOW!! AWESOME shot! Thanks for sharing!!


----------



## redessa

Elizabeth30 said:


> I guess I need to learn more on how to change my points of focus in the camera settings.



Yes, yes you do.   Read the manual. Seriously. I don't mean that to sound patronizing, I mean honest to goodness, read the manual.  Know what your camera can do and how to make those basic simple adjustments. 

I have your same camera.  Changing the focus point is something I do without even thinking.  Look at the back of your camera.  See those two round buttons on the far right, near the top?  They have blue manifying glasses under them w/ + & - in them.  Push the one on the right.  Your screen will say "AF point selection" and below that "Automatic Mode" and you'll see a bunch of blue boxes.  Now find the little wheel on the top of your camera, right behind the shutter button. Turn it and see what happens.  

But seriously, read the manual. Study it. There's all kinds of information in there!


----------



## Elizabeth30

redessa said:


> Elizabeth30 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Schwettylens said:
> 
> 
> 
> You can achieve good bokeh with ANY mode
> 
> 
> 
> ok but the best bokeh I have seen is with the largest aperture.... ??? am 'i wrong??
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I think you are misunderstanding the term bokeh.  Bokeh describes the quality of the blur in the out of focus areas of your picture.  This is a fixed quality for each lens.  By shooting wide open, you have a very shallow depth of field and so you have more of the image out of focus, thus you see more bokeh.  So in a way, you could say shooting wide open gives better bokeh but it does not actually make the quality of the bokeh better, there's just more of it.
> 
> The flip side though is that you are sacrificing sharpness.  Is it worth the tradeoff?  Generally not.  All the best bokeh in the world isn't going to make up for not having the subject in focus.
> 
> The beauty of it is though, that you you don't have to be wide open to get that nice blurred background.  You can stop down the 3.5 or 4 and still get nice bokeh simply by moving the subject further from the background.
> 
> For example, my photographer shot this at f/4 which was necessary to get all of us in focus.  But we were in a clearing far enough from the trees so as to still have that look of a nice shallow depth of field.
Click to expand...


No, I understand the term Bokeh and DoF but what I have yet to learn is how to get the best results. I found out the hard way that Largest Aperture is not always best! I had a friend ask me to do a family shoot for her and I used my 50mm 1.8 SET to AV 1.8 with ISO 100..... now I know most of you are cringing lol all of the photos lack TONS of clarity!! I mean there are still some "ok" shots but they are just "ok". BTW, nice pic!!!


----------



## Elizabeth30

ph0enix said:


> Elizabeth30 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ph0enix said:
> 
> 
> 
> Do you have a specific reason for that?  AF is faster and more accurate most of the time.
> 
> 
> 
> I guess I need to learn more on how to change my points of focus in the camera settings.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yup, your camera has at least a couple of different AF modes.  Study them.  They should be described in detail in the manual.
Click to expand...


haha, yes I've seen these points and thought "hum? don't know how to adjust them or which ones are my focal point but oh well, i'll figure it out" STUPID!  I will work on this as well as many other things


----------



## KmH

Elizabeth30 said:


> Schwettylens said:
> 
> 
> 
> You can achieve good bokeh with ANY mode
> 
> 
> 
> ok but the best bokeh I have seen is with the largest aperture.... ??? am 'i wrong??
Click to expand...

That is DoF, not bokeh.

Before you do anything else - go read this; Understanding Depth of Field in Photography


----------



## Elizabeth30

KmH said:


> Elizabeth30 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Schwettylens said:
> 
> 
> 
> You can achieve good bokeh with ANY mode
> 
> 
> 
> ok but the best bokeh I have seen is with the largest aperture.... ??? am 'i wrong??
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That is DoF, not bokeh.
> 
> Before you do anything else - go read this; Understanding Depth of Field in Photography
Click to expand...


let me rephrase, you get "more" bokeh with larger aperture, but I am now understanding that is not always the best option for a good photo that has bokeh. I'm thinking I've been loosing a lot of clairity in my photos from not really understanding how to use good DoF and Aperture settings.


----------



## jake337

The problem with the original post was that you started talking business and then posted some snapshots.  Do you have examples fromt the 5 senior shoots you did?


----------



## Dom6663

Elizabeth30 said:


> KmH said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Elizabeth30 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ok but the best bokeh I have seen is with the largest aperture.... ??? am 'i wrong??
> 
> 
> 
> That is DoF, not bokeh.
> 
> Before you do anything else - go read this; Understanding Depth of Field in Photography
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> let me rephrase, you get "more" bokeh with larger aperture, but I am now understanding that is not always the best option for a good photo that has bokeh. I'm thinking I've been loosing a lot of clairity in my photos from not really understanding how to use good DoF and Aperture settings.
Click to expand...


You dont get more bokeh, you get a shorter depth of field. If your talking about the actual shape and quality of the bokeh, when you stop down, for example f8 on an f2.8 lens, your bokeh 'balls' will look more geometric, dependant on the ammount of aperture blades you have. However, when your lens is fully open, widest aperture, the bokeh will indeed have a circular shape, typically. 

I dont know if what I just said is relative to what you are talking about, I am not reading this thread, just taking what you say out of context


----------



## MTVision

Elizabeth30 said:
			
		

> let me rephrase, you get "more" bokeh with larger aperture, but I am now understanding that is not always the best option for a good photo that has bokeh. I'm thinking I've been loosing a lot of clairity in my photos from not really understanding how to use good DoF and Aperture settings.



It's a lot easier to miss focus when shooting wide open. You're photos won't be sharp either. You can still get a nice DOF (blurring) by stopping down. At f/1.8 (depending on how close you are to your subject) the eyes may be in focus (if you nail it) but nothing else will be in sharp focus. F/1.8 definitely isn't the best if you are shooting more then 1 person either unless you are really far away - like 15-20 feet away. But no matter what your photos won't be as sharp at 1.8 as at a smaller aperture.


----------



## c.cloudwalker

Beautiful pictures. Can I hire you for my million dollar campaign?


When is the date of the end of these incredible threads?


----------



## ph0enix

Dom6663 said:


> Elizabeth30 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> KmH said:
> 
> 
> 
> That is DoF, not bokeh.
> 
> Before you do anything else - go read this; Understanding Depth of Field in Photography
> 
> 
> 
> 
> let me rephrase, you get "more" bokeh with larger aperture, but I am now understanding that is not always the best option for a good photo that has bokeh. I'm thinking I've been loosing a lot of clairity in my photos from not really understanding how to use good DoF and Aperture settings.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You dont get more bokeh, you get a shorter depth of field. If your talking about the actual shape and quality of the bokeh, when you stop down, for example f8 on an f2.8 lens, your bokeh 'balls' will look more geometric, dependant on the ammount of aperture blades you have. However, when your lens is fully open, widest aperture, the bokeh will indeed have a circular shape, typically.
> 
> I dont know if what I just said is relative to what you are talking about, I am not reading this thread, just taking what you say out of context
Click to expand...



Is a septagon or an octagon more geometric than a circle?


----------



## Elizabeth30

c.cloudwalker said:


> Beautiful pictures. Can I hire you for my million dollar campaign?
> 
> 
> When is the date of the end of these incredible threads?


 ABSOLUTELY!!  Just make sure you have a bag big enough to carry all that sarcasm.


----------



## Joey_Ricard

Elizabeth, I'm glad you didn't get scared off - I'm new to this board, but not new to photography boards. They are all very similar and every board has it's characters. While No, the pics you chose to post were not indicative of a professional portrait photographer, maybe people could have been a little less sarcastic in the responses.

ALTHOUGH, I will say that some of the comments made me laugh. Kind of like when you laugh at someone for something they can't help, but they never know you laughed.

Ok, so, I would suggest now that you have thickened your skin a little and can banter right back, keep at it. Keep at the learning that is, shooting, processing and gaining the all important skills + experience. Just remember, this is the internet and anything you post is subject to comment and criticism but don't let that stop you from posting images. That's a good way to learn, even when you throw yourself to the wolves.


----------



## jake337

Elizabeth30 said:


> KmH said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Elizabeth30 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ok but the best bokeh I have seen is with the largest aperture.... ??? am 'i wrong??
> 
> 
> 
> That is DoF, not bokeh.
> 
> Before you do anything else - go read this; Understanding Depth of Field in Photography
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> let me rephrase, you get "more" bokeh with larger aperture, but I am now understanding that is not always the best option for a good photo that has bokeh. I'm thinking I've been loosing a lot of clairity in my photos from not really understanding how to use good DoF and Aperture settings.
Click to expand...


No, each lens has a specific "Bokeh" characteristic of it's own.  Blurry backgrounds are achieved by understanding DOF and either using a shallow DOF or positioning your subject in a way that your subject to background distance is much larger.


----------



## gsgary

c.cloudwalker said:


> Beautiful pictures. Can I hire you for my million dollar campaign?
> 
> 
> When is the date of the end of these incredible threads?



This could last as long as any of Sabrina's used to


----------



## c.cloudwalker

Elizabeth30 said:


> c.cloudwalker said:
> 
> 
> 
> Beautiful pictures. Can I hire you for my million dollar campaign?
> 
> 
> When is the date of the end of these incredible threads?
> 
> 
> 
> ABSOLUTELY!!  Just make sure you have a bag big enough to carry all that sarcasm.
Click to expand...


Very nice response.

If I wasn't  1/ on the wrong continent and 2/ getting out of the business, I would most definitely give you an interview for a position as an assistant.

I would rather have people working for me who don't know shoot about photography when they start (I can teach you, and teach you my ways easily enough) but are willing to kick me in the rear-end...

You don't know much as of now but if you don't let the idiots wear you down, you could learn. Go for it.


----------



## c.cloudwalker

By the way, everybody who is bashing you for this amazingly stupid thread is quite right. Your photos (the ones you showed, anyway) are quite bad.

You've got a lot to learn. But you've got spunk!


----------



## pgriz

Hi Elizabeth - welcome to the forum.  If you are really interested in starting a business, then this thread may be of interest:  http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/general-shop-talk/266193-noobs-guide-starting-business.html.  Your reception was not very surprising, as you are not the first to announce that you're "in business" before you really know what you're doing.  There are many threads (including quite a few locked ones) documenting people announcing themselves, then showing how they are NOT ready for running a professional business.  There are also several others who did go "pro", and viewing their posts and web-sites usually make it clear why they could do so.  The thing about photography is that "professional" results require a very good understanding of lighting, and most amateur photographers have not learned that aspect.  Certainly, knowing the material partly described by this thread http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/...rum-photo-gallery/123160-tutorial-thread.html, will help, but it will still not be sufficient.  And after you get the experience, having the right equipment will make the difference between good results and great results.  

As for people being rude, well it's the internet.  There are some who don't know better (these you can ignore), and then there are some who know very well what it takes to be considered a professional (and these you should be really paying close attention to, even if their comments hurt).


----------



## KmH

Elizabeth30 said:


> let me rephrase, you get "more" bokeh with larger aperture,


I'll repeat. CoC, or bokeh....... is not adjustable.

It is a static, inherent property of the lens constuction.

You are referring to Depth-Of-Field, or DoF, which is what you are actually adjusting when you change the lens aperture.

DoF is also controlled by some other factors:  the lens focal length, the image sensor to focus point distance. the image sensor size, the distance the background is from the point of focus.
He is an illustration I made a couple of weeks ago:


----------



## sm4him

Elizabeth30 said:


> c.cloudwalker said:
> 
> 
> 
> Beautiful pictures. Can I hire you for my million dollar campaign?
> 
> 
> When is the date of the end of these incredible threads?
> 
> 
> 
> ABSOLUTELY!!  Just make sure you have a bag big enough to carry all that sarcasm.
Click to expand...


Elizabeth30...I'm startin' to like you. You've made a nice recovery.


----------



## Elizabeth30

Ok, So my first day of learning forever and I read ALL of your responses and checked out some of the links, read a few articles and watched a few tutorials and here's is my result.... gonna be brave and post another photo. I just went outside and took about 160 photos with my new learned knowledge for today and already I see a difference. may not be a huge difference but it is a difference. So here it goes, bring on the sarcasm!


----------



## cgipson1

nice shot... but a trifle more DOF (smaller aperture) and her other eye would still be in focus, which is a style I prefer... others may not!

Cropping... dont chop heads and chins if you can help it.. even for a really tight shot.. and vertical format would be preferred here usually!


----------



## Elizabeth30

sm4him said:


> Elizabeth30 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> c.cloudwalker said:
> 
> 
> 
> Beautiful pictures. Can I hire you for my million dollar campaign?
> 
> 
> When is the date of the end of these incredible threads?
> 
> 
> 
> ABSOLUTELY!!  Just make sure you have a bag big enough to carry all that sarcasm.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Elizabeth30...I'm startin' to like you. You've made a nice recovery.
Click to expand...

I just might stick around for a while


----------



## Elizabeth30

pgriz said:


> Hi Elizabeth - welcome to the forum.  If you are really interested in starting a business, then this thread may be of interest:  http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/general-shop-talk/266193-noobs-guide-starting-business.html.  Your reception was not very surprising, as you are not the first to announce that you're "in business" before you really know what you're doing.  There are many threads (including quite a few locked ones) documenting people announcing themselves, then showing how they are NOT ready for running a professional business.  There are also several others who did go "pro", and viewing their posts and web-sites usually make it clear why they could do so.  The thing about photography is that "professional" results require a very good understanding of lighting, and most amateur photographers have not learned that aspect.  Certainly, knowing the material partly described by this thread http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/...rum-photo-gallery/123160-tutorial-thread.html, will help, but it will still not be sufficient.  And after you get the experience, having the right equipment will make the difference between good results and great results.
> 
> As for people being rude, well it's the internet.  There are some who don't know better (these you can ignore), and then there are some who know very well what it takes to be considered a professional (and these you should be really paying close attention to, even if their comments hurt).



Thanks! It's nice to hear this. Although I don't know what I expected coming in here but I was not prepared for all the negative. I guess I was thinking I would hear more things like "that's a good start" or a little more encouragement. Oh well though, I can't sit around waiting for a hug, I gotta keep moving forward and I intend to.


----------



## SCraig

cgipson1 said:


> nice shot... but a trifle more DOF (smaller aperture) and her other eye would still be in focus, which is a style I prefer... others may not!
> 
> Cropping... dont chop heads and chins if you can help it.. even for a really tight shot.. and vertical format would be preferred here usually!


What he said.  The whole thing looks a bit soft to me except for her right eye.  I'd also recommend some fill flash so her face doesn't look so shadowed.  The color correction is MUCH better than the previous shots.


----------



## tirediron

cgipson1 said:


> nice shot... but a trifle more DOF (smaller aperture) and her other eye would still be in focus, which is a style I prefer... others may not!
> 
> Cropping... dont chop heads and chins if you can help it.. even for a really tight shot.. and vertical format would be preferred here usually!



Excellent points.  In addition, I will add that this really needs some supplemental light camera right.


----------



## Elizabeth30

SCraig said:


> cgipson1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> nice shot... but a trifle more DOF (smaller aperture) and her other eye would still be in focus, which is a style I prefer... others may not!
> 
> Cropping... dont chop heads and chins if you can help it.. even for a really tight shot.. and vertical format would be preferred here usually!
> 
> 
> 
> What he said.  The whole thing looks a bit soft to me except for her right eye.  I'd also recommend some fill flash so her face doesn't look so shadowed.  The color correction is MUCH better than the previous shots.
Click to expand...

 Yea, with all the comments about my color in the other photos I opted to NOT do any editing on this. So maybe I should have force flashed this?


----------



## cgipson1

a light fill flash or even a reflector camera right would have filled in the shadows, and given a nice catchlight to the eyes... makes them sparkle! 

As far as skin tones go, google "skin tones by the numbers" .. this will give you some ideas of the various ratios of color for good skin tones


----------



## Elizabeth30

Ok, did some light editing. I want to know if there's anthing wrong with the color here. From what most of you have said it sounds like my monitor might be off or maybe it's my eyes LOL Either way, tell me if this color looks ok??


----------



## jowensphoto

on my laptop, so I can't say for certain it's spot on --- but MUCH better!


----------



## MTVision

Elizabeth30 said:
			
		

> Ok, did some light editing. I want to know if there's anthing wrong with the color here. From what most of you have said it sounds like my monitor might be off or maybe it's my eyes LOL Either way, tell me if this color looks ok??



On my phone it looks really warm but on my supposedly calibrated screen it looks like its on the cool side (bluish). I'm not much help huh? 

What are you using for editing?


----------



## Elizabeth30

MTVision said:


> Elizabeth30 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ok, did some light editing. I want to know if there's anthing wrong with the color here. From what most of you have said it sounds like my monitor might be off or maybe it's my eyes LOL Either way, tell me if this color looks ok??
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On my phone it looks really warm but on my supposedly calibrated screen it looks like its on the cool side (bluish). I'm not much help huh?
> 
> What are you using for editing?
Click to expand...

I'm editing in PS CS5 I processed this from RAW into CS5 and just warmed it up a touch


----------



## 412 Burgh

I sometimes wonder what some people's motives are. I give kudos for the OP for not wanting to bash her head off something after this 10 page topic. She wanted some help that's all. :hug::


----------



## thereyougo!

I'm in on this one late in the day.  Welcome o the forum* Elizabeth30*.  I think your first hiccup was to come on to the forum saying you had just started your business.  This immediately makes people prick their ears and judge your photos very harshly.  Using maximum aperture is rarely beneficial, and I only use it where I have have no other choice for example here where I shot from backstage at a gig.  I got away with it because I was a long way from my subject.  I wouldn't have chosen to shoot at the extremes of my camera and lens but shot at extreme of aperture (f/4.5 on a manual focus 80 - 160 at 160, ISO 1600 which is the maximum on the medium format Pentax 645D).  In an ideal world I would never have done it, but I just made the best of the situation as I didn't have time to do a practise shot:



hannah with orchestra1 by singingsnapper, on Flickr

I see from your responses that you appear to have a thick skin.  That's good as you will need it in photography.  This is one of the toughest forums I know photography, but for all that it's where I often see most improvement.  Where you go from here is up to you.  

With DOF you have to make a conscious decision about what you want the shot to say.  Bokeh/DOF doesn't make a shot great.  It's appropriate and great use of DOF that makes a great shot.  

Good Luck!


----------



## cgipson1

412 Burgh said:


> I sometimes wonder what some people's motives are. I give kudos for the OP for not wanting to bash her head off something after this 10 page topic. She wanted some help that's all. :hug::



and she is getting it! 

When someone announce they have a  business... we immediately expect one of two things...good, professional quality photos.. or what we usually get: FACEBOOK quality photos. 

The  facebook photos don't go very far.. and they do get critiqued! If the OP  responds well, and is willing to learn.. they will get all the help  they need. If they cry and whine.. they usually end up going away, all  because we were honest, and didn't tell them they had wonderful photos! (which would be BS..and would not help them to improve)

Does that help? Or do you feel that is too harsh?


----------



## onelove

gsgary said:


> Some of use still shoot film and digital, i don't mind paying you don't get the same buzz shooting digital as you do shooting 120 film



I think that buzz is from the fixer fumes.


----------



## Elizabeth30

ph0enix said:


> Elizabeth30 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ph0enix said:
> 
> 
> 
> Do you have a specific reason for that?  AF is faster and more accurate most of the time.
> 
> 
> 
> I guess I need to learn more on how to change my points of focus in the camera settings.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yup, your camera has at least a couple of different AF modes.  Study them.  They should be described in detail in the manual.
Click to expand...

 Wow, what a difference this made! I switched to AF and used the view finder only, and then used my focus points and pointed the main one right at the closest eye. So much faster!! and ay easier than the manual focus and LCD screen! This made a HUGE difference in just one shot! Thanks!


----------



## cgipson1

onelove said:


> gsgary said:
> 
> 
> 
> Some of use still shoot film and digital, i don't mind paying you don't get the same buzz shooting digital as you do shooting 120 film
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think that buzz is from the fixer fumes.
Click to expand...


hahaha... sounds like you have been there, done that!


----------



## Tee

With regards to your post processing, I didn't even have to scoll down to see your samples to know what the style was gonna be.  It's a rite of passage: get editing program, move a contrast slider and marvel at the color change, continue working saturation/ contrast sliders like a whammy bar on a Fender.  Marvel at all the cool colors.  And yes, I started like that.  Then I started realizing post processing enhances without taking away from the photo.  Sometimes it takes very little to give that photo a pop.  Welcome.  See ya around the forums. :thumbup:


----------



## ph0enix

Elizabeth30 said:


> ph0enix said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Elizabeth30 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I guess I need to learn more on how to change my points of focus in the camera settings.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yup, your camera has at least a couple of different AF modes.  Study them.  They should be described in detail in the manual.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Wow, what a difference this made! I switched to AF and used the view finder only, and then used my focus points and pointed the main one right at the closest eye. So much faster!! and ay easier than the manual focus and LCD screen! This made a HUGE difference in just one shot! Thanks!
Click to expand...


Selecting focus points is one thing but also take a look at page 66 in your T2i's manual.  The different AF modes that can be used in different situations are explained there.


----------



## ph0enix

Elizabeth30 said:


> Ok, did some light editing. I want to know if there's anthing wrong with the color here. From what most of you have said it sounds like my monitor might be off or maybe it's my eyes LOL Either way, tell me if this color looks ok??



It's better but still lacking light and it's looking magenta-ish on my screen.  You really should have used an off camera flash (not the built-in pop-up flash) positioned to the right of the camera as someone had already mentioned.


----------



## Robin Usagani

If you want help with editing, leave your setting to "My photos are ok to edit"


----------



## mishele

WOOOHOOOO!! I'm the first person to offer popcorn!!!!!


----------



## Robin Usagani

Mishele... you get popcorn at the beginning of the show!


----------



## Raian-san

Welcome to the forum Liz. As you already know, this forum is bluntly honest and there have been many, many online forum arguments and fights before. 

At least you're taking it well and realize to look at all of this as advice instead of them being dicks. Keep practicing and one day you will become really good.


----------



## onelove

cgipson1 said:


> onelove said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gsgary said:
> 
> 
> 
> Some of use still shoot film and digital, i don't mind paying you don't get the same buzz shooting digital as you do shooting 120 film
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think that buzz is from the fixer fumes.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> hahaha... sounds like you have been there, done that!
Click to expand...


Oh yeah.  I processed my first photo 51 years ago and did pro work (both camera and darkroom) for decade or two.  I kind of miss all of that.
In the darkroom I got to make magic with nothing but light.

For now, I am more like Elizabeth.  I am a rank beginner again trying to learn all of this digital stuff.  I still don't even have photoshop or any other serious post production software.  All I have is photomatix, but I am enjoying learning about HDR and I am in this strictly for fun.  (of course I'll never turn down a sales opportunity)

We are fortunate that this is the digital age and we can burn through shots and see them instantly.  When I was learning and even working, I didn't know if I had any usable images for at least several hours. (or even a week or more for Kodachrome)  You don't know terror until the first roll of an important shoot comes up blank.  All you can hope for is that the other rolls have something on them.  And you can't imagine the expense of learning until you get your first 8x10 studio camera and each shot was the equivalent of $15-20 today

Elizabeth,  hang in there.  You have a wonderful feel for children's portrature.  You can learn technique easily enough but the ability to bring out the essence of a child only comes from within.  I could never do it.

Reading, participating in forums and class rooms are all great but the best thing to do is study the masters. Start with Ansel Adams to begin to understand exposure and the expansion or compression of tonal range.  Study Edward Westin to learn about shape, texture and light as well as bringing out the inner being in a portrait.  The list goes on, but once you begin to explore you will find the great ones and learn from them. 

See what good photography really looks like.  It is a humbling experience.  I am playing with HDR as well as 3D photography.  I thought I was getting pretty good...but then I saw what can really be accomplished with those techniques. (search ytf on flicker)  I realized how low I am on the learning curve and how far I have to go.  But at least I am on that curve!

Most importantly, keep making pictures.  Practice, practice, practice.  You hands need to operate the camera before your brain even knows what is needed.  It does become an instinct.  Be critical of your own work.  Strive for improvement in every session.  At some point you will "see the light" both metaphorically and physically.  You'll get it and you'll see differently.  It is part of the process.  No one here was born a pro, they all had to start at the beginning just like you.

If you can make a living doing what you enjoy, you will never work a day in your life.  It will all be play.

onelove


----------



## Elizabeth30

ph0enix said:


> Elizabeth30 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Ok, did some light editing. I want to know if there's anthing wrong with the color here. From what most of you have said it sounds like my monitor might be off or maybe it's my eyes LOL Either way, tell me if this color looks ok??
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's better but still lacking light and it's looking magenta-ish on my screen.  You really should have used an off camera flash (not the built-in pop-up flash) positioned to the right of the camera as someone had already mentioned.
Click to expand...


Yes, well I have a speedlite 430EX but I have no clue how to use it off camera. I was also unaware that it would do any good off camera while outside?? guess I'll have to read that manual too.


----------



## Tony S

Weclcome to the forum Elizabeth.  It's nice to see someone take the info, no matter how hard it is stated and thrown at them, and use it to realize they have some serious work to do and take steps to do it.   It's a lesson that could be learned by many others who come on here looking for advice.

There is so much to learn that a few months, a class or two, and being on forums is not enough to take it all in.  It's a long learning process, and then just when you think you've got it, there's another way to look at it and do things. Continue learning and growing.

 Look for the gems in the rough, I'm talking about the advice given, not the images.  lol


----------



## manaheim

I'm sorry, is this April first and I just missed something?

My that's a lovely bridge up ahead.  Are those ... goats?


----------



## MLeeK

Elizabeth30 said:


> ph0enix said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Elizabeth30 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Ok, did some light editing. I want to know if there's anthing wrong with the color here. From what most of you have said it sounds like my monitor might be off or maybe it's my eyes LOL Either way, tell me if this color looks ok??
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's better but still lacking light and it's looking magenta-ish on my screen.  You really should have used an off camera flash (not the built-in pop-up flash) positioned to the right of the camera as someone had already mentioned.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, well I have a speedlite 430EX but I have no clue how to use it off camera. I was also unaware that it would do any good off camera while outside?? guess I'll have to read that manual too.
Click to expand...

When you are shooting outside-especially in the full light of day-flash is pretty much NECESSARY. 

Had  you used flash to illuminate the girl on the tracks your trees would  have been in good exposure and your sky would have been blue. The flash  never reaches the sky-it's impossible. Even if it were on camera in this case it would have worked beautifully.


----------



## pgriz

RE. editing...  Editing is like salt in cooking.  A light touch bring out the flavor, too much and it kills the taste.


----------



## Elizabeth30

MLeeK said:


> Elizabeth30 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ph0enix said:
> 
> 
> 
> It's better but still lacking light and it's looking magenta-ish on my screen.  You really should have used an off camera flash (not the built-in pop-up flash) positioned to the right of the camera as someone had already mentioned.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, well I have a speedlite 430EX but I have no clue how to use it off camera. I was also unaware that it would do any good off camera while outside?? guess I'll have to read that manual too.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> When you are shooting outside-especially in the full light of day-flash is pretty much NECESSARY.
> 
> Had  you used flash to illuminate the girl on the tracks your trees would  have been in good exposure and your sky would have been blue. The flash  never reaches the sky-it's impossible. Even if it were on camera in this case it would have worked beautifully.
Click to expand...


The girl on the tracks was over edited. here's the original. I see a lot of cool tones and was trying to warm it up and got carried away


----------



## Elizabeth30

manaheim said:


> I'm sorry, is this April first and I just missed something?
> 
> My that's a lovely bridge up ahead.  Are those ... goats?


Hum.... not sure what all the flattery is about...............


----------



## Robin Usagani

*My Photos Are NOT OK to Edit
**My Photos Are OK to Edit*​


----------



## Elizabeth30

onelove said:


> cgipson1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> onelove said:
> 
> 
> 
> I think that buzz is from the fixer fumes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> hahaha... sounds like you have been there, done that!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Oh yeah.  I processed my first photo 51 years ago and did pro work (both camera and darkroom) for decade or two.  I kind of miss all of that.
> In the darkroom I got to make magic with nothing but light.
> 
> For now, I am more like Elizabeth.  I am a rank beginner again trying to learn all of this digital stuff.  I still don't even have photoshop or any other serious post production software.  All I have is photomatix, but I am enjoying learning about HDR and I am in this strictly for fun.  (of course I'll never turn down a sales opportunity)
> 
> We are fortunate that this is the digital age and we can burn through shots and see them instantly.  When I was learning and even working, I didn't know if I had any usable images for at least several hours. (or even a week or more for Kodachrome)  You don't know terror until the first roll of an important shoot comes up blank.  All you can hope for is that the other rolls have something on them.  And you can't imagine the expense of learning until you get your first 8x10 studio camera and each shot was the equivalent of $15-20 today
> 
> Elizabeth,  hang in there.  You have a wonderful feel for children's portrature.  You can learn technique easily enough but the ability to bring out the essence of a child only comes from within.  I could never do it.
> 
> Reading, participating in forums and class rooms are all great but the best thing to do is study the masters. Start with Ansel Adams to begin to understand exposure and the expansion or compression of tonal range.  Study Edward Westin to learn about shape, texture and light as well as bringing out the inner being in a portrait.  The list goes on, but once you begin to explore you will find the great ones and learn from them.
> 
> See what good photography really looks like.  It is a humbling experience.  I am playing with HDR as well as 3D photography.  I thought I was getting pretty good...but then I saw what can really be accomplished with those techniques. (search ytf on flicker)  I realized how low I am on the learning curve and how far I have to go.  But at least I am on that curve!
> 
> Most importantly, keep making pictures.  Practice, practice, practice.  You hands need to operate the camera before your brain even knows what is needed.  It does become an instinct.  Be critical of your own work.  Strive for improvement in every session.  At some point you will "see the light" both metaphorically and physically.  You'll get it and you'll see differently.  It is part of the process.  No one here was born a pro, they all had to start at the beginning just like you.
> 
> If you can make a living doing what you enjoy, you will never work a day in your life.  It will all be play.
> 
> onelove
Click to expand...

Thank you! This encourages me a lot!! This morning I had a bit to much pride and now I'm humbly accepting that I am NOT the photographer I thought I was but I'm so glad I posted here and got all of the replies I did! I couldn't have need this more! Thanks again!


----------



## HowlingWolf

I commend you for sticking around and taking some of the crap you have gotten, just like anyplace online you will find a good selection of self righteous idiots. Especially in photography where people have forgotten it's still an art, and art is destroyed if treated like it's something "proper" because it's not, and never should be. That's why you have so many people who say "anyone can be a photographer", it isn't true, sure anyone can learn how to mimic other shots, but that makes it crap in my opinion, you want to do something that has never been done that's how art evolves, that means braking the rules, if you aren't willing to do that you won't get anything special in the long run, and where is the fun in that? Also don't forget plenty of the heavy hearted lads who don't understand the concept of constructive criticism throw out plenty of crap, they just don't make it obvious, but there will never be an artist who takes hundreds of "perfect" shots in a few shoots. It also seems they sometimes don't understand that if someone had the perfect shot they would have to be a complete idiot to post looking for cc for it, regardless if they have a business or not. 

with that being said there are some issues in the original post that have already been mentioned and I see you working on (which is another wonderful trait of yours). Overall focus is your biggest issue, white balance maybe second, composition is the lesser. Make sure to always take these things into the next level, a lot of which can be fixed by better understanding your camera, read your manual, study different techniques and then practice practice practice. I don't care how much you read up on (which you should do), things are different when you actually work with the camera in the field, learn how to compensate for lighting changes, less then perfect conditions and most annoyingly white balance changes (get a grey card if you can, I don't have one but it will save you time, I heard you can print them out at 18% grey but you are better off just buying one).

To be honest I really like the third one, it can be improved but I love the color to it. Just watch out for obstructions, or use them to your advantage.

Most importantly always push yourself. If you have something you love more then you could love anything, go back and do it better.

One hint to white balance, reflective surfaces and shadows can change the over all color scheme, there is so much lying in photography, cloning and what not, I think it's an ugly thing to do, don't ever rely 100 percent on hardcore pp (lol), it's counter-productive (just _my_ opinion), so don't fake it unless you are going for that desired effect (I do it a lot with saturation, because it's my art, and I love leaving a small amount of color in black and white transitions, I just love the effect it gives off). If you start faking everything in pp (I understand there are situations where that's a must, and contrast sort of stuff almost always helps the transition between camera to computer) you aren't going to learn to become a better photographer, just a better editor.


----------



## PictureBox

This thread puts me to sleep.


----------



## GnipGnop

It looks like you've spent more time on your watermark than your composition.

1. Nothing is in focus and not much to redeem it in terms of content. It looks like a filler photograph you get in a frame. I doesn't seem to capture any traits or character of the child. A bit boring.

2. Her ass is in focus, but her face isn't? I think she should be looking the other way, as it gives the picture an awkward feeling as is. The composition is technically correct, but from where she's looking it sort of ruins it. It seems a bit warm and over-saturated as well.

3. The grass is in focus, but the girl isnt. Also, I don't like how she's jammed at the top of the picture and her face is half faded out from the white haze.

4. Why is the focal point of the photo a camera? Think about this, would you rather have a photo of a childs face, or of a toy camera blocking your child's face? 

I think your photos show some good examples of getting some things right, but getting the actual content of the photos completely wrong.

Sorry to sound harsh.


----------



## cgipson1

HowlingWolf said:


> just like anyplace online you will find a good selection of self righteous idiots.



*Yea.. sure... we are self righteous idiots... and shouldn't critique SH***y photos with the truth, right?*



HowlingWolf said:


> Ive spent a few days trying to get a picture  of this cat or his little orange friend, I thought it was hard enough  getting my hound to stop trying to knock the camera out of my hand for  kisses but cats just don't stop moving, try getting close and they move  to be pet, god forbid they notice you have legs lol.


----------



## Elizabeth30

HowlingWolf said:


> I commend you for sticking around and taking some of the crap you have gotten, just like anyplace online you will find a good selection of self righteous idiots. Especially in photography where people have forgotten it's still an art, and art is destroyed if treated like it's something "proper" because it's not, and never should be. That's why you have so many people who say "anyone can be a photographer", it isn't true, sure anyone can learn how to mimic other shots, but that makes it crap in my opinion, you want to do something that has never been done that's how art evolves, that means braking the rules, if you aren't willing to do that you won't get anything special in the long run, and where is the fun in that? Also don't forget plenty of the heavy hearted lads who don't understand the concept of constructive criticism throw out plenty of crap, they just don't make it obvious, but there will never be an artist who takes hundreds of "perfect" shots in a few shoots. It also seems they sometimes don't understand that if someone had the perfect shot they would have to be a complete idiot to post looking for cc for it, regardless if they have a business or not.
> 
> with that being said there are some issues in the original post that have already been mentioned and I see you working on (which is another wonderful trait of yours). Overall focus is your biggest issue, white balance maybe second, composition is the lesser. Make sure to always take these things into the next level, a lot of which can be fixed by better understanding your camera, read your manual, study different techniques and then practice practice practice. I don't care how much you read up on (which you should do), things are different when you actually work with the camera in the field, learn how to compensate for lighting changes, less then perfect conditions and most annoyingly white balance changes (get a grey card if you can, I don't have one but it will save you time, I heard you can print them out at 18% grey but you are better off just buying one).
> 
> To be honest I really like the third one, it can be improved but I love the color to it. Just watch out for obstructions, or use them to your advantage.
> 
> Most importantly always push yourself. If you have something you love more then you could love anything, go back and do it better.
> 
> One hint to white balance, reflective surfaces and shadows can change the over all color scheme, there is so much lying in photography, cloning and what not, I think it's an ugly thing to do, don't ever rely 100 percent on hardcore pp (lol), it's counter-productive (just _my_ opinion), so don't fake it unless you are going for that desired effect (I do it a lot with saturation, because it's my art, and I love leaving a small amount of color in black and white transitions, I just love the effect it gives off). If you start faking everything in pp (I understand there are situations where that's a must, and contrast sort of stuff almost always helps the transition between camera to computer) you aren't going to learn to become a better photographer, just a better editor.


 Thank you so much! You have very encouraging words and I truley appreciate you taking the time to read the posts and give me a heart felt response!! I don't know anything about grey cards but I will look into it so thank you for that.
I do want my own style and it's funny you should say you like number 3 because I have had more people in his thread tell me how that one is the worse because the light is blowing out her face but that's the point! I like having the light straight into the camera. It gives the photo something different, something I really like. The composition is not great and focus is off but I love the light!!


----------



## MWC2

Elizabeth, I was very much like you when I first posted here (the only difference was I was not and still am not in business), I thought I was amazing after all my family and friends told me so.  Now I can say I have SOOOOO much to learn, and I look forward to it.  Looking back at the photos I first posted, I am so embarrassed to claim them as mine.  Thanks to the people here that have taken time out of their day to point out my mistakes and link me to many great resources, my photography has grown by leaps and bounds (don't get me wrong, I still have a long, long way to go).  I can now look at images posted by "professionals" on FB and giggle to myself and have pride knowing that this Mom happy snapping away and getting better results than some of facebook photographers.

Keep your chin up, take the C&C, work on your photography and take what people here offer freely and try their advise out, you don't have to apply it to your photography but at least give it a try, who knows you might like the results!


----------



## MTVision

Elizabeth30 said:
			
		

> Thank you so much! You have very encouraging words and I truley appreciate you taking the time to read the posts and give me a heart felt response!! I don't know anything about grey cards but I will look into it so thank you for that.
> I do want my own style and it's funny you should say you like number 3 because I have had more people in his thread tell me how that one is the worse because the light is blowing out her face but that's the point! I like having the light straight into the camera. It gives the photo something different, something I really like. The composition is not great and focus is off but I love the light!!



Backlighting can be gorgeous in photography (like in #3) but in yours it's just too overpowering. If you had metered for her face - she still would've had the beautiful backlighting but the sun wouldn't be over powering her face so much.  Positioning her differently would have helped as well so that she wouldn't just have this huge blown out area behind her. Do a google search or search on Flickr for backlighting. Check out www.megbitton.com - she has some beautiful backlit portaits.


----------



## LightSpeed

gsgary said:


> There is no way you should be charging for this sort of quality, i wouldn't pay for any you have posted, did you get the camera for Christmas



LMAOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
gsgary - Tells it like it is.


----------



## HowlingWolf

cgipson1 said:


> HowlingWolf said:
> 
> 
> 
> just like anyplace online you will find a good selection of self righteous idiots.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Yea.. sure... we are self righteous idiots... and shouldn't critique SH***y photos with the truth, right?*
> 
> 
> 
> HowlingWolf said:
> 
> 
> 
> Ive spent a few days trying to get a picture  of this cat or his little orange friend, I thought it was hard enough  getting my hound to stop trying to knock the camera out of my hand for  kisses but cats just don't stop moving, try getting close and they move  to be pet, god forbid they notice you have legs lol.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...


someone thinks he's a self righteous idiot lmao 

way to turn a generalization into a personal thing, I love that picture so you don't really win at anything dude. Other then making an ass out of yourself lol good job.

By the way if you took the time to clip that over here you would be smart enough to have read that I already pointed out major flaws in this photo myself. You might not think of yourself in a very high, or too high, light (I mean, how you turned what I said about no one in-particular into an insult to you obviously means you think you are rude enough for someone to think of you negatively. But I hope to god you are smart enough to realize I wouldn't OP something I think is great anyway. 

And yes I see you take awesome shots of cats, good job, but one or two of them looks just like the shots I see at the shelter on their info-sheets, nothing special, though I do seriously love the expression on that one cat.

Loosen the hell up bud, I don't care how good you are your attitude will lose costumers too you know, I wouldn't be caught dead in a room near you if you where the last good photographer and I think anyone else with enough self respect would do the same if you are the kind of person to go out of your way to point out a bad photo to a remark that for all you know had nothing to do with you.

Sense I have already had paying clients come to me with some of my work I haven't posted and other clients on the way, I'm not gonna get too upset about this, in fact I don't give to licks about the above photo itself other then the super duper awesome pawsome coloration of it.


----------



## Bitter Jeweler

Hi. Just tagging the thread so I can watch.


----------



## LightSpeed

Gipson?? Did you see what HowlingWolf said?
Are you just going to take that?


----------



## Diver_matt

People that merely ***** about your photos without constructive criticism should simply be ignored as unhappy in life.  For all you know, they might be horrible photographers and awesome photo editors.  Back in dad's day, a computer took up the space of a house.  What he took is what he got.  Not only that, cameras didn't have "auto" settings.  Somehow he managed to take some awesome photos.  So many people on here claim to be awesome photographers but they edit the hell out of them before posting on here.  There's a handful I've noticed in my short time here that truly seem to enjoy helping people learn something.  I tend to scroll to their posts and ignore the awesome editors' posts.  "If you have to tell someone how great you are, you're not that great."  DISCLAIMER:  Not referring to anyone in particular here and haven't read all the posts. 

For all that are suggesting she not be in business yet, perhaps an economics class would help you out.  I'm starting a photography business this year.  Do I expect to make money?  Nope.  What I will do is use tax write offs for all my camera and software expenses along with a chunk for "home office".  Additionally, for the first couple years, I'll show a loss which offsets my primary income's taxes.


----------



## MTVision

Diver_matt said:
			
		

> People that merely ***** about your photos without constructive criticism should simply be ignored as unhappy in life.  For all you know, they might be horrible photographers and awesome photo editors.  Back in dad's day, a computer took up the space of a house.  What he took is what he got.  Not only that, cameras didn't have "auto" settings.  Somehow he managed to take some awesome photos.  So many people on here claim to be awesome photographers but they edit the hell out of them before posting on here.  There's a handful I've noticed in my short time here that truly seem to enjoy helping people learn something.  I tend to scroll to their posts and ignore the awesome editors' posts.  "If you have to tell someone how great you are, you're not that great."  DISCLAIMER:  Not referring to anyone in particular here and haven't read all the posts.
> 
> For all that are suggesting she not be in business yet, perhaps an economics class would help you out.  I'm starting a photography business this year.  Do I expect to make money?  Nope.  What I will do is use tax write offs for all my camera and software expenses along with a chunk for "home office".  Additionally, for the first couple years, I'll show a loss which offsets my primary income's taxes.



Just playing devils advocate - those awesome photos taken by your dad back in the day was still edited/processed. Just not done in photoshop - the lab did it. 

I do agree that some people edit the hell out their photos - don't see too many regulars doing that here - but all raw files need to be developed/edited just like all negatives had to developed.


----------



## Skinnifatkid

Elizabeth30, thanks for having the balls to stick around after your initial post!

Having just finished reading this, your post helped me learn some stuff. I am learning constantly and my daughter and wife are getting tired of flashes and camera clicks as I try new stuff. I've rolled the counter on my old camera 2.5 times and close to rolling it on my new one now. I've realized that the pictures I took before were no more than well framed "Snaps" and since have been working diligently at being better all around. Every opportunity to improve or practice, I take.

Keep working at getting better and like many have said already, learn the camera functions. I did reading this thread, Back button AF as well as a few other things. Knew it was there, didn't read that far into my manual or I did read it and forgot about it.

In the end, the snaps you take of your family and friends are yours. If you are happy with them, that's all that matters.  By reading the C&C posts of other members, I see things differently now and have improved also.

Good luck! :thumbup:


----------



## Ms.Nash

Skinnifatkid said:
			
		

> Elizabeth30, thanks for having the balls to stick around after your initial post!
> 
> Having just finished reading this, your post helped me learn some stuff. I am learning constantly and my daughter and wife are getting tired of flashes and camera clicks as I try new stuff. I've rolled the counter on my old camera 2.5 times and close to rolling it on my new one now. I've realized that the pictures I took before were no more than well framed "Snaps" and since have been working diligently at being better all around. Every opportunity to improve or practice, I take.
> 
> Keep working at getting better and like many have said already, learn the camera functions. I did reading this thread, Back button AF as well as a few other things. Knew it was there, didn't read that far into my manual or I did read it and forgot about it.
> 
> In the end, the snaps you take of your family and friends are yours. If you are happy with them, that's all that matters.  By reading the C&C posts of other members, I see things differently now and have improved also.
> 
> Good luck! :thumbup:



Ditto


----------



## onelove

HowlingWolf said:


> I commend you for sticking around and taking some of the crap you have gotten, just like anyplace online you will find a good selection of self righteous idiots. Especially in photography where people have forgotten it's still an art, and art is destroyed if treated like it's something "proper" because it's not, and never should be. That's why you have so many people who say "anyone can be a photographer", it isn't true, sure anyone can learn how to mimic other shots, but that makes it crap in my opinion, you want to do something that has never been done that's how art evolves, that means braking the rules, if you aren't willing to do that you won't get anything special in the long run, and where is the fun in that?



In spirit I do agree that breaking rules is a necessary step in the evolution of art but it must have one very important caveat:

*You must master the rules first!*

Even the most innovative and accomplished artists have learned and practiced the basics.   When I was a music student I took private lessons from a member of the Chicago Symphony.  My lesson was at 7AM.  I would arrive at 6 and sit outside his studio to listen to him warm up.  All he did was practice scales and arpeggios, just like a first year student.  But his _*absolute mastery*_ of those basic lessons was awe inspiring!

Becoming knowledgeable and competent in the basics will give you the freedom to innovate without worrying about technique.  The technique will be there automatically without thought.  It is at that point that creativity can take over completely.

onelove


----------



## gerardo2068

Photography is really confusing at first. I'm not a pro by any means. But I spent a lot of time reading and watching videos tutorial and it help a lot. Don't worry is gonna take time but as you learn new things you will notice that your learning will actually speed up as times go. One thing I highly recommend is spend some money on a good monitor calibrating tool! It's a must. If you don't calibrate your monitor it will be harder to get a consistent result on your photos and photos may show with bad color cast when you share them or post them online.


----------



## thereyougo!

onelove said:


> HowlingWolf said:
> 
> 
> 
> I commend you for sticking around and taking some of the crap you have gotten, just like anyplace online you will find a good selection of self righteous idiots. Especially in photography where people have forgotten it's still an art, and art is destroyed if treated like it's something "proper" because it's not, and never should be. That's why you have so many people who say "anyone can be a photographer", it isn't true, sure anyone can learn how to mimic other shots, but that makes it crap in my opinion, you want to do something that has never been done that's how art evolves, that means braking the rules, if you aren't willing to do that you won't get anything special in the long run, and where is the fun in that?
> 
> 
> 
> In spirit I do agree that breaking rules is a necessary step in the evolution of art but it must have one very important caveat:*You must master the rules first!*Even the most innovative and accomplished artists have learned and practiced the basics.   When I was a music student I took private lessons from a member of the Chicago Symphony.  My lesson was at 7AM.  I would arrive at 6 and sit outside his studio to listen to him warm up.  All he did was practice scales and arpeggios, just like a first year student.  But his _*absolute mastery*_ of those basic lessons was awe inspiring!Becoming knowledgeable and competent in the basics will give you the freedom to innovate without worrying about technique.  The technique will be there automatically without thought.  It is at that point that creativity can take over completely.onelove
Click to expand...

+1. You have to understand the rules and know why you are breaking them. In so doing, your subject and intentions must be clear to people viewing your work.


----------



## Joey_Ricard

Liz, Slow down a bit.

My newly updated advice to you is to spend more time today getting your focus on track....Or off the track and onto the model's eyes in that one photo. Set your camera on a tripod and opposite something of decent contrast. Check your auto focus vs a manual focus (use LIVE view if you have it).
If you rely on AF when it isn't spot on (and it may not be with a particular lens) then you will have to account for that. 

If your camera has the ability to use a separate button for focus than using the shutter button for both AF and metering, try to learn to do that.
There is a term that us Canon users have for this, but I can't think of it off hand. Someone chime in please. I think it's back button focus or something like that. I know it takes a little getting used to, but once you do you will have more control.


----------



## cgipson1

HowlingWolf said:


> cgipson1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HowlingWolf said:
> 
> 
> 
> just like anyplace online you will find a good selection of self righteous idiots.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Yea.. sure... we are self righteous idiots... and shouldn't critique SH***y photos with the truth, right?*
> 
> 
> 
> HowlingWolf said:
> 
> 
> 
> Ive spent a few days trying to get a picture  of this cat or his little orange friend, I thought it was hard enough  getting my hound to stop trying to knock the camera out of my hand for  kisses but cats just don't stop moving, try getting close and they move  to be pet, god forbid they notice you have legs lol.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> someone thinks he's a self righteous idiot lmao
> 
> way to turn a generalization into a personal thing, I love that picture so you don't really win at anything dude. Other then making an ass out of yourself lol good job.
> 
> By the way if you took the time to clip that over here you would be smart enough to have read that I already pointed out major flaws in this photo myself. You might not think of yourself in a very high, or too high, light (I mean, how you turned what I said about no one in-particular into an insult to you obviously means you think you are rude enough for someone to think of you negatively. But I hope to god you are smart enough to realize I wouldn't OP something I think is great anyway.
> 
> And yes I see you take awesome shots of cats, good job, but one or two of them looks just like the shots I see at the shelter on their info-sheets, nothing special, though I do seriously love the expression on that one cat.
> 
> Loosen the hell up bud, I don't care how good you are your attitude will lose costumers too you know, I wouldn't be caught dead in a room near you if you where the last good photographer and I think anyone else with enough self respect would do the same if you are the kind of person to go out of your way to point out a bad photo to a remark that for all you know had nothing to do with you.
> 
> Sense I have already had paying clients come to me with some of my work I haven't posted and other clients on the way, I'm not gonna get too upset about this, in fact I don't give to licks about the above photo itself other then the super duper awesome pawsome coloration of it.
Click to expand...


I was "generalizing" just like you did.. I am only an A-hole to those that deserve it (IMO!).. and you are really close to crossing that line. Yea.. I read your "critique" of your own photo... and it was nearly as incoherent as your photo. You claim to be a poet.. so you should hopefully know something about art and communication... but I have yet to see it. I do know something about poetry too! Care to post a link to some of yours? I want to see if you actually do write better than you shoot!

My customers don't get this attitude.. only those that think they have a clue.. and DONT! If you have paying photography clients.. then you probably fit into what we call "Craiglist/Facebook togs"... who put out crap for people who either don't know any better, or are too cheap to pay for the real thing. Even a knowledgable beginner would not post some like the two cat pictures you posted... they really demonstrate that you have no clue what a decent photo is! 

I would suggest reading up on the Exposure Triangle, Depth of Field, and basic composition... but I am sure that your ego precludes the concept of "needing to improve"!


----------



## cgipson1

onelove said:


> cgipson1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> onelove said:
> 
> 
> 
> I think that buzz is from the fixer fumes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> hahaha... sounds like you have been there, done that!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Oh yeah.  I processed my first photo 51 years ago and did pro work (both camera and darkroom) for decade or two.  I kind of miss all of that.
> In the darkroom I got to make magic with nothing but light.
> 
> onelove
Click to expand...


I got started with the madness in High School.. used to shoot a lot of Tri-X, loved pushing that stuff. Beautiful grain!  Light hasn't changed.. so you know more than most... the basic concepts never change! Applying it to  digital is a little different, but not a whole lot (as I am sure you  have already figured out!). We can be a opinionated, volatile bunch here.. but most of us do try to help, and have some fun! Look forward to seeing your future posts!

Charlie


----------



## jterry85

Dang! Last time I read this thread it was only at 4 pages! I'm gonna have to keep a closer eye on it...


----------



## manaheim

Bad photos and unqualified critics.  A recipe for disaster.  Welcome to TPF.

Mind you, when I say "bad critics", I refer only to the people who give these photos credit, for they have very little ... if any.

OP, I would personally recommend looking at the advice given by those here who were more critical of your work.  Anyone who said anything close to an "attaboy!!!" should be discounted... completely.

Howlingwolf... shhh.  Not so much with the talking.  Trust me on this.  You're embarrassing yourself.


----------



## cgipson1

LightSpeed said:


> Gipson?? Did you see what HowlingWolf said?
> Are you just going to take that?



Lightspeed.. I was asleep by the time this was posted! I have to work in the morning at my successful, high paying professional job! I can't stay up late and argue like some wanna'be poet that probably works at McDonalds!


----------



## cgipson1

manaheim said:


> Bad photos and unqualified critics.  A recipe for disaster.  Welcome to TPF.
> 
> Mind you, when I say "bad critics", I refer only to the people who give these photos credit, for they have very little ... if any.
> 
> OP, I would personally recommend looking at the advice given by those here who were more critical of your work.  Anyone who said anything close to an "attaboy!!!" should be discounted... completely.
> 
> Howlingwolf... shhh.  Not so much with the talking.  Trust me on this.  You're embarrassing yourself.



Manaheim.. I hope someday I get the chance to buy you a beer or two.. (or whatever you prefer!)   lol!


----------



## jterry85

manaheim said:


> Howlingwolf... shhh.  Not so much with the talking.  Trust me on this.  You're embarrassing yourself.



^^Motion seconded! Is there a third Aye in the house?


----------



## LightSpeed

cgipson1 said:


> LightSpeed said:
> 
> 
> 
> Gipson?? Did you see what HowlingWolf said?
> Are you just going to take that?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lightspeed.. I was asleep by the time this was posted! I have to work in the morning at my successful, high paying professional job! I can't stay up late and argue like some wanna'be poet that probably works at McDonalds!
Click to expand...


LoL.
I knew you'd be coming back with guns ah blazin.

HowlingWolf, you may not believe this now, but Gipson is pretty cool people.
Ya'll just got off on the wrong foot.


----------



## Elizabeth30

MTVision said:


> Elizabeth30 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thank you so much! You have very encouraging words and I truley appreciate you taking the time to read the posts and give me a heart felt response!! I don't know anything about grey cards but I will look into it so thank you for that.
> I do want my own style and it's funny you should say you like number 3 because I have had more people in his thread tell me how that one is the worse because the light is blowing out her face but that's the point! I like having the light straight into the camera. It gives the photo something different, something I really like. The composition is not great and focus is off but I love the light!!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Backlighting can be gorgeous in photography (like in #3) but in yours it's just too overpowering. If you had metered for her face - she still would've had the beautiful backlighting but the sun wouldn't be over powering her face so much.  Positioning her differently would have helped as well so that she wouldn't just have this huge blown out area behind her. Do a google search or search on Flickr for backlighting. Check out www.megbitton.com - she has some beautiful backlit portaits.
Click to expand...

Here is one of my favorite photographers. I LOVE her work and use of light! I'm going to post a link to one of her photos. Now I know the quality of the photo is way way better than mine but in terms of her use of light how is it different? Gorgeous C Family Peek | Facebook


----------



## Diver_matt

Big diff. The light isn't such a spot, it's present throughout the image. It also casts a soft halo on the girl, not so much like that it wraps around her. She's also on a wall coming in from the corner which draws the viewers attention to the subject. Shadows aren't so harsh.


----------



## Nikon_Josh

HowlingWolf said:


> cgipson1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HowlingWolf said:
> 
> 
> 
> just like anyplace online you will find a good selection of self righteous idiots.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Yea.. sure... we are self righteous idiots... and shouldn't critique SH***y photos with the truth, right?*
> 
> 
> 
> HowlingWolf said:
> 
> 
> 
> Ive spent a few days trying to get a picture  of this cat or his little orange friend, I thought it was hard enough  getting my hound to stop trying to knock the camera out of my hand for  kisses but cats just don't stop moving, try getting close and they move  to be pet, god forbid they notice you have legs lol.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> someone thinks he's a self righteous idiot lmao
> 
> way to turn a generalization into a personal thing, I love that picture so you don't really win at anything dude. Other then making an ass out of yourself lol good job.
> 
> By the way if you took the time to clip that over here you would be smart enough to have read that I already pointed out major flaws in this photo myself. You might not think of yourself in a very high, or too high, light (I mean, how you turned what I said about no one in-particular into an insult to you obviously means you think you are rude enough for someone to think of you negatively. But I hope to god you are smart enough to realize I wouldn't OP something I think is great anyway.
> 
> And yes I see you take awesome shots of cats, good job, but one or two of them looks just like the shots I see at the shelter on their info-sheets, nothing special, though I do seriously love the expression on that one cat.
> 
> Loosen the hell up bud, I don't care how good you are your attitude will lose costumers too you know, I wouldn't be caught dead in a room near you if you where the last good photographer and I think anyone else with enough self respect would do the same if you are the kind of person to go out of your way to point out a bad photo to a remark that for all you know had nothing to do with you.
> 
> Sense I have already had paying clients come to me with some of my work I haven't posted and other clients on the way, I'm not gonna get too upset about this, in fact I don't give to licks about the above photo itself other then the super duper awesome pawsome coloration of it.
Click to expand...


You get paying customers?????????  :lmao: hahahaha Can you come and take a photo of my Cat please??? And I will pay you alot of money for it!

I like your style.. its great.... Getting the main subject OUT OF FOCUS is a very interesting approach to the art of photography!  hahaha


----------



## cgipson1

Nikon_Josh said:


> You get paying customers?????????  :lmao: hahahaha Can you come and take a photo of my Cat please??? And I will pay you alot of money for it!
> 
> I like your style.. its great.... Getting the main subject OUT OF FOCUS is a very interesting approach to the art of photography!  hahaha



The TOTALLY UNREALISTIC STYLE OF PHOTOGRAPHY, maybe? You should ask him to write a poem about your cat... can't be any worse!


----------



## bazooka

Interesting, a thread which contains one who has accepted critique perfectly, and another who is defending that person that accepts critique poorly.


----------



## KmH

HowlingWolf does have 1 forum friend shown on their profile page - the OP.


----------



## MLeeK

Things that make you go Hmmmmmmm... LOL!


----------



## LuckySe7en

I leave for a couple of days and look what you guys do.  tisk tisk.  Elizabeth I only read the first 3 pages and just predicted the other 9.  
I'm no pro and have only produced a few decent photos but to me it looks like you're on the right track.  Listen to these people, even the jerks.  Some of the things they say are very helpful, even if it comes out of their a$$


----------



## Tee

What is your prIcing?  Do you offer packages?


----------



## Elizabeth30

Tee said:


> What is your prIcing?  Do you offer packages?



$50 for an hour and client gets DVD with all images edited and non with full printing rights.


----------



## MWC2

are you a legal business?  Pay taxes?  Have a business license and any and all other permits/licenses your state/county require to operate a business?

I'm all for people living their dreams and opening a photography business, it's no ones business if you do but if your going to do it, you need to make sure you're doing it right and are legal.


----------



## Tee

Elizabeth30 said:


> Tee said:
> 
> 
> 
> What is your prIcing?  Do you offer packages?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> $50 for an hour and client gets DVD with all images edited and non with full printing rights.
Click to expand...


Just curious- if I understand what you typed, you offer the non-edited photos as well?  What is your thought process for that?


----------



## Elizabeth30

MWC2 said:


> are you a legal business?  Pay taxes?  Have a business license and any and all other permits/licenses your state/county require to operate a business?
> 
> I'm all for people living their dreams and opening a photography business, it's no ones business if you do but if your going to do it, you need to make sure you're doing it right and are legal.


Nope, I'm not legal. I have oly done about 5 shoots all friends and family except for 1 and I had not intended to be a business yet. These where requested shoots and my first shoot I was asked to do senior photos. I agreed to do them for free but my client insisted on paying me something. so she gave me $50 and that was kinda what I went by if anyone else asked. The contract was made because everyone started telling me that Walmart, Walgreen, ect.... wouldn't let them print "professional" photos without a release.


----------



## Elizabeth30

Tee said:


> Elizabeth30 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tee said:
> 
> 
> 
> What is your prIcing?  Do you offer packages?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> $50 for an hour and client gets DVD with all images edited and non with full printing rights.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Just curious- if I understand what you typed, you offer the non-edited photos as well?  What is your thought process for that?
Click to expand...


There are still really good shots in the non edited. I'm not going to go through and edit 200 photos but I do delete any that are obviously blurry or have major flaws before giving them the disk.


----------



## MLeeK

200 images is WAY to many for a session. If you shoot 200 images per session you are going to go through a camera every 750 sessions-provided you are shooting with professional grade gear. 
There are many many many things written on how many images you should be offering per session, but what it boils down to is that you need to only offer the best of the very best and only one or two of each set or pose. Reasoning in short: too many choices make it impossible to choose and that reduces your profitability in prints; editing time is money. You have to make money for your time and you can't edit 200 AND profit. So if you only edit say 30 and give them 200 there is now 170 images out there with your name on it that are not polished, finished images. That is not representative of your true style and skill-the edited ones are. You want your images to suck every one who views them in your front door. Those other 170 aren't going to do it
That's a conversation for another day.


----------



## Elizabeth30

MLeeK said:


> 200 images is WAY to many for a session. If you shoot 200 images per session you are going to go through a camera every 750 sessions-provided you are shooting with professional grade gear.
> There are many many many things written on how many images you should be offering per session, but what it boils down to is that you need to only offer the best of the very best and only one or two of each set or pose. Reasoning in short: too many choices make it impossible to choose and that reduces your profitability in prints; editing time is money. You have to make money for your time and you can't edit 200 AND profit. So if you only edit say 30 and give them 200 there is now 170 images out there with your name on it that are not polished, finished images. That is not representative of your true style and skill-the edited ones are. You want your images to suck every one who views them in your front door. Those other 170 aren't going to do it
> That's a conversation for another day.



HaHA well I DO NOT edit 200 images!! I only took 200 during one of my sessions and I only edited about 20 of them.


----------



## LightSpeed

Elizabeth30 said:


> Tee said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Elizabeth30 said:
> 
> 
> 
> $50 for an hour and client gets DVD with all images edited and non with full printing rights.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Just curious- if I understand what you typed, you offer the non-edited photos as well?  What is your thought process for that?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> There are still really good shots in the non edited. I'm not going to go through and edit 200 photos but I do delete any that are obviously blurry or have major flaws before giving them the disk.
Click to expand...



I would.
But then, you're enjoying the attention. HuH.


----------



## LightSpeed

Elizabeth30 said:


> MLeeK said:
> 
> 
> 
> 200 images is WAY to many for a session. If you shoot 200 images per session you are going to go through a camera every 750 sessions-provided you are shooting with professional grade gear.
> There are many many many things written on how many images you should be offering per session, but what it boils down to is that you need to only offer the best of the very best and only one or two of each set or pose. Reasoning in short: too many choices make it impossible to choose and that reduces your profitability in prints; editing time is money. You have to make money for your time and you can't edit 200 AND profit. So if you only edit say 30 and give them 200 there is now 170 images out there with your name on it that are not polished, finished images. That is not representative of your true style and skill-the edited ones are. You want your images to suck every one who views them in your front door. Those other 170 aren't going to do it
> That's a conversation for another day.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HaHA well I DO NOT edit 200 images!! I only took 200 during one of my sessions and I only edited about 20 of them.
Click to expand...



I don't believe you.
Can we please see proof?
I would like the opportunity to average in.


----------



## Elizabeth30

LightSpeed said:


> Elizabeth30 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MLeeK said:
> 
> 
> 
> 200 images is WAY to many for a session. If you shoot 200 images per session you are going to go through a camera every 750 sessions-provided you are shooting with professional grade gear.
> There are many many many things written on how many images you should be offering per session, but what it boils down to is that you need to only offer the best of the very best and only one or two of each set or pose. Reasoning in short: too many choices make it impossible to choose and that reduces your profitability in prints; editing time is money. You have to make money for your time and you can't edit 200 AND profit. So if you only edit say 30 and give them 200 there is now 170 images out there with your name on it that are not polished, finished images. That is not representative of your true style and skill-the edited ones are. You want your images to suck every one who views them in your front door. Those other 170 aren't going to do it
> That's a conversation for another day.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HaHA well I DO NOT edit 200 images!! I only took 200 during one of my sessions and I only edited about 20 of them.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> I don't believe you.
> Can we please see proof?
> I would like the opportunity to average in.
Click to expand...

 Don't believe what? What do u want proof of?


----------



## LightSpeed

Nevermind.


----------



## thereyougo!

Elizabeth30 said:


> Tee said:
> 
> 
> 
> What is your prIcing?  Do you offer packages?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> $50 for an hour and client gets DVD with all images edited and non with full printing rights.
Click to expand...


And there's your problem.  You are giving away too much and charging too little.  In other words you are doing quantity over quality.  I'm not a pro, but there is no way I would give someone 200 images for $50.  You need to have more pride in your work and earn the entitlement to charge more by improving and developing your own style.  You run a real risk of falling into a Facebook rut.  After all if someone is paying you $50 an hour and that's good enough for you, why improve?  I'm not saying that's how your thinking, but it's how a lot of "pro's" think.  I would think very carefully before I gave anyone unedited work of mine.  I would only want to give people the very best.  The number of photographers that could give you 200+ top quality unedited photos is few to none.  Stop it or else this could seriously damage your reputation.  As others have said, once you hand them it, its out there and you can't get it back.  Photographs are *meant* to be edited.  Even years ago they were edited and tweaked in the darkroom.  You have to be very fortunate indeed to get a perfect shot without editing.  You aren't going to get one of those on every shoot let alone 200.  

Take a bit of pride in your work - this means studying (not necessarily classroom - field work is just as if not more important) and practising, and then charging for quality and giving quality rather than quantity.  Good value isn't necessarily about giving people lots of single items.  It's about giving people something that *HAS* value.  I'd rather have 20 fabulous images than 200 poor snapshots. Cheap is never good value, it's just cheap.  When people think about cheap they think less about quality as they automatically discount it saying, "well it only cost $xxx."

A real shoot is probably nearer 50 considered shots, if that.  The editing can take longer than the shots.  You are therefore charging not just for the shooting time but for the whole job.  You have to see the job as a whole, not just the parts.  So you have to charge for the whole time that the job takes.  Suddenly, it's not $50 for an hour's work, but for say 4 hour's work, which doesn't look as enticing.  You have to have a business plan and decide how much to charge in accordance with your talent, and the amount of time that job will take.  

I cringed when I read an article in the "turning pro" section of Photography monthly:

*"Q: What is the best advice anyone has given you?"
*
A:  "Really Sarah, you should be charging for this"

It's not what I would call advice.  It's encouragement, sure, advice is more balanced and what we need to hear not necessarily what we want to hear.

Her newborn images are ok.  But unremarkable and I've seen similar on here.  Lots of people are told this and take it to heart.  I've been told this myself.  I have some images that I'm really proud of, but my knowledge of photography and in particular editing is not high enough.  I shoot often on instinct, but instinct isn't enough.  

Finally, if you are going to continue to charge think carefully about registering.  It's not just your friends that look on Facebook.  Tax authorities do too, and I'll bet they are aware of Facebook photographers.  If you can't prove what you are earning they'll no doubt give their own estimate, and it won't be one you'll like.  Have a look through the professional area for a poster that got caught out.


----------



## cgipson1

Even if you spend less than a minute on each shot (taking it, Hopefully editing, sharpening, cleaning it up, checking exposure, etc)... two hundred shots is two hundred minutes.... a little over three hours of work... so $50 divided by 3 is *$16.66 per Hour!* WOW.... YOU WORK CHEAP.. and that is if you only spend  ONE MINUTE on each photo (which is IMPOSSIBLE for decent work)! I am not saying you should charge more.. you shouldn't.. you don't deliver quality photos (yet! You may one of these days, if you really work at it!). But you could almost make that working at McDonalds!  lol!


----------



## MTVision

cgipson1 said:
			
		

> Even if you spend less than a minute on each shot (taking it, Hopefully editing, sharpening, cleaning it up, checking exposure, etc)... two hundred shots is two hundred minutes.... a little over three hours of work... so $50 divided by 3 is $16.66 per Hour! WOW.... YOU WORK CHEAP.. and that is if you only spend  ONE MINUTE on each photo (which is IMPOSSIBLE for decent work)! I am not saying you should charge more.. you shouldn't.. you don't deliver quality photos (yet! You may one of these days, if you really work at it!). But you could almost make that working at McDonalds!  lol!



I don't think you should charge either - even if they offer. Most people offer to pay (if you said you'd do it for free) they are being nice and don't expect you to take it. Do you want to be a child photographer, family, seniors, what? Spend your time building your portfolio - offer mini sessions to a few people here and there and just give them a couple of the edited pictures. 

You'll get experience, exposure and if you do a great job - you'll start building a client base - hopefully a client base that doesn't mind spending a few hundred on photography. 

Tons of tutorials out there - read up on how to do a clean edit and stay away from actions for now. You'll also learn how to edit better if you stay away from gimmicky editing (haze, sepia, selective color and even b/w). B/w images aren't gimmicky but most people new to editing don't produce very nice b/w images.


----------



## manaheim

I swear nothing in this thread offends and irritates me more than the comments on "setting up a legitimate business"... As if any of you people talking about it know a blessed thing.

License?  Permit?  Really?  

I don't know what state OP lives in, and I wouldn't profess to know the laws there, but it's just possible that there are no requirements for such a thing.  

What's more, is this... How many people do you think actually look up the photographers "business license" before hiring them?

What's even more is this... Do you honestly think the difference between "Facebook photographer" and "credible" is some stupid piece of paper obtained with a signature and a $25 filing fee?

What we are talking about here is ignorance... And worse is ignorance gone professorial.  This forum is rife with it and it disgusts me.

There's nothing wrong with saying "gee I wonder if you should get some sort of a permit", but you people don't do that, do you?  No.  You jump up on your high horse and start telling people how horrible they are for not fulfilling all the requirements of your fictitious foolishness.

And it doesn't stop merely at legal and business advice!  The denizens of this place are without shame.  The questionable commentary bleeds into all aspects one can imagine.

If you really don't know you should phrase it as such or keep your mouth shut.  Period.


----------



## classixuk

I know I'm only new here, and I've yet to post a shot for C&C (as I have yet to take any I'd be OK with posting as they're all snapshots IMO) but something does strike me as being very odd about this thread.

The description from this part of the forum states:

"Forum: Photography Beginners' Forum & Photo Gallery: Brand new to photography, or brushing up on some of the basics? Dont be shy! Talk to other beginners and ask all your basic photographic questions here. Show us some of the photos you have taken so far and get some review - so you can learn where there is room for improvement!"

So the way I see it, the OP is a beginner. Yes, she made a blooper in stating that she has a photography business, but she rectified that pretty quickly within a few posts. She accepted the critique and is learning from it. I'm not the only newbie who feels I have learned something from it too. The links on composition and back-focusing in particular were really helpful. Thanks to those who posted them.

But then mid-way through the thread, we have 2 allegedly professional photographers having a 'penis war' with eachother comparing eachother's previous shots/critiques and who is allegedly working paid tomorrow and who might be flipping burgers? If either of them were THAT good at photography, they wouldn't be hanging around the absolute beginner's sections doling out C&C across THOUSANDS of posts in just a few months - they'd have a full appointment book and be enjoying the financial fruits of their labours from photography. You don't need to understand the exposure triangle to understand that basic observation.

To the 'pros' who think they are THAT amazing, why not go hang out in the pro section of this website and play among your own kind? Or is it a case of you being a very big fish in a very small sea here in the absolute beginners forum? 

To the ones (beginners and pros alike) who offered advice, links and explanations for the benefit of the OP and us all, I thank you.

I'd write much more, but I'm off out to sarcastically tease a toddler for not being able to walk before they can crawl - feeds my ego you see!


----------



## mishele

manaheim said:


> I swear nothing in this thread offends and irritates me more than the comments on "setting up a legitimate business"... As if any of you people talking about it know a blessed thing.
> 
> License?  Permit?  Really?
> 
> I don't know what state OP lives in, and I wouldn't profess to know the laws there, but it's just possible that there are no requirements for such a thing.
> 
> What's more, is this... How many people do you think actually look up the photographers "business license" before hiring them?
> 
> What's even more is this... Do you honestly think the difference between "Facebook photographer" and "credible" is some stupid piece of paper obtained with a signature and a $25 filing fee?
> 
> What we are talking about here is ignorance... And worse is ignorance gone professorial.  This forum is rife with it and it disgusts me.
> 
> There's nothing wrong with saying "gee I wonder if you should get some sort of a permit", but you people don't do that, do you?  No.  You jump up on your high horse and start telling people how horrible they are for not fulfilling all the requirements of your fictitious foolishness.
> 
> And it doesn't stop merely at legal and business advice!  The denizens of this place are without shame.  The questionable commentary bleeds into all aspects one can imagine.
> 
> If you really don't know you should phrase it as such or keep your mouth shut.  Period.



You didn't drink your morning coffee yet, did you? :greenpbl:


----------



## gerardo2068

Funny stuff making my morning . Keep it up, I'm just going to the kitchen for another cup of coffee


----------



## Elizabeth30

classixuk said:


> professional photographers having a 'penis war' with eachother



LMAO!! :lmao: I about fell on the floor!! Thanks for brightening my morning!


----------



## AgentDrex

If you have a passion for making money with your camera, it'll be imperative to get out of letting the camera do the work for you.  You could just as well use full auto. Perhaps you can try to check what the camera decided for exposure in full auto, switch to manual, dial in the same settings and see what happens. 

 You're going to get a few laughs from stating you run a photography business with little knowledge of the equipment.  Unfortunately, its seems though a lot of businesses suffer from this same mishap. 

 Though I agree that learning the exposure triangle (aperture, shutter speed, ISO) is important, I feel that knowing a good compositonal placement of your subject is more important.  The exposure as part of that composition will be your key to making your photos have a unique style.  Good exposure never alleviates a lame compositional placement of the subject.


----------



## cgipson1

classixuk said:


> To the 'pros' who think they are THAT amazing, why not go hang out in the pro section of this website and play among your own kind? Or is it a case of you being a very big fish in a very small sea here in the absolute beginners forum?
> 
> To the ones (beginners and pros alike) who offered advice, links and explanations for the benefit of the OP and us all, I thank you.
> 
> I'd write much more, but I'm off out to sarcastically tease a toddler for not being able to walk before they can crawl - feeds my ego you see!



Well... after this remark.. I probably won't bother C&C'ing any of your stuff (although I might make fun of it!)    ... and it is usually in the evening (when I don't have work) is when I do this.. for relaxation and entertainment. You see.. anyone here with any knowledge spends more time trying to help the "Beginners" than they do discussing "pro" stuff....  that is why the forum is here! And when someone who really doesn't have clue speaks up and tells us how to do it better... lol!


----------



## bazooka

classixuk said:


> To the 'pros' who think they are THAT amazing, why not go hang out in the pro section of this website and play among your own kind [...]
> 
> To the ones (beginners and pros alike) who offered advice, links and explanations for the benefit of the OP and us all, I thank you.



How would the "pro's" be able to give advice, links, and explanations for benefit of everyone if they are off playing with themselves?


----------



## MLeeK

Damn it. I went to bed AGAIN last night. I have got to learn to quit doing that. I miss everything!


----------



## Diver_matt

If by providing c&c you really want to help someone learn, then HOW you provide it is as important as what you provide. "you did this, this and this wrong" vs "next time try this, angle that, fix this and I think you'll see an improvement".  If you choose the former, the tone often overrides the message. If you don't care about that, you aren't sincerely trying to help others learn.


----------



## cgipson1

Diver_matt said:


> It's important to remember C&C is Comments & Critique, not condescending and cocky. LOL.



only the smartasses get the Condescending and Cocky!


----------



## MLeeK

Elizabeth30 said:


> MLeeK said:
> 
> 
> 
> 200 images is WAY to many for a session. If you shoot 200 images per session you are going to go through a camera every 750 sessions-provided you are shooting with professional grade gear.
> There are many many many things written on how many images you should be offering per session, but what it boils down to is that you need to only offer the best of the very best and only one or two of each set or pose. Reasoning in short: too many choices make it impossible to choose and that reduces your profitability in prints; editing time is money. You have to make money for your time and you can't edit 200 AND profit. So if you only edit say 30 and give them 200 there is now 170 images out there with your name on it that are not polished, finished images. That is not representative of your true style and skill-the edited ones are. You want your images to suck every one who views them in your front door. Those other 170 aren't going to do it
> That's a conversation for another day.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HaHA well I DO NOT edit 200 images!! I only took 200 during one of my sessions and I only edited about 20 of them.
Click to expand...


You need to read that again. I said no where that you did edit all 200. I said you did yourself a disservice by sending out 170 unfinished images to represent you. And that you'd be going throug a camera every 750 sessions-provided you were using a professional grade camera. Which you aren't. So you're now looking at somewhere around 500 sessions. Do not let those other 170 go. They speak poorly of you. No one expects you to edit 200 images. They expect the 20.


----------



## MLeeK

Diver_matt said:


> It's important to remember C&C is Comments & Critique, not condescending and cocky.


FYI it's actually Constructive Criticism.


----------



## jterry85

I think I'm going to start listing this in my signature:

 "CAUTION!!! This poster sufffers from acute smart a$$ syndrome and suffers episodes of smart a$$ness, sarcasm, and plain ol jacka$$ery! Read at your own risk!"

Maybe this will cut down on the number of complaints...


----------



## Diver_matt

MLeek:  According to the sticky at the top of the forum, it's critique & comments. 

http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/...lery/167288-camera-terms-acronyms-dummies.htm

 JT, I'm all for sarcasm. Its the "it sucks" type of responses that have no benefit. Sarcasm is a MUST in the sandbolx. Been twice.


----------



## cgipson1

jterry85 said:


> I think I'm going to start listing this in my signature:
> 
> "CAUTION!!! This poster sufffers from acute smart a$$ syndrome and suffers episodes of smart a$$ness, sarcasm, and plain ol jacka$$ery! Read at your own risk!"
> 
> Maybe this will cut down on the number of complaints...



A Disclaimer!!!! YES!! Hmmm.. maybe I should take submissions on mine... since I probably have an unrealistic view of my own sense of humor, and sarcastic abilities!


----------



## jterry85

I think a disclaimer will save on a lot of explanation for those hard to discern/don't know the poster responses. I mean we could just say no sarcasm allowed but then where would those of us who know each other better get our shyts and giggles?


----------



## cgipson1

jterry85 said:


> I think a disclaimer will save on a lot of explanation for those hard to discern/don't know the poster responses. I mean we could just say no sarcasm allowed but then where would those of us who know each other better get our shyts and giggles?



Absolutely! (but then a disclaimer still needs to be read... and that seems to be the weak point here!) lol!


----------



## ph0enix

cgipson1 said:


> jterry85 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I think I'm going to start listing this in my signature:
> 
> "CAUTION!!! This poster sufffers from acute smart a$$ syndrome and suffers episodes of smart a$$ness, sarcasm, and plain ol jacka$$ery! Read at your own risk!"
> 
> Maybe this will cut down on the number of complaints...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A Disclaimer!!!! YES!! Hmmm.. maybe I should take submissions on mine... since I probably have an unrealistic view of my own sense of humor, and sarcastic abilities!
Click to expand...


Many of us do and it's so hard to keep them at bay sometimes but I try and I TRY (so hard)!


----------



## LightSpeed

I simply leave all the smart ass remarks to gsgary.
He's snide. Direct. And to the point. He's a much more seasoned veteran, in that regard, than I.


----------



## The_Traveler

Elizabeth,

You need to learn a lot more than just how to run the camera and some basic post-processing stuff.
And that involves learning how to take a picture that captures as much as possible what you want people to look at and then how to post-process that picture to correct what the camera was able to give you.

In this picture that you showed last, the person is underexposed because the camera saw the brightness of the background and was using that to average the exposure.  If you had exposed for the figure the background would have been to bright.

Even so the bright background and its detail pulls the eye away from the way too dark person - and the sunlight makes it a bit cold.
So you have to understand how to make the important thing that you want the viewer to look at be the most important thing in the image that draws the eye. 
And the only way to do that is to look at lots of pictures, learn to dissect their faults and understand the ways to fix them.

Here is a VERY, Very ROUGH and exaggerated change to your image just as an example.  I lightened the person, darkened the background, filled in that big bright spot that pulls the eye and made everything a bit warmer. Now the person is the most prominent part of the image.


----------



## Elizabeth30

The_Traveler said:


> Elizabeth,
> 
> You need to learn a lot more than just how to run the camera and some basic post-processing stuff.
> And that involves learning how to take a picture that captures as much as possible what you want people to look at and then how to post-process that picture to correct what the camera was able to give you.
> 
> In this picture that you showed last, the person is underexposed because the camera saw the brightness of the background and was using that to average the exposure.  If you had exposed for the figure the background would have been to bright.
> 
> Even so the bright background and its detail pulls the eye away from the way too dark person - and the sunlight makes it a bit cold.
> So you have to understand how to make the important thing that you want the viewer to look at be the most important thing in the image that draws the eye.
> And the only way to do that is to look at lots of pictures, learn to dissect their faults and understand the ways to fix them.
> 
> Here is a VERY, Very ROUGH and exaggerated change to your image just as an example.  I lightened the person, darkened the background, filled in that big bright spot that pulls the eye and made everything a bit warmer. Now the person is the most prominent part of the image.



WOW!!! What a difference! I never saw that before! I certainly see how much more focus is on the subject now that the blown out sky is gone!! AWESOME! Thank you!


----------



## cgipson1

LightSpeed said:


> I simply leave all the smart ass remarks to gsgary.
> He's snide. Direct. And to the point. He's a much more seasoned veteran, in that regard, than I.



Agreed that gsgary is a excellent person to emulate and learn from... but if you don't practice your "SmartAssery", you will never improve... it will not ever be as sharply focused as it should be... and the limited DOF it has will not impact a large enough audience!

Practice, Grasshopper.. PRACTICE!!!


----------



## gsgary

LightSpeed said:


> I simply leave all the smart ass remarks to gsgary.
> He's snide. Direct. And to the point. He's a much more seasoned veteran, in that regard, than I.



You cheeky bastard leave me out of it


----------



## The_Traveler

OK, here's another you posted. Quite sharp, great look, good composition.
Note that the entire thing look a bit cold and the face looks like it's in the shadow.
A great hint is to look at the whites of teh eye. On children, unless they are ill, they are generally quite clearly white with just a tiny tinge of blue.
Once the image is warmed up, a magenta cast shows.
I changed the bluish tint and the magenta tint as much as looked good.  (There is still some magenta under the eyes but I left that alone for now)

Then I brightened the face only to balance off the brightness of the sun struck part of the head.
I think this gives a much more appealing look. (altho the WB is still a bit off)

While you are learning how to use your camera, remember that the real goal is to learn to recognize good pictures and to understand how to get to them from wherever you start.
A lot of people, unfortunately, can run their cameras but their pictures have no heart, no soul and  their pix  never be more than sharp and reasonably composed with good color. This picture is nicely done and could be an indication that you have a real talent, now support that talent with skill.


----------



## gsgary

Elizabeth30 said:


> Tee said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Elizabeth30 said:
> 
> 
> 
> $50 for an hour and client gets DVD with all images edited and non with full printing rights.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Just curious- if I understand what you typed, you offer the non-edited photos as well?  What is your thought process for that?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> There are still really good shots in the non edited. I'm not going to go through and edit 200 photos but I do delete any that are obviously blurry or have major flaws before giving them the disk.
Click to expand...



How can you take 200 shots in 1 hour and get any good shots, i can be 1 hour setting up lights for a still life and only shoot 2 shots in 1 hour


----------



## MTVision

The_Traveler said:
			
		

> OK, here's another you posted. Quite sharp, great look, good composition.
> Note that the entire thing look a bit cold and the face looks like it's in the shadow.
> A great hint is to look at the whites of teh eye. On children, unless they are ill, they are generally quite clearly white with just a tiny tinge of blue.
> Once the image is warmed up, a magenta cast shows.
> I changed the bluish tint and the magenta tint as much as looked good.  (There is still some magenta under the eyes but I left that alone for now)
> 
> Then I brightened the face only to balance off the brightness of the sun struck part of the head.
> I think this gives a much more appealing look. (altho the WB is still a bit off)
> 
> While you are learning how to use your camera, remember that the real goal is to learn to recognize good pictures and to understand how to get to them from wherever you start.
> A lot of people, unfortunately, can run their cameras but their pictures have no heart, no soul and  their pix  never be more than sharp and reasonably composed with good color. This picture is nicely done and could be an indication that you have a real talent, now support that talent with skill.



Hey......your back!


----------



## thereyougo!

The_Traveler said:


> OK, here's another you posted. Quite sharp, great look, good composition.
> Note that the entire thing look a bit cold and the face looks like it's in the shadow.
> A great hint is to look at the whites of teh eye. On children, unless they are ill, they are generally quite clearly white with just a tiny tinge of blue.
> Once the image is warmed up, a magenta cast shows.
> I changed the bluish tint and the magenta tint as much as looked good.  (There is still some magenta under the eyes but I left that alone for now)
> 
> Then I brightened the face only to balance off the brightness of the sun struck part of the head.
> I think this gives a much more appealing look. (altho the WB is still a bit off)
> 
> While you are learning how to use your camera, remember that the real goal is to learn to recognize good pictures and to understand how to get to them from wherever you start.
> A lot of people, unfortunately, can run their cameras but their pictures have no heart, no soul and  their pix  never be more than sharp and reasonably composed with good color. This picture is nicely done and could be an indication that you have a real talent, now support that talent with skill.


I agree that the OP has really caught the emotion in this shot and I like your edit.  The shot is still let down by composition as it's just a little too tight which would have been solved by a portrait orientation which would have meant that the sweet little girl's chin and head weren't cut off.  Exposed right with correct WB and composed just a little better, this would be a winner.


----------



## Elizabeth30

thereyougo! said:


> The_Traveler said:
> 
> 
> 
> OK, here's another you posted. Quite sharp, great look, good composition.
> Note that the entire thing look a bit cold and the face looks like it's in the shadow.
> A great hint is to look at the whites of teh eye. On children, unless they are ill, they are generally quite clearly white with just a tiny tinge of blue.
> Once the image is warmed up, a magenta cast shows.
> I changed the bluish tint and the magenta tint as much as looked good.  (There is still some magenta under the eyes but I left that alone for now)
> 
> Then I brightened the face only to balance off the brightness of the sun struck part of the head.
> I think this gives a much more appealing look. (altho the WB is still a bit off)
> 
> While you are learning how to use your camera, remember that the real goal is to learn to recognize good pictures and to understand how to get to them from wherever you start.
> A lot of people, unfortunately, can run their cameras but their pictures have no heart, no soul and  their pix  never be more than sharp and reasonably composed with good color. This picture is nicely done and could be an indication that you have a real talent, now support that talent with skill.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I agree that the OP has really caught the emotion in this shot and I like your edit.  The shot is still let down by composition as it's just a little too tight which would have been solved by a portrait orientation which would have meant that the sweet little girl's chin and head weren't cut off.  Exposed right with correct WB and composed just a little better, this would be a winner.
Click to expand...

 Nice!! And you know what, I did warm it up later so I could post on my FB page. I just uploaded the unedited version becuase I'm not sure of my monitor color so I wasn't sure if I was seeing it correctly.


----------



## LightSpeed

gsgary said:


> LightSpeed said:
> 
> 
> 
> I simply leave all the smart ass remarks to gsgary.
> He's snide. Direct. And to the point. He's a much more seasoned veteran, in that regard, than I.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You cheeky bastard leave me out of it
Click to expand...



See what I mean?


----------



## gsgary

LightSpeed said:


> gsgary said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> LightSpeed said:
> 
> 
> 
> I simply leave all the smart ass remarks to gsgary.
> He's snide. Direct. And to the point. He's a much more seasoned veteran, in that regard, than I.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You cheeky bastard leave me out of it
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> See what I mean?
Click to expand...


:hug::


----------



## Redeyejedi

hi elizabeth, amateur/hobbyist/ aspiring photographer here as well. i agree with understanding you equipment is an essential part of the game. there are supplemental books on many camera bodies and some have good layout and illustrations that will help you navigate menus, familiarize yourself with various features. i grabbed one and has helped me understand my camera more. i still have much to learn(in many aspects). you have what it takes to become as good as you desire as you have demonstrated patience, willingness to learn and be criticized, and you seem to be able to deal with a variety of personalities and not be dissuaded. also, many of the links suggested are quite the valuable resources....bookmark them and visit them frequently.
Flickr: Discussing Bokeh vs DoF in ¡Bokeh!   - an interesting discussion on bokeh vs Dof, with a few images to help put things into perspective. for some, grasping the terms; circle of confusion, focal plane, depoth of field, near/far limit of acceptable sharpness, bokeh.... the way i understand it is(and someone can correct me if i am mistaken)  bokeh takes on the shape of the hole the light is traveling through. depth of field has to do with the gradual 'out of focusness' in front and behind the focal plane, what the camera is focused on. and as you have already discovered, you can control the depth of field the choice of aperture, but bokeh is a function of the diaphragms in lens.
commenting late but trying to bring it back to the OP's OPs.

as a side note, one can control/change the shape of bokeh on any lens, although it is not a function of camera or lens settings, but rather physically change the shape of the hole light is travelling to sensor/film plane.
here is an example, nothing special by any means, but it is basically a 'stencil' for the lens.





one more thing, have fun! tons of it!


----------



## Elizabeth30

So I started this thread over two years ago and thought I'd pop over for a visit. How are ya all? I started to read through old posts and holy drama city! 

I'm not back to cause any drama just back to say that two years later and I'm going pro this year! Yup, all new gear and equipment, business license and all  
I don't remember the exact photos I posted in this thread but here's what I've been up to in the last two years.

A few of my faves. 
All taken with my Rebel and a 50! OH and 1 with my 11-16mm


----------



## astroNikon

I'm not a pro .. but from what I read compared to what you just posted, it's a dramatic improvement.

You've learned to use your DOF really well, eliminate background distractions, colors, etc.  Even the church group card photo is really nice with the OOF light star pattern and leading lines to the card behind it.  Nice.


----------



## ronlane

Welcome back to the site. You should stick around. I don't see any drama from that latest set of images. #3,4 and 6 look really good to me.


----------



## Elizabeth30

gsgary said:


> Elizabeth30 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tee said:
> 
> 
> 
> Just curious- if I understand what you typed, you offer the non-edited photos as well?  What is your thought process for that?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There are still really good shots in the non edited. I'm not going to go through and edit 200 photos but I do delete any that are obviously blurry or have major flaws before giving them the disk.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> How can you take 200 shots in 1 hour and get any good shots, i can be 1 hour setting up lights for a still life and only shoot 2 shots in 1 hour
Click to expand...


Reading through some of this is painful!! And kind of humorous at the same time. I'm happy to report that I don't charge $50 any more and I NEVER would even think about letting a client see unedited images let alone giving them one!


----------



## Braineack

Elizabeth30 said:


> Reading through some of this is painful!! And kind of humorous at the same time. I'm happy to report that I don't charge $50 any more and I NEVER would even think about letting a client see unedited images let alone giving them one!



Now I know the post to link back to everytime someone doing the same comes here to complain...


Most of the stuff you put here two years ago is no longer showing up, but the work you put up yesterday looks pretty good; just slightly desaturated/muted and unexposed for my tastes.


----------



## The_Traveler

I'm glad that you stuck with it and got something out of that drama session.
Pictures look much much better 
But never take pictures on or near railroad tracks.  Cliche and dangerous and trespassing

Best of luck


----------



## manicmike

Nice work.


----------



## Elizabeth30

Braineack said:


> Elizabeth30 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Reading through some of this is painful!! And kind of humorous at the same time. I'm happy to report that I don't charge $50 any more and I NEVER would even think about letting a client see unedited images let alone giving them one!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now I know the post to link back to everytime someone doing the same comes here to complain...
> 
> 
> Most of the stuff you put here two years ago is no longer showing up, but the work you put up yesterday looks pretty good; just slightly desaturated/muted and unexposed for my tastes.
Click to expand...


Thanks! Not sure why but for some reason the images look very desaturated and under exposed UNTIL you click on them  Try clicking the first and then you can scroll through.


----------



## astroNikon

The_Traveler said:


> I'm glad that you stuck with it and got something out of that drama session.
> Pictures look much much better
> But never take pictures on or near railroad tracks.  Cliche and dangerous and trespassing
> 
> Best of luck



Yeah, I thought about the train track photo ..
here's the thread to read about it
http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/just-fun/350169-dont-photograph-train-tracks.html

of course, I've *never* done it ... well ... maybe ...


----------



## Braineack

oh wow, yeah, that helps.  I know the thumbnails don't always look as good, but they are much better, to my tastes, when clicked larger for sure.


----------



## astroNikon

Braineack said:


> Elizabeth30 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Reading through some of this is painful!! And kind of humorous at the same time. I'm happy to report that I don't charge $50 any more and I NEVER would even think about letting a client see unedited images let alone giving them one!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now I know the post to link back to everytime someone doing the same comes here to complain...
> 
> 
> Most of the stuff you put here two years ago is no longer showing up, but the work you put up yesterday looks pretty good; just slightly desaturated/muted and unexposed for my tastes.
Click to expand...

But there's some really detailed C&C of the photos.  basically snapshots vs "planned out/think about it" Photos


----------



## Derrel

Elizabeth30 said:
			
		

> Not sure why but for some reason *the images look very desaturated* and under exposed *UNTIL you click on them*  Try clicking the first and then you can scroll through.



You need to learn about assigning an sRGB profile to images that will be seen on the world wide web. The issue is at YOUR END, with your image editing workflow. You're failing to do the last, critical step to make SURE that when people see your images, that they look GOOD.

Glad that you've made some progress. I looked through the first few pages of your post from January of 2012, and saw that a few of the TPF stalwarts tried to help you out. SOme of those people are still here, while others have left TPF.

I would consider going to an ALL- sRGB workflow....shoot in sRGB mode, edit in it, and output images in sRGB, both for printing and for the web. Ignore the "ultra wide-gamut crowd" AND their nattering about Adobe RGB and other wide-gamut B.S. and move to the de facto world-wide standard for real people and most printing houses. Ignore the theoretical; advantage of Adobe RGB, and move to what will make your photos consistent in appearance everywhere... adopt an all-sRGB workflow from one end to the other.


----------

