Seeking constructive criticism about my work

[HouseTiger]

Um, can’t seem to get image posted. So will this again:

<a href=”http://www.flickr.com/photos/zeldablue/7831251958/&#8221; title=”ProPetPortrait: Untitled. by Washburn Photography, on Flickr”><img src=”http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8307/7831251958_e622062265_m.jpg&#8221; width=”240″ height=”192″ alt=”ProPetPortrait: Untitled.”></a>

 

[HouseTiger]

And I meant to add I’m encouraged that some other eyes spotted that sign among the journalism set as a weak shot because that’s the one I had noted as being first to go, just visually, aside from being out of focus (and, that should be enough, I know), but from a photojournalistic viewpoint it doesn’t tell a story as I think the others do.

(Sorry for so many posts, didn’t realize there was an edit limit?)

[nesgran]

I tried to post your photo but that failed badly

[cameraclicker]

The horse photo,

http://www.flickr.com/photos/zeldablue/7831251958

has some strange artifacts from the editing session.  It also has the nearest foreground object out of focus.  That usually messes with my eyes so I move on to another photo.  I don’t know if others feel that way too.  If you have the raw file, there may be enough data for Adobe Camera Raw to provide a good exposure of the blown out parts.

 

I’m learning from this just how much I get attached to photos — I took 3-5 of the horses and bridles but the only lens on hand was my 18-55mm (I was hired because the original photographer couldn’t make it and a friend knew I was visiting another friend nearby, so I only had my basic kit with me) and none worked — the fence always became the focal point! Was I using the wrong tool or could I have got the shot (at least of bridles, probably not the long shot of the horses, which was also what I attempted) using that lens? I know had I had my 50, I could have made this gorgeous. Anyway, as I started to say: I still want this to work so much it’s still up there!

I have the original Canon 18-55 kit lens.  I have probably taken less than 100 photos with it since 2006, when I got it.  There is not really anything wrong with that lens, it is reasonably sharp and since it is light it makes a good back up lens when travelling.  You can throw it in your suitcase and not worry about it.  Anyway, all lenses work the same way.  The longer the focal length, the shallower the depth of field, the hyperfocal distance moves further from the camera.  The larger the aperture, the shallower the depth of field.  If you wanted the bridles and horses in reasonably sharp focus, moving back a little and using the short end of the lens would probably provide that.  You could stop down the lens a bit for added insurance.  A good alternative would have been to nail the focus of the bridles and let the horses go out of focus.  As long as you get the general shape and people can figure out they are horses, they are sharp enough for that kind of shot.  But you really need the bridles to be sharp.

 

[HouseTiger]

About the bridle pic: so, I was trying to get the bridles in focus and let the horses be out of focus and in every shot the fence or chain was what ultimately became the focal point of the image. I suspect had I moved around a bit more, I could have got the bridles in front of the lens — centered — and accomplished what I’d wanted but I didn’t do that. These were the last 4 photos of that day and I’m afraid that’s what (mostly) lead to the sloppiness.

I do have the raw file of horse w blown fence so will give it a try.

Thank you again : )

[cameraclicker]

Focus points vary from body to body but many have the best focus capability in the centre focus point.  Setting that focus point as the only active one then focusing in static focus mode and recomposing while keeping focus locked is frequently a good strategy for objects that are not moving.

If the focus mode is servo, focus will change as the camera is panned, even with the shutter release held part way depressed.

[HouseTiger]

Thank you for reminding me — it must have been on servo by then (as opposed to the horse’s head behind the blown out fence, which I am fairly certain was manual) because I’d just taken the main shots of what I was hired to do: document the rider on her horse. It was fast and very overcast so I set the camera to that thinking that would work best, and it did for three shots of those subjects. But, then that was over and I saw the bridles, wanted them in focus, horses out of focus. Then I tried a shot of the horses in focus with the foreground out of focus. Neither of those worked. So, it seems the first didn’t work because I was too tired and had gotten lazy, but the second idea was probably unlikely to work well with the 18-55 and, while I believe in always experimenting, it probably would have been a confusing looking photo (a lesson photo, not a “I’m growing as a photographer photo”!).

 

Not about focus, but about managing clients:

Something I was proud of about this shoot, and just want to pass on because it seems other new-to-the-business-side-of-it photographers read this forum, is that since I was a last minute replacement I did not have a tripod, etc. and I was asked to photograph a teenager practicing her horse riding — like jumps. Managing clients’ expectations is SO important and I knew there was no way I could capture horse jumps with my handheld Nikon D40! So, I explained what “action” shots I could get: rider and horse not actually moving, but in positions that suggested movement, like a shot of them just before the jump apparatus, and just after. Once I got the rider to look focused (the horse was fine) and forget she was “faking” a jump, it worked well and my clients were happy.

[cameraclicker]

Managing clients’ expectations is SO important and I knew there was no way I could capture horse jumps with my handheld Nikon D40!

Managing client expectations is always important.  Clients are happier if their expectations line up with what is delivered.  It does not matter if the product is a photograph, banana, or telecommunications service.

If there is no way you can capture a horse jumping with a handheld Nikon D40, you need more practice!

Check this out:  http://www.digitalrev.com/article/chase-jarvis-lego-camera/NDAxNjI3Mg_A_A

Next time you are bored, try out photographing dragonflys while they are flying.  Yes, it can be done.

[HouseTiger]

If there is no way you can capture a horse jumping with a handheld Nikon D40, you need more practice!

Yes, I do need more practice but also, I want to clarify, I just wasn’t confident I could deliver a great shot of the daughter atop the horse in mid-air looking great against an overcast sky on a dark brown horse —  and they wanted a portrait of their daughter, not so much a horse jumping — so I felt I took a situation where I was unprepared and likely over my head and did a respectable, payable job. Which is perhaps not what a fauxtog might do?  (I’m hoping?) My worst fear was delivering a blown out or out of focus final product and also their check because I couldn’t accept payment for that poor of a product.

But your point is well taken and I’ve gotten a good sense of where I am technically and what I should work on just from this thread and reading others here : ) Your input has made a big difference for me already.

 

[Author]

Posts