My home computer has been busted for several weeks now (to be more precise, since I took the Photoshop course). Without a computer to download pictures onto, I haven't been as avid about taking pictures. Also, I've been preoccupied by getting my book proposal out the door (which fingers crossed, will go this week). The problem with all this is that I think I've forgotten everything about taking pictures.
The teeny tiny bit of information in my brain about photgraphy has been buried by other things and my camera has transformed back into a very expensive point and shoot.
This is bad.
Aperature/shutter speed/ISO/exposure....ugh, it all feels so jumbled now.
My camera shoots dark. But don't trust me, I've read two other photography blogs that indicate the same thing. Ken Rockwell says that he shoots with his exposure compensation slightly "left of center" on his Nikon D80. I trust Ken Rockwell more than I trust my own eye, so I've been shooting slightly left of center. Up until today, I've never tested out exactly what affect this adjustment has on my camera. So here goes:
I have struggled with feeling "dark" since the day I got it this camera. My D80 just makes everything feel like I have a huge cloud looming over my head and following me around, like I'm Eeyore. This wasn't a problem with my D40 (which I love and still have to sell as soon as I can get over myself and get the courage to part with it. My hesitation: I think it's unworthy of being sold to someone undeserving. I want to know the person I sell it to so they can e-mail me their beautiful pictures and I can feel partially responsible for their joy. The D40 seriously rocks, and I have issues).
I have moved my exposure compensation to +3 so that I am not plagued with remorse and regret every time I upload my pictures.
I'm sure it doesn't help that my subjects are generally dark as well, but the solution to that delimma is far more complex than just moving my exposure compensation over, so I'm going with that for now.
Much like cholesterol, there are good and bad types of blurriness. Good blurriness in photography can be aperature-related, used to show motion, and probably some other things that I don't know anything about. Bad blurriness occurs when the object you shoot is suppose to be crisp and sharp, but isn't. Bad blurriness can be stealth, you may not notice it through the little screen on the back of your camera, but then BAM, it smacks you in the face when crop the image on your computer. Bad cholesterol clogs arteries, bad blurriness eats away at my soul.
Bad Blurriness:
Good blurriness:
I guess I can't say that I'm tired of taking pictures of the "same subjects", that would be un-motherly-like, right? All I'm saying is that if there is an opportunity for me to see someone other than a blood relative when I look through the viewfinder (is that what it's called?) of my camera, I try to seize it. Particularly when it's an adorable baby, like this one! Her mom was wonderful about letting me snap away when their family was over last week for dinner. (..and NO, I haven't started picking our dinner guests by how cute & photogenic their kids are, this was just coincidental)
...then I messed with them in Picassa, which I know is a substandard photo-editing tool (Audra and my brother are against Picassa). I see it's limitations, but it's super quick and easy to use and you can do a few fun things with it.
Speaking of messing with pictures...only one more week until I take a Photoshop seminar. That's when the real magic will begin!
The first thing I hope to learn in Photoshop class is how to skim 30 pounds off of "a person".
The second thing I hope to learn in Photoshop class is how to remove those stinkin' little lines that are beginning to form around my eyes, and forehead, and neck, and everywhere...I think they're called "wrinkles" when they're on "old people" (defined as any age older than me...when I'm 50, "old" will be 51, etc..you get the point...). When these "lines" are on people in their 30's, then they're just called "lines". The purpose of "lines" is to mark the spot where a wrinkle will eventually be, lines are like placeholders for wrinkles. They're very handy that way. However...they have no place in any photograph of me and they must go!
From this day forward I plan to appear perpetually 20 in every photograph that is taken of me (which is one per year).
Before last week I though that shooting on Manual (M) meant that you had it all together, photographically speaking, of course. You could look at a situation and set your ISO, F Stop, Shutter Speed, and hold yourself so steady that you could balance 64 tea cups on your head.
Last week, Audra taught me the trick for working on "M". There is help! Your meter. When you are in "M", if you look through your viewfinder, there it a meter just sitting there waiting to tell you what to do. It looks kind of like a ruler (I said "kind of"). It has a "0" in the middle and a plus sign on one end and a minus sign on the other.
The trick, according to Audra is to shuffle your shutter speed up (or down) until you get rid of all the lines to the right or left of the "0". When you're at "0" you are at the right shutter speed to snap a decent picture. You don't have to pay any attention to those silly little shutter speed numbers, just get yourself to "0" in the viewfinder and snap!
Let's see how this worked for me:
My first shot was totally overexposed. Why? Because I forgot to look at my meter!
There we go, much better, right? The meter knows best.
Ut oh! Looks like I have my baby girl out in the middle of a tornado in her bikini. Before you go calling DHS, it was really just me forgetting to look at my meter. I'm underexposed. My shutter speed is probably too fast.
All better! Thank you meter!
Q. What have we learned today?
A. The meter is your friend.
Audra, uploaded to flickr for your help and commentary!
Not quite. This photo represents me giving up and giving in to the use of the "auto" setting on my camera. After snapping a few blurred pictures of Amaya I quickly switched my camera over to auto (before my subject went off and found a new plaything and ceased being cute). For a brief moment I felt relief knowing that I was in the comfort of a good old reliable point and click camera and I was virtually guaranteed a decent shot (never great, but not blurred either). Then I looked down and realized that this was not a point and click camera, it was a very expensive (well, maybe not for Paris Hilton, but for us) that I was obligated to learn how to use.
Darn.
My question of the day: is it ever acceptable to use the flash on your camera? Here Amaya was in my hallway, which is pretty dark? Could I have upped the ISO, aperture, and shutter speed to get a shot (of this moving object)?
Is there a way?
My homework assignment was to take pictures in my house at 100 ISO, 3.5 F Stop, and use various shutter speeds (from 20 to 80) ...I think that actually means 1/20 to 1/80?
What I learned: The quicker the shutter speed (1/80), the darker the picture.
Was this what I was suppose to learn?
This space is primarily about not annoying anyone. I figure that if I continue to bung up my regular blog with a bunch of experimental pictures, then people are going to get bored with me and stop checking in, and I'll miss them terribly - all four of them.
It's also about me having a repository for my photography experiments and homework assignments. Lastly, I suppose it's a place for me to chart my progress as I learn the ropes of this stupid photography thing. ...and maybe express my frustrations with not being smart enough to figure it all out.
but remnants can be found at: www.the5moores.blogspot.com
Recent Comments
-
Seth & Nancy said:
she's precious! i don't mind lines around the eyes...when you think about it they're there because you smile and laugh... read more
on Messing Around -
Seth & Nancy said:
this is the same question that i have!!! i'll have to send you the answer a photographer friend gave me.... read more
on So easy a child could do it?
What a great perspective you have! Same with fat, I suppose, it's there because I have a fondness for ice... read more
on Messing Around