Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Post Your Photos > People Photos

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old May 11, 2009, 1:38 PM   #1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 627
Default My bride and her mom on Mother's Day 2009

All these were shot outside in shade in the late afternoon using a fill flash.

#1 2.8 1/250 70mm 400
#2 2.8 1/250 154mm 400
#3 4.0 1/60 76 mm 400
#4 4.0 1/60 110mm 400
#5 4.5 1/60 70mm 400

All hand held, no tripod around (idiot me)
One more to come after these 5.

Please comment on any aspect of the photography. You may also be jealous of the beauty of my bride, and the apple that did not fall too far from the tree.
Attached Images
     
FaithfulPastor is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old May 11, 2009, 1:40 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 627
Default just one more

F 4.0 1/60 126mm 400

Looking forward to hearing from you all.
FaithfulPastor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 11, 2009, 2:18 PM   #3
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 627
Default oops, the file didn't attach

Operator error on my part.
Attached Images
 
FaithfulPastor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 13, 2009, 2:28 PM   #4
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 8,529
Default

quote from your post in the other forum:
Quote:
Part of the reason I'm asking this is because I posted some photos (People section: My bride and my mother in law) and I was hoping you guys would take a look at those (I also posted the exif info) and tell me why my bride looks so washed out.

Can you help me out?
The biggest issue I see in these isn't that your bride is washed out it's that the photos aren't sharp. Part of that is the wide apertures you're using but I'm wondering if a bigger part isn't camera shake as well.

The second photo is an example of where you used an aperture too wide. Your bride is in focus but her mother is not. At 1/250 I'll discount camera shake and motion blur and attribute the issues to using too shallow dof.

In the last shot - neither is in focus and at f4 I would still expect something to be in focus. At 1/60 with the background as light as it is (indicating flash wasn't enough to freeze movement) I'm inclined to think camera shake is an issue.

Or your camera has a focus issue.

But - back to your bride being washed out. I don't think it's that bad - overall the photos are exposed well. But this is an example where the dodge tool in your photo editing software is a great tool. A few moments dodging her in these photos and the exposure would be great. When I first read your post in the other thread I was expecting much worse flash burn but exposure wise these are not bad at all.

EDIT: I meant the BURN tool, not the dodge tool - dodging will make it lighter - you want to make it darker. Sorry for any confusion.

Last edited by JohnG; May 13, 2009 at 3:42 PM.
JohnG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 13, 2009, 3:39 PM   #5
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,543
Default

I agree with JohnG that they are all soft, but I don't think it's due to camera shake. Motion blur due to camera shake is directional, especially at shutter speeds faster than 1/25, yet the blur here is uniform.

There's also chromatic aberration in most of them, and it's especially apparent on the vertical white pole in the background in #3 & #4.

Which lens did you use?
TCav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 13, 2009, 3:57 PM   #6
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 627
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TCav View Post
I agree with JohnG that they are all soft, but I don't think it's due to camera shake. Motion blur due to camera shake is directional, especially at shutter speeds faster than 1/25, yet the blur here is uniform.

There's also chromatic aberration in most of them, and it's especially apparent on the vertical white pole in the background in #3 & #4.

Which lens did you use?
Help me out.. what is chromatic aberration?
I used a sigma 70-200 2.8 lens.

Thanks.
I also think that maybe my AF was set to center point focus on all these shots. So if the center focus point was behind the ladies... duh.
FaithfulPastor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 13, 2009, 4:17 PM   #7
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,543
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by FaithfulPastor View Post
Help me out.. what is chromatic aberration?
I used a sigma 70-200 2.8 lens.
Chromatic aberration is when all the colors of light don't focus in the same place. It appears as color fringes on edges in areas of an image where there is high contrast. [See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chromatic_aberration ]

If you look closely at the white pole in the background of #3 & #4, you'll see a purple fringe on the left side and a green fringe on the right. There's also some CA around the white lawnchair, but it's not as noticeable.

Quote:
Originally Posted by FaithfulPastor View Post
I also think that maybe my AF was set to center point focus on all these shots. So if the center focus point was behind the ladies... duh.
If that were true, then the things behind the ladies would be in focus. They're not.
TCav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 13, 2009, 7:31 PM   #8
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

Those photos don't look bad from an exposure perspective. As JohnG already pointed out, your aperture was probably a bit wide for adequate depth of field for some of them, and 1/60 is a bit on the slow side for shutter speed (not fast enough to freeze any movement from subject movement or camera shake, and you've got too much ambient light for the flash to freeze movement with those settings).

When posting photos, you may want to downsize them using an editor that doesn't strip out the EXIF info. If you're using Photoshop, use Save As versus Save for Web. If not, there are many editors around that can retain the EXIF for you. The free Irfanview is one example. That way, members can see a lot more information (aperture, shutter speed, ISO speed, white balance, metering mode, focus mode, and more), depending on the tool they use to view the photos.

I don't think all of what you're seeing is exposure. The White Balance also looks like it may be varying a bit (cooler versus warmer). I'd probably try the cloudy WB setting for a warmer look (or just warm some of them up a bit in Post Processing).

As for focus point, go for the closest eye when using a shallow depth of field (but, for some of those, you may not want DOF to be that shallow and stopping down the aperture can help some).
JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 14, 2009, 3:23 AM   #9
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Hawaii
Posts: 567
Default

FP,

Congratulations, beautiful bride indeed.

Is this the only that you have? Try setting up on a tripod and test with other lenses to determine if this lens is a problem.
paniolo is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 7:51 AM.