Frustrated Photo-dork needs Advice Badly

[thegman]

Jim,
You say that the photos you are most happy with are the medium format shots. Maybe you need to think about whether it's the camera/film you're happy with, or was it at the time you were shooting MF, you had more time to spare, more inspired, or more creative?

Despite not getting along with shooting it, I was delighted with my first roll from my Rolleiflex. I sold that camera, as TLRs are just not for me I don't think, but you say you like square format, you say you like MF, maybe a TLR is worth a go?

Does not need to be a Rollei, $200 will buy you a Yashicamat, and will give you all the resolution you need. Portra 400 is so forgiving with exposure, and I find the colours are predictable ( in a good way).

For pictures of the kids etc. stick with digital, just get a little compact, but maybe for your artistic endeavours, go with what works for you.

 

[jmooney]

Jim,
You say that the photos you are most happy with are the medium format shots. Maybe you need to think about whether it's the camera/film you're happy with, or was it at the time you were shooting MF, you had more time to spare, more inspired, or more creative?

I can honestly say the situation isn't really any different today than in was then, other than the fact that I sold that camera a while ago to finance something else.

Despite not getting along with shooting it, I was delighted with my first roll from my Rolleiflex. I sold that camera, as TLRs are just not for me I don't think, but you say you like square format, you say you like MF, maybe a TLR is worth a go?

This is something I'm considering.

Does not need to be a Rollei, $200 will buy you a Yashicamat, and will give you all the resolution you need. Portra 400 is so forgiving with exposure, and I find the colours are predictable ( in a good way).

Good to know.

For pictures of the kids etc. stick with digital, just get a little compact, but maybe for your artistic endeavours, go with what works for you.

This is good advice too, I think I may be frustrating myself by expecting that one camera can do all I need.

 

[gavinlg]

Be careful not to over sharpen as it will increase noise a lot. I see both shots are quite over sharpened. Be sure to get exposure right in camera as well as trying to bring it up in PP will increase the noise as well.

 

[thegman]

This is good advice too, I think I may be frustrating myself by expecting that one camera can do all I need.

Agreed, as much as we want to buy it, the perfect camera for all occasions does not exist.

 

[Sparrow]

I like it a lot!

Can you tell me what you did to the image?

Just a quick run through photoshop, Auto Colour/Levels/Curves/Usharpen A 30%, R 7, T 1/Usharpen A 90%, R 1, T 1 ... much more aggressive sharpening than I'd use on my film scans but the file was a bit soft to start with

 

[jmooney]

Just a quick run through photoshop, Auto Colour/Levels/Curves/Usharpen A 30%, R 7, T 1/Usharpen A 90%, R 1, T 1 ... much more aggressive sharpening than I'd use on my film scans but the file was a bit soft to start with

Thank you!

 

[codester80]

It might be the gear. It might be post processing. It might be subject matter or the shooting conditions. Or it could be a combination of all of these.

Switching gear or changing post processing each and every time is going to provide you with no answers. You need to stick with one camera, one lens and one post processing routine and then begin to make incremental changes to discover what works and doesn't work in reaching your vision of a great photograph. It's a process of elimination. It's time consuming but in the end will get you the answers you are looking for. Too many people haphazardly change cameras, lenses, film, post processing, etc. and find they continue to be frustrated by their lack of success.

I get the sense you appreciate no noise, high degree of sharpness and detail and nice vibrant colors based on the samples you provided. I'd start with medium format (35mm will always have more noise) with ISO 50 or 100 film and use the best standard lens you can afford. Cheap glass will get you cheap results. I would do minimal post processing (levels/curves, mild sharpening). I would concentrate on getting accurate focusing and exposure in camera.

I would also pay close attention to the shooting conditions. All of your samples were shot in diffused light which produces a high degree of detail and sharpness while providing a tonal range easily handled by either film or a digital sensor allowing for easy contrast and saturation boosting in the post process.

Take one of the images you admire and try to replicate it through making those incremental changes. It's easier to see if you're headed in the right direction if you've got something to compare against.

 

[domagojs]

It takes courage to go full monty like you did here and I admire it! Regarding your question, I'd also suggest you to stick with a camera and a lens or two for at least a year and try to get the pictures you like. I'd also suggest to analyze the pictures you like. Take your time and think about it's subject, light, point of view, overall look, lens that was used, etc. For that I like to study pictures of the photographers I like and it's funny how I subconsciously go after the look I mostly looked at lately. Ofc, I only see that when I get home and look at the pictures 🙂

Also, learn the digital post processing. All great photos you see out there have had it and anything coming out of the camera will not look anything like the look you're striving for. I developed a fetish on Leica and summicron 35mm becuase of one guy's street pictures with that combo. Just when I bought my Bessa, the guy lost his Leica and shot a Nikon with a 50mm lens, which is the setup I used for prior two years, and guess what, his photos with that combo were perfect 🙂

Now, to be of more constructive use, I'd like to recommend to you two cheap ebooks entitled "TEN - Ten Ways To Improve Your Craft. None of Them Involves Buying Gear" http://craftandvision.com/books/ten/ and "TEN MORE - Ten More Ways To Improve Your Craft" (http://craftandvision.com/books/ten-more ) These short and cheap books, IMHO, point out important issues that if you work on, you'd get much more satisfied with your photos. They are special because they talk about the craft, i.e. how best to use the equipment, and they even have exercises that you can do to try out what the author is saying.

 

[Gumby]

jmooney,

Went through your flickr site. Your problem is not the camera at all... First change your subjects, ...

Nobody seems to want to acknowledge this good advise. Oh well.

 

[domagojs]

Nobody seems to want to acknowledge this good advise. Oh well.

they are his subjects. why would he be more satisfied with pictures of stuff he's not interested in? i beleive that as long you are genuinely interested in your subjects they are good, it's just that you should work on transforming them into photos you like and which speak to you...

 

[back alley]

it seems you are talking about technique and not content when it comes to your images...

i read a quote many years ago that might apply here...'a man can make the same mistake for years and call it experience'.

it looks like you might want to play with your photo editing software a bit more...maybe slow down when you are out shooting and take more care with each shot...

 

[redisburning]

OP,

you seem unsatisfied with the noise performance of your camera. I will disregard your second shot, which is not ideally focused or exposed. But for the first, where you appear to have gotten that right, all I can tell you is this.

All digital cameras will show noise, even at base ISO. how much you see in the final print depends upon a combination of the camera and magnification.

I too would be unhappy with what you posted in the first image. The noise in the darker areas is quite apparent. I do not know how much your software pulled them up. The difference between lit skin and a black object in shadow can be >6 stops, which in practical terms is quite a lot.

My honest suggestion to you is this: get back to controlling your own exposure, and your own focus.

of lesser immediacy I do suggest you ditch m4/3rds for a medium format camera if you really want high image quality. MF will allow you to shoot higher speed films without having noticeable grain in your pictures.

 

[thegman]

I agree that photography is not about gear, which is why I think film can help sometimes. Digital cameras are often very complicated and just get in the way. If you want to focus on the photo, you're probably better off not having to focus on the camera. A simple camera, which just has aperture, shutter, and focus controls might help you do that.

I don't think your photo would be any better if taken with a different camera, and I respect your choice to shoot full auto etc. I don't think your opinions are "rubbish" and it's probably a bit disrespectful of you to dismiss the opinions of others like that.

The OP has tried a lot of digital cameras, for whatever reason they're not working out for him, so maybe film would be a welcome change.

 

[btgc]

...this is a photo taken on full auto with a Panasonic G1 and kit zoom. Would this have been a materially better photo for having been taken on a Leica or a Rolleiflex?

Finally, thread reaches another sacred milestone 😀 I though it has been discussed to death before?

 

[redisburning]

right, but your response was "get better at taking pictures" which is unhelpful, unthoughtful and extremely pretentious.

you even admit the OP wanted help with his technical image quality yet you offered nothing to that end. all you did was insult him by suggesting that a person who has been taking pictures for, at the very least, the better part of a decade ought to stick with one camera for 6 months...

you COMPLETELY missed the point, and yet you felt the need to contribute in a way which you must realize would never be mistaken for being nice (or helpful). none of your suggestions help improve his image quality, and still you haven't offered a suggestion that would help him improve things like sharpness or dynamic range.

let us be clear, the OP never said he wanted a new camera so he could take better pictures, he wanted a new camera so that the pictures he already took would look better. you to this point appear to not understand that distinction, either because you lack the intellectual honesty to walk back what you said or you are too ignorant to understand that such a distinction exists.

the highlights in your shot are badly blown, by the way. your picture probably would be substantially improved if that were not the case, especially at larger magnifications.

 

[Steveh]

Redisburning, thanks for a timely reminder of why I generally stay off non-gear threads on here. Are you that rude to total strangers in real life?

Have deleted both my posts, as I have no wish to offend. Having taken a look at your Flickr I'll pass on the photo advice if it's all the same to you.

 

[Brian Legge]

Something about the first image seemed off to me. I'm pretty sure its the sharpening which makes the image look slightly inconsistent. Areas where it should be on the edge of blurring are sharp because they also happen to be edges which work well with the sharpening.

In addition to making the detail look a bit off, it also amplifies the noise.

Is sharpening disabled on the camera itself and done exclusively in post? I'd lean towards no sharpening at all honestly. That is personal aesthetic but I think it can easily have an over all negative impact, particularly up close.

You might want to try comparing shots with sharpening totally disabled and the amount of sharpening you do right now.

 

[back alley]

right, but your response was "get better at taking pictures" which is unhelpful, unthoughtful and extremely pretentious.

you even admit the OP wanted help with his technical image quality yet you offered nothing to that end. all you did was insult him by suggesting that a person who has been taking pictures for, at the very least, the better part of a decade ought to stick with one camera for 6 months...

you COMPLETELY missed the point, and yet you felt the need to contribute in a way which you must realize would never be mistaken for being nice (or helpful). none of your suggestions help improve his image quality, and still you haven't offered a suggestion that would help him improve things like sharpness or dynamic range.

let us be clear, the OP never said he wanted a new camera so he could take better pictures, he wanted a new camera so that the pictures he already took would look better. you to this point appear to not understand that distinction, either because you lack the intellectual honesty to walk back what you said or you are too ignorant to understand that such a distinction exists.

the highlights in your shot are badly blown, by the way. your picture probably would be substantially improved if that were not the case, especially at larger magnifications.

lighten up a bit, eh?
most of us come here to relax, share and maybe learn something...not to be lectured to!
if you can't be civil then keep it to yourself.

 

[back alley]

btw, just what is a photo dork?

 

[dave lackey]

Hey, Jim...come on down to Atlanta on April 14th for the 2nd meet of the S.E. Region! Or, come on down to Pensacola where Raid is hosting another S.E. Regional RFF meet!

You will meet some mighty fine people and get to sample some really cool gear whilst chatting about such topics as this thread!:angel: