I'm so very happy you were successful. I, and I'm sure others, would be very, very interested in taking a look at some of them if you were so inclined to provide a link to the gallery and/or link a few shots into the thread (see my siggy for link to how that's done if you need any help).
Again, glad to hear things went well!
Here are some of my favorites. Comments and suggestions are welcome.
I think you did a wonderful job, especially considering that this is your first time out with a flash and shooting manual!
The first two could have used a little forward fill to fill some of the shadows in the eyes. These are two that would have benefited from the use of the Better Bounce Card.
All but #6 are pretty centered
I really like #5, #6, and #10 (crop a bit from the left on #10 to improve it a touch)
In the size room(s) you were shooting in, you could have easily worked at ISO 200 or 400 - your flash has plenty of power for that. However, I don'tsee much noise in these, even in the ones shot at 1250 though you can see the difference (see #5 and #6).
For those situations where your subject isn't moving so much, consider dropping the shutter speed to bring in a little of the ambient light - makes the photo look more like the way people see the room. At higher shutter speeds most/all the light in the photo comes from the flash which is, typically, not the same color as the ambient.
I think you can be quite proud of these results. See, manaul mode isn't so scary!:D
To fully appreciate how happy we were with these photos, I think that you need to understand the abundance of horrible indoor flash shots that we have taken year after year - the ones with the dark black background, super washed out subject, and demon red eyes. The basic fact that these ain't those is enough to make my day.
On to your comments . . .
I think you did a wonderful job, especially considering that this is your first time out with a flash and shooting manual!
The first two could have used a little forward fill to fill some of the shadows in the eyes. These are two that would have benefited from the use of the Better Bounce Card. point taken - will give it another go
All but #6 are pretty centered is that a complement, or a critique? - I'm guessing that it is not a good thing. I am an engineer, things are supposed to be centered.
I really like #5, #6, and #10 (crop a bit from the left on #10 to improve it a touch)
In the size room(s) you were shooting in, you could have easily worked at ISO 200 or 400 - your flash has plenty of power for that. However, I don'tsee much noise in these, even in the ones shot at 1250 though you can see the difference (see #5 and #6). I was thinking that the higher ISO let me get away with faster shutter speeds = less motion blur. Perhaps I overdid it. I didn't want to completely remove all ambient lighting either. I'll do some ISO bracketing next time and give the lower ones a go.
For those situations where your subject isn't moving so much, consider dropping the shutter speed to bring in a little of the ambient light - makes the photo look more like the way people see the room. At higher shutter speeds most/all the light in the photo comes from the flash which is, typically, not the same color as the ambient. Will try that as well, although it seems that the higher ISOs would be in order - conflicting with the previous comment.
Also keep in mind that these were the best pics. I had 135 keepers and shot about twice that many. There were quite a few totally worthless pics. The beauty of digital!
To fully appreciate how happy we were with these photos, I think that you need to understand the abundance of horrible indoor flash shots that we have taken year after year - the ones with the dark black background, super washed out subject, and demon red eyes. The basic fact that these ain't those is enough to make my day.
On to your comments . . .
I think you did a wonderful job, especially considering that this is your first time out with a flash and shooting manual!
The first two could have used a little forward fill to fill some of the shadows in the eyes. These are two that would have benefited from the use of the Better Bounce Card. point taken - will give it another go
All but #6 are pretty centered is that a complement, or a critique? - I'm guessing that it is not a good thing. I am an engineer, things are supposed to be centered. Centered photos tend to look quite static. If you compare either #5 or #6 with say, for example, any of the last three, I think you will see what I mean. Also, do a google on "Rule of Thirds" as it relates to photography. It's a rule of thumb and can be "broken" but it's a good place to start.
I really like #5, #6, and #10 (crop a bit from the left on #10 to improve it a touch)
In the size room(s) you were shooting in, you could have easily worked at ISO 200 or 400 - your flash has plenty of power for that. However, I don'tsee much noise in these, even in the ones shot at 1250 though you can see the difference (see #5 and #6). I was thinking that the higher ISO let me get away with faster shutter speeds = less motion blur. Perhaps I overdid it. I didn't want to completely remove all ambient lighting either. I'll do some ISO bracketing next time and give the lower ones a go. As you increase the ISO, flash and ambient contributions to the exposure both increase. But the computer in the camera will take a look at things and will dial back the amount of light from the flash (assuming the flash is connected to the camera as it is in this scenario), thus allowing the ratio of ambient to flash to increase (at a given shutter speed). Then, of course, the ambient contribution will decrease as you increase the shutter speed. I've learned something working through an analysis of your photos and your comments.
For those situations where your subject isn't moving so much, consider dropping the shutter speed to bring in a little of the ambient light - makes the photo look more like the way people see the room. At higher shutter speeds most/all the light in the photo comes from the flash which is, typically, not the same color as the ambient. Will try that as well, although it seems that the higher ISOs would be in order - conflicting with the previous comment.I'm going to retract my comment - at least in part. You did have shutter speeds all over the dial (that's a good thing!) and your photos with slower shutter speeds did, indeed, include more ambient (compare #4 with #6 for example). In large part, when shooting with flash, you control the amount of flash contributing to the exposure with your aperture, and the amount of ambient contribution with the shutter speed. The smaller the aperture, the less flash in the expsoure (also less ambient but you can counter that with longer shutter speed). The longer the exposure, the more ambient light will contribute and will have no impact on the amount that flash will contribute as the flash fires in milli-seconds. And, now I understand (finally), with on-camera flash, changes in ISO will allow one to manipulate the ambient contribution at a given shutter speed or, conversly, manipulate the shutter speed while keeping the ambient contribution a constant. Hmmmm
Also keep in mind that these were the best pics. I had 135 keepers and shot about twice that many. There were quite a few totally worthless pics. The beauty of digital!
- Jason
A 50% keeper rate - that's a very good number. The best I've ever gotten at any event is about 30% - but don't hold me as any kind of standard of photographic expertise. I'm still learning too!
Just picked up 4 photography books from the library . . . lots of stuff about the "rule of thirds". I with my 40D had the digital grid like our SD890 does - that would help.
Just picked up 4 photography books from the library . . . lots of stuff about the "rule of thirds". I with my 40D had the digital grid like our SD890 does - that would help.
Only one more questions (for now) . . .
How do you get the yellow text?
- Jason
Surround your to-be-yellow text with [*color="yellow]text goes here[*/color] - but remove the "*" as they are needed to keep the rendering engine from actually acting on the HTML.
Surround your to-be-yellow text with [*color="yellow]text goes here[*/color] - but remove the "*" as they are needed to keep the rendering engine from actually acting on the HTML.
Just added this to my Christmas list. I will add that it is lame that Canon charges $35 for this item, when it is standard (digital version) on their point and shoot digicams. Between this and the super expensive lens hoods and other accessories they have quite the racket going on.
Just added this to my Christmas list. I will add that it is lame that Canon charges $35 for this item, when it is standard (digital version) on their point and shoot digicams. Between this and the super expensive lens hoods and other accessories they have quite the racket going on.
- Jason
Hehehe, just be happy it's $35! I'm paying $70 canadian for my favourite screen (precision matte)
You can turn on grid-lines in live view, which is at least helpful on a tripod for level horizons as well as framing.
Comments
Here are some of my favorites. Comments and suggestions are welcome.
http://www.smugmug.com/gallery/6700058_du7AD/1/427687242_L6MZm
- Jason
Some comments:
- I think you did a wonderful job
, especially considering that this is your first time out with a flash and shooting manual!
- The first two could have used a little forward fill to fill some of the shadows in the eyes. These are two that would have benefited from the use of the Better Bounce Card.
- All but #6 are pretty centered
- I really like #5, #6, and #10 (crop a bit from the left on #10 to improve it a touch)
- In the size room(s) you were shooting in, you could have easily worked at ISO 200 or 400 - your flash has plenty of power for that. However, I don'tsee much noise in these, even in the ones shot at 1250 though you can see the difference (see #5 and #6).
- For those situations where your subject isn't moving so much, consider dropping the shutter speed to bring in a little of the ambient light - makes the photo look more like the way people see the room. At higher shutter speeds most/all the light in the photo comes from the flash which is, typically, not the same color as the ambient.
I think you can be quite proud of these results. See, manaul mode isn't so scary!:DMy Photos
Thoughts on photographing a wedding, How to post a picture, AF Microadjustments?, Light Scoop
Equipment List - Check my profile
Scott,
To fully appreciate how happy we were with these photos, I think that you need to understand the abundance of horrible indoor flash shots that we have taken year after year - the ones with the dark black background, super washed out subject, and demon red eyes. The basic fact that these ain't those is enough to make my day.
On to your comments . . .
Also keep in mind that these were the best pics. I had 135 keepers and shot about twice that many. There were quite a few totally worthless pics. The beauty of digital!
- Jason
My Photos
Thoughts on photographing a wedding, How to post a picture, AF Microadjustments?, Light Scoop
Equipment List - Check my profile
Only one more questions (for now) . . .
How do you get the yellow text?
- Jason
My Photos
Thoughts on photographing a wedding, How to post a picture, AF Microadjustments?, Light Scoop
Equipment List - Check my profile
Thanks!
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/523871-REG/Canon_2377B001_EF_D_Focusing_Screen_for.html
Just added this to my Christmas list. I will add that it is lame that Canon charges $35 for this item, when it is standard (digital version) on their point and shoot digicams. Between this and the super expensive lens hoods and other accessories they have quite the racket going on.
- Jason
You can turn on grid-lines in live view, which is at least helpful on a tripod for level horizons as well as framing.