Just starting out
DigitalKid
Registered Users Posts: 2 Beginner grinner
I have a 13 year old who borrowed my camera (basic point and shoot digital) and seems to have an eye for photography. He joined a photography club (run by his English teacher) about a year ago and is having a blast. So far his teacher has enlarged some of his work to hang in the library, encouraged him to take pictures for the school yearbook, and has suggested it would be a shame not invest in his talent.
At this point, my son continues to use my digital point and shoot although I have recently purchased an SLR that I am willing to loan him as he learns/grows a bit more.
Now for my questions---
Any advice you can share would be welcome.
At this point, my son continues to use my digital point and shoot although I have recently purchased an SLR that I am willing to loan him as he learns/grows a bit more.
Now for my questions---
- What is the best way to get him started in what could be a promising hobby (he tells me his professional goal is to study architecture)?
- Also, we do not own any photo editing software but we were thinking about getting him something along these lines for Christmas...is this a good idea or is that not really needed at this point?
Any advice you can share would be welcome.
0
Comments
A photography course would be a good idea.
A camera with some manual controls is a very good idea, even of it's an advanced digicam. A camera with an external flash capability will lend itself to the exploration of lighting and lighting control, both extremely important concepts for any type of advanced photography.
Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
Picasa is a very nice entry level image editor and the GIMP is also free and allows advanced editing like layers and masks. I believe that both are available for Windows and Mac systems.
http://picasa.google.com/
http://www.gimp.org/
Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
Thanks for posting the link, Ziggy. I should have thought to do that.
There is a lot of good advice in Richy's reply, but I wanted to highlight and emphatically agree with what is quoted above. For me, my dad giving me a film SLR and a basic "Intro to 35mm photography" book when I was about 14 is what ignited my personal journey and passion. It really, truly changed my life and I'm still grateful for that to this day.
Learning the basics, which is relatively easy to do with a film SLR, is an excellent foundation for a beginning (or burgeoning) photographer. A lot of the metaphors (like ISO, for instance) have been carried over into digital, so it's time well spent. "Only" having 36 exposures per roll also can instill a sense of care and thoughtfulness into one's shooting style. And it's dirt cheap to pick up a film SLR these days. In fact, I saw someone on DGrin giving away an old film Rebel just today for the cost of postage: http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=185032.
I don't think photography has to start out expensive to become a lifelong pursuit. With some basic, cheap gear and a little curiosity, you can get a solid foundation and have a ton of fun at the same time. (Later, you can blow all of your disposable income on kit.
I still have and love my original film SLR and its 50mm lens.
The part of the learning curve that I think everyone will agree about is that of 'getting out and about and taking pics' - lots of them - seeing what works and what doesn't, what he likes / doesn't like etc. Last time I used film (am in UK) it was approx £4 > £5 a roll for 36 exp print film incl processing. It won't take too many rolls of film before this can add up and offset the less expensive outlay for manual gear .
Again, depending on circumstances, the (film) cost can start to inhibit how one goes about taking pics - yes, 'only' having 36 shots available implies some discipline / thought - but there's nothing to stop a similar approach being used if using a DSLR, either - and he'd have spare capacity available for that 'once in a lifetime' shot that presents itself (UFO landing on whitehouse lawn / politician apologising for being wrong/lying
Some subject matter - macro for instance - is a good example of where he'd be able to take lots of shots to gain the necessary experience / techniques - without spending a fortune on film would be a factor.
In such cases, another advantage of using digital (over film, imo) shows itself - a DSLR records all the information present at the time thepic was taken, thus letting the user review said info later - which helps to unpick why pics did / didn't work etc. You won't have to look very far on any photography site (like DG) to see people asking for these details of posters who're having problems and looking for help.
Obviously it's possible to record all of this sort of detail if using an old manual film cam - but would it happen?
Since we live in a digital world - like 'D' grin - he'd also need some means of scanning / converting his film output to let him upload it here for people to comment on - Does he have access to suitable equipment, either at home or school?
BTW, a 10D (or any other similar 6Mp cam) incidentally outputs a 3k x 2k pixel image file - which is the same size of file that film users used to get from having their 35mm slides / negs scanned and written to a standard quality photo CD.
If printing of images is still a requirement (generally come as std with film) then there's nothing to stop digital files being printed either - places in the Uk are often offering 6x4 prints @ 5p (8c?) each if done in 100 image batches. Printing from digital files allows the user to only get the ones they want to be printed - as opposed to everything (whether good or bad) being printed at the time of the film processing.
Any standard Canon (EF) lens will fit on any current (and more modern) Canon digital body ( or EF mount Film bodies) - although he/ you would probably have to consider EFS lenses too, if he was more interested in subject matter that required wider angle rather than telephoto coverage.
You mention the recent purchase of a DSLR - so maybe another older (inexpensive) body of the same make - which'd allow lenses to be shared between them?
Whilst I personally don't use film any more, I don't have anything against it - I just think it offers fewer options for experimentation (in the described situation) than digital - especially if cost is a relevant / important factor.
pp
Flickr
Don't forget to check out student discounts if you end up getting commercially available software. I think Adobe offers a student discount for K-12 students. That should bring the cost of Lightroom to <$100.
I had a couple of kids with this profile. One dunked a nice camera into a pond, the other smashed a good lens into a rock. Unless your child is neurotically careful with electronics and glass, like me, I would get them something durable.
Post-processing software is good if they are competent to spend many patient hours learning and like computers.
As a parent I would advise keeping your investment low cost and encouraging them to read and follow courses. Trying to persuade a 13 year old to do anything other than digital is a waste of time. Most of great photography is to do with the eye - so a P&S which is built like an underwater tank would be the thing. Even better when it has a manual mode.
I purchased a copy of Photoshop Elements 8 at a COSTCO discount store for $50. It is an excellent program which lets a photographer do almost everything that the full Photoshop program can accomplish.
IMO, an editing program is essential to any digital photographer, and Photoshop Elements is all that most photographers need (and more than many photographers will ever need). i would opt for an Adobe product because Adobe Photoshop is the standard of the industry and much of what you learn using Elements would be transferable to the full Photoshop program.
As far as cameras go, DSLR cameras lose their value very quickly. They are like computers in this. That makes them quite a good buy on the used market. You can purchase a very decent used Canon 350D or 400D DSLR along with an 18-55mm lens at a really good price.
However, these cameras usually came with the non-Image Stabilized version of the 18-55mm kit lens and the IS version is superior in image quality. It might be a better idea to purchase a 350D or 400D body separately and a used 18-55mm IS lens separately. This should not cost a lot more than buying the camera and lens together.
Photographers are constantly upgrading their DSLR cameras and many used cameras have little wear on them.
I am a Canon user and know their products. Nikon may also have products in this range but, the selection of lenses for the entry level Nikons is quite limited.