Little girl trying on hats at a tea party

lisarhinehart · May 12, 2009

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

rhondavid · May 12, 2009

Love each and everyone of them but think that #2 and #4 are my favoite. You daughter is precious and you have done a great job caturing her imagination and personality.

pwp · May 12, 2009

Those are very sweet. She's such a cutie. #2 seemed a little soft to me, but it could just be my eyes and the last 96 hours I've spent PP with only about 3 hours of sleep.

lilmomma · May 12, 2009

These are adorable, looks like she had a lot of fun! #2 is my fav.

Qarik · May 12, 2009

well done! #4 is my favorite..POP

divamum · May 12, 2009

Lisa, these are absolutely charming - what a lovely little girl!

Based on our discussions over in the technique forum, I"m going to respond to these in light of that thread, which I hope is ok

1. You nailed it. Using the DOF and af point to keep the attention on her hand, with some blur on her face, works beautifully here to make the picture more interesting. Nice job.

2. This one is soft to me. Because there is no clear point of focus in the image, I'm going to guess maybe there's some camera shake here - what was the shutter speed? I'd be interested in the exif info. If not camera shake, did you use AF or MF?

3. Similar problem (and if this is due to camera shake, both of this and #2 were situations where you maybe wanted EITHER to open up your aperture to let in more light and allow the shutter speed to be higher, OR perhaps bump the ISO up so that, again, shutter speed could be higher. If the shutter speed was high enough, please ignore everything I've just typed

)

4. Adorable expression. It doesn't actually detract from the shot, but I think your AF might have focused on the straw of the crown of the hat - look how sharp that is compared to her eyes. Again, it doesn't actually cause a significant problem in this shot, but something to be aware of.

5. Just too cute! I think the focus point might have been on the edge of the hat, but near enough the same distance as her eyes that those are clean and clear enough that it doesn't make much difference. My favorite of the set, I think. And surely that's a plenty blurred bg for you? Was that the 17-55 or your other lens?

6. As with #1, you nailed it. I assume you stopped down a wee bit given the greater dof because it's very crisp. Adorable shot too - what a face!

I think you're well on your way - sure, some things to explore further, but this is a delightful series and you're making it work for you!

ront · May 12, 2009

Really sweet pictures.

Ron

lisarhinehart · May 12, 2009

Let's get technical

divamum wrote:

Lisa, these are absolutely charming - what a lovely little girl!

Based on our discussions over in the technique forum, I"m going to respond to these in light of that thread, which I hope is ok

1. You nailed it. Using the DOF and af point to keep the attention on her hand, with some blur on her face, works beautifully here to make the picture more interesting. Nice job.

2. This one is soft to me. Because there is no clear point of focus in the image, I'm going to guess maybe there's some camera shake here - what was the shutter speed? I'd be interested in the exif info. If not camera shake, did you use AF or MF?

3. Similar problem (and if this is due to camera shake, both of this and #2 were situations where you maybe wanted EITHER to open up your aperture to let in more light and allow the shutter speed to be higher, OR perhaps bump the ISO up so that, again, shutter speed could be higher. If the shutter speed was high enough, please ignore everything I've just typed )

4. Adorable expression. It doesn't actually detract from the shot, but I think your AF might have focused on the straw of the crown of the hat - look how sharp that is compared to her eyes. Again, it doesn't actually cause a significant problem in this shot, but something to be aware of.

5. Just too cute! I think the focus point might have been on the edge of the hat, but near enough the same distance as her eyes that those are clean and clear enough that it doesn't make much difference. My favorite of the set, I think. And surely that's a plenty blurred bg for you? Was that the 17-55 or your other lens?

6. As with #1, you nailed it. I assume you stopped down a wee bit given the greater dof because it's very crisp. Adorable shot too - what a face!

I think you're well on your way - sure, some things to explore further, but this is a delightful series and you're making it work for you!

DM-- well thanks for the unsolicited advice!

-- I'm totally joking, I appreciate you taking the time to help me out and am greateful for all of your advice, and happy that you found this thread. I was thinking about posting this on the technique form, but it seems like the same people found it here, perfect!

You are absolutely right about the focus issues. I should have bumped my ISO up-- it was at 100 the whole time, but that looked in focus to me, apparently not. Maybe I should have changed the ap off of 2.8, but I seemed to need it there to get the light, color and bokeh I wanted. The shutter speed varied from 1/25-1/50 depending on what my camera chose, as I was shooting in AV.

Would ISO and less open ap have helped the fact that she was constantly in motion? Most of the time I tried to move my focus point to her eyes, but by that time, she had either moved or by the time I recomposed the shot, it was different and I knew she was about to pull off the hat and try on a new hat. I figured the band was at a similar focal point in at least one shot.

Thanks for your feedback, and I'm glad you like them. I still have a lot to learn.

lisarhinehart · May 12, 2009

thanks, close angles
Thanks for checking out the pics and thanks for all your feedback. I'm surprised so many people like 4-- I almost didn't include it b/c it seemed flat or washed out to me, lol. I guess it's not.

I also noticed that (and maybe this is b/c I'm used to composing macro nature shots) I use a lot of angles, maybe this doesn't work as well for people or maybe it does. It's just something I'm noticing. I'm also noticing that I like to get really close. (another macro thing)

divamum · May 12, 2009

lisarhinehart wrote:

You are absolutely right about the focus issues. I should have bumped my ISO up-- it was at 100 the whole time, but that looked in focus to me, apparently not. Maybe I should have changed the ap off of 2.8, but I seemed to need it there to get the light, color and bokeh I wanted. The shutter speed varied from 1/25-1/50 depending on what my camera chose, as I was shooting in AV.

I think the aperture choice was good "for artistic reasons" (ie, blurring your bg) so in this instance, increasing the ISO - even if only to 200 - would probably have been a reasonable choice.

Would ISO and less open ap have helped the fact that she was constantly in motion? Most of the time I tried to move my focus point to her eyes, but by that time, she had either moved or by the time I recomposed the shot, it was different and I knew she was about to pull off the hat and try on a new hat. I figured the band was at a similar focal point in at least one shot.

The blurring here doesn't seem to be lack of depth of field created by a wide open aperture; if that were the case there would be somewhere in the image that was tack sharp, with the focus melting away around it. In your shot, there is universal blurring, which suggests another cause.

Therefore, I think the blurring you're seeing is from the camera moving as you pressed the shutter - it won't "look blurred" to you, since it's the infinitesimal movement of your hand which causes it. The IS in your lens will help with that, but it's not infallible. The motion blur caused by a moving subject would be a different kind of blurring, and it probably would have required slower shutter speeds than you had to make it that obvious.

As for focus point - have you tried the center point, focus and recompose technique? It's not infallible, but it can be useful in situations where you have little control over where the focus point will be from shot to shot.

In any case, I still say these are absolutely precious shots

D

lisarhinehart · May 13, 2009

blur issue
These shots were taken by my 17-55, and I'm happy to say they are getting better. I'm happy with these, too. I wish the images would have been more crisp in the eyes, though. As far as 6 being more clear, it's probably b/c we were back at the table (different setting) and the sun was more bright at that point.

So would ISO 200 have fixed the blur issue? How could I have been able tell that needed to be done at the time of the shot so my images could have been clear? I imagine maybe by looking at the little green hash marks in the view finder maybe? I dunno b/c I've never really paid much attention to all that before.

This is an image I didn't include b/c of blurring. I like it, but I think the blur is really too much here. I was on AV 2.8 ISO 100, and my camera chose 1/8-- maybe b/c of all the white in the shot.

Mitchell · May 13, 2009

#1 is the winner here.

She's adorable.

The other shots all just miss the mark. The eyes are just soft and that really detracts from the photos. Diva has given you some great advice. The series with the hats would have be great if you had nailed the focus on her eyes. Shutterspeeds are just too low and your focus points were off with a narrow DOF.

divamum · May 13, 2009

lisarhinehart wrote:

So would ISO 200 have fixed the blur issue?

Perhaps better to say that ISO would have allowed you to use a higher shutter speed, which would have fixed the blur issue. Camera shake is simply the result of a too low shuttter speed - any adjustments you make are to allow the shutter speed to be faster, and you have several ways of accomplishing this: you could open up the aperture more; you could raise the ISO; you could add more light (ie flash); you could use a tripod and remote so the camera is absolutely still.

How could I have been able tell that needed to be done at the time of the shot so my images could have been clear? I imagine maybe by looking at the little green hash marks in the view finder maybe? I dunno b/c I've never really paid much attention to all that before.

Either read the information in the viewfinder - it will tell you exactly what shutter and aperture you're using for any shot - or glance down at the screen on the back of the camera, which will also tell you what the settings for the shot are. All this while half-depressing the shutter, of course (or using the exposure lock button). Also, if you review the shot, it will tell you what was used - if you glance down as it flashes up after the shot is taken, you can see the info and adjust accordingly.

(PS Thanks for the vote of confidence, Mitchell!)

lisarhinehart · May 13, 2009

technique for helping with blur

divamum wrote:

Perhaps better to say that ISO would have allowed you to use a higher shutter speed, which would have fixed the blur issue. Camera shake is simply the result of a too low shuttter speed - any adjustments you make are to allow the shutter speed to be faster, and you have several ways of accomplishing this: you could open up the aperture more; you could raise the ISO; you could add more light (ie flash); you could use a tripod and remote so the camera is absolutely still.

OK-- this is genius, it really helps me to understand my options. (Total side note here: Do you know what would be really helpful as far as writing a book on technique-- a book that listed these types of options... I'm picturing a flow chart like in those medical diagnosis books. Picture blur?> up your ISO, but not too high or it will cause a grainy quality, etc. If there is already a book like this please let me know.)

In this case my ap was as open as it could be (2.8) I probably wouldn't have wanted to use a tripod (informal situation) but I definately could have dialed up the ISO-- if I'm rememmbering correctly it is 100, 200, 400, 800, 1600-- and 800 and 1600 can be grainy so keep it low or use a flash(?).

divamum wrote:

Either read the information in the viewfinder - it will tell you exactly what shutter and aperture you're using for any shot - or glance down at the screen on the back of the camera, which will also tell you what the settings for the shot are. All this while half-depressing the shutter, of course (or using the exposure lock button). Also, if you review the shot, it will tell you what was used - if you glance down as it flashes up after the shot is taken, you can see the info and adjust accordingly.

Knowing the ap and shutter speed doesn't seem all that helpful in knowing if I have the correct exposure, as it's all Greek to me at this point-- as I'm only starting to learn about it over the past few days. I have been playing back images on my display and trying to detect blur, but I didn't notice it in these, except for the white hat one which i just added.

I wonder what others use? Does everyone just know the numbers and use them as guides? I think someone in another thread mentioned green hash marks (when talking about light meters?) and it needing to be near the middle for correct exposure, but since I'm using AV I'm thinking that the camera is choosing the shutter speed that it believes is best and in the center of those green hash marks.

It seemed like closing the ap a little (f4) made it darker and more blurry, so ISO would help-- but how would I know to dial it up if I don't really realize that I need it? Getting all of this technical stuff right is going to make capturing the moment hard until it's second nature, no? Good news though-- I'm starting to be able to move focus points without looking at the buttons-

Wil Davis · May 13, 2009

Ah, what a gorgeous face! …and those eyes! certain to break many hearts, mark my words!

and talking about eyes…

Portraiture:

Rule #1: make sure the eyes (or nearest eye to the camera) are in focus

Rule #2: see rule #1

Rule #3: if the subject is looking into the camera lens (yes, at the lens, not just at the camera, or at the photographer) it is a PORTRAIT; if the subject is looking anywhere else, it is a CANDID

er, that's it…

I think I would have taken a step back and used a longer lens. Manual focus is more controllable than auto (I don't remember if you stated which one you used; someone made a comment about the crown of the hat being the focal-point, so perhaps you used AF, IMNSHO A Bad Thing

)

- Wil

Qarik · May 13, 2009

rule of thumb to avoid motion for shutter speed:

if you shoot 50mm do not shoot slower shutter then 1/50s

if you shoot 100mm do not shoot slower shutter then 1/100s

if you shoot at 17mm do not shoot slower shutter then 1/17s

get it? So with your 17-55mm in gneral you should never go below say 1/50s (with out VR or IS anyway unless you are tripoded) as a rule to be safe.

Your camera does not know this in Av mode. It just chose the the correct shutter speed for proper exposure and indeed it is properly exposed.

As others have mentioned...a flash would have helped or double your iso. Note doubling your iso would mean you camera would have chosen double the shutter speed to 1/16s which may have been okay.

This is the danger of shooting Av mode. The camera just compensates shutter for exposure..not blur.

Fianlly f/2.8 is not the best for shooting head shots. You probably can't tell becasue of the motion blur but the focus will not be that great becasue the wide ofpen aperture = thin DOF.

Basically in the kind of setting you were in..and you will learn with experience...

1) with a diffused flash, your ap should be in f/4-8 range with shutter speed greater then 1/50s (flash will take care of exposure)

2) with no flash..your ap should be in the f/4-6 range with shutter speed greater them 1/50s and ISO bumped up maybe 800 or so. This is the less desirable option.

Joie · May 13, 2009

Cute pictures! What an adorable little girl! I LOVE the chintz pansy teacup and saucer. I have started a teacup/saucer collection and I'm planning to have some teas in the near future so I especially enjoyed the photos.

lisarhinehart · May 13, 2009

more technicalities, my despise-ment of flash
Thanks everyone for your encouragement and advice. It is very helpful and really propelling me forward in this learning process.

Wil, you are right-- I didn't realize the diferrence between portrait and candid (*blush*)

Qarik wrote:

rule of thumb to avoid motion for shutter speed:

if you shoot 50mm do not shoot slower shutter then 1/50s

if you shoot 100mm do not shoot slower shutter then 1/100s

if you shoot at 17mm do not shoot slower shutter then 1/17s

get it? So with your 17-55mm in gneral you should never go below say 1/50s (with out VR or IS anyway unless you are tripoded) as a rule to be safe.

With the exception of the white hat shot, which I realized was out of focus at the time and didn't include in the first post, thanks to my LCD , everything was in that range of 1/25-1/50 and with my 17-55mm. Is there a better way to tell if the shot will be out of focus?

Qarik wrote:

Your camera does not know this in Av mode. It just chose the the correct shutter speed for proper exposure and indeed it is properly exposed.

Is it though? Doesn't proper exposure include not having focus problems?

Qarik wrote:

As others have mentioned...a flash would have helped or double your iso. Note doubling your iso would mean you camera would have chosen double the shutter speed to 1/16s which may have been okay.

This is the danger of shooting Av mode. The camera just compensates shutter for exposure..not blur.

But I hate flash!!! I know it will be a lot better with my 580 ex II w/ difuser, but I need to know how to use that, too. I figure once I am more comfortable using ap, ISO, shut etc. I will move on to figuring out the flash. It's all a little overwhelming at this point.

Qarik wrote:

Fianlly f/2.8 is not the best for shooting head shots. You probably can't tell becasue of the motion blur but the focus will not be that great becasue the wide ofpen aperture = thin DOF.

Basically in the kind of setting you were in..and you will learn with experience...

1) with a diffused flash, your ap should be in f/4-8 range with shutter speed greater then 1/50s (flash will take care of exposure)

2) with no flash..your ap should be in the f/4-6 range with shutter speed greater them 1/50s and ISO bumped up maybe 800 or so. This is the less desirable option.

The lighting was bright, for indoors, I would still need to flash? yuck! I love natural light.

I will probably go a little easy on the wide open aps and super close shots-- its just where I'm at now. I'm kind of feeling my way around at this point. I do like them though, I dunno.

divamum · May 13, 2009

I think you're not realising that there are different kinds of blurring, all of which have different causes.

1. Depth of field blur. Everything in front of or behind the focus point which is out of focus. This is controlled by the aperture so if you want more of the image sharp, stop down; if you want to use the blurring for artistic effect, open it up. This is not a "problem" simply the nature of the physics of the optics - it's up to the photographer to decide how and when to use the various possibilities and stop down or open up accordingly.

2. Camera shake. Blurring of the entire image caused by movement of the CAMERA during a slow(er) shutter speed. To fix this you either need to use a tripod, or bump up the shutter speed. How slow is "too slow" depends on the focal length of the lens. As Qarik has pointed out, the rule of thumb is 1/focal length, thus a 200mm lens would need a shutter speed of 1/200 to avoid camera shake, a 50mm lens 1/50 etc etc. Usually erring on the side of even faster is wise to guarantee a crisp shot.

3. Motion blur: all or part of the image blurred because the SUBJECT was moving. Again, increasing the shutter speed will help freeze the motion.

EDITED TO ADD:

4. Photo out of focus: the camera or photographer did not correctly focus. If it is AF and the wrong focus point was used, there will be sharpness SOMEWHERE in the image, just not necessarily where it was intended. Adjust the focus point to closer to the region which should be in focus, or use the center point, focus and recompose.

To increase the shutter speed (shutter opens to allow light in for a shorter time) WHILE MAINTAINING THE CORRECT EXPOSURE you need to allow more light into the camera in some other way, which can be either:

1. Increasing the aperture to allow more light in during the shorter time the shutter is open - the wider aperture will of course also affect the DOF blurring.

2. Increasing the ISO (makes the sensor more sensitive to light)

Slower shutter = more light (but posibility of camera shake or motion blur)
More open ap (hole is bigger) = more light + smaller DOF (which means more bg blur)

Faster shutter = "frozen" shots regardless of motion but less light as the sensor is exposed to light for a shorter duration
stopped down ap (hole is smaller) = more DOF (less bg blurring), but less light reaches the sensor

I wonder what others use? Does everyone just know the numbers and use them as guides? I think someone in another thread mentioned green hash marks (when talking about light meters?) and it needing to be near the middle for correct exposure, but since I'm using AV I'm thinking that the camera is choosing the shutter speed that it believes is best and in the center of those green hash marks.

I look at the screen - if my shutter speed is lower than my focal length, I adjust accordingly; if I want sharpness from front to back, I stop down (make sure my aperture is set to a higher number); if I want to blur the background, I make sure my aperture is open (lower number). I almost always shoot av, so I pick the aperture for the situation and then simply check to make sure my shutter speed is high enough to avoid problems with camera shake. If I know I need high speed (ie shooting animals, kids, sports etc), I shoot shutter-priority and simply reverse the process. Thassit!

HTH!

Qarik · May 14, 2009

Exposure and focus are two completely separate concepts. Exposure is simply the amount of light in a shot. I am sure you have seen photos of people dancing that use longer shutter speed so that there is intentional blur suggesting movement? It's an artistic choice..it is out of focus..yet it may very well be "properly" exposed (meaning no blown highlights, etc)

Is there a way to tell if your shot is going to be out of focus? Besides the shutter speed rule of thumb that was mentioned there is no real way to predict that. You have to spot check your photos on your LCD every once in while and pay attention to your lens noise (does it seem to be focus hunting?) Besides that..you just have to have enough experience and trust in your lens to hit target. I recall using a borrowed nikkor 24-70mm..just after one session I knew that lens is going hit intended focus 95% of the time.

And it is okay to hate your built-in flash..everyone does.

Indoor lighting may appear bright to the human eye..but it is often not bright to a camera. I think our eyes operate in Green Auto Mode and adjust "ISO" automagically in darker settings. Unless you have a lot of sunlight streaming in from a lot of windows..if your inside I would say 3/4 times a flash would be a benefit.

sugarblossom · May 14, 2009

She is adoriable! i love the last one her face exspression is so cute!

lisarhinehart · May 14, 2009

more technical stuff
Thanks

I'm tired so I apologise in advance if any of this doesn't make sense.

Qarik wrote:

Exposure and focus are two completely separate concepts. Exposure is simply the amount of light in a shot. I am sure you have seen photos of people dancing that use longer shutter speed so that there is intentional blur suggesting movement? It's an artistic choice..it is out of focus..yet it may very well be "properly" exposed (meaning no blown highlights, etc)

Is there a way to tell if your shot is going to be out of focus? Besides the shutter speed rule of thumb that was mentioned there is no real way to predict that. You have to spot check your photos on your LCD every once in while and pay attention to your lens noise (does it seem to be focus hunting?) Besides that..you just have to have enough experience and trust in your lens to hit target. I recall using a borrowed nikkor 24-70mm..just after one session I knew that lens is going hit intended focus 95% of the time.

It does seem like it could just be "out of focus" as there are parts of the hat that are sharp, just not her eyes. The lens focus hunting, yea that is a bad sign that I should keep an eye out for. By 95% do you mean even when you do everything right, it still will miss, and not b/c you or the subject have moved? What are blown highlights?

How can you tell if things are in focus with manual focus? I seriously cannot tell and don't get how other people do-- that window is seriously tiny! I can tell that it's getting more clear or blurry, but don't really notice a sweet spot-- if I manually focused these shots they'd be much worse. It seems like my outer AF points are weaker than the center one-- but I often like subjects off center.

About the camera shake/motion blur/out of focus-- would stepping back a little bit have helped? I do tend to get really close.

What does HTH (Diva) and IMNSO (Wil)-- I'm new to this whole forum thing.

( I do know what that means)

Qarik · May 15, 2009

I really think that picture was blurry due to camera shake. 1/8 of sec is a looong time.

Yes a lens will just sometimes misfocus through no fault of your own. A lens may misfocus due to low light, a lens may misfocus due to a variety of reasons. A quality lens will misfocus much less then a poor quality lens.

*shakes finger* lol don't even think about manual focus at this point. It is not easy and takes a lot practice and still won't be better then auto focus. That said..manual focus, you need to flip the switch on your camera body to for manual focus, flip a switch on your lens to manual focus, and then frame your shot, play with focus ring..and look inside your view finder..when a focal point comes into focus ..a green dot will show up in the either lower right or lower left hand corner of the viewfinder. Then "click".

Would stepping back helped the motion blur? Assuming all you did was step back and not change aperture or zoom? No..it would not have helped. The blur was purely a function of shutter speed.

Wil Davis · May 15, 2009

lisarhinehart wrote:

…snip
What does HTH (Diva) and IMNSO (Wil)
snip…

In My Not So Humble Opinion

Hope This Helps

- Wil

lisarhinehart · May 15, 2009

580 exII

Qarik wrote:

I really think that picture was blurry due to camera shake. 1/8 of sec is a looong time.

The blur was purely a function of shutter speed.

Actually, I was referring to the other pics-- I know the white hat 1/8, last post was very shakey-- way too long shut speed, and knew it at the time. I'm refering to the original set of pics I posted that had a shut speed that fell within the normal range, but maybe you are saying they are camera shake, too. I think hats have focus that woudl have been better on eyes.

I'm beginning to think that the best way to solve the out of focus issues in this tea hat set would be to figure out how to use the 580exII that I just bought. I'm trying to know enough about exposure first, and making that my top priority, but using the speedlight is next.

I have been a minimalist for so long, and I know to get better pictures more of the time I have to learn how to use and carry all of this stuff with me. Luckily my point and shoot photos have generated enough revenue to pay for the nicer equipment-- now to learn how to use it. Is there a book about speedelights like the one I'm reading about exposure-- simple lots of pics...:)

--Lisa

divamum · May 15, 2009

I agree with Qarik - these weren't "out of focus", but suffer from visible camera shake resulting from a too-slow shutter speed. While it IS important to learn how to use your speedlight, you had other options at your disposal to increase shutter speed for the teaparty series, thus adding flash wasn't the only choice.

You were at ISO 100.

If you had bumped it up to 400 - which is perfectly useable on the XT, without particularly disturbing grain - or even 200 you'd have allowed the shutter speed to increase enough to handhold these without camera shake, especially with the added assistance of the IS from your lens.

Canon speedlights are amazing, but the learning curve on them is TOUGH. While I don't know of a book for Speedlights, there are several links to detailed information at the top of the Technique forum. I'd say if you use the flash , stick with full auto mode for the time being, (although bouncing it off the ceiling or walls instead of shooting with it straight on so the results are softer and more pleasing), and once you start to feel more comfortable with the basics of exposure adjustments THEN start adding the more sophisticated features it offers into the mix. If you do that now when the basics aren't 100% clear in your mind yet you're going to get VERY confused (I know I did). One step at a time...

Have you been practicing on non-moving targets just experimenting with different settings so you can SEE what they do in comparison to each other? That might help you get this stuff clearer in your mind. It's hard to shoot moving targets like kids because their actions are a real wildcard and unpredictable, so why not set up a basic still life somewhere near a window and just experiment? Slow shutter+wide ap; stopped down+ more speed. With and without flash, bounced off the ceiling, the wall, straight on Etc. Just as an exercise

joshhuntnm · May 16, 2009

Notwithstanding the focus issue, these are still some great shots of a really cute girl. It is probably only people like us that notice the focus issue, but, that is what we are here for.

One other issue -- the last one looks a tad blue to me. I'd like to see the skin color about like the others.

I'd think shooting at 200 would have got you the shutter speed to make these as crisp as you wanted them to be.

Great series.

lisarhinehart · May 16, 2009

ISO, meters, and princesses-- oh my
J- Thanks for your kind words. It's true-- my in laws and FB friends all loved them and had nothing to say about focus at all.

DM- You are right, how could I forget about ISO? again? So the 580exII will have a learning curve? Do you think it is similar to this exposure one?

In about an hour I have a princess party to attend, so maybe I can use my ISO there and post some more.

lisarhinehart · May 16, 2009

My little garden nymph
Hello friends

I posted a few of my favs from today, where I did use my ISO. My app, shut and ISO are all over the place, but I got a lot more good pics than I usually do. Choosing which to post was tough. You can find it under dgrin>shots>people>my little garden nymph

Lisa

Little girl trying on hats at a tea party

Comments