Quote:
|
So much for being constructive...
|
Actually I think he is being constructive by giving an honest opinion. He thought the B&W are decent, but he stated most look like ordinary pictures with cheap cameras and that the lighting and quality is shady. I thought I had something on the album, but I might have left it out. The not quite right quality of the outdoor pictures can probably be attributed to the scanner I used to scan the prints and then my lack of skill in photoshop trying to correct what the scanner did. I feel the lighting on those are really good, but the scanned results are lacking. But as for lighting on the indoor pics, Insane has a great point. It does look like it was taken by someone that has never used a camera. Red eye problems, washed out faces and big shadows because of the flash. He might be missing the .. what I call emotion of the moment.... But these pics are of people I know and what I feel may be personal and not felt by others when they see this. Most of these I wasn't trying to be creative, just wanted to capture the moment and perhaps Insane is looking for more creative things. If I was someone else looking at these photos of people, id probably not feel much and not really care to linger on them. I really wish my indoor photos where better. I'm pretty unhappy with the onboard flash. I don't think I have redeye reduction mode and the flash is too close to my lens. it tends to wash out the face too much and produce unwanted shadows. I generally try not to use the flash indoors. Now I have to pics of the banjo/guitar cousin and aunt. The underexpose pic was done on purpose to create a warmer feeling as I felt the flash was probably too bright.
All in all, the b&w photo of my father in law is my favorite, but even then it could have been better with a lower iso rating, the removal of the trashcan in left corner and a change of lighting, but the moment only happened right that then and there was no time to ponder things. I no longer by that film and now have Kodak T-MAx 100 sitting here in front of me.
Once I go digital, I'll have no excuses for poor quality as I can set the iso speeds right there and have other functions.
The pic of my wife I was trying to be creative with the angle and the various tones/shades of red. But, the lighting on the face is not as good as it should have been and that is not a scan defect.
I appreciate your comments Insane.. May I ask what you would have done differently if you were in my shoes at those moments. Can you tell me if you would have refrained fromt eh flash, increase/decrease aperatures and shutter speeds or changed the angle to make the pictures more desirable. Your input on what you would have done could be educational for future pics. Just for reference, it seems most of these pics had an aperature range of around.. an average of 5.6 and most on P mode.
Laura, as always, thank you for belief in me. It is most appreciated. But surely one of these must not be all that good to you and you might have some ideas on how to improve it.
OK. I gotta play some CS:S.. having withdrawal espisodes.