Reading mode: Light Dark

They just don't look as good as others... ? (Help)

Go to last post
J

John Markham388495

Active member
Messages
55
Reaction score
0
Location
US
Hi,

I'm new to digital photography, but have been practising loads the past few weeks.

I have a 350D with kit lens plus Canon 50mm 2.8 and Sigma 10-20. Today, i took some pictures of some beech huts (see below). I shoot in RAW, and have spent sometime converting them..

The problem is, I simply cannot get my pictures to look as clear and as colourful as others I see on these forums? Is it down to a) the camera & lense b) my DPP lack of knowledge or c) simply me ?

I see so many great shots on this forum, and only wish I could get mine to look half as good !

I would appreciate any comments on the pic below and general thoughts on how to improve..



If anyone has the time, and would like the original RAW image to play with.... :)

Thanks in advance

John
 
Well, post processing is to your personal taste.
I took your photo and sharpened a bit more (Photoshop USM 150, .4,0).

I also reduced the highlights just a bit in order to show a little cloud detail. Now if you wanted to add just a little more color saturation, you would end up with something more like you get from a point and shoot camera.

Hang in there, you will make quick progress.


John Markham said:
Hi,

I'm new to digital photography, but have been practising loads the
past few weeks.

I have a 350D with kit lens plus Canon 50mm 2.8 and Sigma 10-20.
Today, i took some pictures of some beech huts (see below). I shoot
in RAW, and have spent sometime converting them..

The problem is, I simply cannot get my pictures to look as clear
and as colourful as others I see on these forums? Is it down to a)
the camera & lense b) my DPP lack of knowledge or c) simply me ?

I see so many great shots on this forum, and only wish I could get
mine to look half as good !

I would appreciate any comments on the pic below and general
thoughts on how to improve..



If anyone has the time, and would like the original RAW image to
play with.... :)

Thanks in advance

John
Click to expand...
--
Galleries: http://www.pbase.com/jon_b
 
...no, seriously, I don't see anything wrong this this except I agree with jgb that it could use some USM. I think it could even use a little more than he mentioned, especially on the slightly larger version that you posted (larger than the one I played with). Try 200/0.3/0, as well as the numbers jgb mentioned.

These colors look good to me and the picture is sharp. The problem is, there is just no color in this sky. That's not your fault though.

--
Andy (Critiques Always Welcome)
FCAS Member #120
http://imageevent.com/ajrphotos
 
...not the camera or the lens.

You have to have good, ussualy from behind light.

Shooting with the sun above you, or in an overcast day will ussualy yeld dull looking pictures.
 
The bright, monotone sky is not helping.

This shot would have looked 100% better with broken clouds or a clear sky. It would also help to take the photo when the sun angle is low (although when it's this cloudy, it wouldn't help much).
AJohn said:
...no, seriously, I don't see anything wrong this this except I
agree with jgb that it could use some USM. I think it could even
use a little more than he mentioned, especially on the slightly
larger version that you posted (larger than the one I played with).
Try 200/0.3/0, as well as the numbers jgb mentioned.

These colors look good to me and the picture is sharp. The problem
is, there is just no color in this sky. That's not your fault
though.

--
Andy (Critiques Always Welcome)
FCAS Member #120
http://imageevent.com/ajrphotos
Click to expand...
--
Galleries: http://www.pbase.com/jon_b
 
...without being able to help it, I shoot some at mid day. The same subjects would be so much nicer when the sun is low like you mention. The light can almost be like magic in the morning and evening.

--
Andy (Critiques Always Welcome)
FCAS Member #120
http://imageevent.com/ajrphotos
 
Hi John,

It's a small world. It looks like I visited the same place as you two weeks ago, Southwold in Suffolk if I'm not mistaken?

I think the only problem with your pictures is the conditions they were taken in. It looks like you had a pretty cloudy white sky and from my meagre experience, I found that the camera just can't produce miracles in this kind of light. The only thing you can do in these situation is avoid including too much sky in your pictures and play with shadow / highlights in PP to bring out a bit of definition in the sky, and a bit of color in the shady areas. Also, make sure the sun (or cloudy sun) is behind you, it makes a hell of a difference.

Luckily for me, I was there on a beautiful day with plenty of sunshine and fluffy clouds (that doesn't happen often to me) so I got rather trigger happy...

I'm sure my PP is not the best, I'm still a beginner, but here are my best shots, taken either with the kit lens or the Sigma 70-300 APO DG.













Learning takes time, but it's great fun when you discover something new

Enjoy!

--
Phil
 
Bogdanel said:
...not the camera or the lens.

You have to have good, ussualy from behind light.
Shooting with the sun above you, or in an overcast day will ussualy
yeld dull looking pictures.
Click to expand...
Or with the sun to the side of you. If the sun is directly in back of you, then you won't see any interesting shadows or textures. But if it is beside you and is low (not too long after sunrise or before sunset), then you will have a lot of interesting shadows and textures. And the light will be warmer.

Pro landscape photogs often scout out a location a day ahead of shooting, and map out when and where the best lighting happens. You can short circuit this process by just paying attention to light when you are doing non-photography related activities. There is no law that say you need to spend the whole time doing nothing except watching light.

You have to be prepared to louse up breakfast and/or dinner. There is no other way.

Wayne
 
You'll have to learn how the SLR system works, and you'll have to learn proper PP techniques and what makes an image good in the field and at the computer.
 
Bogdanel said:
Shooting with the sun above you, or in an overcast day will ussualy
yeld dull looking pictures.
Click to expand...
One can do some things about it, too: one can underexpose half stop or 2/3rd to give depth to shadows and saturate colours (and save sky too), one can increase contrast setting in the camera (if you shoot jpg - with raw you can do it later), one can use a polarizer for improving saturation on reflective colored surfaces.
 




Too much contrast, but it shows what a little (30 seconds) of PP can do!

Do you use Photoshop? Or just DPP?

--
Regards
Mark
 
Hi,

I think that photography is like fishing -- you have to know when and where to go and what you are trying to get. In your case the main problem is "when". I usually take photos in early mornings or evenings when there's good light and good sky.
--
Urs, Casus.
Canon EOS 300D,
18-55 kit, Tamron 28-75/2.8,
EF 50/1.8, Sigma 70-300,
Sigma EF 500 DG Super
 
John Markham388495 said:
I would appreciate any comments on the pic below and general
thoughts on how to improve..
Click to expand...
You picture has nice composition. I see two glaring problems.

The first is the lack of a sky, and regardless of what the sky looked like it is totally your fault. You overexposed the sky to the point where it has lost all color and detail. It is blown out. Dial in some negetive exposure compensation and preserve the highlights. If the dynamic range of the scene is too much for the camera to capture, then shoot two shots, one for the sky, one for the ground, and combine in photoshop. The only other alternative is to come back at a time when the light is not so harsh.

The other thing is post processing. Good post processing can make all the difference. I wrote up this description of my post process technique, and other than replace the sky that is all I did to you photo...

My edit technique:
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1031&message=18079744

Your picture, my edit:



Your picture for reference:
John Markham388495 said:
Click to expand...
--
CityLights
http://www.pbase.com/citylights/favorites
http://www.pbase.com/citylights/favorite_portraits
http://www.pbase.com/citylights/favorite_animals
.
 
In RAW conversion, choose the white house with the eye dropper and it'll give a whole different look.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top