I used to think I didn't have a style of photo either, until I looked on Instagram where I post my favorite photos and seeing them all side by side, and I can easily see how my photos differ from many other photographers. Many love to have high saturation in their photos, while I tend to have mine give off a more natural look, which goes alone with a more subdued contrast.
I think NikonGuy meant standing three yards to my right (not left) to cut the houses out. And yeah I agree with him on that. But I shot this with my lens at 10mm which is extremely wide - wanted to capture the view, so I think I probably would've still got them in anyway.
Huh?
Photo looks straight enough to me. Did straighten it in Lightroom but squinting and looking hard it is perhaps a tiny bit off.
Exposure looks fine on my monitor and also Geoff's by the sound of it. Might be that your monitor is quite bright? Slight overexposure is often good on these kinds of shots - makes the water look smoother.
Vignetting was added in post. I usually tend to add vignetting to slightly darken the edges. Just my style. You might not like that, but I do.
There is no discolouration. You weren't there on the day but honestly (hand on heart) that shot was taken at about midday and the light was starting to go dark. It was also taken on a beach and the cliffs were blocking the sunlight, so the light was a similar 'cool' tone as you see in the photo. Granted, I altered the white balance a bit and added some blue tones to make it a little cooler, but it did look a little like that.
Clearly you didn't because I was crouched on the ground. Look at the rocks. Think they'd be that low if I just stood up and shot? I usually tend to crouch down.
I don't think going vertical would've helped at all. This is a landscape shot after all. Also not a huge fan of shooting vertically. Just me I guess, maybe you like shooting portrait/vertical.
Evident from the fact that I seem to remember you telling me on the Camera Forum that you got rid of your D3100 and upgraded to a D7100 purely because you didn't want to edit? And also having a huge go at me because I edit my photos? But it seems like you're editing now which is good - a sign of progression.
Thanks mate. I think that's how everybody, including you with your FujiFilm if I remember correctly, started out.
Anyways... Some of these might be repeats, but they are my personal favorite photos that I've shot recently.
Morning on Mt. Washington by Geoff Johnson., on Flickr
Above the Clouds by Geoff Johnson., on Flickr
The ONLY reason I said tripod is because A, easier to get straight, but the main reason I said tripod is because I said f/22. Your shutter speed was already at 120th. at f/22, the ONLY way you would get to HOLD your camera is by bumping iso way up, and the D3200 does not have the best noise handling. So If you would have used a tripod you could have possible been straighter, AND you could have used f/22 at iso 100 keeping noise way down. Dont be going through what I say and taking it out of context please. Also, I have not asked for people to buy anything for sometimes, look at the date of the photos where that is. Also, Yes I am now a " local " professional in your terms because yes I am getting hired for all kinda of shoots. Also, yes I'm looking where the rocks are, and when I mean low I mean like camera tilted up a little and being just inches of the ground. And i NEVER said ANYTHING EVER about EVER selling my 3100 and getting the 7100 because I didn't want to edit, WHAT? Are we now going with lies? And no, it is quite over exposed. A lot of people purposely lightly over expose, but in a way that you can still see details. Also yes there is discoloration caused by the vignetting. It goes quite far to the middle of the photo because it is so large. It creates a blue tint over most of the image. When I say colors are messed up its because between the vastly over exposed sky and vignetting, you have 2 very strong tone changes. I could give 2 craps less how any shoots and their style. I'm saying this over the stand point that if you ever wanted to sell a photo such as this, it would never ever get to any professional company. They have strict guidelines as to have a photo has to be, and this photo would most likely not even be accepted on dreamstine.com. I know there are no " rules " to photography in general. But in the professional business there is. And Jason on his flickr saying photography is his passion but yet he seems to refuse to make any effort to better himself, but rather keep thinking hes doing great with auto mode, raw, and lightroom. He can like it that's all good and fine, anyone can like it that's good and fine. But i'm pointing out what I would change if I would have shot it and used it for professional use. Oh, almost forgot. You should SERIOUSLY consider going and checking how may landscape photographers go vertical semi often. There are so many way vertical can help. And in that scene I see at least 5 vertical shots that would be amazing. Shoot how you like, but whether people like the style or not, if you really want to move on in photography and want to ever move to a professional audience, well that's a while away at the rate you don't want to change. The photos on my 500px btw are coming down because they were tablet edits and I'll have PS soon again where I can drop the noise.Thanks guys. :good:
I think NikonGuy meant standing three yards to my right (not left) to cut the houses out. And yeah I agree with him on that. But I shot this with my lens at 10mm which is extremely wide - wanted to capture the view, so I think I probably would've still got them in anyway.
Huh?
OK so your D7100 has a horizon meter. That's excellent. Yes, I do struggle with holding the camera straight, that's me - not the camera. Saying that because I have a D3200 (that doesn't have a horizon meter) I must therefore always use a tripod when shooting is ridiculous.
Photo looks straight enough to me. Did straighten it in Lightroom but squinting and looking hard it is perhaps a tiny bit off.
Exposure looks fine on my monitor and also Geoff's by the sound of it. Might be that your monitor is quite bright? Slight overexposure is often good on these kinds of shots - makes the water look smoother.
Vignetting was added in post. I usually tend to add vignetting to slightly darken the edges. Just my style. You might not like that, but I do.
There is no discolouration. You weren't there on the day but honestly (hand on heart) that shot was taken at about midday and the light was starting to go dark. It was also taken on a beach and the cliffs were blocking the sunlight, so the light was a similar 'cool' tone as you see in the photo. Granted, I altered the white balance a bit and added some blue tones to make it a little cooler, but it did look a little like that.
Clearly you didn't because I was crouched on the ground. Look at the rocks. Think they'd be that low if I just stood up and shot? I usually tend to crouch down.
10mm focal length may also be making you think that I stood up - makes the rocks look a little higher than they perhaps were (I guess?) but unless you think I'm about 3 feet tall then I think it's obvious to see that the rocks are quite low so I might have been crouching, right?
I don't think going vertical would've helped at all. This is a landscape shot after all. Also not a huge fan of shooting vertically. Just me I guess, maybe you like shooting portrait/vertical.
Evident from the fact that I seem to remember you telling me on the Camera Forum that you got rid of your D3100 and upgraded to a D7100 purely because you didn't want to edit? And also having a huge go at me because I edit my photos? But it seems like you're editing now which is good - a sign of progression.
Thanks mate. I think that's how everybody, including you with your FujiFilm if I remember correctly, started out.
And may I remind you that the difference between an amateur and a professional is that a professional gets paid. There is no difference in the quality of the work they do - just the money.
I could be wrong but you are not a professional and therefore you are also a 'hobbyist'. And I am guessing that because you keep on asking people to buy your work on 500px you aren't selling as many as you'd like to?
Geoff, these are two are lovely! :good:
100% agree.
Clearly Dale has seen over the years that I like to add vignetting which makes my photos recognisable to him. And I've seen that Dale has his own style too which I really like but thanks to that I can recognise that they are his photos. I have a friend who tends to add quite a lot of magenta tone to his photos. Most photographers tend to have a certain style.
Right gonna buy a Sigma 17-50 f/2.8 tomorrow - time to replace the kit lens (which is not always auto-focusing now) and get a lens that's good in low light. Watch this space for some slightly wonky, low light photos shot hand-held with vignetting added in Lightroom taken in auto mode! :good:
Why do you think he has to shoot at f/22? As I said earlier, the peak IQ of most lenses is around f/8-f/14. Granted f/22 would allow for more of the photo to be in focus, the areas in focus will be softer than if shot at f/8-f/14.
Blue Sky by Geoff Johnson., on Flickr
I don't see the lake
Went for a hike around a lake... took a shot of the sky...
Lovely lighting. I like how the mountains look quite dark against that warm light! Looks very peaceful too.Went for a quick walk around my town
This is a very old picture I took with a not so good camera and just now thought I would spice it up a bit by mixing it with a picture I took of the moon during the day:
There was actually alot of noise from the low quality camera, however the noise doesnt really show in the bright white clouds and the picture I overlayed for the sky was taken with my Nikon so it was much higher quality. So all in all, I think I effectively increased the IQ of the picture
And this is another picture I decided to add to. Thought I would make use of my lightning pictures, though they arnt very good. This was the only picture I had that I thought could use a nice bolt:
