Regular disappointment with photos

highlydebased

Basically, I'm quite regularly disappointed with the photos I take. I've a Canon Eos 1000. I think the problem is I don't quite know exactly what I'm doing with it (have a general idea but not enough of an idea...) I'm mostly interested in aviation photography.

See here http://www.flickr.com/photos/39896705@N05/ the first few photos are some taken today. They only look half decent after some happy go lucky photoshop. So basically, are there any general tips/comments or tutorials available? It's starting to get to me somewhat now

CabanSail

You could post up a few that you want some analysis on for C&C rather than just a link to a Flickr stream.

There is a lot to think about to make a good photo. You have to consider the light and how it will be recorded with the many options of settings available to you and which lens you will use. You also have to work on the composition of the image so that it will work the way you imagine it. All the time you also need to keep in mind your post production workflow so that you have the best data to feed into it to get the result you have in mind.

If you just point the camera and release the shutter without much thought you are more than likely to end up with just record shots.

BlastedGlute

Can you link us to the kind of images you really like, what is it your aspiring to? It'll be easier to get direction on what to do there. Also do you PP any of your work?

BrendanRyan

Yup photography is harder than people think, I think when beginners (not meant to be derogatory or anything) take photographs they expect it to turn out like they've seen photos, you know, like the cliche photograph is expected.

I just had a quick look at your aircraft photography on flickr, I like the title you need to go in circles to make interesting photography, shoot, research see what other people are doing, figure what you can change and shoot again and so on!

I found this photographer a while back who I think will interest you if nothing else, http://www.jeffreymilstein.com/Portfolios.html

There's my 2 cents, I wish I could follow my own advice more often I'd be much more productive!

mrSelfDestruct

All your pics are from the same angle. All the lines are horizontal. You should re position. You should maybe do some processing. Xpro style proceesing can turn a bland photo into something quite cool.

H

BlastedGlute

I guess if you love aviation and you want to get that across in your photographs you need to think differently about what you love about it. I love women but sometimes just a shot of her hand clenched against her chest is enough to signify an emotion or intent. I don't mean to sound too phallic or whatever but the jet emission is quite awesome on passanager airlines like this. Perhaps you can get closer, or get a deeper zoom, have a cool cropped image of the jet engine with that natural heat blast blur on show. Can I ask are any of your images cropped here? And what mp is your camera. Because if you have large versions of these you could crop the full size and then resize with just those elements showing. PP would be nice to boost contrast and saturation. Tinker around with your levels to really make that white nice and clean and bright and reduce the highlights so you dont blow out the image too much.

challengemaster

I think you need to realise that the kind of photography you're doing isn't exactly one that can yield extraordinary results. Especially from viewing areas like at dublin airport. If you really want to take breathtaking images of aircraft, i firmly believe you need an all access pass to go wherever you need to, and tbh a lot of the time, you really need to be in the air as well.

So I wouldn't get your expectations too high on what to expect from aviation photography


If you're not happy with the hit rate you're getting (ie. ratio of keepers to trash), it might be because of shutter speed. Obviously, aircraft travel quite fast, so you need a very high shutter speed to catch them as a stationary object. Realistically, the best thing to do is experiment and see the minimum shutter speed needed to freeze them. It might be 1/200, it might be 1/500. Once you know, just have the camera in TV mode, set the shutter speed to slightly higher than the minimum, set the ISO accordingly to light conditions, set autofocus mode to AI SERVO and click away.

highlydebased

To be honest my main disappointment is with the quality of the photos- not that they are not spectacular because that's not what I'm trying to achieve. My main problem is having the camera configured correctly (biggest challenge) and photoshop (not so big challenge)

No, don't do PP or Xpro etc, don't feel that's what I'm after

PopeBuckfastXVI

highlydebased wrote: »

To be honest my main disappointment is with the quality of the photos- not that they are not spectacular because that's not what I'm trying to achieve. My main problem is having the camera configured correctly (biggest challenge) and photoshop (not so big challenge)

No, don't do PP or Xpro etc, don't feel that's what I'm after

What do you think is wrong with them?

highlydebased

PopeBuckfastXVI wrote: »

What do you think is wrong with them?

Nothing wrong with them, but they're not the type of image I want.

All i want are clean, quality images like these...

http://www.flickr.com/photos/axel_j/5850327990/in/contacts/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/shanair/5845793933/in/contacts/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/n707pm/5825744818/in/contacts/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/n707pm/5825159099/in/contacts/

etc

PopeBuckfastXVI

I can't really see the difference, sorry!

Zascar

Dude I don;t think your photos are all that bad! The aircraft ones do little for me but some of your others are pretty good. What lens do you have? The unfortunate thing about photography is that without the right equipment you really are at a significant disadvantage of a professional with all the top gear. Having a top quality telephoto lens will make it a lot easier to get great photos. Of course the photographer/eye is massively important but its very hard to take magazine standard photos with cheap gear

5uspect

Also struggling to see a difference. Ultimately they're just pictures of glorified buses (I'm an Aerodynamicist btw so it's not like I dislike planes ).

You clearly lack confidence with your tools. You should sit down and watch some Photoshop tutorials and figure out how to best use your camera. Get to grips with the histogram and how you can manipulate it to give things more punch and more contrasty.

FoxT

OP - I think your photos are pretty good! Based on your location & lighting , I would say they are about as good as can be got.

You may find it helpful to shoot RAW - can you do that? You can then process the RAW image with a program like Raw Therapee (free, but you need to read the manual) .

This helps with very high-contrast subjects.

All the best

-FoxT

Monasette

Don't be to downhearted - I don't think there is much wrong with your pictures at all. I think I understand what you are trying to achieve. Looking at the pictures that you referred to [as the sort of pictures that you would like to take], they appear to be taken from either a closer position or with a much more powerful lens. The end result is a main subject that stands out more sharply from the background. Your images show jets that were photographed from a greater distance - as a result, they become part of the background.

Assuming you cannot easily get closer to the jets in any of the main airports, why not try one of the regional airports - I live in Galway and the boundary fence is close to either end of the runway [granted , there aren't that many planes taking off from Galway and there may be even less after the summer]. Another approach might be to pan the camera as the planes are moving, blurring the background.

It is a pity that the Salthill airshow is no longer a summer fixture - everybody had the same access and you don't really need very fancy equipment at all to get a good shot.

happy shooting

challengemaster

Much to my surprise, the ones you've linked to were taken without using tele-zooms. Infact, most seem to be under 70mm... which means those guys were seriously close to the planes.

Freddie59

Just looking at the other photos you posted. My two cents:

1. The other guy is using a faster shutter speed (1/640) and a higher ISO (200). You can see a blur on the nearby trees in your shots - maybe because the SS is not fast enough? These planes are obviously hitting the ground at speed.

2. He's using a 50D.

3. I stand corrected here, but I'd say he's also using some kind of filter on the lens.

4. He's done some PP, including sharpening and increasing saturation.

5. He's using AE instead of M mode.

In fairness that might all be bollocks:D, but it might help! Experiment with the different settings.

K_user

Highlydebased most of what I’d like to say has been point out already – and sorry about the long post but I do understand where you are coming from.

Personally I believe in setting a target, one that isn’t achievable just yet, but something that can be worked on as a project, over a period of time that suits you.

Aviation is what you are interested in. It’s a difficult subject, mainly due to current security issues. But don’t let that put you off, there are many photographers out there that haven’t found what they “love” to shoot yet, so in that sense you are ahead.

The first thing to do is to get comfortable with your equipment. Mainly on how it works, what it can do and how you can use it in the field. I know the feel of my camera backwards, I can often change its settings without looking at down and that’s important when you are out and about.

I also have a “fixed” point to start at, when I switch the camera off I always try to leave it in Aperture mode, F5.6 approx depending on the lens, white balance set to shade, in RAW. From that point I can comfortably change the settings quickly once I switch it on.

I think all of the above is important when you are trying to photograph something as fast and as a plane, something that isn’t going to wait around for you to carefully compose the image.

The next step is to research what others are doing, where they are going, what they are using. Its important not to get disheartened at this stage, you will get jealous, but everyone has to start somewhere. And it’s an easy bet that those you are jealous of are jealous of someone else…

Then comes the “fun” part. Scout your locations, vantage points. Figure out if you want photographs of the plane landing, taking off, in the air, from the side, from underneath. As Monasette has already pointed out the Galway airport is perfect for this sort of thing, you can stand on the side of the road and snap away as the plane flies right over your head! In fact I’ve always been tempted to go out and catch a light trail of a plane landing at night…

From what I can see the biggest difference in what you have already taken and what you’d like to have, is access. Getting close. http://www.flickr.com/photos/axel_j/5850327990/is a perfect example of this. Clean lines, uncluttered, up close. So I’d start looking for ways to get that sort of “closeness”. I’d also look into the sort of lenses, filters, PP work, that would give you the finished product that you want.

In the end its all about practice and access. And if its something that you enjoy that’s great, it makes things easier. Projects take time, so don’t let it get to you.

OldGoat

challengemaster wrote: »

Much to my surprise, the ones you've linked to were taken without using tele-zooms. Infact, most seem to be under 70mm... which means those guys were seriously close to the planes.

Got these with a 50mm (on a crop).

highlydebased

Thanks for the comments.

As I've said it's not the "creativity" of the photos, vantage points etc that I'm disappointed with. It's the actual technical quality. So basically it's the camera i've setup incorrectly etc etc.

5uspect

But you're not really helping us help you when you don't tell us what it is about the quality that you don't like. Most people here say they look fine.

What exactly about them don't you like? The colour, the contrast, the focus, motion blur...

highlydebased

5uspect wrote: »

But you're not really helping us help you when you don't tell us what it is about the quality that you don't like. Most people here say they look fine.

What exactly about them don't you like? The colour, the contrast, the focus, motion blur...

All of those...people with an exact same camera are able to produce far superior looking images. For example photos on the likes of airliners.net - basically that's the standard I'm trying to achieve.

K_user

highlydebased wrote: »

Thanks for the comments.

As I've said it's not the "creativity" of the photos, vantage points etc that I'm disappointed with. It's the actual technical quality. So basically it's the camera i've setup incorrectly etc etc.

You'd have to be more specific than that I'm afraid. What settings do you usually use? Do you leave everything on manual? Do you use RAW? What lenses do you use? And what exactly disappoints you? Is it your focusing, your DOF, are you looking for more of a blurred background?

For example, the way I see it is that planes are usually white in colour, with green grass below them and, in Ireland at least, grey skies above. If you are leaving it in auto then your images will lack punch and contrast. But using RAW, sticking on a filter, setting your white balance - which can be adjusted in PP - and controlling the aperture or speed settings will bring about a instant change in your results.

K_user

highlydebased wrote: »

All of those...people with an exact same camera are able to produce far superior looking images. For example photos on the likes of airliners.net - basically that's the standard I'm trying to achieve.

Excellent, thats exactly the sort of thing that I was talking about in one of my previous posts. And I also mentioned not to get disheartened. Alot of these people will have had alot of experience and have honed their skill set and equipment. Not to mention for every photograph they upload they have hundreds that will never see the light of day!

Speaking of which the first thing I noticed was "blue skies". That makes a difference and its not something that we can control. The rest is down to getting the punch out of the colours, which is all to do with camera settings, PP work and practice.

K_user

http://cdn-www.airliners.net/aviation-photos/middle/7/3/1/1931137.jpg
http://cdn-www.airliners.net/aviation-photos/middle/0/8/0/1922080.jpg
http://cdn-www.airliners.net/aviation-photos/middle/9/7/0/1922079.jpg
Here are a few from Dublin airport and as you can see they have taken with a blue sky, it makes a difference in making the plane stand out.

5uspect

One thing you should get to grips with is the image histogram.

Then read about how you can manipulate this to control contrast and brightness using things like curves in Photoshop. Once you master these you'll feel a lot more confident in your post processing work.

Danbo!

Taking images of planes at Dublin airport rarely results in stunning photos. There are only a small number of places to get shots from and these are rubbish. In Manchester, which has a lot more interesting traffic, they actually have a viewing park with a raised platform. Anyway, you say its not the vantage points or composition, its the technical quality, but I do think that vantage points can help, along with the weather. Its rare enough to get a nice blue sky at Dublin, and when you do the photos seem a lot nicer.

I like your images on your Flickr page, but taking a shot of parked/taxiing plane can only be interesting to a certain level. For example, this is a great shot colour/composition etc.. wise, but the overcast sky takes away from it. Here's a shot I took at DUB when I was lucky enough to catch a blue sky, no post processing.



Or if the sky is grey and dull, process the hell out of it to make it more interesting



With Aviation photography I find its all about shutter speed and a good zoom. Shoot as low as 1/2000th of a second between 100-300mm for good photos. Heres a shot at 1/2000 which was initially quite boring, but playing with the levels and colours made a bit more interesting



Another thing to keep in mind is - forget about Airliners.net for a while, they are very, very stringent with allowing photos on their site if theyre not up to standard, which I've found hard to believe because there is a lot of rubbish on there too.

Id keep practising at dublin airport, using shutter priority or fully manual, getting used to panning on take off or landing and just keep filling up memory cards and learn from your mistakes. Then maybe hit a few airshows and get some interesting shots. Another thing about airliners is there is a LOT of post processing added to most of the photos.

Finally, have you considered taking photos at night? If you search long exposure on airliners there are some amazing shots. I got quite lucky when I took this as the plane was nice enough to turn and stay in the shot



Bear in mind that i've posted 4 pics in this post and for each of them I've a gigabyte of greyed out, blurry, boring images. With aviation you can just get lucky but I have spent hours at the old airport road and come home with nothing

OldGoat

The light trail is lovely. It's something I've been trying to catch at Dublin airport but dismal results so far.

highlydebased

Thanks all for the replies, I took them all into consideration. Got some far better photos (IMO anyway) today as a result

http://www.flickr.com/photos/39896705@N05/5877758060/in/photostream
http://www.flickr.com/photos/39896705@N05/5877196147/in/photostream
http://www.flickr.com/photos/39896705@N05/5877754594/in/photostream


Thanks guys!