[fingerz]

Few shots taken on my lunch break today:


Took loads of squirrel shots but managed to balls-up the focus on almost all of them. Of the few that were focused on the eyes, this was the best. Although the angle is still crap.



Tried to use the flash on some pigeons but they kept flying away. This was just a normal shot but I quite liked the contrast between the moving wings and the still head/back.



Not much explanation required here. It's a sign on a wall. I liked it. I shot it.



Taken last night. My mate Ben wearing shades indoors because he was drunk.

[Matty]

i dunno why, but the pidgeons is really good!

[CT]

Originally Posted by EosD

i dunno why, but the pidgeons is really good!

I think so too. Did Ben get those shades off Dame Edna?

[fingerz]

Originally Posted by EosD

i dunno why, but the pidgeons is really good!

Thank you.

I'm starting to recognise that feeling you get when you look at a shot and go to hit the delete button but something stops you. You don't think it's a great shot but you don't want to just hit delete straight away either. I always used to look at them for a minute and then delete anyway. Now I recognise that something inside me likes it, despite it not being a showstopper.

This was one of those shots.

As for the sunglasses, god knows. I'd like to think they were from a charity shop but they were probably expensive. Either that or they belonged to his other half.

[CT]

Originally Posted by fingerz

As for the sunglasses, god knows. I'd like to think they were from a charity shop but they were probably expensive. Either that or they belonged to his other half.

I think living in London has a lot to answer for.

The pic of Ben is very good too mate IMO. I'd crop it on the left to a square format and clone out that white oof blob at top left and the two flash reflections on his specs.

[fingerz]

Originally Posted by CT

...and the two flash reflections on his specs.

I didn't use flash

It was the 50mm f/1.8 wide open. The bar was dark but I got him to stand in the light. I think it was about 1/16 shutter speed. Not sure of the ISO but I know I didn't ramp it. Probably 400, that was the highest I used all night.

[CT]

Originally Posted by fingerz

I didn't use flash

Duh! Obvious really, looking at it again. I'd still touch out those two white spots on the lenses. I love available light stuff like that, I'm just crazy for it, which is why I bought the 50mm 1.4. I just need a 1:1 sensor to take full advantage of it's speed and get it's full FOV.

[Steve]

Originally Posted by fingerz

I'm starting to recognise that feeling you get when you look at a shot and go to hit the delete button but something stops you. You don't think it's a great shot but you don't want to just hit delete straight away either. I always used to look at them for a minute and then delete anyway. Now I recognise that something inside me likes it, despite it not being a showstopper.

My best advice is to leave your shots a few days before re-visiting them, you will find more that you like on a second visit as your clear memory of what the scene was like when it was shot will have faded and not be so clear.

Time and again this has worked for me and some of the shots that I nearly deleted have since gone on to be recieved well.

[fingerz]

When it comes to low available light photography, non-SLR cameras have a distinct advantage in being able to get the lens much closer to the film/sensor. The DOF you seem to be able to get on Leicas (sorry, but all the street photoblogs I check seem to be people that use them), even in low light, is phenomenal.

They're just stupidly sharp. It actually makes me want to cry. Some of the stuff on www.jbuhler.com in the photoblog section just depresses me. I go out, take a shot which I think is super-sharp, get home, check his blog and he's posted something where you can see every tiny detail on someone's suit.

I'm tellin' ya, if Leica ever make a camera which is exactly like their film rangefinders but with a sensor (and memory card) instead of film, I'm gonna be all over it like a rash. I don't care how much it costs.

Edit - thanks for the advice Steve. Gonna give that a go.

[dod]

Pigeon is my favourite out of those, pity about the bush in behind them though, just makes it slightly messy, but still great timing.

[Steve]

I read and understand your point about Leicas but have to say that your results are not as sharp as they could be. Don't take this the wrong way but I have seen and produced much sharper images with DSLR's than you are showing here, I still believe that you are not yet getting the best from your equipment.

Alot of your stuff seems to be in low light with slow shutter speeds, this will not allow for good focus lock by the camera and unless you are a human tripod and your subjects stationary, then they will not be pin sharp. This would be the same for a Leica.

Some of it could also be down to your post processing, a sharp image does lose some detail when it is reduced for web use, it is very important that the sharpening of all images for web use is done AFTER it has been reduced to the web size.

Not having a go, just trying to help mate.

[milou]

Jamey - these with yer new 20D? Really like the wall photo.

[fingerz]

No offence taken. Proper criticism is always welcome. On the subject of sharpening (because it's the quickest answer), I always do the unsharp mask as the very last step before saving. Learnt that a while back.

You're right that much of the stuff I do is low light and slow shutter speeds. It just seems to be that those are the conditions prevalent for the locations/subjects I prefer to shoot. And since I'm not very skilled with the flash (or it's inappropriate, eg street stuff) I either use the 50mm wide open and sacrifice DOF or I use the kit lens and sacrifice shutter speed.

There have been a few hand-held things I've done that I was happy with, from a sharpness point of view (example 1 / example 2 / example 3) but most of them were down to the light being good.

[fingerz]

Originally Posted by milou

Jamey - these with yer new 20D? Really like the wall photo.

Yep. Thanks. Actually that one's another example of sharpness I'm happy with. But getting a wall sharp is **** easy. It's not going anywhere. Getting people sharp, especially when they don't know you're there and keep moving, is a different ball game.

[Steve]

Originally Posted by fingerz

No offence taken. Proper criticism is always welcome.

There have been a few hand-held things I've done that I was happy with, from a sharpness point of view (example 1 / example 2 / example 3) but most of them were down to the light being good.

And all three are stationary???

Your Joe pic is OOF because of the shutter speed..no one part is totally in focus however I still believe that there is still some more latitude for futher sharpening in the original.



Thats working with you highly compressed image.

I know you have a great hate of noise in photos but having caught a great shot, totally in focus but with a small amount of noise is still preferable to missing a great shot that can't be appreciated due to it being out of focus.

I would direct my attention to firstly learning the new 20D that you have just bought, secondly as its a 20D don't be as worried about the noise as it is much more capable of producing noise free images at higher ISO's, thirdly see
what you can do to futher improve your sharpening techniques during post processing and finally have a look at the available noise reduction software packages/addons.

Buying more equipment is not the right way forward until you have mastered and can get the best from what you laready own. It's not always the case but with equipment of that standard this statement is true.

I hope that helps a little