Evaluate My Photo......What Do You See?

[transam]

You lot, stop beating about the bush , it's a crap photo.

[theblether]

You lot, stop beating about the bush , it's a crap photo.

I'm not posting a bush beating photo, I'll get banned

[endure]

I live next door to guy who's a professional photographer. He does stuff for the local newspapers, local government and schools. I asked him what kit he uses expecting him to reel off a lost of the latest kit. He uses a Nikon D100 which he paid £1000 for 10 years ago and a D200.He's invited me round to see how he works. Looking forward to it.

[endure]

He's just recommended his son buy a D100 from Ebay rather than spend loads on a new camera. Are semi-pro cameras still good after 10 years?

[canuckamuck]

I still have a 10 year old digital SLR. It definitely can be used to make useful images. A journalist that has no expectation of his shots becoming larger prints can use one no problem. But things have changed a lot in cameras. Some things are just silly gimmicks, but there has been real improvement on image quality from those early models. I can tell an image from my older DSLR simply from the way it handles bright spots and skin tones. Also color saturation has improved. On top of that the new cameras are quite a bit smarter and they allow average photographers take much better photos then they could with the old equipment.

Anyhow it makes no sense to get a camera that old, there are plenty of 3 and 4 year old cameras out there and deals can be had. And those cameras are way better than a 10 year old D100.

[transam]

I still have a 10 year old digital SLR. It definitely can be used to make useful images. A journalist that has no expectation of his shots becoming larger prints can use one no problem. But things have changed a lot in cameras. Some things are just silly gimmicks, but there has been real improvement on image quality from those early models. I can tell an image from my older DSLR simply from the way it handles bright spots and skin tones. Also color saturation has improved. On top of that the new cameras are quite a bit smarter and they allow average photographers take much better photos then they could with the old equipment.

Anyhow it makes no sense to get a camera that old, there are plenty of 3 and 4 year old cameras out there and deals can be had. And those cameras are way better than a 10 year old D100.

SLR eh, good rifle, better than the M16 in the bush.

[MaxwellsDemon]

I still have a 10 year old digital SLR. It definitely can be used to make useful images. A journalist that has no expectation of his shots becoming larger prints can use one no problem. But things have changed a lot in cameras. Some things are just silly gimmicks, but there has been real improvement on image quality from those early models. I can tell an image from my older DSLR simply from the way it handles bright spots and skin tones. Also color saturation has improved. On top of that the new cameras are quite a bit smarter and they allow average photographers take much better photos then they could with the old equipment.

Anyhow it makes no sense to get a camera that old, there are plenty of 3 and 4 year old cameras out there and deals can be had. And those cameras are way better than a 10 year old D100.

SLR eh, good rifle, better than the M16 in the bush.

On that note, I just realized my camera can shoot faster than an AK-47

Not an M16 though, whose ROF can reach about 15 fps.

[Tywais]

He's just recommended his son buy a D100 from Ebay rather than spend loads on a new camera. Are semi-pro cameras still good after 10 years?

Shutter life time

Shutter life expectancy

Of course, besides the above, how well the camera was handled and the environment it may have been in such as rain, etc. Guess e-bay has a return policy?

[transam]

I still have a 10 year old digital SLR. It definitely can be used to make useful images. A journalist that has no expectation of his shots becoming larger prints can use one no problem. But things have changed a lot in cameras. Some things are just silly gimmicks, but there has been real improvement on image quality from those early models. I can tell an image from my older DSLR simply from the way it handles bright spots and skin tones. Also color saturation has improved. On top of that the new cameras are quite a bit smarter and they allow average photographers take much better photos then they could with the old equipment.

Anyhow it makes no sense to get a camera that old, there are plenty of 3 and 4 year old cameras out there and deals can be had. And those cameras are way better than a 10 year old D100.

SLR eh, good rifle, better than the M16 in the bush.

On that note, I just realized my camera can shoot faster than an AK-47

Not an M16 though, whose ROF can reach about 15 fps.

Not fps.

[MaxwellsDemon]

He's just recommended his son buy a D100 from Ebay rather than spend loads on a new camera. Are semi-pro cameras still good after 10 years?

With the way of digital camera technology, unless the d100 is coming in at an absolute bargain (under $200) I would say go for a new entry level body.

As someone who's been shooting through the ranks of Nikon cameras, there's two main factors that differentiate models from each other: one is user-interface, and the other is available technology.

The D100 was a higher-end user-interface being aimed at pros (even though it was a little brother of the D1h/x it was not aimed at the amateur price bracket) so it demands a higher price and you get the benefits of a more comfortable camera with more buttons and easier control.

However, the technology at the time was severely limited compared to what's available today, and that is reflected in the image quality - a 6mp image that only looked good up to ISO 400 and with low dynamic range.

That's the best they had.

Now the technology for clean, high-res images is cheaper and so Nikon can throw them into entry level bodies. However, they will lack the control and handling of a higher end body. But even in that factor technology is creeping in and improving things like autofocus and framerates in lower end models.

I went from a D2xs (top of the line in 2006) to a D7000 (mid-amateur in 2010) because the D7000 was technologically superior in many ways. And while the handling was slightly less than ideal, the ultimate images coming out were stunning.

So I would recommend a lower-level body that's newer over the D100. Luckily Nikon is doing what Canon was and releasing new bodies on the amateur level extremely quickly, so a D3100 is a great pickup, being technically outdated even though it came out what 2 years ago?

[Kan Win]

I believe in the photographic principle of 'just av a go'......and on percentage basis....one should be a gooden

Sure and good luck once you have that one "samsiam". Please post it on here will you

Win

Edited June 25, 2012 by Kan Win

[samsiam]

I believe in the photographic principle of 'just av a go'......and on percentage basis....one should be a gooden

Sure and good luck once you have that one "samsiam". Please post it on here will you

Win

I have many...thanks.

[Kan Win]

I believe in the photographic principle of 'just av a go'......and on percentage basis....one should be a gooden

Sure and good luck once you have that one "samsiam". Please post it on here will you

Win

I have many...thanks.

So what are you waiting for, Post them in a new thread then, please

Win

[samsiam]

I believe in the photographic principle of 'just av a go'......and on percentage basis....one should be a gooden

Sure and good luck once you have that one "samsiam". Please post it on here will you

Win

I have many...thanks.

So what are you waiting for, Post them in a new thread then, please

Win

No...you will just make fun of me now....I can feel it.

[Kan Win]

No...you will just make fun of me now....I can feel it.

Sure if we were in the Pubs and Fun Forum, but we are not, we are in the

• → Photography and the Arts
  

so please take a grip of your good self and post one or two of them in a new thread so that we Kan evaluate your works of art

Do you really have the 'alls to do that 'samsiam'

Win

[MaxwellsDemon]

So what are you waiting for, Post them in a new thread then, please

Win

No...you will just make fun of me now....I can feel it.

He might not... But I might!

[samsiam]

No...you will just make fun of me now....I can feel it.

Sure if we were in the Pubs and Fun Forum, but we are not, we are in the

• → Photography and the Arts
  

so please take a grip of your good self and post one or two of them in a new thread so that we Kan evaluate your works of art

Do you really have the 'alls to do that 'samsiam'

Win

I can spot reverse pyhsc....psyco....thinking a mile off...it does not work on me.

[theblether]

theblether has an announcement to make, theblether hereby announces that he is an idiot. theblether has spent the equivalent of 10 years in front of computer screens, and has only just found out how to copy an image.

To celebrate this new found skill, theblether would like to share some more photos. theblether is going to ask his Mum for a How To Use A Computer Correctly class for his Christmas.

This photo, the light breaking through the Jungle, Bako National Park, Borneo

Baan Chang Elephant Park, Mae Rim, I got this printed on canvas and the right hand side seems to bright, any tips?

Not telling you where I liked the idea of the ferry in the foreground, my sister said that was a mistake, some other people commented on the concrete base of the Opera House, they hadn't seen it before, did I make a mistake?

Suva, Fiji.......I got this printed on canvas and my mother immediately stole it. What do you think? Tips please

Edited June 25, 2012 by theblether

[Tywais]

Baan Chang Elephant Park, Mae Rim, I got this printed on canvas and the right hand side seems to bright, any tips?

A quick edit in Photoshop to improve the contrasts and blown highlights. I first used the contrast control to do a general adjustment, then the level control to work on the highlights ( the over exposed area) then the burn tool only on the right blown highlight section. So much info is gone though due to the overexpose it has no color information remaining. The color can be guessed at with a little more work.

This is just a very quick and dirty edit and not too much time spent to make it more even.

//edit - just realized you may be asking for tips during taking the photo and not the editing process?

[Tywais]

The light rays through the jungle foliage is quite nice. The flower at the bottom, a little shallower depth of field for better bokeh may help but may be limited to the camera's lens ability.

[theblether]

Baan Chang Elephant Park, Mae Rim, I got this printed on canvas and the right hand side seems to bright, any tips?

A quick edit in Photoshop to improve the contrasts and blown highlights. I first used the contrast control to do a general adjustment, then the level control to work on the highlights ( the over exposed area) then the burn tool only on the right blown highlight section. So much info is gone though due to the overexpose it has no color information remaining. The color can be guessed at with a little more work.

This is just a very quick and dirty edit and not too much time spent to make it more even.

//edit - just realized you may be asking for tips during taking the photo and not the editing process?

A bit of both Tywais, I can see a massive difference already with what you have done. The canvas print came out well except the kind of void where it was excessively bright to the right hand side, you salvaged it. This next photo didn't come out at all well due to the void in the background.........

The canvas print was borderline ruined due to the lack of contrast in the background, it never occurred to me to use photoshop to sort it out. It just goes to show how naive I am in matters of digital photography, so rather than just point the camera and shoot, I'll need to learn a lot more

Edited June 25, 2012 by theblether

[cdnvic]

Not telling you where I liked the idea of the ferry in the foreground, my sister said that was a mistake, some other people commented on the concrete base of the Opera House, they hadn't seen it before, did I make a mistake?

No, it would have been less interesting without some movement in it.

[theblether]

Thanks very much cdnvic, I thought that too, I also thought it was a handy reference point to give some scale, but from a purely personal point of view, I was quite amazed at how vibrant Sydney Harbour was.

To the right hand side of the photo is Circular Quay, which is the Quay that the original settlers landed at, I was fascinated at how busy it was with ferry traffic, and even though it was the birth place of modern Australia, it was living history. To that extent the photo was a personal note to remind myself of the ambience and history of the Quay.

[David48]

The photo above of theblethers is interesting to me for other reasons that I am Australian.

From a technical viewpoint of positioning/framing the photo it seems to me to present 2 (or more) horizon lines.

One where the concrete base of the Opera House meets the Harbour and a wider one when the sky meets the land meets the Harbour.

With multiple (horizon) definition lines like that ... what generally is the 'rule'?

[canuckamuck]

The photo above of theblethers is interesting to me for other reasons that I am Australian.

From a technical viewpoint of positioning/framing the photo it seems to me to present 2 (or more) horizon lines.

One where the concrete base of the Opera House meets the Harbour and a wider one when the sky meets the land meets the Harbour.

With multiple (horizon) definition lines like that ... what generally is the 'rule'?

If I am concerned with a horizon line I only consider the actual horizon, because when your camera is level the photo is more likely to make sense visually, even if your are askew to an object like the opera house. Blether's photo works the actual horizon was respected and not the base of the Opera house. However I do not feel it is necessary to always consider the horizon.

[samsiam]

I think Blether backside is just above these trees...

[Tywais]

The canvas print was borderline ruined due to the lack of contrast in the background, it never occurred to me to use photoshop to sort it out. It just goes to show how naive I am in matters of digital photography, so rather than just point the camera and shoot, I'll need to learn a lot more

I believe a polarizing filter would been a good choice in the above photo for the cruise ship photo. I used Photoshop and simulated the use of a polarizing filter to see how it would come out. Difficult to simulate a polarizing filter after the fact though.

[Tywais]

And another Photoshop technique to simulate polarizing. These were quick and dirty and didn't spend too much time refining them.

[Tywais]

BTW, if you do not have Photoshop, this is a very good alternative with most of the same features but is open source (free) - Gimp

[theblether]

BTW, if you do not have Photoshop, this is a very good alternative with most of the same features but is open source (free) - Gimp

Excellent stuff Tywais, I can see a difference right away. Thanks very much, I'm going to play around a bit with photoshop and Gimp to see if I can salvage some of my rougher shots.

@SamSiam, Have you ever thought of using that vivid imagination for something.........useful????