# My horrible photos!



## glymauto (Feb 29, 2008)

Currently got a Sony Cyber-Shot (5.1 mega pixel)

A friend of my gf's borrowed the camera when he went on holiday and I was truly amazed at the quality he managed to achieve with my little pointy-clicky camera. He took shots indoors and outdoors. In the daytime and in the evening. All were much better than anything I've ever managed to get out of it!!

I keep thinking I should get a better camera. But then I keep thinking - if I cant make this one work, how am I going to get a more expensive camera to work?

This is a random photo I pulled off the web - its just a listing on eBay so nothing special and not a 'pro' shot.










This is a photo I took for comparison -










My photos always seem too dark or too bright or hard or too blurry.

Should I be getting better shots than this out of my camera?

I'd love to be able to get some of the beading shots I see posted up and some of the excellent shots I see in the photo section.

What do you guys suggest - Better camera? or more time practising?


----------



## pritesh (Mar 6, 2009)

Are you sure the first image was taken with the same camera? To get a shallow depth of field requires a Large aperture. Most P&S camera dont allow you to change such settings like the aperture or shutter speed unlike DSLR's. This is a good place to learn quite a bit about photography, also check out the sony forum on there to see if any one else has the same camera and see what photos they have produced.


----------



## glymauto (Feb 29, 2008)

Oops!..

Sorry, should have explained a bit more clearly. The fist shot is the sort of pictures my gf's friend came back with off holiday. Nice clean crisp images and everything that should be clear was clear and everything in the backgorund was either 'blurry' (as in the first photo) or really crisp and clear (when he was taking pics of his gf on the slopes).

All I seem to able to get is standard 'pointy-clicky' photos, as in the picture of my house phone. They either look too bleached and hard or just blurry and horrible. Nothing you'd want to put on your mantlepiece of your holiday thats for sure!

I've been so impressed by some of the pics on here and now this friend has sort of spurred me on. If he can get good photos out of my camera then I want to do the same.

I'd love to be able to get up at this level (courtesy Gary-360) but dont know how I'm going to get from here to there!










Stunning photo.


----------



## pritesh (Mar 6, 2009)

With regards to having the background blurry or not blurry that's known as depth of field and is accomplished with different apertures. Would you be able to post the model number of your camera so I can see exactly what setting you your self can change.

Im fairly sure that Gary-360 took that shot with a macro lens but I could be wrong. Again if you look towards the top of the image you can see some of the beading is out of focus, this is where depth of field comes in to play.


----------



## glymauto (Feb 29, 2008)

This is the info on the camera - 

Sony Cyber-Shot 5.1 Mega Pixels

Model: DSC-P93

Sony Lens Optical 3x

f=7.9-23.7mm 1:2.8-5.2


I dont expect to get shots like Gary's out of my little camera but if I can get something half decent this will spur me on to get a decent camera.


----------



## Mike V (Apr 7, 2007)

Are you sure you understand photography mate? Do you know how to avoid hotspots, avoid over exposing things, avoid under exposing things, how to meter the light and choose the correct exposure to achieve your desired photo.


----------



## mattsbmw (Jul 20, 2008)

you need to understand the camera and the shooting conditions.

in your pic the background is dark as is the phone but straight in front of it is a white book. That will trick the cameras meter and make it under expose, try the same pic again with just the phone in the frame, should hopefully be better.


----------



## MaDMaXX (Jun 18, 2008)

Sounds like you don't understand photography, i'd learn how to take pictures with what you have before spending money on a new camera.

You can take crap photo's with the best camera in the world, learn first, then upgrade the camera as your skill increases.


----------



## Gary-360 (Apr 26, 2008)

OK, here's my take on this dilemma. you have a decent enough camera to take decent enough shots and believe it or not, I've seen some point and shoot images that would put a Pro to shame!
There is no harm in using auto, as long as you are able to view EXIF data and learn from it. It has already been pointed out that there is a white book page in your image, this has blown out the lower part of the image. As far as sharpness, I've pasted the EXIF for this shot below, 1/20 sec shutter speed is very slow and induces blur by handshake.

Does this camera have manual operation?

Exposure Time = 1/20"
F Number = F2.8
Exposure Program = Normal program
ISO Speed Ratings = 100
Exif Version = Version 2.2
Date Time Original = 2009-04-10 00:19:29
Date Time Digitized = 2009-04-10 00:19:29
Components Configuration = YCbcr
Compressed Bits Per Pixel = 8
Exposure Bias Value = ±0EV
Max Aperture Value = F2.83
Metering Mode = Pattern
Light Source = unknown
Flash = Flash did not fire, compulsory flash mode
Focal Length = 7.9mm
Maker Note = 1566 Byte
Flashpix Version = Version 1.0
Color Space = sRGB
Exif Image Width = 640
Exif Image Height = 480
Interoperability IFD Pointer = Offset: 6416
File Source = DSC
Scene Type = A directly photographed image
Custom Rendered = Normal process
Exposure Mode = Auto exposure
White Balance = Auto white balance
Scene Capture Type = Normal
Contrast = Normal
Saturation = Normal
Sharpness = Normal


----------



## mattsbmw (Jul 20, 2008)

as a rule of thumb any shutter speed less than 1/125 needs a tripod or you will get camera shake.


----------



## MaDMaXX (Jun 18, 2008)

Learn how to use the self timer set to two seconds or something, buy yourself a little guerilla tripod and see how much sharper your images can be.
I was taking beautifully sharp images with my 5 year old 4 megapixel canon because i was setting up the shot correctly.

If the camera has a P mode, start using that, it give a bit more control over the shot and lets you adjust the exposure compensation for a bit more control over the final shot.


----------



## glymauto (Feb 29, 2008)

Cheers guys,

Its about what I thought. I dont need a new camera - I need to understand how to use this one!

I dont have a clue about photography (as if that wasnt already obvious!) but am keen to learn. I never realised how poor my photo skills were until I saw some of the pictures on this site.

So wheres the best place to start for a total beginner? Anybody got any links to photography websites I can get more info for setting up the shot, lighting the shot etc etc?

MadMaxx - The camera does have a 'P' setting so I'll try that and see what happens. I dont have a tripod but I'll try it off a table or something stable and see what happens.

Been hunting high and low for the camera box (and instruction manual!) and cant find it anywhere :wall: I'll see if I can get the instructions for it off the web.

In 'P' mode (no flash) camera supported on a box









In 'P' mode (with flash) camera supported on a box









I see what you guys mean mean about removing the paper and supporting the camera.


----------



## Maxtor (Feb 23, 2007)

Much better mate, don't get discouraged with it I am sure you are on the right track. :thumb:

This site seems to be a popular one.

Happy snapping....

Maxtor.


----------



## Gary-360 (Apr 26, 2008)

Much better!

As Maxtor says, pop along to Talk Photography, you'll get plenty help and advice.

Gary


----------



## MaDMaXX (Jun 18, 2008)

Now you can see how much a flash affects the quality of the picture, ideally you never want to use the flash unless it's for flash fill of shadows when outdoors or very dark photography.

I would say you can still get better on the picture with some tweaks and a steady shot, steadying on a box is always good, but never better than self timer on a steady surface.

Check for the self timer settings on the camera, that will help a lot.

Although the following is really for SLR users, you can still pick up good technique and understanding of settings from here; www.dslrtips.com


----------



## glymauto (Feb 29, 2008)

Thanks for the pointers guys.

OK - heres a couple of very quick shots of my motor (very strong sunlight today!)

Here are my efforts today - 

















I'll go and do some research and hopefully report back in a couple of weeks with something much more impressive.


----------



## Maxtor (Feb 23, 2007)

Try to get lower if you are taking shots of the car, I find standing up just does not work (well, not all the time) in general.

Have a mooch in the back garden or the like and try your hand a flowers, plants etc.

A shot of the Bee orchid I took a while ago got into a local paper.










Maxtor.


----------



## glymauto (Feb 29, 2008)

Thats very impressive Maxtor. I love the depth of the colour (burgundy) you can tell it would be like velvet if you touched it.

How did you get all the fine hairs to stand out on the plant?

How did you get the scenery behind the photo to go 'blurry'?

I take it you wouldnt be able to get this sort of photo if it was windy?

What if its overcast or dark outside? - You dont always have sunny days when you want/need to take a photo?

I'm going to have to actually study some of the car shots in the galleries to see what makes a good photo. I never actually thought about how to position the camera to get a "good shot". I tend to just look at them at them and think - 'thats a brilliant photo' without actually thinking about why its a brilliant photo.


----------



## MaDMaXX (Jun 18, 2008)

He was using what's called macro mode, it's a limited focal setting that concentrates on just catching items that are very close.

As a result, the background tends to blur out as it's using a fast lens, or a low F number.

As for the car pics you took, you'll notice that the picture is both under exposed and over exposed (one half is too bright and the other is too dark)

That is because the car is half and half in light and shadow, the camera is doing it's best to average out the light levels in both halves of the picture.

It would expose much better if it was all dark or even better if all light. HDR shots can get round that in a way, but that's a whole other ballgame you don't want to be looking at right now.


----------



## byngmeister (Apr 7, 2009)

glymauto said:


> How did you get all the fine hairs to stand out on the plant?
> 
> How did you get the scenery behind the photo to go 'blurry'?
> 
> ...


Most of this is down to the lens used, I presume Maxtor used a macro lens 100mm for example. The "blurry" background is called bokeh and this is achieved with a narrow depth of field with say an aperture setting of F1.8, the detail of the fine hairs is just down to correct focus and also adaptation for the lighting conditions (setting the ISO film speed to 400 for example to accommodate low light conditions) Capturing in low/bad light and windy conditions just requires upping the ISO, but it's always a trade off between capturing the moment and adding to much noise to the picture. A better quality digital SLR camera can help with this problem by accommodating higher ISO speeds and still capturing a decent image :thumb:

From a guess I would say this image was F4, ISO 400 and shutter speed of 1/320 but feel free to correct me Maxtor.


----------



## MaDMaXX (Jun 18, 2008)

I'll say F2.8


----------



## NeilG40 (Jan 1, 2009)

I'm fairly new to photography too and found a couple of handy tips recently:-

1. using a piece of tissue paper over the flash to act as a difuser
2. before taking the shot first take photo of a sheet of white paper and use this to set custom white balance.


----------



## MaDMaXX (Jun 18, 2008)

Yeah, if i'm taking picture of anything in my room, i have to set a custom white balance as the energy saving bulb has a yellow hue you don't otherwise notice :/

Although pay attention to how your camera works on how to set a custom white balance, taking a picture doesn't automatically set it.


----------



## NeilG40 (Jan 1, 2009)

MaDMaXX said:


> Yeah, if i'm taking picture of anything in my room, i have to set a custom white balance as the energy saving bulb has a yellow hue you don't otherwise notice :/
> 
> Although pay attention to how your camera works on how to set a custom white balance, taking a picture doesn't automatically set it.


Yeah on my 450d I have to go into the menu and select the photo, then set the white balance to custom.


----------



## byngmeister (Apr 7, 2009)

MaDMaXX said:


> It would expose much better if it was all dark or even better if all light. HDR shots can get round that in a way, but that's a whole other ballgame you don't want to be looking at right now.


For reference the following is exactly the kind of shot MaDMaXX is talking about


----------



## byngmeister (Apr 7, 2009)

NeilG40 said:


> Yeah on my 450d I have to go into the menu and select the photo, then set the white balance to custom.


I shoot in RAW format then use Photoshop/Canon DPP to alter the white balance to exactly what I want for each shot. The click white balance is great and allows more control than shooting a white piece of paper.


----------



## MaDMaXX (Jun 18, 2008)

NeilG40 said:


> Yeah on my 450d I have to go into the menu and select the photo, then set the white balance to custom.


On my SX10, i go to custom white balance and press set whilst framing actual white so it can gauge everything else from there.

Byngmeister, that's a fantastic example.

The difficulty in capturing the detail on a black car in low light, even sometimes in brighter light, the car is very dark Vs the brighter surroundings.

Your wheels are dirty


----------



## NeilG40 (Jan 1, 2009)

byngmeister said:


> I shoot in RAW format then use Photoshop/Canon DPP to alter the white balance to exactly what I want for each shot. The click white balance is great and allows more control than shooting a white piece of paper.


I've started shooting in RAW and am planning on getting Lightroom 2 when funds allow.


----------



## byngmeister (Apr 7, 2009)

NeilG40 said:


> I've started shooting in RAW and am planning on getting Lightroom 2 when funds allow.


Defiantly recommended if your camera supports RAW to shoot with it, most cameras that support RAW also support simultaneous jpg output as well, you can still preview your images on the computer without having to process each image. RAW allows you to correct/learn mistakes you made at the time of shooting :thumb:


----------



## glymauto (Feb 29, 2008)

byngmeister said:


> For reference the following is exactly the kind of shot MaDMaXX is talking about


Simply stunning! I see what you mean about getting down low.

I dont know what features my camera has. I cant find the instruction manual. I'll have to check the loft tomorrow to see if I put the box up there.

*Talking about shiny black things, what do you think of these photos!! *http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/Whirlpool-20T...14&_trkparms=72:1683|66:2|65:12|39:1|240:1318

Before you ask - NO! its not me :lol:


----------



## byngmeister (Apr 7, 2009)

glymauto said:


> Simply stunning! I see what you mean about getting down low.
> 
> I dont know what features my camera has. I cant find the instruction manual. I'll have to check the loft tomorrow to see if I put the box up there.


I should point out this photo was taken with a Canon 400D using the 18-55mm kit lens, the camera was on a mini tripod and I used the bracketed exposure to take the 3 photos, I used photomatix to create the HDR and played around with it in Photoshop, using layers I overlaid it on the original photo as the pure HDR had too little contrast.


----------



## Maxtor (Feb 23, 2007)

MaDMaXX said:


> I'll say F2.8


F4 1/320

ISO 80

Hand held (on my belly :lol: )

I have a bigger version of the photo, the resize and crop have lost a lot of the detail.

Maxtor.


----------



## Jmax (Dec 4, 2005)

mattsbmw said:


> as a rule of thumb any shutter speed less than 1/125 needs a tripod or you will get camera shake.


1/60 not 1/125


----------



## byngmeister (Apr 7, 2009)

byngmeister said:


> From a guess I would say this image was F4, ISO 400 and shutter speed of 1/320 but feel free to correct me Maxtor.





Maxtor said:


> F4 1/320
> 
> ISO 80
> 
> ...


I was close then, the noise on the picture looks like ISO 400 to me, what camera do you use out of interest?


----------



## MaDMaXX (Jun 18, 2008)

Maxtor said:


> F4 1/320
> 
> ISO 80
> 
> ...


Gah :wave:

Too little experience with choosing my own aperture and very little experience with actual dSLR's 

Image stabilisation on the lens?


----------

