Yeah, pretty much every other picture in this thread is better than yours. I really do like the blurred flower, though. Gives it that action feel that all still life shots should have.
Thanks, and no. Just before q3w went down, I had asked him for some photography advice and he didn't answer. I don't remember seeing him again after that.
If not, is your polarizer a standard generic one, or sold especially for this camera?
Its SLR-Like (meaning that there are specific extensions available for it, such as an improved telephoto lens and suchlike). There is a 72mm filter adapter which comes with the camera, but other sizes can also be bought. I use a Hoya 72mm Linear Polarizer which I bought from America.
Its a wonderful camera to use, and has recieved high praise from pretty much everyone whos used it. My only complaint is the level of noise with ISO's above 200 is somewhat poor. But I mainly use ISO 80/100 anyway.
Nightshade wrote:WTF happened to my post?
Anyway, here's what it said before it disappeared:
Nightshade wrote: Nice shots brisk, you have a real eye for composition.
Here's a photography n00b question: With my Powershot A40, what settings do I need for close-up shots, either indoors or out?
Erm sorry, I may have deleted it by accident. I posted and it fucked up the quote so I deleted my post. At least I meant to but I noticed my post was still there so I deleted it again, but it seems I deleted yours by mistake. HAHA and I am a mod.
werldhed try not to put the horizon in the middle oh the photo, it makes it look boring. Cosider the rule of thirds when you take pictures of water and land.
Nightshade wrote:Yeah, pretty much every other picture in this thread is better than yours. I really do like the blurred flower, though. Gives it that action feel that all still life shots should have.
Its not blurred, the center of the flower is sharp, the DOF is shallow.
ToxicBug wrote:werldhed try not to put the horizon in the middle oh the photo, it makes it look boring. Cosider the rule of thirds when you take pictures of water and land.
Would you suggest more sky, or more water? I was having trouble getting the settings right for the sky at the time (it was very sunny and the sky kept coming out over-exposed) so I tried to limit the amount it showed up in the pictures at the time.
ToxicBug wrote:werldhed try not to put the horizon in the middle oh the photo, it makes it look boring. Cosider the rule of thirds when you take pictures of water and land.
Would you suggest more sky, or more water? I was having trouble getting the settings right for the sky at the time (it was very sunny and the sky kept coming out over-exposed) so I tried to limit the amount it showed up in the pictures at the time.
It depends what you like more, or what is more interesting or whatever. As for the sky, I prefer to underexpose (and thus silhouette) the forest or trees and take the exposure from the sky.
Its obvious you have decent tech, but its always gonna be secondary to the subject and composition of the shot. I have to agree with DB and NS in that I don't really care for those photos you posted personally (from a purely "is it interesting to look at" basis), but i'd like to see some other stuff before I judge you.
brisk wrote:Its obvious you have decent tech, but its always gonna be secondary to the subject and composition of the shot. I have to agree with DB and NS in that I don't really care for those photos you posted personally (from a purely "is it interesting to look at" basis), but i'd like to see some other stuff before I judge you.
