This is Photography

[87e30]

No.... Most portraiture is shot at low apertures.

I think you just need to take a little bit more time to compose the image. Really pay attention to "leading lines" and whats in the background. Also the time of day is very important, try shooting in the "golden hour" or really early in the morning. I find that is when you get that really dramatic lighting affect that make images pop. Or get creative and use fill (or rim) from strobes.... Also, as lame as it sounds, try using the rule of thirds and see what you get.

Did you look at the pictures? Or my comment right above yours?

Pretty nice close to golden light in a few (seattle sun is hit or miss) and rule of thirds all over the place.

[willworkfore30s]

Summer

[mrsleeve]

Nice Composition but how can you drink that piss water ????

[dinanm3atl]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=paJqHPHLExo

[pantelones]

Agree he looks a little pasted, disagree that they need more DOF though. Maybe better comps or more interesting/interactive ones. Thanks for pointing that out.

Yes I did look at the photos, but no I did read your comment since it wasn't posted when I replied. If I would have seen it I probably wouldn't have said anything. And after taking a second look I do agree with you using the rule of thirds. Maybe not to it's full potential but it's obviously there. I like to think of the rule as two parallel lines then foreground, middle-ground, and background. (That's my interpretation though)

I also should have pointed out that I actually like the photos, the one below in particular.

I like it because there is nothing distracting in the background, and the darker shadows to the left lead your eyes right to the subject. The light is great too.

The photos do have that feel of "I could have done something better", but the photos still turn out good. I get this type of result a lot when I shoot these days since I really don't shoot that often, and I don't ever shoot in my comfort zone anymore (Action sports).

[T Verdier]

That photo has the most destracting background IMO but I feel you really have your own style of portraits here, the backgrounds are part of the photo so much that I enjoy looking at some bro that I don't even know, in that aspect I really like them, in general most portraits have less background influence, which draws the eye more to the subject, that's why I don't like portraits, I don't like seeing random people it's not interesting to me usually but with these they are astheticaly pleasing on another level. Well done!

[BlackbirdM3]

Here are a few shots of the transition of Venus That I shot.







And other random stuff I shot while waiting for Venus to move a little further, or for the sun to go down.









The dark grass pics were shot through my NDX400 filter, its the same filter I was using to shoot the sun. The lighting source was either the sun or an estuary with light reflecting off it. Yes, I had to play with the images in photoshop to even be visible, but I think they came out kinda cool.

Will

[u3b3rg33k]

Tweaking things in PS isn't cheating - long before photoshop, there were contrast filters, and long before those there was burning and there was dodging.

actually altering the content of the image (as is done for pictures of models on magazine covers) is another matter entirely.

[87e30]

Yes I did look at the photos, but no I did read your comment since it wasn't posted when I replied. If I would have seen it I probably wouldn't have said anything. And after taking a second look I do agree with you using the rule of thirds. Maybe not to it's full potential but it's obviously there. I like to think of the rule as two parallel lines then foreground, middle-ground, and background. (That's my interpretation though)

I also should have pointed out that I actually like the photos, the one below in particular.





I like it because there is nothing distracting in the background, and the darker shadows to the left lead your eyes right to the subject. The light is great too.

The photos do have that feel of "I could have done something better", but the photos still turn out good. I get this type of result a lot when I shoot these days since I really don't shoot that often, and I don't ever shoot in my comfort zone anymore (Action sports).

I agree, definitely takes practice to move beyond the "standard ideas" and really try out some more creative unique approaches. Thank you, I like that photo as well. And frankly, I struggle with rule of thirds with the 5dii because of how awful the focus points are. I have to use the center point so often and then recompose and I don't want to shift the focus plane off the subject - just need some more practice. I would prefer some better comps but error on the side of making sure the subject is in focus.

That photo has the most destracting background IMO but I feel you really have your own style of portraits here, the backgrounds are part of the photo so much that I enjoy looking at some bro that I don't even know, in that aspect I really like them, in general most portraits have less background influence, which draws the eye more to the subject, that's why I don't like portraits, I don't like seeing random people it's not interesting to me usually but with these they are astheticaly pleasing on another level. Well done!

Thanks for the comments. I tried to pull some backgrounds in as I wanted it to be evident that this is part of campus for the memories that the photos represent.

I may be shooting some other friends for their parents as well so I'll keep practicing. I shot these quickly at a Navy commissioning ceremony so they aren't great, but my friends mom again wanted some shots.



^crap just noticed it needs to be cropped up a little.

[mrsleeve]

some fluffy white clouds ??

[CW325]

Took some pics of one of the local rabbits

[Kvasi]

Was out driving and thought this looked good

[trackjunkie21]

[crunk3]

Here are a few pics from my collection http://www.flickr.com/photos/rshabacon/

[Massimo]

So I figured I am more of a sports/nature photo kinda guy. This is now pushing me to big zoom lenses for my Canon 60D.

As I am no professional I don't think I will be looking at the Canon range as they are just to expensive. I came across the SIGMA 150-500mm, tried it out in a store. Besides it weighting a lot, I really liked it. It felt very solid, seemed to focus quickly, the auto stabilizer is really impressive as well and just overal seems like what I want. Plus for $998 it is a great price.

Just want to know if anyone else has one and there thoughts after some usage, or just what everyone else thinks of this lense.