UKC

Hi there,

I've had my Fuji bridge camera so unfortunately not able to change lenses etc for a year now and have made a Flickr of some of the favorites I've taken. I'd really appreciate if you took a look and gives some words of advice/criticism (though be nice )

Thanks. Link - http://www.flickr.com/photos/liam_chester/

In reply to CragRat_Trad: I really like the dappled light in 'Forest' though it might be ever so slightly over exposed (nit picking!).

'Rock tower' is a really lovely image as is 'Tree Branches'.

I like the compsition of 'River'

In reply to Nicholas Livesey: Thankyou very much!!

I'm really enjoying going out and taking shots, and do find sometimes i get the exposure wrong, guess it's all a learning curve.

Finding the bridge camera to have limitations for some things now, so have got myself a film SLR (cant afford a DSLR) and a few lenses. So look forward to trying my hand at film too!

Thanks again for the kind words

In reply to CragRat_Trad:

Some nice pictures there. I thought the composition of Rock Tower (good light and depth of field), Beach Steps and Branches worked well as they are.

'Wet Rose Head'- Id crop it tighter so that the overexposed bits (the whitest bits of the photo)arent included, your eye will always be drawn to the whitest or sharpest part of a picture.

'Bee inside a flower' next time you see this scene (!) set a high shutter speed so that the bee is not blurred. If you cant control this manually on the camera, 'sport mode' is designed to capture moving objects.

Furry leaf- I thought the leaf should have been positioned better in the frame- like you did with 'Wet Rose Leaf'(I liked the clarity and depth of field that one)

'Purple Droplets' the droplets should be in focus as opposed to the stamen area.

Looks like youve got a good macro mode on the camera, scope for lots of fun.

In reply to Joss: Thanks for your comments, much appreciated!

I see what you mean now with the 'wet rose head', i'll certainly have a go at cropping that tighter and see what's it's like!

The bee inside a flower shot was so disappointing, i took it in a rush with just the 'sport mode', wish i'd manually set the shutter speed now!

Really enjoyed taking shots and look forward to using my SLR.

Thanks again!
C

In reply to CragRat_Trad: for the macros, try using a tripod so you can use a small aperture to get greater depth of field. Unless you're already doing that?

In reply to Andy S: No a lot of these were just taken as a stroll around, I've not really been thinking too much about the shots until recently.

Like i say, I've bought an SLR and some lenses and will continue to use my bridge camera but paying more attention to the photography, setting things manually and using a tripod etc.

In reply to CragRat_Trad:The macro feature i find very good on my bridge camera but for landscapes and nature pieces it doesn't work too well. Which is why i bought an SLR a some lenses so i can start to shoot some landscapes.

In reply to CragRat_Trad:
Im not a leafy critter photo type, but I like dragonfly best of all. Strong image with colour and contrast.

In reply to mikehike: Thank you!

Like i say, i've almost been forced into this type of photography as it's where i found my bridge camera worked best (i do enjoy it though). Really look forward to being able to take landscapes now i have an slr and lens options

In reply to CragRat_Trad:


If I could offer one critisism with your photos, then that would be I would liked to have taken them.

cracking shots which you are justifiably proud of.

BTW

May I ask why you think a dSLR is expensive?

Yes the brand new stuff is top dollar, but if you are willing to go second hand then you can pick up a bargain or two. Way back in November I got a Nikon D40, which ad only taken 3,500 shots, for under £100 on fleebay. Even though its not got as many features as the newer models, but if treated with respect it will and does produce excellent results.

Just a thought.

In reply to CragRat_Trad: Look at the work of Robert Maplethorpe as he is the master of flower still life.

In reply to The Lemming: Thank you, probably the best criticism i could have!!

I understand what you mean about the dslr, in the grand scheme of things they're not massively expensive but as you probably know, juggling a couple of hobbies builds up. So i managed to pick up a good condition Olympus OM-10 slr for £5 (just postage) with a lens and some film, so i thought i'd try it for a while and see if i want to get serious about photography.

I've never gone out to take photos, i've gone on a walk and happened to take photos. So with this cheap set up i can go out with photography as the main purpose and see if i enjoy it before spending the extra cash on a DSLR. If that makes any sense?

Thanks again.
C

In reply to Sean Kelly: Thanks, I'll have a look!

In reply to CragRat_Trad:

£5 on a camera?

I think you've come up trumps there. However if you think of it another way, which is how I rationalised buying expensive digital cameras, consider how much it would cost to develop 10 or 20 rolls of film. Once you've developed that many rolls then you will have covered the cost of a camera.

In reply to The Lemming: £5 for an 'excellent condition' Olympus OM-10 and a 50mm f1.8 lens, just need to get the manual adapter (£5-£10). So i snapped it up! Should be arriving early next week.

True,think it's around £6/8 a roll. I definitely will be looking to upgrade within a year but i'm hoping the SLR will give me a good foundation in using new lenses,manual settings etc.

In reply to CragRat_Trad:

I like your images.
One thought, thought this may be generally be due to the nature of most of your subjects, the centre of your main subject is at the centre of your image.

ie. You point are pointing your camera directly at the thing which catches your eye. Sometimes this works, sometimes there are slightly more interesting compositions.

Have a google for rule of thirds, golden mean and composition rules in photography etc.

ps. I think you underestimate your bridge camera and film SLR is not necessarily worth investing heavily in to improve what you are currently achieving. You will learn as much about exposure and depth of field with a DSLR, but you will learn it quicker. - Personal opinion of someone who used to not be able to afford to develop his films (a long time ago), but can take as many digital images in a day as he once took in six months with film.

In reply to interdit: Thanks for your thoughts!

I understand what you mean about pointing the camera directly at the object, i will have to experiment with out angles etc! And will certainly google that!

Yea, i do understand what you mean about the DSLR thing and do hope to upgrade soon, but for what will be a cheap set up it'll be nice to have the SLR, i like the way film looks too and it's a nice piece of history.

In reply to CragRat_Trad: My thoughts.

Do not like the swans. You need to get in tighter to them to make it a worth while shot.

Wet rose leaf ii however is nothing shot of stunning for me. The other macro shots of yours were also very good.

Whether you have a camera/lens combo suited to macro or whether it is your calling I dont know but the macro shots look fantastic. Id been delighted to have taken most of your macro shots. Keep up the good work.

In reply to myth: Thanks very much for your comments.

Get what you mean with the swans, but couldn't zoom any more on my bridge camera, might try cropping tighter but may lose quality.

For all of those shots i was just using the macro setting on my Fuji bridge camera, so couldn't interchange lenses or anything,it seems to work well though

Thanks again,
C

In reply to CragRat_Trad:

That is certainly true.


You've just put a capture of a swan on your flickr account?

Mail me though the forum and I'll send you an alternative composition that I've just made. (Obviously the quality would be better if I had the original file).
Not necessarily saying that it's better, but someone above mentioned a tighter crop of one of your other images. Similar thing here for more impact.

In reply to CragRat_Trad: Fair cop. Shot of the swans would require a much larger zoom or getting closer. Not much that cab be done about that.

Just been looking throught the macros again. Much love.

In reply to CragRat_Trad: Thanks a lot! Really appreciate the kind words on the macros!

In reply to CragRat_Trad:I really like tree branches, for lone trees check out george wright;
http://www.eyestorm.com/george-wright.html

In reply to gd303uk: Thank you!

Waw, his work is absolutely stunning, the night oak shots are brilliant!

In reply to interdit: Very kind of you, have dropped you some mail through here!

Thanks,
C

In reply to CragRat_Trad:

Just spotted the other poster was also referring to the swans.

Just mailed you an alternative composition.

In reply to interdit: Thanks again,

Have upload it to flickr! Love it!!