Critique my photgraphy

[jcj]

[quote name='Flatwoods Forge' timestamp='1352261504' post='840716']




If your in La Follette just north of lake city then your about 20 min out from my old mans shop. You'll have a pm incoming about some pictures. Thanks man[/quote]

Yup, that's where I'm at. I'll be looking for your PM!

Sent from my SPH-D710 using Tapatalk 2

[Spots]

[quote name='jcj' timestamp='1352263187' post='840767']


Yup, that's where I'm at. I'll be looking for your PM!

Sent from my SPH-D710 using Tapatalk 2
[/quote]

I'll send it first thing tomorrow.

[peejman]

I get a free weekly e-newsletter from this site. http://digital-photography-school.com/ I've found it pretty useful. Lots of tips and such and lots of excellent photos from which to get inspiration. Edited November 7, 2012 by peejman

[DaveTN]

I’m not a big knife buyer, but I would not be impressed by cutsie names and funny hats. I would want to see close up detail showing blade surface finish and edge detail, handle detail, etc.

Unless you want to spend a butt load of money on a new camera and learn some software packages, you might consider finding a skilled photographer locally that will trade photos for knives.

Not trying to be hard on you, but you are new, and people are going to have to see close up detail of your work if you expect to sell over the net. Especially when you are asking hundreds of dollars for your work.

[Spots]

[quote name='DaveTN' timestamp='1352292911' post='840922']
I’m not a big knife buyer, but I would not be impressed by cutsie names and funny hats. I would want to see close up detail showing blade surface finish and edge detail, handle detail, etc.

Unless you want to spend a butt load of money on a new camera and learn some software packages, you might consider finding a skilled photographer locally that will trade photos for knives.

Not trying to be hard on you, but you are new, and people are going to have to see close up detail of your work if you expect to sell over the net. Especially when you are asking hundreds of dollars for your work.
[/quote]

This is understood. And I've actually had several pmed offers just from this thread. Thanks everyone for the critiques, I'm gonna start saving for the equipment, and maybe a class or two at my local community college, and work with a pro for now.

[Guest Broomhead]

Go look through the Knifemakers Gallery on Bladeforums. You should see a lot of inspiration there. Look through a bunch and write down little notes of things you want to take from them to do with your photos.

[quietguy]

[quote name='jcj' timestamp='1352232858' post='840235']
This...and a 50mm f1.8 prime lens. Should do nicely for this type of photography.

Sent from my SPH-D710 using Tapatalk 2
[/quote]

On a DX body, a 35mm is closer a prime lens, not a 50mm.


[quote name='S&WForty' timestamp='1352233376' post='840245']
Gotta love the depth of field from the f/1.8 lenses!

I recommend buying from B&H Photo or Adorama in NY. Excellent prices and customer service.
[/quote]

DOF is the weak point of a fast lens, not the strength.

[quietguy]

My advice, take a basic photography class. You can have fantastic results with sub-par equipment if you know how to use it. Anyone can learn to be a decent photographer if they are willing to put in the time and understand the basic concepts. A little knowledge goes a long way.

[S&WForty]

[quote name='quietguy' timestamp='1352308888' post='841075']

On a DX body, a 35mm is closer a prime lens, not a 50mm. [/quote]

Depends on the range you need.

[quote]DOF is the weak point of a fast lens, not the strength.[/quote]

When I first read about the Canon 50 f/1.8, it was regarded as the "puppy lens" or "kitten lens" since the aperture allowed for a lot of creativity in taking pet portraits. It was never hailed to be "fast glass" though that aperture does help tremendously in low light.

It depends on your use/need. Most beginners or hobbyists will find the depth of field of that particular lens to be its strength while pros shooting with f/2.8 lenses are primarily after the fast shutter speed those allow.

[quietguy]

[quote]
Depends on the range you need.[/quote]

No, it doesn't. A "prime lens" is a distinction relative to film or sensor size.


[quote]
When I first read about the Canon 50 f/1.8, it was regarded as the "puppy lens" or "kitten lens" since the aperture allowed for a lot of creativity in taking pet portraits. It was never hailed to be "fast glass" though that aperture does help tremendously in low light.

It depends on your use/need. Most beginners or hobbyists will find the depth of field of that particular lens to be its strength while pros shooting with f/2.8 lenses are primarily after the fast shutter speed those allow.
[/quote]

First, let me state that I am a huge fan of fast lenses.

The Canon 50mm f/1.8 is a fantastic lens, but you have to have a basic understanding of photography and optics. The f/22 is a fairly limiting maximum aperture, and therefore limited depth of field.

[Guest Broomhead]

[quote name='quietguy' timestamp='1352312861' post='841154']
No, it doesn't. A "prime lens" is a distinction relative to film or sensor size.




First, let me state that I am a huge fan of fast lenses.

The Canon 50mm f/1.8 is a fantastic lens, but you have to have a basic understanding of photography and optics. The f/22 is a fairly limiting maximum aperture, and therefore limited depth of field.
[/quote]

[quote name='S&WForty' timestamp='1352310831' post='841108']
Depends on the range you need.



When I first read about the Canon 50 f/1.8, it was regarded as the "puppy lens" or "kitten lens" since the aperture allowed for a lot of creativity in taking pet portraits. It was never hailed to be "fast glass" though that aperture does help tremendously in low light.

It depends on your use/need. Most beginners or hobbyists will find the depth of field of that particular lens to be its strength while pros shooting with f/2.8 lenses are primarily after the fast shutter speed those allow.
[/quote]

[quote name='quietguy' timestamp='1352308888' post='841075']
On a DX body, a 35mm is closer a prime lens, not a 50mm.




DOF is the weak point of a fast lens, not the strength.
[/quote]

None of which helps Flatwoods.


[quote name='quietguy' timestamp='1352309910' post='841090']
My advice, take a basic photography class. You can have fantastic results with sub-par equipment if you know how to use it. Anyone can learn to be a decent photographer if they are willing to put in the time and understand the basic concepts. A little knowledge goes a long way.
[/quote]

This, I agree with 100%. I took one and it really improved my photography. You just have to be willing to learn. Edited November 7, 2012 by Broomhead

[quietguy]

[quote]None of which helps Flatwoods.[/quote]

Not to take the OPs thread into the weeds, but it could help Flatwoods. There are finite rules to good photography. Those that have a bent for art can break the rules, those of us that don't have to live by them.

[S&WForty]

[quote name='quietguy' timestamp='1352312861' post='841154']
No, it doesn't. A "prime lens" is a distinction relative to film or sensor size.
[/quote]

When you said, "On a DX body, a 35mm is closer a prime lens, not a 50mm" I thought you were telling the OP to get a 35 mm prime rather than get a 50 mm prime. So I said "depends on the range you need."

[quote]First, let me state that I am a huge fan of fast lenses.

The Canon 50mm f/1.8 is a fantastic lens, but you have to have a basic understanding of photography and optics. The f/22 is a fairly limiting maximum aperture, and therefore limited depth of field.
[/quote]

The larger the number, the smaller the aperture. Did you mean f/22 is a limiting MINIMUM aperture?

[url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aperture"]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aperture[/url] "The specifications for a given lens typically include the maximum and minimum apertures, for example, [font=Trebuchet MS,Candara,Georgia,Calibri,Corbel,serif][i]f[/i][/font]/1.4–[font=Trebuchet MS,Candara,Georgia,Calibri,Corbel,serif][i]f[/i][/font]/22. In this case [b][font=Trebuchet MS,Candara,Georgia,Calibri,Corbel,serif][i]f[/i][/font]/1.4 is the maximum aperture (the largest opening), and [font=Trebuchet MS,Candara,Georgia,Calibri,Corbel,serif][i]f[/i][/font]/22 is the minimum aperture (the smallest opening).[/b]"

f/22 or f/30-something means nothing to me. I never shoot anything with an aperture [i]smaller[/i] than f/14 or so anyway.

[quietguy]

[quote]Did you mean f/22 is a limiting MINIMUM aperture?[/quote]

Yes, and thank you for pointing out my mis-post.

[quote]When you said, "On a DX body, a 35mm is closer a prime lens, not a 50mm" I thought you were telling the OP to get a 35 mm prime rather than get a 50 mm prime. So I said "depends on the range you need."[/quote]

And that was my intent. A 50mm lens on a DX body is essentially a 75mm telephoto, which is no longer a prime lens in the classical definition. 50mm at 35mm or FX is a classical prime lens. That equates to roughly a 35mm lens at DX format or 80mm at 6 cmx6 cm.

[quietguy]

[quote]
f/22 or f/30-something means nothing to me. I never shoot anything with an aperture [i]smaller[/i] than f/14 or so anyway.[/quote]

If that range serves your needs, then fantastic.

F/32 or F/64 is extremely helpful if shooting professionally.

[S&WForty]

[quote name='quietguy' timestamp='1352328076' post='841381']
Yes, and thank you for pointing out my mis-post.



And that was my intent. A 50mm lens on a DX body is essentially a 75mm telephoto, which is no longer a prime lens in the classical definition. 50mm at 35mm or FX is a classical prime lens. That equates to roughly a 35mm lens at DX format or 80mm at 6 cmx6 cm.
[/quote]

I figured your comment was related to crop factors!

[quote name='quietguy' timestamp='1352328465' post='841387']
If that range serves your needs, then fantastic.

F/32 or F/64 is extremely helpful if shooting professionally.
[/quote]

What do you shoot professionally at those apertures?

[C.lunn]

Yeah what are you shooting at f/32, 64? Large format of what?

[C.lunn]

[quote name='quietguy' timestamp='1352328076' post='841381']
Yes, and thank you for pointing out my mis-post.



And that was my intent. A 50mm lens on a DX body is essentially a 75mm telephoto, which is no longer a prime lens in the classical definition. 50mm at 35mm or FX is a classical prime lens. That equates to roughly a 35mm lens at DX format or 80mm at 6 cmx6 cm.
[/quote]


A 50mm 1.8 is still a prime lens. A prime lens doesn't have anything to do with the sensor size. It means fixed lens. Putting it on a crop camera doesn't change the fact that it's a fixed focal lenth/prime lens.

[Guest PapaB]

Forget spending money on equipment for now. Taking a class or two is a great idea but it won't help for quite a while. Just any professional photographer won't do. Hire a pro with experience in commercial photography. There are important differences in staging and lighting this style of photography compared to shooting nature, landscape, sports or people. Many years ago I was a commercial photographer in Boston working on advertising campaigns for companies like Gillette, Anthony's pier 4, the Boston Playboy Clubs Restaurant and many smaller clients. I've also done public relations photo's for the MA Atty General as well as many weddings before I changed careers. I only mention this to point out that I know the differences in various photographic specialties. You wouldn't go to a nurse, an ob/gyn or a pediatrician if you had heart problems because you'd need a specialist. This is no different.
I know money is tight so try a place where photography is taught such as a college or art school. There should be a talented student the instructor could recommend. They would also have access to the equipment needed to do your work justice.
As far as a critique of your photo's, they lack dimension (provided by proper lighting), the composition doesn't draw you to the subject (the rule of thirds helps) and they don't show the most important features.
I hope this helps you rethink things. Good photo's will help you get top dollar for your creations.

[C.lunn]

[quote name='PapaB' timestamp='1352383455' post='841734']Forget spending money on equipment for now. Taking a class or two is a great idea but it won't help for quite a while. Just any professional photographer won't do. Hire a pro with experience in commercial photography. There are important differences in staging and lighting this style of photography compared to shooting nature, landscape, sports or people. Many years ago I was a commercial photographer in Boston working on advertising campaigns for companies like Gillette, Anthony's pier 4, the Boston Playboy Clubs Restaurant and many smaller clients. I've also done public relations photo's for the MA Atty General as well as many weddings before I changed careers. I only mention this to point out that I know the differences in various photographic specialties. You wouldn't go to a nurse, an ob/gyn or a pediatrician if you had heart problems because you'd need a specialist. This is no different.
I know money is tight so try a place where photography is taught such as a college or art school. There should be a talented student the instructor could recommend. They would also have access to the equipment needed to do your work justice.
As far as a critique of your photo's, they lack dimension (provided by proper lighting), the composition doesn't draw you to the subject (the rule of thirds helps) and they don't show the most important features.
I hope this helps you rethink things. Good photo's will help you get top dollar for your creations.[/quote]

This

[Guest TNBrat]

Contrast is another important tool when taking photos, especially when taking them for something like this. You don't want your focus object (knife) to blend in with your background(hat). And try to loose plain objects that distract like the grass. There's too much of it in the shot or not enough...it can go either way.


TNBrat Hiding in the woods…