Is it the camera, or the photographer

[Anonymous]

My 2 observations w/ digital cameras

I have a tough time w/ motion shots. Prone to blur.

I have a tendency to wiggle the camera when I pu***he shutter button. Be very conscious of the 2nd issue. Once I got a feel for that, things got much better.

- Stack

[Anonymous]

I actually went through Three digital Cameras in the last year, i'll give you a brief summary.

Radioshack Centrios 1.3 MP Camera

Good:
It was easy to shoose the seize of the pictures, and had an auto power off.

Bad:
Everything. If it was too bright, it would jsut appear black and dark, It had to be taken either in evening or morning. Nothing else.
Bad picture resolution, constantly blurry, no tech support.

So I paid, 40 bucks more

Radioshack Centrios 2.0 MP;
Good:
Better picture resolution

Bad- jsut about everyhting else aswell
Couldn't save on an Sd card, it would contantly corrupt the files

So it ook that one back, had an argument with the sales Clirk, and finally got the best camera, in my opinion (and cheap too)

Kodak CX6200
http://www.kodak.com/eknec/PageQuerier.jhtml?pq-path=9/19/32/1055&pq-locale=en_CA

Really Really Really good camera, I'd give it 4.5 on 5 stars the only thing wrong with the thing is the idiot taking the pictures often screws up.

This summer: upgrade to Kodak CX7300 and then i might be happy, if the thug who operates this thing could do a better job.

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by macguy

QUOTE: Originally posted by kevinstheRRman

Macguy- solve the Riddle- What type of Camera did you use?

I own a Kodak Digital camera 2.1 MP, and soon will upgrade to Kodak 3.2 MP, i also have a nextech 0.3 Megapixel camera, And my phoots always turn out the epitamy of garbage.

Except on occasion, rarely that is. ratio 6 billion: 2

Good going, the digitally impared club (i.e myelf and only me) salute you!

I don't actually know.....it's my dad's camera.
Next time I get a hold of it I'll make a note and let you know.

The pictures were taken with a

Nikon Coolpix 2200
2.0 Megapixels
3x Optical Zoom 38-115mm

I was just holding the camera, no tripod or anything special.

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by kevinstheRRman

Macguy- solve the Riddle- What type of Camera did you use?

I own a Kodak Digital camera 2.1 MP, and soon will upgrade to Kodak 3.2 MP, i also have a nextech 0.3 Megapixel camera, And my phoots always turn out the epitamy of garbage.

Except on occasion, rarely that is. ratio 6 billion: 2

Good going, the digitally impared club (i.e myelf and only me) salute you!

I don't actually know.....it's my dad's camera.
Next time I get a hold of it I'll make a note and let you know.

[Anonymous]

Macguy- solve the Riddle- What type of Camera did you use?

I own a Kodak Digital camera 2.1 MP, and soon will upgrade to Kodak 3.2 MP, i also have a nextech 0.3 Megapixel camera, And my phoots always turn out the epitamy of garbage.

Except on occasion, rarely that is. ratio 6 billion: 2

Good going, the digitally impared club (i.e myelf and only me) salute you!

[Anonymous]

I agree that it doesn't have to be about how much $$ you can spend on your camera equipment. For pretty much my whole railfanning career (20 yrs) I've had the same manual, basic Minolta 35 mm SLR. Its served me ver well and I have taken best of show 5 times at NMRA regional meets, had one photo published in a magazine and have a lot of nice stuff in my files. The best of show shots weren't extraordinary trains. They were all actually very ordinary trains, but somehow I caught a really good composition that day.

I subscribe to the 1% rule. That is, 1 out of every 100 photos I shoot will turn out very cool. There's probably 80 or 85 others that are acceptable and the rest go in the trash. By the way - don't save those which need to be tossed. You might be "tempted" to show them to someone in a slide show and that will degrade your work.

My wife pulled me into the digital photo age. We bought a basic Olympus then after a few years, upgraded to a 3.1 megapixel. It did great for several more years. I've started doing some pics for pay (graduation pix, weddings, stuff like that.) The 3.1 actuall did pretty good. We just bought a 5.1 mp and it has the capability to change lenses. Should be interesting. I'd encourage people to start smaller. Don't overkill the budget and get too many bells and whistles that ultimately you'll seldom use. Just cover the basics really well and you'll be happy. I use Adobe Photo Shop. Good product, but not soooo easy to learn. Once you do its great, but I was very frustrated at first. Got the photoshop for dummies book and it really helped.

Good luck.
- Stack.

[JoeKoh]

Nice picture
stay safe
Joe

[edblysard]

On my old 2 1/4 X 2 1/4 twin lens reflex, the view finder had the cross hairs or grid laid out by the rule of thirds.
Makes it easy to take a look thorugh the viewfinder, and decide real quick if you want to press the shutter or not.
Taking a look at a empty track through the viewfinder also lets you get a idea of how the final shot will turn out, and lets you decide ahead of time also, you can see if the background works, or if the foreground will help or hinder your efforts.

By the way, my last photo of the day was shot with the freebie camera that came with my computer, fixed focus, no zoom.

Ed

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by tree68

Composition, composition, composition. Aside from the one-good-picture-from-a-roll rule (digitals don't use film, but the ratio still applies), a well laid out picture says it all.

I've had a number of times when I showed someone a picture and been praised for how great it is. I've shot many of those pictures with my good old Pentax K. Inexpensive, but records a good image of what I shoot. I'm shooting a Sony Mavica most of the time now. Not a top-of-the-line camera, but I still get some great shots. And some really clunky ones (you didn't think otherwise, did you?)

My favorite "rule" of composition is the "rule of thirds." (I had to pay to learn this!) Take a picture and divide it in thirds horizontally and veritically. If you can print one out from your computer, it might make this easier to understand, because you can draw lines at the "third" points.

Note that the lines cross in four places. One of those should be the focal point of your picture. There will be a horizontal focus in your picture as well, most often the horizon, although it could be a tree line, or even telegraph lines. That horizontal focus should be on one of those lines.

Taking a look at macguy's fantastic shot reveals that the headlight is almost exactly at one of the intersections, the ditch lights are on the lower horizontal line, and most of the bulk of the engine is below the upper third line.

Further, the engine is coming into the picture in a very powerful position. This technique, as well as the rule of thirds, even works well for "snapshots" taken to document who was "there", like in front of a monument.

One of the biggest mistakes people make taking pictures is to center the picture on the focal point. In people pictures, this is usually the face.

I certainly don't want to have anyone obsessing about third lines, etc, etc. But, if you take the time to compose shots, and it becomes habit, you will consistantly produce memorable pictures. And it doesn't take an expensive camera to do it.

Happy shooting!

I know what you mean, I learned that lesson via the school of hard knocks.
I would take all these pictures of the trains going by, thinking I had it perfect -- I had lined it up in the center of the shot just perfectly.......

but wait, whenever I got home and loaded them on the computer they never really looked proper......I would have the loco usually right in the middle, but then all this empty space on one side of the photo.

Just had to figure out how to balance the picture out a little better, that rule of "thirds" is a really good one to go by, I'm gonna go focus on that strategy next time I go out there.

......I suppose that 2816 won't be getting up here again anytime soon, I'll have to settle for the widecabs. [:)]

[Anonymous]

If everyone follows tree 68's advice they'll always turn out great pictures. Good job explaining composition...

mike

[Anonymous]

Its Both and Adobe Photoshop =)

[louisnash]

Great shot Charles. I always have the same problem with taking pics here lately. My digital camera I either take to soon or late, but when I hit it just right I am very pleased.

Keep up the great shots.

Brian (KY)

[tree68]

Composition, composition, composition. Aside from the one-good-picture-from-a-roll rule (digitals don't use film, but the ratio still applies), a well laid out picture says it all.

I've had a number of times when I showed someone a picture and been praised for how great it is. I've shot many of those pictures with my good old Pentax K. Inexpensive, but records a good image of what I shoot. I'm shooting a Sony Mavica most of the time now. Not a top-of-the-line camera, but I still get some great shots. And some really clunky ones (you didn't think otherwise, did you?)

My favorite "rule" of composition is the "rule of thirds." (I had to pay to learn this!) Take a picture and divide it in thirds horizontally and veritically. If you can print one out from your computer, it might make this easier to understand, because you can draw lines at the "third" points.

Note that the lines cross in four places. One of those should be the focal point of your picture. There will be a horizontal focus in your picture as well, most often the horizon, although it could be a tree line, or even telegraph lines. That horizontal focus should be on one of those lines.

Taking a look at macguy's fantastic shot reveals that the headlight is almost exactly at one of the intersections, the ditch lights are on the lower horizontal line, and most of the bulk of the engine is below the upper third line.

Further, the engine is coming into the picture in a very powerful position. This technique, as well as the rule of thirds, even works well for "snapshots" taken to document who was "there", like in front of a monument.

One of the biggest mistakes people make taking pictures is to center the picture on the focal point. In people pictures, this is usually the face.

I certainly don't want to have anyone obsessing about third lines, etc, etc. But, if you take the time to compose shots, and it becomes habit, you will consistantly produce memorable pictures. And it doesn't take an expensive camera to do it.

Happy shooting!

[jchnhtfd]

If you can get 5 good ones out of 50 shots, you're doing just fine! And you do good work, keep it up!

[Anonymous]

Thanks, I was really happy with the way my pics turned out, I only had to take about 50 to get 5 good ones [:D]

I had a lot of fun taking them too! [:)]

[Anonymous]

It is a very good pic. [:)]

I am soooooo jealous. [:p]

Between him and Nora, maybe one of them can give me some pointers. [;)]

I can use all the help I can get. [B)]

[Modelcar]

....Fully agreee, if one has a decent camera with lens capable enough to bring in the image...then the major responsibility rests with the fellow with the camera to bring it all together with capturing, composing and emphasizing the supject at hand.

[edblysard]

See the photo of the day?
Nice shot.
Well composed, well lighted, lots of action, all round good photo.
I posted in the thread by Mcguy, to bring it up front, so everyone could remember what he had said, "Be nice, its just a little digital camera"

Living proof that it isnt so much the camera, as it is the person working it that makes a photo good.

See, Charles, I told you so....


Ed[:D]