Nikon 14-24 - Bad Images

Discussion in 'Nikon' started by frederick, Apr 4, 2008.

  1. frederick

    frederick Guest

    I'd join you to share rounds at three pints a time.
    I wrote "you'd" (not "I'd") above without anyone in particular in mind,
    just a perception of what most folks likes are.
    frederick, Apr 7, 2008
    1. Advertisements

  2. I think one of the reasons the average DSLR user produces worse
    photographs than the average P&S user is that the DSLR users think
    they ought to be using some of the sophisticated choices their machine
    gives them, rather than just using full auto mode, but they're just
    ignorantly messing about with the knobs and menus.
    Chris Malcolm, Apr 7, 2008
    1. Advertisements

  3. And here I though it was "I got proffesionel[sic] camera, take
    good pic of everything! lol!"

    Wolfgang Weisselberg, Apr 7, 2008
  4. Sometimes I use aperture priority, sometimes (outside) *auto*.
    In aperture priority I let the ISO and shutter speed bounce around to
    allow me the dof I am looking for.

    Outside, there are so many variables, I truly believe that my camera
    *auto* can do a better job of deciding what settings to use than I

    This decision depends a lot on the algorithms the camera mfgr builds
    into the camera for different *settings.* In the case of my Nikon, I
    haven't had any disappointing results -yet-. They base their
    algorithms, I'm told, on an extensive compilation of photos taken by

    Lawrence Glickman, Apr 7, 2008
  5. that is assuming a normal distribution

    I tend to think the population is more like a gama that is heavily
    weighted on the low end with a median of OK and very few above OK
    william kossack, Apr 7, 2008
  6. frederick

    BioColor Guest

    Except at Lake Wobegon.

    BioColor, Apr 7, 2008
  7. frederick

    Paul J Gans Guest

    Wide angle photography has always seemed to me to be
    a very different art than normal or telephoto photography.
    Paul J Gans, Apr 7, 2008
  8. Auto --- "P", not the granny setting (e.g. green square) --- can
    select viable settings a lot *faster* than I can. So that's
    the default for the camera in the bag. If I do something
    special (and/or have time to do the shooting), other settings
    come into play.
    Which just means you haven't put the camera through it's paces
    and learned in which way it behaves in certain circumstances. :)
    This is true for every evaluative/matrix metering ever used ---
    it is also true that the size of the compilation or the number
    and placement of metering fields has no direct impact on the
    quality of the metering. It's more a question of intelligently
    using the data present.

    And on the user's side, understanding what the camera does is
    going for the average (and how it does that), which often is not
    what you want.

    Wolfgang Weisselberg, Apr 7, 2008
  9. frederick

    Alienjones Guest

    Hash: SHA1

    Wolfgang Weisselberg wrote:
    |> I think one of the reasons the average DSLR user produces worse
    |> photographs than the average P&S user is that the DSLR users think
    |> they ought to be using some of the sophisticated choices their machine
    |> gives them, rather than just using full auto mode, but they're just
    |> ignorantly messing about with the knobs and menus.
    | And here I though it was "I got proffesionel[sic] camera, take
    | good pic of everything! lol!"
    | -Wolfgang

    I still remember when Minolta introduced their "7000" auto focus DSLR on
    an unsuspecting public. I worked part time in a camera store to feed the
    babies and pay the rent.

    This fellow walked in dumping his 7000 loudly on the counter announcing
    "this camera is total shit". He produced some pictures from a "kiss"
    photo lab (now there was real shit). with a sever yellow tint to them.
    All the night shots were just a dull yellow black with an occasional dot
    of light.

    The store owner who was less tolerant of idiots than me, literally threw
    to bloke out when he refused to tone it down, leaving the camera on the
    counter! I don't recall in all the time I worked there, the fellow
    coming back for his camera! When I looked at it, it was set to manual
    exposure. I suspect he thought he knew best.

    - --

    from Douglas,
    If my PGP key is missing, the
    post is a forgery. Ignore it.
    Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (MingW32)

    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Alienjones, Apr 7, 2008
  10. frederick

    Alan Browne Guest

    I think of you browse the top photography at you will find
    many examples taken with that lens that meets or exceeds your expectations.
    Alan Browne, Apr 7, 2008
  11. But good photography has not.
    John McWilliams, Apr 7, 2008
  12. frederick

    C J Campbell Guest

    At WPPI there was some wedding photographer who was complaining about
    how he was losing so much business to the "shoot and burn" crowd -- the
    guys who go out and shoot a wedding for a couple hundred bucks and burn
    a CD. No album, no prints, just a CD. There was a lot of talk about the
    "post-digital" world of business.

    Well, this was a problem before digital. Everyone with an SLR, or even
    a rangefinder, or in some cases an Instamatic, used to think they were
    a wedding photographer. Nothing has changed.

    If you are losing business to the "shoot and burners" then you are a
    crap photographer. I am sorry, but there it is. If you can't show
    people that your time and skill are actually worth something, then your
    time and skill probably really aren't worth anything. Learn better
    photography. Learn better marketing. Learn presentation. Or quit.

    Image is everything in the image business. Some people seem to forget that.

    You know, a lot of people know how to cook. In fact, a lot of people
    can prepare any meal they can get in a fancy restaurant. So why do they
    go to restaurants? Well, why do brides by $10,000 Vera Wang gowns
    instead of making their own? Is it really quality? Or is it because you
    can get something at a restaurant that you would prefer not to do at

    I think it is presentation -- and the fact that preparing that kind of
    food or making that kind of gown is a lot of effort and difficult to do
    right the first time. There are a lot of "orphan" brides out there --
    nothing to show for their big day but a CD. Many of them don't even
    know how to get the pictures off the CD and onto a computer. They are
    never going to have beautiful albums or large prints to hang on the

    That is what the wedding photographer gets paid for. She should expect
    to be paid very well, too. I know wedding photographers who average
    $20,000 a wedding. Their work is worth it. They get the job done right
    the first time, because they have to. They don't annoy the guests. They
    remember that they are not the star of the wedding. But, you go to a
    shoot & burner, you get what you pay for. You get a roadside hot dog
    stand instead of creme broulet in antique china. I never hear a true
    professional complain about Uncle Harry 'stealing' business from them.
    They know that if Uncle Harry can do a better job than they can then
    they don't deserve the business.

    The same goes for nature photographers. How many people can't even get
    a decent picture of a squirrel in their back yard? They don't know how
    to get close. They can't hold the camera steady. They don't pay
    attention to background. The reason a good nature picture costs so much
    is that it takes a lot of time, money and effort to produce it. You
    have to go to Brooks Falls in Alaska. You have to spend a fortune on
    gear. You have to pay attention to what the entire picture will look
    like. You have to pay attention to light. You have to capture the

    Whenever something newsworthy happens, there are probably dozens of
    cameras around -- security cameras, tourists, people with cell phones.
    And sometimes they manage to sell pictures of rare and newsworthy
    events. But if you want to make a living as a photojournalist, you know
    where the news is. You go there, sometimes risking your own life. You
    know how to light your subject. You have the equipment to take a decent
    picture. You can deal with police lines and emergency crews without
    getting in the way. This is the difference between a double truck in
    "Life" and maybe an unpaid spot in the "Our Readers Submit" in the
    local rag.

    Good photography is still rare. It is still highly sought after. And it
    is well paid. The guys who complain about competition are losers.
    Competition should inspire you to be better.
    C J Campbell, Apr 7, 2008
  13. 40+ years ago when I was in college studying the subject, one of my
    Uncles living in California told me flat out, find something else to
    do because "photography has become a cheap commodity."

    He did a lot of portrait *work* and photos of famous movie stars, etc
    etc. and had a Studio. I was hoping I could go to work for him when I
    graduated, but it was not to be. All this while silver halide film
    still ruled the day.

    We had to know things like bellows extension factors, correct light
    metering, even Ansel Adam's Zone System, not to mention a lot of
    practical math. And of course, photographic chemistry, densitometry,
    all the stuff that goes with processing black and white and color
    film. Just to cover the basics.

    Then out into the field to do whatever. With critiqe being the day of
    the week (wednesdays) when we had our prized images *dissed* by
    everybody else in the classroom. What a wake-up call that was.
    Painful to say the least, when your "prize" turned out to be shit in
    other people's *opinion.* And they would tell you WHY it was shit,
    just to rub it it, or make you a better photographer, whichever I
    can't remember.

    So just what the hell is *good photography*??? Are we talking
    technique here? Or _substance_, which was always the POINT of the
    entire course, curriculum.

    The problem being, if you wanted _substance_, you had to put yourself
    in certain situations that were sometimes uncomfortable to deal with.
    Like doing a layout on death and dying, you can't imagine the social
    obstacles that presented themselves.

    So most of *us* take the EASY WAY OUT, and go for the easy mark. IMO,
    that's what it comes down to. Not much of a social hassle to
    photograph a flower in a garden, although there isn't much
    social-redeeming value to a photo like that either.

    Now, what I am saying, is that any moke can take a technically
    passable photo. Even my dog can do it. What makes or breaks it is
    the subject matter, and how it was rendered. In order to get over
    that hump, you sometimes put yourself at risk. Who does those
    documentaries on Gangs of New York? Does he wear a bulletproof vest?
    Use a 1000mm telephoto? Or get close up and personal?

    This is what I mean by distinguishing what I _think_ is *good
    photography* instead of the routine shit we so often see. Unless your
    in the postcard business that is.

    Lawrence Glickman, Apr 8, 2008
  14. frederick

    frederick Guest

    Never been there. Is that somewhere in America?
    I think they were running a serial documentary that mentioned the place
    when I was listening to the radio in the cow shed, but a valve blew on
    the radio, and the man at the general store said it's going to take 6
    weeks until he can get new one shipped.
    From the little bit I heard, it sounded much like home.
    frederick, Apr 8, 2008
  15. You could be in the top 20 of the worlds best wedding
    photographers, but if you don't do good marketing, you loose.
    You could be the average "shoot and burner", if you have good
    marketing, you win.

    Remember that point'n'shoots with 12 and more MPix are selling
    like hotcakes. That, and their noise (and oil painting) even at
    the lowest ISO settings, should tell you how much quality weights
    versus a lower price and good marketing.

    'If you are losing business to the "shoot and burners"',
    then in 99% your marketing is crap, not your skill. Get yourself
    a marketing/sales expert to handle the crowd, the "marks", if
    you will. Personally handle only those customers that seek you
    out for quality. :)

    Wolfgang Weisselberg, Apr 8, 2008
  16. frederick

    BioColor Guest

    LOL Probably right.

    The reference is from the closing lines in a consistent monologue by
    Garrison Keillor, on the Prairie Home Companion, heard weekly on
    American National Public Radio for many years. He describes what's
    happening at "Lake Wobegon, my home town..." and always closes with
    "...where all the women are strong, the men are good looking, and all
    the children are above average."

    A free podcast is here:

    BioColor, Apr 8, 2008
  17. frederick

    C J Campbell Guest

    Truly. It is hardly worth advertising in the Yellow Pages any more. The
    only calls you get are from people who want you to shoot their wedding
    for a couple hundred bucks. I suppose some people think you at least
    have to have a listing, but a display ad attracts the wrong people.

    Word of mouth seems to work best.
    C J Campbell, Apr 9, 2008
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.