Photography hints and tips?

[Fatmarley]

Hi Guys,
I've just bought a Canon 450d body with a 50mm f/1.4 USM lens.

I want to use it to take portrait photos of my 6 month old boy but it's a long time since I used my old 35mm SLR and i'm a little rusty.

Has anyone got any hints and tips for taking photos indoors (bad light etc)? Should I consider getting a flash unit?

 

[stevec67]

On canera flash is generally rubbish unless you have a separate flash and diffuser. I would park him nearer the window and use available light, plus a tripod if necessary. This gives much more natural facial expressions as they aren't frozen. Indeed a lot of portrait photogs use exposures of a few seconds to make the face more alive, provided the subject isn't dancing a jig (difficult at 6 months) you will get some decent results, esp with a f/1.4 lens.

 

[Mr Cat]

yeah, iso2-800, f1.4, adjust the white balance and try out some shots on the Av setting...no flash needed unless very dark....

 

[taffyboy1]

check out both vol 1 and 2 by scott kelby, both are excellent with regards to showing how to get the best results quickly. I have both and have found them excellent refeences.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/s/ref=nb_ss_b?url=search-alias=stripbooks&field-keIn addition if you do get flash make sure its off thecamera! see strobist link below;ywords=The+Digital+Photography+Book&x=8&y=9

http://www.strobist.blogspot.com/2006/03/lighting-101.html

cheers,

taffyboy

 

[Fatmarley]

On canera flash is generally rubbish unless you have a separate flash and diffuser. I would park him nearer the window and use available light, plus a tripod if necessary. This gives much more natural facial expressions as they aren't frozen. Indeed a lot of portrait photogs use exposures of a few seconds to make the face more alive, provided the subject isn't dancing a jig (difficult at 6 months) you will get some decent results, esp with a f/1.4 lens.

I have a tripod in the loft, but using it didn't cross my mind. I will have to dig it out.

Would a seperate flash and diffuser be expensive, and difficult to set up correctly?

 

[Fatmarley]

yeah, iso2-800, f1.4, adjust the white balance and try out some shots on the Av setting...no flash needed unless very dark....

What's "the Av setting"? Do you mean plug it into the tv?

 

[Fatmarley]

check out both vol 1 and 2 by scott kelby, both are excellent with regards to showing how to get the best results quickly. I have both and have found them excellent refeences.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/s/ref=nb_ss_b?url=search-alias=stripbooks&field-keIn addition if you do get flash make sure its off thecamera! see strobist link below;ywords=The+Digital+Photography+Book&x=8&y=9

http://www.strobist.blogspot.com/2006/03/lighting-101.html

cheers,

taffyboy

Cheers Taffy, i'll have a look at those.

 

[taffyboy1]

Aslo have a look at this link which offers a sample number of free intro tutorials ( choose David Ziser and select his wedding stuff i.e. introduction and solving problems video, it really gives a good oversight of the good lighting techniques)

look for online training tab and try it now for free.

http://www.kelbytraining.com

 

[Fatmarley]

What's "the Av setting"? Do you mean plug it into the tv?

Ha ha! Just looked it up on google - Aperture settings.

I read somewhere that my f/1.4 lens becomes sharp at around f/2. I was thinking about setting the aperture to around f/2, and then let the camera work out the shutter speed and ISO on it's own.

 

[Fatmarley]

Aslo have a look at this link which offers a sample number of free intro tutorials ( choose David Ziser and select his wedding stuff i.e. introduction and solving problems video, it really gives a good oversight of the good lighting techniques)

look for online training tab and try it now for free.

http://www.kelbytraining.com

Wow! thank's Taffy. I should be Pro by the time I digest this lot.

 

[cliffpatte]

Ha ha! Just looked it up on google - Aperture settings.

I read somewhere that my f/1.4 lens becomes sharp at around f/2. I was thinking about setting the aperture to around f/2, and then let the camera work out the shutter speed and ISO on it's own.

At F2, you probably still don't have much Depth of Focus for your portraits, if you have f2.8 on the lens it might stop the effects of an in focus nose and out of focus ears, for instance. Try to focus on eyes, or eyelashes as eyes out of focus are odd in a portrait.

cheers
Cliff

 

[Fatmarley]

I guess I could fire off a few pics at different 'f numbers' to see how the DOF looks. Digital photography makes it much easier to experiment.

Focusing on the eyes is the one thing I can remember from when I had my 35mm SLR. Cheers for the tips though.

 

[andc]

Indeed a lot of portrait photogs use exposures of a few seconds to make the face more alive

Is this true? I'm not saying it's not but I've never heard of it and it seems like an excellent way to get subject blur. Genuinely curious - do you have a link or something to this technique?

 

[Rico]

f1.4 is asking a bit much of a rusty novice, especially photographing a 6-month old baby. there's not a lot of features to the face at that age, so concentrating on the light and *some* depth of field are more important than being able to tell hifi guys you shot at f1.4. I'd suggest around f2.2 if the light permits. try for diffuse lighting, and if you're usuing incandescent play around with the white balance to get things looking more natural.

HTH

 

[Mullardman]

I wish I had that camera and any f1.4 lens!

I reckon my totally inexpert advice would be to get your subject and your kit together and see what happens.
I've not long returned from a birthday party for an 80 year old lady. I took my 350D and 50mm f1.8 lens. Even though it was after dark, I tried to shoot without flash, which meant using f1.8. With that sort of depth of field you are forced to chose who/what you are focusing on... with some interesting results. The following are un-edited. All shot indoors at f1.8. I would probably play with colour etc, but I'm quite pleased with the way the main subject in each shot is captured. We looked at these pics on my hosts PC and everyone present seemed pleased. These are in no way top notch pro pics, but I think they illustrate a point.

Mull

 

[Fatmarley]

f1.4 is asking a bit much of a rusty novice, especially photographing a 6-month old baby. there's not a lot of features to the face at that age, so concentrating on the light and *some* depth of field are more important than being able to tell hifi guys you shot at f1.4. I'd suggest around f2.2 if the light permits. try for diffuse lighting, and if you're usuing incandescent play around with the white balance to get things looking more natural.

HTH

I tried some shots at f1.4 but they do seem a little soft and the DOF seems too narrow for portraits.

The 'custom white balance' option on the 450d is great for indoor shots. I've been shooting in RAW so will have a play with the white balance on the PC when i get a chance.

 

[Fatmarley]

I wish I had that camera and any f1.4 lens!

I reckon my totally inexpert advice would be to get your subject and your kit together and see what happens.
I've not long returned from a birthday party for an 80 year old lady. I took my 350D and 50mm f1.8 lens. Even though it was after dark, I tried to shoot without flash, which meant using f1.8. With that sort of depth of field you are forced to chose who/what you are focusing on... with some interesting results. The following are un-edited. All shot indoors at f1.8. I would probably play with colour etc, but I'm quite pleased with the way the main subject in each shot is captured. We looked at these pics on my hosts PC and everyone present seemed pleased. These are in no way top notch pro pics, but I think they illustrate a point.

Mull

There's no need to be jellous of my new camera and lens Mull. I drive an old banger and i'm up to the limit on my overdraft.

I think your advice to practice is good. Reading up on the photography is good but nothing beats actually doing it (especially with digital photography and the results being instant). The booklet that came with the camera has helped a lot and i'm quite pleased with some of the pics i've taken.
I will post some pics when I get a chance to upload them to the PC.


I can't really comment on your pics because i'm looking at them on my mobile phone + I don't feel i'm qualified to comment.

 

[Mullardman]

There's no need to be jellous of my new camera and lens Mull. I drive an old banger and i'm up to the limit on my overdraft.


I can't really comment on your pics because i'm looking at them on my mobile phone + I don't feel i'm qualified to comment.

Re: Overdraft. Aren't we all!

Qualified to comment? Of course you are. You either like them or you don't.
But seriously, they are not great pics, they just (mostly) show how a lens used with wide aperture/short DOF makes you focus on something to the exclusion of all else, as in the group shots, or on nothing, as in the portrait of the old lady, where I got it wrong and focused nowhere.....

Photography seems to me to be hard to get right, but fun to try.

 

[Mr Cat]

Re: Overdraft. Aren't we all!

Qualified to comment? Of course you are. You either like them or you don't.
But seriously, they are not great pics, they just (mostly) show how a lens used with wide aperture/short DOF makes you focus on something to the exclusion of all else, as in the group shots, or on nothing, as in the portrait of the old lady, where I got it wrong and focused nowhere.....

Photography seems to me to be hard to get right, but fun to try.

yes - of course you are...!! there's no elitism on here despite what some people think...

 

[Fatmarley]

Now I know I'm not going to be laughed at, I'm more inclined to post some of my efforts - It wont be for a while though. . . . . .