Found a random lady walking and making bubbles

[Jim Olson]

 

[Jerome Marot]

The image is nice, but the technical quality is appalling, looking like the product of early smartphones. I had the curiosity of looking at the exifs, and that is even more puzzling. Apparently, this is an EOS 10D, but even a 2003 SLR camera should do better than this at ISO 200, as this review shows. There is no capture date. The owner is Curtiss Wong, which may be a previous owner if the camera was bought second hand. The picture was exported by shotwell, a gallery software for Linux used by Fedora and Ubuntu.

None of this explains the very low technical quality, so the question remains.

 

[Jim Olson]

The image is nice, but the technical quality is appalling, looking like the product of early smartphones. I had the curiosity of looking at the exifs, and that is even more puzzling. Apparently, this is an EOS 10D, but even a 2003 SLR camera should do better than this at ISO 200, as this review shows. There is no capture date. The owner is Curtiss Wong, which may be a previous owner if the camera was bought second hand. The picture was exported by shotwell, a gallery software for Linux used by Fedora and Ubuntu.

None of this explains the very low technical quality, so the question remains.

Okay, here is another picture, maybe this is a little better but I was focusing on the bubbles in the first picture.
Also yes the camera is a 2nd hand Canon 10D. I took the picture yesterday. And who is Curtiss Wong? Are you talking about my camera? And where is all this info. I did use Shotwell to adjust the picture. And I do use Linux.

 

[Robert Watcher]

I have noticed your posts here on the forum for a while Jim, and I have found from experience that it never fares well for me when I try to offer constructive help and so I refrain from doing so.

But being you have become a bit of a prolific poster here recently maybe its time I offer advice.

I can understand Asher trying to make you feel good and be active in his forum by complimenting your pictures, but he is probably doing a great disservice to you with some of the praise and particularly some of his suggestions - if indeed you are trying to learn and improve. Please don’t dabble into stitching (if you want a wide panorama shot do it simply and well with your phone instead) - and looking into all kinds of software or methods to improve your photographs. They should only be used once you are able to create a quality image - and only then can they enhance to bring an image to a high or artistic standard.

1 - I will leave composition alone for now. Your drawing our attention to things that you are seeing in your pictures, is a common theme for people who like to take pictures and fail to recognize that what their eyes see and minds visualize is totally different than the reality that is captured in a photograph. If you practice and study other photographers who have a high level of competence - you will eventually improve in these areas.

2 - The images quality. This is an area that you need to work on seriously. And while I may be wrong, I suspect that you may be complicating the process and doing yourself an injustice. Absolutely every camera and every smart phone over the past 10 years or more, is capable of taking exquisite image quality in good lighting conditions as you have been taking your pictures in —- and that quality will come straight out of the box with no adjustments.

When I look at your posted pictures, I can only presume that you may have been convinced to shoot in RAW format, thinking that will improve your image quality - and then trying to adjust the photo after in editing software. If that is the case, please put the setting of your camera back to JPEG and try shooting in Program mode or if you are insistent in Aperture Priority mode and don’t play around with the picture. You should first off, be able to get a good quality straight from the camera. If you can’t, go back and try again watching your LCD screen on back to see if it is right.

Once your camera is set automatically using Program as an example, the only other setting that is essential that you learn to use - is exposure compensation. Look online to find out where and how to change the values with your camera model. I know how to do it on my iPhone by tapping and holding the screen and sliding my finger up and down —- and use plus or minus settings for most photos I take.

When looking at your screen after taking the picture (using Program mode to start) - if the image is too bright and you have lost detail in bright areas, dial in Minus - exposure compensation. If the image looks too dark, dial in Plus + exposure compensation. Take the picture again and see if it is getting better. Keep adjusting the compensation until the picture looks perfectly exposed. Eventually you get used to making these adjustments and how much plus or minus is needed.

My point is. Go back to basics and produce a picture that has a good image quality straight from the camera or phone. Once that image quality is mastered (or along the way) - which is quite easy to do with today’s technology - you can start working on composition and watching for elements and distractions to eliminate from the scene by selecting a different vantage point or lens choice.

Image Quality comes quickly. Producing captivating photographs takes time and practice. It is clear that you are wanting to enjoy your photography and so I am not trying to discourage you, but encourage you. I hope this suggestion moves you to even more satisfaction.

 

[Asher Kelman]

I support all your points, Robert, even being wary of my input.

But what I look at are the drops of wonder that spark THEN the beginning of the hunt to find a spot to shoot from where one can frame the magic.

I support any solid basic approach.

First one has to observe and feel a need to preserve something of that amazing feeling.

You emphasize basics.

At the outset I am happy enough that someone is already moved by sights that most others folk take for granted and pass by.

My next step is to go out without a camera and just a card with frame rectangle cut out and explore with this to include what’s needed and exclude distractions that contribute nothing.

Then I would go exactly as you have instructed: program mode and jpg!

[You are correct there and RAW is only needed for returns to down the road if one wants to work on that picture, (say taming part of the very bright sky), for printing.]

But fundamentally, I really do enjoy the spark that excites the photographer to stick around and take pictures of sights they enjoy and I am patient to the nth, after that!

Asher

 

[Tom dinning]

Confused yet, Jim.
I’d suggest you go for a ride on the Honda and forget all this but that would be productive only in the ride.
Robert and Asher are competent photographs and their advice is worthy of noting.
Theres another way and it combines all those suggestions.

ultimately you want your images to look good. First thing is to decide good for who. That’s where the fights start in this place. What some consider looking good I consider only worth of wiping my arse on as long as it’s a soft image.
Others I find incredibly interesting and telling but might not satisfy Roberts criteria.

So, if it’s to please others, step forward. 3 photographers in a room will give you at least 4 different opinions.

I would suggest using aAshers technique of the cardboard rectangle but go one step further. Use a simple camera with auto controls and take pictures instead. Then you can go home and compare what you took. Thi might chew up a bit of card space but, hey, it’s cheap. It might be common for you to go for a 20 minute walk and come back with a few hundred pictures, mostly different views of the same thing.
Roberts suggestion of keeping things simple by using program and jpg (look that up if you don’t know what it is) is also very appropriate for a learner. And that you are. It enables you to think about what you want the picture to look like, which is different to what you see with your eyes.
Yes, it’s hard to believe, but the camera lies every time. And it doesn’t have a brain either. Your brain makes all sorts of adjustments to the view while your looking by making up stuff that’s not there, ignoring things, changing colour, seeing into shadows, adding bits from your memory and putting in a great deal of emotion just to make it even more complicated.

Gettin what you want in a picture requires a lot of practice and hard wor, lots of mistakes and the occasional satisfying moments. Don’t rely on others for that satisfying moment. They may not have your taste. They might not even have any taste at all and theirs evidence for that anywhere you look.
Personal, I can’t even understand why anyone would buy a Holda Gold Wing. It’s like a block of flats on two wheels.
See what I mean?

people ar reticent to post their own pictures as examples of suggestions. I don’t know why. Somehow, it’s considered bad taste.
I’m Australian and we’re all ill mannered buffoons so I’ll ignore the custom and give you some examples of things that might help. Sort of a lesson on the run.
Then you’ll have something to practice and post and we can see what a mess you’ve made of it and all have a good laugh.

Just kidding, although you’ll never know.

 

[Jerome Marot]

Okay, here is another picture, maybe this is a little better but I was focusing on the bubbles in the first picture.

Other photographers commented on the artistic quality of your pictures, I'll only comment on the technical quality. I can't figure out why an EOS 10D would produce a picture like this one. All this is very puzzling, not only this picture but the whole context.

And who is Curtiss Wong?

I don't know. The name is in your pictures.

Are you talking about my camera?

Obviously yes.

And where is all this info.

In the exifs, a snippet of data that your camera adds to each picture.

 

[Peter Dexter]

The card with rectangle cut out is a useful device used in drawing classes to help students define a composition.

 

[Asher Kelman]

The card with rectangle cut out is a useful device used in drawing classes to help students define a composition.

Peter and Jim,

Yes it’s a recognized way of training the brain. I didn’t make it up!!

I taught my 3 sons that way. They each are now accomplished photographers. My youngest was a photographer for a major model and actors agency for their “new faces”. My elder son uses his photography skill in marketing and my middle son in legal case image presentations for proof.

It’s a simple idea. Move around and explore how you feel towards the view of that sight, framing the object of interest so that it gives you the feelings you want to express.

To do this, crouch, move, go up sone steps, climb on a wall, go home and bring a step stool, move to other side of the street or looking down from an overpass or hillside.

This exploration can of course be done with your opposing fingers in a rectangle or with a camera on “P”. As long as you make a myriad of experiments you will start the path to finding what angle of view and from what vantage point and time of the day adds the best finishing touches and presentation to your idea.

So you have to find out what you like and intriguing and force each scene explore the possibilities that thrill you.

Only allow inclusion of objects in the viewfinder, (cardboard or that of your camera), that add something you feel is needed or obligatory.

Asher

 

[Jerome Marot]

While I know about the cut frame device and believe it helps some people, I would like to point out that I found it not very useful myself. People are different in their ways to perceive photography.

 

[Tom dinning]

Now my head is spinning.

Stay with what you do, Jim. We’ll appreciate your point of view anyway.

 

[Jim Olson]

Well that was interesting to say the least. I do shoot in P almost all the time.

I found the website...
https://exifdata.com/
There it is...
All the info
Than you

 

[Asher Kelman]

Back to the “Random Lady Making Bubbles”!

In truth, immediately my reaction was, “What a delightful opportunity!”

We always are on the lookout for striking scenes! This excited me! Not merely bubbles but a chain of enormous transparent spheres that appear to trail their creator!

If I would have been there, I would have ran to a position to isolate them and the woman, crouching low against the sky.

Perhaps I might have done that.

But I could have just as easily failed miserably...

“to catch the moment to exclusively frame the essential features with flair and compelling importance”,

....just as the way I, (in fact you,), actually experienced it.

You certainly succeeded to document the unusual sight.

For me, I would just tell myself, I wish I could have raced over to position myself and isolate the bubbles and the strange woman! Damn I should have ran and made it over there.

But for me, my camera at that time, was a “note taker”, just a “snap” to save this for my own compositions when I am in control!

I would tuck this away in my brain for a future compositional element with someone striking and magnetic!

In fact, I have already decided exactly that. So that’s why I was immediately delighted with this single picture.

Damn the composition, for me, at least, you certainly slayed it Jim!

Of course you could have raced to that position to compose better, but you did bring to us the raw idea to chew on and feed us!

Thanks for that!

Asher

 

[Robert Watcher]

Back to the “Random Lady Making Bubbles”!

In truth, immediately my reaction was, “What a delightful opportunity!”

View attachment 3310​

We always are on the lookout for striking scenes! This excited me! Not merely bubbles but a chain of enormous transparent spheres that appear to trail their creator!

If I would have been there, I would have ran to a position to isolate them and the woman, crouching low against the sky.

Perhaps I might have done that.

But I could have just as easily failed miserably...

“to catch the moment to exclusively frame the essential features with flair and compelling importance”,

....just as the way I, (in fact you,), actually experienced it.

You certainly succeeded to document the unusual sight.

For me, I would just tell myself, I wish I could have raced over to position myself and isolate the bubbles and the strange woman! Damn I should have ran and made it over there.

But for me, my camera at that time, was a “note taker”, just a “snap” to save this for my own compositions when I am in control!

I would tuck this away in my brain for a future compositional element with someone striking and magnetic!

In fact, I have already decided exactly that. So that’s why I was immediately delighted with this single picture.

Damn the composition, for me, at least, you certainly slayed it Jim!

Of course you could have raced to that position to compose better, but you did bring to us the raw idea to chew on and feed us!

Thanks for that!

Asher

What? You have to be kidding right!

I am an optimist, a believer in people’s potential, and an advocate of charting your own path artistically —— but the advice that Asher and Tom have given you here as a new photographer is terrible. Don’t keep on doing what you are doing. You didn’t slay it. Google is your friend these days. Dig in and find out how to develop your photography skills. Learn to recognize what attracts you to a photograph, and find ways to reproduce that. There was no easy path for any of us who have achieved any level of ability (including Tom). Any skill takes time and effort - study, practice and refinement. On top of those things, pushing boundaries and often times failing and finding solutions can be of great value.

 

[Jerome Marot]

There is a possibility that Jim is pulling our collective legs. I still miss an answer to the question: "why does a picture allegedly taken with a SLR looks like one taken with a first generation smartphone?".

 

[Asher Kelman]

Again you are right, Robert! You are adept at people pictures and you could attack any project as you can turn on a dime and you will almost certainly ace the task at hand.

He can’t yet frame!

That’s why I myself will walk around a village in Tuscany without a camera, make notes and return with my big camera sunset, having thought about it.

Ansel Adams did that.

Obviously not good for event photography. The company wants their PR and the bride wants her wedding guests to be in her pictures.

That is why I stop folk with a camera doing weddings as they can’t really do a job as a pro and “100% deliver” no matter the lighting in the Church or Synagogue or pushiness of a mother-in-law.

Also he shouldn’t be a war photographer either!

Asher

 

[Asher Kelman]

There is a possibility that Jim is pulling our collective legs. I still miss an answer to the question: "why does a picture allegedly taken with a SLR looks like one taken with a first generation smartphone?".

Can you tell us in what what way the pictures technically fail.

Is it possible it being due to focus not being aligned, old firmware, the first owner made crazy settings!

Asher

 

[Asher Kelman]

@ Jim

Shooting a random non staged event like this is hard! At least you recorded the event and perhaps that is sufficient. I really enjoyed it as it sparked ideas for my own work. Those bubbles weigh and cost nothing yet are impressive. The learning part is that you have to get experience to immediately see how to frame what you think are the interesting features you need to include, (you got that) and then from what vantage point, (you were off)!

So to start, avoid serious “favors” for people, so no one is disappointed and you don’t take the bread off the table of hardworking baby or wedding Pro. So just fun experiments as follows:

1. Save pictures you admire, (online, in museums and galleries). Go to exhibitions! Find out what you like and what elements the pictures interest you and make them unique and to hold your attention.

2. Snap what catches your eye. It’s merely a survey and most shots will be awkward at first. Do your best to frame what's fascinating and only add items that strengthen the picture.

3 Study what you come home with.

Pick the 2-3 very best. What do you like about them?

How was that main subject positioned? What other items should have been included or excluded? Make notes and even a drawing. I photocopy the best print and then use arrows and lines to mark what changes are needed.

4. Return in the right time of day in the right light with a plan to shoot from a certain position and vantage point and repeat step #3. That’s why I ask how far away a scene is!

5. Make a folder for your 20 best pictures. Keep adding and ranking and then going back to step #1.


This is how to capture something you like, cleanly, in a way that reflects the “essence” of what makes the scene worthwhile.

There should be no hair or other foreign objects in your soup! Our brains don’t like it!

Asher

 

[Robert Watcher]

Again you are right, Robert! You are adept at people pictures and you could attack any project as you can turn on a dime and you will almost certainly ace the task at hand.

He can’t yet frame!

That’s why I myself will walk around a village in Tuscany without a camera, make notes and return with my big camera sunset, having thought about it.

Ansel Adams did that.

Obviously not good for event photography. The company wants their PR and the bride wants her wedding guests to be in her pictures.

That is why I stop folk with a camera doing weddings as they can’t really do a job as a pro and “100% deliver” no matter the lighting in the Church or Synagogue or pushiness of a mother-in-law.

Also he shouldn’t be a war photographer either!

Asher

You may be presuming that I am putting Jim’s work to my standard. I am not and wouldn’t expect it.

 

[Jerome Marot]

Can you tell us in what what way the pictures technically fail.

Is it possible it being due to focus not being aligned, old firmware, the first owner made crazy settings!

No, I can't explain why the picture looks like that, which is the reason why I am asking the question. The firmware is the last one for that camera. Possibly the lens is malfunctioning, as these pictures were taken at full aperture while the ones on the beach (which are reasonably sharp) were taken at f/8. But that would hardly explain the peculiar colours. Possibly the O.P. is pulling our collective legs and the pictures are not what they seem to be. Exifs can be changed.

Maybe Will Thomson would know? It is supposed to be his camera.

 

[Asher Kelman]

Jerome,

What is the part of the color that is appalling. Grass and bubbles look typical. Also has bright light coming into the lens might decrease contrast.

Anything more specific?

Asher

 

[Jerome Marot]

This is a link to images from the original review of the 10D on dpreview:

https://www.dpreview.com/sample-galleries/5774422920/canon-eos-10d-review-samples/4920723036

The colours look quite different, don't they?

 

[Asher Kelman]

Jerome and Jim,

I think they the lens used is destroying the quality of the Sensor!

It’s a plastic lens and perhaps it has fungus in it or was dropped in water at some stage in its life and a film has dried inside. I would like to see pictures with a 50 mm 1.8 or any other well regarded consumer lens.



Asher

 

[Tom dinning]

What? You have to be kidding right!

I am an optimist, a believer in people’s potential, and an advocate of charting your own path artistically —— but the advice that Asher and Tom have given you here as a new photographer is terrible. Don’t keep on doing what you are doing. You didn’t slay it. Google is your friend these days. Dig in and find out how to develop your photography skills. Learn to recognize what attracts you to a photograph, and find ways to reproduce that. There was no easy path for any of us who have achieved any level of ability (including Tom). Any skill takes time and effort - study, practice and refinement. On top of those things, pushing boundaries and often times failing and finding solutions can be of great value.

Excuse my, Jim, while I defend myself here.
Firstly, Robert, Jim isn’t a new photographer, he’s just a bit more serious than he was. Got himself a fancy camera, he did. Expected it to take great pictures, he did. Didn’t seem to work, did it.
The issue for me is what does Jim want to achieve. Your standard? Mine? Ashers? Or just work on his own skills until he’s happy and having a good time.
I’ve had a browse through Jim’s FB photos (sorry, Jim, I didn’t ask) and they seem OK to me. They won’t win any prizes but I have a feeling Jim ain’t looking to that just yet. He can’t even see the end of his camera let alone that far down the track.
Ashers so righ when he tells Jim of all the exciting things that can be seen and tried. That’s where Jim is and for all we know it may be where he want to be. Just a happy snapper that knows enough to get by.

It’s how we all started, isn’t it? It was for me at least. Still is if I’m honest. I might know a bit more that Jim but that was learned along the way quite incidentally.

I rather like the way Jim spotted something interesting and made an effort to capture it and share it with us.
As for Asher running after the lady with the bubbles! That’s a laugh. I can just see it now. The police are called and Asher is carted away screaming he’s not a rapist. I’d take a picture of that and bugger the quality.

And that’s the essence of people having a hobby and having a good time. It’s all about capturing the moment and having a good time doing it, not carrying a bit of cardboard around and acting like a weirdo.

Introducing all this stuff is a distraction for Jim. He is really better off doing his own thing and Googling if he wants more info, although google has its ‘experts’ that ain’t much different to car salespeople.

JIM? ARE YOU THERE?
Sorry to talk over you.
Contrary to someone’s opinion (I’ve forgotten who and I couldn’t be bothered reading it all again) I did not work hard to get where I am, wherever that is. It was dead easy. A sort of evolutionary process with some osmosis from looking at lots of pictures, especially the early ones from 1830 to 2020 (shit! That’s the whole lot!). Not thinking about technical stuff; ever. Just taking pictures and getting the camera to do what I wanted it to do. Trial and error, experimenting, getting into the minds of other photographers, feeling what they might have felt, carving my own path to ..... Fuked if I know.

So take your camera, go chase ladies with bubbles and find rabbits on the beach. Have a laugh and don’t forget to be Jim Olson.

 

[Peter Dexter]

A most astute soliloquy Tom. There are some who take themselves far too seriously.

 

[Tom dinning]

A most astute soliloquy Tom. There are some who take themselves far too seriously.

Cheers, Pete.

 

[Jerome Marot]

Whatever. Before giving answers to Jim, we would need to understand what he is trying to achieve.

 

[Tom dinning]

Whatever. Before giving answers to Jim, we would need to understand what he is trying to achieve.

Then he needs one person to answer.