Results 1 to 10 of 13
Thread: Taking photos
-
9th April 2011, 11:33 PM #1
- Join Date
- Dec 2010
- Location
- Illinois, USA
- Posts
- 249
- Thanks
- 37
- Thanked 19 Times in 17 Posts
- Images
- 14
Taking photos
So many here have such nice photos of their furries ... and I struggle to get good ones.
The problem of moving around is a problem, I expect, for everyone. Any tips on how to handle?
So many of my shots end up with reflections in the eyes (like the first picture here). I don't even know what causes it, let alone how to avoid it. Any help?
Thursday, I managed to get some good photos of Walter without the reflection in the eyes (but I don't know how I did it). If I take enough pics, I occasionally get a decent shot.
(The second picture was taken to show his lightest colouring.)
-
10th April 2011, 07:20 AM #2debbie560Guest
Fab photos.... even those of us that take pictures regularly get the white and red eyes with the flash... if you camera has an AV and or a pets and children setting this might be the best if your stunning Walter is on the move... you can also on the AV setting make the shots continuous.. I like this setting best you get some fab action shots....
When I have babies I can take up to 400 shots... and only about 20 of theme are good enough for the website...
Your photos are great.... and he is beautiful xx
-
The Following User Says Thank You to debbie560 For This Useful Post:
Walter Coonkat (10th April 2011)
-
10th April 2011, 10:42 AM #3
- Join Date
- May 2010
- Location
- London, United Kingdom, United Kingdom
- Posts
- 926
- Thanks
- 144
- Thanked 167 Times in 158 Posts
- Images
- 51
Photos 4 and 5 are really good - they show off his beautiful coat, his lovely clear eyes, that gorgeous muzzle... think you're better at this than you give yourself credit for! I can generally get good shots of Freyja (although when I use a flash, it makes her eyes like a little insane) but Wicca is an absolute mare... shots with the flash make her eyes look - to put it bluntly - "evil" and her coat is so shiny that it can be difficult to see her features; with no flash, her eyes are great, and her coat doesn't overpower her features, but you still can't see them as she's so black!
-
The Following User Says Thank You to FreyjaRoMaine For This Useful Post:
Walter Coonkat (10th April 2011)
-
10th April 2011, 11:01 AM #4
- Join Date
- Oct 2010
- Location
- Hampshire, UK
- Posts
- 437
- Thanks
- 62
- Thanked 91 Times in 84 Posts
- Images
- 18
-
The Following User Says Thank You to Rachel-C For This Useful Post:
Walter Coonkat (10th April 2011)
-
10th April 2011, 01:04 PM #5
- Join Date
- Jul 2010
- Location
- Further Outside Area 51
- Posts
- 127
- Thanks
- 2
- Thanked 21 Times in 21 Posts
Walter's a looker for sure.
I've been trying to get the hang of snapping the kitties and I found a couple of things.
I'm not any sort of photography expert, but I'll share my limited experience.
Generally, flash doesn't work all that well for cats. It annoys/scares the cats and gives the evil eye effect...
I have what was an entry level DSLR at the time Nikon D40.
One of the better investments I made for it as far as indoor photography was a fast prime lens.
This allows low light shots to be crisp and clear while minimizing the motion blur.
Here's a couple I took in low light without flash.
This one was with the room lights on, no flash or camera lighting,
Coco watching the sunrise with no other lighting.
Elvis in really dim light.
A UV filter helps too with some types of lighting.
The other necessity is a bit of post processing to even out minor lighting adjustments, crop, rotate, size, etc.
I use iPhoto that comes with Apple iLife and a shareware program called Graphic Converter...
There's equivalent programs for Windows. One doesn't need to spend hundreds for Photoshop...
It's also not necessary to spend tons of money on camera gear, either, but it can be necessary to experiment and see what the equipment on hand is capable of.
There's many sites dedicated to teaching the basics of photography...
Also, bits are cheap. One can snap hundreds of shots and throw all of them away except for the outstanding ones...Last edited by claudel; 10th April 2011 at 01:08 PM. Reason: Added another picture
-
The Following User Says Thank You to claudel For This Useful Post:
Walter Coonkat (10th April 2011)
-
10th April 2011, 01:28 PM #6
- Join Date
- Apr 2010
- Location
- Devon, England
- Posts
- 153
- Thanks
- 12
- Thanked 34 Times in 33 Posts
- Images
- 19
Good advice Claudel... I used to have a Nikon D70, excellent camra but it eventually gave up the ghost (we did event photography once-upon-a-time) so I got a point and shoot Olympus (tiny silver thing) it isn't very good at all far too much shutter delay etc... it rally is worth paying that bit more for a DSLR, look on ebay for some used bargains...
-
10th April 2011, 02:21 PM #7debbie560Guest
Beautiful photos....Claudel xx
-
10th April 2011, 03:53 PM #8
- Join Date
- Jan 2010
- Posts
- 488
- Thanks
- 8
- Thanked 160 Times in 129 Posts
I use DSLRs that give much more control over photo parameters and have much better quality lenses. As already noted, trying photos without flash has many advantages, but either the cat must be still or the light level high or you need a really expensive "fast lens." One of the great things about digital cameras for photographing pets is that you can take a hundred photos in a few minutes and just discard all but the good ten or so.
The glowing eyes from flash apparently has a name, eyeshine, and can be read about here:
[ame="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tapetum_lucidum"]Tapetum lucidum - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia@@AMEPARAM@@/wiki/File:Man_and_dog.jpg" class="image"><img alt="" src="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/21/Man_and_dog.jpg/220px-Man_and_dog.jpg"@@AMEPARAM@@commons/thumb/2/21/Man_and_dog.jpg/220px-Man_and_dog.jpg[/ame]
It is possible to use photo adjustment software to clean it up when it isn't too bad. Unfortunately, automated red-eye tools won't work, so you will have to read about how to do it manually. I have gotten pretty good at fixing this, but it can take 5-10 minutes per photo.
I will include one of the first photos I fixed. Would have been a shame to lose this to eyeshine:
-
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to mcguy For This Useful Post:
Walter Coonkat (10th April 2011)
-
10th April 2011, 04:47 PM #9
- Join Date
- Jan 2010
- Posts
- 488
- Thanks
- 8
- Thanked 160 Times in 129 Posts
Photographing black cats is definitely the hardest. Pretty much have to use flash and have a lens that allows you to get close ups or you don't see much. I have tried with the neighbor's black cat that lives on our porch.
Here are zoomed crops showing what was done to Allie's eyes in the photos I posted:
-
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to mcguy For This Useful Post:
Walter Coonkat (10th April 2011)
-
10th April 2011, 09:55 PM #10
- Join Date
- Dec 2010
- Location
- Illinois, USA
- Posts
- 249
- Thanks
- 37
- Thanked 19 Times in 17 Posts
- Images
- 14
Wow and thanks to all. I'm surprised to learn how many here also take a lot of pics to get a few good ones. That makes me feel a bit less useless!
A lot of terms here are new to me -- fortunately, there's Google!
Claudel, I am absolutely gobsmacked how bright those pics are without a flash -- and in low light, no less! I know the camera I use (my wife's, actually) couldn't do that.
Also, thanks for the kind comments about Walter. I do think he's handsome -- and I'm not at all prejudiced!
Bookmarks