Indoor Photography

Hello:

These days it's raining in Lima, or there is so much humidity that the days
are cloudy, I'm trying to improve indoor photography, and I took this photo:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/mmyv/6069807209/

It would be interesting to know your recommendations in this kind of
photography.

By the way, I took advantage to take this video in the main square.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/mmyv/6067609837/

Thanks for your comments.

--
MMYV
http://www.mmyv.com

mmyvusenet wrote:
Hello:

These days it's raining in Lima, or there is so much humidity that the days
are cloudy, I'm trying to improve indoor photography, and I took this photo:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/mmyv/6069807209/

It would be interesting to know your recommendations in this kind of
photography.

By the way, I took advantage to take this video in the main square.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/mmyv/6067609837/

Thanks for your comments.

--
MMYV
http://www.mmyv.com



Hi,

It's a very nice picture, with natural-appearing lighting, and nice
framing. Muy bueno, amigo. I tried replying via your Yahoo page, but
Yahoo refuses to take my valid ID and password.

Mort
New York

Miguel,

I would have shot it differently but I wasn't there to judge the limitations
of taking the shot. Assuming that was the best position and angle you could
get, then framing the picture in portrait mode, opening the lens to get some
bokeh on the background and using a fill flash off to the side would make a
dramatic difference to me. But I'm one that likes the effects of HDR and
saturated colors.

Try cropping the shot to get rid of some of the distractions such as the
wall on the right and reducing the background on the left side. Depending
on the software you use, you may have other options for bringing out some
highlights on the face, robe and flowers and make the central subject "jump"
a little.

If the photo was taken to just document something you saw as a memento, then
it works as is for a snapshot. But if you want to do better, then go back
and shoot it again. Sometimes places do not allow flashes or tripods to be
used, so you need to get creative. A faster lens, a monopod and a LED
flashlight (it's not a flash...) may be some things to try.

Bob S.

"mmyvusenet" wrote in message ...

Hello:

These days it's raining in Lima, or there is so much humidity that the days
are cloudy, I'm trying to improve indoor photography, and I took this photo:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/mmyv/6069807209/

It would be interesting to know your recommendations in this kind of
photography.

By the way, I took advantage to take this video in the main square.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/mmyv/6067609837/

Thanks for your comments.

--
MMYV
http://www.mmyv.com

Bruce said:

How dare you criticise Miguel's efforts?

Just look at all the awards his image got!

;-)

You're right but he doesn't let those awards go to his head either....;-)

Miguel asks for advice and then actually uses it to improve his photography.
I've been following his shots of some very interesting places for the past
year and his improvement has been significant. Now if we can just convince
him that a CPL would help pop some of those outdoor shots.

Keep up the good work Miguel !

Bob S.

The "subject" is lost. Do some work with angles and field of view to let
folks know what you are trying to tell them.

If the "subject" is not what I assumed, then perhaps both you and I are
wrong. You see ... photography is not all that different from other forms
of communication. The message is what is important and the subject is often
the key.

This is a good picture taken by a good camera and there are now billions of
those!

"mmyvusenet" wrote in message ...

Hello:

These days it's raining in Lima, or there is so much humidity that the days
are cloudy, I'm trying to improve indoor photography, and I took this photo:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/mmyv/6069807209/

It would be interesting to know your recommendations in this kind of
photography.

By the way, I took advantage to take this video in the main square.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/mmyv/6067609837/

Thanks for your comments.

--
MMYV
http://www.mmyv.com

In article
,
otter wrote:

I think I will take a no-negative post policy
towards Miguel


Why?

--
m-m
Photo Gallery:
http://www.mhmyers.com

On Thu, 25 Aug 2011 15:10:00 +0100, Bruce
wrote:

"BobS" wrote:
Bruce said:

How dare you criticise Miguel's efforts?

Just look at all the awards his image got!

;-)

You're right but he doesn't let those awards go to his head either....;-)

Miguel asks for advice and then actually uses it to improve his photography.


There is no evidence of any improvement here.

Some months ago an expert photographer posted links to his own web
site containing many images of the historical city of Lima. It was
difficult to believe that his captivating, colourful, well-composed,
detailed and pin sharp images were of the same city as Miguel's dull,
low contrast, unsharp snapshots.

Still, he didn't have quite as many "awards" as Miguel. ;-)


You don't pick up "awards" when you put your photographs up on your
own website. You pick up "awards" like picking up sandspurs at the
beach when you put your photographs up on Flickr. You get 'em whether
you want them or not.

You can blame Miguel for picking the worst photo host venue around,
but not for unsolicited "awards".




--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida

On Thu, 25 Aug 2011 17:10:55 +0100, Bruce
wrote:

tony cooper wrote:

You can blame Miguel for picking the worst photo host venue around,
but not for unsolicited "awards".


Please explain what you mean by "unsolicited" in this context.

Wha? "Unsolicited" means "not requested". If I choose to go on
Flickr and post a comment and mark as a "favorite" some shot there, my
action is unsolicited by the photographer.

I know what you are driving at by asking, but simply using a host that
encourages ratings does not, de facto, solicit ratings.

I tried Flickr in 2008 and posted 8 photos. Only one received a
comment, and that was by a person who follows my photos and comments
on them wherever they are housed. I know him from another newsgroup.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/tony213...n/photostream/

My premise is that Miguel is not very knowledgeable about what is
available in image hosts, and has used one that is easy for him to
work with. I don't think he's in it for the "awards".

My premise is also that Miguel is interested in improving his
photography, but has little ability to put suggestion into use. This
may be because of a language barrier, or may be that he simply doesn't
care.

He also multiple-posts instead of cross-posts despite being informed
that cross-posts are better if you insist on your post being in more
than one group.

You have to admit that the guy has balls. He's been smacked down by
so many people, but he keeps coming back. Most, like Sisker, would
turn-tail and run if their efforts met so much criticism.
--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida

On 8/25/11 12:06 PM, in article ,
"Bruce" wrote:

tony cooper wrote:
On Thu, 25 Aug 2011 17:10:55 +0100, Bruce
wrote:

tony cooper wrote:

You can blame Miguel for picking the worst photo host venue around,
but not for unsolicited "awards".


Please explain what you mean by "unsolicited" in this context.

Wha? "Unsolicited" means "not requested". If I choose to go on
Flickr and post a comment and mark as a "favorite" some shot there, my
action is unsolicited by the photographer.

I know what you are driving at by asking, but simply using a host that
encourages ratings does not, de facto, solicit ratings.

I tried Flickr in 2008 and posted 8 photos. Only one received a
comment, and that was by a person who follows my photos and comments
on them wherever they are housed. I know him from another newsgroup.


One of my students did some research into how these "award systems"
operate. It is all very entertaining.

The way it works is that people give ratings to get ratings. They
give spurious ratings of "excellent" to other people's images and get
them back in return. Had you followed that procedure, you would have
given many spurious ratings and got many back.

The ratings are spurious because no-one pays any attention to the
images, it's just a mutual award society, with awards given purely in
exchange for getting them back.



Sorta like the U.S. Congress, eh?!?

On Thu, 25 Aug 2011 18:06:31 +0100, Bruce
wrote:

tony cooper wrote:
On Thu, 25 Aug 2011 17:10:55 +0100, Bruce
wrote:

tony cooper wrote:

You can blame Miguel for picking the worst photo host venue around,
but not for unsolicited "awards".


Please explain what you mean by "unsolicited" in this context.

Wha? "Unsolicited" means "not requested". If I choose to go on
Flickr and post a comment and mark as a "favorite" some shot there, my
action is unsolicited by the photographer.

I know what you are driving at by asking, but simply using a host that
encourages ratings does not, de facto, solicit ratings.

I tried Flickr in 2008 and posted 8 photos. Only one received a
comment, and that was by a person who follows my photos and comments
on them wherever they are housed. I know him from another newsgroup.


One of my students did some research into how these "award systems"
operate. It is all very entertaining.

The way it works is that people give ratings to get ratings. They
give spurious ratings of "excellent" to other people's images and get
them back in return. Had you followed that procedure, you would have
given many spurious ratings and got many back.

The ratings are spurious because no-one pays any attention to the
images, it's just a mutual award society, with awards given purely in
exchange for getting them back.

If no one pays attention to them, then why are you paying attention to
his?
You have to admit that the guy has balls. He's been smacked down by
so many people, but he keeps coming back. Most, like Sisker, would
turn-tail and run if their efforts met so much criticism.

He doesn't care what people think.

That's opinion.

Contrary to his repeated statements to the contrary, he has no
intention of improving. He persists in posting the dullest and most
boring snapshots imaginable.

Ah, well, so what? It take an action on your part to open the links
and look at the photo. If you choose to take that action, that's on
you. I haven't followed a link to one of his photos for quite some
time.

Still, we have seen worse in the SI on a great many occasions - that's
somewhere else where people enjoy exchanging false praise. ;-)

Some are good, some aren't. That's about par for any group of
amateurs.

You'd have more credibility as a critic, though, if you had the balls
to hold your own up for review.

I critique other people's submissions, but I post my own submissions
which other people can critique. They can look at my photos and
decide if I'm in any position to critique theirs.


--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida