Thanks, Susan. Little girls in white, a butterfly…. I’d have to be a duffer to not swing something under those circumstance.
Normally I use a 70-300mm for portraits, but this time it was the 18-55 because I needed to be close and knew I may not have much time before it flew away. This was our first Wanderer, and I was glad of the precaution because it didn’t hang around nearly as long as the common crows have.
I used the “portrait” setting on my camera… thought about focal point, balance, and filling the frame, and that’s about it. There is no processing on this shot – it is straight out of camera. Not because I’m a purist, but because I am clueless about processing. :/
That is why I refer to your ability to design in expectation of good things. The only reason I produce anything even remotely approaching pretty is the application of art principles in my composition (It is certainly NOT because of any technical knowledge). You, however, have a design background and you are a tech guru, so I anticipate glorious offerings once you get a handle on your new toy and whatever processing tool you choose.
Thanks BB. Wow, you used fairly standard settings. Why can’t I do that?
To be honest, I have been lurking around some photography forums and have been discouraged at how much processing skills seems to be involved in post photo production. See I’m more than happy to learn photography but it seems like some of these photo people are also photoshop experts. I just don’t want to learn 2 new skills. I just want to take photos and do some minor cropping, lightening, etc if need be. So you give me hope!
Thanks for sharing with me. You have a superb eye!
Susan, don’t despair with regards the processing. I chose not to go that path initially because I wanted to learn to see, and to be careful, without relying on the ability to fix it up later. And if you think of it… there were a lot of master photographers producing great work before photoshop
Not that I am against processing: I hope to master it one day, but I don’t think it is impossible to produce something pleasing with out it.
Oh. My. I am in awe. Naturally those are two beautiful girls… but your photography… Wow!
September 1, 2011 at 10:55 am
So, are you going to tell me *how* you did this? What settings/lenses did you use?
September 1, 2011 at 11:01 am
Thanks, Susan. Little girls in white, a butterfly…. I’d have to be a duffer to not swing something under those circumstance.
Normally I use a 70-300mm for portraits, but this time it was the 18-55 because I needed to be close and knew I may not have much time before it flew away. This was our first Wanderer, and I was glad of the precaution because it didn’t hang around nearly as long as the common crows have.
I used the “portrait” setting on my camera… thought about focal point, balance, and filling the frame, and that’s about it. There is no processing on this shot – it is straight out of camera. Not because I’m a purist, but because I am clueless about processing. :/
That is why I refer to your ability to design in expectation of good things. The only reason I produce anything even remotely approaching pretty is the application of art principles in my composition (It is certainly NOT because of any technical knowledge). You, however, have a design background and you are a tech guru, so I anticipate glorious offerings once you get a handle on your new toy and whatever processing tool you choose.
September 1, 2011 at 11:22 am
Thanks BB. Wow, you used fairly standard settings. Why can’t I do that?
To be honest, I have been lurking around some photography forums and have been discouraged at how much processing skills seems to be involved in post photo production. See I’m more than happy to learn photography but it seems like some of these photo people are also photoshop experts. I just don’t want to learn 2 new skills. I just want to take photos and do some minor cropping, lightening, etc if need be. So you give me hope!
Thanks for sharing with me. You have a superb eye!
September 3, 2011 at 8:50 am
Susan, don’t despair with regards the processing. I chose not to go that path initially because I wanted to learn to see, and to be careful, without relying on the ability to fix it up later. And if you think of it… there were a lot of master photographers producing great work before photoshop
Not that I am against processing: I hope to master it one day, but I don’t think it is impossible to produce something pleasing with out it.
Thanks for your kind words. x
September 4, 2011 at 9:26 pm
Absolutely gorgeous picture … beautiful girls AND a butterfly – nothing more perfect than that.
September 1, 2011 at 11:07 pm
Thanks, Fee!
It’s been mighty quiet over your way of late… If your life is a little hectic just now, hang on.. School hols are coming up.. x
September 4, 2011 at 9:29 pm
What sweet girls you have ♥
Beautiful, beautiful photo. Happy Spring! (It’s almost fall here)
September 2, 2011 at 6:06 am
Thanks, Michaela. I guess that means we’ll be seeing some gorgeous colour on your blog soon
September 4, 2011 at 9:30 pm
Gorgeous, my friend, just gorgeous…love looking at this one.
September 2, 2011 at 11:19 pm
Thank you, Burstmode.
September 4, 2011 at 9:35 pm
lovely
September 5, 2011 at 8:34 pm
Jo.. This is beautiful! All three of them looks gorgeous
September 14, 2011 at 2:26 am
Cute & candid photo! Nice settings…
September 27, 2011 at 9:37 pm
Vimsy, Nivin, Firasz, thanks for your kind words. Forgive me for taking so long to respond, I’ve not been about much of late.
October 4, 2011 at 10:16 am