[Ex Finn.]

"Resolution: 700 x 474"

That is not the original size of your pictures, you pulled that EXIF from uploaded images, right.

Cheers. Mike.

[newmikey]

I'd say: forget you have a "P" and green mode. Switch to aperture priority and take the same shot at 3 or four different aperture settings, then compare. Now leave a middle of the road (F8-F11) setting and start varying the ISO, say 200, 400 and 1600.

Next, experiment with shutter-speed priority - take the same shot at 1/8, 1/30. 1/250 and 1/1000 and again leave a middle of the road setting (1/60) and start varying the ISO as above.

When you compare these shots side by side you will learn very quickly what typical settings are to accomplish the shots you want to get. P-mode usually prefers lowish F-stops as you saw and will result in limited DOF. Once you get the hang of this, you'll never again let the camera decide!

[Niki]

Thank you all, again, I appreciate it more than you know.

I will run that experiment, heliphoto and newmikey, as soon as the sun comes up a bit more.
Its a good thing, I did invest in a decent tripod!

Ex Finn, yes its all cropped and chopped lol

res3567, thanks, he's a handful =)

Marc, no, not inside w/o flash, that would rock, but it is asking way too much of physics =)
Being able to take some nice outdoor shots would suffice.

I do need to invest in better flash (the built-in one is so limiting) and a little reflector would be nice as well.
Thats another thing to research what would fit and work best for an all-around flash for the K100D.
Ohhh and some macro tubes and a decent telephoto would be nice as well.
And then I think....should I go ahead and invest in a camera body with more res?

....Im used to be a no-fuss girl, then came photography.

[Niki]

ok, here is a tripod shot
better?

the K100D only goes down to ISO 200, so 100 is not an option
not sure why they did that, it goes up to 3200, but only down to 200...go figure.

This pic has no PP except it was shrunk a bit or it wouldn't fit on your monitor and I have a fleck of dust on the sensor, so I Spot Healed that out.
I need to get a blower thingie and fix that.

Flash Used: No
Focal Length: 26.0mm (35mm equivalent: 39mm...
Exposure Time: 0.500 s (1/2)
Aperture: f/8.0
ISO Equiv.: 200
Whitebalance: Auto
Metering Mode: matrix
Exposure: aperture priority (semi-auto)




I also played around with shutter speed a bit per the previous suggestions.
now, I want to go find a stream and get that really cool silky, running water effect lol

thanks again all, very much!

[Marc Sabatella]

Marc, no, not inside w/o flash, that would rock, but it is asking way too much of physics =)
Being able to take some nice outdoor shots would suffice.

That much won't be difficult. Outdoors, you'll be able to use a smaller aperture like f/8 or f/11 and still have easily handholdable shutter speeds, and you'll have no problem getting a group in focus.

[heliphoto]

This pic has no PP except it was shrunk a bit or it wouldn't fit on your monitor and I have a fleck of dust on the sensor, so I Spot Healed that out.
I need to get a blower thingie and fix that.

I recommend the Giottos Rocket blower - I use mine all the time (on my lenses - I don't get dust on my sensor all the time ).

[atupdate]

ok, here is a tripod shot
better?

This pic has no PP except it was shrunk a bit or it wouldn't fit on your monitor and I have a fleck of dust on the sensor, so I Spot Healed that out.

When ever you downsize an image for posting to the web, the image becomes softer. You need to apply a little sharpness after downsizing.


Tim

[chalion]

Would changing the constant lighting (opening or closing the shades, or having the lamps on) give better lighting effects other than using the flash would? I've drop lights with reflectors on them and keep thinking of using them as bounce reflectors instead of blinding people with using a flash.

[foxglove]

And then I think....should I go ahead and invest in a camera body with more res?

You've mentioned this possibility a couple of times - forget it for now. The K100D has plenty of resolution (I have one myself), you should be able to get acceptably sharp photos once you've got aperture/shutter speed/iso down pat. More megapixels won't make any difference if the information isn't there to be recorded in the first place. Everyone's given great suggestions, and I agree that many of your aperture/shutter speed combinations are virtually guaranteed to give you soft photos. And you need to retrain your eyes from the look of P&S shots!

I wonder also if part of the problem could be in your basic camera settings. I assume you're shooting jpeg - if I recall correctly (I'm sure I'll be amply corrected if I'm wrong!), the factory settings tend to be a bit on the soft side. That may show up in some situations more than others.

If I were you, I'd pretend all those scene modes don't exist - read up on exposure, use Av and M, and learn the limitations (and possibilities!) of SLRs. Have fun with it!

Julie

[heliphoto]

When ever you downsize an image for posting to the web, the image becomes softer. You need to apply a little sharpness after downsizing.


Tim

Well... hmmmm.... if you start with a soft image (edges spread out over more pixels), downsizing can actually make it look much sharper, so I'd say that's an overgeneralization. If you start with an ideally sharp image, the interpolation process probably does soften somewhat (though I really don't know the math).

I think the real issue mandating that sharpening be the last step is that if you apply software sharpening, you are enhancing the contrast along edges by a few pixels either side of the border, and if you then downsize significantly like reducing a full resolution 10MP shot at approx. 3800x2600 down to 800x550 or so for web posting(about a 4.75X reduction), the few pixels of enhanced contrast get lost in the resample, and it's like you never did the sharpening, so you need to apply it to the final image size for the perceptual increase in sharpness to exist. (though my understanding may be wrong and I stand ready to be corrected).

[Niki]

excellent advice mes amis!
I appreciate all the tidbits you all have added.

Julie, thank you so much! I promise I am reading up on Aperture/expos./iso, my problem is that my synaesthetic brain is very visual and I can read a paragraph explaining aperture and while it makes sense, I don't retain it well.
Now, if someone shows me or I see it in a diagram, its recorded forever.

Just call me Rainman.
Wapner's at seven.

Its not always easy to find books that are visually intensive on camera math lol

I figure my best bet is practice and more practice. Read something then immediately try it out so Im seeing what Im reading.
While Im happy to have CS2, Id rather not have to depend on it all the time for decent photos, although curves has become my best friend.

Its a gorgeous overcast day, I should stop working and get my butt outside!

[foxglove]

Julie, thank you so much! I promise I am reading up on Aperture/expos./iso, my problem is that my synaesthetic brain is very visual and I can read a paragraph explaining aperture and while it makes sense, I don't retain it well.
Now, if someone shows me or I see it in a diagram, its recorded forever.

Gee, a visually oriented person doing photography - what a surprise!

I'm the same way, I do far better seeing a diagram than reading a paragraph. If I think of any resource that explains it well in pictures, I'll let you know. Perhaps someone else knows of something.

You're right - practice, practice, and more practice is the way to go! I learned on the venerable K1000 (entirely manual), and I do think it's best not to use scene modes - setting everything manually forces you to understand it. The cool thing with digital is the instant feedback, and embedded information. You screw up, you check the exif, you say, "Oh, that's what I did wrong!" I learned the basics on the K1000, but I've made a lot more progress going digital.

Julie

[Marc Sabatella]

Well... hmmmm.... if you start with a soft image (edges spread out over more pixels), downsizing can actually make it look much sharper, so I'd say that's an overgeneralization. If you start with an ideally sharp image, the interpolation process probably does soften somewhat (though I really don't know the math).

I think the real issue mandating that sharpening be the last step is that if you apply software sharpening, you are enhancing the contrast along edges by a few pixels either side of the border, and if you then downsize significantly like reducing a full resolution 10MP shot at approx. 3800x2600 down to 800x550 or so for web posting(about a 4.75X reduction), the few pixels of enhanced contrast get lost in the resample, and it's like you never did the sharpening, so you need to apply it to the final image size for the perceptual increase in sharpness to exist. (though my understanding may be wrong and I stand ready to be corrected).

Funny you commented on my answer in another thread, because the above is about as clear an explanation as I've seen of a topic I don't have a real firm grasp on myself!

[Marc Sabatella]

I promise I am reading up on Aperture/expos./iso, my problem is that my synaesthetic brain is very visual and I can read a paragraph explaining aperture and while it makes sense, I don't retain it well.
Now, if someone shows me or I see it in a diagram, its recorded forever.

I have a vivid memory of trying memorize the relationship between aperture & DOF - larger aperture means smaller DOF, but smaller f-*number* means larger f-stop. Intellectually, I was OK with it, but I still had to think about it every time the subject came up. Until I got a lens that had a large aperture and I started taking pictures with it, and I started seeing the effect for myself on a regular basis. Didn't take long before I had it down.

So my advice - create your own example by going to manual mode, experimenting with aperture, shutter speed, and ISO settings, and seeing for yourself how they relate.

[Ira]

Has it been confirmed that you're not shooting at such a low resolution? Around 700 wide on all?

Granted, this isn't going to affect your web viewing and the sizes will be fine, but when you catch those magic shots--like the cat--you're going to wish you had it at the highest res your camera can handle for best printing.