Worldwide photowalk 2009

I don't know why I didn't think to mention this earlier, but there was a worldwide photowalk YESTERDAY. I took part in it and had a wonderful time. Of course I took a zillion pictures and I'm busy, busy going through them. The starting point for my area was a 10 minute ride for me and since I was by myself, I decided to do it. There was around 28 people present and we walked about 2 miles total. I took over 300 photos and went through a few batteries. There are prizes (like photoshop, etc) for the best images (slim chance for me) but you never know. You upload your images to the website and judges pick the best. This is the 2nd annual walk. You also get a month's free online photography lessons for participating.

Here's the link to Scot Kelby's photowalk if you think you would like to do it next year:

www.worldwidephotowalk.com

It doesn't seem to want to open at the moment but it is probably due to all the photo uploads going on. I'll come back with the full address later.

Here's two that I took that afternoon. A very cloudy day and I forgot to adjust my ISO, thinking that the AUTO would adjust it.

What a good idea! Look forward to seeing some more of your images :)

Maybe this thread should be in the photography section. I thought that TalkGraphics members might be interested in joining the walk next year.

Nice shots, Nancy! Nature is amazing.

Nancy - I've moved your thread to the Photography Forum.

Looking forward to some more shots ;)
You might also tell us a bit about the camera you used?

Hi Steve, I suggested the move so it's ok.

I have been using cameras for about 5 years but I've never done anything except for AUTO. I've lost alot of fantastic shots because I don't know how to use it properly.

I went to buy a big Nikon and a zoom lens but chickened out because I was afraid that I would still get the same kind of images due to my inexperience. Instead I bought a Nikon Cool-pix.

Alot of my images have artifacts in them. It was a cloudy day and I did not adjust the ISO. I think I should have but not sure exactly how. I read my old camera's manual but not this one except for the beginning chapters.

Another Photowalk member took a similar picture but the train was already passing. Their image is reworked to lighten it up and saturate it and it is extremely crisp. Many people on Flikr are complimenting his image. It's good for me to see the differences between our images. I like my view better but the quality is not there.

Quote:

---

I went to buy a big Nikon and a zoom lens but chickened out because I was afraid that I would still get the same kind of images

---

dSLR's are not always so fast (to use) as point and shoots set on AUTO it's true.
But they're much more fun to play with. And once the basics are understood, they aren't too much of a mystery.

You'd never end up with the same photo from a dSLR as from the coolpix because the hardware isn't the same. For one thing the coolpix has a tiny CCD with very sensitive photosites (they have to be because of the tiny size and the small lens letting in less light) which unfortunately means more (electrical) noise at lower ISO's.
The dSLR's have a much larger CCD's (CMOS in the higher-end) with larger photosites and much bigger lenses. 'Light' is the thing.
So you get superior images with a dSLR with much less noise.
You also have the opportunity to tinker with RAW which bypasses the in-camera-jpeg processing and gives you everything the sensors saw when you released the shutter. This 'digital negative' is then opened in a RAW developer (such as Adobe Lightroom) so that you can bring out the best from the photo rather than the camera's internal software processing it the way it feels it best. You can get away with much much more by shooting RAW. The added bonus is that your RAW images are never destroyed, so you can go back later and re process (develop) them again for a different 'feel' or effect.
It's often mentioned that RAW takes up more space on a card and are slower to write to the card when shooting. This is less of a factor now with much larger capacity (and cheaper) cards with faster write speeds and more powerful camera processors.
dSLR's with video recording are also now coming onto the market, so larger capacity cards are a must have anyway.

By the way. I really like the shot of the bridge :)

Thank you for the breakdown on the differences between cameras. I did not know there were differences. I thought the difference was in the quality of lens. I went from a Traveler to a Nikon P60 and thought the lens would be better. The Nikon is a better camera and I think the images are a bit better. It's suppose to be anti-shake and it goes to 2000 ISO.

I chose this Nikon because it had a viewfinder. So many of the new cameras (pacs) no longer sport a viewfinder. I can turn my LCD off and still take a photo with it. Saves on batteries or lets you shoot when the batteries are low.

Anyhow, I can't afford a big, expensive camera right now. The large Nikon I was looking at is a lower end/entry level DSLR (now I know it is DSLR). It has separate zoom lens attachment available, etc, etc. It was on sale for $469. This is bare bones. Might have included a case. This is about all I can afford and I will have to wait until Christmas for Brian to get it for me (I'm still saving all my money for my nephew's benefit in August...it's adding up :))

What I really need to do is start using the dials on my point and click until I understand how they react and work so that I can move smoothly into a DSLR when I get one. I should make an effort to stop using AUTO setting.

I think it's good to have a pac camera for when I can't carry alot of equipment and I'm glad I got this pac Nikon. It was half price at $99 and it will compliment any bigger equipment that I buy.

Edit: Forgot to say, the bridge picture was my favorite of all my works. Another photographer posted a reworked shot of this moment, though his train was already heading down the track. I caught the train just right. His image is getting many positive comments but he seems to be a noteable person. I figure if he shot and posted it, then I made a good decision snapping this and posting it too.

Nancy,

I would suggest going to your local used book store (salvation army/DAV) and grabbing a book on photography. The equipment might be much newer but film speed (ISO) Apperture (F-stop) and Exposure haven't changed that much in many, many years.

You mentioned about having a different lens available for a DSLR. There are many, many lenses available for both Canon and Nikon DSLRs. I have seen lenses for a reasonable amount of money and some for lots of money. I think the most expensive lens I ever saw was about $50,000.

I think Rich uses a Canon. Steve used to shoot a Pentax (Not sure if he still uses it). I use a Pentax. If you have any questions, just ask.

Thanks John. I don't really want to spend 'pro' money when I'm just a hobbyist so I have to be careful about what I purchase. I stayed away from Canons because they don'thave onboard memory like other cameras. At least the point and shoot ones don't. I also stayed away from Sony because they are proprietory. Nikon seemed the best solution. I'm very happy with my Nikon p&s but likme Steve said, the shutter speed is an issue and I get alot of 'lost' pictures.

I have my eye on one that I can afford and I'll grab it someday when I can get it. Probably for Christmas. It suggestion of a book is a good one. Thank you. I will do that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Burpee

but likme Steve said, the shutter speed is an issue and I get alot of 'lost' pictures.

---

Huh? Wadeyesay?

@John - Yes I still use the olde' PENTAX *istDS with the 18-55mm SMC lens. In fact I'm after a 300mm lens right now. Just have to find the right price ;)
The G10 is my pocket cam (though, actually you need big pockets!)