flash me.

um. this topic is hard for me. not bc i dont know how to use it, but because, really, its not as hard as anyone wants to make it.

and if its supposed to be harder - dont tell me. bc, well, im doing fine my way ;) haha

you should probably remember, for many indoor scenarios, i like flat lighting. i am not a fan of many shadows for my studio stuff. so. yeah. my CC on so many studio set ups is the shadows - i dont *always* like them. so if thats your style, then you may have to adjust this tut for you.

here's what i mean by flat lighting --

see how there arent harsh shadows on her face? just an even *brightness* to the photo overall? thats how i, personally, define flat. consistent.

i always bounce. or at least just toss it behind me. i dont care that often about color casts because i shoot RAW and i''ll fix it later.

i also would rather use a SL then up my ISO and get grain. so there's that, too.

i do not drag my shutter. its not my style.

this tutorial is also not about fill flash.

so.

i mainly use it for extra light. to make the room look as if there's some sort of lighting there that is not.

lets say im at a house shooting a newborn - and there arent windows or light for me to use to my advantage.

so here's how the SL works. turn it on.

mode - M
hold down the (sel/set) button til your numbers are blinking. then play.

itll start at 1/1. thatll be super bright. maybe start test shots at 1/8 or something.

in my opinion, the idea is to set your settings how you want them and then adjust the SL.

*oh and dont forget that the meter on your camera is basically useless when a SL is on ;) also, your SL will have a sync speed with your camera's shutter speed. so you may not be able to go "faster" than 1/200. and youll have to adjust the SL's power, instead.*

so, for the pic below, i was at 1/32 + 0.3 on the SL. so you just need to start moving the arrow down to see what you need. test shoot. whatever. but you want just enough light to make it editable - without leaving flash spots.

i had already set settings for this where i was comfortable. i metered and still needed to use the SL so i just had to play.

it still has some depth, isnt totally "flat" but still gave me the lighting i need without the other problems.

i'll say the hardest part of using a SL is when youre shoot in portrait. horizontal is easy bc it just bounces behind you. but in portrait, you have to turn the SL so its still bouncing where you want it to. this can be useful if you want to MAKE shadows, but on seamless, it can be super hard.

like on this one, you can see that my SL is still the same position it would have been in landscape and that i just turned my camera to the left - bc the left side of her face is brighter. but it works out nicely and gives a bit of a natural light look.

some places in your home may REQUIRE a SL for good photos during the evening/night. or maybe your house is really dark? not all cameras have the ISO capability to not bring grain, not all lenses have a low enough f/stop, and not all kids are slow enough to use a slow SS. so, a SL can help.

sometimes, even when you have the gear, you still need a SL indoors bc of your house... at night, my living room is *ugh* to shoot in. but that doesnt mean i want to miss a moment ;)

i have a bajillion examples if you'd like to see more SL v non-SL. :) just let me know

equipment matters.

it took me a while to decide on whether i wanted to write this post or not - bc i want it to "come off" the right way.

so here goes...

when we get our first dslr cameras - or even a nice p&s - we are told that we can emulate professional looking photos if we just try hard enough... just learn all the settings... just practice. and i want to start out by saying that its not necessarily *untrue*, but i feel like realistic expectations need to hold a place in our minds as well.

having been on several message boards, FB groups, etc for photography (or just for moms), ive seen people get super frustrated trying to do things that their cameras simply... can't. for instance, when everyone wanted to do twinkle lights for the holiday season, not many people realized that their p&s or kit lens couldnt do the job as well. i am not saying this to make people feel discouraged -- i am the #1 person to tell people to learn their gear and that they'll be happy in the results. but there is a reason people spend $2500 on a camera and another $1500+ on each lens --- bc they do make better photos.

***i am going to throw in the obvious disclaimer. it is also, entirely possible, to have $5000 worth of gear and still take a shizzy photo, still not know how to use your camera, and still have it come out looking like a p&s. so please - before this becomes misconstrued, the camera does NOT make the photographer. but its naive to say that it doesnt.... help. it helps someone who already knows what they are doing. who already can maneuver around manual, who already knows how to nail focus and exposure, etc.

i just see a lot of disappointed MWACs. who want their photos to like their favorite photo blogger. but that photog has spent a long time and invested a lot of money in what they have built behind their name.

there are few simple things that i think help any mom, trying to take pics of their kids at home, get better photos (besides, of course, being 100% on the technical end, of course lol)

1. getting rid of the flash. either by having it off completely, using a lightscoop, or getting an external flash.

2. buying a sharp prime. a 30/35mm, 50mm, or 85mm for nikon, canon, and sigma have low f/stops that let in a lot of light (of course, nailing that focus would be first, right?) and your kit lens is not going to cut it. ever. lol

3. editing correctly. meaning clean. meaning without being crazy, buying actions that you dont know how to lower, adding layers of "vintage" or horrible vignette that you think "adds something!!" but really ruins your photos. as a sidenote, hobbyists and pros buy actions all the time --- expensive actions, sometimes, that can make or break that photographer's style -- but they learned how to use them correctly, adjust them for who THEY are, etc. they also pay $$$ for editing programs. picnik and iphoto isnt gonna cut it lol bc, well, equipment matters, right? and remember, pros have monitor calibration software for their computers so that their photos are true to color/print all of the time. that also costs...

this is the time to start taking photos for you. to start comparing yesterday's with today's. and last year's with this year's. to improve for yourself. dont compare yourself to everyone around you -- this goes for all of you pros, too.

for 2012, i want to be *me*.

quick storyboard with color banner

ok here's a quick tut on the color band story boards :)

the pics might be too small, but you can click on THIS LINK and make them bigger :)

first we need to resize the photo.

for horizontal pics, im going to do 750px. that makes it 500px high.

i then open a new blank file. i know i want it 500px high, but i want the width to be bigger.

since FB looks better at certain sizes, i chose 950px as my width.

drag your photo from the bottom tray onto your new blank spot

place it where you want to.

then click the color squares on your tool bar to open the palette. you can use the dropper to click a color from your photo.

make sure your "layer 1/background/etc" is highlighted on your layers tray to the right. then use the paint bucket to fill in the color

add text by clicking T in your tools bar and making a text box.

merge all layers and then save as jpg

nerd is in.

who doesnt love a bit of nerd in your life? :)

i thought id toss some funny photos up. if you follow my facebook, you know im a fan ;)

not only for my kids (which you'll see) but for all ages LOL

comparisons for intro DSLRs.

ok there are a few questions that i read and answer often.

1. canon or nikon?
2. which one should i get for just a mom with a camera?
3. should i get the kit lens?
4. what else do i need?
5. what about editing?


some of these answers are searchable in previous entries on the blog, but ill lump them here, again.

canon or nikon?


all i can say is that this one is up to you. how you feel. go to a camera store and try them out. although, i will suggest not *buying* from said camera store, but thats only bc any one that ive been to is so ridiculously over-priced lol

one will feel better in your hands. look at the buttons - see if they are accessible to how you move your hands... :) then you move on to the bigger questions...

which one?


here are my comparisons for the basic, entry levels for each big brand.

t2i v t3i (canon)


for this comparison - im going to say save your money and get the t2i. here's why: the t3i's main "hoopla" is over the flip out screen. eh? ok... if thats super important to you, then fine - but i def cant imagine paying extra for it.

the t2i is also smaller/lighter -- ok this can be a good thing or a bad thing. some photographers like larger cameras. the weight in their hands. but, for a MWAC, smaller and more compact is likely what youre looking for and the t2i is where it's at.

(the canon t2i)

t3 v t2i

id say the t2i, still. for the $200 youre getting a larger sensor, MUCH better screen, smaller body for a MWAC, and a self cleaning sensor. to me, the t3 is a step in the wrong direction.

buying used canons


do not discredit the t1i or the xsi if youre buying used, either. if youre on a budget, check adorama, b&h, or amazon (even CL - just find out the shutter count before you buy) - to check those rebels! i used my xsi for.everrrrrr and it is very similar to the new t-models canon has.

and i'll say this now -- megapixels are NOT what makes a good camera. no no no. so do not compare those when looking. you arent printing wallpaper ;)

5100 v 3100 (nikon)


i cant decide which wins --- so ill let your wallet decide. the 5100 is the better camera over all. less noise at higher ISOs (which remember is good for indoors when you do not have a lot of light), flip out screen (if thats your thang), and it has a larger sensor (which is more important v mpx).

BUT the 3100 is, imo, better for a MWAC - again, bc its smaller, more compact, and does what it needs to do without feeling as if you are holding a brick ;) and its cheap...

(the nikon 3100)

3100 v d90 (nikon)


again, i think i'll say the 3100 for the MWAC. the resolution of video is better (if the vid is a main selling point to you), but the d90 shoots faster (4.5 fps v 3 fps) and has a larger sensor.

for the price -- maybe a used d90 might be perfect for you - like i said about the canons, newest isnt always *best*.  maybe check out used d80s as well?

kit lens?


that answer is always a big fat "no". do not waste your money. its not what youre looking for when taking pics of your children. so moving on....

eta: someone made a good point --- if you do happen to get the kit lens, you can always sell it later. someone on CL will buy it or even a local shop may take it for trade :) its understandable if you cant purchase the portrait lenses (down below) right away -- but just remember that you may be looking for something in your photos that that particular lens cant give :)

what else?


a portrait lens.

save the money from the kit lens and get a portrait lens like

canon 50mm 1.8 for $100
canon 35mm 2.0 for about $375
nikon 50mm 1.8g for about $225
nikon 35mm 1.8g for $200

THESE ARE PRIME LENSES -- that means you ***zoom with your feet***

if you think you are going to be in cramped spaces, maybe the 35mm is a better idea for focal length.

as you can see the apertures vary, but basically negligible for what you'll likely be doing. as i said in my metering/manual post, the lower the f/stop, the more light comes in - but its a lot harder to shoot at 1.8 than it is at, oh, 2.8 or 3.2. you want things IN FOCUS ;) and sweet spots are usually higher - and also gives you a bit more room to wiggle (or, rather, for your kid to move an inch haha)

also, i always hear moms talk about how they want "the background to be blurry!!!" (that is called bokeh, by the way) and you need a lower f/stop to do that. so those lenses that only have an aperture of, oh, 3.5 or higher? arent going to give you the look that youre likely trying to get.

a speedlite/light is another great idea for new photographers who are shooting their children indoors a lot of the time. its an external flash that you can bounce in different directions to gain light. i have a SL tutorial on broken lenses that i'll have to bring over here. but what youre looking for in one is that it can swivel in all different directions :) and that you can manually change the power and settings for your lighting needs.  its going to cost you about $200-300 but rock your world in the end ;)

something i dont really think you need is a "set-up" for photos. you dont need a stand. or paper. or blankets --- enjoy shooting every day life FIRST, imo. my this year's love blog means so much more than any set up i can do bc they are every day moments --- shoot those first. then plan :)

editing?


save it for after you learn your camera. i think the biggest mistake is buying an editing program right away. it sort of, well, "saves you" from having to learn certain things bc "oh, pffttt ill just fix it later" but in reality, it does not look the same at all.

also, without learning your camera, people tend to go a bit, erm, overboard on editing ;) or overboard on DLing actions. hey, im not judging -- everyone has done it lol the best photographers out there started somewhere, right? everyone makes mistakes, but i just want to help you avoid them!

when you do decide to choose an editing program, remember you dont have to spend $500+. there are many options out there for those who just want to "clean up" a photo a bit.

Lightroom 3 is extremely powerful and easy to use. another option is Photoshop Elements - which is basically a "light" version of photoshop.

the way i compare the 2 is this --- in LR, you can easily adjust your white balance, exposure, brightness... you can remove excess of select colors -- you can also clone and heal spots! but, PSE can be easier for when you want to *fix* something big. you cant swap a head in LR - but you can easily in PSE - there are many other things that are easier to edit in PSE as well --- but not everyone needs to do those things lol. i, personally, use both programs together and its been the right fit for me. youll find your fit :)

remember that canon and nikon are going to spit out new entry level DSLRs all the time. just remember the things that are important --- the size and weight of the camera, the video youre looking for, the better sensor, maybe frames-per-second matter to you... and do not forget to look at used or refurb'd cameras along the way. :) getting a nice digital camera doesnt have to break the bank ;)

ok. i *think* thats all the questions i wanted to answer? if you would like me to add something PLEASE email me at any time -- amandaskelte@gmail.com and dont forget to stop by my FACEBOOK and *like* gingersnap photographs :) lots of fun stuff going on there all the time!!

fixable or not.

some things in photography are not fixable --- out of focus, motion blur... no.

some things are -- too dark, noise/grain, etc...

here is a shot from a wedding we went to last night (as guests). i will say, i wasnt "prepared" for this shot. my camera settings were from another location, i didnt have an external flash on, and didnt want to miss this sweet face.

she was simply enamored while the bride and groom danced.  then she told me she wanted to get married. so cute.

SOOC

COLOR

B&W (my favorite. and how I think the pic was *meant* to be edited*)

so i guess what im saying is with a little editing magic - you can save these photos that you might have thought "ugh too bad there wasnt enough light!!"

i used LR3 to reduce the noise, lighten, and brighten. i added a little fill light and then sent to PSE8 for some polishing. i added a bit of haze and color layer for the b&w -- and for the color, thats just playing with tones, some florabella actions, etc. :) these programs (LR3 runs about $300 and PSE runs about $100?) are extremely powerful and there are lots of great tutorials on how to use them.

if you have any specific "how did you...." questions -- shoot me an email and i'll do some screen shots!! amandaskelte@gmail.com

thanks for reading!!

twinkle and snow.

i love the holiday season. so many fun photo ideas to try and play with :)

today my oldest daughter played with twinkle lights and "snow" :) on the "fake bed" set up.

(you can see a pull back of the faux bed HERE)

you can see a pull back of the lights here -- it might help with distance on "how far is her face from the lights?" etc :)  i am also going to guess that you could do this will a tightly pulled sheet :) you dont need a stand, seamless, etc...

my settings on that photo (and i think all of the others)

i was using my 30mm - f/1.8 ISO400 ss 1/250 - using natural light (windows behind me)

i had to be careful bc i was using my bone paper and the lights were white string and when i wasnt directly facing her  - the shadows made the top strings show

sometimes i had to clone in extra lights, too,

using my 85mm was 100x more glorious!

then i let her play with the fake snow.

i tried to focus on her fingertips/where the snow would poof out lol

just wanted to come and add a few more :)

another with the 85mm. really - this is the way to go - longer focal length.

an editing progression --- SOOC, out of LR, and out of PSE.

and a newb. swoon.

the *key*, in my opinion, is big space (a few feet) from background to subject. then CLOSE distance from you to the subject. thats why the 85 works so well.