Southport pier UK

[moon]

Took a ride out last week "half term school hols" anyway on way back to the car I took some snaps with my camera rushed really as I often do.I can only post one here as rules say.
But I have linked to the others.
If anyone one can spare the time and give some pointers on what I should have done in these conditions and with scene in front of me. Eg. composition.

I have adjusted and cropped them some. Maybe not to everyones liking.

Gary



Flickr: seegarysphotos' Photostream

[theArchitect]

The subject works quite well and I like the converging lead-in lines & reflections.

The sky is a bit too grey and dull so maybe you could have got down lower and made a thing of the railway tracks and reflections?

[doctorjames]

For the one that is shown, I would have moved very slightly to the right, as you are too close to a symetrical image for it not to ideally be perfectly symetrical.

That way the arches and their reflections would have more impact in my mind. Its probably just a few inches difference, to line up the lights, but its something that you cant change once the shot is taken.

[moon]

Thanks for your time and comments.I must be a midges off centre for the lights not to line up.
On the plus side I am chuffed the image didn't get any really negative comments.
If you looked at the ones on the flickr link do you think this is the best one out of the bunch?
I quite liked the grainy one, I guess that maybe to do with it being my Wife and Daughter in the frame "unbeknown to them at the time".

Thx again

Gary

[doctorjames]

This was my favourite of the flickr album. I didnt want to sound harsh with my comments, and its going to be challenging to get your composition spot on with a 'point and shoot'.

As a DSLR snob I am bound to say -- get yourself a DSLR, but its not always that easy, point and shoots tend to be cheaper, more convienient, and of course you may not wish to go the DSLR route.

I have a point and shoot, and they are great for 'memory' photographs, snaps at family events and outings. I have never been able to properly compose a shot through either a small electronic viewfinder or the camera screen itself.

[Neil Sadler]

Originally Posted by doctorjames

its going to be challenging to get your composition spot on with a 'point and shoot'.
.

sorry if this is wrong but surely having a point and shoot or having a DSLR can't make a difference to the quality of composition? In my experience composition comes from the mind and vision of the photographer (my own personal lack thereof is in my opinion what causes my composition to be uninspired, rather than the quality of my camera), and not having an optical viewfinder or not. If anything surely spot on composition could be slightly easier with electronic view finders that have 100% frame coverage compared to the 95% or so common on DSLRS?
Upgrading to a DSLR from a superzoom bridge camera hasn't improved my composition at all and as is often said, it's the photographer and not the camera that makes the shot good or bad.

As to the shot itself, I agree that it might have been improved slightly by being dead on symmetrical. I like the reflection of the light supports on the wet wood too and the way the long spindly supports make it look almost like an insect with the light itself being the body, kind of war of the worldsy.

Just my opinions though
Neil

[doctorjames]

Originally Posted by Neil Sadler

sorry if this is wrong but surely having a point and shoot or having a DSLR can't make a difference to the quality of composition? In my experience composition comes from the mind and vision of the photographer (my own personal lack thereof is in my opinion what causes my composition to be uninspired, rather than the quality of my camera), and not having an optical viewfinder or not. If anything surely spot on composition could be slightly easier with electronic view finders that have 100% frame coverage compared to the 95% or so common on DSLRS?
Upgrading to a DSLR from a superzoom bridge camera hasn't improved my composition at all and as is often said, it's the photographer and not the camera that makes the shot good or bad.

As to the shot itself, I agree that it might have been improved slightly by being dead on symmetrical. I like the reflection of the light supports on the wet wood too and the way the long spindly supports make it look almost like an insect with the light itself being the body, kind of war of the worldsy.

Just my opinions though
Neil

I would argue (in a gentle way of course) that trying to get things 'just right' is difficult when looking at a screen on the back of a camera. I will run through why I think this:

1) there is lots of distraction around the screen, and by the way in which your eyes work, its very difficult to ignore this. In the viewfinder you have the shot (be it 95% of it +/-), and perhaps shutter speed, aperture and a few other bits and pieces, and all of this surrounded by black. Nothing else, no other movements, nothing passing by, no reflections. Our brain is programmed to continually take all that it can see from our eyes. You probably dont realise it, but any flicker of movement and your brain sends your eyes to see it and then back to what you are looking at, which isnt great for concentration.

2) In the field its often difficult to see all the detail that you would through a viewfinder on the screen on the back of the camera, your eye cant focus close enough to do this, even if the resolution of the screen is high enough.

3)Its much more tempting to adjust the angle of your head to make the shot straight, than the camera, and I think there is more of a tendence to do this when you are looking at a screen rather than a viewfinder

4) Point and shoots (in my experience) tend to be laggy, with a slow refresh rate, and if there is any signifiant light coming onto the screen can be nearly impossible to see. (the same applys to a lot of live view systems on DSLRs also, and is one of the reasons im not fussed mine dont have live view )

Dont get me wrong, I agree with a lot of what you say about composition not being about the camera but about the imagination and inspiration and experience of the photographer. Having a DSLR is not going to make someone have these, some of its luck, most of its experience and trial and error, along with a little critique and learning. If you know what you want to do, i.e. how you want to compose the shot I would strongly argue that without a good viewfinder it is going to be difficult to achieve, if not impossible in some circumstances.

I wouldnt be able to get the shot symmetrical with my point and shoot I am certain. Id probably manage it first or second time with my DSLR though, and would have almost certainly gotten it bang on with my old pentax ME super which I love dearly for its ease of use and wonderful viewfinder

James

p.s. oh, and dont worry for being 'wrong' there is no such thing just differing opinions. I'd love to know if you think differently and why, incase I need a rethink!

[Neil Sadler]

all sound reasoning, I guess I came from using an electronic view finder rather than a back lcd which would have made me appreciate the improvement to an optical view finder less, though it certainly is an improvement.

Sorry for the thread hijack moon!

All the best, Neil

[doctorjames]

Cool, and agreed sorry for the hijack moon.

My original comment was a disguised complement..... I guess I was trying to say you may be selling yourself short with a point and shoot.

[moon]

Originally Posted by doctorjames

Cool, and agreed sorry for the hijack moon.

My original comment was a disguised complement..... I guess I was trying to say you may be selling yourself short with a point and shoot.

No problem guys. I do think of buying an slr but feel I am not confident enough to use one yet.

Gary