First of all, this is purely for my benefit - not for any others entertainment, but feel free to massage my ego if you like me, or the results. Professionals or other people who know what they are doing are asked not to laugh.

I liked this policeman. I was half-concerned that he might take offence at me setting up a tripod in the centre of Birmingham on a busy Saturday.

This I like - showing the movement of the people around the statue of the bull. The bull itself is magnificent, challenging, full of movement - yet here it is frozen amidst a sea of people.

Nothing special, but it amused me - I find the contrast amusing between the noisy street-sellers who are all trying to be heard over the crows and a single shot of one, out of context, but silent.

A long exposure, but handheld so a bit of jitter. I'm getting much morepretentious aware of light and movement now.

I liked this policeman. I was half-concerned that he might take offence at me setting up a tripod in the centre of Birmingham on a busy Saturday.

This I like - showing the movement of the people around the statue of the bull. The bull itself is magnificent, challenging, full of movement - yet here it is frozen amidst a sea of people.

Nothing special, but it amused me - I find the contrast amusing between the noisy street-sellers who are all trying to be heard over the crows and a single shot of one, out of context, but silent.

A long exposure, but handheld so a bit of jitter. I'm getting much more
no subject
Date: 2003-12-07 07:11 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2003-12-07 07:13 am (UTC)Are these done with a proper camera, or are they digital?
/*wonders if you _can_ take long exposure piccies with digital camera*/
no subject
Date: 2003-12-07 07:27 am (UTC)These are my first attempts in many years to use a proper camera, first time ever with an SLR, having eschewed digital for a bit.
My digicam will do long exposures - but it's range isn't as good as the SLR, and when I last tried it wouldn't compensate for the exposure time by reducing the apeture (probably just a setting mind!) so the ones I took were heavily overexposed.
I considered taking the shots in parallel with the digital (I was carrying it) but decided in the end that would be too much fiddling.
no subject
Date: 2003-12-07 07:50 am (UTC)I guess my speciality is much more on the post-production side, anyway.. I'm terrible at original artwork. but give me an image/photo to work with and I can do wonders.
Still.. one of these days I'll no doubt dabble :)
no subject
Date: 2003-12-07 07:58 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2003-12-07 10:48 am (UTC)1. Lens – SLRs let in a lot more light
2. Film – this has more resolution than a digital camera.
That said, you can get SLR type digital cameras. The problem is that Digital camera’s are soon superseded whereas Film cameras are fairly stable with improvements coming in the film.
no subject
Date: 2003-12-08 05:07 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2003-12-08 05:43 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2003-12-07 10:56 am (UTC)The police man shot might have been better from a wider angle so we could see what he was looking at and also the person who’s face we see through the window.
The bull is the better picture as it is representing something. The speed & power of the bull trapped within the statue while those who are trapped within the shopping centre appear to be free.
The balloons appear to be too much of a mess.
The car lights also does not appear to have a context. Now a long exposure with say a train stood still while cars wiz past would be good, or for the more green streams of busses while the traffic stays still.
My suggestion for improvement would be to think of the story, the thousand words that your picture will tell.
no subject
Date: 2003-12-07 01:49 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2003-12-08 03:54 am (UTC)Part of the problem with the balloons and another one I've not put up of a flower stall is that I was shooting at max-zoom across a busy road, in the centre of Birminhgam. That really was a circumstance where I needed to take half a dozen, rather than the one I did.
no subject
Date: 2003-12-08 02:25 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2003-12-08 03:44 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2003-12-08 03:47 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2003-12-08 03:48 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2003-12-08 03:50 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2003-12-08 03:52 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2003-12-08 04:00 am (UTC)So, scanner and Photoshop it is.
no subject
Date: 2003-12-08 04:02 am (UTC)Andy used to develop his own. If he could be arsed.
As a result I still have a bunch of undeveloped black and white films from eons gone by.
no subject
Date: 2003-12-08 04:48 am (UTC)Buy film in bulk & wind your own rolls.
Develop them yourself with a dark bag and developing tank.
It's a bit harder do your own prints as you need a dark room. I have managed with a bathroom in the past with success. And there should be some good enlargers available second hand.
Failing that join a club or try you local collages as they often have dark rooms.
Or scan the negatives and let Photoshop do the rest ;)
no subject
Date: 2003-12-08 05:10 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2003-12-08 05:46 am (UTC)I see what you're saying about the Bull. It's a good point - and another time I'll try to vary the length of the exposure of such shots - now I have more of an idea of the results.