Outdoor Shot - What's Missing?

[BUGSBUNNYBOSS]

I'm learning photography with my Nikon D7100. I shot a few pics outdoors for the first time. I feel something is not right with these photos. Can someone point out what is missing?

1.


2.


3.


All these are SOOC.

[Manfred M]

When you look at an image that you have taken, you should ask yourself "what is the subject of the image". If you can't identify that, then your image is not as strong as it should be.

The second question should be "is the first thing the viewer's eyes see the subject?". Again, if the answer is no; then you do not have a strong image.

I don't get past the first question in any of these images. What is the subject?

[Shadowman]

I'm learning photography with my Nikon D7100. I shot a few pics outdoors for the first time. I feel something is not right with these photos. Can someone point out what is missing?

1.


2.


3.


All these are SOOC.

You've chosen a very difficult subject to start testing your camera. Foliage, especially in direct sunlight, is difficult to capture. Try isolating one of the limbs, move around so that you get front lighting, side lighting, back lighting, then compare each image. How does the form of the limb appear, how do the shadows and highlights if any look.

[davidedric]

Hello again Vyas.

Since I was one who encouraged you to post outdoor shots, and full marks for doing so, I want to say a few things.

First, Grumpy and Shadowman are two of the forums most expert and experienced members (just look at their numbers of posts!) so certainly pay attention to what they say.

However, they may not know how new you are to DSLR photography, so I'd like to start somewhere else.

You ask what is wrong, but I'd prefer to start with what is right. You have posted sooc - good, lets not get into pp right now (though you saw earlier what a difference it can make!). Don't know which mode you were in, but for me I would start with "P" mode (warning, others may differ!) because that enables you to concentrate on what you are seeing.

To the photographs (let's stay with the first image for now - I'll say why later). How is the camera and lens performing? Pretty darn well, I would say. The image is sharp, and nicely saturated. The depth of field is what I would expect at 24mm - so everything is working fine, all you have to work on for now is the composition (which is what the others were referring to).

When I look at the composition of the picture, a couple of things strike me. The wall cuts right across the image, and draws the attention. I doubt this is what you wanted, though I can't see an easy way to avoid it without knowing how much space you had to move around. Also, the wall is not level. Off level lines are not good - once you notice them they drive you mad. Easy to fix in pp, but better to get it right sooc.

With the other two images. A confession. I have a shrub outside my window that catches the evening light. Many times, I have though how lovely and gone out to photograph - and I have never caught in camera the way it looked to me. Shadowman is right - a darn difficult subject, even though it looks easy - don't be put off by this.

So, your equipment is working well (in fact it is excellent kit - better than mine ). Now you can develop the skills to make best use of it. Keep shooting and posting.

Dave

[jcuknz]

My reaction to the first shot is that it is 'flat' with no sense of depth and the other shots are a confusion of tones without clarity though there is sharpness.

There seems to be a tendancy with starters, and some never grow out of it, to "get it all in" and simplicity of subject matter is to me a key aspect of good photography, the other is creating a sense of depth in a two dimensional medium. The first mets Manfred's "what is the subject?" requirement. So the first shot is a record of three trees and a wall whereas taken from another viewpoint with the trees stretching away from you and the nearest tree quite close to you would tell us you want us to look at the subject, the first tree in its environment.
The 'get it all in" shot is also proportional to the subject so we might take a mountain GIAI from five miles and a wristwatch GIAI from five centimetres.
Shooting with a DSLR makes this approach harder to achieve because you are using longer lenses for any field of view and longer lenses have less depth of field ... on the other hand once you have selected the primary subject they help to re-inforce your choice by putting the rest out of focus ... so good selection is the essential.
Thats my two cents worth by which I try to operate and judge by

[Stagecoach]

I'm learning photography with my Nikon D7100. I shot a few pics outdoors for the first time. I feel something is not right with these photos.

Can someone point out what is missing?

It's very simple, 'interest'

Grahame

[TonyW]

I have many pictures like these where I have tried to capture the general atmosphere of what I see and feel in my environment but fail as pictures, especially for others' viewing, because they are rather amorphous.

I am not an expert like others who have commented but I quite like no 3. Even though there are no strong features and the first impression is the texture only, there is a subtle form overlaying the image. The branches on either side give a good balance and the seed pods are a central point of interest. To me, the other two don't show good composition.

[Daisy Mae]

The answer lies within.

If you ask what is missing then plainly something is lacking for you.. the shot has not fulfilled all that you sought from the situation...

So...what were you captivated by/wanted to reproduce.....that did not happen?

[FrankMi]

I'm learning photography with my Nikon D7100. I shot a few pics outdoors for the first time. I feel something is not right with these photos. Can someone point out what is missing?

When we are first starting out, there are so many different directions we can direct our learning towards Yvas. As a result, you may get so many differing recommendations as to what direction to go in. I'd like to offer a simple response if I may.

There are two primary learning curves to master at the beginning of the learning journey, one is the technical aspects of capturing an image and the other is scene you want to capture. Of these two, I would favor learning how to capture an interesting photograph, one that both you and your viewers will enjoy looking at. The D7100 can be left initially in Auto mode and it will take care of itself. In fact, it will usually take excellent images of whatever you point it at. Over time you will want to learn how to make the best of a wide range of shooting situations but in the beginning I would focus on Composition.

Why Composition (or what the image is all about) as a starting point? It is simple. A technically poor image of an outstanding scene is still worth looking at whereas a technically perfect image of "blah", is still "blah".

You can certainly learn the ins and outs of your camera while you are learning composition, but it is much more fun to post a compelling scene.

There are hundreds of pointers for getting a good composition but for starters, lets just consider a few basic ones:

What should be in your Compositional Checklist? Get to the point where these steps are part of your natural shooting workflow.

a. Choose your Subject, the anchor of your image.
b. Locate the Directional elements that lead to the subject and away from the subject.
c. Place the Horizon in the top or bottom third and check the corners. Avoid triangles in the corners.
d. Be aware of and try to utilize Positive and Negative space to form rivers for the eye to follow.
e. Slow down and really contemplate the composition.
f. Make your exposure. Review the image and Histogram carefully and you may discover the need to adjust the camera angle or exposure/lighting. If so, adjust, reshoot and recheck.

There may be things in this list that don't make sense at first, like Positive and Negative Space, or how to interpret a Histogram. Just take it one step at a time and once you're comfortable with the results of that step, as imperfect as it may be at the moment, then move on to gain an understanding of the next step.

So pick a subject that interests you, like the trees in this thread. Post your images, as you have done here, get some feedback, as you are doing now, then improve your vision, reshoot, and repost - along with your questions. When you are ready to try another subject, go for it. Before long you will have learned the basics of composition and be well on your way.

The responses I see so far are right on track.

Look for an interesting subject that your attention is drawn to. If the subject doesn't captivate you, it isn't likely to captivate your viewers either.

Trees and forest can be difficult to get an interesting image of. It might be better to pick a subject that is more definitive, like vehicles, pets, people, flowers, anything with a single defined object would be easier to start with.

Hope this helps!

[mknittle]

All good advice. Above all don't get discouraged. It takes time to make the camera see what you feel

[BUGSBUNNYBOSS]

Hello again Vyas.

Don't know which mode you were in, but for me I would start with "P" mode (warning, others may differ!) because that enables you to concentrate on what you are seeing.

To the photographs (let's stay with the first image for now - I'll say why later). How is the camera and lens performing? Pretty darn well, I would say. The image is sharp, and nicely saturated. The depth of field is what I would expect at 24mm - so everything is working fine, all you have to work on for now is the composition (which is what the others were referring to).
Dave

I was using P mode. Tried using the other modes, but the results were horrible. At this point, I'm concentrating on the sharpness of the image -"how sharp can I shoot a picture." Regarding DOF, I'm reading tutorials to understand what you meant.

When I look at the composition of the picture, a couple of things strike me. The wall cuts right across the image, and draws the attention. I doubt this is what you wanted

I have a shrub outside my window that catches the evening light. Many times, I have though how lovely and gone out to photograph - and I have never caught in camera the way it looked to me

Honestly, I did not notice the wall cutting. I just saw a beautiful scene, and wanted to capture it. But in the picture, something was missing (life). That's why I started this post.

[BUGSBUNNYBOSS]

It's very simple, 'interest'

Grahame

What do you mean grahame? Do you mean the picture has no interest?

[BUGSBUNNYBOSS]

I have many pictures like these where I have tried to capture the general atmosphere of what I see and feel in my environment but fail as pictures, especially for others' viewing, because they are rather amorphous.

That's exactly what has happened with me.

So...what were you captivated by/wanted to reproduce.....that did not happen?

I wanted to reproduce what I saw,but I failed. As I already mentioned, the picture lacked life.

[BUGSBUNNYBOSS]

When we are first starting out, there are so many different directions we can direct our learning towards Yvas. As a result, you may get so many differing recommendations as to what direction to go in. I'd like to offer a simple response if I may.
Hope this helps!

Thanks a lot Frank. You have described in a detailed way, what other pro's pointed and it was really helpful and motivating.
I'll make sure I follow your checklist when clicking.

Finally. I guess its a typo. My name is Vyas. not Yvas.

[JBW]

I'm learning photography with my Nikon D7100. I shot a few pics outdoors for the first time. I feel something is not right with these photos. Can someone point out what is missing?

1.


2.


3.


All these are SOOC.

Like you I am new to this. You have already been offered lots of great advice. Allow me to answer the question you asked; for me, and only me, what is missing is something to catch my attention. A bright burst of colour, an unusual shape? One of the options you may have on your camera is 'Landscape'. It will not give you greater clarity or focus but it may allow you to concentrate more on the composition than the technical details.
Brian.

[Stagecoach]

What do you mean grahame? Do you mean the picture has no interest?

Hi Vyas

Yes, I meant the picture had no interest in either subject or composition and I also suspected that this may be your reason for thinking 'something was not right'.

As an image to test your shooting abilities i.e. sharpness and settings I see no concerns whatsoever considering the lighting conditions you had. What I will say is that trees are not the easiest to photograph and make interesting and I say this because I'm presently concentrating on landscapes with lots of trees and sure struggling.

There's some very good advice given above and with the image quality you have already demonstrated in these shots I look forward to seeing some more.

Grahame

[Manfred M]

Vyas - One of the most difficult things to do when you first start into photography is to learn how to "see photographically". When you see something, it is really a product that your brain makes, using your eyes as the main input. You see three dimensionally (a result of using two eyes to see); your eyes have a field of view of around 180° from side to side and about 90° vertically. Your eyes dart around and your iris stops up and down while doing so. Your camera is not nearly as talented, so you have to learn to understand how your camera records images. As you have already noted; you did not see the wall; yet your camera picked it up, because it was there.

You are dealing with a two-dimensional view, and depending on the focal length you use, the field of view will change. This is something one figures out over time.

You say you took the picture because you saw a beautiful scene. That is very likely the case, but this is hardly ever enough photographically. I remember the when I was fairly new to photography and saw mountains for the first time, I had the same reaction as you did and I took a lot of uninteresting images of a "beautiful scene". Trees can be part of a very beautiful composition, either as the main subject or as an part of the landscape. I suggest you read the CiC tutorials on composition as a starting point. Look at pictures of other photographers that have handled the subject matter and armed with your new-found compositional guidelines; see which of these elements are in play and create an image that you like. After that; try going out and try putting these techiques into play. The more you photograph and analyse your images, the better you will become.

Let me show you some ways that I have handled trees as a subject.

This is a shot of fall colours; trees that are along the side of a road. I use the road to lead the viewer's eyes into the scene. I used the road to assymetrically balance the trees on the left side and right side. I also balance the grey of the road and grey of the sky, but using the trees to segment the image.






Another fall colour scene taken late in the day, as the sun was setting. Again, the shot is mainly trees, but the reflection of the trees in the lake as well as the trees lining the lake, take your eyes into the scene. I used a shot where a fish had come to the surface and made a ripple in the water to clearly show that this is a reflection of water in the lake. The setting sun "kissing" the fall colours adds polish to the image.




The last shot here is really a portrait of a tree. with the sunbeams of the setting sun hitting the tree and making it almost sparkle. I don't think this is a great shot. but there is no doubt about the tree being the subject in this image.





I hope that these images help explain where I am coming from.

[FrankMi]

Finally. I guess its a typo. My name is Vyas. not Yvas.

Oops! Yes Vyas, unfortunately I make as lot of typos and often need to update my posts multiple times to correct them but I missed this one. Sorry.