File :-(, x, )
Anonymous
Hey, so I'm new to photography (relatively), and I was wondering if you guys could help me out!

I have a Rebel XTi, with the standard kit lens, and a 75-300 lens as well. I was just wondering if you guys could suggest some websites, dvds, books, anything really that would help me to learn photography.

I'm really interested in taking landscape and portrait photos if that helps at all. Thanks again!
>> sufi pk_x !!tV6ZluPmvVb
Ken Rockwell photography is helpful, unless he's ranting about crackpot theories, when he's a douche.

read this
http://digital-photography-school.com/blog/rule-of-thirds/

If you are interested in a lot of fucking complex physics and optics, pick up The Manual of Photography (5th edition, the 1980s one).

Teaches you about lenses, appropriate viewing distance, calculating DOF, the scientific basis for lens aberration, basically all the shit nobody knows but is helpful for enlightenment.
>> Anonymous
Get the digital field guide for that camera.
>> Anonymous
Rule of thirds is a great suggestion. Keep it in mind as a guideline and take a lot of pictures
>> Anonymous
SEMIOTICS!!!
>> Anonymous
>>273079
>>Rule of thirds is a great suggestion.

the standard issue rule spouted by beginner or non-talented fags who want to look like big shots by giving advice but actually don't have any idea what it takes to take good shots
>> Anonymous
Look for the Creative Camera Control, it's a book, old one really, lost my copy though. OR you can go to workshops, but make sure the person is experienced enough that he knows what he's ranting about.
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>273108
>spouted by beginner or non-talented fags who want to look like big shots
True, but it's also the advice spouted by successful, experienced, talented fags who actually are big shots and want to help the newbies get better.

(And I'm not referring to me there, I'm referring to the authors of every book and online guide to photographic composition I've ever read. Pretty much everyone but idiots here who want to be argumentative just for the sake of being argumentative agree that, while the Rule of Thirds is certainly not a panacea, it's a good starting point)
>> Anonymous
>>273118
I'll tell you a story - When I started my own business, I read whatever I could on the subject and asked anyone who would answer questions. After running it a few years I found out most of the advice I got was useless boiler plate, but I had a whole bunch of secrets of how I made my biz work, that I wouldn't tell anyone.
Do you really think that when you buy one of those useless books that tells you use the rule of 1/3's that they are going to give you any real information about how to shoot? Ever notice that most real pros - I am talking about world class guys not those idiots who teach seminars at BH or Adorama, don't teach much, if at all?
The rule of thirds is an idiot place to start because it assumes, among other things that there is no other object in the shot to balance the subject. Secondly, it does not make any adjustment for different aspect ratios. Don't think this makes a diff? Get out a paper and pencil and play around. Lastly, go to a museum and see a real photography show or view part of the permanant collection at MOMA in NY. Tell me how many shots you see that are composed on the 1/3's.

There's a quote that goes something like "Rules and models kill creativity and art"
Why not just go out and shoot and experiment with what works best for YOU?
>> Anonymous
>>273123
I do semi-agree with this.

However, rule of thirds is a good place to start as most budding photographers won't have the experience to go out and work out proper balance/composition in their photos.
And then when trying to use the rule of thirds, it is always helpful to try to work out how you can break it and get away with it. Doing this will help you find new styles of photography, and will lessen the chance that you get stuck in a rut of taking the same photo over and over again without realising it.

My advice - go and read a few books, get a basic knowledge of photography and go out there and take the damn photos. ;)
Experiment!
Great photos don't take themselves.

Sitting down and reading will only get you so far, the going out and learning for yourself will get you the rest of the way.
>> Anonymous
OP here, thanks for all the great advice. I'm going to head out and try to find some of these books today, and hopefully start taking pictures next week.

I'll let you guys know my progression through photography lol

If anyone has any more advice, please by all means throw it in
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>273123
>Tell me how many shots you see that are composed on the 1/3's.

You'll find many at least flirt with them. No one pulled it out of their ass, it has a real basis, and like someone said, it's not a "rule," it's a ten second "here's how not to fuck up" for beginners and just another mental principle or tool in the bag of more experienced photographers.
>> Anonymous
>>273200
Pic related, open it larger.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
OP here, so I took my camera with me today to a friends house and took some pictures.

I also used my friends flash, let me know if these two are good!

Side note, I saved them as a png for myspace (i know lame lame), but it ruins the quality of jpegs
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
And this is the second one, tried the rule of thirds thing here. Was kinda hard to guess where to stand, took this on a tripod.

In case any of you were wondering what I look like, I'm on the right, and I am a guy lol
>> faggot Anonymous
>>273692
>>273690

sell your dslr.. get point n shoot.. use money to buy more trendy shit.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>273701
Thanks dude! But I think i'll keep mine.

Here's another one from this morning. Someone who's not going to be an asshole behind a computer screen wanna tell me what they think?
>> Anonymous
Heres what worked good for me. I as well have the xTi. Great camera but the kit lens leaves a bit to be desired. If you have the cash get the 50mm 1.8 prime lens. I got mine of amazon for around $80 shipped. This is gonna taught me a bit more about shooting due to no zoom. The focus is gonna be alot different than a zoom lens as well and you'll learn quite a bit just by shooting and analyzing the results.
>> beethy !vW/UaE6zYU
>>273838
this one is pretty good... but the other 2 are fucking horrible.
>> beethy !vW/UaE6zYU
>>273838
just so you know what's good about it....
great use of natural light, excellent framing, good dynamic pose, great expression.
>> Anonymous
>>273123
i agree.
learning art history of not only photography is the way im trying to start out.
And im trying to shoot as much as possible, but not so much that i get bored.
>> Anonymous
>>274086
>good dynamic pose

Disagreed. She looks like a hunchback and the hands pop because of the lighting, which only furthers how awkward (not in a good way) the pose is.
>> sage rage !3I4SJbCh8M
     File :-(, x)
>>273690
>>273838
Both of these are nice portraits imho.

Keep taking photos, fuck the haters, they do a lot of hating and not much posting of original content.
>> tizzou !!HuouSd+PYUs
>>274216
when did you add a trip?

0_o
>> sage rage !3I4SJbCh8M
>>274245
i know i know. i added it the other day after a troll impersonation attempt... you know you've made the big time on /p/ when trolls wanna fuck wit you :P
>> sunshine !!WK+Lu8k4giy
Yeah, I like framing/pose on>>273838, but I'm not a fan of the other.
Yes the pose makes her look somewhat like a hunchback, but it portrays well with the lighting and what not.
But agreed with anon above, hands did pop out of the photo - but for a guy that's "relatively new to photography" it's pretty good