Jump to content
  • entries
    20
  • comments
    64
  • views
    2,769

Photography Ain't Easy


SpoonfulOSugar

1,257 views

It's definitely not easy when your subjects are independent li'l cusses which move very quickly.

I was out early doing chores the other morning, when a neighbor kitten came to visit.

He's a cutie pie and *very* curious.

Spoiler

8_1_Junior_in_the_garden.JPG

So, since I was tired and taking a break, I thought I'd try to get some shots of him.

Here he is investigating the Jerusalem artichoke.

Spoiler

8_1_Junior_investigates.JPG

Now, to be fair, I have trouble shooting outside in bright light because the polarization on my glasses interferes with the screen on the camera.  But this shot is just bad:

Spoiler

8_1_Junior_out_of_focus.JPG

So I tried again.  Something's in focus - but it's not the kitten. :(

Spoiler

8 1 Junior out two.JPG

"Don't give up!"  I said to myself.  "You can get something spectacular!"

Unfortunately, my subject was tired of posing.

Spoiler

8_1_Junior_butt.JPG

That's why I prefer to photograph flowers!

  • Upvote 10

4 Comments


Recommended Comments

Imrlgoddess

Posted

I love marmalade kitties....my sister has been owned by three and they have all been adventurous Tom Cats.  

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Karma

Posted

Aaaaggghhhh polarisation of glasses and trying to take a portrait photo.  Sooo aggravating.  Plus the indicators on our train stations are polarised as well, so are black if you're wearing prescription sunglasses.  It looks a bit odd to turn your head to the side to read it. Take the glasses off and it's too blurry to read it.  Who invents these things?

cute cat btw

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
SpoonfulOSugar

Posted

6 minutes ago, Karma said:

Aaaaggghhhh polarisation of glasses and trying to take a portrait photo.  Sooo aggravating.  Plus the indicators on our train stations are polarised as well, so are black if you're wearing prescription sunglasses.  It looks a bit odd to turn your head to the side to read it. Take the glasses off and it's too blurry to read it.  Who invents these things?

cute cat btw

No one told me about the polarization problems when I got my new prescription.  I like them otherwise - but it is *SEVERELY* annoying when I can't make the camera work.  I really should go back to my contacts - I saw better with them and didn't have these problems!

(I've debated trying without the glasses, but if I cannot see the E on the eye chart, how would I see the images?)

  • Upvote 4
Link to comment
Karma

Posted (edited)

No, no one told me either.  I thought the indicator boards at the train station weren't working at first.  My distance vision isn't that bad, but my close up vision is poor, particularly in my left eye, and once I needed distance glasses as well as close up I opted for multifocals.  Took a while to get used to them, but they've been great.  I do find though that I'm taking more landscape photos than I used to, and cropping them to portrait on the computer, which is stupid.  Or I take the glasses off, and point and shoot.  Which is possible since I have a point and shoot camera, and don't have to focus :) .  If I close my left eye I can kind of see what is on the screen.

Edited by Karma
  • Upvote 3
Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Posts

    • LillyP

      Posted

      It's funny because as a mom of two young kids (6 & 3) I am very much a "time and place" person when it comes kids in public spaces. I think that 100% yes kids have a right to be in public places, and kids in restaurants and planes and places are just a part of life. BUT, I do think there is such a thing as using common sense and I feel like wayyyy too many parents these days feel entitled to bring their kids to places that while it's within their right to do so, it's probably not appropriate. 

      I do admit though that I am probably slightly biased on the subject because as a wedding & family photographer I see it alllll the time. I'm team no kids at weddings, which is always a hot topic. And for me it really boils down to the fact that weddings are formal events and *most* of the time the kids are a big disruption. And it's not that they're being bad, *they're just being kids*. Unfortunately too many parents just either a) don't pay attention or keep their kids in check, or b) are watching their kids and find nothing wrong with their behavior. 

      We are relatively strict parents when it comes to behavior, dare I say "old school". We take our kids out to restaurants A LOT, we fly with them regularly, etc. No kids are perfect, and no matter how strict you are every kid has their moments, tantrums, etc. IMO the difference is in how you handle it and doing so in a way that it doesn't disrupt other people. That might not be a popular opinion, but I absolutely feel that while it's my right to take my kids out to dinner, it's also the right of the other patrons to not listen to my kids yell and scream and be annoying.

    • treehugger

      Posted

      I really think it depends where you live as to what attitudes people have towards kids. I always felt really insecure about having my kids in public in Southern Ontario (where mega families were common) because people were unbelievably judgy about how they behaved and my parenting in general.
       

      Then we moved to downtown Montreal, where having more than 1 kid was considered a big family, and everyone is just so kind and supportive and encouraging. No one batted an eye at them. I swear that’s why we moved here. 

      • Upvote 1
    • LillyP

      Posted

      I feel like they're just regular old Fall family portraits...it's that time of year! All my clients are getting on the books for their Christmas card photos now too. At first I thought maybe an announcement based on the bear with pink ribbon, but I actually think it's more possible that is just to honor the loss they had. I can't imagine they'd give that much away prior to a big announcement. I could be wrong though.

      • Upvote 2
    • GuineaPigCourtship

      Posted

      My bet is it's all for show so they're not changing anything.  After all, these people side hugged their own kids.

      • Upvote 1
    • Howl

      Posted

      5 hours ago, sleepygirl1 said:

      Catch me up on the Bradrick family? Are they the ones that had a daughter in law wear a yellow wedding dress?

      Bradrick! and wife #1 Kelly were the darlings and the couple-of-the-year and marriage of the year  amonst the Vision Forum elite.

      Kelly and Bradrick! proceeded to quickly have six children before the perfect marriage imploded and Kelly sued for divorce, based on...nobody knows for sure.  I

      n the meantime,  Vision Forum had imploded because Doug Phillips was exposed as a sexual predator;  the Vision Forum gravy train left the station and left Bradrick! high and dry.  The young couple headed to the Pacific Northwest where Bradrick!'s family lives and Bradrick! became a realtor.  There's a classic photo of Kelly pregnant and maybe even barefoot, standing on the deck outside their mobile home on a damp day, surrounded by very young children. She looked so...over it. 

      Bradrick! stayed in the Pacific Northwest and Kelly and six kids flounced home to daddy Scottie Brown and then she married the current husband. 

       



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.