Photography Question From An Amateur

[GroobyKrissy]

Soooo...

Mostly, this is directed towards one person (Tate07) but since I don't really PVT people that I don't know... you all get to read it too. Anyone else with input is welcome as well.

Is it impossible to get crystal clear clarity when using a tripod / timer like I do when taking pictures? (see the Krissy4u thread for samples)

I use a Nikon D5100, usually just the auto-settings on a Vanguard ABEO Pro Series tripod. It is not that I am unsatisfied with the picture quality, but it just seems that this camera should be able to take better pictures. Are the auto-settings just not good enough or am I doing something wrong to get the washed out places and grainy pictures? I am not a big believer in heavy post-production besides adjusting colors a bit. I shoot on the highest quality JPEG setting. Is RAW that much better?

Just curious and it is a question that has been bothering me recently as I've thought about upgrading to a different model to try and get different / better results. I've done some research and gotten a wide variety of replies. Input?

Thanks and welcome to the forum!

[Jamie French]

It's all about your lighting. Even a shitty camera kit with the all purpose 55mm zoom lens it came with can take decent pictures so long as your scene is properly lit. The first 4 years of my content were all shot on an entry level SLR, a Nikon D40. That was $400 well spent but the more important purchase at the time was the Smith Victor light kit that I bought. 500 watts of pure amateur lighting action that, when set up properly, took my pictures to professional levels of clarity, depth and white balance.

Also, do take the time to learn how to use your camera's manual settings. So much more control is at your fingertips and all you have to do is crack open the manual and read how to do it. Or YouTube tutorials if you're a more visually oriented learner.

Setting Manual Exposure for Nikon D5100 in Movie Mode - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9x5eZN43Kuc)

Using the Nikon D5100 Manual Mode - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ER4hRAoiE2U)

[bluesoul]

Soooo...

Mostly, this is directed towards one person (Tate07) but since I don't really PVT people that I don't know... you all get to read it too. Anyone else with input is welcome as well.

Is it impossible to get crystal clear clarity when using a tripod / timer like I do when taking pictures? (see the Krissy4u thread for samples)

I use a Nikon D5100, usually just the auto-settings on a Vanguard ABEO Pro Series tripod. It is not that I am unsatisfied with the picture quality, but it just seems that this camera should be able to take better pictures. Are the auto-settings just not good enough or am I doing something wrong to get the washed out places and grainy pictures? I am not a big believer in heavy post-production besides adjusting colors a bit. I shoot on the highest quality JPEG setting. Is RAW that much better?

Just curious and it is a question that has been bothering me recently as I've thought about upgrading to a different model to try and get different / better results. I've done some research and gotten a wide variety of replies. Input?

Thanks and welcome to the forum!

are you also trying to get hired by kink.com? me too

eh yo kink.com? you need any professional males to have relations with women in front of the camera? i got pictures but i ain't pulling a jamie incase someone starts telling me what to fix.

credits: banged lots of chicks (1991-present)

agent: current gf (satisfied and currently sleeping it off)

other talents: you heard that banger 'all gold everything'? i wrote that joint

mission objective: you'll see

pm me here for more details

be easy

[GroobyKrissy]

are you also trying to get hired by kink.com? me too

eh yo kink.com? you need any professional males to have relations with women in front of the camera? i got pictures but i ain't pulling a jamie incase someone starts telling me what to fix.

credits: banged lots of chicks (1991-present)

agent: current gf (satisfied and currently sleeping it off)

other talents: you heard that banger 'all gold everything'? i wrote that joint

mission objective: you'll see

pm me here for more details

be easy

Are you drunk? Usually you're much more cohesive.

I admire Kink's work but no... they would not be interested in me and I have no interest in shooting content for any other sites anyway.

[GroobyKrissy]

It's all about your lighting. Even a shitty camera kit with the all purpose 55mm zoom lens it came with can take decent pictures so long as your scene is properly lit. The first 4 years of my content were all shot on an entry level SLR, a Nikon D40. That was $400 well spent but the more important purchase at the time was the Smith Victor light kit that I bought. 500 watts of pure amateur lighting action that, when set up properly, took my pictures to professional levels of clarity, depth and white balance.

Also, do take the time to learn how to use your camera's manual settings. So much more control is at your fingertips and all you have to do is crack open the manual and read how to do it. Or YouTube tutorials if you're a more visually oriented learner.

Setting Manual Exposure for Nikon D5100 in Movie Mode - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9x5eZN43Kuc)

Using the Nikon D5100 Manual Mode - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ER4hRAoiE2U)

That is typically the answer I have received. Lighting. However, I don't think that is the case here. Some of my galleries are shot in evening light but even the ones I take in broad daylight will either have grain or washed out spots in them.

When I actually shoot indoors in my little studio, I have almost 10,000 lumens of LED / daylight lights. Even then, the pictures don't have the detail that I think they should when cropped and resized even at 100% quality in CS6.

Anyway, thanks for the input... I'll check out the YouTube vids.

[bluesoul]

Are you drunk?

working on it:tongue:

[Willie Escalade]

I've been told as well the lighting makes the difference more than the equipment. Take the picture below; I snapped it back in 2010 with my Canon SX10is...which is basically a fancy point-and-shoot. I lucked out with the light; it had rained the previous evening and the skies were clear. No tripod, but I did (just recently) fiddle around with the colors and such in Adobe Lightroom.

Eventually I'll get a good light kit for shooting portraits and such.

I'm STILL practicing with the manual settings on my camera. I have a long way to go, but I'll get there. Krissy, so will you!

[GroobyKrissy]

working on it:tongue:

LoL... I thought so :). Have fun! I'm just burning time waiting for a midnight showing of Superman :) ... or I guess more accurately, Man of Steel.

[GroobyKrissy]

I've been told as well the lighting makes the difference more than the equipment. Take the picture below; I snapped it back in 2010 with my Canon SX10is...which is basically a fancy point-and-shoot. I lucked out with the light; it had rained the previous evening and the skies were clear. No tripod, but I did (just recently) fiddle around with the colors and such in Adobe Lightroom.

Eventually I'll get a good light kit for shooting portraits and such.

I'm STILL practicing with the manual settings on my camera. I have a long way to go, but I'll get there. Krissy, so will you!

The real problem is that I just have no patience for settings and such. Plus, typically when I shoot outside it is much more of a run out of the car, snap a few pictures, and then run back in before a large crowd gathers :).

BTW... is that SFO? I think I have been pretty close to that exact spot if so :). I love that little grassy hill.

[Willie Escalade]

The real problem is that I just have no patience for settings and such. Plus, typically when I shoot outside it is much more of a run out of the car, snap a few pictures, and then run back in before a large crowd gathers :).

BTW... is that SFO? I think I have been pretty close to that exact spot if so :). I love that little grassy hill.
Alamo Square. I hope to take an updated version of this picture next month. :)

[danthepoetman]

I've been told as well the lighting makes the difference more than the equipment. Take the picture below; I snapped it back in 2010 with my Canon SX10is...which is basically a fancy point-and-shoot. I lucked out with the light; it had rained the previous evening and the skies were clear. No tripod, but I did (just recently) fiddle around with the colors and such in Adobe Lightroom.

Eventually I'll get a good light kit for shooting portraits and such.

I'm STILL practicing with the manual settings on my camera. I have a long way to go, but I'll get there. Krissy, so will you!
Very good, Willie, very nice!
But where is that thread, you know? "post your own pics" or something? Willie, you really should post more of this stuff! You're so talented. Your pictures are a joy to look at. Really!
Or post some of them on that new thread by Nikki. What is it? "Favorite pics"?

[Willie Escalade]

I'll be taking more pics soon. I'll be hitting up San Diego next weekend, and St. Francis next month.

Of course I'll try and get pics of the local ladies as well muahahahah :lol:

[MacShreach]

Krissy,I looked at the pics in the k4u thread and I don't see a lot I'd put down to a problem with the camera. Some of your pictures are heavily backlit, and modern cameras will automatically expose for the foreground, which on digital will just blow the bright background to white. (Digital is actually more like transparency in its dynamic range, or latitude, than colour neg.) In backllit situations, use fill flash or a big white reflector to kick light back in without having to expose so much. In movie use a fixed light.

Your bedroom scenes appear to be lit by not very bright available light (which some of us know as 'available darkness'). To take in situations like this, in film, you'd use a wider aperture, a slower shutter and a faster emulsion. Digital cams it's the same, wider aperture, slower shutter, and more gain on the sensor. More gain on the sensor means more noise, which makes the image look 'grainy'. In situations like that you really do have to use lights to get a decent result. In addition, BTW, your camera is struggling to give a decent white balance in those pictures. Lights will fix that.

If you have a sharpness problem then that could be an equipment issue--autofocus problem most likely--but I can't see that in the pics. The camera you are using is well capable of decent images. Don't waste money replacing it just now, invest in lights and learn how to use them.

The advice to use manual is good but you need to learn quite a bit more before you can use that properly. The pictures look well-enough exposed, just the lighting situations are fiendish.

Post some others here to give a better idea of the issues.

[MacShreach]

Some of my galleries are shot in evening light but even the ones I take in broad daylight will either have grain or washed out spots in them.

You'll need to post a couple of samples for a decent crit, love.

[Tate07]

GroobyKrissy,

Thanks for the welcome :) without seeing the metadata on the image let me give you a few pointers that might help.

I am gonna take a look at the pics and then comment a bit :)

[Tate07]

GroobyKrissy,

OK had to reread your intro. If I am understanding you properly...the answer is no.. it isn't impossible to get great pics from a D5100. A D5100 is a pretty darn good camera for the money.

A couple of thoughts that might help..

1) Shutter speed matters. As a rule don't go below about 1/60th of a second shooting people. Based off of their movement increase your shutter speed. typically in studio I will shoot no lower than 1/100th to 1/125th.. on locations I drop it to a minimum of 1/80th of a second (since I am generally using flash). UNLESS you are using a longer lens..don't ever drop below the focal length of your lens when shooting people. if you are using a 105mm then try not to drop below 1/100th.. a tripod will give you a bit of fudge factor to go lower but your results may vary( camera shake, wind, etc). People are 3 dimensional.. even if you think they aren't moving.. they are :P

2) Be aware of ambient light and how it affects your images. There are times when we can still SEE in the evening, but the camera doesn't see like our eyes. Your camera has limitations, all cameras do. ISO 200 will yield much better results than ISO 3200 or 6400 (less channel noise, and will look sharper) Do you shoot with a flash? If not you might think about getting one :)

3) RAW vs. Jpeg... I would choose RAW any day of the week. There is so much more information there that you can use to recover a shot if you overexpose or underexpose it. I always shoot RAW+Jpeg Fine. It is redundant, but works for my needs. Try shooting RAW and playing with it a bit. Do you use Photoshop/Camera Raw or Lightroom?

Hitting post..

[Tate07]

4) Try shooting in a priority mode or manual mode instead of full auto. If you give the camera full control of itself.. then it will do great on a sunny day shooting with the sun. Otherwise it usually fails miserably. your camera has a built in light meter reading a bit on how it operates will help you immensely (+ is overexposing - is underexposing) regarding proper exposure. Try to keep the exposure to in the middle of the meter. You will have situations where you need to adjust this on a case by case basis.

5) Gear matters. The quality of a Nikon 24-70mm 2.8 vs. a Kit lens 18-55mm. The 24-70 will blow it away for sharpness. If you stick in the DX range the 17-55mm 2.8 is a fantastic lens too. It doesn't mean the 18-55 is horrible, it just means the 24-70 is THAT much better. I shoot a D3 as my main camera and it still rocks because of the sensor. There is a big difference in sensor ability and results between a D3200 and a D4, but unless you plan on dropping 6k on a body you make trade offs. Never underestimate the importance of good glass(lenses).


Hitting post...

[Ecstatic]

Soooo...
I use a Nikon D5100, usually just the auto-settings on a Vanguard ABEO Pro Series tripod. It is not that I am unsatisfied with the picture quality, but it just seems that this camera should be able to take better pictures. Are the auto-settings just not good enough or am I doing something wrong to get the washed out places and grainy pictures? I am not a big believer in heavy post-production besides adjusting colors a bit. I shoot on the highest quality JPEG setting. Is RAW that much better?

Krissy, great recommendations by Jamie, MacS, and Tate, emphasizing the fundamentals: glass, lighting, exposure. By your description (washed out and grainy), I think Mac hits the nail re: backlit scenes being blown out, and the camera compensating in low light situations by automatically setting a high ISO ('gain'):


Your bedroom scenes appear to be lit by not very bright available light (which some of us know as 'available darkness'). To take in situations like this, in film, you'd use a wider aperture, a slower shutter and a faster emulsion. Digital cams it's the same, wider aperture, slower shutter, and more gain on the sensor. More gain on the sensor means more noise, which makes the image look 'grainy'. In situations like that you really do have to use lights to get a decent result. In addition, BTW, your camera is struggling to give a decent white balance in those pictures. Lights will fix that.

It's awesome that dSLRs can give you extremely high exposure levels by pushing the gain, allowing the capture of images in very low light situations (the Nikon D4 goes up to 12,800 ISO, expandable to 204,800), but this will always yield grainy, noisy images. For crystal clear photos, you want a much lower ISO, 200 (like Tate suggests) and no more than 400. Better to add light, to keep the ISO low for much clearer images.

The sensor in the D5100 isn't a match for the D4, but it's a fine sensor and keeping your ISO lower and using more light (incident light on the subject, not backlight) is essential.



1) Shutter speed matters. As a rule don't go below about 1/60th of a second shooting people. Based off of their movement increase your shutter speed. typically in studio I will shoot no lower than 1/100th to 1/125th.. on locations I drop it to a minimum of 1/80th of a second (since I am generally using flash). UNLESS you are using a longer lens..don't ever drop below the focal length of your lens when shooting people. if you are using a 105mm then try not to drop below 1/100th.. a tripod will give you a bit of fudge factor to go lower but your results may vary( camera shake, wind, etc). People are 3 dimensional.. even if you think they aren't moving.. they are :P

Spot on! I rarely shoot at 1/60th, usually 1/125th - 1/200th.


2) Be aware of ambient light and how it affects your images. There are times when we can still SEE in the evening, but the camera doesn't see like our eyes. Your camera has limitations, all cameras do. ISO 200 will yield much better results than ISO 3200 or 6400 (less channel noise, and will look sharper) Do you shoot with a flash? If not you might think about getting one
As noted above. Flashes can be problematic--those deep, dark shadows they can cast, the sharp, flat contrast they create--but as fill light very useful, even in sunlight. For the Nikon, a Speedlight 600 or 800 will do, or you can experiment with off-camera light, like an LED array (one with adjustable white balance).


3) RAW vs. Jpeg... I would choose RAW any day of the week. There is so much more information there that you can use to recover a shot if you overexpose or underexpose it. I always shoot RAW+Jpeg Fine. It is redundant, but works for my needs. Try shooting RAW and playing with it a bit. Do you use Photoshop/Camera Raw or Lightroom?

I always prefer RAW (NEF in Nikonese). RAW allows all sorts of post-production corrections that are impossible, or nearly so, with JPEG, particularly adjusting the white balance after the fact. Oops, you had a tungsten white balance (3200K) accidentally in a sunlight (5500K) setting? Try to fix that in JPEG! Almost impossible, and being a lossy format, you're going to lose data anyway. But in RAW, just adjust the white balance (easy in Photoshop), and voila, you're at 5500K or whatever level you desire. There are several other adjustments as well, all made in RAW before the image is opened in Photoshop proper, for final adjustment and save as JPEG for the web.

[GroobyKrissy]

Thanks everyone for the input and good information.

I guess though, what my actual question is:

Does the Full-Auto function on a camera such as the D5100 "top out" at some point... and have I reached that point?

I realize that I could achieve better results using other settings, but I simply don't have the time / patience to take a picture, readjust the settings, take a picture, etc. etc. When I shoot outdoors, there are usually numerous people about and I dislike gathering crowds. The auto function allows me to take about 500 pictures in just a few minutes, which is great.

Maybe there isn't a YES/NO answer to the question. Really all I'm looking for is the very BEST full-auto camera out there (with articulating view finder).

[Ecstatic]

Well yes, it "tops out" with the inherent limitations of auto setting: there's only so much latitude that auto will allow, nothing like what manual will allow. I don't think you'll gain that much with a move to a D5200, D7100, etc. Moving up to FX (full frame) could help (larger sensor, eliminating the 1.5 multiplication factor of the DX level), but still you'll have auto limits.

Maybe the P (program) setting will be more adaptable to your sets? But I'd prefer going to aperature priority over Auto, so that you control the depth of field, which in itself could sharpen your images, so long as you know the distance you are from the camera for the exposure within the depth of field range. If you're not moving, then the shutter speed will not blur the image when it's snapped.

[GroobyKrissy]

GroobyKrissy,

OK had to reread your intro. If I am understanding you properly...the answer is no.. it isn't impossible to get great pics from a D5100. A D5100 is a pretty darn good camera for the money.

A couple of thoughts that might help..

1) Shutter speed matters. As a rule don't go below about 1/60th of a second shooting people. Based off of their movement increase your shutter speed. typically in studio I will shoot no lower than 1/100th to 1/125th.. on locations I drop it to a minimum of 1/80th of a second (since I am generally using flash). UNLESS you are using a longer lens..don't ever drop below the focal length of your lens when shooting people. if you are using a 105mm then try not to drop below 1/100th.. a tripod will give you a bit of fudge factor to go lower but your results may vary( camera shake, wind, etc). People are 3 dimensional.. even if you think they aren't moving.. they are :P

2) Be aware of ambient light and how it affects your images. There are times when we can still SEE in the evening, but the camera doesn't see like our eyes. Your camera has limitations, all cameras do. ISO 200 will yield much better results than ISO 3200 or 6400 (less channel noise, and will look sharper) Do you shoot with a flash? If not you might think about getting one :)

3) RAW vs. Jpeg... I would choose RAW any day of the week. There is so much more information there that you can use to recover a shot if you overexpose or underexpose it. I always shoot RAW+Jpeg Fine. It is redundant, but works for my needs. Try shooting RAW and playing with it a bit. Do you use Photoshop/Camera Raw or Lightroom?

Hitting post..

1. I bought the camera as a kit so I just use the wide-angle lens that came with it... it is 52mm if that means anything. I always use a tripod when shooting. The camera guy said this Vanguard one ($206.99) is good and I've been happy with the results from when I switched from a cheapo Sony one ($29.99)

2. I NEVER shoot with a flash... Seanchai gave me that little bit of knowledge a long, long time ago. What frustrates me is when the lighting is fine but the picture comes out washed out. (see sample). It is like the camera cannot focus... or else I am just too white and I need my Asian card taken away from me. This just seems like it should have been a better picture. If I was wearing black stockings, it would have turned out fine... Is there a setting to compensate for that?

3. I use Photoshop CS6... I have Lightroom but haven't really spent the time to figure it out. Basically, I spend about 5 seconds editing / cropping / resizing / watermarking each picture. And that is how I need it to stay. I just don't have the time otherwise. That is mostly why I've stayed away from RAW but if there is going to be a huge increase in quality, I may change that and reduce my gallery sizes to compensate for the extra time involved.

[GroobyKrissy]

The picture I was talking about in the previous post.

[MacShreach]

It really depends on the lighting. In good light, sun over the shoulder, the camera's program functions should perform well. As soon as you go away from that, against the light, low-light, whatever, you're making more demands, and eventually you'll run in to problems. The real question is 'Is your camera better at making exposure decisions than you are?' and for most beginners, the answer to that is 'yes'. The simple truth is it takes a long time to learn to be a good photographer. The best investment would be a workshop or two with a pro who has a proven track record in teaching.

I'm still curious about these 'washed out spots' and wonder if the problem here might be lens flare. Modern zooms have a lot of glass/air surfaces. They are not that easy to shade, but as soon as you work into the light they'll flare. Need to see um.

Having looked at the pics you posted in the other thread, I don't think the problem is your equipment. Even the RAW/NEF/jpg issue is not going to make much difference, because to see the difference, using RAW, you need a really good image to begin with....

[MacShreach]

The picture I was talking about in the previous post.
Right, that's just over-exposed. Use your peview screen to check and then set the exposure compensation a stop under and see how that looks.

[GroobyKrissy]

Krissy,I looked at the pics in the k4u thread and I don't see a lot I'd put down to a problem with the camera. Some of your pictures are heavily backlit, and modern cameras will automatically expose for the foreground, which on digital will just blow the bright background to white. (Digital is actually more like transparency in its dynamic range, or latitude, than colour neg.) In backllit situations, use fill flash or a big white reflector to kick light back in without having to expose so much. In movie use a fixed light.

Your bedroom scenes appear to be lit by not very bright available light (which some of us know as 'available darkness'). To take in situations like this, in film, you'd use a wider aperture, a slower shutter and a faster emulsion. Digital cams it's the same, wider aperture, slower shutter, and more gain on the sensor. More gain on the sensor means more noise, which makes the image look 'grainy'. In situations like that you really do have to use lights to get a decent result. In addition, BTW, your camera is struggling to give a decent white balance in those pictures. Lights will fix that.

If you have a sharpness problem then that could be an equipment issue--autofocus problem most likely--but I can't see that in the pics. The camera you are using is well capable of decent images. Don't waste money replacing it just now, invest in lights and learn how to use them.

The advice to use manual is good but you need to learn quite a bit more before you can use that properly. The pictures look well-enough exposed, just the lighting situations are fiendish.

Post some others here to give a better idea of the issues.

As I take the majority of my pictures outside in public areas, I really don't have the luxury of having a big, complicated setup with reflectors and such.

Indoors though, I do have more than ample lighting (around 10,000 lumens of LED 6,400 (5?) K lights on three tripods. I think it is probably because I suck at interior decorating and always shoot against a glossy white wall. I have much better results when I actually set up a shoot against a darker backdrop. I was thinking about getting some reflectors and such though... perhaps that will help.

[MacShreach]

continuing (phone) keep playing with the exposure comp till the images look right. Now there are advantages tomoving off program to one of the priority functions, but you should understand depth of field first. If the camera is on a tripod as I think you said, you can safely go down deom the hand-holdiong minima someone suggested, in static poses like that.

[MacShreach]

As I take the majority of my pictures outside in public areas, I really don't have the luxury of having a big, complicated setup with reflectors and such.

Indoors though, I do have more than ample lighting (around 10,000 lumens of LED 6,400 (5?) K lights on three tripods. I think it is probably because I suck at interior decorating and always shoot against a glossy white wall. I have much better results when I actually set up a shoot against a darker backdrop. I was thinking about getting some reflectors and such though... perhaps that will help.
In the studio ALWAYS GO MANUAL. It would not be dumb to buy an inexpensive incident light meter, or even an 18% Grey Card and meter off that. The reason is that white backdrops etc play hell with the camera's meter.

You can get Lastolite-type folding refelctors of Ebay for silly cheap. Good investment.

[GroobyKrissy]

4) Try shooting in a priority mode or manual mode instead of full auto. If you give the camera full control of itself.. then it will do great on a sunny day shooting with the sun. Otherwise it usually fails miserably. your camera has a built in light meter reading a bit on how it operates will help you immensely (+ is overexposing - is underexposing) regarding proper exposure. Try to keep the exposure to in the middle of the meter. You will have situations where you need to adjust this on a case by case basis.

5) Gear matters. The quality of a Nikon 24-70mm 2.8 vs. a Kit lens 18-55mm. The 24-70 will blow it away for sharpness. If you stick in the DX range the 17-55mm 2.8 is a fantastic lens too. It doesn't mean the 18-55 is horrible, it just means the 24-70 is THAT much better. I shoot a D3 as my main camera and it still rocks because of the sensor. There is a big difference in sensor ability and results between a D3200 and a D4, but unless you plan on dropping 6k on a body you make trade offs. Never underestimate the importance of good glass(lenses).


Hitting post...

4. I have tried both of those and almost ALL the pictures in the gallery came out blurry. The ONLY setting that I've had that actually takes good pictures on the Interval Setting at 1 sec. is the Full-Auto setting. All others seem to come out way blurry.

5. Hmmm... this seems to be pretty widely contested. I've spoken with people who say that the lens doesn't matter when you use a full-auto fuction... only when you are behind the camera itself...? I don't have a problem dropping money on another lens as long as the results are sure... So you think a different lens would help?

[MacShreach]

The picture I was talking about in the previous post.
And....that picture desperately needs fill but not from the camera position but over to the right, deep, to lift the shadows which, when the highlight skin is exposed correctly, will be very dark. A reflector on one of your pods would transform it

[MacShreach]

It's quite amusng, (not at you Krissy) that everyone thinks digital makes photography easy. Actually digital is like transparency, long the standard that separated the sheep from the goats in exposure terms. It has very little tolerance for over-exposure. That image you posted above would still have been tricky, but would have held on chromogenic no trouble.

[MacShreach]

4. I have tried both of those and almost ALL the pictures in the gallery came out blurry. The ONLY setting that I've had that actually takes good pictures on the Interval Setting at 1 sec. is the Full-Auto setting. All others seem to come out way blurry.

5. Hmmm... this seems to be pretty widely contested. I've spoken with people who say that the lens doesn't matter when you use a full-auto fuction... only when you are behind the camera itself...? I don't have a problem dropping money on another lens as long as the results are sure... So you think a different lens would help?


Blurry? You need to show us this. I appreciate your need for privacy, but a squint at the original file would really help. Can you upload it someplace you feel comfortable with and post a link? Alternatively I'm happy to give you a real email for me and you can send it direct, only if you're comfortable with that.

Lenses always matter but actualy I doubt if this is the issue here. But without seeing the original I can't comment.

[GroobyKrissy]

Blurry? You need to show us this. I appreciate your need for privacy, but a squint at the original file would really help. Can you upload it someplace you feel comfortable with and post a link? Alternatively I'm happy to give you a real email for me and you can send it direct, only if you're comfortable with that.

Lenses always matter but actualy I doubt if this is the issue here. But without seeing the original I can't comment.

I'll take some more over the weekend and post here. For obvious reasons, I don't keep blurry pictures so I don't have any of the originals to share taken on those settings. I can easily strip metadata out that I don't want shared so that is not a problem.

[MacShreach]

I'll take some more over the weekend and post here. For obvious reasons, I don't keep blurry pictures so I don't have any of the originals to share taken on those settings. I can easily strip metadata out that I don't want shared so that is not a problem.
I think that's the best plan. The words 'Nikon' and 'blurry' shouldn't even be on the same page, so we need to identify your precise problem.

[natina]

I use a cannon rebel

I found that the best photos or with soft big light. make or buy a soft light box

the bigger and softer the better or you are gonna have to bonce the light to make it soft

if you are outside you are gonna need a scrim to soften the light.

you need to do 3 point lighting

get yourself a light meter

I took a photography class at a community college..


http://photo.tutsplus.com/tutorials/hardware-tutorials/diy-how-to-make-a-professional-softbox-for-under-20/

http://www.diyphotography.net/how-to-build-24-diy-softboxes

http://www.instructables.com/id/Soft-Light-Box/


http://www.shortcourses.com/images/b5ch2/largesoftbox.jpg http://sinnottproductions.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/3point_light.jpg http://www.shopwise2000.com/productimages/proscrim/ScrimStreet.jpg

[natina]

How to Turn a Hard Light into a Soft Light: An Important Video Lighting Technique





Email (?subject=http://www.izzyvideo.com/hard-light-soft-light/)



Video Lighting Technique: Turn a Hard Light into A Soft Light - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OKo8geTeG2E&feature=player_embedded)



Email (?subject=http://www.izzyvideo.com/hard-light-soft-light/)
Video shooters benefit from knowing how to turn a hard light into a soft light, because most people look best under a soft light source. If you’re lighting a person, you’ll notice they look quite different depending on whether they’re under a hard light or a soft light. Here are the five most common ways that I turn a hard light into a soft light.


What is a hard light versus a soft light?

First, we need to discuss the difference between a hard light and a soft light. I’ve noticed that many people can’t look at an image and tell which is which. Here’s an easy way to figure it out:
Look at the shadow’s edge.

If the edge of the shadow is a hard, sharp edge, then the light source is a hard light.
If the shadow’s edge is a soft, gradual transition, then the light is soft.
And of course, it’s a sliding scale. You have a very hard light on one end of the scale, and a very soft light on the other end, and a lot of variations in between.
What makes all this work?
The Magic Behind Soft Lights

The main thing to remember is: the bigger the relative size of the light source (compared to the subject being lit), the softer the light.
Keep in mind that I’m not talking about light intensity here. That’s something different. It’s true that sometimes when you soften a light, you also reduce the intensity, but when I talk about hard and soft light, this is what we refer to as the light quality, or the quality of the light.
Remember that it’s the relative size of the light source, not just the size. As an example, if we used a regular household style tungsten light bulb to light my face, and we held it three feet away, it would be a small light source relative to the size of my head. My head is much bigger than that little light.
However, if we use the same light bulb to light the face of a Barbie Doll (whose head is, yes, much smaller than mine), then the resulting light will be a soft light. The bulb, even at 3 feet away, is still bigger than the doll’s head.
It’s the same bulb. The only thing different is the relative size of the light source compared to the subject. The bigger the relative size of the light source, the softer the light.
Diffusion Paper

If you want to soften the light a little, but not too much, you can clip a piece of diffusion paper over the front of it. Barn doors are great lighting accessories, because not only do they help you control spill light, they also give you something to clip your diffusion paper and color gels to. Most people use regular clothespins for this.
A piece of opal, or frost, can be a great thing to clip to the front of the light, and this will increase the size of the light source. It will also reduce the intensity by stopping some of the output, but remember there’s a difference between light intensity (output) and light quality (hard or soft).
Bounce Light

Bounce light, sometimes called a reflected source, can be a great option for softening a hard light source. To use this lighting technique, you need just two things:

a light source that you can aim
a reflective surface to bounce off
A common option for bouncing light is a white foamcore board. You can purchase sheets of these from your local craft store for a couple dollars each. They’re easy to use and extremely handy. My only complaint is that they don’t last long, so you’re constantly replacing them — but hey, they’re only a few bucks each, right?
You can use nearly any kind of surface. To soften the light, it should be a white surface so it doesn’t introduce additional color into the light. (Don’t use a shiny surface such as a mirror or aluminum foil, unless you want to blind your subject.)
If I need a bounce surface bigger than the small foamcore boards, I’ll usually pull out a diffusion panel with a reflective fabric on it, and use it instead of the foamcore.
Diffusion Fabric

When you watch behind-the-scenes footage on DVD’s, you’ll sometimes see large panels of white fabric suspended over the actors outdoors. These are large diffusion panels (http://www.izzyvideo.com/diffusion-panels-for-outdoor-video-lighting/). They consist of a frame and a fabric. The fabrics are removable so you can swap them out with various levels of diffusion. Light diffusion will let the light pass through without changing the quality much, and heavy diffusion will change the light quality dramatically.
Smaller 42”x42” diffusion panels can be a good option for diffusing light indoors too. To use them, simply put the diffusion panel between the light and your subject, and then “punch” the hard light source through the fabric. This will diffuse the light, softening it, and it turns the fabric itself into the new light source. Because it’s a much bigger relative size, the light is now a soft light.
You hear a lot about people using other kinds of materials instead of actual diffusion fabric. I’ve heard of people using bed sheets, window curtains, even shower curtains as diffusion fabrics. While these are certainly inexpensive options, be warned that..

They might be highly flammable and catch fire if they get close to the hot light source
You probably don’t want to bring a shower curtain along with you if you’re doing client work. You probably wouldn’t do that, but just in case you were considering it… :)
Soft Boxes

My favorite way to soften a hard light is to put a soft box on it. One of the challenges of working with soft light is that it goes everywhere, which isn’t good. To paint with light, we need to control it, and a soft box gives you the best of both words. It’s a soft light, because you can get a big soft box which will give you a nice soft light. And it’s also something you can aim — especially if you put a fabric grid (sometimes called an egg crate) on it.
A soft box is a fabric box that mounts on your light. The light is inside the box, surrounded by four opaque “walls”, and the front of the box where the light comes out is nothing more than a diffusion fabric, similar to the fabric on diffusion panels.
Soft boxes are the most expensive way to turn a hard light into a soft light, but if you’re shooting video of people, they’re a necessity. There’s nothing else that gives you the light quality and the control the way they do.
I almost always use a soft box on the key light when I’m using three point lighting (http://www.izzyvideo.com/three-point-lighting).
An Easy Option to Forget

One last option that I frequently use, but it can also be an easy one to forget — maybe because it’s so obvious?
You can move the light closer to your subject to increase the relative size, or move it further from your subject to decrease the relative size. In other words, move it closer to soften the light, or further to harden the light. (Keep in mind this will also change the intensity of the light, so you might need to adjust your video camera settings to get a good exposure (http://www.izzyvideo.com/getting-a-good-exposure-with-an-18-gray-card/).)
Other Options

Can you soften the light other ways? Sure. You can bounce it off the ceiling and walls. You can toss white fabrics on the ground and bounce the light off them. You can put a light inside a china ball.
You have many options, but my goal here is simply to introduce you to the most common ways that I turn a hard light into a soft light
http://www.izzyvideo.com/hard-light-soft-light/

[natina]

3 point lighting
FIlmmaking 101 - Three Point Lighting Tutorial - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j_Sov3xmgwg)


THE SCRIM

Tech Tuesday: Lighting Versatility with the Scrim Jim - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dOZKrSkpNk4)

[Tate07]

Mac hit the nail on the head. You have to think of digital like slide film..if you haven had experience with slide film that may be hard to do. The washed out look you are getting is due to overexposure. with slide film I always underexposed about 1/3 of a stop to create density in the transparency. try doing that a bit. see what happens..if you were standing infront of me in Florida, I could straighten it out for you in 15 minutes and give you a few rules of thumb to go by.

Krissy, if the above pic is an example of what you are running into with things going white..you are in a position where it is a combination of dynamic range and exposure.. in some cases you have to make a choice.. expose for skin tone, expose for highlights, or expose for shadows. given the wide range of exposure values in that shot, the camera is trying to make a best guess choice. In that case it exposed for middle zone values and blew out the skin.

As far as glass..there is no substitute for good glass and no amount of post processing can fix bad glass. Lenses matter and can make an ok camera better as easily as bad glass makes a good camera look horrible.

As far as RAW try it.. yes the results are useful.

I don't know you well and wouldn't presume to know your experience with photography, suffice to say that the deeper you get into it the more there is to learn.

A suggestion for consistency.. take one shot in auto mode.. read the metadata if the exposure is what you like.. then switch to manual mode with those settings.. your results will be more consistent and at least easier to edit... Just a thought.

-Trey

[natina]

DIY soft boxes
DIY Soft Box Very Nice - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zN87ti6XZ-8)

[GroobyKrissy]

man of steel rocks btw... In case anyone wondering!

[youngblood61]

man of steel rocks btw... In case anyone wondering!Yes Krissy glad you liked it. Mos. def. something I'm going to see.:)

[bluesoul]

I've been told as well the lighting makes the difference more than the equipment. Take the picture below; I snapped it back in 2010 with my Canon SX10is...which is basically a fancy point-and-shoot. I lucked out with the light; it had rained the previous evening and the skies were clear. No tripod, but I did (just recently) fiddle around with the colors and such in Adobe Lightroom.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2EL65KLdEHE

[bluesoul]

I took a photography class at a community college..


i can only imagine how interesting that photography class was

[Willie Escalade]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2EL65KLdEHE
I know, I know...

[bubbski]

A few quick tips I've picked up:
1) Shoot RAW. The raw file has many more bits of detail that you can use to coerce the exposure you want after the fact. An 8-bit jpeg can represent around 16 million colors, whereas a high bit-depth file can represent over 28 billion. In post processing you can use those bits to increase detail in the bright and/or the dark areas. In your case, I'd go for a darker exposure in the camera so as not to blow out the highlights, and adjust the RAW file in post processing to get the look you desire.

2) Every lens has an aperture that gives the best detail, in most cases neither fully open or closed. If you are not happy with the detail you are getting in auto mode, use aperture priority and set the opening to f5.6 to f8. This is usually where most kit lenses give their best resolution. If this is your lens, the test results show it should have excellent sharpness regardless.
http://www.photozone.de/nikon--nikkor-aps-c-lens-tests/397-nikkor18553556vr?start=1

3) If your camera has the mode where it takes three consecutive shots, and adjusts the exposure -1, 0 and +1 for the group, this may help you decide where the sweet spot is for your gear. If the -1 setting gives a consistently better result, then use it for the combination of the camera and this lens.

I hope this helps!

[MacShreach]

A few quick tips I've picked up:
1) Shoot RAW. The raw file has many more bits of detail that you can use to coerce the exposure you want after the fact. An 8-bit jpeg can represent around 16 million colors, whereas a high bit-depth file can represent over 28 billion. In post processing you can use those bits to increase detail in the bright and/or the dark areas. In your case, I'd go for a darker exposure in the camera so as not to blow out the highlights, and adjust the RAW file in post processing to get the look you desire.

2) Every lens has an aperture that gives the best detail, in most cases neither fully open or closed. If you are not happy with the detail you are getting in auto mode, use aperture priority and set the opening to f5.6 to f8. This is usually where most kit lenses give their best resolution. If this is your lens, the test results show it should have excellent sharpness regardless.
http://www.photozone.de/nikon--nikkor-aps-c-lens-tests/397-nikkor18553556vr?start=1

3) If your camera has the mode where it takes three consecutive shots, and adjusts the exposure -1, 0 and +1 for the group, this may help you decide where the sweet spot is for your gear. If the -1 setting gives a consistently better result, then use it for the combination of the camera and this lens.

I hope this helps!

Although it is true that taking lenses are designed to be sharpest at 3-4 stops down, if your lens won't produce an acceptably sharp print at maximum aperture--and I mean a decent-sized print, say 20x16, then get a new lens. This is one of the main reasons why good lenses are so expensive btw. There are many occasions when you need to use max aperture, especially on a DX sized sensor, in order to defocus the background, or in low light. If your lens can't do this, it's not up to snuff.

[Jamie French]

Krissy... you're not going to get the answer you want to hear. Auto functions will only ever yield pedestrian results. You have to learn how to use the things you spent good money on. There is no short cut that'll give you the results you are looking for. I know what kind of stuff you are shooting and it shouldn't take any more than a couple minutes to set up your camera to shoot the things you need... (manual mode doesn't necessarily mean reconfiguring your settings for each and every shot.) If you are truly interested in the quality of your images know that every question you have has been answered in countless, easy to digest youtube videos. More importantly is knowing what questions to ask that'll get you closer to your goals even quicker... I'll save you the problem of that catch 22 by telling you right now. Lighting. Learn all about it as it relates to portraiture, modeling, shooting out doors. As you learn you will start to connect the dots between your light source, your subject, your lens and your sensor. Also, get Adobe Lightroom.

[BigDF]

Krissy... you're not going to get the answer you want to hear. Auto functions will only ever yield pedestrian results. You have to learn how to use the things you spent good money on. There is no short cut that'll give you the results you are looking for. I know what kind of stuff you are shooting and it shouldn't take any more than a couple minutes to set up your camera to shoot the things you need... (manual mode doesn't necessarily mean reconfiguring your settings for each and every shot.) If you are truly interested in the quality of your images know that every question you have has been answered in countless, easy to digest youtube videos. More importantly is knowing what questions to ask that'll get you closer to your goals even quicker... I'll save you the problem of that catch 22 by telling you right now. Lighting. Learn all about it as it relates to portraiture, modeling, shooting out doors. As you learn you will start to connect the dots between your light source, your subject, your lens and your sensor. Also, get Adobe Lightroom. Thank you proving my earlier point, Jamie. :Bowdown::Bowdown::Bowdown:

[GroobyKrissy]

Krissy... you're not going to get the answer you want to hear. Auto functions will only ever yield pedestrian results. You have to learn how to use the things you spent good money on. There is no short cut that'll give you the results you are looking for. I know what kind of stuff you are shooting and it shouldn't take any more than a couple minutes to set up your camera to shoot the things you need... (manual mode doesn't necessarily mean reconfiguring your settings for each and every shot.) If you are truly interested in the quality of your images know that every question you have has been answered in countless, easy to digest youtube videos. More importantly is knowing what questions to ask that'll get you closer to your goals even quicker... I'll save you the problem of that catch 22 by telling you right now. Lighting. Learn all about it as it relates to portraiture, modeling, shooting out doors. As you learn you will start to connect the dots between your light source, your subject, your lens and your sensor. Also, get Adobe Lightroom.

Without looking, can you please tell me what I've already stated about the lighting I use? Also, I've already stated that I have Adobe Lightroom. Also, I've already stated why I don't use the manual modes.

You have your way of "advertising" here... I have mine. I have a mild interest in photography. If I had more of an interest, believe me, I have the resources and smarts to do it properly.

I was just looking to start a conversation, welcome someone into the forum via inclusion, and pick up a few tips along the way.

The answer to my question was actually already stated, and thus I haven't had any further pertinent input to the thread until now.

[Jamie French]

I'll answer your actual questions directly.

1. Is it impossible to get crystal clear clarity when using a tripod / timer like I do when taking pictures?

ANSWER: No.

2. Are the auto-settings just not good enough or am I doing something wrong to get the washed out places and grainy pictures?

ANSWER: Yes.

I am not a big believer in heavy post-production besides adjusting colors a bit. I shoot on the highest quality JPEG setting. Is RAW that much better?

ANSWER: Yes.


Without looking, can you please tell me what I've already stated about the lighting I use? Also, I've already stated that I have Adobe Lightroom. Also, I've already stated why I don't use the manual modes.

You have your way of "advertising" here... I have mine. I have a mild interest in photography. If I had more of an interest, believe me, I have the resources and smarts to do it properly.

I was just looking to start a conversation, welcome someone into the forum via inclusion, and pick up a few tips along the way.

The answer to my question was actually already stated, and thus I haven't had any further pertinent input to the thread until now.

[Ecstatic]

And....that picture desperately needs fill but not from the camera position but over to the right, deep, to lift the shadows which, when the highlight skin is exposed correctly, will be very dark. A reflector on one of your pods would transform it

Good advice, addressing a specific problem area directly and accurately. A fill light on a tripod mounted to the right would also serve; this could be a flash on a slave or an LED for continuous lighting (color temperature could be a problem though).

[Merkurie]

There is a lot of great advice for you to consider so far.
Here is my 2 cents.

Looking at the picture you posted, the scene as a whole looks well exposed you on the other hand are over exposed on the skin and under exposed on the face and hair.

I think the camera is auto exposing for the scene and not exposing for you. Try using your camera's "portrait mode" to convince the camera to expose for you as a center subject and not the scene as a whole.

If you are using "auto" matrix metering, the camera is setting an exposure to render the entire scene. Only Nikons newest models like the D800 can identify a human face automatically in the frame. So what the camera is doing is metering for the trees, the dark shadows a big splash of bright skin tone, more dark shadows; and setting an exposure to make everything show up.

The "portrait mode" is a crude way of telling the camera- there is a person in the center of the frame. All those scene modes are found on Nikons consumer cameras and are ways of biasing the camera to make the "right" auto exposure choices for you. I cant vouch for how well they work, but since you are shooting solo it would no doubt be better than just using the basic "auto" setting where the camera just sets an average exposure to get the whole frame visible regardless of what you are trying to do.

Try using flash as a "fill light source". Nikons (especially their consumer models) bias towards fill flash. They expect you to use it and the matrix meter tends to work better with it in Automatic modes.

Use the bracket function to shoot 3 frames automatically: one -1 under exposed one 0EV"proper exposed" and one +1 over exposed. You can first use +/-1EV steps but eventually will be able to narrow it down to +/-1/2 EV or 1/3 EV steps when you get the hang of it. Then choose the shots that look best.

Don't ask too much of your camera.
Considering what you are doing, your results are not too shabby at all. Most models have a photographer making intelligent photographic choices over time. You are doing it all by yourself (model and photographer) on the fly in tough lighting conditions. You are getting a usable image, using settings designed to take snapshots of the family in front of Epcot Center for Grandma.

Hope this helps!

[GroobyKrissy]

Try using flash as a "fill light source". Nikons (especially their consumer models) bias towards fill flash. They expect you to use it and the matrix meter tends to work better with it in Automatic modes.

Is this why when on any setting except the Full-Auto No Flash setting, the camera insists on using a flash? I forgot to mention that as the other reason why I don't use any of the other auto settings on the camera. Every single time, regardless of lighting conditions, it will pop up that flash. It doesn't really matter outdoors but indoors, that flash makes a big (negative) difference. I actually tried to tape it down one time and my camera made growling noises at me so I thought... "mmm...probably not a good idea".

When shooting with a flash, you also cannot use the "interval timing" on the camera... which is what I use to take a group of 400-800 pictures at one time that I eventually edit down into around 150. Fine for indoor, studio... not fine of shooting outdoors in public places.

Thanks for that little bit of info... if correct, that really answers one of the questions I've had about the other auto settings on the Nikon D5100.

[Willie Escalade]

Get a Canon, dammit! :tongue:

[Jamie French]

There's no real advice to give to when the camera is stuck on auto and lighting conditions won't be improved upon, (on principal I assume? I don't understand how anyone could ask for improvements in their output but at the same time say they don't want to change anything about the level of effort they put into their work. That's the opposite of progress.)

Cameras aren't loaded with settings and dials to test your patience out of spite. They are there to serve the very purpose of your inquiry.

[GroobyKrissy]

There's no real advice to give to when the camera is stuck on auto and lighting conditions won't be improved upon, (on principal I assume? I don't understand how anyone could ask for improvements in their output but at the same time say they don't want to change anything about the level of effort they put into their work. That's the opposite of progress.)

Jamie,

Quit being a dick. I stay out of posting snobbish comments in your threads because it is counter productive. I would ask for the same courtesy. You simply don't know when to leave well enough... alone.

Your condescending attitude is irritating.

You advertise yourself by posting pictures of yourself and / or having someone else do it for you. Fine. I advertise here by engaging people in conversation and trying to be friendly to everyone... throw out a joke here and there and generally being amiable.

I already told you in my previous response... this was a CONVERSATIONAL thread, not one where I wanted to become a photography professional. I've picked up a few tips, let some people show off their photography knowledge, and made someone feel welcome... which is what I wanted.

I've already stated, and I think have the credibility to say, that if I was truly interested in become a photography pro... I would. I have the monetary resources and brains to do it. It simply doesn't interest me. I will advance where and when I can and if technology demands it, and/or Fans start complaining. As of yet, I haven't reached that point.

I already thanked you for your input. I don't really see the point in your snobbish, condescending last post at all.

[GroobyKrissy]

Get a Canon, dammit! :tongue:

I actually had a Canon for a while and really liked it. I picked the Nikon D5100 for the articulating viewfinder mostly...Yup, vanity ruled my choice in picking the camera instead of bells and whistles. That's how I roll!

I suppose I would pick my next camera based upon whether it had Hello Kitty on it... but I don't want people to make fun of me.

[Willie Escalade]

I suppose I would pick my next camera based upon whether it had Hello Kitty on it... but I don't want people to make fun of me.

Don't know if it's a Canon, Nikon, Sony, Pentax...or Sanro...

Edit: It's a Sony...Minolta?

[GroobyKrissy]

Don't know if it's a Canon, Nikon, Sony, Pentax...or Sanro...

OMG... where did you find that!! I am switching cameras immediately.

[Willie Escalade]

OMG... where did you find that!! I am switching cameras immediately.
Google Image Search...although I don't think it's real.

There HAS to be a market for this...

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/23334438

[Tate07]

I know there is a company that custom paints phones mm maybe they would do ur d5100 :)

[Tate07]

Krissy,

By the way..Thank you for your warm welcome. :)

[Jamie French]

How you got snobbish or condescending out of what I said is beyond me. Didn't say anything other than learning your gear provides the results you are looking for.
You ASKED for crying out loud. I never volunteer unsolicited information. Sounds to me like the moment you didn't hear good pictures would come easy you got all huffy. Look, Grooby doesn't hire me to run production because I suck at what I do any more than they put you in charge of blogs and junk because you aren't skilled at promotion and affiliate sales. Take advice gracefully when you ask for it outright. It's much more becoming.

[GroobyKrissy]

How you got snobbish or condescending out of what I said is beyond me. Didn't say anything other than learning your gear provides the results you are looking for.
You ASKED for crying out loud. I never volunteer unsolicited information. Sounds to me like the moment you didn't hear good pictures would come easy you got all huffy. Look, Grooby doesn't hire me to run production because I suck at what I do any more than they put you in charge of blogs and junk because you aren't skilled at promotion and affiliate sales. Take advice gracefully when you ask for it outright. It's much more becoming.

I didn't get "huffy" (which is not the right word... what my reply to you was simply asking that you keep your negativity in your own threads) at all with anyone... except you. Clearly, I didn't respond negatively TO ANYONE else... I engaged those who had good posts and piqued my interest.

I'm not going to start some big issue with you because, like I said, it is counter productive. We work for the same company and we're both owners of sites in a small market.

I've stayed out of entering into your threads and shredding your (for lack of a better word) "logic". Again, I ask for the same courtesy.

I simply don't believe you are so blind (or if I was to channel you, "stupid") to what you write that you cannot extract the implications. But, in case you are, I will spell it out:

"I don't understand how anyone could ask for improvements in their output but at the same time say they don't want to change anything about the level of effort they put into their work. That's the opposite of progress."

The implication here are that I am walking into a "Pull" door... over and over again. The implication here is that I'm "stuck on stupid". The implication here is that I don't have the mental capacity to "progress".

You do this all the time and it is probably why people get irritated. You put people down while basically saying how superior you are (that's the "I don't understand..." part. The implications are that you know better and etc. etc. Which you may well. And that's fine. There are factual ways to state something without being snobby, arrogant, and condescending... as EVERYONE else in this thread has done.

Also, you don't seem to read threads before you comment as demonstrated by your ignorance of what I had already stated before you got irritating... and that shows a lack of actual desire to contribute positively. That basically just says that you want to show off or get the last word or... whatever.

Your whole last post was fine... and then you just had to tag the end:
"Take advice gracefully when you ask for it outright. It's much more becoming."

Jamie... I have more grace and more "becoming-ness" in my little finger than you have in your whole body, however lovely it is. I don't just "go off" on people for no reason, which you do on a regular basis. So, don't even talk to me about "becoming". That is just ludicrous.

Anyway, like I said, I don't want to start a whole big thing with you. But, in your own words:

"You ASKED (How you got snobbish or condescending out of what I said is beyond me....) for crying out loud."

"Take advice gracefully when you ask for it outright."

In the interest of civility, and because you'll want the last word, I'll read but not reply to any further posts by you regarding this issue.

[GroobyKrissy]

Krissy,

By the way..Thank you for your warm welcome. :)

No problem, Hon. I'm always keen to pick the brains of those who have some knowledge to share. I hope you enjoy your stay here :)

[Jamie French]

I read your big block of a response. Answer... I don't think you're stupid at all. Lazy perhaps. Not stupid. When I see people who want something for nothing my tone gets stern. It's that simple.

[GinaB87]

Soooo...

Mostly, this is directed towards one person (Tate07) but since I don't really PVT people that I don't know... you all get to read it too. Anyone else with input is welcome as well.

Is it impossible to get crystal clear clarity when using a tripod / timer like I do when taking pictures? (see the Krissy4u thread for samples)

I use a Nikon D5100, usually just the auto-settings on a Vanguard ABEO Pro Series tripod. It is not that I am unsatisfied with the picture quality, but it just seems that this camera should be able to take better pictures. Are the auto-settings just not good enough or am I doing something wrong to get the washed out places and grainy pictures? I am not a big believer in heavy post-production besides adjusting colors a bit. I shoot on the highest quality JPEG setting. Is RAW that much better?

Just curious and it is a question that has been bothering me recently as I've thought about upgrading to a different model to try and get different / better results. I've done some research and gotten a wide variety of replies. Input?

Thanks and welcome to the forum!

Sounds like lighting is probably your problem... However the camera might not be set to shoot the largest, highest quality photo... You need to make sure it's set to Jpeg and fine quality for largest file size... You don't need RAW. If it's color splotchy and with pixels it's probably your lighting and the camera using too high of an ISO in your low lighting... Even a couple indoor lights close to you won't really help. You'd be surprised HOW MUCH LIGHT you need to really get a crisp good looking exposure. Invest in a camera mounted flash.. SB-600 for example, or some other cheaper but good options that escape me at the moment.

[GroobyKrissy]

I read your big block of a response. Answer... I don't think you're stupid at all. Lazy perhaps. Not stupid. When I see people who want something for nothing my tone gets stern. It's that simple.

OK, so I am negating my "not going to reply".

And this proves my points.
A. You just cannot leave things well enough, alone.
B. You cannot speak without having to insert your own negativity.
C. You cannot (or will not) take responsibility for the implications of what you write.
D. You are SO FULL OF YOURSELF.

If you're basic assumption is that asking for advice is "want(ing) something for nothing"... YOU ARE AN IDIOT. People ask for advice EVERY SINGLE DAY. You must spend a lot of time "being stern"... which I think is a SAD state to be in constantly. Of course, being god yourself, I know that is difficult for you to understand, but we poor mortals here on this little thing called Earth... yeah... we need help every now and then.

Do you realize how ACTUALLY stupid of a statement your comment is?

Regardless of that, I have already stated the reasons for starting the thread... IT WAS CONVERSATIONAL. Either you didn't read it... or you simply are too stupid to grasp it (and yes, I'm just using the type of language you would use... because you will probably understand it better).

As for being lazy... that is just, again... ludicrous. ANYBODY who knows me, knows that I am the furthest thing from lazy... in anything I put my mind to. Another stupid statement from you. (And yes, before you go whining about it, I see you put the clarifying "perhaps" in there. Please... so transparent.)

Listen Jamie. I stay out of your job (production). I don't critique it, I don't agree with others who do. I don't put you down publicly (until now). I work in promotion. Part of that involves engaging people here and making them feel welcome. Stay out of my business and I will continue to stay out of yours... as a professional courtesy.

It's as simple as that.

[GroobyKrissy]

Any mod... please close this thread as it has become pointless.

[EvaCassini]

Ok, not trying to butt in, or put in my 2 cents of photography knowledge in, as I know as much as I asked from Jamie.

But the way you had your OP, sounded like you wanted needed advice to "better" your production output and expand your knowledge/curiosity of taking better photos.

And springing from it you got several people adept in photography give you their advice. Most everyone has given about the same advice, quite literally.

Jamie stated her advice, which is great advice and according to what you asked, it pretty much answered your question. The problem is...

The way you "came back"/"answered" advice is that you don't want to change anything on your camera and basically disregarded the most given advice of "lighting".

I don't see how you read her replies as "combative". She gave you advice, really good advice, which you chose not to use because you "don't feel like it". You replied to her in a "combative/offensive" way thinking she was being a dick. Looks to me that the way you are taking her advice is incorrect.

It perturbed Jamie ( as well as myself, didn't want to say anything until now when I keep seeing you "attack" Jamie ) because you disregarded it and came back at her with sass, as well as "appearing/sounding" like you don't want to do the "work" to improve your work. I.E. Change the setting on the camera and improve lighting, among other things.

That is what I read and see. I don't understand why one wouldn't want to improve by ( regardless of interest levels in photography ) changing settings. Just as Jamie and a few others here have said...You are not going to find that a camera's "auto-settings" are going to give you the answers. Hence, use manual, watch the tutorial vids posted.

Also, if you wanted this "thread" to be more of an "open" thing for anyone, perhaps your OP should've been worded openly, not pertaining to your particular issue.

That said, I hope you realize Jamie isn't being a "dick". She was just annoyed that you aren't going the lengths to improve your photography ( regardless of your level of interest in photography ).

That's like getting advice, and saying "I don't want to put in the extra effort/time into it because I want a camera that will give me what I want right then", and you aren't going to find a camera that does that...you have to tinker with it and without the extra effort, the advice you got from everyone here won't mean shit. That's what Jamie has been saying.

[EvaCassini]

Any mod... please close this thread as it has become pointless.

LOL...and now seeing this...means that you don't want to improve your effort level. And that apparently this thread isn't for "everybody" otherwise you wouldn't have said this.

So if this thread gets deleted, then no one can learn from the advice given....like how you kept saying, you "intended" it for...which reading and re-reading each page shows that that wasn't the case.

[GroobyKrissy]

Ok, not trying to butt in, or put in my 2 cents of photography knowledge in, as I know as much as I asked from Jamie.

But the way you had your OP, sounded like you wanted needed advice to "better" your production output and expand your knowledge/curiosity of taking better photos.

And springing from it you got several people adept in photography give you their advice. Most everyone has given about the same advice, quite literally.

Jamie stated her advice, which is great advice and according to what you asked, it pretty much answered your question. The problem is...

The way you "came back"/"answered" advice is that you don't want to change anything on your camera and basically disregarded the most given advice of "lighting".

I don't see how you read her replies as "combative". She gave you advice, really good advice, which you chose not to use because you "don't feel like it". You replied to her in a "combative/offensive" way thinking she was being a dick. Looks to me that the way you are taking her advice is incorrect.

It perturbed Jamie ( as well as myself, didn't want to say anything until now when I keep seeing you "attack" Jamie ) because you disregarded it and came back at her with sass, as well as "appearing/sounding" like you don't want to do the "work" to improve your work. I.E. Change the setting on the camera and improve lighting, among other things.

That is what I read and see. I don't understand why one wouldn't want to improve by ( regardless of interest levels in photography ) changing settings. Just as Jamie and a few others here have said...You are not going to find that a camera's "auto-settings" are going to give you the answers. Hence, use manual, watch the tutorial vids posted.

Also, if you wanted this "thread" to be more of an "open" thing for anyone, perhaps your OP should've been worded openly, not pertaining to your particular issue.

That said, I hope you realize Jamie isn't being a "dick". She was just annoyed that you aren't going the lengths to improve your photography ( regardless of your level of interest in photography ).

That's like getting advice, and saying "I don't want to put in the extra effort/time into it because I want a camera that will give me what I want right then", and you aren't going to find a camera that does that...you have to tinker with it and without the extra effort, the advice you got from everyone here won't mean shit. That's what Jamie has been saying.

First of all, if you're not:
"Ok, not trying to butt in..." Then don't.

Second of all, I expected as much. It seems that the two of you are are like children, each not able to let the other defend themselves or represent themselves without coming in and "rescuing" the other. Honestly, grow up and fight your own battles... that goes for both of you.

Eva, as with Jamie, I have stayed out of threads critiquing you in any way. AGAIN, as with Jamie, I ask that you do the same.

However, since you raised the points and have shown that you wish to engage and play out the logic... HERE YOU GO, points answered as posted in your reply.

Since you so closely follow Jamie's threads, you know that she jumped all over Tate07 for his input into her threads. Tate07 is a new poster, and I dislike someone's first impression of the people here to be one of absolute incivility. THAT is why the thread was started... I even pretty much stated as much in the OP... mentioning him BY NAME. I work in promotions. Part of that IS engaging here, creating threads, having fun with people, and etc. That is part of my job... as well as part or just being fun and entertaining for me. So, the intent of the thread was NOT to become an expert in photography as you assume. And, even if there was ANY confusion as to that point, I had already stated the goals in my starting the thread plainly BEFORE Jamie's irritating response.

PLEASE STATE / QUOTE FOR ME WHERE I:
"The way you "came back"/"answered" advice is that you don't want to change anything on your camera and basically disregarded the most given advice of "lighting". "

In fact, I thanked her for her input. All other subsequent questions / posts by me had nothing at all to do with lighting, nor did I even bring that subject up again. I engaged those who I had further questions for, and did not reply to the rest. So, you're in fact... COMPLETELY WRONG about that. Demonstrate to me otherwise.

I never used the term "combative" at all. I said she was being a dick... and she was. Honestly, Eva, if the exact same thing was written in the exact same manner to either you or Jamie... YOU BOTH WOULD BE UP IN A TIZZY. That is just fact from pretty much any previous conversation involving either of you that has gotten heated.

Notice how the two of you never respond to an actual accusation... you just move on and do the same thing. I laid out a clear case as to why her statements in the reply were condescending and snobbish... WHICH WERE NOT ADDRESSED AT ALL BY YOU OR HER. Instead, all I got was another backhand basically calling me lazy. That is a really grown up way to respond.

And here is the question... WHAT IN GOD'S GREEN EARTH DOES IT MATTER IF I TAKE ANY ADVICE GIVEN BY ANYONE TO YOU OR TO JAMIE? You say: "It perturbed Jamie ( as well as myself, didn't want to say anything until now when I keep seeing you "attack" Jamie ) because you disregarded it and came back at her with sass, as well as "appearing/sounding" like you don't want to do the "work" to improve your work. I.E. Change the setting on the camera and improve lighting, among other things."

How in the world is it any of your business what advice I take or what advice I disregard? Why in the world should that even matter at all to either you or Jamie? How are you or she the arbiter AT ALL of how I interact with people here or who's advice I respond to or who I don't respond to at all? WHY SHOULD THAT MATTER AT ALL TO YOU?

Eva... CLEARLY you haven't read the thread in it's entirety. I HAVE STATED NUMEROUS TIMES NOW that the intent of the thread was to start conversation about photography, pick up a couple tips, AND HELP WELCOME someone to the forum who got a pretty bad impression here. People are much more apt to respond when they believe they are sharing knowledge / information, as the numerous responses have correctly demonstrated. It is "gracious" and "becoming" to be nice to people in your first interaction with them.

I could have just said in the OP, "Hey all. I'm writing this thread because Jamie jumped all over Tate07 and I want him to NOT feel that everyone here is a total jerk. So, I invented this thread because I noticed he was interested in photography and maybe I can pick up a few pointers, and maybe some others of you and Tate07 can talk about photography." But, that would not be "becoming" and I wouldn't think of calling someone out, that I work with, like that. So, I did it tactfully... which obviously worked as it seems you both seem to think it was me actually wanting to become a professional photographer with the advice from one thread... on a porn forum.

AGAIN... WHAT IN GOD'S GREEN EARTH DOES IT MATTER TO EITHER YOU AND JAMIE IF I'M GOING TO GREAT LENGTHS, NO LENGTHS OR ANY LENGTHS TO IMPROVE MY PHOTOGRAPHY? How is that even pertinent to you or her AT ALL? The fact is, You, Jamie, and Franklin are pretty much the same. Hard to hear, I know. You all think you have the corner on what is right. At the core, that is what the majority of your / her / his arguments come down to: I have an opinion and if anyone doesn't agree with my opinion, they are wrong and need to come around to my point of view.

You are making the incorrect assumption that I haven't listened to anything anybody said or am not taking it into consideration. The FACT is that I thanked those (including Jamie) for their input. I have already stated that the goals of the thread were met. I got a few tips, people got to show off their photography knowledge, and as Tate07 has already said, he felt welcomed.

Again, Eva / Jamie, I'll ask you. If for nothing other than professional courtesy, let's agree to steer clear of each other. I haven't engaged in threads critiquing either of you, although I could easily have done so and taken them apart (and no, I'm not going to point out where). The both of you are highly irrational at times and that is fine. You interact with your Fans the way you want. I could care less since I don't see myself as the arbiter of of that issue. All I ask is that you extend to me the same courtesy.

[GroobyKrissy]

LOL...and now seeing this...means that you don't want to improve your effort level. And that apparently this thread isn't for "everybody" otherwise you wouldn't have said this.

So if this thread gets deleted, then no one can learn from the advice given....like how you kept saying, you "intended" it for...which reading and re-reading each page shows that that wasn't the case.

You're kidding, right? THIS is your big, "GOTCHA"?

I didn't ask that the thread be DELETED. I asked that it be closed because I knew sooner or later you would show up to come rescue your girlfriend. And I knew I would respond. And on and on and on. We both have better things to do and a mod CLOSING the thread would just let this die down quietly.

THINK BEFORE YOU TYPE... especially if you're going to try and have a "GOTCHA" moment and end up looking like a complete fool.

[EvaCassini]

why are you getting sassy and catty? i don't see/understand what it's accomplishing.

And by the way...we aren't the ones acting like children hun.

[Jamie French]

Krissy, I'm not basically calling you lazy. I'm flat out calling you lazy, (in your photographic efforts. Other aspects of your work are beyond the scope of this thread.) You are also passive aggressive to the nth degree if you were starting a thread about photography, not to learn a thing or two about the craft, but to defend a first time poster under an overwrought pretense. Obviously you woke up on the wrong side of the bed when you initially started this thread so I won't hold your bad attitude against ya.

Pro-tip: Try saying more with less. It's easier on the eyes.

[GroobyKrissy]

Krissy, I'm not basically calling you lazy. I'm flat out calling you lazy, (in your photographic efforts. Other aspects of your work are beyond the scope of this thread.) You are also passive aggressive to the nth degree if you were starting a thread about photography, not to learn a thing or two about the craft, but to defend a first time poster under an overwrought pretense. Obviously you woke up on the wrong side of the bed when you initially started this thread so I won't hold your bad attitude against ya.

Pro-tip: Try saying more with less. It's easier on the eyes.

OK... so I will flat out call you lazy too. Because you can't read an entire thread before you open your big mouth.

Passive / aggressive? Good lord. Take a look in the mirror.

You just don't understand. I wasn't "DEFENDING" anybody. I was creating a space where he could have some input and feel welcome. Defending would be if I actually posted in your thread calling you out for being such a jackass. I know you're too lazy to pick up a damn dictionary... but c'mon... DEFEND... pretty easy to define.

OK... I will flat out call you stupid too since your reading comprehension skills are equal to that of a six-year old... and that is giving the six year old a lot of credit.

Short enough for you?

[GroobyKrissy]

why are you getting sassy and catty? i don't see/understand what it's accomplishing.

And by the way...we aren't the ones acting like children hun.

LoL... yeah... no response to the "delete thread" post you made, eh?

Like I said, you and Jamie... take no responsibility... just move on and blame everyone else.

[EvaCassini]

So.....you then resort to name-calling and shouting out false accusations and assumptions???

[GroobyKrissy]

why are you getting sassy and catty? i don't see/understand what it's accomplishing.

And by the way...we aren't the ones acting like children hun.

Again Eva... I ask you this:

PLEASE STATE / QUOTE FOR ME WHERE I:
"The way you "came back"/"answered" advice is that you don't want to change anything on your camera and basically disregarded the most given advice of "lighting". "

You can't. So you deflect. This is your entire MO in discussions. You throw things out there that you can't back up. Then, instead, you either sit back and wait for Jamie to come along and just cuss someone out, cuss them out yourself, or just deflect to something else.

I asked you a specific question. Give me the answer or else admit you're just defending your girlfriend for the sake of that. If that is the case, then fine. I understand that.

[GroobyKrissy]

So.....you then resort to name-calling and shouting out false accusations and assumptions???

The name-calling I gave back (implied stupidity).

Give me PRECISELY what is a false accusation?

Give me PRECISELY what is an assumption on my part?

Pose the question and I'll answer it. Believe me Eva, as smart as you think you are, you are WAY out of your league here.

AND AGAIN: Please answer the question... WHY DOES IT MATTER TO EITHER OF YOU WHAT ADVICE I TAKE OR NOT...WHAT PHOTOGRAPHY SKILLS I IMPROVE ON OR NOT? Why should that matter to you at all and give you a reason to be "perturbed"?

[GroobyKrissy]

So.....you then resort to name-calling and shouting out false accusations and assumptions???

Yeah... you're well accustomed to using sarcasm... yet can't recognize it when someone else uses it? Your reading comprehension skills are even worse than Jamie's.

[GroobyKrissy]

...defend a first time poster under an overwrought pretense.

So this is what this is really about isn't it. You're mad because I chose to interact with someone that you degraded.

And you call me passive / aggressive?

[EvaCassini]

I deal my own, and can handle my own.

I shouldn't HAVE to point out what you said, you should be able to comprehend that yourself.

I tell you right now, you are acting very infantile and it doesn't look good.

Oh, lol and how am I out of my league?

Didn't know you were this way. I met you in person and was nice to you. But if I knew you were this catty and sassy, I wouldn't have engaged in any conversation. But as who I am, I give people opportunities and respect them, especially meeting people for the first time. If there is any sign of disrespect, my respect for said person goes out the window. Give and take respect, it behooves one.

I can EASILY point out what you want me to, but I choose not to because one should realize what they say and at least understand what they are typing.

[GroobyKrissy]

I deal my own, and can handle my own.

I shouldn't HAVE to point out what you said, you should be able to comprehend that yourself.

I tell you right now, you are acting very infantile and it doesn't look good.

Oh, lol and how am I out of my league?

Didn't know you were this way. I met you in person and was nice to you. But if I knew you were this catty and sassy, I wouldn't have engaged in any conversation. But as who I am, I give people opportunities and respect them, especially meeting people for the first time. If there is any sign of disrespect, my respect for said person goes out the window. Give and take respect, it behooves one.

I can EASILY point out what you want me to, but I choose not to because one should realize what they say and at least understand what they are typing.

Of course not. That is pretty much what I expected. In fact, I could have written this post almost word for word for you.

When you have EVER backed down in an argument? NEVER. Yet you choose to do so here out of some imagined "nobility" on your part. Please. It is because you are WRONG... and HAVE BEEN WRONG. You cannot logically argue your points and faced with that, your only option is to play the "we should all respect each other" card.

Eva... I gave Jamie three chances to end the conversation with requests for professional courtesy. She did not. I extended you the same courtesy. You did not take it. YOU are the one that initiated conversation via this thread with me. Not the other way around.

You are out of your league because you argue based upon emotion... not reason... not logic. You can argue any point on emotion but you will hardly ever be correct against someone who just sees things for what they are. In an argument, logic will almost always trump emotion.

So bow out and take your pretend nobility with you... it will go well with all your other pretenses.

ONE MORE TIME. I am asking that we close this thread and simply extend a professional courtesy to each other and let things lie. I AM GIVING YOU AN OUT... take it.

Right now, you just look foolish... throwing out arguments and not being able to back them up and then claiming it is because I should know what I've written. That is the most original play you could have made... so congratulations on being original.

[EvaCassini]

you are the one attacking me. AND I am not paying attention mostly because I am busy and I constantly do things to improve myself. Im not backing down because Im losing LMAO...I just dont want to hear you be catty and sassy. It's ugly.

[GroobyKrissy]

you are the one attacking me. AND I am not paying attention mostly because I am busy and I constantly do things to improve myself. Im not backing down because Im losing LMAO...I just dont want to hear you be catty and sassy. It's ugly.

Of course. Again... a post I could have written for you.

Deflect. Put down. Deflect. Who cares what I wrote before... nothing to see here folks. I am losing. So deflect. MUST. THINK. OF. EXCUSE. Yes! Krissy is catty and sassy. SHE attacked me! I am the victim!

AGAIN... Eva... YOU BROUGHT YOURSELF into this conversation... YOU "attacked" me. I didn't mention you ONCE until you posted, even though the temptation to do so to needle Jamie was strong. I resisted, knowing that you would do it for me, which you, in fact, did.

Do you want me write your next post for you too?

[GroobyKrissy]

Eva's next post:

I don't have time for this. I have Fans to please and real, unique, TOTALLY AWESOME porn to make. You are stupid. I could EASILY prove you wrong, but I just don't have time. I have much more important things to do than sit here and argue with you. You suck.

I only have the time to throw out arguments and put other people down. I don't have the time to defend what I say when I get called on it. And heck... I'm a big star so I should just be able to say whatever I want anyway. Everyone knows that I am right... just look at all the Thumbs Ups Jamie and I get when we post. Who cares if she and I do those ourselves. It proves that we are right and everyone else is wrong. Anyway, Jamie and I are going to back to being the bestest people out there. We are always victims and never instigate anything negative.

OK, so I actually wrote that last paragraph. The first one Eva sent to me via private message to post for her.

[GroobyKrissy]

My Next Post:

OK Moderators, this is what moderating is for. Since neither party is going to actually budge on this and this is only going to degrade further, can we please CLOSE the thread?

I am going to emphasis the CLOSE since it seems to be difficult for some people to understand the difference between CLOSE and DELETE.

[EvaCassini]

HAHAHAHA.....wow, you just don't stop do you?

[GroobyKrissy]

HAHAHAHA.....wow, you just don't stop do you?

I gave you the opportunity to stop years ago.

Now I'm just interested in pointing you out as a total, intellectual fraud.

BACK UP YOUR ORIGINAL POST or revoke it entirely.

I have NEVER, EVER seen you back down from a argument... and yet you're so easily dissuaded to abandon this one. Why?

Oh yes. Nobility. Yes, you are so much more noble than I am. So much more... how did Jamie say it...? "becoming"... Yes, that was it... so much more becoming.

RIGGHTTT...

[EvaCassini]

Krissy, give it a rest. The way you are sounding is very ugly and yes, also very unbecoming. And why put anything else here other than insults, which you seem to only dish out and be quite disrespectful.

[GroobyKrissy]

Krissy, give it a rest. The way you are sounding is very ugly and yes, also very unbecoming. And why put anything else here other than insults, which you seem to only dish out and be quite disrespectful.

Eva... Again, I gave you an out many, may posts ago. You chose not to take it.

Again, I say this.
Either revoke your entire post or back it up.

This is called, "being called on the carpet" - something that you have no trouble doing to others when you know you can amass your Fans to get behind you when it is someone like Franklin.

You shot off your mouth. If you can't back it up... then apologize and let's be done with it. Like I said, I understand the desire to defend (there is an actual definition use of the word) someone you care about, and if that is the case... fine. Chalk it up to emotion.

But, you don't get to sit there, spout off your nonsense, backhand a request to let things lie, and then later ask for things to be dropped when you can't defend your position. Not with me.

[GroobyKrissy]

Eva's Next Post:

Moderators, I agree with Krissy. This is a pointless thread. Let's close it.




In fact, I would guess that private messages have probably already gone out to the powers that be, saying how terrible I have been.

Sometimes I swear I am psychic.

[EvaCassini]

you want to fight, I don't. Grow up. You just want to take everything I say and try to turn it around because you are an angry person. I pointed things out and defended Jamie after you got pissy with her, now let it go, enjoy your life and stop...because the more you keep doing this, all you sound like is a bully and immature.

Oh and by the way...nothing else has been said except for right here. You seem very paranoid.

[GroobyKrissy]

you want to fight, I don't. Grow up. You just want to take everything I say and try to turn it around because you are an angry person. I pointed things out and defended Jamie after you got pissy with her, now let it go, enjoy your life and stop...because the more you keep doing this, all you sound like is a bully and immature.

Oh and by the way...nothing else has been said except for right here. You seem very paranoid.

No. You did not just "defend" Jamie. You said things about me that were not true and now refuse to either take them back or back them up with actual facts. In your words, "you attacked me". That is my problem with you.

Do you know what a bully is? Do you know what being immature is? Because I don't think you do... clearly, you may be as stupid as Jamie is (that is sarcasm by the way).

If anyone is the bully here... it is you. You were not even PART of the thread until you came in, guns blazing for me. I hadn't mentioned you at all at that point. So... two against one (and no... that doesn't constitute complaining on my part)... who is the bully?

If anyone is being immature here... it is you. Part of growing up and becoming "mature" is understanding that what you say (in this case, what you type) is how people will take you to feel (obvious exceptions apply). Part of being mature is taking responsibility for the things you say and the obvious implications that can be drawn for them.

It is I who is asking you to be mature here and either apologize for flying off the handle or else back up what you said WITH FACTS.

As I already stated (I think this is the fourth time), I don't care if you just say, "Hey... I love Jamie. I don't like seeing people being mean to her and I said X because of that. I didn't read the whole thread and I made some false statements because I was caught up in the emotion of it." Fine. Done deal. Jamie and I will work things out.

YOU INSERTED YOURSELF HERE, MADE FALSE STATEMENTS ABOUT ME, AND NOW WANT TO BE "OFF THE HOOK". That is immature.

So, thanks for proving me right again. I thought you would play the victim card... and here you are doing it. KRISSY is the bully. KRISSY is the one who initiated everything. KRISSY did it.

The record speaks for itself. I initiated nothing. I asked for civility and to go our separate ways FOUR TIMES. Those opportunities were not taken. You are now bearing the fruits of that so sorry if you don't like it.

Running to Moderators was a joke (that is why it is so far separated from the rest of the conversation). Good lord... reading COMPREHENSION people.

[EvaCassini]

You clearly don't see it do you?

[dderek123]

http://i.imgur.com/Hkq3c.gif

[GroobyKrissy]

[QUOTE=EvaCassini;1344548]You clearly don't see it do you?[/QUOTE

Oh... I see I am being stubborn. Absolutely.

I also see that you REFUSE to:
A. Apologize. OR: B. Back up your false statements about me.

So, you wouldn't take me to task if I just butted (your word... not mine) into threads and said FALSE things about you while defending your opposition? You wouldn't ask me to back those up? You would just let me run away unanswered? Please... I think we all know the answer to those questions.

I see. Well, I'm going to try that. Have fun posting... anywhere here. I mean, if you can do it... why can't I, right?

[GroobyKrissy]

Eva's Next Post:

OK... you've stepped over the line. Moderators... she is threatening me. Someone please help me. We can't have this type of speak going on. Big Bully Krissy Threatened Me! FANS HELP! MODERATORS HELP!

[GroobyKrissy]

Jamie's Next Post:

You cannot threaten my girlfriend. I hope we never meet again or I'm gonna...

[EvaCassini]

Jesus Christ, Krissy.......i will say it now...You, are a complete asshole.

No, I haven't said anything to any mod, and Jamie gives no fucks.

Why don't you read, re-read, re-read, re-read, and re-read what I initially posted. It says it all. There is nothing for me to apologize for. You are acting like a little child who isn't getting their way. Among other things. Stop being immature, it looks ugly.

[GroobyKrissy]

You clearly don't see it do you?

So Eva, you would have not problem if I just started posting stuff like this. I mean, it is NOT UNTRUE... at least I don't have to back up what I say, right? I can just say it... then let people make up their own mind, right?

I mean, who is to say I haven't spoken to other girls, industry insiders, and etc. about you? I certainly have the connections so perhaps what I say is true. And, it is true that some people would consider other scenes to be better than yours... so I see no problem posting this in your Eva Cassini and Katja Kassin thread, right? And you're not going to try to rebut, right? Straighten out the record?

There are a lot of better scenes on TS Pussy Hunters than this one. Yasmin Lee scenes. Morgan Bailey scenes. Natassia Dreams scenes. Venus Lux scenes. Eva Lin scenes. I mean, if you're an Eva Cassini fan then I suppose you would like this scene, but the real reason to join TS Pussy Hunters is because of the other girls. Eva is just an OK performer. That's what I've heard from industry insiders and other girls that I've spoken with. Also, I've heard that Eva Cassini is pretty high maintenance and not really easy to work with. And some people say she has a really bad boob job. So, I guess this scene is OK... but there are better ones there.

[EvaCassini]

So now you are going to get really low to say false things about me, ridicule me, insult me and my work? You need to stop. Stop being a child. Jamie isn't going to post here anymore, so you wont get that satisfaction, and I wont droop low like you are doing to fight back. Grow up.

[GroobyKrissy]

Jesus Christ, Krissy.......i will say it now...You, are a complete asshole.

No, I haven't said anything to any mod, and Jamie gives no fucks.

Why don't you read, re-read, re-read, re-read, and re-read what I initially posted. It says it all. There is nothing for me to apologize for. You are acting like a little child who isn't getting their way. Among other things. Stop being immature, it looks ugly.

Again.. as expected.
I knew the cussing would come. It is pretty much all you can do at this point.

Believe me, my reading comprehension skills are pretty good. Yours are not. I've read your post. It is UTTER rubbish.

TO THIS SECOND you cannot answer the BASIC questions that I posed to you regarding what you FALSELY wrote about what I said in the thread or correctly state the timeline (I never "attacked" anyone first).

All you have at this point is to say:
"Krissy is being immature (you need a new word... I've already debunked that one)".
"Krissy is being a bully" (again... debunked).
"Krissy is attacking me" (AFTER I gave you ample opportunity to break things off, and AFTER I was attacked with false statements).
"Krissy is an asshole" (Wow... that is SO original coming from you! Do you write this stuff down because you should totally use that line again!)

You're wrong.
You have always been wrong in this thread since you entered it.
You can not ("will not" is now tacit agreement with me) defend your position or what you falsely said.
You will not apologize after making false statements (obvious at this point) about me.
You expect me to just drop something that you would NEVER drop if things were the other way around (proven by past posts).

Now, who is more mature. The person who has been wronged and is standing up for themselves or the person who refuses to own up to being wrong or defend their position regarding false statements?

[GroobyKrissy]

So now you are going to get really low to say false things about me, ridicule me, insult me and my work? You need to stop. Stop being a child. Jamie isn't going to post here anymore, so you wont get that satisfaction, and I wont droop low like you are doing to fight back. Grow up.

So... when I do it... it is low. When you do it... it is fine? Now who is mature here?

You can say false things about me, ridicule me, insult me... but I can't do the same to you? Now who needs to grow up?

So basically, you can stand outside the sandbox and throw the stones but if I throw a piece of sand your way... OMG... TIME OUT!

This isn't about satisfaction. Notice, I've dropped the Jamie thing.

AGAIN FOR THE NTH TIME (yeah, I'm borrowing that from Jamie) - YOU ENGAGED ME FIRST and CONTINUED TO DO SO AFTER I ASKED YOU / I TO GO OUR SEPARATE WAYS.

This is about you being intellectually honest and either saying you got caught up in the moment and apologizing (because that is the "becoming" thing to do - which I know is so important to you) OR defending and backing up what you falsely wrote. That is all.

You can't do it. Your pride won't let you do either one. PERIOD.

You don't have to (sic) droop... you're already there.

[GroobyKrissy]

So now you are going to get really low to say false things about me, ridicule me, insult me and my work? You need to stop. Stop being a child. Jamie isn't going to post here anymore, so you wont get that satisfaction, and I wont droop low like you are doing to fight back. Grow up.

Again... reading COMPREHENSION.
I haven't actually DONE THIS yet, except here. Which if anyone is still reading this thread, they know it is an EXAMPLE to make a point. So quit your crying. I haven't done it and obviously you would have a problem with it if I started to... which is my point.

When people say false things about you and what you've said, you correct them. If they deny it, then you push because you want to be represented and understood correctly. That is not childish... that is called "standing up for yourself".

What is childish is posting false things about people in the midst of a disagreement and then running away and acting like you've been the victim. I.E. - YOU.

[GroobyKrissy]

OK. This reached pointless quite some time ago. I am done. I think I've more than proven my point.

Eva, you're wrong.

You attacked me with false statements and refuse to admit it, correct, or apologize for them...or even defend them when called on the carpet for them. The arrogance of youth. How quaint.

You believe that everyone else should be held to standards of respect and maturity that you do not abide by yourself. Again. The arrogance of youth. Quaint.

You can give, but you can't take. Without your Fans to back you up, and against real, logical opposition, you're just this pathetic shell of a person creating straw arguments and playing the "victim card".

Grow up yourself. I've been there... done that.

[youngblood61]

Easy Ladies.

[MacShreach]

Easy Ladies.
I was splitting my sides. Haven't laughed so much since the last time I read a Mimi Plastique post...:party:

[qtsfan]

Let me be brief and try to get this back on topic, to get good pictures with only ambient light, you need to adjust settings on your camera.

If you're going to only use auto mode, buy a flash, get a diffuser for it and play with flash angles to get the shot you want.

[bubbski]

...and just when I thought there wouldn't be any entertaining back-and-forth until the Republican Primary Debates in 2016...

[GroobyKrissy]

Die Thread. Die.

[TempestTS]

Die Thread. Die.

Zombie Thread - officially dead but still walking - its going to be hard to kill...

[GroobyKrissy]

Well, at least a new last page. Whew.

[MacShreach]

...and just when I thought there wouldn't be any entertaining back-and-forth until the Republican Primary Debates in 2016...
Oh? I'm planning on plenty of entertaining back and forth long before that, mate.

[GroobyKrissy]

Oh? I'm planning on plenty of entertaining back and forth long before that, mate.

Horizontally?

[MacShreach]

Horizontally?
Dunno, yeah mainly but I do have a thing about table-enders...

[Jdeere562]

I've been told as well the lighting makes the difference more than the equipment. Take the picture below; I snapped it back in 2010 with my Canon SX10is...which is basically a fancy point-and-shoot. I lucked out with the light; it had rained the previous evening and the skies were clear. No tripod, but I did (just recently) fiddle around with the colors and such in Adobe Lightroom.

Eventually I'll get a good light kit for shooting portraits and such.

I'm STILL practicing with the manual settings on my camera. I have a long way to go, but I'll get there. Krissy, so will you!

DAMN...! I'm glad my neighbor's houses aren't that close to mine. Barely room to slip in and piss in between them! I could never live wherever that pic was snapped.

[GroobyKrissy]

DAMN...! I'm glad my neighbor's houses aren't that close to mine. Barely room to slip in and piss in between them! I could never live wherever that pic was snapped.

But just think about how convenient it is if you need a little lube.