# Your pictures look terrible!



## MT_Stringer (Jul 21, 2009)

Up on my soapbox - The title says it all. Some of you post the worst pictures I have ever seen. Come on now, get on the stick. You take pride in your work, take that extra step and take good quality photos so the folks here can see and appreciate your work.

It is not rocket science. There is no reason to post out of focus or blurry images. Today's cameras are pretty darn good. It doesn't matter if you are using a cell phone or a ten thousand dollar camera setup. The results are all that matter. Your image should be in sharp focus, and hopefully well lit either by the sun or the camera's flash.

Plain and simple…

*Focus on your subject*. If the image isn't in focus, delete the pic and take more.

*Shoot tight and crop tighter*. That is my motto. Show off your project and not the clutter in the background. I have a small workspace and fight that problem continuously. I take several pictures from different angles to try and reduce background clutter.

*Light your subject*. Turn on your camera flash, cell phone flash or whatever you are using. Your camera will focus better and as a result, your picture will look better.

*Post pics in the correct orientation*. Sideways photos don't do your project any justice and it is hard for the viewer to appreciate your work. I discovered that sometimes when I post straight from the cell phone to the website, the pics would come out sideways. But if I crop the image ever so slightly in the camera and then post it, the picture would post in the correct orientation. Try that and hopefully it will work for you also.

I use a variety of cameras

Canon 1D MKIII which I bought for sports photography several years ago
Sony Cybershot
Cell phone (or iPad) for quick grabs when I am in the middle of a project.

Through the years, I have taken hundreds of thousands of photos but I still struggle with the cell phone to get acceptable pics. And, being partially colorblind, I have a continuous battle that I wage trying to get my color adjustments right.
Getting down from my soapbox.

Hope you aren't offended and find some of this info useful. I am just trying to help fellow woodworkers out.
Mike

Below are several pics each taken with a different camera setup.

taken with Cell phone








taken with Canon 1D MKIII








taken with Sony Cybershot


----------



## JollyGreen67 (Nov 1, 2010)

What if we don't have a Canon 1D MKIII, or a Sony Cybershot ? You think my ancient Canon SLR QL would work ?


----------



## johnhutchinson (Dec 9, 2013)

You struggle with your cell phone??? I think #1 might be the best. I like the red, blue and green accents. Was that composed? 
I think it also has the best lighting. I'm not a fan of a flash shots.


----------



## casual1carpenter (Aug 16, 2011)

Mike, I will admit that there are some posts that I would love to see better pictures. It is not because of the poor camera or technique but because I would really like to get a better view of the project. In your profile pic I see you have a real camera and assume you are an avid photographer as well as a woodworker.


----------



## MT_Stringer (Jul 21, 2009)

JImbo - Yes sir. No problem.

John, I have a hard time holding the cell phone still while it focuses and then takes the pic. I get a lot of blurry pics with it. I was moving the cabinet around to put it under the saw. That was the most room available for a pic.

Anytime my air compressor comes on the tray vibrates outward. The red and blue from the push stick and air compressor just happened to be in the pic.

Casual1 - I used that camera and a couple of others (7D and 40D) for high school sports photography. I finally decided to retire from that and spend more time slinging sawdust.

Actually, the Sony Cybershot is hard for me to hold because it is small and so I wind up fumbling with it. :-(


----------



## DrDirt (Feb 26, 2008)

I agree that tighter photos would be better but the site is for sharing what we have done in the shops.

I share your peeve about sideways pics…. I see a project posted on its side and think 'Really'?


----------



## johnhutchinson (Dec 9, 2013)

Do you worry about the color temperature of your light source? #1 and #2 look great, but #3 is iffy. #1 is a cold machine, and #2 is a warm and cozy kitchen. Both perfect to my eye. #3 has an unappetizing yellow cast for a cutting board. Must be the flash.
I really do like the three green stripes on the edge of the plywood in #1. Block them out and take a look at the picture again. The case and the background would have run together without them.


----------



## tefinn (Sep 23, 2011)

I'm with you 1000% on this Mike. I'm not a photographer and my project pics aren't perfect by a long shot. However they are all in focus, are reasonably well lit and are oriented correctly. IMHO with today's digital cameras/phones there is no reason for a badly focused still picture. If I have to take 30 pics of something to get what I think is a decent enough pic, that's what I do. What are you wasting? Certainly not film. Snap it, look at it, then save it or delete it and retake it. As far as getting them oriented, not everyone can figure out todays technology, but you can ask for help. I'm sure there are plenty of people here that would be able to help walk you through it if you can't do it on your own.


----------



## MT_Stringer (Jul 21, 2009)

John, you have a very keen eye. I had to go back and look at the pics to see the green stripes. I didn't even know what you were talking about.

All three pics were taken using flash. The first one was straight on out in the garage with white light bulbs overhead.
The other two were taken in my kitchen. The wine crate was lit by the flash being bounced off the ceiling to create a soft light. I had trouble adjusting the color balance in that pic. It is too warm.

The last pic was shot with direct flash from the little Sony camera.

As y'all can see I too can improve my pics and I constantly try to get them right. Color balance eats my lunch sometimes. What you see and what I see can be different. Note: I have never been able to find the numbers in the color blindness charts. :-(

Thanks Tom. Good reply. I think you are doing it right. Film is cheep these days!


----------



## oldnovice (Mar 7, 2009)

The photo(s) should reflect the pride in the project!

The best projects can be ruined by poor presenttion and bad photos while a mediocre project can be seen as beautiful with a good presentation in a well done photograph.

All my newer projects were taken several different digital cameras while my older projects were done with a film camera and scanned in for posting. If I get an out of focus image from either CA Mara it is not worth posting.

For example, take a look at the project photos from Bentwood as these are beautiful presentations of her projects.

Another example, IMO, are those of Martyn, BritBoxmaker simple yet well done project photos.

That's my 2¢ worth.


----------



## AlaskaGuy (Jan 29, 2012)

I like seeing what in the background. Sometime you see interesting "stuff".


----------



## mojapitt (Dec 31, 2011)

I totally agree and I am also totally guilty of most of the mistakes.


----------



## reedwood (Jan 27, 2011)

I avoid taking project pics with my droid if possible, sometimes, it's the camera in hand.

I use Adobe Photoshop elements 8 to organize my pictures but it takes too long to edit them with it.

Instead, I use the Windows Live Photo Gallery. it's so simple. Rotate, crop, adjust color, darkness, all that stuff.

how do you guys save and edit your pics?

Good rant.
And…There's no excuse anymore! You can take as many pictures as you want, pick out a few and erase the rest!

Remember 24 picture rolls of 35mm? That got expensive. every shot counted. I'm still scanning all my 4×6s.


----------



## MT_Stringer (Jul 21, 2009)

Mark - in the past, I used PSE 8 also, and still do sometimes, especially if I grab an image off the screen. It is easy to paste it into PSE8 and tweak the settings.

For everything else, I use Adobe Lightroom (left over from the photography days). I can easily import many pics (thousands, if necessary), make a change to one of them, then sync all of the pics to apply the settings to all in the blink of an eye. It is easy to apply exposure, color balance, sharpness, contrast, crop, etc.

I realize Lightroom isn't for a lot of folks due to the cost of the software, but I have the money invested from several years ago so I use it.


----------



## Smitty_Cabinetshop (Mar 26, 2011)

Reedwood asked, "How do you guys save and edit your pics?"

- I used Photobucket faithfully until I ran into their bandwidth usage limit. Pics taken on my iphone within the PB app would upload directly and be sized automatically for viewing on LJs
- Yes, I use my iphone 3gs almost exclusively for posts here; if not that, the ipad 3
- Pics don't get edited… if I don't like it, there's a re-take or two until it's right like Reed says
- Organized in PB and now in Photostream

Good topic.


----------



## johnhutchinson (Dec 9, 2013)

I'm with Mark regarding Windows Live Photo Gallery. It's an amazingly sophisticated photo editing program, and it's *FREE*. I don't think a lot of folks know that it's sitting there unused in their computers.


----------



## renners (Apr 9, 2010)

Interesting stuff Mike, I bought an Olympus C8080 bridge just for photographing my projects, it takes great pictures but I have a constant battle with the image taking on a slight fisheye distort, any suggestions for remedying this on the camera rather than in photoshop?


----------



## MT_Stringer (Jul 21, 2009)

*"but I have a constant battle with the image taking on a slight fisheye distort, any suggestions for remedying this on the camera rather than in photoshop?"*

Check your camera settings. I would be willing to bet the lens zoom is set at it's widest setting. If you have the ability to zoom the lens, zoom out a little and try it. That's my guess for remedying fisheye (ultrawide) shots.

@John - Thanks for the info. That should help a lot of folks.


----------



## renners (Apr 9, 2010)

Thanks Mike, I thought that but unfortunately to get things in the frame when in a small room I often have to go to the widest setting. +5/6/7 on the 'Pinch' distort filter usually sorts it out in Photoshop.


----------



## Picklehead (Feb 12, 2013)

This thing must vibrate like CRAZY!!!!!!!!


----------



## johnhutchinson (Dec 9, 2013)

What happened to the old-school idea of taking photos with a *REAL* camera? We all have dozens of tools in our shops, so why not a dedicated shop camera?

By the way, I never make calls on my camera.


----------



## AlaskaGuy (Jan 29, 2012)

Review of Windows Live photo gallery. A number of people don't rate it so high.

http://download.cnet.com/Windows-Live-Photo-Gallery/3640-2193_4-10920662-1.html


----------



## Smitty_Cabinetshop (Mar 26, 2011)

Because I need fewer distractions in my life, not more. And, my call-making, picture-taking, texting camera does just fine, thanks.


----------



## b2rtch (Jan 20, 2010)

Make sure that your pictures are not upside down or 90 degrees of what they should be.
I am tired of having to rotate my monitor around.
Thank you.
I have been using Picassa since it came out.
I edit most of my pictures if not all of them.
I use an old Panasonic camera that my daughter gave me many years ago because it was not good enough for her. 
I went in Israel with my wife and I took around 4000 pictures with it,. When I show my pictures, people always are surprised that I took them with such an inexpensive camera.


----------



## oldnovice (Mar 7, 2009)

My son is a digital camera specialist and says just because it (the camera) costs more doesn't mean it's going to take better pictures than some inexpensive cameras for the amature photographer.

Many people want as many pixels as possible and when asked "are you going to make large prints" they say "no, just 4"x6" prints" and don't realize that more pixels for a 4"x6" print are really not needed.
Below is a simplified pixel versus print size chart … (it was a chart until I pasted it) and are rules of thumb for amature photographer! Pros and high quality prints are a different matter.

5 MP = 2592×1944 pixels High Quality: 10×13 inches Acceptable Quality: 13×19 inches
4 MP = 2272×1704 pixels High Quality: 9×12 inches Acceptable Quality: 12×16 inches
3 MP = 2048×1536 pixels High Quality: 8×10 inches Acceptable Quality: 10×13 inches
2 MP = 1600×1200 pixels High Quality: 4×6 inches, 5×7 inches Acceptable Quality: 8×10 inches


If you are planning to zoom into part of the image, with decent qualty then more pixels are definitely a good idea.
But if you just want a 4"x6" print then a 2M+ pixel camera will do just fine.


----------



## Airframer (Jan 19, 2013)

You know, bad project pics don't peeve me near as much as blurry out of focus product pics on eBay. Good topic!

I have a decent camera that I never use for project pics for some reason. I have considered making a cheap collapsible "Studio" for taking pics in.. the lighting in my shop makes everything yellowish and it bugs me. Any Ideas on something simple like that?


----------



## johnhutchinson (Dec 9, 2013)

*Eric:* Take a look at what Cowboy Studio has to offer. They have everything from entry level to pro lighting setups.


----------



## MT_Stringer (Jul 21, 2009)

Thanks for all the input. Your suggestions and ideas will help others get better in their photography. Keep 'em coming.

Thanks Bert. I have read a lot of good reports from fellow photogs that use Picasa.

Here is a link to a home made light tent
http://digital-photography-school.com/how-to-make-a-inexpensive-light-tent

And this one is a good one for building a simple light box/tent. I made the frame out of 1/2 inch PVC pipe; didn't glue anything so I could dismantle it when I got through with it. You can make it any size you want. Just by enough pipe for the job.

Lots of light box/tent images here:
https://www.google.com/search?q=how+to+build+a+light+tent&client=firefox-a&hs=A4u&rls=org.mozilla:en-USfficial&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=5crmUuKGKPWosATQnYDAAw&ved=0CE8QsAQ&biw=1536&bih=742


----------



## johnhutchinson (Dec 9, 2013)

*Mike:* I love the cardboard box setups! That's all you really need along with a couple 5000K tripod lights.


----------



## MT_Stringer (Jul 21, 2009)

Yes sir. Especially for the guys that make the small stuff like pens, boxes, etc.


----------



## DrDirt (Feb 26, 2008)

Mike -
Looking to move from a older Sony digital camera- 7.2MP back in 1999 when it was around 400 bucks -

Want to move to DSLR. Both for stills, but also for shooting the kids soccer games. So looking for being able to catch the action - many of the Point and shoots go 'click' then show you a blurry image several seconds later.

The Sony is OK - but if you zoom it is always blurry even on a tripod.

Any recommendations for an "easy" SLR that has good frame speed, that isn't 2 grand.
I'd like to stay 6-800 bucks. with maybe an 18-135mm lens.


----------



## johnhutchinson (Dec 9, 2013)

*DrDirt:* I hate to butt in here, but *DO NOT* think about buying a new camera. They're something like new cars-they depreciate in value from day one because of constant advancements. When I was looking for a 16MP DSLR that could handle a remote control, a Fuji H20 EXR seemed to be at the lower end of the price range with that capability. I purchased what had been a $650 camera a year ago for $239 used through Amazon. I felt comfortable about the purchase because Amazon stands behind the sale.


----------



## oldnovice (Mar 7, 2009)

*Dirt*, you don't need an SLR for good photos of projects. A 4M pixel point and shoot with a macro and 12X optical zoom is plenty good unless you are going to zoom in on a portion of the image and crop off a lot.

If you plan to do other photography like nature or sports that's different and you may want an SLR with interchangeable lenses.


----------



## MT_Stringer (Jul 21, 2009)

*Dr Dirt* - I have been a Canon guy since the 70's. I don't have any experience with Nikon or any other brand of DSLR cameras.

The Canon 7D could be the answer you are looking for. At 8 frames per second, you can get a lot of the action at those soccer games. I used one along with the 1D MKIII. The focus on the 7D is fast, not as almost instant focus of the MKIII but very fast. It also does video. When I sold mine it had 157,000 clicks on the shutter. My friend still uses it a year later as part of his arsenal when shooting sports for MaxPreps.

Here is a pic of my "tool box" from a couple of years ago…taking a break during half time at a private school football game. Love those Saturday day games. The 7D is mounted on the 300 f/2.8. The MKIII is attached to the 70-200 f/2.8.










Hope this helps.
Mike


----------



## Kentuk55 (Sep 21, 2010)

I understand what you're saying, Mike, but, sometimes it's tuff for some to take good pics. I too wish they were all perfect, but, I am guilty myself of poor photos. Just enjoy what you think you see, and, carry on.


----------



## tefinn (Sep 23, 2011)

Roger - Mike's not saying we need to take perfect or even great pictures. They just need to be clear, in focus and upside right. In todays world there's no excuse to have a crap picture posted of your project. In looking over your project pics, you have no worries about being put in the "bad photo catagory". The projects are all really nice too!


----------



## DrDirt (Feb 26, 2008)

Hi John - I am not uncomfortable with getting "2 year old' technology to cover some of the depreciation, as my needs are not super technical.
But the 15 year old camera doesn't do what we would like - so need to upgrade from that baseline -

Our issue is that so many of the cameras you see now, are like navigating Darth Vaders zero gravity toilet, with sub menus that you want to throw your hands up!

So looking for something that handles fast action (12 year olds anyway - not professional events) but also has flexibility to use larger format lenses to shoot scenery on shore from the cruise ship, more than just the digital zoom on the Point and shoot.









Something with a bit more capability, but not such that it makes me want to tear out my few remaining hairs.

Mike - looked at the Canon 7D and am seeing body only prices at 12-1500, and figuring a 18-135 lens will be an easy 500 dollars additional, a2 2grand, gets too rich for my blood, and is more camera than I would use. I would prefer to be all in for less than a grand, understanding that I get what I pay for…. but that argument only works with SWMBO to a point, before raising eyebrows, and getting the 'stink eye'.


----------



## johnhutchinson (Dec 9, 2013)

*DrDirt:* Just get *THIS* and you won't be sorry. It has both auto and manual modes, a 30X zoom, and it takes great movies.
http://www.amazon.com/gp/offer-listing/B004HO58OI/ref=sr_1_1_olp?ie=UTF8&qid=1390882073&sr=8-1&keywords=fuji+hs20+exr&condition=used


----------



## woodbutcherbynight (Oct 21, 2011)

Nothing wrong with the picture, that is Purple Camo!!! ROFLMAO


----------



## oldnovice (Mar 7, 2009)

John, I don't want to really disagree with you but you give me no choice!

The Fuji does not have interchagesble lenses and, IMO, may be a last ditch effort by Fuji to stay in the camera market as they are dropping out of the low end models as I write this. I would definitely stay with the big names Canon, Sony, Nikon, Panasonic, Olympus, and Fuji in that order.

With the LCD display on the back of the cameras you don't really need an SLR. Back in the "old days" SLRs were desirable for two reasons; interchangeable lenses (on most models, I had one without interchangeable lenses) and the field of view through the lenses eliminating parallax.

If you really *need to spend some money* and want one of the best in the world, check this one out Hasselblad H5D-200MS Medium Format DSLR Camera at a mere $42,995.00 … *more than my two cars combined*!










*These are my opinions and, as with all opinions I could be wrong!*


----------



## reedwood (Jan 27, 2011)

I use a Panasonic DMC T25 with 10x optical zoom and 28 mm lens. It's the wide angle lens that makes it better than my cell phone camera. My droid is maybe 38mm and takes lousy close ups and remodeled kitchen shots.

*Alaska guy *- did you read the reviews? most of them were from 2011 about download problems to XP and being confused or unhappy it wasn't more complicated. Just a bunch a out of work geeks giving out of date opinions. The main reviewer gave it 4.5 stars. it's been updated several times since then. Never had a problem with it.

One small detail is, if you crop it, adjust color and light, then change your mind about size of crop, you have to revert to original….big deal.

You can easily make a copy, it auto saves as …..(2) jpeg, resize - if you still post at FWW and have to downsize your pics…what a pain.

For a novice or someone who doesn't want to learn an expensive program yet, it's a great tool - for free.

BTW - isn't it nice that we don't have to resize our photos on LJ? 
We can post numerous photos, at least more than 5, like FWW…...... Thanks for that, LJ.


----------



## dhazelton (Feb 11, 2012)

It's interesting that you show three examples of technology, but it's also three different compositions and three different lighting scenarios so it's hard to get a handle on the differences. I'd like to see shot number one taken with the two cameras as well. I have seen stunning photos taken with a cell phone, you just have to know how to use it and the filters/effects it comes with. I don't think I would take an expensive DSLR into a shop - just too much dust and dirt to mess the thing up. And when I want to see great photography I go over to National Geographic or NASA - not Lumberjocks.


----------



## DrDirt (Feb 26, 2008)

Thanks Old Novice and John - - I understand that SLR isn't exactly what the film based cameras were.

But if you want to change out lenses - - your choices almost automatically drop into the SLR type bodies.

Considering the Sony Alpha SLT-A65V 
Running 598 on Amazon. Everyone seems to be within a dollar or two, nobody offering any really great deals, and many of the reviews are from early 2012, so not the newest greatest thing with a steep price tag.


----------



## Mammatus (Dec 6, 2012)

Very valid post. I do my best to photograph my projects well (Canon 5D here), but this is a good reminder.

Threadjack: 
I am relatively new and I tried to make a new thread yesterday, but it seems hung up in the ether - still awaiting review. As such, I cannot start a new thread, only reply to existing threads. I'm hoping someone would be kind enough and start a thread in the Wood and Lumber forum in which I'm inquiring about a wood identification question.

I figured this would be a good thread to jack because I think the photographs are decent (OK - that's a reach, but I needed a thread to piggyback onto).

I'm considering a furniture project, and I'm after a certain color and appearance. Since I'm somewhat of a beginner, I'm not good at identifying woods and finishes yet, but hoping I might get a little guidance here.

What I'm looking for is the species of wood shown in these photos:









This is the best photo I can find that most closely shows what look I'm after:


----------



## reedwood (Jan 27, 2011)

book matched quarter sawn flecked veneers of white oak.

my guess, but real hard to see with these crusty eyeballs.


----------



## oldnovice (Mar 7, 2009)

*DrDirt*, there are two prime considerations for deciding what camera you want/need. 

What am I going to photograph, stills, action, or a combination of both that will require other lenses. For action photography most find an SLR easier to use.
Cost, is the camera and/or accessories going to "break my bank"

*If you are considering Sony Alpha SLT-A65V you need to realize that is a discontinued model …!* Sony is leaving the SLR market … some inside information!

According to my son who has been working as a digital camera specialist at one of the big box stores for over 18 year, some people are only concerned about the following aspects when purchasing a camera.

cost, must be cheap
can I make phone calls, seriously!!
number of pixels, 20M pixels is not enough for snapshots
camera size, will it fit in my whatever
color of the body, does it go with my outfit
noise, don't want anyone to know I have a camera
can I take pictures in total darkness without flash
how many accessories are available, cases, lenses, etc.
where it is made, Japan, China,Taiwan, etc.

There are "mirrorless" digital cameras available and the run the same gamut of cost that the SLRs do while some, like the Panasonic, have some very unique features they can be as expensive or more than an SLR. Interchangeability of lenses can also be an issue while some have the same lens mount other can only use the lenses from the same manufacturers; *so if you consider a "mirrorless" digital camera check this carefully*.


----------



## oldnovice (Mar 7, 2009)

Since this forum has focused on photigraphs, here are some for your consideration:

If you are interested in some *fantastic photographs* a look at this web site.

One of my former colleagues introduced me to the *gigapixel* camera and the capabilities of that technology. If you are interested in gigapixel and beyond, just Google gigapixel and you will find all types of images, including some from NASA and DARPA.


----------



## patcollins (Jul 22, 2010)

*Looking to move from a older Sony digital camera- 7.2MP back in 1999 when it was around 400 bucks -*

Think you might be off with the year, cameras were just crossing the 1MP barrier back then.


----------



## lumberjacque72 (Jan 28, 2014)

HDR photography would be the key to excellent shots, but you have to have the D-SLR, the +,-,0 compensation bracketing and the software to properly combine the dynamic range of the shot, depending on if it is high-key or low-key. Software recommendation would be this: http://www.hdrsoft.com/

Cheers!


----------



## patcollins (Jul 22, 2010)

HDR is not that great of an idea in a low light area, it requires a tripod for good results because the exposure times are high and it combines several images.

Some cameras can align the pictures pretty well but the worse the light the harder it becomes.


----------



## Betsy (Sep 25, 2007)

I take pride in my wood projects but admit that my photos pretty much suck. I have not done a blog or even posted a project in a long time. Taking the pictures, downloading, cropping, sizing then adding texts was a lot of work. If I had to take the time to take picture after picture to get that one perfect, or near perfect, picture I would never have gotten a blog done. I understand that a picture can really make a project look better or worse than it is in reality, but photography is not my long suit and I bet not the long suit of most here.

There are a lot of projects on the site that would never have bern posted if the poster had to worry about measuring up to high photography standards. But I'm glad people post them with a good or bad picture, they are obviously proud of their project and want to share … I wouldn't want anyone not to post a project because someone may think their photography won't measure up.

I'm glad that there are those who are good photographers but we can't all meet even the lowest standard of even of mediocre photographer.

Now let's talk about all the bad spelling, poor grammar and poorly written posts. I think if you can't do a post with less than two typos or fewer than two misspellings then you shouldn't post at all. I know, how ridiculous is that. Just think of all the great info we would miss if everyone didn't live up to my standard. Same goes for pictures.

Noww were is tht dan camerra i ned to w rote anuther boug its ben two l u n g.

Just my three cents.


----------



## oldnovice (Mar 7, 2009)

*Betsy*, yr poynt Is we'll taken! I don like bad grama iether and pour splling is anothr think I rely dishlike!

Actually you are 100% correct. My cheap Acer tablet has auto correct built in but I have to watch it closely as sometimes it really screws up a misspelled word into something I had not intended!

*It was actually very difficult to write that first line of this post as the auto correct was correcting everything I typed!*


----------



## Betsy (Sep 25, 2007)

That's the truth about auto correct. I had the same problem with my last post here also.


----------



## lumberjacque72 (Jan 28, 2014)

Just a mention here, but if the camera that you are using has "Optical Image Stabilization" (OIS) or "Digital Image Stabilization, USE IT!...If you have a tripod, USE IT!....if you have a 2×4 "monopod" to stabilize your shot, USE IT!...if you know how to use HDR software, USE IT!

Use anything at your disposal to get the best possible picture!

Cheers!

http://stuckincustoms.smugmug.com/


----------



## DrDirt (Feb 26, 2008)

Appreciate all the help and experience with cameras here - -

Somehow the teenager at Best Buy - is not much of an expert in photography to help - and camera shops are hard to find anymore - people just buy on amazon based on reviews..


----------

