At about two months, I had my first photo accepted on my first online photo site. At two and half months I was finally taking better digital photographs. It was a great day for me when my first photo was accepted in the test submission stage to qualify.

I had had months of trial and error. I did it the hard way; but then I had to use what I had! I would not do it that way again. I only had a regular camera, ie: a basic Canon sure shot. I read-up on what the best film type was for the lighting required on a film camera, used the available light outside, which happened to be early spring at noon, and I gave it a go. I had the right ASA film – 100, but… of course I could not change the ISO setting. The photo stock company rejected the photos saying I had borderline grain, which is called noise.

I knew very little at the time but had a lot of desire.

I remembered that I had a lot of better-shot photos I had taken with a Canon EOS and it’s attachments. I figured if I had the negatives put to a disc at the higher resolution, – professional – 2048 X 3072 - all might workout. Then perhaps those photos would pass the quality required for stock photo. It took-up a lot of time digging and sorting through old photographs, I exhausted my files. It did not help that I had moved several times, and had not sorted efficiently each time. This actually ended-up being a waste of time and money... I had tried too hard. The first disc I had developed, I thought the disc images looked good on the computer screen; but I did not know how to tell if there is too much noise/grain, or not. I uploaded them to the stock site, only to be rejected for too much noise. I did get a compliment though, which was that if I fixed a couple of the images, for they were good in subject, composition, and in demand, then I could re-submit. Of course, I couldn’t do anything about that. But it was encouragement.

I learned later from a online photographer friend that, he did the same thing with his photo files, and said even the negatives in good condition put to disc at the best photo place would result in grain.

What to do? I had to start checking the prices on digital cameras.

The prices were out of my reach at that time. I thought maybe I could buy one with my points saved-up at the local department store. That was a no go, as I just didn’t have enough points saved for the camera that was available and suitable for stock needs.

My mother was in the store with me; we searched the camera section and found that there were lower priced cameras with some of the right settings. We kept checking and found that there were some demonstrated models that were a better make of a digital camera with the right mega pixels count, in a reasonable price range. My dear mother loaned me the money to buy a Canon A310 - 3.2 mega pixels, and with a DiG!C feature which helps for less noise, and the low 50 ISO, and with only a few demo. scratches on it! A later bonus was that my mother insisted that I not pay her back for the loan! I had to buy another memory card 256 MB, later on, as the one which came with the camera & soft wear, had the smallest memory space… but that was only a tiny drawback.

I was ready, - like yesterday! This was all exciting to me. I ventured out to see what I could take a picture of? I knew how to center and compose. The first objects I could find in early spring, were bricks, rocks, and ice. I didn’t know what a macro setting was, didn’t know ice could look so good! I had a lot of fun trying the new settings. The ice and rock was accepted, but not the brick as it was too common, being over submitted.

I was on my way to online photo stock photography. There was so much to learn. I got a lot of rejections, but at the same time I was making money. I was not making a lot of money, but I was looking forward to my first paycheck.

I was feeling a little bad, because sometimes, I would have the batch all rejected. I even got a warning not to submit a large batch knowing there was not a good one in it! But, I couldn’t tell what noise looked like at the 100 %. So, I started to read what other submitters were saying on the Forum page. I was learning, and I could ask questions there.

I realized then everyone gets lots of rejections. I started to submit in smaller amounts, and check all images at 100 % and to know more what noise looked like. I think this is when I learned form the Forum that photographers were submitting to more than one photo site. One can make more money, have a rotation of paychecks, and have more experience. I had the time to do this. The first photo site I chanced on when I was on the computer late at night, and I stumbled on a photo stock site; did not know of such places. I had been looking for photo contests.

I read the Forum to see what the best sites were and what they expecting, and what they were fussy on. I learned by trial what each site rejected. Some sites are more for rejecting low lighting, and others on not good composition, and some do not accept Blurs. I did not know what ‘purple fringes’ were, either. At one time, I did not submit anything that had dark blue hues around the subjects, because I thought it would get rejected. Then I learned that purple is purple. I got brave and submitted the blue, as I knew I had taken the photo at a good time of the day, with the sun shinning fully.

When I first started online photography I thought as many people do. I thought what I knew. I thought only in having a good composition and color for photos. I now think outside the box. Designers change, crop and use what they need for their requirements.

There are so many ways one photograph can be edited, and so many avenues.

I have been doing online photography for just under two years time, and have just barely learned what one can do.

Jessie Eldora – copyright 2007.  www.gotmydigital.com

This article can be freely published on a website as long as it's not modified in any way including the author bylines, plus all the hyperlinks must be made active; namely the Site name.

            When I was a new user of the digital camera I sailed merrily along, not giving much thought to white balance.  My first digital camera, a point and shoot Canon A-310, was excellent for color.  An awkward sort of change came when that camera was dropped in the waters of a creek crossing.  The camera was left damaged, with only the memory card untouched. My second digital, also a point and shoot model, was a borrowed Sony cyber-shot.  This camera was new to me and I didn’t know it had no white balance mode.  It had most of the same mode settings otherwise.  It also had a snow mode, which I loved.  Perhaps there would be no more bluish overtones?

            I discovered the difference of not having a white balance mode the day I had a bad photo shoot.  I took off-white pictures!  I took many poses of my cute sisters dressed in their matching black and white attire.  Little did I know that when I clicked so many times I disturbed the white balance, only the first few pictures turned-out.  Being very disappointed, I wanted to learn how to take the best color photos.  I had to understand the white balance of digital cameras, as this was the key to good color photos.

            The day I took the pictures of my sisters it was sunny with overcast periods, the background was not the best, either.  To many times I had asked my models to pose in different positions.  The models became impatient and smiles were fading.  I had assumed that changing between the cloudy mode and the sunny mode, the images would be color balanced.  How can you tell if the image is off-white?  When the image is off-white it will be dull looking.  I also know because those peculiar shots were refused by an online photo stock company as having an off-white balance.  This is harder to tell on your little digital LCD screen, where it is easier to see on your computer screen.  This is why it is always best to check your white balance before hand.

            I also learned that different light sources have varying color temperatures, including neutral.  The balance is a reference point in which your camera determines the true color white. The camera has a harder time judging true white, a harder time than our eyes do.  The camera will calculate what it is told:  you need to tell the camera how to handle the lighting condition.  Film photographers use filters and lens, with digital cameras you use white balancing.

            One has to understand white balance if you want to program your camera.  Learn enough about balancing when your camera has no white balance mode.  I had looked-up a Kelvin color chart spectrum chart.  5000 K (K for Kelvin) is neutral light.  Our automatic white balance mode is set-up using a neutral light measurement.  To set a balance you can take a picture of a non-glossy white surface, but first place it where it is not in shadow. I use a small to medium piece of cut cardboard and I carry it with me.  You can also use a white T-shirt surface, or the underside of a coffee container lid, if available.  It would be a good investment to buy the credit card size white or grey card.  They are professionally made for this so there is more chance it is correct. 

            White color balance is so important for good color.  I check my white balance often now.  It’s good thing we can experiment with the digital camera.  We can shoot many frames as they can be deleted or saved at no cost.  The saved images can be further edited in a photo editor computer program.  In an editor program, a color balancing tool can take away the wrong color cast.  For regular photography the automatic white balance and other mode settings work-out just fine.  It is good to have an understanding of the white balance so you can take the best color photographs.

Jessie Eldora  copyright 2007.  www.gotmydigital.com 

This article can be freely published on a website as long as it's not modified in any way including the author bylines, plus all the hyperlinks must be made active; namely the Site name.