Untitled because I can't decide on a good one.

[Loopy Lisa]

I've always wanted to get into photography...not as in depth as someone who does it for a living or go to school for it for 3 years...but I've wanted to learn how to take really great pics so I can create my own stock photography.

I don't know what kind of digicam to get, I mean wtf is an SLR and what's the difference between that and a regular digicam?

Plus I know nothing about lenses, apeture shutter speeds, all that stuff. I just want to make sure that when I walk into some camera shop I at least know what I am looking for.

Another thing is lighting, I love to take pics using shadows and odd lighting techniques but am doubtful I would need to purchase those large shadow-box lighting things...I've seen them before, and don't know the techinical term for it.

All of my pics will be no larger than 8 x 10 printed as stated before I am using it for stock pics only.

Any suggestions on well...everything and anything? Canon vs. Nikon, 10 X's optical zoom vs. 3 x's digital, shutter speeds etc...for starters, lol.

[JPnyc]

Well if you're starting out, rather than go the DSLR (digital single lens reflex) route, which can be pretty expensive, I would start with a fixed lens that allows manual control, something like some of the panasonics, fujis, Canons, Sony, etc.

The panasonics use Leica lenses, which are pretty high quality lenses. Unfortunately their sensors are noisy.

The Sony (some of em) use Carl Zeiss lenses, another high quality lens, and their sensors are better than the panasonics, but not quite as good as Fuji. However Fuji hasn't the lens quality of the other 2.

[Satchel]

I was in your same shoes a year or two ago... loved photography but didn't know how to do anything but point and shoot. I took a two day seminar, that wasn't very unreasonable on price. The first day we learned the basics of photography then went out to shoot photos. We had to go home that night and look through them bringing in the ten best from the day before and they would critique our work... I learned A LOT from that seminar... I would suggest looking for one in your area.

As far as optical and digital zoom... stay away from digital, it's just like taking a picture with 3x optical zoom and bringing it into photoshop and blowing it up there.

When I first started out I bought a Sony Cyber-Shot T1... I loved that camera because it could fit in my coin pocket of my jeans. It was thin, and pretty high MegaPixel for when I bought it (a little over two years ago now) I've gotten plenty of good pictures out of that camera, but nothing even close to what I get out of my new DSLR, which has totally changed the way I take pictures.

I would say that JPnycs suggestion about getting a fixed lens camera that lets you control your settings is a good idea... save a little money and learn the basics.

Lighting I'm still learning about, so I'm not much help there... but I'm sure there are others on this forum that could help out there...

Good luck, but watch out, photography is addicting! :)

[Broacher]

Those who can-- draw. Those who can't... shoot.

And if you're totally useless... there's always design.

[Satchel]

I can draw, shoot and design...

[JPnyc]

Then there are those of us who shoot those that can draw.

[steve-o]

As for lighting, just set up a table next to a window. You may want to tape a piece of white shear fabric across the window also. Buy some white foam board to use as reflectors.

If you truly want to learn photography, I would buy a camera that at least has manual/creative modes, and only use those features. Stay away from the auto settings.

Focus on optical zoom; forget digital zoom.

No larger than 8x10? Go with at least 5MP.

Ask about how the camera meters light. A blown out picture or underexposed pictures can mean the difference between focusing on the light or dark area of a scene.

I'm sure all digital cameras now have white balance settings, aperture range, various ISO settings, and a nice range of shutterspeeds.

Don't get fooled by more megapixels. A camera claiming more megapixels can actually produce worse quality images if the sensor is smaller.

Also learn about depth of field! This is very important.

[Broacher]

>>Then there are those of us who shoot those that can draw.<<

Those who live by the sword.... die by those with the bullets.

[Loopy Lisa]

Also learn about depth of field! This is very important.

Haha I'm a dolt, I always said it was field of depth...oh dear this should be interesting, lol!

GAWD there is so much to learn <pulls hair out of head> but I will have fun with it...I can draw BTW but not very well, I'd be able to shoot if I had good aim, and I can design pretty things.

I'm all over the idea of a two-day course, we have those here I will look into it this week. I always thought that the more MP's there was the better the image...ah HA t'was a lie...t'was...

But to all - thank you kindly for your advice, hopefully I will walk away with a nice camera and some skillz.

[JPnyc]

Yes, the lens is the most important element for picture quality, and actually as Steve said higher MPs crammed onto a small sensor will make the image noisier. If the sensor is large then it's fine, but that usually means a pricier camera. My boss got amazing shots from a 3mp Olympus because they use great lenses.

[Broacher]

>>the lens is the most important element for picture quality<<

Nope. The eye is the most important element for picture quality.

[JPnyc]

No, that's the most important element for subject quality. The lens has the most to do with picture quality, the quality of the image.

[Broacher]

>>No, that's the most important element for subject quality. The lens has the most to do with picture quality, the quality of the image.<<

Sorry, when I say picture quality, or image quality-- I think of it as a collective term. I'd sooner have a great idea expressed well in a technically mediocre shot than a mundane concept with brilliant technique.

With the advent of the 'digital darkroom' and all the alternatives that it offers, I have much more affordable flexibility to work with a mediocre image than I do with a mediocre idea.

[Steve Buchanan]

Try enrolling in Photo1 at the local community college. They're going to teach you f/stops, shutterspeeds, depth of field, lighting, and maybe color as well depending on the class. They're also probably going to get into black and white film processing and printing. While that won't have direct bearing on what you're going to try and accomplish, it does lay down a good foundation and hey, you can't build a house without a foundation

Steve