# First attempt at fish photography. Please leave feedback!



## Falco16 (Jan 22, 2012)

This is taken from my 10 gallon tropical tank. I will post up some of my cichlid fish when I get some time.









Was pretty difficult with such a small tank but feedback is welcomed.


----------



## newforestrob (Feb 1, 2010)

that looks really good,this is what I want to achieve,I like how its off centre,and the black background really makes the fish stand out,I like it :thumb:


----------



## Vettech85 (Jan 12, 2012)

:thumb:


----------



## RayQ (Sep 26, 2007)

Looks good! did you use any specific techniques? External flashes or anything like that?


----------



## KraKstar (Aug 15, 2011)

the black really makes the trop fish stand out. did you photoshop at all? on shot i always love with fish but never can achieve is the focused face with the blurred background.


----------



## Falco16 (Jan 22, 2012)

Sorry, I actually meant to leave all my camera settings but was in a rush. Here they are:

Canon 40D
24-70L F2.8 lens
F/5.6
1/200 second
ISO 400
580 EX II flash, manual mode, 1/16 power, omni bounce, off camera shooting directly into top of tank.
My white balance was set to flash but I changed it in Photoshop to daylight
I shoot only raw so I did a little post-processing. In Adobe Raw, I changed the white balance, added some contrast, added a little vibrance, and increased clarity to make mid-tones pop. In Photoshop all I did was apply a little sharping and re-sized it for web.

When I was taking the pictures, I set my autofocus into AI-Servo to track movement. I used this to help get a base of focus then manually focused to gain the correct focus and shot away.


----------



## RayQ (Sep 26, 2007)

Sounds like you know your camera and the theory behind why it works :thumb: Nice work on the post processing, not over done like there is always a tendency to do :lol:

Keep it up and keep sharing


----------



## crash2673 (Feb 8, 2012)

awsome pic :thumb:


----------



## mlancaster (Jul 24, 2009)

Hi *Falco16*,

I am unexperinced with shooting in RAW. Can photoshop be used as a RAW converter? Or do you need another program?

What are the benefits of shooting in RAW vs. Highquality JPG?

You shot looks great; did you use any flash on a lower power from the camera? Or only the one flash above the tank?

THank you for sharing.

Thanks,
Matt


----------



## 13razorbackfan (Sep 28, 2011)

How do you guys get the black background with everything out of the pic? Is that done in photoshop or a program that comes with your camera?


----------



## GTZ (Apr 21, 2010)

He's using an external flash, aimed from above the tank downwards so there's not a lot of light hitting the rear of the tank.


----------



## Falco16 (Jan 22, 2012)

Think of Raw and Jpeg this way. Raw is your negative like film and jpeg is like the print but scanned in. Raw files are larger for a reason; more detail. What happens when you shoot Jpeg is it comes out of the camera processed already. This means the camera applies saturation, sharpness, contrast, brightness. These are what the different picture settings each camera has are for. Raw the camera does nothing other then save it to the memory card and they do look worse out of camera then a jpeg (not much worse if you know what you are doing and get the picture correctly exposed). Photoshop is your digital darkroom and this is where you developed your negative. I use Adobe Bridge for all my previewing and storage; this is included with Photoshop. It also allows you to process RAW images. At first it is very intimidating but is very easy once you understand how all the sliders work. Processing images in RAW format has two huge benefits over jpegs. First, I can do much more with white balance with RAW vs jpeg. Two, RAW files are loss-less where jpeg is lossy. This is why raw images are larger then jpeg; jpeg strips information in camera and compresses it. Having a loss-less file gives me huge advantages when it comes to editing. The reason for this is because I have much more detail and information I can change without causing image problems. I really recommend everyone use RAW and learn how to process it. The only time I ever shot jpeg is when I'm doing "point & shoot" pictures (family gatherings just for memories). I did a family portrait session last year, and if I had not shot raw, I would have been in big trouble due to some amateur mistakes I overlooked. I am willing if people are interested and I have time to teach some photoshop classes using Google Hangout. However, I do have a saying, get it right when you click the shutter and spend less time at your computer editing 

To answer the other question. I was able to get such a dark backdrop by proper exposure with a flash (pointed from top of tank down into water) and a little curves adjustment in Photoshop. To not get into too much detail, my flash was the primary light. When this is the case, shutter speed does not affect the flash exposure just ambient light. Since this was the case, I jacked my shutter speed up to 1/200 second to allow the fish being hit by the flash to be the only thing that was exposed.



mlancaster said:


> Hi *Falco16*,
> 
> I am unexperinced with shooting in RAW. Can photoshop be used as a RAW converter? Or do you need another program?
> 
> ...


----------



## nonaram (Feb 18, 2012)

really nice pic.
Its your hard work so the pic is very sweet looking.


----------



## gverde (Mar 3, 2010)

Nice pic. I need to get a DSLR one day.


----------



## kenko (Jan 19, 2012)

Nice picture, great color. At first, I was thinking that you had some odd artifacting going on in the black, but then I quickly realized that it was my monitor. Darn kids and their fingers!

My only critique would be the amount of pure black around the fish and the position. Having so much blankness above the subject tends to weigh it down visually. 
If you cropped it in slightly and shifted the fish upwards a bit, it makes for a more pleasing and natural image IMHO. Very very small, but here is an example. What do you think?









+1 in regards to RAW - but what everyone does need to realize that a RAW image can be about two to four times larger in file size compared to jpeg on average. This also translates into additional processing power needed from the computer. In terms of conversion, you usuallt get a factory program with the camera that can convert, though if you want to get serious, Photoshop or Apeture or the like are the best bets.

To be specific in terms of detail - most noticeable would be the shadows and highlights - and if you need to adjust those, then an uncompressed file is the only way to do it. Like anything digital, you have to start with the best possible source, then convert for the best possible result.

To put it into perspective, it's just like music. CD/SACD/etc. are uncompressed. MP3s are compressed. Listen to a very well produced song on a nicely set up stereo system and it can be a spiritual experience. Listen to the same thing compressed to mp3 on an iPod and it will sound worlds apart.


----------



## Riceburner (Sep 3, 2008)

I'd agree with kenko up to a point. For me I'd crop away 50% of the empty space on the left keeping the proportions. So a tighter shot overall. The negative space isn't really needed in the shot IMHO.


----------

