Not sure if this has already been posted but...here it is. If it already has been posted, it's fun to read again! :)

101 Ways to Improve Your Digital Photographs.

I disagree with:

#25: Take lots of pictures. It’s digital, it’s free. If a shot didn’t work out, change the camera settings and re-take it right there and now.

Wouldent it be better to take fewer pics and compose rather than snap snap and snap some more...which is what i do, and i always look at them and say: "WHY IS IT SLANTED!?!? WHY IS THE SUBJECT WAYYYYY OVER THERE!?!?!?"

#41: Use higher ISO. Contrary to the things you might have read and heard, it’s not always best to use the lowest possible ISO. The reason is that some cameras can’t actually handle large contrast differences that well at lower ISOs, which can result in colour fringing, similar to chromatic aberration. Cranking the ISO up one step can help you overcome this problem.

(i'd have to see an example to believe this being more 'worthful' over noise).

#34: Don’t be too afraid of noise. In the good old days of film photography (well okay, it’s not entirely over yet), films with a high sensitivity used to produce a lot of gain, which in turn gave those images a moody look. Today’s DSLRs can get the same images virtually noise-less, which on the one hand is cool, but on the other hand lacks some of the mood from those good old days. In order to get that look back, crank up the ISO to its max, or add artificial noise to your images. This effect works best with black-and-white pictures.

I personally think the digital noise looks rather...sad. I think it would be better to scan real grain from a real film negative and overlay your image with it for the real look. ;-) ....or just use the ''add noise" in photoshop.

Here are the ones I love:

#45: Your flash doesn’t reach far. I’ve seen people try taking pictures of bands on stage 100 ft away using the flash. Your camera’s built-in flash won’t reach that far. 10 ft is a good bet. 5 ft is more likely to work fine. For everything beyond, flash is a waste of battery, it simply will never arrive there.

...that's b/c your shutter will already be closed by the time the light from your flash reflects back.

Any more tips?

why disagree with 25? thats the primary reason most professional photographers switched to digital. a lot of the big studios in London who switched to all digital reported savings of more than a quarter of a million dollars a year in materials alone by ditching film.

...for pros #25 is good...but for me #25 is the devil. >_> ...but thats me.

doesnt the saving money bit apply equally well to anyone?

...i got distracted by another page...

first few paragraphs. Doesn't that sound like me!? :) Wait...why am i happy.

...now that thats taken care of...

I find I do better taking less photos...but take a look at my gallery and see the results. *rolls eyes* Anyways, this guy is sort of on my side....but his credibility is lacking (considering he has written 834 articles on almost every subject). :(

I think 43 is kinda lame.

"Don’t use on-camera flash. Especially on point-and-shoot cameras this tends to flatten out images (think “full moon faces”). If you can’t shoot hand-held without a flash because it would introduce too much camera-shake in a low-light situation, position the camera on a sturdy surface or against a wall to give it stability."

If thats all you got and your taking a picture of something that isn't going to stand still finding something solid to put your camera on is not going to help. Sure a nice external flash is better, but you gotta work with what you got.

Re: use of flash.I once knew a girl who swore she got better results shooting fireworks with the flash,and.............she liked to use the over-the-counter models....go figure!

Noah, perhaps you misunderstood what #25 was attempting to say. is it possible the author is saying you can bracket, and alter your shots, and as a result, use that as a self-teaching method?

yes, this post was edited. anyone who read my earlier comments, and were offended...my apologies.

I'd have to say that I agree with taking a lot of pictures. I've taken many that I thought looked the exact same, but when I uploaded it to my cpu I could see little noticible differences that made one photo superior to the other