Sunday, January 31, 2010
Shooting techniques?
As this is a blog, not just a location to post photos, this post solicits comments from the group as to their camera technique preferences. Virtually all digital cameras allow some, if not a lot, of selections in regard to automation of taking pictures. Any purists in the group, that are talented enough, and prefer all manual (except autofocus) settings? This does NOT include me, and really don't see the wisdom in it. Of course we all probably know the basics, fixed/fast shutter speeds and panning for action/moving shots, and aperture priority for depth-of-field control. Personally, I know very little about controlling white balance (it must be important, as on many cameras there is a button, or least a menu item) and would like to know more. Hope I am not pushing this group in a direction they do not wish to go, but would like to advance farther than just posting photos, not that I don't love to do this. Please don't beat me over the head, but my belief is a good photographer is one who delivers a relatively good product as taken (do I hear some saying "are you kidding me?") Besides, programs like Photoshop will not do much to compensate for errors with the two basics mentioned above.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I agree with you on some points but the assignments are not technical assignments, they are specific objects to take pictures of. So for me I am using all the technical aspects of my camera to fulfill the item that Steff has us taking pictures of. Back in the days I was in school for photography (35mm) only half of the assignment was actually taking the picture, the majority of each assignment was how it could be enhanced through dark room techniques. When I went digital, I originally had a hard time using photoshop to alter my pictures until I realized it was exactly the same as what I was doing in class, only without all the chemicals and filters. It is said that not one picture you see commercially has not been altered in some way or another. Possibly you could suggest some technical ideas for future assignments. I love any assignment that makes me try something new (and creative).
ReplyDeleteI hear you Shawn, but I don't feel like I am learning much to become better skilled behind the camera, or with Photoshop for that matter. I also belong to a web forum, in this case specific to Canon owners, and there is constructive criticism of the (in most cases, unaltered) submissions. Albeit, too meek to post any of my photos on a worldwide website as yet! However, myself included, I think this group is too close-knit to be candid enough to seriously critique the work of others. The good part is it fosters ideas and gets me out there snapping photos (for some postings), so all is not in vain.
ReplyDeleteI know what you are thinking, Jim. I think it would be good for us to share technical aspects of the pictures we are taking. I always take pictures off of the auto setting, and I love experimenting with the F-Stop settings most of all. There are professional photographers that do not edit their pictures whatsoever. I think it is amazing when a photographer can take an exceptional picture that doesn't have to be edited, and I guarantee these pictures are not taken on the auto setting... We should share our technical expertise with each other, because a large portion of it is Greek to me! :-)
ReplyDeleteFor the most part I'm one of those unwise "purists"...or a control freak. LOL The only time I don't use manual is if I'm attempting to capture a quick moment, like ballgames or the like. All other times I use manual simply because I want to be familiar, inside and out, with all of the camera's workings. I love the challenge of learning which ISO setting will be compatible with what shutter speed and aperture, etc.
ReplyDeleteAs for altering photographs with Photoshop,one of my previous instructors who makes his living selling/editing his photos assured me that 99.9% of all photographs you see anywhere--books, magazines, internet--are Photoshopped and edited in some way. That's the nature of the business and it is considered the premier digital darkroom. The last two course I took on Photoshop focused on using Photoshop to bring out information that already exsists in the capture, not making drastic alteration or combining photographs. Ultimately, as Jim has said, you must have a solid foundation in the basics prior to working with any editing program. You can repair many things, but ignoring the essential basics, like something so simple as failing to protect the highlights therfore losing detail, can render any photograph irreparable and useless. With the exception of employing the awesome clone tool to clean up things like low hanging guide wires,a spot on my lens I didn't notice when shooting, zits, etc., I'm not big on "adding things" to photographs, i.e. combining a great sky from a completely different photograph taken on a different day to "fix" the fact that I failed to take the time to meter the situation correctly. I do love to use filters, though. They're just so much fun!
As for white balance, I've read a great many articles and books about it. WB is really most significant if you're shooting jpeg. When you shoot in RAW, that's something you are able to correct for with the RAW converter. I read and studied a wonderful article about the temperature of color, or Kelvin, by Jim Zuckerman.
http://www.betterphoto.com/article.asp?id=24
Interesting stuff, indeed. One of the assignments given to us by Jim Z. was to do an entire photoshoot using the Kelvin setting for WB on our cameras so that we might gain a strong understanding of the effect WB will have on the mood of our pictures and whether or not they are rendered as our eyes saw them. It was fun and challenging, and I ended up with some amazing photographs.
At any rate, I'm all about technical and would welcome assignments stretching my small amount of knowledge and even expanding it. I love to learn, grow and improve. Because I have a horrible inability to stay interested in anything I'm ever able to master, I never have to worry about that with photography; I've studied for years and still don't know anything, but the adventure has been wonderful so far.
Please ignore the typos...very sleep deprived. Guess I'll go have my Sunday nap now.
ReplyDeleteThanks for the link Lisa! It helped a lot. I do remember from film days the "Daylight" and "Tungsten" films, basically outdoor and indoor, respectively. My favorite (transparency) film was Kodachrome 25. So, you are saying if I shoot in RAW, white balance can be corrected afterwards? The white balance controls on a camera are primarily for folks who shoot JPEG images, or wish their RAW images to be correct beforehand? Sorry for so many questions, but as you, I wish to know all the technical details regarding how the imaging process works.
ReplyDeleteJim, I think it is a good idea to share techniques. I can't say I know a lot about all the technical halaballo that comes with cameras. I just enjoy shooting. I don't enjoy reading 'how to' books. I prefer just experimenting. My goal in creating this site/group is to make me and other photography lovers to just get out and shoot. Some in the group are just beginning, some are quite advanced. I had hoped that by giving an assignment on windows, for example, everyone would be able to be at their own level and also push themselves to new learning. You might learn more about white balance during the assignment and I might learn more about composition. Does that make sense? Also, I hope that we would be able to give constructive criticism to others on the blog. I have given some suggestions/instruction to several people. Was it uncomfortable? Yes! But maybe that is another push we all need.
ReplyDeleteI am open to suggestions about future assignments and hope everyone will feel comfortable in stating questions and concerns as Jim did.
From everything I've read, WB is mostly a concern for jpeg-ers. When you shoot in jpeg, it is what it is and you can work your rear end off to try and correct it later, but my experience is that it usually is irreparable. In spite of shooting in RAW, I still like to adjust WB along with all of my other settings to attempt to match exactly what I see with my eyes at the moment I release the shutter--the less you have to correct for, the better. After all we're Americans and we want our instant gratification, right? And yes, WB can be corrected after. That is one of the many wonders of RAW (which I'm only just really learning about).
ReplyDeleteI've often wondered, and I should ask, are the pros like some of us in that some of them are really creative while being technically challenged, and vice versa? Or, are they that most sought after combination of creativity and technical know-how and that's why they're pros?
I wish I was more like you, Steff. Instead, I've constantly got my nose buried in a book and I can spout facts left and right, but the one thing I want more than anything is to be artisticly creative. A hypercritical photog that I know recently remarked to me that I "simply will never have the eye. That's something you're born with. Your pictures are flat and leave me uninspired." Good thing I've got Simkins running through my blood--just makes me want to try harder. I should send a thank you card...
Man, I'm long-winded! Funny how I didn't notice that until after I hit "Post Comment". My apologies, everyone.
ReplyDeleteThis past year I have been shooting mainly in raw. I am a tech geek by nature and enjoy the flexibility that raw gives me. I leave WB set on auto and then in post I can make any changes with no problem at all. Regardless of how many things you can do in Photoshop etc, the basics still apply. Without proper lighting, focus, and composition the photo will still not turn out the way you want. I also frequent the Canon forums and enjoy seeing the work posted there. I am all for contructive comments good or bad. One of my favorite photography classes included a class review. It was nice to hear the good as well as the ways to improve or do the shot differently. For me the biggest thing is to keep having fun and learning at the same time.
ReplyDeleteAdam, hello Canon fan! I frequent photography-on-the.net/forum/, but are there others for Canon folks? Canon or Nikon (or even Sony as of late?) are fine cameras, just whatever one leans towards. I have a mess of Canon film gear, gathering dust.
ReplyDeleteI am potn/ forum fan as well. One of these days I will get the guts up to post some pics there. I have to agree any camera is a good camera if it works for you. I am going to try and post some of the techinal aspects of my pics from now. Just the basics like iso, apterture, shutterspeed, etc.
ReplyDeleteTo critique, or not to critique...that is the question. I think the majority of us don't feel confident in our own knowledge or abilities to critique each other. Every once in a while I think I will critique someone's picture who I think may appreciate an honest opinion, then I think "what do I know?"
ReplyDeleteSo I am just experimenting with different things as I go along. I have to say I have caught the photography bug again and I am enjoying it. I went to St. George this morning and, of course, had my camera with me. Henry was asking me what winter shot I was trying to get. It made me laugh and I had to tell him that I have moved on to the next assignment.
Yes, have also started carrying a camera with me virtually everywhere I go, even at work it is within reach. Who knows when one will happen on that one-in-a-million shot. Hey, have aways dreamed of while in the middle of the desert of stumbling onto an alien, more accurately an EBE, or "Extraterrestrial Biological Entity." Ha Ha!
ReplyDeleteAdam, yes I would sure like to have the confidence to post on the POTN website, but I fear that is a ways off. However, was sure fascinated by some of the shots on the
Astronomy and Celestial thread. Would sure like to do some star trails, or even a shot of the moon (if I had a "long" enough lens or telescope)
Nope, can't critique others when I am such a novice. But, will give kudos to some that get my admiration.