You are currently browsing the archives for May, 2008.
The digital world as it applies to cameras is changing everything. Especially when it comes to your choice of camera, or camera system from the pros perspective. You see it isn’t about which is the best camera for your needs, its about the best camera system – camera bodies, lenses, flashes, accessories and so on that’s important.
I also look at it from the business point of view. Consumer camera models sell in the hundreds of thousands; professional cameras sell in the thousands. That’s a huge difference. My observation as there is so much competition at the low end – consumer point and shoot and lower end SLRs, is that these cameras get the most innovative features first as the manufacturers are always fighting competition, much more prevalent in the lower end markets. What the point and shoot cameras don’t get is a good size sensor to produce high quality, low noise images.
From the design perspective, the point and shoot camera market is the 5×7 inch print market. You don’t need that high a quality image for the typical 5×7 print. In the SLR market, you do. It’s not uncommon for a standard SLR user to print at 8×10 and commonly 20×24. For those sizes you much have higher quality and larger sensors, and that’s where the SLRs deliver. You just need to calculate the number of square inches of print real estate to find that a 20×24 print is nearly 14 times the size of a 5×7!
At the high end of the SLR market, manufacturers know that their isn’t much competition and that the photographer have specialized needs – the press photographer for example needs instant response in low light with a possibly fast moving subject, such as a basketball player. A point and shoot or low end SLR will not be a good choice, as the point and shoot images will be very noisy (rough looking) and have such a slow response, so slow that the player may have left the frame before the image will have been taken. The lower end SLR will work very quickly, but will likely produce a lower quality image in that scenario, and may have trouble focusing in very low light depending on the lens/focusing system used.
So high end SLR cameras do have a market, as do the low end SLRs and the point and shoots. Now here are my observations based on years of thinking about camera systems and why one is better from my perspective than another. Your mileage may vary depending on your needs and perspective.
The best bang for the buck is in the low end SLR camera marketplace. Forget the point and shoot for any type for professional grade shooting. That leaves the two big players – Nikon and Canon, although Sony, Sigma, Olympus and others are trying hard to get a foothold.
Look at the latest of the entry level products from these two players and you’ll find great value. In most circumstances you’ll not be able to tell the difference between these cameras output versus ones costing five times as much.
And the high volume entry level SLRs will always benefit for the rapidly changing digital marketplace feature sets versus the high end cameras being in the market for years without change. The manufacturers must recoup their investments and in low volume cameras that takes time.
Also, forget the pixel count. High pixel counts are only useful when you are a sloppy photographer and you have to extensively crop the image to get what you should have done in the camera in the first place. In other words, if you think about the final result before you press the button, you’ll fill the frame and won’t need to crop, perhaps at all. Interestingly you’ll find that a 6 megapixel sensor is fine for almost all of your shooting. The same camera with a high pixel count sensor can actually produce worse results as the pixel are more compressed to fit on the same size sensor, and that can enhance noise. And you don’t want that.
If you look at the new Nikon high end cameras you’ll see that they don’t have really high sensor pixel counts. The pro photographer know better than to fall for the numbers game.
What you need to know about tripods, next and why you need a sturdy one.
Having been in the business, on and off, for more years than I’d like to admit I have some observations about my primary love in this business – wedding photography.
What most people think is that the wedding photographer stands around in a church, takes pictures including cutting of the cake, the first dance, etc, and then magically produces an album or two followed by laughing all the way to the bank. None of that is actually true. We work hard in our profession.
From my observation the typical professional wedding photographer works very hard to produce excellent results the first time, of which 90% of the wedding iceberg is underwater. The casual observer doesn’t see any of that.
Here are the numbers -
50% of the wedding photographers’ time is spent marketing and showing his or her work.
35% of the time is spent working on the digital images, which can run easily into the thousands, processing, editing, modifying them, preparing an album design, creating slides shows and generally taking the raw product into a finished work of art. And then spending time with the client showing the work. The client sees only the end result.
The final 15% is spent taking the pictures and applying the many skills learned over years to take pictures with the correct exposure, using the correct lens aperture for the desired result, pressing the shutter release at the right moment, thinking about how that photography will be used, getting the right angle, applying knowledge and discipline, and so on.
Think of the car mechanic with all types of certifications. Based on experience, he can likely diagnose a problem very quickly, and know exactly what needs to be done and how to do it. He may be expensive, or not, but the job is done properly the first time.
And the first is the only time that the wedding photographer has to get it right. There is no second opportunity to shoot a wedding.
I suppose it depends on your camera’s shutter speed and your type of lighting. If you’re using flash, and can flash sync over 1/1000th of a second you can actually turn day to night. Just disable your external flash automatic sync pins using scotch tape and set the flash manual output to max. Set the manual shutter speed to 1/1000th or shorter and start shooting so the flash illuminates the subject, but the background is exposed based on the shutter speed. and lens aperture. By working with the aperture and moving from f/2 to f/32 for example, you will be able to lighten or darken the background to the point it may be black in broad daylight. That’s the f32 at the end of the spectrum. Yes, you can create miracles or at least some dramatic images. Just experiment, and enjoy. Unfortunately only a few cameras can synch at anything faster (shorter) than 1/250th. The original Nikon D40 is the only one I know of in current production.
The chances are that you know that amount of light that gets to the sensor is governed by a number of factors, notably the lens aperture – the f-stop, and the shutter speed or how long the (usually) shutter curtain opens to allows the light past it to the sensor.
But I want to illustrate some quick points about why you’d used a very brief exposure such as 1/2000th of second versus a 1/125th or even 1/8th or even longer.
Other than correctly exposing the sensor to get good dynamic range, depending on the effect you want to create, the shutter speed does many things.
1 It can help create a sense of movement in a subject. If your shutter speed is slow, perhaps 1/15th of a second or longer then anything that’s moves will blur slightly or a lot. You may like the effect. Also a lot of the image will be sharp as the lens aperture will be small.
2 It can limit movement to show every detail without blurring. If you want to photograph a motocross race, you may prefer a brief exposure to get the subject sharp. The byproduct is that your lens aperture, all things being equal, will be much wider than in example 1, meaning that parts of your image may not be in focus.
2 It works with the lens aperture to create a variety of effects, especially very limited or very deep depth of field, a term used to either show just a small amount of the image in sharp relief compared to the rest of the picture, or make (nearly) everything sharp.
3 Finally I’ll introduce dragging the shutter, an odd term used when you use a very slow shutter speed in a very dark location, such as a church to get a well exposed image. A wedding photographer will use this combination frequently during the ceremony as flash usually isn’t allowed. Dragging the shutter is very effective, but you risk shaking the camera and blurring moving people. Lon live the tripod. With some flash you can get a well exposed foreground with a well exposed background that doesn’t get lit using the flash. The trick is to balance the flash with the shutter speed to get a natural image. It takes a lot of practice to get it right. The newer camera sensors which are much better in producing quality images when you set the ISO speed to a high number so the need to drag the shutter is lessened.
I’ll spend a lot more time on this later, but remember – a tripod is your friend. It allows you to experiment with long and short exposures without concern about camera shake that occurs when you typically set your shutter for 1/60th of a second or longer.
Next, Trash the Dress or After Shots as I prefer to call it.
I had the occasion to photograph a number of people for a local business yesterday. To work efficiently, I had to spend some time setting up the lighting, background, etc. and then have the people line up, like in high school for their school photos. Here’s how I did it.
One of the secrets to good photography is to get it right in the camera. What I mean by that is that if you take care to make sure that all of your camera settings, and lighting is correct, you’ll breeze through post-processing and have first rate quality results. I’m not saying that the poses and expressions will be perfect, but the technical aspects will be.
To take the basic head and torso shots, I hung a white translucent, spring loaded background (to avoid the wrinkle problem) measuring 3×5 feet. I used a tripod with a horizontal extension to avoid tripod shadows. I pointed a strobe at the back of the white background and cranked it to full power. The idea was to wash out the background so that, in the finished product, it would be completely white.
I then setup the key, or main flash at 45 degrees to the subject position and about 8 feet high. The key light was a strobe with a 4 foot octagonal soft-box which produces a nice, flattering soft light. Directly opposite, to the right of the background I pointed another strobe with just barn doors towards the back of the subjects head position. In this way I would have a nice soft lighting illuminating the subject and the other light providing some separation punch to the head, and the opposite side of the face. I added a piece of card to block the stray light from the barn door strobe, and a small reflector to bounce some light from the key light to the shadow side of the face.
I taped some duct tape on the floor so the subjects would know where to stand, took a few flash meter or incident lighting readings from the imaginary face position and was ready to go.
I set the Nikon to manual at 1/500th and f/5.6, at ISO 200 and I was ready. A few test shots later 30 people lined up and under 45 minutes later I was done.
I kept an occasional eye on the histograms, or tonal range displayed on the camera LCD, and noticed that they were all over the place but I wasn’t concerned as all that mattered was to get the facial tones right. I knew that the over-lit white background would show spikes on the right side of the histogram, and black clothing would show spikes on the left but as there was plenty of meat in the middle where facial tones reside, and that my meter was reliable, I was happy.
As I was, and always, shoot RAW I could have been a stop off either way and still got good results but when I examined the images they were spot on.
If you don’t have an incident flash meter, you could always take some images of just a person’s face and check the exposure that way. If you switch off the two non-key lights, you’d have a good exposure reading of the important part of the image – in this instance the faces and you could make some quick adjustments there to correct the exposure.
So by doing some setup work, I saved a dozen hours trying to fix problem images. I don’t have that kind of time. Do you?
This blog could be all about technique and equipment, but it won’t be. Why? Because you can visit numerous sites that talk about the hottest equipment and new toys to spend your money on.
So this is exercise one, where I will help you understand the art of photography so you’ll become better when you press the button. You don’t need the fanciest equipment to impress your friends with. They’ll be wowed with the images. That is not to say having a giant camera with a foot long lens isn’t nice. They are the equivalent of a BMW. It doesn’t mean that you’ll drive it any faster than a Honda, or that you’ll be a better driver. In fact, you’ll likely be worse because of all of the buttons you won’t know when and if to press, or what they do.
What I want to do is make you a better driver by helping you think about what you’re doing. So here goes -
This exercise is about light, the raw material of photography. Without it, you can toss your camera away as it will be useless. Just to be clear, you have to think about how light works; which is that it normally travels in straight lines and bounces around when it hits a reflective surface such as a wall and water vapor, a substance that you don’t normally think about unless its so humid that you’re miserable.
So I want to you start looking at TV and thinking about where the main or key light is coming from to light the actors. That’s all. Within a week, you’ll see the world in a completely new way. You’ll instinctively understand how to light subjects, and that’s an entire semester of learning. If you watch the NBC evening news interviews with an eye on the lighting, you’ll learn a lot. Forget the interview; focus on the lighting and why and how the cameraman setup the lighting. After a few interviews, you’ll be able to tell which photographer lit the scene. You’ll become that good.
You’ll quickly understand the difference between a large light source lighting your subject so that the person has very soft or no shadows, versus a single, constrasty light source which creates harsh shadows, well suited to male faces riddled with character. You’ll understand the concept of lighting the main subject, and lighting the background separately.
FYI, the biggest light source in the galaxy solar system is the sun. The reason it seems like a contrasty light source is that it’s a long, long way away. If you could drive there, you’d wear out 600 cars en-route.
At the other extreme you may think that a bare light bulb is also contrasty but it depends. It depends on where the light bulb is in relationship to the subject. Try this. Take the lampshade off a light and hold the light a few feet away from a small object, like a TV remote control. You’ll see a sharp shadow behind the remote. That’s a contrasty image.
Now start moving the light closer to the remote. When it gets within a few inches you’ll see that the shadow gets softer and softer. That will be a good lesson in light. And that will be lesson number one.
Have you ever wondered where the concept of f-stops came from. For those of you that don’t know what f-stops are, they are markings on a lens that indicate the amount of light that can pass through it to the film or light sensor in any one moment. For example, f/2 will let in 100 units of light in a given moment, f/2.8 50 units, f/4, 25 and so on.
This means that for a given film or digital sensor speed, or its light sensitivity a combination of shutter speed and f-stop determines the “correct” exposure. More on histograms in the future.
Now back to the f-stop. What confuses some people is where the number series came from, f/1.4, f/2, f/2.8, f/4. f/5.6, f/8, f/11, f/16 and so on. Let me explain…
If you were to have a point or tiny source of light and have determined that the correct exposure of a subject is when the light is exactly 8 feet from that subject, then by moving the light to 11 feet, the exposure will be exactly 1/2 of the correct amount. Notice the use of the 8 and 11 numbers. Now if you move the light closer to exactly 5.6 feet away, the light will be twice the correct exposure.
So, to put it simply as we are moving the light, and not increasing or decreasing its brightness, you must adjust the f-stop of your camera lens to compensate but not quite the way you think. It’s all based on the inverse square law, one that I think about every day to guess exposure and lighting ratios when I’m out and about.
Simply put, if the correct exposure is when the light is 8 feet from the subject, you must either double the exposure if your subject is 11 feet away or half it if it is 5.6 feet away. You do that by changing the shutter speed, by changing the f-stop (or lens opening), by changing the ISO sensor speed, or by actually changing the light source brightness.
And thereby hangs many tales. More later.
The bad pun was intended. I grew up and was educated in London, England. After the equivalent of high school, I attended college in central London and studied photography. During that time, I photographed architecture, models, industrial machinery, car racing and a variety of subjects that I found interesting. Naturally, move love of view cameras – tripod mounted monsters that used 4×5 inch film plates and were well suited to architectural photography – did not lend themselves to fashion or car racing photography.
So I learned to love my first Nikon, the Nikon F which took a lickin’ and kept on ticking, in spite of once being used as a hammer. They were that strong. I still use Nikons. They have never let me down. They just work.
And then I came to this wondrous country, and wondrous it was, and is. It has never ceased to amaze me how wonderful this country is, in spite of its government and not because of it.
I have been a photographer for more years than I want to admit to. I will say that the Rolling Stones once played at a local theater near where I lived in London. And back then I couldn’t afford the $2 ticket. What does that tell you?
I’m writing this to help other people understand the art of photography. With the advent of digital imaging, it’s getting easier to take pictures and produce prints. I’m not saying that the pictures will be any good, but at least it’s high tech.
I have a friend who does miracles with cars and motorcycles. His garage is packed with fancy gadgets and the best equipment. It occurred to me that even with the most simple, and cheapest of tools he will still be an excellent mechanic. On the other hand, it you hand me a wrench and ask me to fix an engine problem, you would be well advised to be ready to call AAA for a tow.
It’s not the quality of the tools, its the person who uses them.
And this is so for the photography business. Many people lust after, and spend a lot of money of the latest and greatest but have little idea of what to do with it when the finally own the new toy.
On the other hand, give an experienced, talented photographer a point and shoot camera, and he’ll likely out photograph the amateur with the fancy photographic tool.
My job, is to teach you how to use the tools you have to take better pictures. Many things I’ll write about other people disagree with. Thanks okay, but I hope to make you think. And think you will about concepts and ideas you’ve never thought about – photographically before.
First the photographic bio …
It has been said that photographers are born and not made. Is that correct?
While photographers can have a natural eye towards composition and lighting, I suspect that with a little, or to be truthful, a great deal of effort a person with a disposition towards photography can achieve excellent results.
The difference? The natural born artist will just create great images without knowing why, but the non-artist has to work at it.
I suspect that we are all a combination of both. You just need to reach down and find the artist. It’s there somewhere.
