Photography 101

[deanb]

So first up: I have never been professionally trained in photography, nor am I some grand master. This is just something to demystify the functions of your camera to let you take marginally better photos. The guide is written with the assumption you own a point-n-shoot. If you own an SLR and don't know half this stuff then goddamn why do you have an SLR?

 

First off what I consider the most important:

White Balance

White Balance controls the "colour temperature" of the photo. This may come as a shock, but not all sources of light are the same, even the sun varies during the day. On the technical side of things light is measured in kelvins. A dude heated a piece of coal and the colour of it's shade of white was put at the temperature it took to reach that colour.

 

 

If you fuck up white balance your images will look crap no matter what else you do. So get friendly with your camera/phones white balance setting, most of the time it's in a menu and is labelled. If not the icons are usually a give away.

 

Just flick between them until it looks right(most of the time you can go "hey I'm in a room with a tungsten light, I'll use that setting". Others it's not so obvious), if you have a sheet of white paper/card handy you can use that until it looks white on your screen.

Sometimes you might want to leave it with a warm glow, or to make it look like a cool day. But I'd say take it with corrected white balance, then photoshop that stuff in later.

 

While on the topic:

NEVER NEVER EVER use any of your cameras/phones in-built filters. Take a clean raw photo, then tweak it later. You can easily make a colour photo B&W, but adding colour to a B&W photo is a pain in the ass.

 

 

Focus

Focus is where you can get arty, or where you can also destroy a photo as bad as white balance. On DSLRs you adjust the focus via a ring on the lens. I reckon most of you won't have that. Most cameras you set the focus with a half-push on the button. The auto-focus will do it's thing and hey presto the subject is in focus. Sometimes it doesn't work. a trick here is to set the focus on something else, something a bit easier for the camera to work out. Then once it's focused aim the camera at the actual subject (hopefully now in focus properly) and take the shot*. Something to note is that you will need to change to "Macro mode", normally a fire flower icon, if you want to take photos of something close by (usually within 1m of the camera)

*I'm unsure if this is common to all androids, or if it appears on other cameras too, but mine allows you to hold on the screen where you want the camera to focus. So that's another method.

 

 

Metering

Ever taken a photo of say a building with bright white clouds behind it and seen you've taken a silhouette. Or you've taken a photo of a great cloud formation, or snow, or similar and it's come out just a pure white shape, no contrast at all? This is down to metering. Digital cameras only have a small range of what they can cope with* in a photo between the brightest whites and the darkest whites and it tries to find a decent balance. Quite often it fucks up. Most cameras allow you to set how it tracks light. Most point-n-shoots come with either average metering and spot metering. So for example in the case of the building set to spot metering, aim at the building and it will only use the light information from within the central point. This will wash out the sky in the background, but will let you get more than a really dark silhouette of the building n see some actual detail. If you're taking a photo with a light source directly in the scene, say someone near a lamp or fire, then change to averaging and it will dim the light source and brighten everything else up. You kind of have to play around with this a bit to find the best setting and just be aware that shitty cameras will tend to have shitty contrast ranges.

 

Shutter Speed

Most of you won't have a camera with a controllable shutter speed. Shutter speed is what lets you take anything from photos that look like time stopped, to the photos with all the cars blurring past in streaks of light. For the most part you'll have the option of normal or sports mode. Leave it for normal most of the time, sports mode to get rid of blur (as much as it can do) when taking photos of fast moving objects.

 

ISO

Now this one is a bit hard to understand, more so now we use digital cameras. It was mainly to do with the type of film used. Film had a set ISO, but digital cameras you can change it on the fly. It changes how much light is let in, but at the cost of higher grain. So taking a photo in a well lit area you can use a low ISO n get a crisp well lit image. But taking something in the shade, evening/night you'll want to use a high iso, to get in more light, but at the expense of getting it all grainy. Most of the time I'd leave it on auto, it's a bit fiddly to know what to use and tbh I'm not 100% sure on what scenarios require which setting.

 

Flash

I hate the flash. But I'm well aware there's times it is needed. If it's too dark I'd personally just not take photos at all. Anyway a flash helps solve the ISO issue of before. However never ever use it really close to the subject or you end up with bright white faces. Also don't point it in the eyes (or where possible use red-eye.) So try to be a few meters away. Use zoom* if that means you're too far away.

*NEVER EVER use digital zoom. Optical only. If your camera lets you disable the digital zoom then do so ASAP so you don't accidentally move into digital zoom.

 

 

 

Tips n Tricks

 

The Rule of Thirds

This one you might have been taught in art class. This is the quickest and easiest way to make your picture look nice and visually pleasing. Basically break your image up into a grid of 3*3 like so:

 

 

Then you line up things like Horizon lines with either the top or bottom, or other major horizontal lines (say a shelf). Line up buildings or your subject matter within the left or right vertical line. If taking photos of people line it up so that their eyes line up with where the lines cross so that the focus of the viewer is drawn to these points. Wikipedia has a nice gif of how just ever so slightly changing where the subject appears in a photo it can make it look nicer without changing anything else. Some Cameras will have an option to display this grid on the viewport so you can easily line stuff up.

 

Bounce Lighting

Now this one takes a bit of set-up and not really appropriate for straight up snaps, but if you're taking nice photos to go in a frame or something then this can be worth it. Bounce and diffuse lighting break up and weaken the source of light before it hits the subject. This helps cream smoother tones instead of harsh points of light. If you have a desk lamp around these work best for this. Point the lamp at either a wall or onto something reflective like a sheet of white card or tin foil. Then bounce aim the light from that onto the subject. You'll see it in action with school photos when they have the lamps pointing into these giant umberallas. You can also get nice lighting by illuminating the area behind them. This is called a backlight and adds a kind of halo n helps push them away from the background.

 

 

There's probably a fair few things I'm missing. I'm sure there may be others who can fill in the gaps or show off a few of their tips.

[deanb]

Oh yeah editing tools:

 

Picassa

http://picasa.google.com/

Googles Photo Organizer and editor. It's got a great preview tool (though really shitty for pixel art), it can do face detection and makes cool animations using that. Also it includes a bunch of basic photo editing tools for cropping, exposure, colour correct etc. Even has a "I'm feeling lucky" tool. And as it's Google it also has upload tools to put them in a web album or add to Google Earth/Maps. It's my go to tool.

 

Photoshop

Now there's several ways to get this. 1. Pay a few hundred quid on a copy. 2. Pay a few dozen quid on Photoshop Express. 3. Pay jack all n get a copy. 4. Pay jack all and use their website: http://www.photoshop.com/tools

99% of the time Photoshop is overkill for the common photographer. But it does mean that you have pretty much all the tools n tweaks you'll ever need.

 

GIMP n Paint.Net

These are the free tools that are kinda like photoshop, but kinda not like photoshop. If you don't want to pay jack and stay legal then these are the tools for you.

http://www.getpaint.net/

http://www.gimp.org/

I'd recommend Paint just because it's the most windows-like of the two. (and also cos I think GIMP needs you to get GTK+ installed too)

[Battra92]

If you own an SLR and don't know half this stuff then goddamn why do you have an SLR?

 

Because it's man jewelry for many men. See also: camcorders, blackberries, Rolex watches and Leicas.

 

While on the topic:

NEVER NEVER EVER use any of your cameras/phones in-built filters. Take a clean raw photo, then tweak it later. You can easily make a colour photo B&W, but adding colour to a B&W photo is a pain in the ass.

 

Not sure if you mean shoot in RAW (vs JPG) If I'm shooting digital, I never shoot RAW. Shooting RAW is for masochists and people who aren't sure enough about exposure or the amateurs convinced you can always fix it in Photoshoop later.

 

Metering

Ever taken a photo of say a building with bright white clouds behind it and seen you've taken a silhouette.

 

That's not necessarily a metering issue. That could mean you need some fill flash.

 

 

Most point-n-shoots come with either average metering and spot metering. So for example in the case of the building set to spot metering, aim at the building and it will only use the light information from within the central point. This will wash out the sky in the background, but will let you get more than a really dark silhouette of the building n see some actual detail. If you're taking a photo with a light source directly in the scene, say someone near a lamp or fire, then change to averaging and it will dim the light source and brighten everything else up. You kind of have to play around with this a bit to find the best setting and just be aware that shitty cameras will tend to have shitty contrast ranges.

 

I actually say if you're going to use digital with its free images and stuff, use spot metering and bracket. With experience you'll get the right shot. Sticking it on Auto doesn't do much to help you learn.

 

ISO

Now this one is a bit hard to understand, more so now we use digital cameras. It was mainly to do with the type of film used. Film had a set ISO, but digital cameras you can change it on the fly. It changes how much light is let in, but at the cost of higher grain. So taking a photo in a well lit area you can use a low ISO n get a crisp well lit image. But taking something in the shade, evening/night you'll want to use a high iso, to get in more light, but at the expense of getting it all grainy. Most of the time I'd leave it on auto, it's a bit fiddly to know what to use and tbh I'm not 100% sure on what scenarios require which setting.

 

This is one place where I will concede that digital has film beat. In fact, it's perhaps the only place that digital has film beat and that is in high ISO. I used to shoot with Konica 1600 ISO film and believe me, it was a bit different. It had its uses but it was so grainy and messy that it wasn't worth using. Besides, its color representation left something to be desired.

 

I actually recommend against going with Auto-ISO because many point and shoot cameras will not let you set the Aperature, which is the big feature you missed, Dean.

 

to TL;DR it for you guys when it comes to exposure there are three elements of getting an image. ISO (or ASA for us old-timers) aperture and shutter speed. The great thing is that they all are set to the same scale.

 

On a bright and sunny day outside you can shoot at f/16 using 100 ISO film (or ISO setting) at 1/125 of a second and get a good shot. Now let's assume that's perfectly metered. Say I want a faster shutter speed of 1/500th of a second, that is two stops up so in order to keep the image metered properly you either set your ISO to two stops faster (to 400 speed) or you set your aperture two stops faster (to f 5.6)

 

When I select a subject the VERY FIRST setting I decide on after framing the image and knowing the look I want is the aperture. With the aperture you are setting the Depth of Field. Ever see an image where the people are in crisp focus but the background is blurry. That is because they used a wide aperture. Wide apertures are the ones with the small numbers. Essentially they are opening the back of the lens up to allow more light in. This is great for working with slower films but less is in focus. It all depends on what look you are going for.

 

Flash

 

I don't hate flash, I've just learned when to use it and when not to use it. If you have an external flash, bounce it against the ceiling or off a white card. It's much better to use a faster lens than to use flash for low light.

 

That's taken at f1.7 200 ISO handheld. No flash required (or allowed in the museum) for that.

 

I don't have any other real suggestions except to experiment a lot and document what you do.

[deanb]

While on the topic:

NEVER NEVER EVER use any of your cameras/phones in-built filters. Take a clean raw photo, then tweak it later. You can easily make a colour photo B&W, but adding colour to a B&W photo is a pain in the ass.

 

Not sure if you mean shoot in RAW (vs JPG) If I'm shooting digital, I never shoot RAW. Shooting RAW is for masochists and people who aren't sure enough about exposure or the amateurs convinced you can always fix it in Photoshoop later.

 

nah raw as in nothing done with it. A virgin photograph. I get many of your points but I'm just making the guide for folks with point-n-shoots, and afaik (it might have changed in the past couple years) only DSLRs tend to come with the option to save in RAW format.

 

 

I actually recommend against going with Auto-ISO because many point and shoot cameras will not let you set the Aperature, which is the big feature you missed, Dean.

 

to TL;DR it for you guys when it comes to exposure there are three elements of getting an image. ISO (or ASA for us old-timers) aperture and shutter speed. The great thing is that they all are set to the same scale.

 

On a bright and sunny day outside you can shoot at f/16 using 100 ISO film (or ISO setting) at 1/125 of a second and get a good shot. Now let's assume that's perfectly metered. Say I want a faster shutter speed of 1/500th of a second, that is two stops up so in order to keep the image metered properly you either set your ISO to two stops faster (to 400 speed) or you set your aperture two stops faster (to f 5.6)

 

When I select a subject the VERY FIRST setting I decide on after framing the image and knowing the look I want is the aperture. With the aperture you are setting the Depth of Field. Ever see an image where the people are in crisp focus but the background is blurry. That is because they used a wide aperture. Wide apertures are the ones with the small numbers. Essentially they are opening the back of the lens up to allow more light in. This is great for working with slower films but less is in focus. It all depends on what look you are going for.

 

The reason I skipped on setting the aperture n shutter speed is because most point-n-shoots don't have any manual control over it. So wasn't really worth bringing up.

 

 

 

 

[Faiblesse Des Sens]

Not sure if you mean shoot in RAW (vs JPG) If I'm shooting digital, I never shoot RAW. Shooting RAW is for masochists and people who aren't sure enough about exposure or the amateurs convinced you can always fix it in Photoshoop later.

 

Huh? All of my friends who have done professional work shoot in RAW as it makes editing a million times easier and since it's not compressed you can do prints much easier. They have always pointed out that it's easier to work with in the long run.

[Battra92]

Not sure if you mean shoot in RAW (vs JPG) If I'm shooting digital, I never shoot RAW. Shooting RAW is for masochists and people who aren't sure enough about exposure or the amateurs convinced you can always fix it in Photoshoop later.

 

Huh? All of my friends who have done professional work shoot in RAW as it makes editing a million times easier and since it's not compressed you can do prints much easier. They have always pointed out that it's easier to work with in the long run.

 

I say if you want to shoot raw, shoot 400 ISO film. You'll spend less time in post production. RAW takes up a lot more time and you might get marginally a better image. Honestly, you're better off bracketing a few stops in either direction. No pro that I know, shoots RAW. Of course, half the pros I know still shoot medium format film and are resentful that the good labs are closing.

 

Prints from RAW are exactly the same as prints from JPEG. Good prints are printed optically anyway.

[WTF]

I'd just would like to say that Photomatix is a good plugin or standalone (depending on which license you want to go for) when you shoot in bad lighting. So long as you've got your settings right and take the image under such low-light (not low-light noise conditions) or slightly overexposed then yeah this helps a bit. Of course I do not mean that is good to work on footage that's shot in low light high noise conditions.

 

I could post more tips when I've time I suppose. If anyone wants to know about lighting, gels and the like I'll try to answer. Also shooting film in HD or 3D.

 

WB is important but thing is use WB smartly for instance you don't always need your whites and blacks to be natural if you're going for the right effect. Test and play around the first few times and then you'll slowly get what sort of colour shifts work well and it comes naturally in time. Also lenses it's something that most people do not have a clue about. If you're a starter do not buy Macro lenses and no every lens isn't a macro lens just because when you switch the focus and you see the text that says macro on it. Macro lenses are different but that's for another tme

[Mr W Phallus]

I'd be interested in any tips you have on shooting film WTF. I eventually intend to work in the film/TV industry, once I manage to overcome my inherent laziness, and any knowledge you would care to spoon food me would be welcome until then.

[WTF]

lol sure I'll make a thread for film at some point for that . RIght now I can talk about lighting for stills out here as opposed to dynamic lighting