December « 2020 « 360Photography

RSS

Archive for December, 2020

DPReview TV: How set up Sony’s ‘Real-Time’ autofocus tracking

26 Dec

Did Santa leave a new Sony camera in your Christmas stocking? If so, your first step should be to enable Sony’s ‘real-time’ autofocus tracking. In this video, we show you how to set up this useful feature.

These instructions should work for the Sony a6100, a6400, a6600, RX100 VII, RX10 IV, a7R IV, a9, and a9 II.

Subscribe to our YouTube channel to get new episodes of DPReview TV every week.

Introduction
Tracking in Auto mode
Tracking modes
Animal eye-AF
Conclusion

Articles: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)

Comments Off

Posted in Uncategorized

dPS Top Portrait Photography Tips of 2020

26 Dec

The post dPS Top Portrait Photography Tips of 2020 appeared first on Digital Photography School. It was authored by Jaymes Dempsey.

Over the next few days, we’ll be featuring the most popular dPS articles published in 2020 – starting with portraits.

So if you’re looking to improve your portrait photography, I absolutely recommend you check out these articles from the fantastic dPS writing team!

1. Posing Guide: 21 Sample Poses to Get You Started With Photographing Women

Posing Guide: 21 Sample Poses to Get You Started with Photographing Women – Part I

2. 6 Portrait Lighting Patterns Every Photographer Should Know

6 Portrait Lighting Patterns Every Photographer Should Know

3. Posing Guide: 21 Sample Poses to Get You Started with Photographing Men

Posing Guide: 21 Sample Poses to Get You Started with Photographing Men

4. 13 Tips for Improving Outdoor Portraits

13 Tips for Improving Outdoor Portraits

5. The Best Camera Settings for Portrait Photography

The Best Camera Settings for Portrait Photography

6. Dragging the Shutter for Creative Portraits

Dragging the Shutter for Creative Portraits

7. How to Create Dramatic Portraits in Your Garage

How to Create Dramatic Portraits in Your Garage

8. 10 Tips for Photographing Great Headshots

10 Tips for Photographing Great Headshots

9. Good Crop Bad Crop – How to Crop Portraits

Good Crop Bad Crop – How to Crop Portraits

10. Street Portraits vs Street Photography: What is the Difference?

Street Portraits vs Street Photography: What is the Difference?

11. 3 Lighting Setups for Photographing Headshots

3 Lighting Setups for Photographing Headshots

12. Starting with Off-Camera Flash in Photography: Techniques

Starting with Off-Camera Flash in Photography: Techniques

13. 3 Simple Ways to Create Stunning Eyes in Your Portrait Photography

3 Simple Ways to Create Stunning Eyes in Your Portrait Photography

14. 15 Quick and Easy Poses for Family Photographs

15 Quick and Easy Poses for Family Photographs

15. Tips for Finding Beautiful Portrait Light at Home

Tips for Finding Beautiful Portrait Light at Home

Conclusion

I hope you’ve enjoyed these popular portrait photography tips from 2020.

Tomorrow, we’ll be publishing the top landscape photography tips of 2020, so keep an eye out for that!

The post dPS Top Portrait Photography Tips of 2020 appeared first on Digital Photography School. It was authored by Jaymes Dempsey.

Digital Photography School

Comments Off

Posted in Photography

Happy Holidays 2020 From the dPS Team

26 Dec

The post Happy Holidays 2020 From the dPS Team appeared first on Digital Photography School. It was authored by Jaymes Dempsey.

As 2020 draws to a close, we’d like to wish you all a fantastic holiday season and a joy-filled end to the year.

2020 hasn’t been easy, and it hasn’t been the year that any of us hoped for. But the light at the end of the tunnel is nearer than ever.

Here at Digital Photography School, we’d like to thank you – for being part of the dPS community, for supporting us through these difficult times, and for pursuing the marvelous adventure that is photography. We’re certainly excited to keep offering photography content in 2021, and we have some big things in store for you (so make sure to be on the lookout!).

As we approach 2021, we wish you health, happiness, and good light.

Here’s to a fulfilling holiday season and a happy New Year!

The post Happy Holidays 2020 From the dPS Team appeared first on Digital Photography School. It was authored by Jaymes Dempsey.

Digital Photography School

Comments Off

Posted in Photography

Cropping Your Photos In-Camera and in Post-Production: A Guide

25 Dec

The post Cropping Your Photos In-Camera and in Post-Production: A Guide appeared first on Digital Photography School. It was authored by Kevin Landwer-Johan.

Cropping your photos either in-camera or during post-production helps to create more interesting compositions. Capturing a strong composition as you take a photo is always satisfying, but can be difficult.

Learning to compose well takes time and practice. However, you can often create better compositions by carefully cropping your photos as you are editing them.

woman out standing in a field for cropping photos — © Kevin Landwer-Johan

What is cropping?

Cropping is cutting or trimming parts of your photo. This is most often done to improve the composition or to alter the aspect ratio.

In the past, cropping involved a straight edge and a blade. These days, cropping happens on the computer and is much less aggressive; you can always hit “Undo” and try again if you make a mistake.

Cropping in-camera is a common term that’s not particularly correct. Cropping means a part of a photo is cut off. This alters the aspect ratio. You cannot do this when you are composing your images; you can only do this after you’ve taken them.

In other words:

You can compose your photos to include or exclude whatever you like, but this is not really cropping.

Some purists believe cropping your photos is wrong. They maintain that the image you capture should not be altered by cutting part of it out.

Other photographers are quite happy to leave excessive space around their main subject and crop to compose a better image as they are post-processing.

I say, “Each to their own.” My preference is to compose well, then crop well when editing if I need to.

But only if I need to.

Cropping photos always reduces the number of pixels in an image. Cutting off a lot of a photo can affect its clarity and the ability to enlarge it (compared to an image that remains full and uncropped).

studio photo of a woman — © Kevin Landwer-Johan

When is it best to crop a photo?

Beginner photographers can benefit from cropping photos for two main reasons:

First, cropping your photos well can improve a poor composition. You can rescue a photo by reducing the amount of empty space or taking out distracting elements. When you have not taken the time to compose well, or are not yet sure how to create a good composition, cropping can help draw attention to your main subject.

Second, learning to crop well will help you better understand strong composition. It’s often easier to see how to improve a photo by cropping when you are sitting at your computer than when you’re trying to remember how to set an accurate exposure in the field.

As you sit and look at a photo you’re editing, think about how it can be improved by trimming off the top or bottom. Or maybe by bringing the left or right edges closer to your main subject.

farm landscape cropping your photos — © Kevin Landwer-Johan

When there’s no time pressure, you can experiment with how you want your compositions to look. You can make copies of a photo and try different crops to see which one you like best.

The main rule of composition I follow is to fill the frame. If I find that I have not done this well enough when I am taking a photo, it is my first consideration when I start to crop.

Maybe there’s something in the photo I had not noticed when I was taking it. Someone may have stepped into the edge of the frame as I pressed the shutter release. Sometimes, I’ll trim an edge so my main subject lines up with one of the rule of thirds gridlines, or sits at the intersection of these lines.

studio portrait of a man for cropping your photos — © Kevin Landwer-Johan

How do you know what to crop?

Will your photo look better if you crop it? That is the most important question to answer before trimming a photo. If you think your image will look better, go ahead and crop. But be purposeful about what you do.

Consider the lines in your photo. Often, lines in a composition will be affected if you crop. Part of the digital cropping process can include rotating your image. This allows you to straighten a crooked horizon or get vertical lines in your photo looking natural.

Think about the rule of thirds. Will cropping help your photo conform to this compositional standard? It can be much easier to apply this rule during post-processing than when you are taking a photo. You can often be much more precise when editing, depending on what your subject is.

Look for distracting elements. Does everything fill the frame and support the main subject of your photograph? If not, think about how you could crop these elements out. Sometimes, it might be power lines at the top of your photo. Or a power pole or a person at one edge.

Square framing will transform the composition into something completely different. For some subjects, this will be perfect. Not many of us use square format cameras, so to achieve this look we must crop during the editing process.

Think about cropping as you compose. Sometimes, you’ll see that a square will frame your subject better than a rectangle. Or that a wide, panoramic style will suit your subject better. I’ll often think about how I will crop an image as I am taking it if my subject does not fit the 3:2 ratio of my camera’s sensor.

white teapot square cropping photo — © Kevin Landwer-Johan

How do you crop your photo to fit a specific aspect ratio?

Sometimes, you may need to fit a photo to a specific aspect ratio, such as when you want to update your Facebook or website banner image.

Here’s how I do that:

First, I’ll do a quick search to find the current size requirements of the place I want to use the image.

Then I’ll make a new blank canvas in Photoshop or Affinity Photo, one that matches the aspect ratio I need.

Next, I’ll drag and drop the photo I want to use onto that blank canvas.

Then I’ll resize the image and position it to appear the way I want it to look.

When changing the aspect ratio of a photo, you need to consider how it will look and what you’ll be cropping out. Often, banner images are wider than a 3:2 camera-sensor ratio, so the top and/or bottom of the image will be sacrificed. Profile photos often need to fit a square format.

Placing your photo in a blank frame that fits the correct aspect ratio allows you to move it around within the space to see how it best fits, or if it doesn’t.

close-up of a woman with a chocolate ice cream — © Kevin Landwer-Johan

Cropping your photos: Conclusion

Cropping your photos can help you learn to create better compositions. When taking your time to ponder an image on your computer monitor, you can often see how you could have framed the shot better.

Aim to fill your frame. Experiment with copies of your photos. Crop each copy differently to see which composition you like best.

And by repeating this process with every image you edit, you’ll soon find that you’re cropping fewer of your photos.

The post Cropping Your Photos In-Camera and in Post-Production: A Guide appeared first on Digital Photography School. It was authored by Kevin Landwer-Johan.

Digital Photography School

Comments Off

Posted in Photography

Roger Cicala: Understanding field curvature for fun and profit

24 Dec

When deciding which 35mm lens to buy, what do you want to know? How sharp it is? How it handles? How much it costs? I want to know what its field curvature looks like. (Spoiler: the plot on the right is from the little guy.)

I’m not a fan of lens testing purely for the purpose of winning pissing contests. I am, however, a great fan of lens testing for learning how to best use a lens. There are a few tests I find particularly useful, and the single most important one is field curvature.

Field Curvature (in metrology speak MTF v Field v Focus) tells me a lot about how to use a lens. It is also the most complete way to test a lens because it’s three-dimensional. Shooting a brick wall or test chart the way most people do is 2-Dimensional. The 2-D chart test below says the lens is sharp in the center and soft at the edges. How nice.

This is a test image of a lens’ MTF, basically what you’d see shooting a test chart except with color representing sharpness. This one is sharp in the center, really soft at the edges, and a tiny bit softer on one side than the other. But what does that tell you about the lens? Not much.

I’ve spent over a decade developing fast, sensitive optical tests. My gold standard is a modified $ 250,000 optical bench that quickly analyzes field curvature. That test (the graph below) tells me that this lens is actually amazingly sharp at the edges, but that field curvature causes the area of maximum sharpness to be further forward at the edges than at the center. In a 2-D test, the edges look soft because they are out of focus when the center is in focus.

A 3-D (Field curvature) MTF graph. The center focus is along the black horizontal line. The Y axis represents focusing distance, the X axis edge-to-edge sharpness, and the MTF is the color (red is sharpest). So the edges of the lens are very sharp, but not at the same focusing distance as the center.

The 2-D test chart images, like the first graph, are taken right along the black line of best center focus. They show the center is sharp and the edges soft. The 3-D graph shows, the edges are very sharp, but not in the same plane of focus as the center. That’s very, very different than the edges are soft.

Think about that for a second. Photographer #1 gets that lens, knows how to frame with it, and posts about how awesomely sharp the edges are in his photographs, which are 3-D. Photographer #2 buys it, tests it on a 2-D chart and sees the edges suck so he sends it back because it’s supposed to have sharp edges. Again and again.

Inexperienced photographers think a curved field is bad and a flat field good. But a designer may have chosen to let the field curve so the lens has other, wonderful attributes. Not to mention a curved field is a tool that can be useful. Many great portrait lenses are great portrait lenses because of their curved field, for example.

knowing your lens’s field curvature will help you take better pictures

I showed how to check field curvature with just a photo in a previous post. Today I’ll show a slightly different method using a test chart or brick wall. But field curvature isn’t really about better testing; knowing your lens’s field curvature will help you take better pictures.

Take the lens above as an example. I saw a group photo taken with that lens. The photographer positioned everyone in a slight crescent rather than a line because he knew the lens’ field curvature and placed his subjects so they were all in best focus. Someone else (someone without that information) would probably have said the lens was ‘too soft at the edges’ to use in a group shot.

Field Curvature graphs (clockwise from top left) showing overall curvature (this lens doesn’t have much); astigmatism, tangential field, and sagittal field.

A Quick Word About the Graphs

The shape of the field is different for sagittal and tangential rays (the two lower graphs above), which many people don’t realize. Where the fields don’t overlap, there is astigmatism (upper right graph above). The overall curvature (upper left) is what you see at home if you do my not-patented ‘field of grass’ test. Most of the time I’ll just show the sagittal and tangential fields; you can eyeball whether they overlap or not and what the overall curvature would be like.

Testing Field Curvature at Home

If you follow my grass-photo-with-find-edges-filter technique, you get a nice image showing the field curvature. You’ll also know if the field is tilted and if it is, how badly. Here’s the grass test for two copies of the Sigma 24mm f.14 Art, a lens with a bit of field curvature. One copy has tilt problems and it’s pretty easy to see which one.

One copy is good, one is pretty tilted. Can you tell which one is which? I thought that you could. This two-copy test took 60 seconds, was shot hand held, and required no home testing lab.

If you’ve already got a home testing setup and want to put some numbers to your lens, that’s easy, too. First, mount the lens on a tripod and manually focus on your 2-D target of choice: test target, brick wall, treeline, whatever. (If you don’t use a tripod and you don’t manually focus, you should be filled with shame and delete all your test posts because you did NOT test the lens. I never, ever, take a single AF image of a test chart. It’s a waste of time. But you can do the find-edges technique with a hand-held AF shot even if you don’t own a tripod and don’t know how to manually focus.)

Where was I before the rant? Oh, yeah. Take your first image past (distant) to best center focus, then take a series of 6-10 images while manually moving the focus back a bit after each shot until you’ve gone out of focus to the near side.

I never, ever, take a single image of a test chart – it’s a waste of time

Next, you take that set of six or 10 through-focused images, find the one with best center sharpness, the one with best right edge sharpness, and the one with best left edge sharpness. If they are all the same image (it happens sometimes), congratulations – you have a very good lens with a flat field. Most of the time, though, you will get one of three other possibilities:

Both edges are sharpest in the same image, and the center is sharpest in another. Which means: The field is curved but not tilted.
The edges are sharpest in different images: The field is tilted.
One edge never gets as sharp as the other: The lens is optically abnormal.

For example, let’s say you take six images. Images #1 and #6 from the sequence shown below were way out of focus, so I’m only showing you images #2-5. The center is sharpest in image #3, the right edge sharpest in #4, and the left in #5.

What this tells me is that I’ve got a lens with a field that is both curved towards the camera and tilted to the left.

Taking a series of images from far focus (2) through near focus (5) lets you evaluate field curvature and tilt.

Let’s all take just a moment to think about all those threads that started with someone posting just image #3 and asking “do you think this lens is OK??” You’ll see 57 or so responses with no definitive conclusion because the OP didn’t give enough information from which to draw a proper conclusion. If they had done a through-focus test, they probably wouldn’t need to ask the question; the answer would be obvious.

Why Should I Bother?

If the field is badly tilted (scroll back up to the first grass images) you’ll know to exchange it for another copy, or if a little tilted you’ll have that information for framing your shots. I had a favorite landscape lens which had a field that was slightly curved and slightly tilted. It gave me great images, usually with a subject of interest closer and on the left side in sharp focus. It was a great lens for me because I knew how to frame my shots with it and I liked the different look that gave.

If the field is markedly curved, you can use that knowledge to better frame your shots. Or perhaps you’ll decide that this lens isn’t for you. Personally, I often prefer a curved field because it’s a tool I can use, but some people want flat fields all the time. I might choose one lens over another for certain shots because of the field curvature. That lens I showed at the beginning is going to focus the edges closer than the center, for example. It might be great for isolating the subject for center-framed portraits. Or to frame shots so the center point of interest is further away than the edge points of interest. I would prefer a different lens with a flatter field for an architectural shot. You might prefer flat fields for all of your shots, for that matter. I find field curvature a fun tool, but some people are flat lensers.

As an alternative, if the field is really curved, focusing slightly away from center gives an overall sharper image. Here’s an example. The Zeiss 50mm T/1.5 has big-time curvature with the edges towards the camera as shown in the top-half of the image below.

Field curvature of the Zeiss 50mm T1.5 showing that if you place the focus point to the left or right of center you get maximum edge-to-edge sharpness. The calculations show the best off-axis point is 9mm from center (about halfway to the edge) but you could eyeball this pretty accurately.

I love a curved field for just this reason. Center focus can isolate my subject but off-axis focus brings good edge-to-edge sharpness. I get to choose. I love getting to choose.

I have some cool software (bottom half of the image) that tells me exactly where to focus to get the best edge-to-edge sharpness (the black line across the field curvature graph) but you can eyeball your homemade field curvature graph and know where it should go – about halfway to the edge in this case. This can serve as an alternative to stopping down for edge-to-edge sharpness, or let you get edge-to-edge sharpness when stopping down isn’t enough.

The big takeaway is you can often get excellent get excellent edge sharpness in lenses with field curvatures if you know how to use them. Many lenses with flatter fields sacrifice edge sharpness to get flat fields, and you can’t find edge sharpness that just isn’t there.

Do you know the focal length at which your zoom lens has the flattest field, or at which focal length the field curvature changes? That’s useful information, and I want to know this kind of thing for every zoom I carry (pro tip, the flattest field is rarely at the center of the zoom range; it’s often 1/3 of the way from one extreme). Some zooms have massive curve at an extreme, but if you zoom just a few mm away from the extreme the field is much flatter. That’s another useful thing to know.

Very often your 24-70mm is curved one way at 70, while your 70-200mm is curved the another (ditto at 24mm, etc.). Knowing that helps choose which lens best frames the shot. (I should also mention that one zoom is always sharper than the other at 70mm. Of course, I probably should also mention neither one is really 70mm. Most 24-70mm lenses are actually 26-67mm; most 70-200s are about 73mm to 190mm.)

Sagittal field of Canon 70-200mm f/2.8 L III and24-70mm f/4 L IS, both set at 70mm.

The 70-200mm has a very slight curve back towards the camera and is pretty sharp (red) even at the edges at 70mm. The 24-70mm has a more significant curve and is not as sharp at the edges. Depending on what you are shooting, those differences could be important.

At least a few of you, I hope, have read this far and are now interested in field curvature. This article is already long enough, so I’ll stop here for today. For the next article though, I’ll show example field curvatures from various kinds of lenses. To be clear, I’m not going to put out 6,342 field curvature graphs for all the lenses at all the focal lengths. I’m showing you how to fish, not hosting a fish fry.

Since everyone tells me I should click-bait tease the next article, here you go: Next time I’ll show how field curvature explains ‘3-D pop’ and ‘microcontrast’. (Spoiler: No, no I won’t. Field curvature explains a lot of things and is a useful tool, but it’s not magic.)

Until Next Time…

Articles: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)

Comments Off

Posted in Uncategorized

GIMP vs Photoshop: Which Should You Use in 2021?

24 Dec

The post GIMP vs Photoshop: Which Should You Use in 2021? appeared first on Digital Photography School. It was authored by Ana Mireles.

Which is the better post-processing program, GIMP vs Photoshop?

That’s what this article is all about. I’m going to take you through the pros and cons of each program – so by the time you’ve finished, you’ll know which option is right for you.

So, if you’re ready to determine the best editing software for your needs…

…then keep on reading!

GIMP vs Photoshop: Overview

Photoshop is proprietary software that is available via paid subscription, whereas GIMP is a free, open-source program.

In the old days, before 2013 when Adobe changed to its subscription model, price was enough to decide between Photoshop vs GIMP.

You could choose Gimp for free, Photoshop CS6 for $ 699, or Photoshop CS6 Extended for $ 999. For most photographers, GIMP would inevitably win out.

Nowadays, you can have Adobe Photoshop starting at $ 9.99 USD per month. That’s a very reasonable price, even for a hobbyist.

Of course, GIMP is still free, so don’t automatically pay for Photoshop without thinking.

Instead, I recommend you take a careful look at the key differences between these two programs:

GIMP pros

Portability
Light download
Faster processing
Customizable
Free

Photoshop pros

Mobile
More tools
Handles more color profiles
Supports RAW and other file formats
Non-destructive editing
Good value for the money

Mobility and portability

If you only have one computer and do all your photo editing there, this isn’t an issue for you. However, most photographers don’t edit that way.

You see, here’s one of the most important differences between GIMP and Photoshop:

GIMP is more portable, while Photoshop is mobile.

GIMP doesn’t have a mobile version, which puts it at a huge disadvantage in today’s world where every smartphone has a camera.

Of course, you can still edit your photos on your phone for free. There are many options out there (including Photoshop, as I’ll explain in a moment). However, you can’t do mobile editing with GIMP.

What GIMP does have is portability. If you need to work on multiple computers, GIMP can be downloaded as many times as you want. You can even install GIMP on a USB drive so you can use it on any computer without having to download it.

This is an excellent choice if you want to edit your photos in a university library or in the business lounge at your hotel or airport, for example.

Photoshop, on the other hand, can only be installed on two computers. Also, the program needs to be fully installed, so you can’t place it on external hard drives.

However, Photoshop does have a mobile version: any paid Photoshop subscription comes with Photoshop for the iPad.

Plus, Photoshop for smartphones has three free versions (though you’ll need a free Adobe account to use them).

In summary:

Photoshop wins if you need to edit on the go. GIMP wins if you need to use it on many computers, including public ones.

Size and speed

GIMP is a very light program (after all, you can install and use GIMP from a portable USB drive!).

Photoshop, on the other hand, occupies quite a lot of space on your hard drive. It also uses a lot of RAM. So if your computer has limited processing capacity, Photoshop won’t be your friend.

There are some ways to optimize your computer for Photoshop use, but all in all, Photoshop will always be more resource-intensive than GIMP.

For Photoshop, you need 4 GB of available hard disk space (and additional space is required for installation).

GIMP requires 200 MB for the official install. This can grow depending on how you enhance GIMP over time.

As far as memory goes, Adobe recommends a minimum of 8 GB and preferably 16 GB of RAM. I’ve used Photoshop with 4 GB of RAM, and it works – but it’s choppy. GIMP, however, only needs about 20 MB of memory.

Note that the memory required by both GIMP and Photoshop can significantly increase depending on the images you’re working on, so that’s always something to bear in mind.

Ultimately, thanks to its size and processing requirements, I have to give the win to GIMP.

System and tools

I mentioned at the beginning that GIMP is open source while Photoshop is proprietary software.

This means you can modify GIMP as much as you want, from adding tools to directly changing the source code.

Modifying a program is great, but if you don’t know the tech behind GIMP, you probably won’t be able to take advantage of the open-source design. Even installing GIMP plug-ins can be difficult, and without these enhancements, you’ll be left with a program that is too bare to be appealing.

On the other hand, if you can get the hang of it, this flexibility can be hugely helpful. Plus, there is a big community behind GIMP, and many members are constantly creating interesting program additions. That way, you don’t have to wait for the GIMP team to release the next update; you can use community members’ programming to enhance your own GIMP software.

Photoshop is delivered as a finished product. You can’t make many changes, but it also doesn’t require much in the way of enhancements. You can set up your own workspace and add plugins, but that’s about it. On the upside, you get continuous updates included as part of your Adobe subscription – and in every update, you get high-quality improvements and innovations, thanks to a huge team that has maintained Photoshop’s status as the industry standard for many decades.

Photoshop also gives you the tools to create graphics and 3D designs, which is a very big plus if you have use for it.

Otherwise, these features will take up a lot of space in your system, but you don’t have the option to remove them and keep only what you need.

When it comes to tools, I find it difficult to declare an overall winner. Photoshop is a more robust program, but GIMP is more flexible. I’ll call it a tie, depending on your needs and skills.

File formats and color profiles

As you know, digital images are files with information. The file format is the way in which this information is encoded and stored.

Photoshop has its own native format: the PSD, or Photoshop Document. In the same sense, GIMP has native XCF files.

While the PSD is native to Photoshop, it’s very compatible; it can be opened by the Adobe apps, CorelDRAW, and even GIMP.

On the other hand, the XCF file format is not supported by other image editing programs. This makes it difficult to share original XCF files.

As a workaround, you can export the file using one of the common file formats like JPEG or TIFF, but the lack of XCF support does present some problems if you want the file recipient to build on your own edits (assuming they don’t use GIMP).

Also, GIMP doesn’t open RAW files by default. If you want to work with RAW files in GIMP, you have to download and install a plugin called UFRaw, whereas Photoshop has a built-in companion program, Adobe Camera RAW, which handles RAW files with ease.

When it comes to file management, you also have to consider the color profile options.

Gimp can only handle the sRGB color profile, whereas Photoshop has many more options. This is important when you want your images to look their best on the web and for printing.

To recap:

Regarding file formats and color profiles, Photoshop offers more options and is more compatible with other programs – which is why I’d give the win to Photoshop.

Editing and layers

I already covered the tools in a previous section, so you know that, for advanced editing, Photoshop has the edge over GIMP.

Both programs support plugins, actions, and presets. You can find many great options for free. The only difference is that Photoshop has more variety to choose from because it’s more popular overall.

The same rules apply for tutorials:

You’ll find so many more educational materials for the Adobe products compared to GIMP.

Finally, there is one thing Gimp is sorely lacking: non-destructive editing. Photoshop offers both adjustment layers and smart objects, which are extremely important for serious editing and hand Photoshop a definite win.

Cost and value

Last, I want to talk about cost and value.

When you download GIMP, there is no cost or subscription involved in the process. You get a photo editing program for free.

That’s not bad at all, considering that you’re not paying any money or giving out any information that many other “free” programs require.

However, you’ll need to download GIMP enhancements separately.

A Photoshop subscription includes the editing program, plus cloud storage space, a free customizable website on Adobe Portfolio, and access to Adobe Fresco, Adobe Fonts, and Adobe Spark. You can also get Adobe Lightroom if you choose the Photography plan.

And you have access to all the perks that come with the size and experience of Adobe, such as thousands of high-quality, creative brushes designed by Kyle T. Webster, as well as the most innovative tools that a big team of experts can develop.

When it comes to value, I have to declare a Photoshop vs GIMP tie. GIMP is free in every sense of the word, and you get excellent software.

For Photoshop, you do have to pay, but considering the low cost, the high quality, and the number of extras that you get, the program offers great value for the money.

It all comes down to what you need and what you can afford.

GIMP vs Photoshop: Conclusion

In my opinion, Photoshop is worth having if you’re into photography post-production.

That is, of course, if you can afford it. If you can’t do that just yet, then GIMP is a magnificent choice.

I actually have and use both programs. There are some things I find easier to do in one software versus the other. So owning Photoshop and GIMP gives me the best of both worlds!

I hope this GIMP vs Photoshop comparison gave you enough information to decide on the right program for you, based on your needs and budget.

Remember that the most important thing is your passion and your skills, so keep on creating – no matter which program you choose!

To download GIMP, click here, and to purchase Photoshop, click here.

Now over to you:

Which post-processing program do you prefer, GIMP or Photoshop? And why? Share your thoughts in the comments!

The post GIMP vs Photoshop: Which Should You Use in 2021? appeared first on Digital Photography School. It was authored by Ana Mireles.

Digital Photography School

Comments Off

Posted in Photography

Aperture and Shutter Priority Modes

22 Dec

The post Aperture and Shutter Priority Modes appeared first on Digital Photography School. It was authored by Darren Rowse.

aperture priority mode and shutter priority mode explained

What is Aperture Priority mode, what is Shutter Priority mode, and why do they matter?

Over the last few months, we’ve been looking at different elements of exposure and how to move off “Auto” mode on your digital camera. We’ve looked at aperture, shutter speed, and ISO. We’ve discovered what each setting is and what impact changing it will have on your images.

But now that we’ve looked at the theory of how changing these elements impacts an image, I’d like to discuss how to use them by examining two key shooting modes that many digital cameras offer. These should help you take a step away from the automatic settings that you might be spending a lot of time with.

So if you’re ready to learn all about Aperture Priority mode and Shutter Priority mode, then let’s get started.

The elements of exposure: A quick recap

In other articles, I’ve discussed how the three elements of the exposure triangle impact one another. This is particularly important when it comes to aperture and shutter speed.

Remember:

As you increase the size of your aperture (i.e., make the hole that you shoot through bigger), you let more light onto your image sensor.

As a result, you’ll need a shorter shutter speed to get a well-exposed image.

Conversely, if you increase the length of time your shutter is open, you decrease the aperture size that you need to get a well-exposed shot.

Make sense?

Priority modes

Aperture and Shutter Priority modes are really semi-manual (or semi-automatic) modes.

They give you some control over your settings, but also ensure you have a well-exposed image.

You see, semi-automatic modes such as Aperture Priority and Shutter Priority work by letting you select some of the settings. Your camera then chooses the remaining settings (in order to create a nice exposure).

Let’s take a look at each mode separately:

Aperture Priority mode

Often, Aperture Priority mode is represented on your camera Mode dial with an “A” or an “Av.”

In this mode, you set the aperture you wish to use, and the camera sets the shutter speed based on its evaluation of the light.

When would you use Aperture Priority mode?

Aperture impacts the depth of field of your images.

(In other words: By adjusting the aperture, you change how much of your scene is in focus. A narrow aperture results in focus from foreground to background, whereas a wide aperture results in a small sliver of focus surrounded by blur.)

As a result, most people use Aperture Priority mode when they want control over the depth of field.

aperture priority mode and shutter priority mode dandelion seed head

If you want a shallow depth of field (for example, in the shot above, the depth of field is very shallow, keeping the front dandelion seed in focus but blurring out the background), you’ll select a large aperture (f/2.8, for example, as in the dandelion photo) and let the camera choose an appropriate shutter speed.

But if you want an image with everything in focus, you must pick a smaller aperture (for example, f/16) and let the camera choose an appropriate shutter speed.

When choosing an aperture in Aperture Priority mode, keep in mind that the camera will be selecting the shutter speed.

And there comes a point where shutter speeds get too long to handhold your camera (usually around 1/60s).

Once you go below 1/60s or so, you’ll need to consider using a tripod.

(Also, if you’re photographing a moving subject, your shutter speed will impact how it’s captured; a slow shutter speed will mean your subject will be blurred.)

Shutter Priority mode

Shutter Priority mode often has a symbol of “Tv” or “S” on your camera Mode dial.

In Shutter Priority, you choose the shutter speed you wish to shoot at, and you let the camera decide on the best aperture for a well-exposed shot.

When would you use Shutter Priority mode?

In our tutorial on shutter speed, we talked about how the main impact of different shutter speeds is how movement is captured in your images.

As a result, most people switch to Shutter Priority mode when they want more control over the sharpness of a moving subject.

For example, if you want to photograph a bird in motion, and you want to freeze it so there’s no motion blur, you’d choose a fast shutter speed (e.g., 1/1000s, like in the photo below). Your camera would then take into consideration how much light is available in the scene and set an appropriate aperture.

aperture priority mode and shutter priority mode tricolored heron

But if you instead want to photograph a subject with some motion blur to illustrate its movement, you might choose a slower shutter speed, such as 1/25s. And your camera will select a smaller aperture as a result.

The photo below was taken at 0.4s as the flower waved in the wind. Do you see the motion blur that the slow shutter speed created?

aperture priority mode and shutter priority mode blurry flower

But don’t forget:

As the camera chooses different apertures, the depth of field in your image will change. If you choose a fast shutter speed to freeze your fast-moving object, your camera will choose a wider aperture – and your photo will have a narrower depth of field.

My final recommendation: Practice!

As you can see, Shutter Priority and Aperture Priority do give you more control over your images – but getting used to them can take some practice.

So as you use these semi-automatic shooting modes, don’t just think about the setting that you select; also keep an eye on the settings that the camera selects for you.

I find that, when shooting in “Av” or “Tv” modes, it’s often best to bracket your shots and shoot a number of images of the same subject (when you have time) at different settings. This will ensure you’re likely to get at least one shot that meets your needs.

The best way to learn about Shutter Priority and Aperture Priority modes is to grab your camera, head out with it, and experiment. Switch to “Av” or “Tv” and start playing with the different settings (taking lots of shots as you go). Particularly pay attention to how the camera makes changes to compensate for your selections and what impact it has on the shots you take.

In Aperture Priority mode, take some shots at the largest aperture you can (i.e., use small f-numbers) and see how this blurs the background (and also increases the shutter speed). Then head to the other end of the spectrum to take some shots at the smallest aperture you can (i.e., use high f-numbers) and see how this keeps more of your image in focus.

In Shutter Priority mode, play with fast and slow shutter speeds to see how they impact your photo’s depth of field.

Don’t be frustrated if your initial shots are not what you expect; it takes practice to wrap your head around these modes. But keep in mind that, when you do master both Aperture Priority and Shutter Priority, you’ll have a lot more creative control over your shots!

aperture priority mode and shutter priority mode shallow depth of field dahlia

The post Aperture and Shutter Priority Modes appeared first on Digital Photography School. It was authored by Darren Rowse.

Digital Photography School

Comments Off

Posted in Photography

Outfits for Family Photoshoot: How to Choose and Coordinate?

22 Dec

If your home is anything like mine there are photos of you and your family dotted all over it. There’s something heartwarming about looking at the different moments in time and reliving them. Remembering how you felt, the smells, tastes and sounds of the day. It’s no wonder that year after year families just like yours and mine enlist the Continue Reading

The post Outfits for Family Photoshoot: How to Choose and Coordinate? appeared first on Photodoto.

Photodoto

Comments Off

Posted in Photography

Canon to Release an APS-C EOS R Mirrorless Camera in 2021

21 Dec

The post Canon to Release an APS-C EOS R Mirrorless Camera in 2021 appeared first on Digital Photography School. It was authored by Jaymes Dempsey.

It’s more certain than ever before:

Canon will release an APS-C EOS R model, probably before 2021 is out.

The APS-C mirrorless camera (dubbed the “Canon EOS R7” by Canon Rumors) has been rumored for months – we reported on it back in March of this year – but its existence has been hotly debated on the internet.

Why?

For one, Canon already offers a popular series of APS-C mirrorless models (the EOS M lineup), which would make the EOS R7 a bit of an oddity. And an EOS R7 could pave the way for an EOS M phaseout.

To be clear, Canon hasn’t actually acknowledged the existence of the EOS R7. But Canon Rumors has it on good authority that there is “an APS-C sensor-equipped RF mount camera…in the wild with a select group of photographers.”

And from a historical perspective, the EOS R7 makes sense. The Canon EOS 7D and EOS 7D Mark II were Canon’s two semi-professional APS-C DSLR models, designed for bird, wildlife, and action photographers who couldn’t afford a Canon 1D series camera or who simply wanted to maximize reach in the field. They offered blazing-fast autofocus, high continuous shooting speeds, and rugged bodies that could handle extreme conditions.

But the EOS 7D Mark II launched way back in 2014, and despite various rumors, no successor has ever been announced – which is what makes the prospect of an EOS R7 so exciting for fans of the 7D series.

Of course, we don’t know for certain that an EOS R7 would be a true “7D Mark III” model. But an APS-C EOS R camera would be well-placed to cater to the same type of photographers so enamored with the 7D series. An RF APS-C camera would offer the technological advancements of the EOS R series, access to Canon’s excellent (and fast-growing) RF lens lineup, plus a 1.6x crop factor (one that’ll turn the new Canon RF 100-500mm lens into a 160-800mm powerhouse!).

According to Canon Rumors, the EOS R7 “looks nearly identical to the EOS R6,” and Canon Rumors suggests that “specifications [will] be nearly identical as well.” This makes sense; while the Canon EOS R6’s 20 MP sensor offers little in the way of resolution, it makes up for it in autofocus speed, 20 frames-per-second continuous shooting, excellent in-body image stabilization, dual card slots, stellar low-light performance, 4K/60p video, and more – exactly what you’d expect from a next-gen Canon EOS 7D model.

So for any bird photographers, wildlife photographers, or action photographers looking for a relatively inexpensive but high-powered APS-C camera…

…the wait is almost over!

Now over to you:

What do you think of Canon’s decision to create an RF-mount APS-C camera? And do you think it’ll be a 7D successor? Share your thoughts in the comments!

The post Canon to Release an APS-C EOS R Mirrorless Camera in 2021 appeared first on Digital Photography School. It was authored by Jaymes Dempsey.

Digital Photography School

Comments Off

Posted in Photography

Gear of the Year: Dale’s choice – Fujifilm X-Pro3

20 Dec

Photo: Dan Bracaglia

I think we can all agree that 2020 has been an unpredictable year, so it seems appropriate that my gear of the year is a camera I wouldn’t have predicted a few months ago: the Fujifilm X-Pro3.

But first, a bit of context.

Some of my earliest photography was done with a hand-me-down rangefinder camera, a Kodak Retina IIc. I loved the experience of shooting it and still remember exactly how it felt in my hands. I even remember how it smelled, no doubt the result of the grease used to lubricate gears, something you don’t get from digital cameras today.

However, as much as I love rangefinders, I’ve never had a natural knack for focusing them. I can do it, but it’s not my superpower. To this day, I have tremendous respect for photographers who can quickly and accurately focus a rangefinder.

Mt. Jefferson in Oregon’s Cascade Mountains. Velvia film profile, processed in-camera.

ISO 160 | 1/250 sec | F2.0 | XF 18mm F2 R

That’s a roundabout way of explaining why I mostly shot with SLRs for so many years and never lusted after a Leica.

This is where Fujifilm comes into the story, but maybe not in the way you’d expect. You see, I was never so much a fan of the X-Pro series, which always seemed big and chunky, but rather of the fixed-lens X100. I didn’t need one, but from the day I first used an X100 in person, I wanted one. Badly. It was sexy, compact, and provided a shooting experience similar to a rangefinder, but with autofocus. Eventually, I broke down and bought the X100T, and it remains my most-used camera to this day.

With that in mind, I suppose it seems odd that I picked the X-Pro3 as my gear of the year instead of the X100V, so I should probably get around to explaining that.

Pre-pandemic family gatherings. Acros film profile, processed in-camera.

ISO 5000 | 1/80 sec | F2.8 | XF 23mm F2 R WR

It turns out the thing that made me enjoy the X-Pro3 most was the exact thing I expected to dislike about it: the inverted rear screen, which is undoubtedly the most polarizing feature of the camera. Unlike most cameras, the X-Pro3’s screen folds inward and remains hidden until deliberately folded out. There’s an extra step required to access menus or, more importantly, to chimp images.

I trained myself years ago not to ‘chimp’ images on the back of a camera when doing work for clients; I didn’t think it conveyed professionalism or confidence. When shooting for fun, however, I’m like most people. I like to see my photos right away. Because instant gratification.

With the X-Pro3, I shoot differently. Nothing actually prevents me from flipping open the screen to look at my images, but a glance at the back of the camera reminds me that that’s not what this camera is about. The thought of flipping open that screen feels like cheating, so I don’t.

Cowboy country. Astia film profile, processed in-camera.

ISO 320 | 1/170 sec | F6.4 | XF 55-200mm F3.5-4.8 R LM OIS

It’s a subtle shift in mindset, but one that I’m really enjoying. I find myself having more of those zen moments where it’s just me, the camera and my subject. By removing the temptation even to look, I’m spending more time taking in what’s around me, looking through the viewfinder, and just enjoying the journey. I can look at the photos later.

I’m starting to fully realize how the presence of a screen impacts the way I shoot a digital camera, and I’m beginning to appreciate why someone might spring for a model like the Leica M10-D, which has no screen at all.

The only area where I feel let down by the X-Pro3 is its hybrid optical viewfinder, which is a core part of the camera’s experience. Viewfinders on previous X-Pro models had a magnifier that would engage depending on the attached lens’s focal length, allowing the user to view frame lines for a pretty wide variety of lenses.

Home on the range. Astia film profile, processed in-camera.

ISO 640 | 1/3200 sec | F4.0 | XF 18mm F2 R

That’s missing on the X-Pro3. You can’t see frame lines for lenses wider than 23mm (equivalent to 35mm), which I notice when shooting Fujifilm’s 18mm F2, though fortunately, that lens’s field of view pretty closely matches the viewfinder itself. The EVF is very usable, and I’ll switch over to it at times, but it takes away some of the magic.

Many people pigeon-hole the X-Pro3 as a camera for street photography only, which is unfortunate because it’s really quite versatile. I’m definitely not a street photographer, yet to my delight, I found it to be an incredibly satisfying camera.

A lot of unexpected things happened this year, and not all of them were bad. I got to know my family better, even over FaceTime, I spent more time with my pets, and I caught up on projects that have languished for years. I also discovered a camera that brings me joy and reminds me of why I started taking pictures in the first place. That feels like a pretty good way to start 2021.

Articles: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)

Comments Off

Posted in Uncategorized