RSS
 

Posts Tagged ‘Ignore’

5 Portrait Photography Rules You Should Probably Ignore

07 Mar

The post 5 Portrait Photography Rules You Should Probably Ignore appeared first on Digital Photography School. It was authored by John McIntire.

Think back to the time when you first got interested in photography. From the moment you first pick up a camera, you are bombarded with a constant onslaught of dos and don’ts. You have to do this. You can’t do that. Rules, rules, rules, some more rules: then once you have a grasp on those, there’s even more rules and limitations.

Each of these images uses a technique that violates at least one of the rules for portrait photography discussed in this article.

For the most part, these rules (usually more guideline than a rule) are well-intentioned. They force you to pay attention to things you may not have learned to pay attention to yet. They force you to develop habits that you then apply every time you pick up a camera.

For example, the Rule of Thirds (as we all should know is not a rule) forces you to be mindful of your composition in the early stages of photography. This gives you a massive head start when you’re starting out and over time, you will start composing your images without so much as a thought. In these instances, these rules can be a powerful tool while you are learning.

With so many rules out there and so many people coming up with new rules all of the time, sometimes a few get through that make little sense at all. This article discusses five rules for portrait photography that get touted quite a lot. While some of them make sense at first, closer examination should show you that they’re mostly arbitrary and once you have a grasp of what they are trying to point out to you, you should probably, in my opinion, discard them from your rulebook altogether.

Disclaimer: This might be a contentious topic for you. If you happen to like or live by these rules; that’s cool. I’m not here to change your mind. I’m simply asking you to take an objective look at these rules and evaluate why they’re there and if they still have a place. If you feel that way, do discuss it in the comments below. I’m more than happy to engage in any reasonable discussion about this topic and always keep an open mind regarding different views on that matter. The only thing I ask is that we maintain the community guidelines for commenting here on Digital Photography School.

1. Catchlights should only be small and round

This rule almost seems to make sense when you first hear it. Outdoors, in natural light (presuming sunny conditions), the sun will appear as a small, round catchlight in a portrait subject’s eyes. If that’s what the sun does, then it must be more natural to have a catchlight that matches in all of your portraits. After all, natural equals good, right? 

Small catchlights from hard light have their place, but there’s absolutely nothing wrong with large catchlights either.

Here’s the thing: how many times have you been told in photography books and articles, or videos that harsh midday sun should be generally avoided for the most flattering portraits? I’m guessing almost every one of them. (Yes, I know that midday sun can be a wonderful light source at times and there are plenty of resources that say so. They’re right too.) Once you remove yourself from the midday sun to a place where you get softer more flattering light (whether that be natural or studio), those catchlights stop being small and round.

Soft light typically means large light sources close to your subject, whether that be a large window or a large octabox, it doesn’t matter. The same applies if you’re photographing your portraits on an overcast day. Catchlights in those conditions often take up half of your subject’s eyes. The catchlight being a reflection of the light source which is everything above the horizon in your subject’s field of vision. 

The catchlight here is the entirety of the sky above the horizon. This is what catchlights look like on an overcast day. According to this rule, you can’t use them.

You can probably see the conflict here. On the one hand, you’re told that you should use soft light for your portraits. On the other, you have this rule that states that your catchlights should only be the result of hard light. It’s difficult to make sense of it.

I don’t know about you, but I’m very much a fan of my large modifiers and diffusers and the soft light that they provide, and I’d rather keep on using them.

Large modifiers close to the subject provide soft light perfect for portraiture. They also make large catchlights.

Now, if you’re like me, I like seeing new types of catchlights in my subject’s eyes. I like the thrill of finding some new lighting combination, or an odd pocket of natural light somewhere and seeing what it does to the eyes in my portraits. Sometimes the results are incredible. If you followed this rule to the tee, you would never have the opportunity for this discovery, and you’d be pretty limited in terms of the light you can use for your portraits.

None of these odd catchlights are acceptable if you follow this rule to the letter.

Finally, there’s the consideration of specialist lighting equipment. The most obvious of these is the ringflash, or ringlight. Lights like these always create a weird-shaped catchlight. With ringlights, the catchlight shows up as a ring. According to this rule, you can never use these light sources.

If you happen to like the effect of ringlights, you’re going to have to ignore this rule.

2) There should only be one catchlight

This rule is one that I’ve been hearing a lot of recently. It’s similar to the previous rule in that its intent is to keep a natural look to your portraits. After all, there is only one sun in the sky. 

There’s nothing wrong with having one catchlight, but it’s better not to limit yourself in terms of techniques that you can use.

My contention with this rule lies with that fact that unless you’re taking portraits outdoors in a very weird place (maybe, but probably not, the Black Desert in Iceland), there is never, ever only one light source. Everything outdoors in sunlight is reflecting light back to your subject. In many cases, the exposure of these secondary sources will never come close to that of the sun. However, in a lot of other cases, the scenery can and does act as a reflector in your images. Light colored buildings, large windows, fields, foliage and green grass can all act as secondary light sources and more often than not will add extra catchlights to your subject’s eyes.

If you’re photographing a person near a light colored wall at their right with the sun at their left, that’s two light sources with two catchlights. You can’t do that according to this rule.

If you’re in the studio using butterfly lighting and you want to lift your subject’s eyes a bit with a reflector, that’s two catchlights. Don’t even think about it if you’re following this rule.

According to this rule, the catchlight from the reflector shouldn’t be there. Not only would the shadows not be filled in without it, but the eyes would be very dark.

If you take that idea a step further and you like to use complicated or creative lighting setups like clamshell lighting or cross lighting, then this rule rules them out. 

If you were following this rule, clamshell lighting would be a huge no-go.

Like the rule about keeping your catchlights small and round, the idea that you should only have one catchlight in your subject’s eyes only serves to limit you in what photographic techniques you can use if you want to do photography correctly. I don’t like the idea of arbitrary limitations, and I don’t like the idea that another photographer might not be using a technique that suits them, or that they would love, because they were told to follow a rule that someone made up.

3) Close-up portraits are technically wrong because the head is cut off

Because the top of the subject’s head isn’t in the frame, this photo is wrong according to this rule despite the top of the head adding no valuable information to the frame.

You will have heard the basis for this one a lot. “Don’t cut off your subject’s head.” This is one of those basic rules that the person who sold you your first camera might have told you. For the most part, this guideline is pretty sound. It stems from a time where you would hand someone a camera, usually a disposable one in my case, and ask them to take a photo for you. Once you developed the film, you could pretty much guarantee that half of your head was missing and the bottom third of the frame was nothing but empty ground below your feet. It makes absolute sense that people would want to avoid photos like that.

Continuing from that, in a wider portrait or even a headshot, cutting into the head at the top of the frame can seem disjointed and make for an awkward viewing experience. This isn’t always the case, but it’s best to avoid it until you understand when it works and when it doesn’t.

With head and shoulders and 3/4 shots like these, it is best to avoid cropping into your subject’s heads.

The issue here is with close-up portraits. It is not uncommon at all to hear someone dictate that close-up portraits are technically wrong simply because the top of the head is missing. Basically, this is taking the guide to not cut off heads to the extreme and completely discounting a not very uncommon style of photography. 

When you’re creating close-up portraits, you are narrowing your point of focus to specific features of your subject and making those the basis of your composition. There isn’t a whole lot of extra real estate in your frame for erroneous details like the top of the head. In fact, the inclusion of those details stops it from being a close-up portrait. 

When the focal point of an image is only a face, erroneous details need to be left out as much as possible. This rule does not allow for that.

I encourage you to ask yourself this question: What would films and television look like if filmmakers followed this rule? 

The takeaway here should be that when you are creating full, three quarters and head and shoulders portraits, it’s a good idea to not cut off your subject’s head. However, when you get in close, throw it out the window. The space you have in your frame for composition is valuable; don’t waste it. 

4) Portraits without eye contact directly to the camera are technically wrong

Eyes are important, but that doesn’t mean you always need them to create evocative portraits.

This rule purports that if you have a person in your frame, their eyes must be facing the camera or your photo is technically flawed. Fortunately, this has seemed to die down in recent years, but I still see it come up with fair regularity.

If your goal is a straight-up portrait, as in a record shot of a person, then yes, you’ll want to ensure that your subject is engaging with the lens. Likewise, if your goal is to create a commercial style image where the intent is to have your viewer feel personally engaged with the person in the photograph, then, again, yes, you’ll want to have direct eye contact with your subject.

Direct eye contact is fine and extremely useful, but it isn’t the only way to do things.

The problem here is that portraiture is such a broad category and there are so many different ways to approach it. For example, if you’re into street photography and you do a lot of candid portraits, there’s probably not going to be a lot of eye contact with your camera. Instead, your subjects will be engaged elsewhere and they will probably be making eye contact with something or someone else. That’s the trick, if you want to convey any kind of emotion or concept to your portraits, one of the quickest and easiest ways to do that is to have your subject engage with something outside of the frame that isn’t the camera. 

If you want to convey that your subject is involved, in any way, with the world around them, they need to be engaged with the world around them. If your thought is to evoke a sense of thoughtfulness, or longing, or any other sort of internal emotion, having your subject engaged with the camera will make that a much more difficult job to achieve. 

Compare these two images taken moments apart. How completely different are they simply based on the eye contact or lack thereof?

Another aspect of this rule is that it firmly rejects the idea that you can have portraits where your subject’s eyes are closed. Having your subject close their eyes can be another powerful way to convey emotion in your portraits. While this shouldn’t be overused, there is no reason why you shouldn’t use it freely when the situation calls for it.

For a real-world example, open up any fashion magazine and look for the beauty ads. You’ll find that when eye makeup is on show, the subject’s eyes are often closed. For me, it’s a hard pill to swallow that these high-end images by some of the best photographers in the world are somehow technically incorrect because they use the tool required to convey a specific message.

I’ll take things one step further and say that you don’t even need a face in your images to create evocative portraits.

Perhaps it would be easier to say that this rule should be adjusted. So, instead of saying that your subject should have eye contact with the camera, your subject should have eye contact with something, whether that’s visible to the viewer or not.

5) There should be no specular highlights on the skin

Specular highlights are often misunderstood, but they are a vital part of images with depth and contrast. Note the three-dimensional appearance of the subject’s head thanks to the specular highlights on his forehead, nose, and cheek.

Of all of the rules discussed in this article, this might be the least obvious one in regard to why it shouldn’t be a rule. If you take it at face value, specular highlights can be seen as a distraction when they show up on your subject’s skin. The most likely place for these highlights to show up is the nose and the forehead. In poor light, these specular highlights can be irregularly shaped and look awful. You should modify and control your light to mitigate their effect on your photos; however, that doesn’t mean that specular highlights are wrong or that they should be avoided altogether.

Even large, soft light sources (in this case a wall of giant windows) create specular highlights. Use them to your advantage.

Like shadows, specular highlights indicate depth and contrast and they help shape and give three dimensions to your subject in the frame. Unless you’re using extremely soft light, the lack of a specular highlight often means that the light is flat. How often have you read or advised to avoid flat lighting? A lot, I reckon. Yet, somehow, we have this rule that insists that you use flat lighting, or that you use light that’s so soft that it removes all contrast in your portraits.

If you want to create images with a three-dimensional feel, with natural looking contrast, you want to avoid completely removing specular highlights from your images. Instead, control them. You can use flags, diffusers, and lighting position to change and control their shape and exposure. The key thing to look out for is that the specular highlights are not overexposed and that they are not an irregular shape. Try to keep the transitions from specular highlight to highlight smooth and graduated just like you would do for shadow transitions. This will help to ensure that you have pleasing and natural looking images full of depth and contrast.

When controlled and manipulated, specular highlights can be a wonderful tool for you to create bold portraits.

As a little side note on specular highlights, it’s important to mention makeup. It is currently popular to use makeup that intentionally puts a large highlight on women’s cheekbones. If you value your working relationships with make-up artists and models or want repeat sales from a client who has her makeup done this way; do not remove that highlight. In fact, consider going out of your way to emphasize it.  Not only is the makeup expensive, but it’s a tricky technique to get right. Removing the highlight with either lighting techniques or Photoshop will delegitimize the effort that went into creating the effect. Please avoid doing this, not because of some arbitrary rule, but because it respects the specific effort that went into putting that highlight there in the first place. 

There you have it

If you’ve made it this far, hopefully, you can see why it’s important to take an objective look at some of the rules we are bombarded with every day. Even if you disagree with my assessment of any of these rules, I still encourage you to carefully consider why each rule you come across came to be, what its intent is and how it fits into what you want to achieve with your photography.

This article has focused on a narrow subset of rules for portrait photography; please feel free to discuss in the comments what other photographic rules you feel have no place in your photography, or which rules you feel must be followed at all costs.

The post 5 Portrait Photography Rules You Should Probably Ignore appeared first on Digital Photography School. It was authored by John McIntire.


Digital Photography School

 
Comments Off on 5 Portrait Photography Rules You Should Probably Ignore

Posted in Photography

 

Camera makers continue to ignore photojournalist pleas for encryption

07 Feb
Photo by Markus Spiske

In late 2016, more than 150 professionals sent a letter to camera makers requesting that they add encryption to their camera products. This encryption, as it does with other devices like smartphones, would help protect content on the camera and its media cards. “Without encryption capabilities,” the letter explained, “photographs and footage that we take can be examined and searched by the police, military, and border agents in countries where we operate and travel, and the consequences can be dire.”

More than a year has passed since the letter was circulated, and major camera manufacturers have largely failed to introduce encryption-based security on their camera products. Tech website ZDNet recently quizzed major camera manufacturers about potential plans to introduce encryption, and the response was underwhelming.

Fuji failed to respond to the site’s request for info, while Sony declined to discuss any product roadmaps related to camera encryption. Canon declined to talk about “future products and/or innovation.” Both Olympus and Nikon gave more extensive answers, though neither indicate any real progress on the topic.

Nikon, for its part, gave a canned response that it is listening to photographers and “will continue to evaluate product features to best suit the needs of our users.” Olympus’ response wasn’t much better, with a company spokesperson saying that the maker will “continue to review the request to implement encryption technology in our photographic and video products, and will develop a plan for implementation where applicable in consideration to the Olympus product roadmap and the market requirements.”

While photographers and filmmakers aren’t entirely without encrypted options, those options (mainly smartphones) are far less capable than the professional gear they’d otherwise use. Apple and Samsung have both focused heavily on encryption-based security for their mobile products, and Android users in general have the ability to toggle on encryption in the OS’s settings. Is it time for camera makers to catch up?

Articles: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)

 
Comments Off on Camera makers continue to ignore photojournalist pleas for encryption

Posted in Uncategorized

 

Five Photography Rules You May Want to Ignore

02 Nov

A few years ago when I purchased my first Canon dSLR I took a free 2-hour class on digital photography from a local school. They offered free seminars as a way to market their series of intensive 6-week photography courses. I was new to digital photography at the time, having learned on 35mm film. During the class I scribbled away in the notebook the instructor handed out. I was given several photography rules to follow, but is that the best advice?

My camera-loving orange tabby Carter, shot in low light, requiring a relatively high ISO of 1600 to get a fast enough shutter speed to hand hold.  ISO 1600, 1/125th, F4 @ 105mm.

My camera-loving orange tabby Carter, shot in low light, requiring a relatively high ISO of 1600 to get a fast enough shutter speed to hand-hold. ISO 1600, 1/125th, f/4 @ 105mm.

The thing about photography is that it’s a series of decisions starting with the brand of gear you choose and it funnels down to your favorite subject, your preferred shooting mode, your shutter speed, aperture and ISO. By applying popular advice to all situations, you eliminate too many of the key creative decision about how your images look. Go ahead and disagree with or ignore rule-of-thumb photography advice. The choices you make allow you to create images that feel right to you – and that’s the real sweet spot.

So let’s look at five supposed photography rules and see if you agree or disagree with them.

1. Set the ISO at 400

One of my instructor’s key points was to set the ISO at 400 and forget it.”

Since I didn’t know anything about digital photography, it like pretty good advice, so I tried it. I also made a lot of blurry images. Set at ISO 400, and limited by a wide open aperture of f/3.5 on my kit lens, I often couldn’t gather enough light for a shutter speed fast enough to prevent motion blur. I flipped back to Auto Shooting Mode (Full Auto or Program) and suddenly my images were sharp again.

I dissected the settings on the Auto Mode shots and – you’ve probably guessed this already – the main difference while in Auto Mode was that the ISO was higher, enabling a faster shutter speed and reducing motion blur.

five-photography-tips-to-ignore-n

While this image wouldn’t have made the cut because of the awkward composition, the horse is also a bit blurry because my ISO was too low, allowing my shutter speed to lag. It wasn’t fast enough to freeze the motion of the moving horse. ISO 800, 1/160th, f/5.6, 176mm.

Increasing your digital ISO makes your camera’s sensor more sensitive to light, meaning you can shoot at smaller apertures and/or faster shutter speeds in low light conditions. Like film, increasing your ISO can create a grainier, noisier image. But unlike film, digital cameras have extraordinary ISO capacity. High-end cameras like the Canon 1Dx Mark II have an ISO capability of 51,200 expandable to 409,600! Sticking to ISO 400 is like pretending you’re still shooting film and disregarding all the recent digital technology advances.

Earlier this year I was in Mesa, AZ photographing the Salt River Wild horses at dawn. During blue hour, I started with my ISO too low, my shutter speed lagged, and I shot a whole series of blurry images (see image above). Purely by luck, at ISO 800, only this one didn’t have motion blur.

Five Photography Tips to Ignore A

ISO 800

The next day, I started at ISO 12,800 to keep my shutter high enough to prevent motion blur, gradually decreasing my ISO was the sun grew brighter.

Five Photography Tips to Ignore B

ISO 12,800

Five Photography Tips to Ignore C

ISO 1250

While these images might be noisier than those shot at ISO 400, noise is almost always preferred to motion blur. Digital noise can be managed, while an unintentionally blurry picture can rarely be saved.

Setting your ISO to an unrealistically low value and leaving it there is the sort of advice or rule I’d encourage you to ignore.

2. You never need to shoot faster than 1/500th of a second

There’s a famous teaching photographer (I mentioned him here too) who says that you never need to shoot faster than 1/500th of a second. I ignore his advice too. Here’s why.

Five Photography Tips to Ignore D

Shutter speed 1/500th

This image, shot at 1/500th of a second, shows motion blur in the horse’s legs. Sometimes you may want to intentionally include motion blur in your images because it shows speed in a dynamic way, and in this case, that’s what I wanted. If I wanted no motion blur, I would need to have chosen a faster shutter speed.

Five Photography Tips to Ignore E

Shutter speed 1/640th

This image, shot at 1/640th of a second, is sharper. It has very minimal motion blur in the legs but again, it still shows motion blur.

Five Photography Tips to Ignore F

Shutter speed 1/1000th

If you shoot at 1/1000th and above, you can get crisp, blur-free images of fast-moving objects or animals in motion. In this image, even the water droplets are frozen in time.

Depending on your creative goals, you may want to experiment and shoot from 1/100th, all the way up to 1/8000th of a second. That’s the reason to ignore this rule. Adhering to 1/500th of a second as your maximum shutter speed takes too many of your creative choices away from you.

3. Serious photographers always use tripods

Has your instructor or mentor told you that to be serious about making images, you must always use a tripod? That’s another piece of advice you might want to ignore, unless the type of work you make truly requires a tripod. Night photography, for example, typically requires a tripod because of the longer shutter speeds.

Five Photography Tips to Ignore G

Night photography – with a tripod

Long exposure photography, astrophotography and shooting landscapes at dusk or dawn are all good examples of when to use a tripod in order to make excellent images.

Macro photography often requires a tripod but sometimes doesn’t. This image was made hand-held.

Five Photography Tips to Ignore H

Macro photography – handheld

Street photography never requires a tripod. The most serious street photographers I know use small camera bodies with prime lenses. What makes them serious is that they carry their cameras all the time and are always ready to shoot. For a street photographer, lugging around a tripod actually seems a little ridiculous, doesn’t it?

Five Photography Tips to Ignore I

Street photography – handheld

I’m a very serious photographer and I almost never use a tripod. I have two: a Travel Flat Benro tripod and a Gitzo with a Really Right Stuff BH 40 Ball Head. I always have one in the car or in my suitcase, but I rarely use either one anymore.

Does that mean I’m no longer a serious photographer? No, of course not. I travel all over the world to photograph horses and wildlife. I’m very serious about the images I make. The thing is, my images don’t usually require a tripod. Using one is sometimes even counterproductive when photographing fast bursts of action.

When two wild stallions start to fight out in the desert, I begin to shoot while adjusting my body position to look for the best angles for the scene to improve my composition. Sometimes a wild stallion spat can last for mere seconds. If you had to pause to adjust your tripod, you’d likely miss the action.

Five Photography Tips to Ignore J

Wild stallions – hand-held. ISO 250, 1/800th, f/8 @ 98mm

Being a serious photographer isn’t about the gear you choose to use or not use. Being serious is about making images with intention. Your intention might be totally different than the photographer using the tripod. If it is, ignore his advice to use one.

4. Only shoot in Manual Mode

Most of the professional, money-making photographers I know actually shoot in Aperture Priority so I think this rule is more the advice of old-fashioned, learned-on-film photographers. These photographers grew up using Manual Mode since that’s the only option that was available. They didn’t have the choice of Auto, Aperture or Shutter Priority Modes.

So that’s the rub. You do have a choice. You also have stellar gear that is going to make the right exposure choice 90% of the time. Why not learn to use all the modes on your camera?

At a cocktail party for your bestie’s 40th? Use Auto Mode to make sure you get the shot. Shooting fast action? Use Shutter Priority. Shooting in quickly shifting light? Use Manual Mode and set your ISO to Auto. Shooting a portrait? Experiment with Aperture Priority and then give your camera’s Portrait Mode a try.

Five Photography Tips to Ignore K

Self-portrait shot in Portrait Program Mode. 100, 1/100th, f/3.5 @ 50mm

Cameras today have amazing functionality. Anyone telling you to exclusively use Manual Mode may have different photography goals than you do. If your goal is to make sure you make the best images possible, ignore their advice and learn all of your camera’s capabilities backwards and forwards.

5. Only shoot in your lens’s sweet spot

If you’re keeping track, by heeding all of this well-intentioned advice, your camera is in Manual Mode and attached to a tripod. Your ISO is set at 400 and you’re using a maximum shutter speed of 1/500th. There has to be a rule about aperture and focal length too, right? There is.

The sweet spot is a combination of the aperture and focal length where your lens functions at its absolute best. If you’ve read reviews about zoom lenses you may have read something along the lines of; “Wide open at f/5.6 at the maximum focal length of 400mm, the corners get soft and there’s a noticeable loss of sharpness throughout.” Photographers write reviews like that so that you can avoid shooting in the so-called soft end of your lens and gravitate towards its sweet spot.

You can evaluate the sweet spot of your lens by making a series of images of the same subject, in the same lighting conditions, using each aperture at every focal length and comparing the results. (Read: How To Find Your Lens’ Sweet Spot: A Beginner’s Guide to Sharper Images for a full description of how to do this.) That sort of evaluation sounds soul-crushing and unnecessary to me. If you buy a zoom lens, you’re buying it because you need that focal length in your bag. Why run a test on your lens that might make you hesitate to use it at its maximum focal length?

Five Photography Tips to Ignore L

The real sweet spot is making images that feel right to you. ISO 2500, 1/80th, f/4.5 @73mm

Instead how about learning the capabilities of your lens by truly using it? Over time, you may gradually learn that the sweet spot is 100mm at f/8, because every image you shoot at that aperture and focal length is amazing. Rather than avoiding the rest of your lens’ focal length range and aperture combinations, you can shoot a second image using the sweet spot. If there isn’t time to shoot a second image, that’s okay. Just be grateful you had a lens capable of capturing the image at all.

Bottom line

The bottom line is that as you progress in your photography journey, you get to make the decisions. What advice and rules will you follow, and which will you toss out?

Be disagreeable with me! What photography rules have you been taught that you ignore now? Please share your experience in the comments below.

googletag.cmd.push(function() {
tablet_slots.push( googletag.defineSlot( “/1005424/_dPSv4_tab-all-article-bottom_(300×250)”, [300, 250], “pb-ad-78623” ).addService( googletag.pubads() ) ); } );

googletag.cmd.push(function() {
mobile_slots.push( googletag.defineSlot( “/1005424/_dPSv4_mob-all-article-bottom_(300×250)”, [300, 250], “pb-ad-78158” ).addService( googletag.pubads() ) ); } );

The post Five Photography Rules You May Want to Ignore by Lara Joy Brynildssen appeared first on Digital Photography School.


Digital Photography School

 
Comments Off on Five Photography Rules You May Want to Ignore

Posted in Photography

 

5 Photography Rules Moms Can Ignore

09 Jan

If you’re anything like me, you made the investment in a DSLR camera to take beautiful professional quality photos of your kids. You want to document their childhood so the moments they may not remember on their own, they’ll have at their fingertips down the road.

Photography rules mom can break 02

Your camera has opened up a world of possibility in how to go about documenting your days as a family. But, if you’re new to photography, you may have quickly realized that your camera has a lot of buttons, settings, and dials that you have no clue how to use. On top of it all, the advice you’ve been given or articles you read have had conflicting information as well.

When I began my learning journey with the wonderful world of technical photography I was bombarded with information overload. There was no shortage of advice, opinions, and tutorials for what I needed to do to take beautiful pictures. I was told I needed to learn flash, and that I needed special filers, or software, or more lenses, or even a different camera.

During my years of ‘going pro‘ I’ve learned it’s that photography is all about intention and purpose. The rules a nature photographer follows, are going to be much different than the rules that apply to a mom trying to take better photos of her kids.

Photography rules mom can break 05

These days, I’m breaking some of the most common photography rules that were shared with me on my own photography learning journey. Why not become a ‘rule breaker‘ with me? If there’s one thing I’ve learned from my kid, it’s that rules are always meant to be broken. Life (and your photography) will be so much more fun that way.

5 rules moms can ignore

Rule #1: You need to invest a lot of money in gear and accessories

Once you get your camera other DSLR owners will be lining up to tell you all the other gadgets and gizmos you should have to go along with it. If you’re a mom who is just starting out, you don’t need to run out and invest in big bulky external flashes, studio light set ups, lots of lenses and filters, etc. The few affordable accessories I DO think a mom can benefit from are: a 1.8 prime lens (a 35mm works well on an APS-C or cropped sensor) for low light indoor photos, a 70-300mm zoom lens for sports photos, a sturdy tripod, and a wireless remote so you can trigger the shutter away from the camera and actually be in photos with your kids every now and then.

Photography rules mom can break 07

Rule #2: Manual mode is the only way to take good photos

The next piece of advice that I constantly read over and over again was that I needed to learn how to put my camera in ‘M’ (Manual mode) to take good photos. Although there is definitely a better level of control and confidence that comes from mastering Manual mode and knowing how Shutter Speed, ISO, and Aperture all work together to expose photos, it’s not the be-all, end-all, to shooting amazing images. I’d argue that finding decent light is definitely a better starting place for moms. There are still times when I’m running after my preschooler taking snapshots in tricky, constantly changing light, and I won’t shoot in full Manual mode. In these moments I typically opt to use A/Av mode instead and get a bit of help from my camera in choosing shutter speed for me.

Photography rules mom can break 01

Rule #3: The bigger the camera the better

I will admit, as I learned more and more about my photography, I got a bit of camera envy. I knew that the pros shot with some really fancy top of the line cameras, and I thought that I needed the same gear, in order to achieve the same results. The truth is, entry level SLRs are improving by leaps and bounds and are rivalling the bigger cameras in their low light, high ISO capabilities. If your camera is over four or five years old you might want to consider a slight upgrade. Because as it is with technology, newer models will have additional power to them (especially in the area of ISO limits), but you don’t need to immediately jump to a top of line model that costs thousands of dollars in order to take beautiful shots.

Rule #4: The best times of day to photograph are sunrise and sunset

This was another rule that was stated to me over and over and over again, especially as I made the transition to professional photography. Even though the light tends to be awesome during these times (sunset isn’t called the ‘golden hour‘ for no reason), a shoot during these times can go south rather quickly when your child hasn’t had a nap and it’s nearing their dinner time. I want to challenge you to take photos of your kids when they are in the best mood. Good photography is all about finding the right light. The middle of a bright sunny day might be more tricky to seek out even lighting, but if that’s when your kids are the most awake, and alert and willing to play for the lens, then that’s when you should shoot. At the end of the day, it’s all about their beautiful smile and not the beautiful sunset behind them.

Photography rules mom can break 03

Photography rules mom can break 06

Rule #5 You need to invest in Photoshop or Lightroom to edit professionally

One misconception I had when I bought my first DSLR camera was that my photos would come straight out of the camera looking professionally retouched. I learned very quickly that wasn’t always the case, and that editing software would allow me to transform my drab photos into fabulous works of art. Photoshop and Lightroom are two of the most frequently talked about and discussed programs out there for professional photographers, but they are complicated and in some cases expensive, pieces of software that can take a great deal of time and effort to learn. For a mom who is on the go and wants something a bit more user friendly and lower cost, I absolutely love the website PicMonkey. From basic editing features, to filters, collages, and more this website makes it super easy for the mom on the go to still make her DSLR photos look incredible.

Photography rules mom can break 04

Are there any other photography ‘rules’ you’ve heard before that you have a difficult time following? I’d love to hear about them in the comments. Happy snapping!

If you want some inspiration, or more reading and tips for photographing kids, check out these articles:

  • The 3 Biggest Kid Photography Mistakes
  • KIDS: Weekly Photography Challenge
  • How to go Beyond the Regular Composition Advice for Getting the Best Shots of your Kids
  • 7 Tips for Photographing Kids
  • Click! a dPS ebook to help you take better photos of your kids

The post 5 Photography Rules Moms Can Ignore by Beryl Young appeared first on Digital Photography School.


Digital Photography School

 
Comments Off on 5 Photography Rules Moms Can Ignore

Posted in Photography

 

Ignore The Naysayers. Go Create Stunning Images

10 Sep

There has been a spat of posts and articles recently extolling the storyline that “Photography Is Dead!” or “Creativity Is Dead!” or both. And then some. The articles I have read rightly point out that more people have cameras and are sharing images on the likes of Instagram, Twitter and Facebook. And that most of those images are not some form of art (the food you ate, a self-portrait (or ‘selfie’ as they are colloquially know) or yet another sunset, etc…).

They also point to this deluge of images as something that is dragging down photography as a whole and beating the creativity out of the art form. They point to the overall averageness that this mass use of the medium has created.

But I think they are missing a point.

While there are exponentially more people taking photos these days thanks to phone cameras and cheaper, instant digital cameras in general, this is in no way killing creativity. If you’re reading this on DPS then you are someone who wants to learn and improve your photography skills. And that’s my point;

Even though the masses might be churning out average images that don’t inspire, and far more of them today than just 20 years ago, this in no way stops someone who sees photography as an art form from creating beautiful, inspiring art.

What this mass use of the medium has done is only highlight what was already there; That the masses, on average, are average at any given art form.

This is nothing new, but it is made far more obvious because of the ability to share any image with the online world as a whole at any point in time. For instance, most of us are average, or below average in my case, drawers or sketch artists. It’s only because drawings are not as easy to be shared over the internet as a photograph that this fact is not brought to our attention. If every pencil had built-in wifi and out sketches were posted online in real-time, we’d have sketch artists complaining about the “deluge of average” instead of photographers.

To use an analogy, it would be like saying that because cars are mass-produced and, to a certain degree, look the same, that there are no more extraordinary cars. No more creativity in the automobile industry. But that is blatantly false when a look is given to manufacturers like Ferrari, Bugotti, Tesla, Lambroghini and others. Not only that, right now, some place on this planet, there is a man or woman in their home garage who is crafting a custom car unlike any you have seen.

Or better yet, look at motorcycles. Not only can I not really tell one street rocket from another, or one Harley Davidson from another, there are major production TV shows dedicated to the art of building beautiful, creative street machines.

I see a lot of cars and motorcycles while driving the highways around LA. A lot. And I can’t tell you how many Toyota Camrys or Chevy Cruzes I have seen. But any time a custom motorcycle goes by or any time I spot a barely-legal, wedge shaped ‘super car’…those moments turn my head and drop my jaw.

And for you, the learning photographer (a group that will always include me as well), that is your lofty goal. Not to be mired in the hoopla that prices paid for images are dropping through the floor and creativity is therefor dead (the business side of photography in the digital age is another discussion altogether). Your goal is to create head turning art.

If you want to rise above the sheer volume of average photos and get your photography noticed (either for profit or vanity or just to show the world how beautiful or scary it is) you need to be creative and create something worth noticing.

In the end, realize those people telling you creativity is dead and that photography is dead are spending time, like me right now, at a keyboard NOT creating beautiful images that inspire and rise above the din of mediocrity. They are only extolling their opinion about their single-person viewpoint of a huge art form and that things aren’t the way they use to be or how the author wants them to be.

You need no one’s permission to be creative or to produce stunning art. Ignore opinions that tell you creativity in any art form is dead. They are just opinions.

Need some inspiration? Click here and here and here and here and here and here.

Grab your camera, any camera, and go create.

Post originally from: Digital Photography Tips.

Check out our more Photography Tips at Photography Tips for Beginners, Portrait Photography Tips and Wedding Photography Tips.

Ignore The Naysayers. Go Create Stunning Images


Digital Photography School

 
Comments Off on Ignore The Naysayers. Go Create Stunning Images

Posted in Photography

 

Bing Search Engine – Return More Desirable Search Results by Adding Ignore Words

02 Sep

Tired of web pages containing particular words or phrases appearing in a Bing search? Create search queries that ignore them.

When performing searches with Bing involving words or phrases that have multiple meanings, you might wish to prevent the results from including certain types of pages. Perhaps a word or phrase has a popular meaning but you want pages related to the alternate one.

Another example is searching for a word or phrase that matches the name of a TV show, sports team, movie, etc. These popular culture references may result in pages in which you have no interest. For example, searching for “bones” may show results relating to the TV show, restaurants, a movie, or other non-anatomical subjects….

Read more at MalekTips.
New Computer and Technology Help and Tips – MalekTips.Com

 
Comments Off on Bing Search Engine – Return More Desirable Search Results by Adding Ignore Words

Posted in Technology

 

Bing Search Engine – Return More Desirable Search Results by Adding Ignore Words

31 Aug

Tired of web pages containing particular words or phrases appearing in a Bing search? Create search queries that ignore them.

When performing searches with Bing involving words or phrases that have multiple meanings, you might wish to prevent the results from including certain types of pages. Perhaps a word or phrase has a popular meaning but you want pages related to the alternate one.

Another example is searching for a word or phrase that matches the name of a TV show, sports team, movie, etc. These popular culture references may result in pages in which you have no interest. For example, searching for “bones” may show results relating to the TV show, restaurants, a movie, or other non-anatomical subjects….

Read more at MalekTips.
New Computer and Technology Help and Tips – MalekTips.Com

 
Comments Off on Bing Search Engine – Return More Desirable Search Results by Adding Ignore Words

Posted in Technology