Showing posts with label learning photography. Show all posts
Showing posts with label learning photography. Show all posts

Why buying a DSLR body is probably a mistake.

Ok, help me help you not waste your money, and take better pictures. A bit of related entertainment first, then a story.



We all know one of those guys :)  Anyway, before getting to the story, a brief but necessary reminder. If you read that blog, you know what's my approach: I like photography because I like pictures. The process of taking them, looking at them, and hearing people telling me they feel something special when looking at them, relationship with the subject (I mostly do portraits) etc. A good image is a subject in a given light, an effort to put yourself in the right place, and that moment when your imagination meets the situation, and bam ! You just took a great shot. Cameras are accessories to all of that, they can be sexy, do amazing stuff, but they are not what matters. I still use a Nikon FE, a Mamiya RZ most of the time, it does the job great, interfering little in that above described process, and those are decades old cameras. I have this blog for many reasons, one of them being education of customers, so that they make more sense of their camera purchase, and save money to go on a trip where they can actually take pictures :)

But let's move ahead with the story. Important note, this is addressing mostly the casual shooter, not so much the advanced and savvy photographer...although....well I'll let you judge.

I was on a vacation in Tuscani (that's a lovely region of Italy), and some must-see cities are of course suffering a much expected tourists infestation. Can't blame them, I am one of them.
So it's been about 10 years since the first amateurs have been shooting around with DSLR cameras. You would also expect some sort of correlation between ownership of an DSLR system, income and intellectual abilities. You would expect that someone who spends 1k to 5k in a camera system would at least read the manual, or actually link the value of the product to their investment in learning how to use it, to their passion in the matter. Well it seems like it isn't the case. About 50% of all DSLR users I saw during my break were using the kit zoom, in full auto, with the flash blazing at every picture.

I just love that scene, always the same:
  1. holding the camera like a pro, with confidence, telling the wife how to pose, moving like a reporter. 
  2. hitting the shutter and....ZAAAAAP ! flash pops up and goes on.
  3. looking at the camera like a kitten who just got surprised by a jumping object, thinking "why did the flash go off? Was it my even from my camera?"

I would get it if this is your first DSLR, or your very first camera, and you just got it before the trip; but there's no way that's the case at this scale. I see around me people owning SLRs for years and still incapable of using more that 10% of the camera's capabilities. Not that they are stupid, they are just kinda lazy, or mostly they bought it for the wrong reasons and don't actually want those features. It take 10 min on Google to find a few good posts on how to play with depth of field, pick the lenses that you really need, or use manual and semi manual features to be in control of your images. It takes 1 hour to go thru them with your camera in your hand. That doesn't seem like much when you just spent 2 grands. I really believe SLRs offer functions that, if you don't need them, are a burden more than anything. I'll get to that later.

On the other hand, it is true that manufacturers did everything they could to make you want one for all the wrong reasons. Claiming that you'll take better pictures, stimulating that awful pixel peeping habit that makes you want to take pictures of newspapers to see how sharp it remains when you zoom in, and much more in that same vein.

So here we are, I've seen hundreds of tourists with a DSLR walking the streets, a vast majority having no clue what to do with it. It is even worst of a money waste when you realize that a significant proportion among those have upgraded from a good compact, or an older yet very capable SLR. Why? No seriously why upgrading to a semi-pro or pro piece of gear if 1- you don't want to learn how it works 2- since you were not using 25% of you previous camera's abilities, your limitations surely don't come from the gear in the first place.

What happens is the following. It'll sound mean, but I know that process because well... I've done it too. So take it as shared wisdom from past experiences:
  • We love taking images, it's just cool, a tad bit magic, fun and nice for memories. In other words, we'll have to get a camera at some point.
  • We start looking at cameras, and if we have a little cash sleeping at the bank, we quickly get excited by the nicer ones. 
  • We start thinking that those features are necessary. Technical terms with letters and numbers, we barely understand what they mean (or not at all), but we have our mind made up: we need ISO 25600 and 1/16 000 speed and cross matrix alpha 34 sensor BS3000.
  • Camera manufacturers need you to replace equipment every 2 years max. If you realize a good camera can do 10 years or even much more, they are screwed. They'll do everything they can to convince you that the camera makes the picture. And you kinda want to hear that, you are a bit bored with life lately, so you want to get excited about a new product, and suddenly your old camera is full of flaws, or even broken (thank you kitty / dog / 1yo baby, you come in handy on this).
  • It's done, you ordered a expensive DSLR. It's totally justified because you've always loved photography (as the zero photo exhibits you've ever been to, or the absence of any photos of your walls can attest). You secretly want people to see you as a cool arty guy who'll go read Hemingway in a dodgy bar after capturing a few streets moments (mostly homeless dudes).
Rings a bell? I know, I'm sorry :)

So what's my point? Indeed I won't just make you feel bad about your purchase for no reason, that'd just be sadistic. I want to make you aware that whatever camera you own, unless it's a very entry level compact or very first generation digital, you probably have a huge margin for improvement without spending a dime, and you can achieve that by learning how to use it.

You have an DSLR, you want a newer one? 
You probably could do a lot by learning how to use yours, and at best get a lens that corresponds to your needs. A premium SLR does nothing better in regards to image quality. Lenses do. A premium SLR is weather sealed, super fast, includes productivity features for pros....but try taking the same pictures in the same conditions, it'll 99% similar results. Going Nikon D90 from years ago to a D600 will make no difference whatsoever, especially if you never shoot in anything else that P or full auto modes. If you already master you DSLR, what you probably need is better lenses. If not, you need to open the manual.

You have a compact and you want an SLR? 
What do you use it for? Vacation pictures? Then no you don't want an SLR. It's bulky & cumbersome, consumes batteries and memory cards like crazy, requires its own backpack. I only own cameras that I chose for a single purpose: professional quality for a specific purpose. SLRs are for people shooting war, lions, sports on the side of a football pitch. I got a DSLR because I owned premium prime lenses from old Nikon 35mm cameras, but if Nikon had been making a compact full frame body, I'd have bought that over an SLR a million times. 

So when do you probably really need a new camera as a casual user?
  • Yours is so old that the sensor is crap over 400 iso. For casual use, being able to shoot in low light is pretty nice: restaurant pics, children running inside the house etc. It's a must have for a digital camera. Nowadays, most compacts are very clean up until 3200 iso and sometimes even 6400.
  • It's so old that the shutter react 1 second after you press it. That sucks, get a modern compact or mirror-less. You just can't keep missing the moment.
  • You have a compact with a built in zoom, and you really love shooting portraits. You then need a prime fast lens. In that case, you probably should look into good mirror-less systems, not in SLRs. Sony Nex, Fuji X-whatever and else are a better bet. The fact that they are small is a blessing, image quality is the same as a non full frame DSLR (try proving me wrong on this, I'll quizz you on identical shots taken with both, you'll be wrong 50% of the time).
  • You have a non-full frame SLR that took more that 100 000 frames. You should start budgeting for a new one, it might start dying soon. Or you might want to pick a mirror-less if you realized an SLR is not really what you needed.
In any other case, you probably should be doing this instead of buying an SLR body:
  • Ask yourself if there is a gap between the kind of pictures you do, and the kind of pictures that you'd like to be able to take. If yes, figure out why. It's very likely to be a matter of framing, composition, depth of field. All of this can be learned in 1 hour, even on this blog !
  • Once you've done that, if you realize that your camera doesn't allow those manipulations, you might want to consider replacing it. In that case, and remember I assume you are a casual shooter, I strongly recommend you pick an advanced compact or mirror-less over a DSLR. Keep one thing in mind: manufacturers also realized that DSLR are not what people really need. They'll keep selling them for as long as the can, so that you commit to a system with expensive lenses, but they are also rushing on producing premium compact and mirror-less systems. Those often include full auto options that allow some pretty cool stuff, probably what you really want as a casual shooter.
Finally, you'll never look like an idiot anymore with your cheap kit lens (since the cost of the SLR body consumed your entire budget) and your flash popping up in a sunny Italian summer day. You might not be excited by pictures as much as I am, but surely you'd like to honor your family and friend with better images, and avoid wasting your money.





DSLRs can be the worst enemy of an apprentice photographer.

Ooooh the troll title ! Yes, but I do have a solid point. Keep on reading :)

I started photography with a "premium compact", a Olympus C5050. It was slow, and rather automated. Then I got a job, and a bit of money. I went for what was appealing: a DSLR. Wooow, big and all technological, people were impressed, grrrr... That did make me happy back in the days. However, I felt very limited. I was under the impression photoshop allowed me more creativity than the camera itself. I actually believe the very nature of DSLRs lead people to actually work in photoshop instead of working on the camera. 

They, I got a Mamiya RZ67. Full manual film camera. Not even a light meter...I actually wonder what the batteries are for? And then only I learned how to master a camera. Proper photography came after. Why is that? DSLRs can be dangerous for someone who intends to learn photography. They trick you into doing all the wrong things. A Jedi Master would tell you they push you to the dark side, to easier, more appealing choices. 

1st Danger with DSLRs
Automation. You can go all manual with a DSLR, but how many of you shoot in full manual mode with spot metering? I bet less than 5%, ballpark figure. Well if you have never done it, you can't say you master your camera. You can't say you understand exposure, depth of field or any lever that allow you control of your creative approach. A DSLR makes choice based on a software. If you let it do it, what is the part of you in the picture you create? There are so many things to influence when shooting. Good photographers intend the result they obtain. They set up the camera the right way, shoot a few rolls of 10 shots each only and get 50% great shots or more on a total of 30 images. I don't know one DSLR only user who can claim such results. The big problem is: you have no constraint. You can just shoot tons, photoshop what can be, throw away the rest.  It takes me to my second point.

You surely won't get that ouf of a DSLR unless you force it into doing it. 


2nd Danger with DSLRs
Digital = shoot as much as you want. As said previously, without constraint, you have very low expectations. Know that when you show a portfolio to an editor or a gallery, you come with maximum 20 shots. All of them need to be equally good, you are only as good as your worst picture. When I started shooting film with 10 shots on each roll, I realize each picture was costing me about 1$. That makes you think twice about what you shoot ! You start framing, paying attention to details, exposing better etc. 

3rd  Danger with DSLRs
Digital sensors. Yes, they make it cheap to shoot. Yes they allow nice post processing. Yes they are astonishing in low light. However they have one massive weakness: dynamic range is rubbish. It means they are poorly capable of rendering an image that has very high contrast, with bright and dark zones. It also is so neutral color-wise that it naturally comes out boring. Film has a personality, it doesn't allow much margin but it surely doesn't come out boring. It also has tremendous dynamic range, positive film in particular.

Velvia 50 film: notice how the dark rocks anr bright sky both have great detail no matter how strong the contrast is. 


4nd Danger with DSLRs
Kit lenses. They are rubbish, expect in the case of very premium kits (on full frame cameras mostly). Apart from very specific cases that require flexibility, an actual photographer uses prime lenses only, i.e. lenses that are optimized for one focal length only and have much wider aperture. On larger format cameras, the physics is different, you can get superb depth at F5.6. On a 35mm camera, you need wider aperture to benefit from shorter depth of field, F2.0 or below.


So what should you do to make sure your DSLR doesn't not become the enemy of your photographic evolution?

1st thing to do
Either get a film SLR with no other automation than an aperture priority mode. It costs 100$ (nikon FE or anything equivalent if you have Canon lenses, Minolta or else). However I don't expect many of you will do it, so if you don't want to go thru that, simulate it: buy a 128MB memory card (it should cost about 20 cents now ^^) and go out to shoot only with that card. You'll have so little to shoot with, you'll have to pay attention and be very selective.

Olympus OM1


2nd thing to do
Use your camera with spot metering and aperture priority or full manual mode. At first it will suck. But then only you'll have to learn what does what. How to influence the camera to deliver what you want. You will learn how to control your camera to make it a simple intermediary between the image and your creative intentions.

3nd thing to do
Luckily, newest cameras have an HDR (high dynamic range) mode, use it. I don't mean to push you to do those horrible photoshop HDR effects that make your shots look like a poorly painted clown. I mean use the built in HDR that is supposed to simulate the dynamic range of film. The end result should look totally natural. 

HDR used properly: dark and bright elements show properly. Courtesy of http://www.flickr.com/photos/47550048@N05/

4th thing to do
Don't buy the kit lens. If you really need a versatile lens, get a zoom, but not the kit lens. Get a better one. Appart from that, get 2 primes lenses. It will cost you less than one zoom, and it will allow proper shooting. I recommend a 35mm and an 85mm (full frame). Or just a 50mm. Then play with all the aperture range, and see what it does. 

This cost 120$, you have no excuse. 


5th and most important thing to do in order to become a better photographer.
Make a portfolio, even a virtual one. You might have a blog, a site, a flickr account. When making that portfolio, respect one rule: no more than 20 pictures in total. Keep only the best of the best. If you have only 5 pictures you would qualify as really good, then so be it. Make it 5. Talented photographers might have a 5 series of 12 great shots, but that's after 20 years of careers. 60 shots only... They probably shot hundreds of beautiful images, but they decide to show only the best. The exercise of being very picky is crucial. If your image is close to being great, but is not (focus on the wrong part, disturbing element, exposure not so good), use it as a baseline for an other attempt. Shoot until you have it perfect, then show it.

Check my site, I have many galleries with 5 or 6 shots only. And trust me, I know i'll get rid of a lot over time. I personally have a hard time keeping less. Working on it. 

If you upload all your 400 raw files in flickr every time you shoot, kill yourself. You're a lost cause.


The evolution of tastes & photography

Warning: if you are not in the process of trying to find your artistic self, you might find this post boring. It's not a tutorial, a funny post or a guide of some kind. It's a reflection on evolution of personal tastes in art after watching Jaws 2 in bed (really, that's the end? just like that?).

Wyatt Neumann. What I now consider a great picture.

Still here? Ok. Well I am quite certain you've faced similar evolutions in your life: 

As a kid you only liked French fries, chicken and whatever was super sweet or much expected. You preferred milk to dark chocolate, and being forced to finish your vegetables was among those things that made life suck along with brushing your teeth and visiting that weird uncle. Then you grew up, and those things that felt bitter, tasteless, the same one that grossed you up as a kid started tasting good. 20 years later you prefer asparagus to potato waffles, you like dark chocolate, black coffee. You even have your tequila shots with salt and lemon :) 

An other one: who among you found jazz, classical music or technical progressive metal bands boring as hell. All you liked was a simple binary beat, a catchy melody and a few provocative words because well...gotta show the system you're unique ! Yeah, I did use to think that too. Then one day you're 30, and your fiancĂ©e forces you into a ballet or jazz festival. First you think of begging your way out but since you forgot your 2 years anniversary last week, you're gonna suck this one up. And Oh surprise! you actually find that subtile, pleasant, moving. You start searching the web, borrowing CDs, and as time goes by you develop a more sophisticated sense of "music listening", you hear the bass guitar, you catch more details, value more subtile effects. Then you go back to your teenage years CDs and past the nostalgia, it now sounds...childish. 

You evolve in your appreciation of art, weither you produce or consume art. I also do believe that in both cases, challenging yourself leads to a faster evolution. 

The main challenge for me is to be able to connect an sensation, a impression of what I want to achieve, with the actual end result. It like having that knowledge of how it should feel in the end, but not being able to get it out. Like those dreams when someone talks to you but you can't hear the words. If you don't see what I mean, the rest doesn't concern you. 

Making that connection takes time. It's a painful process. It first takes, in the case of photography, being in control of the tools. How can you connect an inner artistic desire to the final piece if you can't control the intermediary (i.e. the camera)? For this I recommend shooting full manual film. Because it's too expensive to afford screwing up.

When discovered studio lightning. Boring, everyone can do. 
Then I realized photographers like naked ladies. Boring.
Then, you need to get read of every catchy temptation. When I started shooting, a bit of bokeh, a halo of light, and yeeehaaa great picture! Then I started pushing contrast way too much, shooting fences in black and white and I was pretty happy with myself. Yeah, right. The best solution is overdose. Like the first time you ate tons of candy or chocolate to the point that it got you sick. Shoot that crap if you must, do those bad editing, make the mistakes and then, be hard on yourself. It's like a sauna that gets bad influences out of your brain. 

Then shoot what you haven't shot, or if you have, analyse your previous images, try to make it better every time. Even if it means redoing it over and over again with one little detail changed.


Off course the usual diptych period. Less boring but we all overdo it: matching images is a tricky exercise.


First revelation: medium format film. Started exposing better, using every element to compose my image. Better, but still girls in romantic poses.
Try to keep only your 15 best shots. Do the exercise, really. What will come out of that? You'll first pick the 3 obvious ones. Then you'll think "hum...but the next 12 are not that obvious, so really, I only have 3 photographs I'm truly happy with". And it's a good thing, you'r setting expectations to the next level.

You can only evolve properly if you listen to critics. Find critics who matured already, so that you don't have retarded comment from angry internet people. Critics from great photographers will come hard, but hell they will be useful.  Only look at the best of the best, the ultimate images from the greatest and dare to admit the gap between you and them. 

As long as you look into Flickr for comparison, you'll feel great with any picture properly framed and exposed.  No offense FlickR users, I've seen great stuff there too, but admit it: finding raw talent on Flickr it's like searching for a needle in a barn, you gotta stop uploading your entire memory cards.

Shoot tons. Be drastically self critical, get inspired by the best.




Finally, via a mix of mastering the tool (property of film, exposure,) and maturing skills (composition, etc.), I was able of pulling good images that did not include an attractive person of the opposite gender:







Learning photography

I often get that question: how did you learn photography? Usually implying "did you take lessons? Where?"

Well I haven't, I actually haven't looked at an other photographer's work during the first 6 years of me shooting. Not one picture. Now that I come to think about it, I even wonder how I achieved that. Anyway the fact is I had little clue about mastering a camera (the one I had left little room for manual controls anyway), exposure or anything of that kind. A lot was left to randomness. However I did take some of my best shots back then, surely more original than the ones I take now. Why? Probably because I was free of rules and daring a lot more, following some elementary creative instincts.

One of my earliest shots, also one of the most creative in my point of view (shit compact camera)


This is why I want to share that quote from Ken Rockwell (.com for his site, don't be afraid of the poor site design, content is excellent):

"...when you start by trying to master camera, lens, Photoshop and computer jockeying, you never finish. Attempting to master all this before just going out and enjoying taking pictures will prevent you from ever having any time to learn about photography itself. Instead of learning photography, you'll spend a lifetime learning about cameras and computers. This makes lots of money for the people selling you all the new cameras and computers you'll think you need, but never helps you make better pictures."


Yes. I will add an other point to this, also raised by Mr. Rockwell somewhere on his site but we can never repeat it enough: nearly any camera is good enough, getting a much more expensive one just makes things a little easier and simpler, but it certainly doesn't make you a better photographer. 


I am a living example of that: I did professional jobs with my old D80 (a 2006 SLR) and Nikon full frame DSLRs, in normal light conditions with comparable lenses I could never tell which pictures were coming from what camera. I still do studio jobs with the D80 and I still can't see a difference with a D3 picture once on the screen. I even had shots taken with a D80 on bus stop size ads in the street. 


Look at the next 3 shots: one taken with a D80, one with a D300, one with a D700. Can you tell ? (No I won't tell you which one, try to guess in the comments)








Expensive gear is more reliable, tropicalized (rain & dust proof), faster to operate, pre-programable, can shoot better in extrem conditions, but it doesn't make better pictures. It's exactly the same as having a really nice clean well organized tool rack as opposed to a bunch of screw drivers in a shoe box. You'll still be able to built whatever it is you are building, but in one case the experience will be better and less annoying. Pros buy super fancy stuff because they shoot all day, they need to save time, efforts, carry less gear. Also they can expense it, they have insurance on the equipment. 

If you have money, and love the gear, why not getting it. Why not. But I have never met a non pro photographer that gets tons of expensive gear AFTER learning photography. I however know a zillion guys that have the huge Lowepro bag full of big lenses and a full frame DSLR, expensive flashes for "strobist" work (sorry but if you like artificial light work, you buy proper flash units). They walk around street with a 70/300mm on a 5D mkII to take picture of bikes attached to fences. They can't take an original, personal properly composed shot but damn those pixels are sharp ! 
Having lots of good gear often allows the bad photographers to market themselves as pros. I could give you a list of people who charge a lot, brand themselves as recognized photographers, while their work looks like a 5yo discovered photoshop for the first time. 

As opposed to this, I know plenty of pros that still shoot the same old 35mm FM3A or even early digital gear (4MP DSLR) because well, why changing? They do all they want with what they have already and they focus on the pictures. Of course reporters, wildlife photographer will go for the edgy gear, but the fact that many talented guys don't even bother using that kind of equipment means something.

Jan Sholtz is an amazing portrait photographer, here he used Nikon FE2 (30yo film camera)



Steve McCurry is probably the most famous photo reporter alive, most of his major shots were with a 35 film camera.


What about me? I shoot all of my stuff with 5 cameras, here they are ranked from the most used to the least:
  • Mamiya RZ67, 10yo, bought used 900$ with the main portrait lens
  • Nikon FE, 30+ yo, bought used for 109$, I used it with a 50mm 1.2 AIS
  • Nikon F5, 17yo, bought used for 300$ to a war reporter (it's got cool vintage impacts on it) 
  • Mamiya 645 manual focus, 30yo, bought 246$ on Adorama
  • Nikon D80, 5 yo, bought refurbished on Ebay.
  • Olympus C5050z (a good compact from 2002, 5MP, slow but great lens)...ok that makes 6 cameras, but I don't use this one anymore
All my gear could not get me a full frame DSLR if I was to sell it. However for photography, you do need light, so I bought a set of Elinchrom 400W studio strobes, so I have proper light when shooting inside. I was dumb enough to buy a SB600 flash because I wanted to save bucks on light, I haven't used it in years. 

The next three shots have been taken with a fully manual, old and used  RZ67:







Now that you feel bad about your impulse to buy better gear all the time, let's get back to our original point: learning photography. 

Talent
As a famous editor once said, it's not because you've done the best schools in NYC that you are any good. Unfortunately most wannabe photographers will end up flipping burgers or doing any other job they wish they didn't need. It's like gravity, you have talent (and a bit of luck), or you don't. I would always recommend you teach yourself by trying things as they come to your mind. You'll quickly figure out if you have any talent by being honest with yourself. Keep in mind that it's a process, it takes time, it's iterative. Do it for a while and you'll see. Have a camera with you as often as possible, challenge yourself to try different angles, shoot a lot, try things on silly intuitions, avoid courses at all cost.

Done? Ok so you should have figured out if you have talent or not. If yes, keep ignoring everything until you've matured your own art to the point that you can't find creativity anymore. Then you are probably ready for sourcing externally.

You realize that you are, let's say, limited talent wise. Keep trying. You might be wrong. But if you really are unable to avoid the same mistakes over and over again, it might be worth getting a few basics right. I insist, just a few basics, and then see how it goes from there. Don't let anyone teach you how exactly you should shoot, how a good picture looks like or not. There is no such thing. 

An image I personally like a lot although it goes against many "rules"

You can have a look at my shooting tips for portraits section. I try to give away some essential yet elementary tips there. It covers composition, exposure and much more. For landscape I am no good advice, but I invite you to check those links out for general photography:
Otherwise, you best friend is and will always be Google. For inspiration, check this link it's full of very talented photographers to get stimulated by.


Long story short, my tips: 
  1. A photographer is someone who...takes pictures. So go do that, only way to improve.
  2. Take the picture the way you should in the first place, don't do it afterwards in photoshop
  3. Force yourself not to redo the same thing that worked before
  4. At the beginning, put the camera in full auto, just work on the subject, your angle to it, your position towards light. And shoot. Approach the same subject in different way, dig for the great shot.
  5. Flickr is full of shit. Don't post half your memory card and get fake confidence from blind people lamely flattering you every time there is a bit of bokeh, a sunset or a hot girl. You will get addicted to this, and never challenge yourself. 
  6. In line with point 5: only constructive criticism will be useful. Also keep in mind that it's art, so one might not like something you adore, it doesn't matter. You'll think about it, question yourself, mature. It's always good. 
  7. Avoid  hanging out with photographers that are just masturbating on gear. It will pollute your creative mind.
  8. Buy a vintage camera, it will make you respect the crafting and enjoy better :)