Beginner Day course for newbie?

[Ellie Jones]

I'm a bit late getting back but here's my low down on my day...

It was absolutely brilliant.....

I was the only one on the day, so had the advantage of 2 pro's, but max size is 2 people.

Even though the course was actually a scenic one, we kinda of did more wildlife and used my 150-600mm lens quite a bit, as well as learning the basic techniques of landscape photography, the provide a laminated handout, of the different aspects of the course/ camera settings etc, which is well written and I found a lot easier to understand than a lot of information I've found on the internet.

I was actually surprised to find that I learnt a lot more than I anticipated and the improvement I've made with my technique, about the only thing I do in lightroom now, is perhaps a crop and that's about it, most photo's I take now, don't need any work done to them to make improvements.... And I haven't touched Auto since the course...

So I probably gained more from that one day, than the 5 x 2 hour colleague course offered at my local college.

Oh, and I've already booked again, a day out photography Stag Rutting...

 

[Nostromo]

You all had me stumped, when you started going on about "instagram".

 

[Tringa]

I'm a bit late getting back but here's my low down on my day...

It was absolutely brilliant.....

I was the only one on the day, so had the advantage of 2 pro's, but max size is 2 people.

Even though the course was actually a scenic one, we kinda of did more wildlife and used my 150-600mm lens quite a bit, as well as learning the basic techniques of landscape photography, the provide a laminated handout, of the different aspects of the course/ camera settings etc, which is well written and I found a lot easier to understand than a lot of information I've found on the internet.

I was actually surprised to find that I learnt a lot more than I anticipated and the improvement I've made with my technique, about the only thing I do in lightroom now, is perhaps a crop and that's about it, most photo's I take now, don't need any work done to them to make improvements.... And I haven't touched Auto since the course...

So I probably gained more from that one day, than the 5 x 2 hour colleague course offered at my local college.

Oh, and I've already booked again, a day out photography Stag Rutting...

Glad you liked your course. Always good to hear a positive result.

Dave

 

[DG Phototraining]

I'm with Dave DGP. We have a multitude of exposure options and modes, and they all have their very valuable uses, but in reality what I invariably use to determine final exposure is blinkies (highlight over-exposure warning that flashes black/white on the LCD image). It's all you need, and mostly it's all that I use. It is the most reliable guide to what you've actually got on the sensor, very easy to read in an instant, and once you get to know where the limits of your particular camera and processing regime lie (with a couple of simple tests*) it is extremely accurate and a lot more reliable than anything else.

Bryan Peterson's Understanding Exposure book was originally written for film and even the latest edition is very poor on digital. Blinkies and the histogram are gifts from the Gods of Exposure, yet he dismisses them in a single sentence! And then tells everyone to set white balance to Shade so all our pictures come out nice and warm looking

*Blinkies show what parts of the image are either over-exposed (blown and unrecoverable) or are on the brink of blowing. In practise, if you shoot Raw, most cameras will have at least one stop of headroom above the point where blinkies just begin to flash, and for optimum exposure and dynamic range it's important to know just how much headroom there is. Bear in mind that blinkies (and the histogram) are generated off a JPEG processed in-camera and the camera settings (Picture Styles in Canon parlance) have some influence on that, mainly the Contrast value, so it's best to stick to one Picture Style.

Take a picture and adjust exposure until blinkies are just flashing over some areas, note those areas, then reduce exposure by 1/3rd stop. Now take a series of pictures keeping the framing identical (tripod is good) increasing exposure by 1/3rd stop each time, say half a dozen images. In post-processing, check which image first shows as actually blown in those areas and now you know where you are

Edit: sorry to go on, but if you use blinkies in this way, then you will almost always find that that there is some small area of the image that shows as blown - maybe a bit of sky, or specula highlights (reflections of the light source/sun). This is unavoidable, no matter what exposure setting method you use, so you have to make a decision, a judgement call. If these areas are important, such as bright reflections off someone's face and forehead, then adjust exposure to stop them blinking. But if they're not important, say a few bright reflections off white paintwork, then let them blow.

- we're like choristers singing off the same song-sheet

I often get people who worship their histogram and haven't considered blinkies, it usually takes me about 5 mins to get them loving blinkies and rarely referring to the histogram lol

For Weddings, I usually aim for the merest hint of blinkies on the Bride's (if white) dress on her chest area = sorted

Dave

 

[Phil V]

- we're like choristers singing off the same song-sheet

I often get people who worship their histogram and haven't considered blinkies, it usually takes me about 5 mins to get them loving blinkies and rarely referring to the histogram lol

For Weddings, I usually aim for the merest hint of blinkies on the Bride's (if white) dress on her chest area = sorted

Dave

This has troubled me for a couple of years now. Couldn't this be the default metering point for all cameras? The current algorythms are hideously complex and getting more so, wouldn't an ETTR trigger make life simpler for all RAW shooters?

 

[DG Phototraining]

This has troubled me for a couple of years now. Couldn't this be the default metering point for all cameras? The current algorythms are hideously complex and getting more so, wouldn't an ETTR trigger make life simpler for all RAW shooters?

Unquestionably it would

Almost negates looking at what the meter says in some ways

Blinkies RULE

Dave

 

[HoppyUK]

- we're like choristers singing off the same song-sheet

I often get people who worship their histogram and haven't considered blinkies, it usually takes me about 5 mins to get them loving blinkies and rarely referring to the histogram lol

For Weddings, I usually aim for the merest hint of blinkies on the Bride's (if white) dress on her chest area = sorted

Dave

It's really easy isn't it! That's exactly how I work, and with a little experience - it's a confidence thing really - if there are blinkies showing on part of the bride's dress (assuming it's white LOL) you know that it'll all be within the headroom without any further checking, that exposure has been optimised and there will also be maximum detail in the groom's dark suit

I might take a peek at a few faces too, foreheads and cheeks, and I usually double-check the histogram too. If there's a huge lump on the left with important stuff in it, I might push the blinkies and exposure a bit further, but there's an inevitable trade-off there, whatever exposure setting method you use.

This has troubled me for a couple of years now. Couldn't this be the default metering point for all cameras? The current algorythms are hideously complex and getting more so, wouldn't an ETTR trigger make life simpler for all RAW shooters?

I think this would be really difficult. This is basically ETTR technique to maximise shadow detail and minimise noise, and that only applies to shooting Raw. There is no blinkies headroom with in-camera JPEGs.

You also need to make a judgement call on how much extra exposure to give, and for me that varies between zero with a difficult subject and maybe 2-3 stops with a very benign one having very few highlights. In other words, the camera would need a smart algorithm and the problem with those is while they're 90% reliable, the other 10% tend to be a long way out.

And now we have ISO-invariant sensors, there's an opposite technique - ETTL, Expose To The Left of the histogram, for max dynamic range, including the highlight detail that ETTR generally lets blow Basically you deliberately under-expose to retain maximum highlight detail, maybe a sunset, then do a big shadows lift in post processing. With traditional sensors, that has always been a no-go because of excessive noise, but ISO-invariant sensors have quite extraordinary potential there.

Edit: I think there is more to come on this ISO-invariant thing, which in practical terms allows you to use the massive high ISO performance of the latest sensors all the time, at low ISO with enormous dynamic range We could have sensors with variable ISOs at pixel level. It will certainly change the way we go about the whole business of exposure setting. Meanwhile, I'd like to see user-adjustable blinkies, and zebras that are already user-adjustable. That would allow you to peg the most important tones very accurately.

On the other hand, maybe you can have too much of a good thing. Do we really need this level of accuracy? I use a Canon 5D2 mostly, state of the art just a few years ago, now old hat in terms of sensor development, yet I have no problems with exposure setting and dynamic range issues. I just try to make best use of what I've got, and all's good

 

[DG Phototraining]

maybe you can have too much of a good thing.

Never

If & when 'exposure' isn't an issue any more, it'll free everyone up to be more creative on composition and reacting to what's happening in a split second without worrying about capture issues

Dave

 

[Nod]

But could it end up with every shot looking like (actually, I suppose it actually WOULD be!!!) extreme HDR?

 

[Gyles]

DK did quite a decent book.

Digital Photography - Complete Course. ISBN 978-0-2411-8609-1

In the days of film you had 3 basic settings film speed, aperture and shutter speed. How usually had a built in light meter.

Swap film speed for ISO and these same basic functions are all still there. Trouble is with digital cameras they have menu after menu of things you can adjust. You just have see through it all.

A good starting point in my opinion would be to learn to shoot in aperture priority the achieve the depth of field you desire.


Say set camera to AP mode.

Set WB to cloudy, works in most situations and can easily be corrected PP.

Set metering to to centre weighted.

Set focus to a single centre point.

Set ISO at 400.

Then photograph a fixed subject, stick to a focal length of about 35-50mm use the prefocus on your subject before reframing. Try finding a large object car/building etc that has details in front and behind it.

Start with your widest aperture preferably using a tripod, then take a series of shots decreasing the aperture each time. Note the shutter speed.

(If you don't have a tripod place your camera on something solid and use the self timer)

Then try this again with a portrait or close up then a landscape.

Then view your image's on your PC and you'll see what controlling aperture does to DOF and the overall look of your images.

 

[DG Phototraining]

Say set camera to AP mode.

Set WB to cloudy, works in most situations and can easily be corrected PP.

Set metering to to centre weighted.

Set focus to a single centre point.

Set ISO at 400.

Then photograph a fixed subject, stick to a focal length of about 35-50mm use the prefocus on your subject before reframing

I've emboldened the bits of that I disagree with

Leave WB on auto if shooting in raw, the camera will usually give a good/usable approximation

Centre weighted is old tech and nothing like as useful as Matrix; but you also need to use 'blinkies' and know what that means and when its good/not so good

Centre point is great if shooting in the dark or that's where your subject is, otherwise use a focus point on the point you want to focus on - that is why they give you so many after all

Set ISO at whatever is the lowest you can sensibly use, just saying 400 is silly

Prefocus and framing has its place, but not really in a test like you're suggesting


What you have highlighted is the problem with getting good advice as the OP now has two people advising him who fundamentally disagree - tricky isn't it lol

Dave

 

[Gyles]

I've emboldened the bits of that I disagree with

Leave WB on auto if shooting in raw, the camera will usually give a good/usable approximation

Centre weighted is old tech and nothing like as useful as Matrix; but you also need to use 'blinkies' and know what that means and when its good/not so good

Centre point is great if shooting in the dark or that's where your subject is, otherwise use a focus point on the point you want to focus on - that is why they give you so many after all

Set ISO at whatever is the lowest you can sensibly use, just saying 400 is silly

Prefocus and framing has its place, but not really in a test like you're suggesting


What you have highlighted is the problem with getting good advice as the OP now has two people advising him who fundamentally disagree - tricky isn't it lol

Dave

Not a disagreement more a difference of opinion. There's many ways to learn, I was just trying to do away with many of the auto features. The OP could just shoot on auto and get some great results. IMHO this is a good starting point to learn photography and not be told the best way to achieve good shots.

Centre point focusing ......you can find that point every time.

ISO 400 is reasonable starting point. Later if the OP wants to he can adjust this both up and down to see the effect it would have on shutter speed. Set at its lowest you have no where to go.

Centre weighted gives the OP the opertunity to meter off his subject, then perhaps encourage him to start asking about blown highlights and shadows.

I'm trying to replicate the basic film camera, keeping it simple. Yes the results won't be perfect but shot by shot the OP can see the differences changing the aperture.

If things aren't to his liking he needs to understand why he is making changes and the effect they have.