We did Programme as a camera setting back last November, when an alarming number of members were convinced that Elephants were a European phenomena (you had to be there), possibly confusing them (the pachiderms) with Mammoths, possibly from remembering seeing them at the zoo. This meeting it was the turn of the rest of the dial and no such confusion reigned thanks to the scholarly efforts of Chris Harvey, Gerry Painter, Steve Hallam, Eddie House and Simon Caplan. Between them they had manipulation of the exposure triangle well and truly nailed.
And if we nail the exposure triangle we have the control of light within our grasp. The other thing we need to have control of is what is acceptably sharp in the picture, a function of lens aperture and shutter speed moderated by the selected ISO setting. With these two things nailed in under ten minutes we are a photographer! Our position in the Point and Shoot Pantheon is but a matter of time!
Ah but …. these are the mechanical issues of image capture. Often photographers are as interested in the settings a frame was taken at as the content and whereas they are the key mechanical elements in capturing the image we are viewing they are actually a long, long way down the list of priorities in making a good, bad or outstanding one.
Unless our job is making, marketing and or selling cameras for a living.
The reasons are thus: to plagiarise that image you have to be in the same place, at the same angle, in the same light, focused in the same manner, with the same connection to the same elements within the frame, and using the same size sensor. Even then all you have done is copy. The only thing worth copying is the look and that can be as much about post processing as image capture these days. The valid reason for copying a look is to learn about photography by applying it to other opportunities. The camera settings represent one choice from a multiplicity of options to arrive at the same amount of light captured.
Let’s put it this way: ISO 100, F8, at 1/125th second gathers as much light as ISO 400, F11, at 1/250th of a second, gathers as much light as ISO 1600, F4, at 1/8000th of a second gathers as much light as ISO 200, F32 at 1/15th second. What alters is the depth of field and the relative degree of that in these examples would depend on sensor/film size. This other variable is why we refer to crop factors compared to the old film size “full frame” 35mm standard (so that those of us set in our ways can get a handle on the perspective generated by a given focal length) and perspective is relative, he wrote with entirely deliberate ambiguity.
As we have been plugging the last few weeks rather heavily – and in every blog published for the club, regardless of author – the issue of absolute prime importance is composition. Yes we have to get the mechanicals “right” for the image we have visualised but that will not arrest the attention of our viewer nearly as much as the arrangement of the elements in the frame. The legendary crime/street photographer Weegee, coined the phrase “F8 and be there” when asked what was the secret to success in his photography. Weege used a Speed Graphic 4 x 5 inch camera and a flash bulb for illumination. The point is, know our equipment and how it gets us the results we visualised. To be fare some people ascribe the quote to Robert Kappa but the point remains the same. Being there means we get the chance to get the picture the f stop is only of relevance If you have the camera with you.
Now, we can argue what being there actually implies. and the list would probably be quite lengthy. Most photography to do lists seem to end up that way. Some people even write books about it. Reading photography books is a very good idea, but putting the ideas we draw from them to use is even more productive. Knowing what camera settings other people use can be informative, knowing the performance limitations of our own camera gives us the confidence to experiment. In fact, it could be argued, there are two sorts of photographers who are happy about using Auto/Programme settings. Those who are just starting out and those who are confident enough in their use of the camera to know what it is going to do and when and under what conditions we might have to over ride or compensate. And that leaves us to concentrate on visualisation and composition, which is where the art is coming from.
Most photographers, however, set their cameras to aperture priority and leave them there to control the depth of field. Which is fine. So is shutter priority to control blur. So is manual to control everything, though as a permanent setting does rather slow things down – which can be the point. Auto/Programme is fine. Find one that works for you and use the others to play to their strengths.
We have had Round 4 of the ROC (see website for results) and a presentation by the Dream Team which both show what you can do with a bit of application – and a lot of planning. So, is there a magic formula to improving as a photographer?
The simple answer is “No”. Anybody trying to sell you an alternative is peddling snake oil and the likelihood of success is about the same, though that wouldn’t stop them claiming any advances as proof positive.
The “Through hard work” answer is a partial truth, there is no denying that application is part of it, but a Protestant Work Ethic alone isn’t going to affect the desired outcome. After all if you just do what you have always done, you are going to get what you have always got, as someone, maybe Henry Ford, or was it Mark Twain? Could have been Albert Einstein, or somebody else, once said. And there is truth in it. But not the whole truth.
Direction comes into it. “If you don’t know where you’re going, you’ll wind up somewhere else”. That was Yogi Berra, and yes we’ve used it before. Direction and hard work, we are starting to get somewhere. The right direction and hard work. The work might be hard but it doesn’t have to be unenjoyable. Rewarding, directed, hard work. The reward and how hard we work for it are linked are for sure. Nothing quite gives us a lift as an image that comes out as we saw it.
None of this, otherwise sound, advice gives us a point to start from. Again there is an obvious but not very helpful answer to this. We can only start from where we are. “I wouldn’t be starting from here” said the eponymous Irishman when asked for directions, and I know what he meant. The first job, then, is to decide where we are.
And this involves looking, but looking with a purpose, looking critically at what we are doing and finding some photographers whose work we admire and practising (here’s a start if you need one, but it is just a start) what we like in their photo’s. Join sites like Flickr (the club has its own page, put some contributions up) or 500px where you can build galleries of your own favourites and try doing your own versions of them. Keep experimenting around a theme and you will start to see some improvements as long as you apply a critical eye to the results.
If we want a starting point then we could do worse than take Robert Capa’s dictum that “If your photograph isn’t good enough then you aren’t close enough”. A photograph tells one story well and cropping in on the essential detail leaves less room for confusion. It doesn’t matter whether you zoom with your lens or zoom with your feet (there are differences but they are subtle, real but not really for today’s argument, and all to do with perspective) but it can have an effect, will have an effect.
We are aiming to tell a story with a single detail. When we are looking at our scene through our viewfinder our mission is to find the detail that makes a difference. That can be a look, the curve of a line, the repetition of pattern, a contrast in colours, or something else. There will have been a something though, and that something is the thing that caught our attention. This is when working the scene comes into its own. This works whether we set out to take a particular picture or are just wandering through the landscape looking for inspiration. Once we find the something, the key, we can use it to unlock the potential in something that has taken our attention.
Or as Aristotle sort of put it, we start seeing when we stop looking. Technically it is known as Inattentional Blindness, and happens when we exceed the processing speed and capacity of our brains. We can use this to our own advantage by letting go of putting everything into context and just following the things that catch our attention (paying due consideration to our own and others Health and Safety of course). Basically our brain is trying to tell us something, so shut up and listen.
And the best camera settings for that? Three options. The camera decides, you decide or something in the middle. Most photographers go for something in the middle. Essentially we are playing with the exposure triangle and the notion that the best that our camera will produce is a combination of shutter speed, aperture and ISO according to the prevailing light conditions. You deciding is full manual. This is a preference, rarely a necessity, but it is worth learning because it teaches you about how your camera captures light and the worth of capturing light and shadow.
The other two options are let the camera decide, “P” or “Auto”, or something in between, shutter priority, aperture priority, exposure compensation. Full on auto will get you an acceptable picture most of the time, after all camera companies spend an awful lot of money on researching these things and writing algorithms to match. But it can be fooled. The in between range from scene selection where you alter the elements of the exposure triangle by selecting the symbol closest to the conditions you are shooting in, to setting the importance of the aperture or shutter relative to the ISO you are using. Control is what you are opting for or out of in various degrees. Most “Serious” photographers seem to shoot in aperture priority if that is any guide because that gives the most direct control over depth of field without having to fiddle with the other two sides of the triangle.
There is no right side, there are preferred sides there are sides that make certain situations easier. The fact is that, as a hobby, we have the luxury of having the time to play, experiment and fail a lot on our way to getting better. Joining a Photography club or an active photography interest group is part of that.
N E X T M E E T I N G
1st June 2017 19:30 – Guest Speaker: Sue Winkworth: “On The Road To Mandalay.”
(Deadline for John Hankin and Stan Scantlebury shield entries)
Last meeting and we were on an away day in Queens Square where we were joined by the Filton Orphans Scooter Club for a 1970s themed photoshoot. Huge club thanks to Myk Garton for organising this, it was a good evening enjoyed by everyone I talked to and an equally big thank you to the Filton Orphans for providing some magnificent props. Megan Gearing, Kelly Wolf Rogers and Paul Walker were our models.
Given the colour of the buildings and the fact that we were shooting into that period of the evening when the light turns more blue, I decided to shoot with the white balance set to shade. This warms the general look of the image (more than cloudy, see below) and I think worked well. I remember having a conversation with a photographer a couple of years ago, before I got into digital myself, and he reckoned that shooting with the white balance set to cloudy was the best setting for his photography. Basically he had his camera permanently set on that because he likes/liked the effect. He is not alone in this. Maybe a little extreme for my taste, all the time, but I can certainly see that there are occasions when it makes a strong case. There is an important thing to take into consideration here, because what we are talking about is the final look of the image and the idea that there is a correct aesthetic for the colour rendition of subjects within an image, when there is in fact only a set of choices. Accurate is quite often a word that is thrown around when talking about rendering an image as an exact a record of an object in the real world. In the camera it becomes a series of electronic artifacts, that represent an object or set of objects in the real world. That is to say there is a certain amount of interpretation involved.
With the permanent cloud conversation in mind, I thought that I would use this week’s blog to look at that setting probably most ignored by most photographers because the camera does it for them, in a manner generally acceptable. Ladies and gentlemen I give you the White Balance.
Let me set down at the outset that if you are uncertain about what you are doing auto will work in most situations. Sort of. It has got better over the years, that is for sure. Certainly it will work well in sunlight. If you look at the settings on your camera, even most compacts these days, you will find a range of settings other than auto white balance. The settings themselves we will return to later. The reason that these exist is because light changes colour over the course of the day and we talk about it in terms of its temperature, which is measured in degrees Kelvin. The colour of this light will affect the colours in your photographs because what we see are objects reflecting the available light into our eyes which are converted into images in our brains. Cloud cover also plays a role in determining the colour of light at any given moment, lending the light a blue hue. This is before it starts to bounce off objects absorbing different wavelengths. But our brains colour correct and so we see not the colour modified hues and shades but the brain’s algorithms for determining what it should look like. Your camera sensor records according to the temperature of the light it receives reflected from the object(s) you are framing. Please note it is where the objects are and the light it/they is/are in that is important not the light where you are (unless it is the same when it obviously doesn’t matter).
Well, again, sort of. White is 18% gray in photography, you may have heard. This is to do with colour neutrality. Some people never leave home without a gray card, certainly they have their uses, but they are not a deal breaker when it comes to taking photographs. You can colour correct in post production (yes even with jpeg but only to a relatively small degree and not in the same way as in raw, as the assumption of what the white balance is is coded into the jpeg file when you press the shutter. With raw its more WYSIWYG – what you see is what you get – and can be manipulated over a wider range of possibilities because all the information is left in).
So there are reasons of colour temperature for the settings in the white balance menus on your cameras. AWB – automatic white balance – is a fire and forget mode, just not always accurate. We then move into general categories. Daylight calibrated from the noon day sun, is fairly neutral and the target which the other settings are designed to immitate. Flash is cooler than daylight on tone (has a higher Kelvin temperature). Shade compensates for the blue by warming up the colours (counter-intuitively lowering the colour temperature) so does cloudy, but to a greater extent. The picture of the light bulb denotes a tungsten colour temperature. Almost orange if uncorrected, with a dollop, to use the scientific phrase, of blue. The picture of the flourescent tube tells you that the sensor is going to have the warm tones boosted to overcome that rather cold, sterile light. Then we get into the custom settings which can be used in conjunction with colour temperature meters and those grey cards we mentioned earlier. They do take getting used to to use properly. If you are interested in getting a light meter and or colour temperature meter and have a smart phone they can easily and freely be downloaded from the Android or Apple stores. They seem to work pretty well (I have Colour Temp meter and it falls into the category of useable. Grass is generally around the 18% grey mark and makes a good substitute as does the palm of your hand which will read about 2/3 rds of stop under exposed as a general rule).
As I started out saying at the top of this piece, you can play around and adopt he settings at will. Cloudy and shade have been the two I have used most often (which I would quantify as not very often) to warm up, and it works well with Cotswold stone backgrounds. I have also tried the bluer settings against a sky of pretty uniform grey cloud. It didn’t work out well but there is a germ of an idea there. Whatever you use you will almost certainly have to change the settings when you get the camera out afresh, or you will, with equal amounts of certainty, have some unplanned colour balances when you download to your computer. This is where CSC’s win out. They are WSIWYG – though it doesn’t work if you ignore the evidence of your eyes. A friend told me that, you understand. Wouldn’t do it myself. Of course not. No.
For all of that there is, you will be happy to know, one more universal setting that eliminates all this faffing around. It’s called black and white.
A N N O U N C E M E N T S
NEXT MEETING: Round 4 of the ROC.
Check out the Flickr competiton on the club Flickr page. To be found on the discussion page.