Is it really better to not half-press to focus with the Fujifilm X-Pro 1?

Question

Fujifilm's new camera uses contrast-detect autofocus, and the current Internet hand-wringing is over whether this is a horrible critical flaw or not. As often happens in such discussion, a bit of street wisdom has arisen: it's better to just push the shutter the whole way. For example, this blog comment:

AF speed on the XPro isn’t that slow, the problem is that most people use it as they would an SLR/DSLR for focusing, i.e half press the shutter and wait for AF confirmation then press the shutter all the way, in most cases with the XPro and the X100 you don’t need to do this.

And there's at least one thread on DPReview, but as characteristic for such discussions, there's a lot more smoke than fire.

The X-Pro 1 manual says nothing about this, and in fact says:

S (single AF): Focus locks while the shutter button is pressed halfway. Choose for stationary subjects.

In my experience, if the subject is stationary, the half-press method works as it always does, and if it's moving the full-press method isn't as good as using AF-C (continuous autofocus). I've used plenty of point-and-shoot cameras as well, which of course use contrast-based AF, and the half-press focus lock has always served me well.

But then, a lot of people are saying this is a big deal. Is there any reasonable basis, or is it just wishful thinking?

Asked by mattdm

Answer

No, it is not. There is nothing magical about not waiting at the halfway point.

What you read is silly, as if waiting would make the focus take longer or something. It does not work that way. You can press all the way as fast as you want and you'll get a shot in focus or not. The longer you wait at the half-press (in AF-S) mode or before fully pressing (in AF-C mode), the higher the probability the shot will be focused. Waiting too long might make you miss action but it won't make the camera miss focus.

Note, having an X-Pro1 one in hand and, for all I tried, I cannot see how not waiting at the half-press can improve focus.

Answered by Itai

Check more discussion of this question.

How are mini-planet photos created?

Question

Here are some examples of what I mean on Flickr -- though I would be open to a better source of examples.

Asked by blunders

Answer

The basics is that you start with a 360-degree panorama and apply a polar to rectangular transformation.

I happen to have written introductory tutorials for both:

• How to Make a Panorama - For this you need a panorama software such as those reviewed there. The free ones do an excellent job, so I suggest you start with those
• How to Make a Wee Planet - This one uses Photoshop, so with another software the procedure will be somewhat different.

One easy short-cut is that some recent Fuji cameras actually can produce a seamless 360° panorama right in the camera. Make sure you choose the Cylindrical 360° option under the Motion Panorama function. Otherwise, or if your camera does not have it, then a seem will appear in the results.

Answered by Itai

Check more discussion of this question.

What advantages does the Brenizer method have over Photoshop blur?

Question

I have seen a lot of posts lately about the Brenizer method. It looks smashing, but at the same time, I am fairly certain I could recreate the look using blurred layers in Photoshop. Apart from having a high-resolution picture using Brenizer's technique, are there other advantages I'm missing from just taking one wide-angle shot and manipulating it in PS to mimic the look?

Asked by Heather Walters

Answer

Most techniques that are 'properly' accomplished in-camera, but can also be approximated in software, are generally better in-camera. No software filter can replicate the quality of bokeh afforded by a good-quality lens (although Photoshop's Lens Blur filter does a decent job).

Having said that, the Brenizer method is relatively time consuming, both in the field and in the computer, and requires a fast lens, so whether or not you do it 'properly' or with straightforward blurring really depends on what you're doing with it. If you're just taking a family portrait shot, you may as well 'cheat'. If you're taking a shot for your portfolio or for a professional wedding shoot, it's worth going the whole hog.

Answered by ElendilTheTall

Check more discussion of this question.

How do I create a “day-night” scene in a photo?

Question

I recently came upon the image below, and more like them on Stephen Wilke's website, and was wondering how the image was made.

It really seems that there would be some form of post processing, but by the seemless flow of the image, it looks like the edits may have been very complex. Is there a simple way to recreate this style?

Asked by Dylansq

Answer

In your question I recognise two parts:

1. How to combine the day/night parts.

Take one photo of the daytime situation, take one photo of the evening situation. Use a tripod for the photos and let it stay there between the shots so the composition stays the same. Another possibility is to tether your camera to a laptop and use the daytime image as an overlay during the night-time shoot. This enables you to replicate the composition as well.

2. How to maintain the seemless flow of the image

By placing the two photos over each other and masking one part of the night photo revealing the day photo (or the other way around) will give you the basic image. From here you need to fine-tune your mask such that the night image flows over into the day image. Gradient masks might help.

Other remarks

The use of a tripod also enables you to shoot with a long shutter time. This is needed such that the cars show a blur, which implies motion. A wide angle lens is needed to capture the whole scene in one go.

Answered by Bart Arondson

Check more discussion of this question.

What techniques should be used when attempting bird photography?

Question

I'm pretty new, and was just playing with the D7000 kit taking pictures of birds in the area. I asked for my photo critiqued in Chat, led to some good general purpose information I think is applicable to all of these kinds of shots, not just my specific scenario.

I'm interested both in how one approaches the subject to make the shot, as well as general composition gotchas common for this kind of photography.

Here was the specific image in question (for ideas of things someone might do wrong):

Asked by Billy ONeal

Answer

First off, birds are jittery little creatures, and much of the time need to become accustomed to you before they will let you get in close and capture one of those amazing, highly detailed, frame-filling shots. "Hanging around" for a while will give birds time to get used to you, realize your not a predator, and be less likely to fly off the moment you start to approach.

Second, it should be noted that even with a very long lens, such as a 500mm telephoto, you will still need to get fairly close to any bird, from your average smaller songbird to your larger birds of prey, to get a frame-filling shot. This means that many of your shots will need to be cropped to zero in on the main subject (the bird). Cameras with higher resolution are more useful here, as they allow more detail to be kept in smaller crops. Cropped sensor cameras (APS-C type sensors) will also help, as they tend to "extend the reach" of most lenses by their crop factor (for example, a 300mm lens on an APS-C sensor is "effectively" 480mm.) Lenses with image stabilization are also a huge help with bird photography, as using a tripod to capture birds (perching or in flight) is difficult at best, and impossible in any practical sense.

When you are actually ready to capture some photos, there are a few things to keep in mind. Perching birds, which are a lot easier to begin with than birds in flight, will usually fly right away if you approach them directly. Try not to zero in on a bird and walk straight for it...approach slower, and less directly, taking a zig-zag or winding path. Try not to be entirely silent, make some noise (but not a lot), and actuate your camera shutter a few times to get the bird used to the sound. Predators tend to approach silently, directly, and stealthily, and such an approach is a sure way to send a bird flying. Its also probably best not to look directly at the birds, at least not for long...let your gaze wander. You might also try bringing the camera to your eye by framing something else first, and pan over to the bird.

For your first few dozen bird shots, I would just try to capture the birds, and work on getting focus and camera shake under control. That is probably the first fundamental technique one should master when learning bird photography. Full-time manual focus can be very helpful here, as you can generally lock on focus with AF, and fine-tune focus manually before actually taking the shot (splitting your AF activation to another button besides the shutter button is also helpful here, as you can focus and take the shot with two different controls, and not always end up re-focusing every time you half-press the shutter button.) Once you have mastered focus and camera shake, you can start working on things like composition, depth of field (a blurry background is an excellent way to isolate a bird on a photograph), etc. You should also try looking for more interesting poses...a bird preening itself, nibbling at some seed, squawking at or fighting with rivals, capturing food, nurturing young, etc.

Answered by jrista

Check more discussion of this question.

How do I get myself to think about every shot using modern digital equipment?

Question

In today's age of fully automated digital cameras, I find it difficult to seriously think about every picture I take before I press the shutter button. The experience is, from what I can tell, completely different with equipment like a manual film camera or rangefinder camera: I have used an all-manual film SLR and it forced me to think about every picture I took. How do I replicate this using my digital SLR equipment?

Asked by DragonLord

Answer

You need discipline and a goal.

Most digital camera users take hundreds of shots without thinking much. Tons of shots are almost the same and most are unmemorable. I also know pros who shoot thousands of photos per day. That's a huge number! The great thing about digital photography which I tell my students on the first day of classes is that experimentation is free. However, shooting without thinking does not teach anything, its more like playing the lottery. You're going to eventually get a few good shots but you wont be able to repeat it or control it.

Most people are surprised how few photos I take and I actually plan to take fewer because I gave myself a goal of not shooting the ones that would get culled. I used delete 9 our of every 10 photos I shot and have been striving to reduce that number of trying to recognize in advance photos without merit. It's tough but I am down to deleting 7 out of 8 now. The strategy to do this takes discipline:

1. Previsualize
2. Position carefully
3. Inspect every edge and the content of the frame.
4. Search for highlights and shadows, decide where to meter.
5. Set exposure parameters depending on the mode.
6. Don't forget White-Balance. Take a reading if using custom. Even with RAW for a better preview.
7. Watch motion in your frame and focus.
8. Shoot and review.
9. Analyze what could have been better.
10. Repeat as needed.

Obviously this needs to be adjusted for different situations and things with rapid motion generally take more shots. Even using burst mode you must anticipate motion not to run out of buffer before the height of the action.

Answered by Itai

Check more discussion of this question.

What is the best method to digitize and touch up my old slides?

Question

I have lots of old slides and should probably digitize them? What is the best way of achieving this? What kind of touchups might be necessary?

Asked by txwikinger

Answer

If you would like to scan the slides the "Epson Perfection V500 Photo Scanner" seems to get good reviews for slide scanning as well for scanning 35 mm negatives - see amazon (4 stars and 281 customer reviews): http://www.amazon.com/dp/B000VG4AY0/

If you would like to outsource it - ScanCafe might be a good option: http://www.scancafe.com/

Answered by Imageree

Check more discussion of this question.

What are the best techniques for photographing overweight people?

Question

I'm not the most lean person on the planet, and many pictures seem to really point this out. While I wish I was simply in better shape, it is simply not the case for me or unfortunately, many people.

Are there poses, lighting techniques, focal lengths, etc. that will work better to reduce some of the common overweight features (large stomach, double chin, etc.)?

---

Update: Ok, so I incorporated a few of the suggestions that I could into a self portrait in the limited space I have. I didn't have suitable room or patience for a three-quarters shot, so here's just a headshot. Some of the suggestions really, really made a noticeable difference.

Its a picture of me I actually like! (I pushed the DOF a little shallow though, and the back of my ear is out of focus.)

---

Second Update: So here's another shot that takes into account a few more of the suggestions yet (including Jay's suggestion of slightly rotating the light a bit more). The only thing I think I'd additionally do is make sure to where a higher collared shirt to help hide neck rolls. Also, I found straightening my back fairly rigidly helped a lot.

And in finale, here's a before picture of how bad it could look. This was taken about 30-40 pounds lighter, by another photographer. (This is a lowres crop, unfortunately.)

Asked by rfusca

Answer

Not an odd question at all. As a large man myself, I constantly find myself on the lookout for ways in my portrait business to help people look their best (no particular order... just as they came to mind):

1. No broad lighting. This is a 'basic' for portrait lighting, but I'm always amazed when I see inexperienced photographers who simply throw light all over the place and don't seem to understand that broad lighting makes faces rounder and short lighting 'sculpts' the face...
2. Rotate the subject 45-degrees to the camera. This, in combination with short lighting can dramatically de-emphasize a person's size.
3. If the subject is sitting have them lean forward. I always tell subjects to 'lean over their belt buckle.' This naturally de-emphasizes the belly, and provides elongation of the neck without specifically asking a subject to stretch their neck (that often causes subjects to really stretch, which always ends up looking awkward).
4. Arrange the legs. There's a whole 'science' to positioning legs, but one of the most basic things to do for female clients is have them place one foot in front of the other, put all the weight on their back foot, bend both knees slightly and rotate one hip towards the camera. (Check out any picture of a female celeb on the red carpet to see this in action... They all do it. Good for you paying attention during media training, celebs!)
5. Hide the gut. Portrait photography has a long tradition of putting the more... rotund... subject behind something to hide the belly. Whether it's another subject ("All them kids are finally good for something!" Actual customer quote during a session of mine. All in good fun, of course... I hope.), or an actual object. Get creative.
6. Hide the gut, Part 2. Lay the subject down. Great/easy way to hide a multitude of problems.
7. The ol' vignette. I find the vignette is a great post-production tool for directing the eye towards the most important part of the picture- the face.
8. The liquify tool. If you're a Photoshop user, the Liquify tool can be great for shrinking muffin-tops, saggy arms, etc. Plenty of 'sin' is committed with the over-use of Liquify, but used subtly it can be a great addition to the toolbox.
9. Darkness favors the big subject. I'm generally very hesitant to light a subject high-key if they're big... Unless the bigness is the point of the picture (A.K.A. you're photographing a pregnant lady, or a sumo warrior). Dark backgrounds and purposeful shadows can have a surprisingly large (har har) slimming effect.
10. Use the group to your advantage. If you have a mixed group of 'average sized' people and 'bigger folk,' position the bigger people farther from the camera than everyone else... Instantly they will appear smaller. It's surprising how far back in the picture you can place people without it being obvious that they're farther back in the frame. Not such a great technique if your subject is big, but short, however. BONUS: This also works great if you need to shorten up a really tall person in a group photo. :-)
11. Lens choice. Generally speaking focal lengths between 50mm and 85mm will give you the least amount of 'unexpected body part distortion' when taking pictures.
12. The clothes make the woman, or man. In addition to the 'standard advice' you often hear about reminding clients not to wear horizontal stripes, wearing darker clothing, etc., many bigger people respond to being uncomfortable with their size or with being photographed by choosing to wear bigger/baggier outfits for the photo session. Typically this only serves to make them look even bigger in photographs... It is far better to recommend that someone wear properly fitted clothing (even if that means seeing a tailor to help) than to have to work around the fact that the client now looks even bigger because of their tent-like outfit.
13. Get A Little Closer. Don't Be Shy. Try really pushing into the subject. Often times the most interesting shots are a bit 'closer than is comfortable,' and leaving things out of frame can 'cover over a multitude of sins' without having to use any additional techniques.
14. Focus, Focus. Try widening the camera's aperture. An f-stop down in the 2s can help you make a portrait with a more selective focal point (which in portrait photography should almost always be the eyes) and as everything else is more out of focus the viewers attention will be drawn back to the important/in-focus parts, and away from the unimportant/out-of-focus parts.
15. Posture-perfect. While not exclusively the domain of bigger folks, poor posture is something that a lot of bigger folks struggle with. A slouch can add apparent weight to a subject as it can make the stomach protrude even farther, so have the subject straighten their back, and also pull their shoulders back as well.

Answered by Jay Lance Photography

Check more discussion of this question.

What are some artistic techniques that can be performed with lenses?

Question

I have recently been attempting to perform various different techniques for taking pictures, like using a tilt-shift lens, freelensing, HDR photography, and a couple others.

The styles that I want to focus on are mainly dealing with how the picture is taken, and not what the subject is. ex. using a tilt-shift lens to selectively focus the subject.

Wanting to further my knowledge of artistic techniques, what are some other techniques, besides those that I have mentioned, that will provide a unique effect on the picture?

Asked by Dylansq

Answer

Brenizer Method by Ryan Brenizer NY Wedding Photographer!

Edited to Add: This image is combination of 14 images stitched together, shot with Nikon 85mm f/1.4 AI-s & D300.

Answered by Alen

Check more discussion of this question.

What are the best tips for photographing children?

Question

I have two children (ages 2-4) who are just getting old enough to know when to make the worst possible face or simply run away when I bring out the camera.

Does anyone have any tips on how to get children to cooperate better for photography?

Asked by cadmium

Answer

It is very highly dependent on the personality of the child. What works wonderfully for my daughter (Positive Feedback) may not work for other kids. So it helps if you already have a good handle on working with the child. With that said, here is what works for me:

Positive Feedback
My 3 year old is very appreciative of positive feedback. If I laugh at a funny face she will keep making the face again and again. If I tell her she's doing a great job of letting Daddy take pictures then often she will want to keep posing.

Give the Child Options
If there's one miracle parenting strategy this has got to be it. Every night: "Time to go to bed." produces "I don't want to go to bed." But "Do you want to go potty and then go to bed or just go to bed?" produces "Potty and then go to bed." So maybe you could try something like: "Do you want to hug your brother while Daddy takes the picture or do you just want to stand by him and smile while Daddy takes the picture?"

Distraction
I recently took pictures of my daughter and a friend on a play date. It was easy for them to ignore the camera because they were more interested in playing with each other. As a result I got great shots of them chasing each other and playing together.

Engage in Pretend Play
Sometimes you can make the camera part of the game. Last week my daughter moved the bathroom stool into the living room, stood on it, and started singing songs. When we asked what she was doing she said she was on American Idol! So of course I grabbed the camera and tripod and my wife and I sat behind the camera and asked her name, what song she was singing and what show she was on. I got TOO MUCH footage and she still wanted to keep playing. Or maybe they're playing with a friend/sibling and perhaps you could direct the play a little bit by saying something like: "Are you going to chase each other?" "Do you want to play outside together?"

Patience, Patience, Patience
I also try to hang around with the camera for awhile and keep taking pictures (or pretending to) the whole time so she'll eventually get bored. Then I can potentially get some candids. Disclaimer: In theory this works perfectly. In practice I have two problems: 1) I get bored before she does. 2) By the time she gets bored she moves on to doing something completely different than what I was trying to get a picture of in the first place. (Which I suppose is fine if you're flexible.)

Answered by Stainsor

Check more discussion of this question.

Can knowledge and preparation offset the need for longer lenses in wildlife photography?

Question

One of the biggest barriers to wildlife photography as I see it is the requirement for fast, long expensive lenses. I have in the past used a teleconverter to get my 300mm lens up to 600mm but even that seems barely adequate for anything except particularly large or close subjects.

If you are properly prepared, e.g. scout your subject in advance for several days (or weeks), wear appropriate camouflage, find downwind vantage points etc, can you actually offset this need for expensive glass by allowing yourself to get closer and thus manage with, say, a 300mm lens? Or is there still a longer minimum focal length you should be working with?

Please bear in mind that I am referring to UK wildlife, which generally consists of small mammals and birds - no elephants here!

Asked by Nick Miners

Answer

Whatever length your lens, knowing the habits and personalities of your subjects is an essential in wildlife photography, and I have found that the knowledge I have picked up along the way, has enabled me to make good use of my 70 -300mm lens in this field. I am in Florida, where we have a variety of spectacular water birds. I have learnt that if the osprey leaves the branch upon which she was eating a fish, and flies off, she will inevitably turn and come back down the river, enabling some great in flight shots of bird and prey. I know not to worry that the dragonfly that I was about to capture sunning himself on a reed has departed, as, if I am patient and get set up focusing on the tip of the reed, he will return to that same reed, and I am ready for him. I have learned not to get out of the car for that shot of a hawk on a telegraph pole, as I can invariably get closer in the car than on foot; indeed any kind of transport, be it car, boat or horse makes me less of a threat for some reason. (I have to add that horses are good camouflage but bad tripods). Also, some birds become accustomed to walkers, or canal boats for example, just as deer in large parks are used to cars and hikers, so you have a much better chance of getting within range with them, than in a really wild spot. I could go on at length, but this is just a long-winded way of saying ‘yes’, decide what you want to capture, and then get to know it and it will pay off.

Answered by Gillie Bengough

Check more discussion of this question.

What's the best way to take a picture of an LCD or CRT screen?

Question

I have seen many bad pictures of LCD and CRT screens. How do I get a good picture of an LCD or CRT screen?

Asked by daviesgeek

Answer

It's not very hard to take a good photo of an LCD or CRT screen. I'll add oscilloscope in here as a special case of both as I've taken meany such over the years. A few pointers. Soem of the following may sound complex at first glance but it's all fairly u=inyuitive taken a section at a time.

• Shutter speed is critical for a frame refreshed device due to the way the iamge is written to screen. Understand the nature of the image - it's a line scanned image refreshed in interleaved half images with non HD 525/625 line TVs, and may be something quite different if using a monitor or oscilloscope or eg Plasma screen. Play with exposure times to see what works.

  Whole screen refresh rate on a non-HD TV is 25 Hz with 50 Hz mains and 30 Hz with 60 Hz mains. It actually writes a screen at double that speed but with only half the data and then writes the second half interleaved with the first. Whether you can see that half is missing if you shoot at 50/60 Hz depends on the image and phosphor persistence and brightness and image content.

CRT framerate will vary with screen mode - you can look it up or check the computer video settings - or just try different shutter speeds until you get one or several that are best. Be aware that frame rate may change if you change mode.

Using exposure times that are not equal to these can give partial pictures with bright or dark areas or no picture at all if you are especially clever.

Take a series of images at rates from say 0.1 s to 0.01 and faster and see what "artefacts" appear. There will (probably) be a shutter speed that best suits and after that you use aperture and ISO and exposure time and lave shutter speed alone.

I just tried various speeds on a 1080p Plasma screen and anything BELOW 1/90th second is good. Above 1/90th the image artefacts are bizarre and almost inexplicable.

A CRT oscilloscope usually scans left to right BUT a modern LCD screen oscilloscope may combine trace write time with frame writes, so start playing.

Once you are happy with shutter speed effects ...

• Use minimal background light - have a desk lamp handy that you can turn off when taking photos. Washing out the image is easy.

• Tripod or solid support! Frame the screen and leave it there OR if that's not conveniemt have a setup where you can promptly put it back in exact position. For some work I'v used two drawer slides with a board on top that allows the camera to be "dollied" sideways out of the way with minimal loss pf position in return, given due care [tm].

• Small aperture but not so small as to get diffraction. Flat screen depth of field needed is minimal. Curved CRT needs only a little. f8 probably OK and f11 or f16 usually very usable - exposure time goes up.

• ISO - something that gives quality with your camera. Higher the better that gives acceptable quality. I have an SLT77 that probably would be OK at ISO800. My older 5D & 7D Minoltas maybe ISO 400. A700 Sony 400 to 800. ISO 50 or 100 if you must but quality usually does not justify it.

• Manual focus and exposure are not essential but help. If having to move and replace camera, if available set to "Manual focus with press to focus when needed" and NOT with shutter button.

• Set LCD/CRT/Scope scope picture and camera exposure to what produces good results. Phosphor persistence will usually cause blurred lines at settings that look OK to the eye normally. Probably have scope trace dim and well focused.

Play.

With an oscilloscope, if it has an "illuminated graticule" adjust level to look good -not blazing bright wrt trace and not invisible.

LCD screens best viewing angle will vary with contrast setting. If contrast is not adjustable you MAY find that an angle above or below horizontal works best.

Answered by Russell McMahon

Check more discussion of this question.

What's the best way to create a tilt-shift photograph?

Question

Specifically, what's the best way to go about shooting photos that have a fake miniature quality to them, which produces high-quality (and believable) images? Is there some special lens that you can shoot these kinds of photographs with, or is this entire effect achieved through software such as Photoshop? And (if it's within the scope of this website), how would one go about creating an image like that with software?

Asked by SpikeX

Answer

The best way absolutely is to use a dedicated tilt-shift lens. They are quite pricey, and manual control only, but that is the best option, and you asked for the best. For some examples, see Canon's TS lineup and Nikon's Perspective Control lineup.

Assuming you don't have $1000 to spend (Or more), then your next best option is to try for something like a Lensbaby. They are somewhat pricey, but only a couple hundred dollars.

Assuming that neither of these is in your budget, you could try some of the other suggestions have come up, I won't bother repeating them.

You're going to be very hard pressed to find a software solution, because it's really difficult to change the focal point using software, and that's what a tilt lens does.

Answered by Pearsonartphoto

Check more discussion of this question.

Are there any techniques to aid/improve reverse macro photography

Question

I recently started playing with reverse macro with my canon 50mm f1.8. A couple things I noticed immediately is:

• Shallow depth of field
• No control over aperture
• difficult to shoot handheld

I believe these are the common problems with this type of shooting

Are there any techniques that I can use to improve/help with Reverse Macro shooting besides buying a Macro lens as they are kind of expensive.

Here is what I've tried so far

ps. I have read Are there macro focusing techniques for handheld shots? but focusing isn't really a problem.

Asked by fluf

Answer

I've faced similar problems and also was able to overcome a few of them. A few techniques that has proved to be efficient for me are:

• Focus changes even if you move a millimeter. I tried so hard to keep my body as stiff as possible but that did NOT work. So, I just let it go. I start by looking at the blur image through the viewfinder, slowly move forward and start shooting as soon as the image looks clearer, keep shooting and moving all the way upto the point the image becomes blurry again. Do NOT move using your whole body/waist, instead try inhaling and exhaling slowly.
• I always shoot in continuous mode which enables me to increase the chance of getting a better focused shot.
• IS wont work, nor will aperture control. So, you'll need to set the aperture before detaching the lens. I usually use higher than normal ISO to be able to use a higher shutter speed, thus remove any chance of shake blur.
• Not sure if you're using a reverse mount ring, if not, get one asap. It helps a lot and you can concentrate on things other than keeping your lens safe from falling.
• DOF stacking is another technique you can apply. Its true I wasn't able to plan and execute DOF stacking yet, but if you take a lot of pictures of the same subject, chances are you'll find a couple or two which you can use to stack and gain greater DOF.
• Use of external flash is also very helpful and let you use smaller aperture as well as higher shutter speed while keeping the ISO low. Generally you'd like to use a diffuser along with it. Use this link to get an idea about how to make your own DIY lighting setup for better macro shooting.

Answered by ShutterBug

Check more discussion of this question.

Is it practical to shoot portraits by only candlelight?

Question

Is it practical to shoot portraits in candle lights, only, provided there is no flash around? If yes, then for portrait shots, where and how should one place the candles? Are there any specific factors that need to be taken care of? Is it prone to creating a flat light?

Here are some specific details about my gear:

• Camera: Canon Powershot SX210 IS
• Min F8, Max F3.1 (but I zoom it gets up to 6, doh)
• My ISO performs horribly beyond 100, and cannot shoot in raw

Considering these conditions in which way should the candles be placed so that they light up the model's face and do not create a flat light? On the side (left and right) of the person, or in the front of the person? How does the position impact the results?

Asked by Anisha Kaul

Answer

Yes, this can work. I know because I've taken photos of children lit only by their birthday-cake candles and they've come out nicely.

First, some general tips, without regard to your specific camera. These are probably most appropriate for a DSLR or other advanced camera which gives a lot of photographer control:

• Use manual exposure. The camera's automatic metering will try to make the scene look nicely bright overall, which is probably not what you want. Even if you're trying to create a brightly light room with lots of candles, the metering is likely to be confused.
• Spot meter on the subject's face. That'll give you a base reading for correct exposure for that area. Metering on the candles themselves will cause the subject to be very dim — which can also work, but tends to make the candle the primary subject.
• Once you have this base exposure reading, take test shots and see how they look. The histogram will probably be useless here, since it'll be mostly flat with peaks near the edges.
• Decide on whether you want to have a largely black photograph with a small pool of light, or a tightly-framed portrait with just a candlelit face, or a whole room and scene lit by candles. This will influence your overall exposure decision, and frames your your other artistic choices as well.
• Decide what you want to use for a shutter speed. A fast speed will reduce the flicker of the flame, and if you're trying to expose so as to show the candle itself clearly, this may be desirable. On the other hand, a little bit of motion blur might be acceptable or even preferred.
• Decide what you want for aperture. Wide-open to gather the most light is the obvious choice, and will fit with the visual expectation of most viewers. The shallow depth of field can add to the intimate, personal feeling of a candlelit shot. On the other hand, a greater depth of field can help show more context.
• Choose your ISO to match the factors above, so that the scene is exposed as you want. Again, take test shots here. You may decide you have to compromise on your artistic wishes for depth of field or shutter speed.
• If you opt for a longer shutter speed, use a tripod. Having to worry about the subject moving is enough trouble; even with image stabilization, keeping the camera still enough will be a challenge.
• Consider black and white, or perhaps a warm monotone. This will give you more latitude in using very high, noisy ISO settings, because color noise is the most annoying and distracting. A little color is nice for candlelight, though. Choosing a warm monotone similar to that cast by candles may be a good compromise — if you experiment or look at some sample pictures, you can see that color photographs often look monotone orange/yellow in this light anyway.
• If you do go for color, set white balance manually. Candlelight is very warm — which means low Kelvin temperature. The camera's auto-wb will try to make the lighting neutral, which is probably not what you want. The tungsten/incandescent setting may be a good choice — candle flame is even warmer than that, so you'll still get a pleasant tone. Typically, candlelight is around 1500-1900K, while incandescent lights are 2700-3300K (and flash or sunlight more like 5500-6500K). If you set the camera to incandescent, the candlelight will still have a strong warm cast, which is probably what you want.
• Manual focus may be required, as autofocus sometimes struggles in low light. Check focus carefully if you're using a wide aperture.
• If you're using any filters for lens protection, take them off, particularly if the candles are in the frame. This is a perfect opportunity for them to increase glare and ruin your image.
• Place the lights as close as possible to the subject — light follows the inverse square law, which means it decreases rapidly as you move away from the source. The birthday-cake photos work because the child is leaning in to blow out the candles, providing lots of immediate light.

In general, working with little point sources like this will emphatically not produce flat lighting. You will get pools of bright light and interesting shadows. As for where to put them exactly, experiment! Move the candles around and pay close attention to how these shadows shape the image.

For your specific camera: on the plus side, it offers a lot of manual control, including spot metering, so you can follow most of the suggestions above. But on the downside, the aperture is only f/3.1 at the widest lens setting, 28mm-e, which you probably don't want to use for portraits as it will tend to distort your subject's features unflatteringly. You'll probably want to zoom in to at least 50mm-e, and probably more like 70-100mm-e is ideal. This reduces your light-gathering ability, forcing you to increase the ISO. Additionally, in combination with the tiny sensor, this basically removes the possibility of shallow depth of field as an artistic choice. That doesn't necessarily kill the idea entirely, but it's a constraint you'll have to work around. Likewise, if you really don't want to raise the ISO beyond 100, you may be quite limited.

---

Here are some examples demonstrating some of the suggestions above. With the exception of a very minor curves adjustment in the last black and white image, these are all JPEG files from the camera, with no post-processing trickery other than choosing different in-camera toning options for the middle example.

A different look and more flexibility could be achieved by shooting RAW and spending more time on post-processing, but I wanted to demonstrate what can easily be done by anyone without special software (or time or knowledge to operate that software.

I spot-metered on on my subject's face, and generally didn't bother with the exposure dials after I was satisfied. I wanted to use settings that you could easily emulate with your point and shoot, so at first, I tried an aperture of f/3.2 and a longer shutter speed, but my model has trouble holding still for more than a fraction of a second. I dropped to f/2.8 and used a 1-second exposure, which almost worked:

f/2.8 / 1 second / ISO 100; two candles

But she looked away at the last second.

I should add that this is with my Pentax DA 40mm f/2.8 Limited; I tried the 70mm f/2.4 first, but the fact that I was using fire around a small child meant I really needed to be closer.

As is probably evident, I'm using two standard taper candles. In this image, the white balance is set to tungsten. I discovered that the manual white balance in my camera doesn't go below 2500K, and I didn't bother to take a reading with a gray card. The image is actually a little cool and the candles too white — I don't like at all how the flames are rendered here and would work on that more for a final image. I do like the soft, muted, low-key tones of the "ghost" image — for me, if she hadn't looked away, I'd crop out the candles and this would definitely be a keeper. (Although, while imaging how things could be different, I'd also pose that stuffed animal so it looked somewhat cute rather than being a bedraggled amorphous blob. Don't tell my daughter I said that.)

f/2.8 / 1 second / ISO 100; two candles

So there's the next try. Pretty much the same as the first but I had her rest her head in her hands in an effort to keep still, which worked relatively well. I also moved one of the candles much closer in order to provide a little more shaping to the shadows on her face. You can see that even that slight change makes a visible difference.

f/2.8 / 1 second / ISO 100; two candles; converted to black and white

That really looks pretty good. My wife likes the color better; I prefer this one.

Here's the sepia version:

f/2.8 / 1 second / ISO 100; two candles; converted to sepia tone

I'm not so keen on how that turned out; I don't think my camera's built-in toning options are flexible enough to make me happy.

Anyway, after that, one second shutter wasn't working — that's a lot to ask of a six-year-old for more than one or two lucky shots. So, I dropped to a third of a second and upped the ISO to 400. I think you might be able to get away with this with your P&S camera too. Or, if you can order up a somewhat more restrained model, you may be able to go with longer exposures and keep the ISO down — even with your more-restrictive aperture in this focal range.

f/2.8 ⅓ second / ISO 400; two candles

Here, some experimenting with changing the angle of the lights. You can see that the close candlelight is very much the opposite of flat lighting, and this image feels almost three-dimensional to me.

f/2.8 ⅓ second / ISO 400; two candles, one off-scene with reflector

This is the only one I edited out-of-camera, and even then only by adjusting the tone curve so that there's a lot more contrast. The images above could also be subjected to the same treatment: the other B&W image, in particular, is very easy to make more dramatic.

I also did more playing with the light. In particular, there is candle just to the right of the frame next to the foot of the tripod where I had the camera, and right behind that, just far away enough to not catch fire, a 32" silver reflector. I'd planned to post a second version of this with that candle extinguished — the effect was dramatically different — but my model decided she'd had enough at that point.

So yeah. This can be done. You can do it, and you don't need 400 candles, or any such nonsense. Your point and shoot camera might have some limitations, but I'd highly suggest you go ahead and see what you can get out of it. It may pleasantly surprise you.

Answered by mattdm

Check more discussion of this question.

How and why do you use an image histogram?

Question

I realize that an image histogram is a graphical display of an images tonal distribution (i.e. horizontal darks to lights, vertical pixel distribution), but how do YOU really use it and why? I mean, can't you determine everything you need just by looking at the image? I imagine there is no right answer, but I'm interested to hear how others use it (or don't) and why...

Asked by heavilyinvolved

Answer

While there may not be a "right" answer to this question, there are "correct" answers. A histogram is a powerful tool, and when you understand how to use it effectively, it can greatly help your photography.

As you mentioned, a histogram is a representation of tonal range and distribution in a photo. The basic mechanics are as such:

1. A histogram represents tonal range from left to right, with blacks and shades to the left, progressing through midtones in the middle, to highlights on the right.
2. The "volume" of any given tone is represented by the height of the vertical line that represents that tone.
   • A vertical line at the very left end is indicative of the volume of total black tones
   • A vertical line at the very right end is indicative of the volume of total highlight tones
   • A vertical line in the very center is indicative of the volume of 18% gray tones
3. The tones for an image are taken from the intensity of each pixel (chroma, or hue, is ignored, and only brightness/lightness/luminosity is measured)
   • The total number of tones in an image is dependent upon the bit depth of the image
   • An 8-bpp (24-bit) image has a total of 256 distinct tones
   • A 12-bpp (36-bit) RAW image has a total of 4,096 distinct tones
   • A 14-bpp (42-bit) RAW image has a total of 16,384 distinct tones
   • A 16-bpp (48-bit) RAW image has a total of 65,536 distinct tones
   • A 32-bpp (96-bit) HDR image is effectively able to represent infinite tonal range
     • As a real (float) number, its values range from 1.0 x 10^-37 through 1.0 x 10^38
     • In more real-world numbers, tonal range from black, through very dim starlight (0.00001), through indoor lighting (1-10), through the sunlit outdoors (1,000,000), to the brightness of the sun itself (100,000,000) and well beyond can be represented in a single HDR image
4. There is no technical limit to the height of a histogram.
5. Unless you have a very low-bit image, a single histogram is generally incapable of representing every single individual tone in an image, so each vertical line tends to represent a small range of similar tones.
6. A color histogram can represent a much greater range of information than a pure tonal histogram in the same space.

Given these facts about a histogram, there is a wide variety of information you can gleen from one:

• Contrast
  • Contrast is the measure of difference between the brightest tones and the darkest tones.
  • The more range a histogram covers between its left and right edges, the greater the contrast of an image.
• Key
  • Key is the rough measure of brightness in an image, with high-key being brighter, and low-key being darker
  • If the histogram is bunched up in the highlights, you have a high-key image
  • If the histogram is bunched up in the shades and shadows, you have a low-key image
• White Balance
  • When using a colored histogram, the convergence of red, green, and blue peaks is an indication of white balance
  • In particular, the offset of major blue peaks can be a strong indicator of the warmth or coolness of a photo
• Tonal Range
  • The balance and height of peaks in a histogram is an indication of tonal range and tonal balance
  • Parts of the histogram that are very low (valleys) indicate very low volume for those tones
  • Parts of the histogram that are very high (peaks) indicate very high volume for those tones
• Color Volume
  • A basic colored histogram will often show gray, red, blue, and green
  • A more advanced colored histogram may also show yellow, magenta, cyan
  • Colored peaks are an indication of the volume of those given primary colors
  • The horizontal position of a colored peak is an indication of the tone of colors of that particular primary or primaries
    • Gray indicates a balance of primary colors at those tones
    • Off-primary color peaks (or partial height lines), such as yellow, magenta, and cyan, indicate a blend of two primary colors at those tones

EDIT:

As mentioned by Jordan H., there is a trick called "expose to the right" (or ETTR) that can be useful to get you the optimal RAW data. When shooting a scene, particularly those that have a broad range of contrast that may be on the border of, or possibly slightly beyond, the 5-6 stop dynamic range of a digital camera, capturing enough tonal range in the shadows can be difficult. This is due to the the limitations of most current digital sensors, and how they are more sensitive to highlights than shadows. "Exposing to the Right", which is a technique where you slightly overexpose your shots by 1/3 to 1/2 of a stop (which, in turn, shifts your histogram to the right...toward highlights), can help mitigate these limitations. Exposing to the right can also help alleviate noise problems in the shadier parts of your images. It should be noted that exposing to the right requires that you use RAW format, as only with raw are you saving enough information to correct your overexposure during post-processing to bring your image back into normal range. The benefit of this technique is that it allows you to capture detail that would otherwise be lost, without the need to resort to ND grad filters or other more extreme measures.

This guideline is just that, a guideline. With newer camera sensors, dynamic range is improving, and capturing a greater range of contrast in a scene with a single shot is easier. However, even as digital sensor dynamic range improves, there will always be times when we need to shoot "on the edge" or what is possible, and tricks like shooting to the right will always be useful.

Answered by jrista

Check more discussion of this question.

What is white or black “clipping”, and how does one avoid it?

Question

I have been told that this photograph has "white clippings"?
What are they, and which light sources should be placed in what way to avoid that?

Asked by Anisha Kaul

Answer

Clipping is a term that basically refers to data loss in a captured image. Another common description for this phenomenon is referring to part of an image as 'blown out'. The light streaming into your camera hits the pixels on your camera senor and is turned into a tiny amount of electric charge. Each element can only hold so much charge so when its full the highlight is fully saturated and when a whole area of pixels are saturated, any detail in that area is lost, referred to as clipped or blown. Similarly there has to be a sufficient amount of light hitting the pixel to generate any measurable charge and if there is not enough in an area of the sensor only a solid black is captured and any detail in that area is similarly lost. No amount of post processing can bring detail back in these areas because no detail at all has been captured.

With a film camera the same thing happens except that instead of the light being turned into an electric charge on a sensor it causes photosensitive molecules on the film to react. When they have all reacted in an area of the negative no detail can be captured in that area.

In compositions where there are both very bright and very dark areas such as your example it is very challenging to capture detail across the whole image. Techniques such as HDR were developed exactly for this scenario where several images at different exposures are combined to increase dynamic range. It is impossible to capture detail across the whole image with a single shot without employing some external lighting to illuminate the darker areas so you can lower the exposure an bring the lighter areas in. Professional photographers tend to make good use of reflectors to do this just to lift the shadows enough to get some depth.

Answered by Paul Round

Check more discussion of this question.

Where can I find advice on using an advanced AF system for wildlife and bird photography?

Question

I recently purchased a Canon 7D, as my previous 450D had become a severely limiting factor in my endeavors to wildlife and bird photography (particularly bird photography, which I LOVE, but for which I have a bare handful of keepers out a few thousand shots.) The AF system of the 450D had a single cross-type point and a total of nine, while the 7D has a much more advanced 19 point system, all of which are cross-type. I've taken the 7D out a few times since I first purchased it, and while I have definitely had better luck photographing wildlife, I am still having trouble photographing birds on the move.

I have read through the 7D manual, however I am still not exactly sure where to start on learning how to use an advanced AF system in the real world for moving subjects. I could really use some insight from photographers who regularly use advanced AF systems for tracking subjects and keeping them in focus. I would also like to know how to take multiple shots of a subject on the move and keep them in focus between shots. While I can often nail one shot in a motion sequence, I regularly seem to fail to get proceeding or trailing shots after the one keeper (and that keeper is often not the most interesting one of the bunch.) The 7D supports a variety of AF modes as well, including AF Expansion and Zone AF, where the camera can supposedly utilize extra points around the selected point in case the subject moves away from the selected points area of sensitivity, or the selected point lands on a low-contrast part of the subject and a neighboring point lands on an area of high contrast (so focus can always be achieved, even if the selected point isn't detecting anything to focus on.) I have also not had much luck using either of these modes, and I think its primarily because I simply don't know how.

From a lens standpoint, I have used the following lenses:

• EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 L
• EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro
• EF 50mm f/1.4

My most frequently used lens is the 100-400, usually at the 400 end, so aperture is only f/5.6. I am not sure if that might be a problem or not (as far as I understand, the 7D supports AF at f/5.6, although I am not sure how many points might be considered "high precision" at that aperture.)

Asked by jrista

Answer

There are several custom function options available to the 7D which can be configured to assist with tracking moving objects:

• C.FnIII -1 AI Servo Tracking Sensitivity You want this set to "Slow" - this will stop the AF system trying to refocus on anything that briefly passes between you and the subject you are tracking - handy with birds where branches etc might flash by as you track

• C.FnIII -2 AI Servo 1st/2nd Image Priority This should be set to 0 so that the camera will give priority to focusing on the subject over taking shots - basically, if it thinks it hasn't got a lock, it won't shoot while it obtains one

• C.FnIII -3 AI Servo AF Tracking Method Set this to 1 - this further adds to the system ignoring obstacles by allowing the system to use AF points around the main focus point when something gets in the way of what you were tracking

Use single point AF with the AF Expansion custom function (C.FnIII -6) switched on - this gives you accuracy on the initial pick up but then allows the camera to help out as you track.

These settings should be correct from the camera side of things but the story doesn't end here.

Your 100-400mm L lens has a 2 mode IS system, with more predictable objects, you should use mode 2.

For tracking moving subjects it is important to get a good solid stance and to track the subject as it approaches some time before you want to start shooting (trickier with birds but achievable depending on the behaviour of the species). You should also follow through after you shoot (much like when shooting a shotgun).

You need your feet about shoulder width apart and need to be facing across the path of travel of the object you're tracking:

Object -------------------------------------------->

               ^ 
              You 

Hold the camera with your right hand as normal and with your hand a good way down the lens (similar to holding a rifle or shotgun). Keep your elbows tucked in, possibly resting against your torso to provide extra support and twist your torso from the hips upwards to meet what you want to track. Track it in the viewfinder, ideally if you can switch eyes so if you're tracking right to left, look through the viewfinder with your left eye so you can keep your right eye open to help keep track of the object (especially if it moves erratically) - do the opposite for left to right.

Start tracking the object, and smoothly pan with it. If you are shooting birds, turning off IS altogether is probably a good idea as the movement is likely to be too erratic for the IS to keep up with (even in panning mode 2) - aircraft are steady enough to use IS mode 2 with usually.

Squeeze the shutter release, don't press it (just like with a rifle) or it will jolt the camera and try to keep the object in the viewfinder as you get glances between shutter releases. Carry on tracking as the object moves away.

Getting a smooth torso twist is paramount and takes practice but getting the stance right gives you the foundations to build upon.

Answered by JamWheel

Check more discussion of this question.

How to create motion blur in daylight?

Question

How can we create motion blur in daylight with a DSLR?

Asked by meetpd

Answer

The short answer is: use a long shutter speed. To control this, put your camera into Shutter Priority mode (indicated by a "S" on the dial" and adjust the speed to a relatively long time - perhaps a half a second, a whole second, or perhaps longer.

The longer answer for when it gets tricky: You might find that during the daytime, things are so bright that when you set a long shutter speed, even at the camera's smaller aperture (biggest f/ number) you end up with blown-out highlights or overexposure. In these cases, make sure that you're using the lowest ISO possible. If that's not good enough, you might need to look at a neutral density filter, which is a filter that limits the amount of light coming into the camera. These are often used for longer daytime exposures such as those seen with silky waterfall photos.

Another tip that applies to long exposures at any time is that you'll want to stabilize the camera using a tripod or other device to prevent camera shake.

Answered by ahockley

Check more discussion of this question.

What are the best techniques for photographing butterflies in a glasshouse?

Question

I will be going to a glasshouse where there will be butterflies as part of a special exhibition / attraction.

What are the best techniques for taking good shots, assuming that using a tripod might be difficult? I will be using a 100mm macro lens.

Answer

I would definitely bring a monopod. Where a tripod might be difficult to use given space constraints, time constraints, or regulations of the exhibit, a monopod should give you a considerable amount of stability while still being very mobile.

If you are inside of the glasshouse (green house), you should be free to use flash. I would either use a macro flash, or find a way to move your flash off camera, close to the subject, with a small diffuser. That should help increase lighting, which even in a green house is likely to be dimmer than you would really need. You won't need a large light...but a small diffused flash should be perfect for butterflies.

If you are going to be shooting through glass, you'll want to make sure you shoot at an angle that hides reflections. It can be possible to use a flash through glass, especially if it is off camera, but you run the risk of increasing glare and obscuring your subject with reflections. You'll want a fast aperture and higher ISO if there is limited light.

Check more discussion of this question.