Technical tips to improve photography?

New Topic
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
monsoon 30 Oct 2018

Hi

I want to improve my photography when climbing and mountaineering. I have a reasonable understanding of the principles of photography and I have a small mirrorless camera which gives me full control of things like aperture, shutter speed and ISO. My lens is a 13-32 f5.6 ish zoom on a 4/3 sensor.

I have 2 questions:

1: what tips do people have for getting better photos - i.e. technical tips over composition and

2: I would like to improve image quality and also to get a shallower depth of field to isolate the subject. I know this means a lower aperture but I still don't get a very blurred background. Is this because of my lens or does a 4/3 sensor give greater depth of field and therefore isolating the subject becomes harder than say on full frame? 

 Tringa 30 Oct 2018
In reply to monsoon:

> Hi

> I want to improve my photography when climbing and mountaineering. I have a reasonable understanding of the principles of photography and I have a small mirrorless camera which gives me full control of things like aperture, shutter speed and ISO. My lens is a 13-32 f5.6 ish zoom on a 4/3 sensor.

> I have 2 questions:

> 1: what tips do people have for getting better photos - i.e. technical tips over composition and

> 2: I would like to improve image quality and also to get a shallower depth of field to isolate the subject. I know this means a lower aperture but I still don't get a very blurred background. Is this because of my lens or does a 4/3 sensor give greater depth of field and therefore isolating the subject becomes harder than say on full frame? 


Its difficult to advise technically without seeing one of your photos and have you say what you aren't happy about.  However, common problems are,

camera shake,

the dynamic range of the scene is too great for the camera to capture in one shot,

the shutter speed too low to stop movement and the subject looks blurred.

 

Getting a shallower depth of field is more difficult the smaller the sensor of the camera and while a 4/3 sensor isn't the smallest by some margin it is on smaller than some. Using the lens at full zoom will help as at any given aperture the longer the lens the smaller the depth of field. If possible, don't have the subject close the background.  However, I realise these two are not always achievable in the real world.

Dave

 Jon Read 30 Oct 2018
In reply to Tringa:

> the dynamic range of the scene is too great for the camera to capture in one shot,

Too true. I suggest (to the OP) that you learn to set your exposure 'to the right' and understand your in-camera histograms. Consider ND-grad filters or HDR if you have very wide natural range.

 

 The Lemming 30 Oct 2018
In reply to monsoon:

> Hi

> I want to improve my photography when climbing and mountaineering. I have a reasonable understanding of the principles of photography and I have a small mirrorless camera which gives me full control of things like aperture, shutter speed and ISO. My lens is a 13-32 f5.6 ish zoom on a 4/3 sensor.

> I have 2 questions:

> 1: what tips do people have for getting better photos - i.e. technical tips over composition and

The best tip I can give is to be in superb locations, which is practically anywhere away from an urban setting.and you will be hard pressed to take a duff image.  The scenery will make the image zing

> 2: I would like to improve image quality and also to get a shallower depth of field to isolate the subject. I know this means a lower aperture but I still don't get a very blurred background. Is this because of my lens or does a 4/3 sensor give greater depth of field and therefore isolating the subject becomes harder than say on full frame? 

From my limited experience and knowledge, to get a blurred background which brings out the subject then its best to use a zoom lens with as low an aperture as possible.  It does not have to be a zoom lens, a prime lens with focal length of about 100mm or longer will work best.

Open out the aperture and have the subject some distance from the background.  This gives the lens a fighting chance to blur out the background artistically enough to be noticeable.

With a 13-32mm lens at f5.6 you are going to have to get very creative to get a shot with the background out of focus.  With this type of lens then you should get pin-sharp images with a lot of the scenery in good focus.

Its a bit of a misconception that a full-frame lens gives better depth of field over a micro four thirds camera.  A 100mm focal length will give the same depth of field on any camera.  However with a MFT camera a 100mm focal length is roughly equivalent to a full frame camera with a 200mm focal length but only with the cropping/scale of the lens and sensor combo.  The 100mm lens will give the depth of field for 100mm and could never give the same depth of field as a 200mm lens.  This is the pay off for going micro four thirds.  You get smaller lenses for similar image/crop size with full frame cameras.

I'm a happy micro four thirds camera owner.

Here is what 100mm can do on a mft camera.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/the1lemming/28745156948/in/dateposted-public/

And here is a stab at a blurred background at 35mm

https://www.flickr.com/photos/the1lemming/26181556157/in/dateposted-public/

Post edited at 18:02
 Russell Lovett 30 Oct 2018
In reply to monsoon:

The best advise i was ever given was shot in RAW get Photoshop and learn how to use it, you can bet your bottom dollar that anybody in the top 10 galleries on hear use Photoshop. Also and this is not just for landscapes, shot in the Golden hour it realy does make the rok glow and the light in the images will be much nicer.

 Robert Durran 30 Oct 2018
In reply to Russell Lovett:

> The best advise I was ever given was shot in RAW get Photoshop and learn how to use it, you can bet your bottom dollar that anybody in the top 10 galleries on hear use Photoshop.

Well I'm reasonably regularly in the top 10 galleries and don't shoot RAW or use Photoshop. Please contact me to arrange to send me your bottom dollar

Having said that, I bought Lightroom nearly three years ago, but, technophobe that I am, have been so intimidated by rumours about it's nightmare filing system that you apparently have to buy in to, that I havn't yet dared try to use it. I can see the disc right now, sitting on a table mocking me..........    If anyone can recommend an alternative where I can simply open a RAW file and edit it before putting a jpeg back in my own trusted filing system, I'd be delighted!

 The Lemming 31 Oct 2018
In reply to Robert Durran:

I use lightroom, but I don't use it's filing system.

 spartacus 31 Oct 2018
In reply to monsoon:

Re composition, one of the best tips I ever got was to ask yourself ‘what is this a picture of ? If the answer is some mountains or a wood the results are not going to be that interesting. The picture needs a focal point for the eye to go to and create interest. 

Understanding of the rule of thirds will improve composition enormously. Check on the internet should give you loads on subject and examples. 

Post edited at 07:21
1
 FactorXXX 31 Oct 2018
In reply to Robert Durran:

>   If anyone can recommend an alternative where I can simply open a RAW file and edit it before putting a jpeg back in my own trusted filing system, I'd be delighted!

Photoshop as opposed to Lightroom will do that.
Alternatively, there is Affinity Photo:

https://affinity.serif.com/en-gb/photo/

 

 

 

 JDal 31 Oct 2018
In reply to Robert Durran:

What do you mean by "It's filing system"? It has a catalog that points at your own filing system and holds stuff like preview data, thumbnails, keywords, GPS and changes you've made. It can write this stuff to your  filing system if you want. I use it largely for its cataloging capabilities.

 

 

 FactorXXX 31 Oct 2018
In reply to JDal:

> What do you mean by "It's filing system"? It has a catalog that points at your own filing system and holds stuff like preview data, thumbnails, keywords, GPS and changes you've made. It can write this stuff to your  filing system if you want. I use it largely for its cataloging capabilities.

It's the fact that once you transfer your Folder/File system into Lightroom, that you have to thereafter do any management of that Folder/File system from within Lightroom and not use Explorer (or Mac equivalent).   It's the reason why I don't use Lightroom and use Photoshop on 'Stand Alone' images. 
Some people love the whole Lightroom Cataloguing thing, I don't... 

 

1
 HeMa 31 Oct 2018
In reply to Robert Durran:

There are 3 reasonable non desctructive editing softwares available. Affinity and Luminance(?) being the cheaper ones. 

That said, you don’t need to use the automatic foldering from LR. As in you can choose the exact folder where you wish to copy (or move) the originals. 

 JDal 31 Oct 2018
In reply to FactorXXX:

> It's the fact that once you transfer your Folder/File system into Lightroom, that you have to thereafter do any management of that Folder/File system from within Lightroom and not use Explorer (or Mac equivalent).   …..

Er, no. 1: You can keep all your changes in sidecar files (ALL raw processors do/can do that) and rename/copy things about to your hearts content and then resync your LR catalog.  Why you would want to, I don't know.

2: If you don't like LR, then you can just dump it at any time, your original files are left untouched "thereafter you have to manage via LR" is just not true.

> Some people love the whole Lightroom Cataloguing thing, I don't... 

Fair enough, horses for courses. I have, for example, 2.5k botanical images that are hierarchically catalogued by scientific names. I can't use the directory structure, because that's used to store by date. 

 

 

 FactorXXX 31 Oct 2018
In reply to JDal:

> Er, no. 1: You can keep all your changes in sidecar files (ALL raw processors do/can do that) and rename/copy things about to your hearts content and then resync your LR catalog.  Why you would want to, I don't know.
> 2: If you don't like LR, then you can just dump it at any time, your original files are left untouched "thereafter you have to manage via LR" is just not true.

Once you transfer the Folder/File system that you use for your photo's into Lightroom, then you can no longer use Explorer to modify that Folder/File system without messing up the Lightroom Catalogue i.e. you have to use Lightroom to modify that Folder/File system and if you don't, Lightroom will not be able to find Folders/Files that you have moved/added, etc.
It's obviously totally down to preference of how you manage your Folder/File system - I just find it easier and more efficient to do all my sorting of folders, etc. in Explorer without having to open Lightroom and do it in there.
As far as actual editing goes, Lightroom and Photoshop are essentially the same when it comes to RAW files, so all square and even there.  Once I'm happy with an image, I save it and bin the Sidecar file if one has been generated (all work done on a copy).
There are workarounds as Lemming seems to be using, but why bother when you can use Photoshop?
This might well all become academic, as I'm currently trying out Capture One and/or Affinity. 

 

 

 ring ouzel 31 Oct 2018
In reply to monsoon:

I've just been on a weekend photography course with a pro photographer. Highly recommended. I learned lots!

Now I have to practice, practice, practice. And experiment to see what works and what doesn't. And I'll ask other photographers to critique my images to see what other people think and why.

I have also found You Tube useful and lynda.com has some very good photography courses too.

And then practice some more!

 balmybaldwin 31 Oct 2018
In reply to Robert Durran:

This is almost exactly what I do with Lightroom, import to a Lightroom collection then export back to original folders.

This does mean effectively I'm doubling my storage but I figure I'm not low on space and an extra copy isn't a bad thing.

To op and depth of field, the lens you have will give you the effect you want but you may need to work harder for it. The closer you get to your subject the smaller the depth of field. I can get great background blur with my 16mm but I do have to get close to subject

 JDal 31 Oct 2018
In reply to FactorXXX:

Like I said, horses for courses on cataloguing. But LR & PS are a long way apart on editing functionality in some key areas.

Because LR is accessing the raw data, it can do non-destructive WB adjustments and highlight recovery is much better. Also, for some reason, it has an intuitive Grad filter, I don't understand why PS doesn't. There are other things like haze reduction which seem like magic. On the other hand PS is loads better at cloning, sharpening (via filters) etc.

I hardly use PS at all these days. It's worth saying that I always work from RAW files, things might be different if I chose to just use JPG's, these arguments become invalid and LR editing would have no real advantages.

monsoon 31 Oct 2018
In reply to monsoon:

Thanks to those who replied to the original post! 

Awesome hijack the rest of you?! 

 FactorXXX 31 Oct 2018
In reply to JDal:

> Like I said, horses for courses on cataloguing. But LR & PS are a long way apart on editing functionality in some key areas.
> Because LR is accessing the raw data, it can do non-destructive WB adjustments and highlight recovery is much better. Also, for some reason, it has an intuitive Grad filter, I don't understand why PS doesn't. There are other things like haze reduction which seem like magic. On the other hand PS is loads better at cloning, sharpening (via filters) etc.
> I hardly use PS at all these days. It's worth saying that I always work from RAW files, things might be different if I chose to just use JPG's, these arguments become invalid and LR editing would have no real advantages.

Open up a RAW image in Photoshop and it goes into a RAW editor pretty much the same as Lightroom - which is non-destructive and has the haze reduction function, etc.
The essential difference between the two lies in the Cataloguing facility provided by Lightroom.  Which you either think is a good thing, or don't...

 yoshi.h 31 Oct 2018
In reply to monsoon:

1. Shoot in RAW, learn to edit in photoshop or lightroom.

2. The short answer is that you need lower aperture prime lense (unless you have money to buy a low aperture zoom lense - expensive).

 HeMa 31 Oct 2018
In reply to yoshi.h:

> 1. Shoot in RAW, learn to edit in photoshop or lightroom.

helps, but not strictly needed.

> 2. The short answer is that you need lower aperture prime lense (unless you have money to buy a low aperture zoom lense - expensive).

again, helps... but shooting with the biggest aperture and having the subject close and background really far away helps.

 

for a good cheap lens Kamlan 50mm F1.1 is pretty hard to beat. Manual focus though. A tad more spendy (my personal favourite) is Kamlan 28mm F1.4. Samyang also has suitable manual lenses. Takes a bit of practice, but works quite well for non action stuff.

 

 planetmarshall 31 Oct 2018
In reply to JDal:

> What do you mean by "It's filing system"? It has a catalog that points at your own filing system and holds stuff like preview data, thumbnails, keywords, GPS and changes you've made. It can write this stuff to your  filing system if you want. I use it largely for its cataloging capabilities.

Yeah, the fact that you have to ask what's meant by "filing system", and then it takes a paragraph and several follow up posts to explain it.

1
 Robert Durran 31 Oct 2018
In reply to JDal:

> What do you mean by "It's filing system"? It has a catalog that points at your own filing system.

You have just confirmed to me that the whole thing is intimidatingly confusing. It is not at all clear to me what the difference is between a catalogue and a filing system.........

And most other replies just come across pretty much as gobbledygook to me!

I've come to the conclusion that the only way I'm ever going to get to grips with photoshop is to pay for some 1 to 1 tuition targeted at what I want/need to know (or try another less confusing alternative). 

 yoshi.h 31 Oct 2018
In reply to HeMa:

In my opinion, if you have a basic understanding of ISO, shutter speed and aperture the next easiest and biggest aspect to improve your photos will be to be able to post produce.

With the OPs lense you will not get any useful desirable blur unless you are shooting ants. If I had to buy one additional lense I would suggest just getting a standard 50mm f1.8 (cheap and common), being the most versatile prime. Usually any aperture larger than that (esp. f1.1) is a faff to use and unless you have very good camera skills you will screw up more photos than you'd want to (unless you want extreme bokeh which is quite niche in my opinion). 

monsoon 31 Oct 2018
In reply to monsoon:

I used to shoot on fast primes in a previous life. The reason I’m on the little zoom is portability with a bit of flexibility too. A fast 50 prime would work well but doesn’t work that well for climbing shots IMO? 

1
In reply to monsoon:

I think I learnt a lot from showing my pictures to other people and asking them for feedback. I used to use Flickr a lot and there were groups for doing just that, not sure if they are still there. I not only learnt about technical stuff - focus, composition, lighting etc but also what other people liked about my pictures and it wasn't always what I thought. I use RAW for serious photography & jpg for casual and process them in PS Elements with my own cataloguing system. I use the camera's software (Nikon ViewNX2 to upload to my laptop and save all originals then process & save selected images in seperate folders e.g monthly or assignment based. One thing I do that I think is useful is to save images with a unique yet meaningful name & its original file number eg 4587-JohnonTowerRidge. That way I can track it down from my index and go back to an original for any reworks.

 JDal 31 Oct 2018
In reply to planetmarshall:

> Yeah, the fact that you have to ask what's meant by "filing system", and then it takes a paragraph and several follow up posts to explain it.

You've lost me there. 

madamtutu 31 Oct 2018
In reply to monsoon:

Hey monsoon,

it has already been said but maybe worth reiterating

To get a shallow depth of field you need to indeed open up the aperture. However, to get a blurred out background you normally need a lens with an aperture between F1.4 and F2.8, your F5.6 lens is simply not fast enough to give you the look you are after.

Zoom gives more blur (very simplified) but for taking climbing photos with your mates a wider lens is more useful unless you are mostly rigged up on a static rope far far away.. like in this picture of Tom Randall conquering a crack in Norway: notice how Tom is sharp and the background is nicely blurred without losing all the detail

https://bqphotography.photoshelter.com/portfolio/G0000GG0hIKqrwdY/I0000owV6...

This was shot at F2.8 on a 70-200mm lens at 70mm. So this wasn't shot on a wide angle, it was shot on a zoom but you really don't want to lug that around on a day out climbing obviously! 

Your lens is a 26-64mm (in 35mm terms) so that's a really useful range for landscapes/portraits but it's not fast enough for what you are trying to achieve. Something like F2.8-3.5 would be perfect. The other advantage of a fast (wider aperture) lens is that you can shoot in low light without getting lots of grain or camera shake from a slow shutter speed. Someone mentioned a manual focus F1.1 50mm upthread - I wouldn't buy that because it's impossible to focus properly unless you and your subject are 1000% static. Manual focus is an absolute bitch to work with.

Generally, image quality improves with correct exposure and shooting in manual mode. Keep shutter speed at a minimum of 1/250th to avoid camera shake (faster is better for moving targets or if you don't have very steady hands). Shoot at the lowest ISO possible to avoid too much noise/grain. 

And then of course there's the effect of ambient light (someone mentioned the golden hour!) and editing in Lightroom/Capture One. Light is important. Flat light is sometimes a bit "boring" and bright sunlight is too harsh. Most of this can be remedied in Photoshop by controlling the contrast

On sunny days or where there's a big contrast between shadow and bright areas, try to expose the bright areas correctly. You can bring up dark areas in Lightroom to reveal details but you cannot tone down blown out (white) highlights. White is white! For backlit situations, where the face of the climber is dark because of the sun behind them, expose for the face but go maybe one or two stops under (so expose slightly darker than you normally would but make sure you don't completely lose the details) and then correct afterwards in Lightroom. That way you still get visible surroundings and not just a blown out background.

The thing with the dynamic range is difficult to assess without knowing what camera you use. I have never used HDR in my entire life as a professional photographer but it might be worth looking into if you regularly shoot landscapes.

Not sure if this solves any of your issues? Feel free to PM me if you need more of my "wisdom"

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 The Lemming 31 Oct 2018
In reply to monsoon:

> I used to shoot on fast primes in a previous life. The reason I’m on the little zoom is portability with a bit of flexibility too.

Going off what you have said here, I mistakenly guessed you were new to photography in general. However if you are used to fast primes, is it safe to assume that you have a good technical undersanding of a camera?

If this is the case, then I'm guessing you have specific advice in mind?

 

 FactorXXX 31 Oct 2018
In reply to Robert Durran:

> I've come to the conclusion that the only way I'm ever going to get to grips with photoshop is to pay for some 1 to 1 tuition targeted at what I want/need to know (or try another less confusing alternative). 

If you open up a RAW image in either Lightroom or Photoshop, then the actual editing package is fairly straightforward and intuitive - It essentially gives you a workflow to follow and with the most important bits of that workflow being the first ones.
Lightroom users will have to clarify this, but I believe if you open up a JPG image in Lightroom, then it gives you pretty much the same interface.
In Photoshop, you can open up the JPG in 'Camera RAW Filter' (easy to do) to once again give you a similar interface.
In all of the above, there is a very real possibility that you won't have to actually use the full blown Photoshop at all, as all the important stuff regarding White Balance and Levels, etc. can be done quickly, simply and perhaps more importantly, you can see the changes you make as you move the sliders back and forth - no more difficult really than adjusting the brightness on an old school 'analogue' TV.
If like me you don't like the Cataloguing system of Lightroom and refuse to use it, then either use Photoshop, or, do a fudge with Lightroom by setting up a temporary folder (containing copies) for Lightroom and deleting it once you've got the images that you want. 
Another alternative is Affinity.  I'm currently trying to learn how to use it, but finding the changeover from Photoshop confusing.  However, it is supposed to be very good and if starting from scratch you shouldn't face the same frustrations as I'm currently facing.  It's also way cheaper than Photoshop! 

 

 FactorXXX 31 Oct 2018
In reply to Jon Read:

>  Consider ND-grad filters or HDR if you have very wide natural range.

I think ND Graduated filters are something which seem to have disappeared with the arrival of digital photography and editing.  I use them a lot and often get asked what they are - the usual reply to my answer is 'Why bother, I've got Photoshop'.  Fair enough, but it's so much easier to get it as near to right as you can in the camera.
For the instantaneous magic feeling, use a Polariser.  Once you've turned one and seen the viewfinder change from flat to vibrant then you'll wonder how you managed without one...  

 

 Robert Durran 31 Oct 2018
In reply to FactorXXX:

> If you open up a RAW image in either Lightroom or Photoshop, then the actual editing package is fairly straightforward and intuitive - It essentially gives you a workflow to follow and with the most important bits of that workflow being the first ones.

Yes, I have looked at the editing and would be fine with that - it is just all the filing and catalogue stuff which puts me off and which I need help with.

 HeMa 31 Oct 2018
In reply to Robert Durran:

> Yes, I have looked at the editing and would be fine with that - it is just all the filing and catalogue stuff which puts me off and which I need help with.



The "filing", is often based on the date/month. But as was already mentioned, you can also select/define the folder your self.

The catalogue portion, is the real reason to use LR. But you do not need to use it at all. How ever, it is rather handy, just for keeping track that you've edited all them pics and so on. (So have a workflow with enough steps and then tag the step you want on the pics... after completion, change the tag to the next one.... like 1.DeleteBadShots, 2.RateOrStar, 3.CropOver3Stars, 4.AdjustHighlights...) Also handy, to keep track of the subject (person, category, climb, location etc.) of each pic. Then you can simple pic a tag (or Keyword) and see all pics that you tagged it with. Naturally, "moving" your legacy photos and tagging them is going to be a big task, but it can help (or not). So it is easier to start when you add the new pics and edit them (I have tagging as one step in my work flow).

 FactorXXX 31 Oct 2018
In reply to Robert Durran:

> Yes, I have looked at the editing and would be fine with that - it is just all the filing and catalogue stuff which puts me off and which I need help with.

To be honest, the actual process of putting your Folder/File system containing your photos into Lightroom is relatively straightforward.  It's also straightforward to navigate around that Folder/File system within Lightroom as per Explorer.  There are loads of Videos available to help you out - Try the Julieanne Kost ones as I found those quite good.
However, I'm probably in the same camp as you in that I don't like Lightroom being the master of that Folder/File system and would prefer to do all my Folder/File management in Explorer. Others obviously disagree and it's up to you what you do in that regard.  
One option is to keep your Folder/File system as it is and set up a seperate Folder/File system just for Lightroom.  This isn't a duplicate of your Explorer Folder/File system, but a temporary cache for the photos and only the photos that you intend to edit.  Set that up as the Lightroom Catalogue, do your editing and bin the images from the temporary Catalogue once you're happy with the editing.  That way, you keep your Explorer Folder/File system intact, but have the benefits of a Lightroom Catalogue - batch editing, sorting, classifying by star, etc. for your 'live' photo collection. 

 Robert Durran 31 Oct 2018
In reply to HeMa:

> The catalogue portion, is the real reason to use LR............(So have a workflow with enough steps and then tag the step you want on the pics... after completion, change the tag to the next one.... like 1.DeleteBadShots, 2.RateOrStar, 3.CropOver3Stars, 4.AdjustHighlights...) .............

I've absolutely no interest in tagging anything. I just want to keep my photos in named and dated files like I do now!

 Robert Durran 31 Oct 2018
In reply to FactorXXX:

> To be honest, the actual process of putting your Folder/File system containing your photos into Lightroom is relatively straightforward.

I'm sure it is if an actual real person shows you how to do it - in my experience this is the only way to learn any computer stuff without it all ending in apoplectic luddite violence!

> It's also straightforward to navigate around that Folder/File system within Lightroom as per Explorer. 

Explorer? What's that got to do with it?!

 

 FactorXXX 31 Oct 2018
In reply to Robert Durran:

> I've absolutely no interest in tagging anything. I just want to keep my photos in named and dated files like I do now!

I'm guessing that you want to do the same as me i.e. 'Right Click' on image, select 'Open with Lightroom' and then have the image open in Lightroom with no further action from yourself apart from the actual editing?  No Catalogues involved, just open image, edit and save.
If so, you might be out of luck, but maybe someone knows of a way of doing this?

 FactorXXX 31 Oct 2018
In reply to Robert Durran:

> Explorer? What's that got to do with it?!

The File/Folder system set up in the Catalogue is the same structure as the Explorer one.  So, once the Catalogue is set up, you can treat it just like Explorer.

 

 HeMa 31 Oct 2018
In reply to Robert Durran:

> I've absolutely no interest in tagging anything. I just want to keep my photos in named and dated files like I do now!

You don't need to... and the tags (or rather keywords) would only be in the Lightroom (or sidecar XMP, if you wish).

This information does not change the name nor the date of the actual files (unless you set up lightroom to do so). So it's an additional layer of information, that you can also omit.


That said, then you do loose the best part of LR (ok, perhaps the batch editing will be useful). But then Affinity and Luminar Photo might be more suited (and a lot cheaper) editing applications. Both available as trial versions I believe.

 HeMa 31 Oct 2018
In reply to Robert Durran:

 

> Explorer? What's that got to do with it?!

 

Everything, as it seems to be your preferred file management system (or are you on a mac, then replace Explorer with Finder).

Explorer =/ Internet Explorer

 

 Robert Durran 31 Oct 2018
In reply to FactorXXX:

> I'm guessing that you want to do the same as me i.e. 'Right Click' on image, select 'Open with Lightroom' and then have the image open in Lightroom with no further action from yourself apart from the actual editing?  No Catalogues involved, just open image, edit and save.

Yes, that is exactly what I want to do!

 Robert Durran 31 Oct 2018
In reply to HeMa:

> Everything, as it seems to be your preferred file management system (or are you on a mac, then replace Explorer with Finder).

> Explorer =/ Internet Explorer

I don't use Explorer to file things (as far as I know..... ) - presumably, being interenet, this is a cloud thing?  I just use the (windows?) filing system on my laptop.

In reply to Robert Durran:

> Yes, I have looked at the editing and would be fine with that - it is just all the filing and catalogue stuff which puts me off and which I need help with.

If you want a local course to help you with Lightroom have a look at https://www.stills.org/courses/beginners-courses/project-day-digital-workfl... .

I’ve been on a Lightroom course at Stills a couple of years ago and it was very useful and would recommend Stills. Unless it’s changed, it’s a hands on course and actively encourages discussion within the group and with the tutor so all your questions could be addressed.

They also do a Photoshop course though it’s past for this year, if you want to consider that.

I do use LR catalogue now having done the course (and actually moved a lot of my photos from my previous filing system which was easy to be consistent). However, I don’t see why you can’t do as FactorXXX mentions and retain your own system saving files out, and just use LR’s cat files as a temp store or even backup of those you edit. Access to the LR files can be done outwith LR for viewing or other programs, just like your own filing system.

 FactorXXX 31 Oct 2018
In reply to Robert Durran:

> I don't use Explorer to file things (as far as I know..... ) - presumably, being interenet, this is a cloud thing?  I just use the (windows?) filing system on my laptop.

Sorry, Explorer = Windows Explorer or File Explorer - the bog standard File/Folder system on Windows. 

 Robert Durran 31 Oct 2018
In reply to FactorXXX:

> Sorry, Explorer = Windows Explorer or File Explorer - the bog standard File/Folder system on Windows. 

That makes sense!

 Robert Durran 31 Oct 2018
In reply to Climbing Pieman:

> If you want a local course to help you with Lightroom have a look at https://www.stills.org/courses/beginners-courses/project-day-digital-workfl... .

Thanks. that looks good - can't make that one but shall bear Stills in mind.

 Mike_d78 31 Oct 2018
In reply to Robert Durran:

Sorry to continue the hijack and perhaps confuse things even more........

How I use Lightroom Classic CC..... the folder structure and image file location in Lightroom exactly mirrors the folder structure in explorer. See the link below as an example

https://helpx.adobe.com/uk/lightroom/help/create-folders.html

To repeat my Lightroom and explorer folder structure and contents of the folders are identical. Yes it keeps things simpler from a Lightroom point of view to manage the files in Lightroom, but that is no more difficult than doing it in explorer. 

The catalogue is different to the image files and folders. The catalogue is a single a separate Lightroom file (a database i guess) which holds primarily image edit information.

Folders are where the unedited image files sit. The catalogue contains edit info on the image files. You need both to run LR, but for the most part the catalogue can just be ignored in the background.

Sorry hopefully it's clearer? ; )

 

Post edited at 22:25
 Mike_d78 31 Oct 2018
In reply to monsoon:

And from a non hijack point of view;

If you're going to post process shoot RAW gives you much more control of the edit. 

Learn composition rules though don't always follow them. 

As some others have said there are quite a few options to reduce DOF choose what suits you best taking into account the best focal length for the types of photos you take.... cost as well!

monsoon 31 Oct 2018
In reply to monsoon:

Thanks all, well most of you...

i had visions of this thread being a useful resource for ‘how to improve your photography’ for those who already knew a bit, plus I had a couple of specific questions. 

Guess its moderately useful for someone looking to understand LRs filing structure. Which for my part is great. Just let it take control of how you organise - it’s what it’s good at. 

So what fixed length lens works best for photographing your second, photographing others climbing from a static line close by and climbing related landscapes? I’m currently using a MFT body. 

Post edited at 23:34
 nacnud 31 Oct 2018
In reply to monsoon:

Learn the relationships between ISO Aperture and Shutter Speed. Here is a cheat sheet.

https://www.slrlounge.com/iso-aperture-shutter-speed-a-cheat-sheet-for-begi...

Shoot RAW + jpeg so you have both if you end up not wanting to learn how to edit RAW files.

Learn a bit about composition, without that no amount of editing will help. This is a nice video of composing a landscape photograph.

youtube.com/watch?v=68bPnr-c8Vc&

And here is what climbing mag thinks makes a good climbing photograph.

https://www.climbing.com/news/10-rules-climbing-photography/

Learn a photo editor, if you want to improve the photos you took without too much brushing out parts etc up then Lightroom Classic CC is the standard. Confusingly Lightroom CC is a different thing and not as powerful. Photoshop is there if you want to dramatically change the photo, add elements from different photos, change the perspective etc. Adobe has free week long trial for all those programs. Find a few photos you want to play with, watch a bunch of you tube vids and spend a few evenings learning what is possible.

This vid goes from taking a photo all the way through to editing in Lightroom. There is a lot to take in so watch it, play around in Lightroom to get a little familiar with the controls then watch it again. It makes much more sense the second time around.

youtube.com/watch?v=k0kfUiRX7Rk&

Good luck! 

 

 nacnud 01 Nov 2018
In reply to monsoon:

> So what fixed length lens works best for photographing your second, photographing others climbing from a static line close by and climbing related landscapes? I’m currently using a MFT body. 

Whatever you have with you when you compose the shot

I use an APS-C camera with a crop factor of about 1.5. MFT camera has a crop factor of 2. Full frame cameras have a crop factor of 1. So to get the equivalent lens in different systems multiply by the crop factor of the system you use then divide by the crop factor of the system yor are converting too. Clear as mud?

The human eye is about the same as a 35mm to 50mm lens on a full frame camera, or 17mm to 25mm on a micro 4/3. This is why most cameras come with a lens that zooms over about that range, probably a little more. Start with a lens like that and learn how to use it, then go and learn what a wide zoom, tele zoom and prime lenses are and how to use them. Do you even need them?

To get you started:

Wide zooms get everything in but push the horizon away, you need a good foreground subject to make pictures work well.

Tele zooms bring the horizon closer but focus in on a small part of it, good for picking out details.

Prime lenses are fixed, they don't zoom, but can have amazing control of depth of field and can be good in low light.  

You can also get zoom with a massive range that replace all of these lenses, good for travel photographs as much less faff.

Good luck!

 

 FactorXXX 01 Nov 2018
In reply to monsoon:

> So what fixed length lens works best for photographing your second, photographing others climbing from a static line close by and climbing related landscapes? I’m currently using a MFT body. 

One prime for each?
Or, one prime to cover all three activities?

I use a DSLR with a 1.5 crop factor and use a 17-50mm with a constant f2.8 aperture.  That would probably cover all three of your requirements and the constant f2.8 aperture gives you a bit more control over Depth of Field compared to wider zooms with apertures going up to f5.6, etc.
If I had to just use one lens, I'd probably go for a 35mm as that is pretty much the 'Jack of all Trades' lens for a 1.5 crop factor. That, in general, would also give you a larger aperture to give you even more control over Depth of Field.
I personally would use an equivalent zoom lens for your crop factor as I stated above - Standard zoom with constant aperture.  Not sure what is available in Micro Four Thirds though, but I'm sure there are MFT users on UKC that could recommend something.

P.S. Sorry for contributing to the thread derailment, it's UKC and that's what happens...
(You're actually lucky that no one has mentioned how Brexit is going to make digital cameras and lenses prohibitively expensive and that we'd all have to revert to film)  

 

 HeMa 01 Nov 2018
In reply to monsoon:

> So what fixed length lens works best for photographing your second, photographing others climbing from a static line close by and climbing related landscapes? I’m currently using a MFT body. 

Quite wide, at least for a second. Same actually for shooting pics of a leader from a fixed line. That said, I mostly shoot pics of single pitch stuff (and short one at that, think grit) often in dense forests. So I need to get close.

If you do mountain crags (and/or open multibitch stuff), normal or small tele might be suited.

If compact size happens to be a criteria, then Panasonic 14mm f2.5 is about the smallest. Pany/Oly 20mm f~1.8 is also a viable option. About the size of your current zoom, or smaller.

You could complement this with a small zoom (say Pany 35-100mm) for when takin' pics of climbers further away (and leave it in yer sack at the bottom, when you're actually climbing).

 Jon Read 01 Nov 2018
In reply to FactorXXX:

> One prime for each?

> Or, one prime to cover all three activities?

IMHO, a zoom would be more useful for pictures of climbers taken from a rope -- you want to avoid juggling lenses at height, really.

 

 Robert Durran 01 Nov 2018
In reply to HeMa:

> Quite wide, at least for a second. Same actually for shooting pics of a leader from a fixed line.

But please avoid those all too common wide angle close up photos which make the climber look like they have a grotesquely huge grasping hand in the foreground attached to a little body with tiny spindly legs

 nacnud 01 Nov 2018
In reply to Robert Durran:

There is a difference between a fisheye and a wide angle

 Robert Durran 01 Nov 2018
In reply to nacnud:

I'm not talking about fisheye (which I really hate at all times - why would anyone want to completely distort a landscape?).  Just a "normal" wide angle such as the 15mm equivalent I have.

 HeMa 01 Nov 2018
In reply to Robert Durran:

Robert, on MFT a 15mm gives the FOV of 30mm (for fullframe or 35mm terms), so not wide at all.

 yoshi.h 01 Nov 2018
In reply to monsoon:

> Thanks all, well most of you...

> i had visions of this thread being a useful resource for ‘how to improve your photography’ for those who already knew a bit, plus I had a couple of specific questions. 

This is UKC, you'll be ok as long as you remember only about 5% of the response might be useful.

> Guess its moderately useful for someone looking to understand LRs filing structure. Which for my part is great. Just let it take control of how you organise - it’s what it’s good at. 

> So what fixed length lens works best for photographing your second, photographing others climbing from a static line close by and climbing related landscapes? I’m currently using a MFT body.

50mm prime. 35mm prime if you can afford one...preferably with aperture f1.4-1.8 (whatever you can afford).

 

 nacnud 01 Nov 2018
In reply to Robert Durran:

> Why would anyone want to completely distort a landscape?

To provide context.

Post edited at 10:18
 Robert Durran 01 Nov 2018
In reply to HeMa:

I have a 10-15 zoom on an APSC sensor. I meant that this gives a full frame equivalent of 15mm at widest angle - and that's pretty wide.

Post edited at 10:45
 Robert Durran 01 Nov 2018
In reply to yoshi.h:

> This is UKC, you'll be ok as long as you remember only about 5% of the response might be useful.

.........but the beauty of it is that the other 95% might be interesting and useful to other people.

 Robert Durran 01 Nov 2018
In reply to nacnud:

> To provide context.

Maybe, but I just find the distortion aesthetically pretty silly (just my opinion  ).

Post edited at 10:47
 nacnud 01 Nov 2018
In reply to Robert Durran:

If you are taking a photo at very close range but need to show the subject within a wider context then fisheyes work for that. Hence their use in action cams. They are also very forgiving when it comes to framing.

If you have more control over framing and camera position then non fisheye wide and ultra wide lens can provide context which brings a lot to an image. There is more going on in the below image than just two people kissing.

https://shotkit.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/Shotkit_Two_Mann_02.jpg

Post edited at 10:56
monsoon 01 Nov 2018
In reply to monsoon:

50mm on MFT = 100mm at FF, which seems pretty long for a 'do it all lens' for climbing work?

 Robert Durran 01 Nov 2018
In reply to nacnud:

> If you are taking a photo at very close range but need to show the subject within a wider context then fisheyes work for that.

Yes, I agree, but to me that is at the expense of aesthetics (straight lines being distorted to curves)

> Hence their use in action cams.

For this reason I generally dislike action cam stuff.

> If you have more control over framing and camera position then non fisheye wide and ultra wide lens can provide context which brings a lot to an image. There is more going on in the below image than just two people kissing.

> https://shotkit.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/Shotkit_Two_Mann_02.jpg

Yes, I have no issues with that at all (straight lines are still straight!).  I love using my wide lens for landscapes to get immediate foreground almost up to my feet.

 

 nacnud 01 Nov 2018
In reply to Robert Durran:

We seem to be in agreement! Different tools for different jobs.

 Marmolata 01 Nov 2018
In reply to monsoon:

> Hi

>Is this because of my lens or does a 4/3 sensor give greater depth of field and therefore isolating the >subject becomes harder than say on full frame? 

Both. To stay in M43 something like the Panasonic-Leica 15mm f1.7 (fantastic lens) will give you more control over Depth of Field, with a wideish field of view (landscape) or the Panasonic 25mm for a little closer FoV (people in surrounding environment). For even thinner DoF a longer lens with a narrower FoV like the Panasonic 42.5mm f1.7. would be a good choice, e.g for portraits. The Pana 42.5 is better than the Oly 45 for you because of stabilisation and autofocus compatibility with your Panasonic camera.

For more DoF range you need to carry bigger sensors with bigger lenses.

Otherwise try things out and learn by yourself.

 

 yoshi.h 01 Nov 2018
In reply to monsoon:

> 50mm on MFT = 100mm at FF, which seems pretty long for a 'do it all lens' for climbing work?

I should have clarified - I meant the full frame equivalent of

 The Lemming 01 Nov 2018
In reply to monsoon:

 

> 2: I would like to improve image quality

I don't know which mft camera you have or what focusing features it has however my camera has 3 focus settings. It took me a while to get to grips with each of the settings before I realised I was using the wrong one at times giving me blurry or out of focus shots.

If you have not considered this before maybe you could do some test shots to find the best combination and limits of each feature when combined with your lens?

I'm still trying to nail the perfect action shot of my dog but I have to accept that a small black dog running towards my lens is too fast for it to focus and nail the shot.

Maybe my best bet is to set the camera to manual focus at a certain distance. I could then get him to run at me and I do a burst of shots hoping that one will hit the spot.

I like to try to find ways around the limitations of my kit to try and nail a sharp image.

Having a lens with image stabilization helps as well.

And it's not cheating if you put the camera into auto everything if you are in a rush or you don't want to screw upthe shot.

Post edited at 22:38
 HeMa 02 Nov 2018
In reply to The Lemming:

> I'm still trying to nail the perfect action shot of my dog but I have to accept that a small black dog running towards my lens is too fast for it to focus and nail the shot.

> Maybe my best bet is to set the camera to manual focus at a certain distance. I could then get him to run at me and I do a burst of shots hoping that one will hit the spot.

Set something on the path as a marker (say a stick, or distict rock) and pre-focus on that. Works like a charm.

 HeMa 02 Nov 2018
In reply to Robert Durran:

> Yes, I agree, but to me that is at the expense of aesthetics (straight lines being distorted to curves)

> For this reason I generally dislike action cam stuff.

 

You got the wrong lenses... there are lenses close to no barrel distortion and at pretty wide angles... AFAIK the widest being 9mm. 

https://www.venuslens.net/product/9mm/

Spendy though (and MFT mount model was published earlier this year, but no release date).

They even sell a 7.5mm f2.0 lens (for MFT), with it starts to show distortion...
https://www.venuslens.net/product/laowa-7-5mm-f2/

 

 HeMa 02 Nov 2018
In reply to Robert Durran:

Back to the topic of photo editing and categories....

This one application will do what you wish, quite nicely and without the catalog -thingy...
https://www.43rumors.com/announced-new-luminar-2018-with-sky-enhancer-tool-... (which, is promised by the end of the year for free... but they did promise the same thing last year this time).

In fact, once the DAM -module is out for Luminar, I might even make the switch from my old Lightroom 5 to it... As for me, the catalog and mass operations are the prime reasons I use Lightroom in the first place (suits my mind/temper and by actually using the workflows I mentioned above, I can sporatically do some work and still always no exactly where I'm at the next time I have some free time... a week or few months in between).

 Robert Durran 02 Nov 2018
In reply to HeMa:

> Back to the topic of photo editing and categories....

> This one application will do what you wish, quite nicely and without the catalog -thingy...

> https://www.43rumors.com/announced-new-luminar-2018-with-sky-enhancer-tool-...

Thanks. Shall have a look at that. Though I've realized that there seems to be a problem with what I want to do (file everthing in Windows and just open a photo in whatever programme to edit it), in that Windows does not seem to be able to show thumbnails from RAW files, so I won't know what photo I'm trying to open! Nothing is ever simple on a computer..............

 

 The Lemming 02 Nov 2018
In reply to Robert Durran:

> Though I've realized that there seems to be a problem with what I want to do (file everthing in Windows and just open a photo in whatever programme to edit it), in that Windows does not seem to be able to show thumbnails from RAW files, so I won't know what photo I'm trying to open! Nothing is ever simple on a computer..............

 

I have found this worked for me and my Windows 10 computer.

https://www.fastpictureviewer.com/codecs/

 

 HeMa 02 Nov 2018
In reply to Robert Durran:

As Lemming mentiones below, you'll need to install drives that understand your Raw format...

Or come to the dark side and start using Lightroom .

 Robert Durran 02 Nov 2018
In reply to HeMa:

> Or come to the dark side and start using Lightroom .

Yes, I suspect the answer is to pay for some 1 to 1 idiotproof tuition and do that!

 

 The Lemming 02 Nov 2018
In reply to Robert Durran:

> Yes, I suspect the answer is to pay for some 1 to 1 idiotproof tuition and do that!


Why do you need to do that?

Lightroom is for titliating images mostly.

In reply to Robert Durran:

"file everything in Windows and just open a photo in whatever programme to edit it"

I do just that but use my cameras viewing software (Nikon NX2) to transfer to the laptop from the SD card. I can then view them in RAW with all the shooting information available. I use PS Elements to process the ones I want and can set up to open them with that program directly from the viewer. I have a similar system for my Olympus but my Canon was second hand with no software so I use Google Picasa - still available but no longer supported by Google. It views RAW files.

 FactorXXX 02 Nov 2018
In reply to keith-ratcliffe:

> I do just that but use my cameras viewing software (Nikon NX2) to transfer to the laptop from the SD card. I can then view them in RAW with all the shooting information available. I use PS Elements to process the ones I want and can set up to open them with that program directly from the viewer. I have a similar system for my Olympus but my Canon was second hand with no software so I use Google Picasa - still available but no longer supported by Google. It views RAW files.

Blimey, that must be the most complicated workflow ever!

 

 Robert Durran 02 Nov 2018
In reply to keith-ratcliffe:

Well, if that's what I need to do to keep things simple, I might as well give up. To be honest I don't know what a lot of it actually means....

Though I do use Picasa to drop and drag photos into the order I want and renumber them, because Windows photogallery, which I use for everything else (because it came with my ccmputer), annoying stopped allowing it.

Post edited at 17:52
 Mike_d78 02 Nov 2018
In reply to Robert Durran:

The absolutely basics of my Lightroom workflow is;

1. Import raw files from SD card using Lightroom to a Windows folder.

2. Edit files

3. View edited images (1 at a time, hundreds at a time), relax following a job well done. 

Optional extras could be;

Star rate 

Keyword tag

Rename

Export as jpeg.

It is as simple or complicated as you want it to be. I'm not familiar with other photo editing software so don't know if they are easier or better!

Enjoy your weekends outside taking photos and doing stuff!

 

 

In reply to FactorXXX:

It works for me. A friend recently asked me if I still had that picture of him at Stanage in 1992 and I could find it in my archives in a couple of minutes. It was of course a scan from a slide as my digital archive starts about 2004 and they are even easier to access.

 Murderous_Crow 03 Nov 2018
In reply to monsoon:

Hi,

The big tips I can offer for anyone new to photography are not really technical. 

Firstly, just learn your camera. Whatever mode(s) you use to shoot, take pictures purely for the sake of it. Practice until everything is second nature. You should be able to focus accurately, and use your shooting mode and exposure comp instinctively. 

(Personally I find the complexity of modern exposure and focus systems challenging. I'm aware they get good results in most situations, but I find the breadth of options exhausting, and I also like to retain control. I generally shoot fully manual, I focus and recompose, and use the histogram to expose to the right. This last minimises the need for exposure bracketing too.)

Chimp lots (this means to examine your images in camera IYDK). Chimping may be disdained in the 'tog community, but to hell with the snobs: it's an excellent way to learn photography. Of course you don't need to chimp every shot, but with the ability to instantaneously check technical and compositional issues, it is an immensely powerful tool. 

Shoot tons of images: with digital you’ve minimal processing costs so you’re completely free to mess around, make mistakes and learn. As a massive bonus, every image you take contains EXIF data. When you see a memorable shot or a big mistake, you can right-click ‘properties’ and you’ll be able to see what the focal length, aperture, shutter and sensitivity were so you’ll know exactly how you did it.

Experiment with angle, position and zoom, regardless of whether you feel technically competent with the camera or not... Too many people take a pic from their eye level, hoping to convey to the viewer what they 'saw'. Angle is everything, so try different camera positions to bring the view into proper context and convey what you're feeling. 

Something that feeds into this is lens length. For learning how to compose a shot, one cannot beat a fixed-length lens (IMO). It forces you to move in or out, and because it's already got you moving you're more likely to explore other positioning options. A good all-purpose prime is something in the 35-40mm equivalent ballpark. For portraiture, 50-80mm equivalent should be about right. 

For climbing photography one's choice of position is dictated for you to a large degree, and so a zoom is much more useful. When using a zoom in a less restrictive setting, try to use it consciously rather than just staying put and zooming to your subject. Look at the perspective change difference between zooming in and walking out, or zooming out and walking in. 

It's a key moment when a photographer realises that there is an infinite choice of camera position, angle and zoom and starts to play with these. Add good creative use of aperture and shutter speed effects, and you're definitely getting somewhere: you can vary all these simple physical aspects to convey exactly what you want. Really this is the essence of creative photography.

 Jon Read 03 Nov 2018
In reply to Murderous_Crow:

Good tips!

just to add: remember to look behind you -- could be some amazing light happening in the opposite direction to the one on which everyone is focused (ho ho). For example: https://flic.kr/p/pmf6y9

 

Post edited at 10:47
 Murderous_Crow 03 Nov 2018
In reply to Jon Read:

Nice one, that's a really important insight. Look for the unexpected. 

I often find my favourite images are taken once I've already been out shooting for a bit and got my head in the zone. I definitely 'see' more once I've started thinking about creating a good image in whatever context, and working to make it happen.

While it's great to shoot a compelling scene, such things can sometimes look a bit generic. Finding unexpected stuff and actively looking for that new perspective makes photography much more rewarding. 

 Jon Read 03 Nov 2018
In reply to Murderous_Crow:

amen.

 Snowdave 03 Nov 2018
In reply to monsoon:

> Hi

> I want to improve my photography when climbing and mountaineering. I have a reasonable understanding of the principles of photography and I have a small mirrorless camera which gives me full control of things like aperture, shutter speed and ISO. My lens is a 13-32 f5.6 ish zoom on a 4/3 sensor.

> I have 2 questions:

> 1: what tips do people have for getting better photos - i.e. technical tips over composition and

> 2: I would like to improve image quality and also to get a shallower depth of field to isolate the subject. I know this means a lower aperture but I still don't get a very blurred background. Is this because of my lens or does a 4/3 sensor give greater depth of field and therefore isolating the subject becomes harder than say on full frame? 

 

First things are to set the camera to lowest native ISO, not the "forced low" setting, set the file quality to highest type with no compression & remember to shoot at shutter speeds faster than the focal length at 35mm equ…eg your tele is 64mm (35mm equ) so shoot faster than 1/60sec .if you can't then & only then raise the IOS....or raise IOS if capturing fast objects..800ISO is usually the limit for sharpest at pixel level..

 

To get more back ground blurring always stand farther away & use the long end of the telephoto & open the "F" wide....so on your lens that's use at the 32mm end at f5.6......unfortunately that's still useless as the lens is only 64mm equ @ f5.6...which is not made for background blurring......you need longer & wider...I have a 12-40mm f2.8...(24-80mm @35mm)..& a separate 60mm (120mm) f2.8....

 

I have been selling my photos on two of the top 10 stock sites...& all from a 16MP "point & shoot" camera with a very small sensor..& all in JPEG format....yes I tidy them up in PS, but some don't require it even at pixel level, for the type of shot.

Recently I got M4/3 to get "fully sharp far background" images for massive multishot panoramics….

 

It the tool behind the camera which makes the pictures....

 

 Robert Durran 03 Nov 2018
In reply to Murderous_Crow:

> Shoot tons of images: with digital you’ve minimal processing costs so you’re completely free to mess around, make mistakes and learn.

> Experiment with angle, position and zoom, regardless of whether you feel technically competent with the camera or not... Too many people take a pic from their eye level, hoping to convey to the viewer what they 'saw'. Angle is everything, so try different camera positions to bring the view into proper context and convey what you're feeling.

> It's a key moment when a photographer realises that there is an infinite choice of camera position, angle and zoom and starts to play with these.

Yes, I couldn't agree more.

Last weekend I spent about an hour after sunrise taking about 160 photos on Rannoch Moor - wading into Lochans, sitting in bogs, balancing on boulders to get interesting angles and foregrounds. I've kept just six of the photos.

Another time I was on the north rim of the grand Canyon at sunset. There were a few people there with their full frame cameras and massive tripods setting up for the one "perfect shot", but with the light changing all the time, it was almost impossible to predict or know which way to point a camera and I was hopping all over the place (including over the railings!) again taking more than a hundred shots.

With good image stabilisation, I think that a tripod will more often than not be a hindrance more than a help - much better to be fast and mobile in changing light.

Removed User 04 Nov 2018
In reply to monsoon:

Here's a vital tip for you. 

I did a traverse of some of the north Glen Shiel hills on Friday. The entire day was as photogenic as they come with lots of snow, shifting clouds, sun rays, shades and shadows. The sort of light and scenery that makes carrying about 4kg of Canon worthwhile. It was just before the summit of Saileag that I realised I hadn't put a card in the camera.

So my tip is, put a card in the camera.

 The Lemming 04 Nov 2018
In reply to Removed UserStuart en Écosse:

Or spend a bit more on a proper camera that gives an SD Card warning?

Removed User 04 Nov 2018
In reply to The Lemming:

It does, which is no use when you're two hours up the way.

 nickprior 04 Nov 2018
In reply to Removed UserStuart en Écosse:

> It does, which is no use when you're two hours up the way.

... unless you choose to switch the warning off because who would be stupid enough to forget to put an SD card in. Er, so I heard from a friend ...

Post edited at 21:09
 Mike_d78 04 Nov 2018
In reply to The Lemming:

Or always carry a spare SD Card in case of failure of card or brain? 

 Mike_d78 04 Nov 2018
In reply to monsoon:

 another few none LR related penneth from me:

1. Give back button focussing a try, it almost makes single focus redundant, also good for action shots. 

2. Use the correct metering mode for the situation, mostly i use spot or centre weighted. 

3. Shoot raw and sort white balance in post (one less camera setting to mess with).

4. Customise your camera buttons to get quick access to the functions you change most often. 

Any good photos this weekend? We went to the zoo and got some shots of some happy rodents and a sad monkey.... not really typical ukc fodder!

Ta

 Toerag 05 Nov 2018
In reply to monsoon:

>  So what fixed length lens works best for photographing your second, photographing others climbing from a static line close by and climbing related landscapes? I’m currently using a MFT body. 

Have a look at the oly 17 f1.8. It's wide enough to fit some background in and fast enough to give some* background blur.  If you want to splash some cash the 12-40 pro would also be good - the 40mm end will happily give background blur at f2.8 as long as the subject is close enough.

*you're not going to get a 'wall of cream' background on any lens wide enough at the relevant distances with a mft camera.  You will get enough to make the subject appear super-sharp though.  Use other techniques to help your subject stand out - bright clothing, put them in the sun with everything else in the shade etc.  Look up Alexander Buisse, he has a page with tips for climbing photography. Other 'top tips' - use ETTR, but you need to prioritise shutterspeed to prevent blur of moving climbers or yourself. Slightly worse tonality is by far the lesser evil compared to a shot with camera motion blur.  Don't go above iso 3200 or things get too noisy.


New Topic
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Loading Notifications...