Donkeys and Elephants and Delegates,oh my!
Check out the most popular
Noob's guide to manual photography
thetechlounge.com — Some might ask why you would want or need to modify camera settings manually when the camera can do it for you ‘just fine.’ If you really want to end up with expressive photographs instead of mere snapshots, this beginner's guide is a must-read. I personally didn't really get into photography until I learned the manual controls. Check it out.
TTLKurtis- 1730 diggs
- digg it
- Enigma5, on 10/12/2007, -14/+9Very cool article...helped me out ALOT!
- popularme, on 10/12/2007, -37/+1website isn't there.
reported as inaccurate - david76, on 10/12/2007, -1/+18What do you mean it "isn't there"? It's just a little slow to load. The background loads, and finally the whole center portion w/ content loads. This is why friends don't let friends use tables for layout.
- popularme, on 10/12/2007, -37/+1website isn't there.
- EgriZ, on 10/12/2007, -20/+2thanks
- MeatFlaps, on 10/12/2007, -36/+13People that use the term "noob" oughta shampoo my crotch.
- povofsky, on 10/12/2007, -26/+4lol
- MeatFlaps, on 10/12/2007, -25/+4must be a lot of "noobs" here that got offended by my comment.
- john2kx, on 10/12/2007, -20/+3it's better than plagiarizing maddox, of all people.
- NotASenator, on 10/12/2007, -8/+6It's not Maddox, it's "As Good As It Gets"
- MeatFlaps, on 10/12/2007, -7/+2I had no idea that quoting movies on a geeky message board was considered plagiarism.
- ArchieAndrews, on 10/12/2007, -8/+5Manual is the way to go if you want to get the least bit artistic. After seeing this photo set, I want a tilt-shift lens:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/automatt/sets/72057594078648378/- CypherXero, on 10/12/2007, -7/+4What you need is a camera that can correctly handle Depth of Field (DoF). Professional SLR cameras are quite good at the DoF and focusing on foreground/background subjects, where as point-and-shoot cameras have pretty much zero DoF.
- ArchieAndrews, on 10/12/2007, -4/+1Interesting. I have messed with my DoF setting but didn't think it had the control needed to generate the images I have seen like I linked. Perhaps I just don't have a good enough camera. Can you set DoF to focus on a centre band and move the lower and upper thirds of the image out of focus, for example?
- balls187, on 10/12/2007, -8/+3Yes, it's called post processing using Photoshop, or GIMP.
For the cost of a tilt-shift lens, you can buy photoshop.
Or you could pocket the cash, and use GIMP. - Scruffydan, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5Tilt shift lenses give you MUCH more control over the focus plane (ie it doesn't have to be parallel with the film plane). But if that is what you really want to do then Large format photography will give you MUCH more options and better quality, at the cost of portability and speed of use.
- Scruffydan, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7@balls187
GIMP or photoshop can't do what a a tilt shift lens can do, or at least not nearly as good - chongli, on 10/12/2007, -4/+2@balls187
Photoshop cannot replicate the depth of field control that a tilt/shift lens provides. Tilting the lens causes a corresponding tilt in the plane of focus. This is called the Scheimpflug principle.
Read this pdf to learn about it:
http://www.trenholm.org/hmmerk/SHBG05.pdf - balls187, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2@scruffydan
If all you want to do is create an image that is blurred on the top and the bottom, photoshop's Camera blur function works extremely well.
The op mentioned nothing about correction for distortion.
I agree, a Tilt-shift lens can do more things than just create a blur. However, photoshop is cheaper, and more useful (imho). - balls187, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1as for the mini model look: http://recedinghairline.co.uk/tutorials/fakemodel/
- Scruffydan, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2@balls
What about preventing blur? Tilt shift lenses can keep thing in focus (in fact they are probably used for this effect more that the 'mini' effect, and you have probably seen countless images that have used this... you just haven't noticed and that's the point.
Photoshop CAN make things blurry, but can't take a blurry image and make sharp (without loss of detail).
As to where to spend your money? that depends of what kind of photography you do (TS- lenses are VERY useful in landscapes and architectural photography), and if you know what you are doing (and are good at it) your images wont need any photoshop tweaks to make them look good. - ArchieAndrews, on 10/12/2007, -3/+2Photoshop/Gimp is a cool way to do it, to be sure but then I wouldn't be able to spend ridiculous amounts of time shopping for a new toy for my camera! That's half the fun.
- Scruffydan, on 10/12/2007, -8/+1ignore this... grrr!
- mack1082, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3I wish flickr would hurry up and finish with it's massage
- balls187, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2@scruffydan
I understand that TS lenses do more.
I was specifically talking about producing an image similar to the one posted.
- jhunt, on 10/12/2007, -1/+13Good article from a basic technical standpoint, but I'd say the single simplest and most effective thing to do in order to take good photos is the Rule of Thirds: http://photospot2004.blogspot.com/2004/07/rule-of-thirds.html
- Kilroy2004, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Ah... never been able to voice that rule before, but definitely noticed when it is put into effect. Good article!
- MeatFlaps, on 10/12/2007, -8/+2i believe that rule is made to be broken.
- Scruffydan, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4all compositional rules are... but only sometimes:)
- jhunt, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7Just know and understand the rules of composition before you break them.
- MeatFlaps, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2exactly. i feel like 90% of the pictures on flickr are the same regurgitated rule of thirds *****. be creative and break the rules.
- thunderhammer, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Personally, I rely heavily on the rule of fifteenths.
- MeatFlaps, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1i like that rule. it should be mandated by law.
- Valleye, on 10/12/2007, -7/+5Using the manual settings for the sake of using them is lame. You should only use them when you know the computer in the camera is not going to give you what you need. For the most part solid well exposed images with the right composition is all you need to make a great photo.
Using manual settings all time is like writing HTML ny hand. There is a time and place where you want to code or tweak but not always.- jhunt, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5I agree to an extent. I find using Shutter priority or Aperture priority better than going totally manual. Just be aware of the settings that the camera selects for you and be sure they're right for what you are trying to achieve.
- invader, on 10/12/2007, -4/+8i'm lame. i use manual settings all the time for my photography, and i code exclusively in notepad. i don't do either for the sake of doing everything manually, i just do it to be in complete control of the result, and as a perfectionist, i don't want to give an application or AI the opportunity to deliver something other than exactly what i want.
- balls187, on 10/12/2007, -4/+4I also use manual settings. I trust my eyes much more than I trust the processor in my camera.
Also coding in notepad? Jeebus dude, download xemacs. - Scruffydan, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2I use aperture priority for most of my pics. Its faster than full manual and Giver me full control (if i use exposure compensation). In the end though it doesn;t matter what you use, only if you like you photos.
- invader, on 10/12/2007, -5/+3@balls187
yes, notepad.. i learned on notepad, and EVERY windoze machine has the exact same version of the application, whether it's xp, 2000, 98, etc.. i've used plenty of apps with syntax highlighting and stuff like that, but when you get efficient in notepad, that's all you really need. it's like craig counsell's batting stance.. it might not work for everyone, but because he learned to swing that way, he's comfortable with it and good at it. notepad is my weapon of choice, even though most other people are more efficient in other ""more advanced"" editors.
@Scruffydan
using aperture priority is fine for the average person, but if you ask any serious artistic photographer, you'll find that focal length is extremely important for achieving the effect you're looking for. if you're not looking for any specific effect and just want to have a pic of your friend passed out on the bathroom floor, go full auto. - Scruffydan, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2@invader
I agree Depth of field (I assume this is what u meant when i said focal length) IS very important, which is why I use aperture priority. This allows me to set the aperture I want (this gives me the DoF i desire) and the camera sets the shutter speed according to the light meter. If I feel that the light meter is wrong (there are certain lighting conditions that I know confuse the light meter) I use exposure compensation.
in other words I use aperture priority because I want control over the DoF.
Depth of field is distances from the film that will be in focus in you picture (I assume that’s what you meant). - invader, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1i have my lack of experience with the semi-auto features to blame for misinterpreting "priority." for some reason i was thinking more along the lines of the aperture being the variable setting, don't ask me why. but still, every lighting, action, and distance has a different ideal ISO speed [digital speak], aperture size, and shutter speed. cameras are great at finding a good combination to achieve the proper exposure, but there's more to it than getting the right exposure. using a priority setting is part of the way there, but a lot of shots take careful calculation of the DoF you're looking for, the right amount of blur or lack thereof (if an action shot), using the least sensitive ISO setting as possible [to reduce noise and capture more rich colors] and deciding how much shutter speed and aperture size you're willing to sacrifice, etc
- countzen, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2XeMacs?! NotePad?
Why don't you compile the code yourself save the hassle of actually using processor?
I know, write it out the code in machine code for your specific processor and get it over with?
What, you write assembly too? Burn it on to a PROM?
That's ridiculous to boast that you write code in notepad. Efficiency shot down the tube.
- invader, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2my dSLR has a bunch of those auto features.. but the first day i had it, i got myself comfortable with changing and fine-tuning the settings manually. since then, that big dial with ~8 options hasn't left "M" more than once or twice.
- t0ny, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Same here I got a E-500, only time I used any auto settings was when I let a friend use it. :)
I never take it off of m.
The only auto on the camera I use is auto focus. And that is because I have to turn the focus ring 6 times to get in focus. I wish there was a way to make it more sensitive.
- t0ny, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Same here I got a E-500, only time I used any auto settings was when I let a friend use it. :)
- iSamurai, on 10/12/2007, -8/+6http://www.duggmirror.com
- TheCheeks, on 10/12/2007, -3/+3i use priority settings, like aperture or shutterspeed. using the manual settings just cause you think your cool is no excuse, ive come up with some good pics on auto. it just depends on the situation
- dJCL, on 10/12/2007, -3/+4I love using the manual setting on my Canon A80. It makes for much better photography until I can afford a better DSLR camera.
My main reason for this is to allow me to avoid using my flash whenever possible, I hate the look of a handheld camera flash, and manual settings allow me to get the shots I want whenever I want.
Proof: http://djcl.gits.org/photos/2005/2005-07-09/IMG_3543.jpg
(C) 2005 Jared Young
That photo would never have been anywhere near as good with a flash, but manual settings allowed me to get that with a handheld digital. (I did not know who that girl was at the time, by coincidence, I do now)
JC- invader, on 10/12/2007, -3/+2gotta love the colors cameras can find in flashless dark shots.. too bad it wasn't bright enough to use a lower ISO speed
- dJCL, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1Yeah, iso400 on that shot, mostly due to a smaller ccd chip in the camera being unable to pickup high quality images in low light. The lighting is basically stage lights from the festival.
Still, I am a fan of film grain sometimes - I have a very dark picture of a scraggly pine tree taken on a moonlit night, and when you apply any auto levels filter to it, the film grain suddenly becomes an artistic effect.
- david76, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3Priority settings are the way to go 95% of the time if you want creative control. I leave my camera (Canon 10D) in apeture override most of the time. Manual mode is fine, but very time consuming.
As nice as digital photography is, I miss developing and printing my own black and white photos in a darkroom. It's a totally different experience. - balls187, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1Use the settings that work best for you.
For me, I prefer using manual. It works best for me.
For other people I'd imagining it doesn't work as well. - xXShadowstormXx, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Dugg Mirror (site's down): http://duggmirror.com/hardware/Noob_s_guide_to_manual_photography
- MatchASM, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Nice way to read the intro.
However, the article is six pages long... :-(
- MatchASM, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Nice way to read the intro.
- balls187, on 10/12/2007, -7/+1thumbs down!
- TTLKurtis, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3ooo we got dugg.
- mpettengill, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I agree with the original poster. Having and old-school film SLR with minimals bells-and-wistles and a 35mm prime lense is a greate way to help people practice good photogrpahic techniques. A good book on basic photgraphy technigues is also essential. People will spend more time establishing thier shots too becuase there most people don't want to shell out $8.00 to develop a roll of bad pictures.
Before going digital, I had 70's vintage Pentax K-1000 with a 35mm prime lense I inherited from my parents. The only things I could adjust on the camera were the aperature, shutter speed, and focus...all manual.
Even so, I love my new Rebel XT :-)
- mpettengill, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I agree with the original poster. Having and old-school film SLR with minimals bells-and-wistles and a 35mm prime lense is a greate way to help people practice good photogrpahic techniques. A good book on basic photgraphy technigues is also essential. People will spend more time establishing thier shots too becuase there most people don't want to shell out $8.00 to develop a roll of bad pictures.
- benzzene, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0My first camera (I still use it all the time) was a Nikon FM2n. It's like the opposite of an automatic camera. The only thing that even requires a battery is the light meter which uses a watch battery. I have learnt so much about photography using this camera. There's nothing quite like pressing the DoF preview lever and watching the image change in front of your eyes.
I only found out what "Aperture Priority" and "Shutter Priority" modes were last year. It turns out I've been using the Aperture Priority program inside my head for the last few years.
The best advice I could give to a beginner photographer is to get a manual camera (or only use your fancy automatic camera in Manual mode) and get a prime 50mm (or equivalent for digital sensors) lens. The fixed focal length lens will force you to think about the composition and you won't become a lame zoom wuss who's afraid to get close enough to take a decent photo. "If your photographs aren't good enough, you aren't close enough." -- Robert Capa- Scruffydan, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1I learned how to shoot in my dads Pentax sportmatic. It is a great camera, and batteries last for years and are small enough to carry in your wallet. My F100 only gets about 20-30 rolls of film on 4AA batteries, drives me nuts sometimes!
I prefer zooms, because they give you MORE control over your composition (close up wide angle shots are different from far away tele shots), but I agree you CANNOT be lazy and stay in one place (unless you have no choice). - benzzene, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1I agree that zooms are great for their versatility and these days they're not as slow and ugly as they once were. However, primes are great for forcing you to think. Having a few primes (eg wide, normal, tele) really alerts you to the differences between the different focal lengths, rather than just seeing them as part of a continuous flow.
- Scruffydan, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1I learned how to shoot in my dads Pentax sportmatic. It is a great camera, and batteries last for years and are small enough to carry in your wallet. My F100 only gets about 20-30 rolls of film on 4AA batteries, drives me nuts sometimes!
- fjvwing, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1During the 90s I walked around with a semi-automatic Pentax SLR. Everything manual fi I wanted to, but mainly I would set it on semi, look at the suggestions, and override. I took it in my backpack everywhere, lugging that thing around.
These days I shoot almost exclusively with camphones. And it is hard work, but very rewarding because it is so direct an experience, including the sharing where it gets to my blog via Flickr moments after I shoot it. Often I only have the vaguest idea whether the shot worked or not. I am loving it far more than the delayed aspect of waiting for film to be processed, and always having a camera. I am about to drop serious coinage for a Nokia N73 now, just to keep doing this process.
Manual's great to learn, and futz, and get things just right for shots you have already ready in your head. But you don't need to stay with manual to learn new things after that, or experience a challenge. - TTLKurtis, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6BTW guys, we just talked to ThePlanet and they tweaked something so now page should load fine. :)
- fetusface, on 10/12/2007, -7/+1Digging down everyone who thinks they're hot *****.
- Pie_Man, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1I have a pentex K1000 with 2 lenses and various other items for $100 if anyone wants to buy?
- dodger2020, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1This person says "As a general rule of thumb, you should try to set your shutter speed to 1/2 your focal length (or higher) to avoid camera-shake" but that's not true. The "general rule" is you should set your shutter speed to 1/focal length or faster to avoid shake. For example, if you're shooting at 300mm you should use a shutter speed of 1/300s or faster. Then you have several options that can reduce that such as using a tripod, an image stabilization lens/body, bracing yourself, etc.
- TTLKurtis, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I'll check on that and update the article... i could have swore it was 1/2 focal length. maybe i just have gyros implanted througout my body and i can do un-humanly super slow shutter! ;-)
- TTLKurtis, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1okay i just confirmed that you are indeed correct, although this rule is more of a suggestion than a rule IMO. it depends on the person holding the camera, really. some people have very steady hands whereas others do not. i'll update the article with corrected information. thanks for pointing that out.
- mediaphile, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I use Aperture Priority mode on my Canon EOS Elan 7NE 35mm film camera (that's right, film). I set the aperture based on the DOF I want, and let the camera suggest the shutter speed. But at the same time, I know the approximate shutter speed I have in mind to control the exposure and the manner in which time is frozen. I just find it faster to let the camera get me close and then adjust it from there.
CypherXero: "What you need is a camera that can correctly handle Depth of Field (DoF). Professional SLR cameras are quite good at the DoF and focusing on foreground/background subjects, where as point-and-shoot cameras have pretty much zero DoF."
your point stands, but i think you mean point-and-shoot cameras have only full DoF.
ArchieAndrews: "Interesting. I have messed with my DoF setting but didn't think it had the control needed to generate the images I have seen like I linked. Perhaps I just don't have a good enough camera. Can you set DoF to focus on a centre band and move the lower and upper thirds of the image out of focus, for example?"
you're thinking in terms of a 2d image like you would when you work with it in an image processor. that's not how depth of field works. instead, it's the distance away from the lens that matters. when you focus on a subject and use a large aperture (lower number f-stop), you are setting your lens to recieve light most accurately from your subject so its image appears crisply on the film. the areas farther away and closer to you than the lens end up out of focus because the light doesn't have a chance to resolve on the film. when you set a small aperture (larger number f-stop), it restricts the rate at which light can enter the camera, and allows the light from more areas to reach the film plane, resulting in an overall sharper image.
in other words, if you have three people in your image with one at 1 foot, one at 5 feet, and one at 20 feet, and you set a large aperture (like f1.8), and focus on the person at 5 feet, the people at 1 and 20 feet will be out of focus. if you have the same setup but set a small aperture (f22), everyone will be in focus. since most point and shoot cameras, especially smaller ones, can only open up to f3-4 at their widest, pictures are almost always mostly in focus.
hope that helps.- TTLKurtis, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2well said, mediaphile. simply put (for those too lazy to read that whole post), DoF determines the distance in front of and behind the subject which will be in focus. large DoF means everything in focus, small DoF means just the subject is in focus. i have some illustrations in my article which I think should help understand the concept - look at the Aperture page.
- GrahamStw, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I think you are missing the point, mediaphile.
You are commenting on general Depth-of-Field considerations.
ArchieAndrews was specifically talking about the exaggerated DoF effect and perspective distortion in the photos he linked to - which use a special Tilt-and-Shift lens. You cannot reproduce this effect on an SLR with a standard lens.
Incidentally, Point-and-Shoot cameras do not neccesarily have a fixed DoF either. My ancient Canon PowerShot S45 has Aperture-Prioirity, Manual modes, both of which allow me to control the DoF.
- blinking8s, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0http://www.morguefile.com/archive/classroom.php is a well written camera 101 how to, i moderate photography on several design forums and it's been the #1 link i send to people wanting to know how to use their camera.
- lucas911993, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Good article. This is why digg is great!
- Keithamus, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1If you really want to learn about photography; contrary to popular opinion on the above comments, ditch the digital camera, go find a darkroom (colleges, unis, or build one yourself for like... £800 ($1500)), and go buy an old SLR, like... a canon a1 (£40 ($80)). Make sure its completely manual, go buy some b&w films (£2-3 ($6)).
This will teach you in more ways that one. It will teach you how photography works, without the wires getting in the way, having a computer between you and the lense will only confuse matters and hinder your learning, and you'll say stupid stuff like "...ISO (digital speak)..." as one commenter did. Secondly it'll teach you the math, or rather, let you gauge shots nicely, from experience most photographers will say that 400 ISO film, at 1/1000 shutter speed, is good for outdoor shots, in the daytime. You'll quickly learn about aperture, ISO and shutter speeds, the only downfall is you'll probably realise the digital camera you blew a few hundred on is utter crap. Also, ff you are a poor student, which i think counts for like 50% of digg, then you'll quickly realise that film gets expensive when you go out and waste it on a crap shoot, so it forces you to quickly develop talent, or otherwise waste a load on film ;).
if you think I'm spewing rubbish, talk to _any_ pro photographer, most will say "the camera doesn't matter, its the photographer that counts", but if you ask them what they learned on, it'll be a manual.
The point of photography isn't an auto-focus algorithm and an AI to detect white balance and shift your ISO, the point of photography is YOU taking the shots, I've noticed people are lowing the benchmark of good photography now that the "digital revolution", probably because you're surrounded by so much visual noise from "photographers" who don't know what they're doing and sit in full auto mode, perhaps occasionally venturing out into Av/Tv.
My two pence for what it's worth.
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2008 —
Content posted by
