Calling all the talented photographers • Non-Gaming • Photography • Eurogamer.net

boo 10 Mar 2006 09:18:41 13,901 posts
Seen 5 days ago
Registered 18 years ago

I just want to get some perspective on something.

I had a little Olympus XA2 for 20 years, and I'd happily 'point and shoot', and that was about it.

Always fancied a nicer camera, and about 3 years back, Mrs Boo bought me an SLR.
Great!
For a while, I just 'pointed and shooted' with a nicer camera. Then I started mucking about with aperture priority and stuff, and I ended up taking pictures of things or people at F5.6 so I got a nice blurry background, and landscapes at F22 to get a long depth of field.

So what the hell are all those other F stops for?
What can you do with all those filters that are available?
Why is half a sec at F16 better than quarter of a sec at the next stop?

Etc etc.

So I found that there's a local camera club and went along for the first time last night.

There's about 40 people, 75% over 60, but a few young(er) people. There was supposed to be a talk by someone on digital photgraphy but they didn't turn up, so one of the 'club elders' volunteered to nip home, get a projector and slides and put on a show.

Meantime I got chatting to one of the guys there. It seems that most of the clubs activities revolve around competitions, and 'producing pictures that please the judges'.

Hmmm.

Anyway, blokey comes back and sets up projector.

At this point I'm thinking 'I'm going to get to see some really good pictures now, I'll probably learn something.'

40 minutes later and I'm seriously underwhelmed. Ok, the guy clearly likes flowers and likes getting his money's worth from his macro lens, plus a few wildlife shots and a couple of landscapes.

I couldn't see any difference between his 'close up of flower at small f stop', and mine.

Question.

Do you need to be 'taught' to appreciate a good picture? Were his better than mine but I just didn't know why?

I'll go again next week and talk to a few other people, but I'm wondering if I'd be better just reading a book.

For interest, the club's website is here, and there's a gallery.
Looking at them, I'd say that while there are a few striking pictures, there's many that if I'd taken them, would have just been discarded as 'just another boring snap'.

While it's possible that I am some kind of undiscovered photographic genius, and these people are simply so far below my enormous, unrealised talents that they are not worthy to sit in the same room as me, it's more likely that I'm missing something.

Have a look at the gallery and tell me whether you think they're good, or whether they're just a bit ordinary.

Carlo 10 Mar 2006 09:47:50 21,801 posts
Seen 1 day ago
Registered 16 years ago

boo wrote:
Do you need to be 'taught' to appreciate a good picture?

IMO Yes.

Here's ONE example taken from my time in Perpignon with nothing else to do but look at the photography there, and talk to the agents & photographers.

'Most people don't have a clue about DoF. Show them 2 pictures of a portrait with the backgroud blurry (thrown out) in one and another with everything in focus, and they'll be able to spot the difference, but not understand why one picture is better than the other'. Following on from that, most 'semi-serious' photographers using the same example probably couldn't tell if the shots used a high-end lens by looking at the bokeh in that blur (and bad bokeh'll draw your eye off the subject just as badly as a bright red-dress in the fully focused background).

You see, my mum for example, takes 1,000s of pictures (no, really!) and about the only things important for her are:

The light is behind you, not behind the subject.
It's not blurry.
Doesn't have a thumb/strap in the image.

That's about it. She's got a 'fairly' sophisticated camera (Ok, she has about 6 cameras, film and digital, bettween her and my dad), but never moves the dial off 'Full auto'. She never looks at composition (Unless this means "Go stand near that fountain while I take a picture of you').

So, IMO, you need to be 'trained' (or to use a more accurate but harsher term: taught) to 'see' these differences in images, to realise what's good, and what's just average.

Edited by Carlo at 10:04:40 10-03-2006

sam_spade 10 Mar 2006 09:59:24 15,745 posts
Seen 7 hours ago
Registered 20 years ago

I don't think you need to be taught to appreciate a good picture, as Carlo says in his example people will pick and choose the one they like.

However, I think you need to be taught how to express what you like about a photo. And through that development of language you also develop the ability to question your own understanding of what makes a good photograph.

presh 10 Mar 2006 10:19:34 1,221 posts
Seen 8 years ago
Registered 19 years ago

Photography is essentially the same as painting - some people have an innate ability to be great at it, some people practice until they are great, and some people have lucky accidents :-)

There is an element of technical ability to photography, in that there are plenty of ways to use F-stops, DoF and processing effects to highlight the elements of an image you are interested in.

IMHO, the most important thing for someone just interested in taking better photos rather than being a professional is learning more about composition. If you understand how the human eye scans images, you can use this to make your images more 'pleasing' on the eye.

I suggest going to a big bookshop and seeing if there is anything that catches your eye in terms of 'how to' books - there is meant to be a great book of techniques used by the great Ansel Adams that includes stuff on digitial photography.

Also, have a trawl around Flickr - there are some brilliant photos on there, and a lot of semi-pros seem to have photostreams. It's really inspiring to see how other people can be creative.

ruttyboy 10 Mar 2006 10:23:20 7,950 posts
Seen 4 years ago
Registered 18 years ago

That's why I find photography competitions a bit laughable, the 'quality' of a photo is completely subjective dependant upon the viewer. Just like art, IMO most of it is bollocks but because of the wealth of human tastes someone'll like it

Also why my advice to anyone who takes photos is to 'take photos that you like'. If you spend all your time struggling to copy someone else's style or trying to impress a panel of judges then you're going to get a lot less fun out of the hobby.

presh 10 Mar 2006 10:28:47 1,221 posts
Seen 8 years ago
Registered 19 years ago

@ruttyboy:

yes, all forms of art are essentially subjective as to who will like them, but everything creative involves craft and skill. Try and paint someone's portrait and you'll see what I mean ;-)

Art is about turning in idea into a true visual representation of that idea, which can be harder than it sounds. As one of my art lecturers used to say, "everyone can draw, but some people can draw better than others."

ruttyboy 10 Mar 2006 10:35:24 7,950 posts
Seen 4 years ago
Registered 18 years ago

presh wrote:
@ ruttyboy:

yes, all forms of art are essentially subjective as to who will like them, but everything creative involves craft and skill. Try and paint someone's portrait and you'll see what I mean

Art is about turning in idea into a true visual representation of that idea, which can be harder than it sounds. As one of my art lecturers used to say, "everyone can draw, but some people can draw better than others."

Absolutely, I actually see photography as going someway to levelling the playing field for artistic expression. Finally people who can't draw for toffee can put themselves across through imagery.

My point holds true that you should express yourself for your own benefit in a way that you find preferable rather than pandering to other people's tastes.

/presents The South Bank Show

presh 10 Mar 2006 10:38:25 1,221 posts
Seen 8 years ago
Registered 19 years ago

hehe yeah, Ruttyboy - very true :-)

I guess the satisfaction in creating art is when something you find personally exciting also chimes with a wider audience - I guess it's part of human nature that we seek peer approval.

Of course, take this too far and you end up creating the latest Athena poster.

(Does remembering Athena poster shops show my age?)

ruttyboy 10 Mar 2006 10:48:06 7,950 posts
Seen 4 years ago
Registered 18 years ago

Yeah, I'd be a lying if I said it didn't make me smile when someone says a nice thing about one of my photos, but I like to think I'd still do it anyway

Don't they have Athena shops now?

boo 10 Mar 2006 10:48:57 13,901 posts
Seen 5 days ago
Registered 18 years ago

presh wrote:
(Does remembering Athena poster shops show my age?)

Yes. Yes it does. ;o)

The sort of thing I joined up to find was, for example...

If you look at the photography magazines, the pictures usually have notes like :

Camera/lens/film/F11 for 1/2s etc

What I want to know is how you arrive at the aperture / shutter speed combo. If I set the aperture, I assume that the shutter speed that the camera selects will be the optimum one.

In fully manual mode I'd be lost. I don't understand, for example, why a landscape photo, in daylight, with a 4 second exposure isn't completely washed out.

I guess it's just practice, practice, practice.

patlike 10 Mar 2006 10:58:05 920 posts
Seen 14 years ago
Registered 18 years ago

boo wrote:

presh wrote:
(Does remembering Athena poster shops show my age?)

Yes. Yes it does. ;o)

The sort of thing I joined up to find was, for example...

If you look at the photography magazines, the pictures usually have notes like :

Camera/lens/film/F11 for 1/2s etc

What I want to know is how you arrive at the aperture / shutter speed combo. If I set the aperture, I assume that the shutter speed that the camera selects will be the optimum one.

In fully manual mode I'd be lost. I don't understand, for example, why a landscape photo, in daylight, with a 4 second exposure isn't completely washed out.

I guess it's just practice, practice, practice.

It doesn't blow out because the aperture will be very small, probably down to around f22. For landscapes (usually) you'd want the aperture to be down that low to acheive a thick depth of field, so in the case you're describing there, the photographer has prioritised the aperture in his choice of settings. He's said, "I want everything in my shot to be in focus," decided that to achieve his goal he needs a small aperture, and the shutter speed is then incidental to that decision. I hope he had a good tripod

ruttyboy 10 Mar 2006 10:58:18 7,950 posts
Seen 4 years ago
Registered 18 years ago

boo wrote:
If you look at the photography magazines, the pictures usually have notes like :

Camera/lens/film/F11 for 1/2s etc

What I want to know is how you arrive at the aperture / shutter speed combo. If I set the aperture, I assume that the shutter speed that the camera selects will be the optimum one.

I think they just include that for nerdy knowledge sake. In real life 99% of the time, the available light will decide on the settings for you guided by what you want to achieve. For instance, if you are shooting handheld then you want a shutter speed fast enough to prevent blur through camera shake, and because shutter speed and aperture are related, this effectively limits the maximum aperture (higher f numbers) you can use whilst still getting the correct exposure. If what I just said baffled you then it's certainly worth getting hold of a book that will explain how a camera actually works, from that knowledge everything else will follow with experience.

In fully manual mode I'd be lost. I don't understand, for example, why a landscape photo, in daylight, with a 4 second exposure isn't completely washed out.

I guess it's just practice, practice, practice.

Again, a landscape shot would typically use a high f-number for greater depth of field, consequently less light is entering the camera and the exposure can be longer.

Hope the above wasn't patronising, it wasn't meant to be but I've no idea of your level of technical knowledge

ruttyboy 10 Mar 2006 10:59:15 7,950 posts
Seen 4 years ago
Registered 18 years ago

Pat just said it better

patlike 10 Mar 2006 11:01:24 920 posts
Seen 14 years ago
Registered 18 years ago

I wasn't being patronising either!

Just for the record, like

Carlo 10 Mar 2006 11:06:31 21,801 posts
Seen 1 day ago
Registered 16 years ago

boo wrote:
What I want to know is how you arrive at the aperture / shutter speed combo. If I set the aperture, I assume that the shutter speed that the camera selects will be the optimum one.

Bizzare! When I do anything 'semi-auto', I always go for Apeture Priority and let the camera work out the shutter time (I like to control the DoF).

The only time I go 'shutter priority' is for 'effect'... You know, like motion blur etc.

Edited by Carlo at 11:09:08 10-03-2006

Jos 10 Mar 2006 11:07:57 712 posts
Seen 1 week ago
Registered 20 years ago

Check these pages out for an overview Boo

Here

I agree that there is nothing like just getting out and taking lots of photos then having a good look back over them to slowly start to get a feel for what you like to shoot and how you like to shoot.

Some books are great and can give a helping hand but they can't beat getting out and doing it.

As for the combination of shutter speed/apperture - don't think of it as one optimum setting. They work with each other and so long as you adjust both accordingly you can get an almost infinite variety of settings and still get a properly exposed picture (which is simply saying you get the right amount of light onto the film/sensor).

But that is just one part of the equation - do you want to freeze the action or give it motion blur - shutter speed. Do you want the image to be sharp or soft - apperture (depends on lenses a lot though). Do you want background blur - apperture and focal length. Are you shooting in a dark or very bright place...

All these things will influence what settings to put on the camera to get the type of shot you are after.

This is a good link for exposure info

Carlo 10 Mar 2006 11:14:03 21,801 posts
Seen 1 day ago
Registered 16 years ago

The only other part of the equasion for shutterspeed/appeture is the lens itself.

Very good (AKA: Bright or Fast) glass will let in more light at any given apeture, meaning you can get a situation where you can have deeper DoF *&* fast(er) shutter speed or generally be able to shoot in darker situations without a tripod.

boo 10 Mar 2006 11:17:15 13,901 posts
Seen 5 days ago
Registered 18 years ago

Thanks all, feel free to be as patronising as you like - all info's welcome.
I'll have a look at those links.

Carlo 10 Mar 2006 11:20:50 21,801 posts
Seen 1 day ago
Registered 16 years ago

So hey boo... I'm in Enfield... D'ya think it's worth going to this club?

You know, stir things up a bit

boo 10 Mar 2006 11:37:10 13,901 posts
Seen 5 days ago
Registered 18 years ago

Carlo wrote:
So hey boo... I'm in Enfield... D'ya think it's worth going to this club?

You know, stir things up a bit

D

Out of the way oldsters!!

I got the impression from the guy I spoke to that there's a 'hierarchy'.
A beginners section, which only has 4 or 5 people in it, an intermediate, which is most people, and about 10 in the advanced section. I think you have to have won a club competion to be promoted to the next section, and it seems that in the advanced, it's the same 4 or 5 who win every time.

I'll probably keep going for a while to try and learn some stuff so if you're ever at a loose end on a Thursday night between 8 & 10 and fancy coming along, give me a shout. It'd be good to meet up, and it sounds like I could pick your brains at the same time!

limited_immortal at yahoo dot co dot uk

Edit - or if you just fancy meeting up and going for a wander with a camera somewhere local for an hour or so one weekend.

/rereads

That's not meant to sound as dodgy as it reads

)

Edited by boo at 11:38:27 10-03-2006

patlike 10 Mar 2006 12:12:02 920 posts
Seen 14 years ago
Registered 18 years ago

ZOMG TEH PORN PICUTRE MEET-UP FRED

sam_spade 10 Mar 2006 12:17:19 15,745 posts
Seen 7 hours ago
Registered 20 years ago

Photographer looking for funtime, large DOF essential, must be up for doing new things with apetures.

boo 10 Mar 2006 13:33:41 13,901 posts
Seen 5 days ago
Registered 18 years ago

otto wrote:
Each lens will have a 'sweet spot' where it's at its sharpest. This is usually somewhere between f/8 and f/11.

Ah! This is news to me.

I realised that the other F stops were there as that's how it works (like you wouldn't have a volume control with only 'really loud' and 'really quiet' on it), but I didn't know about the sweet spot thing.
Cheers!

sam_spade 10 Mar 2006 13:35:34 15,745 posts
Seen 7 hours ago
Registered 20 years ago

These are mainly about digital photography. But they do cover some of the basics.

boo 10 Mar 2006 13:37:59 13,901 posts
Seen 5 days ago
Registered 18 years ago

sam_spade wrote:
These are mainly about digital photography. But they do cover some of the basics.

Cheers Sam.

That was a good site you linked to, too, Jos.

Carlo 10 Mar 2006 13:49:53 21,801 posts
Seen 1 day ago
Registered 16 years ago

patlike wrote:
ZOMG TEH PORN PICUTRE MEET-UP FRED

Actually, it'll be really funny if I got hold of a load of pr0n pics and done a 'slide show' at the club ("Hey guysl, have a look at what I got with *my* macro lens!")

Now, who can I see to get some granny pr0n?!?!?!

boo... I might attend the club, what kind of photography are you into?

Edit: in fact, there are a LOT of us camera users on this forum in or near North London. You should organise a bigger meet up with everyone.

Edited by Carlo at 13:53:04 10-03-2006

sam_spade 10 Mar 2006 14:14:28 15,745 posts
Seen 7 hours ago
Registered 20 years ago

Carlo you need to speak to Furbs. He'll set you up.

boo 10 Mar 2006 14:15:05 13,901 posts
Seen 5 days ago
Registered 18 years ago

Photo meet - I could be up for that.

On a related note. I had a look round the web at lunchtime and found photo.net.
So I trawled around, seems interesting, and I'm reading the macro page, which is an interest of mine.

Part way down, there's a close up of a girl with a piercing.
I took one look at it and assumed it was her navel.

But at second glance, I'm not so sure...
(It's about the 6th photo down on the right hand side of the page)

Hmmm...

I can't get to the Christina page.

Any thoughts.

Jos 10 Mar 2006 14:31:31 712 posts
Seen 1 week ago
Registered 20 years ago

Its title of belly-button-9 might give us a clue...

Nice to think of what else it could've been though.

And yey to a photo meet.