[timw4mail]

I ask because I tend to do so intuitively, generally doing focus by eye, adjusting aperture based on exposure, et cetera.

So do you...

• Really pay attention to the parameters of the shot, using lens distance scales, DOF scales, et cetera
• Turn the lens and set the aperture until the picture looks good
• Let the camera do it all for you

[enoeske]

I ask because I tend to do so intuitively, generally doing focus by eye, adjusting aperture based on exposure, et cetera.

So do you...

• Really pay attention to the parameters of the shot, using lens distance scales, DOF scales, et cetera
• Turn the lens and set the aperture until the picture looks good
• Let the camera do it all for you

Not every shot is the same. It depends on the subject, background, colors, intent of the photo, ...

[timw4mail]

Not every shot is the same. It depends on the subject, background, colors, intent of the photo, ...

Very true, but most often what do you do?

[link81]

Generally,
Most of my pictures, are vehicles in the woods. So I usually don't have much time to pre-plan.
Camera generally stays on AV, ISO in auto. (100-6400)
Grab the camera, turn it on, Frame the shot while holding the af button, take a quick peek at shutter and iso to see if they're in OK ranges, and fire off the shot(s).

If i want motion blur, i'll change it over to SV quick and let aperture fly.

Only time i shoot in manual is if i'm setting up a group shot, or something to that effect.

[enoeske]

Very true, but most often what do you do?

Most often I'm shooting products. So, I set my camera to X mode for 1/125 s shutter speed. The shutter doesn't effect the images, I just need to make sure its less than the sync speed and that the pocket wizards and lights can keep up. That also allows the live view image to show the scene, otherwise in M mode, exposure preview would show a black image. I use f/16 or f/18 to make sure I get the whole product in focus and ISO 100 for clean image with low noise. I let the camera auto focus on the subject.

If I need to make changes, its usually to the power or position of the lights/softboxes and not the camera, since I need to retain those settings or close to them.

[photoptimist]

I'd say my process is:

1. Decide the focal length: Look at the scene with the current lens and decide if I need to change lenses. If I've got a 28 mm lens on the camera. I might notice that the scene is less than 1/3 of a frame high so I switch to 28*3 ≈ 100mm. If I've got the 70-300 on, I might pan and count 4 frame heights @ 70 mm to get the whole scene and decide to put something like 70/4 ≈ 18.

2. Decide which exposure parameter matters: Some photos need a specific aperture (use Av with full open for subject isolation & bokeh, middle sweet spot aperture for sharpness, or tightly closed for DoF), others need a specific shutter speed (use Tv with very slow for motion blur, sweet spot 1/F speed to handle normal movement, or very fast for fast subjects), and some require both specific apertures and speeds (use TAv).

3. Decide whether auto-exposure will work well: Look at the overall DR and decide if highlights are an issue or whether excessive shadows might fool the meter, or if I'm shooting in a very dynamic situation and must let the camera do AE. That determines whether I use P/Av/Tv/TAv or use M. I might also use an auto exposure mode, frame an 18% gray part of the scene, hit AE-L and then recompose to the meter-fooling composition.

4. Decide how to use AF, OVF MF, LV AF, or LF MF depending on criticality of focus, composition, and whether I'm shooting with the camera held to my eye or using the tilty-screen and holding the camera in a strange place.

5. Click. chimp, and repeat!

[normhead]

Every thing is like walking into a studio back in school that was just used by someone else. WHat's in the way that I don't want in my picture. For flowers, where can I find a flower in front of shadow for image separation. There are fools in this world born of modern generations who honestly believe a narrow depth of field is the only way to achieve image separation. It isn't true.

Using a black or white background is better. You can still use ƒ 11 or more to get the most depth of field on your subject and have just as good separation, if not better than using a wide aperture and a blurred back ground. Seriously, using narrow DoF for subject isolation is a hack move to some of us.

SO where are the acceptable backgrounds is the first matter of consideration. Then where is the best angle to take advantage of that background.

Next up, aligning the focal plane with the parts of the subject you want in clear focus. Again a serious disagreement between the Stieglitzer and the ƒ64 clubs on this issue. I've seen many photos where one little bug is in focus and every thing else is blurry. Some people even think that's good photography. Personally, I've seen maybe a half dozen images where it sort of worked, and host of images that would have been better with more DoF.



In the image above, I've aligned the camera so the film plane is parallel to the features I'm trying to show. Once you have the film plane aligned as I want, check and make sure you still have that dark background.

These are small plant parts but the approach in portraiture is the same. Control your back ground. Can't control enough of the back ground? Can you back up and use a longer lens? At least make it less messy.

At the same time you're dealing with these issues, possibly the first thing you check, where is your light coming from and do you want high contrast direct or diffused. Or high contrast with diffused fill light,

Direct sun slightly backlit.. hard light


Diffused light, shadow "soft" light.


Same bird a half hour later. Where the light is, is hugely important to the final outcome.

I don't use distance scales, too much aggravation. If I'm unclear on how much DoF I'm going to want, I shoot multiple exposures. Wide open, ƒ 4 ƒ5.6 ƒ11 or some variation thereof. There have been so many times the image I ended up liking was not the image I would have had had I messed about with some paper calculations I won't even entertain the thought of doing multiple exposures. You won't ever learn anything if you work out every thing on paper and take only that exposure. You won't learn from the times you are wrong, when you thought narrow DoF was appropriate but actually ƒ22 is the best image.

IN areas of very high dynamic range, bracket your exposures. You can't tell from the histogram and back screen if you have what you want although very often my original setting is the best based on the histogram. Sometimes the perfect exposure for the scene is a stop more or a stop less.

I'm sure lots of other folks have a different perspective, and many can probably mention things I do but didn't think of. But anyway, that's a start.

its really hard to describe this because much of it has been done for so long it's unconscious. It's like a baseball player analyzing his swing, what he's thinking about when he's swinging. He can talk about what he thinks about it, but without video it's really hard for him to know what he's doing. He just knows what because of his own idiosyncrasies he has to think to get it right.

The things he does naturally, he doesn't have to think about. But, he also can't explain how he does them to anyone else, just because he never had to think about them. Part of the reason natural athletes rarely make good coaches. Natural photgrpahers probably don't make good teachers. Find a teacher who really struggled to become proficient.

---

Last edited by normhead; 06-20-2017 at 12:52 PM.

[ramseybuckeye]

it totally depends on the situation, for example you usually have to be ready for wildlife before you see it, so you have the camera at the best setting for the environment, sometimes you'll get the chance to make adjustments, if the subject doesn't see you or is not concerned with you, For a landscape you may have more tome to compose and get your settings right, but even then you may be working with fleeting light, or you could be in a semi dangerous position. Last night
i was out in the car at sunset time, it was raining, but I could see the top of the sun yet. I stopped on a country road to get a picture, I was getting the tripod out when i realized there was no time to set it up. I got three handhelds shot in quick procession and the sun was gone. I would much rather compose the image and set up the tripod and try multiple compositions.

[IgorZ]

Interesting discussion... When I think about how I take photos, I realize that I am in the "technical" stage of my photo life. By technical I mean I focus on technical aspects more, than on composition. That's lack of skill, as the things that Norm talked about are not at the subconscious level for me. That leads to mistakes, again, like Norm mentioned, coming from the fact that I focus on the how as opposed to the what. So I have been making an effort to focus on what more. Having said that, I currently have only manual focus lenses, so focus using the viewfinder, or the LCD when I use ND filters. Don't really pay attention to the scales, but I do pay close attention to the aperture. I shoot almost exclusively at ISO 100, so I don't touch that. I use bracketing in high contrast scenes, or just spot metering to get the correct exposure for what I need exposed correctly...

[pathdoc]

For me it depends very much on the circumstances. When I was shooting for my kids' dance recitals recently, I wanted to be able to put all my concentration into composition. TAv, AF... the camera controlled everything. I just watched the dancers do their thing and took the shots. Barely touched a setting all night, except for shifting my AF focus point around a fair deal.

If I'm taking a macro of a flower, ALL the automatics go off and I will plan everything down to the most careful detail, juggling aperture, flash, bounce angle etc.

That's if I'm using a DSLR.

If I'm shooting film, it all depends on what camera I'm using. It can be anything from letting my ME have full control on a bright-light Sunny 16 day at hyperfocal distance to having to juggle everything on an S1a and work a hand-held Sekonic meter into the bargain too. The two most recent film cameras I've had in action are the S1a and the Spotmatic F - with the latter I tend to leave the shutter speed at the ISO setting or one slower and rock the aperture back and forth to keep the needle centred unless I'm specifically going for a bokeh or macro shot; then I'll set the aperture for whichever extreme suits best and adjust shutter speed to match. The S1a tends to be a Sunny 16 prospect.

[pakinjapan]

I like to shoot city's light during sunset to night time.
Usually I do:
1. Location scout, Google map help a lot but I still have to go there and just walk, look around during the day time, take a few sample to find an angle I like, plan what lens(es) I want to use for each place, etc. If It possibles, I will try to have my first 3 locations close to one another. Usually I do 5-7 locations in one trip. Then go back to the nearest location about 15-30 minutes before sunset.
2. Focus: Live view manual focus to make sure the main object is in-focus. I don’t give much attention to distance scale, lens near limit, far limit, etc. I got an app doing those calculations on my phone but never use it in the field.
3. Camera setting: ISO100, Av mode for sunset to early blue hour. Change to M mode for late blue hour to night. Do 5 images bracketing of -2 to +2. I usually but not always do one set for landscape orientation another one set for portrait orientation Then move on to the next location and repeated #2

If I am lucky I might have 3 locations covered within 30-35 minutes during golden hour to late blue hours. [I keep call it “… hour” but the light show usually lasts only a few minutes. I wish it lasts about an hour in where I live!] During that time-frame, I usually be very strict doing things according to the plan on #1 and move on quick. I will be a lot more relaxed, take it slow and spend time with each location after sky turn completely dark.

I give #1 the most important step in the process.

[timw4mail]

I recommend this book to my Basic Photography students Understanding Exposure . As the author points out, there are usually a half dozen equivalent exposures for any given lighting situation. Deciding which one to use and why is your opportunity to make the image that you see.

Which then falls under the analytical side of things.

[normhead]

Which then falls under the analytical side of things.

Not if you just bracket and pick the best.

[GlennG]

I ask because I tend to do so intuitively, generally doing focus by eye, adjusting aperture based on exposure, et cetera.

So do you...
Really pay attention to the parameters of the shot, using lens distance scales, DOF scales, et cetera
Turn the lens and set the aperture until the picture looks good
Let the camera do it all for you

Great question, and some great experience already provided. As a modestly experienced amateur, I must also admit that I'm very much in the technical realm- thinking through the aspects of iso, focal length, aperture, and shutter speed. I find that I mostly try to look at the situation and determine what factor is "controlling" most, then adjust for that parameter first. For example, if I'm trying to capture a sports scene, in most instances the shutter speed has to be fast enough to freeze the motion. To get the shutter speed fast enough, I may have to increase iso to be able to accommodate the faster speed, so the iso adjustment is second. For most landscapes, I find I think about depth of field first, and then followed closely by adjustments for light, if necessary - backlit vs front lighted, high contrast light vs shadows, etc. I am happy to report that I'm improving the technical aspects of my photos. I have been thinking about composition more, but sadly, most of my photos lack a compelling composition.

[leekil]

Not if you just bracket and pick the best.

You still have to pick the base settings to bracket around!