So whats a good picture?

Its pretty hard to define what a good picture is, since it is often the sum of what you have learned to be a good picture. Its a lot like art, peoples tastes are so different that it is close to impossible to discuss that it is good or bad art. But still we like to discuss it, much like music. If you listen to older people they think that the music today is terrible, and this is probably true for the current generation when they grow up too and something new comes around. Well it seems to be a pattern of "you like what you have learned to like".

But with photography there seems to be some clearly defined things that make a good picture and what ruins it. I think that what we learn is a more abstract notion of what pleases the eye. I can mention some here to get you on the right track:

Repeating patterns. Our brains seems to love the idea of something repeated, wheter it be flowers in a landscape or round stones on a shore. These shots often show depth which permit us to understand the scene and its scale.

Smooth color gradients. Plain looking images with large areas of smooth color gradients often catch our eyes. This is why macros where the background is out of focus often works so nicely. Although most people seem to like the idea of a nice blue sky, it is becoming more appreciated to have some texture in the sky, with clouds. Still many abstracts often have these gradients which work well.

Lines and curves. There is a certain part of the brain that is excellent at finding lines and curves in what we see. That is why putting things on a line works nicely too. It leads the eye and please the part of us that recognize simple geometry. Often combined with repeating patterns it can be very effective.

Offset point of interest. While most amateur photographers often shoot what they see by putting it directly in the middle of the picture, most professionals know that composition where the center of interest is placed off-centre works better. This is because it convey some understanding of the space surrounding the object, hence more clues to the depth and scale of things. This helps us appreciate that the object is related to its surroundings and that is the image instead of just focusing on the tree itself. The rule of thirds is not a coincidence, but a result of how humans like to relate objects to its surroundings. Often the relation can be to the frame itself, so even abstract work benefit from this rule.

Symmetry. There seems to be evidence that people regard a symmetrical face to be more beautiful than a non-symmetrical. This is also related to how we like lines, curves, geometry and patterns. Finding symmetrical patterns in everyday things can produce some interesting images.

Of course there are tons of different things that make up a good picture, but try to take time to study the images you like, and write some words that pop into your mind about why you like it. Soon you will find the similarities and patterns, and as you experiment with your photography, your mind will remind yourself about these "clues" to make a good picture. Your eye will start seeking and the checklist in your brain will be accepting and rejecting more on auto-pilot than you would think. This is when you have a "trained eye". Happy shooting!

Hobby or work?

I guess all of us sometimes face the choices of making our hobbies into a professional full time job. I did that with computers. Starting with the Commodore 64 back in the old days I ate basic for breakfast, assembly for lunch and later all kinds of programming languages for dinner. Now I am a full time software developer, and have been for the last 6 years. Suddenly I realized that I had lost my hobby. Getting back home after a full day on the office, doing mental work, solving all kinds of software problems, the temptation to sit in front of my computer was diminishing. Although I am still interested in the technology I dont find as much energy for it like I did before, and eventually realized that it was a good thing. Not only did I get more time for photography, but I also got a break from the computer. Then I went digital, and suddenly the computer was a necessary tool for my hobby. While some people do 90% of the imaging work on the computer, I hope that I can balance this by using more time on making the photo correct the first time off. But sometimes the technology opens new creative doorways that "you just have to try", and so you are stuck in front of the computer again. Its rather dangerous, and it can drain the energy from you faster than you know - especially when you also work with computers full time.

But the challenges has now entered a new dimension, and that is, I love photography so much that I can see myself doing it fulltime. Hey, but wait, wont I loose my hobby again? Yeah, and thats what bothers me. I do see photographers working fulltime that love their work, and that they can enjoy walking in the mountains shooting picturesque landscapes and come home and said they had a busy day in the "mountains". It sounds like a dream, but I guess its hard to live off photography alone, unless you are Ansel Adams. In any case it can easily become motivated by different aspects than the pleasure of photographying as a hobby. Well, there are those that seem to be able to combine both, professionals that produce images that just sell and sell. But there are also those that do both. A bit of Winnie the Pooh mentality. Why choose?

Recently the photography club that I am part of (Bergen Kameraklubb) had an exceptionally talented underwater photographer showing what he does. His name is Espen Rekdal and has documented new species as well as some classic shots with excellent composition lighting and colors. Well, it seems he is a teacher and photography is a hobby-parttime-work-business-thing. In any case the balance seems to work well and I guess having enough time for photography so that it truly becomes professional is the key to getting somewhere, and having a fulltime job that isnt quite as full. Maybe 3 days of work and 2 days of photography that can be combined with long weekends. Now that sounds like a compromise I like.

Well, enjoy some of Espen Rekdals images here:
http://www.espenrekdal.com

No I dont work for Canon

I am sorry if my articles seems to be ads for Canon equipment, but its just that I have settled down on only getting Canon gear. Why? Well because I feel more at ease that I get what I pay for. My experience so far is that it is worth the extra cost. I have seen too many Sigma lenses fail, Tamron glass that is terrible and one more plastic than the other. Do not get me wrong, Canon has some turkeys too, and the other brands also have some very good lenses. The Sigma EX series is pretty good from what I hear, the new Tamron 90mm f2.8 macro is very good.

So why Canon you might ask? Its because thats what I chose the first time on, and thats what I feel comfortable with. If you like Nikon you should stick to that. Mind you, the new D70 is a very nice starter SLR if you dont have one. I think its better than the Canon 300D in almost all aspects, but not quite the 10D. One thing I did love about the D70 was the short startup time. The 10D feels like an old hog compared to that. I am quite sure Canon will change that in future products. Also, the chances are that I will upgrade to other Canon SLRs, so the lenses will still be working fine on the new equipment. I really dont like the trend of "Digital lenses" which even Canon has made for the 300D. Digital lens for me means: "we dont have to make good glass in the edges anymore since the sensors are only using the center". That and the fact that the moment you upgrade your camera, your chances are that you have to get rid of your old lenses too, either they vignette a lot or they are useless in the borders, or they simply dont fit the new SLR. Also, the megapixels of today are better off getting a bigger chip than pushing more into the small sensors. Why? Because image quality suffers. Just look at todays 8 Mpix prosumer cameras and compare them with a 6 Mpix SLR. The 10D has an APS-C sized chip. The 1D Mark II a bit bigger, and if you look at the image quality of the Canon 1Ds pictures you will see what a full size 35mm sensor is able to produce. So do yourself a favour, stick to glass meant for the full 35mm and your gear will live longer (unless you start dropping it the concrete like I do).

A friend of mine has a Pentax ist, which is also a very nice digital SLR. Its small and lightweight if you dont like the typical lumpy SLR builds of Canon. I kind of prefer the weight and size of the 10D, I guess it grows on you. A heavy SLR is most likely to cause less camerashake if you still havent gotten that coffee yet. But my friend also mentioned something good about the Pentax, and that is that it is a pretty unknown brand, which again makes it less visible for thieves in the busy streets of some big city. Contrast this with Canon 10D which has a big strap saying "CANON DIGITAL", it might as well have said "HEY STEAL ME, I AM WORTH A BUNDLE". Well, you get what you like. I kinda like Canon, so thats what I stick with, and I guess if I talk gear here, it will be Canon gear unless I am awed by something another brand has made.

Are your images stabilized?

Well, its 17th of may, Norways national day. Hurrah! Today there is going to be tons of people in the city today, but the weather seems a bit bleak for photography. Although I do like photographying in overcast days too, thats when closeups and macros are really nice. But for casual shooting nothing beats having an Image Stabilized lens around, or IS lens for short. Canon has a range of IS lenses now and it almost seems to be standard on the zooms and long primes now. I never thought I would be able to take photos hand held at 300mm or that is actually 480mm in 10D terms (due to the 1.6 crop factor). As you might know the golden rule is that you need a shutter speed of 1/mm so if your zoom is at 300 you need 1/300 or higher to avoid camera shake ruining your picture. Well, with IS lenses you can drop that by 2 stops, on some canon lenses they claim up to 3 stops. Actually if you shoot a series like 3-4 pictures your chances are that you will get sharp shots 4 stops below that "rule of thumb". So it is almost possible to shoot at 1/30 and still get sharp pictures. But remember that you are often shooting at the widest aperture of the lens, and unless you really need that small depth of field (DOF) you are wise to stop down to f8 or f11 which is often where the lenses perform the best. The Canon 75-300mm IS is very soft wide open at 300mm so I usually get better results by stopping down 2 stops to f8 and make sure that I am above 3 stops below the 1/mm golden rule. Although the IS is often said to be unecessary for zooms like the Canon 28-135mm IS, I think it gives the images that little extra edge, and that zoom is a great lens if you want to upgrade your zoom in the similar range. Canons 24-70mm L f2.8 does not have IS yet but maybe the next version will, so I am waiting some more to get that one. The 70-200mm L f2.8 IS is what I want now to replace my 75-300mm, and after using IS in that range I couldnt go for the non IS version of the 70-200mm.

Finally if you are shooting and want to avoid camera shake, nothing beats a tripod. In some cases, when you are faced with an incredible vista in front of you, you need to stop down to f22 to get everything sharp. From the little pebble in front of your camera to the snowdrift on top of that mountain in the background. I often shoot closer to the ground when I take wide angle shots to get that feeling of depth. You need a tripod in these cases, and although its a pain lugging that big piece of metal around, it will greatly increase the quality of your images. At least for sharpness, it wont do anything about your composition skills. :-)

A good magazine

If you are looking for a good magazine on photography I would recommend Practical Photography, a UK magazine. It has a very varied collection of articles and good an funny writers. Try it.

The day I went digital...

...was a relief indeed. I have been shooting slide film for many years, preferrably Fuji Velvia on my EOS 50E. Being a system developer in my full time work and having computers as a hobby for more years than I have been photographing I saw the potential of digital imaging. And I dont only mean image manipulation, but more about tweaking colors and cropping to get that extra finish. Well, I realized I needed a slide scanner, and soon realized a good one would cost me $800 or so. I borrowed one from a friend and immediately felt that working on my pictures in a computer produced very satisfactory results. I just had to have a slide scanner. Well, some time earlier I had bought a small pocket digital camera, the Canon S40, which I used mostly for "holiday shots". Although it had all the manual operations available, it wasnt exactly an SLR. But I realized one thing, I could shoot for free! And I could shoot until I got it right. Moreover this little camera enabled me to experiment with my photos, especially long exposures where I could paint with light. So I got hooked, and thought, I need a digital SLR. Amazingly, Canon released the 10D and 300D just around then, and having Canon EOS lenses in my backpack I dropped the idea of the slide scanner and chose the Canon 10D SLR. Although quite expensive, the sum of pictures I have shot since then would have set me back at least the equal amount in slide film. And it has definitely got me some shots that I would never have gotten with the slide film. In tough light conditions when I dont have a tripod available, I often shoot a series of 3-4 pictures. The chance of one of them being sharp is greatly increased. I also experiment more, since its free, and I get the results instantly on my computer screen. The processing time from image shoot and working with them in the computer is also incredible low compared to all the fuzz with development and slide scanning. So, you might ask if I am satisfied with image quality, and I just have to say a definite yes to that. I am more likely to get better results in total from my Canon 10D than my film camera. The resolution is just enough to produce 300dpi A4 pictures, which will satisfy magazines or similar publications. Do I want higher resolution? Yes definitely. If I could have afforded it, the Canon 1D Mark II would have been in my backpack instead. I will say more later about the pros and cons of the Canon 10D. Until then, happy shooting and dont be afraid of going digital!

Filtering filters

The first thing budding amateur photographers did a while back, as did I, was to buy lots of filters that were used only once. Yes, there are so many special effect filters out there that are cool once, and then the coolness wears off. As most photographers will realize, there is only a handful of filters that are needed. This is further amplified by the digial era in which most special effect filters can easily be done in Photoshop or Paint Shop Pro.

The only filters you do need are the following, a polarizer, some ND graduated filters and some pure ND filters. The polarizer is especially good for getting clear colors and a blue sky with well defined clouds. The greens in the foilage will jump at you if the sun is at 90 degrees angle to what you are shooting. Towards the sun or away from it, it wont do anything exept loose you a couple of stops. Yes, the polarizer blocks out a little over 2 stops so you might say it works like a 0.6 ND filter too. Except you might have to be carful so that you dont remove reflections you want in the picture. Overdoing the polarizer effect can also ruin some pictures.

The ND grads are very useful for balancing the exposure range of your image. As you might know the film, or digital sensor, can only record a certain range of light intensity. Thats why you curse and swear once you develop those pictures you took that looked awesome only to realize that the sky has been burned out or half the picture has turned black. Most amateurs seem to have a hard time getting past this, but when you do, your images will improve dramatically. How? Well, you start using graduated grey filters, or ND grads as they are called. Of course, shooting in a light range that the camera can record is also a good place to start. But sometimes you are faced with the most spectacular landscape with a low sun and details in the wet stones in front of you. Thats when you need a ND grad to make that bright sky and sun a couple of stops darker, 0.3 - 1 stop, 0.6 - 2 stops, 0.9 - 3 stops. Your images will improve drastically. Just look at the average Joe Cornish photo and you will see what I mean. Of course you still cant be sloppy about composition. Although, ND grads are nice, you can also easily do this effect digitally by combining two exposures that record each end of the light. This also requires you to have a tripod to frame exactly the same images, and in some cases you do not have this luxary, so ND grads should be in your backpack at all times.

Finally, a clean ND filter like the 0.9 can be very nice to have when you need to extend time in your exposures. This gray filter covers the whole image and a 0.9 filter will reduce the light with 3 stops, e.g. lowering your shutterspeed from 1/125 to 1/15. This is enough to make that water look foamy and nice, or lengthen that night shot even further.

So there it is, only 3 types of filters. Some of you might disagree. What about warmup filters, and filters for black and white? Well, I shoot digital so I can do all that in post processing later, and get exactly the results I want.

Do not try this at home...

I recently had a little accident when I came home and picked up my bag in the backseat of my car. A little absent-minded I had forgotten to close my Lowepro Minitrekker bag properly and as I lifted it over my shoulder, my camera fell out into the backseat (puh!) but my Canon 28-135mm IS lens took a backflip and a triple half-twist before going PLONK in the concrete floor in the garage. It all felt like a long slow motion John Woo shot, it only missed the white pidgeons flying in. Well, as I picked it up, I saw the casing had gotten som scratches, but the glass was undamaged. What luck I though, until I heard some pieces inside make expensive noises. The barrel would not extend all the way and I knew it was going to cost. Fortunately my equipment is insured so I hope that I can get the repair cost back. Is it possible to install airbags into photoequipment? I dont think its going to get any cheaper as I change gear.

Stuff for sale

Well I am trying to sell some things now, a Canon 70-300mm IS lens, my ipaq, a Navman gps sleeve for it, and some other stuff. For my Norwegian readers you can find it at:
http://www.gibud.no

My next piece of gear

Well, who said photography was cheap? Although I never have to buy another roll of film and never fiddle with mounted slides again, the digital equipment itself cost quite a deal. And the moment you get picky about the quality of your images, thats when it becomes really expensive! Thats when you start drooling over Canon L lenses. After buying the Canon 17-40mm L f4 I started realizing what L glass is about. I recently decided to ditch most of my non L glass and start saving for better ones. Although prime lenses are the best, I wanted the flexibility of a zoom, so this is what I am saving for now:


Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM

This must be Canons best lens around if you believe what photographers are saying about it. They say its pretty sharp even wide open at both ends of the zoom. I guess I wont know until I have it in my hands. But at a price of $1600 its going to cost. And from what I hear its pretty heavy too, so maybe I need an extra arm installed. Now where did Zaphoid get that extra pair of hands installed? :-)

I usually find that I crave for those extra stops, something I know when I am using my Canon 100mm macro (which is being repaired now). The macro is also said to have L class quality glass. Being able to operate at f2.8 in the 70-200 range will be great! In 10D terms that means 112-320mm. And from what I hear its pretty good with the 2x extender, giving me an effective 640mm lens at f5.6. I guess that will do well until I win the lottery and can afford a 500mm prime from Canon.

My photography website

Please visit my photography website and tell me what you think about my pictures.

http://photo.lonningdal.net/

I am for the moment updating these webpages with a slightly different look and of course more pictures! Hope to have them operational over the weekend sometime.

My brothers blog

My brother likes to dabble with all things technology. Read his blog at:

http://teckpuzzle.blogspot.com/

And so it began...

Hi, I am a guy from Norway who happens to like Photography. Been at it for almost 10 years now, from the day I borrowed my fathers old SLR with light meter and manual operation. Today I am using a Canon 10D for my photography and find it a very nice piece of equipment. Well, this is my blog and I will post ideas, rants, questions (for you and myself) and other news I find interesting. Happy reading!