Five Steps to Improve Your
Photos |
|
You have just purchased
your first DSLR, and you are not happy
by the result that you get? Even tough
it takes some time to improve, there are
some things that can immediately help
your photography - in this article, I
have listed five suggestions that I
consider very important to improve your
results!
|
|
Read the camera
manual
Many photographers - sometimes even
professionals - don't fulfill the potential
of their cameras because they don't know how
to use properly some features, or they don't
even know that some features exists. When I
buy a new camera, I always read the entire
manual - of course, I'd be able to use the
camera even without reading the manual, but
I'd miss many useful things.
Other
than that, if you don't know well your
camera you may think that it does not work
or it has defects, while actually you are
not using it properly. Some common
complaints are:
The autofocus is not
precise: even though there are few defective
cameras that actually have focus problems,
generally the 90% of focus errors are due to
the photographer. Read carefully the pages
about AF and learn how to use it; pay
attention to center the subject (or the area
where you want to focus) into the selected
AF point. Other than that, remember that AF
is not perfect - you can not expect to get
always sharp photos, in particular if you
photograph a fast moving subject.
The images have color cast (or "my friend's
camera gives better colors"): usually the
color cast are a consequence of white
balance errors; personally, I always use
Auto White Balance and I don't care at all
about color casts, because when I convert
the RAW files I can adjust the white balance
to get perfect colors. Another complaint
that I hear often is "that Canon/Nikon/ett
camera gives much better colors than mine".
All DSLRs currently in production gives
good colors; what really matters is
not the camera, but the post processing - if
you process well your RAW files, you can get
excellent colors with any camera.
The
photos are soft: many photographers that
have switched to a DSLR from a compact
cameras think that the photos are soft. The
reason is that compact cameras often use a
strong in-camera sharpening, while DSLRs
generally apply less processing to the
photos; this is a positive thing, since a
less processed photo has less artifacts and
it is more "customizable" by the
photographer. You can get a perfect
sharpness by shooting in RAW and with good
post-processing techniques; of course, you
need also good lenses and good techniques
(the photo must be properly focused, and you
have to use a tripod or a fast shutter speed
to avoid blur).
The photos are
underexposed: some cameras actually tend to
underexpose by 0.3 or 0.7 stops, if you use
them in complete automatism. I recommend to
spend some time learn the basis of exposure,
in particular the use of histogram. The
histogram is a very useful tool, once you
know how to read it you will be able to get
always properly exposed images.
A
DSLR is a very versatile and powerful tool,
and the time that you spend reading the
manual will be repaid by great images.
Understand
composition, light and background
To master the technical and the artistic
side of photography, I recommend to read the
articles in the Nature Photography section.
But if you don't know where to begin, try to
remember there essential guidelines:
Composition: don't place the subject (or the
horizon line) right in the center of the
frame: centered images often have a "static"
look. Instead, you should try asymmetrical
compositions: if your subject is a flower or
an animal, put more room in front of it than
behind it; if you are photographing a
landscape, frame 2/3 of earth and 1/3 of sky
(or vise-versa); and so on.
Wildlife
- angle of view: one of the most common
errors of beginners is to take photos of
animal and plants from the eye level of the
photographer, that results in a "high to
low" perspective and a very amateurish look.
If you want to improve your photos, you have
to get low: the camera should be at the same
height of the eye of the subject, or even
lower.
Light: the light changes
during the day. At early morning or at late
afternoon there is the better light for
photos; a warm, "sweet" light. The central
hours of the day, instead have a white,
harsh light: they are far from ideal for
photos.
Background: the background is a very
important element of an image: usually, it
should be as clean as possible, otherwise it
distracts the attention from the subject.
The easiest way to get a pleasing background
is to use a long focal length and a wide
aperture.
Learn from other
photographers
One of the best ways to improve your photos
is to receive suggestions and critiques from
other photographers, and to analyze their
images. I suggest to join a nature
photography forum, where you can post your
images and receive useful feedback; you can
also view and comment the images of other
photographers. This is a fantastic
opportunity to learn and to know other
nature lovers! If you are not a member yet,
I highly recommend to join the
Juza Nature
Photography Forum! |
Before and
after: a good post processing makes a big difference.
|
Learn how to
post-process your photos
Good post-processing techniques are
essential to get the best results. I know
many photographers - even professionals -
that have very poor post-processing
techniques, so they are not able to optimize
images that otherwise would be fantastic. I
suggest to get Adobe Photoshop (or
Photoshop Elements if you have a tight
budget) and to learn how to use it for
nature photos - many PS techniques are
described here on JuzaPhoto, and there are
many other websites that explains how to use
PS.
Use the right
equipment
If you have a limited budget, I recommend
to invest in lenses, instead of buying an
expensive camera: a cheap Canon 500D with a
good lens gives better results than a
Canon 1DsIII with a poor lens!
Which
are the "good" lenses? A cheap 70-300mm zoom lens
costs about $250 and it is lighter and more
versatile than a 300mm f/2.8 lens, that
costs ten times as much ($3,000-$4,000).
Nevertheless, a professional is willing to
spend that much to get the bulky, fixed
focal 300 f/2.8 : why? Both the lenses reach
the focal length of 300mm, so you get
exactly the same magnification, but the
images taken with the 300 f/2.8 are sharp
and rich of details, while the images taken
with the 70-300 are much softer. Other than
that, the pro lens has faster AF, IS and
better built quality.
Of
course, this is an extreme example; you
don't have to spend an exaggerate amount of
money, there are also many affordable
good quality lenses. Nowadays, even some
cheap lenses, as the Canon 18-55 IS ($150),
have very good image quality: if you are
interested in a lens and you want to know if
it is worth the price, I'd suggest to read
the reviews you can find on JuzaPhoto and on
many other websites, and to ask on the forum
to receive owners opinions.
Other than lenses, another thing that can
make a big difference is the tripod. The
tripod is a great help to get sharp images.
If you handhold the camera, many times you
need to use wide apertures or high iso to
get a shutter speed fast enough to freeze
hand shake; often resulting in insufficient
depth of field or poor image quality due to
noise.
With the tripod, instead, your
only concern are the subject movements;
other than that, you have the freedom to
choose the shutter speed and the aperture
that you prefer; you can use the lowest ISO
setting, too. The result are sharp, noise
free images.
Do you have
comments or questions?
If you have comments or questions about
this article, feel free to ask in the
Juza
Nature Photography Discussion Forum!
|
|
