So if I'm going to be a half decent travel blogger, I need to take good photographs, right? As a self-confessed terrible photographer for many years (my mother refers to most of my photos as "tonsil shots") I took the bold decision some time ago to try change this and so in recent weeks I have been spending more time and effort in getting a shot right, in learning what things like "ISO" and "aperture" mean and how they change a photo.
However I still made the potential rookie mistake of thinking that if I had an all singing and all dancing camera that would give me instant knowledge and, more ashamedly, recognition. I've since learnt that this isn't the case. The basics of photography apply to any camera and indeed the benefits and best shots may not come out of the "best" camera. And now I will take you on the visual journey.
Here's where the story begins...
Over dinner with one of my brothers and my parents the other day I mentioned that I have been researching and looking into bridge cameras. My brother has one so I grilled him on the benefits and drawbacks. Twenty-four hours later he returned to my parents house where I'm staying for the weekend, with his Panasonic Lumix DMC FZ100 in hand and he suggested I borrowed it for a day or so to see if this technical level of camera is one I am comfortable with. As I've read on many a forum and on Jessops website, "playing" with the cameras is the best way to determine if it's the one for you.
Here's what follows...
Numerous shots of random inanimate objects and views, testing out the action settings and marvelling at the close-up and zoom capabilities followed. Yet even after a number of hours I've only really tested a small fraction of the camera's ability.
The following day NewMan joined us for Sunday lunch and I showed off my new toy. Although he was smiling he was unusually polite and quiet. Later when alone he explained that he thinks that buying and then taking a camera like this travelling could be "an unnecessary risk". He admits it's a brilliant camera but says he is worried about us transporting one around as we travel as it's a bulky, heavy and of course would be one more thing which could get lost or stolen. God I hate it when he's so
"But look at all the pretty photos I've taken..." I shoved the LCD display in front of his nose. He smiled and nodded but then adopted a sly look; the same one that tells me when he's had a brilliant idea or when he's seen the desert selection on a restaurant menu.
"How about we see who takes the best photographs between that camera and my phone?"
"Your phone?"
"Yes."
Now you may think this is sheer madness but NewMan's phone an iPhone 3G it ain't. He owns (and virtually glorifies on a daily basis) the Samsung S II and I knew it was capable of taking beautiful photographs as well as shooting in 1080p.
Rarely one to turn down any kind of challenge and with an abundance of natural sunlight all around us we started snapping and here are the photographs that are going head to head (without any Photoshop-ing or Autocorrect-ing).
Here's where Bird loses disgracefully...
I effectively lost the competition single handedly at the review stage when I looked at one clean, crisp, clear photo uploaded on NewMan's computer exclaiming "Oh wow! You have to admit that photo is awesome. My camera wins!". NewMan adopted that same "desert menu" look and replied smugly "Er Birdie, that's one of my photos...". I had to promptly shut up, man up and name him the winner.
Deep down I know there's actually very little in it and to give you some context, I was very much the "all the gear, no idea" competitor, while NewMan has
Here's where there is a happy ending and a new blog feature is born!
Following on from this embarrassment, my bruised ego was soothed when my kind brother offered his very own camera to me to borrow for the duration of our travels. I accepted without a second thought; thank you Bro!
NewMan and I have also discussed playing this game again on the blog to see if you my lovely readers can tell the difference between those taken on his phone and those taken on my Panny. Remember, there's no shame if you can't; I couldn't!
some tips from an ex media teacher reliving his teaching days...
ReplyDeleteIts not so much about the camera more about how you take photos. Leave the settings alone and try these tips on different cameras.
Almost never take a picture from eye-level (unless you are organising a portrait or group portrait photo). You almost always get more interesting shots standing on something high, down low, from the side or from behind something.
If organising a group shot or inanimate objects take time planning it. Making sure they are all in a suitably well lit place well composed/grouped, with nothing odd behind etc...
Remember you are actually taking pictures of light. If you are confronted with something that has great light (colour contrast etc..., ) it should make a good picture. If the light is flat try getting some contrast, some light and shade, by finding a different angle or prospective. Professionals use filters too.
Flat pictures can be given depth by putting something in the front or background.
Just like organising a group portrait organise your picture. Take time framing it well and looking at the composition of things within the frame. Does the eye flow easily between each element.
Good pictures will have a narrative in their composition. The lone fishing boat in a massive ocean can be made to look more small and lonely by showing more ocean and no land.
Find out what are your favourite subjects and what you are good at photographing and focus on them to get your style. Landscape, people, inanimate objects, set up pictures or capturing moments.
Really study your subject well and make sure you are taking its best angle. Study the entire composition of the picture and make sure that its all the best you can do.
Don't be lazy each photo takes a lot of effort and thought to catch the right angle, composition, depth and light.
Following the above roles lets do some Grading of the photos...
stones B is better than A as there is more contrast so its more interesting, A is just too flat with no light contrast or compositional depth.
Garden B needs some cropping but it is just slightly better than A because the framed composition is better. The flower beds to the right lead your eye into the shot and it gives a better sense of depth allowing the eye to wander around the picture better.
Flowers B is better because the actual quality of the flowers picked to photograph were better. Also the background is more dynamic and contrasting. Finally the angle chosen was a better angle to let in more interesting light.
B is the winner in all 3 for those reasons.
Its about the person taking the photos not the quality of the camera. Most defects from bad cameras can be corrected on photoshop. The important thing is to take a well composed, well lit photo with depth and narrative in the first place.
For travelling I recommend a camera that is small practical durable. SLR's are essential for quick action photos so if you don't want to carry one think about omitting that from your repertoire.
Good luck
B I am saying the Pani is B. Am I right?
ReplyDeleteIt is difficult to tell. So I am well impressed with the phone pics. You will find that the camera is better generally to be honest. But as I said, I am impressed. x
I go with Stuart on the camera type too. Older SLRS have less vibrant colours.
ReplyDeleteI can highly recommend the pannosonic lumix TZ10 great for travelling, small, robust, great photos and you can take hd videos as well! also has gps so remembers exactly where pics are taken.
ReplyDeleteI would tend to agree with new man and advise you not to take to larger camera away it just becomes something that you need to look after.
As far as the pics are concerned I would guess A are the better camera although not nescecarly the better pics
Picture B is by far the better quality image.
ReplyDeleteThe thing that gives it away? The garden shot. Shot A is horribly oversaturated especially in the blues (sky), awful clarity of detail (look closeup at the leaves on the trees), way too high a contrast presumably to compensate for the fact there is no detail in the shadows and highlights.
Exception is the flower shot, where A has a nicer quality of light, but that's because of what was going on in front of the lens, as opposed to in the camera itself.
Final thoughts: don't let anyone tell you that it's a bad idea to take a good camera anywhere, and don't let anyone tell you to sacrifice quality for ease of portability. Sure - it's a hassle whipping one's humungous SLR out at a party or with friends, but you may just take that 'timeless' shot and you'll be glad you did.
Also, as an addendum to previous post, one can't improve one's art unless one aims for the best. Photography, as a previous commenter noted, is not so much about the equipment. Likewise you don't need a great piano to play piano well. But my god it helps inspire you when you use good kit...
ReplyDelete