If there's one thing the Torino-Nice Rally has highlighted it's that I usually take a 'good' (averagely so) photo by chance, rarely by intent. I try to line up a shot OK .. but I've recently seen pictures taken in places where I also took a photo at the same time - my photo is average, some of the others I've seen are stunning. Since there's a number of good amateur and pro photographers on here and it's bike landscapes I'm mostly taking pictures of, anyone able to help me with some tips?
I need to understand ISO, F stops and exposure better. I bought a Sony RX100 III a week before the TNR, ie no time to get to grips with it first but I can read up on all that. That's what I have to work with anyway (enough for what I want I guess).
I know it's a huge and subjective subject so too big for a thread here... but in general, any pointers on good websites for learning the basics? Any comments on the below?
From looking at my pics so far this is what I think I need to improve on -
Composition - I try to fit in the whole landscape or too many elements rather than express what makes it interesting. Less 'get it all in' and more 'present some aspect well' - ? Sometimes I think I get this aspect, other times I think I make way too many basic errors (or it's a case of seeing it second-time on screen and then realising what was missed or why poorly composed)
Exposure - I think I need to take more care with the brightest parts of an image and learn that some light conditions just make crap photos (with the equipment and experience I have, at least). Is it safe to say I should be setting light levels on the brightest area and letting the rest do its thing?
Post editing - is it normal / to be expected that images need cropping and editing somehow, am I expecting too much from the basic images? ie, how much a part of photographyi s editing?
General - don't expect great pics by stopping on the bike and taking a shot while stood straddling the bike. Need to find more interesting angles, climb up slopes or frame differently, consider that what I see as a great view and what makes a good image aren't always the same, etc. Take some time - I need to experiment more, try a few things once something has my attention. Any methods or ideas to help with this?
And how do so many iphone users get such great pics, is it just a link between creative types with a good eye and apple products, the editing apps available etc? If a phone is better than my new camera I'm not happy
Last edited by jameso on Mon Sep 25, 2017 5:11 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Thanks Ben, will look it up. Not sure I should admit this but I started looking at my images, then the camera settings, then thinking about what I can see in terms of what light levels or focus I actually see .. like some sort of dopey monolith moment - "Ahh, it's all about how we see light.. " Still, better than "wow look at that view!" 'click'
look at other photographs and understand what it is about them you like
practice copying them....lots and lots....
take lots of photographs and don't expect that its just going to happen, if you were a natural it would have happened by now, it takes years and years to get good for most people
learn how to post process, practice lots and lots....
when you're done with all this stick the camera in aperture priorty and use the exposure compensation dial lots and lots....
Thanks Steve, sound advice. Under no illusion that there's a quick fix - maybe a case of going from 'this will help me do a much better job' to 'damn, my photos just aren't much good'. I wouldn't expect to buy ability in a bike though ...
For me the main differences between 'snaps' and good photos is composition. Most modern cameras will do 'most' other stuff for you 'most' of the time. and if your camera shoots RAW files you can tweak quite a lot afterwards if you are inclined to.
It's a good excercise to use a fully manual camera to make you think about focus, depth of field, exposure etc. But increasing your awareness of composition you can make bigger improvements in the end product.
I hardly ever take photos while out riding as I used to be a TV camera-op back in the days when cameras still ran on tape. So it feels a bit like work!
Forget about all of the technical aspects for now. Most of that can be corrected later.
In the days of film this would have been important, but in a digital world you can take 100's of pics and easily correct them later.
Think about what you want the picture to show and build the frame around that. You'll tend to find when you look at a picture your eye will naturally be brought to a certain point. Generally a point of interest.
Trying to fit too much in makes things messy.
Other compositional tricks like thirds, diagonals, POV, people, etc.....
Any post editing I do is very light touch. Correcting horizons, a bit of cropping to reframe, and changing the exposure. 5 mins max.
Just take loads of pics and expect only 1 in 10 to be any good, and maybe only 1 in 10 of those to be great.
I'd also recommend leaving pics for a few weeks until you review them. You can then look at them for what they are, rather than the memory of what you were trying to capture.
If you're brave enough, post a few up here, and I'm sure you'll get some friendly feedback
I view being crap as a bit of a bonus. I know nowt about cameras and such but every now and then, I find myself in the right place at the right time and manage to capture something (IMO) fairly good ... when that happens, it's so much more special due to my usual level of crapness
I've also learnt* to take pictures in monochrome to help disguise my colour shortcomings ... sometimes it even works.
I say, embrace your crapness and forget all about getting better - it's overrated
Ian, really good of you, thanks - though I just grabbed a copy on ebay cheap already. Appreciate the offer though
Chew, very true. 1/3s and lines etc is the bit I thought I felt comfortable with, but it's where there's a lot that can fit in or a few ways to do it that I think things can improve. eg I've seen great landscape shots that don't have a skyline, just a hillside and trail, they look great to me. I'd have always tried to get the sky in. Why? No idea. Habit maybe. The imagination fills in what you miss out if it's done well. Also where I take the shot from - move 15-30ft and it can look a lot better.
Good point on reviewing later, I already left it a week or 2. tbh the light was very flat and/or difficult for much of the ride so easy to mess up or get a dull image, especially after waiting a year to go back to those spots and try again. Will post a few up but I need to get them on flickr first.
Post editing, I just used the image>levels adjuster in PS, adjusted 5-12 points either way max. Any more than that and I'm not sure what I'm trying to achieve or it looks unnatural. Ben uses VSCO but I've not looked into it yet, not until I know what I want to try to acheive anyway.
Stu, I know what you mean. I've taken what I think are really nice shots when the light and location are so amazing that you'd be hard pushed to take a bad photo : ) thing is, I ride partly to see places, I'm in these amazing places during great light conditions fairly often and I'm quite visually inspired, or something like that. I really admire good photography (subjective as it is). A better result is more satisfying. I can happily ride through a place that looks amazing and not need to take a photo, equally I'd like the time I do spend taking photos to be a bit more worthwhile. Within what I can do with a small camera anyway.
Stu, I know what you mean. I've taken what I think are really nice shots when the light and location are so amazing that you'd be hard pushed to take a bad photo : ) thing is, I ride partly to see places, I'm in these amazing places during great light conditions fairly often and I'm quite visually inspired, or something like that. I really admire good photography (subjective as it is). A better result is more satisfying. I can happily ride through a place that looks amazing and not need to take a photo, equally I'd like the time I do spend taking photos to be a bit more worthwhile. Within what I can do with a small camera anyway.
Don't worry, never expected anyone to take a blind bit of notice of anything I wrote up there
As Chew says, most photos can be corrected later from a exposure perspective. I spend quite a lot of time doing that sort of adjustment.
I only consider myself average, however I was pretty terrible when I started shooting. I've currently got over 34700 photos in Lightroom, and that what it's taken to get my photos to the point they're at now.
Look at others photos and critique critique critique and learn from their mistakes. What works, what doesn't? What could they do differently? Do the same to your own.
After a shoot I'll fly through images in Lightroom pretty rapidly (1500 images from second week in Cumbria) and flag ones that catch my eye, after that I'll spend a couple of minutes tweaking each of them in Lightroom to see what potential I can get from the RAW files. I'll let Lightroom auto-stitch any panoramas.
Maybe 2-3 of these images -- absolute max -- will get anything more than 10 mins. At that point one really will have caught my eye and I'll know exactly what I exact it to look like to reproduce the atmosphere I was experiencing. At that point I can spend hours on an edit. You can probably tell which ones I've put that sort of time into.
Finally, get feedback from others. Don't take it to heart, it's not personal, everyone just wants to help you improve.
The main thing though: practice, practice, practice!
Edit: don't worry about gear too much either. Let your camera worry about your exposure unless you have a reason not to let it, the main thing you really want to be looking at is composition.
Think of different viewpoints - too often we (well certainly myself) will just get the camera out, point and shoot. But if you get down on your knees or even lie down you get a completely different perspective: the foreground changes dramatically for a start.
Better weight than wisdom, a traveller cannot carry
danielgroves wrote:Maybe 2-3 of these images -- absolute max -- will get anything more than 10 mins. At that point one really will have caught my eye and I'll know exactly what I exact it to look like to reproduce the atmosphere I was experiencing. At that point I can spend hours on an edit. You can probably tell which ones I've put that sort of time into.
Finally, get feedback from others. Don't take it to heart, it's not personal, everyone just wants to help you improve.
The main thing though: practice, practice, practice!
Edit: don't worry about gear too much either. Let your camera worry about your exposure unless you have a reason not to let it, the main thing you really want to be looking at is composition.
Really interesting, I've been on enough photoshoots to know that a day's shooting may only get a handful of great shots but didn't appreciate that hours can go into editing the worthy ones. Also I thought the manual setting on the RX100 was overexposing too many pics (manybe how it'll always be in flat light shooting toward the sun) so I started to use manual setting - ie tools I wasn't qualified to use : )
Feedback, all welcome, some cropping (minimal though) and a few points on levels in PS and I have these so far in this folder on flickr - https://www.flickr.com/photos/67338272@ ... 9581583555
- some are attempted copies of good shots I saw last year, knowing the route well I could get into a similar position - some worked ok, some gave me the lesson in the OP - how the ?? did you get such an amazing shot from there? : )
every one of those can be improved by using something as simple as snapseed to process never mind lightroom or photoshop, its all there just waiting to be tweaked
They're all good photos James.
A few i've picked out, but nothing more than correcting the exposure (making them a bit darker, which brings out the contrast and colours) and croping them down to take away some of the dead space.
For me the Alps is about scale. Small people vs big mountains.
Trying to bring the people out as that has interest for everyone, and then you can appreciate the scale as we all know the size of a person.
Theres also the story. These people are on a journey. Hopefully your eye follows the road. Whats ahead...
Steve, will take a look at that. Similar to VSCO (not used that either)?
Chew, thanks, point well made. I'd cropped all of them at the same proportions to see how they could look if taken at the same ratio, just zoomed or composed differently. Postbox proportions there look very different.
correcting the exposure (making them a bit darker, which brings out the contrast and colours)
I thought they looked better in PS when made a bit darker - they were taken on Auto setting so would this suggest needing a faster shutter speed? My old camera gave better results in sunny conditions on a -0.3 or -0.7 setting which I think is simply a faster shutter /less exposure.
jameso wrote:I thought they looked better in PS when made a bit darker - they were taken on Auto setting so would this suggest needing a faster shutter speed? My old camera gave better results in sunny conditions on a -0.3 or -0.7 setting which I think is simply a faster shutter /less exposure.
If in doubt I'd always slightly over expose as it's easier to correct later, rather than under.
i used to spend ages trying to take good photos. now I really can't be arsed. realised that right place, right time with a camera (any camera) in hand is far more important.
I leave my rx100 on P mode most of the time and let the camera work it out. In fact most of the time I only take my phone which takes suprisingly good pics.
quite often I'll not even stop riding to take a pic.
Angles and perspective matter to me more than the overly processed stuff that most folk are publishing these days. I like colours to be "as I saw them" and I'll think about composition as I'm riding, sometimes waiting to get just the right angle or combination of foreground and background. That can sometimes mean getting off the bike and getting higher or lower - particularly if there's another rider involved.
I hear what you're saying about trying to capture too much in landscape shots. There's a desire to replicate what we're seeing with our eyes at the time. I long ago realised that this was pretty futile so more commonly use tighter compositions these days.
ScotRoutes wrote:Angles and perspective matter to me more than the overly processed stuff that most folk are publishing these days. I like colours to be "as I saw them" and I'll think about composition as I'm riding, sometimes waiting to get just the right angle or combination of foreground and background. That can sometimes mean getting off the bike and getting higher or lower - particularly if there's another rider involved.
I hear what you're saying about trying to capture too much in landscape shots. There's a desire to replicate what we're seeing with our eyes at the time. I long ago realised that this was pretty futile so more commonly use tighter compositions these days.
Agreed, seems to be the 2 points I took from the last ride. Angles and deciding what I'm actually trying to get - can't get it all. On processed stuff, I'm not a fan of anything that looks unatural yet I've seen some really good images that adjust in a way that adds to the overall feel of the subject. Basics first though ..
jam bo wrote:i used to spend ages trying to take good photos. now I really can't be arsed. realised that right place, right time with a camera (any camera) in hand is far more important.
I leave my rx100 on P mode most of the time and let the camera work it out.
Best camera is the one we have with us .. will be taking mine out more often just for the sake of practicing certain types of shot I think.
I wrote a similar piece for the Brooks blog. But due to a website redesign it all looks a bit odd now. So here are the tips I collected from a handful of pros:
Geoff Waugh:
"Always set the scene with a nice wide angle shot first and then come in to shoot the incidentals that tell the story. I always want to see winding roads, great landscapes and so on - that’s the reason for cycle touring, no? But also the faces of locals, local manufacturing, food and drink. They are the pieces of the jigsaw. If you have a wide aperture lens then isolate interesting subjects by putting the background out of focus or just focusing one one bend on a long stretch of road. What I wouldn’t do is take the fully loaded bike against the signpost picture. It’s old and cliched! And don’t place the horizon in the middle of the frame. Modern autofocus cameras might focus best with the subject in the centre of the frame but that doesn’t make for good pictures. Instead, use focus lock to put the land in the bottom of the frame if there is a big sky, place subject figures off centre, to the right or the left of frame. In other words, learn and use the rule of thirds. Always carry a chamois leather to wipe the lens if the weather turns wet. And remember bad weather often makes the very best pictures."
Wig Worland:
"When photographing something that usually moves, like cycling, remember to make it look like it’s actually moving if at all possible. This means experimenting a little but digital photography is ideal for that as the feedback loop is very quick, instant in fact. Shoot as slow a shutter speed as you dare to show movement. This advice goes against most everything you learn at photography class as usually the advice is to try to stop the motion dead. But that give lifeless results. I’ve shot some of my best images of cycling at 1/25th of a second. Seriously, see how low you can go without the dreaded camera shake. Do that and white lines disappear. Roads become silky smooth and everything becomes a little dream-like. That’s is what photography is best at doing: augmenting reality."
Pete Goding:
"I try to be prepared for the unexpected. A unique photo on the road is something that cannot necessarily be pre-constructed or planned. I find the best photos are ones that have elements that can’t be replicated easily, with multiple points of interest woven into the fabric of the scene. Capturing freak rain clouds and storms are one example, as are photographing wild animals and birds as part of a bigger picture. You may have found that killer landscape shot with the sun fading into the distance, but being able to catch that sunset as a bird flies by or a deer wanders by is something which takes lightening reactions. Download memory cards, recharge batteries, backup photos, format regularly, clean sensors and lenses before you go out and always have your camera nearby, ready for action."
John Watson:
"As cyclists, we are able to experience landscapes at a different speed and scale. Everything in the environment effects us, from the weather, to smells and sights. Try to make your images capture what you feel the overwhelming sensation you're experiencing is. Be unique. Try new things. Experiment. Not every photo will be a keeper. Learning to edit your photos down to a selection, rather than a massive feed, will help you learn which photo is good and why. BE SAFE. Don't be that cyclist that is in the wrong lane of traffic on a windy rode, or the person hanging off their handlebars in the middle of a tight group. I've seen so many idiots wreck trying to "gram". And remember, the best camera is the one you have on you at the time. An iPhone can make a beautiful image, if you're willing to give it a little effort."
So I've decided to reply to your post - then read others and maybe chip in some more. Please note, this may be full of opinion. I also own an RX100 - wonderful camera - very rare that I don't have it with me. Good choice.
First off - photography is art, simple enough. Taking images of your brunch is not art. If you want to take photographs of moments to recall, it's not art until it is on your wall, when you open it up for others to critique. But, not everyone likes the same thing, so make sure whatever you create pleases you. In the end, that is all that matters. But, opening yourself up for criticism helps the skills develop. Hording digital images on a hard drive does not.
First off - keeper rate. I take a reasonable amount of photos, with a variety of cameras, across two mediums. On looking back at this years photos, of which I've taken a bit over 4000, I've ranked 13 as 5 stars. These are photos I've taken, which when I look at them, I say "well that is something special". I've ranked 54 as 4 stars, which I would consider keepers. Everything else is social media worth, ok, or mih. 3151 photos did not even get a single star. So, when you talk about getting a good photo, a keeper, realise that the ratio of photos taken to good photos is very, very low. I'll add to this, I never, NEVER put a camera on burst capture. So those numbers are for individual captures, or attempts to capture the same thing under different conditions.
What I'm getting at is this - don't worry about it. The actual number of good photos you'll take in your lifetime is low, but when you take a good one, you'll know.
in my lifetime, I will be happy if I make 10 images that I can look at every time and smile, cry, or feel a direct emotional attachment with. Currently I am about half way there - in about 20 years of pointing cameras at things.
Technical aspects of photography Easy to explain, but take a while to use. FWIW, I rarely shoot a camera in full manual mode bar film cameras. Normally I'm shooting aperture priority - where you change the aperture(f stop) to control the depth of field (the depth of the focusing area into an image - smaller is shallower, wider is deeper field) and it will change the ISO, shutter speed for you. I only use shutter priority when shooting sports. From what you're saying, you'd probably benefit from taking this as a way of shooting with first. ISO is how sensitive the sensor is going to be to the light getting to it - it's based on old film speeds - you may see it called ASA occasionally .
There are loads of books out there talking about these things and how they work. Understanding Exposure is an excellent book. Technical aspect is honestly less to worry about, getting your eye in is much more important. I frankly love a poorly executed shot technically that has wonderful composition.
Composition - learn the basics, don't go trying to become the next Dali until you can. If it's landscape (with bike in or not) you want to photo, go look at any of Ansel Adams images, Galen Rowells book Mountain Light is worth a look at from inspiration point of view. Go to your local library and immerse yourself. If you want to look at beauty in the mundane, Martin Parr.
Again, many books on this, some go into to much art theory. The basics are that, basic. Balance is the main one, symmetry next, leading lines finally. Again, visit your library and its photography section.
Exposure for highlights (bright bits) - depends on how you have the camera set. My RX100 does blow out the bright areas, but as 90% of the photos I take with it go B&W I don't mind, it's normally intentional. Check where your spot metering is happening - centre (where you half press is where it meters) or focus (where it autofocuses is where it meters) or wide (it takes an average of the frame).
Sadly the answer to this is a big old "it depends" sometimes you want to expose for shaddows, sometimes for highlights. However, if you do the basic - don't shoot into the sun - you'll get away with it in PP.
PP - post processing - if you're not, turn the camera to JPG+RAW. RAW files are digital negatives. Anyone who tells you "editing digital is cheating, I only shoot JPG" is failing to understand how the camera works at a basic level. JPG is a camera makers idea of how the scene is viewed, they apply an algorithm to the data captured at the sensor and it tweeks it to look like the colour scheme they apply. Hence you hear the terms "Leica look" "Fuji blue" and other such nonsense. It's just post processing done in camera, then a compressed, lossy file is delivered that is no longer malleable when it comes to editing. Also, when you edit a JPG that is it, it's not reversible. RAW files have a sidecar where all the edits are, the file is always able to go back to day 1. Grab a 30 day trial of Lightroom, look at some videos, play with it. Cropping, sure, up to you. I often shoot with a wider 28mm lens and crop to what a 50mm would have seen. You're making art, that is all, do as you like.
FWIW, I use Lightroom. My general workflow inside it is: I shoot in RAW, adjust tone curves to bring up shadows and reduce highlights, set the white point, apply a sharpening filter for either people/nature shots dependant. Then I do my damnedest to remember the colours things were - but I try not to over hype, over sharpen, or drag the sliders to 100 on anything. Or, the file goes straight into SilverFx Pro if I'm doing B&W work. Or, or, I scan the negative - then i don't mess with it. One of the joys of film.
H General things - This comes back to composition somewhat. Perspective is good, small person - large open landscape. Photos of kids when taken from lower than them stick out as we normally see kids as small. Lots of other ways you could interpret it. My advice, use your legs as your zoom. Walk, move, climb, dig, whatever. But don't stand where every other plonker is taking a photo from, you'll get nothing interesting that hasn't already been captured. Prime lens, legs, no zoom. Go out, on your lunch break for a walk with the camera with no other aim than to take photos of things that other people don't but make them look interesting. The more you practice, the more your eyes will start to see photographs around you. Unfortunately, this often ends up with me randomly pulling the car over for no reason and pisses my wife off to no end....
As for the iPhone users and great pictures....well my Leica, my Sony and my Macbook allow me to post images "from" my iPhone....so take from that what you will.
...and in terms of post processing my workflow with keepers tends to be: set white balance, adjust exposure, adjust levels (highlights, shadows), set the tone curve. If necessary a grad filter / dodging / burning. Depending on the photo, adjust clarity (good for increasing micro-contrast), vibrance (colours), sharpening. but all these manipulations should be used sparingly else you'll end up with that horribly fake HDR look.
There are youtube tutorials on all of this. I use Lightroom at the minute, not so much because of its processing power so much as for its tagging and organisational tools. The same workflow would work with Photoshop, Affinity or any of the photo processing packages really. Google's Nik Collection is free and very powerful. https://www.google.com/nikcollection/
It's good to periodically view unadjusted image side by side with the adjusted image, so you can see the effect of the changes you're making step by step.
The alternative is to use something like Snapseed or VSCO. This may produce equally good results but you may not gain an understanding of what it is doing, as it the software be doing more of the work for you.
Still, better than "wow look at that view!" 'click'
