PHOTOGRAPHER’S JOURNEY.com

Every time I’ve ever announced I was about to buy a digital camera, I am inevitably asked the question “What kind of camera are you going to get?” Immediately afterward comes the even-more-inevitable follow-up to that question: “How many megapixels?”

Megapixels have become the universally understood measurement of a camera’s clout. More muscles. More horsepower. More gigahertz. More megapixels. More of anything — it just has to be good, right? Well, it’s true, megapixels are a good thing and the higher the number gets, the more flexibility you have as a photographer. But megapixels are really more about marketing than they are about making great photographs.

The truth is, in the early days of digital cameras, when megapixels were measured in ones and twos, it was a stretch to get the quality out of an image when printing. 5×7 prints were okay — but 8×10s at that level can’t pass as quality photographs. So early on, camera manufacturers realized that increasing the number of megapixels not only made it easier to make larger prints, it also gave them something to boast about!

Nowadays, though, most digital cameras are at least 5 megapixels. And some are well above that — as high as 12. My own camera, the superb Canon 30D, has a bit more than 8. What’s the difference? Frankly, not much. 5 megapixels is fine for an 8×10 image but 8, 10 or 12 allows printing even larger (and some fantastic printers out there such as the Canon Pixma Pro9000 allow prints and paper sizes as large as 13×19). I suppose if I wanted to make professional images for use in magazines or on billboards, more megapixels might make some small difference. But that’s not me — and I suspect it’s not you either.

So if megapixels don’t matter that much, what does? Ah, the money question. Fundamentally, I shop for a camera using the following steps:

1. What do I want it for? A tiny, lightweight digital camera such as the Canon PowerShot SD800 IS is a great choice. Slim enough for a pocket, it’s a wonderful camera. (Bear in mind here– my recommendations are often Canon products since I happen to use Canon myself. I am not paid by Canon and the fact is it’s merely a personal choice — Nikon, Panasonic, Sony and others all make fantastic cameras you may well prefer.) If I can stand a bit more weight as a trade-off for versatility, a higher-end camera like the Canon Powershot G7 is excellent. And of course, if I can afford the weight of a full single-lens reflex (SLR) camera that allows interchangeable lenses, than there are many great choices, with Nikon and Canon leading the way.
2. Quality and features. Once deciding on the particular size of a camera, the next step is to focus on quality and features. The best source for top-notch reviews on cameras of all makes, models and sizes is Digital Photography Review the field for you.. The site is a bit technical, but at the end of each article is a summary of the particular camera in question. If you read nothing else, read the summary. I guarantee it will help narrow down the field for you.

So what features do you want to consider when buying a digital camera? First, as I said, there are trade-offs between size, weight, and features. But in an ideal world, here are some general things you’d be well-advised to consider:

1. Image sensor size. At least as important as the number of megapixels is the image sensor size. The image sensor — in overly simplistic terms — is like the film of a camera. It is literally a small digital sensor that acts like the film. Because digital sensors, however, are far more sensitive relative to actual 35mm film, most image sensors are smaller than a 35mm exposure size. In other words, you get the same bang with less buck (not literally!). In my Canon 30D, the image sensor is roughly three-fourths the size of a piece of 35mm film. But in Canon’s professional 5D, the actual sensor is exactly the same size as a 35mm film slide (a 1:1 ratio). Why does this matter? More data. And consequently, higher quality pictures. There is much more to this than I can explain in this article, but you get the idea.
2. Lens quality. This, in my opinion, is the biggie. There is simply no substitute for a good piece of glass. Again, Digital Photography Review is a great source on this since the lens quality affects camera performance so well. As far as lens quality, I consider Canon and Nikon the best among point-and-shoot and SLR digital cameras. They also have the widest selection of lenses in the SLR line, which is something to consider if you plan to shoot with different lenses for your SLR somewhere down the road.
3. RAW mode. RAW mode is essentially a setting on the camera that allows you to shoot an image in “raw” format — with no compression. Some cameras offer only JPEG format but that can be a problem if you intend to do any digital editing afterward (after all, that’s the real reason we shoot digital isn’t it?). JPEG files are compressed, so any subsequent editing rapidly degrades the quality of the file. RAW images represent data in its pure form. And most cameras that shoot RAW come with software designed for handling it.
4. Shutter speed and maximum aperture. Shutter speed should be obvious. The faster the shutter speed the more effective your camera is at stopping motion. The bigger the aperture, the better it is at shooting in low light — a fabulous advantage. For example, a zoom lens with a range of f3.5 to f22 is not as strong in low light as a zoom that ranges f2.8 to f22. The smaller number always indicates when the aperture (or hole) is at its widest. And the smaller that number gets the better. But…alas…you will pay for it. Lenses with large apertures always have more glass, are heavier, and more expensive. Pro lenses are almost always of a very wide aperture.

Some things to avoid:

“Digital” zooms. These are effectively just a form of cropping the photo with tremendous loss of resolution. If you must crop — do it in the computer later. Not in your camera. If your camera has this feature, turn it off.

Alkaline batteries. This one may get me in trouble — many photographers swear by them, since they are easy to find in any country, are cheap, and not proprietary. However, I prefer the modern rechargeable batteries that come with most cameras today. While it’s true they cannot be easily replaced (and it is often wise to pack a spare) and are more expensive — at least initially — most hold a charge easily for quite a long time. When I’m out shooting, I have no trouble making it a day or two. And I simply recharge the battery every night.

That’s it for now. I’ve boiled down a lot of material and there is easily a great deal more I could write. But it should be enough to get you started. Cheers.

Popularity: 2% [?]

If you enjoyed this post, be sure to subscribe to my RSS feed!

It’s not often I use the word “best” when it comes to photography. After all, photography is a subjective experience for the photographer and viewer. While certain universal qualities do add to a photograph’s power, ultimately it is up to each individual viewer to decide how the meaningfulness of a particular image.

But for me, Dorothea Lange’s photographs are some of the most powerful I have ever seen.

(click image for larger view)

Of course, she is most famous for the “Migrant Mother” photo she made in 1936 during the height of the depression. It is, I’d argue, among the most powerful photographic images ever made. But Lange’s portfolio goes well beyond that famous photo. She had been hired by the Farm Security Administration during the height of the depression, which put her in direct contact with the plight of the nation’s poor at that time. And while she could have made generic, somewhat distant photographs that a lesser artist might make, Lange’s images instead resound with tremendous humanity in every click of the shutter she ever made. She had a unique ability, it seems, to connect with the individuals she photographed.

It is, of course, a tremendous inspiration to look at the work of someone like Lange. Unlike someone such Ansel Adams, whose grand and intimate portraits of nature are unquestionably powerful, Lange’s work brings us a glimpse of the grandness and intimacy of the human spirit.

She was… simply the best.

Popularity: 2% [?]

If you enjoyed this post, be sure to subscribe to my RSS feed!

Over the coming weeks I will be writing a series of blog posts aimed strictly at newbie photographers. So if you’re an expert, check back and I will have something a bit more advanced to say. But for those of you who are fascinated by photography but don’t quite know how to get the most out of your vision, you’ll want to read this and the coming posts. Many people start out in photography with amazing visions the photographer they’d like to be. Let’s face it, cameras are fun. So most people starting out – and I did this also – rush to buy the best and coolest camera they can afford. There’s nothing wrong with that. But you must remember that the camera is like a painter’s brush. Just because you know how to hold one doesn’t mean you’re Van Gogh.

Photography is an art. It can take years to master and – some say – we never master it at all. Frustrated? You shouldn’t be. Photography is a joy and becomes a passion for anyone who begins to get serious about it. It’s seductive and teaches you a new way to look at life with every glance.

So how do you begin to get the most out of your images? The place to start is in composition. And there are several “rules” any beginner is wise to live by (rules can be broken, of course, and in a future post I will show you why and when that can happen.) The best photography is composed.

There is some degree of thought given by the photographer even in the most extreme cases such as news or sports photography where things happen in a split-second. Even in sports or news photography where the photographer has just a second – or split-second – to compose a shot, the best of the best are quick enough to consider the framing. Of course, framing a picture badly can often be rectified on the computer later. But even to do that, one must understand the basics of good composition in the first place.

There are several rules here (and I use the word “rules” loosely) but the biggest is the “Rule of Thirds.” Lesson #1 “The Rule of Thirds”: Take a look at the two images below. Can you guess which utilized the Rule of Thirds?

Can you guess which image most people would find more appealing? Can you see how the image on the bottom is just a bit more dynamic?

In essence, the Rule of Thirds says that when we look at a photograph, it is generally more powerful when the subject of the photo is not dead-center. Note that I said “generally.” There are exceptions to this – but they are a bit more advanced and you should try to avoid dead-center shots until you know exactly why you are trying to do them (more about that in a future post). The “Rule” basically says you should try to divide up the frame in your viewfinder into thirds – either top to bottom or left to right. Place the subject somewhere along one of those lines instead of dead-center, and you’ve taken a great step forward on the path to better composition.

Don’t worry if you end up not quite hitting the one-third mark precisely. The thing to keep in mind is that you are trying to keep the subject in a place where he/she/it/they will not be dead center. Try it.
The reason this rule tends to be effective is that the human eye tends to follow a natural path when looking at a photo — a path that roughly takes a person’s eyes around the image about one-third of the way in from the outer edge of the photograph. There have actually been scientific studies that show this. But the truth is, you can take a look even at some of the great painters — particularly of the 19th century — and see that they were following similar composition “rules” even then. That’s it. There isn’t much more to it.

Sounds simple, right? It is. And yet you can spend just a few minutes on a lot of photo-sharing sites and quickly understand that a lot of photographers out there don’t understand it. Then again, take a look at some really great photos and try to consider whether the Rule of Thirds played a role. It’s a basic – and a good starting point. But powerful framing and composition goes well beyond the Rule of Thirds. There is more to come. So stay tuned.

Popularity: 4% [?]

If you enjoyed this post, be sure to subscribe to my RSS feed!

For many years, I’ve made my living as a journalist and writer. And one thing I’ve noticed over time is that nearly everyone thinks they can write.

I suppose it’s much the same with photography. After all, you just point the camera and click, right?
But the fact is, if you’re reading this then you either know or at least suspect there’s a lot more to it than that. If there wasn’t, then the images I take these days would look just like the ones I took in college (and thank God that’s not the case!).
Of course, back then I did capture a winner every now and then. But it had as much to do with luck as anything else. Instinctively, I had an “eye” for making a picture and usually it reasonably well. But there was a great deal I didn’t know. And worse — I didn’t know that I didn’t know it!
The fact is, not everyone can be a good photographer. At least not without a great deal of time and investment in learning. I’m still investing that time in my own learning every time I go out with my camera in hand. And while I think I’m a reasonably good photographer, I’m certainly not the best. There are many others out there from whom I can learn. And I do.
That’s the thing with photography (and writing, for that matter). You have to accept the fact when you’re learning that no matter how good you get, there is always someone out there better than you. In college I took Tae Kwon Do for a semester (I made it all the way to “yellow belt”–how embarrassing). What I learned there is that even the black belts — or at least the wisest of them — know that no matter how good they are, chances are there is someone else out there who can kick their butt. A great reason to think of Tae Kwon Do as a great defense, rather than an offense, if you ask me.
But the point is, learning from others who are greater than we are does not diminish our own skill as photographers. And over time it enhances it. But here’s a strange twist: the better you get at your own photography, the more you will recognize others who are better. Why? Because I think as our skills improve, we begin to respect the subtleties that go into making a powerful image. And that’s a good thing.
So I want to share with you a photographer whose images I came across recently. The more experienced of you reading this may already know him, but his photographs were new to me. He is a Polish photographer named Andrzej Dragan — a portrait artist of the highest caliber.

Indeed, Dragan has a achieved a mastery of style that is unmistakably his own. So much so that others out there seem to be copying it his style quite directly. Rather than copy his style, I prefer to borrow snippets and ideas from it and work them into my own vision. But his images are stunning: muted color, crisp highlights and shadow and impeccable lighting.
And when I view his images, I take a little something away that — I think — makes my own photography just that much better. They have a dreamy quality that I very much admire and have begun to work into some of my own photographs (albeit differently).

Ultimately, photography is our vision. And every work is original — as it should be. But we should never be afraid to borrow from techniques photographers we recognize as better than us. That’s where we can find sometimes find great inspiration. And chances are, they may be borrowing a thing or two themselves.

Popularity: 28% [?]

If you enjoyed this post, be sure to subscribe to my RSS feed!

Every year the Smithsonian Institution holds its annual kite festival on the Washington DC Mall.

If you’ve never seen it, it’s really extraordinary. Probably a thousand kites in the air (although I certainly didn’t count them). I decided it might make a great photo project, but when I got there, I struggled.
I brought with me a 28-135mm lens which I thought would be more than adequate. After all — it wasn’t shooting the kites in the air that interested me. It was the *people* who were flying those kites. But somehow, as I shot, I became more and more frustrated. It was a cloudy day — nice, flat lighting. And it was windy — perfect for kites. But everywhere I looked I couldn’t quite capture what I thought was the “Americana” of the moment. It truly felt like a magical day for me. But when I viewed the images I was getting on the nice slick screen on the back of my Canon EOS 30D, blah. Actually it was more like blah, blah, blah.
I was getting frustrated and figured I’d move on to some other location. But it was disappointing. Then, just as I turned to head somewhere else, I glanced over my right shoulder and what I happened to see was the image you see above. I was, by mere happenstance, perfectly alighted with the Washington Monument mid-way down the Mall. And right between me and that monument, was a child and his wagon (with another kid sprawled out in the dirt behind him, if you’ll notice!). It was beautiful and I knew immediately that it was something special.
Of course, I tweaked it some in “the digital darkroom.” But overall, what you see is what it looked like. Or, at least, what it looked like to me. And that is really the point with photography. It’s not about realism — although there are times where it should be. It is about capturing, and conveying to others, an observation of what you see. In a sense, all photographers are “journalists” since that is exactly what we do.
Now, in my case, since I work as a professional journalist in my real job, that approach may come naturally to me. In fact, my sister Kerry McFarland, an outstanding photographer in her own right whose work I hope to showcase on this site in the future, pointed out that each of the images I shot that day told a story. That is especially true with this one. But until she pointed it out, I hadn’t really thought about it. And she went on to say that the picture seemed to reflect my background as a journalist. Wow. Hadn’t thought about that either.
But she’s right. My best photographs do tell a story. And when you think about it, that’s true of nearly all the best photography. But each of us brings who we are to the table every time we click the shutter. And it’s worth stopping now and then to consider just how our backgrounds — personally and professionally — are impacting the photographs we take.
All the technical mastery and skills aside, photography is ultimately a poignantly simple choice. A choice in where we point the camera. A choice in when we click the shutter. And that choice is different for each of us.

Popularity: 3% [?]

If you enjoyed this post, be sure to subscribe to my RSS feed!

Technorati Profile

Popularity: 1% [?]

If you enjoyed this post, be sure to subscribe to my RSS feed!