Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Photography for geeks

lcamtuf.coredump.cx

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 150 posts

Re: Photography for geeks

#51

Post by trap_goes_hot »

yieldcrv wrote: post #19

This is good, I would add that “made up composition rules” are instead “made up composition guidelines ”, that people should learn how to deviate from after constricting themselves with false constraints

Artists will not have a common answer to "Are there any rules in art?". Personally, I think there are patterns in art, and there are often rules that can describe those patterns. Oddly, I think the word rule works out OK. 'guidelines' is problematic in another way as it also implies that one is being guided towards a certain aesthetic/end result.

Re: Photography for geeks

#53

Post by CWuestefeld »

rsch wrote: post #28
geokon wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think when you break down all the variables there is really very little to play with bc no phones have variable apertures. ISO is basically a linear gain that's done on the sensor. As long as you aren't blowing out your photo and loosing information, it basically makes not difference if you do it in sensor or later while editing So the only variable left is the shutter speed - which is basically directly dictated b…

If you underexpose too severely, the JPEG compression will eat up all the detail in the shadows.

Pretty much any serious camera, and I think even serious camera-phones these days, will optionally record the image as RAW data rather than encoding as jpeg.

That you want to shoot RAW is pretty much covered in day 1 of intro to digital photography. The only exception to the rule is when you need super-fast frame capture rate, and the bandwidth to storage of much larger RAW files interferes. This is typical of folks shooting sports.

Re: Photography for geeks

#54

Post by yieldcrv »

trap_goes_hot wrote: post #51
yieldcrv wrote: post #19

This is good, I would add that “made up composition rules” are instead “made up composition guidelines ”, that people should learn how to deviate from after constricting themselves with false constraints

Artists will not have a common answer to "Are there any rules in art?". Personally, I think there are patterns in art, and there are often rules that can describe those patterns. Oddly, I think the word rule works out OK. 'guidelines' is problematic in another way as it also implies that one is being guided towards a certain aesthetic/end result.

I feel like your definition of rules is my definition of guidelines, and vice versa

same observation, different semantics

Re: Photography for geeks

#55

Post by fedeb95 »

All good advices. I've been taking pictures for a decade and reading books really does help more than a lot of online stuff you find. Also, looking at masters' photographs and reasoning about how they were made. After some time when I thought composition was all that mattered, I realised that light is all that matters. I use only natural light, so that means I shoot only when the intersection of good light and free time is not empty, but this has improved my craft.

Re: Photography for geeks

#56

Post by fedeb95 »

nbzso wrote: post #52

Just sharing: If you want to learn photography, buy yourself a film camera and read those two books. Ansel Adams: The Camera https://amzn.to/3gMyCa5 The Negative https://amzn.to/3U88fsN The rest is just practice.:)

Good advice. A film camera forces you to learn, while digital will "fix" things for you

Re: Photography for geeks

#57

Post by CWuestefeld »

mgraczyk wrote: post #14
geokon wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think when you break down all the variables there is really very little to play with bc no phones have variable apertures. ISO is basically a linear gain that's done on the sensor. As long as you aren't blowing out your photo and loosing information, it basically makes not difference if you do it in sensor or later while editing So the only variable left is the shutter speed - which is basically directly dictated b…

This is only true if you take just one capture. On Pixel, iPhone, and others we take many small captures and merge them together. There's lots of cleverness there and it allows you to have less noise without motion blur or blowing out highlights.

Computational photography is coming to "real" cameras now, too.

I just upgraded to an Olympus OM-D E-M1.3. Olympus has, unlike most manufacturers, in-body image stabilization. That means that there are tiny actuators moving the sensor around to offset shaky photographer hands. Doing the stabilization in-body gives some other nifty side effects.

Olympus cameras over the past several years have a "super resolution" mode that uses this. My sensor is only 20MP, but using super resolution I can get 50MP or 80MP (on a tripod) out of it. The camera accomplishes that by using the IBIS system to move the sensor by fractional pixels and combining them as you describe. And as you note, this in turn has the side effect of cutting noise.

I was just taking advantage of this a couple weeks ago out at Fort Davis, TX, near the McDonald Observatory, which has some of the darkest skies in the continental USA. Astrophotography is notorious for causing headaches with noise, but this technique goes a huge way to cutting that down with zero extra work from the photographer (except that the shot takes 9 times longer to record).

Re: Photography for geeks

#58

Post by excite1997 »

throw0101c wrote: post #5

If anyone wants to move beyond using the "auto" setting on their camera (or phone), I would recommend the book Understanding Exposure by Bryan Peterson, the first edition of which was published in 1990: * https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/142239.Understanding_Exp... The principles involved haven't changed much in the intervening decades; the current fourth edition was publish in 2016. If all you have is a phone you…

> The principles involved haven't changed much in the intervening decades.

My problem with many old-time tutors is that they refuse to recognize that photography has gotten a lot easier. We don't need to learn the craft the way they did.

For example, you don't need stuff like the "sunny 16" rule of exposure if you have real-time previews in the camera. You use visual feedback, usually with better accuracy.

In the same vein, you probably don't need to learn about flash guide numbers when modern continuous LED illumination covers 99% of use cases without any guesswork.

Or, you don't need to learn about optical filters (perhaps except for the polarizer) when almost all their functions can be accomplished in software without loss in fidelity.

Re: Photography for geeks

#59

Post by emsixteen »

muglug wrote: post #24

The main thing about photography is your first 10,000 photos will likely be bad. Modern technology makes it possible to get through 10,000 snaps much faster and much cheaper than when using film. But taking those photos is not enough — it’s in the editing of those first 10,000 photos that you will find the hidden photographer in you. Photography is a lot like writing code: you can create something that does the job,…

I have a heap of photos that I'm very happy with from my first 10,000 exposures, and I'm sure that if I went back and re-edited them I'd have more. I think it's only when you start to dial down into trying to achieve a specific look where it takes some time and effort.

Re: Photography for geeks

#60

Post by Loic »

fedeb95 wrote: post #55

All good advices. I've been taking pictures for a decade and reading books really does help more than a lot of online stuff you find. Also, looking at masters' photographs and reasoning about how they were made. After some time when I thought composition was all that mattered, I realised that light is all that matters. I use only natural light, so that means I shoot only when the intersection of good light and free t…

Time. It takes time and preparation to wait for the right light at the right place. Waking-up early is oft very well rewarded.
Post reply on HN