Photography courses/books/resources

[Mohamed Ellozy]

Back from a trip to Switzerland that was both encouraging and depressing from a photo perspective. I took several photos that really pleased me, but often failed to capture on camera what I clearly could see with my eyes.

I feel that the feedback from an instructor would add value to any reading (book or web) that I did. Probably I should start by reading, then come back and ask about short courses.

My camera is a Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ28, with lots of manual controls which I am starting to learn how to use.

I have one very basic book, David Pogue's Digital Photography: The Missing Manual. I found it useful before my trip, and will start by rereading it. But I would definitely like something that goes a bit further.

 

[Taconic]

Back from a trip to Switzerland that was both encouraging and depressing from a photo perspective. I took several photos that really pleased me, but often failed to capture on camera what I clearly could see with my eyes.

That's because what you see through the lens and with your eyes are two completely different things. A photograph can never capture what you "see." Your eyes are far more sensitive than any film or sensor for one, and your eyes also aren't effectively limited to a fixed field of view.

When you see something, you have to visualize it through the lens rather than what you're seeing. It's easy to be overwhelmed by a scene and come home with underwhelming results.

I have one very basic book, David Pogue's Digital Photography: The Missing Manual. I found it useful before my trip, and will start by rereading it. But I would definitely like something that goes a bit further.

Any recommendations would depend upon your level of knowledge. There are two aspects of photography: technical knowledge and technique. The technical aspects are easy to grasp, but technique is difficult and takes years to develop.

If you're comfortable with your technical knowledge (exposure, metering, processing, etc.,) I'd suggest looking at books by the likes of John Shaw, Tim Fitzharris, and maybe Galen Rowel. Of their books I've read, they generally assume that the reader has a certain degree of technical proficiency, but give a lot of insight into their techniques. That can be useful in helping you look at things differently.

 

[Mark Schaefer]

Back from a trip to Switzerland that was both encouraging and depressing from a photo perspective. I took several photos that really pleased me, but often failed to capture on camera what I clearly could see with my eyes..

That's because what you see through the lens and with your eyes are two completely different things. A photograph can never capture what you "see." Your eyes are far more sensitive than any film or sensor for one, and your eyes also aren't effectively limited to a fixed field of view.

When you see something, you have to visualize it through the lens rather than what you're seeing. It's easy to be overwhelmed by a scene and come home with underwhelming results.

I will further add that some scenes contain ranges of contrast (brightest highlights to darkest shadow) that are beyond the capability of any film or digital process to render in an image. While you can use split neutral density filters and the HDR digital editing process to overcome some of these problems, they may not be able to resolve all the contrast problems you will find.

Another approach is to avoid wide ranges of contrast and try to photograph either in the bright areas of a scene or in the more shadowy areas of a scene.

Another thing I have noticed about digital photography (having come from using color slide films such as Fujichrome Velvia or Kodak Ektachrome) is that my digital photos' color palette pales by comparison. Downright dullsville. Color slide films tend to be very "contrasty" in photographer lingo. In essence that means the colors in slides appear brighter than in digital photos. I have found in digital photo editors that if I increase the contrast of my digital photos -- then like magic they begin to resemble Velvia photos. One needs to exert some discretion in such digital editing. You do not want to over dazzle the colors. I try to just recreate what my eyes saw. I actually try to keep the final results a bit less than the super color saturated look of Velvia (which to be honest is a bit unnatural).

The HDR process can also produce some rather nice bright color saturation, but I find all too often that the look of many HDR photos is too unnatural for my tastes. Consequently I do not use HDR.

 

[Mark Schaefer]

Books. I agree with Taconic's recommendation of Galen Rowell's books. While most his books predate digital photography, the information in his books about mountain photography is still very applicable..
Some of Galen Rowell's books that I would recommend are below, the first is an excellent book for a start:
Mountain Light, in Search of the Dynamic Landscape
Galen Rowell's Vision, The Art of Adventure Photography
The Art of Adventure
Galen Rowell's Inner Game of Outdoor Photography
High & Wild, Essays and Photographs on Wilderness

Classes / Workshops. I would recommend looking at the local colleges in your area. Seek out classes that offer photo outings with critiques afterwards. The workshop format where all students have the opportunity to critique each others' work is very good in that you receive feedback from multiple photographers, not merely the instructor. But with all photo classes I recommend checking one's ego at the door. You do not want someone that will praise your work; our friends and relatives stroke our egos sufficiently. I have found that my photography only improved when I found someone who would tear my photos apart, pointing out all of the faults along with suggestions as to what I needed to do better.

The traveling "Nikon School" classes and the seminars/workshops that Outdoor Photographer magazine sponsors provide excellent information. But they tend to be too short, often with too many participants to get much individual critique.

 

[pudgy_groundhog]

I would recommend looking at the local colleges in your area.

I had wanted to take a photography course, but had a hard time finding one that fit the bill. I know a lot of people who take classes at the local community college, but they weren't quite what I was looking for. The class that was more about fundamentals was a B&W film class with a lot of time in the dark room and the color photography class seemed to spend a lot of time on Photoshop and post processing. I wanted a digital class that focused more on fundamentals, etc then Photoshop. I've had some online classes and workshops recommended to me, but now I have no time.

Another book I would recommend is Understanding Exposure, although this depends on where you are in knowing your camera, etc.

Since I don't have time to take a class, I use a lot of online resources - online tutorials, message boards, etc. It's more hodge podge than an actual course, but it works for now. But even with all the reading, I think the best thing is just taking pictures, getting CC and learning that way.

 

[Grumpy]

...

When you see something, you have to visualize it through the lens rather than what you're seeing. It's easy to be overwhelmed by a scene and come home with underwhelming results ... .

Actually, you must discipline yourself to shut off your mental photo editor, and to actually see what is in the entire camera viewfinder. (It is important, of course, that the viewfinder image bear some close resemblance to the captured image, in terms of scope. This is one reason why higher end SLRs have an edge these days.)

This also is why I typically recommend longer focal length lenses over wide angles for scenic photography -- the longer lenses tend to have a perspective that seems to more closely reflect the relatively selective angle of view of our "mind's eye."

G.

 

[Taconic]

I will further add that some scenes contain ranges of contrast (brightest highlights to darkest shadow) that are beyond the capability of any film or digital process to render in an image. While you can use split neutral density filters and the HDR digital editing process to overcome some of these problems, they may not be able to resolve all the contrast problems you will find.

The really nice thing about digital? GNDs are now useless... as long as you bracket your shots

I always bracket. I go from +/- 3/4 stop to 2 stops depending on the situation. It has been a lifesaver many times. Usually because it lets me expose properly for both the foreground and the sky, but also because every once in a while you wind up with that really great shot that you metered incorrectly, and bracketing it lets you pull it out of the fire (as long as you weren't way off, anyway.)

Granted, you always need to shoot from a tripod and will need a cable release, but the benefits are worth it IMO.

Another thing I have noticed about digital photography (having come from using color slide films such as Fujichrome Velvia or Kodak Ektachrome) is that my digital photos' color palette pales by comparison.

I think that depends.

If you shoot JPEG, then the camera automatically sets the white balance and adjusts saturation immediately after the exposure. With a lot of point-and-shoots and even some superzooms, this results in undersaturated images (I suppose the thinking is that undersaturation looks less strange than oversaturation.)

If you shoot RAW, then you have complete manual control over white balance and saturation. It's pretty easy to reproduce the look of Velvia. You can do this after the fact with a JPEG, but not losslessly--8-bit JPEGs are far less forgiving to changes than a 12 or 14-bit RAW and you will lose color and tonal data with anything more than just a minor change.

I can't stress the benefits of shooting RAW enough. If you don't do it already, Mohamed, you should definitely start. As far as I know, your camera supports it.

Actually, you must discipline yourself to shut off your mental photo editor, and to actually see what is in the entire camera viewfinder. (It is important, of course, that the viewfinder image bear some close resemblance to the captured image, in terms of scope. This is one reason why higher end SLRs have an edge these days.)

That's what I meant. Guess I didn't phrase it too well.

 

[JohnL]

While I also am a big fan of Galen Rowell’s work and I have several of his books, you can certainly be intimidated by not only the technical quality of his photos but you can be over-awed by the scenery and lose track of the fundamentals of what he is trying to tell you. Every photo you see in any how-to book on photography was taken using basic fundamentals. Like any pursuit, there are numerous fundamentals to be learned. As you get more proficient in your photography, the fundamentals will become second nature to you. The more you learn about the fundamentals, the more you will see that many of the fundamentals can be combined to take a so-so image and make it a lot better.

Every pre-season, sports teams start out practicing the fundamentals over and over again and even for the experienced athlete, the return to fundamentals is key to their continued success. The same is true for photographers. Every time you go out to take photos, make sure you develop a routine of fundamentals so they become automatic. Have a mental checklist of what to do next. Nothing is more frustrating than seeing your photo get away from you as you fumble with your camera.

As for books, I second Bryan Peterson’s book Understanding Exposure. It is full of fundamentals with photo examples of how-to and how-not-to. Brenda Tharp’s book Creative Nature & Outdoor Photography is another excellent book with basic examples that can be used from your back yard to majestic venues. Designing a Photograph by Bill Smith gives good illustrative examples of basic compositional techniques. I have been photographing for 35 years and I purchased these three books within the past couple years just so I can get newer examples of fundamentals and different ways to put them together. There are a lot of good books out there. I just happened to pick these three.

JohnL

 

[Mohamed Ellozy]

Many thanks for the good advice. Much is way over my head right now but food for thought later on.

I am taking a basic course, which focuses on the mechanics of shooting. The instructor said something interesting on the first day: By the end of the course we would be able to understand the camera's manual. Well, we are only half way through and I have read almost every page and more or less understand it.

I have also been reading Bryan Peterson's "Understanding Photography" and getting ideas from it.

I am doing a lot of bracketing, and am surprised at how often the settings suggested by the meter are not really optimal.

A couple of photos by Taconic in another thread revived my interest in trying to capture moving water (thanks for the informative PMs, Taconic!!!) and on Monday I took some pictures of Gibbs Falls and of the water flowing over the dam lower down (Crawford Path). No tripod yet (I have a Gorillapod on order) but leaning against a tree allowed me to take a picture at 1/15 sec with no blurring (except where I wanted it). I also have a set of filters (UV, ND and polarizing) on order.

I plan to work first on getting the mechanics under control (is that what JohnL means by "the fundamentals"???), then to concentrate on the more creative aspects of composition.

 

[JohnL]

Knowing the mechanics of your camera is an essential part of the fundamentals. Knowing what ‘buttons to push’ is important. Knowing what buttons to push to truly achieve your desired effect is another matter altogether. As your desire to create something more than snapshots increases, your skill level and repertoire of fundamentals will also need to increase. This new set of fundamentals builds on your solid foundation of your previous set.

JohnL

 

[sardog1]

Take a look at the Outdoor Photographer magazine How to>Shooting page and the related pages on other aspects. This magazine is one of the leaders in the field. It's available in bookstores for mulling a possible purchase/subscription.

Ditto on the advice to go with longer focal lengths at first. Some of the very best outdoor photography is done with 35 mm-equivalent lengths from 105 to 180 mm or thereabouts.