Wed 17 Oct 2007
Over the past few months I have been learning photography. It’s fun.
After much head-scratching I have dragged myself through the beginner phase of the initially bewildering world of photography, and can now present to you Bernie’s Better Beginner’s Guide to Photography for Computer Geeks Who Want to be Digital Artists: the guide that I wish someone had written for me 4 months ago.
As of now, this is a blog about web development and photography. If you only want one, try these feeds for web development only or for photography only.
October 18th, 2007 at 2:37 pm
Nice tutorial on photography. I’ve got a nice camera but no idea how to use it. I’ll have to use your article and try to get better with it. Thanks!
October 18th, 2007 at 8:11 pm
Awesome work man. I got a camera and a copy of “The Camera” by Ansel Adams but I probably learnt more in 20 minutes reading your article than I did from that book.
October 19th, 2007 at 9:01 am
hey, stumbled upon ur article at delicious, great article man! it helps alot! great for rookies like me, hehe.
October 19th, 2007 at 4:34 pm
Bernie:
Great job showing what you are telling. I teach a 12-hour digital photo course at the Community College. You condensed most of it into a simple quick tutorial. Very good. And your illustrations are also great work.
October 19th, 2007 at 5:06 pm
Thanks for the feedback everyone.
Jack - If you want to use the article in your course then go ahead. I’ve put it under a creative commons license.
October 19th, 2007 at 8:43 pm
Great article though I wanted to point out a safety tip. In the article you said
“Taking a photo directly into the sun would have hurt my eyes without an ND filter.”
Unless the filter is filtering UV and IR you can still hurt your eyes.
October 19th, 2007 at 9:10 pm
This article was definitely right on focus on it’s target audience. I am a computer geek, and I want to learn more about advanced photographic techniques. Thank you for writing it!
October 19th, 2007 at 9:31 pm
Where can one purchase the filter that creates macro settings which you spoke about in your article?
Thanks so very much for all the great info.
October 19th, 2007 at 10:11 pm
Exellent guide,informative & well written
October 19th, 2007 at 10:36 pm
Great article full of useful information, I enjoyed your style of writing.
October 19th, 2007 at 11:06 pm
Jacob: you are right, mostly. ND filters do fall off rapidly outside the visible range. However, as long as you’re not using a very wide aperture lens or taking ages to frame your shot, you will be fine.
While it may be unpleasant to look into the sun for a few seconds, it will not damage your eyes. The benefit of an ND filter is to allow you to compose the shot without discomfort.
However, looking into the sun through a f/1.4 lens is like focusing the sun through a magnifying glass onto your retina. Don’t do this, even with an ND filter. Stick to smaller aperture lenses (what counts is the maximum aperture, since lenses always show you the maximum aperture through the viewfinder, then step down for the shot), and don’t look through the viewfinder too long.
October 19th, 2007 at 11:52 pm
Thanks Bernie I enjoyed your article and look forward to your next updates.
October 20th, 2007 at 12:16 am
Awesome tutorial! Sure explains a lot of things. This will be a good guide for my next digital camera purchase.
October 20th, 2007 at 12:56 am
Very nice tutorial. I’d love to learn about flash lighting and multi-flash techniques, so if you’re looking for chapter ideas … ;)
October 20th, 2007 at 1:50 am
Well thought out basic (and not so basic) tutorial. Even after 40+ years with Nikons & 40,000 jewelry photos I learned a few new things.
October 20th, 2007 at 4:10 am
i’ve photographed for a long time, but i really needed to sum it up in an article like this. Bravo!
My gallery, mind the publicity, is at http://microwaves.deviantart.com , take a look :)
October 20th, 2007 at 5:45 am
I really appreciate your well written and easy to understand article. Looking forward to more of your work.
October 20th, 2007 at 12:15 pm
Great article!! I am just about to make the jump into DSLR and this had really helped me understand some concepts I was unsure on. Perfectly pitched at the geek/photographer!
Thanks,
October 20th, 2007 at 1:09 pm
Hi, cool guide, I’m still reading it but I can say that it’s very well done! :)
Only one comment: you advise to buy canon or nikon, I disagree! ^^
I’ve just bought a Pentax K10D, “European camera of the year 2007-2008″ for the prestigious association European Imaging & Sound Association (EISA), and the price is wonderful for the settings it offers, in my humble opinion of course! ;)
I agree that Canon and Nikon are today the leaders on the market, but they are other great companies too! =)
What do you think about it?
Bye!
October 20th, 2007 at 1:25 pm
There’s nothing like gadget brands to inspire fanboy loyalism. I’m not immune - I type this on my 6th Apple computer.
Canon and Nikon have the best selection of unusual lenses, but any camera range has great lenses in the medium wide (~24mm) to medium telephoto (~135mm) range. If you want good quality ultra wide or long lenses, Canon or Nikon seem to have the edge.
You work with what you have, and a good photographer with a Pentax K100D will take better photos than a Canon 1Ds owner with plenty of money and no passion.
October 20th, 2007 at 1:34 pm
Thanks for your reply.
I agree with you that Canon and Nikon probably have the best quality ultra wide or long lenses, but I don’t care because they are too expensive! XD
Thanks again, bye bye.
October 20th, 2007 at 5:22 pm
Thank you so much for your tutorial. It really helped me to understand what was what. I have taken two photo classes and being a non-geek could never get past f-stops. Thanks again.
October 20th, 2007 at 6:00 pm
Fantastic article! I need you to explain how that creative commons works. We’d love to feature you on our site. Great job Bernie.
October 20th, 2007 at 6:44 pm
The article was great. But you’re wrong about people being able to look up anything on wikipedia. I can’t get past the Great Firewall of China.
October 21st, 2007 at 2:32 am
I had nowhere to really start with my 20D until I read this article. I am not quite the “book” type and when my friend sent me the link to your article I knew it was for me. Everything is laid out very simple and “newbie friendly”
Thanks again for putting this great site together for people looking to capture better photos.
October 23rd, 2007 at 12:07 am
Great article !! Precise & to the point .. well written.
October 23rd, 2007 at 6:53 pm
Excellent tips for a beginner. Thanks!
October 23rd, 2007 at 7:22 pm
I have recently been very interested in photography and photoshop myself. I have already read a number of articles on photography already, but I must say, none of my readings covered metering in the manual mode (even though you merely mentioned it in your)as creatively as you did.
Could you write a longer article, indeed, a step-by-step guide on how to use the manual mode in photography? I’d love to be able to use the manual exposure metering quite often.
Thanks, and please, more of those guides!
October 23rd, 2007 at 10:08 pm
Wow, this was a brilliant article. I love the extras on the side, but the content of the article is concise, and relevant. You briefly mention that you plan on writing more articles. PLEASE DO! The nerd in people like us is unquenchable we need more!!!
October 24th, 2007 at 2:26 pm
Hi I am doing an open university course on digital photography. One of the students on the course,recommended your website, as further reading to do for our course. Very well explained, you cover most of what we are trying to learn. Thanks Melody
October 24th, 2007 at 3:58 pm
Bernie,
Extremely well done - I like your style and also think the photos portray the “1000 words” concept especially the split image on Noise Ninja. Looking forward to your next articles. Thanks for taking the time.
October 25th, 2007 at 8:14 pm
Great article! Can’t wait for the next one.
Stumbled..
October 29th, 2007 at 9:22 am
Excellent article! I was just wondering, what technique do you use for noise reduction. I’ve been adjusting through Light Room and Photoshop CS3’s built-in noise reduction filters, but nothing is giving me the product that I need.
The work is for web, not print, and the problem with the set of images is that it was shot with high ISO in a not-so-well-lit environment.
I was able to color correct and come to a good image in all other aspects except for the noise.
please help.
October 29th, 2007 at 10:35 am
I use Noise Ninja. Also, all the big photos in the article were shrunk down to 50% of their original size. This restores the sharpness lost to noise reduction and the Bayer filter demosaicing process which is the reason that no photo from a digital camera looks completely sharp when viewed at 100%.
October 29th, 2007 at 10:48 am
Nice work! I am developing a training course to train staff how to take photographs of our products. Can I use the URL of your article as a resource for learners that have limited photographic knowledge?
October 29th, 2007 at 11:23 am
Neil: You certainly can. In fact, the creative commons license lets you print out and distribute copies if you like.
November 3rd, 2007 at 3:25 pm
Thanks for the fantastic tutorial. Very concise and with excellent examples. This should be required reading for any new SLR owner.
November 5th, 2007 at 7:45 am
Fantastic guide! Much appreciated. My RSS reader is anxiously awaiting your next article. :)
November 5th, 2007 at 4:16 pm
Thanks Bernie,
Very nice read. I want to ditch that P&S and get into DSLR world. Your article came just with the good timing! :-) Being a “computer geek who wants to be digital artist”, I think I just found the gem that will let me go forward.
I would be very intersted in your views and tips on basic post-processing. I am confused as to know if I need Photoshop CS3, Adobe Light Room, etc…
November 5th, 2007 at 5:08 pm
You don’t need any such software products. If you’re not planning on doing much digital manipulation beyond adjusting the exposure in RAW conversion, the free RAW conversion software that comes with your camera (Digital Photo Pro for Canon users) will be just fine. Clunky, but fine.
If you want to, for example, add and remove objects from photos or add special effects, you will need a good image editor. The Gimp is free, and is rapidly improving which is another way of saying that it sucks.
If you haven’t tried Photoshop, by all means see if you can get by with The Gimp first, but do it that way round because starting with The Gimp after your 30 day free trial of Photoshop runs out will be a depressing experience.
November 5th, 2007 at 5:16 pm
Thanks for that quick reply! :-) In fact, I am already a Gimp user and it seems to be handling quite well my need for the moment. But I never shoot in RAW so that part is a bit scary for me.
What about Light Room (or Aperture)? Do you use one of them? They seems interesting for exposure manipulation and quick editing of a bunch of photos.
November 5th, 2007 at 5:26 pm
The biggest advantage of those products is the workflow management. They don’t do anything that Photoshop (or even The Gimp) can’t do, but they do it faster, and have features that help you keep track of hundreds of photoshoots each containing hundreds of photos.
I don’t take enough photos to warrant buying them. If I did, I’d choose Lightroom.
November 8th, 2007 at 8:51 am
B-E-A-U-tifully written… cant wait for more
November 8th, 2007 at 11:24 am
Hey bernie,
Greatly written! I am most eagerly waiting for the next part.
November 9th, 2007 at 2:46 pm
Real good written!
It took me some time to read it through cause I’m from Austria an had to translate the technical phrases, but in general, it was easy to understand. Thank’s for this big help!
November 12th, 2007 at 8:13 pm
Nice article!!!
One question though: I don’t understand the calculation for the Neutral Density filters (1/50 doubled 8 times = 5 seconds). Could you give me some more examples?
I’m wondering if I want a ND4 or ND8 lens - What would happen with a 1/200 or 1/1000 “normal” exposure without the ND filter, how would those two affect the exposure?
November 13th, 2007 at 10:18 am
Let’s say that you put your camera in aperture priority mode and select f/11, a good general purpose aperture for obtaining sharp results. The camera meters the scene and automatically selects a shutter speed of 1/50.
Adding a 1 stop filter halves the light reaching the meter, so the meter will compensate by doubling the shutter length to 1/25 so that the resulting picture is just as exposed.
Adding a 2 stop filter halves the light coming in again, so the shutter speed drops to 1/12. This filter is called an ND4 filter, because 2 stops darker means 4 times darker and 4 times the shutter speed - half something twice and it becomes a quarter.
In the same way, a 3 stop filter doubles the shutter speed to 1/6 second, and is called an ND8.
It’s probably easier to remember that an ND8 multiplies your shutter speed by 8, I just wanted people to understand what’s happening: a stop is a stop is a stop, whether you get it through an ND filter or any other setting; you could just as well add a 4 stop ND filter and increase the ISO 4 stops from from 100 to 1600, if for some reason you wanted a really noisy image.
Incidentally, when you stack ND filters, the stop values add together, so a 2 stop filter plus a 3 stop filter is a 5 stop filter. The marketing numbers add together, so for the previous example an ND4 plus an ND8 makes an ND32.
November 13th, 2007 at 11:47 am
I just always used the scale and Canon’s AV button to make the pictures lighter and darker, but never understood what I am actually doing, with your article I understood the essence of stops.
Thanks for the thorough explanation of ND Filters+stops. Going to buy a ND4 now I think.
Cheerio
December 5th, 2007 at 4:14 am
Two words. Thank you…well, maybe that and I don’t feel so stupid anymore. Your examples are so clear.
December 18th, 2007 at 5:20 pm
Great tutorial. Keep ‘em coming.
December 25th, 2007 at 6:27 am
Your site is terrific! Any time I have a friend/family member who is asking me about photography, I gladly link them to your site as it has more than enough information to get them learning the fundamentals! Thanks for the hard work putting this together.
January 3rd, 2008 at 4:50 pm
I’ve been reading many online articles regarding photography and you are the first that actually described what Metering is all about! YOU ROCK! Keep up the good work. I’ll be checking your site more frequently now.
January 4th, 2008 at 7:32 am
Bernie:
Thanks for taking the time to boil down the basics into normal-person language. Stops, ISO, depth of field, all in easy-to-understand terms - brilliance! Santa dropped off a nice new DSLR and what you have written will put me on a great path.
Like everyone else who has commented, looking forward to your next post. I know you weren’t thinking you would tackle this, but some thoughts on composition would be a good next “chapter”…
January 6th, 2008 at 7:03 am
Hi,
I have a very old camera,Powershot A75 Canon, I didn’t know I can do a lot with it before i read the article. Can you write an article in detail on other modes of a digital camera? or just write on something you choose.
January 7th, 2008 at 11:54 pm
Hi!
Thanks for a really good article!
Keep it up!!!
Patrik
January 9th, 2008 at 4:06 pm
Good article, but I was confused about something. What causes this to be true? “At narrow apertures the whole of a scene will be in focus, whereas at wide apertures only the bit of the scene that you focus on will be on focus.” What causes that? How does letting in more light make the background blurry? Thanks, Lori
January 9th, 2008 at 4:12 pm
I’m glad you asked that: check back in 2 weeks for the second instalment that I’m working on now - an explanation of Depth of Field.
January 9th, 2008 at 9:59 pm
Thanks! That’ll be just about the time I get my new Nikon D40 from Amazon!
January 9th, 2008 at 10:32 pm
Okay, related to that… If I choose a particular aperture (let’s say, f1) for a particular lens, that means that the aperture opening and the lens’s focal length are the same, right? So, if my lens is 50 mm, and the aperture setting is f1, then my aperture opening is also going to be 50mm. Let me know if I’m understanding this correctly so far, ’cause it’s gonna matter for my question.
Now, if I’m using a lens that goes from 18mm to 50mm, and I change from 50mm to 20mm, and keep the aperture setting at f1, will my actual aperture opening also change, to 20mm, on the fly (to maintain the 1:1 ratio)? Thanks in advance. -Lori
January 10th, 2008 at 11:00 am
Yes - zooms with a constant aperture of say f/2.8 change the physical size of the aperture as you zoom.
Lenses with a variable aperture, e.g. my 70-300 f/4.5-5.6 also change the physical size of the aperture as you zoom, but not by enough to compensate for the focal length, so the f-number rises as you zoom.
Incidentally, all lenses let you compose the shot through the maximum aperture, then quickly step down to take the shot. The value that they step down to is set electronically by the camera. Therefore even with a f/4.5-5.6 zoom, if you set the aperture to f/11 on the camera, zooming will not affect the aperture of the photo.
January 11th, 2008 at 11:12 am
Wow ! great tutorial :-)
Where did you get your close-up filter ? I’ve never seen one of those.. And it seems interesting.. Somebody knows if its available for a Canon 17-55 f2.8? Thanks !
January 11th, 2008 at 11:26 am
Close-up lenses work best with telephoto lenses. I use mine with a 70-300.
There is a different solution for normal and wide lenses: extension tubes. A 12mm or 25mm extension tube placed between the camera body and the lens will let you focus really close to the subject.
Kenko make a set of 3 tubes that cost much less than the Canon ones, but there are mixed reports about whether they work with EF-S lenses, so try them in a shop first.
February 4th, 2008 at 11:31 pm
Great Tutorials, Keep it up.
I have a quick question, probably sounds a bit stupid.
I have recently been looking at buying a Polarizing filter for my DSLR, problem is its become apparent that I can buy either circular or linear.
Whats the difference?
Is it as simple as it sounds?
Thanks in advance.
Neil.
February 5th, 2008 at 7:24 am
You need a circular polariser to work with modern SLRs with automatic metering.
Circular polarisers ‘reset’ the polarisation after filtering out the light polarised in a certain direction. This prevents them from interfering with the meter, which also uses polarised light.
If you always use manual mode, linear polarisers are fine.
March 14th, 2008 at 8:20 am
Thank you so much! I am a bit of a closet geek (analysis paralysis & research until my eyes bleed) and just cant stand those glib articles directed at techno-phobes and haven’t got the attention span for wading through fat books for stupid people. You answered all my newbie questions in one fell swoop. I know I sound stoned but you’ve actually changed my life.
March 26th, 2008 at 6:19 am
Hey!
So glad I stumbled across your article - as everyone above has said already…THANKS!
It’s a great article and provided me with succinct info that I usually fins a bit confusing and boring (thus never manage to wade through.)
Here’s to me actually using my SLR rather than putting it on auto all the time!
March 26th, 2008 at 7:10 pm
Great article. The heading “Aperture, or 1, 1.4, 2, 2.8, 4, 5.6, 8, erm, what the f***?” made me laugh as I’d been thinking exactly that but it was finally put in a way that made sense.
As an idea for a future article, would you consider doing something on different lens types and what they do? By that I mean you mention a prime lens at one point, and I’ve heard this term before but no one seems to be able to tell me what the difference between as prime lens and a normal one is (if there is one). I’ve also seen referances to things like wide/ultra wide lenses and a detailed description of these and their advantages and disadvantages would be really helpful.
March 26th, 2008 at 7:23 pm
A prime lens is any lens that’s not a zoom, i.e. that has a fixed focal length.
Here’s a good article that covers the different types of lens: http://photo.net/equipment/building-a-digital-slr-system/
April 1st, 2008 at 7:22 pm
Like everyone has said, great article on ND filters. I stumbled upon your site from ADIDAP - please keep up the good work.
Anyway, I had a couple questions that I think I know the answers to, but just wanted clarification: 1\you mentioned that ND filters can be stacked, so if I stack a ND2 and ND4, the result will be an ND8 (based on the f-stop reduction). That be being said, is there any reason to buy the ND8 at all, or is it more practical to have an ND4 and ND8 - because the ND2 is too small of a reduction of light to be used on it’s own?
2\can I get away with just the ND filters and forget about the ND grad filters (considering I can use the ND filter for 1 shot, say for the sky exposure, a 2nd shot without the ND filter, say for the foreground exposure - then Photoshop the 2 exposures, masking out the lighter areas to simulate graduation)?
Thanks in advance for your reply.
April 1st, 2008 at 8:42 pm
If ND2 is 2 stop and ND4 is 4 stop, then stacking them gives a 6 stop filter.
If you want to capture a bright sky and a dark ground in one exposure, you need an ND grad. I prefer to use two exposures with no ND filters at all - one exposure for the sky and one for the ground, then merge them in Photoshop. This allows me, for example, to shoot landscapes without a flat horizon.
The only thing I use ND filters for is getting longer shutter speeds. There’s no reason that you couldn’t expose the sky by using the same shutter speed and aperture that you used for the foreground and adding a 2 stop ND filter, but in practice you’d just increase the shutter speed by 2 stops if you’re in manual mode, or dial in two stops of underexposure if you’re in one of the automatic modes.
April 2nd, 2008 at 2:08 am
Thanks - sorry, I was flipping back and forth from a Wiki site describing ND filters and this page - on the Wiki, ND2 equated to a 1 f-stop reduction in light, ND4 equated to a 2 and ND8 equated to 3 stop - so with that, a stacked ND2 and ND4 would result with a 3 f-stop reduction.
From what I understand so far, the application of the ND filter is so you can prolong the shutter speed in bright conditions to prevent overexposure beyond the 9 stop dynamic range (which is difficult to correct in PS), whereas the ND grad has a different application - but can be reproduced in PS with multiple exposures of your subject.
thanks again.
April 9th, 2008 at 12:32 am
found the link on Google and after giving it a quick look and saw how it was delivered, i decided to close the rest of my browser’s tab, containing the rest of the links i found on Google. The guide proved to be REALLY REALLY informative, and the occasional humor made the topic a lot less intimidating and scholastic. and the sample pictures: pretty :)
to say that the guide is great is in itself an understatement.
April 12th, 2008 at 9:01 am
Those stupid books make it all sound so damn complicated, don’t they?! I’ve been reading photography books for weeks, I’m on overload. Your tutorial is a breather. Concise but not undermining the underlying theories. Thanks a bunch…
Keep up the good work
April 14th, 2008 at 8:17 pm
What a great little gem…I ran across your article while looking for some tips on my new Olympus camera…I have owned several Canons and this is my first Olympus. But your article give names and reasons for some of the things I have learned along the way…Thanks big time!
April 14th, 2008 at 8:52 pm
Bernie -
I thoroughly enjoyed reading your guides. Refreshingly understandable!
Looking forward to your next ones.
April 24th, 2008 at 9:04 pm
Great guide for digi novices. Paid for a 12 week course but learnt more reading your article in 10 mins. Keep up the good work and thanks.
April 25th, 2008 at 4:32 pm
“This is the guide I wish someone had written for me when I started 3 months ago”
Exactly the same for me too with a slight difference that someone actually did write it! And did a really good job!
Good sense of humor too :P Morpheus and titles of paragraphs :)
Thanks!
April 26th, 2008 at 3:23 pm
Wonderful site appu!! …the site should be called ‘photography for intellects who don’t really understand much from reading camera book”
Much thanks and keep up the good work!!
May 1st, 2008 at 10:25 pm
BRILLIANT AT LAST SOMETHING A THICKO LIKE ME
CAN UNDERSTAND YOU WAN’T TO PUT ALL THIS IN
A LITTLE BOOK SO PEOPLE CAN CARRY IT AROUND
WITH THEM ON TRIPS
I REALY ENJOYED READING AND UNDERSTANDING
THIS ARTICLE THANK YOU
FRAN WHITE
May 3rd, 2008 at 4:57 pm
THANK YOU!
May 11th, 2008 at 7:32 pm
Great tutorial!! Very well explained!!
xstacy
May 13th, 2008 at 9:32 am
Excellent article. I’m just about to purchase a dSLR and can’t wait to try playing with the manual settings based on what I’ve picked up here.
Can you help me with my maths? I tried to repeat your calculation for angle of view using the values in your diagram, so:
arctan((35mm/2)/80mm) x 2 = 0.43
Is this value returned in radians, so then 0.43 radians x 180/Pi = 25 degrees?
May 13th, 2008 at 9:41 am
Yes, as google will confirm: arctan((35 / 2) / 80) * 2 radians = 24.6781746 degrees
To be honest though, unless you think in degrees you’ll get more insight from looking through a viewfinder. Also, bear in mind that unless you get a full-frame DSLR like the Canon 5D, the number needs to be 22, not 35, to take into account the 1.6x crop factor.
May 24th, 2008 at 7:19 pm
thank you. i want to learn photography but i can’t do it by my self
June 3rd, 2008 at 7:14 pm
Wonderful tutorial, thanks for writing it. It was a good review of photography basics I had forgotten some I had never learned.
June 18th, 2008 at 6:15 pm
Great easy to understand photography basics, I use a Fuji s9600 just a point and shoot but with lots of dials and control not a DSLR but ok for me while I’m getting grips to the basics
Keep up the good work thanks again