So I'm weening myself off automatic. Still use it in a pinch, but I'm taking pictures constantly going from shadow to light, trying to get the perfect exposure and field of depth as fast as possible.
This is the mental process I use for shooting in manual. I'm looking for constructive criticism to make it better.
1. I determine the white balance of the shot. Inside orange, shady blue, or sunlight yellow. I either set the white balance to counteract it, or decide to keep the natural tone of the shot.
2. Now I set the iso all the way down. If possible I want to ignore it. In fact, I don't think of iso as being part of the 'trinity' of exposure. To me its an extra option.
3. I try to fill the frame with the shot. So I zoom if necessary and this gives me my focal length.
4. I decided what kind of depth of field I want and need. If I'm not sure if I can get a perfect shallow depth of field, I stop it down a bit
5. Now I put my shutter speed at a minimum to my focal length. So if I zoomed to 200mm I put my shutter speed at 1/200
6. Now I think about how bright the light is in the environment and how wide my aperture. I speed up the shutter speed to darken it if its too bright.
7. Now, if I have my shutter speed at my minimum in accordance with my focal length... but its still too dark... I might open up my aperture a bit. If my aperture is open all the way or I need to get a large depth of field... I finally go to my iso.
This is pretty much the process I go through when I shoot. Once I get a good exposure, I generally try to only use my shutter speed to adjust for exposure. I also aim low. In other words, I much rather underexpose the image, than overexpose the image, because its a lot easier for me to fix shadows in camera raw than blown highlights. Even though I try to just ignore my iso I tend to use it a lot indoors. It amazes me how much dimmer indoor lighting is than outdoor lighting even though it seems similar to my eyes. Also, it amazes me how I can look at a shaded area under a tree and the grass out in the sun right next to it and see both clearly, while if I take a picture of one or the other I can only expose for one at a time. The dynamic range of my eyes is sooooo much better than my camera.
Right now I'm trying to train my hand and mind to kind of go through this process as fast as possible and do it with as little thought as possible. Trying to get a natural feel for it.
My biggest problem right now is that the force required to click my button tends to shake my camera surprisingly hard, and its really softening up my pictures when I'm kind of in the moment taking candid pictures.
So... whatcha guys think? What am I doing wrong? How can I do this better?
Certain hobbies - some of which can turn into occupations - tend to have certain myths within them. IMO when it comes to photography there are two which seem to show up with great regularity.
The first is, shooting in full manual mode is how to do this like a pro.
The second would be, keeping ISO to an absolute minimum because that's what the pro's do too.
In either case, the pro's probably have much better equipment than you do so what they do isn't of that much importance to your photography.
These are hand in glove thinking processes; if you believe one, you automatically accept the other must fit. Neither IMO makes a lot of sense for most hobbyist shooters. You can't harm anything by trying either of these ideas but they won't necessarily lead you to better photographs.
While I understand you are trying to formulate a method here, you also seem to be going through a lot of decision making to get to what should be a rather simple solution.
White balance is more a matter of the subject than the lighting IMO. Today's cameras all have auto WB that does a fairly good job 95% of the time. If you're shooting in RAW capture, WB isn't that important anyway. If I'm shooting in Jpeg, then I consider what I want done with the subject. Here I tend to go along with Ken Rockwell's advice;
How to Set White Balance Value and saturation being more important than color alone. Or I have my Custom Color presets which have been built with consideration towards my camera's tendencies to manipulate colors.
I seldom use full manual exposure mode since I find it wastes time for me. The very back and forth thinking you exhibit it is where I see a lot of student photographers spinning their wheels.
I began photography with film cameras and they were much more limited in their acceptable light range than most of today's digital cameras will be. We generally shot with ASA 100, 200 or 400 film and worked within those confines. As we shot in the last moments of the golden hour we rushed to complete a roll of 100 or 200 film so we could switch to a roll of 400 to get those last few shots. The visible improvements of a low ASA film were quite easily recognized back then, even with drugstore processing. No one had an ASA 12800 film.
Today's cameras make ISO much more flexible, IMO, and one of the first thoughts I have when shooting in anything other than bright midday sun. In fact, I see shutter speed and aperture as the least flexible legs of the triangle since I depend on one of those two values to get the shot I see in my head.
A moving object requires a faster shutter speed and, if I miss with that value, there's nothing I can do in post production to save a blurred image.
DOF is DOF and I determine that value as I am assessing the shot I'll take and mentally setting the limits for what will be allowed to fade away into out of focus range by my framing of the shot.
I shoot primarily in Av mode since DOF is one thing I can't easily fix in the computer. It's also how I see the shot; what's in front of the subject and what's behind the subject. Therefore, for the most part DOF is the least flexible of my values.
I will prefer to keep my focal length down in order to maintain DOF. I will move - as in, actually walk towards or away from the subject - in order to keep DOF to a manageable level. As I shoot more and more with primes and less and less with zooms, the latter becomes even more the case. In any case, I'm thinking of the finished shot as I work my camera.
That's a bit of a lesson that I think a lot of hobbyists need to address as it comes up. What is your finished shot going to look like?
Not so much in just the framing though that's obviously important but also very flexible if you've allowed yourself the ability to crop at a later date. If you've not considered your eventual print and you've ignored aspect ratios, then you may be very disappointed with framing for the shot and not for the print. Even more so if your vf doesn't provide 100% coverage.
I've cropped many a shot down - waaaay down - to arrive at an image that wasn't fully in my viewfinder. Therefore, I'm thinking how will I print this shot as I'm lining up my settings for the shot. That makes ISO the most flexible of the three exposure values. It's also the value I set first when shooting in anything other than midday sun.
At less than 8 X 10, ISO is a negligible value IMO. Digital sensor noise can be reduced or taken to the level where it is not a deterrent to a good shot. At larger than 8 X 10 print sizes - which I seldom do - noise is going to be obscured by the viewing distance away from the print.
"Sharpness" (the reason for using base line ISO, right?) is, IMO, a trap many student photographers fall into as they become more and more aware of what the reviewers review.
Reviewer's talk about sharpness.
And they show how in a lab setting ISO impacts ultimate sharpness.
Their fixations on these two values makes them fixations for the student when the student can't yet see it is the image and not the results of the camera that really matter.
Objective reviewing is what occurs most frequently with cameras and lenses and it is the least valuable way to think of your gear IMO.
But, then, I've always be a subjectivist when it comes to these things. And, personally, I don't give a flip about what the objectivists think.
Even with a decent prime lens, the light will fall off towards the corners of the image and the sharpness and color accuracy will fade. I know this and I also know only the objectivist photographers - those pixel peepers or the guys paid to notice such things - actually see into the corners of the image.
98% of the people who would see my photos will never look deeply into the corners, they will focus on the center of the shot and only move from that spot if my composition directs their eyes away from the center. IMO I use that fact to my advantage.
I'm not looking to shoot photos for anything other than my own enjoyment so I don't do somethings a "professional" might need to take into account. YMMV when thinking about an image as I do.
WB = Very flexible. I shoot mostly in RAW so I seldom worry about it. I probably use three WB settings at most.
Shutter speed = Flexible, but only after I determine DOF. Mostly, determined by the camera unless I absolutely need to stop movement.
Aperture = Least flexible. This is how I see the shot before I take the shot.
ISO = First value I set when out of midday sun. I have a good idea what my camera's limits are for ISO and I never exceed them. However, if I'm shooting in the shade of late day sun or an overcast day, I will first run my camera up to 400-800 ISO. Seldom higher, that's typically sufficient. Set aperture and observe the camera's chosen shutter speed shooting in Av. Adjust exposure compensation.
I can adjust exposure, remove most noise and sharpen the image in the computer. I can also crop the image to move the viewer's eye to the part of the shot that's of prime importance and which will minimize the rest of the image and it's defects. While I make the attempt to get the best shot in my viewfinder and I don't tend to spend much time in production, I think ahead before I even aim the lens. And I think of the shot as entirely flexible until I make a print.
"My biggest problem right now is that the force required to click my button tends to shake my camera surprisingly hard, and its really softening up my pictures when I'm kind of in the moment taking candid pictures."
As noted, it shouldn't require extreme pressure to release the shutter. You are probably jabbing at the shutter release button. Simply depress the button and hold your finger down until the shot is complete.
Also, if your camera has a mirror lock up -assuming you are using a camera with a mirror - use that feature to remove any camera shake induced by the mirror hitting the back of the camera.
Try back button focus. Most digital cameras allow a button on the rear of the camera to be assigned as the focus lock button. (Whether this button also serves to lock exposure is determined in your menu.) By using BBF you have now eliminated the need to hold and recompose a shot with the front of camera shutter release. The front of camera button is now only a shutter release and you press it lightly (and hold it down) to actuate the shutter.
You can, depending on the shot, use the self timer function of your camera. Press, release, stabilize the camera body and wait two seconds for the shutter to flip. This works nicely if your camera is mounted on a tripod.
You can also set your camera to continuous shooting mode. Press and hold the shutter release to get maybe five or six shots. They're free with any digital camera, delete the ones you dislike later. By using continuous mode your chances of not moving the camera by depressing the release are more likely to turn out an acceptable image since you'll get in the habit of simply holding the release down until the shot is completed.
Of course, always make sure your shutter speed is not so long that it contributes to camera shake.
![[No title]](/data/xfmg/thumbnail/31/31751-fb2f68cca32f9eec468dbde7d649840f.jpg?1734160471)
![[No title]](/data/xfmg/thumbnail/42/42253-fef7e43227f484b1a95dd6d85c03bd40.jpg?1734176623)
