photo taking logic tree?

[bchbum]

As a newb finally making the jump from a point-and-shoot, I often find the myriad choices of settings confusing. I have read many discussions about individual settings, and reviewed a number of "cheat sheets" to help with the settings, but have seen nothing as yet that takes you through the decision process start to finish. What (assuming you have a subject in mind) choice should be first? What should be the last?

I try to always carry a good manual to study the details when possible, and I realize there are infinite variables, but it seems that a well thought out logic tree would be invaluable. I do not want to rely on the auto and program modes, but want to learn the proper use of the capabilities offered.

Thanks for any suggestions.

 

[Derrel]

logictree.gif

I do not think there exists a source for filled-out logic trees for photographic decision-making. But hey, there might be some...the web has a ton of info...

What choices first? 1) What is my desired END result?

2) What paremeters are essential to achieving said result?

3)What technique and equipment is needed to achieve said desired end result?

Briefly: if you want shots that convey motion and movement, you might consider slow-speed shooting; hand-held (a la Ernst Haass), or panning, or tripod-mounted with a Neutral Density filter. If you want deep DOF, consider a short focal length as a starting point. And so on.

 

[480sparky]

I use one of four:

or

 

[Big Mike]

What I teach the students in my 'Using your DSLR class' is this:
#1. Set your artistic goal.
#2. Get a proper exposure.

Of course, before getting to that point, they need to learn about the three aspects of exposure; ISO, shutter speed and aperture. Each of those affects the exposure of the photo and also has it's own unique effect. So with three settings, you can choose to get more or less of the effect from each...that essentially gives you 6 options.

So the logic path goes something like this: Choose the primary effect that you want to use to achieve your goal. (lets say it's a deep depth of field, so you would choose to use a small aperture (high F number)). You then use the remaining two settings to get a proper exposure.

Of course, you do have to give thought to what those other two settings will end up at...and there will always be some compromise.

 

[amolitor]

The main thing is going to be to start small.

Don't try to map the whole thing out before you take your first picture.

 

[sm4him]

I use one of four:

Well, CR*P.
So much for getting any work done today. I'll just be staring at these instead. :lmao:

 

[480sparky]

Well, CR*P.
So much for getting any work done today. I'll just be staring at these instead. :lmao:

Let us know when you find Waldo.

 

[runnah]

Me thinks you are over thinking it.

 

[fjrabon]

It is a bit overwhelming, because it isn't particularly easy to take great photos. The best, and most succinctly adequate treatment, is Michael Freeman's Perfect Exposure and his The Photographer's Eye. And that's a two book set. He gives you something sort of like a logic tree, but each "box" in the logic tree has sort of an embedded logic tree all of its own.

 

[ronlane]

I use one of four:

or

Is that last one for low light situations? I need the high noon, outdoor, busy background portrait one for tomorrow, please

 

[ronlane]

I use one of four:

Well, CR*P.
So much for getting any work done today. I'll just be staring at these instead. :lmao:

what? careful, you could be banned for using that word.

 

[cynicaster]

OP, I’d be wary of this approach to learning. I guess all minds work differently, but I find that if I’m always relying on step-by-step cookbook instructions, I just follow the steps without really learning anything. Same goes for when I punch an address into my GPS system—I end up not even paying attention to where I’m going because the system is spelling it out for me, and as a result, I often have to use the GPS again the next time I head to the same destination.

I like Big Mike’s recommended approach, as it kind of reflects how I personally prefer to operate: I think of how I want the camera to help me creatively (e.g., blurred background? Everything sharp? Frozen or blurred motion? Etc.). Then, I invoke whatever camera settings do that for me, meanwhile setting the others up so that a suitable exposure is achieved. Note I said “suitable” and not “correct”, as the exposure will also be part of the creative process, and thus will not necessarily conform to any rules (despite what some will try to tell you).

 

[Nahin]

I use one of four:

or

Hey 480sparky !!! you are such a talent and genius guy!!! God Damn !!! I never can create something like that!

 

[480sparky]

The process I use would be totally dependent on the subject matter as well as the final use intended for the image.

For instance, I would take a totally different approach to shooting a volleyball game at an indoor venue when the images are intended for publication (newspaper, yearbook, etc.), as opposed to my method to shoot a mountain range at sunset destined for the wall of an office.

 

[bchbum]

Well, I think 480sparky's renderings pretty well replicate the process as I currently see it. For 40 years I've utilized flow charts for programming and complex business processes, and gantt charts for tracking large projects, just doesn't seem a stretch to find something along those lines.

Maybe I'm just a left brainer in a right brained world.