For today’s wedding I used a 35mm lens, a 16-35, a 24-70, a 70-200 and a 100mm macro. At a later day (when I am not falling sleep after working 7am-midnight) I will go into more detail But for now:
Macro for close-up detail:
Wide for environmental shots;
And use telephoto for farther-away detail:
More on technique in the next few days!
I see that this site is today’s Site of the Day at http://www.1001noisycameras.com/ – that’s great! Welcome, 1001 Noisy Camera fans.
As you will see, on this blog I teach daily – a teaching post every single day. Enjoy, and search back through the past year – many useful tips here from a working photographer and teacher to everyone who is interested!
Few posts of mine come without a snap or two, so here are a couple from yesterday’s shoot – the Hon. Minister Harinder Takhar MPP, a truly charming man:
The Honourable Minister Harinder Takhar, MPP
I used three lenses: one long (70-200 on the 1D Mark IV) and two wide (24-70 and later 16-35 on the 1Ds Mark III).
Wine being poured, photograph by Michael Willems
Manual and with a flash for fill.
Reception Buffet
Cheers,
Michael
A quick walk through Montréal. 32-12800 ISO and Lightroom noise reduction.. Wow. Wow. And wow. Both Montreal and the low noise performance:
Montreal church, by Michael Willems
Montreal Wall, by Michael Willems
Montreal
And my favourite:
Le Chat (en Montréal)
All this shot handheld with a 1D Mark IV and a 16-35 f/2.8 lens. At ISOs up to 12,800, and with Lightroom 3 noise reduction applied.
Even when you take a simple snapshot, as a photographer you should think about how to do it. Almost subconsciously, I apply the same rules and the same thinking to a snapshot that I do to a photo I am paid for.
So I thought it might be worthwhile to discuss some of that thinking. In that context, here is a snapshot I took the other day of a friend:
Michael's friend Ninon, shot with a wide angle lens
In the second or two before I take that snap, what is some of my thinking, and what are some of the decisions I make?
That is, in a nutshell, what I thought in the seconds leading up to this picture.
That is my thinking. Yours may have been different, and that is of course perfectly OK. There is not one good picture: there are 100 billion. The essence here is not what my conclusions were, but the fact that I was thinking at all, instead of just blindly snapping.
Light, moment and composition/subject, that is what makes up a picture. So think of those every time you take one, and your pictures will get better.
Toronto, for the next weeks, has a Berlin Wall, designed to keep any protesters and citizens (a.k.a. “threats”) away from the visiting G20 dignitaries, who must not see any of this.
I took a few snaps yesterday, from the car:
Toronto's G20 Security Fence
Toronto's G20 Security Fence
Toronto's G20 Security Fence
Army presence in the street, riot police, many extra Big Brother cameras, constant ID and security checks, roads closed when VIP convoys arrive, a large part of downtown that will be completely shut off for two days, cell phones that will be jammed when Mr Obama is around, and a $1bn bill for the taxpayer: very third world, and I thought that was probably worth a few dramatic black and white pictures.
Am I being ever so slightly manipulative, by using contrasty black and white?
Perhaps, and in news photography I would not of course use any contrast enhancement, or even go to mood-setting black and white. But in this type of documentary shots, on my blog, it is exactly what is called for. I believe the Berlin wall thing is hideous and that must be shown: outrage is suitable.
That said, you should be aware of the fact that just like a writer, a photojournalist can also tell the story he wants. A protest with only forty protesters? Shoot diagonally from above and it’ll look like hundreds. Black and white creates drama. When looking at news pictures, see them in this context, and ask “what was the journalist doing to put across his point of view?”
…you can shoot softly lit subjects.
Oakville Inn Sign, Lakeshore, Oakville
Can you see – no shadows, no harsh contrast, no washed-out colours.
And another one:
A 1958 Dodge in Oakville
So next time it is overcast, don’t say “bad weather, I can’t take pictures”. On the contrary, it’s great weather for photos.
…your picture is not sharp enough, or too grainy, or slightly blurred, or too contrasty?
Then consider making it into a black and white image. Black and white is less critical.
A black and white picture of Michael Willems
Many images can be made better this way: B/W images show the image, not the quality of the image.
When shooting anything, including events, always make sure you catch little details, not just the big overview pictures. Like this, from a recent corporate event shoot:
Snacks at an event: an impromptu food shot
Wide open aperture, bounced flash, camera to manual: grab shots like this and you add to the story.
In yesterday’s post, I talked about making “hyper-real” images by using light coming from unexpected directions.
Today, another reason to use artificial light in photos: because the available light is too contrasty.
Here’s a picture of a model last Sunday in available light in the forest. Horrible contrast: pretty girl and great model, but not a picture I would use:
A model in natural light, in the forest
No, that just will not do.
Instead, let’s use a strobe in a softbox, and a gridded light as hairlight. Now we get:
A model in outdoors studio light
You can easily see how much nicer that is. The soft strobe light overpowers the sun, and removes the harshness and the contrasty nature of the available light. It also allows me to decrease the exposure of the background.
So next time you see a photographer lugging light stands and batteries and cables and such, you know why.
Here’s my current screen saver, made to fit my 1920×1200 pixel 24″ iMac:
Passenger jet landing
You need to see t his at original size to see it properly: click and then save the image.