Photos can look great. An astonishing landscape can transport the viewer to another time and place. Maybe it is just for a fraction of a second. A great photograph of a person can look into the person’s soul, and let you share their smiles or tears. A great photo communicates to the viewer. There is an enormous market out there for photographs. Publishers know that the people who buy their materials want photographs that reach out to them. Visual communication is something that we all can relate to. Subjects out there to take photos of are never ending. The only limitations are within your mind.
But what is it that makes a photograph successful? A photography course can definitely help you, but the answer is fairly simple, and you can improve your photography today, if you just learn a few very basic rules.
However, rules are meant to be broken. Some of my favorite photographs very purposely break a lot of the basic rules. But to break the rules in a way that enhance a photograph and effectively turns it into a great photo, you first have to know the rules and second you must have a reason for breaking them.
Number one: Get in close, really close, much closer than you think.
The first, and most essential, rule: Simplify. The more you simplify a photograph, the more attention you draw towards your subject. And the more attention you draw towards your subject, the more successful you will be in communicating your message to the viewer. There are approximately a million ways to do this, so I will keep it simple and stick to my preferred technique here, and that is to get in as close as possible. When you do that, you eliminate anything in the background that may distract from your subject.
Number two: The photographic composition
Most strong photographs position their main elements in certain specific places of the frame. When you think about where you want to put your subject in the photo, you are composing your picture. When a painter starts out with a blank canvas, he or she has full control to decide where to put that river, those mountains, the trees, clouds and whatever thing that needs to be included. Creating a photograph, you ought to go through the same process.
Number Three: Is there a better way to do it?
The last thing we will talk about is point of view. The photographers’ point of view more exact. How often have you seen something worth taking a photo of - perhaps a barn, a tree, or your dog - and picked up your camera to take a picture right then and there? If this is the way you go about taking photos, you can noticeably improve your technique with one simple process. Just walk around the subject. Notice how the background changes as you move 360 degrees around your subject. Try to lie down on the ground and point the camera up at your subject. Climb up a ladder and look down, trying the same thing. Tilt the camera vertically, even diagonally. Take a whole roll of film or fill a whole memory card if you use a digital camera, of the same subject from different points of view and compare the results. You will surprise yourself. You will certainly surprise the viewer by trying something different and that will add power to your photo.
So, should you take a photography course? I think so. It does not have to be a long tedious one with a lot of technical stuff and hour after hour with boring behind the desk lecture. No, go out and play with you camera - I will see you out there!
Huge amount of information on Photography Course - check out for your self.
Taking portraits can be fun but if you want to get the best results you need a few pointers. Otherwise your images will end up uninteresting and jaded. Many people either snap haphazardly without any thought or take the whole process far too seriously.
Try and think about the following:
What type of portrait you want?: formal, candid, informal, close up, groups - try and plan beforehand
What pose are you looking for?: relaxed, serious, funny - having pictures taken can be nerve wracking - put your subject at ease and tell THEM what you want them to do (after discussing their own desires beforehand, if appropriate)
Consider a prop: people are more natural and relaxed when doing something with their hands - give them a flower or newspaper or something else to hold - even get them to position the item in different ways
Talk to your subject: distract them and make them feel more relaxed
What lighting do you want?: studio flash, natural light, a candle? - choose the appropriate lighting and use reflectors to remove or lessen shadows
Watch the background: make the background appropriate to your subject and get rid of all the clutter
Choose the correct lens / zoom: wide-angle lenses and telephotos will give an unnatural appearance to your model - use 90 - 130mm (35mm film equivalent)
Take lots of images: you will always get people with their eyes closed or looking different to what you intended - by taking lots of pictures you will heighten your chances of success
Know your equipment: make sure you know how to change settings on your equipment - fumbling around does NOT inspire confidence in models!
Eric Hartwell runs the photography resource site http://www.theshutter.co.uk and the associated discussion forums as well as the regular weblog at http://thephotographysite.blogspot.com.
With all of the hype, it’s easy to lose track of something.
Digital Single Lens Reflex (SLR) cameras don’t have all of the same features as compact cameras.
While a digital SLR is the ideal camera for the photographer who wants more control, they aren’t for everyone.
Before you rush out to buy one, you should know what a digital SLR can’t do.
No Photo Preview
If you own a compact digital camera, do you ever hold the camera up to your face to take a photo?
I doubt it.
With a compact camera, it’s much easier to use the LCD on the back of the camera to set up your shot.
You won’t be able to do this with a digital SLR.
The majority of digital SLR cameras don’t have this live LCD preview mode. While you can use the LCD to adjust camera features and playback photos, you can’t see the photo you’re about to take.
As of April 2006 there is only one SLR with a live preview mode - the Olympus E330 - which helps narrow your options if this is a feature you really want.
No Movie Mode
Digital SLR cameras don’t moonlight as video cameras.
They exist to take still photos, and that is all that they do.
If you want your camera to take short video clips along with your photos, you’ll have to consider either a compact digital camera or SLR-like compact camera.
The SLR-like camera will have many features of a digital SLR, but will still include the movie mode that a digital SLR lacks.
No Electronic Zoom
If you own a compact digital or have done some research, you know that these cameras have electronic zooms.
There is a lever on the camera somewhere that lets you zoom the lens in and out.
This lever is convenient, because you can zoom right in on your subject with only one hand on the camera.
With a digital SLR, you’ll need two hands.
None of the digital SLR zoom lenses are electronic, which means that you have to hold the camera with one hand and zoom the lens with the other.
In Summary
Are there advantages of owning a digital SLR camera? Absolutely.
But that’s material for another article. For now, just realize that digital SLR cameras can’t do everything that compact and SLR-like cameras can.
If you take the plunge and get one, at least you’ll know ahead of time what features you’ll be missing.
Chris Roberts dispenses practical plain-English advice and information about digital SLR cameras at the Digital SLR Guide. His 5-week ecourse in digital SLR technique helps beginners get the most out of their digital SLR cameras.
Keeping up with the times…
Is It Still Called Stock Photography ?
A century ago, magazines featured mostly text. Graphics were secondary. Today, it’s reversed. If you include advertisements, our periodicals today feature more graphics than text. The new “automated” stock photo services (with Royalty-free photos that offer lower prices for photos), are providing quality generic images to publishers who previously couldn’t afford photography as an option. As a result, new markets are now opening up for photographers who produce generic images.
The stock photo industry has finally come around to recognizing a previously largely neglected major marketing principle (one that we actually have been espousing here at PhotoSource International since our beginning). To wit: there’s a vast market of photobuyers who are not interested in high-fee, RP (”rights-protected”) photos. They simply want an image they can temporarily use, one-time, in one of their low-circulation, limited-readership, publications.
Let me backtrack.
In the 1950’s, there were few stock photo agencies. When I returned from a trip through Africa in 1958, I sought out an agency from the few listed in the Manhattan telephone directory. My photos landed at Photo Researchers, then a two-person, New York City hole-in-the-wall on 42nd Street. Photo Researchers is still there today.
The dozen or so “managed-rights” photo agencies of the ’60’s have increased to several hundred agencies today. In the late 80’s this “managed-rights” stock industry was at its peak. Today it’s still thriving, with a major impetus being the emergence of the massive corporate digital agency (Corbis, Getty, Jupiter Media, Index Stock Imagery, etc.). The smaller stock photo agencies are folding or being absorbed in mergers, or have resorted to specializing.
THE TRANSFORMATION
The Digital Era has transformed other major industries: communications, transportation, banking, plus the military and government. It was bound to transform our stock photo industry, and it has.
In the past, traditional “managed rights” stock agencies demanded very high fees for their images, and why not? They had the market all to themselves. There was no “Kmart” counter in the stock photo industry.
The formation of micro digital stock agencies has changed all this. These new companies are able to reach out to markets that couldn’t afford the traditional high stock fees of the past. Using “volume” as their guide, rather than “managed exclusivity,” these digital agencies have proved that there was a sleeping market for their inexpensive on-line offerings.
This movement has opened a whole new market area for individual photographers whose files are filled with generic photos that, up to this point, have been going nowhere. Today, by using the power of automation, digital photo corporations are selling “Royalty-free generic images for very low fees: $35, $15, and $1.
Do these lower fees deflate the market? We have seen in other industries that they do not. The textbook progression is that after a leveling out period, thanks to lower fees, the market actually expands. If you have an automated volume product at a lower fee, the bottom line usually improves. The consumer benefits, and so does the corporation. It’s called free enterprise.
This marketing approach, of course, is what we have been espousing here at PhotoSource International since 1976 when we introduced our first marketletter, The PHOTOLETTER–still in existence today. Back then we observed there were thousands of small graphic houses, regional publishers, denominational houses, and small book publishers, whose budgets would not allow the use of $200, $300, or $3,000 images.
Many of our subscriber members, by concentrating on only a few specialized markets among these lower-budget buyers, found they could earn healthy incomes by selling to these markets in volume. Back in the 70’s, these photographers in effect automated their selling methods and reduced administrative costs, much the way corporate digital stock houses have learned to do today.
The theme of my first book, Sell & ReSell Your Photos, emphasizes this approach. If the picture is good, more than one photobuyer is going to want to use it, when there’s no cross-readership conflict and the price is within their budget. The early stock photography pioneers found it was a lot less stressful selling a photo 10 times at $75 to these lower budget editorial markets, than selling one picture at $750 in the high-pressure commercial arena.
- - - - - - - - -
WHAT IS EDITORIAL STOCK PHOTOGRAPHY?
You know what photography is, and you know what stock photography is — yes?
Take another look. During the past couple of decades, an aspect of photography has been growing to where it is now planted firmly on the scene as a photographic division in its own right: editorial stock photography.
These are the photos of everyday slices-of-life, the insights into the human condition, the events and vignettes and moments you spot — and then dive for your camera. Editorial stock photos show people involved, doing things; they feature specific geographical locations; they give a “real” look at every aspect of human activity and the world of nature. As legendary Magnum photographer Elliot Erwitt has said, “[Photos] have got to tell you something that you haven’t seen, or touch you in some way emotionally…” As to his personal preference, he says, “With regard to photography that I respect, my view is fairly narrow. I like things that have to do with what is real, elegant, well-presented and without excessive style. In other words, just fine observation.”
Editorial stock photos are in contrast to commercial stock photos, the latter being the slick scenic and product shots, the gorgeous sunset, the healthy senior citizen couple bike-riding through autumn leaves, that we see in advertisements and commercial promotions.
Commercial stock photos have to conform to “what sells.” The commercial photographer must engineer the photos to fit into commercial clients’ needs, trends in the industry, and to appeal to a wide, general audience. The resulting photos are often called generic images because they can fit a variety of uses.
Editorial stock photos are produced by a different approach. Rather than appeal to the commercial needs of a client, the editorial stock photographer follows his or her own interest areas, and targets certain segments of life and culture that they enjoy photographing. Examples: medicine and health, sports, social issues, travel, etc. The photographer then sells these photos to markets that use images in those specific subject areas.
Buyers in the commercial field include designers at graphic houses, corporate art directors, and ad agency creative directors. There’s much turnover in these positions, so developing consistent working relationships with these markets is frustrating and difficult.
In the editorial field, the buyers range from photo editors at books and magazines, to photo researchers — the people who are hired by publishers and art directors to seek out highly specific pictures. There’s less turnover and more longevity with editorial buyers, and editorial stock photographers can enjoy strong long-term working relationships with their buyers, which translates to more consistent sales.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Rohn Engh is director of PhotoSource International and publisher of PhotoStockNotes. Pine Lake Farm, 1910 35th Road, Osceola, WI 54020 USA. 1 800 624 0266; Fax: 1 715 248 7394. http://www.photosource.com