BetterPhoto Instructor Insights

DSLR cameras: Do we need 5 frames per second or faster?

By Peter K. Burian

Question: Many DSLR cameras allow for shooting at 5 or 6 frames per second (or even 8fps), but is that really necessary? I was taught to anticipate the peak of action when taking photos. It seems that shooting a long series at high speed is just hoping that you'll capture the right instant. And even at a fast burst rate, and a shutter speed of 1/500 second, the "decisive moment" may happen between frames.

Answer: A professional sports photographer may be adequately skilled to capture the peak of action with one or two shots. But very few sports and photo enthusiasts will ever get enough experience to do so. As well, there are many situations where we are not trying to capture the peak of action, per se, making high speed drive particularly useful.

In a few types of situations, it's certainly possible to anticipate the peak of action; in such cases, Single Shot drive mode may be suitable. But even then, I usually find that two subsequent photos (taken with high speed drive mode) can both be "keepers", allowing me to select the one that the subject would definitely prefer. (c) 2011 Peter K. Burian

At a high jump event, for example, you may indeed be trying to record a specific instant: the competitor at the top of the pole, just as she begins to vault over it. But at a baseball game, when your son is running toward home plate, you simply want one well-framed photo without distracting elements, with a suitable facial expression and just the right "body language". It would be virtually impossible to anticipate that instant. Shooting ten or more photos in a quick burst is the best way to get the shot you want.

The same applies to other events where the most important instant is simply unpredictable. At a bicycle race with dozens of competitors, you want to get a photo with just the right facial expressions and body positions demonstrating effort and motivation. While you might get that with one shot, why not increase the odds by taking a dozen in quick succession? (In digital photography, when there is no expense for film and processing, this makes a lot of sense.) Even after shooting numerous cycling events, I find that this is the best way to get really stunning photos.

This is an example of an event where it was impossible to anticipate the perfect instant: the dogs in just the right positions, with the ideal "expressions". Shooting a dozen JPEGs of each competitor - at 5fps - ensured that I would get at least one in each series that was close to ideal. (c) 2011 Peter K. Burian

And finally, when panning with an action subject - at a long shutter speed such as 1/15 sec. - it's worth taking many shots. That will increase the odds of getting one with an uncluttered background, a subject that's adequately sharp and well placed in the frame, minimal problems with blurring from up/down camera shake, etc. In fact, you may need to shoot hundreds when panning with high speed race cars, for example, to get a couple that you would be proud to enter in a photo contest. So, the bottom line is that there is real value in a fast drive mode because it increases the odds of getting one photo that's perfect in all aspects.

Editor's Note: Peter K. Burian teaches two terrific online photography workshops - Mastering the Digital Camera and Photography and Mastering the Canon EOS Digital Rebels - at BetterPhoto's digital photography school online. Also check out Peter's Pro BetterPholio website: www.peterkburian.com.

Creative Photography: Tell twice the story with a reflection...

By Deborah Sandidge

Tell twice the story with your photograph by creating a watery reflection! This technique can enhance your image and make it look more dimensional. This is one of many techniques that I teach in my online photo courses at BetterPhoto.com's digital photography school!

(c) Deborah Sandidge

Both the shore and the bird were photographs converted to silhouettes, and the rest of the image was fabricated for fun in Photoshop! This is part of a tutorial I wrote for Photoshop Creative magazine. Here's how you can create a reflection in Photoshop...

• Select your image, Cmd/Ctrl A, and copy Cmd/Ctrl C. Cmd V to paste.

• Rotate the image, Rotate Canvas>Flip Vertical (it will look upside down).

• Increase the size of your original image by about double. Go to Image>Canvas Size and click on the top center square and type in the new size in the height field.

• Drag new rotated "reflection" to mirror your existing image. You can also create a rippled effect by choose Filter>Distort> Ocean Ripple.

• Merge the layers, Cmd/Ctrl E.

Another easy and fast way, and my favorite method, is to use the Flood Filter from Flaming Pear. This is the technique shown in the shorebird image above. I use the crop tool to roughly extend the canvas area, and then choose one of the cool effects in Flood. This filter has unlimited variations on waviness, complexity, brilliance and blur. You can also "roll the dice" for a random effect.

These techniques for reflections can make a beautiful difference with your images. Get creative! ~ Deb

Note from the Editor: Join Deb Sandidge for her online Photoshop courses: Photoshop - Enhancing Digital Images and Creating Works of Art and Digital Infrared Photography.

Should I Buy the Very Latest DSLR Camera?

By Peter K. Burian

Question: It's time for me to trade up from a Nikon D70 to a more advanced camera. The D7000 sounds perfect but the older D90 is still available at a much lower price. Should I go for the newest model or get the D90 and use the money I would save to buy another lens?

Answer: This is a common question from owners of all brands of cameras. My answer depends on how significant the upgrades are in the new/improved DSLR. If they are really meaningful, and you already own a couple of decent lenses, I recommend buying the newer model. While a higher megapixel number may be the most attractive, other DSLR features are actually more important.

PHOTO: April QA D7000: Although a newer camera may be very similar to a predecessor in style, size and controls, it's what's inside that counts. Superior technology, speed and image quality can be compelling reasons for buying the latest model. Courtesy of Nikon Canada

When testing the 16.2 megapixel Nikon D7000 I rated it as one of the best in the enthusiast-level category. The 12.3 megapixel D90 was certainly impressive in its time, but since then, superior technology has been developed: Nikon's fast new EXPEED 2 processor and CMOS sensor for amazing high ISO quality, the new 39 point autofocus module with 15 cross-type focus detectors and faster Tracking focus, improved 2,016 pixel RGB 3D Matrix metering, system, and so on.

In addition to the benefits I have already mentioned -- and the superior quality at all ISOs - I consider the following upgrades to be particularly valuable: full HD 1080p (vs. 720p) Movie mode with new full time AF, larger 100% viewfinder and the faster 6 vs. 4.5 fps) drive mode. The D7000 is also even more rugged than the D90, thanks to its magnesium alloy body shell, a feature usually reserved for pro DSLRs.

PHOTO: April QA Flags: The Nikon D7000 provides excellent value for the money in terms of reliable autofocus, great speed, maximum versatility and excellent image quality at surprisingly high ISO levels. (ISO 3200; Royal Winter Fair, Toronto.) (c) 2011 Peter K. Burian

A new lens that's much better than those you own - or an entirely different type such as an ultra wide or Macro - would be tempting too, of course. And if you have only a single lens, like the 18-55mm zoom, you may want to buy the more affordable camera and upgrade to a superior and/or more versatile lens. Otherwise, I would suggest acquiring the best available DSLR now and saving up to expand your system when your budget allows.

NOTE: Peter Burian teaches a couple of terrific photo workshops online - Mastering the Digital Camera and Photography and Mastering the Canon EOS Digital Rebels - at BetterPhoto's online digital photography school. Also check out Peter's Pro BetterPholio website: www.peterkburian.com.

How Do GPS Devices for Digital Cameras Work?

By Peter K. Burian

Question: I noticed that an increasing number of cameras include a built-in GPS device. How do these work? And how effective and how complicated are they? Also, is GPS for photography a really useful option?

Answer 2: Yes, an increasing number of digicams with built-in lenses are equipped with a GPS receiver as is one DSLR, the new Sony a55. You can also buy accessory GPS devices such as Nikon's GP-1 (compatible with some of the newer Nikon DSLRs), a Samsung device for the brand new NX100 and Sony's GPS-CS3KA (compatible with any camera that uses SD or Memory Stick Duo cards). Whether built-in or external, either type can record data as to the exact latitude/longitude for each of your photos for later recall with imaging software or with an app such as Picasaweb http://picasaweb.google.com/ or Panoramio http://www.panoramio.com/ or Google Map http://maps.google.com .

While a few cameras are equipped with a built-in GPS receiver, geo-tagging is also possible with other cameras, using one of the external devices such as the Sony CS3KA or the Nikon GP-1. Photos courtesy of Nikon Canada and Sony Canada

These GPS receivers acquire data from three of the satellites orbiting the earth and use triangulation to calculate your exact coordinates at the instant you take each photo. This data is added to the EXIF (or metadata) file that also contains information as to camera settings that were used to make the photo. After downloading the images to a computer, you can view all of the information with imaging software by accessing the Properties or EXIF Data. You can also view each photo on a map when using one of the applications mentioned above.

Note: The Sony GPS-CS3KA (like other devices that work with many different cameras) requires an extra step to transfer the information from its internal memory to the image files' EXIF data folders. This step is not complicated but it's unnecessary with in-camera GPS or the Samsung and Nikon devices. After shooting for some time, insert the memory card from the camera into the Sony device. Pressing a couple of buttons causes it to apply the geo-tag data to 60 images per batch, taking a couple of minutes.

All of the external devices used for geo-tagging (except the Nikon GP-1 and the new Samsung GPS for the NX100) require you to match each image with the location data that was recorded by the device. This is an extra step but the process is simple and reasonably quick. Photos courtesy of Sony Corporation

A camera with a built-in GPS is the most convenient and adds little to the price but it does consume power so you'll want to buy a second battery. Of course, this feature is available with only a few cameras. As well, the Sony and Nikon devices that I tested also provided faster signal acquisition than the digicams' built-in GPS receivers. Especially if you're a frequent traveler who shoots a lot of images that you plan to upload to photo sharing sites, geo-tagging will be a real benefit. While location mapping is not essential, it's definitely nice to have.

NOTE: Peter Burian teaches two excellent online photography workshops - Mastering the Digital Camera and Photography and Mastering the Canon EOS Digital Rebels - at BetterPhoto's online digital photography school. Also see Peter's Pro BetterPholio website: www.peterkburian.com.

Finding Your Photographic Style or Vision

By Rob Sheppard

(c) Rob Sheppard

Right now, I at the North American Nature Photography Association annual conference in Texas. I am also helping out with the college student program, and they are a passionate group of photographers who care a lot about the natural world.

I got a question from one of my students at BetterPhoto.com about finding one's personal vision or style, and this is closely related to some of the things I have seen with the college students. A lot of photographers think about this, and I do think it can be an important part of the growth of a photographer. What is interesting is that some of the students are developing some unique ways of seeing and communicating through photography, yet I am not sure they have thought about it a lot.

I don't think there is any one way to finding a distinctive vision or style to your photos. Years ago I spent a lot of time thinking about this. Yet a distinctive style came to me more when I forgot trying to achieve one. Now I get people telling me all the time that they recognize me from my photographs, which is what a personal style is all about.

Hopefully, I won't turn anyone off by going all "Oprah" (though I think she has a lot to tell us about this). I think Oprah is actually right about how we live our lives - authentically and true to who we are. That, to me, is exactly what being a good photographer is all about and that is how we find our distinctive style. And that does require taking a lot of pictures so that you can truly respond to what is authentic and true.

One thing about photography is that it is a craft as well as an art. The more you hone your craft, the more you can use that craft in service of your vision. It is very difficult to be authentic and true if you cannot control your medium. This is why it can be difficult for a beginner to find a personal style.

Many photographers will look at style as a certain way of using photographic technology, such as black-and-white, HDR, how lenses are used to control an image and so forth. These are certainly part of photography. However, all of these are things external imposed on photography. Shooting all high-contrast black-and-white, for example, might give a "style" but it would be very superficial and would not be very satisfying (or a very positive experience) if you simply did that imposed on your photography yet you did not care very much about high-contrast black-and-white.

In many ways, it comes down to something that is perhaps a little overused these days, passion. What do you care about? What turns you on about your subjects, your photography? What makes you excited is also about what will be true and authentic to you.

(c) Rob Sheppard

Photos: The spider is an orbweaver common to the Los Angeles basin in the fall. The California poppy is from Central California (from last year - it is still early for poppies in most areas).

Editor's Note: Rob Sheppard, Outdoor Photographer magazine's editor at large, teaches many excellent online photo courses at BetterPhoto.com, including Impact in Your Photographs: The Wow Factor and Creating Storytelling Photos.

Is a DSLR 50mm f/1.4 Lens Better Than a 50mm f/1.8 Lens?

By Peter K. Burian

Q: I have two zooms with a maximum aperture of f/4.5-5.6 so I'm planning to buy a "fast" 50mm lens for low light photography without a tripod. What is the difference (besides price!) between a 50mm f/1.4 and the 50 mm f/1.8? It seems like such a minimal difference but the f/1.4 lens costs about $300 more. Do you think I should buy the more expensive model?

You're right: An aperture of f/1.4 does not sound much wider than f/1.8. In fact, it's less than one stop so the shutter speed in a dark location will not be substantially faster. And yes, the f/1.4 lens (of any brand) is significantly greater in size, weight and price. That's partly because the wider aperture requires a barrel of wider diameter and larger pieces of optical glass. Note too that the lens elements must be more effective at correcting optical aberrations which are more problematic at f/1.4 than at f/1.8. All of this drives up the manufacturing cost.

In addition, a 50mm f/1.4 lens is larger/heavier - and far more rugged, with tank-like construction - than its more affordable f/1.8 counterpart. Some, like the Nikon 50mm f/1.4G, are also weather-resistant, useful when shooting in a dust storm or during inclement weather. The superior construction makes sense, because a 50mm f/1.4 lens is usually bought by professional photographers or by very serious photo enthusiasts. Both expect the very best in build quality.

The difference in shutter speed is not great at f/1.4 vs. f/1.8. This image, made at f/1.4 at ISO 100, required a shutter speed of 1/25 sec. If I had used an f/1.8 lens instead, the shutter speed would have been around 1/15 sec. but switching to ISO 200 would have allowed me to shoot at 1/30 sec. (c) 2011 Peter K. Burian

Even with high-grade optical elements, it's very difficult to make a lens that will provide superb image quality at f/1.4. Often, the 50mm f/1.8 model will provide comparable quality at f/1.8. Hence, you should be perfectly happy with the less expensive lens unless you're certain that you need the slightly wider aperture and more rugged construction. You'll probably be pleasantly surprised to find that the f/1.8 model provides decent image quality at f/1.8 and excellent from f/2.8 to f/11.

NOTE: Peter Burian teaches Mastering the Digital Camera and Photography and Mastering the Canon EOS Digital Rebels BetterPhoto's digital photography school online. Also check out Peter's Pro BetterPholio website: www.peterkburian.com.

Is HDR Mode better than Dynamic Range Expansion?

By Peter K. Burian

Q: Most digital SLRs seem to have a dynamic range expansion function but I noticed that some also offer a High Dynamic Range mode and it's listed as a major feature. What exactly is this mode and how does it differ from the typical dynamic range expansion or optimizer feature?

A: The recent Pentax and Sony DSLRs (and the Canon Powershot G12) do provide an HDR mode, and it's very useful. When it's activated, the camera fire three shots - each with a different exposure level - and then merges them into a single photo. The final image exhibits dramatically increased shadow detail. This is quite different from dynamic range expansion, a function which provides greater shadow detail by extra processing of a single image.

For example, imagine a scene inside a cathedral on a sunny day. Small windows allow the sun to enter to illuminate some areas, while much of the interior remains significantly darker. A photo made with dynamic range expansion will exhibit lighter shadow areas than a conventional photo. Of course, the shadow lightening also makes digital noise (graininess or coloured speckles) more obvious. And when a very high expansion level is used, the photo can look unnatural. A camera with an HDR mode can provide a more dramatic improvement in shadow detail and as a bonus, image quality will be better.

Sony was a leader in providing a very versatile Dynamic Range Optimizer in its earlier DSLRs. The newer Alpha models (i.e., A55 and A33, both shown above) provide both DRO and an Auto HDR mode (that does not require a tripod) so you can use the feature that's most suitable given the lighting and the circumstances.

An HDR mode is particularly useful in extremely high contrast. Imagine a scene inside a cathedral or castle on a sunny day. Small windows allow the sun to enter, making some areas extremely bright. The unlit areas are significantly darker, of course. Shoot an HDR image and you'll get a great deal of detail in the shadow areas. The process should also tone down extremely bright highlight areas, but frankly, it's less impressive in this respect.

To illustrate the value of an HDR mode, I shot a conventional JPEG of this beautiful lobby and then activated the in-camera HDR mode. The HDR photo (a composite made up of three shots) definitely exhibits more detail in dark areas and is quite clean, without obvious digital noise. (Sony a55, hand-held; ISO 800; 1/15 sec.) (c) 2011 Peter K. Burian

Earlier DSLRs with an HDR mode required the user to mount the camera on a tripod when taking the three shots. The more recent Sony a55 and a33, as well as the Pentax K-5, allow for shooting the series hand-held. (The user can set the amount of exposure difference that the camera will use when taking each of the three shots.) Avoid serious camera shake - perhaps by bracing the camera against a solid object - and do not change the composition. As long as the three photos are quite similar in framing, the DSLR's processor can micro-align them so the final image should look perfect.

NOTE: Peter Burian teaches two excellent online photography workshops - Mastering the Digital Camera and Photography and Mastering the Canon EOS Digital Rebels - at BetterPhoto's online digital photography school. Also see Peter's Pro BetterPholio website: www.peterkburian.com.

Photoshop Technique: Revisiting an Old Picture

By Jim Zuckerman

I took the original photo of the Alcazar (in Segovia, Spain) in 1993, with medium format film (the slide is 6 x 7 cm or 2 1/4 x 2 3/4 inches). I never really liked it because the colors were too bland and the sky was boring. I was looking for a strong image to help promote my Spain and Portugal photo tour in April 2012, and I decided to replace the sky to see what I could come up with. Here's the final result:

(c) Jim Zuckerman

The problem was the tree on the right. It’s impossible to cut around that in Photoshop, although Topaz just came out with ReMask V3.0 that looks very good in this regard.I just bought it but haven’t tried it yet, so I used a layer mask in Photoshop. I placed the new sky over the whole image and erased away the unwanted portions of the sky. I then used the gradient tool to blend the mask with the underlying photo. I thought the results came out quite well. In 1993, this would have been impossible.

Original image (c) Jim Zuckerman

Editor's Notes: Photographer/author Jim Zuckerman teaches many excellent online photography courses at BetterPhoto.com, including these online Photoshop workshops: Creative Techniques in Photoshop , Advanced Creative Techniques in Photoshop and Photoshop: Thinking Outside the Box.