cameras and shooting your own content

[basschick]

lately i've been seeing a lot of dark pics, blurry pics, yellow pics and other problem pics in various sites, and i can tell thanks to the exif info that a lot of these pics are shot with pretty good - or even really good - cameras. the thing is, most people don't know what all the features on dslr's are, and auto on the better cameras is actually inferior to some of the better digicams.

i was actually discussing this with arie when i recently wrote a blog using content from bentley race. funny thing there - the pics were sharp, well focused and looked good. and they weren't shot with a canon 1D or a nikon D200 or even a digital rebel - they were shot with a canon s3-is.

and here's the funniest thing. a lot of the people i talk to who shoot their own content would scorn shooting content with the s3-is, but in reality, it has what they need - a really great auto (yeah, as long as you use the tungsten setting indoors), long zoom, the ability to get really close, image stabilization. actually it also has better looking video than a lot of camcorders, but that's an other story.

sure, it has its drawbacks - you'd be wise to only use it at ISO 80 or 100. but the reason most people wouldn't use something like this is prestige. they feel their models won't respect them (yes, i've been told this one more than once) or that other photographers or webmasters won't respect them.

for what it's worth, the people who really count respect people who use the right tool for the job. if you don't have the time or interest to learn to use a dslr, your pic quality will suffer and you may make less money and have few pics well-lit and sharp enough to use for design.

and speaking as someone who has to choose blog pics from over 50 different programs - and also as a consultant whose clients sometimes have no sharp, clear pics to use for banners or design - i know that your members, your designer and your affiliates will all be much more impressed with good pics than on whether you're using a pro camera with a $1200 lens.

[chubbs]

Well I just noticed you have 7000+ posts so I am guessing you know your stuff. (j/k I know you take pride in your work)

Seriously though, I agree with what you said about the right tool for the right job. Why spend more $ than you have to? As long as the final product looks great. Hell I'd use a polaroid if I could.

--Chubbs

[krunnch]

People ask me all the time what camera I use. I tell them it doesn't matter - it's all about light. The bad pictures I've taken have nothing to do with the number of megapixels blah blah blah. It's because I forgot a reflector or I was too lazy to measure the light or... whatever.

just FYI I use the lowest end Canon DSLR I can find, which at the time was a Rebel XT. I did pop for a good L glass lense, though. That makes much more of a difference than the body.

[basschick]

i like the rebel xt more than the rebel xti. it is a little more comfortable to hold and the pics show a little less noise. but i'm a firm believer that for internet use or prints up to 8x10, even the canon kit lens does a fine job and looks great. L glass is great for large prints, magazine covers, etc, but like i said - the exif info at bentley race showed they used an S3 and the pics looked better than 80% of what i see.

did you find the rebel was unbalanced when you first put an L lens on the front of it?

People ask me all the time what camera I use. I tell them it doesn't matter - it's all about light. The bad pictures I've taken have nothing to do with the number of megapixels blah blah blah. It's because I forgot a reflector or I was too lazy to measure the light or... whatever.

just FYI I use the lowest end Canon DSLR I can find, which at the time was a Rebel XT. I did pop for a good L glass lense, though. That makes much more of a difference than the body.

hey, after i read exif into on every adult site who leaves it in, and i began to realize that ALL the worst looking or not great pics came from dslr's, sometimes better than mine. funny thing is that in a good kit, my camera was going for over $1200 and the s5 can be had for $350.

Well I just noticed you have 7000+ posts so I am guessing you know your stuff. (j/k I know you take pride in your work)

Seriously though, I agree with what you said about the right tool for the right job. Why spend more $ than you have to? As long as the final product looks great. Hell I'd use a polaroid if I could.

--Chubbs

[attis]

When I started with digi SLRs I had to learn pretty quickly to forget all about that auto stuff and to go back to the basics of photography. The auto thing works pretty much okay with cheaper digi models, but with SLRs the results are next to terrible. And guess what, this is exactly what every serious photo guide about digital photography tells you.

I think the biggest problem is that with DSLRs marketed as 'easy to use' killer machines with +10k pixels, everyone and his brother thinks they just can buy one of those neat thingys and become a photographer without having a real clue about lighting and stuff and also without bothering to read at least the manual, not to speak of taking a photo course.

In times before the digi age only the most professional, ambitious or adventurous photographers would go and buy a SLR. And at least most of the latter would quickly discover their limits and return to their roots where they've been happy before, and continue with taking pictures at their sisters birthday party.

I hope the days when customers accepted any poor quality picture as long as there was a dick or butt in it, will be finally over and they will only pay for quality material.

[krunnch]

Yes, you quickly learn that it's all about lighting, which means you need to know what an f stop is :-)

Basschick, I didn't find my 24-80mm lense cumbersome at all or unbalanced. I tend to hold the lense now more, but that doesn't bother me.

I talked to a lot of wedding photographers. Although I don't do that work, what I do is similar. Indoors, outdoors, focusing on people... If a wedding photog has a canon, most likely [sh]e has this 24-80 L glass.

The real advantage of that lense is that it's faster than the stock lense. You probably get an extra two f stops of range. This makes a great deal of difference to me. I can get much clearer shots.

You might be able to get decent pics with a point and shoot but IMHO you'll never get great pics, precisely because of what attis says. Outdoors you might be ok, but I don't see how you could do a proper studio shoot at all.

For one thing, point-and-shoots can't use strobe lighting because they can't go manual, among other things. And for me strobes produce the most dramatic, clear shots.

I'm not sure auto mode on SLRs is a bad thing. It lets you ease into learning the camera, which can take time. At least with the Canon, if the lighting situation isn't too demanding, auto modes can take really good pictures.

But as you say, very soon you will find that you want more variety, more drama, whatever. And for that you must go back to basics, for sure.

[basschick]

auto mode would let you ease into shooting maybe - but the auto model on the 20D is dismal and on the 30D isn't much better, at least for indoor shooting.

keep in mind that this thread was about shooting web content, not other photography. i see a LOT of sites where after a year or two, the pics are still blurry, dark and/or yellow. these webmasters haven't even discovered the tungsten white balance setting in a year or two. they haven't changed settings or used lighting enough to make the pics look even decent. they haven't learned to either speed up the shutter speed enough after learning the lighting and settings or learned to hold the camera steady, nor have they opted for a tripod. they're pics aren't "comsumer" quality - they're still beginner quality.

so in this case, auto on a dslr is hurting their sites. that was my point. i saw far superior pics inside bentley race - who used an s3 is - then inside more than half the the sites i review.

btw, many point and shoots have full manual these days, among them the s3 and s5 is and the fujifilm S9100 and F6000. they can all use a strobe and the S9100 and S5 actially have hot shoes.