Think Differently in the World of Macro Photography

By Don Komarechka

Macro photographers learn over time that this genre of photography can break rules you’d always follow in other areas like landscape or portrait photography. It’s a different world to explore, and taking a different approach is an asset when mixing science with art.


As a landscape photographer, having a horizon line two degrees off is an annoyance, but for small-scale subjects where no horizon exists, it can be creatively freeing to rotate the camera arbitrarily to allow for the lines, shapes, and colors of the composition fit together better.
A flower stem or a blade of grass can be put to a diagonal line for stronger visual appeal. It’s completely believable for most insects to be seen at angles or completely upside down, as if gravity plays a far less important role in their lives.

I constantly have to make a mental note to play with odd angles as it doesn’t become instinctual. Something that easily becomes second nature with a bit of practice, however, is focusing by physically moving the camera. Autofocus can be hit-or-miss with many macro subjects, especially when you are aiming for maximum magnification – if your subject is a hair too close to the camera, it might never end up in focus.
Manual focus can work, but it’s often easier to physically move the camera forward and backward to make the subject pass through the focal plane. This might sound intimidating at first, or at least a foreign concept. It’s easier to focus this way on frolicking bees!

This is how focusing rails work, akin to adjusting a microscope: the optics stay the same, the distance between lens and subject becomes the variable. This technique is useful handheld as well as on a tripod with a focus rail, and I tend to shoot most of my images handheld – it provides a level of creative freedom where moving your forward and backward while simultaneously rotating it around your subject for the best composition allows for far more creative options than you would have “locked down”.
Using this technique, you set the focus on the lens based on the size of your subject (you’re effectively using it as a magnification ring) and then let the focal plane pass through your subject with physical movement. With the below example of a bee, everything is staged but the “actor” is an element you need to be flexible around.

Using this technique, it’s common to shoot a high-speed burst of images as you approach proper focus, and pass through the proper focus hoping that you nail exactly the focus you were after – applicable to insects and other moving subjects.
Adding an extra battery pack to your flash will help keep things illuminated – the Bolt CBP is a great inexpensive option. You’re hedging your bets by taking images likely to be out of focus in order to hit exactly the right focus point on a chaotic subject.
It’s not uncommon to take 100 images to end up with one photo where all the variables are aligned. You’re not using the images as a “spray and pray” concept, but rather as an attempt to overcome pandemonium.

Why can’t you overcome such a shallow depth of field by other means? If your aperture could go infinitely small, why couldn’t you just shoot at f/96 to get greater depth? Well, light doesn’t play nicely in such scenarios due to diffraction. What is diffraction? Essentially, when light passes through an opening (your aperture) it bends – just as water waves behave in ripple tank experiments. The smaller the opening, the more the light will bend off-course, eventually spilling onto neighboring photosites on the sensor. This coloring outside the lines problem can be easily seen when you push to these extremes.

One great example is the Canon MP-E 65mm f/2.8 1x-5x lens set to 5x magnification and f/16. The manual for this lens details a chart (page 8) that illustrates how your “dialed-in” aperture needs to be translated to your “effective” aperture since the lens magnification has an impact on this setting. You’ll actually be shooting at f/96 given the above variables, and diffraction makes a muddy mess out of your image.
There are a number of diffraction calculators online to see if you are limiting your resolving power, but remember this: increasing your depth of field becomes problematic the closer you are to your subject, as your aperture effectively becomes smaller with higher magnification.

If we cannot overcome the physics of light, we can at least work around it: focus stacking. By combining narrow slices of focus that slightly overlap, we can create a composite image with greater depth in post-processing. Remember those hundreds of images you shot earlier looking for perfect focus? If two or more of them are very close together, you’ve got a decent chance of combining them for even greater depth.
Some subjects such as water droplets might require 2-15 images, my work with smaller subjects such as snowflakes will average 40 images to get everything tack sharp. Remember that you don’t have to get everything in focus, but you have tools available to help you get the most of your efforts in post-processing. You don’t even need dedicated software to handle this: Photoshop works great and ON1 Photo RAW recently added focus stacking to their RAW processing workflow with a simple and easy to use interface.

As always, new technology allows for more options to overcome certain limitations. A fun example is using the sensor-shifting “high resolution” mode found on many mirrorless cameras. If I only need a 20MP image but I can shoot a 187MP image with the Lumix S1R, I can be farther away from my subject. This will inherently allow for a greater depth of field, and I can crop in heavily and still have great results. Only five images were needed for the below image, which would have otherwise required closer to 15:

Getting lost in all the technical information is easy, so let’s bring this back around to the artistry of macro photography: storytelling. Few people would disagree that an image is weaker when it contains a narrative of some sort, and the possibilities of creating fantasy fables in the macro realm are endless.
Often times I’ll just wander around our gardens looking for a story – some insect interacting with its environment, the progression of the season from bloom to dead flower head, or even just looking up from the ground to see the world from the perspective of a flower. Ask yourself “what if?” and try to see the world from a new perspective before picking up your camera and you’ll find a story worth shooting.

---

Blogger's note: Want to learn more photography techniques? Copy and paste the link below into your browser. Click "Enter" and enjoy the options.

https://resources.digital-photography-school.com/ref/937/

  I hope you're enjoying your weekend.  Here's another free Photography Ebook.



This weeks' Photography freebie is about Close-up and Macro Photography. Enjoy!  Just copy and paste the link provided into your browser, then click "Enter".

Here's the link for your book:
https://www.astrologysoftware.com/download/macro_closeup_v1.pdf

How to Get Foregrounds Right in Photography

By: Darren Rowse

After my last overseas trip I received emails from two fellow travelers from the tour group I shared two weeks with as I toured around Turkey. Both emails contained some of the ‘best’ photos that my two fellow travelers. Many of the photos that each of them took were in the same locations (mainly landscape photography) and I was fascinated to compare them because despite being taken in the same location – many of them were remarkably different in terms of quality.
One of my fellow travelers consistently had taken better shots and one of the reasons for this was that he’d obviously given some thought to the foregrounds in his shots and used them to really add depth to the shots he’d taken. His shots made you feel like you were standing right in the scene itself. The foregrounds added context, perspective and interest.
On the other hand – my other friend had quite obviously given the foreground in his images little, if any, thought at all. The resulting images were one dimensional and lacked a way into the shots.
I’ve looked previously at factors to think about in the background of images and now I’d like to raise a few to consider with foregrounds:

1. Check your Foreground Before Hitting the Shutter Release

Ok – so this was the same point that I made in the background article but it applies here too (I promise the rest of the points in this post will be more unique). Before you hit the shutter always run your eye around the viewfinder (all of it).
Check your foreground for distracting elements but also move your camera around a little to see what you’re missing from your foreground that could ADD something to your shot. You see good foregrounds don’t just happen. Sometimes you have to search them out and make them happen.

2. Get Down Low

One of the strategies that many landscape photographers use when trying to accentuate their foreground is to lower the height that they take their image from. Crouch down and/or lower your tripod and you’ll find the perspective of your shots can be changed quite remarkably.

3. Raise your Horizon

Similarly when you change the positioning of the horizon you change the influence that a foreground has on the image. Most people naturally place horizons in the middle of a frame but as we’ve discussed previously they tend to do better along one of the horizontal ‘thirds lines’. If you place it on the bottom third line you tend to emphasize the sky in your shot – however when you put the horizon on the top third line you accentuate the foreground. Either can work of course – depending upon what’s going on in the sky or foreground but if you have an interesting foreground you’ll generally want a higher horizon.

4. Use Leading Lines

Another very effective strategy with foregrounds is to look for ‘leading lines’ that will draw the viewer’s eyes into your image. They’re usually vertical lines (sometimes with a diagonal direction) of some kind.
Leading lines could be actual lines but they might also be objects, patterns or shapes that create flow from the bottom edge of the imaged up into the main part of the frame.

5. Aperture

Depending upon the type of image and the effect that you’re after – you’ll probably want to use a reasonably small aperture (a larger number) in order to have a large depth of field. This will keep as much of the image in focus as possible (from your foreground and into the background).

Share this article.

Darren Rowse 

How to Use Focal Lock

By: Darren Rowse

At a recent wedding I handed my camera over to a friend to take a shot of my little family and I. We posed for a few shots, looking forward to getting home to see how they turned out (it’s amazing how few shots we have with the three of us all in them).
I didn’t think to check how they came out on the LCD after my friend took the shots and it wasn’t until I got home and downloaded them on my computer that I realised we’d been victims to the old ‘focus between the heads on the background’ mistake. The shot was similar to the one to the left where the couple is out of focus but the lady in the background between them is pin sharp.
You can see what’s happened immediately when you look at the images – my friend quickly raised the camera to his eye – put us in the middle of the frame assuming that the camera would know where to focus and took the image.
The camera unfortunately didn’t know where to focus and decided that the it would focus upon the garden behind us. As a result we were treated as the foreground and thrown out of focus.
This is a common mistake that many digital camera owners make (I’m sure we’ve all done it). Digital Camera manufacturers are now making cameras with ‘face recognition’ technology to overcome it (where the cameras look for faces and make sure that they are the focal point) but most of us are stuck with cameras that don’t have this yet and need to learn about ‘focal lock’.
It’s a very simple technique and something that virtually every digital camera (and most film cameras) have the ability to do. Here’s what you do:

• Pose your subject.
• When framing your subject put the central point of your frame on the point that you want to focus upon (the face of a person is generally the best point).
• With the subject’s face in the centre of your image half press down on the shutter button (not fully). This will tell the camera to focus on that point.
• Without letting go of the shutter (it should still be half depressed) move your camera to frame your shot as you want it (ie the person’s face doesn’t need to be centred now).
• Once you’ve got the framing right press the shutter the rest of the way and the shot will be taken with the right focussing even though the centre of your image might not be the person’s face.

This technique is not just useful for taking photos of people when they’re not central in your shots but can also be used in many other types of photography. For example in Macro shots when you want to place the insect or flower that you’re photographing off centre (using the rule of thirds) you might want to use focal lock. Similarly if you were taking a landscape shot but wanted to focus upon a house in the foreground that was off centre rather than the horizon you’d use this technique.
This technique is one that most people know but it’s something that beginners should master in the early days of their photography as it’s something you’ll use constantly. It might take a little practice but after a while it will become second nature to you.

Share this article.

Canon vs. Nikon: Everything you need to know about the camera heavyweights

Canon vs. Nikon: Zooming in on a longstanding camera rivalry

 Hillary Grigonis/Digital Trends

 

Like Batman versus Superman, the Red Sox versus the Yankees, or paper versus plastic, the Canon versus Nikon debate has been raging for decades. Long two of the top-selling brands for professional and consumer cameras alike, the names are likely the first that come to mind when thinking about buying a new camera.

Once you’ve made a choice, you’re invested into a system — and switching becomes a huge expense, as you need to replace lenses, flashes, and potentially other accessories. Understandably, that puts a lot of pressure on the initial purchase decision. But photographers concerned about the name on the front of the camera are worrying about the wrong things.

Why? Because choosing between Canon and Nikon isn’t really like those other matchups above, where there’s an obviously correct answer — Batman, Red Sox, paper — and is more like, well, dating. It takes a while to get to know someone and to find that special person whose odd nuances you don’t mind putting up with for the rest of your life. Similarly, you might not know if you made the right choice between Canon and Nikon until long after you’ve made it.

But don’t worry; because unlike dating, there’s really no right or wrong answer to the Canon versus Nikon debate, partially because the differences between the two are a matter of personal preference, rather than objective performance statistics. What’s more, each company tends to leapfrog the other from one model to the next; if you’re feeling like you chose the wrong brand, maybe just bide your time until the next release comes out.

So what do photographers need to know before deciding whether to pick up a camera with that white Canon logo emblazoned on the front or one with Nikon’s characteristic red swoosh on the grip? While both Canon and Nikon have great cameras, you shouldn’t just flip a coin before investing in a system, either.

History

Canon launched in 1933 as the Precision Optical Instruments Laboratory in Tokyo, producing its first camera, the Kwanon, in 1934 before trademarking the name Canon a year later. Throughout the company’s nearly century-long history, Canon is responsible for a number of industry firsts, including the first camera with a shutter synchronized to a flash, the first still camera with a video mode, and the first camera-to-lens electronic connection with the launch of the EOS line in 1987 (which stands for Electro-Optical System, not Every Other Shot as Nikon fans will tell you). Along with both still and video cameras, Canon also produces printers, calculators, broadcast equipment and even digital X-ray equipment.
Nikon is the older of the two companies, having celebrated its 100th anniversary in 2017, but didn’t produce its first camera until more than a decade after Canon did, in 1948. The company started as an optical instrument and glass company, lunching its line of Nikkor lenses (which continues to this day) in 1932, before its first camera. Nikon even made lenses for early Canon cameras. The company’s history includes landmark cameras like the Nikon F, which introduced the F-mount still in use today; sending cameras into space with NASA; and technological achievements like developing Extra-low Dispersion (ED) glass. Today, besides cameras, Nikon also produces products in the healthcare, precision equipment, and industrial industries.

Current camera series

What’s in a name? At least a few clues about the camera’s design and capability. 
Canon’s DSLRs start out with the Rebel series — these are the more basic camera bodies that are ideal for beginners. The company’s high-end DSLRs have single digit numbers followed by the letter D, with the lower numbers being more advanced, all the way up to the flagship EOS-1D X Mark II. Mid-level DSLRs have two digit numerals in the name.
Canon’s mirrorless line keeps the EOS designation, with the EOS R and EOS RP full-frame cameras. The company’s EOS M line use smaller APS-C sensors. Note that all three — EOS, EOS R, and EOS M — use different lens mounts, however. Canon’s point-and-shoot cameras use PowerShot name.
Nikon’s professional flagship DSLR is the D5, while the remaining full-frame DSLRs are designated by a three-digit number like the D850. Crop-sensor DSLRs use four-digit numbers in the name, with the exception of the D500. The D3000-series is the most basic, followed by the D5000 series for beginners and users on a budget, and the D7000 series for enthusiasts and more advanced users.
For mirrorless, Nikon has the Z 6 and Z 7, with the Z 7 being the more advanced of the two. (The Nikon 1 mirrorless series has been discontinued). Nikon’s point-and-shoot cameras use the Coolpix name.

For DSLRs, both Nikon and Canon have a good selection of high-end models, beginner options, and mid-range bodies. Our favorite DSLR tends to flip flop from one year to the next — on the high end, the Nikon D850 is our current favorite followed closely by the Canon EOS 5D Mark IV, but the Canon EOS Rebel T7i is possibly the best entry-level DSLR we’ve ever tested.
While there’s usually a competing model for the two brands in DSLRs, mirrorless is a bit different due in part to the shorter history. Canon has an entire line of APS-C mirrorless cameras while Nikon only has two full-frame models. The companies’ full-frame mirrorless cameras don’t directly compete, either. Nikon has the 45-megapixel Z 7 at around $3,400 and the 24Mp Z 6 at $2,000 that both use the same, professional-level body and design. Canon has the 30MP, $2,300 EOS R targeted to professionals, and the the $1,300 EOS RP which uses a different design and control layout and targets beginners.

Innovation

Canon has been among the top five companies for the number of U.S. patents for 32 years in a row. A handful of those patents end up becoming features inside the company’s DSLRs and mirrorless cameras. Dual Pixel autofocus (DPAF), for example, splits pixels into two halves to allow for on-sensor phase-detection — it’s a type of autofocus system that allows mirrorless cameras to perform as well as DSLRs (and sometimes better).
Nikon may not break records for patent filing, but the company is sometimes more willing to take a risk with new features. For example, Canon has been slow to add professional video features into its still cameras — probably in part wanting to avoid cannibalizing their own high-end cinema line — while Nikon has surged ahead with video features in its latest products.

Image quality

Can you tell which of the above images were shot on a Nikon, and which were taken with a Canon? Without digging into the files’ metadata, probably not. Professional photographers have been shooting both brands for decades and producing great results from each. Some photographers may prefer the straight-from-the-camera colors from one brand over the other, but there is little that truly separates them.
If you look at sensor performance measurements, like those from DxOMark, you’ll notice there are some objective differences — on average, Nikons tend to rate higher for dynamic range, for example — but these numbers can be misleading as they don’t necessarily translate into a noticeable real world difference. What matters more is the effort you put in to creating a good photograph.

Video

A few years ago, Canon was well out in front when it came to video. Now, that lead has disappeared — and in the case of mirrorless, Nikon has clearly sprinted to the front. Both Canons and Nikons will shoot some good video, but as Nikon has no competing cinema camera line, it is free to incorporate higher-end video features into its still cameras. Comparing the current full-frame mirrorless options, the Nikon Z 6 and Z 7 can use the full sensor for video, while the Canon EOS R uses a 1.7x cropped region for 4K. The Nikons will soon be able to output RAW video, as well, becoming the first hybrid mirrorless cameras to do so.

Design

Holding a Canon feels different than holding a Nikon, and ergonomics are a surprisingly important part of the photography equation. Again, this is something that comes down to personal preference. The grips each have their own distinct designs, and the placement of the command dials and buttons is quite different. If you’ve never shot with either one, heading to a store that has both on display will go a long way toward helping you choose the right camera for you.
The mode dials also look a little different. The four manual modes on a Nikon camera are called the exact same thing as the manual modes on a Sony, Fujifilm, Panasonic, or Olympus: Aperture Priority (denoted by an A on the mode dial), Shutter Priority (represented by S), Program Auto (P), and full Manual (M).
Canon had to go and be different, using Aperture Value (Av) rather than the standard aperture priority. Shutter priority instead becomes Time Value (Tv). The actual functionality of these modes is exactly the same. A/Av let you set the aperture manually while the camera adjusts shutter speed to compensate, while S/Tv let you set shutter speed and the camera compensates with the aperture automatically.

Lenses

Hillary Grigonis/Digital Trends

Both brands have pretty wide lens selections thanks to their long histories. The most popular focal lengths are available from both brands, but if you are looking for a very specific lens, you may want to make sure it’s available before committing to a brand. For example, for DSLRs, Canon doesn’t have an equivalent to Nikon’s 105mm f/1.4, but Nikon doesn’t have the 135mm f/4 tilt-shift macro that Canon has.
When it comes to the younger mirrorless systems, both Canon and Nikon have a lot of catching up to do. Canon started out on the high end with some very good — but very big and expensive — lenses, whereas Nikon started with more compact and relatively affordable options. Fortunately, each company offers an adapter that lets you mount its DSLR lenses on its mirrorless bodies without sacrificing any functionality.

Price

Is one brand more affordable than the other? Perhaps, though that’s largely dependent on factors like sales and what type of camera you’re eyeing.
Currently, Nikon has the cheapest current-model DSLR with the D3500 listing for $500 with a kit lens. The entry-level Canon, on the other hand, lists for $750 with a kit lens, but it offers a few more features, including 4K video. For full frame, both companies’ entry options, the D610 and 6D Mark II, list for $1,600 body only.
For full-frame mirrorless, however, the scenario is different. The Canon EOS RP is the cheapest, current-model, full-frame camera ever made, and a fair margin less than the Nikon Z 6, at just $1,300 compared to $2,000. The RP, however, is missing many features compared to the Z 6, and is meant for a different audience.
Lenses follow the same sort of variation. Canon’s 50mm f/1.8 is cheaper than Nikon’s, as is its 70-200mm f/2.8, but Nikon’s stabilized 70-300mm budget lens is $150 less than Canon’s. Sometimes, the price difference is indicative of a quality difference; other times, it may just be marketing at work.

So who wins?

Brand hopping is expensive once you’ve committed to an interchangeable lens system — but how much does choosing between Canon and Nikon really matter? For most people, the answer is very little. Both companies make great cameras and lenses, and the best DSLR on the market tends to favor one brand one year and the other brand the next. Simply put, the people viewing your images won’t care if those pixels came from a Canon or a Nikon.
While the brand doesn’t matter when it comes to taking great photos, each brand has some nuances that make a photographer favor one brand over the other. The grip and control schemes differ between the brands, and there’s slightly different terminology for some settings. 
Choosing between Canon and Nikon then, tends to come down to the smaller, more minor differences between the two. Some of us shoot Nikon, for example, because the photographer who taught us shot Nikon. Some us bought into Canon because there was a great deal at the time, and we’ve been happy with the system since.
The best thing to do before committing to a brand? At the very least, head to a store that has cameras on display. (No excuses, even Walmart does this). Hold a Nikon, adjust some controls and see how the camera feels in your hands. Then, do the same thing with a Canon. An even better option is two rent one of each and shoot with each camera for a few days — there’s a cost, of course, to renting, but it’s minimal considering the investment in lenses once you’ve committed to a brand.
The Canon versus Nikon debate is one without a definitive answer, but there is a right answer for your personal shooting style and preferences. And remember, more important than the brand on the front of the camera is the person behind it.

Editors' Recommendations

• Nikon Z 7 vs. Canon EOS R: Full-frame flagship mirrorless cameras compared
• Canon vs. Sony: Which camera brand belongs in your bag?
• Sony vs. Nikon: How to choose between two great camera brands
• Shoot like a Rebel (or a pro) with the best Canon cameras for 2019
• Light on price but rich on features, these are the best cameras for students

Share this article.

Hillary K. Grigonis

Organic sensors jump out of the lab and into Panasonic’s upcoming 8K camera

Panasonic Japan

Organic image sensors are no longer just an idea inside research labs — Panasonic just announced the world’s first 8K organic sensor in the AK-SHB 810. The camera realizes the potential of organic sensors by capturing a wider dynamic range and eliminating rolling shutter distortion by using a global shutter.

Organic doesn’t mean a GMO-free camera — this type of sensor uses two different layers. One is a photoconductive film that’s responsible for capturing the light. The second layer holds the circuits that turn that light into a digital image. The design allows for capturing a wider range of light and deeper colors.
That sensor also uses a global shutter, which exposes the entire image at once rather than moving up and down over the image, By exposing the whole image simultaneously, the shutter eliminates rolling shutter, a type of distortion that makes fast-moving objects appear to lean because they moved before the shutter finished exposing the rest of the scene. The camera requires a 1/120th shutter speed to use that global shutter. The global shutter can also help eliminate flash bands, Panasonic says.
Panasonic earlier this year announced the production of an organic sensor with a global shutter, but the AK-SHB 810 is the first time an organic sensor has been integrated into an actual camera. The camera, Panasonic says, is capable of 4K using a dynamic range wide enough to capture details in sun and shade. The camera also integrates an electronic neutral density filter, allowing for longer exposures or wider apertures in bright light.
The AK-SHB 810 isn’t actually a camera you’ll be able to just add to your cart on Amazon, though — it’s a box-type camera designed for broadcast and production-level video work. However, the camera marks the move from laboratory research into an existing camera, and with any luck, consumer cameras are next.
Panasonic isn’t alone in researching organic image sensors — Fujifilm has also published research on the topic. Besides the wider dynamic range, Panasonic researchers also demonstrated that adding a near-infrared layer would allow a single sensor to shoot both visible light and infrared.
The camera will be on display at the International Broadcast Equipment Exhibition next month before an expected launch sometime in the fall of 2019.

Editors' Recommendations

• The best point-and-shoot cameras for 2019
• The best digital cameras for 2019
• Panasonic Lumix S1 vs. Nikon Z 6: Entry-level camera comparison
• Ricoh GR III review
• The best external camera flashes for 2019

Share this article.

Digital photography begins its next chapter with radical changes

Computational photography remakes phone photos, while Canon and Nikon embrace the camera design of the future.

By Stephen Shankland

Digital photography has changed a lot over the past two decades, with clunky DSLRs giving way to sleek smartphones. Over the next 10 years, expect a similar evolution as the science behind the art changes.

Much of the technology in use today represents the breakthroughs of the first generation of digital cameras. Film was stripped away and digital image sensors took its place, but much of the rest of the camera -- things like lenses, shutters, autofocus systems -- often stayed largely the same. Manufacturers centered camera designs on the single, fleeting snap of the shutter.

Now two big trends are reshaping our expectations of digital photography. Computational photography, which uses computing technology to improve photos, vaults over the limits of smartphone camera hardware to produce impressive shots. And the "mirrorless" movement, which drops hardware once necessary for film and elevates the image sensor's importance, overhauls the mechanics of traditional cameras. Old assumptions about optics are being reconsidered -- or discarded -- as computer processing takes over.
"Cameras will change more in the next 10 years than in the past 10," said Lau Nørgaard, vice president of research and development at Phase One, a Danish company that makes ultra-premium 151-megapixel medium-format cameras costing $52,000 apiece.
 

The changes will matter to all of us, not simply professional photographers on fashion shoots. New technology will mean better everyday snapshots and new creative possibilities for enthusiasts. Everything -- selfies, landscapes and family portraits -- will simply look better.

Computational photography

For much of camera history, bigger meant better. A larger frame of film could capture more image detail, but that meant a bigger camera body. Bigger lenses offered more detail, but that meant more weight.
Computational photography, which runs on powerful processors, will change that paradigm. And that's good news because most of us rely on our phones for taking pictures.
Perhaps some of the most advanced computational photography available now is in Google's Pixel 3 phone, which arrived in October. Here's some of what it can do:

• Combine up to nine frames into a single shot with a technology called HDR+ that captures details in both dark shadows and bright highlights.
  
• Monitor how much your hands shake the photo so it can snap shots during fleeting moments of stillness.
  
• Compare multiple shots of photos to find the ones where people aren't blinking or suffering from awkward facial expressions.
  
• Brighten the parts of the image where it detects humans and slightly smooths skin to make subjects look better.
  
• Zoom in better by capturing more data about the scene from multiple shots and and using artificial intelligence technology that predicts how best to expand an image.
  
• Photograph in dim conditions by merging multiple shots through a technology called Night Sight.
  

Isaac Reynolds, Google's Pixel camera product manager, says his company's product underscores a fundamental change in what we think cameras are. Much of the Pixel 3's performance and features come not from the lens and sensor but from software running on the phone's chip that processes and combines multiple frames into one photo.

With a computational photography feature called Night Sight, Google's $900 Pixel 3 smartphone can take a photo that challenges a shot from a $4,000 Canon 5D Mark IV SLR, below. The Canon's larger sensor outperforms the phone's, but the phone combines several shots to reduce noise and improve color. Stephen Shankland/CNET

"You're seeing a redefinition of what a camera is," Reynolds said. "The Pixel 3 is one of the most software-based cameras in the world."

Seeing in 3D

It's all pretty radical compared with a shutter flipping open for a moment so photons can change the chemistry of film. And it's only the beginning.
Two years ago, the iPhone 7 started using two cameras side by side, which lets the phone judge just how far away each element of the scene is. The phone's computing hardware then constructs a 3D-infused layer of information called a "depth map" in which each pixel of a photo holds both color and spatial information.
Initially, Apple used the technology to re-create a style used in portrait photography that requires expensive camera lenses. Those lenses could shoot a shallow depth of field that focused on the subject but left the background an undistracting blur. Apple used software to do the blurring.
The depth map has more to offer. With Lightroom, Adobe's widely used photo editing and cataloging software, you now can adjust an iPhone photo based on that 3D information. For example, you can selectively brighten shadowed subjects in the foreground while leaving a bright background unchanged.
That's a manual process photo enthusiasts will appreciate, but it should help smartphones take photos automatically, said Google distinguished engineer Marc Levoy, who coined the term "computational photography" in 2004 when he was at Stanford University. A camera that could generate reliable depth maps means a camera app could fix problems with brightness and color balance so photos look more natural.
"We have just begun to scratch the surface with what computational photography and AI have done to improve the basic single-press picture taking," Levoy said.

Goodbye, SLRs

Generations of photographers grew up using SLRs -- short for single lens reflex. It's named after its reflex mirror that bounces light from the lens into a viewfinder so you can compose a shot. When you take the photo, the mirror flips out of the way and the shutter opens to let light reach the film.
The first serious digital cameras -- DSLRs -- replaced the film with an image sensor and memory card. But they left almost everything else the same -- the mirror and viewfinder, the autofocus system, the mount for interchangeable lenses.
Now mirrorless cameras are changing that setup, dumping the mirror and optical viewfinder. You compose your shots using a screen. It might be the screen on the back of the camera or a smaller electronic viewfinder you use like a film-era photographer.
With mirrorless cameras, the sensor is recording nonstop. It's essentially taking a video but throwing away most of the data, except when you push a button and pluck out a single frame. Indeed, this video-centric design makes mirrorless cameras adept at video.
What's so great about mirrorless designs? They offer smaller, lighter camera bodies that can shoot photos silently; use autofocus across the frame, not just in the central portion; make it easier to compose shots at night; shoot fast bursts of photos; and preview shots more accurately through an electronic viewfinder so you can do better dialing in exposure, focus and aperture.
"There's none of this dropping the camera down, looking at the image and seeing if it's too bright or dark," said wildlife photographer David Shaw, who sold his Canon gear to move to Panasonic's Lumix G9 camera, which is smaller and a quarter the weight. "I can see it all as I'm shooting."

Canon and Nikon embrace mirrorless

Mirrorless cameras have been gaining traction for years, but here's what changed in 2018: Canon and Nikon.
The two DSLR heavy hitters, still the top dogs of the traditional photography market, started selling high-end mirrorless models. Nikon's Z7 and Z6 and Canon's EOS R. Following Sony's lead, they come with large "full-frame" sensors that are best at capturing color and light data. Nikon and Canon aren't phasing out their traditional SLRs, but their mirrorless models will be peers. Meanwhile, mirrorless pioneer Panasonic joined in with plans for two full-frame models debuting in 2019.

Nikon's $3,400 Z7 looks similar to traditional DSLR cameras but dumps the internal mirror in a move to a more purely digital design. Nikon

Mirrorless is the future, says Stuart Palley, a Newport Beach, California, professional photographer whose specialty in wildfire photography appears in his new book Terra Flamma.
"DSLRs are going the way of medium formats and Speed Graphics," Palley said, referring to film-era camera designs that now are mostly footnotes in history. He's begun shooting with a Nikon Z7 and likes how it's lighter than his Nikon D850 DSLR.
"It's so liberating carrying around less," Palley said.
The Z7, like the Sony and Panasonic full-frame mirrorless models, also can move its image sensor to compensate for shaky hands -- something utterly impossible with film. "I can shoot a handheld image of the Milky Way now. It's crazy," Palley said.

Outpaced by phone innovation?

The traditional camera makers are adapting. But will they adapt fast enough? There's nothing in principle that stops them from using the same computational photography techniques that smartphone makers do, but so far that's been a secondary priority.
"The camera guys have to look at what's going on with handsets and computational photography and see what's' adaptable to traditional cameras," said Ed Lee, a Keypoint Intelligence analyst. He expects the pace of change in photography technology to increase.
The phone makers are moving fast, but Phase One's Nørgaard doesn't see any problem embracing their technology. Indeed, the company has begun embedding its Capture One editing software directly into the camera body.
"The cellphones make really good images from a small camera," Nørgaard said. "We can do the same on the other end, where we start with an absolutely fantastic image. The software approach will push that even further."
But smartphones have gobbled up the point-and-shoot camera market and each year pick up more high-end camera abilities. Phones that sell by the tens of millions offer a huge incentive for chipmakers like Qualcomm to push photography technology. The company's next-gen mobile chip, the Snapdragon 855, adds all kinds of photo smarts, like the ability to detect, identify and track objects in a scene, to create depth maps and to counteract shaky hands.
And that's just next year's chip, said P.J. Jacobowitz, Qualcomm's senior marketing manager for camera and computer vision.
"In this book, there are about 50 chapters," he said of digital photography tech. "We are in chapter two."

Share this article.

Why Black and White Photography?

By: Darren Rowse

One of the questions I’m being asked about more and more lately is about Black and White Digital Photography.
As I said yesterday in the post announcing our Black and White Assignment it seems as though Black and White images are making something of a comeback of late as digital camera owners rediscover the beauty of mono images.
If the big response to the assignment is anything to go by readers of this blog LOVE black and white photography too (I’ve used a few of the images submitted in the assignment on this post to whet your appetite).
I have a few friends who are into Black and White photography and I asked them what it was that attracted them to it. Here are a few of their reasons for getting a little obsessed with Black and White:

Versatility

“I love that it’s a format that suits almost any type of photography. Portraits, landscapes, urban landscapes, architecture. Not only that, it’s a medium that adapts really well to all lighting situations. Whereas color photography often works best on sunny days or in brightly lit studios – low light just makes a black and white image moody.’ – Sol
No Distractions
“I find that colors can be terribly distracting in some images and can take the focus away from your subject. I do portrait work and find that taking the color out of an image lets the subject speak for themselves. Its raw, it’s stripped back, it’s honest and it allows you to show the true person.” – Shane
Subtlety of Tones

“I love the subtlety of tones that black and white images can have. In a world that often boasts about how many millions of colors a TV or monitor is able to produce – I love that in ‘Mono’ there is such a variety of what can be achieved in a photo. Black and White sounds so boring – but the fact is that there are so many shades in between – I love the challenge of bringing them all out in an image!” – Jim


Variety

“I find the creative process with black and white images is so… artistic. It’s like molding clay – you can shape it into a myriad of shapes. Black and White images can be strong, high contrast and powerful – or they can be so soft, gentle and subtle.” – Belle
Of course the black and white vs color debate is a very personal one. For every person I ask who loves shooting mono there are others who much prefer the vibrancy of color photography.
Which do you prefer – Black and White or Color?
What do you like about your preference? Have you experimented much with Black and White digital photography? Interested to hear your thoughts in comments below.

Share this article.
 

26 Black and White Landscape Images

By: Darren Rowse
Learn more about how to take great Black and White Landscapes and Portraits

At first I was a little hesitant – when I think of landscapes I have to admit lots of colour comes to mind – but the more I thought about it – the more I realised that it would make a great collection. So here are a few black and white landscapes to get your creative juices flowing!


























Discover how to improve your Black and White Photography


Here's the link.
https://resources.digital-photography-school.com/ref/937/