Ever wondered how some photos were actually shot? What was required for those photos and what went through the photographers mind when he/she shot them? Knowing that might be really beneficial, especially for a beginner who wants to learn something more than just the basics and try different areas on photography. Personally I try to explain something about the photo in the "Artists comments" section but it's quite often too short.

For this article I selected 7 photos that, in my opinion, serve as good examples in their own category. I will tell you what gear I used for them, what gear might be required for similar images and also try to tell you what I thought while shooting them and perhaps also some background behind them. I will try to give you good starting point if you want to shoot similar photos. In some occasions, it's pointless to repeat something that has already been written, so I will provide you with links that contain more information. It is not thorough look into that category but should give you some basic ideas.

And why exactly 7 photos? I thought I would start with 10 but that would have made really long article. So I thought to select only 5 photos. But then I had few extras that I just wanted to include here. If enough people feel that this is helpful, I might write another part to this article later giving more examples.

I would like to stress that I'm by no means experienced photographer. These thoughts are mostly my own (and some maybe taken from comments I've recieved) and are not absolute thruths. Also this article might not be too useful for more experienced photograpers but it should contain some valuable ideas and inspiration for beginners, especially since I try to cover several different areas of photography that I have tried. Also if you find something that isn't correct, feel free to comment it, I would like to hear it.

Personally I shoot most of my photos with dSLR (currently semi-professional Nikon D300 and a D80 as backup) but I will try to think from P&S shooters point-of-view too. Some of these photos might be completely possible with compact camera, some might be possible to some extend and some might require a good dSLR.

Autumn Afternoon



I will start with landscapes since they're my favorite category to photograph. This particular photo is still my favorite in my whole gallery. I was actually trying one second hand lens near this location and since it was beautiful day, I devided to grap my other gear too and go to shoot around that location since there was quite a lot of nice nature.

Camera: Nikon D80
Lens: Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 @ 17mm
Exposure: 1/25s @ f11, ISO100
Other gear: Cokin P-series ND grad filters (ND4 and ND8), Tripod

I have covered sunset photos in one of my older articles and most of that information can also be applied to other landscapes so I won't repeat that information here: [link] I had checked the area before from a map so I knew where I was heading but I didn't have any specific plans. When I arrived at this scene, I just knew it would make great landscape: the colors were great, weather and time of day nice and there was a good foreground interest (which is usually important to get everything out from the great landscape).

From composition point-of-view I decided to place the boat in the middle of the frame since I shot this as vertical photo. Placing object shaped like that (and from that angle) somewhere else in vertical photo would be a bit akward and I wanted to shoot this vertically (for some reason I prefer that over horizontal anyway).

What actually made this photo was the use of ND grad filters. I had to use two filters, giving me total of 5 f-stops less light for the sky. I spend long time there getting just the right exposure. This was because I waited for good light and also checked the results from histogram after the shot. The histogram is really important tool in camera, learn to use it if you have it. LCD display on camera isn't accurate enough with telling you about the exposure so, for the best results, see how the exposure ended up from histogram. More information: [link]

A tripod is really useful with landscapes (almost mandatory). It would be really pain in the ass to place the ND grad filter accurately while handholding (tried that too few times). Also for 1/25s (like this one) exposure, it gives you sharper results and lets you tweak the composition more accurately. To get as sharp results as possible, use a remote controller or self-timer to release the shutter. This way you won't create any extra vibrations from pressing the shutter. And if you have, use mirror-lock up (though it seems to be quite rare these days lower level cameras). In SLR, the mirror movemet can also create some extra vibrations so by locking the mirror few seconds before the exposure, you don't have that problem.

To shoot a photo like this, you really don't need that special gear. Neutral density graduated filters are somewhat must, but you can get them for point-and-shoot cameras too, like with Cokin A-series (though if you're planning to upgrade to dSLR later, maybe it would be worth waiting). One word of warning about Cokin P-series that I used for this image: especially stacking them will greate a nasty red hue that was visible in the clouds (though I removed it in post-processing). Lee would probably be one of the best brands and also what I've heard, Hitech is cheaper than Lee but far better than Cokin.

Biggest benefits from dSLR come from the usability (shooting manual with spot metering) and naturally from image quality. You can get nice images with compact cameras but to get pin sharp images, a dSLR and good lens combination is the choice.

From technical aspect, you want to use small enough aperture to get the whole scene to be sharp (though with too small you'll end up decreasing the image quality because of diffraction). F11 was enough for me in this case. Also since you have (or should have) a tripod, exposure time isn't a problem, so use the base ISO of the camera since it gives the best results and then just select the appropriate exposure time for the exposure you want.

For the post processing, I increased the contrasts and saturation slightly. For the latest version I also did few tricks: I cloned away one corner of a building on the right edge of the frame, burned some over-exposed areas on the right of the boat (just couldn't help them while shooting this) and slightly made the insides of the boat brighter (and removed the red hue from the sky).

Spring Blues



Another category I like is flower photography. This is my favorites from my gallery in that category. I actually was going to a nearby store and decided to grap my camera bag with me and went through a small park. There I noticed these blue flowers that I thought would make a perfect subject for a flower close-up.

Camera: Nikon D300
Lens: AF Micro Nikkor 105mm f2.8
Exposure: 1/250s @ f4, ISO400

First thing that came into my mind was that I want to shoot an image that has really shallow Depth of Field to make a really beautifully blurred background and somewhat dreamy mood (and actually make part of the flower itself to be out of focus). For this, I needed to be really close to the subject with large enough aperture (at this close distance the f4 was enough) and long enough lens. So I grapped my macro lens.

For the subject I had few criterias. First of all, it needed to have lots of those blue flower on the background so I could have it partly blue. This flower was also interesting since it was in good enough condition but was pointing towards the ground. That suited the overall blue mood quite well.

I didn't have my tripod with me, so I laid in the ground (naturally trying to make sure I don't kill the rest of the flowers) and shot this photo handheld. Quite often for nice flower photos you really need to lay on the ground so remember to wear suitable clothes. I had to use ISO400 to get fast enough shutter speed to really guarantee good results. But since the D300 can handle that really well, it wasn't any problem (it actually has a base ISO of 200). Also aperture of f4 seemed to give me nice DoF.

This is a photo that, in my opinion, requires a SLR and a macro lens. With compact camera, you just can't get this shallow depth of field since it has so small sensor. And since the subject was rather small (which was a good thing because it forced me to be closer and made the DoF narrower and background more blurred) I had to use a macro lens. Another possible option would be using some other lens (like the inexpensive 50mm f1.8) and extension tubes. Extension tubes shorten the minium focusing distance so you can have larger magnification by moving the lens farther away from the sensor.

As technical detail for beginners, macro capability of a lens is reported as magnificatio ratio. 1:1 means that the biggest magnification it can produces is lifesize. So 1cm long subject would be 1cm also in the sensor/film. So if you have a sensor that is 23.6mm wide (like Nikon dSLR's with DX cropped sensor), you would need that wide subject to fill the frame. The real macro lenses that are capable for 1:1 magnification are all primes (fixed focal length, no zoom). The 3rd party zoom "macro" lenses are not real macros, capable of magnifications like 1:2 or 1:3. For Nikon, good choice would be Micro Nikkor 105mm f2.8 VR and for Canon, 100mm f2.8 Macro. There are also cheaper (and still quite good) 3rd party lenses.

The post-processing was really basic for this image: I just had to tweak the curves a bit to get nice contrasts and finally apply some sharpening into image.

Have a Beer



This is one of my newer photos. I chose it since it serves as a good example of a studio still-life and I also have a nice "Making of" image: [link] Here I just had this idea that I wanted to try, spend some time thinkig about the setup and shot it on my kichen table. And I got a good excuse to drink the beer afterwards.

Camera: Nikon D300
Lens: AF Nikkor 35mm f2
Exposure: 1/250s @ f16, ISO200
Lighting: Elinchrom D-lite 2 set
Other gear: Tripod, reflector, mirror

In studio shots like this, the importance of lighting rises since you need to build it yourself. But lets start first with the setup since you'll build the lighting only after that. I wanted to shoot with a bit wider lens to get some perspective distortions. With the help of that and the lower angle, I was able to emphasize the subject making it look more important or dominant (since I was able to be closer to it making it to look more "towering"). Then I just placed the can a bit behind the glass to have interesting composition. Finally somewhat tilted angle gives the image a bit more dynamic feeling.

I decided to place the subject on a mirror. This would fit the scene well (with the glass there) and would also be more interesting than just plain papersheet etc. The background itself was just a white wall that didn't get too much of light. In this case, it's important that you can control the light as much as possible to prevent it leaking too much to the background.

On photos like this, it's important that the glass and mirror are clean. So that's why I washed the glass and didn't touch it with my bare hands after that, just with the help of a napkin. A micro fiber cloth is quite useful to get the nice finishing touch for images like this.

For the lighting, I placed the mainlight behind the subjects so that the light would go throught the glass of beer for interesting effect (usually one good and easy startingpoint if shooting any liquid in a glass). I also needed a fill light for the can, so I placed a reflector on the other side. Then I had another light for the background. It was important that this light didn't spill anywhere, just for the background, so I had a empty Cola six-pack cardboard to act as a snoot. This way I was able to get some differences in the lighting for the background and get the nice halo-effect for the subjects.

Also since the mainlight was behind the subject, I needed something to shade the lens. This prevented any unwanted flares in the image that the light might cause.

Finally, when I had the right output power from the flashes, I shot this. I used a tripod naturally (here the live view came in handy) and a remote with mirror lock-up. The ISO was set to the base ISO of the camera. And since I used flashes, I set the shutter speed to fastest possible speed that camera syncs with them (since the exposure time doesn't effect in any way to the exposure of the image from the flashes, as long as it's slow enough for the sync, it only affects the ambient light and I didn't want to get any of that).

This image would be quite possible to do with any compact camera and any lights you find from home. You just need two portable lights and a way to control them so the light doesn't get where you don't want it (use your creativity, shouldn't be too difficult... I used that Cola box there). Though if you're shooting with flood lights (that are constantly on, compared to flashes) you might need a tripod to get sharp image, since you need to use lower aperture to get a sharp image and this might lead to too long exposure time.

Few problems with this image that I've found: first of all, the base of the glass is over exposed a bit. Also the beer itself is a bit too dark so I didn't get the transcluent effect that I was after there. Finally the aperture had to be too small (and the table was too close to wall) because of the background lighting so the details of the wall were visible and I had to fix that in post-processing. Remeber, you have a vision of the final image so shooting and post-processing are both just phases that will help you to get the results you want. Some problems can be solved in many ways.

Anni



Since I shoot portraits often these days, I wanted to have one studio portrait here as an example. And this is one of my recent ones, so it will do nicely. A basic studio portrait with quite schoolbook lighting, and again I have a "Making of" photo for you: [link] The model here just had a new haircut and people on our irc-channel (I can be found from IrcNET as "fouro", feel free to come and chat if I'm not idle) wanted to see it and since she lives near to me, I was give the job to shoot it. So I thought to do it properly.

Camera: Nikon D300
Lens: AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f2.8 VR @ 95mm
Exposure: 1/250s @ f8, ISO 200
Lighting: Elinchrom D-lite 2 set (1 soft box and one reflector with grid)
Other gear: background setup, reflector

Lets start this by stating the obvious: for studio portraits, you need a studio. But it doesn't have to be any official studio, any place where you have enough space will do fine. Studio gear is expensive but most of the stuff you can get for cheaper. Here's my recent article about building a home studio: [link] The setup is doable with quite basic gear.

So lets start with the lighting this time. I had two studio flashes for this image that enabled me to shoot a really basic school book portrait. The mainlight was (somewhat) 45 degrees to the side and 45 degrees up from the model (on the left side from photographers point-of-view). For the fill-light, I had a reflector on the other side of the model. This provided a nice basic lighting for the model (for traditional portraits, it's good to have some directional light and more light on the other side that the other).

Then I also needed a hair light. It gives nice touch for the image, especially since this was partly about her new haircut (and partly, for me, just getting a nice portrait out of this). For this, I placed another flash behind her and quite high. I had a small reflector with a grid to direct the light exactly to her head so the light didn't leak anywhere.

One thing to consider with the lighting are glasses, if the subject is wearing them. They can make really nasty reflections and I had to fight with them with this image too, since I didn't want to photograph her without them (she wears them always). If you look at the comments in that image, you'll find few suggestions by *ISO25 what to do with them.

For the lens I chose my baby: Nikon's 70-200mm f2.8 VR. This is really excellent portrait lens (except for full-length portraits in small studio). Personally I think that 50mm is a bit too short lens for head-and-shoulders portraits, even with a crop sensor. You're still too close to the subject and will get some perspective distortions that aren't flattering for the model (like a bit bigger nose). Aperture of f8 provided me wide enough DoF to get sharp photo.

While shooting portraits, you actually want to be quite far away from the subject. I've seen photos of professionals shooting outside even with 300mm or longer lens. Basically the idea is that if you're too close, you will have to use wider lens and this will give you some perspective distortions, such as larger nose etc. These might be fun special effects in some cases but most of the time model probably wants to get as flattering results as possible. Around 100mm should be fine for head-and-shoulder portraits.

Next thing was that I had a her sit on a chair. This is good for this kind of portraits since it lets the model relax a bit. Quite many people might be a bit nervous in front of the camera so you need to make them as comfortable as possible. Try to chat with them, tell few jokes etc.

After shooting I did some retouching for the image (that I usually do with portraits). I made the skin look a bit softer (but not too soft), enhanced her eyes and lips a bit and finally added a small soft focus effect.

Wedding portrait



I though to take also this as an example; you really don't need a studio to shoot nice traditional portraits. This one I shot while shooting friends wedding where she wanted to have few on-location portraits too. A really classic wedding portrait.

Camera: Nikon D300
Lens: AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f2.8 VR @ 125mm
Exposure: 1/200s @ f2.8, ISO200
Lighting: Nikon SB-600 + white shoot-though umbrella

After the ceremony we had some time to take few quick on-location wedding portraits. I found this nice little corner that had a wall behind it and a tree providing a prefect shade and lighting. So we started shooting. We tried few other poses too, but I preferred this one. Another good one was [link]

The tree provided just great a shade and the sun was behind a thin cloud. But to get some extra kick into image, I decided to use also a flashgun for extra lighting. I had the bestman to hold the SB-600 and white umbrella on the left side (from my point of view) of the couple. Then I just popped the build-in flash up that controlled the SB-600 but didn't fire during the exposure. Nikon calls this "Creative lighting system" and it's really quite handy for wireless controlling of Nikon flashguns.

The lens was again the 70-200mm. I went as far back as possible and shot wide open to get the wall on the background to blur nicely. With help of the lighting and shallow depth of field I managed to get the couple to stand out. But still the background contains some nice textures.

In general, you can make nice on-location photos with any camera, but there's one reason why a SLR is useful: it gives you shallower depth of field so you can have the background blurred and make the subject stand out. If you're shooting with compact camera, use the largest possible aperture (small f-number) and longest possible focal length ("zoomed in") to get some of this effect.

For the lighting, you can also use a white bedsheet (or anything similar) as a reflector instead of the flashgun. But this time I wanted to control the light a bit better and I didn't have to mind about the location of the sun to get some reflection (and forgot to take the white bedsheet with me that we had reserved for this purpose).

What is really important is to find a place where there is neutral enough background. Preferably something that supports the whole scene. Like in this one, the stone wall was neutral (and far enough from the subjects) so that they did stand out from it. Also it suited the classic wedding setup quite nicely.

One good idea for portraits like this is to see what other people have done. This might give you some inspiration. As I have commented in that image, I got the inspiration for that image from another photo. Just wanted to do my own (more traditional) interpretation.

Here's also a group photo that was done with the same setup (except with Nikkor 35mm f2): [link] Again the shady corner made a really nice background for the image.

Golden Swan



I spent one afternoon/early evening shooting nature at one park-like area at the outskirts of Helsinki. Flowers, landscapes and birds mostly. This was the best photo I got and also serves as a good example of bird photography.

Camera: Nikon D300
Lens: Sigma 100-300mm f4 + 1.4x teleconverter
Exposure: 1/1250s @ f8, ISO800
Other gear: monopod

Bird photography is one of the most demanding areas in photography when it comes into gear (or at least demanding for your wallet, if nothing else). A good long and fast lens can cost thousands of dollars/euros. Naturally you can make some compromises (usually you have to) with the image quality and still get decent results for decent price. I wouldn't go shooting birds without at least 300mm lens on crop sensor (making it 450mm equivalient with 35mm film format). Also a teleconverter is quite useful with some lenses.

So to start with... you need to find the birds. Knowing the species you want to photograph is usually really beneficial: where you can find them, how they behave, when they move etc. Birds are also most active usually after the sunrise or before sunset. This photo was shot during sunset so that gave the image the golden light it has.

Next you need to approach the bird. Best option would naturally be getting near frame-filling photo but quite often that's impossible, especially with smaller birds (so you might have to crop). Find a nice location, perhaps get some camo net etc and wait. You could perhaps leave some food on suitable position, though you need to leave that exactly where you want the bird to be. There's one princible with nature photography that applies also to birds: Do not disturb the nature!. Try not to scare the birds and never, never scare them off from their nests if they have chicks there. Usually patience is really important and you have to accept that you might go home without good images.

If you need to approach the bird, don't walk straight towards it. Try to walk slowly so that you would be walking past it so you wouldn't seem to be that big threat. Also try to monitor the bird: if it gets too nervous, leave (slowly).

Here I sat on a high cliff (about 2 meters off from the water level) for some time (over on hour) and watched those swans. I did get many shots but this was the best one. That one swan swam for a while towards my direction and I had the sun behind my back. I was still far away from it and I actually had to crop that from horizontal image.

So... what gear bird photography needs then? I think I could divide it into four different sets (this is just rought divide that I just came up with). What you need depends on how much you want to invest into the hobby.

1) Compact camera shooter
A superzoom will get you started with bird photography and is the cheapest option. They can have quite long lenses but the problem is that the autofocus is really slow, image quality isn't the best and ISO performance (quite useful in fading light) is quite bad. Probably hopeless to get shots of flying birds.

2) Entry class dSLR
Your basic entry class dSLR and cheap a bit longer lens, something like 70-300mm lens that ends up with max aperture of f5.6 in tele end. A bit better option. Also Canon and Nikon has VR/IS versions of those something-300mm lenses that have better image quality. A nice set to get started.

3) Enthustiast class / semi pro
This is somewhat the gear I use currently. More advanced body and a bit better lens. Like Nikon D80 or D300/D200 and 300mm f4 prime (I'm using Sigma 100-300mm f4, one of the best lenses Sigma has ever made). This translates into faster shutter speeds because of the higher aperture and better high ISO performance (or to ability to use teleconverter for some extra range).

4) Pro level gear
Then there's the best option, pro level gear, that costs a fortune. Something like Nikon D3 (though I still would keep my D300 also because of the 1.5 crop ratio) or Canon 1D series and long primes. Something like 400mm f2.8 or 500mm f4 (or Nikon 200-400mm f4) VR as a lens.

With fast primes, teleconverters are quite handy. They will increase your focal length by some multiplier (like 1.4x or 2x). But they also have drawbacks: they will make the lens slower (1.4x by 1 f-stop and 2x by 2 f-stops) and make the image quality worse. So don't even think about using them on such lenses that will have max aperture of f5.6. Best option would be using them on prime lenses so that the aperture will decrease to minium of f5.6 (after that, the AF usually doesn't work).

With long lenses (especially without any image stabilization technology) you might want to use tripod. Remember that for sharp image, you need a shutter speed of 1 / focal length in 35mm format so with 300mm and Nikon, you would need 1/450s exposure handheld for sharp image (so 1/500s in practise). If tripod is too clumsy, use a monopod.

Lets have a look to the technical aspects of my image as last point. As you can see, the focal length in exif information is 420mm (300mm x 1.4). I also used aperture f8 since usually when shooting with teleconverters, the image is quite soft if you shoot wide open. Shutter speed is quite fast to make sure it really freezes the moment (though I wouldn't have needed this fast shutter speed for this shot, but I used aperture priority). And finally, I had to use ISO800 but D300 can handle that without a problem.

Lahti - Porvoo II



As last photo, I chose a sports photograph. I haven't done that too much but I still have few thoughts about it. This is also quite gear intense area, requiring a good lens and a good body (though not that expensive lens usually as with bird photography, unless you're shooting something like surfing).

Camera: Nikon D300
Lens: AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f2.8 VR @ 190mm
Exposure: 1/500s @ f2.8, ISO1250

First of all, I would say that most important thing would be knowing the game you're photographing. This way you will know what will happen next and can anticipate it. This was first serious basketball game I shot but I still was able to get better results that the local news paper normally. They don't have specific sport photographers but I had played basketball for 10 years and was a referee for five years. I knew quite well what to expect.

Gear is also important. Unless you're shooting on sunny day outside, you need a fast lens (f2.8) and camera with high ISO capability. My personal experience was that at least 1/500s shutter speed is required for basketball. I have tried shooting basketball game with super zoom compact and it was quite a pain: slow shutter speeds so no chance of capturing the moment, AF usually lacking, lots of noice etc.

Since people tend to move fast, you want fast autofocus. It would be best to have a lens with internal ultrasonic autofocus motor (like Nikon AF-S, Canon USM or Sigma HSM). Good AF tracking is really beneficial since it let's you concentrate on framing while you can trust that the camera keeps the focus on the subject. And fast framespeed is quite useful too (though if you know the sport, you probably can compensate this by anticipating the moments). I shot at 8fps with D300 and battery grip.

For basketball, my personal experience was that 70-200mm was good focal length (unless you're standing right next to court). Some people tend to use shorter lenses too if they're close enough. Naturally for sports like soccer you want longer lenses.

There's not much else I can say about shooting different sports. In my opinion, especially for a not-so-experienced photographer, it's about knowing the game and having good enough gear for the job. Though I could mention that for basketball, I personally like tight framed action shots.

In case you want to compare, here's more photos:
[link] Easter tournament 2007 with Panasonic DMC-FZ50
[link] Finlands championship series game, Easter 2008, with the gear described above



So here you have some thoughs on how I photographed those seven photos. I hope it's at least somewhat helpful and guides you to right direction. If you have any questions about those photos (or any other that I've taken), feel free to ask. Best way would probably be commenting straight to the photo in question.


My previous articles:
[link] Do-it-Yourself Photography Studio
[link] How to analyze and critique a photo
[link] Photography as a Hobby: How to start improving
[link] Guide to better sunset photos
[link] Photography learning resources on internet