Photography in simple English

[HST Power]

I first started railway photography roughly one year ago. I started with a Kodak M550 and have sinced progressed to a FujiFilm S2950.

Despite repeat practise I haven't been entirely convinced that I'm doing the best I can. Part of the problem is that I just don't understand a lot of the technical jargon that comes with photography.

A friend of mine, who is a professional, recently gave me a whole load of magazines to try and help me on my way. He must have given me about £200 worth of old magazines. I've had a look through them, and they're all very nice, but I think what I really need is a bit of general advice on how to take a proper railway photograph with the right settings embedded on the camera.

My S9250 has broken and I am on the lookout for a replacement. I have a budget of around £500-£700. Thought about getting the Canon 1000D, which is listed as a good camera for novice photographers, though I've heard good things about Nikkon and Pentax as well.

Any simple, easy to follow advice on where to go with this would be massively appreciated.

Thanks!

 

[Nym]

Still in the middle of sorting things out from moving house, but if you want a half decent deal around that budget, a certain large chain has a 550D with twin lens kit (18-55mm and 70-300mm) available at £550...

The 550D is a big step up from the 1000D, but the 1000D, like the 550D isn't being made any more. The current cannon range within your price range would be either a 1100D with many nice accessories, such as a longer range lens (70-300mm Tamron comes in at £110) but for the amount extra that costs you can make the jump to the 550D twin lens kit.

Whatever you get expect to add on another £140 for accessory parts, but if you're looking at staying within the 'starter' zone then you are OK within the 1100D and 550D end, the 650D comes with a new processor for better low light performance, but this is just a digital enhancement of the sensitivity of the sensor (ISO Rating).

Depends to be honest on what kind of railway photography you'll be doing, for example if you want moving shots with a very high continuous shot rate you need to be going to the level of a 60D to get near the entry level Sony Alpha a37 (in terms of shot rate performance), but as usual, pick a brand you can live with, since you'll be stuck with that brand's lens fits, accessories, flash guns, etc. (Partner is currently stuck with Sony equipment and wants to move to cannon, the Sony is starting to have some performance 'issues')

 

[eastwestdivide]

Dare I say learn about the technical jargon and get the basics right before splashing out £££s on new equipment?

 

[PaxVobiscum]

The current cannon range within your price range...

Just to avoid confusion:
Cannon = the gas cooker people
Canon = the camera people

if my Canon Professional Services membership card is to be believed.

 

[Nym]

Ooops, quick typing on netbook fail there...

Still, I can't see any reason why people who make cookers couldn't make perfectly good DSLRs

Either way, my post is very cannon biased, like I said at the end of it though, look at what you'll actually be using the camera for before you splash out on buying something that isn't appropriate.

Ie. Sonys are good at sports at the low end, but will rarely beat the likes of the 5D MkIII or D200 in their respective markets.

 

[StripeyNick]

A DSLR is always going to give you the best results but if you are still learning, you could look at a compact with manual controls. I am currently using a 6 year old Fuji Finepix F11 which, because I can control the shutter speed, is giving me reasonable results.

The most important thing you need to know is that for moving trains, you need to be able to set fast shutter speeds so you can freeze the action. I use my Fuji on shutter priority and adjust the speed depending on the train.

Have a look at my Flickr page to see the sort of results from a compact. (Ok, there are some dslr shots on there too).

 

[GB]

I first started railway photography roughly one year ago. I started with a Kodak M550 and have sinced progressed to a FujiFilm S2950.

Despite repeat practise I haven't been entirely convinced that I'm doing the best I can. Part of the problem is that I just don't understand a lot of the technical jargon that comes with photography.

A friend of mine, who is a professional, recently gave me a whole load of magazines to try and help me on my way. He must have given me about £200 worth of old magazines. I've had a look through them, and they're all very nice, but I think what I really need is a bit of general advice on how to take a proper railway photograph with the right settings embedded on the camera.

My S9250 has broken and I am on the lookout for a replacement. I have a budget of around £500-£700. Thought about getting the Canon 1000D, which is listed as a good camera for novice photographers, though I've heard good things about Nikkon and Pentax as well.

Any simple, easy to follow advice on where to go with this would be massively appreciated.

Thanks!

Which sort of areas do you think you are struggling with? Have you got any links to any pictures?

Important things to read up on I think would be how the ISO settings can affect both the taking of and end result of photos, aperature settings and how lighting affects pictures both in the sense of type of lighting and it's position.

More importantly though, give your self some time. 1 year is not really a lot at all so I wouldn't worry.

 

[HST Power]

Dare I say learn about the technical jargon and get the basics right before splashing out £££s on new equipment?

You have a point. My S2950 has broken so I need a new camera anyway. That's what I'm looking for, something I can try and learn some more of the steps with, if you like.

Either way, my post is very cannon biased, like I said at the end of it though, look at what you'll actually be using the camera for before you splash out on buying something that isn't appropriate.

That's what I did with my first camera, so I'm trying not to make that mistake again! :P

A DSLR is always going to give you the best results but if you are still learning, you could look at a compact with manual controls. I am currently using a 6 year old Fuji Finepix F11 which, because I can control the shutter speed, is giving me reasonable results.

The most important thing you need to know is that for moving trains, you need to be able to set fast shutter speeds so you can freeze the action. I use my Fuji on shutter priority and adjust the speed depending on the train.

Have a look at my Flickr page to see the sort of results from a compact. (Ok, there are some dslr shots on there too).

That's what I'm having the most trouble with, trying to get the exact shutter speed right. I think I have tried shutter priority before.

Which sort of areas do you think you are struggling with? Have you got any links to any pictures?

More or less exactly what you have said below. There seems to be quite a lot to grasp, what with getting the shutter, the aperture etc all in correct place to pull off the shots. I'm not convinced that I'm doing that.

I can't provide any photographs on this computer, but if you give me a few days I can dig a few out.

Important things to read up on I think would be how the ISO settings can affect both the taking of and end result of photos, aperature settings and how lighting affects pictures both in the sense of type of lighting and it's position.

 

[eastwestdivide]

That's what I'm having the most trouble with, trying to get the exact shutter speed right. I think I have tried shutter priority before.

In that case, two tips:
- look for camera where shutter priority means you control the shutter speed, not where the camera does what it thinks is best. I've had compacts where the shutter priority mode set the speed to be lower than my selection despite there being plenty of light.
- squeeze the shutter release, don't jab it, as that can cause blur (of the whole shot, obviously)

and remember the amount of blur on a moving subject depends on its *relative* movement to the camera during the fraction of a second that the shutter's open. If it's coming at you head-on, the relative motion may be less than a side-on view. Likewise the smaller it is in the frame, the less relative movement between shutter opening and shutter closing.

 

[JohnB57]

A DSLR is quite simply the best tool for the job the OP wants to do. It's fast, versatile and forms a system that can grow with your skills, needs and budget. It has an optical viewfinder - much better than an LCD in bright light - and shutter response is generally quicker than compacts, so capturing fast moving objects such as trains is a more reliable process.

I use high end Canon but I have grown my gear from film days and added lenses, lighting and other bits and bobs such as filters. But your basic requirement is a decent body and the best lens you can afford within your price range. Nym's suggestion of the Canon 550D is pretty sensible - the lenses that it comes with in the kit mentioned are not the best, but they will get you started. Secondhand gear is pretty inexpensive and there's lots on the market. I have an "as new" DSLR and lens on sale at the moment and there's hardly any interest so it's definitely a buyer's market.

Lastly, to the OP, what particular technical terms do you need explaining? This would be the place to ask any questions...

 

[Track Basher]

First the bad news. Taking good railway photos is difficult. It takes skill to master. Unfortunately you always end up with a compromise.

Take a look at www.railpictures.net it is US based but there is some amazing stuff on there and if you are only interested in UK you can filter by country.

See what you like and work out how they have done it. I take it as a challenge to get photos in. They are harsh.

A lot of what makes a good photo is not just equipment a lot is down to location and time of day can ge a factor to get the lighting right.

Have managed quite a few now.

 

[Nym]

Yup, I have the perfect picture sat next to my desk of a Class 390 pulling into MAN, perfect light, at 35mm focal length with ~1.4 crop factor, shutter priority worked perfect, perfect postion, OHLE framed it very well, and the unit was clean, and in the right platform, that was more chance than skill, but the right settings and test shots on approach REALLY helped, full auto would have made it kak, as would any compact.

 

[richw]

I'm using a Canon 550d and it has some good functions for railway photography, highly recommend it. I've had it about 12 months and am just trying it out.
A friend who has been photographing for a long time, advised me the best way to learn is to try the different settings out so you understand which is best for what type of pics.
I've been having a play about with mine today in the nice weather, and have managed some really good photos with no knowledge of the settings I've used or what I am doing really. I'm carrying a notebook and recording which setting I've taken each pic with.

 

[Nym]

I'm using a Canon 550d and it has some good functions for railway photography, highly recommend it. I've had it about 12 months and am just trying it out.
A friend who has been photographing for a long time, advised me the best way to learn is to try the different settings out so you understand which is best for what type of pics.
I've been having a play about with mine today in the nice weather, and have managed some really good photos with no knowledge of the settings I've used or what I am doing really. I'm carrying a notebook and recording which setting I've taken each pic with.

Pssst.... Look in the JPG/JPEG properties and it tells you the camera settings at the time(!)

And yes, it's a good way to learn, is how I got better at sports / action / railway / landscape and macro photography...

 

[Donny Dave]

Right then, as 1 of the very few Pentax users on the forum, I'll stick my tuppence worth in.

If you do end up buying a dSLR, go to a camera shop first (seeing as you live in Hertfordshire, it might be worth your while going to WEX Photography in Norwich), and try the various cameras, not only to see how they feel in your hand, but to see how you get on with the menu system.

I chose the Pentax, as it felt easy to hold, plus the menu system is easy to use. My current setup is Pentax K-r (just ordered), a Sigma 70-300mm macro lens and a Sigma 28-105mm lens. I'll recommend Pentax to anyone who asks.

Anyway, photography is 1 of those skills that is easy to learn, but difficult to master, the best advice I can offer is keep practising, and don't be afraid to experiment with different subjects and settings. By the way, the camera is the cheap part of the hobby. The lenses are the expensive part!

@ Nym and Track Basher. While light is important in a picture, why not make the available light and conditions work for you instead? A few examples coming up ....

http://www.david-perks.co.uk/Landsc...7731_fW9gh7#!i=2020582685&k=gF2M3GW&lb=1&s=XL
http://www.david-perks.co.uk/Landscapes/Scotland/17172335_MMQRf5#!i=1301862462&k=CVwt6np&lb=1&s=L
http://www.david-perks.co.uk/Trains/northrail/16970582_zq4Mfw#!i=1283553173&k=z8R7Fj7&lb=1&s=XL

 

[richw]

Pssst.... Look in the JPG/JPEG properties and it tells you the camera settings at the time(!)

And yes, it's a good way to learn, is how I got better at sports / action / railway / landscape and macro photography...

Brilliant I wasnt aware of this thanks.

 

[Nym]

@ Nym and Track Basher. While light is important in a picture, why not make the available light and conditions work for you instead? A few examples coming up ....

Did some very interesting pictures at the paralympics by manipulating the flash settings and f number, and I'd love to show you the photos on here, but there's two issues with that, one, they're on my partner's memory card and a looonnnggg way away, two, they're of him, so no chance...

But I was messing around with different fill flash settings to get the shadowed area we were in (the top of the lower tier) staying dark, pulling the track into the subject of focus with a deep depth of field, and illuminating the subject of portraiture to the same level of the floodlighting on the track & field, while keeping everything else in shadow, was a fun 10mins playing round with settings, if only we had a proper flash gun (and a Canon 60D / 5D MkII/MkIII)...

 

[JohnB57]

Flash can be a really useful tool, but it's pretty important to discourage its use for rail photography.

The obvious reason - distracting the driver - probably doesn't need mentioning on here.

However, even powerful flash units are only useful up to a few metres. My most powerful unit has a guide number of 58 - this means it will correctly illuminate an object 58 metres away using an aperture of f/1, which in practice, nobody has. Using an aperture smaller than this means dividing the guide number by the aperture so at f/4, the maximum distance would be 14.5 metres - about two thirds the length of a BR mark 3.

Built in flash units have much smaller guide numbers - usually 12 on Canon for example - so at f/4, the maximum distance is only 3 metres. Using a slower shutter speed will not improve this as the maximum duration of the flash is around 1/250th of a second.

Tried to make it as jargon free as possible, but maybe it will help to explain why all those folks using flash at concerts etc are wasting their time.

 

[Track Basher]

I can't disagree use the lighting to best advantage. Another alternative is know what the light is going to do and use it. Use the link below and look at 2012 - September. There are two there taken on Saturday this weekend of the 66 at Onllwyn.

This was done with a combination of location and predicting the light conditions.

How did I do it? It was partially down to a bit of bad luck which turned into an opportunity. For some reason I woke at 4 am on Saturday with a stiff back so could not go back to sleep. So sat watching TV. At 0530 heard the 66 hammering up the branch to Onllwyn. Checked out the conditions outside and the sky was clear. So got dressed and headed to the coal loading point and waited for the sun to rise at 0630. It was not luck this effect I knew the loading point runs east - west so the sun was going to rise behind the train. I was just a case of waiting.

This is also where another trick comes in. I took nearly 50 shots with slightly different settings and picked the best one. You don't always have to have one attempt at taking a photo! You can take quite a few and only show the good ones.

I like taking night shots the long exposures can be spectacular. Incidently do not use flash at all.

 

[HST Power]

In that case, two tips:
- look for camera where shutter priority means you control the shutter speed, not where the camera does what it thinks is best. I've had compacts where the shutter priority mode set the speed to be lower than my selection despite there being plenty of light.
- squeeze the shutter release, don't jab it, as that can cause blur (of the whole shot, obviously)

I was reading about this, apparently it would be worthwhile buying a tripod, as even the slight pressing of the shutter button can distort the image. The question is though, what is the ideal shutter speed? My S9250 allows both manual and automatic adjustment. I managed to get it working again yesterday evening.

Lastly, to the OP, what particular technical terms do you need explaining? This would be the place to ask any questions...

I'm a little bit unsure about aperture. My S9250 offers an Aperture Priority mode and a mode where you can set it yourself. From what I've been reading, I take it that aperture entails the amount of light allowed to fall on the subject. At the moment I'm doing a fair bit of trial and error, though with all the different F stop settings I'm never really sure how exactly to use it in what conditions!

If you do end up buying a dSLR, go to a camera shop first (seeing as you live in Hertfordshire, it might be worth your while going to WEX Photography in Norwich), and try the various cameras, not only to see how they feel in your hand, but to see how you get on with the menu system.

Very useful, thank you. I might go up and have a look.

II like taking night shots the long exposures can be spectacular. Incidently do not use flash at all.

Funny you should mention this, I've actually been trying that recently.

 

[eastwestdivide]

...what is the ideal shutter speed?
...
I'm a little bit unsure about aperture.

OK, rough guide to the basics.

You need a certain amount of light to record the image. It's all about a trade-off between three elements which you can control on the camera:
1. shutter speed (how long it's open to the light)
2. aperture (how wide the lens opening is)
3. ISO (how sensitive to light the camera sensor/film is)

So,
1. the quicker the shutter speed the less light, but the less the subject can move
2. the wider the aperture (lower numbers) the more light you allow in, but the less depth of field (depth of focus)
3. the higher the ISO, the less light you need, at the expense of "graininess" or "noise".

And apart from all those, you need to get the lens to focus on your subject, for which most auto focus cameras are not bad, except on moving subjects, or subjects which aren't central in the frame.

That's all there is to it (you might like to argue with that, but it's a starting point anyway!)
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
And adding to the above, for moving subjects, shutter speeds of 1/250 sec and quicker are really needed, and as I said elsewhere, the faster the relative movement of subject and camera, the higher the speed needed.
At least it doesn't cost much with digital to experiment.

 

[theblackwatch]

A site you may find worth looking at is Kim Fullbrook's 'Digital Photoguide' at http://www.digitalphotoguide.co.uk/ . Kim has also done a book "A Guide to Digital Railway Photography" which is available via Amazon (although it said only 1 in stock when I checked a few minutes ago so be quick!).

 

[JohnB57]

That's all there is to it (you might like to argue with that, but it's a starting point anyway!)

I don't think you can argue with any of that, except, being pedantic, by modern convention, depth of focus is different to depth of field and only the latter needs the photographer to control it by changing aperture.

 

[Bill EWS]

A tip I have mentioned before when taking back-lit shots and which always works for me is to point the camera in exact the opposite direction from your object of interest, providing you have a similar distance available as to the main object you want to catch, so that your focus isn't wrong. Press the shutter halfway to get the focus and exposure to set, then turn back to the main subject, square up and take the shot. This gives what is called the mean or average exposure for the open scene and will open up the shadows in the main scene.

Likewise, if you are photographing something such as a tall works chimney, either place the focusing indictors in the viewfinder, all on the chimney,in a vertical line, or drop the camera to avoid any sky light and again press the shutter half way to set exposure and focus then return the camera to the 'chimney, as you want it then take the shot. As long as you hold the shutter button half way the camera will keep to that setting.

You can use this method for virtually and back light shot or just to make sure the exposure is open enough to show up detail in the shadows.

 

[Dennis]

Surprised shooting in RAW mode and fiddling with the 'camera settings' offline hasn't had a mention....

 

[Track Basher]

OK, rough guide to the basics.

You need a certain amount of light to record the image. It's all about a trade-off between three elements which you can control on the camera:
1. shutter speed (how long it's open to the light)
2. aperture (how wide the lens opening is)
3. ISO (how sensitive to light the camera sensor/film is)

So,
1. the quicker the shutter speed the less light, but the less the subject can move
2. the wider the aperture (lower numbers) the more light you allow in, but the less depth of field (depth of focus)
3. the higher the ISO, the less light you need, at the expense of "graininess" or "noise".

And apart from all those, you need to get the lens to focus on your subject, for which most auto focus cameras are not bad, except on moving subjects, or subjects which aren't central in the frame.

That's all there is to it (you might like to argue with that, but it's a starting point anyway!)
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
And adding to the above, for moving subjects, shutter speeds of 1/250 sec and quicker are really needed, and as I said elsewhere, the faster the relative movement of subject and camera, the higher the speed needed.
At least it doesn't cost much with digital to experiment.

This is a good summary. Another tip to improve is that once you have copied your photos to your computer look at them closely and work out what is wrong. The good news is that most modern cameras will store the camera settings you used and stores them with the image. You can look at what they were then see what went wrong the adjust settings next time.

 

[JohnB57]

Surprised shooting in RAW mode and fiddling with the 'camera settings' offline hasn't had a mention....

The problem with this is that it gives the impression to those who are learning that anything can be corrected in post-processing. The truth is that the shot needs to be correct at the taking stage in terms of basic exposure or you'll still not be able to extract a good image. You can't correct motion blur in post...

 

[Nym]

The problem with this is that it gives the impression to those who are learning that anything can be corrected in post-processing. The truth is that the shot needs to be correct at the taking stage in terms of basic exposure or you'll still not be able to extract a good image. You can't correct motion blur in post...

Exactly, there is only one camera feature I can think of that can be replaced by photoshop, that being the one that I can't remember the name of that moves the sensor element very slightly to adjust focus, this can now be handled in photoshop extended. Or at the higher end, better lens focus motors. (have jumped on massively recently by the idea of using two stage motor control systems)

If you take a photo with the wrong exposure, ISO, or equally other important setting, and then end up with all the light being either washed out at the high end of the histograms or down dark at the bottom, this can be modified by photoshop by messing round with the colour depth levels, but you're artifically reducing the colour depth of the image by only using say, half or a quarter of the sensor's colour depth, you also introduce noise and distortion at this time but that's another matter.

Not to mention you're taking a digital format and changing the properties in a quazi-analouge scale, this will result in massive quantisation errors when the image is re-coded into it's 14, 12 or 10bit colour format, as the changes to the histogram (sticking to the lighting model) will result in not being able to be quantitized within the same scale that it was taken, pushing colours all over the place.

The same holds true for if you're leveling an image at a lower resolution (anything below 10Mpx for printing on 8"x10" or larger) as you just don't have the dpi to support level corrections, hence why I normally shoot quick shots with my other half at 14Mpx so a small level of correction can be accomadated with rotation, but we always try to get the shots level in the first place.

There are so many other examples of why you can't use photoshop to correct a bad image, it just doesn't work, and even if it 'works' you can tell, you need to get it right, or pretty damed close to it, when you press the shutter button...

(PS: Yes, I did do extensive training on DAC-ADC systems for control software for state space translation systems to model hardware controllers, it's the same kind of principal.)

 

[eastwestdivide]

...
Not to mention you're taking a digital format and changing the properties in a quazi-analouge scale, this will result in massive quantisation errors when the image is re-coded into it's 14, 12 or 10bit colour format, as the changes to the histogram (sticking to the lighting model) will result in not being able to be quantitized within the same scale that it was taken, pushing colours all over the place.
...

Crikey, don't scare the OP off!
No offence, but can we have a poll asking who understood all that?
[smiley face pretending to be thick]

 

[Nym]

Crikey, don't scare the OP off!
No offence, but can we have a poll asking who understood all that?
[smiley face pretending to be thick]

Sorry, but the general gist is understandable, isn't it?

To put a simple term to it, you have a continuous scale of colour and light that is put into neat little slots by your camera when you take the picture, if you use photoshop, you pull it out of them slots onto a near continuous scale, if you change things to make a photo look better, it won't fit into the slots again when you come to save it, and you get changes to colour definition that can sometimes be noticed, known as quantization errors?

That better?

Nym BEng MIET AMIMechE...