The one photography tip that changed everything
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 26 ส.ค. 2024
- The first 1,000 people to use the link will get a 1 month free trial of Skillshare: skl.sh/todddom...
I changed one thing about my approach to photography, and it has changed the way I find subjects. In this video, I share an image illustrating how this approach has helped, plus an alternate version.
💌 Subscribe for more tutorials, updates, and other cool stuff in your inbox
www.todddomine...
📦 PRODUCTS MENTIONED
Adobe Lightroom Classic
bit.ly/3FpbJmt
🎤 GEAR USED FOR THIS VIDEO (AND OTHER RECENT ONES)
Canon C-Log Rec.709 LUTs: dominey.gumroa...
Camera: geni.us/x1qWvob
Lens: geni.us/4KsfBe
Monitor/Recorder: geni.us/lH7lITS
Microphone: geni.us/qmVjq63
Audio recorder: geni.us/ABAEu
Key light: geni.us/XFlq4Sw
Fill light: geni.us/AUKn2
Complete gear list: kit.co/todddom...
🤝 CONNECT WITH ME
Glass: glass.photo/td...
Vero: vero.co/dominey
Instagram: / dominey
Blog: www.todddomine...
Email: dominey@gmail.com
LEGAL DISCLOSURE
Some of the links in this description will direct you to online stores where I may earn referral credits at no additional cost to you. If you want to shop and support this channel, you may also use the following storewide links.
🛒 Amazon: geni.us/gotoam...
🛒 B&H: geni.us/shopbandh
🛒 Adorama: geni.us/shopad...
In summary: The one tip that changed everything is to pay attention to light, focusing on the sun's position, the angle of sunlight, and which areas are being illuminated. Thanks, Todd
😁thanks, i'll spend 9 min on something else
Got as far as the sponsored ad, and gave up.........wish I'd read your comment beforehand......
Well, there is some legitimacy here as many enthusiasts and especially beginners, don't pay that much attention to light, and they think the subject is more important than the light. Not always true. Sometimes you can have an otherwise boring subject, but lit in the right light, it could look amazing. Likewise you could have some spectacular subject but in the wrong light, and it looks, well, just flat or bland.
Hero
thank you for this. this video was all filler.
the locations and the shots at 8:03 and 8:26 are magnificient
As an aspiring photographer, I wanted to take a moment to express my deepest appreciation for the incredible knowledge and skills that you share through your videos.
What I admire most about your channel is not only the stunning images that you capture but also the willingness you have to share your secrets and techniques with your viewers. It takes a truly generous spirit to share those little tips and tricks that can make such a big difference in the final result, and I respect you greatly for doing so.
Thank you for all that you do, and please know that your work and generosity are greatly appreciated!
Shooting black and white has taught me how important light is. I think I now prioritize that as being the most important aspect when I'm taking photos.
I think this is a realization you come to after a while of shooting and looking at lots of images. It helps to hear it from folks like you as well. I think one thing that helped me get better at seeing light was to shoot in black and white in the view finder. Have a great day!
Ooh I love this! I've been taking up a bit of street photography but I have had no idea what to actually take pictures of and I live in a pretty boring place so there isn't much inspiration from surroundings. I'm going to go out and try to take photos of things with interesting light next time instead of thinking of the subject first.
I find taking street photography of a supposedly boring place gives me more motivation. It makes me excited to show the beauty in the mundane. Photographing already beautiful places is so boring to me 😅
A very useful tip to counteract an over obsession with subject.
Yes, exactly.
Just beautiful point to add to have great images.
Very thoughtful, ty. I love that picture.
Excellent video!! Unless a photographer has a specific shot in mind, reading the situation and creating within the moment as opposed to staying with a preconceived idea no matter how the environment around the subject changes is a huge difference between someone just taking photos and a good photographer aka photo artist.
Honestly I would like to say that I think I prefer the one without the light shaft. The composition in my opinion is very simetric and sort of leads the eye to the window with those beautiful curved lines from the old vehicle design and having that hard shadow destroys that gentle curvature of the cars features and also distracts from them. Its like there is too much going on when the light is hard vs when its soft. One thing I do prefer about the one shot in direct sunlight tho is the hole on the roof, it looks better illuminated but not by all that much.
I feel that the 2 images also tell a different story
no light = humanity is over, sad
and the light in the same image is like a beam of hope, new start
A few of the very professionally made photography lessons. Thank you for the inspiration. ❤
This hits so close to home for me. I'm an avid creative product photographer and I used to think lighting is something you can master very quickly and the true magic is the composition and finding creative angles/perspectives to make the product stand out even more. While composition is still absolutely important and still in my opinion, the hardest aspect of photography to master, lighting as I learned later, is in and of itself, a composition. The product can be "properly exposed", but it can also be "creatively lit".
100% - well explained - don't look for things to shoot, look for light to shoot - shit can look like jewels with the right light. Thank you for the video - nicely done - Lkd&Subd.
I am delighted to have discovered your channel. Thank you for making such interesting videos.
Some of the best advice on photography I’ve seen in a long time. Simple and true.
The raw is so good too man
i prefer the raw file on the truck but i still very much appreciate your work !
Thanks a lot for the perspective! I will now always watch out for what is light creating for me in that time and space!
I Think it is lucky day Im searching about photographers and I am finding real ones
great tips thank you
The video is very interesting, for sure, particularly with the comparisons of photographs.
That kind of "recipes" make photographers think more and control expositions more precisely, I guess.
Although the particular photographs shown in the video are not only about light but also about colour grading in the proper way.
Thank You, Todd, for another well-balanced and cognitive story about photography! Keep going, please!
Such good points! Spend an hour in a forest,both morning and evening. Then do the same in a desert. Then the city. Always observe the sunlight and regard it as being your best teacher. You can learn a LOT in 6-8 hours,just long enough to get addicted,so be careful out there😋 Thank you for sharing.
i dont know how to say, but this is my first time watch this channel. and thattt booommmm AWESEOME !!!! thank youu
thank you. so helpful. i subscribed!
Nice bit of advice re: light, and something I will bear in mind, thanks Todd.
good tips! The original file look better because of the color tones look more realistic and old truck would not have those vibrant colors on the edit version due to how old and weathered it is.
What a great video ! Thank you
I think that photo/ subject is a gold mine through my eyes. So many scenes and situations that the scene can portray. Best in any situation. when overhead light [noon] the sun could beam through that hole on the roof and during sunset another slow calming scene can play too. It would be grat if you could come back to that place and camp through out the day to get those scenes. such an amazing place. [this is just my opinion. you don't have to do it]
I’ve always wanted to spend a whole day with one subject and shoot it multiple times, then present them all together. Someday! Thanks for sharing.
Thanks for this reminder ❤❤❤
Love your work Todd although im an experienced photographer i find your content and way of delivering the message inspiring.Thnk you
Sometimes I feel that I've been through the lessons and interesting photographers that TH-cam has to offer.. Then you popped up on my feed today. Great video! I'll definitely be a regular viewer.
also, I think that when changing between f2.8 and f8 you had to even out the exposure with longer shutter speed, so the camera captured more ambient light
nonetheless importance of sun is unmatched!
Good tip. Thanks.
Hi Todd ))) Wow! What a great tip - follow the Light, make the Light first! And it makes sense, but as you mentioned, the subject has always been first for me. There really needs to be a dance between the two. Great video and thanks for sharing )))
Great stuff, not just instructional but right on point as well.
Tks Todd.
I completely agree that light plays a crucial role in a good photograph. It's just so much more important than other elements, composition, etc.
I wouldn’t say „so much more important“. It ties everything together and also defines the character of the image.
That is some good bait right there. xD
@@theowlfromduolingo7982 I would say light is the most important thing. What is a photo? It is captured light. Without light you dont have the photo, So for sure it is everything and should be allways number one in mind when you take photos. Light makes the shapes of the subject, it makes reflections, it makes shadows, colors, etc... so...
@@JJ79_ yep exactly
Great Video Todd, Fantastic images as always thanks for sharing
really powerful idea man. great video
Thank you
Really superb presentation. Many thanks 🙏🙏😊
The raw image is nice as well.
Great idea, very informative video. Excellent images.
Definitely agree that the hard light made the shot but I did like the DOF of the f8 shot better.
Some good take-aways there, thank you!
love your approach to todays photography tip. Can you share this location?
It is not all about light. The subject is the critical component. Light comes and goes, it can be created on the spot if you wish.
That's a great tip and obvious once you realise.
A really enjoyable video. You are absolutely right, too. Thank you.
What is that icon with swatches on it on the upper left of your screen in LRC? Looks interesting but I haven’t seen it or accessed it before. Thanks.
Every serious photographer wants to have great light. Yet honestly, how often is this the case right out of the gate? Very often I go on a photo trip with the highest of expectations only to realize that great light cannot be pre-ordered. 😢 I would guess it based on some luck no matter how hard you go about planning it. As long as the location is right and a great composition can be made, stunning light is a welcome add-on … betting on it can work, most often is does not really. Thanks for your insight 😊
Insightful video! Also random question, would you mind sharing what model/brand of glasses you wear?
I second this question!
Love the audio! What microphone did you use?
Taking a picture is not just a snap. At first, maybe it is, but over time you learn to notice more things that help you get a good photo 😊
I couldn't agree more with you! I read something recently which said " Stop taking pictures & start creating photographs" That really resonated with me and helped me move forward in our craft.
I've heard it referred to as "Chase the light"!
Great lesson! Thank you! Subbed.
I don't know if you can hear it, but there is a constant A7 tone in your audio. Even tho I am here for the visual content, that is amazing, the tone is little bit annoying :D
Edit: It stopped for a while in a cut maybe. Is there some fan, pc, AC/DC source or any electronic near the microphone?
This is gold!
Nice video 👍
Subscribed
Chasing light is like chasing unicorns. The older I get my truth is that I now find being out in nature trumps the constant frustration of finding that perfect image. If I find a good light situation it’s no longer the ultimate goal. Being in the moment is a far better ideal
Oh yeah. I always wait for these notifications
Beautiful 🔄⭕🔄 Todd
I really enjoyed the insights, although I preferred the throw away shot over the edited version. The scene was calm, serene, even stoic and contemplative, and the f8 photo captured that; it put you there, and you felt what it would have been like to take a seat and soak it in. The edited photo with the harsher, angled light plus the color/edit choices created chaos, rather than captured it, and rather than drama. It's distracting and I'm not sure what to look at or what to think.
That said, I wasn't there, and perhaps it felt or appeared different in person. Or perhaps I'm just injecting my own emotions into the scene, rather than absorbing what was captured. Who knows.
I'm just barely starting to take photos as a hobby and I saw on another video somewhere that it can be a good technique to change your display settings to monochrome so that you're putting more of an emphasis on lighting more than the color, and then to adjust colors in post. Is this something that would help someone just starting out?
Yes! Monochrome in camera is great when shooting raw (cause only the preview is b/w not the file itself). I also like using monochrome when editing to see light and tonality without color distracting me. Both are def worth trying!
Useful stuff as always, Todd.
I like the color in the Raw file much better without the post editing. It has a more believable and intriguing atmosphere. The saturation editing is excessive from my point of view, the color of the seat is distracting and conflicts with the green of the truck which It's also excessive to be abandoned (this is something that a painter controls very well, green is the most difficult color to apply) , it's just an opinion. All the best
5:50 one of them is the post processing
I found the cool Tony Northrup
Nice. How you processing this cars photos? Using the film emulation presets, which you show in another video? I bought the emulation presets pack and is very good presets. Thanks!
If you're out in the wild just looking for something to shoot, watch the light first, then find something to put in front of it. An ordinary subject in good light will look better than an extraordinary subject in poor light. Light hunting and light stalking are clichés, but it's still the best method for consistently finding good pictures outdoors.
When we gonna get a photoshoot with Amy Pond?
8:05 wow I thought that was an actual image
If everything can be altered in post, then what's representing the reality of that photo, space and time? During the good old days of film this is never brought up, because there were never enough options. Different films carry different colours no doubt, but never from a light green to a teal. Great tip on the light though.
I prefer the alternate version. The f2.8 one does have more drama but maybe too much and ends up being pushed into a corny place. Also, the beam of light isn't highlighting anything particularly interesting so it isn't drawing your eye towards anything notable. But that's all just a matter of personal taste.
Chase the light and find the shapes.
Yes!
100 percent think the f8 looks and feels better as a photograph. It just doesn't have the sharp light. I don't think the light added a layer of emotion as much as the muted f8.
Am I the only who likes the image on the left with the softer lighting better than the image on the right with the hard lights? I felt like the photo on the right was too saturated and had too much contrast. But the one on the left was more soft and even which I enjoyed more. Must just be personal preference.
Galen Rowell had this same approach and made some ok photos I guess 😛
"Light is everything. If there's no light, you have no photograph. And in landscape photographs, I think in terms of light first, I don't even think of the subject matter first..."
Come to the UK . And try and get a photo with out rubbish in it . Nappies. Barbecue's. And thousands of dog poo bags. Bear cans. No chance. People go to a nice place to look at the scenery. And then dump their rubbish. Rather than put it in a bin or take it home with them.
Then again, the UK has some of the most pristine, breathtaking landscapes in the world. Hoping it stays that way. Stuff like this is really disturbing and disappointing, no nature/landscape photographer or regular person I know thinks this kind of environmentally destructive blight is cool.
I guess the great British empire is totally a $hxth0le now. How sad lol😂
I always take a large trash bag everywhere I go hiking, it’s become a secondary part of my photography is litter pickup 🤷♂️
Bear cans??? Terrifying!!!
8:26 looks like from windows wallpaper
3:57
When people tell you the RAW looked better after spending time editing the image. 😭
you are comparing a processed image (the one with light) to a flat, light-less UNPROCESSED one... In order to see what the light does it would have been nice to see the left image with the same processing as the one on the left. also: why is the f8 image (left) not as sharp as the f2.8 image on the right? misfocused?
Camera makers taut high iso performance, but if you're not shooting in "low light" iso is largely irrelevant. One of the biggest mistakes in photography is listening to advertising hype.
A junkyard in the woods? Only in America. Nobody should be allowed to dump their garbage in a forest. The complete lack of respect for our natural resources should be deeply disturbing for everyone.
Happens in Europe too. But far from as much as in America, that's true.
it makes nice pictures and its private property so people can do what they want with it. Its a different life there, the woods aren't a rare resource, the whole continent is covered by them.
@Phillip Banes yes but if we speak in terms of size it can he compared to usa/canada in landmass and us states could potentially be compared to countries in europe.
@Phillip Banes dude I was born in CZ and I am studying architecture in France I have lived in Spain and I grew up in Canada and have visited different regions in USA. If we are talking about junk in woods it can be found anywhere. Even in Luxembourg. It is a lot less Impactful in north America, aka USA or Canada, I mention both as its the same situation (why you are getting excited that I mention Canada is beyond me). Also you can very well compare the landmass because I was already making the association between amount of junk in the woods compared to landmass and the amount of woods in that landmass. Europe is a lot more dense and people have smaller properties and vast nature is much more rare in Europe, I study architecture and we learned that not a single forest in France is of natural origin, every single one has been replanted. I understand why a junkyard in the woods may be shocking to a European citizen. Also for the states, many have completely different regulations and approaches to the environment just like European countries have different regulations so it this sense it could be compared. I believe California is the closest state to European like regulations when it comes to pollution and vehicles. In Canada we joke that its sometimes easier to move from one country to another in Europe then from province to province in Canada due to the different regulations in each province. I am sure its similar in the States, you should do some research about this if you want to learn and be surprised about how silly the division is between provinces in Canada and states in the USA. Back to the topic at hand, u toss a few hundred trucks into a forest in USA and nobody's will even notice, its probably land owned by a farmer abd the farmer dumped his stuff there with many others. In Canada we have this as well.
@@MINECRAFTandSEB lol, there are rules by the EPA for disposing of end of life vehicles because dumping them, aside from the question of blight, absolutely harms the environment as fluids leak thereby contaminating the soil and ground water. The fact that it’s private property, perhaps owned by some thoughtless farmer does not justify the practice at all. Every county in America has ordinances and codes that landowners must adhere to. Legally or illegally dumping is one reason whe have protected lands and forests. Whether a forest is 50 or 200 years old is totally irrelevant. The earth is not a personal trash can for lazy, destructive people.
Photography is, after all, drawing or writing with light.
I swear by this, light, shadows, volume, thats where is at
Was that Old Car City?
Ex0lore everything without limits . . Not just light . .
It ‘s all about light.
The more I hear the term quality of light, the more I dislike it. Light can not be better or worse. Light can only be different. And you have the perfect example here.
I know what you mean. When I first got going I had a mental picture of “ideal light” and only pursued that, not realizing I was missing loads of possibilities by not thinking about good versus bad. Just work with whatever is happening.
The light can be better or worse in terms of it's characteristics for the particular scene or scenario, I believe. Simply put, worse light often means it is inappropriate for the particular task, nothing more.
@@_Name_ Yeah, that is what I mean. That is why the term quality of light doesn't make any sense. A screwdriver isn't worse just because what you need right now is a hammer. That is 1:1 true in studio photography since you make your light yourself there. But it is also true for landscapes. Where you can't adjust the light you have to adjust yourself.
Oh no, I already carry more than enough gear now a powerful LED light????
just bring a strobe on a stand. no more light chasing,
I travel full time and don't have the benefit of being able to wait for light... I relight in post...😊
Open your heart to hear God speak on the ထ channel.
👍👍👍👍
I'm a much bigger fan of the original shot over the processed version. The original is much more realistic, true, warm, cinematic, and not oversaturated. Oh well, to each their own.
🌚🖤🎶
I wholeheartedly disagree with literally everything in this video.
At 7:24 you say the image on the left looks flat and boring, but to my eyes, it looks a lot more natural. Sure, the dramatic lighting in the image on the right is cool, but that's generally not how we humans see the world. The left image is how we see the world.
The depth of field looks completely artificial, and it has way too much contrast. The darker bits are too dark and the really bright area in the middle is too bright. It's like looking at HDR video on a crappy TV with no HDR capabilities.
Personally, I've never been a fan of depth of field in general. It's never made sense to me. Why would you want to intentionally make parts of your image blurry? It just results in an objectively worse image, because 2/3rds of it is blurry. What if I wanted to, you know, _actually see_ the stuff behind all that blur? I'm 100% convinced the whole concept of "depth of field" is some nonsense that artsy-fartsy photographers invented just stroke there own superiority complexes and every "real photographer" since has just bought into the propaganda.
And high contrast lighting that creates those dramatic beams of light are cool and all, but again, it's not how we see the world 99% of the time.
When you showed the raw image vs the processed one, the image on the left honestly looked better to me. It kind of lacked saturation, but I blame that on the camera. Digital cameras always seem to desaturate colors. That's kinda the whole reason color grading and post processing are even a thing to begin with. (Frankly, I think the ease and availability of post-processing has made camera manufacturers complacent and stop driving to make better cameras that produce images that don't need processing, but that's a whole different debate.) And while that lack of saturation is unfortunate, the image overall looks more natural. The processed image looks TOO saturated and too contrasty.
It looks like it's been post processed. The human eye wouldn't black out the shadowed bits of the roof, dash, and seat. The human eye wouldn't blur parts of the image just to make it look less "flat". (At least not in a way that you can actually perceive.) Because a lack of depth of field doesn't actually make an image look flat. It makes it look a lot more real.
Hello General Nickles,
I have a few counterpoints to your thoughtful comment.
---
1. Consider that some of the most interesting photos may very well be ones that don't look like something we see 99% of the time. We don't see the world in UWA or telephoto... should we limit ourselves to 35mm (FF) because it's very close to the FOV the human eye sees?
Every image we create is there to capture what we see, either with our actual eyes, or our mind's eye. Not everything needs to look perfectly like it does in real life. High or low contrast, overexposed or underexposed, blurry or sharp, saturated or washed out - all of these variables play a part in producing an emotional response with the image. Some photography can be about capturing hyper-realistic images, like real estate, but even landscapes (where you think you'd want to capture them faithfully) are subject to alteration by the photographer to match the mood they're trying to capture (myself included).
The colors that our cameras capture aren't perfect anyway; they have filter arrays to interpret different wavelengths and then assemble that into one image. Short of using gray cards and being absolutely meticulous about color grading, every image you make is influenced by what you want to see/what you want the viewer to see. You might as well embrace this.
----
2. Depth of field is another tool to produce a response. With shallow DoF, it leads the viewer's eye to the thing you want them to see. You're not supposed to be looking behind the blur -- the whole point is specifically leaving other things out of focus, because they're not as important to the photograph as the subject. That said, bokeh can sometimes be pleasing in its own right, particularly in low light shots with LEDs or other small point source of light (for my own tastes anyway), but generally, DoF is used to put the important parts of the photo in focus.
If you want to compare this to your desire for things to look how they look in real life, consider that your eyes don't have everything in focus in your FOV. There is a natural blurring of things outside your focal plane, you just can't focus on the blurry areas like you can in a static 2D image so it's less apparent to you.
---
3. Camera sensors can be to blame for poor color saturation in some cases, but not today's mid tier and up (~$1000+), as long as you're not shooting at super high ISOs, like 25600+, and even then a lot of modern sensors produce respectable color fidelity up to that point. The issue is either the lens or the available light. I've used several lenses that always produced dull, low contrast images.
You can push files pretty far these days to get the contrast and saturation you want, so, barring inexperience in editing, I'd say any post-processed photo that looks under-saturated was specifically created to look that way because that is the way the creator wanted it to look. I will say that my Fuji X-T4/16-55 produces beautiful saturated contrasty images, as does my Canon R5/14-35 (in RAW format, no JPEG colors/processing). You know what didn't, though? The same R5 with the mega cheap RF 50/1.8, which had a boring, flat, lifeless look to it. I'm sure I could push the files to make them a little more engaging, but I'd rather use lenses that have better native contrast and saturation through quality optical construction and coatings.
---
Overall, we have many variables we can change to produce an interesting or emotional image, and you shouldn't feel like you have to shoot for the most faithful reproduction of that scene as it was lit in the moment. Add that vignette, drop that contrast, nudge that saturation... if nothing else, make an image that you love, but consider other options. I think we can agree on one thing; the final images Todd showed were definitely very different in tone/mood, though I think both are likeable for different reasons.
It is always curious that any person who engages in writing with light (photography) comes only later to the realisation that (s)he is, indeed, "writing with light"...
I know what you mean!
Photography, is painting with light. That’s it folks. No light, no photo.