| Focus is critical, pixels are cheap | | | | been talked to death, but keep in mind that it is |
| If you are shooting wide open, which is at the | | | | more akin to negative film than transparency film |
| camera's largest aperture, your depth of field will | | | | and I personally find that I can safely get another |
| be correspondingly shallow. That means your | | | | stop to a stop-and-a-half in post-shoot processing. |
| focus is going to be even more critical than | | | | Shoot RAW, not jpeg! As far as exposure, keep |
| otherwise. Pick a point that needs to be sharp and | | | | your histogram as far to the right as possible |
| really pay attention to keeping that point sharp. | | | | without clipping (going off the edge). If you loose |
| Generally, if you are shooting people, the most | | | | your highlights (which are on the right hand side of |
| important thing to keep sharp is the eyes. When I | | | | the histogram) you probably can't get them back. |
| am shooting people I focus on the eyes, shoot, | | | | I guess in that way a digital file is like |
| re-focus and shoot again...and then do it all over | | | | transparency film. |
| again. I can't tell you how much I hate to be | | | | I am not a big user of on-camera flash, but it can |
| editing and find that I have a potentially great | | | | be a real life-saver. I suggest a good starting point |
| shot, but out of focus eyes ruin the picture. I | | | | is to set your flash to under expose by |
| have found that if I am worried about an image | | | | two-thirds of a stop. That can help bring out |
| not being sharp, I am usually right. Pixels are | | | | details without overpowering the image...and |
| cheap...shoot enough to make sure you have your | | | | looking like you used on-camera flash! If you do |
| shot! | | | | use on-camera flash it is generally a good idea to |
| Shooting for stock, know your equipment, know | | | | bounce it or at least put some sort of diffuser |
| your agency | | | | over it. |
| If you are shooting with a stock agency in mind it | | | | Use movement to your advantage |
| is good to know just how high you can push your | | | | Another thing to keep in mind is that a little |
| ISO before you reach the point where the | | | | movement in your image isn't necessarily an |
| agency is going to reject the image. That means | | | | image killer. Sometimes you can make it work to |
| you have to know both your own equipment and | | | | your advantage. A year ago I was shooting in the |
| the standards of the agency. I was once shooting | | | | train station in Mumbai, India. The station is indoors |
| from the interior of a jeep on a mountain road in | | | | and while it wasn't exactly gloomy, it still qualifies |
| China. The scene, road-building equipment clearing | | | | as low light. I put the camera over my head as |
| a landslide, was lit by the headlights of the cars | | | | high as I could hold it and fired off a half-dozen |
| waiting for the road to be cleared. I shot the | | | | frames at an eighth of a second. I only shot six |
| scene, hand held, but braced against the | | | | frames because at that point a machine gun |
| head-rest, at an ISO of 1600 with a Canon 1ds. | | | | carrying police officer politely but firmly informed |
| Man did I work on that image in post (processing | | | | me that photography in the train station was |
| the digital files)! They accepted it too. With the | | | | forbidden. That image, in which everything has |
| newer cameras I have no qualms about shooting | | | | movement, even the lamp posts, has already sold |
| at 400, I am comfortable shooting at 800 and | | | | a number of times as a stock picture with Getty |
| don't think 1600 would really be such a stretch. | | | | Images (1377). Sometimes movement can make |
| But don't take my word for it... do some testing! | | | | an image more dynamic and help it convey a |
| Exposure and more | | | | mood or message. |
| RAW (the file format native to the camera) has | | | | |