As the saying goes, an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. (Another apt axiom is “garbage in, garbage out.”) In other words, all the editing tricks in the world won’t help as much as learning how to take better shots in the first place. To get you started, we asked Mark Madeo and Samantha Berg—Mac|Life’s awesome staff photographers and the maestros who create the luscious photography you see in this magazine every month—for their best tips for getting the most out of your photo shoots. And we’ll use Susie’s snaps to illustrate what not to do.
AVOID SHOOTING AT MIDDAY when the sun is at its peak. The high angle creates harsh shadows, and the bright light washes out colors. Instead, opt for outdoor shots closer to dawn or dusk for richer colors and better overall lighting.
Susie never should have taken this photo from that angle with the sun right there.
When you’re shooting indoors, DON'T USE THE FLASH. The bright white light washes out everything in the foreground. Plus, it makes everyone blink. Instead, increase your ISO and open your aperture to the lowest f-stop possible. If you still can’t get a proper exposure (most “nice” cameras have a built-in light meter that checks your exposure; it’s the little meter-like portion of your viewfinder display), it’s time to use a tripod.
Using the indoor flash ruined this otherwise lovely picture.
Change your angle or switch locations to KEEP DISTRACTING OBJECTS OUT OF THE FRAME. It’s easier than cropping later, which ultimately lowers the resolution you have to work with. Move your feet and your camera—both can pay off in big ways!
Susie couldn't have cropped out that trash can?
SHOOT LOTS OF FRAMES. Unlike film, shooting extra digital images costs nothing. So take more shots than you need and cull the best ones later.
If your camera supports it. ALWAYS SHOOT RAW. More data means cleaner digital images and more to work with later in Photoshop.
For group shots, SNAP AT LEAST ONE FRAME FOR EACH PERSON IN THE PHOTO. That way, you're bound to get a few where everyone looks good at the same time.
Group shots are even harder with dogs.
FOLLOW THE RULE OF THIRDS. Imagine your frame split into thirds horizontally and vertically, and try to place subjects along those lines or at their intersections. Your photos will be much more dynamic than if you simply center everything in the frame.
If you use an iPhone the free Gorillacam app can overlay a rule-of-thirds grid and a level to help keep the—horizon straight.
BREAK ALL THE RULES! Often, the best shots are complete accidents. So don't be afraid to try something new, and most of all, have fun out there!
sling74
March 07, 2011 at 8:52pm
FYI, when importing a SET of images into a new iPhoto library, the size of the library is FOUR TIMES the size of the same set of photos imported using the image transfer option. I would assume that Aperture will cause the same increase in "required hard drive space" since both programs are from Apple.
This is NOT to say that Aperture is the wrong choice as there are pros listed in the comments above. However, it is another consideration since an Aperture (or iPhoto) library will take more space on your hard drive or external drive (in my case).
jimweil
December 24, 2010 at 8:59am
How come Gimp (open source free Photoshop clone) was not mentioned?
iwbyte
December 09, 2010 at 4:24pm
Great article! Its nice to know that I made a good decision picking iPhoto :)
I also would be interested in knowing how to organize digital footage.
My specific issue is that i have a digital camera that takes HD footage, as well as an iPhone 4 and possibly a Flip in the future. I've been taking less and less video as I worry about storing and finding it all
middlebass
December 06, 2010 at 6:56pm
Mostly an excellent article, but more than a bit unfair in its comparison of Aperture vs. Lightroom. Lightroom not only handles RAW files, but also allows you to use the RAW interface to enhance JPGs with excellent results. For those of us who shoot only RAW or mostly RAW, it's a no-brainer to use Lightroom.
I haven't found Lightroom to be sluggish even with 800 photos in a collection, and even if it is slightly slower than Aperture that's hardly a big deal.
Stating that "folders and collections don't integrate" and that that is a negative, however, means that the author doesn't understand that this feature is part of the beauty of Lightroom. There is a many-to-many relationship between the two. A folder can have images in many collections, and a collection can have images from many folders. If you have a scanned photo album page with 4 photos, this feature allows you to have the page (image) only once in a folder, but to have 4 individual collection items, each of which is a cropped, rotated and enhanced part of the album page that contains exactly one photo. Then when and if you need to turn the collection into a new folder, you simply export it.
In the past, you would have had to save five different images. Now you have just one until you decide to do something with one of the "virtual" images in a different program.
Bob Forsberg
December 03, 2010 at 1:55pm
Please keep simple, free flowing, instructive, informational articles like these forthcoming.
MacLife seems to have captured what most readers find interesting, while keeping some author's poor attempts at humor and personal ramblings that most of us find boring, in check. Keep up the great work.
leicaman
December 02, 2010 at 8:47am
A major benefit you missed with Aperture over Lightroom is that Aperture has much more comprehensive support for video. If you have a DSLR that shoots video, Aperture clearly supports your camera better than Lightroom, which doesn't seem to know what to do with video other than store it.
Aperture can also combine videos and stills and export them as Quicktime movies.
Of course, if you're a Final Cut Pro user, that's probably not an issue.
Rich364
December 02, 2010 at 5:44am
Excellent article... thanks for taking the time to write such an easy to read and detailed piece. I've been hoping to find something like this.
Now I can only hope that someone will write a similar article about home movie footage. I've been trying to figure out the best way to store footage taken from my iPhone and my HD Camcorder. Should I keep the files in Aperture, iMovie... or switch to Final Cut (or some other program)?
It seems like I should keep the iPhone video footage in the same event folders as the photos I've taken (in Aperture) - and then keep the Camcorder footage in iMovie (since they're usually longer in length). However, I hate having my video footage stored in two different locations and accessed by two different programs (years from now I'd have to figure out where to find the footage). And when I use iMovie's ability to show Aperture files in the Event List, it separates the footage with Aperture Stuff grouped together and iMovie stuff grouped separately (which can be confusing if I've shot footage from the same event with both the iPhone and the Camcorder).
I hope to see a future MacLife article to address this topic... but in the mean time, thanks again.
