Search...

REVIEWS PHOTOGRAPHY TIPS FORUM PHOTO SPOTS LENSES ABOUT US WORKSHOPS SHOP LOG IN

HOME / ESSAYS AND INSPIRATION / WHY THE TECHNICAL STUFF MATTERS

Why the Technical Stuff Matters 62Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)62
Click to share on Google+ (Opens in new window)
LAST UPDATED ON MARCH 29, 2017 BY SPENCER COX — 25 COMMENTS
Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window)
Along with normal how-to articles and essays, I’ve always liked reading
2Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window)2
and writing very technical, nitty-gritty articles about photography —
sometimes, articles on topics that rarely come up while actually taking
pictures. In fact, I usually don’t even use my own sharpest aperture charts in the field, as useful as they are, since I don’t like carrying
around charts. So, then, does all that technical stuff matter? Is it even worth talking about in the first place? These questions are very
important to ask, since most people don’t want waste their time on topics that are unnecessary for their photography — do these
articles actually help? There are no easy answers, but a recent trip I took to Death Valley makes a compelling argument for why some
of this highly-technical information really does matter.

1) Driving a Car/Using a Camera

If you’ve just passed your driver’s test, and you’ve barely been behind the wheel for a few hours, the scariest thing in the world
would be to see someone swerving in front of your car on the highway.

At that point, you have enough driving experience to nail down the basics: using turn signals, staying in your own lane, watching
your speed, and so on. From the outside, you certainly look like a competent driver — and, in many ways, you are, since you just
passed your test.

Yet, when you just start to drive, it naturally takes a lot of conscious thought to do everything correctly. You’re always glancing at
your speedometer, for example, or you’re constantly thinking about staying within your lane. Nothing is habitual or automatic; your
brain is hard at work the entire time.

So, when another car does something unexpected, you may not know how to solve the problem instantly. Your automatic reaction
system isn’t developed yet, and your brain is still focused on the basics. It’s not that you’re a bad driver — in fact, even when you’re
starting out, you probably knew enough to drive flawlessly under typical conditions — but you haven’t internalized everything yet.

That’s how I see the technical side of photography.

Many of us have a solid understanding of camera technique: aperture, shutter speed, focusing, and other technical skills that are
part of your basic, creative toolkit. It’s not that you simply know them at a surface level, either; you actually understand them. You
could even teach other photographers how many of these concepts work, and you’ve taken plenty of good photos that put your
knowledge into practice.

But that isn’t always enough. Sometimes, you’ll be taking pictures under rapidly-changing conditions, and you don’t have time to
think about exposure or depth of field — you don’t have time to think about anything. Every step of the process needs to be
perfectly ingrained in your head, or you’ll miss the shot.

Simply learning a lot of technical information is not the same as knowing everything backwards and forwards in your sleep. When
conditions are changing rapidly, a few seconds can be crucial. How do you maximize your time and truly understand the basics, so
that you spend as little time as possible perfecting the basic technical stuff — aperture, exposure, focusing, and so on?

One way is practice. When you start out in photography, the best method to master the basics is to keep taking pictures and reading
about the topics you’re trying to master. That’s how most people do it, and it obviously works well. However, the problem with
practice is that some concepts pop up so rarely that it may take months or years before they’re fully ingrained in your head. In other
cases — say, setting an aperture that balances diffraction with depth of field — you may have plenty of time to do trial-and-error in
the field (assuming typical conditions) without really understanding the topic. It’s only when you’re rushed that you realize your
reactions aren’t as quick as they could be.

That brings us to the other method: Learning the really technical stuff.

When you read about high-level, complex photographic topics, or you start to work with them in the field, you’ll force yourself to
learn the basics solidly. If you can understand highly-technical information — even at a surface level — it means that you have a
rock-solid foundation. For example, by reading about a topic like Airy disks, even if you don’t think about it while you’re out in the
field, you’re forcing your brain to understand basic concepts like aperture and diffraction with far more thoroughness.

And that’s the goal.

When we write about crazy topics at Photography Life, the benefit isn’t just to teach something new. Often, it’s to reinforce the old,
basic skills in such a way that they become automatic parts of your thought process. Say the words “large aperture” to a professional
photographer, and they’ll instantly think of countless things — bokeh, focus mode, depth of field, the necessary shutter speed and
ISO values, and countless more — while a beginner is still working to remember that a large aperture is a small number.

It’s one thing to understand how a basic, important topic works if you have a few moments to sit back and think about it, but it’s
totally different to recall it automatically while you’re being pelted by sand and 35mph winds, trying to take a photo before the light
changes.

2) A Case Study
That brings us back to what I mentioned at the start of this article: Death Valley.

This was only my second trip to the area, so I’m not yet at the point of knowing exactly what to photograph in Death Valley, but I
was familiar with the Mesquite Sand Dunes. I also knew that, on a day with 35mph gusts of wind, the sand dunes would be a vicious
place to take pictures.

But you know the saying — “Bad weather makes good photos!” — and I know it, too. So, with sunglasses and a scarf to block the
sand, I treaded into the desert for sunset photography.

Everything was fine for an hour or so, and the light was starting to get good. The clouds were dark and dramatic, and the sand in the
air was creating amazing lighting conditions. After hiking an hour into the dunes, not long before sunset, I noticed a low-hanging
cloud in the distance.
As I took more and more photos, it became clear that this cloud was quickly approaching the dunes — and it wasn’t a normal cloud.
Out in the middle of the desert, while I took pictures of a spectacular sunset, a massive cloud of sand was rolling in my direction.

As you can imagine, I was rushing to capture the best possible photos before the sand cloud arrived, and I didn’t have much time. To
be as efficient as possible, I ended up taking just a couple photos per tripod position, then walking a bit farther and finding
something else to capture. This isn’t my normal method, but these were unusual circumstances.

Side note: I strongly caution people against going into the desert, or any other landscape like this, unprepared. Mother Nature is
harsh. It’s best if you can bring someone else along, as I did, but that’s not enough. I also had a walkie talkie, a GPS, a separate GPS
on my phone, a full battery pack to charge my phone, and even some spotty cell coverage. I also had a bright flashlight and plenty
of water, and it wasn’t a hot night in the first place. Even then — knowing that I was well-prepared, and knowing exactly where my
car was — parts of that sandstorm were otherworldly. I very likely could have maneuvered back to my car or the road without a
GPS… but I certainly wouldn’t have wanted to try.

That said, if you stay safe, crazy weather almost always pays off. I came back with a handful of photos that I really liked, including
the one below:

NIKON D800E + 35mm f/1.8 @ 35mm, ISO 100, 1.3 seconds, f/16.0

I only took a single photo from this tripod position. In fact, it was the last shot I captured before the cloud of sand was overhead,
and visibility dropped to about ten meters in each direction. (If you look at the left-hand side of the photo, you can actually see the
very front edge of the dust cloud approaching.)

To make this single photo a success, several things needed to go right. First, since my focal length was 35mm, and the foreground
was quite close to the lens, a small aperture was crucial (and I chose f/16). My focusing distance had to be roughly at the hyperfocal
distance, or I risked a blurry background or foreground. Also, dealing with a high-contrast sky, I needed to watch the exposure and
make sure not to lose any highlight detail. An error in any one of these steps — or a few extra seconds spent, since the dust cloud
was approaching rapidly — would harm the photo significantly, and perhaps beyond repair.

In a situation like this, 100% of your mental energy should be focused on finding the best possible subject and composition. All the
technical settings should fly through the back of your mind without wasting time, yet they also need to be as accurate as possible.

In this case, it went well. I credit part of that success to luck (since shots like this certainly don’t always work out), part to practice,
and part to reading and writing articles that are vastly more complex than what I actually needed to know in order to capture this
photo. That’s why the technical stuff matters.

3) Conclusion
Learning advanced technical information is one of the best ways to be as efficient as possible in the field, internalizing the basic
concepts that you’ll use all the time and making them into long-lasting habits.

Then again, I’m not saying that you should take pictures on autopilot; I actually believe that can take a lot of the fun out of
photography. If you’re not thinking while you’re in the field, you’re not challenging yourself — but if you’re spending too much time
thinking about technical information and camera settings when you’re in a rush, you probably need to practice and read more.

It’s that goal — internalizing and automating the basics as much as possible — that makes it worthwhile to keep learning the super-
technical stuff, even if you don’t see yourself using that specific information very often. When you learn high-level techniques,
whether or not you actually use them, you’re still reinforcing the knowledge that you need every day.
I know that not everyone will agree, but I firmly believe that technical information will never harm your photography. It doesn’t bog
you down to learn about hyperfocal distance or ISO invariance, even if you never use them in the field, and even if (though I think
this is rarely the case) they don’t help reinforce the basics.

At the absolute worst, learning about those topics still expands what you know about the world. If your goal is to stay interested and
excited about photography, that sounds good enough to me.

FILED UNDER: ESSAYS AND INSPIRATION

TAGGED WITH: ADVANCED PHOTOGRAPHY TIPS, LANDSCAPE PHOTOGRAPHY, PHOTOGRAPHY TIPS, TRAVEL PHOTOGRAPHY

About Spencer Cox

Spencer Cox is a nature and travel photographer from Franklin, Tennessee, who is studying journalism at
Northwestern University. To contact Spencer directly or view more of his work, visit his website at Spencer Cox
Photography. Or, follow him on Facebook.

Comments

1) Moira
MARCH 29, 2017 AT 1:07 PM

Bang on. I think I finally understand the basics but have not internalized them enough to quickly use them in the field. Need more
practice and lots of reading to help make that happen.

Reply

1.1) Spencer Cox

MARCH 29, 2017 AT 1:11 PM

Thank you, Moira! I’m still working on it as well — I’ve seen other landscape photographers who are significantly quicker at
setting up and picking the right settings than I am. There’s always room to improve. One technique that helped me was learning
how to take macro photos, then practicing it constantly. That’s one field where you need to combine several different technical
topics at once just to get a sharp photo, let alone a successful image with an interesting composition and good lighting.

Reply

2) ZeroVc
MARCH 29, 2017 AT 1:10 PM

How much post-processing has that photo been through?

Reply

2.1) Spencer Cox

 MARCH 29, 2017 AT 1:15 PM

All the processing I did was in Lightroom, so it was just various sliders there. Specifically, I increased contrast and darkened the
photo, since it was shot ETTR and looked quite flat out of camera. I didn’t change around saturation/vibrance much at all, just a
-5 vibrance and 0 saturation adjustments. My Darks slider is currently at -18, which adds some contrast as well. Any specific
edits you were wondering about?

Reply

2.1.1) ZeroVc
MARCH 29, 2017 AT 1:17 PM

No, just a general idea of degree and time spent.

Reply

2.1.1.1) Spencer Cox

MARCH 29, 2017 AT 1:20 PM

Sure thing. I’m still working on it some, since I only took it a few days ago, but this is roughly the finished product. It
definitely has more contrast than some of my photos, although part of that is just a factor of the amount of darkening that I
wanted.

Reply

3) Richard Handler
MARCH 29, 2017 AT 1:35 PM

Spencer, you have intuitively recognized the two complementary patterns of thinking, fast and slow. Read the classic on this by
Daniel Kahneman: https://www.amazon.com/Thinking-Fast-Slow-Daniel-Kahneman-
ebook/dp/B00555X8OA/ref=tmm_kin_swatch_0?_encoding=UTF8&qid=1490815784&sr=1-1

As a retired physician, I can recognize that a principal difference between a seasoned, experience clinician and a young bright
colleague, is the amount of information which has become automatically accessed with fast reflex thought.

Reply

3.1) Spencer Cox

MARCH 29, 2017 AT 1:41 PM

Richard, very interesting, thank you for bringing that up! Yes, this idea certainly is generalizable outside of just photography.

Reply
 4) ZeroVc
MARCH 29, 2017 AT 1:37 PM

If in fact you have not had to spend much time in post-processing, then the photograph represents what “getting it right in the
camera” is all about.

In time critical situations, I just rely on some hip pocket basics to get me through. I can’t say that I’m steeped with a deep technical
background, because I’m not. I understand the basics, and experience in the field has taught me a lot, but I have never toiled over
technical articles.

I have had situations where in a time critical situation I decided on an idea regarding what I wanted the photo to look like, only to
find that I missed the target a bit when I looked at it in LR. Many times I end up showing the photo to my wife while explaining
what my real target was, and she many time tells me that she likes the picture the way it is. I think the moral of the story is that
there are multiple ways to shoot a photograph, and many times, they are all valid (read “good”).

Reply

4.1) Spencer Cox

MARCH 29, 2017 AT 1:56 PM

Thank you, ZeroVc. I see “getting it right in camera” as capturing a photo with the most flexibility and ease of editing that lets
me match my intended result in the end. I think many other people see it differently: as a way to end up with a photo that, out
of camera, looks like the final result as much as possible. I don’t think that either school of thought is incorrect; but, depending
upon their goals with photography, different people will be attracted to one over another, or fall somewhere in between.

Reply

4.1.1) Richard Handler

MARCH 29, 2017 AT 3:11 PM

Realism vs. artistry: I first grappled with this when a friend, viewing one of my underwater coral reef albums, asked how I
would know the correct white balance. At depth ambient light is blue/green. How much red do we restore? What filter do we
add to housing? How much red slider and white balance slider do we use in processing? If I use strobes, what I record will look
far better than than what I saw with my own eye. And how would we know what a fish sees? I concluded that my best
photographs should add beauty and interest, be better than what I saw. Here’s an example, photo I recently made in Volcano
NP. Cut the glare on the water with a polarizer. This had to be “right, in the camera”. But then used the Lr CC Dehaze filter,
and tweaked the orange slider up a bit, which could not have been done until post capture processing. Result looks better
than what my wife and I witnessed in person! My self criticism is that I did not have best lens for unexpected distance from
which I was forced to stand, as I was only toting a wide angle, so this is very over cropped, but grain may add to spooky aura
of scene (ILCE 6500, Zeiss 24/1.8 @f/3.5 ISO 200 1/4000″) Link: https://goo.gl/photos/irpKM956Q8Y4RZw6A

Reply

5) Carol Storey
MARCH 29, 2017 AT 1:57 PM
Hello. While I have a pretty good grasp (finally) of aperture, ISO and shutter speed, I am confused with the settings of the above
photo. How can f/1.8 AND f/16 be used in the same photo? What am I not understanding?

Reply

5.1) Spencer Cox

MARCH 29, 2017 AT 1:59 PM

Very good question. The first aperture number — f/1.8 — isn’t actually the aperture I used for the photo. It’s simply the name of
the lens that I used: the Nikon 35mm f/1.8 lens! In this case, f/1.8 refers to the maximum possible aperture of the lens,
although it wasn’t the one I actually used in the field.

Reply

5.2) Rashad Hurani

MARCH 30, 2017 AT 2:26 AM

The actual setting used to take the photo comes after the @ (at) sign

Reply

6) Walter Koppe
MARCH 29, 2017 AT 2:21 PM

Wow! What an image! When all the technical stuff disappears into a thing of utter beauty – then you know why you have laboured
for those many hours, days, years. These are the moments of reward for a life-long investment in what at times appears to be a
peculiar obsession. Thank you for sharing these corrective amendments reminding us that photography is an art form requiring
beyond our passion to be attuned to basic tools and measurements and rules.

Reply

6.1) Spencer Cox

MARCH 29, 2017 AT 2:36 PM

Walter, very glad you like it, and I really appreciate your comments!

Reply

7) ZeroVc
MARCH 29, 2017 AT 2:26 PM

“I see “getting it right in camera” as capturing a photo with the most flexibility and ease of editing that lets me match my intended
result in the end. I think many other people see it differently: as a way to end up with a photo that, out of camera, looks like the
final result as much as possible. ”
As you probably know, I belong to the second group, with my “looks like the final result as much as possible” meaning in most
cases a photograph that represents what it looked like with my eyes at the time I tool the photograph (not “my minds eye”, but my
physical eyes). It’s fun to play around sometimes, but generally I shoot with the objective of producing a picture that if shown to
someone who was standing beside me when the shot was taken, they would say…”wow, that captures just what it looked like”.

When I shoot with the objective of creating a more artistic final result with the help of some camera/LR/PS techniques, it is not
normally in a time crunch situation. When on those rare occasions location, lighting, and weather present themselves at the same
time, many times for a brief period, I tend to run with what nature has presented instead of attempting to obtain a photo that
offers the most flexibility during post-processing. In these cases, the art is in what nature supplies, not what I supply.

Reply

7.1) Spencer Cox

MARCH 29, 2017 AT 2:39 PM

Yes, exactly! We do approach it differently, but I don’t doubt that your method works very well. It is akin to the approach of
many of history’s best-known photographers, particularly documentary photographers, though some nature/landscape artists as
well.

Reply

8) runbei
MARCH 29, 2017 AT 4:05 PM

The assumption that you have to defend the need for technical information speaks to the longstanding Western prejudice that
favors either-or thinking. It’s unfortunate also because it tempts those who favor a very technical approach to photography to feel
that they’ve got all the bases covered. This was typified, in my experience, by a guy I visited in his home, back in the mid-’60s,
who showed me two small prints that he had hung on his apartment walls. He was obviously very proud of the way he had
followed Ansel Adams’s methods to the letter. I was a sports photographer at the time, and I wondered, “Is that it?” Ansel Adams
was a technically very advanced photographer, of course, but he was prolific and he didn’t confine his vision to a prissy/proud
approach to the Zone System.

Reply

9) Elaine Lansdown
MARCH 29, 2017 AT 4:46 PM

Hi Spencer,
I read something once that has stayed with me ever since, that I quote quite often. “Nothing learned is ever wasted.”
Surely we can encourage our brains to enlarge by learning things that are complex and difficult. We don’t lose by it. In a way, this
idea embodies what Photography Life is all about: striving for excellence in photography. In my opinion, which I have embedded
into my personal philosophy, good enough is never good enough. Only the striving to do our best all the time is good enough.
Well done, Spencer. I applaud you. Keep offering opportunities for people to grow.

Reply

9.1) Rashad Hurani

 MARCH 30, 2017 AT 2:40 AM

I kept teaching this same wisdom to my people: never regret anything you learned, it’ll pay off someday. Yours is shorter and
probably more concise. As for “the good enough is never good enough” nightmare, it gave me hard times throughout my entire
life. It is called alternatively “perfectionism”- read never finish a job on time

Reply

9.1.1) Elaine Lansdown

MARCH 30, 2017 AT 6:18 AM

No, I cannot agree. Perfectionism is an obsessive need to find fault with every effort and so never feel satisfied either with
one’s own efforts or the efforts of unfortunate subordinates. That person drives themself and others crazy. I meant something
very different. I have often encountered a kind of mental laziness that let’s people make a half-way effort and say ‘that’s good
enough’ because they don’t want to bother. They often then seek praise by trying to convince others that their halfway efforts
were something more. Putting in your best effort and being satisfied that you did the best you could is what I was talking
about. If we strive to do our best with our photography, then ‘good enough’ will never satisfy. That is why I applaud Spencer,
because not only does he strive for his personal best, he tries to bring people along with him by offering his technical articles
to help the rest of us do our best.

Reply

10) Famelent, Inc.

MARCH 29, 2017 AT 7:10 PM

Hello Spencer,
It is a great article to enlighten some critical points. Technical information and knowledge can give leverage to the people who is
interested in photography in any level.
The statement you mentioned as “most people don’t want waste their time on topics that are unnecessary for their photography —
do these articles actually help?” is actually related about what we are doing. You can check more in http://www.famelent.com
Keep the great work and we would love to see people like you in our platform with a common vision.
Famelent, Inc. Team

Reply

11) Rob McKenna

MARCH 29, 2017 AT 9:32 PM

Thanks for another great article Spencer and a beautiful image. Just wondering why you kept your ISO at 100 instead of increasing
it to allow for a faster shutter speed. Even with a tripod it seems that you were risking camera shake given the shooting
conditions.

Reply
 12) jack
MARCH 30, 2017 AT 2:14 AM

well, if you are talking about technical aspects it is good to know your DOF calculations – like for example the fact that with 35mm
on full frame camera you need to focus about 15ft away to get 7ft-infinity focus range at f/11. Resolution loss between f/11 and
f/16 is about 7 lpmm at MTF50 (for the lens you took this photo with – I assume Nikor 35mm f/1.8G ED) – by going to f/16 you
only gaining about 2.5 ft of niear limit… Nice photo btw….

Reply

Comment Policy: Although our team at Photography Life encourages all readers to actively participate in discussions, we reserve the
right to delete / modify any content that does not comply with our Code of Conduct, or do not meet the high editorial standards of
the published material.

Leave a Comment
Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Comment

Name *

Email *

No soy un robot
reCAPTCHA
Privacidad - Condiciones

POST COMMENT

Notify me of follow-up comments by email.

Notify me of new posts by email.

ARCHIVES

› Composition and Art

› Essays and Inspiration
› Photography Business
› Photography News
› Photography Techniques
› Photography Tutorials
› Post-Processing
› Tours and Travel

LOGIN

Username

Password

Remember Me

LOGIN →

› Register
› Lost Password

SUBSCRIBE BY EMAIL

Enter your email address to subscribe to this

site and receive notifications of new posts by
email.

Join 19,751 other subscribers

Email Address

SUBSCRIBE
 RECENT FORUM TOPICS

› How do I take camera menu screenshot?

› When hand holding, should (is,vr,vc,os) be turned

off at higher shutter speeds?

› How much lens weight can a camera safely hold

without cradling the lens?

› Gel Sensor Stick for Sony A6000 back in stock?

› Nikon 200 – 500 vs Tamron 150 – 600 G2

› D500 firmware update

› Long Exposure at Tidal Basin

› Testing image quality on different cameras

› Disable shutter button focus on the Nikon D810

› canon recommendations

SITE MENU REVIEWS ACCOUNT

Photography Tips Camera Reviews Shop

Forum Lens Reviews Cart
Lens Database Other Gear Reviews
Photo Spots
Submit Content
Subscribe

Copyright © 2017 Photography Life