Reading mode: Light Dark

Why I am I so bad composing with wide angle lenses?

Go to last post
As a wide angle fanatic, I always read threads like this to see if there are any new tips and tricks I can use. I was originally just lurking in the Sigma forum to see what was up with the new L mount camera, disappointing.

I have trouble seeing great telephoto shots like yours, because I started serious photography with wide angle due to my real estate business. It then bled over to my fun shots.

Your wide angle shots are not bad. They would be improved by very small adjustments, like getting a little lower with your beach shot.

One comment you made earlier is that you see your telephoto shots instantly. That doesn't happen with ultra wide. You see a scene, but it looks so much different with the UWA that you have to move around and look at different perspectives, in terms of angles and distances. It's a ponderous activity. Take your time.

Very small movements that would not be noticed with another kind of lens make a big difference with UWA.
DavidMillier said:
Thanks to everyone for their thoughts on this.

I've compiled a list of hints and tips. Perhaps it will be useful to somebody. The trick, as always, is turning theory into effective images!

Wide angle lenses - dealing with compositional difficulties and exploiting characteristics

Framing
  • Subject elements not very close to the camera appear very small - clutters compositions with multiple competing minor interests and no obvious main subject
  • Tend to get a lot of unwanted foreground, sky, if not close enough to subject
Click to expand...
The foreground is easily controlled by getting lower. The key to the sky is shooting on a day with a spectacular sky. There is nothing more boring in a UWA shot than a clear blue sky.
DavidMillier said:
  • Even when there is a close main subject, it is easy for additional elements to pass unnoticed at edges of frame
Click to expand...
Be ponderous and notice them.
DavidMillier said:
Apparent distortion
  • Subjects close to lens exaggerated in size compared to midground and background
Click to expand...
Use this to create a busy picture but with a clear hierarchy of importance to the elements.
DavidMillier said:
  • Steep perspective to vanishing points as a result
Click to expand...
Yes. Use that to focus the viewer's attention to the most important part of the image.
DavidMillier said:
  • Objects near edges and corners pulled out of shape
Click to expand...
This is an unavoidable problem with no artistic value that I have been able to figure out. Often I use vignette or edge blur to minimize it in post. Cropping works too, if you don't have more issues at the new edge.
DavidMillier said:
  • If camera tilted up or down, verticals lean inwards or outwards
Click to expand...
This one can be most interesting. Perfectly parallel verticals can be good if the object (building) is not too close. A little bit of this distortion, sometimes called keystoning, can actually look more natural. A little more keystoning can look sloppy.

A lot of keystoning can look artistic if you pay attention to the angles in your composition.
DavidMillier said:
Tips

Deal with unwanted distractions
  • Because subject elements further away are diminished in size, they can easily be overlooked, allowing unwanted elements in to clutter the composition. Examine edges and corners carefully in viewfinder and watch out for unwanted distractions. Look for branches, tripod legs, camera bags or other elements that aren’t a part of the image. This may be easier when chimping after capture
Make use of distortion for compositional impact
  • Choose a very strong foreground interest which will be the main compositional element even if it leads to a secondary background subject. This will dominate the lower frame
  • Get close to main subject to fill frame, exaggerate the size and shrink the background.
  • Shoot from nearer ground level, (while pointing up or down) to exaggerate line, patterns and textures in the foreground
  • Objects near the top and bottom of the frame tend to get stretched. Take advantage: With suitable landscape subjects, point down and lower shooting height to emphasise foreground lines and textures. At the same time, position a distant mountain at the top of the frame where it also gets stretched - this will make an otherwise diminished background element look bigger than expected
  • Use lead in lines from the edges/corners to the centre to pull people in
Minimise distortion
  • Keep camera level to avoid leaning subjects
  • Shift lens/adpator: Use rising front to include tall buildings while keeping verticals level
  • Shift lens/adaptor: Use drop front to include foreground without pointing camera down
  • Avoid placing objects at edges and corners that don’t benefit from stretching and distortion
  • Keep things that need to be undistorted in the centre of the frame
Corner to corner sharpness

When shooting from a low position with a foreground element close to the lens and a background which is equally important, getting sharp focus on both an object close and far away from the lens can be challenging. Possible solutions:
  • Use a small sensor camera for increased depth of field
Click to expand...
A larger sensor can take a smaller aperture before hitting the diffraction limits, so the sensor size makes no difference.
DavidMillier said:
  • Focus on the hyperfocal distance
  • Stop down to small aperture
  • Use forward tilt on tilt lens/adaptor to move plane of focus for flat subjects
  • Focus stack: capturing multiple images that focus on different places throughout the frame and blending them together in post-processing
Click to expand...
I've been debating whether to take up focus stacking, but more for macro than landscapes.

In your landscape/cityscape compositions, think foreground, middle ground (usually the main subject), background. All three have to be there and have to be good, hence my love of partly cloudy days. A good sky takes care of the background problem, particularly if you don't have any mountains like we don't on the Texas gulf coast. If you don't have any mountains, and there are no clouds in the sky, leave the wide angle at home. There is always something fun to put in the foreground, if you look hard enough.

Take your time, and be ponderous.

Last tip, think of all the things in your picture as elements in an abstract painting and arrange them by moving your camera around. You clearly have a good sense of abstract composition as shown in your telephoto shots.
 
Ed Rizk said:
As a wide angle fanatic, I always read threads like this to see if there are any new tips and tricks I can use. I was originally just lurking in the Sigma forum to see what was up with the new L mount camera, disappointing.

I have trouble seeing great telephoto shots like yours, because I started serious photography with wide angle due to my real estate business. It then bled over to my fun shots.

Your wide angle shots are not bad. They would be improved by very small adjustments, like getting a little lower with your beach shot.

One comment you made earlier is that you see your telephoto shots instantly. That doesn't happen with ultra wide. You see a scene, but it looks so much different with the UWA that you have to move around and look at different perspectives, in terms of angles and distances. It's a ponderous activity. Take your time.

Very small movements that would not be noticed with another kind of lens make a big difference with UWA.
Ed Rizk said:
Thanks to everyone for their thoughts on this.

I've compiled a list of hints and tips. Perhaps it will be useful to somebody. The trick, as always, is turning theory into effective images!

Wide angle lenses - dealing with compositional difficulties and exploiting characteristics

Framing
  • Subject elements not very close to the camera appear very small - clutters compositions with multiple competing minor interests and no obvious main subject
  • Tend to get a lot of unwanted foreground, sky, if not close enough to subject
Click to expand...
The foreground is easily controlled by getting lower. The key to the sky is shooting on a day with a spectacular sky. There is nothing more boring in a UWA shot than a clear blue sky.
Ed Rizk said:
  • Even when there is a close main subject, it is easy for additional elements to pass unnoticed at edges of frame
Click to expand...
Be ponderous and notice them.
Ed Rizk said:
Apparent distortion
  • Subjects close to lens exaggerated in size compared to midground and background
Click to expand...
Use this to create a busy picture but with a clear hierarchy of importance to the elements.
Ed Rizk said:
  • Steep perspective to vanishing points as a result
Click to expand...
Yes. Use that to focus the viewer's attention to the most important part of the image.
Ed Rizk said:
  • Objects near edges and corners pulled out of shape
Click to expand...
This is an unavoidable problem with no artistic value that I have been able to figure out. Often I use vignette or edge blur to minimize it in post. Cropping works too, if you don't have more issues at the new edge.
Ed Rizk said:
  • If camera tilted up or down, verticals lean inwards or outwards
Click to expand...
This one can be most interesting. Perfectly parallel verticals can be good if the object (building) is not too close. A little bit of this distortion, sometimes called keystoning, can actually look more natural. A little more keystoning can look sloppy.

A lot of keystoning can look artistic if you pay attention to the angles in your composition.
Ed Rizk said:
Tips

Deal with unwanted distractions
  • Because subject elements further away are diminished in size, they can easily be overlooked, allowing unwanted elements in to clutter the composition. Examine edges and corners carefully in viewfinder and watch out for unwanted distractions. Look for branches, tripod legs, camera bags or other elements that aren’t a part of the image. This may be easier when chimping after capture
Make use of distortion for compositional impact
  • Choose a very strong foreground interest which will be the main compositional element even if it leads to a secondary background subject. This will dominate the lower frame
  • Get close to main subject to fill frame, exaggerate the size and shrink the background.
  • Shoot from nearer ground level, (while pointing up or down) to exaggerate line, patterns and textures in the foreground
  • Objects near the top and bottom of the frame tend to get stretched. Take advantage: With suitable landscape subjects, point down and lower shooting height to emphasise foreground lines and textures. At the same time, position a distant mountain at the top of the frame where it also gets stretched - this will make an otherwise diminished background element look bigger than expected
  • Use lead in lines from the edges/corners to the centre to pull people in
Minimise distortion
  • Keep camera level to avoid leaning subjects
  • Shift lens/adpator: Use rising front to include tall buildings while keeping verticals level
  • Shift lens/adaptor: Use drop front to include foreground without pointing camera down
  • Avoid placing objects at edges and corners that don’t benefit from stretching and distortion
  • Keep things that need to be undistorted in the centre of the frame
Corner to corner sharpness

When shooting from a low position with a foreground element close to the lens and a background which is equally important, getting sharp focus on both an object close and far away from the lens can be challenging. Possible solutions:
  • Use a small sensor camera for increased depth of field
Click to expand...
A larger sensor can take a smaller aperture before hitting the diffraction limits, so the sensor size makes no difference.
Ed Rizk said:
  • Focus on the hyperfocal distance
  • Stop down to small aperture
  • Use forward tilt on tilt lens/adaptor to move plane of focus for flat subjects
  • Focus stack: capturing multiple images that focus on different places throughout the frame and blending them together in post-processing
Click to expand...
I've been debating whether to take up focus stacking, but more for macro than landscapes.

In your landscape/cityscape compositions, think foreground, middle ground (usually the main subject), background. All three have to be there and have to be good, hence my love of partly cloudy days. A good sky takes care of the background problem, particularly if you don't have any mountains like we don't on the Texas gulf coast. If you don't have any mountains, and there are no clouds in the sky, leave the wide angle at home. There is always something fun to put in the foreground, if you look hard enough.

Take your time, and be ponderous.

Last tip, think of all the things in your picture as elements in an abstract painting and arrange them by moving your camera around. You clearly have a good sense of abstract composition as shown in your telephoto shots.
Click to expand...
Thanks for stopping by!

I see that we're almost neighbors (by Texas standards) ...
 
I think it's a matter of taste and mood, sometimes I feel lots more like shooting longer stuff, other times I really want to capture a wide subject.

I saw you collected a list of tips for dealing with wide angle images, here's a few more:

1) Keep your camera level if you want vertical lines to appear straight without further post processing work.

2) Nothing wrong with considering cropping a really wide angle image down to a pano!

3) More important the foreground stuff is sharp than background, so err on the side of closer focus if trying to use hyperlocal focus.

4) Since as your notes noted things on the edge get misshapen, you can use that re-shaping to producing a pleasing leading line effect towards the center of the image (works better for objects, re-shapen people might be considered more odd).
 
Kendall Helmstetter Gelner said:
I think it's a matter of taste and mood, sometimes I feel lots more like shooting longer stuff, other times I really want to capture a wide subject.

I saw you collected a list of tips for dealing with wide angle images, here's a few more:

1) Keep your camera level if you want vertical lines to appear straight without further post processing work.

2) Nothing wrong with considering cropping a really wide angle image down to a pano!

3) More important the foreground stuff is sharp than background, so err on the side of closer focus if trying to use hyperlocal focus.

4) Since as your notes noted things on the edge get misshapen, you can use that re-shaping to producing a pleasing leading line effect towards the center of the image (works better for objects, re-shapen people might be considered more odd).
Click to expand...
I think what is perhaps going on here, for David, and I know this is an assumption, is that he may have the desire to have everything in the frame be (equally) sharp and in focus. To me this is also part of the disturbing allure of the Merrill cameras...

The reality is that we do not see things that are far away with anything like the clarity we can achieve with our Sigma cameras. Trying to keep everything in focus and sharp and detailed strikes me as about as misguided as "lifting" all the shadows in an image, the beginning of the road (paved with good intentions, of course), that leads (sadly) to HDR. Longer lenses can "solve" that problem.

Keeping the distant mountains (or buildings) "in focus" is, to me, something like a visual pun: What exactly is the viewer supposed to "focus" on, in the image? With a WA lens it has to be in the foreground, and middle, distance wise, not the background. Yes, it's fun to peep at these images with everything sharp and in focus, and it can also be disturbing, another legitimate result. (If it is intentional...)

And in the end, if you are trying to take pictures like that you are fighting with reality and your lens choice. I would not say that resistance is futile... But we have to pick our battles.
 
richard stone said:
Kendall Helmstetter Gelner said:
I think it's a matter of taste and mood, sometimes I feel lots more like shooting longer stuff, other times I really want to capture a wide subject.

I saw you collected a list of tips for dealing with wide angle images, here's a few more:

1) Keep your camera level if you want vertical lines to appear straight without further post processing work.

2) Nothing wrong with considering cropping a really wide angle image down to a pano!

3) More important the foreground stuff is sharp than background, so err on the side of closer focus if trying to use hyperlocal focus.

4) Since as your notes noted things on the edge get misshapen, you can use that re-shaping to producing a pleasing leading line effect towards the center of the image (works better for objects, re-shapen people might be considered more odd).
Click to expand...
I think what is perhaps going on here, for David, and I know this is an assumption, is that he may have the desire to have everything in the frame be (equally) sharp and in focus. To me this is also part of the disturbing allure of the Merrill cameras...

The reality is that we do not see things that are far away with anything like the clarity we can achieve with our Sigma cameras. Trying to keep everything in focus and sharp and detailed strikes me as about as misguided as "lifting" all the shadows in an image, the beginning of the road (paved with good intentions, of course), that leads (sadly) to HDR. Longer lenses can "solve" that problem.

Keeping the distant mountains (or buildings) "in focus" is, to me, something like a visual pun: What exactly is the viewer supposed to "focus" on, in the image? With a WA lens it has to be in the foreground, and middle, distance wise, not the background. Yes, it's fun to peep at these images with everything sharp and in focus, and it can also be disturbing, another legitimate result. (If it is intentional...)

And in the end, if you are trying to take pictures like that you are fighting with reality and your lens choice. I would not say that resistance is futile... But we have to pick our battles.
Click to expand...
 
xpatUSA said:
Ed Rizk said:
As a wide angle fanatic, I always read threads like this to see if there are any new tips and tricks I can use. I was originally just lurking in the Sigma forum to see what was up with the new L mount camera, disappointing.

I have trouble seeing great telephoto shots like yours, because I started serious photography with wide angle due to my real estate business. It then bled over to my fun shots.

Your wide angle shots are not bad. They would be improved by very small adjustments, like getting a little lower with your beach shot.

One comment you made earlier is that you see your telephoto shots instantly. That doesn't happen with ultra wide. You see a scene, but it looks so much different with the UWA that you have to move around and look at different perspectives, in terms of angles and distances. It's a ponderous activity. Take your time.

Very small movements that would not be noticed with another kind of lens make a big difference with UWA.
xpatUSA said:
Thanks to everyone for their thoughts on this.

I've compiled a list of hints and tips. Perhaps it will be useful to somebody. The trick, as always, is turning theory into effective images!

Wide angle lenses - dealing with compositional difficulties and exploiting characteristics

Framing
  • Subject elements not very close to the camera appear very small - clutters compositions with multiple competing minor interests and no obvious main subject
  • Tend to get a lot of unwanted foreground, sky, if not close enough to subject
Click to expand...
The foreground is easily controlled by getting lower. The key to the sky is shooting on a day with a spectacular sky. There is nothing more boring in a UWA shot than a clear blue sky.
xpatUSA said:
  • Even when there is a close main subject, it is easy for additional elements to pass unnoticed at edges of frame
Click to expand...
Be ponderous and notice them.
xpatUSA said:
Apparent distortion
  • Subjects close to lens exaggerated in size compared to midground and background
Click to expand...
Use this to create a busy picture but with a clear hierarchy of importance to the elements.
xpatUSA said:
  • Steep perspective to vanishing points as a result
Click to expand...
Yes. Use that to focus the viewer's attention to the most important part of the image.
xpatUSA said:
  • Objects near edges and corners pulled out of shape
Click to expand...
This is an unavoidable problem with no artistic value that I have been able to figure out. Often I use vignette or edge blur to minimize it in post. Cropping works too, if you don't have more issues at the new edge.
xpatUSA said:
  • If camera tilted up or down, verticals lean inwards or outwards
Click to expand...
This one can be most interesting. Perfectly parallel verticals can be good if the object (building) is not too close. A little bit of this distortion, sometimes called keystoning, can actually look more natural. A little more keystoning can look sloppy.

A lot of keystoning can look artistic if you pay attention to the angles in your composition.
xpatUSA said:
Tips

Deal with unwanted distractions
  • Because subject elements further away are diminished in size, they can easily be overlooked, allowing unwanted elements in to clutter the composition. Examine edges and corners carefully in viewfinder and watch out for unwanted distractions. Look for branches, tripod legs, camera bags or other elements that aren’t a part of the image. This may be easier when chimping after capture
Make use of distortion for compositional impact
  • Choose a very strong foreground interest which will be the main compositional element even if it leads to a secondary background subject. This will dominate the lower frame
  • Get close to main subject to fill frame, exaggerate the size and shrink the background.
  • Shoot from nearer ground level, (while pointing up or down) to exaggerate line, patterns and textures in the foreground
  • Objects near the top and bottom of the frame tend to get stretched. Take advantage: With suitable landscape subjects, point down and lower shooting height to emphasise foreground lines and textures. At the same time, position a distant mountain at the top of the frame where it also gets stretched - this will make an otherwise diminished background element look bigger than expected
  • Use lead in lines from the edges/corners to the centre to pull people in
Minimise distortion
  • Keep camera level to avoid leaning subjects
  • Shift lens/adpator: Use rising front to include tall buildings while keeping verticals level
  • Shift lens/adaptor: Use drop front to include foreground without pointing camera down
  • Avoid placing objects at edges and corners that don’t benefit from stretching and distortion
  • Keep things that need to be undistorted in the centre of the frame
Corner to corner sharpness

When shooting from a low position with a foreground element close to the lens and a background which is equally important, getting sharp focus on both an object close and far away from the lens can be challenging. Possible solutions:
  • Use a small sensor camera for increased depth of field
Click to expand...
A larger sensor can take a smaller aperture before hitting the diffraction limits, so the sensor size makes no difference.
xpatUSA said:
  • Focus on the hyperfocal distance
  • Stop down to small aperture
  • Use forward tilt on tilt lens/adaptor to move plane of focus for flat subjects
  • Focus stack: capturing multiple images that focus on different places throughout the frame and blending them together in post-processing
Click to expand...
I've been debating whether to take up focus stacking, but more for macro than landscapes.

In your landscape/cityscape compositions, think foreground, middle ground (usually the main subject), background. All three have to be there and have to be good, hence my love of partly cloudy days. A good sky takes care of the background problem, particularly if you don't have any mountains like we don't on the Texas gulf coast. If you don't have any mountains, and there are no clouds in the sky, leave the wide angle at home. There is always something fun to put in the foreground, if you look hard enough.

Take your time, and be ponderous.

Last tip, think of all the things in your picture as elements in an abstract painting and arrange them by moving your camera around. You clearly have a good sense of abstract composition as shown in your telephoto shots.
Click to expand...
Thanks for stopping by!

I see that we're almost neighbors (by Texas standards) ...
Click to expand...
 
Ed Rizk said:
xpatUSA said:
Ed Rizk said:
As a wide angle fanatic, I always read threads like this to see if there are any new tips and tricks I can use. I was originally just lurking in the Sigma forum to see what was up with the new L mount camera, disappointing.

I have trouble seeing great telephoto shots like yours, because I started serious photography with wide angle due to my real estate business. It then bled over to my fun shots.

Your wide angle shots are not bad. They would be improved by very small adjustments, like getting a little lower with your beach shot.

One comment you made earlier is that you see your telephoto shots instantly. That doesn't happen with ultra wide. You see a scene, but it looks so much different with the UWA that you have to move around and look at different perspectives, in terms of angles and distances. It's a ponderous activity. Take your time.

Very small movements that would not be noticed with another kind of lens make a big difference with UWA.
Ed Rizk said:
Thanks to everyone for their thoughts on this.

I've compiled a list of hints and tips. Perhaps it will be useful to somebody. The trick, as always, is turning theory into effective images!

Wide angle lenses - dealing with compositional difficulties and exploiting characteristics

Framing
  • Subject elements not very close to the camera appear very small - clutters compositions with multiple competing minor interests and no obvious main subject
  • Tend to get a lot of unwanted foreground, sky, if not close enough to subject
Click to expand...
The foreground is easily controlled by getting lower. The key to the sky is shooting on a day with a spectacular sky. There is nothing more boring in a UWA shot than a clear blue sky.
Ed Rizk said:
  • Even when there is a close main subject, it is easy for additional elements to pass unnoticed at edges of frame
Click to expand...
Be ponderous and notice them.
Ed Rizk said:
Apparent distortion
  • Subjects close to lens exaggerated in size compared to midground and background
Click to expand...
Use this to create a busy picture but with a clear hierarchy of importance to the elements.
Ed Rizk said:
  • Steep perspective to vanishing points as a result
Click to expand...
Yes. Use that to focus the viewer's attention to the most important part of the image.
Ed Rizk said:
  • Objects near edges and corners pulled out of shape
Click to expand...
This is an unavoidable problem with no artistic value that I have been able to figure out. Often I use vignette or edge blur to minimize it in post. Cropping works too, if you don't have more issues at the new edge.
Ed Rizk said:
  • If camera tilted up or down, verticals lean inwards or outwards
Click to expand...
This one can be most interesting. Perfectly parallel verticals can be good if the object (building) is not too close. A little bit of this distortion, sometimes called keystoning, can actually look more natural. A little more keystoning can look sloppy.

A lot of keystoning can look artistic if you pay attention to the angles in your composition.
Ed Rizk said:
Tips

Deal with unwanted distractions
  • Because subject elements further away are diminished in size, they can easily be overlooked, allowing unwanted elements in to clutter the composition. Examine edges and corners carefully in viewfinder and watch out for unwanted distractions. Look for branches, tripod legs, camera bags or other elements that aren’t a part of the image. This may be easier when chimping after capture
Make use of distortion for compositional impact
  • Choose a very strong foreground interest which will be the main compositional element even if it leads to a secondary background subject. This will dominate the lower frame
  • Get close to main subject to fill frame, exaggerate the size and shrink the background.
  • Shoot from nearer ground level, (while pointing up or down) to exaggerate line, patterns and textures in the foreground
  • Objects near the top and bottom of the frame tend to get stretched. Take advantage: With suitable landscape subjects, point down and lower shooting height to emphasise foreground lines and textures. At the same time, position a distant mountain at the top of the frame where it also gets stretched - this will make an otherwise diminished background element look bigger than expected
  • Use lead in lines from the edges/corners to the centre to pull people in
Minimise distortion
  • Keep camera level to avoid leaning subjects
  • Shift lens/adpator: Use rising front to include tall buildings while keeping verticals level
  • Shift lens/adaptor: Use drop front to include foreground without pointing camera down
  • Avoid placing objects at edges and corners that don’t benefit from stretching and distortion
  • Keep things that need to be undistorted in the centre of the frame
Corner to corner sharpness

When shooting from a low position with a foreground element close to the lens and a background which is equally important, getting sharp focus on both an object close and far away from the lens can be challenging. Possible solutions:
  • Use a small sensor camera for increased depth of field
Click to expand...
A larger sensor can take a smaller aperture before hitting the diffraction limits, so the sensor size makes no difference.
Ed Rizk said:
  • Focus on the hyperfocal distance
  • Stop down to small aperture
  • Use forward tilt on tilt lens/adaptor to move plane of focus for flat subjects
  • Focus stack: capturing multiple images that focus on different places throughout the frame and blending them together in post-processing
Click to expand...
I've been debating whether to take up focus stacking, but more for macro than landscapes.

In your landscape/cityscape compositions, think foreground, middle ground (usually the main subject), background. All three have to be there and have to be good, hence my love of partly cloudy days. A good sky takes care of the background problem, particularly if you don't have any mountains like we don't on the Texas gulf coast. If you don't have any mountains, and there are no clouds in the sky, leave the wide angle at home. There is always something fun to put in the foreground, if you look hard enough.

Take your time, and be ponderous.

Last tip, think of all the things in your picture as elements in an abstract painting and arrange them by moving your camera around. You clearly have a good sense of abstract composition as shown in your telephoto shots.
Click to expand...
Thanks for stopping by!

I see that we're almost neighbors (by Texas standards) ...
Click to expand...
Howdy neighbor. I’m in Houston. Where are you?
Click to expand...
8 miles down a dirt road out of Bellville. :-D

Before that, Katy.
 
xpatUSA said:
Ed Rizk said:
xpatUSA said:
Ed Rizk said:
As a wide angle fanatic, I always read threads like this to see if there are any new tips and tricks I can use. I was originally just lurking in the Sigma forum to see what was up with the new L mount camera, disappointing.

I have trouble seeing great telephoto shots like yours, because I started serious photography with wide angle due to my real estate business. It then bled over to my fun shots.

Your wide angle shots are not bad. They would be improved by very small adjustments, like getting a little lower with your beach shot.

One comment you made earlier is that you see your telephoto shots instantly. That doesn't happen with ultra wide. You see a scene, but it looks so much different with the UWA that you have to move around and look at different perspectives, in terms of angles and distances. It's a ponderous activity. Take your time.

Very small movements that would not be noticed with another kind of lens make a big difference with UWA.
xpatUSA said:
Thanks to everyone for their thoughts on this.

I've compiled a list of hints and tips. Perhaps it will be useful to somebody. The trick, as always, is turning theory into effective images!

Wide angle lenses - dealing with compositional difficulties and exploiting characteristics

Framing
  • Subject elements not very close to the camera appear very small - clutters compositions with multiple competing minor interests and no obvious main subject
  • Tend to get a lot of unwanted foreground, sky, if not close enough to subject
Click to expand...
The foreground is easily controlled by getting lower. The key to the sky is shooting on a day with a spectacular sky. There is nothing more boring in a UWA shot than a clear blue sky.
xpatUSA said:
  • Even when there is a close main subject, it is easy for additional elements to pass unnoticed at edges of frame
Click to expand...
Be ponderous and notice them.
xpatUSA said:
Apparent distortion
  • Subjects close to lens exaggerated in size compared to midground and background
Click to expand...
Use this to create a busy picture but with a clear hierarchy of importance to the elements.
xpatUSA said:
  • Steep perspective to vanishing points as a result
Click to expand...
Yes. Use that to focus the viewer's attention to the most important part of the image.
xpatUSA said:
  • Objects near edges and corners pulled out of shape
Click to expand...
This is an unavoidable problem with no artistic value that I have been able to figure out. Often I use vignette or edge blur to minimize it in post. Cropping works too, if you don't have more issues at the new edge.
xpatUSA said:
  • If camera tilted up or down, verticals lean inwards or outwards
Click to expand...
This one can be most interesting. Perfectly parallel verticals can be good if the object (building) is not too close. A little bit of this distortion, sometimes called keystoning, can actually look more natural. A little more keystoning can look sloppy.

A lot of keystoning can look artistic if you pay attention to the angles in your composition.
xpatUSA said:
Tips

Deal with unwanted distractions
  • Because subject elements further away are diminished in size, they can easily be overlooked, allowing unwanted elements in to clutter the composition. Examine edges and corners carefully in viewfinder and watch out for unwanted distractions. Look for branches, tripod legs, camera bags or other elements that aren’t a part of the image. This may be easier when chimping after capture
Make use of distortion for compositional impact
  • Choose a very strong foreground interest which will be the main compositional element even if it leads to a secondary background subject. This will dominate the lower frame
  • Get close to main subject to fill frame, exaggerate the size and shrink the background.
  • Shoot from nearer ground level, (while pointing up or down) to exaggerate line, patterns and textures in the foreground
  • Objects near the top and bottom of the frame tend to get stretched. Take advantage: With suitable landscape subjects, point down and lower shooting height to emphasise foreground lines and textures. At the same time, position a distant mountain at the top of the frame where it also gets stretched - this will make an otherwise diminished background element look bigger than expected
  • Use lead in lines from the edges/corners to the centre to pull people in
Minimise distortion
  • Keep camera level to avoid leaning subjects
  • Shift lens/adpator: Use rising front to include tall buildings while keeping verticals level
  • Shift lens/adaptor: Use drop front to include foreground without pointing camera down
  • Avoid placing objects at edges and corners that don’t benefit from stretching and distortion
  • Keep things that need to be undistorted in the centre of the frame
Corner to corner sharpness

When shooting from a low position with a foreground element close to the lens and a background which is equally important, getting sharp focus on both an object close and far away from the lens can be challenging. Possible solutions:
  • Use a small sensor camera for increased depth of field
Click to expand...
A larger sensor can take a smaller aperture before hitting the diffraction limits, so the sensor size makes no difference.
xpatUSA said:
  • Focus on the hyperfocal distance
  • Stop down to small aperture
  • Use forward tilt on tilt lens/adaptor to move plane of focus for flat subjects
  • Focus stack: capturing multiple images that focus on different places throughout the frame and blending them together in post-processing
Click to expand...
I've been debating whether to take up focus stacking, but more for macro than landscapes.

In your landscape/cityscape compositions, think foreground, middle ground (usually the main subject), background. All three have to be there and have to be good, hence my love of partly cloudy days. A good sky takes care of the background problem, particularly if you don't have any mountains like we don't on the Texas gulf coast. If you don't have any mountains, and there are no clouds in the sky, leave the wide angle at home. There is always something fun to put in the foreground, if you look hard enough.

Take your time, and be ponderous.

Last tip, think of all the things in your picture as elements in an abstract painting and arrange them by moving your camera around. You clearly have a good sense of abstract composition as shown in your telephoto shots.
Click to expand...
Thanks for stopping by!

I see that we're almost neighbors (by Texas standards) ...
Click to expand...
Howdy neighbor. I’m in Houston. Where are you?
Click to expand...
8 miles down a dirt road out of Bellville. :-D

Before that, Katy.
Click to expand...
 
Each to his/her own. I looked over your list and wondered what is happening? To quote David Bailey again in this forum (he is a very famous English photographer and now in his 70s at least), "The photographs are there. You just have to find them."

For myself I find the photo then determine which tool to use to make the image, a list is not a lot of help and even long-established art critics (in the painting sense) have been known to say, "Is this a good photograph?" But, each to their own.



e7cc2c96aa8445f48abafe0b82a49456.jpg
 
Ed Rizk said:
richard stone said:
Kendall Helmstetter Gelner said:
I think it's a matter of taste and mood, sometimes I feel lots more like shooting longer stuff, other times I really want to capture a wide subject.

I saw you collected a list of tips for dealing with wide angle images, here's a few more:

1) Keep your camera level if you want vertical lines to appear straight without further post processing work.

2) Nothing wrong with considering cropping a really wide angle image down to a pano!

3) More important the foreground stuff is sharp than background, so err on the side of closer focus if trying to use hyperlocal focus.

4) Since as your notes noted things on the edge get misshapen, you can use that re-shaping to producing a pleasing leading line effect towards the center of the image (works better for objects, re-shapen people might be considered more odd).
Click to expand...
I think what is perhaps going on here, for David, and I know this is an assumption, is that he may have the desire to have everything in the frame be (equally) sharp and in focus. To me this is also part of the disturbing allure of the Merrill cameras...

The reality is that we do not see things that are far away with anything like the clarity we can achieve with our Sigma cameras. Trying to keep everything in focus and sharp and detailed strikes me as about as misguided as "lifting" all the shadows in an image, the beginning of the road (paved with good intentions, of course), that leads (sadly) to HDR. Longer lenses can "solve" that problem.

Keeping the distant mountains (or buildings) "in focus" is, to me, something like a visual pun: What exactly is the viewer supposed to "focus" on, in the image? With a WA lens it has to be in the foreground, and middle, distance wise, not the background. Yes, it's fun to peep at these images with everything sharp and in focus, and it can also be disturbing, another legitimate result. (If it is intentional...)

And in the end, if you are trying to take pictures like that you are fighting with reality and your lens choice. I would not say that resistance is futile... But we have to pick our battles.
Click to expand...
Reality is highly overrated.

A wide angle shot with a lot of detail should have an overall pleasing composition made up of the larger elements. The viewer can then look closer and notice the details.
Click to expand...
I agree that reality is over-rated: My point was only that trying to make "everything" sharp in an WA image is fighting with the reality of distant things being blurry simply by being far away. I like wide angle shots.
Ed Rizk said:
I guess you can use wide angle for environmental portraits where you would try to deemphasize the background detail by blueing it out or darkening it by using flash on the main subject. But that’s not how a scenic shot works with wide angle.--
Click to expand...
Ed Rizk said:
My small gallery: http://www.pbase.com/richard44/inbox
Click to expand...
 
DMillier said:
I used to love wide angle lenses - I thought they produced very dramatic imagery.

Nowadays I shoot almost always with longer focal lengths, even for landscapes. I find that using wide angles almost always results in terrible compositions.

Question is, why? Ultra wide angles are very popular these days, everyone uses them, often with great success. But I can't shoot anything wider than 35mm equivalent without getting poor compositions.

Why do I find wider lenses so hard to compose with? There must be something about the characteristics of wide lenses that is hard to control...
Click to expand...
Don't worry, this is not confined to you. You are one of the only people who realise or admit it.

I soon realised that the interesting bit of many landscapes was on the horizon and ultrawides exaggerated foreground clutter.

I did get an ultrawide but the bigger the landscape I'm shooting, the longer the lens I prefer to use now. My ultrawides are mainly for small spaces. I may use fisheyes for indoor spaces with a lot of people because it doesn't make them bigger at the edges.

The longer lens compression effect is helpful on some landscapes, making stacked rows of things.
 
I was thinking mainly about the use of wide lenses for landscape photography. Perhaps that wasn't obvious from the thread. Landscapes are obviously a more limited palette than the totality of wide angle work and therefore seem more open to a workflow based approach. Of course, the hope would be that with time, this all becomes instinctive.
 
Interesting question.

I think it is because wide angles include SO MANY things in the picture, often TOO MANY things. So, after the first "wow" effect that this can give to the photographer (which can persist for a whole lifetime in some cases :) ) it can come to be a little boring, or at least less interesting.

Having the chance to try a lot of lenses, I'm finding much more intriguing, often, to shoot without a wide angle, or at least not with an extreme one.

Yet, I cant' wait to use my 12-24 Art on a full frame foveon sensor for an "effective" 12 mm shooting experience! :)
 
richard stone said:
I think what is perhaps going on here, for David, and I know this is an assumption, is that he may have the desire to have everything in the frame be (equally) sharp and in focus. To me this is also part of the disturbing allure of the Merrill cameras...

The reality is that we do not see things that are far away with anything like the clarity we can achieve with our Sigma cameras. Trying to keep everything in focus and sharp and detailed strikes me as about as misguided as "lifting" all the shadows in an image, the beginning of the road (paved with good intentions, of course), that leads (sadly) to HDR. Longer lenses can "solve" that problem.

Keeping the distant mountains (or buildings) "in focus" is, to me, something like a visual pun: What exactly is the viewer supposed to "focus" on, in the image? With a WA lens it has to be in the foreground, and middle, distance wise, not the background. Yes, it's fun to peep at these images with everything sharp and in focus, and it can also be disturbing, another legitimate result. (If it is intentional...)

And in the end, if you are trying to take pictures like that you are fighting with reality and your lens choice. I would not say that resistance is futile... But we have to pick our battles.
Click to expand...
If you look at a landscape by Breughel, you will see that everything is in focus. Nobody ever complained.



Pieter_Bruegel_the_Elder-_The_Corn_Harvest_%28August%29.JPG
 
 
Last edited:
DMillier said:
I was thinking mainly about the use of wide lenses for landscape photography. Perhaps that wasn't obvious from the thread. Landscapes are obviously a more limited palette than the totality of wide angle work and therefore seem more open to a workflow based approach. Of course, the hope would be that with time, this all becomes instinctive.
Click to expand...
I think it is very difficult to get a satisfying landscape shot with a wide angle lens, unless you are shooting the Milky Way or you are very close to something very big.

WA lenses seem more suited to emphasizing the space between the foreground and the background and showing the relationship of the foreground to the background.

There are lots of examples of beautiful but cliched WA shots. The lonely tree in the desert. The rock in the surf. The detail on the classic car. Finding your own "voice" using a WA lens is hard but if you are able the results can be very dramatic.

Jan
 
D Cox said:
D Cox said:
D Cox said:
This is very nice indeed.

Can you tell us which lens and camera you used, and where the scene is ?
Click to expand...
Thanks. This is a tiny casio ZR850 with 25-900 lens in southern Croatia.
Click to expand...
An example of how a good photographer can use any camera.
Click to expand...
The everlasting discussion between FF luggers making snaps for facebook and people doing exhibitions with smartphone pictures... All I can say is that some of my smaller cameras get the shot much more reliable/consistently then my big equipment...
 
Smallpox said:
Smallpox said:
Smallpox said:
Smallpox said:
This is very nice indeed.

Can you tell us which lens and camera you used, and where the scene is ?
Click to expand...
Thanks. This is a tiny casio ZR850 with 25-900 lens in southern Croatia.
Click to expand...
An example of how a good photographer can use any camera.
Click to expand...
The everlasting discussion between FF luggers making snaps for facebook and people doing exhibitions with smartphone pictures... All I can say is that some of my smaller cameras get the shot much more reliable/consistently then my big equipment...
Click to expand...
That’s the first thing I noticed when I became a FF lugger. It is harder to get the shot with FF.

Perfect focus is much more important, because of the shallower DOG. Smaller sensors are more forgiving when it comes to focus.

--
Ed Rizk
 
Last edited:
D Cox said:
richard stone said:
I think what is perhaps going on here, for David, and I know this is an assumption, is that he may have the desire to have everything in the frame be (equally) sharp and in focus. To me this is also part of the disturbing allure of the Merrill cameras...<..>
Click to expand...
If you look at a landscape by Breughel, you will see that everything is in focus. Nobody ever complained.<...>
Click to expand...
I was going to respond with pretty much the abstract of that response - that in paintings there are a large number of images that are very wide, yet also hold compelling detail if you look close.
I really like wide angle images that can work that way, I think the effect works best with some strong foreground stuff, some pleasing background elements, then very little in the middle ground area so as to keep separation and let you enjoy the larger scene before moving on to details, a conscious step.
 
D Cox said:
richard stone said:
I think what is perhaps going on here, for David, and I know this is an assumption, is that he may have the desire to have everything in the frame be (equally) sharp and in focus. To me this is also part of the disturbing allure of the Merrill cameras...

The reality is that we do not see things that are far away with anything like the clarity we can achieve with our Sigma cameras. Trying to keep everything in focus and sharp and detailed strikes me as about as misguided as "lifting" all the shadows in an image, the beginning of the road (paved with good intentions, of course), that leads (sadly) to HDR. Longer lenses can "solve" that problem.

Keeping the distant mountains (or buildings) "in focus" is, to me, something like a visual pun: What exactly is the viewer supposed to "focus" on, in the image? With a WA lens it has to be in the foreground, and middle, distance wise, not the background. Yes, it's fun to peep at these images with everything sharp and in focus, and it can also be disturbing, another legitimate result. (If it is intentional...)

And in the end, if you are trying to take pictures like that you are fighting with reality and your lens choice. I would not say that resistance is futile... But we have to pick our battles.
Click to expand...
If you look at a landscape by Breughel, you will see that everything is in focus. Nobody ever complained.
Click to expand...
You hit the nail on the head! Depth of field unsharpness is sooooooo unnatural
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top