Beginner looking to educate myself Locked

No problem. Your criteria for a good photo is different to mine.

I would check out photography life's free series for beginners, then look at the tutorials at Cambridge in colour.

https://photographylife.com/learn-photography

https://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials.htm

bleirer wrote:

I would check out photography life's free series for beginners, then look at the tutorials at Cambridge in colour.

https://photographylife.com/learn-photography

https://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials.htm

I wouldn't bother with the Cambridge in Colour site. It is attractive looking, but contains fundamental errors regarding ISO, noise, exposure and diffraction, even though the site owner has had the problems explained to him.

You will have to be more specific if you are throwing down a gauntlet like that. I do recall one error where he refers to iso as sensitivity,  but it didn't make a practical difference in the topic. What specific things are you referring to?

I'm sticking with my recomnendation as a good source of practical information for beginners, though I agree he could have chosen his words more wisely in the few picky examples given.

Not all of the statements on the Cambridge site are incorrect but some of the statements about the very foundations of photography are totally wrong.

For example, the author says -

"In photography, the exposure settings of aperture, shutter speed and ISO speed are analogous to the width, time and quantity discussed above."

ISO is not an exposure setting.

Only scene luminance, aperture and shutter speed affect exposure.

Exposure is defined as the amount of light striking the sensor per unit area. I don’t see amywhere on the Cambridge site the definition of exposure they use.

For a given ambient lighting,

f/7, 1/200s, ISO 100 and

f/7, 1/200s, ISO 200

are exactly the same exposure but the ISO 200 shot will be lighter.

Changing ISO had no affect at all on the exposure.

Also,

f/7, 1/200, ISO 400 and

f/7, 1/400, ISO 800

will both have the same image lightness but the 1/400s shot will have 1/2 the exposure of the 1/200s shot and so will be more noisy because of the lower exposure.

Exposure and image lightness, although related, are two different things and it's when people use them interchangeably that they can become confused and go round in circles.

Another incorrect statement the site makes is

"One can therefore use many combinations of the above three settings to achieve the same exposure."

Here they are using the word exposure incorrectly because they really mean "....achieve the same image lightness." as shown in my second example above.

bleirer wrote:

You will have to be more specific if you are throwing down a gauntlet like that. I do recall one error where he refers to iso as sensitivity, but it didn't make a practical difference in the topic. What specific things are you referring to?

I'm sorry. I have written detailed analyses of the site's shortcomings in several past posts.  So have more qualified commentators such as bobn2 and Iliah Borg, among other Since I am stuck at home with  the flu, I don't feel like repeating myself again. I suggest you avail yourself of the site's search function or Google to see detailed critiques.  richarddd has already provided a link to one such thread.

FingerPainter wrote:

bleirer wrote:

You will have to be more specific if you are throwing down a gauntlet like that. I do recall one error where he refers to iso as sensitivity, but it didn't make a practical difference in the topic. What specific things are you referring to?

I'm sorry. I have written detailed analyses of the site's shortcomings in several past posts. So have more qualified commentators such as bobn2 and Iliah Borg, among other Since I am stuck at home with the flu, I don't feel like repeating myself again. I suggest you avail yourself of the site's search function or Google to see detailed critiques. richarddd has already provided a link to one such thread.

One excellent critique by bobn2 explaining the flaws in Cambridgeincolour is at

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/52218486

Danno B wrote:

Not all of the statements on the Cambridge site are incorrect but some of the statements about the very foundations of photography are totally wrong.

For example, the author says -

"In photography, the exposure settings of aperture, shutter speed and ISO speed are analogous to the width, time and quantity discussed above."

ISO is not an exposure setting.

Only scene luminance, aperture and shutter speed affect exposure.

Exposure is defined as the amount of light striking the sensor per unit area. I don’t see amywhere on the Cambridge site the definition of exposure they use.

For a given ambient lighting,

f/7, 1/200s, ISO 100 and

f/7, 1/200s, ISO 200

are exactly the same exposure but the ISO 200 shot will be lighter.

Changing ISO had no affect at all on the exposure.

Also,

f/7, 1/200, ISO 400 and

f/7, 1/400, ISO 800

will both have the same image lightness but the 1/400s shot will have 1/2 the exposure of the 1/200s shot and so will be more noisy because of the lower exposure.

Exposure and image lightness, although related, are two different things and it's when people use them interchangeably that they can become confused and go round in circles.

Another incorrect statement the site makes is

"One can therefore use many combinations of the above three settings to achieve the same exposure."

Here they are using the word exposure incorrectly because they really mean "....achieve the same image lightness." as shown in my second example above.

Well stated Danno ... +1

bleirer wrote:

I would check out photography life's free series for beginners, then look at the tutorials at Cambridge in colour.

https://photographylife.com/learn-photography

https://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials.htm

Those two appear to be excellent.  I'd also stress looking for some good books, maybe even in a library.   The internet is not always the best place to learn as it is full of opinions that differ that are believed to be fact by those offering them.

Best to see if you can get a mentor in your area, and if not do lots of experimenting with your equipment.  With digital photos are free, so you can take thousands and compare what changing the various settings does to your photos.

Try taking a photo of a particular scene and changing aperture, shutter speed and iso individually, each one at a time and view what effect it has on your photos.  This is one of the best tools available to help understand these functions.

FingerPainter wrote:

bleirer wrote:

I would check out photography life's free series for beginners, then look at the tutorials at Cambridge in colour.

https://photographylife.com/learn-photography

https://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials.htm

I wouldn't bother with the Cambridge in Colour site. It is attractive looking, but contains fundamental errors regarding ISO, noise, exposure and diffraction, even though the site owner has had the problems explained to him.

Not to mention colour (management)

Bob A L wrote:

bleirer wrote:

I would check out photography life's free series for beginners, then look at the tutorials at Cambridge in colour.

https://photographylife.com/learn-photography

https://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials.htm

Those two appear to be excellent.

Ahhhh, but appearances can often be misleading or even totally wrong like in the case with Cambridgeincolour as shown earlier.

Bob A L wrote:

bleirer wrote:

I would check out photography life's free series for beginners, then look at the tutorials at Cambridge in colour.

https://photographylife.com/learn-photography

https://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials.htm

Those two appear to be excellent.

On https://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/color-management1.htmthey show a 2-dimensional u'v' diagram and claim it is the standardized profile connection space

Danno B wrote:

No problem. Your criteria for a good photo is different to mine.

What are your criteria, Danno? Genuine question. (For me, as I think you know, composition trumps technical aspects.)

Appropriate discussion, I think, since we're talking about beginner education.

Aaron

For me, both composition and technical aspects are equally important in creating my final image for a scene, especially if the intent is a documentary type photo.

For example, a great composition with unacceptable noise in it is not a keeper for me. YMMV

But I am not sure the op is very interested in my personal criteria for a "good photo" so you are straying off topic here.