Choosing the right camera settings for the image you want should be straightforward, but there is so much conflicting and overly technical information out there, that I really struggled to make the jump from ‘point and press’ to knowing what to set to get the images I wanted.
This is Part III of the four part trilogy, The Path of the Photographer.
Camera settings explained: This post is aiming to continue the journey from the fully automatic ‘let the camera choose’ to the ‘this is what I want to capture’, and provides a deeper explanation of some of the more technical and less direct settings that also influence the resulting images. It is also meant to be camera / gear agnostic.
There are more settings than these, but I feel these are the main ones that really influence my images and that can be wielded with great power (and great responsibility).
Contents
1. The Interpreter of Light | White Balance
Light has colour. White balance is just the colour correction for certain conditions that is required to make white, well, white.
Remembering my high school physics, light is made up of the three primary colours, Red, Green and Blue. Light can be more orange (warm, sunset) or blue (cold, ice / snow, midday light), and for artificial light, it can be red (tungsten), or green (fluorescent light). This is its colour temperature, (measured using the Kelvin scale).
The key temperatures on the scale are:
- 1,000 K – red, commercial heating elements
- 1,850 K – orange, candles and sunset / sunrise
- 5,000 K – light orange, daylight
- 6,000 K – very light orange, vertical daylight / camera flash
- 6,500 K – off white, overcast daylight, LED lamps
- 7,000 K ish – shade
- 15,000 to 27,000 K – deep blue, clear sky
The human eye is incredibly good at adjusting for these different conditions and colour casts, and seeing ‘white’, and we can see well in both shady and bright conditions, (this is all that dynamic range is – the difference (as a ratio) between the lightest and darkest parts of what we are looking at).
Cameras, not so much. They have to be programmed to do this and will record the scene as they see it, guided by the settings we have given it.
For White Balance, there are eight settings that most cameras have. The camera will balance the programmed (manual) or detected (auto) colour temperature by correcting to white, i.e. adding more of the opposite colours. For example, if Shade is selected or detected, shade is light blue, so the camera will add a dash of orange to balance the blue back to white.
Setting
Auto | AWB
Custom
Manual | Daylight
Manual | Shade
Manual | Cloudy
Manual | Flash
Manual | Tungsten
Manual | Fluorescent
Description
Lets the camera evaluate and correct based on what it detects
Lets the photographer choose a temperature on the K scale
For shooting in bright sunshine / daylight (5,000 to 6,000 K)
For shooting in overcast or shade (7,000 K)
For shooting in between daylight and shade (6,000 K)
For using the camera flash, as flashes tend to be very white (6,000 K)
(Often the light bulb icon) For shooting in artificial light, light streetlamps, where the light is orange (around 3,000 K)
Some cameras have a fluorescent warm and cold setting.
Warm is closer to the red end, and camera will add blue
Cold is closer to blue end, camera will add red
Under normal conditions most cameras will do a competent job when on Auto White Balance, and I have never had to adjust in post-processing (this is also where shooting in RAW really helps, more on that next). But where there is a lot of artificial light, or minimal white in the image for the camera to use to detect, the resulting image may be off and look warm when it was cold, or vice versa.
One way to tell is to look at whites in the shot, for example, this image of white stupas would be around 5,000 to 6,000 K based on the expected K for full sun high in the sky. The shot the camera took on AWB reflects the white I saw in reality, so it did a great job of detecting.
I have applied the various manual white balance settings to show how the camera would correct if the shot were taken under each of the different conditions to bring back to white / what we see.
As I shoot in RAW, I set my white balance to AWB and forget about it, as I will be able to correct in post-processing if the camera has got it wrong. However, this has come from lots of experience of how my camera responds to different light conditions. If your camera has a quirk or struggles with a specific light condition, it may be worth adding the White Balance setting to a predefined user profile, so you can simply switch to that profile when you know your camera will struggle, and get to the required White Balance setting without having to fiddle.
2. The Keeper of the Record | RAW vs JPEG
I think / hope I can summarise millions of words spilled in arguments all over the internet on RAW or JPEG down to a couple of sentences. Before I do that, this is what each is.
RAW
Everything the sensor saw when the shutter button was pressed. Every. Thing. Think of this like an information packed digital film negative. A world of opportunity on how to develop.
So these have large file sizes (mine are 85MB / image).
Needs specific software to interpret, eg. Photoshop, Lightroom, though applications like Apple Photos are now able to display and support simple post processing.
JPEG
The image you saw in the viewfinder / on the LCD screen. Compressed, coloured basis the camera settings. Think of it like the finished photos already developed from the negative.
Compression means smaller file sizes, 2 to 5MB
No specific software to interpret / process. These are ready to share
So choosing comes down to personal choice, and don’t let anyone shame you for choosing one over the other. In my view it really boils down to appetite for post-processing.
Post-processing is just any adjustment or editing of the image after it was taken. For example, cropping (composition), White Balance correction or colour adjustments.
Choose RAW if / when…
You are happy to spend time in post-processing before you share your images. I love this aspect almost as much as taking the picture.
You want flexibility and full control in any post-processing adjustments. For me this is getting rid of sensor fluff and ensuring that the colours and exposure came out how I expected, before the image is compressed and turned into a JPEG for sharing.
You have a massive SD card, or you are able to get the RAW files onto a hard drive regularly to free space on your camera.
Choose JPEG if / when…
You really don’t have the time to spend, or the inclination, to faff in post-processing.
You are happy with how the camera interprets the image you took and how the JPEG looks (i.e. how the film was developed)
You don’t have the space on your SD card for RAW files.
You want simplicity and to just enjoy taking the shot and sharing.
If you are not sure, then many cameras have a RAW + JPEG option. This saves the image as both, and so will need additional storage, (assume roughly 90MB per shot (85 for the RAW, 5 for the JPEG)). But it does mean you can look at both, fiddle with post-processing, understand your preferred look / workflow and then make a decision.
I did this for a while, but realised I never looked at, or used, the JPEGs and just switched over to only RAW.
Something else to bear in mind if you are making a decision based on how a RAW file looks in Apple Photos or in Lightroom, is that RAW files look very flat and a bit meh. This may drive towards choosing to shoot in JPEG. But, think of RAW files as a wonderful little bundle of potential, ready for the magic touch. They are meh because they need that personal magic to come alive. JPEGs from the camera have already had the camera’s magic touch; the camera’s choice, not yours.
Flexibility in Post-Processing
To segue from the White Balance discussion, if I was shooting in JPEG only and used the tungsten setting in daylight, it would be much harder to come back from. What you can do with an already processed / coloured and compressed JPEG is much more limited than with a RAW file.
Using the example above, I have exported that tungsten stupa out from Lightroom as a JPEG. Importing it back in (as it would look if I had shot in JPEG only), the limitations of corrections become clear.
In the above, all of those 9 images were from the same RAW file and I had the full 0 to 50,000 K temperature range to play with. Without any loss of detail or choice.
For the JPEG, I get only As Shot, Auto and Custom, and the custom is limited to + /- 100 K in Lightroom
Whilst the custom can get close, it’s still not what my eyes saw when I was taking the shot, it’s a bit sickly. I can’t adjust it to the warm daylight of the real thing. Whereas I can with the RAW file.
3. The Seeker of Clarity | Focus Modes
Most cameras have a number of settings, from Manual focus, through to Intelligent Focus (where the camera identifies what you should be focusing on). The shades between can be confusing to unpick and understand, especially as two seemingly similar settings, Autofocus mode and Autofocus area mode, work together.
Worry no more, here are the descriptions:
Manual Focus (MF)
You do the work. Using the focus ring on the lens.
I use this for night sky shots, where there is nothing for the camera to fix on to focus.
Note: Check that the viewfinder diopter is adjusted for any short or long-sightedness to get the image sharp via manual focus.
The Main AutoFocus Modes
Auto Focus Single (AFs)
Single Focus. Choose what you want to focus on, press the shutter button halfway, and then if it moves, good luck with that, release the shutter button and refocus.
Use for landscapes, architecture, relatively still things.
Auto Focus Continuous (AFc)
The camera should continue to track the subject if it moves, as long as the shutter button is half-pressed. How well it does it depends on light, camera technology and how quickly the subject is moving.
Use for wildlife, sports, action.
Intelligent Auto Focus (iAF)
A hybrid, based on the camera’s assessment of the situation, moves between single and continuous focus.
Use when indecisive.
The above modes set how the camera will focus. The next setting, Auto Focus Area Mode, defines where the camera will focus.
Use the two in harmony. For example:
Landscape photography, I use AFs as subject is not moving, doesn’t need to be tracked, and Spot AF as I want to focus on a point of interest in the landscape. But AFs plus Zone or Field Auto focus work just as well.
Wildlife or Bird Photography, you could use AFc, as subjects are moving and this tells the camera to track them, plus any variation of spot (precise), zone (flock), Field (large single subject), Multi-field (herd), and tracking, if your auto focus is quick enough. Mine isn’t.
I use AFs mode and Spot / Single Point area mode almost without exception. This makes Puffin / wildlife photography harder, but I make this choice because I am using a relatively under powered telephoto lens (280mm at the maximum), and so often have more than my selected subject in the frame, thus I want full control over the focal point in the image.
The Main Auto Focus Area Modes
Also referred to as focus metering, not to be confused with light metering. Focus metering is what will be sharp / in focus in the resulting image. Note also that the aperture setting will determine how much in front / behind the focus selection will be sharp.
Different manufacturers may have slightly different names for these modes, or slightly different ways of implementing, but this should be relatively common / standard.
Most cameras will indicate whether your focus area is in focus or out of focus by the colour of the frame / spot / cross. Red is not successfully focused, green is successfully focused.
A half-shutter press will initiate and lock the focus on the subject on most cameras. Once locked, you can take the shot, or re-compose, i.e. move the camera to keep the subject in focus (by keeping the shutter button half-pressed), but change where it is in the frame; note – try not to change the distance between the camera and the subject while you have it under focus lock, as it may cause it to go out of focus.
A couple of reasons you may not get a successful focus lock;
* The subject is too close to the lens. Lenses have a minimum focusing distance. For my 50mm lens, that’s 60cm (24″), and for my 90 to 280 mm it’s 60cm at 90mm and 140cm (55″) at 280mm.
* There is not enough contrast for the camera to lock onto. I get this sometimes when I try and focus on a cloud if the cloud is not ‘solid’ enough for the camera to see it as a subject. Or trying to focus on something dark with little detail / contrast. Switch to manual focus, or aim for something else at a similar distance away.
Spot / Single Point AF
Exactly what it sounds like; a single spot in the image.
Choose this to be really precise; for example the eye of a subject, a house / tree etc. in a landscape, a flower in a spray, a bird.
Normally a cross or small square marks where the focal point is.
Most cameras will let you choose where in the image you want that tiny focal point to be.
Field AF
Similar to spot / single point, but with a larger area selection; on my camera I get a single rectangular frame. Choose this to be reasonably precise, (small area not spot),
Multi-Field AF
Builds on Field AF by providing a number of frames over key areas in the image. The camera will detect these automatically, for example faces in a group shot, multiple birds in a shot, etc.
Choose this if you don’t have time to think about focusing, or are happy to cede control to the camera.
Works the same way as for the field auto focus, with each frame indicating which is in focus / out of focus.
Zone AF
The camera provides a square of smaller squares (for my camera, it’s 5×5). Chose this for larger subjects.
Place the zone of squares over the focal area.
Tracking
This is normally a variation on field area auto focus, and does what it says on the tin. Once the subject is ‘captured’ with a half-press of the shutter button, the camera should track any movement of the subject and continuously adjust focus.
Some cameras will have different tracking options, often somewhere else in the menu. For example, children, pets, wildlife, sports. These settings will refine the tracking based on expected movement and speed of movement.
Eye / Face / Body Detection
The camera automatically identifies eyes, faces, or bodies and will spot or field / multi-field focus with tracking.
As outlined in Part II, the Aperture / f-stop will determine the depth of field, i.e. how much of the image will be sharp in front and behind the selected focal point. So I will have that in mind when I decide what focus area mode to use, and where to wield it.
For example, if I am using f/1.4, I will pick a spot that I want the eye to be drawn to to focus on.
In this image it is the central orchid of the spray. This also illustrates how narrow the depth of field is for f/1.4. Only the parts of the image at the same depth as the orchid are sharp.
For this shot I used an aperture of f/1.4 and focused on the Crested Lizard’s eye, using AFs and Spot Focus.
I could use AFs as the lizard wasn’t moving. And spot focus meant I could control exactly what I wanted to be in focus, as I know the small depth of field from using f/1.4.
4. The Judge of Balance | Exposure Metering
Whilst the focus metering mode determines what / how much of your image is sharp / in focus, Exposure Metering determines how bright, or dark, the image will be, and whether the image is “properly lit”, both literally and figuratively.
There are four main metering modes, and they work by telling the camera ‘evaluate the brightness, and therefore the light required, based on this area‘. Part II of The Path of the Photographer covers how the required amount of light is balanced between Aperture, Shutter Speed and ISO, but this section covers how the camera determines the required amount of light.
Most cameras come out of the factory with a default setting of Multi-field, as this gives a solid average across the frame, as outlined below.
Multi-Field
The camera uses a grid or similar method, to detect the light values across the frame, which are used (in an algorithm) to calculate the exposure required for what the camera thinks the main subject its.
This works well in many circumstances but can give poor results where there is a large difference in contrast in the image (high contrast / high dynamic range); think lots of sun creating very dark shade / silhouettes. If the camera is averaging or trying to find a balance, it may end up blowing out the light areas to lighten the shade / silhouette. Ending up with the worst of both worlds.
In this kind of situation, using a Multi-field exposure metering is likely to result in the camera attempting to bring some definition to the landscape that is silhouetted in this image.
Using Lightroom, I’ve increased the exposure to bring the foreground into definition, and this results in the sky losing definition and colour. Whilst the Multi-field is unlikely to be quite this bad, it demonstrates the challenge the camera has in this kind of situation.
Similar issues may occur where the subject is a person with the sun behind them, the camera will set the exposure for the person, and this may have the effect of blowing out the sky, or areas of light around the subject.
Highlight Weighted
The camera looks across the entire frame, and adjusts for very bright subject(s). The camera will adjust the required light to prevent the bright subjects being over-exposed.
For example, snow capped mountains, people in white T-shirts, spotlights, etc.
Using the same image as above, the highlight weighting might recognise the sky / clouds as the subject and adjust the exposure to bring more definition onto the sky. The definition in the foreground is lower, but this is better at balancing the contrast.
Centre Weighted
The camera looks across the entire frame, but the exposure algorithm will be weighted to consider the subjects at the centre of the frame more than those at the edges.
This works well when there isn’t a high contrast between the centre and the background / edges.
In this image, the frangipani flowers are considerably brighter than the background, creating a reasonable amount of contrast. Using centre weighting the flowers have a bigger influence than the rest of the frame, and come out how the eye sees them, but this is still slightly over-exposed (for my taste).
Spot
Exactly what it sounds like. The camera meters for exposure based on a spot point.
For most cameras, the exposure is metered based on where the focal point is when using Auto Focus Spot (the exact spot), Field (centre of field) and Zone (centre of zone).
Drawbacks of this method are that the exposure is based on the exact spot the camera is being focused on, so if there is a high contrast between that spot and anywhere else in the frame, the result will be too dark / too bright elsewhere in the frame.
So, what to choose? This is a personal preference. Each camera is different in its algorithm and the results so playing around (the joys of digital) will give a sense of the camera’s strengths and weaknesses and help develop your preferences.
I use spot focus, and spot metering. Almost without exception. I like the control it gives me. I get to choose the focal point of the image and how I want it lit.
I chose to spot meter the Puffin’s eye (also the spot focal point). In this image the chest of the puffin is over-exposed as the eye is dark, but this is what I wanted to achieve.
Had I chosen centre-weighted or Highlight weighted, the camera would have chosen to expose for the chest of the Puffin and I would have lost the beak / fish definition.
had I chosen multi-field, the camera would have tried to balance the contrast between the bright white and black of the Puffin. Whilst a competent result, it’s not quite to my taste.
These two images demonstrate how different the results are from using spot exposure metering, and focusing on different areas of an image; and so how much control the photographer has.
In the first image, I focused on the house as the interest in the frame. The house is not quite in the sun, so the camera is exposing for an area in the shade. The clouds, sea and sand are lightly over-exposed, but this is fine as they are supporting actors in this shot. The mountain has definition and the colours of the rocks are obvious.
In the second image, I focused on the sand as the interest in the frame. The sand is in the sun, but there is contrast from the shade of the clouds. As the sand is bright, the camera exposes for that, and it has the effect of making the dark areas darker. The definition of the mountain is lost, the sky is darker and the clouds have more definition.
Almost the same content in the frame, different mood and atmosphere.
5. Unconsidered Trifles | Filters and Lens Hoods
Another two areas where debate rages. Should I use a lens hood, should I put on a filter, and if so, which one?
For these, I am going to give my personal view with what I use, as these both come down to personal preference.
Filters
I always use a plain UV filter. Always. The main reason for this is that I am clumsy and the thought of damaging the front of any of my lenses fills me with dread and despair. And is highly likely.
The argument against is that the lens is precision engineered and stuffing another random piece of glass in front of it has consequences on image quality.
I think this is fair, so I will buy the best quality filter I can afford.
Other types of filters are available, but I largely ignore them. I carry a good quality circular polariser for the really bright days where I need sunglasses. I figure if I need sunglasses, so does my camera. I follow the same principle as the clear filter, I buy the best I can afford.
Lens Hoods
Most lenses come with their own lens hood. I always use one. Even for night shots. The lens hood on my 50mm lens is held together with duct tape (love duct tape), because I use it so much and drop it every single time I take it off the lens to put it back on backwards when I have finished shooting for the day.
In my view, using a lens hood means the camera lens is protected from stray light, and so is exposing for exactly what it is pointed at, so a lens hood reduces lens flare and improves image contrast. I think of it like a sunshade. When I am under one, the world looks crisper and more colourful than when I am squinting at it in full sunlight.
A lens hood also allows me to shoot in drizzle, as it is a little umbrella for the lens.
Though to note, my cameras and lenses are reasonably weatherproof, so a little light rain is not an issue.
Bonus | Lens Flare
Lens flare normally happens when shooting directly into the sun / other bright light source. Even the best lens hood is not going to prevent lens flare under these circumstances.
In this image, shooting straight into the sun, creates some spectacular lens flare.
The coloured dots and circles, the rings around the sun, and the haze, are all examples of lens flare, and result from the direct light being bounced around in the lens.
In the image above, the sun is showing a sun star effect, and whilst this is also part of lens flare, it is generally something desirable, whereas the rings, dots, lines, etc. type of lens flare are not. Using a wider aperture can help prevent the noisy lens flare, as can using a lens hood or a polarising filter.
The number, and shape of the aperture blades in the lens will have an effect on the sun star. Lenses with an even number of blades create sun stars with the same number of points as the number of blades. Lenses with an odd number of blades create sun stars with double the number of points as blades. Higher f-stops (narrower apertures), create sharper / more visible sun stars.
Contact me if anything in here piqued your interest or you would like any more information on anything I have mentioned.