Lately, I’ve really tried to slow down in a lot of areas in life in order to be more present and experience moments more fully. I’ve slowed down my normal hiking pace and I’ve been stopping more frequently to take a look around. As a result, I feel like I’ve seen many places more deeply and have seen things I wouldn’t have noticed at all if I was in a rush.

I often see people walk up to a flower, quickly take one photo, and then move on. And this is perfectly fine if you’re just looking for a record of seeing the flower, but if you’re looking to create an image that expresses something more about your subject, then consider slowing down and spending more time with your subject before you even start thinking about taking a photo.

Being in a rush can make it seem like you’re more likely to “get the shot,” but rushing will make you overlook so many opportunities. Many times, when you start slowing down, you’ll start off wanting to photograph one thing but then as you spend more time exploring that subject you notice something even more interesting to photograph.

When you’re in a rush, there’s more mental pressure to get a good photo. When you choose to slow down, and just be present in the moment, then the photo becomes secondary — just as it should be. In photography (and any form of art), if you really want to capture the beauty of a scene, you must first really experience it. This leads to you really “seeing” your subject for what it really is, and helps you determine what you want to say about your subject.

About the Author: Steve Berardi is a nature photographer, web developer, and founder of PhotoNaturalist. You can usually find him hiking in the beautiful mountains and deserts of southern California.

I’m putting “good” and “bad” in quotes here because, like I’ve said before, I don’t really think there are good and bad photos. I think it’s more of a personal choice about whether or not a photo triggers some feeling in you. So, in that sense, when I say “bad photo” here, what I really mean is a photo you took that you personally don’t like for some reason—it doesn’t say what you want it to say about your subject.

One of my favorite ways to learn to see more creatively is to take a lot of photos as experiments: not really knowing if they’re going to be good or not (and also not caring!). Sometimes it’s hard to visualize how a scene will look in a frame, and although looking through the viewfinder helps a little, I feel like you don’t really “see” the photo until you get home and check it out on your computer. Taking lots of photos as experiments really helps you develop this sense of visualization. It also results in a lot of “bad photos” — but that’s a good thing.

The way you learn from bad photos is by analyzing them. Instead of just quickly going through them, spend a few minutes on each one and ask yourself why you think it’s bad. What’s missing from the photograph? What could’ve made it better? Is there too much going on?

Analyzing your photos and articulating what you like and don’t like will help build your creative intuition. It will help develop that sense of knowing when an image “feels right.” The more you develop that sense, the more natural photography will become for you.

For example, this past weekend I decided to take a bunch of experiment photos of pine trees. I didn’t really like any of them. But, in looking through them, I realized I liked elements of some of them. Here are the two photos I learned the most from:

I really liked the shadows on the ground in the first image (although they’re not very strong or clear here), but I liked the more isolated feeling of the tree in the second image. So, putting those two things together, now I more clearly see the image I want to create. I want to find a tree that’s a little more isolated and perhaps a little shorter (to make most of its shadow visible in the frame), and use a wider angle lens (I shot both of these images at 35mm). This was something I clearly saw when analyzing the photos at home, but didn’t really see when I was out there photographing the tree.

I like to think of bad photos as stepping stones towards the final image you’re striving to create. So, again, they’re not really “bad” — they’re just helping to lead the way.

About the Author: Steve Berardi is a nature photographer, web developer, and founder of PhotoNaturalist. You can usually find him hiking in the beautiful mountains and deserts of southern California.

The art of art, the glory of expression and the sunshine of the light of letters, is simplicity.” —Walt Whitman

One of the first lessons I learned when I got into photography is to simplify your composition. Decide what your subject is, and then compose your shot so it only includes your subject or things that support the subject (for example, natural lines that lead the viewer’s eyes to the subject).

A common problem is trying to include too much in one photo. This makes it hard for the viewer to figure out what the subject is, and how to navigate the image. You want to make it as easy as possible for the viewer.

So, here are some ways to simplify your composition:

1 — Awareness of Your Subject

You should always start by deciding what your subject is and what you want to say about your subject. Then, start looking around the scene for things that might complement or get in the way of your subject. If there are too many distracting elements around or the conditions aren’t right for photographing your subject in a way that communicates the message you’re trying to send, then don’t be afraid to move on and look for other opportunities to photograph your subject.

For example, if you stumble upon a beautiful flower, start looking at it from different angles to see what kind of backgrounds you can photograph it against. And, think about other things too, like the lighting conditions. Is everything good for creating the image you’re looking for? If yes, then continue, if not, move on and keep an eye out for other opportunities.

2 — Depth of Field

One of the most simple ways to simplify your composition is to use selective depth of field to make your subject in sharp focus while everything else is out-of-focus.

A common belief in nature photography is that everything besides your subject should be completely out-of-focus, but I don’t agree with that anymore. I think having some non-subject elements just a little out-of-focus is enough, and can often help complement the subject. For example, in the photo below, I purposely made the sage branch in the center in sharp focus while keeping the two branches in the back just a little out-of-focus. This helps the viewer know that the center branch is the main subject, and the other two are in a supporting role.

3 — Position of the Camera

Another thing you can do to simplify your composition is to position your camera so only your subject (or supporting elements) are in the frame. Ansel Adams used to say that “A good photograph is knowing where to stand.”

So, like I talked about earlier, be aware of your subject and its surroundings: walk around your subject (as long as it doesn’t harm any plants or the surrounding environment) and look for the best angle to photograph your subject from to minimize distractions in the frame. Sometimes this can be as simple as just “getting closer” to your subject.

What did I miss?

Do you have another favorite way to simplify your composition? If so, please share it by leaving a comment below. Thanks!

About the Author: Steve Berardi is a nature photographer, web developer, and founder of PhotoNaturalist. You can usually find him hiking in the beautiful mountains and deserts of southern California.

For example, I recently had an encounter with a dragonfly known as a Prince Baskettail (Epitheca princeps). We all know photographing dragonflies can be a very daunting and sometimes humbling experience. The Prince Baskettail can be especially frustrating because it seems to be forever on the move and rarely rests for any length of time. Occasionally though, luck comes at surprising times and the most important thing to remember at those times is to take full advantage of it and to always keep trying for the best possible photo while keeping in mind to never pressure your subject to fly off.

What I hope to illustrate here is how this photo evolved from initially a “documentation” type photo of a Prince Baskettail to something much more pleasing to the eye. If the dragonfly flew away at this moment, like most do, then at least I would have this record. This is the full frame shot, no cropping but I did some post-processing for clarity:

As I approached this subject even closer I noticed something that caught my attention. Those bluish violet wildflowers in the background. The first photo here is what I saw in my viewfinder, again full-frame, no cropping, just post-processed. The second photo is what I saw in the background, a group of Ohio Spiderwort (Tradescantia ohiensis):

Now realizing I might be able to use this dash of color to turn my documentation type image into something a bit more artistic, I began to move a bit quicker and with purpose. Although I would’ve been satisfied with the shot above as is, with some selective cropping to help with the composition, I decided to see what else I could come up with. Moving in closer surrounded much of the dragonfly with blue. Here is the final photo I ended up with:

You can see from start to finish the thought process that went into this final photo. To reiterate, some patience as well as some luck (the dragonfly staying still and the wildflowers in the background) were requirements here, but perseverance was the key element. Know what you want to achieve and persevere until you get there.

This sequence of photos from the first one to the last were made over an approximately 20-minute timeframe. That might sound like plenty of time but the number of movements I made to get the result I wanted took that long. And the most important element of it all was that this particular dragonfly never flew off. When I felt I was done (the last photo), I left the spot. I did come by this same spot about an hour later as I backtracked on the trail I was on and it had left. I paused for a moment and couldn’t wait to get home to see on the “big screen” what I accomplished.

About the Author: Vic Berardi is a raptor lover that lives in the Midwest. He is the founder of the Illinois Beach State Park Hawk Watch which has been in existence now for 18 years. His number one passion is hawk watching and photographing hawks. Many of his photographs have been published in several leading raptor and bird guides along with many cover photos of a leading raptor journal. During the year he gives presentations teaching others about hawk identification, hawk migration and how to photograph them. Vic also photographs other beauties of nature including dragonflies, butterflies, wildflowers and trees. He is always respectful of nature, its creatures and the habitat they live in.

So, how do you show depth in close-ups? Simple: just photograph your subject from an angle. This happens to be one way to show depth in landscapes too

For example, compare the photo at the beginning of this post with this one:

Notice how the flower in the first image looks more three-dimensional? That’s because my camera was at about a 45 degree angle from the flower. In the second image, my camera was parallel to the front of the flower, which made the flower appear more flat.

Neither image is necessarily “better” than the other. They’re just “different” — and going back to the continuing theme I keep talking about these days, the composition you choose in this instance should depend on the feeling you’re trying to convey about your subject.

Showing depth in a close-up makes the image more inviting and makes the viewer feel more like they’re in the scene. On the other hand, a more flat appearance of your subject makes it look sharper and stronger—it tends to emphasize the form of your subject.

About the Author: Steve Berardi is a nature photographer, web developer, and founder of PhotoNaturalist. You can usually find him hiking in the beautiful mountains and deserts of southern California.

It’s called “white” balance because it’s often thought of as the color temperature of the white colors in your image—so a “correct” white balance would be one where the natural whites in your image are actually white and don’t have a red or blue tint. But, it’s important to remember that the white balance affects the entire image, not just the white colors.

The camera is usually pretty good at guessing the correct or most natural-looking white balance, but sometimes it’s not, and other times it’s mostly correct but you might still want to adjust the color temperature to emphasize the feeling of a photograph.

For example, one of the scenes that your camera usually has trouble with is sunrise or sunset, like in this photo I shot on the island of Nuku Hiva:

When I first saw this image, I was disappointed because I remembered the scene being much warmer with a much stronger red-orange glow that seemed to have been lost in the photograph. I was so disappointed that I initially ignored the image. Then, eight years later I was just going through old photos on a Sunday morning and saw this one again and said to myself, “wow, this is actually a pretty good photo, I just need to adjust the white balance a little bit.” So, I opened it up in Photoshop, made the entire image “warmer” and ended up with this new image:

I decided to go a little beyond what was natural, in order to emphasize the warmth of the scene. I think it’s okay to do this, as long as the effect isn’t too drastic.

So, next time you photograph a landscape at sunrise or sunset, think about the temperature of the scene. If the scene has more blue/purple colors and feels “cold,” then make sure your white balance is adjusted properly and consider making it even more “cold” to emphasize that feeling. On the other hand, if the scene has a more “warm” feeling with lots of reds and oranges, then consider making the scene a little warmer.

About the Author: Steve Berardi is a nature photographer, software engineer, and founder of PhotoNaturalist. You can usually find him hiking in the beautiful mountains and deserts of southern California.

After writing that article, I realized there’s another reason to press the button halfway first. With some lenses, the stabilization system isn’t always active. Sometimes it’s only activated by pressing the back-button autofocus and/or the shutter button. And, when the lens stabilization is first activated, sometimes there’s some noticeable jitter before the lens really stabilizes and is ready to take a sharp image.

So, if you’re using a lens with stabilization that’s activated when pressing the shutter button, it’s a good idea to press the shutter halfway first to activate the stabilization, and then wait until any jitter/shake disappears (usually takes much less than a second), and then finally you can press the button all the way down to snap the photo. If you don’t do this, then there’s a chance the first few photos you shoot will be blurry because the stabilization hasn’t fully stabilized yet.

I’ve noticed that this effect is different on every lens, and many lenses don’t seem to have this issue at all. One lens in particular that I’ve definitely noticed it on is Canon’s 300mm f/4L — it doesn’t always happen, but it happens enough to make me want to press the shutter halfway first.

Since lenses aren’t very consistent with this issue, it’s difficult to do a good test, but I did find an interesting test that Nasim Mansurov wrote about at Photography Life.

Have you experienced this issue before?

If you’ve noticed this issue on any of your lenses, please share your experience by leaving a comment below. What camera/lens have you seen this with? Is there anything else you do to prevent this from happening? Thanks!

About the Author: Steve Berardi is a nature photographer, software engineer, and founder of PhotoNaturalist. You can usually find him hiking in the beautiful mountains and deserts of southern California.

So, the thought of creating black and white images of flowers might sound crazy. But, it’s a great way to draw the viewer’s attention to other aspects of the flower. By de-emphasizing color, you move that emphasis to other things.

For example, consider the black and white photo above of a Desert Sunflower and compare it with a few color images of the same type of flower:

Notice how different things stand out in the different images. In the color images, the strong color contrast really grabs your attention. But, in the black and white image, the shadows in the flower and the white hairs on the stem stand out a lot more.

The different images also have very different feelings. The color images have more of a happy feeling, because of those bright colors and the contrast and because it makes you think of spring (generally, a happy thing for us humans!). But, the black and white image has a more neutral or maybe even a little sad feeling.

None of these three images is necessarily better than the rest, they’re just different. Each one says something different about the subject. And, as I’ve said a lot lately: how you photograph your subject should be driven by what you want to say about your subject.

About the Author: Steve Berardi is a nature photographer, software engineer, and founder of PhotoNaturalist. You can usually find him hiking in the beautiful mountains and deserts of southern California.

I’ve written about this topic in previous articles, but it’s such an important topic that I want to start a series of articles that go through specific examples of knowing your subject. So, here’s the first example

I shot the photo above a few weeks ago at Anza Borrego State Park in southern California. Normally, this time of year I’d be busy photographing wildflowers there, but we didn’t get much rain this winter, so there haven’t been many wildflowers. Anyway, the morning I shot this photo I drove through a bunch of rain storms on my way to the desert. After visiting Anza Borrego so often, and knowing a little about how mountains affect precipitation, I knew the mountains bordering Anza Borrego in the west might break up some of those storm clouds and create opportunities for rainbows on the other side. So, I drove to a spot near these mountains and just waited, and sure enough a rainbow showed up. I started shooting photos at that point, but I also knew the photo could be better if the rainbow was closer to that hill on the right, so I waited some more. Eventually, I got the shot I was looking for.

This is just a simple example. I don’t even know much about meteorology, but now I’m more inspired to finally start reading that book I have on mountain meteorology! What I hope this example shows is that you can learn a lot about your subject just by careful observation, and by spending a lot of time with your subject.

About the Author: Steve Berardi is a nature photographer, software engineer, and founder of PhotoNaturalist. You can usually find him hiking in the beautiful mountains and deserts of southern California.

I recently stumbled upon a quote by photographer David Alan Harvey that I think really helps explain how to do this: “Don’t shoot what it looks like, shoot what it feels like.”*

In the beginning, we tend to photograph what everything looks like, and that makes perfect sense as we’re initially attracted to photography because we want to record all the beautiful things we see in nature. But, then somewhere along the way, we start wanting more from our photographs. Something to set them apart from other photos of the same subject. And, the secret to that is photographing what it feels like, instead of what it looks like.

For an example of how this applies to a real image, check out this article I wrote a while ago that compares two photos I shot in the Alabama Hills.

*Special thanks to one of my favorite photographers, David duChemin, for sharing this quote in a recent blog post. He also has a lot more to say about it, and I highly recommend reading his post — duChemin has a strong talent for talking about this side of photography.

About the Author: Steve Berardi is a nature photographer, software engineer, and founder of PhotoNaturalist. You can usually find him hiking in the beautiful mountains and deserts of southern California.