Over the years, I’ve encountered some ideas about photography—call them ‘beliefs’—that I find hold little truth. In some cases, it might be too strong to call them outright fallacies, as they come from a place of good intentions. However, they can lead to misunderstanding of the details because these fallacious beliefs lack nuance. They are traps for newbie and experienced photographers alike because they limit critical thinking and sound decision-making. And so, I would like to explore these fallacies one by one, and present alternative lines of reasoning to help you avoid the traps!
In the day time, my best camera is sometimes my Ricoh GR II…
…and at night my best camera is my Nikon D4. I never default to my phone.
1. The best camera is the one you have with you.
This has certainly become a cliché in recent years. On the face of it, this sounds great. It seems to imply that the best cameras are compact, easy to bring along, small, lightweight, etc. And it leads to this common conclusion: your phone is best because you always have it on you. At least this is the sentiment I’ve heard repeatedly in discussions both online, and in reality, when discussing this topic during my photo workshops. But the this is only a half-complete truism. Let’s complete the whole idea: the best camera is the one you have with you... that's why I always bring my best camera!
You see, I understand this mantra to imply that, as street photographers, we should always have our camera with us, whatever that camera may be. And if you are the owner of an amazing camera, that camera is useless sitting at home. It doesn’t matter if the camera is huge, hard to carry, or what-have-you. The only thing that matters is if you are motivated to bring it with you or not. Ideally, this does not mean you simply use the default camera that you happen to always have in your pocket. Instead, it should be a camera which you consciously choose to have with you at all times. If that is your phone, great! But for me, I choose to bring my good cameras and avoid relying on the default camera in my pocket.
I love doing street photography with my Nikon D4 and a manual focus Voigtländer 40mm f/2 lens. I guess I should stop because I’ve been told this camera is “too big” and “not discreet enough” for candid street photos.
2. You Need [X] Camera
Going off the previous point, there is a lot of noise out there these days about certain cameras being the ‘best’ for certain things. Sometimes this is true: if you need images that have certain attributes, or you must capture them a certain way, then you might require certain gear. For example, to do macro photography you need the equipment to do it. If you want to shoot wildlife from afar, you’ll need a telephoto lens. And for both of these kinds of photography, smaller sensors tend to be better due to the ‘free’ crop they provide. On the other hand, if you are photographing a quiet event such as an acoustic music performance, a play, or even an intimate wedding, a camera with a silent shutter would be preferable to one without.
However, those are all very specific technical requirements. What I take issue with is the endless avalanche of people questioning each other about camera choice when it comes to general or street photography. They focus on details that only apply to personal preferences, such as having an OVF vs. an EVF, or the size/weight of the camera, or access to certain color styles. These things are purely subjective. Sure, weight is an objective fact, but how we react to that fact is subjective. A heavy camera for you, might be perfectly fine for me, and vice versa. It sounds so obvious to write this out, but in short, don’t let anyone tell you know what camera you need. Choose a camera that work for you and fall in love with it.
Use the entire frame—right down to the corners—not just the thirds.
Diagonal lines are a photographer’s friend.
3. The Rule of Thirds
The biggest trap for newbie photographers and one that I myself fell into for a couple of years: the ‘rule’ of thirds. I’ve said it before, but it might as well be called the ‘suggestion’ of thirds, at best! There is nothing special or magical about the thirds of an image, especially when taking into consideration all of the different aspect ratios that we can use. But more importantly, it the concept does not really say much about why it works, which leads to a better understanding of why to use it. And as such, I’ve seen time and again photographers fall into this ‘trap of thirds’ and all their pictures come out looking the same. For a deeper sense of composition, check out my essay in which I explore composition in detail.
Shot on aperture mode at f/2.8 with minimum shutter speed set to 1/250 and compensation set to -1.7. With those settings, the camera chose 720 ISO. I could have shot this on manual, but by simply keeping an eye on the camera’s chosen settings I was able to shoot it on Aperture priority much more quickly.
4. Shoot Everything on M (it’s what the pros use)
Another common misleading bit of advice out there is to always shoot everything on Manual. This is probably the most annoying fallacy on this entire list. There is no reason to always shoot on M. It is certainly a completely valid way of doing things, but it by no means the only legitimate way. There is nothing wrong, in a universal sense, with using P! If it works, and you can produce great images, then use it! Having said that, Manual exposure is very useful in some cases, and I use it myself (just not all the time). Manual is ideal when you need two things. The first is complete control of the exposure settings and their secondary effects (DOF, motion blur, and noise). The second reason to use manual is even more important: consistency. There are times when you will need very consistent exposure even in a dynamic and changing environment. These are times when the camera’s metering system might not be trusted, usually because of rapidly changing lighting conditions that could fool the camera but are ultimately not relevant to the shot. This could be something like stage lights during a concert, or neon signs cycling in an urban landscape scene.
There is one more use for Manual and that is learning. When you are starting and need to learn how the camera works, what the aperture does, how shutter speed affects the image, how ISO plays into exposure, that is when Manual is great. But, once you understand all of those things, for most high-speed shooting situations, Aperture priority mode is ideal. Why not Shutter priority mode? This is a personal preference of mine, but I simply do not like the camera to be in control of the aperture because of its impact on Depth of Field. DOF is an important aspect of photography as it affects how you actually compose your shot, and as such I do not feel comfortable granting the camera any control over DOF. Therefore, when it comes to street photography, I shoot most of the time on Aperture priority mode and when necessary on Manual. I go into detail on my preferred street photography settings in this video tutorial.
I choose to avoid film because I’m lazy. :) And my goal is capture moments, not a particular look.
5. Film vs. Digital
Photography is not about the medium. It’s about perception, ideas, a way of seeing the world through your own unique perspective. If that perspective requires a specific medium, great! That’s a choice you make personally for yourself. But there is nothing objectively more special about one medium or the other. There are certainly objective technical differences with things like dynamic range, color, resolution, etc. In short, film is great as medium, and it certainly has qualities that digital cannot match. But the same is true the other way around. In the end, they are both simply that: different photographic mediums. It’s simply another choice in an endless series of decisions that we make as artists in our chosen craft.
Does this photograph lack ‘soul’ (whatever that is) because it’s in color?
I suppose it’s easy mode because they are geisha.
6. Black and White photos have ‘Soul’
There is a famous quote by photojournalist Ted Grant: “when you photograph people in color, you photograph their clothes. But when you photograph people in black and white, you photograph their souls!” It should be painfully obvious now in 2020 that this is a ridiculous statement. Even in 1999 when it was made it was already ridiculous. But I think it’s a good way to dive into the topic of color, or its absence, as a stylistic choice. The fallacy in the quote is obvious as there are countless examples of color photographs that have ‘soul,’ whatever that may be in the subjective eyes of each viewer. However, in a broader sense there is a lot of discussion out there on the topic of ‘color science’ (and how each camera manufacturer implements it) or about the color qualities of different film stock, and so on.
I personally don’t shoot in monochrome because, as I see it, I perceive the universe in color, and my photography is a preserved instant of my own perception, so it too must be in color. Having say that I also believe that there is no ‘definitive’ color in a photograph. Every single photo out there has colors that not ‘true’ to reality in some way. And in fact, our perception of color is a whole philosophical rabbit hole. The point is that colors are also a choice. How you want to present color, or its absence in the case of black and white photographs, is entirely up to you. There is no inherent value to anyone kind of ‘colorscape’ in an image.
The photo on the left is unfinished. The one on the right is at its full potential thanks to a few edits in post. The one on the right is the ‘real’ photo because I say so.
7. Editing is Cheating / An Edited Photo is not the ‘Original’
Building on the previous point, the idea that editing is somehow ‘cheating’ or deviating from the ‘original’ is a fallacy as well. Many times, people ask me, “did you edit this photo?” Recently, someone left a comment in a street photo editing tutorial I created: “Absolutely love this photo, sorry, but, [sic] original was the best for me, as it was the real photo. Rad job editing though.” The emphasis is mine. This idea that there is even such a thing as a ‘real’ or ‘original’ photo is a fallacy. A photo, like any work of art, is complete when the artist deems it to be so. Photographs shot on film required processing of some sort before they could be consumed by the viewer. At the minimum the film had to be developed. And in most cases, to create a print the negative has to be enlarged onto photographic paper. And all along the way the photographer can make changes in the darkroom. At which stage is the photograph original?
It is the same for digital photos. When they exit the camera, they can be immediately deemed ‘finished’ by the photographer. While another photographer might edit their photos extensively. I go for moderate editing in most cases. But this is my choice, not a universal rule. All I know is that in any case, there is nothing special about the digital data that pops out of the camera when you click the shutter button. Even that is hard to pin down definitely as different software will interpret the raw files differently. Shooting in JPG format removes some uncertainty, but even then, most cameras allow us to select the picture style or color style, and anyway the image will appear different on different screens. And even more so if it’s printed. Which one is the ‘real’ one? In short, the camera does not create the photo; the photographer does. And that final image is the ‘real’ one.
The left side is straight from the camera and the right side appears after some significant editing of the raw file. Had I set my white balance more carefully in the camera, I could have gotten a result closer to the one on the right. Raw offers more flexibility.
8. Always Shoot in Raw / Always Shoot in JPG
This is another debate that comes up now and then, but less so than when I got into photography over 10 years ago. As every other fallacy on this list, it’s not that one choice is always right and the other is always wrong. It is a choice, one that depends on your personal needs and preferences. If like the ‘look’ of an image as it comes straight from the camera, then perhaps JPG images are good for you. Similarly, if you have no time or wish to spend no time on editing images in post, then raw format more than likely is not for you. Neither choice is more valid than the other. I personally prefer raw format because I enjoy editing my photos and getting the colors and look that I desire in my images (see the point #6 and #7 above). But I know plenty of great photographers who set their color preferences right in the camera and just stick with that. Go with what works for you!
Nikon D4, 5000 ISO — I know, I know, I use a camera that does well at high ISOs. But still, there is noise in the full-size image. If I was afraid of noise, I wouldn’t be able to get the shot.
9. Noise is Bad / Keep your ISO Down
Now to get into something technical that I’ve had address time and again on my photo workshops. Noise is not ‘bad’! Noise just another artifact of the photographic process. It is just the air is in the room. It’s always there, even at low ISOs, just more hidden. Even on film, noise exists, though we call it ‘grain.’ The point is that noise, in the sense of information theory, simply exists in our world. There no ‘pure’ signal out there when dealing with light on the street. And when we raise our ISO that noise will be more pronounced, as we are simply raising the gain on a weak signal. The question is, is noise aesthetically pleasing? That’s up to you. I don’t mind the look of noise in my street photos. It’s not ugly or unpleasant. And more importantly, what’s the trade off? Often the only way to mitigate noise is to bring down the shutter speed. If you are using a tripod, no problem! One benefit of long exposure photography is the reduction of noise. But when shooting by hand, or shooting moving subjects such as people, a reduced shutter speed can result in motion blur. Motion blur itself can be a stylistic choice, such as in the case of panning. But in the same way, a photo with frozen action, but noisy as a result, is a stylistic choice. Once again, the choice is yours. Also, on the note of editing, noise reduction should be used with care. This is because noise reduction can reduce sharpness and details. It’s up to you what is more important, but don’t be afraid to embrace the noise!
Used HDR to capture the entire dynamic range of the scene. It took three exposures, one of them being extremely dark just to get the neon sign exposed correctly.
10. Expose to the Right (ETTR), Histograms, Picture Styles, and a Whole Bunch of Technical Mumbo Jumbo
First of all, a brief explanation of ETTR. The idea is this: at the camera’s lowest ISO, it’s best to get the exposure as bright as possible (in other words to move the histogram to the right). This means the camera captures as much data as possible, which is better for subsequent editing when working with raw files. The photo may look washed out when you take it, but the additional data in the photo allows for greater manipulation, and with careful editing the resulting photo will look very natural and with excellent dynamic and tonal range.
To be honest, it’s unfair to call this a fallacy since it is in fact an effective technique, but it comes with lots of traps and pitfalls. The problem arises when it’s applied in the wrong circumstances, or when it is outright misinterpreted. The first caveat is that while ETTR works well in low contrast situations it is not so great for high contrast scene that have high dynamic range. The reason is that you have to be very careful not to overexpose the highlights. You are kind of playing with fire since it can be easy to go too far and lose important information in the highlights without any chance of recovery in post. On the other hand, some highlight loss is totally acceptable (e.g. bright objects like streetlights or the sun, which appear pure white even to the human eye). This is another creative decision that is up to the photographer to make: how much detail can you afford to lose in the highlights?
Made from one exposure employing ETTR. This was not the right place or time for the technique. You can see the loss of detail in the neon—its vivid pink tone is blown out to white in some spots. Oops.
The thing is, to have a good idea of your exposure you have to pay attention to the histogram. The problem is that you must also beware of the histogram, since it kind of lies to you. This is because the histogram applies to the JPG preview of your photo even if you’re shooting in raw format. What?! Yes, that’s right: pretty much all digital cameras embed a JPG preview version of the photo into the raw file for quick access when reviewing the photos on the camera. This means that the histogram the camera shows you is not reflective of the full data in the raw file, and you really have no way of knowing exactly how much it’s off. The best thing to do is to set your camera’s picture style to a low contrast profile. On Nikon I always use ‘Neutral’, but there is also a ‘Flat’ setting which is extremely low contrast. This will give you a much better idea of the histogram for the raw data.
One more thing: ETTR is less of an advantage at high ISOs (beyond the cameras base ISO or native ISO), so it’s not very useful in low-light situations unless you’re using a tripod and keeping the ISO to the minimum and utilizing the aperture and (ideally) slow shutter speeds to get the light necessary to expose the image.
However, if you’re using a tripod, then you have plenty of time to fiddle with the exposure, so much so, that ultimately you might as well use HDR, which is much more effective at gathering additional data and boosting dynamic range (though it comes with the downside of additional work in post-production).
The bottom line is that if ETTR works for you, great, but if you’re already going to such lengths, try bracketing and HDR instead. And either of these techniques should be applied in the right circumstances.
Ikebukuro at dusk, with some serious edits. But still, this is the ‘real’ photo—I kid you not! :)
The Gist
Whew, that was a lot to cover! So, what’s the TL;DR? The gist of it is that there is no 'right' way to do photography—no universal method. And you should not let anyone make you feel otherwise. You have the freedom to choose for yourself the best way to create your art. I hope you’ve gained some insights into your own decision process and also shook off any ideas that were holding back your creativity and photographic ambition!