Tripods and Composition

[pierre_fermat]

<p>Hello All<br>

I would like to share some revelations to my fellow beginners (which the experts know all along ;-) ) on tripods and compositions. Frustrated by limitations of hand-held photography, I got myself a gitzo+markins pair last week. It drastically changed the modus-operandi of taking pictures.<br>

1. Tripods force you to think about the POV and composition of the picture way more than when you do hand-held. It happens because you have to consciously set up the height/inclination of the rig, and you tend to think for a few seconds during that process. You sub-consciously hate to constantly fiddle with the tripod; in hand-held, your 'tripod'(body) moves at your finicky will.<br>

2.As your DSLR is off your hand and shoulder , once you set up the tripod, you tend to spend more time fine tuning the composition with your tripod head. You spend more time comfortably looking through the viewfinder.<br>

3.You are no longer constrained by aperture/shutter speed. You can easily execute your artisitic vision.<br>

4.You tend to take more shots of that composition with exposure comp, aperture/shutter speed variations - you will end up with more choice.<br>

5.You only move away from that scene once you are fully satisfied; again, the mind rebels against repeating the same tripod set up.</p>

<p>I suggest that beginners do get a tripod (refer to Tom Thogan's article on tripods) that will suite their need and budget. Even if you don't use it constantly, try getting used to it. You will start homing in on good compositions even if you do hand-held afterwards.</p>

<p>Cheers<br>

Pierre</p>

[john_tran14]

<p>Congratulations! for your finding</p>

[mjferron]

<p>As much as I like the the freedom of being tripod free there's no substitute for a tripod when shooting landscapes/cityscapes. Especially in low light. It's a must.</p>

[lachaine]

<p>The revelation that tripod devotion limits all spontaneity comes later :-)</p>

[Lou_Meluso]

<p>For static subjects, a tripod is THE way to go for the reasons mentioned also to maximize image quality. However, not all subjects are static and there is much to be said about the speed and fluidity of a handheld camera such as in candid work where critical timing or the ability to move quickly is key. Sometimes an "in-between" solution, like a mono pod is the right solution. Different subjects and approaches require different techniques. The complete photographer has them all in their tool kit.</p>

[alan_zinn]

<p>I'm a monopod lover. It cures the shakes and is plenty mobile for fast work. If getting plumb and level is a problem use a viewfinder grid. I tried a tiny electronic level that snaps onto the flash shoe but found it a bother.</p>

[tonmestrom]

<p>shooting with a standard prime for 1 or 2 years does way more in improving your compositional skills.</p>

[chris_letts]

<p>tripod plus available light beats hand-held plus flash anyday in my book.</p>

[stp]

<p>Spontaneity and tripod use are not mutually exclusive. Spontaneity comes from seeing; then it's just a matter of setting up the tripod to achieve that composition one has seen. Honestly, I feel both naked and stupid if I'm holding a camera about to take a photo without using a tripod. Note, however, that I photograph landscapes; I might feel differently if I were photographing moving people in street photography, children at play, and other dynamic situations.</p>

[gordonjb]

<p>I do not subscriber to broad generalizations about which gear makes one do what. Some people can compose images with or without a tripod. Use a tripod when the use of one would benefit your photography and do not use one when it would not be of benefit.<br>

In either instance it tends to be of benefit to think about what you are doing.</p>

[john_bellenis]

<p>To me this seems a little backwards - I don't think your tools should be dictating and defining your style, I think your style and what (and how) you want to shoot should define which tools you choose to use.</p>

<p>I would never shoot fashion, street or lifestyle with a tripod, the freedom to experiment with different angles, camera height and following the action makes it wholly inappropriate for the way I work. For interiors and exteriors however I am never without a tripod - I am looking to get one perfect image and the scene is slowly lit, styled and built up (and usually includes a long exposure) so a tripod is essential.</p>

<p>As you say, things you discover while hand holding can be translated to tripod use and vice versa, however I'm not sure I want my tools to "force" me to do anything.</p>

[Spearhead]

<p>I agree with Gordon and John. A tripod is useful to hold a camera steady and/or to give the photographer freedom to move lighting, props, etc. without moving the camera. It's a result of a decision on what to photograph. Allowing equipment to determine what you do is completely backwards. To comment on your five points:</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>1. Tripods force you to think about the POV and composition of the picture way more than when you do hand-held. It happens because you have to consciously set up the height/inclination of the rig, and you tend to think for a few seconds during that process. You sub-consciously hate to constantly fiddle with the tripod; in hand-held, your 'tripod'(body) moves at your finicky will.</p>

</blockquote>

<p> This seems completely off-base to me. It's very easy to look at a situation from an infinite number of points of view quite easily without a tripod. A tripod limits you severely in this respect.</p>

<blockquote>

<p><br />2.As your DSLR is off your hand and shoulder , once you set up the tripod, you tend to spend more time fine tuning the composition with your tripod head. You spend more time comfortably looking through the viewfinder.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I fine tune composition with my brain. I think most experienced photographers do. I don't need a tripod head to compose.</p>

<blockquote>

<p><br />3.You are no longer constrained by aperture/shutter speed. You can easily execute your artisitic vision.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Aperture has nothing to do with it, but shutter speed does. This one I can give you.</p>

<blockquote>

<p><br />4.You tend to take more shots of that composition with exposure comp, aperture/shutter speed variations - you will end up with more choice.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I can much more easily re-compose without a tripod. I can quickly spin the dials to vary things off the tripod, holding steady. I control the equipment, not vice versa.</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>5.You only move away from that scene once you are fully satisfied; </p>

</blockquote>

<p>This is about self-control. If you need equipment for self-control, then you need to work on self-control.</p>

<p>There are certainly situations in which a tripod is called for, but it's the situation that dictates it. A photographer chooses and controls the equipment. </p>

[david_henderson]

<p>I also, for whatever reason, find composition easier with a tripod when shooting broadly static subjects like landscapes, cityscapes, close ups or whatever . When just walking the streets it makes things harder and can cost you shots because of the reaction of others to the tripod - eg "you can't use that here" and the extra time it takes to set up has to affect sponteneity. </p>

<p>Given the absence of reasons why not to use a tripod ( and there are several contributors to this thread whose work would be badly hindered by a tripod) then I use one because I believe it improves my results. I'm not going to try to justify my choice in terms of your five factors. They're a week old in your life and to be frank some of them are going to go up in importance and others will go down as you adapt to your purchase. A week's photography is not quite enough for a eureka moment for me. I can add one more factor to your list though, and that is that it makes using Live View a lot more worthwhile for landscapes and close-up as the ability to move a magnifier round the frame does help you to know rather than estimate whats sharp enough and what isn't. </p>

<p>Clearly what you need to take on board is the fact that not everyone takes the same type of photograph and a tripod is more use to some people than to others. Some people - and I'm in that box - find a tripod essential for some photography and a liability for others. And yet I have to learn to compose decently regardless. I can't say to people that I'm sorry that the compositions are c**p because I didn't use a tripod. There are people in this thread who not only have to compose well but also they have to do it a fraction of a second, quite possibly whilst altering other settings as well. You can't expect them to be really enthusiastic about tripods- and thats why you get the reaction you do- for your post gives the impression of being advice for everyone rather than being specific to types of photography and certain mindsets. </p>

<p> </p>

[Spearhead]

<blockquote>

<p>your post gives the impression of being advice for everyone rather than being specific to types of photography and certain mindsets.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>It's not just the "impression," it says that beginners should shoot with a tripod regardless of what they are shooting. And it lists a bunch of statements as absolute that are not, as I pointed out.</p>

<p>As an example, how could a tripod possibly help shooting this:</p>

<p><center><img src="http://spirer.com/images/jadepunch.jpg" alt="" width="700" height="525" /></center></p>

[dan_south]

My own tripod revelations:

 

1. When I find the perfect composition with my handheld camera, it's difficult to replicate the composition exactly with

the tripod.

 

2. If I skip the handheld composing stage and start with the camera on a tripod, I overlook chances to fine tune the composition

because moving the tripod and rebalancing it can be a big PITA.

 

3. Wind is the enemy. If the tripod doesn't blow over it serves as a vibration magnifier.

 

4. A tripod is an accident waiting to happen. All you have to do is fail to notice that one knob has come loose (or that

you loosened it and forgot to retighten it) and your expensive camera can quickly and easily crash to the concrete. Been there, dine that.

 

5. Using a tripod for events, kids, pets, street photography, and most spots is highly discouraged.

 

6. The airlines greatly appreciate our willingness to pay them an extra $100 each way for that additional checked

bag. Meanwhile, golfers and skiers check their enormous bags for free. Thanks for your patronage!

 

7. Police and security guards equate tripod use with criminal activity. A loud, obnoxious bum drinking hard liquor from a paper bag is

less likely to be harassed by law enforcement than a photographer with a tripod.

 

8. Don't forget to turn off the IS/VR switch. Blur City!

 

9. Great! I needed something else to carry up this steep, treacherous trail in this heat/cold!

 

10. It seems as though this darned this would double as a handy walking stick, but it doesn't.

 

11. By the time I set up this tripod, the amazing moment that caught my eye will be long gone.

 

12. Could someone please explain why carbon fibre is so expensive?

 

13. Dammit! I got my hand pinched in those stupid leg locks again!

[Norma Desmond]

<blockquote>

<p>The revelation that tripod devotion limits all spontaneity comes later :-)</p>

</blockquote>

<p>If you haven't been successful at being spontaneous while working with a tripod, keep trying. No reason you can't.</p>

<p>What is "tripod devotion," anyway? I'm devoted to my parents, not my gear.</p>

[john_elder1]

<p>Many photography schools , like RIT, early in school, require students to shoot a 4x5 (on tripod) simply to force discipline on the student. I found it a good idea.</p>

[mbkissel]

<p>When what I'm shooting requires a tripod, it's the perfect tool for the job at hand. When I don't need it, it's just another several pounds to haul around. When you know why you are using it, you will be able to appreciate the many occasions where it's not necessary or desirable. </p>

[Spearhead]

<blockquote>

<p>What is "tripod devotion," anyway?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I think it's what the OP is espousing.</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>Many photography schools , like RIT, early in school, require students to shoot a 4x5 (on tripod) simply to force discipline on the student. </p>

</blockquote>

<p>If one has problems with discipline, it has nothing to do with equipment. I have always found this concept confusing. I discipline myself. My photos with large format would be no better, possibly a lot more boring.</p>

[tonmestrom]

<blockquote>

<p>If one has problems with discipline, it has nothing to do with equipment.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>The point is a (self)imposed limitation which can be very helpfull if one s starting out. Also I think it has less to do with discipline than it has to do with seeing. I for one have benefitted from shooting with a standard prime for two years.<br>

As for discipline I always wonder why LF would make one shoot more carefull than any handheld (D)SLR would for instance as many people argue. I agree, discipline has nothing to do with gear. But then, composition is not about discipline, it's about seeing.</p>

[KenPapai]

<p>Pierre?</p>

<p>" In <a title="Number theory" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Number_theory">number theory</a>, <strong>Fermat's Last Theorem </strong>states that no three <a title="Positive number" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Positive_number">positive</a> <a title="Integer" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Integer">integers</a> <em>a</em>, <em>b</em>, and <em>c </em>can satisfy the equation <em>a</em>^<em>n</em> + <em>b</em>^<em>n</em> = <em>c</em>^<em>n</em> for any integer value of <em>n</em> greater than two... "</p>

<p>Three legs to stand on?</p>

[alan_zinn]

<p> I carried a tripod around like it was attached to my hand all day for years because I shot pans. It wasn't a big deal to carry. It is a waste of time for me to carry a free camera and a mounted one on the same shooting session because I use them both so differently. As I mentioned, I carry the monopod. It is a like swagger stick or cane. Sometimes I even remember to carry a camera. I've got several sizes including a free-standing bruit with extendable feet. I find it hard to resist trying a new one. Hammacher Schlemmer has one Santa's supposed to bring me: 11in. collapsed that goes to 50 in. and weighs 12oz. They call it a "packable walking stick." It has a compass and a 1/4-20 stud.<br>

To get to the compositional point, try using an aperture card to fiddle with composition. You needn't set up the 'pod until you have the shot figured out or not at all. Some find that just carrying the card satisfies the creative urge and saves film.</p>

[johne37179]

<p>I have a mono vote for the monopod.</p>

[stephen_hipperson]

<p>Pierre Fermat - I agree with you wholeheartedly - for beginners a tripod can give a braking effect to slow you down and give yourself time to think about what it is you're doing. But of course as individuals become more experienced and find 'the technicals' becoming second nature or that 'the technicals' aren't worth worrying about the tripod becomes just another tool, to be used as needed.</p>