Create The Old Masters Look With Modern Gear

Using the latest in software, techniques and hardware can provide you with imagery that will rival the masterpieces of nature photography

By Dave Willis, Photography By David Muench

Labels: How-To, Techniques

This Article Features Photo Zoom

Sharpness And Depth Of Field
While the Masters used large-format cameras with 4x5-inch film planes (or bigger) for the most part, modern digital equipment can provide excellent results, thanks to highly specified lens construction, detailed sensor design and extra features too numerous to go into. Still, to fully maximize the possibilities of a D-SLR in the field, you need to follow certain criteria and practical choices.

The Masters stopped down to apertures like ƒ/32, ƒ/45 and even ƒ/64 to get the sharpness and depth of field they needed. Modern digital sensors have such sophisticated construction that many higher-end D-SLRs can provide amazing depth in an image. Stopping down to the minimum aperture available on your lens is the most important step. The good news? Shooting in the ƒ/16 to ƒ/32 range gives you excellent image sharpness, front to back. The bad news? The smaller the aperture (even though it looks like a bigger number), the more light you need, which means longer exposures. Expect blurring of motion when dealing with rapidly moving elements like streams or waterfalls.

Quality Optics
Quality lens design is important to both depth of field and image sharpness. Digital imaging picks up every flaw, and lenses designed for digital have been meticulously constructed for the best results. This is one of the reasons why the small image sensors of most D-SLRs can provide excellent depth of field and sharpness that rivals the results of large-format cameras. Remember, the better the glass, the better the final image will be.

Don’t Forget About Filters
The Masters frequently used filters to enhance areas in the frame and to add or reduce contrast. While Photoshop and various plug-ins can mimic many filters in postprocessing, nothing can fully substitute for using a filter on the lens when you actually make the exposure in the field. Red-yellow and orange filters can boost contrast in a black-and-white scene by darkening dull skies to dramatic, deep grays and blacks. Polarizers cut glare and enhance colors that would otherwise be washed out. Split NDs enable you to control the contrast between foreground and sky. All of these filters were commonly used by the Masters, yet they have been largely discarded by famous digital shooters. Photoshop can do a lot, but nothing can completely make up for a filter on the lens at the time of exposure.

Page 4 of 7

« Start Prev1234567Next End »

18 Comments

Feed

Jay makes this comment

Tuesday, 09 June 2009

I wonder, is the writer not versed in photography, or is it in many parts, intentionally misleading? I currently use mostly digital, but have used view camera (4x5 & 8x10) various medium formats, etc. The vast majority of my images are now done with DSLR's. A couple examples: DSLR's cannot rival the IQ of large format. A landscape print from a 120 format can be seen to have higher IQ in a print even of 8x10ish size.The histogram is not analogous in use to "the zone system". The histogram is normally used to avoid blow-outs. The zone system is used to place the values where you want them, creatively. I have never posted a comment re a consumer photo mag article before. I understand that your advertising base is now digital. But does all attempt at accuracy have to be abandoned? I have been a reader since the 1980's. No more.
MC makes this comment

Friday, 29 May 2009

There are also tilt shift lenses available for the Sony Alpha mount from Schnieder Optics and I think also at least another Zeiss approved company but forgot the name. ARCA Swiss has the M Line (makes your DSLR into a view camera). Another option, for any camera, is software that does the same thing.
patricia clapp makes this comment

Thursday, 28 May 2009

I think that everyone who made a comment is right in his own way whatever makes us feel fulfilled is the one we use. I am using a digital have used film in the past but prefer digital.
Wayne Edwards makes this comment

Wednesday, 20 May 2009

If I travel from my home town, 500 miles to St. Louis, Mo. I can walk, ride a train drive a car or fly a plane. Either way I get there. If my friends are happy to see me what does it matter how I get there? Same with a piece of art, what does it matter how you get there as long and the viewer is pleased with the result?
Haroon Rashid makes this comment

Monday, 18 May 2009

Hi, Look at the latest issue of SilverShotz fine art photography magazine, it give a good technical explanation of how digital capture and printer prints have a long way to go when it comes to resolution befoe they can begin to compare with film and that includes H3D-50 size sensors
Jack makes this comment

Sunday, 17 May 2009

Why can not a group of photographers adult or otherwise express thier opinions without attacking each other?
S Hurwitz makes this comment

Thursday, 14 May 2009

Over the years I have come to the conclusion that it doesn't matter what instrument [of photography] you use. It's the eye behind it and the brain, I hope. Eve Arnold
s Hurwitz makes this comment

Thursday, 14 May 2009

Over the years I have come to the conclusion that it doesn't matter what instrument [of photography] you use. It's the eye behind it and the brain, I hope. Eve Arnold
S Hurwitz makes this comment

Thursday, 14 May 2009

Over the years I have come to the conclusion that it doesn't matter what instrument [of photography] you use. It's the eye behind it and the brain, I hope. Eve Arnold
Bill makes this comment

Thursday, 14 May 2009

To Roy You don't know me nor how old I am. It is true that the use of a digital camera is much easier than a film camera! If they didn't have digital cameras. A lot of you wouldn't call yourself a Pro. Photographer! Film will always be around and many True pros. are reusing film. You sound threaten Dawg! Live with it!
Roger makes this comment

Thursday, 14 May 2009

If I hear someone state that shooting at F/16 or smaller aperture is bad, I'll puke. I've seen "plenty" of great, sharp photographs taken with these small aperture settings. I think we read what "experts" say then we take it as the truth without trying it ourselves. Although diffraction and lower contrast does occur it's not to the degree most people bemoan it to be. I challenge anyone to actual go and photograph at various apertures. You'll find the hype is not commensurate with the actual results. Bottom Line: Take what you read as a guide but not as the gospel! Lastly, the guy ridiculing digital because it's not film should realize. They're two different mechanisms used to achieve a result. All that matters is the result. People decrying digital need to get over it. I'm sure he's not using a wood-burning stove to heat his home. Advancements in technology are inevitable. If you don't like them, don't use them but don't "hate" on others who do!
Roy makes this comment

Thursday, 14 May 2009

"Bill" sounds like a sour faced old fool who rants on about how his opinion's concerning film vs digital is pure fact and everyone else is wrong. Isn't photography supposed to be fun? Regardless of what type of camera you chose to shoot with? I may not have "formal training" but I do know why i take pictures, because its fun. Roy-
Roy makes this comment

Thursday, 14 May 2009

"Bill" sounds like a sour faced old fool who rants on about how his opinion's concerning film vs digital is pure fact and everyone else is wrong. Isn't photography supposed to be fun? Regardless of what type of camera you chose to shoot with? I may not have "formal training" but I do know why i take pictures, because its fun. Roy-
Bill makes this comment

Wednesday, 13 May 2009

I am going to puke when another Digital Whore (who is pushing digital for some company) put down Film. I still use film and will continue to do so. I have several digital cameras and only use them when someone needs a photo in a hurry. I have a D3 and D700 Nikon and there is no comparsion to my Nikon F4. With film cameras you have to use your brain (I have formal training) with digital you point and shoot.
Jeff makes this comment

Wednesday, 13 May 2009

Suggesting that digital users shoot at apertures in the f/16-f/32 range is generally bad advice (for landscapes, anyway). Not only do you typically not need such a small aperture, but diffraction will rob the image of sharpness and resolution. Large-format shooters needed those tiny apertures because of the much longer focal lengths needed for a given field of view.
cuibel makes this comment

Wednesday, 13 May 2009

"ultimate in sharpness" uh-oh, heave
cuibel makes this comment

Wednesday, 13 May 2009

If i hear someone use the phrase "ultimate control" once more i'm gonna puke.
ofer makes this comment

Friday, 08 May 2009

Classic photograph in the modern resources

How-To

Create The Old Masters Look With Modern Gear

Using the latest in software, techniques and hardware can provide you with imagery that will rival the masterpieces of nature photography

18 Comments

Add Comment

Recent OP Articles

Popular OP Articles

OP Most Popular Tags