Can a modern DSLR be made 'fool-proof'?

ukaskew

ukaskew

Suspended / Banned
Messages
3,839
Name
Chris
Edit My Images
Yes
I read an interesting blog by a wedding photographer yesterday, for their own wedding they didn't employ a photographer, they just set up their own cameras and told people to hand them around and shoot whatever. The results were superb from the selection I've seen, it was obviously a brave choice but they were very happy with the results, so it paid off. Of course they had out of focus photos and all sorts of odd things, but there is no way of legislating for everything.

That got me thinking, is it possible to set up a DSLR to the point where anyone can pick it up and potentially take a reasonably competent photo? I own a 5Dc so I'm well out of touch with what a modern body is capable of, but could you...

- Set an aperture (say, f2.8 on a 35mm 1.4, for arguments sake).
- Tell the camera to shoot at base ISO if shutter speed is within a set parameter, but push it up to a maximum pre-defined ISO if needs be (say, ISO6400).

I'm not for a second suggesting wedding photography is that straightforward, I'm just wondering if you decided to approach your big day from that angle, could you put your kit in a position to maximise the chance of getting good photos in a relatively fool proof way? With the high ISO performance available now I would guess it's more possible than it's ever been.
 
just stick on full auto.........

depends what you mean by modern... my camera cost 5 thousand pounds.. I wouldnt hand that to anyone at a wedding reception to go off taking pictures wiht.. dount anyone would be that brave..

a modern but lesser camera might have scene modes they cold just stick it in one of those modes and hand it over..
 
agree, that is what full auto is for/does.

The only thing they could get wrong is to press shutter fully down before camera had focused but this is only the same as a compact or any other AF camera.
 
ukaskew said:
The results were superb from the selection I've seen
Click to expand...

If it was a blog link, can you show us the link?

As in all photography, there will always people who think "excellent!" about pretty much any image..

Ultimately, if the couple were happy then I guess its worked for them.

Without seeing the images though I am guessing it looks less like a 5k GBP photographer's effort and more like my compact does after a night out on the town when all of my friends have taken pictures of puddles of sick and down some bird's top at the bar. Funny, anarchic but not *terribly* formal.
 
Depends on the camera, no such thing as auto on some cameras.
 
Mikesphotaes said:
Depends on the camera, no such thing as auto on some cameras.
Click to expand...

honestly wasnt aware of that.. the OP says modern dslr... what models don't? pretty sure all modern canon dslrs have.. but i havent actually seen them all so ? :)
 
Well, your 1D's don't have auto do they?

Nikon for sure with the D300/D700/D800/D3/D4 don't have an auto mode or any scene modes. Closest is P.
 
Well there isn't on my 1D Mk111, and I am pretty sure you will be looking for more than a wee while for Auto on your Mk4 and X too;)
 
desantnik said:
Well, your 1D's don't have auto do they?

Nikon for sure with the D300/D700/D800/D3/D4 don't have an auto mode or any scene modes. Closest is P.
Click to expand...

EXACTLY!
 
hmmm maybe we are talking cross thingy.. maybe i havent had a camera wiht the auto you mean... I have always thought of P mode as fully auto?
 
ukaskew said:
I read an interesting blog by a wedding photographer yesterday, for their own wedding they didn't employ a photographer, they just set up their own cameras and told people to hand them around and shoot whatever. The results were superb from the selection I've seen, it was obviously a brave choice but they were very happy with the results, so it paid off. Of course they had out of focus photos and all sorts of odd things, but there is no way of legislating for everything.

That got me thinking, is it possible to set up a DSLR to the point where anyone can pick it up and potentially take a reasonably competent photo? I own a 5Dc so I'm well out of touch with what a modern body is capable of, but could you...

- Set an aperture (say, f2.8 on a 35mm 1.4, for arguments sake).
- Tell the camera to shoot at base ISO if shutter speed is within a set parameter, but push it up to a maximum pre-defined ISO if needs be (say, ISO6400).

I'm not for a second suggesting wedding photography is that straightforward, I'm just wondering if you decided to approach your big day from that angle, could you put your kit in a position to maximise the chance of getting good photos in a relatively fool proof way? With the high ISO performance available now I would guess it's more possible than it's ever been.
Click to expand...

Sorry, don't see how you could stop curious fingers playing with all the buttons and dials.:lol:
 
KIPAX said:
hmmm maybe we are talking cross thingy.. maybe i havent had a camera wiht the auto you mean... I have always thought of P mode as fully auto?
Click to expand...

Nah, on cheaper cameras you have a "fully auto" mode (usually marked with a green square on the dial), it does more than P mode does - it takes over pretty much all the other settings too.
 
KIPAX said:
hmmm maybe we are talking cross thingy.. maybe i havent had a camera wiht the auto you mean... I have always thought of P mode as fully auto?
Click to expand...

I think all the **D Canons had full auto, my 30D has full auto as well as P, Av, Tv etc.
 
Last edited:
When we got married - 2nd time for both of us - we did not have a photographer. Instead. We dug out our old Polaroid Instant camera and told people to take photos of whatever they wanted and pin it up on a board that was set up. Unique shots of the evening reception. This was quickly copied by others!
 
desantnik said:
Nah, on cheaper cameras you have a "fully auto" mode (usually marked with a green square on the dial), it does more than P mode does - it takes over pretty much all the other settings too.
Click to expand...

Aye, you can't shoot in RAW, continuous shots, or use AI Servo on auto on my 30D.
 
well blimey.. I have always refered to P as fully auto.. its what I set when using flash... because thats my weak spot.. stick it on P and it always does a good job for me :)

see...still learning :)
 
Zoomboxer said:
When we got married - 2nd time for both of us - we did not have a photographer. Instead. We dug out our old Polaroid Instant camera and told people to take photos of whatever they wanted and pin it up on a board that was set up. Unique shots of the evening reception. This was quickly copied by others!
Click to expand...

Unique, for sure, but what did you get? The anarchic view that I suggested earlier?

A lot of wedding togs do the "chuck the disposable cameras out" things and photo booths and all sorts, but in combination with formals.
 
KIPAX said:
well blimey.. I have always refered to P as fully auto.. its what I set when using flash... because thats my weak spot.. stick it on P and it always does a good job for me :)

see...still learning :)
Click to expand...

I do the same when using flash :)
 
Mikesphotaes said:
Aye, you can't shoot in RAW, continuous shots, or use AI Servo on auto on my 30D.
Click to expand...

You can do all that on auto on my Sony A700. It would appear than the actual DSLR being used is key here as not all auto's are equal.
And if using continuous focus on the A700 the camera is always focusing so even removes the user being too heavy handed on the shutter button.

So just give all the guests an A700...
 
I've often handed my camera to others, to take a pic of me and the missus for example. Some refuse to handle it but - Chances of them dropping it are slim right? ... though I do get nervous when they hold it like a compact. When I do this I'll set up the camera for them and tell them to make sure to half press for the beep before clicing through. It always surprises me the amount of people who just don't get this, and as mentioned earlier, it can end up being the crucial part of taking a picture, even a snap shot.

I reckon most people could stick just about any camera into P mode and work away. But, then again, it surprises me how a lot of people just don't have the 'eye' for a photo/composition. You could end up with a tonne of sideways shots, with heads chopped off, focus on the backing rather than the subject etc ... even full auto can't save some people.
 
Zoomboxer said:
When we got married - 2nd time for both of us - we did not have a photographer. Instead. We dug out our old Polaroid Instant camera and told people to take photos of whatever they wanted and pin it up on a board that was set up. Unique shots of the evening reception. This was quickly copied by others!
Click to expand...

Whilst this is obviously a popular approach, I'm not sure it is really what the OP is talking about. Polaroid Instants are obviously very popular right now, as evidenced by the Instagram craze which replicates such snaps, but these photos are more of a fad - and whilst these will be considered as pretty cool for a good few years to come I'm sure, most people (with all due respect) would not be satisfied with just Polaroids from their wedding. I had a Polaroid going round at my reception too - got some great snaps for our signing book, but I wouldn't have been happy with just those - we had a dedicated photographer too.

More on the main subject - for the most part I think most wedding couples would get some nice shots with this approach. By inviting more than a couple of dozen people you are bound to have one or two people who have some sense of artistic style, and these people have either used a DSLR before and could be pretty handy, or they haven't and they take the chance to impress a few people. It also helps that the guests will be comfortable around people they know who will be taking pictures of them for the most part.

Having said all this though, I wouldn't take the risk. Anyone wanting more formal bride and groom shots would be stuck and the shots could be pretty terrible if you have a poorly lit venue (or indeed night time comes) - no matter how good the composition and subject, there could just be no salvaging such shots.
 
Cagey75 said:
I've often handed my camera to others, to take a pic of me and the missus for example. .
Click to expand...

same here... but at a wedding reception to strangers to go off and wander round with..thinkiing beer n stuff.. ..... far from the same thing...
 
Of course, anything more serious, or when I'm not standing right beside them, forget it! I was making the point more that they could probably manage, but you need to show them how to handle it first. I get puzzled looks when I show them how to hold it proper, they just automatically revert back to holding it like a compact. Scary!
 
Cagey75 said:
Of course, anything more serious, or when I'm not standing right beside them, forget it! I was making the point more that they could probably manage, but you need to show them how to handle it first. I get puzzled looks when I show them how to hold it proper, they just automatically revert back to holding it like a compact. Scary!
Click to expand...

i always forget to tell them about back button to focus on mine... second nature for me now ...forget others dont know :)
 
I think that any camera that you would be willing to offer to just about anybody to take pictures with will have a P or auto setting that will do the trick.

However, fools are extremely competent at finding ways around the system that leave them totally unusable! .....unless, of course, you glue up all the controls.
 
Here is the link...

Autumn Wedding

Are they spectacular? No, but would I happy with them from my wedding day? Absolutely. At 30 we're in the 'wedding phase' of many of our friends and family, these comfortably hold up against many of the £1000 photographers used in at least half of those that I've been to in the past couple of years.

On a slightly unrelated note, I got married in April. What surprised me most was how much we enjoyed and appreciated the photographs supplied to us by family and friends. 99% had compacts, 2 had DSLRs with kit lens. When a 'moment' is captured it's surprising how little we worried about how good the photo was technically, as long as it's not out of focus or blurry. My in-laws actually have one of those up in their dining room, chosen over all the official ones.

Our official photographer was superb and we were beyond thrilled with the results, don't get me wrong, but I've surprised myself at how much I really love some of the other photos from the day.
 
david357 said:
However, fools are extremely competent at finding ways around the system that leave them totally unusable! .....unless, of course, you glue up all the controls.
Click to expand...

Why a four year old child could understand this.
Run out and get me a four year old child,
I can't make head or tail out of it.

Groucho Marx
 
steveo_mcg said:
Why a four year old child could understand this.
Run out and get me a four year old child,
I can't make head or tail out of it.

Groucho Marx
Click to expand...

haha.... haven't heard that for years....made me laugh out loud
 
desantnik said:
Unique, for sure, but what did you get? The anarchic view that I suggested earlier?.
Click to expand...

We got what you suggested earlier:

desantnik said:
Ultimately, if the couple were happy then I guess its worked for them.
Click to expand...

Indeed, very happy with them.

Like I said earlier, both of us had been married before as the "formality" of the occasion had been done, got the t-shirt and all that.
 
And under exposed B&W ...

Processing has a LOT to do with the end result. I think the images are ok, some nice ones even, but the processing isn't the best.
 
The results are not too bad, but it really needed the photos of the venue (taken by the bride - a photographer), and some shots by the husband/family to pull it all together. I would think members of the family and the husband would have some previous experience (particularly the husband spending time with his wife out and about with the camera), or were at least briefed with tips from the bride. Nothing wrong with that, but for a wedding couple who have no photography experience I would expect far worse results. There is a noticeable dip in quality from the reception part II set, where I would assume more casual shooters take over and conditions become a bit more challenging. Fortunately (indeed perhaps not by fortune but by planning), the venues are very photogenic and well-lit to provide the absolute best chance of good images from amateurs, and for the most part it worked.
 
by judging the photos from a technical viewpoint or limiting yourself to what you think wedding photos should be like is completely missing the point.

Not everyone wants a set of formulaic photos that are all staged (with typical set of poses and situations) with the highest IQ, perfect exposure etc,.

Some people just want to record a feeling of what it was like, who was there, what they were doing etc,..

The typical wedding shots, no matter how well they are taken, leave me completely cold. I had some at my first wedding and never looked at them after the first week (I don't even know or care where they are now but that is a different story!)
 
Fool proof in terms of exposure and camera shake?

Yes....except a few conditions where it will get fooled.

Like shooting into back light it will under exposed.
It won't focus on single distant object if you leave all the AF points on.
Colour balance will be all wrong, although you can fix this later on.

And no fool proof camera can fix composition. You could end up a thousand photos of uncle bob's belly button, just his belly button. Perfectly exposed.
 
At my works christmas party last week one of my colleagues asked to borrow my D3100 to take some pictures, and some of the shots she got were actually pretty good - I think she must have taken shots of about 50 different people in about 5 minutes!

She was a bit confused at first as she could not see the "live" preview image on the screen, but luckily she realised you have to look through the viewfinder after I explained this.

I had the camera set in P mode and TTL flash and auto focus with focus assist on, so it would have been difficult to get too much wrong
 
Can a camera be made fool proof? No, the fool will always prove it wrong.

Personally I think giving a camera to the guests is a foolish thing to do.
Firstly are the couple paying for a photographer or the hire of a camera?. Secondly, theres weddings and weddings, some will have half sensible guests who have used a camera before and get good pictures.
Others will have drunken idiots who'll end up loosing/breaking the camera after they have finished taking pictures of bits of their anatomy that are best left covered (ask anyone whos handed out disposable cameras) I also wonder how the cameras insurance will work if it's being handed out to anyone.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top