I find woodland photography extremely difficult. Except for rare occasions everything looks a mess to me. Then I watch your videos and others and I marvel at how you find such order in seeming chaos.
Love the woods for photography! It is sometimes difficult to photograph due to so much clutter and distractions. Enjoying this as I watch it. Thanks for sharing........
Loved your video today. I had a chuckle while watching it, though. At about 50 seconds in, you stopped your introduction with “Oo, it’s getting foggy!”, followed by an explanation of distractions being the photographers common mistake. I immediately had images of Dug from Pixar’s “UP” exclaiming “squirrel!”.
Rainbows🌈 were amazing ‼️👏‼️👏📸🎥. I’ve seen several double rainbows but never 4👏‼️👏‼️👏. Excellent photos ‼️👏‼️👏‼️. Woodland photography is a favorite so THANK YOU for sharing your tips📸📸📸📸📸
What an absolutely brilliant way to showcase your compositions and demonstrate objects within a scene.... By literally immersing yourself in the same frame that you are describing. Very clever, very intuitive, and will certainly aid me on my new found photography journey. Thank you!
Kudos to you finding beauty in the mess. I haven’t devoted myself to doing that but my efforts so far haven’t worked. Finding details to shoot has worked better for me. Thanks for sharing your secret sauce so openly.
I know that bench by the wall (under the rainbow shot), from when I was up in the Lake District with my Z6 and 24-200 and 14-30 a couple of years back. I took a portrait of my brother sitting there, great times. So much to photograph in that area! Loved the video as usual ❤
Very kool & great, we got to share that 🏆moment, albeit remotely. I find myself goggle-eyed in the beauty of trees, but I know to step back & remember not every scene I see translates well. It's luck & majic as well as judgement ✨
Nigel, thank you very much for this video. I concur 100% with your assessment of the environment you are shooting in. One thing I've added to my bag is a dog-training clicker. I have used it to get horses, ducks, owls, and other animals I encounter with outdoor photography to "get their attention". The photo (10:44) of the field/barn with sheep would really pop with their heads up looking at you. For SAAL, I have used them for years and they are spot on with color, and their wedding books high quality.
I really enjoyed this video Nigel. After taking photos for 4 years and avoiding woodland because it's so difficult I by watching videos like this Im giving it a go and producing images I'm quite happy with. I'm learning that a polariser is a must, especially after rain. Yesterday I forgot to rotate my polariser to effect the reflections on the leaves for a lovely composition and I have loads of white over exposed blown out leaves on what otherwise is a nice image. I'm yet to get any fog here in Northampton, but I've also learnt to embrace rain and put a shower cap on my 7Dii 😂. A terrible day to walk with my family is a great day to do woodland photography. Thanks for the great videos and for your unique content.
Thanks man. Your video gave me the urge to go out and try your tips in a nearby forest. I am sitting on a bench in it right now. Can’t wait to go home and check my pictures out :-)
Beautiful woods and beautiful colors! Your woodlands are open underneath...wow! Ours are like being inside a dark cotton ball -- Very undergrown and dense. LOL
Very helpful tips, Nigel. Your woodlands are incredible there this time of year. I really appreciate your own self-critique of what you felt doesn't work in some images.
Thank you for the video and confirming my struggles with woodland photography. I live in the PNW and well, it's all woodlands, especially my little slice of this paradise. And, I recently picked up a M43 camera (usually ff shooter) to try my hand at landscapes, which added another level to my difficulty. I usually shoot wildlife, specifically birds, so needless to say it's been confounding most of the time. But I think I'm getting it with your help. Cheers!
Great video. I've struggled a little with woodland photography until recently. Been out the last three weeks to the same local woods and been able to get some photos that I'm very pleased with. On the second week, there was quite a bit of mist which helped massively. An large number of potential compositions were discounted as could not make them work and instead moved on quite quickly to find several that I was pleased with. Your previous videos have helped me think about woodland photography and to improve my own, so many thanks.
Thanks for the tips. Nigel, I really struggle capturing rainbows (they always look very faint) or making them stand out in post-processing; I would love to see you give some tips on that some day, thanks.
I recommand watching Mark Denney video on lightroom color tool (FINALLY! a Lightroom Tool that Actually Improves COLOR Photos! (100x better)) it will help you select your rainbow very precisely
I used SAAL digital to have some calendars printed. The colors were wonderful and made my travel photos look great. It was a simple process and I would definitely use them again. It was an earlier discount code that enticed me to try it. Thanks so much for the “push”. Love these woodland videos 😊
At 12:30 I think you made the right decision. The narrower shot had a lack of context and I was distracted from the subject (the foreground tree with the fallen-over one). I don't know why but with the wider one I had a calm feeling the narrow one made me a bit nervous.
Thanks Nigel for taking us on that venture, you managed to get some great images, I must say the image at 10:41 was brilliant and as you said those sheep coming into the frame nailed it. Great work.
Complete front to back focus can just add to the confusion within busy woodland. Most images need a focal point, when all is in focus the eye just wanders within the image aimlessly !
Just hearing you say (multiple times!) that woodland photography is quite difficult, is very helpful! It's reassuring to know that such an accomplished photographer who loves to do woodland photography finds it as difficult as the rest of us. The tips are spot on and very helpful. Thanks to multiple viewings of your other videos, I was able to detect what was wrong with the photos that you showed as examples before you revealed the problems. You're a great teacher Nigel! BTW, if you would sell that book on Pebbles, I would buy it! The most famous photography dog on RUclips!
Hi Nigel, I decided to check out Saal digital, thank you for the tip, and ended up ordering 27 photos 🙈! and yes, I have ADHD 😅. I got my discount but couldn't find no reference to you, my guess is that if they sponsor you they want to know if there are any results but I could only tick a box saying that I found Saal through RUclips. Writing this in case more people have the same problem. So exited to get the photos😊. Great video also! you still make it look easy and end up with beautiful photos.
Between the two different approaches to the trees (one up, one fallen) and the other trees leading away, I liked the more inclusive photo better. The first two trees are more arresting for me when set off against the line of trees leading away. And the trees leading away then invite me further into the image. To me that worked better. It feels more dynamic and inviting to me.
I was suprised by how good that photo of the barn with the sheeps came out. My first thought would have been to consider that branch on the left as an awkward element being so close and pertaining to a very different depth plane but damn would i have been wrong. I'll try to consider more this kind of composition in the future. Great inspiration to improve. Thanks Nigel :3
Lovely video and perfect timing as I had just made my coffee when the notification came through. Nigel how long did you have to wait to get all of the sheep framed 😄 epecially the one within the tree on the left 👏 @10:49
Great video on an area of photography (woodland/forest) that never stops teaching us things! You have some hints of it in your B-roll here with the mushroom and the dew on the leaf, but do you ever turn your eye to small scenes, closeup, macro, etc?
Where's this place ? I want to go there, it's gorgeous ! Thx for the interesting video, now I feel better knowing I'm not the only one struggling with woodland photography.
Enjoyed the video as usual Nigel. Some really good advice in the video. You captured some fantastic image's and the rainbow ones were a bonus. Look forward to the next one.
Excellent vlog as always. Enjoyed going on this shoot with you! BTW, Do you have a vlog that shows your iMac specs? I need to upgrade my 2017 iMac. Wondering if yours works well with all the latest heavier LR & PS, Final Cut Etc. Thank you, Nigel.
Another great video and suggestions. I have a real difficult time with woodland shots. Mainly due to the area I live in here in the States. The forest are really dense with over growth of primarily pine trees, oaks and norway maple. ( which are considered invasive species ). Will keep working at it with your suggestions.
Did you pay the sheep to stand there? Watching it, I kept thinking if it was me, I'd be muttering at the sheep to get into position! Great shots and advice. Thanks.
Is it necessary or recommended to observe the golden hour guideline for woodland photography, or can it be done any time of day due to the filtered lighting? Very nice video, as always 👍👍
The trees you claim to be 'not quite sure about': i was instantly drawn to the angle of the trunks in the mid-ground, and the sense of a row of trees, from far to near, in a state of gradual collapse - kind of like some slo-mo domino effect. Consequently, i preferred the wider shot as it emphasized the effect. Loved the shot that didn't have the mini-tarn in it - i'm a sucker for a triplet of contrasting, horizontal bands. Re complexity in woodland: i live in a rainforest... your woodlands appear to me to have all the complexity of a Capability Brown garden. But i'm comparing that to a riot - to chaos - so there's no criticism. The problem i'm always trying to resolve - not photographically, but philosophically (i suppose) - is that these things really are 'a mess', at least in terms of the received aesthetic. At the same time, they are a vital part of the real world, and photography has its role to play in depicting 'The Real'. Just a thought, anyway, and one that i'm far from resolving. Great video, btw, so thanks. The Pebbles cushion is completely out the gate (Kiwi vernacular, probably?) and a great tribute to a fine hound. All the best from a cabin in a swamp in a rainforest in New Zealand. (Edit): when you pulled up the shot at the end that included the tree on the island in the lake - the one you felt included 'too much' - my immediate reaction was 'Oh wow'. I even said it out loud. You're critiquing the composition, but for me the whole photo was about way the light fell from top left across the entire image. That light needed the whole frame, imho, and i think it's great.
The only Woodland photography that I ever have success with isn’t landscapes or any kind of open shot. It’s always the macro shots that end up impressing me.
I live in Germany and my local area has incredibly dense woodland for miles on end. Imagine three times as dense as what you showed here, with trees that are either young or just grow upwards in a straight line. Makes me grasp at every remotely good shot, which can be really frustrating.
i personally look longer at the pictures with distraction, especially at the distraction. e.g. the woodpicture where you removed the dead branch via photoshop, my impression with the distraction "whats that", with the removed branch "another bvoring photo" but thats my personal opinion. I'm looking for the detail that was causing the photograph to take the picture. But perhaps thats the reason why i don't see a pure white canvas as art, but a probably kitchy picture attracts me. On the other hand the distraction by the rainbow is o.k., because in that picture the distraction is the attraction, as it for me the dead branch was in the other picture.
I think location is very big. Where I live all of our forests/parks are overrun by weeds and all of the tree species are different. I quite prefer the UK woodlands to what I have here.
enjoyed the video, just to be clear, when you display ur photos, underneath them when u write 4S and the fstop, thats a 4 second exposure? also saw one with 13S, are you using a ND filter?
Nice video thoroughly enjoyed thank you. Just one thing to point out, the base of your monitor is filthy, for something that is appearing so prominently in your videos a bit of a dust wouldn't go amiss 😂
A couple of comments… 18:53 time stamp on the video, where you showed the overhanging tree, which you commented on, about giving it space - is that an instance where you could use ai in photoshop to remove a few branches and leaves to create space, where there was none in reality, like where you showed the removal of the distracting log (image shown early on in the video)? Also, on a different subject, I saw a twitter comment that you put earlier on this week, about some parasite of a person taking your stunning unusual quadruple rainbow image and using it on their own page, as if it was their own capture. I felt your frustration, and I wholeheartedly agree with you. I don’t know the answer to these despicable individuals, but I’m so glad you reported them for it. On a positive note, I loved looking at your proper original of that unique rainbow. Thank you Nigel.
“But the are trees in here…” LOL Yes, there are all kinds of distractions! “It would be wrong not to take it.” That really made me laugh. Better to go ahead and take the shot, rather than turn around half a mile down the road and run back to see if the light is still there, because, you really should have taken that shot. Ask me how I know. Unfortunately, I don’t get much mist in my woods, and rain generally comes with thunder and lightning, but I do pray for clouds and drizzle, and the leaves that cover the ground are much better after a rain. Once the colors fade, dappled light gives dry leaves a weird, almost blown out bronze sheen, which is a surprising test of my photoshop skilz. These days I just skip most of those photos. I envy you your moss & ferns, but that brown bracken is sort of a mess, isn’t it? I used to be careful about moving things around. I’d occasionally tie back an inconvenient branch with a bit of string, but I got tired of removing obstacles ex post facto, so over time I’ve become quite ruthless. I’m shooting in my own woods, so my kit now includes clippers and a pruning saw. BTW, I actually liked the shot of the three trees that included the additional crowns of the trees in the row extending behind it best. They added a nice slanting depth and an unusual kind of elegance to the fallen tree in the foreground. At the moment you started cropping the photo I found my self saying “Don’t take them out.” Always lots to think about! Many thanks!
Unfortunately the link to Saal Digital is to a US site and when I try to switch to the UK I lose the offer. BTW - I had the same problem last time Saal Digital sponsored you and gave a discount code.
I had some photos printed by Saal digital and they came out a bit too dark. Do you typically have to increase the exposure of the photos when getting them printed?
You need to deep dive into "printing". This begins (1) with having your monitor in a controlled (light level) room, and (2) adjusting your monitor/display in light level and contrast so as to give you an illusion of what a print will look like. In order, however, to get the print right you also need to tell your raw processing and print software (3) what printer/inks are used and what (4) paper. Nigel will have some videos about this, likely, also Keith Cooper goes in-depth by many miles, and a recent YT video (lost its reference) demonstrates how to calibrate your monitor without a calibration tool resulting in a fair but not perfect calibration. My personal 24/7 control of my monitor is a neutral dark grey wall paper with a grey scale (not wedge) strip from [0,0,0] to [255,255,255] at the top and bottom. My monitor's calibration software reminds me to run a calibration check periodically. Paper manufacturers and printer/ink manufacturers have ICC profile files that give a very good starting point and a print house like Saal will likely have an ICC profile too. A print house may have one for their entire operation irrespective of what printer and ink and paper they use (meaning they have adjusted their individual printer/paper/ink lines to that), or specific ones for a line of print (quality, etc.). "A bit too dark" is a subjective statement that may be debatable between us and them. I shot a high fashion shoot and one of the images in one of the 5 sets (backgrounds, lighting), with one of the 5 models has a very nice look when printed "neutral" (a bit vivid). When I print it much darker, it becomes an attractive almost Goth, almost old painting masters chiaroscuro kind of image. But I can make it lighter than neutral without losing detail, reduce contrast, slightly desaturate, and it becomes a modern lifestyle picture for girly fashion magazines. One correctly exposed shot. But, without instruction to the print house, which is the correct one? Herein lies the complicated relation that photographers have with their print houses. Imagine Ansel Adams, Henri Cartier-Bresson, and Richard Avedon and their anally retentive approach to printing the right gradation, brightness, tone, etc., with some dodging and burning. For his prints, Nigel here, goes through similar steps. With prints, you also have to take into account (5) at what light level your print will be displayed. Walk through galleries or museums and you'll generally see moderate room light levels with spotlights on the art works. This also means you (6) have to take into account what colour temperature/tint the light source will be when/where you display it. You may have greenish tinted windows in your car and have noticed that the sky looks magenta when you open that window a bit. Such effect can happen with prints too and the white balance (+ tint) of ambient light around you, may thus impact how the person looking at your print sees its colour rendition. The problem with print houses is that you need to figure this all out yourself (but with a photographic printer at home you have the same challenge). If you only print very incidentally, then you need to invest in sending a couple test images for them to print, making sure you have documented your assumptions about 1..6 carefully. The problem then is what test image is a good reference to begin with. YT channels with a focus on the in-depth how-to of precise printing will explain this to you. In the process, you must be aware that the rendition of your raw shot on your display internally in Lightroom's workspace may be in ProPhoto colour space (Adobe Camera Raw does the raw processing in Lightroom Classic and Photoshop) but your monitor cannot display that and your monitor shows a sort of equivalent of a JPEG rendition (8 bits per channel or 24 bits per pixel). That is not a problem and photographic printers/inks generally can render that perfectly. It becomes a problem when you want to try to print more colour space correctly than your display can render. If you sport a good gamers' monitor then it may approach sRGB colour space and use dynamic contrast (locally varying light levels in the backlight of the display). My EIZO monitor would be slower, have great static contrast, will not do dynamic contrast, be much more expensive, but it has 100% Adobe RGB colour space and that makes a serious impact in a critical work process and attitude. Sending your image as a JPEG means there's lossy compression and printing an A2 size (594mm*420mm = 23.4"*16.5") print at 300 DPI needs 34.8MP (7,016*4,961). At 8 bpc or 24 bits per pixel, you now need 2,505,782,132 bytes (2,390MB or 2.3GB) if YOU want to come up with the detailed RGB tones at the printer's DPI level. I know, dots are not pixels, and you may want to render the implied thus far 300 Pixels Per Inch at 1,200 or 1,440 DPI on your photographic printer. That will give you the maximum colour space and dynamic range (and use more ink - a simple rule of thumb with A-brand photographic art inkjet papers, is that your ink costs will equal your paper costs). While you and I would use ink jet (posh French name being "gicleur") technology, print houses may use photographic paper where our images are "exposed" onto the paper and this then is processed (developed) in the way of the film days. This resolution thing also means that you might want to generate a losslessly compressed TIFF rather than JPEG. Or PNG maybe. But the file size will blow up a lot and the print house may not support that. However, with a photographic printer at home, the blowing up of rendered pixels towards dots per inch will happen somewhere in the app-to-print chain. "A bit too dark" means you have homework to do, along these lines. I print at home to a photographic printer with larger than Adobe RGB colour space. No affiliations with print houses, nor with printer or paper or ink companies. And I do have a calibration tool. And I don't print a lot so I cannot earn that investment back. But my prints are perfect.
@@jpdj2715 Wow wasn't expecting such a detailed response! That's very helpful, many thanks. I've checked Saal digital's website and they have ICC profiles, so I've downloaded the one for the paper they used for these prints and imported that into Lightroom. I'm currently just using a TV, rather than monitor, connected to my computer, so don't think I'll be able to calibrate that, so might just be trial and error with adjusting the brightness on my TV and getting a few test prints done.
I find woodland photography extremely difficult. Except for rare occasions everything looks a mess to me. Then I watch your videos and others and I marvel at how you find such order in seeming chaos.
2:58 "I think it would be nice if it was dead." -- Something about that was funny to me. I might start using that in my daily routine.
It's funny that the ideal woodland photograph is one with no distractions, but the natural woodland is full of distractions and jumbled trees.
You're right, forest photography is difficult... but you are an amazing forest photographer 👏
Love the woods for photography! It is sometimes difficult to photograph due to so much clutter and distractions. Enjoying this as I watch it. Thanks for sharing........
Loved your video today. I had a chuckle while watching it, though. At about 50 seconds in, you stopped your introduction with “Oo, it’s getting foggy!”, followed by an explanation of distractions being the photographers common mistake. I immediately had images of Dug from Pixar’s “UP” exclaiming “squirrel!”.
Rainbows🌈 were amazing ‼️👏‼️👏📸🎥. I’ve seen several double rainbows but never 4👏‼️👏‼️👏. Excellent photos ‼️👏‼️👏‼️. Woodland photography is a favorite so THANK YOU for sharing your tips📸📸📸📸📸
That rainbow shot is AMAZING - very well done and glad you could share this light with us
Yeah agreed like the rainbow taken from drone. It is lake district England?
What an absolutely brilliant way to showcase your compositions and demonstrate objects within a scene.... By literally immersing yourself in the same frame that you are describing. Very clever, very intuitive, and will certainly aid me on my new found photography journey. Thank you!
5:05 That is one amazing drone shot. Congrats!
I used Saal for a metal print of my Northern Lights, and they did an amazing job!
Great advice and video.. was wondering when we would see that incredible rainbow footage .. Happy Sunday Nigel
Kudos to you finding beauty in the mess. I haven’t devoted myself to doing that but my efforts so far haven’t worked. Finding details to shoot has worked better for me. Thanks for sharing your secret sauce so openly.
I know that bench by the wall (under the rainbow shot), from when I was up in the Lake District with my Z6 and 24-200 and 14-30 a couple of years back. I took a portrait of my brother sitting there, great times.
So much to photograph in that area!
Loved the video as usual ❤
Very kool & great, we got to share that 🏆moment, albeit remotely. I find myself goggle-eyed in the beauty of trees, but I know to step back & remember not every scene I see translates well. It's luck & majic as well as judgement ✨
I shoot several genres, but find woodland to be the most challenging! Thanks for the advice…and thanks for taking me along!
Nigel, thank you very much for this video. I concur 100% with your assessment of the environment you are shooting in. One thing I've added to my bag is a dog-training clicker. I have used it to get horses, ducks, owls, and other animals I encounter with outdoor photography to "get their attention". The photo (10:44) of the field/barn with sheep would really pop with their heads up looking at you. For SAAL, I have used them for years and they are spot on with color, and their wedding books high quality.
4 rainbows, so sooo wonderful!! 😀🤩
10:50. Simply outstanding.
I really enjoyed this video Nigel. After taking photos for 4 years and avoiding woodland because it's so difficult I by watching videos like this Im giving it a go and producing images I'm quite happy with. I'm learning that a polariser is a must, especially after rain. Yesterday I forgot to rotate my polariser to effect the reflections on the leaves for a lovely composition and I have loads of white over exposed blown out leaves on what otherwise is a nice image. I'm yet to get any fog here in Northampton, but I've also learnt to embrace rain and put a shower cap on my 7Dii 😂. A terrible day to walk with my family is a great day to do woodland photography.
Thanks for the great videos and for your unique content.
Thanks man. Your video gave me the urge to go out and try your tips in a nearby forest. I am sitting on a bench in it right now. Can’t wait to go home and check my pictures out :-)
Beautiful woods and beautiful colors! Your woodlands are open underneath...wow! Ours are like being inside a dark cotton ball -- Very undergrown and dense. LOL
Very helpful tips, Nigel. Your woodlands are incredible there this time of year. I really appreciate your own self-critique of what you felt doesn't work in some images.
i could watch this all day
Thank you, Nigel, for sharing the great images and such mindful dissection.
..... Yes, a book of Pebbles what a GREAT idea - I would buy it...! Another fab video Nigel, well done and TY
I really love the barnd shot. And the sheep!
This video includes some amazing tips! Super helpfull!
Thank you Nigel. I appreciate your thoughtfulness and dedication to your craft and art. Thanks for the vid. Cheers!
Thank you for the video and confirming my struggles with woodland photography. I live in the PNW and well, it's all woodlands, especially my little slice of this paradise. And, I recently picked up a M43 camera (usually ff shooter) to try my hand at landscapes, which added another level to my difficulty. I usually shoot wildlife, specifically birds, so needless to say it's been confounding most of the time. But I think I'm getting it with your help. Cheers!
Great video. I've struggled a little with woodland photography until recently. Been out the last three weeks to the same local woods and been able to get some photos that I'm very pleased with. On the second week, there was quite a bit of mist which helped massively. An large number of potential compositions were discounted as could not make them work and instead moved on quite quickly to find several that I was pleased with. Your previous videos have helped me think about woodland photography and to improve my own, so many thanks.
Wow an incredible video and outstanding tips. The photos were super, I really loved the "stop the car, stop the car !!" shots towards the end.
Thanks for a great video. I think these kind of videos are your best. I'm also glad it's not always foggy..
Thanks for the tips. Nigel, I really struggle capturing rainbows (they always look very faint) or making them stand out in post-processing; I would love to see you give some tips on that some day, thanks.
I recommand watching Mark Denney video on lightroom color tool (FINALLY! a Lightroom Tool that Actually Improves COLOR Photos! (100x better)) it will help you select your rainbow very precisely
I used SAAL digital to have some calendars printed. The colors were wonderful and made my travel photos look great. It was a simple process and I would definitely use them again. It was an earlier discount code that enticed me to try it. Thanks so much for the “push”. Love these woodland videos 😊
At 12:30 I think you made the right decision. The narrower shot had a lack of context and I was distracted from the subject (the foreground tree with the fallen-over one). I don't know why but with the wider one I had a calm feeling the narrow one made me a bit nervous.
I'm watching your video at 5AM with a snowstorm outside and a foot and a half of snow on the ground, fall colors were gone in September...
The drone shots in the hills are amazing.
Your Quality of your Video are absolutly crazy!
Really beautiful shots and very helpful comments. Thank you.
Thanks Nigel for taking us on that venture, you managed to get some great images, I must say the image at 10:41 was brilliant and as you said those sheep coming into the frame nailed it. Great work.
Love the tips, thx for sharing. Photos were fantastic 🙌🙌
Complete front to back focus can just add to the confusion within busy woodland. Most images need a focal point, when all is in focus the eye just wanders within the image aimlessly !
The droneshot is amazing 😮
Yes, I like that photo of Rydal Water at 18:21 very much
Thank you! Love your work.
We have awful "autumn color" in SE Texas, so I tend to shift to macro photography. Your video may help me rethink my mindset.
Long time we did not see you nice dog. Hope he is well
Thank you for these wonderful tips! Your photography is amazing. 👌
Great video, love the locations you take us to. The woodland colours are gorgeous at the moment, we are certainly being blessed this autumn 😊
Great tips. Loved the drone footage with the fall colors and rainbows!
Just hearing you say (multiple times!) that woodland photography is quite difficult, is very helpful! It's reassuring to know that such an accomplished photographer who loves to do woodland photography finds it as difficult as the rest of us. The tips are spot on and very helpful. Thanks to multiple viewings of your other videos, I was able to detect what was wrong with the photos that you showed as examples before you revealed the problems. You're a great teacher Nigel! BTW, if you would sell that book on Pebbles, I would buy it! The most famous photography dog on RUclips!
Hi Nigel, I decided to check out Saal digital, thank you for the tip, and ended up ordering 27 photos 🙈! and yes, I have ADHD 😅. I got my discount but couldn't find no reference to you, my guess is that if they sponsor you they want to know if there are any results
but I could only tick a box saying that I found Saal through RUclips. Writing this in case more people have the same problem. So exited to get the photos😊. Great video also! you still make it look easy and end up with beautiful photos.
Between the two different approaches to the trees (one up, one fallen) and the other trees leading away, I liked the more inclusive photo better. The first two trees are more arresting for me when set off against the line of trees leading away. And the trees leading away then invite me further into the image. To me that worked better. It feels more dynamic and inviting to me.
I’ve started drinking a shot each time Nigel says “it doesn’t get better than this”. I’m dead
How I wish the national forests in Oregon had as few distractions as you have in your woodlands!
I was suprised by how good that photo of the barn with the sheeps came out. My first thought would have been to consider that branch on the left as an awkward element being so close and pertaining to a very different depth plane but damn would i have been wrong. I'll try to consider more this kind of composition in the future. Great inspiration to improve. Thanks Nigel :3
Your video is so sharp!! Beautiful place and images!!
As always a brilliant video and very relaxing. The rainbow fantastic.
Great woodland photography advice . Thanks 🙂👍
Lovely video and perfect timing as I had just made my coffee when the notification came through. Nigel how long did you have to wait to get all of the sheep framed 😄 epecially the one within the tree on the left 👏 @10:49
To be honest - that one was just pure luck!
Great video on an area of photography (woodland/forest) that never stops teaching us things! You have some hints of it in your B-roll here with the mushroom and the dew on the leaf, but do you ever turn your eye to small scenes, closeup, macro, etc?
Where's this place ? I want to go there, it's gorgeous !
Thx for the interesting video, now I feel better knowing I'm not the only one struggling with woodland photography.
"This tree, I think it'd be nice if it was dead" 🤣🤣🤣
2:51 I can't get enough of this lol.
Love a bit of Velvet Moon. Great tips, lovley video.
Great video tutorial.
Great topic and video … did forget to have an apple to ponder your thoughts?
Enjoyed the video as usual Nigel.
Some really good advice in the video.
You captured some fantastic image's and the rainbow ones were a bonus.
Look forward to the next one.
Excellent vlog as always. Enjoyed going on this shoot with you! BTW, Do you have a vlog that shows your iMac specs? I need to upgrade my 2017 iMac. Wondering if yours works well with all the latest heavier LR & PS, Final Cut Etc. Thank you, Nigel.
Another great video and suggestions. I have a real difficult time with woodland shots. Mainly due to the area I live in here in the States. The forest are really dense with over growth of primarily pine trees, oaks and norway maple. ( which are considered invasive species ). Will keep working at it with your suggestions.
Great shots 🙂
Did you pay the sheep to stand there? Watching it, I kept thinking if it was me, I'd be muttering at the sheep to get into position! Great shots and advice. Thanks.
Is it necessary or recommended to observe the golden hour guideline for woodland photography, or can it be done any time of day due to the filtered lighting?
Very nice video, as always 👍👍
Breakfast Time with Nigel Danson
I'm glad you explained about the qudruple rainbow - my first thought was: "We don;t inhabit a binary star system".
The trees you claim to be 'not quite sure about': i was instantly drawn to the angle of the trunks in the mid-ground, and the sense of a row of trees, from far to near, in a state of gradual collapse - kind of like some slo-mo domino effect. Consequently, i preferred the wider shot as it emphasized the effect. Loved the shot that didn't have the mini-tarn in it - i'm a sucker for a triplet of contrasting, horizontal bands. Re complexity in woodland: i live in a rainforest... your woodlands appear to me to have all the complexity of a Capability Brown garden. But i'm comparing that to a riot - to chaos - so there's no criticism. The problem i'm always trying to resolve - not photographically, but philosophically (i suppose) - is that these things really are 'a mess', at least in terms of the received aesthetic. At the same time, they are a vital part of the real world, and photography has its role to play in depicting 'The Real'. Just a thought, anyway, and one that i'm far from resolving. Great video, btw, so thanks. The Pebbles cushion is completely out the gate (Kiwi vernacular, probably?) and a great tribute to a fine hound. All the best from a cabin in a swamp in a rainforest in New Zealand. (Edit): when you pulled up the shot at the end that included the tree on the island in the lake - the one you felt included 'too much' - my immediate reaction was 'Oh wow'. I even said it out loud. You're critiquing the composition, but for me the whole photo was about way the light fell from top left across the entire image. That light needed the whole frame, imho, and i think it's great.
great vid. thank you
The only Woodland photography that I ever have success with isn’t landscapes or any kind of open shot. It’s always the macro shots that end up impressing me.
I live in Germany and my local area has incredibly dense woodland for miles on end. Imagine three times as dense as what you showed here, with trees that are either young or just grow upwards in a straight line. Makes me grasp at every remotely good shot, which can be really frustrating.
i personally look longer at the pictures with distraction, especially at the distraction. e.g. the woodpicture where you removed the dead branch via photoshop, my impression with the distraction "whats that", with the removed branch "another bvoring photo" but thats my personal opinion. I'm looking for the detail that was causing the photograph to take the picture. But perhaps thats the reason why i don't see a pure white canvas as art, but a probably kitchy picture attracts me.
On the other hand the distraction by the rainbow is o.k., because in that picture the distraction is the attraction, as it for me the dead branch was in the other picture.
I sure hope you checked with Henry Turner before you set out in his work area. I wouldn't have been surprised if you had run into him.
“This tree.. it would be nice if it was dead”
- Nature photographer 🥴
Where I'm from this time of year woodland photography is almost impossible - it's just black metal band logos all over the place! 😂
I think location is very big. Where I live all of our forests/parks are overrun by weeds and all of the tree species are different. I quite prefer the UK woodlands to what I have here.
enjoyed the video, just to be clear, when you display ur photos, underneath them when u write 4S and the fstop, thats a 4 second exposure? also saw one with 13S, are you using a ND filter?
As ever, great informative stuff. Unortunately, you don't mention whereabouts you were. It looks like Scotland?
He mentions several times he is in the Lake District 😉
Nice video thoroughly enjoyed thank you. Just one thing to point out, the base of your monitor is filthy, for something that is appearing so prominently in your videos a bit of a dust wouldn't go amiss 😂
when I’m doing this I try my best to use the wooden trees as my guide line to line up my image?
A couple of comments… 18:53 time stamp on the video, where you showed the overhanging tree, which you commented on, about giving it space - is that an instance where you could use ai in photoshop to remove a few branches and leaves to create space, where there was none in reality, like where you showed the removal of the distracting log (image shown early on in the video)?
Also, on a different subject, I saw a twitter comment that you put earlier on this week, about some parasite of a person taking your stunning unusual quadruple rainbow image and using it on their own page, as if it was their own capture. I felt your frustration, and I wholeheartedly agree with you. I don’t know the answer to these despicable individuals, but I’m so glad you reported them for it.
On a positive note, I loved looking at your proper original of that unique rainbow. Thank you Nigel.
Thanks for sharing. :-)
“But the are trees in here…” LOL Yes, there are all kinds of distractions! “It would be wrong not to take it.” That really made me laugh. Better to go ahead and take the shot, rather than turn around half a mile down the road and run back to see if the light is still there, because, you really should have taken that shot. Ask me how I know.
Unfortunately, I don’t get much mist in my woods, and rain generally comes with thunder and lightning, but I do pray for clouds and drizzle, and the leaves that cover the ground are much better after a rain. Once the colors fade, dappled light gives dry leaves a weird, almost blown out bronze sheen, which is a surprising test of my photoshop skilz. These days I just skip most of those photos. I envy you your moss & ferns, but that brown bracken is sort of a mess, isn’t it?
I used to be careful about moving things around. I’d occasionally tie back an inconvenient branch with a bit of string, but I got tired of removing obstacles ex post facto, so over time I’ve become quite ruthless. I’m shooting in my own woods, so my kit now includes clippers and a pruning saw.
BTW, I actually liked the shot of the three trees that included the additional crowns of the trees in the row extending behind it best. They added a nice slanting depth and an unusual kind of elegance to the fallen tree in the foreground. At the moment you started cropping the photo I found my self saying “Don’t take them out.”
Always lots to think about! Many thanks!
Unfortunately the link to Saal Digital is to a US site and when I try to switch to the UK I lose the offer. BTW - I had the same problem last time Saal Digital sponsored you and gave a discount code.
I always run into the problem of trying to single out a tree I really like but it blends into something else too much in the background.
it is Lake District location?
Sheep ftw!!!
I had some photos printed by Saal digital and they came out a bit too dark. Do you typically have to increase the exposure of the photos when getting them printed?
You need to deep dive into "printing". This begins (1) with having your monitor in a controlled (light level) room, and (2) adjusting your monitor/display in light level and contrast so as to give you an illusion of what a print will look like. In order, however, to get the print right you also need to tell your raw processing and print software (3) what printer/inks are used and what (4) paper. Nigel will have some videos about this, likely, also Keith Cooper goes in-depth by many miles, and a recent YT video (lost its reference) demonstrates how to calibrate your monitor without a calibration tool resulting in a fair but not perfect calibration. My personal 24/7 control of my monitor is a neutral dark grey wall paper with a grey scale (not wedge) strip from [0,0,0] to [255,255,255] at the top and bottom. My monitor's calibration software reminds me to run a calibration check periodically.
Paper manufacturers and printer/ink manufacturers have ICC profile files that give a very good starting point and a print house like Saal will likely have an ICC profile too. A print house may have one for their entire operation irrespective of what printer and ink and paper they use (meaning they have adjusted their individual printer/paper/ink lines to that), or specific ones for a line of print (quality, etc.).
"A bit too dark" is a subjective statement that may be debatable between us and them. I shot a high fashion shoot and one of the images in one of the 5 sets (backgrounds, lighting), with one of the 5 models has a very nice look when printed "neutral" (a bit vivid). When I print it much darker, it becomes an attractive almost Goth, almost old painting masters chiaroscuro kind of image. But I can make it lighter than neutral without losing detail, reduce contrast, slightly desaturate, and it becomes a modern lifestyle picture for girly fashion magazines. One correctly exposed shot. But, without instruction to the print house, which is the correct one? Herein lies the complicated relation that photographers have with their print houses. Imagine Ansel Adams, Henri Cartier-Bresson, and Richard Avedon and their anally retentive approach to printing the right gradation, brightness, tone, etc., with some dodging and burning. For his prints, Nigel here, goes through similar steps.
With prints, you also have to take into account (5) at what light level your print will be displayed. Walk through galleries or museums and you'll generally see moderate room light levels with spotlights on the art works. This also means you (6) have to take into account what colour temperature/tint the light source will be when/where you display it. You may have greenish tinted windows in your car and have noticed that the sky looks magenta when you open that window a bit. Such effect can happen with prints too and the white balance (+ tint) of ambient light around you, may thus impact how the person looking at your print sees its colour rendition.
The problem with print houses is that you need to figure this all out yourself (but with a photographic printer at home you have the same challenge). If you only print very incidentally, then you need to invest in sending a couple test images for them to print, making sure you have documented your assumptions about 1..6 carefully. The problem then is what test image is a good reference to begin with. YT channels with a focus on the in-depth how-to of precise printing will explain this to you.
In the process, you must be aware that the rendition of your raw shot on your display internally in Lightroom's workspace may be in ProPhoto colour space (Adobe Camera Raw does the raw processing in Lightroom Classic and Photoshop) but your monitor cannot display that and your monitor shows a sort of equivalent of a JPEG rendition (8 bits per channel or 24 bits per pixel). That is not a problem and photographic printers/inks generally can render that perfectly. It becomes a problem when you want to try to print more colour space correctly than your display can render. If you sport a good gamers' monitor then it may approach sRGB colour space and use dynamic contrast (locally varying light levels in the backlight of the display). My EIZO monitor would be slower, have great static contrast, will not do dynamic contrast, be much more expensive, but it has 100% Adobe RGB colour space and that makes a serious impact in a critical work process and attitude.
Sending your image as a JPEG means there's lossy compression and printing an A2 size (594mm*420mm = 23.4"*16.5") print at 300 DPI needs 34.8MP (7,016*4,961). At 8 bpc or 24 bits per pixel, you now need 2,505,782,132 bytes (2,390MB or 2.3GB) if YOU want to come up with the detailed RGB tones at the printer's DPI level. I know, dots are not pixels, and you may want to render the implied thus far 300 Pixels Per Inch at 1,200 or 1,440 DPI on your photographic printer. That will give you the maximum colour space and dynamic range (and use more ink - a simple rule of thumb with A-brand photographic art inkjet papers, is that your ink costs will equal your paper costs).
While you and I would use ink jet (posh French name being "gicleur") technology, print houses may use photographic paper where our images are "exposed" onto the paper and this then is processed (developed) in the way of the film days.
This resolution thing also means that you might want to generate a losslessly compressed TIFF rather than JPEG. Or PNG maybe. But the file size will blow up a lot and the print house may not support that. However, with a photographic printer at home, the blowing up of rendered pixels towards dots per inch will happen somewhere in the app-to-print chain.
"A bit too dark" means you have homework to do, along these lines.
I print at home to a photographic printer with larger than Adobe RGB colour space. No affiliations with print houses, nor with printer or paper or ink companies. And I do have a calibration tool. And I don't print a lot so I cannot earn that investment back. But my prints are perfect.
@@jpdj2715 Wow wasn't expecting such a detailed response! That's very helpful, many thanks. I've checked Saal digital's website and they have ICC profiles, so I've downloaded the one for the paper they used for these prints and imported that into Lightroom.
I'm currently just using a TV, rather than monitor, connected to my computer, so don't think I'll be able to calibrate that, so might just be trial and error with adjusting the brightness on my TV and getting a few test prints done.
How on earth did you get a quadruple rainbow, Nigel? I understand, I think, the optics of a double one, but four?
The rainbows were once in a lifetime! 🌈🌈🌈🌈
You have dust on the monitor leg 😁
Put timestamps please :). Thanks