Photography

1. Yes, in a Studio you stop down to get more sharpnes and use flashes to get enough light. Yes, bokeh looks good, but does nothing for your customer if his products are out of focus. Aperture is a tool and is used according to the situation. You don't shoot groups of people at f1.8.

2. Especially with a DSLR you will be more "in the zone" when looking through the viewfinder. Looking at the screen makes you look away from the scene. Your screen lies in regards to brightnes in a bright or dark room and it's slower than the optical viewfinder. Again, it's a tool, use it according to situation. If you can't use the viewfinder because of a "disability", then that's fine, try working around it, don't treat it as an easy excuse, use the screen if you must.

3. You can cook with a pan and a knife. You can also use a oven, a mixer and a cooking ladle. Lights and reflectors are tools as much as your camera and lens. Learning on- and off-camers flash is important, learning how light works and shapes your subject is crucial. Many use natural light in a artistic way, many more use it as an excuse to not learn flashes.

4. You can always do a one-man-show. But you can't shoot a camera while holding the reflector for better light, repositioning the flash or moving your models dress around to a better position. Theres nothing wrong with doing a 1 one 1 session, out in the woods with natural light. Being a assistant to a better photographer gives you insight into workflows and behaviour, you can learn and help shape the photo and later you can profit from that. Having someone who helps and takes distracting work off your shoulders can help you focus on your actual shooting experience. Assistants are tools, use them accordingly.

5. I know what he means, and he has a point. The digital viewfinder has a slight delay in what it shows you. You might miss those crucial moments where the model smiles just right, just because your camera is behind by that 0.05s. I have this a lot with my DSLM and I can't wait for these new delay-free systems that the Nikon z8/9 have to become more widespread. There are pros to DSLM cameras thou, like eye-detection autofocus and they show you exactly how your photo will look before shooting. With studio settings and flashes, your shooting experience with a optical DSLR viewfinder might actually be better. Cameras are tools, use them according to their strengths, work around their weaknesses.

(Edited for slightly better readability)

A couple points.

1. Lenses are typically sharpest a few stops down from wide open so shooting at 5.6 makes sense in that regard, but if you want a narrower depth of field than what 5.6 provides you gotta go wider (also some photographers use extremely narrow depth of field as a crutch so it can be a good thing to shoot at narrower apertures for variety and to expand your style. You are also more likely to miss focus and not realize it until later shooting totally wide open). It's up to you as the photographer to make the picture you want, there are no ruless that say you can't shoot portraits with only the eye in focus or whatever.

2. Using the viewfinder is a more stable position than using the back screen because your arms are tucked in tight to your body. This will minimize camera shake and help you get sharper pictures, especially if you are shooting at longer focal lengths and are limited by a slow flash sync speed. If you are using a 135mm lens and are limited to 1/125 second sync speed you are probably going to get some noticable blur from the camera shaking if you hold your camera out away from your body and use the back screen. This is much less of a problem if you are using a 50mm lens, could be somewhat of a problem at 85mm depending on how strong your arms are, etc.

Tapping the back screen to set focus may or may not be precise enough to nail your focal point, depending on the camera, especially if you are shooting wide open. Using eye or face autofocus, or setting a focus point is typically more precise.

Nothing is wrong until you (or the person paying you) don't like the result.

End of story.

1. The aperture you use depends on the result you want. Some people want a shallow depth of field, some what everything in focus.
2. Do whatever works for you.
3. Having lots of lights and reflectors can be really useful, but they are not essential. Again, it depends on what you are trying to create. If you are in a studio, having lots of lights is straightforward, but if you are doing things outside it isn't.
4. Not everyone has assistants. Ignore anyone who says they are necessary.
5. Having a heavy camera is not essential, and being a DSLR does not make a camera heavier. There are some very light DSLRs out there and some very heavy mirrorless cameras.

This sounds like a person very set in his ways and experienced in only one particular field.

Number 1 is the only thing I kind of agree with, super shallow dof shots in studio can look amateurish. The dslr better than mirrorless thing is hilarious tho, sounds like you got a class taught by a staunch old head. I’m sure there were some valuable lessons in there tho. But there are no rules and it’s not the 80s anymore and people aren’t using 12 kicker lights on a portrait shoot.

Remember the old adage, "There is more than one way to skin a cat."

Sounds more like this is what worked best for him so it must be best for everyone. I've never shot professionally, though have been asked. I don't think I'm good enough for a lot of projects, so I practice. Probably why I do mostly wildlife, never had a complaint.

Thanks to the joys of modern cameras, practice is a lot cheaper than the old days of film. Finding willing subjects is the only obstacle. Family, friends may be able to help.

Just have a good idea what you want your end result to be and how you wish to obtain it and see if it works.

I think your teacher is very conservative and stuck in time. Be open minded, try different things and find your own style.

Listen to experienced people but don’t imitate them. A lot of the things you pointed out are a matter of situation and preferences.

Like the aperture for example: shooting f2.8 on a 200mm will give you more of the subject in focus than a 50mm at f5.6. It’s just that with the 200mm you need a lot of distance between you and the subject, which is hard in a studio. Also you don’t need to blur the background in a studio as it doesn’t contain any details.

A DSLR is usually built more robust and they exist with better specs than the mirror less counterparts. They do better in studio but when you’re moving around a lot and shoot outside, a mirror less camera can be advantageous.

Also with a mirror less camera it doesn’t really matter if you look at the screen or the viewfinder cause both signals come from the sensor. Actually, a lot of DSLR viewfinders show you less than what the actual sensor will see. (Usually about 90% viewfinder coverage)

I feel like the lesson you took was specifically for people doing full time studio photography.

The guy is a professional teaching you got to take photos in a studio environment. Of course he's gonna use lights and assistants. He had to work his way up to this level. It's a demonstration of how you may be working if you get really successful. Tho he's probably more successful by selling"workshops" to photography hopefuls than actual photography work.

1. I think it really depends on what look you're going for. I wouldn't have a set rule like that. And absolutely you have to make adjustments based on conditions for any "rule". In challenging conditions you make the best of it because if you rigidly followed rules you'd end up with no photos.
2. I think viewfinder if preferable but definitely if you've got a good reason to use the screen then do it. I use the screen rather than lying in the mud if I am eg taking an outside photo from a low angle. And I certainly would as well if I had mobility issues like you mention.
3. I mean if you have good lighting equipment and an idea in mind then use it. But again just make the best with what you have. But like the real top fine-art and fashion pros that use big lighting rigs take awesome photos. I don't think you could recreate eg Julia Fullerton-Batten's work without them.
4. I guess it depends what kind of photography you want to do. You probably wouldn't do magazine quality advertisement/fashion photography by yourself. It seems like that's the kind of course you've signed up for.
5. Mirrorless is probably better these days and I don't know that we'll see many (or any) new DSLRs. Nikon haven't brought a new model out since 2020 and for midrange ones it's even earlier.

I mean, there's some truth to all of this but realistically it's up to YOU to figure out what works best for capturing the feeling of the moment you're in.

I personally throw away the rule book. We live in a tech society, a lot of high end photography and video these days is taken and edited directly on cell phones and I personally find it fascinating. It's a new learning curve in photography for me.

Quick shots. Fuck ups. Accidental takes can all end up being something spectacular with the right creative mind.

I'm a surrealist, urban photography type.

I like to capture nature in a surreal way and architecture in a dirty and raw way.

"1.Studio portraits should only be taken with aperture of 5.6 or higher."

Whenever you see a statement like "X should only be done like Y", seriously question who makes the statement.

Studio portraits should only be taken in the way that achieves your vision, whatever your vision is. If you want very shallow depth field, shoot f/1.4 and have fun.

"2. I am apparently supposed to use viewfinder only and not camera screen to frame the pictures, with both eyes open to see the model. Also taping the screen to correct the focus is a no-no."

BS

"3. Using tons of lights and equipment to get desired results. The photographer that leads the lectures is very fixated on complicating the scene by using multiple of expensive lights and giant reflectors."

Huge BS.

"5. DSLR are better because they are more stable due to their heavier weight, compared to lighter mirrorless cameras. Also apparently information displayed on mirrorless cameras is lagging behind compared to DSLR, but I am not exactly sure what he was talking about."

Probably the biggest BS.

Ditch this guy.

Obviously can't answer for your tutor, but my opinion on your points:

1.Studio portraits should only be taken with aperture of 5.6 or higher.

Is this true and does the same apply for outdoor portraits? Most of my outdoor portraits were taken with aperture 1.4 to 2.8, mostly because of less than optimal lighting conditions and I just love this beautiful bokeh.

You're in a studio, you control the light so you should be able to perfectly expose for f/5.6 in this light controlled environment. Depending on focal length and distance to subject, the narrower f/stops could result in a depth of field that doesn't encompass your subject, such as nose and ear tips going out of focus if you've nailed the eye at f/1.4 (which will give you around a centimetre of focus if you were a metre away with an 85mm lens getting a head shot - f/5.6 is over four centimetres, which is still not enough for this scenario, but the effects will be less exaggerated and the soft more useful).

But this is a generalisation, you may want that absolutely crushing small depth of field for some artistic reason in a shot. So, don't take it as a hard rule, more of a guidance to think about what you're trying to get out of this shot and to, typically, get a pleasing shot of the subject before the depth of field starts to drop off.

Even if they're a metre from the background, it's still going to be pleasingly out of focus in this scenario, and many similar.

2. I am apparently supposed to use viewfinder only and not camera screen to frame the pictures, with both eyes open to see the model. Also taping the screen to correct the focus is a no-no.

I was usually only using the screen since I lack the mobility (really bad knees injuries), so I preferred moving the camera around instead of my entire body to frame the pictures, having eye contact with the model is also easier this way for me. The focus on camera is also often not perfect and being able to quickly "correct it" by telling camera where to focus is very, very useful.

I've had this from a course I've been on, I think this comes from people who primarily used DSLR's where the viewfinder differs to the liveview of the rear screen, with EVF's they're starting to get more in aligment, though magnification and resolution will still differ, giving benefits to the EVF over the rear screen.

So I can see where they're coming from here, but, personally, I feel it's restrictive in artistic expression as your shots are all going to come from eye level, or where you can get your eye level. I use a TLR camera as my every day carry as I like it's kitsch old fashioned style and being film makes me slow down and consider the shot more, but being TLR also means I take shots from waist level as I'm looking down in to the top of it, rather than holding it up to eye level and this change in perspective also has an impact of the outcome.

So if you're really using your rear screen, and can tip it out, flip it etc.. to get some really good angles, unusual angels that will help with your artistry, then go for it, but also, don't overlook the benefits of the EVF and the assistance that can give you with nailing focus (as what's a great shot that's missed focus? - that's rhetorical rest of reddit..)

3. Using tons of lights and equipment to get desired results. The photographer that leads the lectures is very fixated on complicating the scene by using multiple of expensive lights and giant reflectors.

Personally I don't own a ton of equipment, so I always look a ways to achieve things without resorting to that many lights and reflectors and usually I can find people being able to achieve those results with two or even one light, simply by adjusting the angle, distance or power of the light.

I absolutely understand that more equipment offers more possibilities, but I just feel like it's sometimes unnecessarily complicated by some photographers.

May be you're in a class a bit more advanced than you're at in your journey - don't take this as a slight, it isn't, we're all progressing and you'll come to understand better why this complexity is being used. Here I would say your tutor is possibly failing in not explaining the reasoning for all these lights, but, again, a studio environment is a light controlled environment and this is why you're using so many lights and reflectors, to absolutely control all the light, overpower any ambient and light the subject as you intend, not how it might come out - though it's a bit outside the scope of a reddit post to really get in to this topic to explain it, or, perhaps outside my scope to be able to condense it in a way that would be accessible.

4. Having a large team of assistants. Last lesson we were split us into groups and had role assigned to each of us. Two people responsible for lights, director, photographer and so on. According to our teacher and the way he teaches us, having group of assistants is necessary or at least highly advised.

As someone who only ever worked alone (excluding the models of course) and plans to work alone in foreseeable future, I am not sure what to think of that.

The course isn't just for you, there may be some tailored aspects from questions you've posed or discussions at the start, but other people on the course may be on a different journey to you, they may want to head in to a more professional setting where this is the norm and they deserve the opportunity to have exposure to the process and know what's expected when they get there so they don't feel so out of place when the day comes.

5. DSLR are better because they are more stable due to their heavier weight, compared to lighter mirrorless cameras. Also apparently information displayed on mirrorless cameras is lagging behind compared to DSLR, but I am not exactly sure what he was talking about.

nah mate..a dSLR has a huge mirror moving out the way and slapping back down when you take a shot - though that is less of an issue than the way most approach pushing the shutter button and rock the body as they do so (even on a tripod, this is why you find astro guess use remotes or delayed shutter firings).

Information wise, I'm not sure what bodies they've used, but you get more information on a mirrorless than a dSLR - settings like ISO / Aperture / Shutter Speed are equal, you'll probably have things like vertical balance on both (though I've only seen it on mirrorless personally), but only a mirrorless will give you focus peaking (highlighting areas in focus - as you simply can't do that with an optical viewfinder..).

Using the EVF you'll get a more detailed image than any rear screen so when reviewing and punching in to check focus will be a benefit on a mirrorless (hell, you can punch in with focus zoom on most mirrorless through the EVF before you've taken the picture - dSLR will let you do that on the rear screen, but, as said, less detailed, and, you're supposed to be using the viewfinder right? ; ) ).

​

​

Haven't read the other replies as yet to not bias my responses above, will read through now as the biggest takeaway you should get from this is there's no right answer.

Everyone has their preferences, experiences that've driven an idea and how they feel things should be, but that might not be what you're after or work for you. Take what you like from the course, try another course with someone else in the future, get a wide range of opinions, pick what works with what you're aiming to achieve, keep your mind open to the fact that some of your pre-conceptions, or what sounded like wise words from a great teacher, may actually, not be. It's all a guide.

(except for my responses above, they're cold hard immutable facts.. = p )

Wow I hope you didn’t pay a lot for the class. Still, a valuable learning experience. Learn about light, and learn to LOVE the light. Shoot what you love and eventually a style and a flavor will emerge. If you’re very lucky, you can monetize it. Photography is a journey. There is no instant success. As far as gear, the camera matters, and yet it doesn’t. Any DSLR or mirrorless made after about 2015 is going to do just fine. Sure the newest Nikon Z cams or Canon Rs are going to produce some stunning files especially with matched lenses, but your viewer is not going to know the difference between a flagship camera and an off the shelf APS C cam from the Best Buy. Choose lenses based on subject. Get advice from various sources. Lights, reflectors, et al — if you’re going to use them, have balls enough to justify each item used. Some haven’t a clue I’m afraid. Be curious, ask the right questions, and Good Luck 😀

Well at least he didn't mention that using auto is a sin...

If I paid for lessons and was taught I had to have multiple assistants I’d ask for my money back and walk out.

1. Use whatever aperture you want
2. Not true. Technologies improves, whatever is the most convenient for u. I mean tons of people use capture one to check focus and control camera.
3. If you wish to build a complex set, always start with one light, and slowly build the effects desired.
4. Kinda true but mostly on commercial jobs. I don’t see why you can’t work alone if the workloads are not too intense.
5. Tell that to thousand of studio photographers who shoot on r5.

What a bunch of nonsense

Absorb what is useful, discard what is not, Add what is uniquely your own...

Don't think, feeeeeeeel...

It's like a finger pointing away to the moon. Don't concentrate on the finger or you will miss all that heavenly glory....

1. If you want to get the best details, you shoot in studio at 5.6 or 8. But you don't have to. Believe me, it depends on a lens you use. If it gives you better portraits at 2.8 and 4.0, you may not want to close it down to 8.

In outdoor portraits, the idea is not the same. Imagine you have film camera with ISO100 slide film. And you need f:0.2 in these light conditions. What should you do? It's just too low light to get anything good. So you either use higher ISO (film with high ISO), or stop shooting. Your aperture depends on the distance to the subject and on your task. When you get close to your subject, f:1.4 will give you blurry far eye and most part of the portrait, just one eye will look like it's in focus. When you are far away from subject and shoot full portrait, f:1.4 and even f:1.2 or f:0.95 will be ok.

2. Viewfinder is for training and learning. In real life you use either viewfinder or screen depending on the situation, your comfort and personal preferences.

3. You may learn this. But you don't need additional light in some of your shooting situations. You may even shoot weddings without additional light. And reportage.

To me it seem's like you booked a class for professional studio (portrait) photography, without wanting that.

While everybody has their on technique, the points he made are very valid.

1. Reason for that is, that in a studio, there is no background to be blurred, so there is no real advantage of the wide aperture. since you are in the studio, you have enough lights to compensate. Using smaller aperture like F5.6 or higher, results in sharper images. Of course if you know that you want something blurry, you can shoot wide open, but that is rather untypical for studio work
2. use what works for you. he is probably used to the old days, when the display was very inaccurate. There are many great photographers only using the display. if its about checking sharpness and accuracy, nothing beats tethered shooting and checking the image on a larger screen
3. well, light is king. You can get excellent shots with natural light or a single light only. Guess this class focused on getting the best possible if you have a studio to use
4. .. check manny ortiz youtube channel, that guy works alone in his studio. many others as well.
5. ok i call complete BS on this. DSLRs are so heavy for me, that I start shaking almost

I think everyone here covered most of the points. Just hope you got your money's worth from the lessons. I'm a hobbyist photographer and I've also paid to attend 2 workshops so far, a basic photography workshop and a couple's outdoor portrait photography workshop. For the second workshop, the instructor had more experience in wedding and family shoots so his method was totally opposite of what your instructor taught. He only used one external flash sometimes and had a couple of assistants with him but they were not critical, we spent most of the workshop using shooting in natural light and only used the flash after sunset. In any case, I find that after learning about the fundamentals of exposure triangle and how they affect your photos. Everything else has to be learnt through trial and error and practice. There are plenty of free and good resources online and YouTube. Paying to attend a Professional-run course is only useful if you want to gain some first-hand insights in that industry, to understand the workflows and expectations required. Which would be the roleplaying and use of lighting in your case. However, the instructor's opinions on rules regarding dslrs and apertures are just his opinions and are not absolute.