Unlike taking a photo, where you try to adequately capture what a scene gave you, there is more control when you make a photo. With a few exception, you tend to have a lot of control over many aspects of the shot, including subject, background, and today’s topic: lighting.

There are really only a handful of ways to modify light, even though the number of tools with which to do so are infinite. Don’t get lost deciphering between strobes and hot lights and soft boxes and umbrellas and diffusers and reflectors and lions and tigers and bears. Oh my. As I always say, if it’s hard, that means you’re doing it wrong.

Size does matter

The first thing one should know about controlling light is that a large light source creates soft shadows, while a small light source creates hard shadows. One example of this might be the difference between the harsh, high-contrast light you get on a bright sunny day versus the soft, beautiful light you get on a cloudy day. The sun by itself is (figuratively) a small light source — just a dot in the sky, really. By comparison, on a cloudy day, the sun lights the clouds, but the clouds are your light source. The world’s biggest softbox, for free!

Along with that, you should remember that distance changes the effective size. A light with a 30-inch umbrella may be many times the size of a person’s head, but it won’t create soft shadows if it’s 10 feet away. Similarly, an 18-inch reflector really isn’t going to be much good in the hands of an assistant, because it’s small size requires that it be very close to your subject — that is, your model needs to hold it.

What set’s you apart

The second important thing to remember is that light — or, more accurately, changes in light — are what tell us what we’re seeing. We need the modeling of shadows to convey a three-dimensional shape in a two-dimensional image. I know that’s a vague statement, but if you keep it in mind you’ll never have any problem figuring out where to put your light source(s).

The need for modeling of shadows is the reason why good photographers never use their camera’s built-in flash as a main light source. (Some do use it, as fill.) Since shadows show in the places where there is no light, a flash coming from the same direction as the camera is going to leave the shadows where they do no good!

Why do professional portrait photographers put a light on the background? It creates separation. That is to say that it reveals where the subject stops and the background starts. This is also why glamour photographers have an extra light set up just to light their subject’s hair.

In the first photo above, there is a large, soft light source from camera left creating nice shadows, but without any fill, background, or rim lighting, the light just falls off into obscurity. You can’t see where the subject (me!) ends and the background begins. Sometimes this is the desired effect, but sometimes it is not. In the second photo, lights from behind on both sides separate the subject from the background, and reveal details in the hair, pose, etc.

It’s all black and white
And the final thing to remember is that where photography is concerned, light goes from black to white. Period. Too much light (for the exposure) will result in an all-white photo, no matter what color the light is. And too little light will always result in black. Not only does this mean that proper exposure is critical for getting your colors right, but it also means that with a little creativity in your exposure you can intentionally get your colors wrong!

If you intentionally overexpose the sky, it will turn white, allowing you to make some interesting fine art photos of leaves or flowers, even without a studio. Likewise, with an off-camera flashgun, you can underexpose on a sunny day and still get a black background. Try it!

One of my favorite examples of this was a photo shoot I did in a location that had no great backgrounds. I was able to muster up a red bedsheet, but I really didn’t like the look I was getting from that. The solution was to crank up the lights and completely overexpose the red material until it turned white. As you can see, the results were pretty cool.

In the first two photos, the background is not truly black, but by under-lighting and under-exposing the background, I was able to obtain the black color I wanted for the photo. In this third photo, the background was nowhere close to white, but by flooding it with enough light, I was able to turn it white (and get a little bit of magenta spill onto the subject).

That’s all you really need to know about controlling your light. Yes, there are more things that are good to know, and maybe I’ll touch on them in the future, but if you remember these three things there’s no reason you can’t figure out the rest on your own.

Unlike snapshooters — those who take photos — when you make a photo you have control over your subject. This added control opens up a wealth of new possibilities.

Appearances
Perhaps the most obvious new option is your ability to choose the right look. If your goal is to visualize a hero, for instance, you’ll probably be looking for someone tall and muscular, with friendly facial features. By contrast, portraying a victim will be far easier for someone of a more diminutive stature.

Innocence can represented in a child’s smooth skin, experience in an old person’s wrinkles. Scars tend to make people more imposing. Long hair on a woman can seem matronly, while short hair is playful. Long hair on a man tends to be rebellious, and bald tends to be more intimidating.

Thinner people tend to have very strongly defined features; proper lighting can reveal a whole landscape of muscle, bone, tendons, and veins. Heavier people, on the other hand, tend to have a more smooth shape, with less features.

Special talents
Sometimes the features of the person aren’t as important as what they can do. Do you need someone who can juggle? Someone can can do the splits? Does your idea require someone with great strength, or excellent balance, or the ability to hold still for a long time? While these types of requirement are less common, they do come up when you start taking it upon yourself to make a photo.

Environment
Where you shoot is an equally important part of your subject as who you shoot. The environment has many implications on the feeling of a photo. Synthetic building materials (brick, concrete, steel) tend to make a cold and ominous feeling, whereas more natural settings (consisting of woods, water, grass, flowers) tend to feel more warm and welcome by comparison.

Environment can also create limitations. For instance, you don’t want to shoot tall people inside a typical home, because the space (or focal length of your lens) necessary to fit them into the shot will cause you to catch unwanted details like ceilings and light fixtures. Likewise, most beauty and glamour requires lenses with long focal lengths, which will have you wishing for more working space than what a typical home provides in any of its rooms.

One of the aspects of art that has always fascinated me is power of symbols. There is a truly powerful resource out there for artists to tap into, in the form of everyone else’s prior work. Funny isn’t it?

Symbols carry messages with them. They do a large amount of communicating for the artist. And what’s more, symbols have an advantage over words because whereas an opinion expressed in words will lose most of the portion of its audience who disagrees, the use of a symbol resonates just as much with those who agree with it as with those who do not.

Let’s take a look at a few examples of symbols, and consider some of the various thoughts and emotions they can evoke:

• Religious Symbols. Religious symbols of any kind can evoke a whole range of thoughts and emotions in their viewer. They have the ability to align the viewer with the subject of the photo if s/he is a member of the religion, whereas a non-believer will be aligned against the subject.
• Military Emblems. Military emblems can imply patriotism, strength, and power to those aligned with them, whereas they can at times convey ideas like oppression and injustice to those who do not.
• Corporate Logos. Many people will have many different opinions of the companies or ideas associated with a corporation and its logo.
• Historical Icons. Famous scenes, such as raising the flag over Iwo Jima, the protester in Tienanmen Square, Michael Jackson’s white glove, and Nixon’s “peace” sign all have personal meaning for the viewer.
• Real World Objects. Many items in the real-world have specific uses that convey meaning: candles can have spiritual significance; chains can indicate captivity; masks can represent anonymity, or pretense; money can symbolize power, greed, etc.

When used well, a symbol can take an average idea and make it into a truly powerful image. For instance, imagine the difference between a photo of a man pointing a gun at another man when compared to the same image if the man with the gun is also clinging tightly to his Bible. How much stronger is the emotional connection to the second image?

Similarly, how boring is the typical group photo? Everyone bunched in, arms around one another, all wearing that goofy fake smile. What if everyone posed like Charlie’s Angels? Or Michael Jackson’s Thriller?

What are some possible symbols that could be used to make your photo more interesting? Here are a few ideas…

Charlie’s Angels
Michael Jackson’s Thriller
Raising the flag over Iwo Jima
Lunch atop a skyscraper
Mona Lisa
Gabrielle d’Estrees and one of her sisters
sitting in yoga “lotus” position
the crucifixion
The Last Supper
“Air” Jordan
Michelangelo’s “David”
the Unabomber
The Statue of Liberty
Hopper’s “Nighthawks”
Rocky
A Coke and a smile
Rosie the Riveter

Does something else come to mind that you don’t see listed? Please, feel free to add it in the comments!

One of the most important aspects of planning a photographic project is knowing your audience. This happens in two parts: one is determining who your target audience will be, and the other is determining who you want them to be.

Today, I want to deal with the first part: Knowing who you expect to be viewing your photo(s). It’s good to ask yourself a few questions about your audience:

Who is your audience?
Do you expect them to be mostly women? Mostly men? Mostly children? Are they motorcycle enthusiasts? Boaters? Campers? Hunters? Dentists? Sports fans? Cat lovers?

Children don’t understand politics. Women don’t understand football. Men don’t understand women. You might get a teenager’s attention with photos of a band. You can usually get a woman’s attention with photos of shoes. You can always get a man’s attention with photos of women.

By what means will they encounter the photo?
Is this photo going to be published in a magazine? Will it be included in an article, or standing alone? Is it for an advertisement? A billboard? Is it going in a brochure? Is it an art piece, to be displayed in a gallery showing? Is it a product photo for eBay?

Yes, it’s safe to assume that a photo being printed in Cosmo is going to be viewed by women, whereas a photo printed in Sports Illustrated should target men. A product photo for Macy’s has a different audience than one for J C Penney, and neither is like Abercrombie.

What do you know about their personality?
Is the average viewer going to be someone who tends to be very conservative or liberal? Will they respond to religious imagery? Are they likely to be politically active? Romantic? Humanitarian? What social groups are they likely to relate to?

For some people a photo of a Bible evokes deep, personal meaning. Others just see a book. A humanitarian may view a photo of a homeless person completely differently from how a capitalist might see it.

What experiences do they bring with them?
Are they likely to have experienced a wedding? A funeral? A death in the family? Are they likely to have eaten a hotdog at a baseball stadium? Cotton candy at the fairground? Have they been in a car accident? Been in a submarine? A casino? A hospital? A snowstorm?

Some people love them, and some people hate them, but either way, most people have strong feelings about clowns. The same might be said about cats. Or priests. Or guns. Or naked women.

Sometimes, simply adding one of these themes will draw out strong, unpredictable emotional responses from your viewers. How can you use your photo to draw these memories and emotions out of the viewer?

I’ve recently written a pair of posts about the difference between taking a photo and making a photo, and the whole subject of this difference has really gotten my mind going on the subject. It would seem that I’ve got quite a lot of opinions about it!

Photo takers capture what happens to be there. Some may prefer it this way, but I believe many have simply never thought about what it would take to me a photo maker, so this will be an introduction to what is involved in making a photo.

Knowing your goal

Failing to plan is planning to fail. A good photo must start with a goal. It is important to determine up front what you want to accomplish. What thought or emotion do you want to convey? Is the photo going to represent a professional? Is it going to be used on a business card? Is it a glamor photo? An editorial? An art piece? Is it meant to sell clothing? Is it meant to illustrate a procedure? Determining the purpose up front is an important part of making a great photo.

Knowing your audience
There are actually two parts to knowing your audience. The first is determining who your viewers will be. The reason for this is that you choose imagery to which your audience will relate. For instance, if your photo is about the strong taking advantage of the weak, an adult may relate to a photo of a group of police beating up on a minority, whereas a child might relate better to a bigger kid stealing lunches from a smaller kid.

The second part of knowing your audience is determining who you want them to be. This helps you to determine aspects of the photo such as camera angle. Should the viewer be emotionally neutral to the scene? Should they feel disoriented? Are they meant to revere the subject? Scorn it? For instance, if the viewer is meant to take the side of the bully, shoot from up high, over the bully’s shoulder. If the viewer is meant to take the side of the underdog, shoot from a low angle, up into the bully’s menacing face.

Choosing a subject

While those who take photos may already have some control over their subject, the power to choose your subject that is introduced when you make a photo may be quite new. Will you choose a subject with hard, chiseled features? Do you want a soft, friendly face? How should they be dressed? How should they be posed?

Choosing a location
What clues can your choice of location add to the photo? Again, with the bully example, how could your choice of location help or hurt that photo? What idea would the photo convey if you shot it at night, in a warehouse district, by the loading dock? How might that idea be different if you shoot during the day, near the merry-go-round, at a park? What about in a parking garage, surrounded by dozens of onlookers?

Controlling your lighting
Perhaps one of the most daunting of new factors one encounters in the switch to making a photo is the total control of lighting. How much light do you need? Where do you need it? Should the light be at the front? On the side? High? Low? Do you want long, ominous shadows, or soft, pleasant shading? Do you have a lot of detail that needs to be filled in? What if the light was set up that the bully’s face was hidden in a shadow… how might that change the meaning of our photo?

Composition
In addition to all the “golden rules” of composition, there are, again, new ideas to consider when “making” a photo? What part of the scene do you put in? What part should you leave out? How might you crop the shot to change its meaning? Can you use a different lens to cut out the cars in the parking garage? Can you assign a new meaning by tilting your camera to the right or left?

I’m certain that there are more aspects that could have been included, but hopefully this is enough to get the mind going, and start you thinking about how you could exercise a little control over different aspects of your photography in order to make more interesting photos.

Recently, I discussed the topic of “taking” photos vs. “making” photos. Today I’d like to continue on that thought.

The question is: What kind of photographer are you? What kind of photographer do you want to be?

There are two kinds of photographers: journalists and artists. Both require skill, but each uses it differently. One uses his camera to record the facts, the other uses his camera to express a fiction. One produces photos that are documentary, the other produces photos that are fantasy. In other words, one takes photos, while the other makes photos.

Taking a photo
The photojournalist takes photos. He “captures” a scene. He records an event. When you look at a roll of his photos in a series, you see the story of what happened. While photojournalism can often evoke an emotion (example), the photos themselves are a cold, sterile retelling of fact.

Those who tend toward photojournalism — those who tend to take photos — find their niche in such realms as news photography, war photography, sports photography, street photography, or doing school portraits.

Making a photo

The photo-artist, on the other hand, makes photos. He “creates” a scene. He sells an idea. When you look at a roll of his photos in series, you form the story of what could be, what might be, what you imagine, what you want. The very intent is to convey a thought or an emotion. Facts are covered up, because they distract too much from the fiction.

Those who tend more toward photography as an art — those who prefer to make photos — usually find their place in fashion photography, glamour photography, fine art photography, commercial photography, or stock photography.

Both of the photos on this page have the same meaning to me. One says it through through the cold retelling of fact, while the other conveys it through the expression of an idea.

More inspiring stuff coming from the Epic Edits photography blog. This time, it’s short and simple: Do you take photos, or do you make photos? There’s even a poll. I voted, and found that I’m in the minority. The overwhelming majority of votes were split between “take” and “both”.

The power is in your hand.

Well I’m sorry, I don’t like to take photos. I don’t enjoy it. I’m not a documentary photographer. Anybody can try to “capture a moment”. Any hack can pick up a camera, aim it at the action, and with a little timing (or just blind luck) capture what happened. But that’s not why I am a photographer.

The phrase taking a photo sounds dirty to me. It sounds like an attempt to steal something. Something was there. Then you took it. Now it’s not there any more. And here you are clinging to the memory of what was. To take a photo is to live in the past. It’s holding on to what was.

For me, photography is a performance art. It’s smoke and mirrors. It’s illusion. Photography is both black and white, truth and lie. My camera sees the world the way I see it; the way I want it to be seen — a beautiful, emotional, controversial, fantasy world where fact is fiction and up is down. But you only get that when you make a photo.

The photo on this page is an example of the kind of shot that can’t simple be taken. No amount of luck or timing can make up for the thought and planning that went into the shot before the shutter release was pressed. This is what I live for. This is why I make a photo.