Peru. Lampa. Nighttime on Plaza.
5DMarkII 24mm f/1.4 1/40sec at f/1.4 ISO 1250
I am starting a new section call Anatomy of a Photo. I’ll post different images (mostly recent) and explain the inner workings of how they were made. Enjoy!
I was in Peru a couple of months ago; I hadn’t there for five years and I really loved it. We went to Lampa, a lovely small town, north of Julicaca. I enjoyed photographing in the late afternoon when the shadows were deep and long, however I knew that plaza would be lovely just after the sun set and the artificial lights appeared. Lampa is 15 degrees south of the equator so the dusk does not linger. The sun set at 5:35pm on July 11th. I figured there would be 10 – 15 minutes of “dull” light before the ambient artificial light glowed with the same intensity as the lingering blue in the sky. Then there would only be 10 to 15 minutes, maximum, to photograph before the sky turned too dark.
The first evening I brought my 5DMarkII with a 24mm f/1.4 lens and photographed hand holding, occasionally with an off-camera flash with a 1/2CTO gel. It was fine and I got some reasonable images. However, the church was a dominating presence and it begged to be sharp. The next evening I returned with my tripod and set up near a food stall and waited for people to cross into my frame. It is not a busy plaza, even on a Saturday night. I felt very lucky to have this confluence of activity. I only had ONE opportunity, and ONE click of the shutter when the spacing between the subjects was perfect.
It was taken on 7/11/2011 at 5:53 PM. A couple of minutes later the sky was too dark.
So why did I use such a shallow depth of field since I was on a tripod? Because I needed a relatively fast shutter speed so that my subjects would not ghost out. I did want a bit of motion blur but not too much; the subjects had to be recognizable. The church was at “infinity” and I almost parallel to it so I know it would be sharp even at the very shallow f/stop of 1.4. (You get what you pay for… the Canon 24mm f/1.4 fast lens is expensive but sharp). I kept my White Balance on Daylight to preserve the Kelvin temperature of the various mixed lighting. ISO 1250 was as high as I wanted to go with this camera.
Any other questions?
Nevada Wier Photography 
26 comments
Comments feed for this article
October 21, 2011 at 3:58 pm
Ian Mylam
I love this shot, Nevada. In particular, the way your eye zig-zags in to the frame, from the old lady with the hat and shawl (wonderful gesture there), to the dog, the bicycle, and finally the church, and then back again. Great timing and choice of moment, and a wonderful juxtaposition of elements. I also like the choice of white balance: this image positively vibrates with the colour contrast of the warm orange of the ground against the rich cool blue of the sky. Finally, I like the visual clues to the location: the church and the old lady’s dress shout ‘South America’ to me. Thanks for explaining your process with this image.
October 25, 2011 at 5:25 pm
nevada wier
Thanks Ian. I knew when I saw the four moving people/dog that I had to get the right moment. One chance. Luckily they weren’t moving too fast! I use Daylight WB the majority of the time to preserve the Kelvin temperature of the scene. I suspect I tempered it a bit during the RAW processing in Adobe Lightroom. Thanks so much for your thoughtful comment.
October 15, 2011 at 9:48 am
Ballroompics
Damn! It is nearly always inevitable that, no matter how many times I proofread a post, once I click “Post Comment” I see faulty grammar or non sequiturs!
Oh well. I’m not as grammatically challenged as might appear from my below post.
October 15, 2011 at 9:41 am
Ballroompics
I always enjoy your photos and the associated articles, especially on topics related to composition. I will be traveling to South America October 25. Peru, Argentina, Uruguay and Chile are in my travel plans. A unique set of circumstances left me with more than a year’s worth of salary coming in but no work commitments :). I’m allocating two months to South America.
For anyone traveling to Peru to specifically see Machu Picchu, as I am, be aware that the government has imposed a 2500 person per day limit on visitors to the site. It’s best to buy the admission tickets in advance via website. This change apparently came about at the end of July 2011.
Now back to the picture. I really like the sense of depth of this picture and that’s in spite of the shallow DOF. I’m perceiving this depth to be a function of the placement of the components – pedestrian, dog, bicyclist and metal cart along. I also perceive the church a slightly receding away on the left side.
You mention that you are almost parallel to the church so perhaps my perception of the church receding slightly is incorrect? Or perhaps is a function of lens perspective?
October 15, 2011 at 5:14 pm
nevada wier
And, I always love your comments. It is very clear to me that people are interested in the “behind the scenes” stories of images. So that is what i’m going to write about. There is plenty of information on the Internet about our “stuff”.
Photographers (and any artist who works in two dimension surfaces) has to build depth in images. We (two eyed creatures) inherently see depth but a camera is a cyclops, so we have to “build” depth in an image. One of the reasons I like “layers”, another reason is that the image becomes more complicated and, thus more interesting. I think the building appears to fall off on the left is because I am so far right with a wide angle lens.
nv
October 11, 2011 at 11:39 am
Stacy Baird
I look forward to reading more of these anatomies. I am a tech geek, but I love nothing more in my photography reading than learning how an image was made. In this one, you chose to place the vendor’s cart (or what ever the metal box is) in front of the church. Trying to get into your head, I was imagining if you were to take a few steps to your left, you would have had an enormous empty space to fill in the foreground, but with the cart, a bit more sense of place? What ever the reason, the choice took the photo from being a ‘postcard of a church’ to a moment in time.
October 11, 2011 at 12:02 pm
nevada wier
I needed to be as inconspicuous as possible so I was on a sidewalk leaning up against a building in a shadow. If I had been in the street, then the people would not have walked through naturally. Also, If I stepped to my left into the street then there would have been more empty space in the road. As it is I’m fine with it; I think it adds to the scene. Thanks for asking.
October 7, 2011 at 10:21 pm
Dustin Hatcher
I really enjoyed reading this post. I hope you’ll do a lot more. Much to be learned from here.
October 4, 2011 at 5:30 pm
rustythegeek
I like the words “Decisive Moment” and “Decisive Image”. It gives the impression that some thought (hence decision) went in to the creation of the image. One thing that’s really cool about Nevada is her commitment to share her ideas and strategies. Her images are so good because she makes a concerted effort to do what is necessary to put herself in a good location at the right time or situation to capture unique images of life, not just take the easy pictures to get the job done. As she says, “I stay after everyone else leaves to get my favorite images.” As I evolve as a photographer myself, I am finding I prefer wider lenses and being closer to people instead of longer lenses that force me to be farther away. At some level I think I understand why Nevada prefers wide and the look and perspective it delivers. Nevada’s tidbits and ideas motivate me to keep trying new things and challenges me to make more mistakes. Some of her images prove to me that it’s possible. Here’s to all those glorious mistakes! Yeaahy! Thanks!
October 4, 2011 at 3:02 pm
Robert Cowan
Fantastic idea! I like the idea of following the entire Creative Process. It certainly give me more to think about than “If only I had her equipment..” or “If only I had her software…” As someone said…”There’s more to the art of photography than the Decisive Moment. For starters, it’s knowing enough to understand that a decisive moment is about to happen, finding the right vantage point, having the right gear and having your finger on the shutter so you don’t miss it!” AND knowing how to process the shot so the Decisive Moment becomes the Decisive Image.
September 30, 2011 at 9:36 pm
rustythegeek
Personally, I like to get an idea of what I am doing based on the LCD image reviews. If you leave the light balance on Auto, it neutralizes the JPG preview. However, if you set the white balance deliberately, the JPG preview will reflect the results and give a better idea of what is trying to be achieved. That way, the RAW can be manipulated later and the JPG can help remind you of what you were doing at the time.
September 30, 2011 at 9:39 pm
nevada wier
That is fine. A personal preference. I rarely look at the image on my LCD, only the histogram.
September 30, 2011 at 9:21 pm
fabrizio cocchiano
Really a beautiful image. just out of curiosity…you mention that you kept you white balance on daylight. I assume that you shoot raw, so why not simply keep it on auto?
fab
September 30, 2011 at 9:24 pm
nevada wier
I usually put my WB on Daylight 99% of the time. I want to preserve the exact Kevin temperature. I don’t want the camera to filter the light to neutral. It is a personal choice. Not a critical one.
September 29, 2011 at 3:35 pm
Jilske
Yes, I think I’ll love this new section! Not for the camera settings, but for the story behind it so.
Good to hear you went back the next evening and stars (aka subjects) aligned. Do you have situations where you can’t go back? Do you try to salvage what you have or make mental notes for next time and move on?
Oh and can we nominate pics for anatomy lessons as well? 😉
September 29, 2011 at 3:59 pm
nevada wier
I usually have situations where I can’t go back! However, when I can I try and use the problems I encountered to find solutions. Personally, I like challenging situations (and light); they often make for more interesting images. There is nothing to “salvage” as I don’t crop or change content. If an image doesn’t “sing” as I framed it, then it is trashed.
Yes, please feel free to nominate pics. Great idea! nv
September 29, 2011 at 1:04 pm
rustythegeek
Of course, I still lust after (and buy) the cool equipment as much as anyone. :-p
September 29, 2011 at 11:43 am
Tony Filippone
Nevada – nice shot! It would have been great to illuminate the square behind the church, but I guess that would have taken some serious gear. With the moving foreground subjects, HDR wasn’t an option (and may not be an option for philosophical reasons).
Regarding your final shot: did you end up using a gel and/or flash? It looks like your foreground is lit by city lights – or is that your flash? If you didn’t use one, what did you learn from the first day that caused you to not use it the second day?
September 29, 2011 at 11:47 am
nevada wier
Ha! no way am I going to carry gear to “illuminate a square”! And, I am not a fan of HDR. I like the limitations of the visually impaired sensor. I did not use a flash on this image. The foreground is lit by street lights. I didn’t need the flash for this image and I wanted to remain inconspicuous. Thanks for the great questions. nevada
September 29, 2011 at 11:36 am
mrbillmccoy
This makes me want a DSLR so bad… Great tips, I will revisit this post when I finally drop the cash on a “big boy” camera!
September 29, 2011 at 11:39 am
nevada wier
Actually you can do this a compact camera also. Give it a try. But you will need a tripod!
September 29, 2011 at 12:40 pm
Rusty Lewellen
Not sure how “big boy” you want to be but you can make some seriously wonderful shots with a Canon 40D and a good lens. Don’t wait until you can afford a Mk II. Get a used 40D and a 28 f/1.8 and have fun. Trust me, you’ll love it! After that, get a used 24-70L or 24-105L. If you want Full Frame, get the 5D and don’t look back! Limitations make you learn more, become a better shooter and appreciate the better stuff even more down the road.
September 29, 2011 at 12:48 pm
rustythegeek
BTW, gain confidence from this image and relish the back story that made it possible. I am confident that Nevada could have made this shot with a 5D or a 40D or an S95 (etc) if that was the camera she had with her. She simply would have compensated with different technique and settings. The 5DMark-II and lens didn’t exist years ago but Nevada made stunning images then as well. IT’S NOT THE CAMERA that made this picture, the camera just made it easier. 🙂
September 29, 2011 at 12:55 pm
nevada wier
I really like your comments Rusty. It is certainly not about the camera, certainly a sharp lens is always important. The most important aspect of the image is that I used mixing lighting and got the spacing right between the multiple subjects. That is the trick. The “stuff” fades away when you get the critical moment. nv
September 29, 2011 at 11:26 am
Rusty Lewellen
Thanks Nevada! Great post! This is good info and a great shot! What is lighting the church?
September 29, 2011 at 11:31 am
nevada wier
Ah! good question. It is lit by external lights. I liked it because they were white so a good contrast with the yellow streetlights and blue sky.
nv