Fundamental Errors in Spacetime That Even Experienced Photographers Make

Fundamental Errors in Spacetime That Even Experienced Photographers Make

Photography, whether photojournalism, documentary, sports, wildlife, or even landscapes, is much about camera placement and timing. But there are some fundamental mistakes that most of us photographers make that are barriers to getting great photos.

Spacetime is a beautiful idea. Three-dimensional space (up/down, left/right, and forwards/backwards) and one-dimensional time (it only moves in one direction, from the past to the future) are constituent parts of the same thing. Consequently, you can only be in one place at one time. A skilled photographer knows where to be and when to press the shutter release. That skill is achieved not through luck but through planning.

Let's take, for example, my preparation for shooting a seascape photograph at sunrise. I work out where I must be to see the sun come above the horizon, and I time it to be there at the right moment. If I went to the wrong location at the wrong time, I would not get the shot.

So, the first mistake people make is not properly planning their shots, therefore not being in the correct location in spacetime. Misquoting a well-known military saying: "Proper Prior Planning Prevents Poor Photographic Performance."

Of course, there is nothing wrong with just going for a walk with your camera and hoping for the best; I do it. In fact, all the photos accompanying this article I shot early on this dull, wet morning. They are okay, but not amazing. My planning typically includes knowing the position of the sun at a particular time, the weather, the state of the tide, the subject I'm going to shoot, the gear I need to take with me, the camera placement and settings, and wearing the appropriate clothing.

Because I have lived here for 15 years, some of it has become second nature; the historic planning is embedded in my mind, so experience takes over. I was in the right place, I was wearing proper clothing, my camera was set correctly, and the tide was about right. However, the probability of me capturing something stunning would have been far greater had I planned it. That would have resulted in me going an hour earlier on a brighter morning. 

Having the correct gear with me does not mean packing a camera bag full of every lens I own, carrying all five spare batteries, and lugging a tripod everywhere with me. In fact, I no longer own a camera bag. They get in the way and restrict movement. Additionally, I will not change a lens on location because of the damage that can cause. Whether shooting landscapes, weddings, wildlife, or street photography, all that extra, unwanted kit is just an impediment.

Photographers buy vast amounts of kit and feel compelled to carry it everywhere. They would get better photos and suffer fewer backaches if they just took what they needed for their planned photo. So, I will probably carry my camera secured on the tripod, and an ND filter screwed to the lens for a seascape shoot. For bird photos, it's just the camera and shoulder sling. The battery will be fully charged, that will last me all day, and the SD card will be empty and in the camera.

Without that heavy burden of a kit bag, I can safely climb over rocks or wade into the sea without being hindered by it. I want my position in spacetime to be standing with my camera taking photos and not in the water after losing my balance and falling. Furthermore, I don't want the incoming tide washing over my spare kit if I left it in a bag on the beach; I've seen that happen.

A young great black backed gull, the world's largest gull.

The next mistake is maybe not a mistake at all, but a different approach to photography, and it's about how to time the shot. It's nearly impossible to talk about timing in photography without a nod to Henri Cartier-Bresson. So, now that's out of the way, let's discuss the two approaches to capturing the decisive moment.

Historically, photographers would have studied their subjects. Thus, they would learn to anticipate the precise moment to press the shutter. Then, motor winds were invented, enabling continuous shooting, albeit at a slow rate compared with today's standards. My camera can fire off 120 raw frames a second and be buffering images before the shutter button is fully depressed. Consequently, my chances of missing the shot are significantly reduced, as my reaction time is taken out of the equation.

Do you see the problem? That rapid-fire approach to capturing the photograph means that new photographers don't learn the skill of anticipating the action. Is this important? They still get the photo, and if the result is all that matters to them, then the answer is no, it isn't. However, if photography also means learning how the subject behaves, then switching off these modes and learning to shoot single frames facilitates that. The obvious subject I am referring to here is wildlife, but it could be an aircraft, a wave on the sea, a person on the street, or the sunlight flickering through a leaf. All the photos in this article were shot as single frames.

That rapid-fire approach with guaranteed results probably appeals to the modern mindset of having everything instantly without putting in the hard work. Still, I wonder whether we, by handing so much over to technology, are losing a sense of achievement that was once the result of effort and learning.

A common tern hunting over the river mouth.

The final mistake relating to time and space is the single-minded pursuit of the commonplace. Trends in photography usually start because one skilled and inventive photographer finds their own style, placing their camera at a particular place at a specific time. People hail it as a success, and then, they copy it. There is absolutely nothing wrong with emulating the styles and techniques of a photographer we look up to, but that should just be a starting place for finding our own style.

Take, for example, studio portraits. Most fall within a limited number of styles copied from the likes of Annie Leibovitz or David Bailey. Then Google the images of the White House, the Eiffel Tower, the Leaning Tower of Pisa, or St Paul's Basilica. Many of those photos are so similar they have become clichéd. So too have pictures of birds on a stick, forced perspectives, black and white images of Yosemite, newlyweds looking over the landscape towards a sunset, or uncomfortably cropped frames. Adding to a cliché does little for photography or our growth in the art, although it can be an excellent place to start our photographic journey into spacetime.

A variation of a bird on a stick: a house sparrow on a lobster pot.

How much planning do you put into a shot? Do you rely on technology, or do you go back to basics and shoot everything manually? It will be great to hear your thoughts in the comments.
Ivor Rackham's picture

A professional photographer, website developer, and writer, Ivor lives in the North East of England. His main work is training others in photography. He has a special interest in supporting people with their mental well-being. In 2023 he accepted becoming a brand ambassador for the OM System.

Log in or register to post comments
9 Comments

Finally a photography blog post that actually says something (beyond the usual "be yourself, dude"). Thank you.

Hi Chris, thank you. I hope that a few of my education articles over the past few months where I have shared compositional techniques have said a bit more than "be yourself". Although, thinking about it, that is an important aspect of developing your own photographic style. Thanks for the kind comment.

I agree with the content of the article. Preparation is a key element in everything we do or at least ir should be. I tried film photography to refine my photography knowledge. There is no live view there is no instant way to know whether you nailed the shot or not. Therefore, one must ensure that the Aperture Shutter Speed and ISO are correct prior to take the shot. Technology is great but as a photographer one must continue to strive to master the craft. Great article

Thank you very much, Felix.

When I shoot landscapes , mostly on the coast, I do a lot of planning. I check multiple weather apps, check the tide and position and timing of sunrise with TPE. Just taking my camera connected to my tripod is not possible for me, most of my locations are only accessible by foot or bicycle, and keeping my tripod over my shoulder whilst riding a bike is asking for trouble. I sometimes bring two cameras with me, one with a wide angle and one with a telelens attached. When we go on a day trip and I bring a camera it’s usually with a 24-105 attached and I’ll see what comes, no photography planning at all.
I also agree on the point of learning to time the shot, I shot a lot of handbal with a Canon EOS 6D, that’s not a fast camera by any means and handbal is a very fast sport, but knowing the game and anticipating what will happen, I did manage to get the action shots. Having 120 FPS would have increased the keeper rate though.
So I agree with your article , planning and knowing what your doing and why is important.

Thank you Ruud. I too cycle and walk with my camera and one of the deciding factors in the purchase of my tripods is their length when fully retracted. My very lightweight carbon fibre Benro Slim will fit inside my small daysack. https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1417878-REG/benro_fsl09cn00_slim_...

I have a slightly larger Benro Tortoise that I can fit inside the paniers on the back rack.
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1576690-REG/benro_ttor35cgx35_tor...

That was not a cheap tripod, but well worth every penny of the investment. With previous, larger tripods, I tried all kinds of methods to carry it on my bike, but they were all impractical. As you say, asking for trouble.

Ivor asked,

"How much planning do you put into a shot?"

Some shots are planned for months, or years, while other shots present themselves unexpectedly, and require reaction, not planning.

PLANNED: An Eastern Collared Lizard basking atop a particular rock, with the distant rocky slope lined up behind him in the background. Aperture, time of day, weather, distance, and angle are all thought out ahead of time. Just need to wait until a colorful male gets up on top of that one rock between 8 and 10 o'clock on a sunny morning. Spend enough days or weeks there, eventually it'll happen.

It did finally happen, and I have precisely the image that I want because I had time to think through all of the details beforehand, and prepare accordingly.

Ivor asked,

"How much planning do you put into a shot?"

UNPLANNED: I am lying prone on the ground, shooting portraits of a male Eastern Collared Lizard. With no warning, he suddenly dashes off at incredible speed, covering about 15 meters ... and pounces on a big Grasshopper! I have to get up off the ground, get to the Lizard quickly, but not move so quickly toward him that he is scared off, and photograph him before he swallows the Grasshopper.

I got a shot of him eating the grasshopper. I got my camera in the right position quickly enough to get the shot at the right time. But, because I did't have a lot of time to think about such a shot beforehand, I made a crucial mistake. I zoomed out a bit with my 100-400mm zoom, so that I could fit the entire Lizard into the frame. Why? Because this is what I had been doing all morning, when shooting portraits of him and the other Lizards.

After I got back to my motel room and downloaded the day's photos on my big iMac, and took time to look them over, I then realized that I had made a great mistake. This photo was really all about the Lizard having captured a big Grasshopper. But my photo didn't showcase that as well as it could have. If I had zoomed all the way in to 400mm, and leaned a few inches closer, then Lizards head, mouth, and prey would have been showcased a bit more prominently in the photo. A little more detail in these crucial areas would have been captured, and the view would have been a little more dramatic feeling if it had the look of having been taken more close up.

Of course, I was able to crop the photo to frame it the way I wish I had framed it in the camera, but it just isn't quite the same as it would have been if I had shot it a little differently. Trying to fit the Lizard's whole body into the frame was a mistake.

Right camera location. Right time. Right "spacetime", so to speak. But not so perfect execution, because I didn't have time to think the composition and framing through ahead of time, and I don't perform perfectly when I have to act quick. This is why I do far better with wildlife portraiture than I do with wildlife action photography ... unless the action is predictable and capturing it can be all planned out and set up for ahead of time.

Brilliant photos, especially that last one, Tom. Thanks again for the comments.