21. What's wrong with this picture? 24. Short and Sweet
26. Ask Jim 27. Photography tours 29. Student Showcase 35. Past issues 43. Subject index
On the cover: The Painted Hall, Greenwich, England. The huge room is reflecting in a mirrored table. This page: Spiral staircase in the Hide Restaurant, London.
There are still many photographers who don't like using Photoshop to alter what their camera captures. Many of them feel it's not photography in its purist form. Replacing skies, removing objects, altering backgrounds -- that somehow lessens the intrinsic creativity of images.
If the standard these photographers hold dear is to 'capture what you see', sometimes our cameras don't, in fact, capture what we see and only Photoshop can address those issues. For example, using a wide angle lens to photograph a tall building invariably shows the vertical lines of the architecture leaning inward. That's not what we see, and Photoshop can usually fix that problem (see the article beginning on the next page).
Another issue is that wide angle lenses make elements in a scene seem farther away than they really are. Impressive mountains that we know are huge seem diminuative when photographed with a 16mm focal length. I call this the Wide Angle Conundrum, and I explain how to address this issue in the May 2019 issue of Photo Insights.
My point is that Photoshp shouldn't be shunned because it can be used to alter reality. It can also be used to bring reality back from distorted photos -- due to the limitations of optics -- to what we see.
Jim Zuckerman
photos@jimzuckerman.com www.jimzuckerman.com
Correcting P a r a l l a x
The image below is 7th century Whitby Abbey located on the eastern coast of England. I took this sunrise shot from my DJI Air 3S drone with a 24mm lens. If you look carefully, the left side of the structure is not vertical. It's not parallel with the left side of the frame.
This is parallax in photography.
Parallax is commonly seen when wide angle lenses are used in such a way that the back of
the camera (i.e. the plane of the digital sensor) is oblique to the plane of the subject. In the case of the abbey, the plane of the camera was oblique to the sunlit facade.
Theoretically, photography is all about capturing what we see. As I'm sure you know, though, in many instances this fails. Parallax is one example. The vertical lines in buildings are always vertical, not angled inward or outward depending on the lens used and the angle of the camera. We as photographers have become accustomed to see-
ing distortion in architecture and we accept it as characteristic of wide angle lenses. If angled lines in architecture bother you, though, as they do me, you don't have to accept them.
In the corrected version of the abbey below, I straightened the left side of the building to make it vertical. At the same time, it became parallel with the left side of the frame. Now the abbey looks correct.
To do this in Photoshop, here is the procedure:
1. Select the entire image with Select > all.
2. Choose Edit > transform > distort.
3. Handles form around the periphery of the image allowing you to pull it in any direction. On the next page you can see a screen capture
of how I pulled -- i.e. distorted -- the picture to straighten the verticals. If there is significant parallax, meaning lines that are actually vertical are angled badly, you'll need to pull the handles on both sides of the image until you get it right. What always happens when you pull one side of the image to straighten it, the vertical lines on the other side become worse. So, it's a back and forth correction that will eventually address the problem.
There are two ways to correct parallax when you're shooting. First, you can use a tilt-shift lens. This is impossible from a drone, but from the ground it corrects the unwanted non-vertical angles. This means, though, that you have to carry another big lens in your camera backpack. And, they are expensive.
Second, you can compose the picture in such
a way that the back of the camera is parallel with the plane of the subject. This changes the composition completely, of course, and usually we don't want to do that.
In the shot of the abbey, to make the camera plane (in other words, the plane of the digital sensor) parallel with the facade of the structure, I would have had to lower the drone so it was midway between the top and bottom of the facade. In addition, the drone would have had to be positioned directly in the center of the facade, left and right. Then and only then would the vertical supports of the building appear to be perfectly vertical. To capture this perspective, though, in which the ocean and the city is seen in the background, this was the only position from which to shoot.
In the interior shot of the Tate Britain Museum in London on the next page, like the drone aerial of the abbey, I pointed the 14mm wide
angle lens downward to include the stairs. The vertical columns, then anged inward. To avoid this, I'd have to shoot with the camera back parallel with the far wall . . . but that's not the composition I wanted.
All vertical lines are affected like this, including trees. With our landscapes, we accept parallax in forest scenes, but most trees grow vertically, not leaning inward. The redwoods below exhibit extreme parallax because I angled the wide angle lens upward.
One of the problems with correcting parallax in Photoshop using the distort tool is you lose picture area on both sides of the frame. For example, in the shot of The Bean in Chicago, the original image, below right, shows a building at the far right that was lost as I corrected the parallax in the bottom image. And on the far left of the original capture, a large portion of that building was lost as well.
This loss of picture area is unavoidable. Therefore, if you know you'll be addressing the parallax issue in post-processing, the solution is to include more in the composition than is necessary. This allows you to eliminate that extra area without hurting the composition.
In the images below and at right, you can see that the loss of the highrise on the far right and the reduction in area of the building on the left doesn't hurt the picture at all. But the fact that
the architecture has been straightened makes a huge difference. The original image is a representation of what photographers have come to accept with architecture, cityscapes, and even landscapes: A distortion of reality.
To me, the original shot of The Bean looks ridiculous. Buildings don't lean like that. I find it interesting that photographers who adamantly reject replacing a sky because it's 'not real' readily accepts leaning buildings and leaning trees. §
Some people are just
c l u e l e s s
Ihave seen a lot of bad photographs in my life -- I've even taken some of them. But I've never seen a picture worse than the one below. The subject -- whatever it is -- is out of focus, and the in-focus metal fencing isn't worthy of being a dominant foreground. The image makes no sense, it has no artistry, and it doesn't hold anyone's attention. There is not a human being on the planet who would look at this picture for more than half a second.
What point am I trying to make here? During my recent photo tour, Abandoned in Georgia, my group stayed in a Hampton Inn. This photograph hung in the bathroom as de-
cor. In fact, in each of our rooms we all had the same framed print. Needless to say, I couldn't believe it.
Hampton Inn is part of the Hilton chain of hotels. So, some person in the upper echelons of Hilton who is in charge of selecting decor for thousands of hotels actually chose this photograph -- among the trillions of images available -- to adorn a bathroom.
I understand that beauty and artistry is in the eye of the beholder. But at some point absurdity replaces reason.
My underlying point is when a corporate gi-
Iceland Drone Tour
August 24 - September 2, 2026
ant like Hilton, with enough resources to do anything they want, hires a person presumably with artistic credentials and who makes terrible choices in decor, what does that say about people who judge photography?
And this made me think of photo club competitions. So often clients of mine have complained about how judges see things so differently than they do. Sure, beginning photographers need guidance and direction, but photographers who are experienced and who submit photos for competition sometimes feel the personal tastes of judges are often at odds with their shooting style.
What happens, then, is too often photographers start shooting to please the judges. They compromise their own vision in trying to win ribbons and stature within the club. It seems to me the reason people pick up a camera in the first place is to express their vision, to de-
velop their artistry, and to capture special moments in time. It is not to please other people. Maybe I'm very different in my outlook, but as nice as it is get the approval of others, my own reward in photography has always been the pleasure I receive from capturing beautiful and intriguing images.
A few years ago I won a national photo contest in the category of birds, and to be honest, it didn't even phase me. The real joy I experienced was in taking the picture that won. That's the whole point of photography.
And for the person who took the horrible picture on page 9, if that image pleases them and makes them fulfilled as a photographer, more power to him or her. My own negative assessment hopefully won't phase them at all. If our involvement in photography doesn't give us the joy of creation, then what's the point? §
Another Hampton Inn photographic work of art -- this time behind reception.
Dust Specks A close look at
Photographers have been plagued by dust from the beginning of photography. When I think about the late 19th century photographers who used to travel around the U.S. in covered wagons and who developed huge glass plates, I can't imagine the nightmarish dust they had to deal with.
With the introduction of mirrorless cameras, most of the headaches from dust have disappeared -- but not entirely.
1. Situation one: If you are still shooting a dSLR, dust in your pictures is an ever present issue. Dark spots show up on the digital files regularly. Assuming you change lenses, the only way to eliminate dust is to clean the sensor itself. The built-in cleaning mode works to some degree, but if the dust is bad enough you need to use a sensor swab to manually clean the sensor. This takes some practice, but it's the best way to eliminate most or all of the dust. You can purchase sensor swabs here: sensorswab.com
2. Situation two: If you see dust in the viewfinder, this will not show up in your pictures. This dust is located on the ground glass within the camera body and not on the sensor. It can usually be eliminated by a hand blower. If that doesn't work, use a sensor swab to clean the glass.
3. Situation three: If you see dust on the lens, either on the front element or the rear, this will
affect your pictures only if the lens is a wide angle. That's because wide angle lenses have extensive depth of field, and the dust on the lens starts to take form. The dust won't be sharply defined at all, but it will appear as a slight smudge on the final picture. Depending on where the smudge appears, this may not be repairable. The way to prevent this problem, of course, is to keep your lenses clean. Always carry a microfiber cloth with you to clean both the front glass element as well as the rear. These cleaning cloths have virtually no weight or volume, so they are easy to carry. Make sure you clean the electrical contacts on the lens while you're at it.
4. Situation four: In high winds, specks of dust will enter even the smallest places in your lens and camera body and can cause significant damage. When you turn the focusing ring on a lens and hear sand or grit grinding between two metal surfaces, you know the lens is in trouble and desperately needs to be cleaned.
If you know you could be in situations with high wind, bring a piece of Saran Wrap that can be wrapped around the lens barrel. This will completely eliminate the threat to your gear. The same could be done for the camera body. I am speaking from experience. In the 90's, I was caught in a sand storm in Utah and I had no protection for my equipment. That cost me over $2000 in repairs. That won't happen to me again. §
Switzerland Photo Tour
Sept. 23 - Oct. 2, 2025
Exotic Birds of Colombia
Sept. 23 to Oct. 3, 2026
Pantanal Photo Tour, Brazil
Jaguars in the wild, birds in flight, caiman, otters and more
Dec. 1 - 9, 2025
Photography Quiz
1. In black and white photography, which filters darken a blue sky?
a. Yellow and red
b. Green and blue
c. Orange and blue
d. Red and green
2. Raising the center column on a tripod to its full height reduces the stability of the tripod.
a. True
b. False
3. The original flash that photographers used in the 19th century emitted light by a small explosion of gunpowder.
a. True
b. False
4. The 'exposure triangle' refers to:
a. F/stop, shutter speed, and lens calibration
b. ISO, shutter speed, and depth of field
c. ISO, shutter speed, and f/stop
d. Shutter speed, f/stop, and white balance
5. When shooting directly into the sun, lens flare can be prevented by:
a. Using f/32 as the lens aperture
b. A lens hood
c A chemically coated lens
d. None of the above
6. When shooting a series of images for a panorama, it is best to hold the camera in portrait mode.
a. True
b. False
7. The best shutter speed to render flying birds sharp is:
a. 1/1000
b. 1/2000
c. 1/3200
d. 1/8000
8. Using AUTO white balance when shooting sunsets will elimimate the golden tones that we love so much at this time of day.
a. True
b. False
9. When a camera goes from an air conditioned room outside to high humidity, which of the following surfaces are fogged?
a. Viewfinder
b. Front glass element of the lens
c. Rear glass element of the lens
d Mirror (in a mirrored camera)
e. All of the above
10. Extension tubes and teleconverters perform the same function in photography.
a. True
b False
UPCOMING PHOTO WORKSHOPS
TEXAS BIRDS WORKSHOP
Shooting from a blind, you'll get frame-filling shots of many species of birds in flight including red cardinals, crested caracara, green jays, greater kiskadees, and painted buntings. Jim shares with you the best camera settings for ultra sharp images. Based in south Texas.
May 14 - 17, 2025
FROG & REPTILE WORKSHOP in Kansas City
This is an exciting macro workshop in which you will be able to photograph about 40 species of colorful dart frogs and exotic reptiles. Held in a hotel conference room, Jim sets up natural backgrounds for outstanding photos. The photo at left shows a Jackson chameleon with the background replaced in Photoshop.
June 14 - 15, 2025
CARNIVAL in VENICE
Photograph amazing costumes in a Medieval environment. We shoot inside a 16th century palace, in an iconic gondola, in a stunning bedroom with traditional Venetian decor, and at other great locations. The photography as well as the experience is phenomenal.
February 7 - 13, 2026
India Tiger Safari
May 20 - 30, 2026
What's Wrong with this Picture?
Adrone opens up entirely new possibilities in photography, and I'm having a great time using mine. I now have the DJI Air 3S, and the high resolution images I'm getting are impressive. This is 13th century Brougham Castle in England, and while it is photogenic from the ground, from an elevated height it's even more impressive.
The problem with this image isn't immediately obvious, but after I worked on the picture in post-processing, I noticed some kind of modern black box to the far right of the castle interior. I don't know what it is, but from the air the juxtaposition of a modern element with the ancient castle ruins doesn't seem to work. To me, it's quite out of place.
In this version, I removed the black box and, as you can see, that improved the image. To do that, I used 'generative fill' in Photoshop. If you haven't been using this extraordinary tool in Photoshop, it's truly magical
The pulldown command is Edit > generative fill. You first use the lasso tool to make a rough selection around the element to be eliminated, and then use the above pulldown menu command. In most cases, and with no further ado, the unwanted element is replaced by what the AI aspect of this command thinks should be there. In 95% of the cases it is perfectly accurate. And, Photoshop gives you three variations to choose from in the properies palette. If you don't like any of the three possibilities, you can request three more until you like what you see.
Generative fill is so good it replaces cloning in many situations as well as the content aware feature. It's really worth its weight in gold!
On Safari: Kenya
March 22 - 31, 2026
SHORT AND SWEET
1. This is a drone shot of Lennox Castle in Scotland,. The scene was contrasty because the sun was out. The only way to mitigrate contrast like this is to use HDR. This is a 5-frame HDR composite, and in post-processing I was able to lighten the shadows and darken the highlights.
3. If possible, getting down to ground level when shooting animals or birds that are small and close to the ground creates a more intimate portrait and, at the same time, gives the subjects more stature. I shot this ring-necked pheasant in England while lying on the grass as it walked past me.
2. Panorama images can be taken indoors as well as outside. This is a 7-frame pano of a beautiful staircase in London. The beauty of this technique is that it shows the entire width of the architecture without the distortion of a wide angle lens. I hand held the camera as I took the 7 frames.
4. Repeating patterns make interesting pictures. Here the windmills of Kinderdijk in Holland present a strong graphic composition. Their attractive shapes diminish in perspective, and that draws the eye into the picture. There are many fundamental principles in photography that consistently work, and this is one of them. §
Vietnam Photo Tour
October 13 - 23, 2025
ASK JIM
Every month, Jim answers a question from his online students, from people who participate in his tours and workshops, or from subscribers to this magazine. If you have a question you’d like Jim to answer, please drop him a note at photos@jimzuckerman.com.
Q: Jim . . . I took this picture of a wallaby in Australia, and I wanted to know if you think the out of focus tree on the right side of the background is distracting. If it is, should I clone it out?
Julia Fowles, Albany, New York
A: Yes, I do think it's distracting. As a general rule, graphic images behind a subject that are not part of the subject itself are almost always distracting. And yes, I would clone it out. §
Partial List of Photography Tours 2025 - 2026
Aug 2025
Sept 2025
Oct 2025 MOROCCO
Oct/Nov 2025
SCOTLAND'S PAST
May 2026
EXOTIC COLOMBIA BIRDS
Sept/Oct 2026
PANTANAL, BRAZIL Dec 2025
ICELAND DRONE TOUR Aug/Sept 2026
Oct 2026 AUTUMN in JAPAN Nov 2025 INDIA TIGER SAFARI May 2026
INDONESIA WILDLIFE
ARMENIA & GEORGIA Oct/Nov 2026
Armenia & Georgia
October 26 - November 8, 2026
STUDENT SHOWCASE
Each month, Jim features one student who took beautiful and inspiring images on one or more of his photography tours or workshops. It’s really fascinating how photographers see and compose such different images even though we may go to the same places. Everyone takes great photographs on Jim’s trips.
Hank Houser, Seminole, Florida Venicie photo workshop, Ethiopia photo tour
1. a 2. a 3. a 4. c 5. d 6. a 7. c 8. a 9. e 10. b Your score 90% - 100%: You could have been a pro 80% - 89%: Your glasses probably need a new prescription 70% - 79%: Just don’t quit your day job < 70%: You should really be using an iPhone
