The Liberated Camera: Part II

By John Kennerdell

(Continued from Part I)

About a year ago a young photographer came to me with a question I'd never heard before. What did I think about "face detect" autofocus?

Probably I sighed. Then said something about how modern cameras left us with so little to do that any half-competent photographer just might want to decide where to focus on his own.

There was one problem with this expert advice—I'd never used the feature, not for a single frame. Every photographic instinct told me I was right. But then ignorance is a splendid way of maintaining our pet prejudices. So I resolved to give face detection a fair shake.

Sawannakhet, Laos, 2011. Shot more or less blind from inside a bus by holding the camera out a small ventilation window. I suspect conventional AF would have locked onto the gloved hand or the bright end of the metal bar at the center...or maybe not. In any case, face detect got this one right.

First let's be clear what we're talking about. This isn't like those silly modes that snap when people smile or won't shoot when they blink. It's simply an algorithm that finds and focuses on faces. It lights up a rectangle around the face in question so that you know what it's doing. The newest versions lock specifically onto eyes. I've spent several decades learning how to do just that, first with manual focus and then with autofocus, so I couldn't very well object to the concept. The only question was whether it worked well enough to actually serve the photographer, or if it just got in the way.

As it happened I already owned a camera that offered this feature, a little Micro 4/3 Olympus. So I put on the 20mm lens, turned on face detect AF (it doesn't help that the icon is a smiley face), and tossed it into the bag for my next trip. Three weeks and a couple thousand exposures later, I had my answer.

Pursat, Cambodia, 2011. Here's a clearer example, shot from the waist. Without recomposing, no conventional AF system could have known that my interest was the face in the corner, not that nice contrasty arm in the center.

In a word, it was a slam dunk. OK, that's two words, but seriously: I got hundreds of shots that I probably wouldn't have without it. By the end I was attempting things I wouldn’t have even considered without it, and a lot of those worked out too. It wasn't perfect of course, but it raised my percentage. Ultimately, what more do you want?

Let me stress that this was all full-on freestyle photography. I don't even own an eye-level finder for this camera. I carry it strapped to my right hand and shoot fast and loose, from any position that feels promising. The screen is fairly visible even at oblique angles and the image stabilization helps keep things sharp. Add this—intelligent, reliable AF, with no need to try to focus and recompose—and it was as if the last piece of the puzzle had fallen into place.

Singapore, 2011. And just for fun: trans-species face detect.
Undocumented, but surprisingly effective.

Many photographers, especially more experienced ones, will of course have no interest in face detection. Many, after all, have no interest in taking the camera away from their eye, and there's nothing wrong with that. Others, generally younger and newer, are already routinely using it without a second thought. No doubt some are doing fine work with it. Me? I’m not young or new and I'll probably still leave it turned off much of the time. But at least now I know when to turn it on. And, hopefully, when not to give advice about things I've never tried.

•     •     •

Non-viewfinder shooting has never been for everyone—it almost seems to offend some photographers' sense of order in the universe—but with even top photojournalists now wielding little digicams, never mind snapping with their iPhones, it's clearly gone legitimate. The "perspective of a paralysed Cyclops" (that annoying Mr. Hockney again) is not to be underestimated: most of the great and good photographs of the past half century have been framed via eye-level finders. But the one-eyed view will likely never enjoy such dominance again, and perhaps that's not a bad thing.

John

John Kennerdell is a writer and photographer based in Southeast Asia.

Send this post to a friend

Please help support TOP by patronizing our sponsors B&H Photo and Amazon

Note: Links in this post may be to our affiliates; sales through affiliate links may benefit this site. More...
Original contents copyright 2011 by Michael C. Johnston and/or the bylined author. All Rights Reserved.

Featured Comment by expiring_frog: "Thanks for the tip John, something to try on my new camera. Also, what wonderful pictures on your website!"

Mike adds: Not to toot TOP's horn, but this marks the public debut of John's new site. His old one, Studio Hatyai, has been down for some time, and this is the first time Indochina Photoelectric has emerged from beta. I haven't spent any time there yet, but I plan to.

Featured Comment by Louis: "I took some photos in the crypts under Paris and my compact had no problem recognising faces in the mounds of skulls in the gloom!"

Featured Comment by Friedrich: "I like the humility and pragmatism that shine through this article. That's something to strive for."

Featured Comment by Gordon Lewis: "Some cameras, such as the one in my HTC Incredible 2 Android smartphone, take this feature one step further by allowing you to tap the screen to where you want to shift the point of focus. This comes in handy when there is more than one face in the frame and you'd prefer to choose which one to focus on. I wouldn't describe it as fast or elegant, but it works."

Featured Comment by Diego: "Part three—smile shutter! Or how about automatic scene recognition? In-camera merge-to-HDR?"

Mike replies: Now, now, sarcasm isn't necessary.

Featured Comment by Hans: "Like you I initially dismissed this as another annoying gimmick. But then I tried it and was amazed by how well this feature works. When I first ran a few tests, I noticed it was even able to lock onto faces on the TV!"

Question from Dahlia Lee: "Good article! What camera did you use for these street photos? Which one would you recommend for the face detect feature?"

John replies: Hi Dahlia, I used an Olympus E-PL1, just because it was the only camera I had with this feature. (At least I thought it was—now I see that one of my Canon DSLRs has it too.) I have no idea which brands or models do it best, but I'd suspect that all the newer ones are are good enough. It's a bit of a "black-box" feature, so the main thing is to experiment and get to know your camera so you can begin to predict how it's going to respond to different situations. 

Mike adds: Does anyone know of a list of cameras with Face Detection? I haven't found one anywhere, and compiling one seems like it would be a lot of work.

Answer from Adam Lanigan: "Dpreview.com to the rescue. It has a database of cameras (433 in all) that can be filtered by various characteristics and features. It's located here. Under 'Show Advanced Filters' is an option for Face Detection, which cuts the list to 'only' 121 cameras. You can further specify by any other combination of criteria to find your oh-so-perfect shooter."

Featured Comment by Ed Hawco: "Here's where it's a bust for me: you're set in 'face detection' mode, and then you see a great shot in which you want to focus on an object in the foreground with the onlookers in the background slightly blurred. Beeep! Beeep! Sorry. No can do. Face detection says MUST FOCUS ON FACE.

"So you start spinning through the menus trying to find where you turn that feature off (which could be anywhere from two to ten clicks, depending on the camera). By the time it's off, the background people have moved on, the foreground subject has flown to Florida and all that's left is you swearing at your camera.

"One thing I like about my Lumix LX3 is that I can change focus method (manual, autofocus macro, autofocus normal) and aspect ratio without even looking at the camera. I just turn the switches on the lens barrel. It takes milliseconds and I know the positions by feel.

"If there was a camera with face detection switching that fast and physical, I would embrace it. Otherwise, no, because ultimately I would rather miss a shot because of my own incompetence than miss a shot because the camera overrides what I want to photograph."

Comments

[Bernard Scharp]

I don't own a camera with this feature (or one with live view), but these columns once again shook up the truth that there is no `One True Path', a lesson that applies to all cameras. Thank you.

I do have a body with ECF though, which is sort of like an early version of this. Still a shame Canon never used that technology in their digital bodies.

[nick]

I completely desagree with MR. Kennerdell, eye finder are fundamental in photography now as it was 100 years ago. It's impossible to see the photograph you are taking if you do not isolate yourself from the subject. the lcd screen is completely useless for composition. may be I'm idiosyncratic, but I don't like or feel taking photos with my arms up and walking like a zombie in the street.
that is why there still rangefinder and dslr on the market.
you say that now also professional are using small compact cameras with no eyefinder, let me tell you that in the market you can find only two compact cameras (that are not really so compact) with an useless small eyefinder, you can add the ricoh grd III + the eyefider you have to buy separately.
so everybody is using the lcd screen just because the are only lcd screen cameras. that's all.

[John Roberts]

I love it when someone debunks the wisdom the photography intelligensia. Eventually, someone like yourself actually tries the new technology, and finds that using it will not bring down civilization as we know it. I got interested in photography a couple of years before Minolta brought out its Maxxum line of cameras, and I can still remember the howling about how autofocus would be the ruin of "real" photography. We survived, and millions of fantastic photos have been made with autofocus cameras. As you've demonstrated, "real" photography will survive cameras without viewfinders, and face detection too.

[Paul Van]

I've never tried the technology mentioned, but... Isn't it a practical solution and implementation of advice often given when people want to improve? ie Look for new or unique viewpoints, and/or place the camera at the subject's level.

We do live in interesting times.

[Crabby Umbo]

Absolutely and totally agree...not a big fan of auto-focus, seems to work better and is far more intuitive on some brands than others (and with a decent screen, easier to just focus yourself than mouse around the focus points til you get the one you want), but using my little Canon point-and-shoot digital, when I saw that little green box covering the face and floating around as I moved the camera, I was totally in awe. As a guy that generally just photographs people, and generally only one person in the frame at a time, this is the auto-focus I've been waiting for, AND, it will be the feature I look for on my next pro-grade camera....

[James]

Ah, that moment of the light bulb turning on in my head :)

I have always ignored face detect AF, now I have a reason to give it a try - thanks!

James.

[Cecelia]

Thanks for an interesting series John! I recently acquired an X100 and have discovered a problem - I am "left-eyed." This means my nose hits the LCD panel on the back and my right eye is completely blocked.

After reading your articles and some of the posts from Ken's X100 reviews I am going to restart on the X100 using it without the viewfinder.

Thanks again,
Cecelia

[Robert Roaldi]

Being irreverent for a moment, this "shoot-from-the-hip" style could lead to interesting products, like quick-draw holsters for cameras or showdowns at high noon competitions in camera clubs.

Might work at weddings too. Or during riots.

Jokes aside, you're getting some interesting pics. It's an odd approach since so much emphasis has been traditionally placed on seeing what you're shooting. There are terabytes written on the subject, people freaking over 95% coverage finders or complaining that EVFs will never be good enough. I've never used large format, but after reading Mike's description yesterday, it occurred to me that at the moment of tripping the shutter, you don't really know what you're capturing with those either.

[Bill Corbett]

Well I was up early this morning, hoping Part II was on my computer! Great! Funny, just a few days ago I decided to turn on face detection on my $79 used Canon A490 (which for the price takes pretty good pictures)& being one of those who snubbed the whole concept of face detection, I was glad to see your post! I'm out with it today...perhaps I can regain some of that "shoot from the hip" fun I used to have at events with my TLR and waist level finder. One thing I've discovered too is that if one is a more experienced photographer of the "old school", one can actually use some of these more modern conveniences even more effectively. Thx for the tips!

[JL]

Interesting, though trickier than the points in the last post, inasmuch as it assumes, or at least enforces the idea, that the human face should be the focal point of any given photo. As I'm sure, often enough, it should be, but some of my favorite pictures (for example, the bottom left one here, by Jack Pierson: http://goo.gl/u9Brx -- sorry, it's the best example I could find online) would have been ruined if facial auto-detect was on. I can think of a couple of William Klein photos that wouldn't have existed, too. Which doesn't, of course, mean you shouldn't use it, if faces are what you want to single out; but in a weird sort of way, I like the almost random-feeling focus that you sometimes get with regular AF. This sort of thing lets your pictures look more, for lack of a better word, 'professional', but the 'inspired amateur' look has its place, too. In the Pursat photo, my eye is drawn to the man in the background with the baseball cap -- maybe precisely because he's harder to read -- which is just to say that focus isn't always focus, if you know what I mean...

[Carl Root]

I'd always taken the one-eyed view for granted . . . until I asked my wife (then my daughter) to take a picture with my DSLR, only to find that neither could close one eye and look through the viewfinder.

My ideal street camera would be a wide angle square format with a flip swivel screen that permits reasonably accurate framing while hip shooting.

Face detection is now on my check list.

[charlie]

I heartily agree John.

[MM]

Excellent advice! Mike, you should create a new article tag, "Photographic heresies." That way TOP readers can easily link back to pieces like these when they read on photo forums that "Serious photographers only use eye-level viewfinders" and "Face detection is only for beginners" and other such conventional "wisdom."

[Michael Barkowski]

Face detection these days also exposes for the face if you want.

The use in your examples certainly gave you more depth of field control than hyperfocal snap photography that many people would have used.

As a software programmer I delegate a wide variety of levels of control to computers, from "execute the next instruction" to "show me whatever's new, using the usual presentation method".

The square around the face, the histogram, and the exposure-previewing live view let you confirm some things before the shot, so instead of delegation, it seems like the camera and I are partners.

Some painters and sculptors have an assistant that applies brush-strokes or carves out chunks of rock for them. This is a little like that, but this being photography, it all happens a lot faster.

I decide I'm going to point the camera and focus on the face. Everything after that is just mechanics, no matter how you do it, right? Well, maybe not. What about those tiny moments leading up to the moment you press the shutter? Who or what should be in control?

It depends, it really depends.

[toto]

I've been meaning to give face detect a try, but was just too lazy. If you have several faces at varying distances, will the camera (in auto mode) adjust the aperture and focus distance so that all faces will be in focus?

Haven't tried scene modes either, for the same reason. Perhaps Part III of your article?

[Stephen McCullough]

Thanks for your articles.

Your openness to at least trying some of the newly available modes is to be admired.

Love the trans-species bit...

I feel that the difference between being a 'serious' photographer who uses these tools (or explores them) and a casual photographer who may be a slave to them, is that the former is intentional about the process. In other words, your core photographic skills and experience are still in play. You know why the tool will help in a given set of circumstances.

I prefer to compose at eye-level. I prefer to focus and re-compose.

But tonight I am taking my daughter to a Taylor Swift concert. The star has a huge online community and my kid is meeting up with a mass of over-excited tweens. I will have my GF1 and 14 lens ready. The facial expressions are crucial, but change in an instant. face detect is one button away. Perfect. I'll be shooting from the hip, because spontaneity is the key.

[Ken White]

I have been shooting with an E-PL1/2 and 20mm 1.7 over the past year or so. Most of the time I don't use the VF-2 finder because it gets in the way. For me, the viewfinder is very useful with manual focus legacy lens. Without the finder I tend to push the camera forward when focusing and then move it back toward my eye for the shot. Because of this I ofter miss getting the focus exactly right.

I've never used the face detection except by accident. Sounds like I need to give it a try

[CK Dexter Haven]

When anyone belittles "non-viewfinder shooting," simply invoke the name 'Garry Winogrand.' Shuts'em up like duct tape.

[Steve Jacob]

Ironically, if you DONT have a viewfinder, face detection is almost necessary....

A lot of these innovations may reduce the level of technique required, but if you are working hard as an event or wedding photographer, they can also reduce your failure rate and stress levels.

Knowing how to do both is important. Pilots need to know how to fly by stick and instruments and navigate by compass, as well as using autopilots and GPS. There are always times when automation doesn't work.

[phil martin]

Whilst I do grant that instead of just taking pot luck, “live view” does allow the images to be “visually” composed from all sorts of previously unavailable viewpoints, I still think the use of the LCD radically alters the relationship between the subject and the photographer. Well at least it does for me.

With a traditional SLR, film or digital, I certainly don’t feel I’m “peering into a machine” but instead looking through one. Using the viewfinder as a frame to select and edit the subject and to exclude the wider world beyond the camera however the experience is totally different when I am using my medium format Mamiya RB67. The sheer size and clarity of the viewfinder image allows a totally different experience.

When I use the RB67, either handheld or on a tripod, I don’t feel I am not looking through it as such but instead feel I am actually inside the camera, able to move and walk around the subject, making micro adjustments to the composition as I go, until the image feels right and I take the picture. This experience is totally different from “live view”.

With live view I feel totally removed from the subject and instead am definitely not “peering into a machine” but peering at one. Whilst I remain totally aware of everything going on outside of the camera, instead of seeing the subject on the LCD screen, it feels like there is a screen blocking the view and obscuring the subject.

The LCD screen can only give the vaguest indication of the final image, just the basic composition of the largest elements but nothing of the smaller subtle elements that make up the image. This is not to deny it is possible to take good images with a compact or live view camera, it’s just that the LCD screen always seems to prevent me from engaging with the subject and I can never get in close like I do with my medium form film cameras.

[TBannor]

I always leave my S95 in face detect mode. It defaults to regular AF if it can't find a face. The other important thing about face detect AF is that it also adjusts exposure for the face. In both of the examples, the faces would probably have been overexposed to some extent otherwise.

I recently picked up a refurbished 60D. I agree, it is liberating to use the flip LCD and live view to compose weird angle shots. It too has face detect.

[Vadim Gordin]

I was about to write a response to these two posts, but realized that everything I wanted to say here was clearly stated in my featured comment to the x100 review.

[Tom Turnbull]

Very insightful and potentially liberating.

I'd love to see a photo of your camera strapped to your hand; I've tried zillions of such arrangements for half as many years but haven't yet hit on anything that works really well.

Thanks for the face tome!

Tom

[Miserere]

Once again, I'm agreeing with Mr Kennerdell. The first time I tried a camera with face-detect AF it was a revelation; as a street shooter, no other modern camera feature has helped me more. And yes, I call it a "feature", and will defend it when I see it called "gimmick" by those who do not care to understand how useful it is when shooting people.

[yinyangmixman]

John: Thanks for your open-minded, pragmatic (and admirably succint) appreciation of current cameras' overlooked potential. I've just revisited your excellent 1998 article Street Shooting In the Orient, where you advocated "glancing through the viewfinder only when necessary": clearly, it's even less necessary today. I'll follow your example and factor in face detection capability when shopping for cameras. I'd already wondered why Fujifilm, who've long had advanced face detection on some of their point-and-shoots, don't seem to have enabled it on their new X100; the other camera I've been considering lately, Nikon's D7000, seemingly has face detection in video and live-view modes, but not otherwise, though when I had one in hand for evaluation, it didn't occur to me to consider this feature. Thanks for pointing out my shortsightedness in snubbing face recognition as an 'amateur' feature beneath the notice of serious photographers. Your lucid thinking is much appreciated, and very well illustrated by your grab shots.

[Marc Rochkind]

Wow! I'm going to run out and buy one of these nifty cameras!

Wait a minute... I already have one! Never bothered with face detection, though... didn't even think it was useful. Not sure I even knew it was there.

Thanks, John... I'm going to try this out myself.

[Mike Johnston]

"I've never used large format, but after reading Mike's description yesterday, it occurred to me that at the moment of tripping the shutter, you don't really know what you're capturing with those either."

Well, actually you do, you're just not seeing it on the ground glass. You're looking at the real thing as you shoot.

Mike

[John Allen]

I've always had face detection switched on in my Canon S95 - indeed, it's the default setting - and generally it's worked well, a feature which helps to make photography more spontaneous, for which the S95 is good.

Recently I found one case where face detection seemed to cause a problem: photographing small alpine flowers in Switzerland, the camera always seemed to be focusing on the wrong part of the picture. Switching from face-detect to AF on the centre of the image worked way better with the alpines. But apart from this one special case I can't see any reason to switch it off.

[David Dyer-Bennet]

I find face-detect AF quite useful. A lot of the futzing around I do with my D700 is adjusting the focus point to about where the face is, and then adjusting the framing so the focus point is on an eye in the face. Automating that speeds things up (I use FDAF in my small cameras, currently an Olympus EPL-2). (The D700 can focus in conditions the Olympus essentially can't, and much faster too; for example it can track a musician's head as it moves while they perform. So I still end up using the D700 for many of the low-light photos. And of course it produces better files under low-light conditions, too.)

I'm surprised people are so locked into absolutes. John's article doesn't assume the faces/eyes must always be the focus of a photo; he talks about a technique (technology) for focusing on faces/eyes. I really think it's uncontroversial that quite a lot of photos include people as major elements, and that photographers frequently want the eyes of a person in a photo sharp; hence such a technology is of potential interest to many photographers. That's all. It's not a universal issue, it's merely a common issue.

I would tend to agree with Nick that eye-level finders are as fundamental now as they were 100 years ago -- but I think we mean opposite things by that (I could be misreading Nick, but the opening sentence saying he completely disagrees with John set the tone for my interpretation). I'll make a somewhat strong and contentious statement: nothing as simplistic as a viewfinder style, sensor size and shape, or capture method has ever been or ever will be "fundamental" to photography.

[Nick]

Like a lot of the other commenters above (and probably a lot of lurkers), I'm going to give face detection a try. I don't generally photograph people I don't know (architecture and landscapes don't glare at you when you take their picture), but this could be a great thing for taking pictures of my kid, who usually doesn't sit still well enough for my usual focus-and-recompose routine to be highly effective. I don't know why I hadn't thought to try it before.

[GKFroehlich]

Don't know of any list of cameras with face detection, but the Nikon D3 and D3s have it in their "Auto Area AF" mode. And it works remarkably well in difficult situations, like shooting live jazz performances in really dark venues. Took me a while to get comfortable handing that decision over to the cameras, but frankly they have a higher 'hit rate' in those situations than I do.

[Paul Glover]

It's a tool, to be used as appropriate. Someone who knows what they're doing can use it when they want faces in focus and turn it off when they want more control.

The trouble is that it's probably buried under a small mountain of menu options, so getting to it to switch it off and on might be a problem.

[GKFroehlich]

Regarding my previous post, Nikon does not claim that the D3 family has face detection per se. To be more precise, they state in the manuals "Auto-area AF: Camera automatically detects subject and selects focus point. If type G or D lens is used, camera can distinguish human subjects from background for improved subject detection." Whatever it is or it isn't, this mode nails focus on faces in a range of situations.

[wchen]

I am a viewfinder addict, but I did try other approaches in framing a shot. Yes, "Why not"?

[Sebastian Schanze]

I am also a big fan of face detection! Not necessarily because of AF but because of auto-exposure: at least in my camera the recognized face is automatically put into "Zone VI". So no need for compensation for backlighting, no need to spot meter a face (and add +1 EV). I think face-detection AE is simply brilliant.

[NucularHolyWarrior]

Finally a good reason to update my K20D :-)

[david]

"If there was a camera with face detection switching that fast and physical, I would embrace it."

Panasonic's GH2 for one has the focus mode (face-detecting, tracking, all area, single area) on a dial.

[John Krumm]

I think all of the new mirror-less ep1-like cameras have face detection (don't know about Leica). I'm less sure about dslr's. I have it on my E5 and use it for sneaky shots of my daughter on occasion. As long as the face isn't in deep shadow focus is usually good.

[Tom Stermitz]

Even my K5 has face detection as one of the three autofocus settings in live view.

That makes it easy to switch between normal eye-level shooting, and live view with face detect.

[Jeff]

I’m curious as to how well this works when there are multiple faces, as Ed Hawko points out, and understand that auto-focus using Live View is problematic for some photos on some cameras (i.e., too slow to be useful on Canon’s, otherwise cool, 60D). Someone smarter than me should make an accessory device that works with any camera using something like its’ USB port or its’ Blue Tooth functionality to send a TTL image to a high-res screen in the hand (or worn around the wrist of the hand) which is not holding the camera. Then, you could compose and focus as you wish, use the best auto-focus mechanism in the camera, and get even more harder-to-reach photos.

[James]

I don't really understand Ed Hawco's complaint. Either you have a camera where you can override the autofocus trivially, or you have a camera where you can't. Face detection doesn't enter into it any more than using the wrong autofocus mode or selecting the wrong autofocus point does.

[Craig Norris]

How about face detection combined with matrix metering, whereby it only focuses on Keanu Reeves' face?

Seriously though, one benefit that impressed me in real world use was that in some cameras the face detection mode also limits the metering to the face, and thereby avoids the usual problems in backlit situations.

[expiring_frog]

> "If there was a camera with face detection switching that fast
> and physical, I would embrace it."
>
> Panasonic's GH2 for one has the focus mode (face-detecting,
> tracking, all area, single area) on a dial.

Also the G2: http://a.img-dpreview.com/reviews/PanasonicDMCG2/images/topleft.jpg

None of the others have the dial, but the focus mode menu is one click away plus you can probably map face detection on/off to a q.menu item.

[expiring_frog]

Btw, the G2 + 20/1.7 combo is on overstock at Adorama for $609: http://www.adorama.com/IPCDMCG2BKP2.html . Given that the lens itself costs $379 and is much in demand, this seems like a wonderful bargain (which I have been unable to resist).

[Kelvin]

Loving your articles John. Truly creative individuals always keep an open mind and will try whatever colours are available on their palette.

[greg g]

Re: Ed looking for fast mechanical switching to/from FDAF: Panasonic G2 allows the selection/de-selection with switch/knob top left camera. Unfortunately the new G3, otherwise seemingly such an improvement has, I believe, lost that control entirely.

[Farnesworth]

The "Auto Area AF" face mode on Nikons works very well. The D300s was very snappy - I was able to walk down the street snapping faces without breaking stride. The D700 seems a little slower in comparison.

[Tyler]

One Better!

My camera has a setting that only allows the shutter to operate when there are >no< faces in the frame. F8 addresses all focusing matters.

Works perfectly for me.

[Patrick Snook]

Does anyone know of a camera that has an EVF or (preferably) a screen that would allow me to compose with an inverted live-view image (i.e. flipped about the horizontal axis)?

I know there's a way to do this with tethered shooting, but it's not practical to carry a MacBook along with me for that.

Thanks.

Patrick

[Chris Lucianu]

Thanks for making me discover that AMD (Automated Mug Detection) could be put to such creative use – indeed, to any use at all.
And thanks to Mike for hosting this current run of inspired guest contributions. It takes talent to be a good writer; it takes genius to be a good editor and host.

[Hugh Crawford]

Patrick:

"Does anyone know of a camera that has an EVF or (preferably) a screen that would allow me to compose with an inverted live-view image (i.e. flipped about the horizontal axis)?"

Most of the cameras that allow the LCD to point to the front in "self portrait mode" do that automatically but only when the screen is facing forward. If you use an external LCD , the ones sold as rearview mirror cams for cars have a switch to do that.

[Oskar Ojala]

I had used "traditional" phase detect AF and MF with SLRs for roughly ten years when I got myself a Panasonic GF1. I noticed that it has face detect, something which I hadn't tried before. It quickly proved to be a splendid feature, it makes casual snaps of people very easy to do, particularly with Panasonic's fast AF. I also feel that it enables me to focus (no pun intended) on things like compositions more instead of trying to ensure that the focus is correct. I haven't tried fancy DOF effects with it, but let's face it (again no pun...), most photos involving humans as the main subject have the face in focus. I think this is one of the really useful innovations that new camera technology has brought us.

[rrr_hhh]

Thank you for this interesting post. I like your flexible way of approaching things. My first digital camera was the Canon g2, which then had an articulated LCD and i really got lot of pleasure to shoot with it.
Presently i do also own an Olympus E-P1, but I tried to use face detection for street photography without succes : the camera was always focusing on the nearest object, often very near of the frame. I found it disappointing. May be Olympus improved the algorythm of the Successive models. I came to the conclusion that it was just set to avoid focusing on the background when two people were posing in front of the camera.
May be that I should check whether the algorythm of the Panasonic G1 is any better...

[Sam]

"If there was a camera with face detection switching that fast and physical, I would embrace it. Otherwise, no, because ultimately I would rather miss a shot because of my own incompetence than miss a shot because the camera overrides what I want to photograph."

Olympus PL1 will let you map the Function or record video button to Face Detect on and off.

Other cameras probably have the same ability.

[The Lazy Aussie]

Well how interesting. I must admit I turned off face autofocus in scorn on my epl2. Will now give it a try.

On other fantastic Olympus news, the lenscap I dropped on the busiest street in the city without noticing was still there 24 hours later, and despite being run over by thousands of cars was still workable. In fact scarred in a cool way! Yay to me.

I have set up the prog button to switch instantly to manual focus, so I don't have a problem with turning off the face focus.

[John Whitley]

Diego jokes about in-camera merge-to-HDR, but this feature has been in the iPhone 4 since its release. When enabled, the camera shoots two frames which are automatically merged. For myself and others I know this has considerably improved shots in difficult-to-impossible lighting conditions, especially given such a small sensor.

[Jan Kwarnmark]

What matters is to be in the right place at the right moment. Thats the difficult part and the camera can never do it for you. But why not let it help you with the rest?