# Toddler on the move advice



## gayle23 (Nov 20, 2016)

Hi I've been trying to get a classic Christmassy picture of my 2 year old in front of a Christmas tree with sparkly bokeh from the lights on the tree, the kind of picture I want to use as a Christmas card for the grandparents. Anyway I've been trying to get a good shot at my local garden centre where there are tons of huge Christmas trees indoors all decorated with sparkly lights. Trying to get my daughter to stand still has proven a challenge but even when she does I have not been pleased with my images. Her blonde hair is looking really back lit and over exposed and the focus is not as sharp as I would like it. I've tried higher shutter speeds to catch her while she moves but am wandering whether I need to change my metering mode to centre weighted, guessing spot metering might not work as she moves around too much. I will post a picture up tomorrow if that would help. If I increase my aperture then my shutter speed will slow which worries me as she's not good at keeping still! Am I losing sharpness but using too low an aperture? Should I be increasing the Iso instead? Are the Christmas lights making it difficult for the camera to gain a good focus? Bit confused. Am using a Nikon D3300 with a 50 mm 1.8 lens. Any advice would be much appreciated.


----------



## Derrel (Nov 20, 2016)

Spot metering is for getting "the right exposure" before hand, and then setting that exposure, in Manual mode. For shooting AND metering AND setting the actual camera speed and f/stop while actually photographing, Spot metering mode is usually a bad idea; trust Nikon's center-weighted or Matrix metering modes to give you better exposures in fluid, fast-paced situations, and leave spot metering where it mostly belongs: set to OFF.

Chrtistmas Lights usually demand ISO 400 to 800, and a wide f/stop, like f/2.8, to make them look bright, and lighted! it's like Fireworks: the f/stop and the ISO create the basic level of brightness. The shutter speed, for the ISO in use, and for the f/stop in use? That is often pretty sloooooow: think 1/4 second to 1/25 second, at ISO 400 to 800, at f/2.8.

The "trick" is to set the camera to Tungsten white balance, for the Chrtistmas lights. Tape an ORANGE gel over an electronic flash unit. Light the subject (the child or model) with the flash. There are actually two, different exposures going on here: one is the exposure that makes the tree and lights look best (slow shutter, wide lens opening, moderately high ISO), and then the second exposure for the foreground--made by the orange-gelled electronic flash unit.
*****
There is seldom any place where the natural "existing light" can make both the tree and lights, and a moving person, look good. Christmas scenarios are almost always exactly as I suggest above: a balancing act of *ISO, f/stop, shutter time, and a secondary light source* for the foreground person or people.


----------



## Derrel (Nov 20, 2016)

Here is what I mean, some Chrtistmas light shots I took. Settings are mostly 200mm lens at f/2.8, ISO 400 or so, shutter at a slowish speed of 1/25, White Balance for the tree lights set to Incandescent Light, and the subject lighted by a very low-powered foreground electronic flash (Nikon SB 800) fitted with the factory-supplied orange filter for the flash and firing at about 1/16 power as I recall. The flash was maybe 7 feet from the subject, shot into a small umbrella.


----------



## photo1x1.com (Nov 21, 2016)

Derrel is spot on with his suggestions - especially metering first and then dialling the readings into manual mode is a great way to achieve constant exposure. 
While the lights on a christmas tree appear bright to us, they are not at all. Shooting the christmas tree with a person and keeping the mood in the scene is probably the most difficult shot you´ll ever try to create.
Last year I equipped a christmas tree with 1.200 LED lights in an attempt to get the most out of it photography wise. And I experimented pretty much with it.
The readings I´ve got with the shot below were 0,6 sec | f2,5 | ISO 100. The tree itself on this image is a little bright so one stop darker would still be enough for the blurred light background, but then the foreground would be darker too.
In order to achieve at least 1/100th which is still too slow if your kid really moves, you´d have to use ISO 6.400. Too much for a portrait in my opinion.

So using a flash as Derrel suggests is about your only chance. Nevertheless you´ll loose quite some light for the background (tree - christmas lights), as soon as you start bringing your ISO down, so at least for me - the image I have in mind is impossible to shoot with lower ISO.
AND: what you want to do is light the background with the flash as little as possible, because that will destroy the mood. So you need to:

Get as far away with your kid from the background so that the flash doesn´t light it too much

Get the flash as close to the kid as possible because any light source will always light objects that are closer to it much more than objects that are further away. 

To be able to get really close, use a light source that is big, but at the same time easily controllable (ideally a strip softbox with an attached grid, or a ring flash in front of your camera). If you´d use a speedlight without any light shaping tool and get really close, the images will look awful.

Point the flash in a direction that it will not light the tree in the background (not possible with ring flash)

Probably you´ll want a reflector on the opposite side of the light to bounce light back into the shadows that are created by the softbox with grid - a white foamboard will do.
One more thing to consider: if you want your christmas tree lights to look yellow, rather than white, (I have to disagree with Derrel) - you´d want to skip the orange filter, or even add a blue filter instead. If you use an orange filter, and later white balance the image for your orange light source, the tree lights will appear white. If you use a blue filter instead (or no filter at all), and later balance the whites to that blue (or neutral) light, the face of your kid will have nice skitones, and the christmas tree lights will be yellow.

All that sounds rather complicated, and it is to be honest. I always try to explain things with really easy words. But this one is the holy grail of photography. As  crazy as that sounds.


----------



## vintagesnaps (Nov 21, 2016)

I don't know if the trees at the garden center are indoors or outside, but if it's indoors it could be fairly low light. Either way, maybe try doing some test shots first while she looks at trees, etc. Make sure your camera is set so you can use a fairly fast shutter speed (since it's likely she could move a little). Get framed and focused where she will be standing, so you're all set. Then maybe make a game of it - have her stand by the tree and, I don't know sing Jingle Bells, say ho ho like Santa, pretend to be a snowman, etc. Then give her a break, let her move around, then come stand by the tree and do ___. 

You gotta have the camera set and ready to go before she gets in the picture so you can get a couple or so photos when she's actually standing. Which probably won't be long! lol Try giving short breaks and take the pictures efficiently (by that I mean quick but not too rushed). 

I don't know what the store's policy is on picture taking (or if they have one), they may not mind people taking pictures of their trees but some places seem to have cut back on allowing photos if they've had too many people trying to take pictures (which with everybody having phones now can get disruptive for shoppers/customers). Being a garden center they may be okay with people taking pictures while they're picking out a Christmas tree, buying decorations, etc.


----------



## gayle23 (Nov 22, 2016)

Derrel said:


> Here is what I mean, some Chrtistmas light shots I took. Settings are mostly 200mm lens at f/2.8, ISO 400 or so, shutter at a slowish speed of 1/25, White Balance for the tree lights set to Incandescent Light, and the subject lighted by a very low-powered foreground electronic flash (Nikon SB 800) fitted with the factory-supplied orange filter for the flash and firing at about 1/16 power as I recall. The flash was maybe 7 feet from the subject, shot into a small umbrella.View attachment 130592


Thank you, that's really useful advice. I'm learning that what I'm trying to do is maybe not that easy! I will work on getting my daughter to stay still and have a play about on the weekend. I don't have an external flash/speedlight yet so I guess I will have to work on that next year if I have one by then. Your pictures looked great. Thank you for taking the time to respond in such detail.


----------



## gayle23 (Nov 22, 2016)

photo1x1.com said:


> Derrel is spot on with his suggestions - especially metering first and then dialling the readings into manual mode is a great way to achieve constant exposure.
> While the lights on a christmas tree appear bright to us, they are not at all. Shooting the christmas tree with a person and keeping the mood in the scene is probably the most difficult shot you´ll ever try to create.
> Last year I equipped a christmas tree with 1.200 LED lights in an attempt to get the most out of it photography wise. And I experimented pretty much with it.
> The readings I´ve got with the shot below were 0,6 sec | f2,5 | ISO 100. The tree itself on this image is a little bright so one stop darker would still be enough for the blurred light background, but then the foreground would be darker too.
> ...


Yes my goodness it all sounds a bit much for me at this stage of my learning which is really frustrating. I will have a good play about when I set up a tree in my house as I can take a bit more time then. I am planning on investing in a nikon speedlight fairly soon but want to have mastered the basics a bit more first so I know what I need to buy. Thank you for taking the time out to reply and when I get a speedlight and maybe some reflectors/soft box I will re read these messages!


----------



## gayle23 (Nov 22, 2016)

vintagesnaps said:


> I don't know if the trees at the garden center are indoors or outside, but if it's indoors it could be fairly low light. Either way, maybe try doing some test shots first while she looks at trees, etc. Make sure your camera is set so you can use a fairly fast shutter speed (since it's likely she could move a little). Get framed and focused where she will be standing, so you're all set. Then maybe make a game of it - have her stand by the tree and, I don't know sing Jingle Bells, say ho ho like Santa, pretend to be a snowman, etc. Then give her a break, let her move around, then come stand by the tree and do ___.
> 
> You gotta have the camera set and ready to go before she gets in the picture so you can get a couple or so photos when she's actually standing. Which probably won't be long! lol Try giving short breaks and take the pictures efficiently (by that I mean quick but not too rushed).
> 
> I don't know what the store's policy is on picture taking (or if they have one), they may not mind people taking pictures of their trees but some places seem to have cut back on allowing photos if they've had too many people trying to take pictures (which with everybody having phones now can get disruptive for shoppers/customers). Being a garden center they may be okay with people taking pictures while they're picking out a Christmas tree, buying decorations, etc.


Thank you so much for your advice. I'm heading there on the weekend so will try a few more. I will try taking pics of the tree first that's good thinking and getting her to sing as she loves putting on shows. She's cottoned on to the fact that I want her to stay still so is finding it funny to literally sprint towards me laughing! If I were home  I would have more chance of keeping my daughter still by getting her sat on a cushion with a Christmas book or something but there I have to be quick like you said as people get might start getting annoyed! Thanks again. Gayle


----------



## gayle23 (Nov 22, 2016)

These are the best out of quite a few!


----------



## photo1x1.com (Nov 22, 2016)

gayle23 said:


> View attachment 130698 View attachment 130699
> These are the best out of quite a few!


Really cute! I think there is too much surrounding light to make the christmas lights really pop.
Today I went to a christmas market, because just like you I still have that perfect christmas image in mind . We have a really big one here in Vienna. I found out that they have huuuuge electric bulbs on the huuuuge christmas tree. I guess that would help a lot because these send out tons of light. So maybe if you have a bigger christmas market in your town, you could try that.


----------



## Dave442 (Nov 22, 2016)

I would take her walking around the garden center first, a long walk. 

You can use the settings like Derrel noted (f/2.8, 1/25 sec, ISO 400).  Try for a good exposure of the tree and just adjust the ISO, then with your daughter add the pop-up flash, dial the flash compensation all the way down: EV -3 and raise to -2 if she is still too dark.  Do this a few times before going out of the house so you don't have to think about it at the same time you are trying to have your daughter where you want her at the home center.


----------



## The_Traveler (Nov 22, 2016)

The first one is cute- a bit dark and cold but nice


----------



## photo1x1.com (Nov 23, 2016)

The_Traveler said:


> The first one is cute- a bit dark and cold but nice
> 
> View attachment 130704


awesome - I love it!


----------



## gayle23 (Nov 23, 2016)

photo1x1.com said:


> gayle23 said:
> 
> 
> > View attachment 130698 View attachment 130699
> ...


That's a good idea thank you, I will have a look out for some really good big lights.  Good luck getting your perfect Christmassy photo! Be good to see it if you get a good one.


----------



## gayle23 (Nov 23, 2016)

Dave442 said:


> I would take her walking around the garden center first, a long walk.
> 
> You can use the settings like Derrel noted (f/2.8, 1/25 sec, ISO 400).  Try for a good exposure of the tree and just adjust the ISO, then with your daughter add the pop-up flash, dial the flash compensation all the way down: EV -3 and raise to -2 if she is still too dark.  Do this a few times before going out of the house so you don't have to think about it at the same time you are trying to have your daughter where you want her at the home center.


Thank you so much, I don't usually use my flash and don't know quite what you mean by Ev (I know exposure compensation) but will look it up and will definitely try it out.


----------



## gayle23 (Nov 23, 2016)

The_Traveler said:


> The first one is cute- a bit dark and cold but nice
> 
> View attachment 130704


Ooooh how have you made it look better!?


----------



## The_Traveler (Nov 23, 2016)

gayle23 said:


> Ooooh how have you made it look better!?



Looking at a photo, understanding how it could be edited to look better is the hardest skill to achieve.
And that is only done by looking at pictures, trying to understand what you like and why and the reverse,  reading what other people think in the critiques.
That's what will drive your editing.

I have 3 rules - Put important things in important places, minimize defects, amplify good points.
What should the viewers be looking at?  What is really the most important part?
Her face.
Why is it way up in the corner?
Do we need so much dress, so much Out of Focus tree?
I don't think so.






So if this is cropped (I generally crop to a standard format)
(In this case 3:2)
Her face is more prominent in the frame and it is at a strong point (the Thirds).
A lot of the tree and dress are gone but so what?  We know that they're there.
Now look at her face; is she really blue and sort of dull - and is that the impression you want to give?




So I added some brightness, added a bit of contrast and warmed up the color.





What I did took me 30 seconds at most.
No fancy tricks, nothing special.
You need to work at actually seeing the picture as it is and not the picture in your mind's eye.
Then learn to understand what the defects are.
The easiest part is correcting them.

The easiest way to focus your attention is to go trhough a set of interrogatories about a picture as a guideline to how a image could be improved.

I wrote this article, Getting to a Final Image - some words on editing photos for a new photographer, a couple of years ago and I think it might help.


----------



## gayle23 (Nov 23, 2016)

The_Traveler said:


> gayle23 said:
> 
> 
> > Ooooh how have you made it look better!?
> ...


Thank you so much I feel like that is really good advice. I will definitely read your article.


----------



## The_Traveler (Nov 23, 2016)

Here is the section with the questions for those who hesitate to go offsite:

These are some of the questions I ask myself when I look at a picture to decide what items need to be considered in a post-processing workflow.

Are there obviously horizontal or vertical lines that are off their true direction without any artistic reason? (horizon, trees, etc.)
Are there bright areas of light or color that draw a viewer's eye from the real object of interest? 
Are there one or more obvious centers of visual interest where a viewer's can settle? 
Is(are) the center(s) of interest - the main subject(s) - well placed within the frame and does the placement relate well to the rest of the content so that any viewer's eye is drawn to, rather than away? 
Is there excess space that pulls the eye away and drains any tension or drama from the picture?
Is there space that gives some weight to an important part of an image? 
Is there enough space so that nothing feels cramped or cut off? 
If the subject is a person or a face and his/her placement in the frame is asymmetric, does the asymmetry make sense to the eye?
Are there geometric issues? e.g. are the horizontals and verticals correct, and is that important or as you want them?
Is the skin color 'natural' to the subject?
Are there little off-tints in the skin? (look at the sides of the nose and under the chin where these lurk.)
Is there a bluish tint to the skin or the whites of the eyes? (Even with a custom white balance, this is all too common in portraits taken outdoors. Try adding a warming photo filter and see how this looks.)
Is the color or tonality appropriate for the content? Saturation or lack of it? Correct hues, white balance? 
Does the color make the point that you want?
Is the sharpness or lack of sharpness appropriate? 
Is everything that should be in focus and sharp, actually so? 
In the reverse, is there so much depth of field, so much in focus that attention is drawn away from the real object of interest?
Are there individual small defects -points of motion, dirt on the lens/sensor, out-of-focus spots that hurt the image, unduly bright areas that draw the eye?
After doing this kind of image evaluation for a while, one doesn't need to dwell specifically on questions and the evaluation will become unscripted and automatic.

*Nothing is wrong per se if it creates the impression that you want to make.
Something is wrong if it gets between the viewer and her/his appreciation of the image.*​


----------



## gayle23 (Nov 23, 2016)

The_Traveler said:


> Here is the section with the questions for those who hesitate to go offsite:
> 
> These are some of the questions I ask myself when I look at a picture to decide what items need to be considered in a post-processing workflow.
> 
> ...


So helpful, thanks for that. I will still read your article when I get a chance very soon.


----------



## donny1963 (Dec 3, 2016)

Derrel said:


> Here is what I mean, some Chrtistmas light shots I took. Settings are mostly 200mm lens at f/2.8, ISO 400 or so, shutter at a slowish speed of 1/25, White Balance for the tree lights set to Incandescent Light, and the subject lighted by a very low-powered foreground electronic flash (Nikon SB 800) fitted with the factory-supplied orange filter for the flash and firing at about 1/16 power as I recall. The flash was maybe 7 feet from the subject, shot into a small umbrella.View attachment 130592




Darrel:   
it's a good shot how ever 1/25 is too slow a shutter speed to do a portrait, too many things can go wrong, if the subject moves even slightly the picture will be fuzzy,  you got away with that one except for her finger she moved it i know this because the wedding ring she has on there and her hand is fuzzy as hell.

Why would you want to put your self in that situation to use a slow shutter speed when you don't really have to?

you can get the same results by changing the ISO to maybe 200-ish instead of using a slow shutter speed..
So why would you tell some one who is new to that kind of stuff? to increase his chanced in a failed picure?
one thing i would never do is tell some one to use a shutter speed lower then 100 for portraits to some one
who is new at it, that is a recipe for disaster..

and the other thing i mention he was asking about how to do this with kids moving around, well if you got
toddlers moving around you don't want to be using a slow shutter speed unless your looking for a blur effect..
Any one who has kids, knows you can't get a toddler to stay still for a second,   and from experience of doing
portraits in the studio, i can tell, not one client who has brought in their kids for portraits, will stay still for a
1/25 shutter speed if you attempt that, good luck with that..


----------



## photo1x1.com (Dec 11, 2016)

gayle23 said:


> photo1x1.com said:
> 
> 
> > gayle23 said:
> ...



More than two weeks later I found a christmas tree that was suitable. Yesterday I went to the biggest christmas market in vienna - oh my god it was crowded beyond belief. I forgot to take a picture of the tree alone, but I took an image that was resembling exactly what I was looking for:
Lens was 55mm full frame. ISO800 | f2.0  | 1/80sec 
It was about 20 min after sunset, open skies.
The tree was pretty big - I´d say around 4m high, rather wide and well covered with lights. The lights themselves haven´t been that big, but nice and bright. Distance to the tree was about 2m
Now I need to go back and reshoot it with our cute little neighbour  .
I hope that helps you with your christmassy images.


----------



## photo1x1.com (Dec 11, 2016)

And when I say it was crowdy, I´m talking about this:


----------



## gayle23 (Dec 11, 2016)

Wow that market looks amazing and god so many people! The lights look amazing in your picture, really beautiful. Thanks for remembering, I am still trying to get a really good shot, have been experimenting with my tree at home and trying out stuff with fairy lights, just been watching a tutorial about using card with cut out shapes that you stick to your lens, gonna try that as it looked fun. Still struggling to use a slow enough shutter speed with my moving daughter and I don't have a tripod so getting camera shake. Will post some if I get any I am pleased with. Hope you get a really good one with your neighbour.


----------



## KmH (Dec 11, 2016)

EV = Exposure Value
Most DSLR camera come set by default to adjust EV by 1/3 stop increments.

*What’s A Stop?*
A stop of exposure is a fundamental photography concept.

A 'stop' is a doubling (2x) or a halving (0.5x) of the amount of light that reaches the recording media, be it film or an electronic sensor.
Since exposure is a triad of adjustments (shutter speed, ISO, lens aperture) you can change 1, 2 or all 3 of the triad settings.

If you want 1 more stop of exposure (brighter) you can adjust just one of the 3 by 1 more stop.
Or, you can change 2 of the 3 by 1/2 more stop each for a net gain of 1 stop of exposure.
Or, you can adjust all 3 by 1/3 more stop for a net gain of 1 stop of exposure.

You can also change the triad of settings and have no change in the exposure.
If you change 1 of the 3 settings by 1 stop more exposure and change a 2nd setting by 1 stop less exposure the net change is zero.

Suppose you subtracted a stop of shutter speed to help stop subject motion, you could add a stop of lens aperture to keep the exposure the same. However, adding a stop of aperture will also affect the total depth-of-field (DoF) by a small amount. So, if you don't want the DoF to change you would add a stop of ISO instead, however, adding a stop of ISO will likely increase by some amount the image noise in the photo.

*Notes:
• DSLR cameras are set by default to adjust the exposure settings in 1/3 stop increments.*
Most DSLR cameras let you change that to 1/2 stop or 1 stop increments.
However, the advantage of 1/3 stop step increments is more precise control of exposure.
• DSLR cameras only meter reflected light and have 3 or 4 scene metering options - Spot, Partial, Center-weighted, and Matrix/Evaluative.
• Many professional portraiture photographers use a hand held light meter so they can measure reflected light, incident light, and strobed light (flash).
Good hand-held light meters  meter in 1/10 EV increments allowing very precise exposure adjustment.


----------



## smoke665 (Dec 11, 2016)

Lots of good advice on the technical side, so thought I throw in my two cents on non-technical. We have a 15 month old granddaughter who must be a decedent of  Speedy Gonzales because she's everywhere at once, touching everything in sight. I've had to totally readjust how I take pictures. First of all, my lights are set to light a zone. X marks the spot so to speak. Exposure and shutter is all set to manual for that zone. Auto Focus on (spot), so that when she enters the zone, all I have to do is compose and shoot. Secondly, at that age only one thing stops them cold in their tracks - something sparkly that they haven't seen before. We keep an assortment of shiny (the brighter the better) non-breakable objects so that just as she enters the zone, my wife makes sure they magically appear in the right spot.  If lucky we get as many as 3 or 4 shots before she's on the move again.


----------



## gayle23 (Dec 12, 2016)

smoke665 said:


> Lots of good advice on the technical side, so thought I throw in my two cents on non-technical. We have a 15 month old granddaughter who must be a decedent of  Speedy Gonzales because she's everywhere at once, touching everything in sight. I've had to totally readjust how I take pictures. First of all, my lights are set to light a zone. X marks the spot so to speak. Exposure and shutter is all set to manual for that zone. Auto Focus on (spot), so that when she enters the zone, all I have to do is compose and shoot. Secondly, at that age only one thing stops them cold in their tracks - something sparkly that they haven't seen before. We keep an assortment of shiny (the brighter the better) non-breakable objects so that just as she enters the zone, my wife makes sure they magically appear in the right spot.  If lucky we get as many as 3 or 4 shots before she's on the move again.


Thank you, good advice about the sparkly stuff! I will try it. I have recently switched from using the auto servo focus mode (as a friend said it was no good) to using either single point (when she's sat still) or continuous servo, but I'm really having trouble catching shots with the right compostion now when my girl is on the move. I have been trying to keep the middle focus spot on her face as I heard that the middle focus spot is the most sensetive and I want to get sharp focus of her face. But then I'm trying to recompose quickly and it's all going wrong. Am I in the wrong focus mode? Is that a whole other thread question? There is dynamic mode on my d3300 is that what I should be in? It's hard to quickly move the focus points to track my toddler.  Frustrated!!


----------



## gayle23 (Dec 12, 2016)

KmH said:


> EV = Exposure Value
> Most DSLR camera come set by default to adjust EV by 1/3 stop increments.
> 
> *What’s A Stop?*
> ...


Thanks, I'm trying to really internalise all of that advice. It's like at the moment I get it when I read it and then when I'm taking photos of moving kids I kind of get so focused on capturing the moments that I get confused by it all! I get a bit frightened of using manual. Would you suggest using manual when photographing kids on the move, or one of the priority modes? I have also been struggling with using the continuous servo focus mode as I described in my response to smoke665's message. Have you any advice?  Thanks


----------



## smoke665 (Dec 12, 2016)

gayle23 said:


> Am I in the wrong focus mode? Is that a whole other thread question? There is dynamic mode on my d3300 is that what I should be in? It's hard to quickly move the focus points to track my toddler. Frustrated!!



Though my camera model has "face tracking" mode I don't use it, nor do I use continuous focus. Instead I set my exposure as I said above so that I know I have an acceptable depth of field, set auto focus on single spot, then concentrate on placing that spot on the eyes.


----------



## gayle23 (Dec 15, 2016)

smoke665 said:


> gayle23 said:
> 
> 
> > Am I in the wrong focus mode? Is that a whole other thread question? There is dynamic mode on my d3300 is that what I should be in? It's hard to quickly move the focus points to track my toddler. Frustrated!!
> ...


Thank you for that, does single spot mean the same as single point af? I thought auto focus was the one that switched between single spot and using multiple focus points automatically?  It's all a bit confusing. I'm trying out using Af_c with dynamic af_ area mode but not sure if that's the best combination for a moving toddler. Just trying to read up on it all.  Thanks again Gayle


----------



## smoke665 (Dec 15, 2016)

gayle23 said:


> does single spot mean the same as single point af?



Sorry, didn't mean to confuse you, my camera may have settings that yours doesn't, but they are similar across brands. In my case I have a "spot" setting which places the focus area to a limited area in the center of the frame. I use this when hand holding to focus on the eyes. I also have a "select spot" which allows me to move the spot around the frame. I use this when on a tripod, again focusing on the eye. In "multiple points" the sensor is divided into selectable multiple point areas, used primarily on landscapes. "Tracking" tracks the subject when you half push the shutter, think moving car, and "face detection" automatically detects faces and tries to keep the majority of that face in focus. 

I use the viewfinder when hand holding set to AF.S. Without confusing you more, the viewfinder uses a different means to reach focus (TTL phase matching) on my model, which gives a quicker, more accurate focus, especially in low light, than the contrast method used on liveview/screen. I'm not sure that having it set to AF.C would hurt. Again, though my personal preference is to use the eyes as the focus point, and any method that uses an area method generally ends up with fuzzy, missed focus around the eyes.

Metering options generally include "spot", "center-weighted", and "multi-segmented". Again, when I'm in manual mode I use "spot" choosing to "spot" meter areas myself and make adjustments as needed.


----------



## robbins.photo (Dec 15, 2016)

gayle23 said:


> smoke665 said:
> 
> 
> > Lots of good advice on the technical side, so thought I throw in my two cents on non-technical. We have a 15 month old granddaughter who must be a decedent of  Speedy Gonzales because she's everywhere at once, touching everything in sight. I've had to totally readjust how I take pictures. First of all, my lights are set to light a zone. X marks the spot so to speak. Exposure and shutter is all set to manual for that zone. Auto Focus on (spot), so that when she enters the zone, all I have to do is compose and shoot. Secondly, at that age only one thing stops them cold in their tracks - something sparkly that they haven't seen before. We keep an assortment of shiny (the brighter the better) non-breakable objects so that just as she enters the zone, my wife makes sure they magically appear in the right spot.  If lucky we get as many as 3 or 4 shots before she's on the move again.
> ...



Simple enough.  Don't recompose.  Shoot wide instead.  If you shoot wide, meaning zoom out or back up and include more background, then you can adjust your composition in post.  So leave your AF dead center and shoot wide, then crop and adjust in post to desired composition.


----------



## gayle23 (Dec 15, 2016)

smoke665 said:


> gayle23 said:
> 
> 
> > does single spot mean the same as single point af?
> ...


Yes my camera doesn't have a spot setting but I have the select spot that I can move around when I'm in single servo mode so that's more for when a subject is totally still isn't it. I get what you mean about a method that uses an area method ending up with fuzzy missed focus around the eyes so how would I counteract that seeing as I don't have the 'spot setting'. Do you think my best plan to stick to single point (select spot) and just try to take shots when kids are still for a second?  Would using the single point be stupid in Af-C mode? As mine is just a beginner entry level camera should I just be sticking in Auto focus mode! but I don't want to do that as I really want to improve and have more control. Thank you for your help.


----------



## gayle23 (Dec 15, 2016)

robbins.photo said:


> gayle23 said:
> 
> 
> > smoke665 said:
> ...


Interesting advice, I will give it a go. You mean AF dead centre on a the single point area mode setting? What about for when kids are running about? Thanks.


----------



## robbins.photo (Dec 15, 2016)

gayle23 said:


> Interesting advice, I will give it a go. You mean AF dead centre on a the single point area mode setting? What about for when kids are running about? Thanks.



If they are relatively stationary I'd use single point, dead center, aim for the eyes.  If they are flitting about like mad hatters - 9 point.  Leave it in the center, and then track them yourself as they move.  If your shooting wide and are far enough back you can usually keep them in the center of the frame pretty easily.


----------



## Derrel (Dec 15, 2016)

Flash will stop the motion of foreground people. Slow shutter speed and wide lens opening is what allows weak little Christmas tree bulbs to "burn in" and actually show up. This reply written in response to a very uninformed respondent above.


----------



## adamhiram (Dec 15, 2016)

gayle23 said:


> Interesting advice, I will give it a go. You mean AF dead centre on a the single point area mode setting? What about for when kids are running about? Thanks.


Usually, you'll want to use the focus point closest to your subject, in this case, on the toddler's eye (whichever is closest to you).  However the D3300 only has 1 cross-type focus point, which is in the center; using the other focus points may have trouble grabbing focus in low light.  I concur with the above recommendation to use the center focus point, then recompose as needed.

AF-S focus mode will work well if you can find a way to distract the toddler and keep them still long enough to get the shot.  For a moving subject, you may want to try AF-C focus mode, but again your best bet may be to stick with a single focus point in the center.  On a D5100 (same number and type of focus points), I found that with only 11 focus points, most of them being non-cross-type, 3D tracking and other dynamic tracking modes don't really work too well.


----------



## gayle23 (Dec 16, 2016)

adamhiram said:


> gayle23 said:
> 
> 
> > Interesting advice, I will give it a go. You mean AF dead centre on a the single point area mode setting? What about for when kids are running about? Thanks.
> ...


great thanks for that advice will give it ag


robbins.photo said:


> gayle23 said:
> 
> 
> > Interesting advice, I will give it a go. You mean AF dead centre on a the single point area mode setting? What about for when kids are running about? Thanks.
> ...


Thanks, I will look up how to get the 9 point thing to work on my camera as I haven't come across that yet. I have single point, dynamic, 3D and auto area modes. Maybe getting 9 - points active is set somewhere else on the camera? I will research.


----------



## gayle23 (Dec 16, 2016)

adamhiram said:


> gayle23 said:
> 
> 
> > Interesting advice, I will give it a go. You mean AF dead centre on a the single point area mode setting? What about for when kids are running about? Thanks.
> ...


Thanks for that, I feel lots more informed now with all the advice, will give it a go.


----------

