These three "mistakes" are not things you need to avoid entirely. There are appropriate times and places to use each of them in your photography workflow, but what truly matters is that you don't repeat them mindlessly. I'm labelling them as ‘‘mistakes’’ because following them consistently without question would be a mistake, and I’ve certainly fallen victim to all of them myself in the past.

Going wide because you can..

One common pitfall is constantly shooting too wide simply because the scene in front of you is expansive. We've all been there: standing in an amazing location, wanting to capture everything because it looks incredible. However, looking back at my early work, I know that simply maxing out your lens's field of view doesn't guarantee impactful images.

Not only are wide-angle lenses the most difficult to compose your photos with (which isn’t always a bad thing if you like a challenge) but new photographers often fall into the trap of investing in a wide-angle focal length because they believe capturing ‘more’ will lead to better photos. In fact, I specifically remember reviewing early photos as a teenage novice and constantly thinking, 'Wait till I get that 16mm and can capture much wider vistas.'

This approach often results in photos lacking a clear focal point or subject, and even if you do have a subject, it can easily get lost in such a wide frame. This isn't to say you should never shoot wide; there are times when a 20mm shot, for example, perfectly captures the scene's essence.

The first time I visited the Faroe Islands back in 2019, I was so blown away by the landscape and it was so new to my eyes, I ended up photographing most scenes far too wide out of fear I’d not do justice to the sheer power of the landscape. Some of those wide images did work, but again, most of them lacked conscious framing that highlighted my subjects, and worse, a lot of the images ended up being just photos of ‘views' because it looked so epic in person.

The key is awareness. The sooner you become comfortable with the fact that a bit of extra land, sky or sea in a shot really won’t make that much impact on the overall outcome, the sooner you can throw away the guilt of leaving out a few extra pixels that the viewer never knew existed anyway.

While shooting wide and cropping later might seem like a solution, it encourages a lazy approach and prevents you from developing the crucial skill of composing effectively in-camera, which should be the fundamental goal for any photographer. Wide-angle focal lengths are the hardest to navigate. If you do pull off a super-wide shot, then fantastic, but you certainly don’t need to be rocking up to every location you visit and trying to include as much as you possibly can. Less is often more.

If you find yourself struggling with this and often get overwhelmed by what's in front of you, a great challenge is to head out with a fixed lens that isn’t overly wide (like a 50mm) and practise getting the most out of your scenes while using a much tighter focal length. You could work backwards from there if you wanted, and give yourself a slightly wider focal length to work with over time.

Northumberland Beach House - Shot at 50mm

Your techniques and approaches are on autopilot..

This second point echoes the first but focuses specifically on the trap of repeatedly using the same creative or artistic approach simply because it's been successful in the past.

I once heard a guest on a podcast say, 'I'm not a good photographer; I just put my subject in the middle and take a photo, and it looks good.' While I appreciate their honesty, particularly because they weren't trying to be a serious photographer, those of us who are (or at least trying to be) should strive to avoid this repetitive reliance on a single technique.

I was guilty of this myself a few years ago; I’d always be shooting from a low angle. Everywhere I went, I'd immediately look for a chance to get down low and include heavy foreground depth, even though it often wasn't the ideal way to present the subject. Now, I explore a much wider range of perspectives, and when I do shoot from below, it's a deliberate choice, not just my default setting. It took me a while to spot this repetition, but once I did, I went out of my way to make sure I wasn’t becoming a one-trick pony.

Long exposures are another common example. If I were photographing a farmhouse in bright daylight, would I use a long exposure just because I have the equipment to do so, and have captured beautiful long exposures before? Of course not. I may be wrong here, but I don’t think many photographers out there want a portfolio full of the exact same technique rinsed and repeated over and over again.

The goal is to have a diverse toolkit of photographic approaches at your disposal so you can choose the one that best suits the moment. This principle extends to editing as well. Do you need to boost the oranges in every photo just because it's worked in the past? That's a rhetorical question.

If you notice you’re defaulting to the exact same photographic technique, angle, composition and so on, wherever you go, force yourself to go out and try new things; you can only learn and improve by doing so.

Camera settings hot takes..

This is a ‘don’t believe everything you read’ kind of point. Try to make sure you’re not blindly following "hot takes" about camera settings and how you should shoot, simply because they sound technically correct or somebody with a big following states it’s the right way to do things.

This is especially prevalent in short-form social media content, where creators can amass millions of views by stating something technically true but not necessarily situationally appropriate. For example, I recently saw a video claiming you should always underexpose landscape photos because it's easier to recover shadow detail than highlight detail.

While yes, there's technical truth to this, and it’s widely known by most photographers, it's not a universal rule that works in all situations. There is no one correct exposure to always shoot at. What would have been much better advice would have been for the creator to simply state this is a technique you can use to retain data in bright skies if your camera has the dynamic range to bring the shadows and mids back in post.

Blindly adhering to advice like that without considering the specific scene and desired outcome is another road to being stuck on autopilot without questioning why. If you're shooting in heavy fog, you might want to overexpose beyond what your light meter suggests is correct. What about a city scene with deep shadows? You might want those shadows to remain completely black in order to block off part of the image. It all comes down to what result you want to achieve, not what a guru says is correct.

As photographers, we should prioritise the creative and artistic aspects of our images, not just blindly chase the latest buzzword about detail retention. Technical tips and facts are valuable, and understanding your camera's capabilities is essential. However, you, the scene, and your artistic vision should dictate your settings, and once you figure out what works for you in different situations, you’re on the way to having complete control over the outcome of your images.

Take tips and advice in from other photographers, try them out for yourself, but don’t get stuck believing one thing that one person said is the one and only correct way to shoot.

Featured