An "Impossible" Photo

Willy Porter and Carmen Nickerson. Copyright 2016, Charles Black and Eye Guess Photography. Photo taken with Olympus
OMD EM1 and 50-200 f2.8-3.5 zoom. ISO 5000, 1/200 at f3.5, 200mm

This photo of Willy Porter and Carmen Nickerson is supposed to be "impossible". It was produced with a micro four thirds camera, the Olympus OMD EM1. According to some people the sensor in my camera is too small to use for concert photography. High ISO images, such as this one shot at ISO 5000, are just too noisy, too lacking in detail to be any good.

At least that's what some "experts" say. The thing is, many of these "experts" are the types who depend very heavily on their cameras to do things they should be using their own minds to do. That is, take the steps necessary to capture images in a way that allows for the final version to look the way they want it to look. What has happened is that some people become fixated on "OOC" images (out of camera) and eschew and criticize any images that they feel have had too much post processing done.

This is actually a pretty ridiculous attitude given that for the entire history of photography the greatest images have often involved extensive "post processing" of some sort. However, this article isn't about the whole "OOC vs PP" argument that continues to rage on various websites and at camera club meetings. It's about how to make sure your chosen photographic tool produces images that may seem "impossible". Whether that photographic tool is a smartphone, compact camera, or top of the line DSLR, the principles behind "impossible" images are the same.

1. Get to know your equipment. Understand what it can do well and what its limitations are. Then understand that it's a stupid, inanimate object and you do the thinking. Study some books, articles or watch videos about photography, not just about gear. Learn basic principles such as exposure, dynamic range (the range of dark and bright areas that retain detail in the photo) and other things that your dumb camera can only adjust based on fixed, programmed parameters.
2. Learn how photographs you admire were created. This will help you understand things such as lighting, composition, posing models, etc. You will find that in very few instances did the photographer depend on the camera by itself to make the image stand out. One thing that makes the best pros the best, and the Masters the Masters, is realizing that a camera is a tool that has to be used in the right way, not the decision maker in the creative process.
3. Get a good editing program, and learn it in depth. I use Adobe Creative Cloud, which consists of Light Room and Adobe CC. I also have a collection of plug ins that do things the basic applications can't, or don't do as well. There are plenty of programs out there, many of them free. If you primarily use your smartphone for photography, I recommend Snapseed or Photoshop Elements for Android. They're free, and allow for a lot of adjustments. There are also some terrific apps specifically for iPhone.Then, learn the real editing part of the software, not just the cool looking effects. Those effects only go so far in making photos truly stand out. Some people call some of my images "amazing" and nearly all of those images have no special effects added: it's just a good combination of my experience and skill in photography in general, the camera and the software.
4. Experiment. One great thing about digital is you can take thousands of images without it costing much to do so. This allows you to capture images of a huge variety of subjects under a wide range of conditions. Take lots of photos with different in camera settings. Then see how those settings related and interact with settings in the editor. 
5. Develop a front to back workflow. The "OOC" folks tend to put almost all their attention on the moment of capture, and how the camera is set for that. They are selling themselves short, in my opinion. Photography has always been about a complete process to create the final image, not just how to set the camera appropriately for the moment of capture. That's where step 4 becomes so helpful: over time, you will find how in camera settings A will work with editor adjustments B to create a certain look to your images that set them apart from the "typical snapshot". What I mean is that know, before you even capture the image, how you want the final image to look, and how what you have the camera set for works with what you will do in post processing to achieve that look.
6. Be your own harshest critic. Probably the area most people hinder themselves in improving their photography is they don't know how to effectively self-critique. What usually happens is emotional involvement with an image makes a person think it's a better photo than it really is. I regularly look at "great photos" people submit to forums and think "Holy Buckets of Cod, why did that person even keep that image?" I know the answer: it's a photo of a child, or pet, or pretty sunset, and they wanted to preserve the memory. That is really what photography is best for. However, it doesn't mean the photographs are good as photographs. It just means they are good as a preserved memory. Learnt to separate emotional assessment of the memory from critical assessment of the technical and aesthetic qualities of the image.

All of this can take some time to put together, but the results are worth it. It's taken me a couple of years to develop the familiarity with both my gear and software, as well as my workflow, to create images which defy the conventional wisdom of how they are expected to look. I'm not alone in this regard. I have seen some images from iPhones and Android phones that are breathtaking, because the photographers took the time to learn their tools, learn the best process, and make it all work for them, whether someone else says it's impossible or not.

Good luck and take lots of photos.