Photographing abandoned places often puts us in some incredibly difficult environments for capturing images. We’re often presented with scenes where there is a huge contrast between light and dark values, which can make a scene incredibly challenging to capture. This guide will hopefully help answer some burning questions you may have about the proper way to capture photos in abandoned buildings, or at the very least, provide you with some insight to some techniques you may not have already known, or variations of techniques you do know. It’s always good to add a few more pieces of knowledge to your craft, or at the very least get a refresher on it all anyway. So let’s begin.

Composition:

 Of course this wouldn’t be a real photography guide if we didn’t talk about composition, so let’s touch on that for just a moment. In urbex photography, as with many other categories of photography, most of the same general rules apply. It’s quite difficult to “teach” composition, but I would like to talk a bit about lens choices, and how things have changed for me personally over time, as this has helped me evolve in compositions I’ve been able to see when out shooting.

When I started photographing abandoned places in 2006, I was shooting only with a Minolta X-700 and a 50mm 1.7 lens. I had no other choice, so I made the best of it.

Well, I guess I actually made the worst of it, because the photos were terrible. Good thing I lost most of those negatives. Okay, I do wish I still had some.

Anyway, this didn’t matter much to me at the time, considering I knew pretty much nothing about other lens types like wide, telephoto, macro, etc. I was finding any way I could to get the shot I wanted with the only lens I had. This is something I will look back to quite often now, and I’ll sometimes force myself into shooting with a lens I don’t often shoot with. This helps me become far more comfortable with that lens, and opens up entirely different compositions that sometimes I come to love so much more. 

When I started getting into using wider lenses, I loved capturing scenes in abandoned buildings with them. Actually, I loved capturing almost any scene with my 11-22, 14, or 16-35. This started to become an issue though, as I started to shoot things that simply should not have been shot on a wide, and would have been far better subjects for something like a 50mm, or 85mm lens. I had just refused to give up the wide, as it would barely ever leave my camera. Sure, photography is art, and you could argue that it doesn’t matter what lens you use to capture what scene, as long as you’re enjoying what you are creating. This is all true, but in this case, I’m trying to speak from a general viewpoint, or at least how I view my own work today. I personally look back on these images and hate many of them today. I wish I could go back in time to re-shoot the scene with a different lens. Moral of this little story I guess is to not be stubborn in lens choice, and always work at expanding your knowledge of using other lenses at different focal lengths. Not only could it make a better shot overall, but it will open your eyes to different compositions or details in a scene you wouldn’t have noticed otherwise.

When I finally stopped using wide lenses for everything, I started to see scenes in a whole new light. Ha. Photography pun? Sure.

I had made seen such a huge are of growth in my photography solely using a wide lens that I had now pretty much forgot about using my 50mm as I had when I started. But now with more knowledge, as I was starting to force myself to use my 50 once again when photographing abandoned places, nature, or anything else, I started to notice details in a far different way, which not only helped me in capturing the closer details in scenes, but helped me understand the space far more, ending with the ability to capture it so much better with a wider lens whenever I could really utilize it.

It’s like it opened up an entirely new appreciation for what I really should be shooting with the wide, and what I should not. I grew to understand wide lenses much more, and my shots with them became better by making use of other focal lengths. Today, I rarely shoot with a wide unless it is entirely needed to get the view of the scene across to the viewer. Past this though, I’m not sure there’s much more I could talk about, as composition is such a huge topic, there’s no way I could cover it in this article. These are just some things that I think can help improve your compositions in such a huge way. Moving on…  

Light, and how to capture a scene:

As mentioned earlier, when photographing abandoned places, you’re often presented with a scene that has wildly varying intensities of light, from incredibly bright windows, to very dark interiors. Most urbex photographers don’t carry around studio lighting to an abandoned building (imagine that though), so we’re almost always working with ambient light. As most buildings are without power, it’s obvious that we will almost always be presented with a scene containing large contrasts between light and dark.

If you’re shooting on film, there are some different ways to navigate around this, as the dynamic range of film differs from digital in some ways, but in this case we’re talking about digital. By understanding your specific digital camera, but also understanding how cameras in general capture light, this helps in a huge way to how you set up for capturing the scene in front of you.

When taking a photo, you have to remember that the camera is always going to want to expose for either the lighter or darker areas of a scene. Unlike our eyes can, the camera is unable to capture both in a single image. I won’t go into the incredibly long, drawn out details of how a sensor works vs how our eyes work (maybe in another article), but you have to remember that the sensor is a single fixed plane containing millions of pixels all reacting the same way at the same time. Given this knowledge, we can remember that we need to make a decision between the lighter or darker values in a scene. Well…do we really need to make this decision? Not always, and I will get to that in a moment!

Oftentimes, the contrast between light and dark is fairly minimal enough so we’re able to shoot and expose the image more for the highlights rather than the shadows, and later are able to pull a lot of the shadow detail back in post-processing with digital images. This is completely opposite when working with film, as the rule with film is to always shoot for the shadows, because when it comes to film, bringing shadows back is rarely going to happen, and even if it does, it won’t be very pretty. When we’re working with digital, especially with newer cameras, there is a lot of detail captured and retained within a RAW file.

However, while the dynamic range of modern cameras (such as the Sony a7r iv, or Nikon Z6 ii) has gotten far better overall, it does not change the fact that when you make a darker foreground brighter in your exposure, the already brighter background, which was bright to begin with, is going to get brighter with it until eventually it blows out, and becomes unusable. When highlights become blown out in a digital image, that means those areas of the image were exposed until they reached pure white on the sensor. Once a digital image hits pure white, data becomes lost, and impossible to recover later. This becomes a huge issue when we’re faced with a scene that we’re unable to capture in just one image.

So what are our options to deal with this?

1. Bracketing:

Bracketing images is definitely one of the most popular things to do today in many different fields of photography, and especially urbex photography.

By bracketing images, we’re able to capture the light, dark and in between areas of the scene, and put them together later to create a balanced exposure closer to what our eyes would see.

So what do I mean by bracketing images?

Bracketing images simply means that you’ll capture one image with the light meter balanced to where the camera thinks it needs to be, but in addition to that exposure, you’ll capture 2, 3, 4 or more darker exposures, as well as 2, 3, 4 or more brighter exposures without moving the camera. This is where a tripod comes in handy, because without that, you can run into many issues. Ideally, you want to have as little movement as possible when bracketing a scene.

Here’s an example:

Your settings are as follows:

ISO – 100 (the lower, the better. I always try to stick to 100 when I’m shooting bracketed exposures for minimal noise in the final result)
Aperture – 2.8

Now your camera thinks you need a shutter speed of 1/100

You’ll shoot the initial image at 1/100, followed by one at 1/50, 1/25, 1/10, 1/5, 1/2, and these will make up your brighter exposures which will capture all of the detail within the darker areas of the scene. You’ll also capture darker exposures (1/200, 1/400, 1/800, 1/1600) to capture detail within the brighter areas of the scene. 

For this example, I used a full stop between each exposure, allowing a full stop difference of light in either direction. In this example, I’m only adjusting for the shutter speed, but some people like to adjust aperture, or a combination of aperture, shutter speed, or even ISO, though I personally don’t see why you would want to do that, unless you’re looking to keep a consistent shutter speed with each stop difference.

Most modern cameras have bracketing as a built-in feature, and will shoot these images one after another automatically, but if not, then you can still do this manually.

Once you have the images captured, you can then bring them into Photoshop, Lightroom, Aurora HDR, or other software to merge them into a single exposure. Of course there are more and less technical ways of blending these exposures into one, and they all yield different results. Find what you like best, and what works best for your style of work, and go with it. I personally use all three of the ones I mentioned, depending on what look I’m going for in the end result.

2. Use Filters:

If you want to capture a well-balanced exposure straight in camera, you can make use of filters, such as graduated neutral density filters, which allow you to darken one area of the image, allowing you to expose longer for another in one single shot. These filters are mostly suited to landscape photography as they’re used mostly for the sky and lined up where it meets a darker horizon/foreground, though there could be instances where these could help while photographing abandoned places.

I have personally never used one while photographing an interior, though I have made use of them when shooting exterior photos, such as the one of the old Edsel above.

The downside to filters like this, is that they are quite pricey, time consuming to set up while shooting, and are fairly limited in their use. Additionally, with the dynamic range of modern cameras, filters like these are becoming less and less useful, especially with the ability to bracket and merge later. Still though, I can’t hate on a good old standard neutral density filter, or a good polarizing filter, but those have entirely different uses, so I won’t go into those here. 

3. Use Your Histogram:

So, I mentioned dynamic range quite a bit, and I’d like to touch on this for a moment as well, because I feel like this is another area where people often become confused. So before I get into the histogram bit, let’s go over this. 

Understanding what dynamic range is and what your camera is capable of can help greatly in how you shoot and edit, whether you bracket or not.

Dynamic range refers to the ratio between the lightest and darkest parts of a photo from pure white to pure black, and all cameras have a different range that they are capable of capturing. Knowing this helps you judge how you prefer to shoot, and allows you to know a great deal more about how much information you’re able to bring back in the darker or lighter areas of an image captured with your camera. The histogram will help in a huge way when it comes to this, which is why I’m putting this all together here.

The human eye is capable of 22-24 stops of dynamic range, while some of the highest dynamic range seen in most digital cameras today is about 15. Most film is capable of about 13 stops of dynamic range, however film does not have a pure white point, which is one of the many characteristics that give film its very unique “film look.”

If you’d like to dive deeper into the complexities of understanding dynamic range, you can check out these very well constructed articles below, or keep scrolling for the TL;DR version.

https://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/dynamic-range.htm

https://neiloseman.com/how-is-dynamic-range-measured/

https://pixelcraft.photo.blog/2021/05/10/from-photosites-to-pixels-i-the-process/

Okay, TL;DR version:

One of the most important things to take away from any of these articles above is that each photosite (the thing that gathers photons and essentially creates a pixel) gathers light and outputs a voltage proportional to the amount of light it is receiving. If it receives too much light, the voltage reaches a maximum where it can go no further (pure white), and if it receives little or no light, it will barely output any voltage, or output none at all (pure black). These levels are converted to digital grayscale values, and are each assigned a red, green and blue value which as a whole, makes up the colors in a color image.  

Okay so that’s neat and all, but why does it really matter to know this?

Because it really helps you understand your camera better, and what to think about when reading your histogram, especially when you know what your camera is capable of.

So…Pay attention to your histogram, because it will tell you if it will be possible to do this later when you’re editing.

Most every DSLR or mirrorless camera will have a histogram. In fact, I can’t think of one that doesn’t. This will of course vary between camera how to turn it on and off, but a quick Google or YouTube search should bring you right to your answer if you’re an animal and threw away your user manual.

Your histogram tells you when levels in your image, according to the camera’s sensor, are reaching pure black or pure white. Looking at your histogram can oftentimes be far more helpful than relying on looking at just the image. Screens can be deceiving, and it might look as though you’re able to bring back the darker areas, when really there’s nothing to bring back. Alternatively, it may even appear that your highlights are too bright, because screens have become so much brighter in recent years. If you take a look at your histogram, you’ll know if they’re okay for editing later.  

On the left side of the histogram, if you see peaks reaching the top, you’ll know that the image is reaching full black in areas, and on the opposite side to the right, pure white. If you see these peaking to extreme levels, you’ll know before even taking the photo that you will not be able to rescue those areas, or at the very most, barely be able to in a way that works well. So what about that middle area? Well, I won’t go into that really within this article, but I’ll be putting together a post that focuses only on the histogram.

With this knowledge handy, and when you know what kind of dynamic range your camera is capable of in post-processing, pulling back information in shadows and highlights, you will know how far you can really push your histogram in one way or the other. This will help you judge whether you want to bracket a scene or not.

No matter which method you choose from the above options, remember to ALWAYS USE YOUR HISTOGRAM.

The next option I think is the most important to think about when capturing a scene, especially when trying to really convey a certain mood, as is usually the point of photography or any other art.

4. Pick one or the other:

Coming from film photography, where it is far more difficult (and rarely done) to blend exposures, I got used to working with single shots all the time, and personally, when it comes to digital, I’ve liked most of my work from single shots vs bracketed shots I have done. There have only been some select scenes where I felt it was just completely necessary to show exactly what my eyes were seeing, so the use of bracketing has come in handy for those.

Shoot a single image with the exposure focused on light that you feel makes the biggest impact to the image and helps convey a certain feeling. Photography is an art, and I feel like too many people forget that as artists, we are trying to make the viewer feel something. We’re not always out to just make something appear the way our eyes saw it; we want to show how we felt it. Even though our eyes may have perceived a scene one way, our brain is perceiving these different light values in different ways. Our brain is focusing on one aspect of the scene in relation to the others, rather than evenly as our eyes are seeing it, allowing us to feel something based on a very specific part of the scene, such as the warm sun flowing into a mostly dark, gloomy room. Our brain is telling us to feel this, even though our eyes are focusing on far more. It’s hard to make sense of, so explanations may fall pretty short.

That being said, and I may contradict myself a slight bit here, but oftentimes when I’m shooting with digital, since I can shoot pretty much as many images as I want, I’ll bracket most scenes just in case I do want to merge images later, but I often end up using only one exposure. It’s one of those better to have them than not have them kind of things, especially if it’s a location I know I will not be returning to. I think most urbex photographers understand, because when you’re photographing abandoned places, you often don’t know when they’ll be demolished or completely destroyed by vandals.

Sure, you might end up with 500 more photos than you’ll even use, but you’ll have the comfort of knowing you have the ability to merge photos later, rather than wishing you had bracketed when you’re editing.

And finally, something I do fairly often when photographing abandoned places, or anything for that matter.

5. Shoot against the light:

By shooting against the light, or even looking for diffused light to use in any particular scene, you’ll eliminate the need to worry as much about blown out highlights.

Turn away from the light source, whether it be a window, or the sun, interior lighting of any kind, whatever it may be. Look around at what that light is being cast on, and compose your image based around shapes the light is helping create. Oftentimes, a large window that has fogged over, or as mentioned earlier, the early morning, or evening sun can help create a diffused light source similar to a large soft box in a studio environment. This can also help if you’re trying to shoot portraits using natural light.

I feel that this tip is one of the least involved, but like I said, it remains one that I use the most. Always remember that one of the most important key elements to a photograph is light, and without good light, all other things (composition, color, etc.) start to fall apart. Sure, there are instances where this doesn’t apply, but they are quite rare. Again though, photography is art, and as with any art, there are no “rules,” only guidelines. It’s so important to learn as much as you can about the technical aspects of your craft, not because you need to follow them all word for word, or step by step, but because when you know how to use all of the tools at your disposal, you also know how to fuck them up in a way that makes them work in your favor.

So what comes next?

Editing:

When it comes to how to edit urbex photos, I’ve been asked countless different things about how I go about processing my images. It’s such an endless rabbit hole to get sucked down, because there are countless ways you could go about editing your images, and we all end up finding something that works for us. Even so, that might change over the course of a year or two, so it’s hard to give a specific guide to editing. While there is no way to give an end all guide, I could at least show you how I edit some of my photos, and many of the same things apply no matter what type of photos I’m shooting. Below, I’ll link a video you can watch, because I feel like a simple blog article can’t help nearly as much as following along with a video.

I’ll be working on a more involved editing video, and blog post to go with it, which I’ll be posting later.

For now, I hope that this article, and the video below, could help even if just as a refresher for your own urbex photography workflow, or whatever adventures you should find yourself getting into!