Many people overcomplicate photography.

They worry about camera gear this, lens that.

They think too deeply about trying to find the “best compositions” online.

They worry about presets, filters, and color grades because they think that other photographers have something or know something they don’t.

And they spend too much time thinking and fantasizing about photography instead of actually going outside and taking photos.

Now, you can probably tell, but I’m a huge proponent of telling people to go out and take pictures.

That’s because I believe that you can listen to me and other photographers waffle on about photography for hours and never get any better.

It’s something that feels like productive progress but is actually just productive procrastination.

However, if you actually want to improve your photography, spending an hour a day taking or editing photos will teach you 10x more than listening to me.

But don’t worry.

As much as I want to tell you to go outside and take more pictures, this article isn’t that.

Today I’m going to share with you the single most important concept that changed my photography.

It’s a very very simple framework that if you keep it in your back pocket can simplify your photography process and allow you to take better photos with just one razor.

So I’ll share this with you guys and then you can go out and take photos.

Lets get started.

Master this and photography becomes effortless - 2025 version.

The Negative Process

When I first started photography, I had a hunch about what would lead me to take good photos.

Now, it was just a hunch, but I learned it from years of trial and error in other disciplines that weren’t photography related - and it worked there, so I figured it’d work here.

To lead into it, let me ask a few questions to help you understand the concept.

Why does cropping work?

Cropping in photography is something that is discouraged by many photographers online.

Many will say it’s “cheating” or a bad habit to build.

I think there’s some truth to this, but I also think there’s a reason why it works and why cropping can often make our photos better.

Personally, I’m in the party of “If it works, it works.”

And I’ll take the approach that gets me the best end result.

Another question:

Why is street photography “easier” with a tighter focal length?

Many street photographers will recommend to begin practicing with a tighter focal length.

Despite popular street photography focal lengths being the 18mm (27 full frame) and 23mm (35 full frame), it’s commonly known that wider focal lengths are more challenging for beginners.

There’s a reason for this too.

What it boils down to is the amount of variables you’re playing with.

When you shoot with a wider lens you’re working with more stuff in your frame, much of which is unnecessary.

Similarly, when you crop in on an image, what you are doing is removing the stuff in your image that is unnecessary.

Extra subjects and variables that have no business being inside your picture can make your shot worse, not better.

Another example of this is shooting with a prime lens.

A prime lens is a great constraint to help you grow as a photographer because you are forced to move your feet instead of zooming in to compose your photos.

There is a common theme here.

Many photographers think photography is a game of addition, not subtraction.

They are using an additive or positive process instead of a subtractive or negative one.

When in reality, photography is a “negative” or “subtractive” craft.

If we want to take better photos, less is more.

If we want to take better photos, we must do so by removal, not addition.

The reason why many people’s photos suck is because they have all these conflicting elements interfering with the photo.

If you get rid of all that stuff your photos will improve.

Here’s another example.

The Story of Michelangelo

This is a popular story you’ve probably heard of before.

Michelangelo was a Renaissance artist - the very one who sculpted the famous statue David.

When asked how he carved the statue, he said something along the lines of:

"It's simple. I just remove everything that is not David."

The underlying presumption for this is that David already existed within the marble.

And as an artist, Michelangelo’s job was not to put things together to make something - although that’s often what it feels like we’re doing.

Rather it was to be a catalyst to allow what already exists to come to life.

The same exact principle applies to photography.

To take better photos, remove everything that is not the photo.

You see, photography is just pattern recognition.

When we photographers go out into the world we are not creating the world.

The world is whatever the world is and we are just observers looking for opportunities to capture the moment.

We are not manufacturing or creating the moment.

Of course I’m speaking about this in the context of street, landscape, and candid photography - not studio type work.

In this context, we are tempted to include every single little thing into the shot.

We are mystified by a beautiful sunset or something and we can’t delineate which parts are actually important for the shot.

In other words, our photos don’t need more bullshit, they need less.

So learn to ignore the elements that don’t matter.

Photography is subtraction, not addition.

Photography is negative not positive.

Ask yourself: what am I actually taking a picture of?

And then eliminate everything that is not that.

Make sense?

If you can remove any and everything that is not what you’re seeing in the moment your photos will come to life.

So that’s great Andre.

I get the idea now.

But what are some practical ways I can actually use this in my photography?

Frameworks for a Subtractive Process

If you want to apply a subtractive process to your photography, there is only one line you need to remember.

“Photography is not what you leave in, it’s what you leave out.”

This is a phrase I came up with to help myself remember and apply this concept.

And it works for both taking and editing photos.

Some other versions of this are:

“Less is more”.

That’s a common one that is easy to remember, but can mean a few other things so I don’t prefer it for this specific concept.

You can also use a phrase called “via negativa” which means “negative way”.

Ask yourself: “How can I make this better via negativa?”

Or you can think of in terms of subtraction.

“What can I remove from my frame that will make it better?”

These are all useful practical ways to apply a negative process to your photography.

You can pick the one that suits you best, is easy for you to remember, or you connect with the most.

Personally, I like the first framework I mentioned.

It’s not only easy to remember but also instantly useful - and it applies to photography specifically.

photograph is not what you leave in, it's what you leave out

So, what does applying this framework look like in the real world?

Let me show you a few examples.

This first shot I took at a Tokyo firework festival last year.

It’s a pretty decent shot.

I’m happy with the moment I pressed the shutter because I got the firework exploding at it’s fullest.

I also got the light from the firework shining on the motorcyclist which gives a nice contrast between the pinks and blues.

But there’s one element here that irks me, because it’s unnecessary.

And that’s this car in the background here.

I feel like if it were just a few feet back, I could have gotten the shine from the headlights without having this large unnecessary shape in frame.

It sucks because I knew it at the time, but couldn’t adjust or reposition my camera because the firework was already going off.

So it’s not a terrible photo, but elimination or removal in this case, would have made it that much better.

Here’s another example of a photo I took of a sunset in Tokyo.

This first image on it’s own isn’t bad.

We have the shapes of the building creating a silhouette in the sky.

And that’s contrasted by the colors of the sunset.

But if you look closer, there are people at the bottom walking.

Now, in most cases, this wouldn’t be a problem, and I think the shapes add to the whole city feel.

But for this photo specifically, the exposure between the people and the buildings is off and it draws the viewer’s eyes away from where I want it to go.

So I have a few options:

crush the shadows and blend the people in
add a gradient mask to even out the exposure
re-edit the photo
crop the people out

The first one didn’t work - crushing the shadows globally changed the contrast of the entire image and made it ugly.

So now I had to decide between a local gradient adjustment or cropping them out.

Which meant asking myself a few questions:

“Who is the true subject of this shot?”

“What do I want people to look at?”

“Are these people getting in the way?”

The true subject here is the city and the sunset.

That’s what I want people to look at.

And in this case, the people, because of the way I edited the shadows, are getting in the way.

Now if I re-edited the photo this way, it works a bit better, but it’s a different look than what I was going for.

So I saved myself some trouble of trying to make the people work and cropped the bottom part out, and you can see the difference.

The previous image felt as if there was a weight on the bottom of the image that was getting in the way and I didn’t like looking at it.

And the second image there’s less visual noise, I know what I should be looking at, and it just looks better.

That’s how we apply a subtractive process to this photo - by removing what’s unnecessary.

You can see how much better the image is simply by doing this one thing.

Ideally we would’ve done this when I was taking the picture, but sometimes we don’t know any better.

This is also a testament to the importance of having a clear or well defined subject.

It doesn’t have to be super obvious but the viewer has to know what they’re supposed to be looking at.

And if that’s not clear to you, it’s not clear to them.

Keep that in mind.

So those were a few examples of how I’d apply the framework:

“Photography is not what you leave in, it’s what you leave out.”

Overall, if you wanna take better photos, try using a subtractive process rather than an additive one.

Think about removing everything that is not the photo before taking a picture or while photo editing.

Ask yourself questions like, “What can I remove from my photo that will make it better?”

But don’t just take my word for it.

Go outside, apply the concept, and take better photos.

You’ll learn more from that than from listening to me.

I hope this helped - if it did, please share this with a friend who could use this.

If you want to learn more and build a solid foundation with photography, go to Photography Essentials - it’s free.

You can also support me by adding to the travel fund or by grabbing a copy of my photography zine “The Sinking Sun”.

Thanks for reading, see you next time.