When it rains, it pours!

Well, yesterday I had a great conversation with Tom Hogarty, senior Product Manager for Adobe Photoshop Lightroom for inclusion in the upcoming podcast.  In my excitement to finish the post production side, I came downstairs at 3am to my man-cave, and found that Jason Moore had finished an article I sent him for possible inclusion in his “Workflow Friday” series, and posted that out there.  Egads!  Thanks to Jason for that outlet as well.

What’s kind of exciting about that article, is that not only did Jason find it interesting enough to include with the collection of folks that have been featured thus far on his blog, but the good folks (Hi Dave!) over at Photography BB have released their latest free online magazine, and the article was included in there as well!  (I must be doing something right!  *grin*)  Be sure to download that magazine as well, because there really are some talented writers and photographers sharing their perspectives.  I’m also honored that Dave has included the CB Learning Digital Photography podcast in his list of favorite online media sources for photography (we’re #1 in the audio section – woOt!).

When it rains, ir really does pour!  However, because of the interview with Mr. Hogarty, the podcast is thus delayed again, because the two themes of Listener Questions and Answers and Questions with Adobe seamed together pretty well.  I may have it compiled early enough to post before the weekend, but don’t expect any miracles there.  More likely that will be published next week Tuesday under the software heading of the new schedule (since it’s about Lightroom – there’s also some great links you’ll want in the show notes).

For today though, I do have a little maintenance announcement as well: for those of you picking up the blog via Feedburner, you will likely be getting a double dose of images, because as promised, I am also uploading the images from yesterday’s post to share on Flickr, so you will likely see some repetition there.  It’s also a little exciting to share that the feedburner subscription hit an all time high not once but twice this week of 691 listeners/readers.  So, thanks to everyone that has signed up – it really means a lot that so many have found the CB resource useful!

That’s about it for this first Friday in May – have a great weekend everyone!  Happy Shooting and we’ll catch you back here on Monday for the latest in the hardware reviews.  I’ll leave you with one of my favorite selections from this past week in the What the Duck series:

wtd398sun

Is 12 enough?

An interesting news story came my way today over on CNet where Akira Watanabe, manager of Olympus Imaging’s SLR planning department said that most needs of most people can be met with a 12MP camera.  The full story is here, but does bring what has been an ongoing discussion into a more defined state.  As we’ve seen megapixel counts increase from counts lower than 3 MP less than a decade ago to counts that now are at 12 MP or higher, discussions have arisen throughout the industry on “How much is enough?”

From my perspective, I would agree that 12 is probably close.  Yes, processing capabilities are increasing and hard drive storage space costs continue to decrease at almost ridiculous rates (you can get a 1TB hard drive for around $100 these days!), but these are mitigated by need.  When you look at the true and honest need for most folks (myself included), we do not regularly print much larger than 8×10, or 12×16.  I would venture to guess that even artist gallery prints and portfolios do not exceed 16×20″ dimensions that often.

Yes, more megapixels means you can crop smaller and retain print quality, but at what price?  More grain or noise?  Yep.  Reduced dynamic range?  Yep.  More processing demands?  Yep.  More storage needed?  Yep.  While all of these can be addressed by buying software to handle noise, bracketing exposures to increase dynamic range, and buying more storage to meet the increased demand, there does come a point of diminishing returns on the investment, and Olympus seems to have set that mark at 12 MP.

But, will the market agree?  I think so.  It’s no secret that the economy is not doing so well.  People are likely going to be more frugal in their purchases, and getting that full-sized wall print may not be as high a priority as, perhaps, bread on the table is anymore.  Do we need to re-assess our priorities?  Some say yes, that it’s not all about the megapixels.  Some say we should be asking for things like low light responsiveness, better auto-focusing, faster auto-focusing, better in camera noise handling.  I don’t think any of us would complain either if we saw a decrease in the costs of fast glass.

But who knows – maybe the masses will continue to push for more megapixels.  Now that Olympus has drawn a proverbial line in the sane, will other vendors see the logic and start to taper things off?  Or will the megapixels wars continue indefinitely?  Sure, we can’t predict the future, but guessing and talking about it can be a good source of discussion too because it can get us thinking about what is important in our pictures.  So, what do you think?  Where will things go from here?  Sound off in the comments, and watch for the podcast coming up on Monday where you’ll get an extended version of my thoughts on where things may go from here.

In the meantime, have a great weekend, and go out and getcha some (pictures)!  We’ll see you back here on Monday!

The Lensbaby Composer

For those of you that are regular podcast listeners, you know I talked recently about the Lensbaby Composer and what it can do for your photos.  In the podcast you heard the terms “selective focus” but the term is kind of hard to explain without a visual, so I thought I might be able to do it better justice with a visual here today.  Take a look at this setup:

lensbaby1

So, if you are looking at a scene from camera view 1, and you want the sharpness of your image (your viewers attention) to focus on something at point B, it’s easy to do this.  Simply drop your aperture wide open and the depth of field will throw points A and C out of focus naturally.  Pretty easy, no photo editing, no trickery or anything involved – the mechanics of apertures and depth of field handle this for you.

Well, take a moment to consider things from the viewpoint of Camera Two.

lensbaby2

You still want the focus to be at point B, but because both A and C are also positioned relative to the camera at the same place (they are not in front of or behind the point of focus, they are merely off to the sides of the point of focus), dropping your aperture wide open will not throw A and B out of focus – they still there, just as sharp as point B.  Well, up until now, you’ve always had to take images taken under situation 2 and bring them into image editing software to blur, dodge, burn, and otherwise minimize the attention that points A and C got from the viewer eye.

Well, what the Lensbaby does, through it’s unique combination of lens elements that include an actual curved optic and a curved field of focus, giving you a round spot of focus, so that it allows you to set point B as a single point of focus, so that A and C will fall off in sharpness, bringing the viewer back to your desired point of what to look at.  (The eye will almost always naturally look for sharpness and light in images…)

So now, dodging, burning, blurring and other darkroom and software techniques are no longer needed!  The Lensbaby allows you to create these visions in camera, not afterward in post processing.  What does this mean for you?  More time shooting, and less time photo editing!  Who doesn’t want that?

The coolest part of the new partnership with Lensbaby is that they’re also offering anyone reading the blog or listening to the show an opportunity to get a 0.6x wide-angle/macro conversion lens for the Composer lens totally free! Imagine taking your creative visions to a whole new level with the Composer lens from Lensbaby – and then add the macro capabilities, and literally, the sky is the limit!  Your creativity knows no boundaries with lens-work like this!  So, if you are looking at adding the Composer lens to your gear bag (and you can purchase it from any retailer), then look no further, because from here you can get a free 0.6x wide-angle/macro-conversion lens from Lensbaby as a way of saying thanks.

Expanded creativity + Free gear = lots of fun

Sounds like a perfect equation for me!  So, stop on over to the partner website they made just for Canon Blogger listeners and readers to get your free lens today.  This is a limited time offer, and I am not sure when it will end, but the Composer and the companion 0.6x wide-angle/macro conversion lens (which you can get for free) would have been very useful this last weekend on the Eldorado shoot.  Remember the rock fissure?  Imagine if I had a chance to fade the DOF out away from the rock completely?  What about the rear window reflection?  Imagine if I could have faded the front window part out of focus completely?  Both of these shots might have ended up in my portfolio!  As they are, I’ve got two snaps that while interesting, will likely never get added to the print portfolio…

Does this help clarify how the Lensbaby works and what it does?  I know it’s a very simplified version, and the folks at Lensbaby have a lot more resources to help explain it than I do so be sure to visit their partner landing page here to learn more about it!  If you’d like to see some samples of the lens at work, (my lens hasn’t arrived yet) make sure to stop over to the gallery page here too!  Got some pics you’d like to share?   Link them here in the comments section (or even share then with the good folks at Lensbaby – they like to hear feedback from the field so share your thoughts and shots with them too!)  Finally, to learn all the details about this promotional offer, stop over to the page the folks at Personal Life Media have set up here.

If you do have pics and thoughts to share here, feel free as always to drop me an email, and you could be on the show!    For those interested in buying the composer, make sure to visit this link here to get the free macro conversion lens!  Questions, comments, feedback and ideas are welcome at my email address (as always) is jason <at> canonblogger <dot> com!

Check them out today – then get back out and keep on shooting!  Hope all your shots are good ones and we’ll see you back here tomorrow!

Thursday Thoughts with… Andrew Rodney

This is an historic day for CB, because our next guest here for the Thursday Thoughts series takes thing to a whole new level of quality information.  Our guest this week is none other than Andrew Rodney.  He has agreed to carve some time out of his already busy schedule to contribute to the series here.  Who is Andrew Rodney?  Andrew is a renowned instructor, NAPP Hall-of-Famer, published author (of Color Management for Photographers, Hands on Techniques for Photoshop Users), and well known contributing writer to several magazines including PDN, Publish, Photoshop User, Electronic Publishing, Digital Output, MacWeek, Digital Photo Pro and Professional Photographer.  He also regularly contributes to the forums of the NAPP community, and is considered by many to be one of the best around at color management and is a regular contributor for the Epson Print Academy.  (Which is coming to Denver in April too!)

CB:  Hi Andrew, and thanks so much for taking the time out of your schedule to participate in this.  I’ll get right to things…first with a few of the standard questions.  How long have you been a photographer?

AR:  I started as a kid. My dad gave me his camera, an Exakta VXIIa 35mm that at the time was pretty cool camera with interchangeable viewfinder. Plus it was a left-handed camera. Like many, my first experience in the B&W darkroom was one of amazement upon seeing ones first print come up before my eyes. I assisted a very good commercial photographer in LA in the early 1980s after which he kind of forced me to go to Art Center to get a degree in photography. I left the fall/winter of 1983 to work for the LAOOC who were staging the LA Olympics that summer. I got to shoot for them for 7 months, including the games themselves. It was my first introduction to sports photography and Fujichrome! I went back to Art Center, got a degree in 1988, shot locally doing mostly editorial and corporate/annual report work. Left LA in 1994 for Santa Fe and a new career that wasn’t income generated from shooting.

CB:  What kind of gear have you used over the course of your career?

AR:  From Exakta I went to Pentax, then Nikon, then Canon (as well as Hasselblad, Sinar). I shot with a lot of Kodak DCS cameras too, dating back to the original DCS-1. Now I’m using a 5D-MII, which I’m very impressed with. I’ve been lucky over the years to be able to shoot with a lot of digital capture devices I could never afford to buy. Betterlight scan backs, Leaf and Phase backs and so on.

CB:  So, you’ve clearly been shooting since the film era.  Did you have any particular favorite or are you still shooting with it?

AR:  I became a big fan of Fujichrome, despite its original reputation in 1984 when we were testing it for the Olympics (Fuji was a sponsor). Prior to that, I was a Kodachrome shooter. I can’t recall the last time I shot film that wasn’t for some Film vs. Digital test. I don’t miss film at all, sorry. I had to do a lot of scans in my time, like working all night in the darkroom, it gets weary after awhile.

CB:  I must say, testing film for use in the Olympics is sufficiently impressive!  How about your computer setup?  Do you prefer Macs, PC’s, Linux, or some other variant?

AR:  Mac, since 1988. In the old, old days, Photoshop only ran on a Mac!

CB:  Fair point…and now for the zany question of the day, Chocolate, Vanilla, or Strawberry?

AR:  Chocolate if forced to pick just one.

CB:  With all the sundry stuff out of the way, let’s move into an area with a little more granularity. Photographers often enjoy hearing helpful and constructive critiques of their work, as we are aware of how much we can grow from it.  However, we’ve also all had the “nice shot” and “cool” comments when we’ve shared our work.  What was the singular most useful critique or comment you’ve ever had on work you’ve shared publicly?

AR:  My god, that’s a though one! A great deal of the learning process at Art Center was the “crit”, from both instructor and fellow students. I think that total honesty with the understanding that much of this is subjective is key. That said, I spent two weeks on the Amazon River doing a photo tour with Jay Maisel who is one of the best instructors I’ve ever had. His approach to working with light, color and gesture is always in the back of my mind when shooting. If you ever have a chance to hear Jay speak, it could change the way you look at the world as a photographer. I don’t recall who first suggested that its critically important to scan your frame prior to capturing an image when time permits, really thinking about what’s in the frame and why its important to the image. Cropping after the fact is equally important because sometimes you really need to study the image after capture. Jay really reinforces the idea of ensuring everything in the cropped final is important to the total image. I really love Lightroom’s non-destructive cropping. It pays to revisit images you haven’t looked at in some time and seeing if indeed, the crop works or not.

CB:  Kind of makes me want to go back and look at some of my past images using Lightroom now!  What about giving critiques though?  If someone was asking you for an honest critique of their work, what 3 factors would you look at most (excluding friendships or family relatives, we’re talking professional or fellow photographer-types here)?

AR:  There’s that initial first look that either pulls me into the image or it doesn’t. Going back to Jay, I ask myself “is does this image say anything about light, color, gesture or more than one”? Second, I ask myself,  “Would I want to have this image on my wall, can I view it over and over again and see something new”? There are many images that I find successful that I might not want to view every day. Third, ask myself if I find the image successful due to the image or the presentation (which try to dismiss if possible). I’m seeing a trend these days with images that are printed really, really large because the size makes the image seem more important or more successful. But size doesn’t count; it doesn’t make a lesser image better.

CB:  Wow, I’d not thought of the impact that print or presentation size can have on how imagery is received, but that’s a great point!  Let’s move into something more software and technique oriented.  Being as well-versed as you are in color-management, you know that as Photoshop and other software programs mature and develop, new ways to create images are presenting wider options and possibilities. If you had to choose between the gear or the software as the only way to create, which would it be and why?

AR:  The gear. I’m finding less and less the need or desire to do work in Photoshop once I’ve used Lightroom, my modern digital “darkroom” to process the Raw images. I have to have software! The Raw (even the JPEG) is useless without a way to interpret what is nothing more then a big pile of zero’s and ones. The gear and latent film image, without a processor is equally inadequate. The software doesn’t create the image, so we have to rely on the photographer and some capture device. Some of the newer software is interesting in how it attempts to allow the user to produce some “looks”, like HDR that were not possible or darn difficult in the analog days. I find however that many prosumer photographers (if I can use that term), even some pro’s use software to mimic a “look” someone else has created and I think that’s usually a shame. I have to wonder if we really need plug-in’s that automatically make your image look like someone else’s style.

CB:  So, in looking at images you’ve captured with your gear, if you had to pick three pictures out of your entire portfolio to represent your approach to photography, or your artistic vision, which ones would you pick (feel free to share images here)?

Tosh

The image called “Tosh” (Macintosh my dog at the time) that became my logo is near and dear to my heart and was one of a series of such images I did in the early Photoshop days (I started on version 1.0.7).

Digital Dog Photography

Digital Dog Photography

Two recent images from my trip with in 2007 were influenced by Jay (who I’ve known since I graduated from school). I’m uncomfortable with the term “artistic vision” although I do recognize that there’s some creativity involved in making (my) images.

CB:  These shots are fabulous, and it’s nice to learn a little background of your well-known image of “Tosh”!  Thanks so much for sharing these.  Any final thoughts you’d like to share about the state of photography or any catch phrases that you keep in mind when shooting?

AR:  I’m still so surprised that many users who are shooting Raw don’t realize that the LCD preview on their cameras and the histogram isn’t based on the Raw but the JPEG. And they don’t fully associate the differences in shooting for Raw versus JPEG in terms of proper exposure (Expose to the Right). As for catch phrases, I hate the term “accurate” color. You can’t define accurate without measuring the color and 99 times out of 100; measured color produces quite unattractive imagery on a display or output to a print. So when I shoot, I try to view the scene as I hope to express it on output, knowing neither the JPEG preview nor what I first see of the Raw data in my converter is going to be accurate to my memory vision of the scene. It’s still our job to render the print from what we “saw” when we captured the image or wish to visually express.

CB:  Let me say it for the record right here, that I did not know the histogram is based off the jpg and not the raw image.   As for the rest of your closing thoughts, you’ve definitely given me some food for thought, as well as the rest of the readership.  Andrew, again, thanks so much for taking the time to participate.  Have a great time at Photoshop World – I wish I could be there to take a class from you!

Well gang, that’s it for today.  There’s really nothing I can say to really “wrap things up” like I usually do.  You can find Andrew on the web at his website: Digital Dog, as well as through the NAPP forums.  There’s just tons of information on his website, including articles, links, ICC profile services, and much much more, and he is always very helpful to everyone in the NAPP forums!  Suffice to say, after hearing from Andrew, my own position on the learning curve just seemed to drop a little further.  Thanks so much to Andrew, and let’s hope we can take the insights he has shared with us here on the Thursday thoughts series and strive to make our own work better.  Happy shooting and we’ll see you back here tomorrow!

Another Magazine Article!

photobbmag

Well, I completely lost track of the week and did not get the weekly podcast recorded in time for publication today.  So, while I could have gone with the alliterative “Forgetful Friday” blog title, I figured that would have been a little too on the nose.  So, instead, I’ll share the exciting news that the latest issue of PhotographyBB magazine has been published.  Dave Seeram, editor-in-chief, announced it a few days ago on the website, so do stop over and download the latest article now. Make sure you take a peek at the article Photography Food for Thought (pgs 19-22), it was the contribution of yours truly to this months issue!  Of course the rest of the magazine is a worthwhile read too.  I particularly enjoyed Dave’s article on Photoshop Retouching.  He’s got a unique balance of technical expertise and translating that skill to the written word. Thanks go out to Dave and the entire publishing crew over at PhotographyBB for another opportunity to share an article with a wider audience than is here at CB!

That’s it for this week.  Happy shooting, have a great weekend, and we’ll see you back here Monday with the belated podcast!

Thursday Thoughts with… Chris Breedlove

The “Thursday Thoughts Series” returns this week with an inside look at the work of Chris Breedlove.  Chris was mentioned to me by Rob Jones over at Towner Jones Photography when he participated.  I got in touch with Chris and asked if he’d be interested in participating.  Happily, he agreed to jump in the foray here.  So, let’s give a big welcome to Chris Breedlove!

Q:  Everyone always wants to know some of the basics, so let’s get a few things out of the way at once here… how long have you been a photographer?

A:  In some degree I have always been a photographer – ever since I picked up my first Pentax 35 mm (film).  Although, I had some issues with understanding certain basics about the camera; but I always had it at my side.  When I went to college I took a course on developing film and b/w portraiture.  The professor I took was a good man, but could not relate to me very well on how to truly get the most out of the camera.  Nonetheless, I kept trying.  When I graduated college I was hired at that same University in their media relations department; it was then that I got my first digital SLR, a Canon 20D.  After I could see the image and really grasp the world of digital photography, then everything became more and more clear and exciting to me, especially, the world of off-camera flash.

Q:  Canon, Nikon, Sonly, Olympus, Pentax or some other brand?

A:  I started with a Canon 20D, but for the past 4 years I have been shooting with an amazing camera: a Nikon D200.  The D200 is out of date but this camera holds great significance to me; it is the first camera I bought with my own money.  I bought a D200 w/ vertical grip and a 70-200 f/2.8 lens.  Just recently, I have added to my arsenal a Nikon N80 film camera.  (My future camera purchases will be a Nikon D3 & Nikon F6).

Q:  Even though this is predominantly a blog about digital photography, I hit recently on what appears to be a resurgence of film.  Do you have any thoughts on film photography?  Have you ever shot with film?  If so, any particular types of film that you’ve enjoyed using?

A:  I truly love film, I always have.  But, due to not understanding film and how to shoot film in the beginning I allowed that valuable lesson to slip me by.    This is not the case anymore.  I am gradually making the mark back to film and I am absolutely ecstatic about what I am seeing.  (All the b/w images featured are examples of my wedding film work).  Film represents more than an image taken with a digital camera; it represents a true moment forever captured in time, un-manipulated, unrehearsed, captured art.

I shoot primarily Professional B/W film speeds; Kodak Tri-X 400, Kodak T-Max 3200, and a little Ilford Delta 3200 here and there.

Q:    Mac, PC, or Linux?

A:  Once you go MAC, you don’t go back.

Q:  Chocolate, Vanilla, or Strawberry?

A:  This question can only be answered by expressing my much needed and much appreciated desires for French-Pressed Coffee and Rich Chocolate.  Mix them together, a whole new world emerges.

Q:  I guess that would mean chocolate, eh?  Moving into a little more granularity, photographers often enjoy hearing helpful and constructive critiques of their work, as we are aware of how much we can grow from it.  However, we’ve also all had the “nice shot” and “cool” comments when we’ve shared our work. What was the singular most useful critique or comment you’ve ever had on work you’ve shared publicly?

A:  The most useful comment I have ever received is: “less is more.”  How true is that; for us all.  Technology rapidly advances every day and more cameras are coming out with the best ISO ratings, sensors, frame rates, etc., but, just because you have the power to take a thousand images per event or live by the philosophy “shoot now, ask later,” does that necessarily mean you should?  Less is more has been dramatically helpful in my wedding work.  I will talk with a bride and when I relate that I shoot film and only a limited amount of portraits will be shot compared to a thousand files uploaded; they get ecstatic.  Sometimes, I feel that the wedding photography industry has a tendency to overload the brides and grooms of tomorrow with endless amounts of files and photos; the goal is to tell a story not a mini-series.

Another helpful critique that was told to me not to long ago is “slow-down.”  The wedding day is packed with lots happening and lots to be photographed, but when we as professionals run all over the place trying to capture that “perfect” moment; we lose the beauty of that moment.  A photographer should be on his/her toes but not at the expense of ruining those tender moments for those in attendance, more importantly the bride and groom.

Keep in mind: less is more & slow-down.

Q:  If someone was asking you for an honest critique of their work, what 3 factors would you look at most (excluding friendships or family relatives, we’re talking professional or fellow photographer-types here)?

A:  If someone was asking me for an honest critique I would look at these factors: emotion and perspective, these two work hand in hand.  Wedding Photography, or any photography for that matter, is not about fancy equipment or the latest photography gear; it’s about telling a story with the tools you have.  It’s about capturing emotion through unique perspectives. Anybody can capture a smile or a hug at any event, but what excites me about photographing a wedding is capturing those exceptional and special moments and more than that; revealing the love that the bride and groom (even the guests) have for one another.

Q:  Wow, that’s a great mentality to have for an approach to wedding photography and constructive critique perspectives.  So, you obviously enjoy capturing moments.  With software seeing the development it has in recent years though, you could almost create images without a camera.  If you had to choose between the gear or the software as the only way to create, which would it be and why?

A:  If I had to choose between the gear or the latest software; it would be the gear.  I am not a Photoshop gu-ru.  Photoshop is a tool, not the means to create.  Photography will always begin and end with the gear.  Keep in mind, it doesn’t have to be the most expensive gear (although we all wish we could afford and have the most expensive stuff) to tell a story.  It is how you use what you currently have in your hands to do the job.  Photography, in my opinion, should always be about telling a story; not creating one.  Graphic Design and Graphic Arts, is a different story.

Q:  If you had to pick three to six pictures out of your entire portfolio to represent your approach to photography, or your artistic vision, which ones would you pick (feel free to share images here)?

Q:  Any final thoughts you’d like to share about the state of photography or any catch phrases that you keep in mind when shooting?

A:  When I am photographing a wedding (or anything in general) I always remember it’s not about me; it is about capturing a moment forever embedded in time on a photograph.  That’s what photography is to me.

Chris, thanks so much for taking the time to participate in the Thursday Thoughts Series!  Your work is really impressive and a true pleasure to look at and enjoy.  For anyone interested in seeing more about Chris, stop over and enjoy his website, his blog, and feel free to share your thanks with him via email too.  In the meantime, thanks all for stopping in and continuing to read and support the CB blog and podcast series.  Happy shooting and we’ll see you back here tomorrow!

Is Film making a resurgance?

There’s been a lot of talk lately about film making a resurgence. Ever since Polaroid announced a about a year ago that they were ending production of their film, forums, blogs, and photography communities have been ramping up a widespread discussion over the benefits of film.   More recently, when Polaroid filed for Chapter 11 less than a month ago, the discussion of film vs. digital was taken up yet another notch.  While I am firmly in the digital world of photography, since my roots are founded in the Vivitar 110 I used as a youth, (and subsequently with my brothers Pentax K1000) the subject does hold a certain appeal for me.

So, I’d like to take a moment here on the blog to frame the “debate” from my own perspective. As a digital enthusiast, and at times, an admitted pixel peeper, the benefits of digital technology are not lost on me. At the same time, while technology can benefit us all, in many ways, and across many disciplines, it does have limits. Why? Because of the physics of it. Technologies can only be broken down so far before they reach limits. Data, for instance, can only be broken down into 1’s and 0’s. Likewise with the pixel in photography. Yes, we can advance technologies, and make pixels smaller, but in the end, there is always a limit to what a digital sensor can capture.

This is not to say that we cannot approach film-like quality with digital means. Feathering techniques, plugins, and action scripts can approach film-like characteristics, and many are quite good at it. For some examples of some of the best resources out there, I’d recommend a site called Action Central (www.atncentral.com) that has an impressive array of actions and such. Several plugin sites are also out there that include The Plugin Site, Adobe’s own Plugin pages, among several others.

On a side-by-side comparison though, I tend to be of the belief that film has a degree of smoothness in tonal and color gradations that simply cannot be duplicated by a digital sensor. They are getting very very good, and coming close, but from where I set (like I said, as an admitted pixel peeper at times), a pixel will always have a line that it cannot cross on its own. From that perspective, film will always win. I understand the converse, that when pixel peeping, I am looking at prints much closer than ever were intended for viewing purposes – but that’s just me.

What struck me most about this debate though, was a statement that really hit home, made by my friend, Dave Zarzecki (sorry folks, he does not have a web presence). It was analogy to graphic design and I think perfectly summarizes the difference between film and digital:

Film is to digital as vectoring is to rasterizing

Think about it.  Film is smooth and transitions from one tonal area to another blend very seamlessly,so even when you look at a print very close, it’s hard to tell where one color, tone or shade ends and where the next one begins.  The same holds true with vectoring…you can increase or decrease your viewing distance to HUGE degrees without seeing any pixelization.  By start contrast though, with digital, there will always be lines that the photoreceptors cannot cross for traditional sensors.  Wheter they are CCD, CMOS or other bayer arrays, there are fundamental limits to digital incarnations that cannot be surpassed without help.  The same holds true for rasterized objects.  Lines of demarcation are made, and to cross them, you need help, whether it be in the form of feathering, actions or plugins.

This is not intended to denigrate digital by any means – I love my 40D, and suspect within the next year I will also own a 1st generation 5D.  However, a fondness for the early days of my Vivitar 110 (and my brother’s Pentax K1000) will always be there.

So, what about the listening audience?  Will digital ever surpass film in tonal and color quality?  Has it done so already?  Or is it about to cross that line soon?  Sound off in the comments, I’d love to hear your thoughts!  In the meantime, happy shooting, and we’ll see you back here tomorrow!

Sex and photography?

The Influence of Sex on Photography

This has been a topic I’ve wanted to address for some time now, because I think gender does have an impact on how we look at, and how we capture imagery.  We all know that men and women are different, so it should come as no surprise that we see the world differently.  Thus it also naturally would follow that we take pictures differently too.  So, can we really break down how men and women take pictures differently?
Probably, given a scenario, anyone could devise a set of criteria to measure how people see the world.  In fact, a recent article in Popular Photography (the one that inspired me to finally write this actually), suggests that men tend to think of images in technical terms (the geometry, the depth of field, the aperture, the shutter speed, the lighting, etc.) while women tend to look at images in terms of the impact and the meaning of the image.  I am very much oversimplifying things here, so would highly encourage you to read the article at Popular Photography, but it does give us an indication that not only do we view the world differently, but that the world reacts to us differently as well.

I found the latter statement to be profoundly interesting… the world reacts to men photographers versus women photographers differently.  It makes sense once it’s said, and you think about it.  But are we aware of how we are impacting the shot?  This is particularly a useful question to ask if we are taking portraits.  People respond to genders differently all the time – call it a gender bias.  It’s not necessarily a bad thing (though it can be if taken to an extreme), but it is something that we as photographers should try to get a sense of as we capture our images.  So, put your radar antenna up – and look at how people respond to you.  Are you getting the reaction or the expressions you want?  If not, it might be simply the gender bias factor coming into play.  Since there’s not much you can do about your own gender (at least not without a serious fiscal investment in some extensive medical procedures), about all we can do is be aware of it, and when possible mitigate the bias when we do encounter it.

For me that means talking to women and men, and working collaboratively when the situation permits.  Surely though, there are other ways to address role that sex plays too.  So, now that I’ve got your radar up – think about it, and consider these questions:

  • Are people reacting the way I want them to, and if not, could my gender be a factor?
  • How can I mitigate that?

Share your thoughts and answers in the comments!

Holiday Photography…

I recently agreed to put together an article for the December issue of the PhotographyBB magazine on “How to Shoot the Holidays”.  With the compilation of that nearing completion, I subsequently got an email from Towner Jones Photography to write a guest post over at his blog!  Egad!  A guest post?!?!  Never been asked that before!  I was floored.

About all I could muddle out was “Well..uuh, I am writing an article for a free online magazine…would that work?”  Again, I was floored when he said that’d be great!  You could have knocked me over with a feather!  So, my post for today is actually to say thanks to Rob for the vote of confidence!  The scariest part of it all though, is not having to deal with my bantering, but he asked for a pic too!  So, here’s your chance to see my mug on the other side of the lens.  Go check out Towner Jones Photography today.  Make sure you tell him thanks for me too!

I’ll return next week with a new edition of Thursday Thoughts…let’s see, who can I ask for an interview?  Any ideas? 🙂  thanks again go out to Rob, and remember, it’s all about the photo, so get out there and get ya some!  Happy shooting everyone and we’ll see you back here tomorrow!

PhotographyBB Magazine Honors

Last night I got word from Dave Seeram, Editor of PhotographyBB Magazine that the latest issue of his monthly online publication had been completed!  The reason this is so exciting?  I had an article published in this issue.  This is my second published article here and it’s always exciting to see the fruits of your labor in print.  Take a moment to stop over and read the entire issue (but especially my article! 🙂 )  THanks to Dave for the honor of participating.

You may also notice the delay in the publishing of the daily post today – the host I have had some SQL issues and the resulting maintenance made for some downtime on a few domains, mine included.  As a result, the site was not visible yesterday, but obviously since I am writing this post everything is back up and running again.  FTP access has been sketchy, but seems to be okay again.  Due to the downtime both on the host and for me personally (see Monday’s post, or lack thereof) I don’t have a “What’s This?” for this week, so stay tuned for next weeks edition.  In the meantime, stop over to the TOP Test and see how you rank!  Can you beat the high score of 23 on the advanced test?  Share your thoughts and scores in the comments section.

Tomorrow is also an exciting day as Jeff Revell agreed to sit down with me for the Thursday Thoughts with series.  He’s got some great little nuggets and such so be sure to stop in for that.  Until then, I hope all your shots are good ones!  Keep on shooting, and we’ll see you back here tomorrow!