Category: personal

In Loving Memory

Jason1 Comment

5/4/2013 was a sad day…after 12 years together, our family dog Maggie had reached a point where her body is just not able to sustain her anymore. Over the last 9 months we have seen her deteriorate slowly. Her Lab face always seems to defy the pain she is in as she perks up whenever we come in the room, take her on a walk, or give her some “floor time” to play. Play times have gotten shorter, walks are probably more appropriately referred to as stumbles and flat out face plants, and her smiles when we enter the room have changed first to tail thumps, and more recently, just an ear perk.

I remember when I first got her – a dozen years ago. I was a single guy in St. Louis, and many family and friends suggested I get a dog for companionship. This bundle of energy snuggled into my arms from the litter almost immediately:

Over the years, she grew, and enjoyed many many happy days. Some of my favorite moments include particular events. Here she is expressing her curiosity the year I got a 10-22mm lens, checking out the new gear in my bag:

Us humans can take a page from our dogs, because they always seem to be smiling, happy to just be there, and both giving and receiving companionship, even just enjoying something as simple as a warm sunny day:

Being the Lab that she is, Maggie also enjoyed every moment she could in water, swimming, chasing sticks, and of course, giving me a dousing whenever I needed one…

Maggie is such a good dog – and acutely aware of people and their emotions This dog never left my side when I was bedridden with pneumonia. When something is missing or unfamiliar, she is always on the alert, checking things out to make sure all is in order…

Not to say that she was always good – as sometimes Maggie would get into something either with our consent, or just from her own search and explore sessions…

Her signature mark is a “happy wiggle” where she would literally throw herself down on the floor, and wiggle around on her back. This was always a sign that we knew she was in a happy place…

One of our favorite shots of her is one where she is obliging us with a pose over Halloween, so I feel compelled to share it here as well – so prim and proper…

So, we made the painful decision to let her go with some dignity. It was SO HARD to make this decision. We cried and reconsidered countless times whether we were doing the right thing or not. With no human children, Maggie really is our only child, and letting her go even today is something we feel physically ill about. She just can’t handle another move though – there are literally weeks, possibly only days left, so we opted to let her go gracefully…

 

 

 

It’s an inevitable part of the circle of life, and while the logical part of me knows and understands this, the emotional side of me will never be the same person again. It hurts so bad to let her go, even though I know she is going to a better place. Thanks for the lifetime of memories “Moo”…we love you! You were larger than life itself!

Shooting for fun or money

JasonLeave a comment

For this first of two holiday weeks for the year, the blog will be turning to more of an esoteric theme. Tips, tricks, tutorials, and the like are all fine and dandy, but this week I’d like to pose a question fo whether we are shooting for fun or money!

While clearly we all start in the craft because we love it as a form of expression. We are captivated by capturing the moment, painting a scene with light and color. if we learn the craft well enough, and our eye gets discerning enough, others may ask us to take pictures for them! Or even better, ask if they can have a copy of something we’ve already done. Praise is a wonderful ego boost and source of flattery, and while we all may mask it with self-deprecating remarks, humor, or coyness – no one likes the compliment better than someone who wants to pay them for their work!

“Getting paid to do something you love” is an oft-quoted sentiment, as is the idea that “if you love what you do, you’ll never work a day in your life”. But, truth be told, if you make your living in photography, there is going to be a certain amount of pressure to perform – or produce results. And the minute to take something you love and try to earn a living at it – the pressures of running the business side will reduce the passion you have for the subject. It’s the nature of the beast. You have to eat. You have to have shelter. If you can’t afford those two necessities, how much will you really “love” working as a professional photograper?

The shot today is a perfect example…I absolutely love this shot:

Adirondack Weeds
Adirondack Weeds

From a critique perspective, this is a horrible shot. The angle is all wonky, the horizon isn’t straight, there is really no subject, and I probably butchered the saturation in post production. But, for me…when I was canoeing with my family this last summer, we were cooling off in Raquette Lake, and I was sipping a lukewarm beer. My brother and brother-in-law were to my left and right…the nephews were out galavanting around being pirates or whatever young kids pretend on trips like this. We were cut off from the world (well, not really, but as close as one can get since there was no cell reception, and only a 9-5 Park Ranger available to sell you firewood at $5 a bundle)., and this shot reminds me of that day. I loved that day, and for that reason, I love this shot!

This shot will never sell though – for no one else except those on this trip, this shot is meaningless until now. I cannot make anything off of this picture. Yet I feature it today on the blog because I took this shot for fun…

The comparison shot I am about to show you actually sold for me on iStock. Now granted, it’s not like I’ve made a ton of money off of it (it only sold once or twice), but it actually sold!

I was on a photo walk, scouting out areas for the South Carolina Photography Guild (now defunct), and the shadow of the guy on the crane, along with the wet bricks from where he was repairing and cleaning the masonry work just stuck out for a reason. I took it from a few angles and this one was the best of the 3 or 4. In the end, it was kind of a boring shot, but it was pretty tack sharp, and when I opened my first iStock account ages ago, figured it’d be a good sample to submit to show I had enough of a grip to consider stock work. The image was approved, along with 4 or 5 others, and my istock account was opened. Within a few days, there was a sale on this shot. Do I like it? Not really. It’s probably on some construction workers website, or someone wanted it for a church bulletin, or a school project or other long-since completed project. It doesn’t really inspire me though.

Which image brought me more satisfaction? Which one brought you more? Would you pay huge amounts of money for either shot? Probably not. I wouldn’t either. Thus, this is the dilemma we face.

It’s no secret that most photographers don’t make huge amounts of money. Yet, somehow the ability to say that “I am a professional photographer” is something said often with a sense of pride. Is it because you know the crap out of pixels, shutters, and apertures? Or is it because you made 50.1% of your revenue from photography last year? Or is it because you love to hear the sound of the click? Last but not least, could it be the excitement at seeing something you made come out beautifully on either a printed tangible piece of paper or in a web page…saying “this is my artistic vision that I want to share with you”. Why do you take pictures? What motivates you?

Can You Shoot Thirteen Views

Jason1 Comment

I was reading a book recently called “Beyond the Obvious” by Phil McKinney (great book by the way) that challenges people to think about concepts and questions, and then encourages people to look beyond the knee-jerk reactions and responses.  This same mentality exists in the world of photography.  We see a scene, a portrait, or something that catches our eye and our instinct is to capture that “something”.

McKinney illustrates his point in asking the reader to answer the question:

“What is half of 13?”

He then goes on to show that there are many responses to this. The canned answer is always 6.5, and that’s what came to my mind too.  But in going “beyond the obvious”, he shows that if you think about it from the perspective of say, a deck of cards, and 13 cards in a suit.  Since the ten, jack, queen and king all are values of 10, then really, half of thirteen in that scenario is 5.5, not 6.5.  You could also say that half of thirteen is really “thir” with “teen” being the second half!  By illustrating that you can divide either numerically or semantically, entirely different perspectives, thoughts, and answers can be right at the same time!  Once I got on the mental plane of looking at things differently, my own result was that half of 13 could also be 1 or 3 – applying the semantic concept to the number…

That is such a great concept, and one I’ve always tried to help people understand here in many different ways.  The “half of thirteen” way is probably one one the most succinct I’ve ever seen though.  Let’s take that concept now and apply it to photography.  Go get your camera!  Right now…seriously!  Go get your camera, and pick some random object in your room, office, or where ever you happen do be.  I don’t care if it’s your SLR, P&S, or camera phone.

Now what?  Take 13 pictures of that object.  Make each one different!  Change the angle, change the light, change the object itself.  It doesn’t matter what you do, just do 13 different things.  I can guarantee you that at least one of those photos will be something new, unique, and even compelling.  Now, take the most compelling one, and post it here.  To get you started on the right mentality, if you’re not already, here’s my own set of thirteen:

The shots above come from the “Wreck of the Peter Iredale” – on the coast of Astoria, Oregon.  Now, granted, the setting sun, and the unique nature of the composition made my 13 shots a little easier, but there’s now reason you can’t do the same.  Take a speaker and shoot it from as many angles as you can.  Run out of angles?  Try a different tack and change the lighting!  What happens if you pop an on-camera flash?  Try throwing your hand up to act as a barn door of sorts.  There’s no end to potential…it just takes thinking outside the box!

What Is Zoom?

JasonLeave a comment

A great question came up in my Twitter feed a while back, and felt it was worthy of putting together a short post to help explain the whole concept of zoom on cameras.  The original tweet asked:

“What’s the best focal length on a lens to reach 400 yards so I can see a 1 inch square at that distance?”

We started talking about different long length lenses, such as the 400mm, 800mm, and 1200mm lens options from Canon.  All were (are) very pricey and beyond the budget for my friend.  he then started asking why a 35x zoom point and shoot wouldn’t be an option.  So, the discussion turned to a teachable moment!  How exciting for a teacher!  The recap is two simple points:

Point #1  When manufacturers refer to the zoom of a lens, whether it’s a P&S camera, binoculars, or digiscopes, they are referring to how much of a magnification one can get over “normal viewing conditions”.  Notice how I put the last part in quotes.  What are normal conditions anyway?  What kind of vision is normal?  20/20 vision?  And what are we looking at?  Something 10 yards away or 400 yards away.  The point here is that there are so many subjective factors, the “zoom” isn’t really has hard and fast a number as one would think.  We can approximate sure, but it’s not set in stone, and certainly a measurable distance is nothing more than a rough guess.

Point #2  The zoom of an SLR lens isn’t at all on par with the zoom of other equipment – it actually is a hard and fast number.  Simply put, the zoom of a lens is the ratio of it’s longest reach to it’s shortest reach.  A 70-200mm lens starts with a focal length of 70mm and ends with a focal length of 200mm.  This is the distance from the focusing point to the sensor.  So, a 70-200 lens has a “zoom” of 200/70 or almost 3x.  A 100-400 lens would have a zoom factor of 4.  it’s simple math for SLR lenses.

This is a classic example of where the same term can mean different things to different people.

So, my answer to him?  Well, to see something at 400 yards large enough to take a decent picture you would likely need an 800mm lens or 1200mm lens.  You also probably need a 1x or 2x TC to really get far enough.  The problem with taking a picture at this distance is that heat, atmospheric conditions, and just the physical limitations of optics would not make for appropriate conditions to capture decent images.  Most wildlife photographers I know of like to get closer than 400 yards from a subject to take their picture, and for good reason.  The distance to subject is of prime importance in capturing wildlife photos.  Zoom or no zoom (prime lenses), there’s no substitute for proximity!  Photography all too often comes down to something along the lines of real estate mentalities…location, location, location!

My best example?  A hummingbird I shot from a mere 15 feet away!

Hummingbird in Flight
Hummingbird in Flight

Why Scott Kelby and Crew are Wrong

JasonLeave a comment

It was brought to my attention over the weekend that Scott Kelby chimed in on the pricing and policy change that Adobe has implemented on their latest episode of “The Grid”.  It’s a great vidcast that hits on the meat of topics that photographers are talking about, and this episode was no exception, helping to dispel some of the myths that surround photographers.  What I want to talk about here is what they prefaced the show with: a short five minute blurb about the Adobe policy, and what’s wrong/right with it.  I was dumbfounded.

Fair warning – this is a long post….much longer than what I normally post – but it’s that important!  Please take the time to read this whole thing because you will have a complete and clear understanding of these odd terms like Subscription Service, In Perpetuity,  and Creative Cloud.  You’ll understand the differences, and see why the new pricing scheme is not a good decision for anyone – personal or professional businesses!

So, in the interests of getting it right, I went back and listened to it several times, finally writing a transcript of it (which you can read here.  Here’s the nuts and bolts though of what they had to say…

[Scott] And that’s my guess.  I haven’t talked to Adobe on this.  Nobody in Adobe’s pricing dept. said this.  I can imagine the reason why Adobe did this is a couple of things:

1. I…and this is where all the controversy is, I don’t think it’s the pricing so much, I haven’t heard anybody gripe about the price it’s like $50 a month and you get everything they do. You get everything, right? You get like the whole Master Collection.  Again, I didn’t look at all the numbers, so I don’t …I could be a little off.

[Matt]  It’s ballpark and if you add up what it would cost you to buy the Master Collection, it actually in some ways can save you money.

They are looking at the Creative Cloud service, not the subscription pricing.  Let me state that again, unequivocally:

They are confusing the subscription model with the Creative Cloud stuff.

These are two different things, so let’s get that on the table right away.  The subscription service is not $50 a month!  What’s the difference?  It’s easy! A subscription service is something you pay a small amount for every month (or week, or year…whatever, you are a subscriber.  How is that different from the current licensing?  The current licensing (whether by download or media – it doesn’t matter)…means you own that license forever.  In legal terms, it’s called an in perpetuity license.  You’ve bought that license and are entitled to use it forever!  Renting a house (or apartment) is far more expensive than buying one.  Renting (or leasing) a car – the same.  Would you rent a camera?  For one time uses, sure…but who wants to use that model if you plan on doing anything regularly?  The answer:  no one!  From Adobe’s perspective (or any provider for that matter), it’s a great business model because it makes the renter more money.  The same holds true here for Adobe!  Don’t believe me?  Take a look…

We are assuming that we are starting from an upgrade perspective – people that already own a CS5 license.  The following chart is based on the cost to upgrade an in perpetuity license (assuming that doesn’t change…) and shows what that same cost would be under the subscription model based on a 24 month cycle:

Adobe Pricing Licensing Numbers

An important qualifier here – Adobe is also moving to an alternating schedule whereby dot releases are put out in alternating years to full version releases:

CS5 – 2010
CS5.5 – 2011
Cs6 – 2012
CS6.5 – 2013
CS7 – 2014
etc.

This is why you are renting on a 24 month schedule.  It’s also why there is no way that renting anything would cost you less.  They said they hadn’t had the time to look into it.  Several others have.  In their defense, the 5 minute bit was full of qualifications – Adobe didn’t tell us, we don’t know, we can only guess…all that sorta stuff, which is fine in and of itself.  But how can someone say with a straight face that renting costs less than owning?  Seriously.  Take any basic business course or economics course.  The pricing factor aside (which is already been demonstrated as exorbitant…) at the end of renting – you own nothing!

How is the subscription model a better model for anyone besides Adobe?  Scott and crew answered with the following:

“[Matt] The biggest problem I see, there’s gonna be a barrier to entry for someone who is on Cs3 or CS4.

[Scott] Especially hobbyists

[Matt] That’s who I’m really talking about.  For a company I think…it’s not just better for Adobe…to put in a subscription model because now they know how much they are gonna take in every year…but now a company knows exactly how much money you’re gonna spend each month on software.  So it’s easier for a company.

Hobbyists though, ya know, it’s hard to swallow six or seven hundred dollars…

[Scott] A year…

[Matt]  And then go into the subscription model too…

[Scott]  Oh no no…you’ve gotta upgrade…it depends on what you have…if you have the Suite..I don’t know…

[Matt]  It does get, it can get hairy…”

As you can see – it’s not that hairy – it doesn’t matter what you own: CS2-Cs5 will cost more to go to a subscription model than it would to stay on an in perpetuity license.  One more time for clarity, here’s where Scott Kelby and Crew got it wrong:

They are confusing the subscription model with the Creative Cloud.

Not only is it not that complicated – even for businesses, it’s very easy to extrapolate out the Total Cost of Ownership over time and see how this is not a good economic move for anyone (unless you are Adobe).  With all due respect to Scott and crew – I would ask them if they will switch to the subscription model?  My guess is no.  They also provided, in my estimation, a pretty lame explanation for why Adobe is changing their policy.  Here’s what they said:

“[Scott]I’ve been getting so many people asking about Adobe’s new pricing and all that stuff.

Adobe does not call us and ask what we think about pricing.  We learned when everyone else did.  I haven’t had any time to really look into it.  I think there are some good things about it.  I think the subscription model is really great, and by the way, you might as well get used to the subscription model, because it’s the wave of the future. You’re going to be subscribing to everyone’s software.  Especially when the big people like Adobe start moving into that thing.  I think the days of you going to the store and buying off the shelf – it’s either going to be direct download or it’s going to be subscription based.  And everyone wants the subscription model because it gives you revenue all year long ya know

[Matt]   Well,  it’s predictable they know Jan through December what they are going to get.”

Huh?  So they can get revenue year round?  They do already!  Different folks buy at different times…it’s called effective management of resources.  This isn’t about regular revenue – it’s about more revenue!  And we all know Adobe isn’t hurting.

That isn’t on the NAPP gang though – that’s just Adobe greed.  But I do think where Scott and crew are misunderstanding the outcry is that they think we are upset over the subscription offering.  It’s not that we are against the subscription offering per se.  It’s the exclusive and disingenuous way that people are being set up into that option.  Let me state more unequivocally what I think is wrong:

1.  The sudden elimination of 3-versions back upgrade options.  The solution to this is rather than just cutting it off immediately, to phase it out.  (This was posted in the comments from last week here.)

Since there was no major outcry when Adobe said that only 3 versions back could upgrade you would think that if they wanted to do this to go 2 versions back for CS6. Then they could offer a graduated sliding scale something like this:

Upgrade 2 versions back. Upgrade price $189.
CS3 and CS2 Upgrade at $249.00
Older Versions Upgrade at $329.00

Every Quarter or so offer older versions a 20% discount if purchased directly from Adobe.com

2.  For those that want the subscription program, fine, but I am here to tell you from a financial perspective:  It is a horrible idea for anyone…personal or professional!  The TCO is 4x what it would be for an in perpetuity license, and if you ever end the subscription program for yourself or your company – you have nothing left to work off of. It’s like renting.  For most outfits, that makes no sense for any software (or hardware) used on a regular basis.  Now if I had a one time need for In Design or something, that’s another story – but we are talking regular use here.  Heck, I’ll rent glass I can’t afford, but I also am not using that glass every day!  Only for 2 or 3 days.

3.  The last part I have a beef with is whether this will ripple over to other products.  We don’t know yet, but I can only assume that Lightroom and Acrobat are soon to follow if this subscription service takes off.  The installation base for Acrobat is far more extensive – going into regular businesses, not just creative businesses, and the impact there could be dire.  I suspect Adobe is merely giving an indication of what’s to come by testing their leading products in this model.  Unless we want to see everyone adopt this method of sucking that much more from our own wallets – we need to tell them to stop now!

So, chime in now, and share on Twitter, Facebook, and Google Plus – as well as to Adobe.  I gave out links on how to do this here.  Here’s the on-going poll too if you don’t want to comment.  Speak up now and let Adobe know how you feel.  We still have a chance to change their minds.

EDITOR NOTE:  This post was written and published before I had a chance to read Scott’s Open Letter to Adobe on his blog today.  That letter pretty much takes Scott and Crew off the hook – they are advocating on our behalf and I’ve already given my accolades to Scott over there.  Please read that post as well!

Puerto Angel Vacation Photos

Jason1 Comment

As you may or may not have noticed, the blogging schedule has sort of gotten re-aligned again.  I had slipped from the 5-day schedule down to a 2-day schedule, but during a recent getaway, I was able to get things back on track.  Hopefully there won’t be any more changes to what is now a Mon-Wed-Fri setup, but news-breaking or other earth shattering info may trump the normal order of the universe!  In any case, during the break, I happened across a few really good photo ops.  Some gorgeous vistas and scenery, plus an occasional animal sighting from the trip to Puerto Angel Mexico (you’ll get more info if you subscribe to the free PhotographyBB magazine as a full-length article with many more photos is due out next month).

Nevertheless, since photos have not been at the forefront, I wanted to dedicate an entire post to sharing some photos from the trip here with you.  So, without further ado, some selects from the trip!

A Few From the Fire House

Jason1 Comment

Nothing tip-related, tutorial-esque, or educational today, just thought I’d share some photos from one of the local photo clubs I participate in regularly.  One of our members is the on-staff photographer, and was able to get us permission to take photos for an entire session.  We even got one of the guys to get in his gear and do some shots with us.  Devin is the guys name and he totally was cool with our posing instructions and everything – this guy even kept this super heavy fire hose on his shoulder for like 30 minutes while we had him stand and pose, looking in various directions and holding his head a certain way.

So, without further ado – here’s a few samples/selects from what I am affectionately calling:

The Fire House Shoot

Fire House 1

Fire House 2

Fire House 3

Fire House 4

Fire House 5

 

And to close out the series, one that struck me while there was a scene that reminded me of why we have these courageous men to serve and protect us…

Fire House 6

 

The poses that Devin struck were directed courtesy of yours truly (stop back in later this week for more details on the posing techniques I used), and all post processing was done using your favorite photo editor (and mine):  Adobe Lightroom!


Adobe Lightroom 3

Thanks to Tim Tonge for organizing the event, and to the brave men of Castle Rock Firehouse for tolerating our presence for an afternoon!

8 Megapixels…

Jason5 Comments

When I first transitioned to digital photography seriously, my camera of choice was the Canon Rebel XT. In that camera I found a whopping 3 frames per second, 8 megapixels, and a host of other features and benefits that go with SLR photography. The times, how they change…

My Droid2 smart phone bit the bullet (this was the third one of these to die prematurely), and Verizon in its wisdom decided I needed to go to a different model phone.  After several logistical problems with getting the correct battery shipped for the correct model to the correct address, I finally got a battery for the new phone, powered it up and activated my number on the new line.  Imagine my surprise when I found out that this new phone has…yup:

8 Megapixels!

It staggers my mind that they can fit the same number of pixels on this teensy sensor that used to fill a sensor for an SLR.  My hesitancy at embracing this MP count is that there will be excess noise, and pixelation on the images.  While the smart phone features (phone, email, Facebook, Twitter, etc.) look to perform adequately, the camera is always a point of contention for me as I wish these phones could adapt somewhat and figure out a way to have an adjustable aperture.  If you can fit that many pixels onto that teensy a sensor, surely the aperture could be adjustable!

This could just be me ranting on quixotically though – so, here’s a sample image at full resolution (click it to see full size).  Does this seem decent enough for a camera phone?  Sound off in the comments with your own thoughts on cell phone cameras – what features are good, what should be thrown out, and what should be improved?  (No carrier bashing please – try thinking of this as carrier agnostically as possible! 🙂

Droix X Test Shot

Turning Tasks into Photos

JasonLeave a comment

I had to bake bread for a work potluck today.  That’s ok, I like cooking, and it seems others do too, because most of the time the dishes I serve are some of the first things to disappear.  I decided last night to do something simple, but often popular:  banana bread!

When it was done, the house sure did smell good from the caramelized sugar, bananas toasting, and who doesn’t like bread?  (I know, I know – lots of carbs aren’t good for you…)  But, every once in a while it’s fun to indulge.  As luck would have it, this particular loaf of bread had some nice colors and tones to it, so naturally, I started thinking about my other hobby – photography!

With bread there’s so much you can do from capturing details, to using a shallow depth of field, to creative lighting and shadows, everything becomes a cornucopia of possibilities.  Here’s a few of my selects from just ten minutes of prep, 60 minutes of cook, and ten minutes of shoot time!

Banana Bread 1

Banana Bread 2

Banana Bread 3

Banana Bread 4

Banana Bread 5

Want a slice?  What tasks have you taken and turned them into photo opportunities?  The lesson learned here today (hopefully anyway) is to take something you have to do and make it something you want to do!  In this case, it was a win-win scenario for me, but what about you?  Sound off with your own fun-filled (or food-filling) photo projects!

Defining your craft – and yourself!

Jason7 Comments

Photography as we know it has changed a lot over the past several years.  The advancements of digital are pretty well-known, and have been written about extensively.  In addition to the nature of the medium, several other factors have come together in what photographers are calling “the perfect storm”.  Included in this picture are the decreased cost of entry, increased interest from a wider and ever-increasing portion of the population, photographers are finding themselves in larger company than ever before…to put it quite simply:  there’s more of us!

David Ziser, the quintessential wedding photographer did an excellent write-up in two parts (here and here) as a guest blogger over at Scott Kelby’s blog.  Not only is he an incredible photographer, his writing is among the best in the industry too!  I would highly recommend reading these two posts because even if you aren’t a fan of “The Kelby Kool-Aid”,  (although I must admit, I take a sip of it every now and then…) because these specific writings give insights and directions for all of us moving forward.  While the insights and perspective-changing considerations to take into account (including drive, motivation, work ethic, etc.) are definitely helpful, the more serious question that lies at the root of all of it seems to find a cornerstone in one simple question:  WHY DO YOU TAKE/MAKE PICTURES?

Without getting into the semantics of taking versus making pictures – my point here is that we all pick up the camera for different reasons.  And only in understanding those reasons can you really determine where you want to go and how you want to get there from where ever you are now.  We may pick up our camera to capture a moment in time, with dew glistening off the petals of a flower in the morning light:

Black and White Flower

Does that make us nature photographers?  Absolutely!  But, by the same token, does that define us?  Of course not!  We may also enjoy capturing that beaming bride as she smiles and kisses her husband on their special day!  Or, we may revel in the laughter of children as we capture those moments in time!  By the same token, we may also be pulled on some deep and intangible level by the power of a sunrise or a sunset in some place!  Heck, maybe it’s even the place that moves us.  As David DuChemin says, “…vision is better!”

The Kiss

Laughter

Mexican Sunset

There are so many scenes and images that surround us every day, but yet so often we do not trip that shutter, because we likely are not tuned in to a particular vision or perspective.  So, the question then becomes:  What is your vision?  Do you see the beauty inside that awkward teenager who only smiles for family?  Or what about the majesty of a skyline timed so perfectly?  The fact is, we can find it everywhere, and while we can blog and twitter, and Facebook until the cows come home about our latest project, or to promote and network across so many sectors of the economy (whether it’s improving or on the downturn), what ultimately matters is what motivates you to shoot in the first place?

Those Eyes!

Denver Skyline

When push comes to shove, the foundation for creating photographs (I believe) is something that comes from inside.  You have to want to be there, capturing that moment in time in order to the vision to really come to life.  Whether it’s a sunset, a smile, a skyline or anything, if you’re not true to your own roots, then twittering about it all becomes less than inspirational.

Of course, I could be completely half-cocked, and off base entirely here.  What do you think is at the root of photography?  Is it for the passion, the fame, or the glory?  Or is it something else altogether?  What drives those like David Ziser, Joe McNally, Zack Arias, David DuChemin and the rest to such degrees of excellence?  Time and again, what makes them and folks like them rise to the top?  Share your thoughts, comments, and feedback below!