article – CanonBlogger

Depth of Field Matters!

March 9, 2011 Jason2 Comments

When we approach the topic of depth of field, most people nod along about how the composition can change pretty dramatically when moving between various apertures – but have you ever really studied the differences? Take some time and do an exercise. It’s not that difficult, and really seeing the differences in photos can totally lift the roof on your approach to composition. For this exercise, I took a scrap piece of lumber, and nailed 6 framing nails into it about two inches apart from each other.

Step two was to set up the lighting, the tripod, and the “wood art” in a scene where i could adjust the aperture and keep everything else constant. With my own little studio set here in the house, that was accomplished easily enough. I set the focal point on the nearest nail, and dialed in the exposure I wanted. Then, I switched to manual focus so as to not bump or have the camera try to shift it for me and dialed through the various f-stops.

Step three – simple post production: camera calibration, white balance, and lens correction. I also applied a 75 value to the sharpening slider from the detail panel, but did so universally. So, with everything but aperture constant, here’s the results:

So, at this point you should have enlarged the photos above, and scrolled through the entire gallery so you can see exactly what is sharp at f2.8 all the way through f16. By the time you get to the end, so much has changed and often gradually, it’s hard to see the difference. But if you look at the f2.8 and f16 shots side-by-side – they are worlds apart compositionally speaking. Now I grant you, nails hammered into a 2×4 piece of lumber 2″ apart is not the most artistic piece ever shot, but it hopefully illustrates what can happen to a photo simply by changing the aperture and keeping everything else constant!

WHere do you think creatively adjusting your depth of field would work? Try to think outside the box here too. A few ideas for starters:

A flower from close up…
A portrait shot, with background blurred
Macro photography – bugs and insects, computer chips and parts

There’s a whole world out there with plenty of opportunities to create gorgeous photos with only your creativity to limit you. Where do you want to go today?

Hardware Review: Sigma 70-200 f2.8

November 2, 2010 Jason16 Comments

The kind folks at Sigma have become quite the regular contributor to the review section here – as you keep asking for lens reviews, the Sigma brand keeps coming up, and they continue to be generous with my participation in the loaner program. Thus far the lens line-up I’ve reviewed from the Sigma Collection include:

Having compiled quite the list of review lenses, I am happy to announce the latest addition to this review series (some day I hope to have reviewed every lens Sigma has! 🙂 ) I give you the Sigma 70-200 f.28…

This lens is the comparable one to the Canon 70-200 f2.8, and while I’ve not had a chance to test the Canon equivalent, there are some optical similarities. I won’t go so far as to compare it to my own Canon 70-200 f4.0 simply because there are enough differences that it would be an apples to oranges comparison. So, here I’ll just share my own thoughts and shots on and from the lens for everyone to consider. Here is everything from soup to nuts:

The (Alphabet) Soup

This is the 70-200 F2.8 EX DG OS HSM lens – quite a mouthful, but all of these features are important. The EX signifies that this lens has benefitted from the now signature finish of Sigma lenses. It’s smooth but rugged, and hard to really explain, but denotes quality and professionalism while being also understated – it means business. I’ve raved about the finish that Sigma puts on their lenses and this one is no exception. Top Notch! The DG? That means it’s optimized for Digital use. To quote Sigma,

“These are large-aperture lenses with wide angles and short minimum focusing distances. With an abundance of peripheral illumination, they are ideal lenses for Digital SLR Cameras whilst retaining suitability for traditional 35mm SLRs.”

In other words, the f2.8 means the aperture is designed for the width and opening, optimizing the amount of light that comes in, and minimizing barrel distortion. The end result of all this means you spend less time in post fixing things. A definite plus in my book!

OS is the now easily recognizable label of optical stabilization. These lenses have built in mechanisms that counter your movement to allow for shooting at slower shutter speeds. Slower shutter speeds, wide open apertures all means you can shoot and get quality results in lower light! I’ll go into more details on their OS features later though.

HSM refers to the Hyper Sonic Motor, which means nearly whisper quiet movement as the lens picks up on the AF points. Less noise means less distraction. This is good regardless of whether you are shooting portraits, wildlife, or street photography. Remember, it’s not about the photographer, it’s about the photo, and the HSM is an added bonus to help achieve that end goal!

The Nuts

All the acronyms in the world won’t tell you a thing about lens performance though, and neither will my blathering about this or that, so let’s just get to the nuts. I went out with the lens to take some test shots and basically get a feel for the optical quality throughout the lens. I took some at short range (70mm), some in the middle (ranging from 120-150mm), and some at the long end (200mm). Shot groups also were mixed between simple test shots (a street) to portraits, and landscapes to get an idea of the focal range. Here’s said shots!

The 70mm shots

Mid-range Shots

Long Range Shots

Here, you can get an idea of both the optical quality and range of the optics as well as an idea of how it would perform in a variety of functions. I should also note that I have done literally no post production work in these at all. The only sharpening that was applied was on output sharpening from Lightroom, and that was set “For Screen” by default on all my images. In other words, nothing has been tweaked. Having said that, let’s take a look at some of the pros and cons of the optics overall.

Pros ~

I absolutely love the bokeh on this lens at long range. It compresses subjects nicely for portraiture, and throws the background nicely out of focus with some great treatment due to the optics. These shots were taken in afternoon light, and the sun was coming in and out of the scene – which could change the settings quickly. We were shooting on a monopod, and with IS on so the minor changes in shutter speed (these were aperture priority shots) didn’t really affect us. The f2.8 end came out nicely too, which was as expected though – that’s the whole reason for the f2.8 My excitement was primarily lent toward the bokeh at the long end which came out to about f4.5 Not too shabby!

I also was a huge fan of the OS – optical stabilization. It had two settings…OS 1 for shooting handheld, which counters both vertical and horizontal axis movement, and if you are shooting on a monopod (which is common with heavier glass), you can switch to OS 2, which turns off the one axis (horizontal I think). This allowed me to take some pretty decent shots at a hockey game a few weeks ago. You may recall seeing a gallery of those shots here on the blog. I was toggling between the OS1 and OS2 for that series so some shots did come out better than others – the ones with OS2 were the sharper in the set!

Another advantage here is that the collar for tripod or monopod mounting is included. I had to shell out an additional $50 for my Canon when I bought the f4, so seeing it included here was a happy surprise. I hate to go on and on here, but there was one other feature that bears mentioning and that is the smooth rotation I was getting from the lens as I worked it through the focal range. Either this was brand new, or had just been serviced because it was about the smoothest glass I’d seen from Sigma yet…and given the laundry list up top, that’s saying something!

And finally, the last big notch in favor of it, is – of course – the price. Coming it at $1700 this lens is certainly not cheap. However the savings is still there as it offers a s$200 over the Canon equivalent which comes in at at $1900! For the cost conscious (and who isn’t these days), that $200 can go toward many other accouterments in your shopping cart! And from what I can tell, the image quality is pretty darn good. (I got my prices from B&H Photo – the Sigma one is here and the Canon one is here)

Cons ~

This was much heavier and bigger than I anticipated. It was longer than my own 70-200 from Canon. Now I grant you my own is only an f4.0 and does not have the OS (or IS if you prefer – for the strict Canonistas out there). But I was a little surprised. I think that’s why my initial shots were a little oof – out of focus – because my arms just weren’t used to carrying the weight around. Lesson learned though – when moving into the fast glass category, at least shoot with a monopod, arm strain is greatly reduced!

The other big con was battery drain. All the time I could hear the OS kicking on and off as it would sense movement, even as I walked around. This caused some noticeable drain on my battery and I found myself swapping out after about 3 hours of shooting. Maybe this is typical of optically stabilized lenses and I am just not used to it, but the drain was something else that I had to take into account. I did have a spare with me, so it wasn’t that big a deal – but I certainly could not have shot all day on only two batteries with this lens.

While the collar was included, I don’t believe the lens hood is. Now the test unit I had did include a nice lens hood with the butterflies to avoid as much vignetting as possible, but that would likely add to the cost. Based on prices seen on B&H though, that’s only in the neighborhood of $25 (Direct link to Sigma marketplace here).

The Decision:

I would loved to have held onto this lens a while longer, and truth be told, will probably end up buying it. The Canon 70-200f4 may be working its last days in my bag, just because the faster glass and features are sure to see much more use from me. Coming up tomorrow, the results of the October contest giveaway – and announcing the November giveaway…make sure you stop in for that! Happy shooting and we’ll see you then!

The TEN stop Filter DIY Project

October 22, 2010 Jason7 Comments

As promised in the monthly newsletter (you can sign up for it free, by visiting this link here), the article on creating your own 10-stop filter is finally here! Delays with some tripod issues have prevented the final shots showing the effects, but the principles will hold, so without the end results (I should have my tripod fixed by next month, and will share a supplemental post then with the resulting shots and work ups.) So, today, I give you:

The TEN stop filter project

A common problem with shooting landscape photos is that we are limited by the hours of available shoot times. We all know that the best times to shoot are morning and evening for the best light. The overhead light in the middle of the day just does not allow you to drop your shutter speeds much to get flowing water, or a sense of motion in clouds without assistance. Another possible use could be a kissing engagement couple with some blurred motion behind them (like a train, the clouds, or whatever – suggesting a really long kiss!) 🙂

The only way to address that is through stacking MANY neutral density filters (ND). They are made in various stops (defined by the stops of light they block), and stacking can get pretty costly. There are some though that you can get that address multiple stops of light in one filter, like the Lee 10-stop filter. Problem? Cost! (It’s $160 at B&H). I learned a while ago about a way to make one yourself for as little as $20.00 though. Here’s the process I used (let me also apologize for the image quality – some of these were taken with the Droid in low light and studio level shots wasn’t where my attention was…but you can hopefully get the gist from these):

Step One – Find a cheap filter at your local camera store. These can be found for a dollar or so. The one I used was found at a camera store for 50 cents. A Hoya 85B orange filter (77mm).

Step Two – Place it on a paper towel, and wrap a second one over the top (this is for your protection and easier cleanup)

Step Three – Get your favorite hammer out…

Step Four – Do not just go to town….whacking away crazily is not needed. Just a couple firm taps until you hear the glass give way…

Step Five – Once the glass is broken, a few strategic taps around the edges should pop most of the glass out of the filter ring:

Step Six – Wrap up paper towels of broken glass and discard. Then check the filter ring and make sure it is free of any glass shards (I used canned air)…

Step Seven – Buy a welder’s replacement lens from your local hardware/tool store, or perhaps a local welder shop. If you prefer, there are online retailers that sell this stuff too. The problem there is that the cost of shipping quickly ratchets up the price. I found some Hobart #9 at a local store for under $2.50 per pack and some Lincoln Electric #10 at Lowe’s for $5 a piece.

Steps 8a – I tried first to mark a circle with tape and use a Dremel with a regular cutting wheel to slowly cut to the ring dimension. It resulted in a pretty bad crack through the center of the glass, rendering it unusable, so I had to start over.

Step 8b – I tried a second piece of glass with a scoring hand tool. Since the welding glass is about 1/4” thick, it takes several score to make it weak enough at this breakage point to snip off cleanly. My efforts did not result in clean snips, and ultimately, the glass cracked from my impatience (so, add patience to the list of materials needed!).

Step 8c- I went to purchase a 3rd piece of the cheap stuff. This time, I called around and found a place willing to try to cut the glass (everyone will ask and believe the glass is tempered, when in my case – neither was). I took a sheet of the cheap stuff into them and explained what I was trying to do, then asked what size they could cut to. They had a 2 1/2” hole saw and a 3” whole saw with diamond tips for glass cutting. We did the calculations and realized that 77mm is almost 3 inches exactly. He warned me that the saw itself would take a portion out. Thinking there was a lip on the interior of the filter, I said go ahead (after all, it’s only $2.50 here right? 🙂 )

He was able to cut it into a nice circle. I knew it would be close so thanked him and asked how much I owed. He smiled and said “No charge – give me a plug or a print if it works out!”. Since I am happy to either way, the name of the place is CNC Glassworks in Arvada CO! Super nice folks and great attitude toward customer service! I am sad to admit though that the hole he cut out was just a shade too small. I may possibly attempt to sand this down to the next filter size in my gear bag glass and on testing, but it did prove to be too small.

Step 9 – I now knew that I needed to either find a diamond-tipped hole saw and cut it myself, or find someone that had a 3 1/2” hole saw that would be willing to use it on my glass. A little bit of Google research showed that Bosh makes a Diamond Hole Saw in the 3 1/8” size. Problem? None, if you want to pay $60 or more for the tool itself (the cheapest I found was around $60 at Ohio Power Tool, and locally through a company called Tool King for $70). Even if it was half this price, the DIY cost saving approach is quickly ratcheting up. So, a little more in-depth research was required.

Step 10 – Sure enough, after I did some more research via telephone and email, I found a manufacturer online (THK Diamond Tools) that sold the equipment. I was able to purchase the diamond coated hole saw bit for $10 (+ $10 shipping). Since I don’t own a table drill, a quick trip back to CNC Glassworks with a 4th piece of the cheap stuff resulted in in a good cut. I have a piece of the good welder’s glass (the #10 Hobart one for $5 at Lowe’s), but wanted to test the results first. The end result of the cut now fit perfectly into the filter ring!

Step 11 – Now, I just took a little clear silicon glue applied to the inner circle of the filter ring and snugged the new “filter” into place. After letting it dry for about a day, it is now ready to shoot! (Unfortunately, my tripod is still pending repairs, so the final results will have to wait a while longer – but the project is officially complete!

Supplies/Tools Used:

Filter Ring ($1-$10 depending on where you get them)
Welder’s Replacement Glass (ranges in price from $2.50 – $5 depending on market – ymmv)
Paper Towels (50 cents)
Hammer (??? had this forever)
Safety Glasses (required for any DIYer – but $3 from Lowes if you dont own a pair)
Safety gloves (again, required for any DIYer – but $3-$5 from Lowes if you dont own a pair)
Glass Cutter ($3)
*Dremel with cutting bit (ETA – if you have the time and $, get the diamond cutting bit – you may have more success than I did… and sanding bit)
Strong glue (to hold glass in filter ring after completion – $5)
Masking tape ($2)
*If you want to go the more “professional route” and have a table drill, or know someone who does, the cost for the$20 for the diamond tipped 3″ bit from THK is $20.)

*You don’t need both of these, but you should have either one or the other.

Project Time Frame – 1-4 hours total work time, 2-4 days total project time.

So, in totaling all the costs of the project, I probably invested $40. This did involve multiple test cuts which you can avoid though, and if your area has a glass cutting shop with a 3″ diamond tipped bit, then another $20 can be saved. This could drop your cost to less than $20 if you only need one cut and already have the materials. Either way, considering the cost of a Lee 10 stop $160 filter, I’ve saved $120 in my project by going the DIY Route!!

Keep in mind that these filters will leave a green tint, so you’ll have to do a little bit of post processing, but if I spend ten minutes in post, that’s worth the savings to me – especially since this is an extremely unusual type of use piece of glass, and hard to justify that kind of expense. Give it a whirl and share your own shots in the LDP Flickr pool! Happy shooting and we’ll see you here again tomorrow!

Five Key Elements of Tripod Leg Purchasing

September 29, 2010 Jason4 Comments

It doesn’t matter whether you are a seasoned veteran or new to the field, the purchase of a tripod is something that we all consider and eventually make the plunge with in the field of photography. Let’s face it, we get sharper shots, are forced to plan composition more carefully, and in general, a tripod will improve your photography ten-fold over not using one. Having said that, there are degrees of effectiveness in a tripod, and as in most things – you typically get what you pay for. Continue reading “Five Key Elements of Tripod Leg Purchasing” →

Creating HDR Panos with PTGui

September 23, 2010 Jason3 Comments

A while back I had approached a few companies about putting together an article on how to create panoramas. One of those companies was PTGui – and I’ve finally had a chance to put together a few images through their software to take a look at the processing and stitching quality. First impressions are good…what I especially liked is that the software has the ability to render both panoramas as well as HDR processing algorithms. While a dedicated work flow that addresses panoramas and then a separate work flow to address HDR work may yield better results, I’ve gotta say that PTGui does an impressive job for a multi-function program: Continue reading “Creating HDR Panos with PTGui” →

Must Read – Rangefinder Magazine

April 20, 2010 Jason6 Comments

We all have our periodicals that we subscribe to, and while differences of opinion abound about which ones are the “best” ones out there, there is always good content available. One that I subscribe to is “Rangefinder Magazine”, which has great reads on up and coming artists, good food for thought, and other items of interest on a regular basis. Their most recent issue (April 2010), had an article that also boils down well for blog posting, so today, a nod goes out to Rangefinder magazine, particularly Alice B. Miller for the article:

Marketing Mojo:

12 Ways to Land Your Next Magazine Assignment

Here she looks at things to do and not to do when trying to stay current in the ever-demanding world of “publish or perish” in periodicals and online print circles. The entire article I would classify as a “must read”, but for here, the bullet points suffice. Enjoy!

Stay Current on World Events
Pursue Your Own Projects
Don’t become a prisoner of your style
Look the Other Way
Let the Freedom Begin
Stay Positive in Slow TImes
Stay Fresh, New, Vital
Shake off the Doldrums
Focus on Stories Close to You
Learn How Editors Want Material Submitted
Be Interactive and Engaging With Clients
Plan Ahead

As you can tell, there’s more here than just the bullet points, and thankfully, Rangefinder also keeps current issues available online for easy viewing, so head on over there to enjoy the full length article. Surely though, there’s more content out there that others know about too, so feel free to share links to either your own work, or other articles of interest in the comments. What magazines do you like? Any particularly useful articles? Sound off to spread the word! Thanks for stopping in and we’ll see you back here again tomorrow!

The Life of a Lens

December 29, 2009 Jason7 Comments

Yesterday we looked at things to consider when getting a new camera body…while the idea is all well and good, lenses are another story, and since we are likely to invest more in glass than in cameras (Have you seen the costs of some of the really good glass lately?), the life of a lens is something worth considering.

In all things technology-related, there is a principle called Moore’s Law which states that technology will advance at a rate of re-doubling roughly every two years. While this principle was developed primarily for computers, we can draw similar analogies for digital photography too, with the sensor being analogous to the transistor. The rate of increase has not quite been on par with re-doubling every 2 years, but the increases can be noted pretty impressively going from a mere 4 in 2001 to a current rate of 21 MP per frame for DSLR cameras (I am only looking at the Canon line-up here:

Canon 1Ds Mark III = 21MP (2007), Retail
Canon 1Ds Mark II = 16 MP (2004)
Canon 1Ds = 11MP (2002)
Canon 1D = 4 (2001)

Lenses aren’t like that though – focal lengths don’t change that much. Instead, technology has allowed lenses to become faster at the longer end of the given focal lengths. We’ve also seen the introduction of image-stabilization technologies. The addition of new technologies in lenses does not necessarily deprecate previous generations – it merely antiquates them! This means your lens may not have the bells and whistles of future generations, but it should work indefinitely if treated properly.

Keep in mind though that there is a distinction between full frame and crop sensor cameras here though, because Canon has two lens lines, the EF line and the EF-S line. The EF-S line is intended for the crop sensor cameras and cannot be used on the full frame mounts – if you try to use an EF-S lens on a full frame body, the mirror could slap down and shatter the back element of the glass, so avoid this scenario if at all possible! (There are some converters on the market that will extend the gap between the mirror and the element to avoid this, but I’ve not used them.)

Lenses are also different from camera bodies because there are no moving parts that can fail. Well, that’s not entirely true because zooms do have moving parts when you rotate the lens, and these can fail. * However, because the lens is always a closed item, the susceptibility of a lens to parts failure is not as high as it is for camera components. Shutters, for instance, have a certain lifespan for which they are rated, (usually somewhere between 50,000-150,000 actuations). Lenses don’t fail after a certain number of focal adjustments (assuming you are handling the lens correctly), and in the case of fixed focal length lenses (primes), this is even less the case.

So, a lens can literally last for as long as the vendor makes a body that will accept the mounting mechanism, and in the case of most vendors, I don’t see that changing any time soon. I’ve had my kit lens from Canon when I got my first Rebel XT back in 2004 and it still works great on my 40D – it may not be in the lineup anymore (neither is my 40D either, but I digress…), but any EOS body will accept this lens and the image quality has not deteriorated at all over time! Lenses can last forever!

How long have you kept your lenses? Do you have any “go-to” lenses in your bag that you anticipate will always be there? Let me know your favorites!

On a blog administrative note, don’t forget that there’s still a little time left in the Flickr Giveaway thread for December, so if you have any shots (the holidays are good times to capture those “Giving” themed photos), make sure to get one in for a chance to win that $400= prize package! Happy Shooting and we’ll see you back here again tomorrow!

*ETA: Special thanks to Marco for pointing out in the comments that there are quite a few moving parts in even fixed focal length lenses. In addition to the focusing ring, there is also the diaphragm that moves which closes down the aperture to the correct setting for every actuation of the shutter, so there are moving parts in any lens, including fixed focal lengths.)

How To Make Your Pictures Sing!

December 24, 2009 Jason2 Comments

While recently listening to This Week in Tech (a great podcast, and I highly recommend it), the show host, Leo Laporte, made an interesting observation about the advancement of technology. He was musing about the changes that have happened in audio consumption. We listen to much of our music in iPods and portable music players, when not too long ago, we were confined to a certain space. To that end, he noted that the technology of audio in those days revolved around things like the number of amps, tweeters and woofers, quadraphonics, decibels, and much of that technical information. We jam-packed our houses with stereo components, our cars with subwoofers, and on and on. To get truly high quality audio you needed to have resources (a.k.a. money), and the producers of that audio content was restrictive because of the costs.

Not today – these days you can plug a $5 microphone into a USB port on a $400 computer, say or sing anything you want, and almost instantly have beautiful high quality digital recordings of whatever you like. This is a good thing though – because even though more people are recording audio, what matters is what the message of that audio is saying. I can’t just go on the podcast and talk about nothing because no one would listen…although sometimes it feels like I am blathering on and on! 🙂 As the old saying goes, “content is king“! Leo’s observation was that in the audio world, it’s a wonderful thing because anyone can produce audio, and there are now more voices for creativity. With the lower cost of entry to producing high end audio, two questions came about. The first is “What does that content say (what is the point, or message)?” The second is “How do you want to consume that media?” (With the options being whether you want it on a CD in your car, on your iPod at the gym, on your computer as you work, or where ever.)

It was a very astute observation, and that description applies to other media as well. I am, of course, thinking about photography. Think about the analogy for a minute. For the longest time we had the film world, and as ASA speeds got better, grain got finer, the size and quality of image development improved as technology permitted. With the movement to the digital world, and the subsequent “Megapixel Wars”, capturing high quality detail in your photography was no longer such an arduous process. I believe we are at a crossroad now in digital photography, where the technology has expanded to a quality level that anyone is able to produce excellent quality images, in terms of technical details. The portability factor for audiophiles doesn’t really apply as much to photography though as the medium is more portable by definition. You are also looking at the image rather than listening to it.

The advances in the technology of photography has also introduced a creative outlet for many where it previously did not exist. The decreasing costs of production have allowed many to find their “photography voice”. With the holidays upon us, many are likely to get a shiny new camera with lots of bells and whistles, and for some out there, this will be an opportunity to “sing”! It’s an exciting time to be a part of the chorus because with so many voices, there are lots of melodies and harmonies to be heard and enjoyed.

This will undoubtedly lead many to ask “So, how do I make my pictures sing?” It’s a great question, and one that I have been tackling in some way, shape, or form for some time now from various points of view, including technical, compositional, and subtle intangibles that are all part of this larger question of how to better express yourself photographically. There’s more to come on that, and I’ll be sharing more thoughts on this in the weeks to come. But it is a good exercise, so I would like to throw it to the reading and listening audiences. As we take a blogging break over the holidays, ask yourself (and post your thoughts here in the blog) the following two questions:

Can pictures really “sing”? Why, or why not?
If so, what does it take to make your pictures sing?

Share your thoughts in the comments below! As a reminder, you can also now embed photos in your comments by using the link to attach a URL. Happy shooting, Merry Christmas, and we’ll see you back here next week!

P.S. Don’t forget – next week is the last week to add your “Giving” themed photos to the December Giveaway! Should be lots of opportunities to capture some photos with that theme over the weekend! There’s over $400 in prizes will go to one lucky person, so post your best photo to the Flickr thread here. The guidelines are posted there, so be sure to check those to make sure your entry is counted…Happy Shooting and good luck to all!

Grab the Feed

Follow Me on Twitter

Repost: Quality versus Quantity

July 28, 2009 Jason10 Comments

I’ve got a few software reviews up my sleeve for both Windows and mac, but ratehr than rush them out the door prematurely, I’d rather postpone that material in the interests of sharing some rather thought-provoking content on the question of quality versus quantity. I’d written this post before, and the first publication got a few interesting email responses – so we’ll see if the debate is still holding true. Tell me what you think: Does quality trump quantity or vice versa? Here’s my take:

“Okay, I’m done.”

“That’s it? You’ve only been shooting for ten minutes!”

“Yep, got about 50 shots, I should have 4-6 proofs for you from that bunch.”

“So we’re done?”

“Pretty much…I mean I can keep shooting, but there’s really no point, it’ll just be duplicates of the same stuff.”

This was the dialog I had with a co-worker a short fair time ago when I went to take pictures of her son for her. It is indicative of a mentality that exists in society…not only is size king, but so is quantity. If you were to take two photographers and set them side by side, who would you think is a better photographer: the one who took 40 shots or the one who took 400? Many of the general public would probably respond by saying the latter, without giving it much thought.

Yeah, I took 50 instead of 40, because I have not been a pro shooter for 20 years, so I gave myself a little bit more of a margin for error. Having checked ISO, white balance and histogram settings though, I was pretty confidant that all that was left was composition – so I went with my instinct for what would make a good composition, took 3 or 4 different angles and was done. Ten shots of each pose was enough. I have photographer friends who still take 25 shots of each pose with only negligible differences in lighting or facial expression. Can you see it when blowing up to 200%? Sure, but who looks at pictures that close?

Nevertheless, photographers fall victim to this mentality of delivering a massive quantity of images. I know of several studios that just inundate their clients with hundreds of shots to choose from. They can’t understand why these clients never get any prints or very few prints from the studio. They think that people like to have a choice, and that the more choices you give them, the better. While the idea is not without merit, (because choice is a good thing) it can go to an extreme… and I think that’s where it’s going. The reason why they’re not getting prints done is because too many choices can also be paralyzing. If presented with 4 options, it is very easy to pick out which one you like best, whether it’s cars, cameras, televisions or photos. Presented with 400 cars, cameras, televisions or photos, the choice becomes more difficult and time consuming, primarily because you become concerned over picking the “wrong one”.

My perspective, in contrast, is to deliver just a select few shots. It makes the choices easier for the client. In a world where time is an increasingly valuable commodity, getting bogged down in sorting through hundreds of images trying to find one or two to print and hang can be more frustrating and lead to inaction. In essence it’s like you are transferring the process of elimination part of the work flow from your hands to the client. This has several downsides with minimal upsides. The one upside is that “Hey, the client chose this, not me.” can absolve you of responsibility for getting a bad shot framed. I would venture to ask though: why was a bad shot among the choices?

As I told a friend via email recently, it also comes to one of work flow management. Which would you rather deal with as a photographer – a work flow where you process 50 images or 500 images? The argument that “it’s digital, so what’s the big deal?” always seems to get under my skin a little bit. For me, the big deal is that some are going out there and not putting much time or thought into capturing the essence of a scene. They just lift the camera, point in the general direction of what they want and just fire away. I’ve actually heard the term “spray and pray” used for such shooters. The idea of slowing down and taking your time to both enjoy the moment and to really take into consideration all the nuances of things like lighting, shadows, and minimizing distractions has benefits. For me, the benefits far outweigh the downsides. Firstly, it is a much more enjoyable situation to be in. Not only do you have fewer images to process, but you can really take your time, pay attention to the detail, and get every nuance of the image pegged!

Secondly, you will probably find that you are less stressed yourself. You’re not worried about missing the shot because you didn’t have time to consider all the aspects – primarily because you are considering the nuances. Third, and most importantly, when you relax and aren’t stressed, your clients aren’t stressed either…a photographer and their subject often feed off each other. I have so much fun when taking pictures of subjects, I often forget that I am there for a specific reason – we’re enjoying the moment.

That’s right…we are enjoying the moment – client and photographer! We’re laughing, and having fun, and I just happen to have a camera in hand recording it. Yeah, the first shots are often always a little awkward for them, but once they see my mug grinning over the camera at them and laughing and joking around, the stress level decreases by a factor of ten! When your client is less stressed, they photograph better! They are more willing to strike goofy (in their eyes) poses! You can capture the shot!

So, that’s pretty much it: taking fewer shots will do three things for you:

Cut down on post processing (both for quantity and quality)
You stress less, and thus, your client stresses less.
You increase your keeper percentage!

Having said this, I realize that there are some situations where you have to mass produce images. Another friend of mine talked about a basketball or softball tournament where they had to take pics of every person on every team over the course of a weekend. With 50 players per team and upwards of 30-40 teams, that is 2000 shots to process – and that’s a small regional event even if it’s only one shot per person. Take it on to a national event, and it just ratchets up another notch. While the quantity is there, it’s also a different shot every frame. This is also not a fine art or a studio environment. This is a very fast-moving, fast-paced environment and is not applicable to the type of photography I am talking about here.

I would venture to guess though that most of us do not fall in that category…we’re shooting far less than this on average, so the quality versus quantity rule does apply in most scenarios. Now, if only I could take that principle and apply it to the writing here on the blog!

Before signing off today, just a couple closing thoughts to share that are non-related to this article:

Some link-love from two friends who are doing some cool 365/blogs (a picture a day for a year: very creative minds at work and so inspiring!
- – Rob Weiher (whom I’ve interviewed before here on the blog)
- – Peter (GrfxGuru)
Don’t forget the Numbers Contest – only 4 days to go for your chance to win a $500 software package: Flickr Thread for submissions

Happy shooting all, and watch those apertures!

Grab the Feed

Another Magazine Article!

January 30, 2009 JasonLeave a comment

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!