web analytics

New Orleans photography » A Big Easy photo blog

Masthead header

Category Archives: general photography

topics or images related to photography in general

Reading is Fundamental

Today, the Summer 2009 issue of The Key fell through the mail drop and this was on the cover:

Lexi-cover

This is the first time an editor has used me for both the cover photos and the cover feature story! That’s my daughter in the picture, my son holding an SB 800 Strobist-style to camera left.

On the back cover (below) is Quinn (originally posted here.)  All of my clients around the time I was writing this story were photographed as potential cover candidates, but I knew Quinn was a likely winner with those big blue eyes and a shirt to match.

Quinn

I didn’t realize until recently how much I miss my days as a writer. (Well, the writing part, anyhow. And the reading part; working for newspapers is the only job where you can be caught at your desk reading the paper and not get fired. And of course the off-beat social life. And the smell of ink. And the Glass House notes. And the sports desk that spoke its own language, the photo desk that could come back with a single image that said way more than all the writers and copy editors in the room combined, the art desk that lived in its own cult back there in the corner, the editorial desk that got the phones ringing and all that mail… But the 4 a.m. showtime to write for an 11 a.m. deadline, editors throwing things at me, basement quarters devoid of windows and plant life, that :ick: couch and again, the Glass House notes? Not so much.)

I could spend a whole post writing about the wonderful organization that is RIF — but that would be sort of redundant since I’ve already written a feature and a sidebar and I’m linking you to both.

So I guess the cat’s out of the bag: it’s true. I’m a writer masquerading as a photographer. But today is special because for the Summer 2009 issue, I get to be both.:)

Page 22-23

Page 22-23

Page 24-25

Page 24-25

July 21, 2009 - 4:14 pm

Rachel - Thank you for putting together such a wonderful and informative piece on RIF! We at RIF are honored to be Kappa Kappa Gamma’s national philanthropy and are proud of the partnership the two organizations are creating. For more info on RIF, visit http://www.rif.org.

July 23, 2009 - 8:49 pm

Carol Hampton Rasco - Wow, this is a terrific spread; we are so grateful to you for making RIF come alive and jump from the pages of great words and expressive photographs into the readers’ minds and hearts!

Carol Rasco
President
RIF

July 24, 2009 - 9:39 am

Lynn Croneberger - You did such a fabulous job highlighting RIF, I can’t wait to get extra copies of this wonderful piece in the office so I can send to some of our other partners and donors! Thank you for Kappa Kappa Gamma’s support and for developing such a compelling “case for support”! Lynn Croneberger, VP of Development, Reading Is Fundamental

July 30, 2009 - 3:38 pm

Ray - Christine, you never cease to amaze.

Lesson 4: exposure review

This image, my friends, is an example of first learn the rules, then learn to break them.:)

Nikon D700, 28-70mm f/2.8 lens at 62mm, f4 @ 1/2 second, ISO 200, off-camera flash at 1/16 power + sparkler

Nikon D700, 28-70mm f/2.8 lens at 62mm, f4 @ 1/2 second, ISO 200, off-camera flash at 1/16 power + sparkler

Relax. Today is a fun day, lesson is a review, assignment is relevant to a festive American holiday.

Going back to last lesson’s extra credit question: Originally, our goal wasn’t to change the exposure ratio by lightening or darkening the image; the goal was to change the aperture in order to change the amount of detail in the background behind our subject so that I could show you examples of why you might choose to shoot wide open and why you might choose to shoot stopped down. In other words, exercise some control over the image we’re shooting to render us photographers rather than people holding glorified point-and-shoots. Remember when I talked in aperture about learning the whole stops so that you can effortlessly jump from stop to stop in your head? That’s what I was challenging you to do with this question. The problem I ran into, that you can see clearly in the close-up crop of each image, is that I used a shutter speed that was too slow for a handheld shot; it caused the image to blur. And for our purposes, correct exposure is not too bright, not too dark, in focus and generally, technically correct. Image blur due to camera shake is operator error.

Notice I called it extra credit and not an assignment — that’s because you’re going to have to jump into ISO and/or shutter speed, and we haven’t fully covered those yet! (Never hurts to get your mind thinking in the direction you want to go, though.)

So back to the question: if we increase our shutter speed, the inherent effect is that we’ve decreased the amount of light coming in by one-half. The way to make up for that loss of light, keeping all things equal, is to increase the amount of light by one stop with ISO or aperture. So if we’re at f/16 and 1/30 and ISO 400, and we want to move our shutter speed to a minimum of 1/60 because our focal length is roughly a normal lens (remember, 50mm lens needs 1/50 shutter speed or faster), we have two options: open our aperture (or lens opening, think circles) one stop or bump up our ISO one stop higher; both would let in twice the amount of light to compensate for the shutter speed’s loss.

In this example, f/16 at 1/30 ISO 400 is the same as f/11 at 1/60 ISO 400 is the same as f/16 at 1/60 ISO 800.

Q: Whoa! I have no idea what you just said. Come again?

A: That’s okay. Hardly anybody gets that the first time.

What I need for you to walk away with from this post is the crux of another huge point that has nothing to do with fractions: there is no one single exposure possibility to make a particular image. Think about that. I’m going to say it again, differently, to hammer my point home: there are lots of different exposure combinations possible for every single image you take. Aperture showed you two extremes of possibility, shooting wide open and shooting stopped down; shutter speed (tomorrow? Depends on how fun tonight is, I suppose.) will show you two more extremes of possibility, freezing and blurring motion.

If I handed a beginner my camera in manual mode and asked the beginner to pick the settings to shoot a portrait of me, a beginner would search his or her brain for the “correct” exposure. That kind of thinking gets beginners into trouble. If you’ve been a beginner for a long time, you need to do an about-face; turn yourself around and slowly start backing out of the dark, optionless void of glorified Xerox machine photography. There is no “correct” exposure. There’s only the exposure the photographer chooses to make the image he or she wants.

Remember this:

Q: What kind of camera should I buy?

A: What kind of pictures are you looking to take?

I understand where it comes from: we’ve all taken photos that were technically incorrect. Perhaps we missed an important shot that can never be re-created — a baby’s first steps or a graduate accepting a degree, and that makes us fear photographic mistakes. We have a natural desire to learn how NOT to mess up a photo like that again.

Technology is improving and we want to buy a camera that will save us from ourselves, take the picture without making mistakes. See “there is no magic pill…” in the introduction to this crash course. You can’t buy the camera that will take the pictures you want. You have to learn how to take those pictures with your camera.

Q: You’re wrong! I CAN buy a camera that will take pictures on program mode better than I can take them in manual! Technology IS there! I know for a fact, because my brother has one and he does it all the time! His pictures of my nephew are WAY better than my pictures of my son. I just want what he has, so I thought I’d ask you, too, and get a second opinion.

A: Think about the question you originally asked me, the one I replied to with a link that landed you here. The questions I get are, “The moms using 28mm lenses at gymnastics meets are getting better pictures than I am with my 200 mm zoom — and my lens was more expensive and gets me way closer to my daughter than theirs does. WHY???”

See “camera shake/blur” in aperture.

Any of us can buy package of ballpoint pens at Target; it’s what we write with those pens that is uniquely ours.

It’s easy to cry “but technology!” now because crying “egads! I get it! I learned photography!” requires a lot of work. (A LOT. And a lot of knowledge. Education. And a hefty investment in gear. So the answer is no, I won’t shoot your sister’s wedding for 500 bucks! But I digress.) It’s easier to buy the camera and hope for the best than to keep reading and learn — finally, truly learn — how to use your camera.

For those of you who want better pictures, for those of you who want to make a smart purchase, for those of you who asked me why, keep reading.

Erase from your brain this notion of making a “correct” exposure. Correct exposure. Remember, we agreed for the sake of argument that you’re looking to create images that are first and foremost in-focus and not too bright (overexposed) or too dark (underexposed.) That’s why we made this agreement. Creativity will come later. Creativity comes once you’ve learned the rules. Sometimes creativity comes as a fluke, a mistake that actually looked pretty cool.

First learn the rules; then learn to break them.

Today is just review. Look over the exposure flowchart and get your brain thinking like a photographer. What kind of picture are you trying to take? Are you trying to show action? Freeze action? Isolate your subject from the background for a portrait? Look over the ways to make that happen. The more you see it, the sooner it will become second nature.

And then go enjoy the celebration — Happy birthday, America!!!

Nikon D700, 28-70mm f/2.8 lens at 56mm, f4 @ 1/2 second, ISO 200, off-camera flash at 1/16 power + sparkler

Nikon D700, 28-70mm f/2.8 lens at 56mm, f4 @ 1/2 second, ISO 200, off-camera flash at 1/16 power + sparkler

Nikon D700, 28-70mm f/2.8 lens at 56mm, f4 @ 1/2 second, ISO 200, off-camera flash at 1/16 power + sparkler

Nikon D700, 28-70mm f/2.8 lens at 56mm, f4 @ 1/2 second, ISO 200, off-camera flash at 1/16 power + sparkler

Nikon D700, 28-70mm f/2.8 lens at 56mm, f4 @ 1/2 second, ISO 200, off-camera flash at 1/16 power + sparkler

Nikon D700, 28-70mm f/2.8 lens at 56mm, f4 @ 1/2 second, ISO 200, off-camera flash at 1/16 power + sparkler

 

Nikon D700, 28-70mm f/2.8 lens at 70mm, f5.5 @ 1/2 second, ISO 200, off-camera flash at 1/16 power + sparkler

Nikon D700, 28-70mm f/2.8 lens at 70mm, f5.5 @ 1/2 second, ISO 200, off-camera flash at 1/16 power + sparkler

 

Nikon D700, 28-70mm f/2.8 lens at 70mm, f5.6 @ 1/2 second, ISO 200, off-camera flash at 1/16 power + sparkler

Nikon D700, 28-70mm f/2.8 lens at 70mm, f5.6 @ 1/2 second, ISO 200, off-camera flash at 1/16 power + sparkler

 

Nikon D700, 28-70mm f/2.8 lens at 70mm, f5.6 @ 1/2 second, ISO 200, off-camera flash at 1/16 power + sparkler

Nikon D700, 28-70mm f/2.8 lens at 70mm, f5.6 @ 1/2 second, ISO 200, off-camera flash at 1/16 power + sparkler

 

Nikon D700, 28-70mm f/2.8 lens at 70mm, f5.6 @ 1/2 second, ISO 200, off-camera flash at 1/16 power + sparkler

Nikon D700, 28-70mm f/2.8 lens at 70mm, f5.6 @ 1/2 second, ISO 200, off-camera flash at 1/16 power + sparkler

 

Nikon D700, 28-70mm f/2.8 lens at 70mm, f5.6 @ 1/2 second, ISO 200, off-camera flash at 1/16 power + sparkler

Nikon D700, 28-70mm f/2.8 lens at 70mm, f5.6 @ 1/2 second, ISO 200, off-camera flash at 1/16 power + sparkler

[return to the PHOTO 101 Table of Contents]

July 4, 2009 - 10:04 pm

Jim - Trying to soak all of this up! Happy 4th!

July 4, 2009 - 10:27 pm

alexis - mommy, it’s blurry.

July 5, 2009 - 5:59 pm

christine - Sweetie, I know! it’s supposed to be blurry! :)

defocusing

defocus
verb ( -focused , -focusing or -focussed, -focussing) [ trans. ]
cause (an image, lens, or beam) to go out of focus : the filter lets you defocus all or part of an image.

•••

At the beach, for example, on vacation: why focus? Watching my husband toss a football to our son requires (of me) very little focus, yet captivates me completely. Dreamy recollections of a beach vacation don’t necessarily rely on the crisp details I demand of a lens.

Find it in the “first learn the rules, then learn to break them” chapter.

April 26, 2009 - 5:25 pm

carl zoch - that beach is looking sweet! hope your vacation was awesome!

be careful what you wish for

you might just get it


Photographers Rights UK from Nick Turpin on Vimeo.

March 27, 2009 - 9:22 am

kate gardiner - good for them!~ what an inane law. are they going to arrest everyone with a cell phone? if i was a terrorist, do you think i would stand on the corner with a big slr? nope, i’d look like a tourist with my camera phone…thanks for posting this. I had heard about it, but hadn’t watched the video yet.

March 27, 2009 - 11:42 am

Elise - The rights of “man” are being stripped away in the name of “safety” and “security”. It is a very sad thing. It keeps me up at night thinking abou the kind of world my children and grand children will live in…if one still exists. I’ve re-read “1984″ and it’s terrifying. I’m in the process of trying to find a copy of “Animal Farm”…it’s amazing how we’ve been warned of these things, but have become too lazy to see them. Keep a population stupid by controlling the media…, indoctrinate the kids (public education starts younger and younger), take away their ability to protect themselves (oh, your guns are at risk…don’t be blind) and you have a perfect storm. WAKE UP!!!

April 14, 2009 - 11:25 pm

mark - Very interesting site!

the print that never was

lookdad.jpg

In 1997, my husband and I moved to Tokyo. Expecting to take a gazillion photos to post on the webpage I maintained for friends and family in the States to follow along on our adventure (this was long before blogs hit the scene), I bought a digital AGFA camera. As planned, I shot at least a gazillion photos — and then along came our first baby and I shot a gazillion more. One of my all-time favorite photos of my newborn son was made with that camera. I was extremely frustrated with the lack of options for getting a good print of that image, even in tech-savvy Tokyo, and I sort of lost my enthusiasm for using digital. I upgraded my film camera twice since living in Tokyo, but during that same time I never upgraded my digital camera. For me, it’s always been about the print and I remained one of the lone holdouts in the (as a mother) consumer and (and a photographer) professional arenas shooting film.

Today, I thank God for that print that never was, but for another concern it has since raised. Every single digital file I shot in Tokyo was meticulously saved, backed up and backed up again, storing them on a remote server, on my hard drive and on an external drive. And every single one of them has spontaneously corrupted. Only six remain, and that’s because I found a program called SplashID that I can’t live without, and it came with Splash Photo and I just happened to upload some of my favorites to my Palm before they corrupted. (Thank you, Splash!)

“That’s great and all, but what’s this got to do with me?” you ask. And that’s where it gets interesting.

Each and every time you open, save and close a .jpg file, you lose data. .jpg files were created for maximum compression (which is inherent to data loss) and for viewing with the human eye, which is quite adept at filling in missing pixels. If you don’t believe me about the human eye, try printing my low-res favorite image posted above, the infamous photo I could never print; it looks like a newspaper photograph under a child’s magnifying glass. I didn’t even bother reducing it so someone wouldn’t steal it from my blog to market it elsewhere — it was low-res straight out of the camera in those days and therefore unprintable. On screen, it views fine. It’s one of my favorite photos I’ve ever taken in my life, and it’s (you guessed it) a .jpg. .jpgs are called “lossy” files in the industry, because they lose data. The more you open them, save them, close them, open them, edit them and save them again, the more lossy the file. If you really don’t believe me, google “.jpg lossy” and see for yourself.

I fear an entire generation of today’s children are going to emerge from childhood with no photographs to document their journey. My son is 8; it took only eight years for the digital files of him, albeit backed up with great intentions, to disappear. The average photo CD has a lifespan of about 3 years. THREE YEARS! That’s barely enough time to regroup from having a newborn in my world, let alone getting around to properly storing images. Gold-plated CDs have a 10-year lifespan under optimal storage conditions. OPTIMAL STORAGE CONDITIONS. Raise your hand if you’re one of those people who has actually gotten around to optimally storing your negatives and CDs and digital files. (The rest of us can jot a note on our list of things to do someday, right under “learn French” and just before “trek across Europe.”)

Those of you who have been photographed by my studio received a box full of 4×6 prints in the mail. Other photographers tell me that I’m committing studio suicide by giving out so many prints with each session. “People are scanning them!” is the moniker in all the professional photographer magazines. And it’s true. I’ve been the victim of theft countless times as clients scan my photographs, sending them to Snapfish or Kodak or another online lab to have reprints made, both the client and the lab violating federal copyright laws. (Professional Photographers of America has a program that tracks this kind of illegal scanning and printing, and I have since enrolled to help protect my images.) But I can’t shake the experience of the photos from Tokyo. I continue to offer the box of prints for my clients because, although I would love to think that my photos remain a treasured part of their childhood in the decades to come, I would hate to think that they are the only images that made it to print before the digital files were lost.

I continued shooting my children with good old fashioned film until two years ago, when I was sufficiently satisfied that the quality of digital prints could rival at best even a mid-range black and white lab. I upload all of my professional digital files to Pictage, but I also utilize Lakeside Camera and Mpix and San Miguel Photo Lab [editor's note: unfortunately, San Miguel has since gone out of business.] for the photos I take of my family. All good labs for printing from digital files. But it isn’t only the print quality of digital that gives me pause; it’s the longevity of a digital file. I wish I could say that I diligently convert all .jpg files to .tiff files, but I don’t. Somewhere between learning French and traveling Europe, I hope to accomplish that. For now, I backup, backup and backup.

And I print every good image.

I shoot RAW. Sometimes I convert to .tiff once they’re on my hard drive.

And I shoot one roll of film to every six months of digital of my children. I have joined the Film Preservation Society at San Miguel Photo Lab, the best black and white film lab I’ve had the privilege of partnering with, and I can only tell you that even Christmas morning is nothing compared to unpacking a box of prints that I haven’t already previewed on an LCD — especially when I’m shooting T-MAX film in a trick $30 Holga I bought off the masterful Randy Smith. I take my Holga on all of our family vacations and I’ve found that by giving pause to consider each frame I shoot, my Holga photos are inherently different from my digital photos. Plus, we’re a beach family; our vacations involve sand, and sand is the deadliest enemy of a $5,000 digital SLR. The last thing I need to worry about on vacation is my equipment.

Yes, I shoot digital photos of my family; the debate of digital vs. film, in my world, really boils down to personal preference. I am and have always been (and am likely to remain) a technophile. I had my own website long before most of my friends even had email; I love Photoshop and the possibilities it brings to my images. And I love film and true black and white labs and the illusions of permanence in storing decades worth of negatives in pretty black notebooks.

But most importantly (and WHEW, finally, the conclusion), I love photographs. Digital or film, Nikon or Canon, actions or RAW presets … all of those things are simply tools in a photographer’s toolbox. My greatest aim is to pass on to my children the photographs that document their childhood so that they may one day enjoy the look back at all that is good and wonderful about today.

May 9, 2007 - 9:52 pm

miette - OH MY GOD!!!

So what exactly am I supposed to do???? I don’t get what the answer is! You mean after all my agonizing I was actually better off with my crappy 35 mm camera! AAAARRRRGGGGHHHH!

*sigh* :)

May 16, 2007 - 2:14 am

Bob Sullivan - As a tech reporter, I hear all the time from people who are crying because their gadgets or hard drives have let them down. Chris, you are so right, when the precious photos are only on a hard drive, tragedy is almost certainly ahead. My mom always used to say if our house caught on fire, she’d grab the family photo album. What does she grab now?

I have a question about your JPG comment, however. I believe you are only partly right.

I know every time you open a jpg, do something to it, and save it, information is lost as the image is further compressed and pixels are thrown away. But the mere act of opening it and/or closing it does not throw away additional information, I believe. The file is unaltered; it is not compressed again unless save it again.

Am I missing something?

April 12, 2011 - 10:38 am

christine - Miette, make prints of your favorite photos. Backup your hard drives diligently. Store images on 24K CDs for the best results. Pray. That’s what I do.

Bob, you are correct; .jpgs lose quality every time they are opened, edited and then saved, but not when opened or displayed.