Forgot password?
A creative blog on The Whole 9

The Photography Blog is written by members of The Whole 9 Creative Photography Circle. For a short “bio” on today’s contributor, scroll down to the bottom of the blog. Enjoy! – Mike Hayward, editor

View Creative Photography Circle’s Portfolio

Backing Up Your Images in the Field

January 27, 2010
8 Comments (see all)

Backing Up Your Images in the Field

by Mike Hayward

Member, Whole 9 Creative Photography Circle

Among the numerous “pro tips” provided in his Digital Photography books, photographer Scott Kelby advises the use of a small, portable external hard drive-viewer when taking numerous images in the field. While he suggests that it’s possible to fill up a memory card, the only situations in which I can imagine this happening would be a Unification Chuch mass wedding officiated by the Rev. Sun Myung Moon or shooting the upcoming Winter Olympics. I, myself, shoot to a 16GB CF card and, even when shooting the larger RAW format, I often feel I can snap away ‘til the cows come home.

And, even then, there are about three more (albeit smaller) backup memory cards in my photo bag.

Still, anyone who thinks nothing can ever happen to make those “memories” disappear from a memory card and float off into the ozone is mistaken.  As all the great philosopher have taught us, stuff happens.

Here’s how Kelby describes his digital workflow when he’s shooting on location:

“Let’s say I do an early morning shoot (the 5 a.m. sort). As soon as I’m done with my shoot (around 7 a.m.), when I get back to my car, I pop my memory card out of the camera, pop it into my Epson P-7000, and start copying the card over. Then, while it’s still copying, I put the P-7000 back into its carrying case, and then back into my camera bag.”

Kelby continues, “By the time I get to the breakfast restaurant (a yummy breakfast is a critical part of the early morning shoot), the photos are copied onto the [external] hard drive. Right after I place my breakfast order with the server, I break out my P-7000 and start seeing if the morning shoot yielded any “keepers” in the P-7000’s huge LCD window. That way, not only do I have a solid backup, but I also get a preview of how my morning shoot went.”

Of course, when Scott wrote these happy words, his Epson P-7000 was (and possibly still is) an $800 state-of-the-art, 4-inch LCD portable storage viewer that holds 160GB of image data. Happy to say, you can spend $300 to $100 less on the cheaper models if your budget for eating and having a place to stay is tight.

For someone like me, an $800 “accessory” is a little out of the question. Drop one of those zeroes and you’ve got me listening. Something like a Fry’s Electronics $50 special – such as the Hitachi 250GB “SimpleDRIVE Mini” – is closer to what I might need.

Of course, I’d have to drag my laptop along in order to actually power the USB connection and actually see what I had captured – or possibly refreshing my camera batteries for a more direct transfer, but again without the benefit of physically seeing anything.

So here is the trade-off: You either pay the big bucks ($500 to $800) for the self-powered portable hard drive storage-viewers with the 4-inch LCD or you go with a USB powered external hard drive ($75-$125) with greater (yes, I said “greater”) storage capacity but no built-in LCD viewer – and you’re left to figure out how you’re going to power the device and view the images out in the field.

Of course, there’s a really nice meet-you-halfway solution: buy a new, cheap-at-half-the-price netbook (“mini-laptop”) and, when necessary, a USB powered multicard reader. Of course, it looks like the Asus Eee PC 1008HA or the Asus Eee 1000HE already come with multicard readers! By the way, the 1000HE has a battery life expectancy of 9 hours.

Price range: $340 to $400 or about $285, used, on Amazon.

What do you do for backup (if anything) when you’re out on location? Please share your opinions and suggestions by commenting below. Thanks!

MIKE HAYWARD is an extremely gifted and media storage conscious photographer specializing in corporate and non-profit special events that seem to last forever. Sample images can be seen on his web site at MikeHaywardPhotography.com

Leave a comment
8 comments (see all)
RSS Feed
comments
wonderwall

I tend to favor smaller gig cf cards, although I shoot with the less is more mentality and bracketing throughout my shoots, although I have to agree with you about the importance of backing up in the field having had some freak accidents.

Inkjet Photo Paper 101

January 19, 2010
5 Comments (see all)

by Cameron McIntyre

Member, The Whole 9 Creative Photography Circle

I recently invested in a Canon Pro 9000 MkII printer and, like most photographers, I have been very pleased with the ability to produce my own prints and the resulting pride I take in their quality.  The print is the final product and although I always get good results from labs I am never totally comfortable giving up that phase of the process.  I still use a lab for large sized printing jobs or producing large quantities, but the vast majority of my prints come right off the Canon.

After the printer, the biggest variable in do-it-yourself photo printing is the photo paper.  With the over-abundance of photo paper manufacturers and products, one can only hope for the best in achieving accurate image rendition and printer compatibility. Amplify this with the knowledge that the same paper in different printers will have slightly different characteristics. Thus, bringing the best results to print quality, color, and contrast rendition can become a Herculean task.  My goal here is photo paper 101:  providing you with a little science behind the magical surface of photo papers, a guide to the heretofore mysterious numbers, and a few recommendations.

Inkjet photo paper works by ink absorption. Each paper manufacture has their own layering technology, but in simple terms the paper is layered with ink absorbing coatings (aka “ink receptor layers”).  There are two types of coatings: polymer and particle. The two differ in their absorption process.  Paper with a polymer coating absorbs ink when the polymers swell; paper with particle coating absorbs ink between the particles.  The polymer coatings consist of water-soluble macromolecules while the particle coatings consist of barely visible particles called “colloidal” particles. That being said, inkjet photo papers are not commercially classified by their ink receptor layer type. There are some clues, however.  If terms such as “particle technology or “micro technology” are used that suggests it is a paper with a particle coating.  The surface of polymer coated papers may feel slightly sticky to the touch.

There are three universal specifications for inkjet photo paper: opacity, brightness and weight:

“Opacity” is the “see throughness” or bleed-through of the paper.  This number is always high (94-99) in inkjet photo paper.  The higher the number, the higher the quality of the paper.

“Brightness” is the “whiteness” of the paper and ranges from 1-100 (although I have seen “brightness” rated higher than 100).

“Weight” is the paper’s weight in pounds (lb.) or grams per square meter (g/m2).  Most of the paper ranges from 24 to 71 lb. (90 to 270 g/m2), although very high quality museum papers are in the mid-300 g/m2 and can get as high as 500 g/m2.

In addition to these specs, there is the choice between “glossy” and “matte.”  There aren’t any standards for defining the “gloss” or “matte” levels and each paper manufacturer is different and they all use their own fancy names.

Being totally up front and honest, I have not tested every photo paper in every printer, so my research is limited.  I can tell you that the big three printer manufacturers (Hewlett Packard, Epson, and Canon) all have their own ink jet photo paper and I have used both Epson papers on Epson printers and Canon papers on Canon printers with great results.  Even these low end papers deliver very acceptable images – especially when used with the higher end printers.  In fact, I use the Canon Pimxa Photo Paper Pro and Platinum papers quite often.  For general printing I recommend using the photo paper from the manufacturer of your printer.  They all have a reasonably priced high quality paper.

When you start looking into printing for your portfolio, textured, or gallery pieces, a high-end museum-quality paper should be considered.  There are many paper players and the choice is ultimately yours.  Call it brand loyalty but I am partial to Oriental and Ilford simply because I printed black and white images with these papers for years.   Other brands that I am familiar with – although have not necessarily tried – are Hahnemuhle, Museo, Pictran, Moab, Red River, Canson Infinity, and Harman.  When printing at this level of quality you will want to protect your paper by never touching its surface. You should handle the paper by the edges only and keep it in the original packaging until needed.  Once you have printed your image:

†   Wait 24 hours before matting and framing.

†   Use archival quality mat boards.

†   Do not use spray adhesive as many inks are sensitive to moisture.

†   UV filtered glass is recommended.

†   Seal off the back of the frame to prevent moisture and other airborne containments from reaching the print.

One of my goals for 2010 is to print on many different paper types from many different paper makers and to share my results.  I welcome all to share their comments and experiences.

CAMERON McINTYRE is a Los Angeles-based photographer specializing in industrial, technology, architecture and commercial photography. You can see his work at http://www.cameronphotographer.com When Cameron is not photographing machinery, micro chips, or a building, he can be found photographing the ocean, the mountains, the desert, and the quite empty spaces that fill the mind.

Leave a comment
5 comments (see all)
RSS Feed
comments
mikehayward

Really good information for us photo print newbies! Thanks!

Review: Scott Kelby’s Digital Photography Books

January 9, 2010
3 Comments (see all)

by Mike Hayward

Member, Whole 9 Creative Photography Circle

How would you like to go out on multiple assignments with one of the world’s most knowledgeable digital photographers?  And while you’re out with him, how would you like to be able to ask him just about any question on how to get the most professional results from your digital camera?  And not only get the answer, but actually be shown how to do it?

This is the basic premise of Scott Kelby’s Digital Photography series of three paperback books published by Peachpit Press – and each book honestly and humorously delivers on Scott’s promise to “answer questions, give you advice, and share the secrets I’ve learned just like I would with a friend – without all the technical explanations and techie photo-speak.”

I’ll admit, being the scrooge that I am, that I was just a little put off by the $24.99 price tag that accompanies each of the three seemingly slim books.  Each volume runs an average of 220 pages.  But, browsing through Volume 1 at my local Barnes & Noble bookstore, I was quickly convinced that the “tricks of the trade” I could learn were well worth the minimal investment.

Each volume covers a wide range of photography subjects.  Volume 1 starts off with “Pro Tips for Getting Really Sharp Photos (If Your Photos Aren’t Sharp, the Rest Doesn’t Matter)” and quickly moves on to “Shooting (insert your area of interest here) Like a Pro” and wraps up with “Avoiding Problems Like a Pro,” “Taking Advantage of Digital Like a Pro,” and “How to Print Like a Pro.”  Each volume ends with a series of “The Recipe for Getting This Kind of Shot,” each “recipe” illustrated with an image we would be proud to call our own.

Along the way, we learn “little” things like “Building a Studio from Scratch,” and a hundred or so “Pro Tips for Getting Better Photos – Tricks of the Trade for Making All Your Shots Look Better.”

Happily, there’s always the entertaining inside humor Kelby brings to each subject.   One of the early tips Kelby shares is about the pop-up flash: “Use it as a weapon,” he says, “If you have a grudge against someone, shoot them with your camera’s pop-up flash and it will even the score.”

About the “introductions” added at the start of each chapter, Kelby says, it’s “designed to give you a quick mental break, and honestly, they have little to do with the chapter. In fact, they have little to do with anything, but writing these off-the-wall chapter intros is kind of a tradition of mine (I do this in all my books), [and] if you’re one of those really “serious” types, you can skip them because they’ll just get on your nerves.”

I can think of no better “starter school” for learning about digital photography than this small, unintimidating set of books. And I’m happy to say that, as I read through them, I hope to share with you the knowledge of what I’ve learned and how it has transformed – for the better – my talent as a professional photographer.

If you’ve read any of Scott Kelby’s books, I’d be interested in having you share your opinion of them – or other photography books that you’ve found indispensable to your education as a photographer! Please comment below… and thanks for sharing!

MIKE HAYWARD is an avid reader and professional photographer specializing in corporate and non-profit special events. Sample work can be seen at MikeHaywardPhotography.com

Leave a comment
3 comments (see all)
RSS Feed
comments
creativephotographycircle

But wait! Here’s a web site where you can buy Kelby’s “Digital Photography” books at a great discount: http://www.kelbytraining.com/books/

friditz

This is cool. I am a hobbyist looking to learn and grow as a photographer. I am happy to have found this blog. I have Scott’s book “The Digital Photography Book” which gives a lot of tips. You are right about his sense of humor. I also highly recommend anything by Rick Sammon and Bryan Peterson.

Photo Class – Using Adobe Lightroom To Select Your Best Images

January 4, 2010
2 Comments (see all)

by Kyle Sparks

Member, Whole 9 Creative Photography Circle

While studying at Brooks Institute of Photography, the digital revolution was starting to gain momentum and become its own beast. Instead of having boxes of film, I had stacks of hard drives to store the thousands of images that I shot each term. The photo editing programs were changing rapidly as well. I started off using Adobe Photoshop CS (Creative Suite)… then Photoshop CS2 came out and blew the doors off the original.

One of the advantages of CS2 was that the user could convert RAW files to other image formats in Photoshop. That was cool enough, but the real kicker was the introduction of the Adobe “Bridge” add-in. The “Bridge” program allowed the user to edit several images at the same time.

With the introduction of Bridge, the user could make an image adjustment on one RAW image and apply that same adjustment to the rest of the selected images. This saved me a lot of time and allowed me to give more time to shooting assignments instead of editing them. My favorite time saver was “batching” (making collective changes to) metadata. Those were the days. But that was three years ago and I’m happy to report that times have changed for the better.

Adobe now has a great photo program that I currently use called “Lightroom.” Lightroom is an industry-leading photo editing and catalog program that allows photographers to maintain a large collection of images. Basically it’s a one-stop shop for both the amateur and professional photographer.

Key Points about Adobe Lightroom:

§ You can search your library for specific images FAST.

§ You can export images using presets.

§ You can make batch adjustments to images and accompanying metadata.

§ You can edit images using the latest RAW converters.

§ You can print photos directly from the Lightroom program.

§ You can make slideshows and upload to web pages without ever needing another program.

Seriously, Lightroom rules. The only reason I use Photoshop anymore is to run “save” actions or do hardcore retouching; Other than that, I’m solidly in camp with Lightroom.

Lightroom has many great features and I would have to write a book to cover all of them (thankfully, a number of other people have). On this blog I will be talking about how I use the features, instead of simply telling you what they are.

First up, Lightroom handles the editing workflow for 90 percent of everything I shoot:

I import all of my images into Lightroom, making a new “collection” for those images. I prefer to have the title of each collection correspond with the images. For example, if I shot photos while on a riding on a train, that collection would be called “Train.” It’s really, really complicated stuff. (Note to editor: That was a joke.)

After this, I like to make a quick pass through of all the images in the collection and remove any stinkers. A “stinker” image, to me, is out of focus, improperly exposed, or was the result of a camera misfire. To remove images from the collection, I check the image box and hit the delete key. This only removes the image from the collection; it does not take the image out of the original folder where it was imported; therefore, the original image remains on your hard drive. To completely remove an image, select the image in its original folder within the Lightroom program and hit the delete key. A goof-proof window will come up and make sure that you really want to trash the image.

Next, I start picking out the good images. I like to have Caps Lock key enabled when I rate images because the program automatically advances you to the next image, saving you one full keystroke. This might not sound like much of a time saver but if you are going through a thousand images, the time saved starts to add up.

During this stage of the edit I am in the library mode “Loupe” view. This mode displays one full-screen image at a time and I have found it to be the best mode for critiquing your images.

When I find an image that I like, I give that image a rating number between 1 and 5. For example, when you give an image a rating of three (“3”), you have just assigned three “stars” to that image. The star system was developed back in the days of Adobe Bridge. Here is my star rating system:

* Like the image, want to see it again.

* * I think the image is better than other, similar images.

* * * I think this is an even better image and that it will end up in my final edit pool.

* * * * I think this is one of the best images of the shoot.

* * * * * Best of the Best! I should think about including this one in my portfolio!

Having used this process for a few years now, I edit through all my images quickly. Knowing what you’re looking for while you are editing photos will increase your speed greatly. After I’ve gone through the collection and rated the images, I click on the star icon in the filter bar at the bottom of the screen. I then see only the images that I have assigned a rating of one star or more.

In my next step, I switch to the newly defined collection grid view and look over all the images. While I’m debating between similar images, I use the “compare” or “survey” features of the program, depending on how many images I am looking at. I use “compare” when I find an image that I really like and want to see it next to a similar image. After I finish selecting what I consider the best images, I color correct them and prepare them for “delivery.” “Delivery” could mean burning a DVD of the selected images, exporting them to a web destination, printing them, or a number of other end actions.

Using the star rating system is a very common and simple way of editing through your photos. Give it a try and let me know what you think.

KYLE SPARKS currently lives and thrives in Southern California where he busies himself with a wide variety of editorial and advertising clients. You can see his work at http://www.kylesparks.com or you can follow his “Photo Class” tutorials at http://kylesparks.blogspot.com/

Leave a comment
2 comments (see all)
RSS Feed
comments
rosendo

Kyle,

Thanks for the informative introduction to Adobe Lightroom. I too work with Photoshop daily but not to the the extent that you do. Nonetheless I appreciate you sharing all the cool aspects of a program I never knew existed until today.

I will be certain to share this blog with all my freeze frame friends.

peace and light~

R~

mikehayward

Excellent information to help me with one of my New Year resolutions: Getting all my digital images organized! Thanks Kyle!

Transgressive Photoshop (Updated)

December 29, 2009
3 Comments (see all)

by Mike Hayward

Member, Whole 9 Creative Photography Circle

[ Updated 12/30/2009 to include a valid hyperlink to the key image under discussion ] 

A short time ago in this space we examined something called “transgressive art” (“In Your Face, Baby!” November 4, 2009 – an outstanding article worthy of some year-end blog award, if anyone’s listening).

One of the considerations which qualifies “transgressive art” is the fact that it should shock or insult some portion of its audience and thereby engender controversey – which is a helluva lot better than having no one talk about your art at all.

Today we move along to what I call “transgressive Photoshop,” wherein a photograph becomes a manipulated “image” which becomes a “work of art” by way of controversy. Here we go:

(From The Los Angeles Times, October 15th, 2009:)

“Museum replaces Shields photo”

“Britain’s Tate Modern museum has replaced a nude image of 10-year-old Brooke Shields with a photograph of the actress as an adult.


“The Tate closed a room housing the “Spiritual America 1983″ image by artist Richard Prince after a visit two weeks ago by a London police unit that deals with obscene publications.


“The London museum said in a statement Wednesday that it had replaced the piece with a later version of the work made by Prince in collaboration with Shields called ‘Spiritual America IV 2005.’ It shows a photo of Shields in a bikini taken in 2005.”

While I can’t unearth the original L.A. Times article, here is the UK’s Guardian article for reference.

Did you notice that, in the Times article quote above, the museum’s nude image was replaced with a photograph? That’s because the artist, Richard Prince, had previously contracted to use and reproduce a photograph of Brooke Shields taken by Gary Gross.  Prince then artistically “manipulated” the nude image in question to make it “art.” (Full disclosure: This was some time before Photoshop came along, but I felt “Transgressive Photoshop” was a  much better blog titled than “Transgressive Airbrush.”)

You can see the image in question through the link provided below, but I advise you just to admire the image and not to read the sordid details of how Gary Gross contracted with Brooke Shields’ mother to make the photograph(s) because you might be shocked at how a Hollywood mother could possibly allow her daughter to be turned into some kind of underage porn princess. The manipulated image shows a naked prepubescent Brooke Shields tarted up and posing in a brothel-like atmosphere.

The Gary Gross original photo can be found HERE.

And, after Richard Prince re-tooled the Gross photo, HERE is the way it became an art “image.” [I hope the preceding link holds up - the image keeps disappearing across the Internet.  If the link doesn't work, just use the Gary Gross photo link and use a little imagination.]

Much to their credit, The Tate Modern Museum replaced the transgressive artwork with another artful image of Miss Shields called “Spiritual America IV 2005.”  I’m sure you would have been surprised, much as I was, to discover that Miss Shields posed (for a fee) on the later image rather than posing freely for the sole purpose of having the earlier image replaced.

But I digress.  We not concerned with what Brooke, Gary Gross, Richard Prince, or Brooke’s mother did those many years ago.  We’re now concerned with the fact that the British “art police” busted the Tate Modern for (questionably) trafficking in porn.  The image, in some minds, went beyond the pale of good taste and propriety. The image, in other minds, was an artful statement both about American culture and American fixation with Hollywood celebrities.

You are concerned, aren’t you?  About the image?  About the Tate being busted by the art police?  About American being more concerned with so-called celebrities than the way their politicians run the country?  We invite you to express your concern, support, or indignation by commenting below.  The results could be both interesting and illuminating.

Questionable resources:

http://iconicphotos.wordpress.com/2009/06/05/brooke-shields-by-gary-gross/

http://www.richardprinceart.com/images/photography/spiritualamerica/popup/popup_spirit1.html

http://storage.canalblog.com/63/00/577050/41244492.jpg

MIKE HAYWARD is a righteous photographer specializing in minimally re-touched corporate and non-profit special event images.  His other, somewhat transgressive, images can be seen (if someone hasn’t already deleted them) at MikeHaywardPhotography.com

<!–[if gte mso 9]> Normal 0 MicrosoftInternetExplorer4 <![endif]–>

Leave a comment
3 comments (see all)
RSS Feed
comments
solshakedown

Very clever to include a link that doesn’t work. I wish I would have thought of that.

creativephotographycircle

I wish I could take credit for being clever, Ricky, but it was simple stupidity on my part. In the space of time between having written this piece and actually posting it, the original link was taken down. I’m happy to report that a new, working link to Prince’s “Spiritual America – 1983″ has been re-inserted to the piece and seems to be working (for now).

creativephotographycircle

It’s interesting that the bad link (http://www.richardprinceart.com/images/photography/spiritualamerica/popup/popup_spirit1.html) was Richard Prince’s professional web page URL (BetterWhoIs search: domain effective to February 5, 2011). The registrant’s name is “Richard Prince” and you could link through to his galleries on the web site until it was recently taken down.

Photo Class: Exposure Metering Modes

December 23, 2009
3 Comments (see all)

by Kyle Sparks

Member, Whole 9 Creative Photography Circle

When talking about creativity in regards to photography, people often talk about the “eye” of the photographer. You will hear people say, “Wow!! You have a great eye for photos! They always look so good!”

Having an “eye” for good photos is great… if you are gifted with that ability.  If you don’t have that gift, all hope is not lost – you just have to look at how you take photos from a different perspective.

Personally, I rely on the technical aspects of photography when I shoot photos more than the creative side.  For me this meant reading my camera manual more times than I can count and doing a LOT of camera tests.  Once I knew all the technical aspects of my camera, I could stop thinking about it while I was shooting and just focus on the creative aspects of taking photos.

What does this mean for you? Something good, I hope…

Once a week I will be posting a new photo tip on my web blog to help others to make better images.  I will be going over camera manipulation and settings, lighting, image processing, photo gear, super nerdy computer short cuts, and what ever else I can think of.  If you have questions ask them! You won’t know the answer unless you ask the question first.

That being said, shoot me email if you have a question or leave a comment on the blog and I will try my best to give you an answer.

Metering Modes – What they do for you.

Most SLR cameras have a few different metering modes. They are typically called “evaluative,” “partial,” “spot,” and “center-weighted average.” My camera has all four modes but I only use two of them because the other two don’t give me good results  The two modes I use are evaluative metering, and spot metering.

Evaluative metering:  It’s an all-around metering mode.  The camera uses the whole viewfinder to meter the scene to give you an exposure reading.

Spot metering:  The camera uses 3.5% of the frame (typically the center auto focus point) to meter the scene to give you an exposure reading.

Now here is when to use the different modes:

If you are shooting a scene that has low contrast or is mostly the same tone on the gray scale, evaluative metering is the way to go.  I use this mode for most of my shooting – especially when I am shooting landscapes or surfing.

Spot metering is good when you want to meter a specific part of a scene.  Use this mode when you are shooting in a difficult lighting situation or when you want to make a silhouette.

The next time you go out and shoot, try using these different modes and see what results you get.

Have fun out there!

KYLE SPARKS currently lives and thrives in Southern California where he busies himself with a wide variety of editorial and advertising clients. You can see his work at http://www.kylesparks.com and his photoblog “photo tips” at http://kylesparks.blogspot.com/

Leave a comment
3 comments (see all)
RSS Feed
comments
creativephotographycircle

Excellent article, Kyle – not to mention the great images!!

Free Holiday Gifts for the Whole 9 Photographer!

December 17, 2009
3 Comments (see all)

by Mike Hayward,

Member, The Whole 9 Creative Photography Circle

In the spirit of the season, here are a couple of “free” gifts for you from the Creative Pho-ho-ho-tography Circle – “free” in the sense that you don’t have to lay out any money and what you have to do to receive them isn’t going to pester you whenever you’re online.

The first gift is a free 38-page e-book from pro photographer Simon Plant whose website ProPhotoInsights is the place where you can take up the e-book offer (look on the left side of the page after it loads in).  The title of the e-book is “Photographing the Edge of Darkness” with a subtitle of “Low Light Digital Photography & HDR imaging.”  Here is the come-on image of the book . . .

(They always come up with these beautiful virtual book covers and, of course, an e-book is something you won’t see on anyone’s bookshelf.)

What Simon offers here are invaluable insights into capturing pro-quality images taken at dawn and dusk. What Simon wants you to do – in order to receive the e-book – is sign up for his newsletter which comes down the pike every other week or so (maybe monthly, I’m not sure).  The newsletter, which originates in London, is well worth reading and his web site is always interesting and informative.

The second gift – what I call the “Poor Man’s Photoshop” – is an entirely free-of-charge download for P.C. owners (sorry, mac lovers).

“The FastStone Image Viewer,” the copy reads, “is a fast, stable, user-friendly image browser, converter and editor. It has a nice array of features that include image viewing, management, comparison, red-eye removal, emailing, resizing, cropping and color adjustments.”

“Its innovative but intuitive full-screen mode provides quick access to EXIF information, thumbnail browser and major functionalities via hidden toolbars that pop up when your mouse touches the four edges of the screen. Other features include a high quality magnifier and a musical slideshow with 150+ transitional effects, as well as lossless JPEG transitions, drop shadow effects, image annotation, scanner support, histogram and much more. It supports all major graphic formats (BMP, JPEG, JPEG 2000, animated GIF, PNG, PCX, TIFF, WMF, ICO and TGA) and popular digital camera RAW formats (CRW, CR2, NEF, PEF, RAF, MRW, ORF, SRF and DNG).”

You can download it (for free) at the Fasfstone web site.  You want to download the top item on the opening page, the “Faststone Image Viewer.” The only thing the Faststone people ask is for you to consider some kind of donation. They don’t say it need be large or small or somewhere in between. They have a little pop-up screen when the program loads which reminds you about a possible donation. You can check the “Don’t show this message again” option or you might decide to simple allow it to pop up every time you use the program – which is what I did until I felt so guilty about not paying anything for what I consider a high quality, extra functional image program that I finally did make a Paypal donation of ten dollars.  Which is darn cheap when you consider what you’re getting.

We’re sorry we couldn’t bundle these gifts up with a nice ribbon for you.  Once you see what you’re getting (did I mention “for free“?), you won’t even stop to think about it.

Anyway, enjoy!!

MIKE HAYWARD, in addition to being Editor for The Whole 9 Photography Blog, is a holiday-conscious professional photographer specializing in corporate and non-profit events. You can view some of his work at MikeHaywardPhotography.com (for free).

Leave a comment
3 comments (see all)
RSS Feed
comments

Paint the Night

December 12, 2009
4 Comments (see all)

Paint the Night

by Cameron McIntyre

Member, Whole 9 Creative Photography Circle

A recent trip to Joshua Tree National Park took me back to a time long before my student days at the Brooks Institute of Photography and an assignment called “Painting with Flash.” The assignment was a simple concept with a not-so-simple plan of execution.

Joshua Tree National Park comprises hundreds of miles of sun-burnt soil studded with Jurassic granite monoliths, towering cacti with uplifted arms praying to the sky, and struggling shrubs. It is a waterless void millions of years old.  Nothingness surrounds it and yet, within this arid desert landscape, beauty abounds. At dusk, the howls of coyotes welcome the coming night. The bold photographer, with his trusty camera, tripod and flash, steps into the darkness to “paint the night.”

Painting with flash or any other light source is a fun and often rewarding photo adventure, especially where the location provides dramatic foreground subjects.  Photographing at night is an exposure exercise and a focus free-for-all.  With technology on our side, these dilemmas can be solved through trial and error.  So if you’re only able to get it somewhat right on the fifth capture, your secret is safe with me.

The idea behind “painting with light” is to illuminate various objects within the frame individually.  This can be accomplished with a hot shoe flash, a battery powered strobe head, or a powerful flashlight.  In Joshua Tree I used a Nikon SB600 flash unit and a flashlight.  With the camera on a tripod, you need to set your ISO reading to a reasonably fast setting.  I used 400.  I don’t think you need to go over ISO 800 because you’re not really trying to expose for the dark areas.  If these areas end up totally black, that’s cool.

Seeing that it’s night, it’s (err…) really dark out there; so go ahead and open up that exposure setting.  5.6 is a good place to start.  Take time to frame your shot, placing the rocks, trees, walls, buildings, statues, whatever object(s) you want to “paint” in the right area.  A flashlight is a great tool here, allowing you to light up the areas inside your frame while you establish frame boundaries.  It’s very important to know where “out of frame” is because this is the area where you will be walking and standing while “painting”.

Focusing can be frustrating, especially in AF mode in low light.  I tend to go with a manual focus, sometimes taking the focal distance to infinity.  Other times I may measure the focal distance to a specific object, just like a cinematographer will do.  Once you have established frame and focus, the next step is to choose your automated exposure time.  Don’t be afraid to make a “guesstimate” of how long you’ll need your shutter to remain open. Experiment with anything between 30-seconds and two minutes.  Factor in the time you think you’ll need to walk from your camera to your subject(s) and “click” the automated countdown timer that will open your shutter.

Now walk quickly (but carefully) to the object(s) you’ll want to “paint.”  Take your flash or flashlight and focus the light on the object(s) you wish to illuminate.  It might help to literally (especially with a flashlight) paint the light like you would with a paintbrush. With a strobe, you should adjust your power setting depending on your distance from the flash to the object.  More than one exposure may be required.

When you’re done, return to the camera and take a gander at that great LCD screen. How does it look?  If you like it, great!  If not, take another one!  And another! Change settings and distances where you believe the change will benefit the image.

Colored gels are a great tool for “painting the night.” Having a friend along can be a big help, too.  If nothing else, you won’t have to stand around in the dark alone… thinking about those coyotes.

Please feel free to share any “painting with light” stories, comments or questions.

CAMERON McINTYRE is a Los Angeles-based photographer specializing in industrial, technology, architecture and commercial photography.  When Cameron is not photographing machinery, micro chips, or a building he can be found photographing the ocean, the mountains, the desert, and the quiet empty spaces that fill the mind.

Leave a comment
4 comments (see all)
RSS Feed
comments
cameron

Kudos to our dedicated editor Mike.

creativephotographycircle

When you start with a great piece, how can you go wrong?

Getting “It” Right For Better Photographs: Color Space

December 5, 2009
0 Comments

by Chuck Behrman,

Member, The Whole 9 Creative Photography Circle

What do I mean by “color space” and why should you care?

Your monitor is the primary device you rely on to show you the colors of your photographs or other artwork on your computer. Today’s monitors are primarily flat screens and may use various technologies for displaying images (this sounds suspiciously like the beginning of the last “Getting ‘It’ Right” entry, doesn’t it?).

The color space, in fairly simple terms, is how many colors are available and how many can actually be shown on the monitor or the printed image.

Your eye can see billions of colors but a typical 8-bit image can contain 28 colors per each of the three channels, or a maximum of 16.7 million colors. That’s a lot of colors. I don’t want to get into a deep discussion on color theory because I’d like to keep this on a basic level.

The bad news is that a typical 8-bit monitor can’t see anywhere near 16.7 million colors. Nor can a typical inkjet printer reproduce them. Although a good printer can reproduce more colors than a monitor, the colors are different.

Let’s talk about monitors for a minute…

Back in the olden days when color specs were being defined, a standard called “sRGB” was created to cover what could be reproduced on monitors of the day. This was (and still is) the standard for image viewing on monitors and the internet. An sRGB image should look the same (or at least similar) on monitors that are correctly profiled. This should be true in most applications and all web browsers without any need for additional color management. sRGB color space is also used for many digital cameras (when creating jpeg images) and is required by many print labs using chemicals to process their images.

In the late 90s, Adobe came up with a new standard that expanded the color space to include what could be reproduced on more up-to-date monitors and the better color inkjet printers. They called this “Adobe RGB(1998)”. This is still the color space of choice today for most commercial and fine art inkjet printing. Some of today’s 10-bit and higher monitors can display most, if not all of this color space.

Today, some people use an even larger color space called “ProPhoto.” However, you can’t see all of the ProPhoto colors on any printer or on most monitors (maybe on a 32-bit monitor, but there aren’t very many of those and I don’t know anyone who can afford one).

By the way, most good digital cameras will produce jpeg images using either Adobe RGB(1998) or sRGB. My preference is to shoot RAW and to apply the color space I need to use for each image on an “as-required” basis.

Knowing this, and hopefully not too confused, let’s try to simplify the process. If you stick to the following rules, you’ll be okay.

If your aim is to make prints on a giclée or inkjet printer – use Adobe RGB(1998) for your working color space. Do not use Adobe RGB(1998) for the internet – your images will look horrible (or at the least different from what you intend). This is because of how sRGB interprets colors that are not within its gamut (or range of colors).

If you are going to use the images for Powerpoint or similar presentations, on the internet, or for printing at a color lab – use sRGB. You can use sRGB for images you’ll be printing on an inkjet printer but they might not look as good as those you’ve printed based on Adobe RGB(1998).

What about ProPhoto? Well, for right now I just want you to be aware that it exists.

How do you specify the color space? In Photoshop, go to ”Edit > Color Settings…” and set your RGB color space preference. Photoshop will ask you what it should do when you try to open an image with a different color space.

How do you change an image’s color space? In Photoshop, go to “Edit > Convert To Profile…” and chose your new color space. Photoshop’s “Save For Web & Devices” also has a check box for converting to sRGB since that action is intended for images destined for the internet.

Oh, by the way, you can convert from a larger color space to a smaller one as needed (Adobe RGB(1998) to sRGB). But you can’t go the other way and expect to pick up any of the colors in the larger color space.

Our next step will be to learn about “printer profiles” and how to use them. It’s really not as intimidating as it sounds and we’ll cover it next time.

You can add your comments and questions below. I’ll be happy to answer them. The idea is to just enjoy and learn.

CHUCK BEHRMAN, a Los Angeles based advertising and fine art photographer, has been holding workshops in digital photography, Photoshop and Lightroom in the Los Angeles and Central Coast areas since 2004. You can see his images and learn about all his services at http://www.chbphoto.com. Chuck has created a number of video tutorial CDs covering this topic in detail as well as many other Photoshop & Lightroom subjects.

Leave a comment
0 comments (see all)
RSS Feed

Faded Memories

November 29, 2009
4 Comments (see all)

by Mike Hayward

Member, Creative Photography Circle

My dear great-aunt Agnes had become distraught by the thought of throwing out all those old family photographs – images of people she either didn’t know or could hardly remember.

Aunt Agnes in happier days

She ultimately decided her best course of action was to share her faded memories with others… by enclosing one or two of the photos in each bill payment she mailed out at the end of the month (this was in the days long before the convenience of what we know as online payments).

What the people at the electric company, the telephone company, the gas company, etc., at the other end made of her thoughtfulness when the photographs fell out of the payment envelope is anyone’s guess.

But now that we’re in the digital age, we don’t have the problem of what to do with a box full of old, faded images anymore.

Or do we?

Amazing as it sounds, I’ve been told that – as yet – we can’t expect our digital images to survive as long as Aunt Agnes’ old-fashioned, film-to-paper photographs. We’re now told that we must continually save our digital images across a minimum of three (count’em, three) archival sources …and then pray that our built-in and external hard drives don’t crash, or that the CD-DVD backups don’t start to flake or chemically deteriorate in two or three years. Just thinking about all the things that are waiting to destroy the digital world as we know it makes us seriously considerer investing in a temperature, light, and humidity-controlled steel vault beneath the garage

Finally, we have to pray that before the BIG ONE strikes, we’ve all had the good sense to mail (registered and insured) digital copies of our precious images to out-of-state friends or that we’ve uploaded them (for a modest fee) to an online storage site like Mozy.com or some other reputable company.

Sure, we all laugh at the idea, but listen very closely – that’s nervous laughter you’re hearing.

It’s enough to make a normally confident photographer paranoid.

Personally, I subscribe to the CD/DVD-internal/external hard drives-online storage-bomb shelter solutions. The only problem is that I’m never certain where specific images are stored.

Now I’m paranoid about my image record-keeping.

What about you? Are you a confident image saver? If so, please share your secret here by commenting below.

MIKE HAYWARD is an extremely gifted yet paranoid photographer specializing in corporate and non-profit special events. His at-risk images can be seen (for who knows how long) at MikeHaywardPhotography.com

Leave a comment
4 comments (see all)
RSS Feed
comments
solshakedown

Ahh… the paranoia. Completely founded in reality, however, which makes it just that much more… interesting.
Don’t know that I would ever do much more than that. Short of going back to film and keeping the negatives.. can you imagine? That bunker underneath the garage sounds a little more reasonable than I’d like to admit.
As for record keeping and trying to remember where everything is stored, I do actually like how Aperture manages its files. Once you’ve decided between the myriad of places you want to store the originals, you tell it, and it remembers. Of course, there is always pen and paper…

celestevoce

I generally print out copies of all my digital images too, so I have a hard copy and two back ups (yes, my closet is filled with photo boxes, but I think it makes me value each picture I take more instead of going overboard because digital makes things so unlimited). I also have a cork covered wall where I put tidbits of things that get my creative juices flowing, whether a bizarre photo from a magazine, or working versions of projects I’m experimenting with. Also on that wall is old photos I’ve purchased at estate sales. I love old photos from other people, especially when I don’t know the stories behind them. If I had been the recipient of one of your great aunt’s photos, I would have been elated. And I’d love to think that once I’m long gone, someone will find a couple of those digital photos that I printed out and find some novelty value in them too.

creativephotographycircle

Interesting, Celeste (“,,,old photos I’ve purchased at estate sales.”).

I can’t seem to be able to pass by a flea market table that has an old photo album on it. There are actually people who buy them in a collector’s venue known as “Other People’s Lives.”

awaken2sun

Ugh…I have been using Macs for over 20 years and do you know that I’ve never had one crash on me? Somewhere down the line I got me some good computer mojo which has led to the mistaken belief that I don’t need to back anything up. Thank God for the automatic back-up at the office, but for everything else, photos included, it sounds like I’m screwed. Life goes on with the memories in my head…