Just looking at a few random posts of photos on Flickr.
I search under "architecture" and am always surprised at how off-topic so many of the posted photos are...sorry, mate....a photo of your girlfriend in a slip doesn't constitute architecture no matter how well she's built...I never search under "titties" but I wonder if there are pictures of buildings in there.
Reason that I post today is to address the disturbing trend of people using the "vivid color" setting on their cameras or doing HDR treatments of subjects that don't need it....and that's most of them.
I can see the vivid thing helping out on an overcast day BUT there's usually an adjustment for the setting buried deep in your camera menus....I'd suggest that you experiment with the settings so that you get a photo that's adequately punched up but isn't frickin' glowing....it's unnatural and disturbing. You might say that it's your idea of an artistic treatment but c'mon...who are you kidding?
Same business with HDR. HDR is a great idea...working in conventional photography (with film) I learned several techniques to either contract or expand the range of a photo so the final print gives the maximum detail in both highlight and shadow areas. There was this wonderful guy named Ansel Adams who worked out a whole empirical system for doing this and called it, cleverly enough, the Zone System. One thing that I've found over the years is that a lot of people toss that term, Zone System, around and have absolutely no idea what it really means...I encourage anyone who picks up a camera with any idea of doing anything serious to LEARN WHAT IT ACTUALLY MEANS....seriously....even if you have no intention of ever shooting any film or making a silver print it will give you a foundation that will help you make something that visually represents what you intended when you took the photo.
But back to HDR. I'm beginning to see that it's being recognized as a trend and a look that's becoming passe...we've been through those...high contrast, grain, soft focus...over the years there have been a lot of trends. I would, however, like to remind everyone that all trends have their place and when it comes to architectural photography in particular, HDR is a good thing if you don't overdo it. Please try to get that awful "radioactive" look out of the HDR shots...crank back the color saturation or something but tone it down so the viewer feels that he's looking at the subject and not a "treatment". Again, you could say that it's artistic but a really good photo doesn't need a gimmick to connect with a viewer.
Wednesday, May 1, 2013
Wednesday, March 6, 2013
I though that the war was over...
That seems to be the prevailing sentiment: I thought that the war was over and you film guys lost.
Well....the report of our death, as Mark Twain once said, has been greatly exaggerated.
I will grant you that the economics of the rise of digital photography have had some pretty profound effects on those of us who still shoot a little silver based film now and again. Eastman Kodak has dropped the manufacture of Ektachrome, for example. Ektachrome was the industry standard for color reversal (slide) film for years and was manufactured in several types all of which had unique applications and characteristics to suit both the application and the photographer's sense of aesthetics. Ektachrome was the backbone of commercial photography, especially product, industrial and architectural photography, for years. Ektachrome joins it's predecessor, Kodachrome, in extinction...heard about many photographers who stockpiled Kodachrome in their refrigerators after Kodak announced that they were killing it off...hope they used their stock up because Kodachrome could only be processed by a proprietary process controlled by - you guessed it - Kodak. I assume that some people may have stockpiled Ektachrome and they will be able to use it because the Ektachrome developing process (E6) continues to be available. I suppose that the main supplier of E6 type film is now Fuji with Fujichrome available in several types to suit the needs of the photographer.
Lately, when I've gone to the camera store (one that is Downtown Chicago's oldest), I've been unable to find Kodak's black and white film developers...they are on "backorder"...so I've been buying Photographer's Formulary pre-packaged D-76 equivalent. Interesting because Photographer's Formulary was a smaller company catering to those who preferred to mix their own photo chemistry from the component chemicals or those interested in experimenting with antique photo processes. They may do well in the future as all silver based photo processes become "antique". I have no doubt that there will be people out there who will not only be mixing their own photo chemistry from scratch but will be making their own film and paper as well...somewhere out there is the photo equivalent of the NRA's Charlton Heston who will say, "You will get my Leica away from me when you pry it from my cold, dead fingers."
And while the eminently collectible Leicas seem to be maintaining their value, a quick search of ebay will find lots and lots of really good photographic equipment going for the proverbial song. If you're one of those folks who shot 35mm and longed to move up to medium format, get thee to ebay....all of those old medium format "tanks" are pretty damn affordable these days. Of course, your equipment has probably depreciated dramatically so any "trade in value" you thought you might have had is shot. Looks like the smart people were the ones who leased those multi-thousand dollar system then turned them in at the end of the lease period and started a new lease on the current state-of-the-art digital stuff. As much as you or I love to have that well tuned, mechanical object that accompanies us on our photographic adventures and always comes through for us, remember that there ARE people out there who don't really give a rat's ass about the equipment and just look at it as a means to make money...it's a pretty romantic notion to feel attached to your cameras and feel like they have individual personalities but I readily admit that I do it...hell, I sometimes find myself talking to the bloody things as if they were people.
The cold, hard reality that we have to face is that the vast majority of photographs, from commercial work to family snapshots, end up on a computer screen. Think about it....had any prints made lately? And if you did, were they printed with chemical processes or on the latest zippity-doo-dah inkjet printer? I recently spoke with someone who expressed the opinion that there was nothing like a good silver gelatin print. I agreed but pointed out that unless it was going to an exhibition or into a serious private collection or a museum, the chances that any image was going to get the deluxe darkroom print treatment were slim to none. The individual I was speaking to was really aghast that I would point that out because it was just so obvious that anything other than a silver gelatin print was crap. Considering that this fella was working behind the darkroom supplies counter at the camera store, I found myself once again agreeing with H.L. Mencken's warning that "There is no point in arguing with someone who's paycheck depends on not being convinced."
But we're still shooting film...how odd. And we're still acquiring old cameras and getting them put in working order...even though we can "instagram" any digital photo so that it looks like it was shot with an old camera. Maybe it's like painting. You can use acrylic colors and pretty much not have to worry about drying times and other technical considerations....or you can paint in oils which demand a lot of knowledge about oils and pigments and preparation of supports and sometimes take weeks to dry between painting sessions. Maybe the discipline is more important than convenience. Maybe the digital is just too damn easy for some of us.
Well....the report of our death, as Mark Twain once said, has been greatly exaggerated.
I will grant you that the economics of the rise of digital photography have had some pretty profound effects on those of us who still shoot a little silver based film now and again. Eastman Kodak has dropped the manufacture of Ektachrome, for example. Ektachrome was the industry standard for color reversal (slide) film for years and was manufactured in several types all of which had unique applications and characteristics to suit both the application and the photographer's sense of aesthetics. Ektachrome was the backbone of commercial photography, especially product, industrial and architectural photography, for years. Ektachrome joins it's predecessor, Kodachrome, in extinction...heard about many photographers who stockpiled Kodachrome in their refrigerators after Kodak announced that they were killing it off...hope they used their stock up because Kodachrome could only be processed by a proprietary process controlled by - you guessed it - Kodak. I assume that some people may have stockpiled Ektachrome and they will be able to use it because the Ektachrome developing process (E6) continues to be available. I suppose that the main supplier of E6 type film is now Fuji with Fujichrome available in several types to suit the needs of the photographer.
Lately, when I've gone to the camera store (one that is Downtown Chicago's oldest), I've been unable to find Kodak's black and white film developers...they are on "backorder"...so I've been buying Photographer's Formulary pre-packaged D-76 equivalent. Interesting because Photographer's Formulary was a smaller company catering to those who preferred to mix their own photo chemistry from the component chemicals or those interested in experimenting with antique photo processes. They may do well in the future as all silver based photo processes become "antique". I have no doubt that there will be people out there who will not only be mixing their own photo chemistry from scratch but will be making their own film and paper as well...somewhere out there is the photo equivalent of the NRA's Charlton Heston who will say, "You will get my Leica away from me when you pry it from my cold, dead fingers."
And while the eminently collectible Leicas seem to be maintaining their value, a quick search of ebay will find lots and lots of really good photographic equipment going for the proverbial song. If you're one of those folks who shot 35mm and longed to move up to medium format, get thee to ebay....all of those old medium format "tanks" are pretty damn affordable these days. Of course, your equipment has probably depreciated dramatically so any "trade in value" you thought you might have had is shot. Looks like the smart people were the ones who leased those multi-thousand dollar system then turned them in at the end of the lease period and started a new lease on the current state-of-the-art digital stuff. As much as you or I love to have that well tuned, mechanical object that accompanies us on our photographic adventures and always comes through for us, remember that there ARE people out there who don't really give a rat's ass about the equipment and just look at it as a means to make money...it's a pretty romantic notion to feel attached to your cameras and feel like they have individual personalities but I readily admit that I do it...hell, I sometimes find myself talking to the bloody things as if they were people.
The cold, hard reality that we have to face is that the vast majority of photographs, from commercial work to family snapshots, end up on a computer screen. Think about it....had any prints made lately? And if you did, were they printed with chemical processes or on the latest zippity-doo-dah inkjet printer? I recently spoke with someone who expressed the opinion that there was nothing like a good silver gelatin print. I agreed but pointed out that unless it was going to an exhibition or into a serious private collection or a museum, the chances that any image was going to get the deluxe darkroom print treatment were slim to none. The individual I was speaking to was really aghast that I would point that out because it was just so obvious that anything other than a silver gelatin print was crap. Considering that this fella was working behind the darkroom supplies counter at the camera store, I found myself once again agreeing with H.L. Mencken's warning that "There is no point in arguing with someone who's paycheck depends on not being convinced."
But we're still shooting film...how odd. And we're still acquiring old cameras and getting them put in working order...even though we can "instagram" any digital photo so that it looks like it was shot with an old camera. Maybe it's like painting. You can use acrylic colors and pretty much not have to worry about drying times and other technical considerations....or you can paint in oils which demand a lot of knowledge about oils and pigments and preparation of supports and sometimes take weeks to dry between painting sessions. Maybe the discipline is more important than convenience. Maybe the digital is just too damn easy for some of us.
Monday, January 28, 2013
The Angle Of Incidence Equals The Angle Of Reflection.
How many of you were paying attention in High School Physics? I admit that I had a pretty bad instructor...the space program was in full swing, room sized computers held hope for the future and the world was finding practical uses for a new invention called "the Laser" but this guy was still teaching us about pulleys and the St. Louis Electric Motor....hardly cutting edge technology. I was bored but my ears and my subconscious memory were still engaged and I filed everything away for future reference. Good thing I did.
I didn't start out wanting to work in photography. I had some luck in the theatre while in high school and that looked like a good course to follow through university so I "went with my gut". Several of my friends went off in the direction of studying architecture and design and ended up getting involved in photography. Eventually one of them ended up majoring in photography and I ended up drifting away from the theatre and toward film making....that seemed more of a "total" art form at the time...it was also very, very hip to be in film making.
While Chicago had a pretty good bit of commercial and documentary film work going on, it soon became clear that it wasn't Los Angeles or New York. Jobs were few and far between and I don't even want to start talking about the difficulties and expense of getting established in any of the necessary unions. Things being what they were, I ended up working for a small studio that made late-night car dealer commercials and a photo studio that did commercial catalog photography. I basically knew how to set up lights, meter, focus and get an exposure so those qualities and my willingness to work for minimum wage got me the job at the catalog studio.
Another buddy of mine from the theatre department in college eventually put his acting skills to a profitable use: he opened a photo studio specializing in portraiture. He was doing pretty well but he always wanted to expand into food and product photography so he asked me if I could come over from time to time and give him a hand with the "non-people" stuff.
After spending years doing the bush league stuff, this was more like a shot at the big time....actual REAL LIVE art directors from REAL ad agencies on set....real models....stuff that was headed for national ads instead of page 231 of the Service Merchandise catalog. This was cool and the sort of thing that a photographer really aspires to. Even if I was technically an assistant, I was finally getting to use the sum of the knowledge that I had acquired over the years.
So one day, we're all mulling over how to place a light so that the highlight it would produce would let the product on set just jump off the page. Everybody had an opinion....nothing seemed to do the job. I very casually said, "Well, the angle of incidence equals the angle of reflection." Everybody stopped. Dead silence. The head art director looked at me and said, "I've been doing this for years and I've never heard that. That is one of the most profound things I've ever heard. Is that Physics?" "Yeah, it's Physics." I said, "I studied optics when I was in school." I didn't want to say "in HIGH school" because I didn't want to make the guy fell like this stuff was SO elementary that I was amazed that a grown man with a prestigious and high paying job didn't know it.
My status suddenly jumped from lowly assistant to resident physics guru. Suddenly instead of me getting them a cup of coffee, they were getting ME a cup of coffee. Sadly, though, all I could think of was how unbelievable it was that out of a whole room full of people, I was the only one who knew this and I wasn't even really paying attention back in high school when that nattering old guy ran it past me the first time.
So photography, besides being an Art, is a discipline and a science. When we were all working in silver based imaging, those of us who knew the Physics and the Chemistry were a class apart. Sure you could just load a camera, shoot with auto exposure and send it to the lab....but those of us with the TRUE knowledge, the ARCANE knowledge....we were the Illuminati. WE knew how to make the photons and the atoms dance to OUR tune. I once worked with a fella who jokingly referred to me as "The Photo God"...I took it as a compliment. Now we work in digital...do we understand the Physics of that process as well as we did in the Silver Age? Sorta....but those of us who were members of the Illuminati now see where techniques and materials from both schools of photography can be used to optimize the final result.
So were ya' payin' attention back there while you were sitting there in Physics class? Chemistry class? There's another aspect to the expression "The Angle Of Incidence Equals The Angle Of Reflection", ya' know...where your art is concerned it means that what you put into it is what you get out of it.
I didn't start out wanting to work in photography. I had some luck in the theatre while in high school and that looked like a good course to follow through university so I "went with my gut". Several of my friends went off in the direction of studying architecture and design and ended up getting involved in photography. Eventually one of them ended up majoring in photography and I ended up drifting away from the theatre and toward film making....that seemed more of a "total" art form at the time...it was also very, very hip to be in film making.
While Chicago had a pretty good bit of commercial and documentary film work going on, it soon became clear that it wasn't Los Angeles or New York. Jobs were few and far between and I don't even want to start talking about the difficulties and expense of getting established in any of the necessary unions. Things being what they were, I ended up working for a small studio that made late-night car dealer commercials and a photo studio that did commercial catalog photography. I basically knew how to set up lights, meter, focus and get an exposure so those qualities and my willingness to work for minimum wage got me the job at the catalog studio.
Another buddy of mine from the theatre department in college eventually put his acting skills to a profitable use: he opened a photo studio specializing in portraiture. He was doing pretty well but he always wanted to expand into food and product photography so he asked me if I could come over from time to time and give him a hand with the "non-people" stuff.
After spending years doing the bush league stuff, this was more like a shot at the big time....actual REAL LIVE art directors from REAL ad agencies on set....real models....stuff that was headed for national ads instead of page 231 of the Service Merchandise catalog. This was cool and the sort of thing that a photographer really aspires to. Even if I was technically an assistant, I was finally getting to use the sum of the knowledge that I had acquired over the years.
So one day, we're all mulling over how to place a light so that the highlight it would produce would let the product on set just jump off the page. Everybody had an opinion....nothing seemed to do the job. I very casually said, "Well, the angle of incidence equals the angle of reflection." Everybody stopped. Dead silence. The head art director looked at me and said, "I've been doing this for years and I've never heard that. That is one of the most profound things I've ever heard. Is that Physics?" "Yeah, it's Physics." I said, "I studied optics when I was in school." I didn't want to say "in HIGH school" because I didn't want to make the guy fell like this stuff was SO elementary that I was amazed that a grown man with a prestigious and high paying job didn't know it.
My status suddenly jumped from lowly assistant to resident physics guru. Suddenly instead of me getting them a cup of coffee, they were getting ME a cup of coffee. Sadly, though, all I could think of was how unbelievable it was that out of a whole room full of people, I was the only one who knew this and I wasn't even really paying attention back in high school when that nattering old guy ran it past me the first time.
So photography, besides being an Art, is a discipline and a science. When we were all working in silver based imaging, those of us who knew the Physics and the Chemistry were a class apart. Sure you could just load a camera, shoot with auto exposure and send it to the lab....but those of us with the TRUE knowledge, the ARCANE knowledge....we were the Illuminati. WE knew how to make the photons and the atoms dance to OUR tune. I once worked with a fella who jokingly referred to me as "The Photo God"...I took it as a compliment. Now we work in digital...do we understand the Physics of that process as well as we did in the Silver Age? Sorta....but those of us who were members of the Illuminati now see where techniques and materials from both schools of photography can be used to optimize the final result.
So were ya' payin' attention back there while you were sitting there in Physics class? Chemistry class? There's another aspect to the expression "The Angle Of Incidence Equals The Angle Of Reflection", ya' know...where your art is concerned it means that what you put into it is what you get out of it.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)