Shutterfinger

My Perfect Camera

Before the advent of digital photography and before I needed a few more pro features, the Pentax ME was pretty close to my "perfect" camera. The Pentax MX, which had manual shutter speeds rather than full automation would have been even better. Even today I would find a digital equivalent hard to resist.

Every photographer has a different idea of what constitutes their “perfect” camera. Here’s mine, with the features listed in no particular order:

1. It weighs no more than a pound (a half-kilo) without lens.
2. It fits comfortably in my hands, with no more or less gripping area than necessary.
3. Every essential control is right where I expect it to be and functions the way I expect it to.
4. The main controls have the same function no matter what mode I’m in.
5. It features a large, bright, TTL eye-level viewfinder that shows at least 98% of the full frame.
6. Menu-diving is kept to a minimum. Once the camera is set up the way I like I will rarely if ever have to open a menu.
7. It’s whisper-quiet, with virtually non-existent shutter delay or mirror-blackout.
8. Shutter and mirror-vibration are a non-issue.
9. Manual focusing is quick and accurate, should I decide to do so.
10. The exposure meter is consistent and predictable.
11. The rear display (assuming it’s a digital camera) has high pixel resolution and has no obvious color shift.
12. The flash-sync speed is at least 1/125 second.
13. The lenses are small yet fast, sharp, and durable. It can even have a fixed lens if it meets these specifications.
14. Low light performance is respectable up to ISO 1600.

That’s about it. I don’t want video. If I did I'd buy a video camera. I don’t care about high frame rates because I seldom shoot sports. Even when I do, I go for peak moments of action rather than a sequence. I’m not interested in image stabilization, vibration reduction, or whatever because it adds complexity and frankly, because of past experience I don’t completely trust it. I'd rather take my chances with a fast aperture and a reasonably fast shutter speed, or better yet, a tripod.

I have yet to own a digital camera that meets all of these requirements. Every camera I’ve owned, however, has met most of them or I wouldn’t have owned it. For what it's worth, the camera I’m using the most at the moment is a Nikon D7000. I could be equally happy with a Pentax K-5 with the in-body SR off.

Please don’t write to tell me why I should trust IS or VR or to ask why I didn’t include some feature you find essential. This is, after all, my perfect camera. What’s yours and why? (For the sake of brevity you might want to simply add or subtract from my list rather than create an entirely new list of your own.)

I Want To Be Alone

Spontaneous yet purposefully composed photos like this are hard to get with having the luxury to move at your own pace while instantly reacting to what's going on around you. In other words, they're easier to pull off when you're working solo.

A recent article in the New York Times posited the idea that creative people are more productive working alone than in groups. I doubt this is true in every situation but I'm sure it's true for me when it comes to photography. I produce my best work when I'm either alone or working with a single subject.

This is mostly because I mainly do either street photography, family candids, events, or portraits; however, I wouldn't be enthusiastic about having company around even if I was shooting a still life or landscape. I feel the same about working with an assistant. I rarely need one. Even when I do, it's hard to find someone who knows how to avoid being a distraction to either me or my subject.

I need to be able to relax and concentrate on the task at hand, without worrying about having to listen to someone else, carry on a conversation, keep up with them, or force them to wait while I'm "working a scene." They don't understand why I'm taking so long, why I'm not paying attention to what they're saying, or where I disappeared to. Company also makes it hard to be unobtrusive, especially when your companion(s) don't feel any particular need to be unobtrusive themselves.

My impression is that most photographers feel this way. On the other hand, I've never asked, so that's what I'm doing now: Do you prefer to work alone? Are there situations where you are more productive working with one or more other people. If so, when, how, and why? It would be interesting to know whether I'm alone in this attitude or in the majority.

Four Tips for Great Portraits

You can tell I used a large softbox to light this by the highlights in her eyes. The reflector opposite the softbox is less obvious. I placed it just close enough to keep the keep the shadows open but not so close that I would lose the three-dimensionality of the lighting.

Even though the bulk of the photos I shoot these days are candids and street photography, I can shoot a professional quality portrait when the need arises. In the even that you get called upon to shoot one yourself--for a friend's LinkedIn page or website for example--or you'd simply like to improve your portrait skills, here are a few tips that should come in handy.

1. Think about the background first.

In a classic headshot your subject is in the foreground while the background is, well, somewhere in back. It's generally best to choose a background that has neutral color, tone, or pattern; one that won't visually merge with your subject, yet not so bright and colorful that it becomes a distraction. A pure white background can work as long as it's not so bright that it causes lens flare.

Also think about the distance between your subject and the background. The greater the separation between the subject and background the greater your ability to use depth-of-field to control how in focus the background will be. A telephoto lens and a wide aperture can do wonders to blur away a distracting background. Separation between the subject and background also allows you the option of lighting or shading the background separate from the subject and thereby prevent tonal mergers.

2. Start with one light, preferably large and close.

A common mistake portait beginners make is to overlight the subject. There are too many lights coming from too many different directions and most of them wrong. I find it's a lot easier to get the light right when you start with one light and then move either the light or the subject until the highlights and shadows look good to the eye. This obviously takes some judgement and the best position with vary with the subject. Generally speaking, you want the light off to one side or the other, otherwise the lighting will look flat and one-dimensional. You also want to raise it a bit, so there's a slight shadow under the nose.

The size of the light and how close it is to the subject will determine how soft and diffuse the light will appear. If I'm using a 42-inch diameter umbrella or a 48-inch wide softbox  I generally place it no further away than 36-inches from the subject. If I'm a large, north-facing window, I place the subject as close as possible without getting the window into the photo.

Here the light source is smaller and the shadows darker. There is still some light filling in the shadows though, as you can see from the detail in her black shirt. As with the first photo, the background was a simple roll of white backdrop paper, lit to reproduce as a shade brighter than her skin.

3. Fill in the shadows to taste.

If you use one light you will have one shadow area. How dark it is will depend on the general reflectivity of the room or the area you're in. If you're shooting digital you have the luxury of being able to tell right away just how dark the shadows appear in a photograph. If the shadows are too dark, place a large white reflector, such as a piece of foamcore or matteboard, opposite your light source. The closer and/or brighter the reflector, the lighter the shadows will be. If you're looking for darker shadows, try a sheet of black foamcore or matteboard.

4. Be relaxed and relax your subject.

Remember that you're dealing with a human being, not an inanimate object with no insecurities and limitless patience. The more attention you pay to making your subject feel relaxed and confident, the more these feelings will show in their expressions. Even the most beautiful and "perfect" lighting will be wasted if your subject looks tense, confused, apprehensive, or annoyed. So keep the mood light. A few compliments, a few jokes, a few clear directions ("Turn your face toward the light a bit. Ah! That's it. Perfect.") and frequent clicks of the shutter when everything falls into place will do wonders for their confidence and yours.

Dozens of photographers have written entire books on the subject of how to light and pose portraits, so there's obviously more to learn than just these four tips. Nevertheless, if I were to boil what I've learned down to just four tips, these would be them. The rest is just practice, experience, knowing what you're look for, and paying close attention to what you see happening in front of you. If any of you have anything of value to add, either advisory or precautionary, feel free to add a short comment. None of us, myself included, knows so much that we can't learn a thing or two.

Upgrade Update

Adobe has decided to modify its previously stated upgrade policy for its Creative Suite products, which includes, among other things, Photoshop. In December Adobe announced a policy that would basically require you to upgrade to Photoshop 5 or 5.5 to qualify for a discounted upgrade to Photoshop 6. This policy was, ahem, not well-received by Adobe's customers.

The new policy is a lot like the original policy: You still qualify for a discounted upgrade price if you own CS versions 3-5, at least until December 31, 2012. (What happens after that is anyone's guess.) The difference is that the upgrade pricing is tiered. The more recent the version of Creative Suite/Photoshop you own, the greater your discount. Feel free to click this link for more details.

Isn't it nice to know that even companies as big as Adobe listen to the voices of their customers--or should I say "howls of protest?"

Digital Overhead

Ask this dude in this classic 50s sedan if he'd like to "upgrade" to a shiny new Toyota, Honda, or VW. My guess is his answer would be no.

Is it just me, or is there something ironic about a business that so prominently advertised its ability to finance its customers purchases being so prominently out of business?

Photographers who got into the hobby at the blossoming of the digital age find it hard to understand the attraction that other photographers have for film cameras and darkroom equipment. Many digital photographers find this attraction quaint at best. Others think it’s downright reactionary. How can anyone in their right mind not take advantage of so much obvious speed, economy, convenience, versatility and quality? Is film really all that wonderful? Is it really worth all the hassle involved with processing and printing it?

There is no one right answer to that question. I would like to point out, however, that it’s not all peaches and cream in the land of digitalia. Although you can a lot of wonderful things with a digital camera, these wonders require a certain amount of overhead. The greater your ambitions, the higher this overhead will be.

Let’s start with the camera itself. For it to be of any use to you you’re also going to need a computer. And not just any computer: a computer with plenty of hard drive space for all those digital photos you’re going to be storing on it--and for the photo imaging software you’re going to buy. You might need more RAM too. There’s no such thing as too much RAM when you’re doing digital image processing. Oh, and that LCD monitor the retailer threw in a part of the package? You’re probably going to have to upgrade that to something that provides consistent color over a wider range of angles; something you can actually calibrate. You do have a monitor calibrator, don’t you?

Don’t feel too smug if you’ve already got a smokin’ computer loaded with all the latest and greatest software. The time will come when you’ll feel the need to upgrade. It may be because you bought a new camera that only works with the latest Raw converter that’s only available if you have the latest software running on the latest operating system. Or it could be because Adobe informs you that you now have to have the latest version of Photoshop before you can qualify for the upgrade price on the next version. And since the new version may be released sometime this year, you may have to upgrade twice in less than 12 months. (This is not hypothetical. It is actually Adobe’s new policy.)

Whatever the reason, you’ll upgrade to the latest and greatest operating system or digital imaging software, only to discover that some of your older drivers, profiles, plug-ins, and other miscellaneous bits and pieces no longer work in the new environment. Now you’ve got to upgrade them too; that is, if you can. Not all developers have the time and money to update applications they released years ago. They might not even be in business anymore. I’ve described these miseries in a previous post. So real is this phenomenon that hard-core digital photographers have been known to maintain separate computer systems for the sole purpose of keeping older yet fully-functional software and drivers running.

Contrast this to what life is like if you’re the average film shooter. Forced upgrades are the furthest thing from your mind. Whatever camera you have is already “obsolete” and therefore not a candidate for an upgrade. In fact, if it’s something like a Leica MP, a Nikon F6, or a Hasselblad 503CX it’s pretty much as good as it gets.

The introduction of new film cameras and lenses is unlikely at best. If a manufacturer introduces a new film (admittedly rare these days), you can use it in any camera that accepts whatever size it’s available in. Access to ready sources of film processing is downgrading, if anything, yet if you already have a darkroom up and running then processing and printing is no more difficult than before. Depending on your preference you can practically eliminate computers from your workflow or use them only when you want to display photos on the web. And believe it or not, some people still prefer the results they get with film to digital.

Please understand that I’m not trying to resuscitate the now tired film vs. digital argument. Digital has clearly “won” and I myself have no plans to give up any of my digital cameras and switch entirely back to film. I’m just saying we should all keep in mind that the digital overhead can be heavy at times. Those who opt out of paying it may be more sane—and having more fun—than you think.

My Apologies to Recent Commenters

I have no better reason for attaching this photo than I like it and thought you might too.

It occurred to me this morning that I hadn't been receiving any comments on my most recent posts. At first I assumed it was because of the holidays. There was a lot going on and we all had more pressing matters to attend to. Even if it hadn't been the holidays, it's not as if you have to comment, especially on so few posts.

Still, after almost three weeks of listening to the crickets chirp (metaphorically, of course), I decided to open the Comments screen in Typepad, just to check. Lo and behold, there was a backlog of at least a dozen comments, many from my most faithful and esteemed readers. (Yes, I know who you are.)

How did this happen? Apparently, whatever piece of code Typepad uses to send me e-mail alerts to new comments broke. I hadn't been receiving an e-mail alerts so assumed I wasn't getting any comments. I was wrong. I have approved all previously unposted comments and from now on I will check the Comments screen daily, e-mail notifications or not.

So if you've been wondering why your comments never appeared, now you know why. I'm an idiot. But at least now I'm in recovery.

Opposite Ways of Composing

This is a photograph of my youngest son Clay, snapped this summer, just as he finished the last of a cup of lemonade. The limited depth-of-field, tonal range and color palette all contribute the visual economy of this particular composition.

I've been browsing and sorting through a lot of my photos lately. One of the things I've noticed as a result of doing this is that I favor simple, elegant, minimalist compositions. I like to direct the viewer's attention to what I think are the most import elements and visually minimize or crop out everything else.

Here's another example. If I were to get anal about minimalism I could use Photoshop to clone out the clouds at the upper right and apply a layer to turn the area in shadow completely black. But as I said, this is just an example. No need to go overboard. Whoever painted this old Mercury already took care of that.

 

And now for something completely different. There's a lot more going on here. In fact, a few seconds after I shot this photo another photographer and two dozen more people entered the foreground area at the left. The boy and girl at the right kept holding hands.

Not all of my photographs look this way, of course. I occasionally take the opposite approach: I shoot a scene where there's a lot going on and invite you to take it all in at your leisure. Of the two approaches, I find the latter the hardest to pull off successfully. When there's a lot going on at once you can't afford to concentrate on any particular thing; you simply have to sense when the moment is right, release the shutter, and hope for the best. There's not a lot of time to do it, either. Your window of opportunity might literally be the interval between when your shutter opens and closes.

That's how it works for me, anyway. If this is your normal way of composing then you may find the minimalist approach more challenging. If your compositions usually fall somewhere in-between, neither here nor there, that's okay too--however, you might want to try one extreme or the other from time to time. It's a good visual exercise. You might also find it reassuring to know that you can alter your style, even if you choose not to.

If you decide to give it a try, here's a technical tip: It's generally easier to go the minimalist route when you're shooting with a medium-to-long focal length lens. Wide-angle lenses take in a lot more and therefore lend themselves to images that feature panoramic activity. That said, there are always exceptions--and the exceptions only add to the fun and challenge.

Not Dead, Just Hibernating

If you've been wondering why I haven't posted anything lately it's because I've been swept up by the need to finish and bill the projects I actually get paid for and the desire to spend the remaining days between Christmas and New Year's day with family and friends. It wouldn't surprise me if most of you are doing the same, in which case you've barely noticed my absence. That's okay. In fact, I hope you've got a lot more important things to pay attention to than me during the holidays.

This is not to say I haven't had photographic matters on my mind, though. The one thing I've been thinking the most about is my desire to simplify and optimize how I practice photography. I plan to spend less time screwing around with equipment and software and more time producing and selling books and photographs.

I also plan to spend more time writing about the things that have helped improve my photography and that I think will do the same for yours. Here's a hint: They're all free and yet they all require an investment.

In the meantime, thanks for sticking with me during 2011 or for deciding to become a regular visitor. Here's wishing you open eyes, an open heart, and the ability to recognize a miracle when you see one.

My Favorite Fotos of 2011 (So Far)

I didn't agonize over this. I simply went through my Lightroom catalog month by month and selected the photos that jumped out at me for one reason or another. The result is the 30 photos I uploaded to my Zenfolio online gallery. Feel free to click the link and visit.

I chose these photos mostly because they stood out on their own or because they contributed to a visual theme.I've developed a fairly consistent style over the years, so the visual theme part wasn't difficult. The pictures that look good on their own are more a problem because they don't necessarily "play well with others."

But as I said, I didn't agonize over this. If you're planning to put together a similar collection I hope you won't either. None of this is cast in stone, especially if your photos are displayed on the web. You can add and subtract as you see fit. You can respond to viewer critiques or ignore them entirely.

The one thing that strikes me and this and previous years' bests is how little gear I need. A decent camera and a wide or normal prime is all it takes. Add good light, a good location, and plenty of time to wander around and I'm good to go.

As for next year, I'm not big on resolutions. Spontaneity, improvisation, and inspiration motivate me far more than My Plan for the Year. I do feel inspired to print and sell more of my work though.

How about you? Was 2011 photographically satisfying, frustrating, or both? Do you have any particular plans for 2012 that involve photography? Note: By "photography" I mean the act of producing photographs, not buying more equipment. I'm not saying there's anything wrong with buying equipment, especially if you use the one link on this site (heh, heh...); I'm only saying it's not the same as producing photographs.

Here's the Deal(s)

I've been trying not to get to caught up in the holiday gift buying frenzy. These are tough times. A lot of people are having a tough time buying groceries and paying rent, much less buying a new camera or zoom lens. That's why I've been generally unresponsive to the steady flow of notices from various online retailers who would like me to refer my readers (that would be you) to their shops for your Christmas purchases.

The referrals would be through my posting links. Even though I would get a small percentage of any resulting click-throughs and sales, I haven't posted any of these offers because, quite frankly, I'd rather spend my leisure time on leisure rather than posting new links every few days in an effort to make a couple of bucks with affiliate sales.

Then again, what do I know? I could be doing you a great favor by providing a link to where you can find the latest photo equipment bargains. I could also be doing myself a favor. Maybe I could earn enough in commissions to buy a few more bags of groceries for the homeless shelter. So with no further preliminaries, here is a link to B&H Photo's "deals" page. When you click through you'll see a list of discounted goodies, from tripods to lenses and cameras. If you buy anything as a result of the click-through, you contribute a few bucks to the cause.

If you prefer, instead of buying something you could simply pretend I'm a Salvation Army volunteer standing in front of B&H Photo, holding a bucket and ringing a bell. Drop something into my bucket (tip jar) and I'll reward you with a hearty "Ho, ho, hoooo!"

In all seriousness, the greatest gift you could give me would be your continued readership and the supportive comments you contribute from time to time. Spread the word and keep coming back. It means a lot more to me than you might think.