I’ve been reading Lev Grossman’s blog about all things nerdy over at Time Magazine. Here’s how he started his entry a few days ago:

“See, I’m running with this new top 5 format. It’s for days when I’m having trouble finding a blogworthy item, so instead you get five items that aren’t blogworthy. Let’s go!”

Now personally I think every thing we put forth is, ummm, well, okay – maybe he has a point. Let’s go!

1. You spend a lot of money on a lens, you have a realistic expectation that it’s gonna focus spot on. Indeed you do. And yet it’s possible you’ll have a small – even tiny – problem with front-focus or back-focus. And what are those two things? It’s relatively simple actually. Front-focus just refers to your focus point being slightly in front (closer to camera) of your intended focus point and back-focus – well yeah – slightly behind your intended focus point. You focus on an object that’s exactly five feet away. With front-focus issues your camera/lens will focus, for example, at 4′-11 3/4″. With back-focus – say 5′-0 1/4″. That might not always matter when you’re shooting at f/8 or higher, but if you’re shooting at f/1.4 then it can be a  royal pain in the patooty. There’s good news on a couple fronts here. First off, you can buy a system to test how accurate your focus is and whether you are front- or back-focusing. Secondly, with most new digital SLRs, you can actually compensate for that slight misadjustment in camera. And not only that, but your camera will know which lens is attached and adjust accordingly when you put that lens on. So if you think you’ve got a small focus problem – then check out this article over at Canon’s Digital Photo Pro eNews on Precision Focus. I then strongly encourage my friends at the Peoria Camera Club to break out the checkbook and buy a LensAlign system which they can rent to members for a very reasonable fee.
2. Ever been flummoxed (yes flummoxed) by all the gobbledy-gook associated with lens terminology? Aberration, Aspherical Elements, Dispersion, Stabilization, blah, blah, blah. Does it mean anything to you? Well it does if you want really sharp images. Since I was spending more then a few minutes reading a Canon publication the other day – I though I would also pass on this nice primer on Lens Tech. It’s written very down to earth and it tells you a lot about the things in a lens that can steal sharpness like a dingo steals a baby. Enjoy that mental picture.
3. And when you’re done reading the Lens Tech article you will have a slightly better understanding of the two kinds of aberration: spherical and chromatic. I’ve got a whole article planned on those two lovlies but one thing you may have encountered is PURPLE FRINGING – a sure sign of chromatic aberration. Check out this short Wikipedia article on purple fringing to see if you’ve ever encountered it and then stay tuned. We’ll talk about all the fringes – like red/cyan and blue/yellow fringing – when it happens and how to fix it – in a separate post. And I had a classic case of fringe to deal with in this shot above because of how I put this image together. Problem resolved but watch shooting really wide open, watch your overexposed highlights, and if you don’t shoot with a haze or strong UV filter – well now may be the time.
4. Speaking of embarassing photographic moments, I had a 40-minute long exposure mistake on my recent trip. We’ll save the evidence and laughs for a whole separate post (again!) on long exposures that’s coming up but consider this: what if – instead of taking one 40-minute exposure you could take 40-one minute exposures and get the same results? If you already know of which I speak then you might really be interested in Image Stacker. If you are momentarily befuddled – come back shortly and we’ll give you the 411 on long exposures – and what not to do with your hat (oooooh foreshadowing).
5. And as one last preview for an upcoming article on slide shows and multimedia presentations of your photography – I point you towards this Strictly Business Blog article on Prepping Images for Multimedia and Video. And if you don’t know the Strictly Business blog from the ASMP – it’s a great source of ideas and resources for folks in the photo biz (and just mouse over the ASMP link to see what it stands for).

Alright – there’s the top five for today. All mediocre great stuff to say the least.

I’m not sure what photo blog I first read it on, but was reminded this morning when scanning John Harrington’s  Photo Business News & Forum about the dangers of websites like Flickr.

Danger you say? Flickr? How is Flickr dangerous???

The danger of Flickr or for that matter any website where you might upload images for public viewing is the danger of those images being stolen or used without your permission.

The short version of Harrington’s post is that recently, a freelance journalist, wrote an article for the venerable New York Times and pointed out that she goes to Flickr and if she likes an image and it’s downloadable in size she can use she will print it and hang it in her home. In her mind she could do that with any image (not just Flickr) because she basically wasn’t making any money on it and was just using it for her own personal use. She goes on to say that everyone should do the same thing. Basically she was advocating the potential violation of copyright or at least the Creative Commons Licenses found on Flickr.

Harrington follows up with a post on Sunday where the New York Times responds to questions about how they could condone one of their writers, albeit a freelancer, suggesting copyright infringement. Read the article to see how the Times wiggles through all of this.

Well you have to like this turnaround. Eight days ago I shot this image of Bowman Lake in Glacier National Park – as we watched a summer thunderstorm pass over the other end of the lake. And wham! Here it is – just for youse guys – in all of it’s July 2009 Desktop Calendar goodness. Enjoy it as much as I did – in one of five designer sizes:

800 x 600

1024 x 768

1200 x 800

1280 x 1024

1680 x 1050

Photographer James Nachtwey, photographed by Яков, Creative Commons licensed

I just finished watching Christian Frei’s 2001 documentary “War Photographer” about James Nachtwey. And while I was late to the party by a few years, the film has held up so remarkably well. It was – in a word – superb.

Nachtwey came to war photography in the 1980s and is more or less considered the guy when it comes to documenting the human condition in less then ideal situations. The documentary provides some very interesting views of a man at work – consumed by the importance of it – in Kosovo, South Africa, Jakarta, Palestine, and Indonesia. It’s riveting stuff – and his images – beyond the pale. They hit you with a force that will knock you off your feet.

Part of Frei’s approach to the documentary was to have Nachtwey attach a micro video-camera to his own Canons – so you can see from the camera’s point-of-view quite a bit. It really transports you to the chaos. It also cleverly lets you see that Nachtwey loves to shoot at 1/250th of a second an awful lot (although I’m sure that’s not always the case) – and always in manual. Being 2001 you also get a dose of Kodak Tri-X film and Canon motor drives, but mostly you just get the amazing story of the man who wants to – no has to – make a difference. And you get the story of how photography can change the world. I was most astounded by Nachtwey’s compositional elements. Things I would never think of. He definitely challenges the watcher and is a man on top of his game.

How does Nachtwey do it? Listen to the man himself:

“The worst thing is to feel that as a photographer I’m benefiting from someone else’s tragedy. This idea haunts me. It’s something I have to reckon with every day because I know that if I ever allow genuine compassion to be overtaken by personal ambition, I will have sold my soul.

The only way I can justify my role is to have respect for the other person’s prediciment. The extent to which I do that is the extent to which I become accepted by the other and to that extent I can accept myself.

“The worst thing is to feel that as a photographer I’m benefiting from someone else’s tragedy. This idea haunts me. It’s something I have to reckon with every day because I know that if I ever allow genuine compassion to be overtaken by personal ambition, I will have sold my soul. The only way I can justify my role is to have respect for the other person’s predicament. The extent to which I do that is the extent to which I become accepted by the other and to that extent I can accept myself.”

Just wow to the movie. Netflix will have their local copy back on Tuesday. Get crackin’. If you want to fill the time until the movie shows up, just click on the Nachtwey link above and start exploring the images.

Note: Genuine appreciation to photographer Яков, who photoblogs here, for the Creative Commons attribution-licensed photo of James Nachtwey, taken in September 2007 in Amsterdam.

Hitting the road for a couple weeks has a few consquences, one of which is the amazing backlog of photoblog entries you can rack up while gone. Another is you might get to see visions like Lake Josephine up in Glacier National Park. That’s not the consequence. Leaving such a place is definitely the downside. As for the backlog – I’m most of the way through it – I’ve been working hard on a Saturday.

Yep. Most.

Anyway – time for still another Linkapalooza…

Future friend of the blog (someone please let him know, eh?) Joe McNally has totally revamped his website and blog. That’s great and all – and you can see some really top notch stuff over there but I was even more pleased when I got my July copy of National Geographic and saw Joe had shot the article on telescopes. Beautiful stuff for a guy who thinks he can’t shoot landscapes…

Another NatGeo shooter who is still blogging up a storm, Steve McCurry, has a poignant essay on AIDS in Vietnam. The essay is thoughtful and haunting; a wonderful online presentation involving stills, video, and sound. We’re going to be exploring online slideshows and presentations in the next few weeks here on the blog FYI – but I’ll leave you with one more McCurry thought. Kodak announced this past week that they’re ending production of their awesomely famous Kodachrome slide film. It’s been all over the Internet this week – with the mandatory references to Paul Simon’s “Mama Don’t Take My Kodachrome Away” – but the cool thing is Kodak has asked McCurry to shoot the last roll off the production line. What a freakn’ honor. Interestingly – if you have a few spare rolls of Kodachrome laying around – don’t linger. Apparently there is only one lab left in the US that processes  Kodachrome – and they’re only onboard through 2010. So you can shoot what you want – but don’t delay on the processing (follow the link to get the lab info).

So Farrah Fawcett passed away a few days ago. As a 46-year old man (shhhh!) now, I was amongst the legions (in the millions) of teenaged boys in the 1970s who had THAT poster. Photographer Bruce McBroom talks about shooting that iconic image of Farrah (with said iconic image included).

I can’t seem to leave things alone – and I think I’m kinda preaching to the choir now – but I was hopped up when I saw Bruce Percy’s own diatribe about how Photoshop is a tool and that Photoshopping an image is not a crime (or even a bad thing). I of course couldn’t agree more. And if you check out the article, there’s a great video on Ansel Adams’ work in the wet darkroom that’s all about using tools. Let’s keep the ball rolling on another topic near and dear to my heart – the professional/non-professional debate. David duChemin nicely encompasses my thoughts – with his thoughts.

The Luminous Landscape blog has two good articles for perusing. First esteemed landscape shooter William Neill talks about Landscape Photography and Black and White. Well worth the read. And then Irish shooter Peter Cox gives some good visuals on Shooting with Gradiated Neutral Density filters.

Digital Photography School has a slick article nee video on shooting living movie posters. The main culprit – the Red One camera.

Wedding shooter Jasmine Star has a straightforward article on How to Build a Photo Portfolio for people shoots. She is a magical shooter for one so young and a real testament for following your heart and really doing the work.

Alright – those are the highlights of the last few weeks. I’ve still got a few things to read but that should hold you until … I read them. Have a great week ahead.

Well well… I have survived my trip to the wilderness and I am back. I would ask if you missed me – but you had the encouraging words of Tim, Lily, Stacy, Lynn, and Mike to soothe you while I was gone so I’m guessing you were fine. Sorry ’bout all the humidity though – man I didn’t miss that. While the main goal of my trip was to shoot in Glacier National Park in northwestern Montana for a number of days, we did manage to get around: 5,188 miles and 10 states later – we saw some wonderful sights. And frankly I’m exhausted – I need a nap. But not before I at least say hello and do a little housekeeping.

First of all – thank you again to my fine cast of guest bloggers who totally kicked butt in my absence. I really appreciate you guys. A lot of passionate photographers on a lot of topics so kudos to y’all.

Secondly, you’ll see two changes to the blog today. I’m throwing out my self-imposed rule that all photos on the blog have to be local photos. I guess as long as they’ve been taken within 20,000 miles of Peoria they will suffice – that should cover the world. I’m further changing up the photos on this photoblog by making them about four times larger then they’ve been in the past. It is, afterall, a PHOTO blog – we should make it easier to see what we’re looking at. So instead of 240 pixels on the longest side, we’re going with your basic 500 pixel-width and seeing how that flies.

The eagle above was found up in Polebridge, MT one week ago. Glacier National Park had some extensive fires in 2003 – burning nearly 150,000 acres and there are huge swathes of land that are now wide open – significantly changing the vistas for not only photographers – but also some of the “natives”. This guy was very patient with us. He was about 60 feet up a large mostly burned out tree – and he let me get the tripod set-up and go to work. I kept manually focusing one tiny bit at a time to really dial in the sharpness. My 18-200 lens did pretty well considering, although I would have loved to have a little more glass – I had to crop into this significantly – so getting the focus perfect was paramount.

Anyhoo (as they say) – I’m back in the land of humidity and will get back to work just as soon as I read the nearly 600 other photoblog entries I’m behind on. July it is!

(Note: You guys met Lily aka LolaTakesPictures a few days ago with her first guest blog on the CIPB. But she’s an overachiever so she’s back for more. And she still does her thing at the Peoria in Pictures blog)

“I have discovered photography. Now I can kill myself. I have nothing else to learn (except maybe lighting).” Original quote by Pablo Picasso (embellished a little by me).

I’m guilty. I admit it. I have stacks and stacks of photos stored somewhere in my basement of people with eyes so red they look like spawns of Satan. I have even more photos of people with shadows so dark against the wall behind them they look like some featureless Gumbi. Unflattering light, all of it! That’s because my camera was always set to automatic and that pop up flash would hit my subjects with a light so powerful it could have been used in a police interrogation. So when the Peoria Art Guild offered a class on how to light with small flashes, I signed up. It was time to wean myself from the pop-up flash and start getting creative.

But there are pros and cons to taking an interactive, fun lighting class (that Dave teaches, by the way), like:

Pro #1 – you’ll definitely take more flattering photos of Aunt Meg on her 81st birthday and everyone will compliment them and even offer to buy some from you…BUT…

Con #1 – you’ll learn so much that you’ll become your own worst enemy. You’ll go down to the basement to look through that box of old pictures you took before you knew what you were doing and want to throw nearly all of them away.

Pro #2 – the more familiar you become with your flash the more you’ll want to use it…BUT…

Con #2 – the more familiar you become with your flash the more you’ll want to use it…to light everything! You’ll look at a scene and think, “Man, if I had another flash I could make that sucker really pop!”. That’s great unless you’re trying to light the side of a mountain or the propellers on a 100 foot tall windmill at night.

Pro #3 – the more you use your flash, the more comfortable you’ll feel using your flash, which is a great thing. Until you realize you don’t have enough accessories, which brings us to…

Con #3 – the more stuff you’ll want to buy for your flash. I already owned one flash for my camera when I started the class. When it was over six weeks later, I owned two, some gels, a Paul C. Bluff Cybersync transmitter and receiver, some light stands, a couple of umbrellas, and a foam core board. Eventually I’ll own a set of tri-grip diffusers and maybe even some Alien Bees, in hot pink, too.

But seriously, if you’ve ever been even slightly interested (but terrified/mystified) of using your flash unit, I recommend taking a hands-on class such as the one the PAG offers. Not only did I become more confident of using my flash off the camera, I’ve also become more aware of how I look at my subjects overall. “Could it use a little more light there?” “What would happen if I pop the flash from this angle?” My pictures have gone from having startled, red-eyed people in them to having people who look more natural and relaxed.

If you can’t take the class but want to get started, check out “The Hot Shoe Diaries” by Joe McNally or the Lighting 101 section at the Strobist site . All I can tell you is if I can do it, so can you.

(Editor’s Note: If you want to take the summer version of the Art Guild’s Lighting class – which runs four weeks – with a bonus week TBD – contact Education Coordinator Erin Robert at the Art Guild to sign up. The class starts July 8. Our apologies if its already full. We’ll be back in the fall.)

(Note: We’ve asked Stacy Hanna – our favorite Visionary extraordinare – to come back and give us her wisdom once again.)

 

 

Last time, I wrote about vision and what it means to find your vision and starting that journey of shooting what you love.  It seemed to resonate with many of you and so I thought we should continue this adventure of self-exploration with a topic that not only follows vision, but is also delicately rolled into it.  Style.

Let’s assume for a moment that you found your vision for the sake of conversation.  It is okay if you haven’t or is something you’re constantly working on because defining a style may help guide your vision.

Let’s say you’re passionate about shooting landscapes.  To get the best light, you’ll get up so early that I may have just gone to bed.  You’ll tote your tripod into places that I’d rather use it as a self -defense weapon than a tripod. You’ve got more filters than lenses.  You’re that passionate.  But, what about your images makes them yours?  If you and the next Joe or Jane go to the same exact spot with the same light, then what about your image makes it look like yours and not theirs.  What is your style?

After having a little conversation with some other local shooters, I realized that many of us already have a style and we may not even know it.  Sure, it may be a work in progress.  It may not be the style that defines our entire body of work or the work that we will become best known for, but I am certain that right now there is something about your images that makes them look and feel like you.  I can think of several talented and passionate local shooters whose style is so well defined, that I can see an image and know beyond a doubt that shot is theirs.  This is what we are all aiming for.  Style that is so clearly defined that the work truly speaks for itself and it calls our name loudly.

Take a moment and think about what makes your work unique.  It may or may not be what you are shooting.  There are so many images in the world and mostly seemingly every subject has already been shot or thought of.  If what you’re shooting isn’t necessarily unique, than what part of your work is?  That is your style; the techniques that you use to create your art are what create the look and feel that is you.  Remember, this isn’t just about taking pictures.  It is about making them.  It is about creating art, your art, regardless of what the subject matter is.

Dave Vernon shared a nice thought on here about using Photoshop that I completely agree with.  Your choice to use or not use Photoshop (or any other editing software for that matter) is part of your style.  It is a tool to the end result or final look.  Maybe you always bracket your shots, maybe you create HDR images, maybe you always shoot black and white, maybe you only use film, maybe you only use flash, or deeply saturate your color or just one color (we don’t call it “Kevin May Blue” for nothing).

The tools that you choose to use or not use consistently start to create a specific look and feel to your work.  No one has exactly the same workflow.  There are probably some standard motions that we go through similarly, but everyone would probably tweak the same exact image in just a slightly different way.  We each want to create an image that is aesthetically pleasing to us.  The key here is consistency though.  It is looking at your own workflow and seeing what tools you use over and over as well as using consistent camera techniques when shooting.  The more consistent of a shooter and editor of our own work we are, the more clearly defined style we will have.

After all, we want someone to hire us because we create a certain look they want to buy or we want someone to buy our art because it is look they want to hang on the wall.  Clients will ask what your style is, so it is important to identify what yours is so that you can clearly explain it and sell yourself.  Part of being on the journey to becoming a better photographer is defining our style as we grow and knowing what that style is.

I’m still developing my own style.   I’m continuing to shoot couples and weddings and I’m noticing that I use natural light as a part of my current style and I look for inspiration and technique from photographers who use natural light very well as a part of their style.  I look to Jasmine Star and Jessica Claire as wedding photographers for inspiration.  I find that having a goal to emulate a style will help me learn ways to deviate to make it my own.  I’m also wanting to add the use flash lighting into my work, so I’m looking at people who use flash lighting well and maybe someday that will become a part of my style or maybe it won’t.  I want my work to look different than the next local wedding shooter, either in my posing or lack of, or use of lighting, or something that make people want to hire me and not the next guy.  It is good to have goals though.  I know I want my work to look clean and crisp.  I want vibrant colors.  I want to tell stories.  I have a long way to go, but it is okay because I love learning and love the journey of self-discovery, even when it is frustrating.

I can’t say what will work for you because this is about self-exploration.  Shoot what you love and then edit the look you love as well.  Don’t worry about what others think about it.  Create art that you love.  That art you want to hang on your own wall.  Don’t shoot and edit to please others.  If you show the work that you want to create, then people will hire you because they like that look as well.  Usually as photographers, we are our own worst critics.  This can be good though if it means we keep ourselves in check so that we don’t start trying to please the masses.  If we did that, we’d all go shoot portraits at the mall.  Let’s leave that task to the people who are passionate about that.  Be you and remember there is no right or wrong.  That is why we love photography, right?

If you want some examples of work that speaks loudly for itself and has a clearly defined style, I suggest you check out these photographers.  (Note: I noticed that I chose photographers whose style involve the use of great light or manipulation of light – so I guess that speaks to me.) If you want to keep reading about finding your own style, then check out Luminous Landscape. They have a great article on the how-to and say it even better then me.

• Dave Hill (commercial shooter)
• Ansel Adams (landscape)
• Cliff Mautner (wedding)
• Jill Greenberg (commercial)
• Drew Gardner (commercial)
• Galen Rowell (landscape)
• Moose Peterson (wildlife and landscape)
• Joe McNally (everything)

(And check out Stacy’s previous post on Vision.)

(Note: Today’s guest blogger, Michael Vujovich aka vujiphotos, is a freelance photographer/rebel who specializes in portrait, glamour, and rock photography.  As a singer/songwriter himself, he has met and shot a wide variety of local and national artists.  He also shoots commercially for local businesses.)

I recently attended my first Summer Camp Music Festival. One of my good buddies got me a gig working in exchange for free admittance.  With a ticket price of almost $200 for the entire weekend, that was a sweet deal.  Not to mention, this buddy of mine also hooked me up with the chance to get into the  official press pits for some of the larger shows.  For a guy who is usually content to squeeze his little 5’3” frame up to the front of a crowd in order to grab a shot or two, this was heaven.

As a musician myself, I’ve always had experience with photography and music, mostly on the glass side of the lens.  However, there are very few rock photographers who really blow me away with their images and there are even far less rock photographers who are willing to share their secrets.  That being the case, I decided to “take matters into my own hands” and start shooting the images I wanted to see when it came to rock photography.  There aren’t many in the Peoria area that focus on this type of photography, so I thought a post about shooting live concerts and musical performances would be a bit of fun.

Here are just a few tips, tricks, and things to know about rock photography, at least how I see it.

It’s Not What You Know; It’s Where You Go

That’s right.  I said it.  When it comes to shooting bands, it isn’t about how much equipment you have or what ISO you are using (for the most part).  Shooting during live performances is all about how close you can get to the stage, whether it be pushing your way to the front of a throng of people or just having a zoom lens that will allow you to sit 5 rows back, but shoot like you are sitting on stage.  Don’t be afraid to have some cajones and push your way to the front or try to slide past the security guard.  If you can’t get within your lenses limits to shoot properly, there is no point in really shooting.  I have seen guys and girls with cell phone cameras up in press pits shooting a shot of a performer and ending up with decent shots.  When you are able to get close, you are able to get any shot you want, but if you are at the back of the auditorium, even your 300mm ain’t gonna cut it.  Getting closer also allows you to drop that ISO down and the shutter speed up so if a guitarist is running across stage, you can stop his motion and still grab the ambient stage lighting as well.

(Note: Today’s guest blooger, Lynn Dunaway, is a knitting photographer, er a photographer that knits, here in Central Illinois. She’s famous for eating hummus, knitting, being extremely kind, and her unique perspective on the world. Enjoy her post today).

Whether it’s the look on the groom’s face at the moment he first sees his bride or that few seconds wheb the evening light flashes on the graveyard tombstones as witnessed by Ansel Adams, we all are in pursuit of capturing a moment.

How does one capture a lightning-fast two-year-old? As one of my instructors put it, “Set the camera on automatic and shoot, shoot, shoot!” The point being, I believe, that one uses all one’s basic composition and lighting knowledge and skills, then picks the optimum automatic setting, and comes up with images that will be great with just a bit of cropping.

Weddings are great opportunities to capture those important moments. Remember to plan your shots and think location, location, location! Two of my favorites moments are that look on the groom’s face when he first sees his bride and the relaxed and happy smiles of both the bride and groom when they make that trip back down the aisle. I always place myself about 1/3 back from the front of the altar and on the aisle. Of course, you have to follow the Church or facilities rules about flash or not. Then just try really hard to capture those exact times.

Sometimes the moment presents itself to you. At my Sister’s wedding the best shot of the day was during the professional photo session after the ceremony. We were being goodphotographers letting the professional flash first and then taking our snaps. At one point Sister Sue and Greg faced each other, sighed a combined big sign, closed their eyes, and put the foreheads together…bingo! Flash…got it! Then the pro had them recreate it so he, too, could document the emotion.

Also at weddings don’t forget to photograph all the lovely details that the bride has spent months planning: the detail in her dress, the back of the dress, the hairstyles, the centerpieces, the cakes, the invitations, the programs, the gift table…she’s really put time and thought into these details. Capture those little moments…like the bride and her Grandma chatting tete a tete. (I personally would be too stressed to do the photos of record but love doing candids at weddings.)

What about nature? How do we capture nature and our beautiful landscape to the optimum? I have learned that the human eye is about a 200mm zoom. If I have learned anything, it is that the interesting object in your landscape – that your eye has zoomed to – must be captured by walking right up close to it. I use as wide-angle a lens as I have in my bag, find a backdrop to go behind that interesting item (move around 360 degrees if you have to), go for greatest depth of field, focus on that object, reframe and shoot. Go for those optimum morning and evening times when the light is oh so pretty.

Bracket, bracket, bracket!
You want to get the best photo in camera and most of these moments flit by us in the blink of an eye. Do bracket and get a successful capture…recreating the moment often is not an option.

Or take a mistake into PhotoShop and play with it. It just might be salvageable with a little creativity!

Make a list of your own personal moments that you want to capture, grab that camera, go out there hunting, and make it happen!

(Note: Today’s guest blogger is Lily Dale aka LolaTakesPictures. She is a photographer and blogger who lives in Central Illinois and recently transplanted here from Las Cruces, NM. She chronicles her experience on the blog Peoria in Pictures, where she has been known to occassionally insult me. I’m sure I deserved it.)

So I had a conversation with Dave one day when he asked if I’d contribute a post to this blog. I asked him what he wanted me to write about and he said, “Something you’re passionate about.”

My mind has been spinning since that day. What the heck am I passionate about? I’m passionate about flip flops in the summer time and the taste of sweet watermelon. I’m passionate about not missing noontime naps and about every song I’ve collected on my Ipod. I’m passionate about my kids and about chocolate, of course. But what about photography am I passionate about?

I started taking pictures badly when I was 16. I had signed up for the photography course at my high school, taught, badly, by a teacher who played favorites with her students. I wasn’t one. Consequently, I learned nothing, not even how to read the meter in my borrowed Pentax K1000, but I loved taking pictures and I cherished the ones that, by some miracle, turned out okay. If film was more affordable and if I had had my own camera I would have breathed photography and lived on developer. In the end, I had to admit to myself that I just wasn’t going to be National Geographic photographer material so I let go of the hobby. I figured I could concentrate on writing for them instead.

Getting my Bachelor’s degree was accomplished in fits and starts. I had kids and a husband, all of which are not conducive to pursuing those old hobbies or goals. They tend to complain when you’re not around to feed them, you know. I went back to college for good in 2005 and, once again, jumped into the photography courses. Although I’d given up on that NG dream, I still had a love for the feel of a camera in my hands. This time around, too, I was older and more patient (and wiser) and had a good teacher who broke things down for me and let my swiss cheese brain process it slowly. I finally understood what the picket fence in my viewfinder was all about and how to use it successfully. It was as if someone threw open the dusty drawers in the cabinet of my accumulated photographic knowledge and gave me the last pieces of this puzzle. I was finally able to make a decent picture–on purpose!

I guess what I’m trying to say is just because you don’t accomplish your greatest dreams or manage to turn your hobby into a lucrative career doesn’t mean you have to give them up. I know I will never be a glossy magazine photographer like I imagined myself to be all those years ago but I’m okay with that now. My goal is to continue to challenge myself to be the best photographer I can be and I challenge you to do the same!

“Look, I’m not an intellectual. I just take pictures.” Helmut Newton (German Photographer, 1920-2004)

(Note: Today’s guest blogger, Tim Sheets aka tsheets, is a fine Central Illinois photographer, who chronicles the places he visits and the food he eats – all important stuff. Enjoy!)

Many times when a photographer first lays hands on an ultra-wide lens, the first thing they do is look in amazement at all the stuff they can fit in the frame. But, the real power of an ultra-wide is in the wide-angle perspective it provides. To learn the basics of using an ultra-wide to make more interesting images, there are a few things to consider.

Over the past several years, there have been several “Ultra-Wide” angle zoom lenses released for digital cameras with APS-C (cropped) sensors. The focal lengths covered by these lenses range from about 10mm – 24mm depending on manufacturer. This would be the equivalent of about 16mm – 36mm field- of-view on a full frame 35mm camera. That’s great and all….but, what does that mean to me? Why should I care?

Well, let’s start with the basics. With angles of view (at the wide end) in the 108.4 – 99 degree range, you get a LOT of coverage. All that coverage also means you have a lot of subject matter to manage. In other words, you have to be careful your shoes (or tripod legs) don’t end up in your shot!! You also have exaggerated near-far relationships which give you that “wide angle perspective” we all know and love! These features are great for shooting landscapes, close quarters such as interiors or larger subjects where you can’t back up far enough to get them all in the frame (buildings, for example). But, more importantly, you can create dramatic images by using the wide angle perspective to immerse your viewer in the scene. And yes, you can also use it to distort your subject with an almost fish-eye effect.

Let’s take a look at the ‘get everything in the frame’ approach. Ultra-Wides are certainly good for that!! Capturing grand vistas, entire skylines, or whole rooms is a snap! This example shows how while you can get everything in the frame, there really isn’t much depth. Just as a telephoto lens pulls things in close (and compresses near-far relationships), the ultra-wide pushes things away. So, you get a lot, but, a lot may be relatively small and loose significance in the overall frame. With so many objects in your viewfinder, you have to be careful to manage them properly or risk loosing the viewer in a weak composition that feels cluttered. That entry-way that first grabbed your attention is suddenly lost in all the surrounding environment. How do you counteract this potential pitfall? The answer is really pretty simple. Get close!! Which brings us to the other main (and more effective in my opinion) strategy when using an ultra-wide, perspective!

One rule of thumb for creating compelling landscape images is to have an interesting foreground, middle ground, and background. These layers help give depth to the image and lead your viewer through the scene. With an ultra-wide attached to the front of your camera, the way to accomplish this is to find a foreground object, and get close! Line it up so you have a good background (and hopefully some middle ground) and you have the makings for an effective composition. Remember, since the wide angle is going to exaggerate the near-far relationships, the distance between your foreground and background doesn’t have to be miles, even a few yards can be enough. For this example, I was probably about two feet from the log in the foreground and the base of the bluff was (guessing) about 10-15 yards. In the leading picture, I had the camera set on a tripod, maybe a foot away from the near step.

I also want to mention wide-angle distortion. This is what can lead to converging lines. If you don’t care that parallel lines bend in towards (or away from) each other, carry on. However, by tilting the camera up or down, you can have a dramatic affect on this.

See how the building and even the lamp posts are leaning in towards each other? If you tilt the camera up, verticals bend towards each other the further up you go. If you tilt the camera down, the vertical lines will bend towards each other the further down you go. By keeping the camera perfectly level, you will minimize this distortion. As you can see in the example, I tilted the camera up significantly. For a quick reference, here are a few tips for using / characteristics of an Ultra-wide lens.

1. Get close – often 3ft or less.
2. Get creative with wide-angle perspective/distortion.
3. Find subjects that extend past (behind) you to immerse the viewer.
4. Find an interesting foreground to give depth (foreground = close).
5. Keep the camera level to minimize wide-angle distortion.
6. Tilt the camera up or down to creatively use wide-angle distortion

In summary, you can use an ultra-wide lens to gather everything in a single frame, and that’s perfectly fine and something we all do on occasion. But, a more effective use is taking advantage of wide-angle perspective. This is accomplished by arranging a foreground object close to the camera which helps pull the viewer into the scene. Now that you have the basics down, go out and borrow, rent, purchase, or simply become better acquainted with your ultra-wide angle lens. They can be a lot of fun, and a most creative tool to have in your camera bag!

Another lesson we spend time on in the Intro course at the Peoria Art Guild is on how to make a panoramic image. So what defines a panoramic image. Obviously it’s a very wide, or very tall shot. I like to think of panoramic images starting at an aspect ratio of at least 2:1 – at the very least. When you shot film, a traditional pano size was 4×10 – which is an aspect ratio of 2.5:1. Nowadays I like the Mpix sizes 5×15 and 10×30 – which are of course aspect ratios of 3:1. I think in the end, like a lot of things, you know a pano when you see it – and it’s a great way to really increase the drama in your image. So how do we get there?

The first step approach is easy. Take any normal image and crop it. And then walk away. You’ve eliminated the things that don’t make the picture any stronger – additional foreground or sky for example – and you’ve left behind all that counts. This is the simplest and quickest approach. Here are a few panos I’ve made from cropping a single shot into a panoramic perspective:

San Francisco, CA: Aspect Ratio: 2.5:1

Crater Lake, OR: Aspect Ratio: 2.5:1

Detweiller Park, Peoria: Aspect Ratio almost 4:1

All of these shots are cropped into the essential element – and no more.

There is a downside to creating panoramic images this way. Since we cropped, we’ve actually thrown away pixels and made the image smaller. That’s not a big hairy deal if you’re just showing this digitally – on a screen or in a blog article. But if you want to print, you’re compromising your ability to print very large – and believe you me – panos are best seen BIG.

So how best to get there? The answer is STITCHING. And it’s a lot easier then you might think. Let’s take a look.

The image that led this article – the skyline of Peoria on a crisp October morning – was really 12 photographs made into one final image by digitally stitching the images together. For a lot of years, stitching software was slow and somewhat inaccurate. Nowadays, stitching software not only is fast and smart, but it will blend images for you to further hide alignment points. Photoshop and Photoshop Elements have it built-in. Photoshop is nice because you can work on RAW files – but taking your JPEGs and stitching can work very well too. For those of you who don’t use Photoshop, I can heartily endorse a FREE piece of software called Auto Stitch. It works specifically on JPEG files and it does a superb job. But it’s not enough to just go out and grab a bunch of shots to stitch together. There’s a process of course.

CREATING THE MOSIAC

The simplest approach to creating a multi-shot panoramic is just to pan through your scene, overlapping each successive image by some amount until you’ve captured the entire shot. You might in fact have a “panoramic assist mode” if you own a point-and-shoot camera. This feature will actually show you the previous picture you shot at the same time as the LCD is showing you the current picture the camera is seeing. Line the two up and you know you’ve got it covered. But if you’re shooting a DSLR – well – you’re on your own. But there are some things that can help.

First, you’re best off shooting this on a tripod. And if you’ve ever wondered why tripods have little bubble levels – well – here’s one good reason. You must be level to make your panoramic image work – especially if you’re just shooting one pan. When the software stitches the image, it aligns consecutive images based on commonalities at the overlap points. If you’re running downhill say – instead of level – you have fewer common points as you work across the image. The resultant file may be severely cropped as a result – with an exaggerated aspect ratio that is almost unusable. Level – in any circumstance where panoramas are concerned is better – and a tripod will help that. If you don’t have a tripod, you’ll need a lot more shots to cover your bases. That’s fine – but it will take longer to shoot, and it will take longer to stitch.

Next up is how you pan. I don’t mean left-to-right or right-to left – I’m talking about panning around the nodal point. The what? The nodal point. Now having said that – let’s not sweat too much what the nodal point is (it’s actually a point that’s parallel with your sensor) – let’s just say it’s important to have a tight rotation. If you’re on a tripod you’re going to stay very close to the nodal point. You’ll be fine. You can buy an expensive panoramic tripod head (I have personal experience on this front) that will get you perfectly over the nodal point – but frankly (in retrospect) for most work it’s overkill. A tripod is plenty. What you want to avoid – particularly if you’re using a point and shoot – is holding the camera far from your body when you shoot and pan. This puts the camera far in front of the nodal point and leads to… parallax.

BEWARE OF PARALLAX

No – that’s not something out of Jabberwocky. Parallax is a phenomenon that occurs when you make the simple mistake in shooting your panoramic images of operating too far in front of the nodal point. When you’re shooting at the nodal point, all the resultant images will be parallel. If you’re far in front, you’ll get a parallax effect. Frames in the middle will be straight, but frames on the outside will tend to run uphill to the middle. Take a look at this example – where I held the camera at arms length while taking the images:

Finding Parallax - Far in front of the Nodal Point

Just looking at these images immediately gives the impression that they are not parallel. The left side image is definitely going to struggle matching the middle. The further I panned away in fact, the worse it got.

When we stitch something like this together, the software does in fact struggle to line things up at the intersections:

Parallax strikes back - Stitching errors

So work level, and work on a tripod – or at least very close to your body. What else?

Let’s talk about overlap. From the images above of the bridge you can see that I like a decent amount of overlap. You just need to make sure you’re covered. More overlap means you won’t leave a hole somewhere in the final stitch. I like about 30% overlap between pictures, but you can overlap as much as you want. More overlap means more images but surer coverage. Also – if you’re using a zoom lens – watch where you operate. I wouldn’t zoom too much wider then say 35mm. Again, a wider zoom means more stuff fits into each shot but it also means you might start getting distortion onthe edges – which will make stitching difficult again. I like to work between 35mm-70mm – it seems like a good compromise between eliminating distortion and not getting to many shots.

Let’s talk about settings. This is big. The one thing you don’t want is your exposure to change with each shot. What I like to do is put my camera on auto (let’s say aperture priority) and meter off the most important part of my shot. I’ll then take those settings and set them manually. Same with ISO, same with white balance. I don’t want anything to change as I execute my shots. This will really help hide your stitch points – even if some parts of your shot are a little over or under. But mostly things will turn out just fine. So manual is key – even if you arrive there with a little help. If you’re shooting a big distant landscape, focus is usually not an issue – but if you’re working in close – let’s say shooting around a table of people, you may need a lot more depth-of-field to carry the day so that everyone is in focus. Racking (changing) focus between shots again may complicate stitching.

There are other tidbits of course. Don’t limit yourself to horizontal panoramics. Vertical panos work too – but keep in mind that  as you tilt the camera up the subject is going to start running in and narrowing from the edges. If you can get yourself a little elevation for a vertical shot – well it never hurts. And certainly don’t limit yourself to just one pan. The bad stitching example is one pan of three shots. The downtown Peoria shot that started this off, like I said, was 12 images stitched together. But it was three pans of four shots. I started high – made a sweep for the sky, then tilted down and did it again, then tilted down and did it one more time. Here are the 12 shots before stitching:

The great bonus in stitching is you get huge files. These were taken with a 6.1 megapixel camera. So with no overlap that would be about 73 megapixels. Even with significant overlap – about 65% here – I still end up with almost a 24MP image. I’ve printed this photo up to 42″ wide so far and found no issues at all. Big is suddenly a possibility.

In the end, once you have good starting images, your software will do most of the hard work for you. And the nice thing is the software itself is so easy to use – one or two clicks and you’re on your way. A little post-assemblage cropping and you have a wonderful piece of work. The folks at Digital Photography School have a nice article on creating panos – and they have a nice gallery of stitched shots for you to see. Let your mind wander and give this a try; meanwhile I’ll leave you with a few of my other stitched panos.

3 Images - shot with an 11-18mm lens. Wider is possible - but stitch carefully

12 Images - 6x2

3 Images - digital matte added for variety

20 Images - 10 x 2 - for the upper shot of Ewing Manor

And with that I’m outta the house for a few days – taking a little photo trip to parts unknown (to you not to me) but far afield from Central Illinois. I’ve got some very helpful guest bloggers lined up for the next few days. It’s always good to get a different perspective so enjoy what they have to say and we’ll see you on the flipside.

I found out this past weekend at the art fair that a few people actually do read this blog (and by that I mean people I don’t pay to read, er, nevermind) and so it occurred to me today that perhaps I should occasionally do a little housekeeping to inform folks what your options are in Central Illinois. I also want to say thanks for everyone who came up and introduced themselves at the fair. It’s always a miracle nice to see the faithful few. It was especially nice to finally meet Joe McNally – who not only dropped by but plunked down a couple hundred bucks for a canvas print. Um, okay – got my dates wrong – today is not April 1 – it just felt like it weather wise. So no – no Joe McNally sighting – but we’re always hoping.

Anyway – on to a little housekeeping…

Did you know you can always come out and read the Central Illinois Photoblog – right here on these very pages? You did? You folks are geniuses. Let’s assume you did indeed figure that one out and you’re here now – not for the monthly calendars – but for other reasons. Catch up on a boatload of educational articles, find out what Joe McNally (and others) are doing on their insightful blogs, search for your photographic soul and vision, learn about products that have tickled my fancy, and okay – download those cool monthly calendars. It’s always the calendars.

Did you also know you can be a joiner and take classes at the PeoriaArt Guild? Of course you did too. Still geniuses you are (said in your best Yoda voice). We’ll be teaching a few “lite” versions of classes this summer (starting July 6), and the big fall semester starts on or around October 12.

I will be teaching a four (really five) week session of the “Lighting With Small Flashes” class – beginning July 8. Ann Conver will teach a four-week short course on Basic Digital Photography, mostly on Tuesdays, beginning July 7. Jeff McSweeney is also teaching a two-day portraiture workshop – on July 11 and 18th. We’ve got more interesting things planned for the fall – so stay tuned.

Did you also know you can join (for FREE!) the Peoria Flickr group? Yeah – that I KNEW you would know. Peoria’s best Internet social-media, web frenzied photographic group. We love to get together, hang out, talk photography, eat, eat some more, pick on Canon people, pick on Nikon people (you didn’t see that one coming did you?), and every so often we like to go take pictures. We are the ones the cool kids talk about. Chew on that for a minute.

Did you also know about the Peoria Camera Club? Um-hum – I thought so. They’re taking a relaxing summer off – but are planning for a very full and rich year beginning in September. President Tom Romanowski has a full schedule that he’s already juggling. We’ll be previewing a number of things here in the next few weeks to give you a little taste. I’m going to try and get a little more involved from a promotional standpoint of club activities so we can keep you in the loop. Tune in you shall (Yoda… again).

Just a brief note on the Peoria-version of the Worldwide Photowalk. As of Monday night – there are just three spots left. Okay – technically there are four spots left when a certain person who told me she is headed to Europe instead of walking with us UNREGISTERS (hint, hint you know who you are). This is awesome and you guys rock. Good luck getting the last three, er, four, spots.

And finally – I’m going to have a few minor changes to the CIPB beginning on July 1 (or whenever). I have almost no idea what they are right now – but change is always good so we’ll think of something. Now off to bed.

The good news… if you head to the amazing Abraham Lincoln Museum down in Springfield, you can photograph your rear end off in the gigantic main entryway. There are tons of pictures for the taking there. The bad news… photography is generally prohibited in the rest of the museum. Not sure when museum folks will get it – I don’t like any reasons for prohibiting photography in settings like this but oh well (and I didn’t say there weren’t valid reasons – I just DON’T LIKE ‘EM).

Anyway, I’m gearing up for the Junction City Art Fair tomorrow so I’m keeping it brief today. Chase Jarvis, who’s a pretty clever and inventive photographer, wrote a post a few weeks ago that may have slipped past you. Entitled “Shake Your Tree Today“, it’s a list of 22 ways to stretch yourself as a photographer. And this isn’t the old standard list – this is some clever stuff that you might not think of. So go read it and embrace at least one idea. Come back and leave a comment telling me which one struck a chord with you. I’m kind of partial to #14 (okay I don’t have to rent – but I do have to dust off). You?

Okay – have a great weekend. Stop by Junction City and say howdy if you get the chance. Saturday and Sunday – 10:00am to 4:00pm.