Todd Walker

2011: Come Out Swinging!

2011-01-03T15:02:00.008-06:00

It's been a while since I last posted on here (I had the busiest fall of my career to date). I want to start off this year's first post, summarizing my journey over the past 13 months.

Over the last 13 months, I...

Shot my first, second, and third solo weddings
Landed my first commercial shoot
Dedicated myself to learning off-camera lighting
Committed to developing and creating my personal photographic style
Started this blog, in an attempt to give back to the photography community
Began to take Facebook seriously so I could connect with more of you
Started a Twitter account, again to further connect with the Photography community
Traveled over 5,000 miles shooting various events for one client
Had work published in several newspapers from Washington state to North Carolina
Had some of my work incorporated into a television show on the Outdoor Channel
Started a new company called Restored Film (more on that as the year continues)
And added over 30 new images to my portfolio on my Website

Keith m's Image Critique. . .

2010-08-26T11:22:00.006-05:00

Alright let get back into the swing of things with another image critique. If you’re new to the blog, read the first few paragraph's on THIS post to see where I’m coming from concerning these image critiques.

Today’s image has been sent to us by Keith. Thanks, Keith, for being patient over the last several weeks while I was, **cough cough**, absent from posting. Okay, lets get into it…

First off, lets talk about the composition. It’s a well done headshot. Following the “rule of thirds,” the subject’s eyes are positioned on the top third of the frame. I really like the movement of the subject’s hair – very natural. The background is pretty good. I might have moved the subject a little to the left, getting rid of the black void tot the right of her head. But its not too bad; a mere nit-pick really. The lighting is well handled, and exposure is spot on.

There are a couple of aspects of this image that I think are simply golden. You absolutely nailed the subject’s expression. I love the pleasant eyes, the slightly open mouth – the entire expression is great. The eyes are perfectly engaged with the camera. The eyes are the single most important part of any portrait, especially a headshot, and even more so when they are looking into the camera. And you nailed it! If the eyes aren’t engaged, then you’ve lost it. Think of it this way, lets say you had this exact image, only the eyes were at mid-blink. The shot would be ruined. As the old saying goes, “the eyes have it” (or something like that). The expression and the eyes are what make this such a strong image. Nicely done.

Now lets discuss how the image might improve. As photographers, we should continually be stretching ourselves, looking for ways to improve what we create. So what could you do next time to improve on this image? I’ve already mentioned my nit-pick about the background, so I won’t go over that again. But the most distracting part about this image to me, oddly enough, also has to do with the subject’s eyes/face. They simply aren’t sharp. Now, depending on what you were going for, its not necessarily “bad.” The face/eyes have that sort of old-time, high-ISO film look. Remember when you’d shoot ISO 1600 or 3200 film, and the detail simply wasn’t there? No? Well trust me. When you shoot 3200 speed film, it lacks detail, no matter how dead-on your focus was. If that’s the look you were going for then great. Great except for one problem. As you look down the frame, you’ll notice the subject’s hair, shirt, and necklace all have more detail than her eyes/face. So, if you’re going for that look, creating it in post-production, then don’t forget the rest of the image.

On the other hand, if you weren’t going for that old-time film look, then the face and eyes simply need to have more detail. Though the “old-time” film look is nice, I would like to have seen sharper details in the face. I’m not sure what caused it, but again, compared to the shirt/hair/necklace area, the face leaves something to be desired. Is it horrible? No, not at all. In fact, its somewhat acceptable in my opinion. But, since we’re committed to our craft, actively looking for things on which to improve, then this is one area of this image we can look at and learn from. Actively scrutinizing our work, helps us hone our skills.

Overall, Keith, I think this is a well done portrait. A few minor tweaks, and you’d have a shoe-in for your portfolio.

Now a reminder to all of us, myself included. Getting out from under the keyboard, picking up our cameras, getting out there and shooting, messing things up, and evaluating what we create is the single best thing we can do to improve. Remember, YOU are the single most important aspect of your craft. Not your gear. Not your subject. Not your settings. Not your location. Not even your skill level. Its YOU. So have some fun, get YOURSELF out there and make YOURSELF better.

As always, in an attempt to improve the photography community at large, please feel free to post a comment and offer some constructive criticism. We all see things differently, and I am by no means the final authority on anyone’s work. See something different? Post a comment. Disagree with me? Post a comment. We’re in this together. Lets help each other out.

Alright, enough is enough,

now, go out and shoot something!

Welcome Back, Kotter...

2010-08-20T12:12:00.007-05:00

For those of you who have no idea what the title is all about, click HERE or HERE (and realize how old I am). But I digress...

Its been a while, so I thought I rev up with a post showing a small portion of what I've been up to since last time. Below are some shots I've taken the time to resize and post on the blog. I've also been working completely revamping my website, which I'll be launching soon. Next week I'll be critiquing a photo from Keith. After that, I hope to get back to posting much more consistently than the last couple of months. So stay tuned, and as always, if you have any questions about the world of photography, please contact me. If you're new to the blog, feel free to take a look around and make yourself at home. My sole purpose in maintaining this blog is to offer what little I have to better the photography community as a whole. If you're interested in where I'm coming from, read THIS POST.

Here's some recent work, starting with a few more from Laura & Joel's engagement session (who's wedding I'm stoked to be shooting next month!), then a few from the Tusla Air and Space Museum:

Now, go out and shoot something!

Laura & Joel: a sneak peek...

2010-06-26T18:29:00.003-05:00

Here's a sneak peek at Laura & Joel's engagement portraits. We had a great time this morning all over Kansas City. We started around 8:30 and shot for over 3.5 hours. And, as you can see, it was well worht the time we spent.

Congratulations you two! I can't wait to photograph your wedding!

Stacy F's Image Critique...

2010-05-25T15:00:00.003-05:00

Hello everyone. Here we go with this week’s image critique. This one comes to us again from Stacy F. She sends us a shot of a fire-breathing, stilt-walking, back-alley dwelling, guy. So lets get to it…

Fist off, this image is very striking, very interesting. Immediately, I was drawn into the image, to figure out what’s going on. Nothing like an abnormally tall man spewing fire from his mouth to peak one’s interest. Love it. One thing that will always raise impact level is to shoot subjects seldom seen. I can tell you, with absolute certainty, the number of times I’ve seen a photograph of a guy on stilts breathing fire – three (counting this one). If it were a shot of, say, a squirrel at the park, then it’d be much harder to hold my attention (I saw enough squirrel photos the first week of photog school alone to last me a lifetime). So just by having such an interesting subject you’ve started off with a huge plus. And then there’s the scene. The creepy, decaying, dead-end alleyway is a great place to place your subject. It really gives it that “I’m-lost-and-went-the-wrong-way-down-a-dead-end-alleyway-and-there’s-bars-on-the-windows-and-a-creepy-fire-breathing-carney-in-the-shadows” vibe. It really works with your subject.

The exposure of the image is very well done. You have handled your flash very well. Wait…What? Flash?? That’s right. It may not have as short of a flash duration as, say, an SB-900, but the fire is acting as a flash, illuminating the entire scene. And you’ve exposed for it quite well. You were even able to underexpose the sky by a couple of stops or so, keeping it a dark, rich blue, which is very suitable to the overall image. I also love how the fire creates so much contrast and deep shadows.

Lets talk composition. Here’s where the image could use a little work. The position of the scene is placed nicely within the frame. The angle of the walls framing the sky, the dark shadows to the left and bottom right. So kudos for the composition of the scene. The placement of your subject could use a little work though. As is, its not too bad. But I think if you were to have placed him further into the corner, turned him 180° (facing to the left) and had him blowing the fire towards the left (at the same upward angle), it would have been a stronger image. That would anchor him in the middle of all those great leading lines the building is creating. We could also see his face, which would add some interest as well. Whenever I'm on a shoot like this, I’ll shoot my subject from several different angles and positions, exploring as many options as possible. And maybe you did that. But for this image, a little moving of the image would make it a bit more powerful.

Overall, I really like this image. It has a lot of interesting components. And there’s really only minimal tweaks that I think would help it out. Nicely done Stacy. Keep up the great work!

Now, go out and shoot something!

Your Questions Answered...

2010-05-13T12:18:00.005-05:00

If you’ve been following this blog for any amount of time, it’ll come as no surprise that I really want to help other photographers improve. As much as my schedule allows, I’ve tried to pass on as much help/info as I can. For this week's post, I’ve been asked a number of questions that can be lumped into the same pile. I’ve gotten a barrage of “What blogs are you following?” “Who do you learn from?” “Who do you gain inspiration from?” etc. In other words, I’ve been asked “what do you do to keep up with the photography industry and sharpen your skills?” Well, here’s the skinny on this part of my photoggin’ leranin'.

Let me start off by saying, I put the greatest amount of effort on my family life. I strive to be the man, husband, and father that my family needs. If it were to ever come down to choosing between photography and my family, I’d leave photography in the dust and never look back. I carefully and consciously strive to daily guard my family life. Keep this in mind as you read this post. It can sound like I spend every waking moment reading, studying, and shooting. But I strive to keep a balance between what I do, and who I am to my family - and I tend to lean towards the family side of this balance. Having said that, here’s what I am currently putting into the learning side of my photography.

First of all, I read and ingest as much as humanly possible concerning our craft. I read and study constantly. The internet is a beautiful thing. There is so much good it does. And the proliferation of knowledge is some of it. Land a commercial job photographing custom leather baby shoes, and not know how to light it? Google it, and you’re overloaded with multiple lighting scenarios that’ll help. Get to shoot a model’s portfolio and need some pointers on how to use the only light you have? Search it on Youtube and you’re inundated with videos showing various ways to accomplish a fashion shoot with one light. I recently shot for a new restaurant that opened here in Tulsa. Having never photographed food, I first called a commercial photog friend of mine for pointers. I then quickly hit the web. After a short serf around the net and I was able to walk into the shoot with confidence and accomplished it with peace of mind. The client was ecstatic with the results. So the internet is an invaluable tool in my photographic arsenal. But what about all the other time, when I don’t have a “special” shoot coming up? There are several things I do to continue to learn.

There are several blogs I follow. I have chosen them because of 1) they offer so much in the way of learning, and B) they offer a great deal of inspiration to me. So what ones do I follow? Here’s a few who have made my RSS feed:

zarias.com ~ You’ve probably heard me talk about this dude before. Even though I went through a two year photography school, what I have learned from Zack has revolutionized my photography. School was great for the basics, but what Zack has given away on his blog allowed me to take what I knew and catapult me to another level. He’s one of the present-day lighting gurus. But the biggest thing he offers me is not technique, its inspiration. I’ll not retype his story here, but in short, early on he lost everything, and found himself working at a Kinkos, having to sell all his gear just to pay rent. But it was from there the dude pulled himself up, headed out with a borrowed camera and speedlight, and built a hugely successful career, all without going into debt. Just knowing there’s a regular guy out there who has successfully built a career doing what he loves, is able to provide for his family, and give back to the photography community, gives me a great deal of inspiration to keep going. So, I always read what he has to say.

pixelatedimage.com ~ David is another photographer that has a spot on my RSS feed. Talk about inspiration. First of all, the guy is doing exactly what I aspire to do: travel the world using his camera to work for non-profit organizations. When I was a kid, I wanted to be Indiana Jones when I grew up. I wanted to travel the world in grand adventures, fighting off bad guys. Now that I’m grown, not much has changed. Now I just want to have a camera in my hand. I would love to work with/for organizations like “For the Silent,” “Compassion International,” or “Voice of the Martyrs.” I want to create images that help them further their respective causes. And this type of thing is exactly what David is doing. He’s traveling the world shooting for some great causes. And his blog is constantly updated with very worthwhile posts, offering very sound food for thought on our craft. He has also written several books that I HIGHLY recommend. The most recent one I’ve read is “Visionmongers” ~ An absolute must read for every photographer trying to make a buck IMHO. If you haven’t already, check out his blog, its worth it.

jeremycowart.com ~ Relatively new to my RSS feed is this dude Jeremy. I don’t know much of his background, but he’s another that is very inspirational to me. Last year he is responsible for creating the Help-Portrai t movement. This was a grass roots movement of photogs all over, volunteering their time and talents to take family portraits for families who otherwise couldn’t have any made. Around Christmas-time, there were something like 40,000 families around the world who received family portraits for free from photographers around the world. More recently, Jeremy traveled to Haiti to create his Voices of Haiti Project. While there, he created portraits of earthquake survivors. He is now selling these images and all proceeds are going directly towards Haiti disaster relief. It’s a VERY powerful collection of photographs. Plus, the dude is simply an awesome photographer. I love to look at his work.

noireblanc.com ~ I follow Beki’s blog for a couple of reasons. A) she’s an incredibly talented young photographer. By young, I mean, she’s only 17 years old. But, regardless of her age, Beki creates some of the more beautiful nature/macro photography I’ve come across. She’s also quickly become a Queen of Black and White. I have a lot to learn from her concerning BW photography. And 2) Beki is a friend of mine. Though I’m a little biased because she’s my friend, she really is an inspiration. At only 17, she is quite accomplished in her photography skills, is a very creative designer, and maintains a blog that is loaded with stunning images, photography techniques and design ideas. She is one to keep a close eye on. Her career is just starting to blossom. (did you catch the macro pun? Close eye... blossom... um, okay, moving on...)

scottkelby.com ~ Scott is the world’s foremost expert on everything photoshop. I could write forever on what he brings to the table. His blog is updated daily, loaded with tons of industry news, photography techniques, and of course, photoshop stuff. Scott has also written a plethora of books on photography and photoshop. He has another site called kelbytraining.com where members have access to a sea of online photoshop classes. He even has his own online "tv" station at kelbytv.com that airs webisodes teaching photoshop and technical camera stuff. If you’re not familiar with him, you owe it to yourself to get acquainted with what he does. He's like the Michelangelo of modern photography - he's everywhere creating impossible amounts of photography realted stuff.

Here’s a few more on my RSS, since you asked =)…

strobist.com ~ Everything you ever need to know about using hotshoe flashes.

joemcnally.com/blog ~ Joe is the Kung Fu Master when it comes to lighting.

digitalprotalk.blogspot.com ~ This one I just found out about… I haven’t spent a lot of time on David’s blog, but so far, it seems to be loaded with tons of great information, largely aimed at wedding photographers. If you’re into weddings, you may want to check into this one.

One other site I want to bring your attention to is creativelive.com. I’m just starting to learn about it, but I believe this will completely revolutionize the photography industry as we know it. Simply go to the site. Sign up for free. And then, you are able to “attend” live workshops FOR FREE. And there are some amazing workshops being offered. For instance, Zack Arias is conducting a three-day workshop in June. All you have to do is log on and participate. Catch that? Everyone who is “attending” the workshop is able to ask questions to the instructors, as they are conducted LIVE. Not available for the workshop you want to attend? No sweat. Once a workshop is over, you can purchase the workshop and watch it at any time. This is how they offset the cost of the website. In short, watch all the live workshops you want for free. Then, if you miss one and its worth it to you, you can pay for it. Its that simple. This is an amazing concept brought to us by the genius known as Chase Jarvis. I am pumped about it!

So there you go. There’s a short list of where I draw photographic inspiration and knowledge. Check ‘em out. Maybe they can give you something that will help you along on your journey. That’s it from me for this week. Have a good weekend everyone.

Oh, one more thing I want to add. Even though I spend a great deal of time studying, it doesn’t do any good if I don’t get off my backside and get out and shoot. There’s a deliberate reason I end every post telling you to go shoot. As much as I want you to learn something here, my goal is to get you out there and shoot. Do all the “book” learnin’ you want, but there’s no substitute for experience. Soooo...

Now, go out and shoot something!

Brad V's Image Critique...

2010-05-11T12:54:00.003-05:00

This week’s image critique comes to us again from Brad V. The image is of a tree standing in a cut crop field, in black and white. So lets get to it…

First off, the image is composed pretty well. The tree, which is the subject of the image, is placed in the right third of the frame. As a general rule, it is much more pleasing to break the frame into thirds, and then place the subject of a photograph in on one of those planes. Sometimes, rules need to be broken, but for this shot, it was rightly followed. Had the tree been placed in the dead center of the frame, the overall image would loose much of its interest.

One that would have helped the composition would be to use the leading lines of the crop rows. Notice how the lines created by the crops in the lower left of the frame lead your eye into the image. Now, picture the base of the tree at the pinnacle of those lines. The viewer’s eye would be lead right up into the subject of the photo. But, wait, you can’t transplant a grown tree, so how would you make this happen? Well, assuming that all the crops in this field were planted in rows, you could have walked further to the right until the tree was in line. It may mean your subject would have to be in the left of the frame, but it would allow you to further draw the eye to your subject. The way it is now, these lines compete with the tree, the subject of the image. Its not necessarily bad, but could be that much better using the crop rows.

I really like the heavy use of grain in the image. It adds a good amount of texture to the image, giving it more depth. It has an “old-school-photo-shot-50-years-ago” feel, which adds to the “fine art”-ness of the image.

I like the choice to use Black & White. However, it seems to be more Dark Grey & Light Grey, instead of black and white. In other words: Its Flat. It simply needs more “pop”. You can adjust the levels from this:

To this:

Notice that I just pulled in the sliders from the left (shadows) and right (highlights), and moved the middle slider (contrast) to the right. The made the image pop off the screen (I didn’t post the adjusted version because I didn’t obtain permission from Brad to publicly “hack” his image). Whenever creating B/W images, they really need to have areas of deep black and bright whites. This way the images have more impact, more “umph” to the viewer. Black and white images need to smack viewers in the face. And this image falls just a little short of that.

The biggest problem this image has is the white halo-ing around all the tiny branches of the main tree (which is near impossible to see here on the blog). I'm not sure what happened here, but its just too distracting. It looks as though you needed to darken the sky, using the magic wand tool in photoshop to select it, then darkened the selected area. The problem though, is this always leaves an edge around whatever is selected. This can be “fixed”, but it would take an insane amount of time to go around every little twig, darkening the halo. This could have been captured in camera using a Circular Polarizer (or, since shooting B/W, maybe an 80A filter). A Circular Polarizer polarizes stray light in the sky, darkening the blue, and giving more contrast to the clouds. And it does nothing to the colors of a scene. But, it is dark, which forces a slower shutter speed by a couple of stops, maybe causing the need for a tripod, so be aware of that.

Overall, this image is pretty good. But it needs a little work to get it to the next level; the level that really “wows” people. Thanks for sharing your image with us Brad! I hope I’ve given you some things to help you along. You’ve been doing some great work, and you seem to be improving, so keep it up!!

Now, go out and shoot something!

First Friday Photos!!

2010-05-07T15:29:00.002-05:00

Thats right, its the first Friday of May, so here's a small sampling of what I shot this past month. Let me know what ya' think! Any and all feedback is ALWAYS welcome and appreciated!! See you next week!

First up are some shots from Gage's Senior Shoot:

And here's the location for his football shots (pretty nice 'eh?):

Here's a few from some of the GOYA shoots I went on:

Here's how the world looks through my daughter's eyes (though her sunglasses anyway):

And here's a few of my family on Easter Weekend. Starting with my beautiful Wife Jenny and Daughter Addison:

Here's one of Jenny's sisters and niece:

That's all for this week. To all you Mothers out there: Happy Mother's Day!! Each of you are worth more than you know! Have a fantastic weekend!

Now, go out and shoot something!!

My Image Critique...

2010-05-04T15:50:00.003-05:00

Hey everyone. I've got a bit of a curve ball to throw at you. This week, instead of me critiquing one of your images, I would like your thoughts on one of mine. So those of you who read the blog, especially those of you who've had images critiqued on here, I'd really like to get your input. So, for the image above, give me your critique in the comments below. I can't wait to hear what you have to say!

Also, I'll have my regular post on thursday, but I will be posting some of my work from the previous month on Friday. It's time again for First Friday Photos!! so be on the lookout for that!

Now, go out and shoot something!! (right after critiquing my image) =)

I'll sell you the Mona Lisa for $1

2010-04-29T14:27:00.001-05:00

So you've decided to make some money with your camera. To do that, you have to take pictures for people, and you have to charge a price for it. So where do you start? How do you determine what to ask for the work you do? When it comes to the business side of photography, this is the number one question I've been asked. It's a hard one to answer. There are just so many variables involved, its nearly impossible to answer. Everyone of us has a different style that appeals to a different market. We live in various places serving very different demographics. Different markets will tolerate different rates. To an extent, each one of us will have to figure out what we will charge for our photography. Being relatively new to the industry, and having to have figured this out for myself, I do have a few thoughts on the subject. I could go on and on about it, but hopefully I can at least get you thinking.

When starting out, it is easy to think that price alone give you the edge over your competition. "If I can just undercut Frank's Fabulous Fotos, then I'll get some of his clients." Its natural to think this way. So much of our materialistic culture is based around this ideal. Think of it this way. Say there's a small-town hardware store that sales a particular power drill for $200. But down at Wal-Mart you can get the exact same power drill for $150. The same exact drill, made by the same exact manufacturer, but at 3/4 the cost. That's a no brainer. But photographers aren't in this game. The photography you offer is not, and never will be, the same as anyone else's. You view the world in a particular way, possess a particular shooting style, and produce a unique photograph. To think that what we produce is exactly the same as what everyone else produces is ignorant. We aren't manufacturing a widget. We are creating art. And since we are not producing the exact same thing as Frank down the street, we shouldn't be competing on price alone.

If we ever get into a price war with photographers around us, it won't be long before all of us are out of business. I work part time at a retail camera store. We sell some of the exact same items found at other stores. Competing on price alone, we can lower the price on these items to barely above cost, or even below cost, in order get customers in the door. The hope is we can then sell other items that have much higher profit margins. We may loose a couple bucks on one thing, but profit fifty on another. The reason you can't do this as a photographer is simple. There is only one of you. You only have one thing to sell. If it we compete on price alone, we would have to lower our prices over and over until we are charging less than what it costs us to be in business. Game Over when this happens. And there are so many photographers in the industry who are doing this very thing. And many more who have gone under because of it.

Have you ever walked by the portrait studio at a Wal-Mart and seen how much they charge for a portrait package? Here its something like 30 prints for $9.95. Ever done the math on that? The prints lone would cost me much more than that. And that's not considering my time to photograph the family, edit the images, the wear on my equipment etc. At $9.95, that's massive loss for someone who can't also sell the family a flat screen TV for a large profit. It may be different where you are, but I can't pay my bills with a negative cash flow. So how do we compete with Wal-Mart? Simple: you don't. Nor should you. What you produce should have so much more value than what Wal-Mart has. I know that people can get 30 prints for $9.95 there. But I also know that they can come to me and receive much more value for their money. "Say what? Your sitting fee alone is nearly 13 times Wal-Mart's entire package price. How in the world is that more value?!?"
David duChemin wrote, "Value is not determined by price. Value is about what the client gets for the price paid. If I pay $100 and get nothing, that's not value. It's cheap. If I pay $1,000 and get much more than I expected, that's not expensive; it's value. And when you consider this way of thinking, it's easy to see how competing on price can lead a client to look at your pricing and ask the question, 'what's wrong with their service? Why are they so inexpensive?' Repeat after me: 'I can't compete on price alone.' Is pricing important? Yes. Will clients consider the price? Yes. But if you need to lower your prices until you are bankrupt, then these are not clients you want and you should find a new market... the clients who are worth keeping want value."

Instead of worrying about what others are charging for their work, we should be building value into our own. Put simply, charge cheap rates, and you're perceived as cheap. Add to what your clients receive for the money, and you're seen as valuable. Think about it. Say you have a newborn daughter. You want portraits taken of your beautiful little girl. Money is no object. Do you go down to Wal-Mart for the $9.95 package, or do you higher Anne Geddes and pay her whatever she charges? Somehow, having your child photographed by Anne Geddes seems so much more valuable than being able to pick up some milk and a new shirt on the way out of the studio.

Get where I'm comin' from? The value of your work is perceived. Many of us are very good at creating the images we do. However, way too many of us charge way too little for it. Granted, some simply don't have it, and need to move on to something else. I tried to play the guitar for years, and finally gave into the fact I simply didn't have it. Bt for the rest of you, those who are shooting good, solid photography, need to recognize the value of your work. Charge $9.95 and your work won't be perceived nearly valuable as if you were charging $1500. Also, you will attract certain clients based on your perceived value. A $9.95 photographer will attract $9.95 clients. A $1500 photographer will attract $1500 clients. This all should play into your thinking as you determine what to charge for your photography.

One more thought before signing off. If you have decided your photography is unique, has value, and are charging a good amount for it, then what you create better back up your prices. These two things, the work you produce and the amount you charge, go hand in hand. Anyone would gladly pay $9.95 to have their newborn photographed by Anne Geddes. That would be an incredible value. But no one in their right mind would pay Wal-Mart what Anne Geddes charges. That would be a rip off.

If you say you can give something of high value for really cheap, people will question its value. If I were to tell you I'd sell you the Mona Lisa for $1, all kinds of red flags would go up. "Is it the real Mona Lisa, the one that is worth so much more than a dollar? What's wrong with this deal?" But if I were to tell you I'd sell you a great painting for $1000, and gave you the Mona Lisa, you'd think you got a great value for your money. Work on your craft, charge what its worth, produce great images, and add value where you can. You are an artist, not a peddler of power drills. You cannot and should not compete on price alone.

So there you go, 1348 words about pricing your work. This is a massive subject, one I am still learning. I could never do the topic justice in a blog post. But hopefully I've given you something to think about. Whatever you do, don't undervalue your work. It is worth so much more than you think it is. Do your research, think it through, and charge accordingly.

Now, go out and shoot something!

Stacy F's Image Critique

2010-04-27T11:02:00.002-05:00

Happy Tuesday everyone. . . Lets get to this week's critique.

This one comes again from Stacy. The image is of a girl in a hat. This one is very heavy on the graphic side, as a apposed to a straight photograph. I must say, I love this image. Very well executed.

First off, the lighting is handled very well. The high level of contrast between the face and hair is very suitable for this type of image. The deep shadows keeps a level of "darkness" to the image that perfect for the image. As always, the lighting is what makes this image what it is. Use broad lighting and low contrast, and the image looses its impact. The expression on the subject works well. And the hat. . . the hat is a great detail, adding so much interest to the subject. Adding the hat to the subject took the interest level up several notches. Without it, the image would still be great, but with it, its on a whole other level. So bravo on the decision to use the hat.

As you all know, I love compositions heavily weighted to one side. So its no surprise that I really like the composition here. The dead space to the right of the subject adds so much interest to the overall image. Shoot it as a tight, portrait (vertical) composition, and it looses a lot of its impact. So shooting it as a landscape (horizontal) composition was a good decision (in my opinion anyway).

A few more things I like about the image: first) the textured background. Its only adds to the interest of the image. Nothing like a gritty, decaying wall to add interest to any image. B) the coloring of the image. The overall "rusty" look is awesome. And 3) whatever you did to the eyes. . . love it! It may be hard to see on the blog, but the sharp, golden eye "pops" really well out of the rusty surroundings.

Now, on to some things to consider that could make the image stronger. The first thing I think would help would be to add a hard accent, or edge light to the back side of the subject. Not to illuminate the entire left side, I like the deep shadows. But just a little rim light on the back edge of the subject would help separate her from the background. Also, the light on the front of the hat, on the laces is a bit too bright. This is the brightest area in the image, thus pulling the eye to that spot. Now, if you intended to focus on the hat, then I'd leave it alone. However, if you intend ed for the girls to be the true subject of the image, then her face, particularly her eye, should be the focus. So, if you couldn't (or overlooked) modifying the amount of light hitting the laces, then you should burn them down in post production. Darkening that area would allow the eye to be the brightest area, and thus drawing the eye more naturally to that spot.

Overall, this image is stellar, a very striking image. Keep it up Stacy, you're on your way to becoming a huge part of the photographic community! Thanks for sharing your work with us. I look forward to following your work.

As always, anyone reading this is welcome to chime in on Stacy's image. So what's your opinion? What'd I miss? Feel free to offer your opinion in the comments! Also, if you have any images you'd like for me to give my opinion on, you can e-mail them to me at toddwalkerphotography@gmail.com. I only use them on the blog, for the critiques, and for the purpose of helping the photographic community improve. I also do not use last names, or link any image to your website. This is so your clients won't come across my critique through google, who sees all and knows all. The last thing I want is for you to loose potential clients because they saw a critique of your work, even though you are using the input to improve your craft. So, I am vague as to who send in the images.

Now, go out and shoot something!

Longsuffering...

2010-04-22T15:52:00.001-05:00

There are days, no, weeks when I think this career thing of mine is a dead end. It seems that too much time passes without income. Sure, I keep shooting, sharpening my skills and honing my craft. But I've decided something different. I want more out of my camera than simply creating images. I want my camera to completely replace the need for a job. And that's what I'm pursuing. But at times, for far too long, the means to this end eludes me. Every time I seem to gain a little bit of traction, start making a little money, I somehow get stuck, and a monetary dry spell ensues. As the time passes, the bills continue to come. It doesn't take very long before discouragement sets in. Discouraged over the fact that my craft, the very thing that makes me most alive, is doing very little to put food on the table. This is when I begin to think, "maybe I should just give it up and go get a 'real' job." At least that way I could shoot for the pure enjoyment of it - without the added pressure to make a living at it. Just about the time I open up and update my resume', something happens that changes everything...

A few months back, I was about to put my camera down. It had been a long time since I generated any consistent income with it. Things were getting tight, my wallet gathering too many cobwebs. This dry spell nearly lasted too long. I began to think "well, its been a good ride, but it looks like its coming to an end. Time to hang it up and start sendin' out the old resume'. But I sure don't want to." And no sooner does this thought race through my mind, the phone rings...

"Yes, I am free that weekend. Okay great! I'll send you the packages I offer. Thank you so much for considering me." Soon, the wedding was booked. Finally, something to keep me going.

Then the phone rings again...

"I do happen to have that Saturday free. I'd love to cover that for you! I'll send you all the info and we'll be set. Thank you so much for the opportunity to work with you." Not long after, the prom was scheduled. Now were talking!

The phone rings again...

"Sure, I can shoot tomorrow. It just so happens I'm free. Absolutely, I'd love to. What time is good for you? Great! I'll see you at 8:30am at the stadium." Senior session on the books. On a roll!

Again the phone rings...

"I would love to do the product shots for your restaurant! You can just pay me with a couple of free meals, and pass my name around to your business associates. Lets plan on next Friday. Awesome, see you then." Commercial shoot in the bag. Pickin' up steam now!!

Then I get an e-mail...

"I would be honored to photograph your wedding! I'd be more than happy to send you my pricing. I look forward to the opportunity to working for you. If you have any questions, please let me know." Another wedding?!! Are you kidding?!! This is starting to cut into my time to update my blog.

And on and on its been going. Things are picking up. I love getting to do what I love doing!! And its even better to be paying the bills while doing it! And this is great, since I didn't really feel like looking for my resume' anyway. =)

More than anything, I want to make this photography thing work. I don't want to settle. Even when there seems to be no hope, and its time to hang up my camera, I muster everything I can to stand my ground, and keep fighting. I hope against hope that something will change, and I can move ever closer to being finished with my day-job. And once again things have changed. The tide has turned. This time more so than any other year. And I am so glad it has.

So why am I telling you this? Simple. Above all, I want to tell you to hang in there. Clich‚? Sure. But I really want us all to make it. Perhaps you're in the same boat I was in a few months ago. Don't give up. Pick up your camera and get out there and shoot. If you don't have any clients to shoot for, use the opportunity to sharpen your skills. Shoot as though you are practicing for the assignments you will have when things pick up. If you stay at it, and keep hustling for work, things will take a turn for the better. And if you've been "practicing," you'll be all the more prepared to deliver the level of photography you clients want. Use the time you have wisely. If you keep shooting, it won't be in vain.

Maybe you're not trying to make a living as a photographer, but in a creative rut. Hang in there. Keep at it. Things will change. You will break through that creative funk, and your photography will reach the next level. If you love it, do everything you can to push on to better things. If you give up, you will surely never improve.

Delivering images to a recent client...
"Here's your high resolution disc. Its been an honor to work with you...Yes, I would absolutely be interested in working with you on that later this year. I am more than willing to fly to those destinations to cover those events for you. I would love the opportunity to work with you on that!... I really look forward to talking with you more about it." I Did not see this one coming. So glad I never put down my camera! I am currently in negotiations with a company to photograph five, weeklong events this year. These five events would completely replace the income I make in an entire year at my part-time day job. And this could potentially be a yearly gig.

You just never know what's around the corner. Just a few months ago, I was seriously tempted to put my camera down, and giving up. But something in me refused. And now I have some great opportunities on the horizon. Sometimes we must hope against hope, keeping at it until something happens. This opportunity may not pan out. But, hey, it's a heck of a lot more exciting than leaving my camera on the shelf. And even if it doesn't work out, one day, one way or another, my entire income will be made with my camera. I'm fighting for those days. I vow, Lord willing, to never put down my camera.

Now, go out and shoot something!

Nikki C's Image Critique

2010-04-20T11:16:00.003-05:00

Hello everyone. Welcome to the new blog schedule. In case you missed it, business has been picking up, which means my time has become more scarce. So, in an attempt to keep my life balanced, I'll only be posting twice a week until further notice. Tuesdays will be critiques, and Thursdays will be technique and your questions answered. So keep sending in your images and questions, I'll still be offering my two cents. I'll also continue to post my work the first Friday of every month.

This past Sunday, I was glad to finally get out and shoot FOR FUN! Its funny how so many of us begin in photography for the pure enjoyment of it. But then we begin to make a living at it. And before we know it, though its still a lot of fun, we find ourselves shooting for everyone else but ourselves. I'm finding I have to fight for the opportunity to just go out and shoot for the fun of it. Sunday, there were six of us, plus my wife and daughter, who met downtown just for the fun of it. And, despite being very late (my daughter is 21 months old), and only shooting for an hour or so, it was great fun. Afterwards most of us even went out to eat (thank you Beki for diner!). I'm looking forward to doing this more and more. It helps my creativity to shoot for no one but myself. I'll be sure to let you know when our next GOYA shoot is, and hopefully more of you can join us. =)

Now, on to this week's image critique. This shot is sent in to us again from Nikki C. The shot is of a dude with some spiffy sunglasses on.

Overall, I think this image is pretty well executed. Most of the images I've been getting for the critiques have been very good, its been difficult to find much to improve on. And such is the case with this one. Being an editorial portrait photographer myself, I love the composition of this shot - subject heavy to the left, lots of dead space to the right, perfect for type. Of course, this is my style, and not everyone is gonna give the composition the same love I do. And that's okay. If we all saw everything the same way, and created everything exactly the same, photography would be a terrible thing. Ugh, the thought of that is almost to horrible to bear. . . anyway, back to the critique. . .

I also really like the stoic expression of the subject. It goes well with the shades. The reflection in the glasses is also nice; it adds to the interest of the image. I find myself trying to figure out what's going on in the reflection - where is he, what's he looking at, etc.

Lets discuss a few things that could make the image a bit stronger. I love the pure white background. But, judging by the dude's hair, the background was dropped out in post. This, of course is fine, it makes a great image, but the edge around the subject needs to be a bit cleaner. Its very difficult to see on the web, but his left jaw line, and all along his hair is a bit jagged. So watch out for that.

Another thing that could be tweaked is the contrast. The subject is a little flat. The skin tone and shirt are a little too grey. As is, its not bad. But boosting the contrast will give it just enough "pop" to take it to the next level.

Overall this shot is well done. A couple of tweaks and it'd be that much better. Nice job Nikki! Keep up the good work!

Anyone have anything else to add? Feel free to post a comment below. Also, let me take another opportunity to say to anyone out there, you are welcome to send in your images for critique at toddwalkerphotography@gmail.com . Also e-mail me any photography related questions and I'll do my best to answer anything I can. I'm not the end-all authority on photography, but together we all can help each other improve our craft.

Tune in Thursday for the next post. Until then...

Go out and shoot something!

A Little This & That...

2010-04-14T09:53:00.003-05:00

Well, its Springtime. The weather is finally warming up, the trees are beginning to bud, and I've started mowing my yard. It's a welcomed change from the doldrums of winter. Along with the new season comes another welcomed change for a photographer: business begins to pick up again. And such is the case for me. This weekend I shot a prom and senior session, have a commercial shoot lined up for this week, a GOYA shoot of sorts set for Sunday afternoon, and a wedding in the works. I love being busy doing what I love. It makes me feel alive.

The reason I'm bringing all this up is I have a bit of a conundrum. With all that's been going on, my time is beginning to be eaten up. So, in an attempt to properly balance my business time with family time, Beginning next week, I will be changing my posting schedule. Instead of Mon-Wed-Fri, I'll be posting Image Critiques on Tuesdays, and combining technique with answering your questions on Thursdays. I'll still be posting my First Friday Photos the first Friday of every month. We'll see how things go. Of course, It'll be my prerogative to post more often whenever possible, which I hope will be more often than not. I've loved doing this blog, and judging by the feedback, many of you have enjoyed it as well.

Now, on to some other things. First of all, has everyone heard that the season finale' of the T.V. show "HOUSE" has been shot entirely with the Canon 5D Mrk II? You can read about it HERE. This is very intriguing to me, and I am going to do my best to watch it. Its amazing to me the advances in technologies in our craft. The ability to shoot HD video with a still-frame camera has changed, and continues to change our industry forever. It also speaks to the desire of people to be creative. Though I am to the core a creator of still images, I love that so many others have been given the opportunity to expand their creativity from stills to motion. One day, I'm sure I'll dabble in the art of video. But I don't see that happening in the near future. I'm having too much fun making photographs. Plus, I don't know how so many are finding the time to learn this new medium. I do well just to keep moving forward and improving my photoggin' skills. But to those who are making the jump, more power to you! Keep on creating! Anyway, "HOUSE" should prove to be a very interesting. I'll be tuning in for sure.

One last thing I want to mention. This coming Sunday at 4:00, me, Beki Tillotson, and several other local photographers will be meeting in downtown Tulsa for an informal "GOYA" shoot. If you live in the Tulsa area (or want to drive to the Tulsa area), and are free, come on down and join us! Its going to be a totally informal "lets-all-get-together-and-shoot" shoot. Also, bring someone with you who is willing to be a model. Its always better if there are plenty of models to go around. Oh, so what does "GOYA" mean? It stands for "Get Off Your Arse And" shoot. Sometimes we need a little kick in the backside to get us going. That's what a GOYA shoot is intended to do. So, this Sunday, 4:00pm, downtown Tulsa at 1209 S. Frankfort Suite 400 . See you there! And until then...

Go out and shoot something!

Garrett D's Image Critique...

2010-04-12T11:32:00.002-05:00

Happy Monday everyone. For those of you who have been following the blog, you undoubtedly noticed I skipped Friday's post. I had an incredibly busy week/weekend, and simply didn't have the time to get onto my computer. Sorry about not posting it, but it was great to be busy =).

This week's image up for critique comes to us from my buddy Garret D. from Springfield, Mo. He's fairly new to photography, but has developed quite an eye. The image he sent is one from his very first senior photo session, shot just a few weeks ago. And if I remember correctly, he shot it on film - actual, 35mm negative print film. Garret shoots a great deal of his work on film, because it fits his style. Good for you Garrett. Way to stick to your guns. So lets get to it...

Overall, especially for a first senior session, the image is pretty well executed. We all know, posing/directing our subjects is difficult. And multiply that ten times over when it's a person we don't know. I still struggle with engaging, directing, and posing my subjects. I am much better than when I began, but I still have a long way to go in my "directing" skills. Natural people skills are a plus, but directing a subject on a shot demands something more. If we are going to be photographing people, then we must be committed to developing our directing skills. And this comes largely from experience. In this image, the subject's expression is very good. He looks relaxed, and is engaging the viewer. Best of all, it looks like something is going on in his mind. With this sort of expression, it wouldn't be much of a stretch to get a blank, unengaged look. So nice job on that.

Aside from some problems with the composition, which I'll touch on in a moment, I like the use of leading lines. The bottom of the fence on the left, and the bottom of the wall on the right lead the eye right into the subject. This, too, was well done.

Lets look at a few things that could improve the image. The first thing I'd like to mention is the subject's pose. Generally, it makes for a more pleasing pose to angle the shoulders one way or the other. This would create an angle to the subject's shoulders, and project a more interesting pose. Also, whenever the shoulders are squared to the camera it widens the subject, which isn't so bad for males, but not usually appreciated by the ladies (for the most part, the squared shouldered pose here isn't bad. It works pretty good. BUT, it may be a bit stronger to angle 'em. I mention this mostly for the sake of discussion).

The next thing I'd like to point out is the composition. Notice how the subject's head is smack in the middle of the frame. It would be a stronger image if you were to drop the camera so his head is in the upper third of the frame. THEN, turn the camera to the right, so the subject is in the left third of the frame. You would still have the leading lines of the wall, which would still lead the eye to the subject. Also, by turning the camera to the right, you would nearly eliminate the blown-out highlight area on the left side of the frame. This bright area is somewhat distracting, drawing the eye away from the subject. Shooting in the open shade of an alleyway is a great place for a shoot (I shot several frames this way in downtown Tulsa just yesterday). But you have to be careful of the contrast between the shade and direct sunlight. If both areas are in the frame, exposing for the shade will likely blowout the area in the sun. Adversely, if you expose for the sunlit area, your subject will probably be too dark. It makes life much easier if you avoid this mix of lights in your frame, if you can help it.

But lets say, you shot it this way, and this is the image you have to work with (I end up in this scenario more times than I'd like to admit). What can we do? One thing we can do, without going into a ton of fancy-pants photoshopping is to crop down some. With this image, we can still achieve the above results simply by cropping the image. Here's what I'm talking about:

Notice how the subject is to the left of the image, and his head is now towards the top of the frame. Also, the bright area has been greatly reduced, much less distracting (Thanks Garrett, for letting me hack your photo). =)

One last thing to watch out for is things in the background behind your subject. Notice how the doorway to the right of the subject's head comes very close to intersecting the head. Its great that it doesn't, but would be that much better if there were more separation between the two.

Overall, Garrett, its a great first senior photo! And, having seen many of the others from the shoot, you did an outstanding job! Thank you for letting us see and discuss your work. We look forward to seeing more of your stuff as you continue to pursue your photography. Keep it up!

Now, go out and shoot something!

Film vs. Digital

2010-04-07T12:30:00.003-05:00

In this corner... As many of you know, I work part time at a pro camera shop in Tulsa. Since digital took over the photographic industry a few years ago, many people have crossed over kicking and screaming. Most of the apprehension towards digital is because of the idea that "film is better." Years ago, I agreed that digital would never come close to matching the quality of film. But, a few years ago its like they flipped a switch and **BAM** down goes film. The quality of a digital image became better than film, and has continued to improve since then. But telling this to the die hard film shooters is like telling Chicken Little the sky ISN'T falling. Am I saying people shouldn't shoot film? Absolutely not. I'm saying the image quality is better. But, if your vision in photography is best achieved shooting film, then digital would be a poor choice. What I am saying is digital is no longer a poor photographic medium. And to be shooting film because "film is better," is a misguided decision. Film is as good as it ever was. AND digital is even better, and continuing to improve. So, for the short time we still have film at our disposal, shoot whichever one fulfills your vision.

Years ago, I loved shooting film. But my first "professional" camera I bought during school was digital, and haven't shot any film since (about 4 years). Well, this past weekend I decided to shoot both film and digital. It was nothing official, just family snapshots over Easter weekend. I had a D200 set at ISO400, and a N6006 w/ 400 speed film. I didn't set out to compare the two. Rather, I simply wanted to shoot both mediums. I shot both available light and flash. After the weekend, here's a few thoughts about the two mediums.

First of all, digital is so much faster. Each day I was able to take my mem card, plug it into my mac, drag some sliders in lightroom, upload them to Facebook for the family to see, and done. I had to wait until Monday to have the film processed, scanned to cd, then into the computer, and here it is Wednesday and I still haven't had a chance to post them on Facebook.

One nice thing about film is it forced me to slow down. Getting in a hurry is my downfall. But having only 3 rolls of film for the entire weekend made me think about each shot, being sure every shot counted. And that was nice. With my D200, I cranked off too many poor shots.

But in the end, it all came down to the image quality. And for my style of shooting, its digital all the way. The dynamic range, detail, contrast, handling of noise (grain), and color were all far superior from my D200 than my N6006. After all these years, with many fond thoughts of shooting film, I gave it a go once again. But I discovered that my memories of film were somewhat fluffed up, romanticized. To give you an idea of how things came out, here's a couple of examples from the weekend.

This one is available light on film

And a similar one in the same available light with digital

This shot is with an sb-800 light to balance the sky on film

And this is the exact same light and camera settings with digital

These images are not state fair ribbon winning photographs. But they were a couple of the best examples I had to show the difference between film and digital, in my experience. Over the weekend my aim was not to compare the two. But once I saw the difference, I had to share them. Perhaps one day I'll do a more "scientific" testing.

Film still has its place in the industry. There are many photogs out there making some pretty amazing images on film. And some are making serious bank doing so. So if that's you, awesome. Keep rippin' those rolls. If you're like me and shooting digital, awesome. Keep heating up those mem cards. But in either case, stop the debate over which is better. Both allow for amazing work and stellar images. So pick one and get out there and capture your vision.

Now, go out and shoot something!

Beki T's Image Critique

2010-04-05T09:35:00.002-05:00

Good morning everyone. I trust you all had a good Resurrection day yesterday. We had a wonderful weekend with Jenny’s family in northern Missouri, filled with good food, lots of chocolate, and dozens of hidden eggs.

Now its Monday, and everybody’s back to the grind. So lets get to it… This week’s image up for critique comes from my good friend, Ms. Black & White herself, Beki T. You can check out her work HERE; and her super informative blog HERE. If you’re a photographer at any level, I’d highly recommend looking into her blog!

The image she sent in is a BW detail shot of a hand against an obscure and out-of-focus background. Being an abstract detail type of shot, this kind of image is very subjective. The image is subjective to the interpretation of the viewer. And regardless of what I, or anyone else says, the viewer either likes the image or they don’t. It’s that simple.

I like the feel of the image. There’s a story behind this image – a story I, the viewer, am free to narrate. It makes me think to myself “what’s this person doing? Is she going somewhere? Or is she looking at something she’s already done?” The darkness of the overall image makes me lean towards the later, thinking the subject has just done something dark and sinister. But hey, that’s me. That’s my subjectivity. Overall, the image is intriguing, interesting. It makes me stop and think, and wonder what’s going on. What do you think is going on?

Lets take a look at the technical aspect f the image. I like the shallow depth of field. Isolating the subject from the background is a major key to making this shot work. It looks like a very busy background, which would distract from the subject. By being out of focus, our eye is lead straight to the hand. And, while we’re on it, for all the gear-geeks out there, the Bokeh is quite nice =).

I’m not sure what the colors were like, but the use of black and white works well. It helps serve my dark narrative for the shot. As does the high level of contrast. The contrast brings out the gritty dirt on the palm. Which again adds to my case for the dark scenario.

I also like the composition, lots of dead space on the left. Of course, I shoot in an editorial style, so go figure. Concerning the composition, I like how there’s near black on the left, graduating to lighter as we look right, then back to a darker grey tone on the subject’s shirt. This creates a stark contrast between the BG and the subjects hand, and keeps our eye right there.

The only thing I can nit-pick about this image is its exposure. Again, I stress “nit-pick.” Now, if the aim of this image was in fact a darker scenario, then it was nailed. However, if the intention was a more pleasant scene, then it needs to be brighter. And, the dirt on the hand needs smoothed out or removed. But again, this all depends on the intent of the final result.

So that’s it. That’s my two cents for this week. And, as usual, everyone reading this is welcome to offer their comments on this shot. Its an open forum. So feel free to make a comment, suggestion, or ask a question. As iron sharpens iron, together we sharpen one another’s skills in our craft.

Lastly, for those of you in the TULSA area, be on the lookout for an upcoming announcement. There might just be a hip new photoggin’ club starting soon. =).

Now, go out and shoot something!

First Friday Photos

2010-04-02T08:00:00.002-06:00

Here's a sampling of what I created in the month of March. Feel free to give me your honest opinions as a comment! Happy Easter everyone, have a great weekend, and go out and shoot something!

See you next week!

Completely Concerning Copyrights

2010-03-31T08:34:00.004-06:00

Lately I’ve been increasingly interested in copyrights; what it is, what its for, who’s it for, and why I should care. I run into a lot of my fellow photogs who don’t care about copyright, are willing to give it away for free, or look down on anyone who does care about copyrights. This ought not be the case. If you’re a photographer, especially if you are making a living at it, you need to understand copyrights. We ought to understand our right, and hold that right in high regard.

First of all, a copyright is your right. Anytime you create a photograph, it yours for 75 years after your death. After that, it belongs to the public (at that point, anyone can do anything they please with what you create). This means, if I create an image at age 30, live ‘til I’m 80, then that image is owned by me or my linage for125 years! This gives me a great deal of incentive to keep shooting. Why? Because of all that I invest into an image, once I create it, I own it. My work is protected. Does this mean it will never be stolen? Hardly. But, if they do, I can take legal action, reclaiming any revenue I may be owed.

Copyright not a new concept. According to John Harrington in his book "Best Business Practices for Photgraphers," he points out that "copyrights are included by our founding fathers, spelled out in the US Constitution." To those of you out there who think copyrights aren’t all that important, chew on this: "In Section 8, the Constitution stipulates that congress shall 'promote the Progress of Science and useful arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries.' This is found within the first 1,600 words of our Constitution that, without amendments, is approx. 4,500 words in length. This exclusive right explanation comes before a discussion of who can be the president and how, before the rules and obligations of the states, and before the Bill of Rights, and all the other amendments such as ending slavery, right to bear arms, and women’s rights." This was the basis for copyright. Not even on the amendments, but on the body of the Constitution itself. It is a big deal, and has been throughout modern history.

Here’s a personal reason I care about copyright laws.

A few years back, my Dad retired from the Tulsa Fire Department. As a gift, I photographed his bunker gear on the ladder truck he drove throughout his career (this is the image at the top of this post). We then matted the photograph with a large matte, framed it, and had firefighters from all over the Tulsa area who’d worked with Dad over the years sign the matte board. The gift was a huge hit. Everyone loved it. I soon began to have firefighters from Dad’s station begin to ask me to create them a similar image of their bunker gear. They insisted they’d pay me for my work. So, one afternoon, I arrived at my Dad’s old station and spent several hours capturing the different images. I then spent a great deal of time creating the final images in PS. After that, I returned to the station and presented 5x7 proofs to each of them, along with a list of prices for prints.

That’s the last I ever heard from them. Now, I have no way of knowing for sure if my images have been illegally reproduced and thus my copyright infringed. But, based on the amount of enthusiasm of my “clients”, and then the utter lack of communication since, I have a sinking feeling there are several 8x10s and 11x14s of my work hanging some walls somewhere. And I have nothing to show for it. I am NOT saying these guys are outright crooks. To the contrary, they truly are Tulsa’s finest, many of whom are my Dad’s lifelong friends. If my copyright has been infringed, it is likely due to ignorance of the law, rather than outright malice.

But either way, I did a lot of work, created several unique images, and received no compensation. I did, however, learn a TON from that endeavor. Like the importance of copyrights, educating clients about copyrights, charging a “creative” fee up front, using a contract, not giving large hard copies for proofs, following up with phone calls/emails afterwards – something, anything but the way I handled things.

So why not take action and get what I’m owed for these images? A couple of reasons. 1) like I said, I'm not even sure they have been reproduced. I’d have to go into these guys’ houses and seen it for myself. Then I’d have to prove it in a court of law. And I’m not willing to do that for reason 2) these men are my Father’s friends. They each are responsible for keeping one another safe (alive) fighting countless dangerous fires over the years. If they did infringe on my copyright, I’m okay with that. They helped my dad make it to retirement free of major injury. If I had it to do over again, due to the unique situation, I would have insisted on doing it for free and given high resolution images on discs. Instead, because of the way I handled it, it created an awkward situation.

For more information on the subject, I would suggest reading “Best Business Practices for Photographers” by John Harrington; “The Law, in Plain English, for Photographers” by Leonard D. Duboff; “Legal Handbook for Photographers: The Rights and Liabilities of Making Images” by Bert P. Kranges; and “Copyright in Historical Perspective” by Lyman Ray Patterson.

So there. A lot of words about copyrights. Your work is protected. You should be compensated for your created work. You have a right to take action for stolen work. You should respect the copyrights of others.

Oh, and don’t even get me started on everyone out there who is pirating (stealing) copies of Photoshop, Lightroom, and the like. These too are protected under Federal Copyright Laws. How, in good conscience, can anyone expect their copyright to be respected when the photographs have been created on stolen (copyright infringed) software? That is a massive double standard at the vary least, and outright criminal if caught. Just as we have the right to take legal action against those who steal our images, so too the software companies have the right to take legal action against those who steal their software. But that’s a whole other post. One which I will likely write in the near future. =)

Now, go out and shoot something!

Stacy F's Image Critique

2010-03-29T08:36:00.003-06:00

First off, let me start by saying I need more images to critique, and questions to answer. I have a few more in each category, but I’ll be needing more soon. So, if you’re out there reading this, and need/would like to have one or more images critiqued, you can e-mail them to me (high resolution please, I’ll format them for the web) at toddwalkerphotography@gmail.com. I know many of you following this blog have questions. If you’ve noticed, I haven’t been putting names to the questions, so you don’t have to feel stupid, like you’re the only one out there who doesn’t know – even though you aren’t. So e-mail your questions, no matter how “dumb” or insignificant they may be. Okay? Okay. Now on to the image critique.

This week’s image comes to us again from Stacy. Its her second to be put up for discussion. The image is a detail shot of a flower with water drops on the petals. Now I’ll be the first to tell you that I’m not a macro/flower/pretty-shapes-made-with-water-drops expert. I'm a portrait photographer. However, I do have an eye for beauty and I know what I like. And I like this shot, and have a few things to say. BUT, on any shot like this, I’ll always defer to you nature photographers out there. If that’s you, please post your thoughts in the comments section below.

First thing I like is the tight composition. This helps to accentuate the drops of water all over the frame. Its busy, but in a good way. It has good contrast which make it a striking image. There’s good specular highlights on the water drops; good texture to the petals; and the black background was a good choice. Though, I’d be interested to see this same shot on a white bg. Scratch that, I just swapped the bg in PS and it’s not nearly as nice white as it is black. So nice choice. Overall a very nicely done image.

Here’s a couple of things I’d like to point out. Not necessarily negatives, but some things to help us think a bit. This type of subject is suitable for selective focusing. Though I think the deep depth of focus works well, you could also use a very shallow depth of focus and highlight say, one petal, or one row or droplets. You can do this of course by opening up your aperture to say f/3.5 or f/2.8 or larger.

Another thing that you could do is limit the amount of water droplets. If you had say even only one large drop, it would draw the eye to one focal point. This would create a completely different image, the drop itself would become the main subject, and the flower merely environmental.

Again, these are merely pointed out for thinking and discussion. The image as is, is great. Keep up the good work Stacy!

Now, go out and shoot something!

Your Questions Answered: What's your post production workflow?

2010-03-27T14:10:00.001-06:00

One of the most important aspects of our craft is a good post-production workflow. A poor workflow can drive you crazy. If you're trying to make money in photography, you can waist a lot of time with a poor production workflow - and time is money. The more efficient you are with your post production, the more time you'll have to do other important lucrative things - building relationships with clients, making contact with potential clients, working on your skills, creating more images, and the list goes on. Being stuck at your computer keeps you away from some very important stuff.

The thing that has streamlined my post production workflow is to pursue capturing everything I possibly can in the camera. I am passionate about this pursuit. If spend the time on a shoot to capture my vision in camera, then I won't have to spend that time later in post. I've found slowing down to fix problems during a shoot is time well spent; while waiting to fix problems after the shoot at the computer becomes a time waster. Its inevitable. Happens every time.

Here's a quick look at my workflow, start to finish. Shoot the images. Copy the images onto two hard drives for backup. Load the images into Lightroom. Delete the clunkers. Then adjust the keepers. And I use the word "adjust" deliberately. Since I've done what I can to get 'em right in camera, I now only have to do minor adjustments to exposure, color, contrast, etc. I usually spend only a couple of minutes tops on an image. After that, some of the images may still require some photoshoping - remove acne, wrinkles, the person walking in the background I failed to notice etc. After that, I save the final images, and done. I recently watched a video of Zack Arias' workflow and was surprised that his workflow is almost identical to the way I've been doing it for a long time now. He utilizes one more program for loading/organizing his images on his hard drives, but then its into LR, a tad of PS, then done. For a more in-depth look at a similar workflow to mine, check out his video HERE. The nice thing about Zack posting his video is I don't have to do a video on it. Thanks Zack!! =)

Having said all of that, I'm continually looking for ways to be more efficient. So ask me again in 6 months, and its likely to be different.

Now, go out and shoot something!

Portraiture 101: Lenses

2010-03-24T08:32:00.002-06:00

I seem to be coming across photogs out there that are confused about the same thing: which lens to use for portraits. As you all well know, I do not ascribe to this ideas that we need a new piece of equipment to be better photographers. Put simply, the number one thing new gear does for us is drain our bank account. If we would only understand the limitations of our gear, we could then maximize its capability. We must master the equipment we already own. But I digress. When it comes to shooting portraits certain lenses, more specifically, certain focal lengths are better than others.

If you don’t want to read the rest of the post, with all the ‘splainin’, here’s the short version: For the most flattering headshots, shoot with a focal length somewhere between 85-100mm. That’s it.

For the longer version, here we go… **big stretch**deep breath**and, go…

When it comes to portraiture, which focal length to choose depends on the type of shot you’ll be taking. If you plan on taking a tight, head-and-shoulders shot you will get the most pleasing results shooting somewhere in the 85-100mm range. Why is this? Can’t we get the same tight shot with a 50mm by just moving in closer? Well, yes and no. With a wider lens, you can move physically closer to your subject and achieve a similar composition. However, shooting in this manner will distort your subject’s face. The closer you get to your subject, the closer they are to the curvature of the front element of the lens. This will cause the subject’s nose/face to bulge, looking unnatural. Shooting between 85-100mm, we get the same tight composition, but we are further away from the subject. More importantly, the subject is far away from the curvature of the front element of the lens. This keeps the subject’s nose /face from bulging, and therefore looking natural.

What about shooting with a focal length longer than 100mm? Can’t we use a 300mm and just move back? Again, yes and no. Shooting with a lens longer than 100mm you begin to have the opposite effect. The more we zoom in on something the more it compresses the image. So, the further past 100mm you get, the more compressed your subject’s nose/face becomes, looking flatter than it should.

To put it another way, shooting with a focal length between 85mm and 100mm eliminates the unflattering facial distortion wide-angle lenses are notorious for, while avoiding the compression long telephoto lenses give.

So which is it? 85mm or 100mm? There’s a massive debate over that one. In my opinion, it doesn’t really matter. In my honest opinion, anywhere between 85mm and 100mm is pleasing for close-up portraits. What about using a prime lens or a zoom? The nice thing about zooms that incorporate the 85-100mm range is the flexibility to pick 85mm, 100mm or anywhere in between. Plus, you don’t have to move your tripod or model each time you recompose the shot. On the other hand, Prime lenses tend to be sharper than zooms, but you loose the flexibility. So, pick your poison.

Most entry-level SLRs come with an 18-55mm lens. If this is all you can afford, then simply stay away from tight headshots to keep from distorting your subjects. If, however, you need to shoot tight headshots (to fulfill your vision), and you can afford it (without going into debt), then consider another lens. The complimentary lens you can pick up for a modest investment is the 55-200mm for Nikon, and the 55-250mm for Canon. These are relatively inexpensive and incorporate the 85-100mm focal length.

Again, this is all applies to tight, head-and-shoulder shots. Anything other type of portrait (3/4 length, full length, wide environmental, etc), you can use just about any focal length you want. For all of you out there confused about focal lengths, I hope things are a bit more clear.

Now, go out and shoot something!

April C's Image Critique (#2)

2010-03-22T10:36:00.002-06:00

Friday, Jenny and I went out to eat, then hit the IMAX to watch Alice in Wonderland in 3D. It was brilliant. The day was beautifully sunny, reaching a delightful 70 degrees. But then it was over and Saturday came. We woke up to 8 inches of snow, and hit a frosty high of 32 degrees. How’s that for the first day of Spring? Gotta’ love Oklahoma weather. But I digress…

This week we have another image from April C. She’s the first to have a second image critiqued. I’m honored that several of you have sent in multiple images for me to scrutinize. From all the feedback, its been a worthy and beneficial exercise. So as long as you keep sending in the images, I’ll keep giving them my two cents.

April’s image this week is of a girl dancing, captured on a pure white background. I’d like to start with covering what’s great about the image. First of all, I love the posing of the subject. There’s a ton of movement, showing a good amount of motion. This is perfect for a dancer. I really like the movement of the hair. Its crazy, all over the place, but you can still see much of the subject’s face. I also really like the posing of the subject’s body. Every joint is bent, which adds so much interest to the subject. Overall, the posing is excellent.

Another thing I like is the composition. I am a huge fan of dead space. Maybe its because I tend to have an editorial style to my own work. At any rate, it’s a great use of the extra dead space to the right of the subject. Its perfect for any use – it’d look great framed on the wall; and it’d be great for a magazine spread. It’s very multi-usable (is that a word?).

Now, on to the negative. First of all, the white background isn’t actually pure white. I'm sure its hard to see here on the blog, but there are areas that have a light grey hue. There’s a grey outline around the subject, and a grey line running across the top of the image. This is an easy fix in photoshop. All we have to do is use the dodge tool and clean it up a bit. If you’ve been following the blog for a while, you know how much I preach capturing the image IN CAMERA and not relying on photoshop to fix things. Well, this is one area I think photoshop is essential in creating the image. If you’ve ever shot a white seamless background, you know how hard it is to get it pure white. The lighting has to be perfect. You have to light your subject separately from your background. Then you have to light the background around 1.5 stops brighter than the subject exposure. And it has to be lit very evenly. This is usually done with at least three lights. To get everything perfect is very, very difficult. And even when you think everything is perfect, you open up the image in post only to find the BG is a tad grey. In this type of shooting, its almost a given you’ll be cleaning this stuff up in post. And it’ll take all of 30 seconds to do. So this is one of the few times you’ll here me say “this is an easy fix in photoshop.”

The only other thing that I find problematic is the light spilling over the subjects right leg. It looks as though a BG light is spilling back into the camera, just enough to wipe out the contrast on that leg. This is something that could have been fixed on set with better placement of a flag to block the light spill. But say you didn’t notice it while shooting (slow down), this too can be fixed in photoshop. Just burn it in a little and you’ll have your contrast back. But this just adds time at the computer fixing stuff, instead of using that time for creativity.

Overall though, you’ve captured a great image April! Thanks for sending it in. If anyone has anything to add, leave a comment.

Now, go out and shoot something!

Your Questions Answered: "What do you shoot with?"

2010-03-19T17:56:00.003-06:00

I’ve gotten the question that every photographer asks every other photographer in the world: “What do you shoot with?” I really try hard not to make a big deal out of equipment. I don’t get into the Canon vs. Nikon, zooms vs. primes, blah blah blah. The reason is simple. I’ve seen images made with disposable 35mm film cameras that could run circles around some of the high-end pro cameras. To me the final image is the most important. When it comes right down to it, I couldn’t care less about what a person shoots with, so long as he or she is able to capture their vision. A good image is a good image. Period. The end. Game over. To read my opinion of essential gear, read this post HERE. At any rate, I’ve been asked the question so many times, I figure I’ll go ahead and answer the question. But I must warn you, you may be disappointed. My bag is far from glamorous.

What I use 99% of the time

Nikon D200 (you know, vintage)

Tamron 28-75 f/2.8

Nikon SB-800 (used for most of my portrait work)

(2) Pocket Wizard Plus II Transceivers (used to fire my flash)

(1) Light Stand

(1) Umbrella Adapter

(1) 45” Shoot-through Umbrella

Plus plenty of memory cards and batteries.

I also own, and use occasionally:

Nikon 18-200mm VR f/3.5-5.6 (used for a backup, and trips to the Zoo)

(3) Promaster 300ws studio strobes (inexpensive, but they get the job done)

(3) Light Stands

(2) 24x36” Softboxes

100ft extension cord

For most shoots, I can fit everything I need in a Tamrac 506, and carry a lightstand and umbrella. And that’s it. Is there gear out there I’d like to add to my bag? Sure. There’s some things out there that would help me fulfill my photographic vision. What would those things be? First and foremost, a new camera. Wait, what?!? What about all that “using your D200 till it dies talk in your essential gear post?” As I am beginning to shoot more and more weddings, I am finding I need a backup camera, for obvious reasons. Though my friends have been awesome about letting me borrow theirs for backups, having my own only makes sense.

Another thing I’d love to have is the ability to take my studio strobe on location, without the need to plug them in – ie, portable power. I’ve done amazing stuff with my SB-800, but to progress in my photographic vision, I’m needing more power. So I’m looking into that as well. I also wouldn’t mind having a wide angle prime lens, like the 20mm f/1.8 I borrowed from Nikki C. two weeks ago, and fell in love with. But for now, that’d be a luxury.

So for all you equipment geeks out there, there you go. But please, don’t go out and buy anything you see on my list thinking it will make you a better photographer. It won’t. The only thing that will make you a better photographer is you, not another piece of equipment.

Now, forget the equipment, and go out and shoot something!

Fighting Fire with Fire: a brief introduction to using light to control light

2010-03-17T08:26:00.003-06:00

W. Eugene Smith was a legendary staff photographer for Life magazine. Concluding a lecture at Syracuse University he was asked “Mr. Smith, is the only good light available light?” “Yes,” he said and paused. A shudder ran through the crowd. That was it! No more flash! God’s light or nothing! But then he leaned back into the microphone, “By that, I mean any &*%%@$# light that’s available” (as told by Joe McNally in his book The Moment It Clicks).

Today I want to talk a little bit about how we can use light to control light. And I stress “a little bit.” Using flash is a massive subject, for which there is loads of information out there, and of which I am no expert. I have come a long way in my understanding of light and how to use it. But compared to Jeremy Cowart, Joe McNally, David Hobby, or Zack Arias, I'm just a hack with a light on a stick (but one day I’ll give them a run for their money =) ).

There are purists out there who will only shoot in available (ambient) sunlight. And I used to be one of them. Flash photography was sub-par, and to be avoided. But what did I know, I was young and ignorant. Looking back, this was not an informed decision. More than anything, I was scared of using flash, and thus, flash was bad. However, once I began to learn how we can use flash light to control available light, it opened up a whole new universe of creativity. With flash, we no longer have to avoid the harsh midday sun. Flash can control it, and we can shoot from sunup to sundown. With enough flash power, we have the ability to turn day into night (just check out this shot by Zack Arias). Once we learn how to use flash, we can become a true “Available Light” photographer, taking advantage of any light that’s available, including that hotshoe flash in our bag.

So lets get to the understandin’ part. In outdoor portraiture we have the ability to knock down the harsh sun simply by implementing a flash. Shutter Speed controls continuous light, while Aperture controls flash light. This is critical. Continuous light is controlled by Shutter Speed. Flash light is controlled by Aperture. Flash to Aperture, Continuous to Shutter. Tattoo that on your brain.

Here’s a down and dirty ‘splainin’ of how that works. Set up your flash to light your subject. Then expose for the flash by adjusting the aperture. With a hotshoe flash, you can usually get up to somewhere around f/11, depending on whether you use a modifier (i.e. softbox, umbrella etc.) or not. Then, expose for the continuous light by adjusting the shutter speed. You can darken the scene with a faster shutter speed, or lighten the scene with a slower shutter speed. Lets look at what I mean, with a real life example.

Here’s a shot of my good friend Aaron and his sister Amy. I shot both families together a few weeks back. The shoot had everything going against it. It was super windy, very cold, and in the harsh midday sun. Why didn’t we schedule it for later in the year when its warmer? Aaron and his family live north of Springfield, MO. Amy and her family live in Tulsa. Getting both families from different states available on the same day I was free for a shoot, was near impossible. We’d been trying to book a date for months. Finally a day in late January looked to be our only choice. Between the two families, there were five children under the age of 5, two of which were newborns. Starting at noon was the only nap-free time of the day. So noon it was. Here’s what the available light was allowing:

Shot at ISO100, f/6.3 at 1/250^th. Harsh and nasty. Luckily though, I’m an available light photographer. I also used an SB-800 flash, because I had it available =). Knowing that adding flash can nock down a harsh sunlight, whipped it out, set it up, and started shooting. Here’s the result:

ISO100, f/11 at 1/250^th. Much better balance. Not perfect, but a heck of a lot better than straight sunlight. Notice the smoother skin tone, the lighter shadows, and the deeper blue sky – all captured IN CAMERA. No photoshop needed here. And it saved countless hours and headaches trying to fix these problems later in post production.

Occasionally we will find ourselves shooting in a situation that is less than ideal. Having the knowledge and tools to adapt will allow us to capture our vision even in the poorest environment. The key to this technique is to properly balance the flash with the ambient light. If not properly balanced, the image can look unnatural. So be careful of that.

This post is only the tip of the iceberg, so to speak. A mere introduction to what is possible when we use every light that is available to us, including flash. Much of the time, the existing light works great for an image. But many times, what’s there simply won’t work. In these situations, having the know-how to control the environment with flash can allow us to create images otherwise not possible. For more information about this technique I highly recommend you check out David Hobby’s Strobist website, or Zack Arias’ Onelight Workshops and/or DVDs. Heck, even Popular Photography even has a post about it. As a creative, you owe it to yourself to at least explore what flash has to offer. It might just kick your photography to a new level.

Now, go out and shoot something!

Brad V's Image Critique

2010-03-15T08:32:00.005-06:00

Good morning everyone. Time for another image critique. This week’s image comes to us from Brad V. Brad came across the blog while reading the discussion board on Jasmine Star’s facebook page. That’s one of the many places I stay plugged into in the greater photography community, giving back as much as I can. Brad told me he’s new to photography, and would appreciate any advice I (we) could give.

First off, I’d like to reiterate that I do not take these critiques lightly. I offer them for one purpose: to help others improve. I never mean to offend, but neither will I sugar-coat my thoughts. So, with that said, lets get to it.

The image is a sort of a fashion shot of a woman in an alley. Overall, I think the image is pretty well done. It looks to be shot in available daylight, exposed well. Whenever we use available daylight, shooting in the open shade works well for portraiture. If we shoot in direct sunlight, the highlights can be too harsh and the shadows too dark. The open shade gives us that nice diffused light, resulting in a nice buttery skin tone. It was a great choice for this shot.

Next lets look at the composition. Overall the crouching position of the subject works well. If the image is intended as a portrait, one thing that would make it stronger would be to have the subject’s eyes looking at the camera. In portraiture, eyes are a person’s most important feature. They are the window to the soul. With the eyes looking to the camera, it would solidify a deeper connection with the viewer. It would draw the viewer into the image, and more than that, into the subject herself. The pose is pleasing, but eye contact would give greater impact to the image. On the other hand, if the aim is to showcase the outfit, a fashion shot, the eyes are much less important. In fact, by having the eyes looking away from the camera, the viewer is inclined to stay focused on the clothing, which is what you want in a fashion shot. The subject’s expression is fine overall, but depending on whether it’s a portrait or fashion, the eyes could be recomposed.

One thing that bugs me, just a little, is the subject’s left hand. This is a nit-picky thing to mention. But it seems a bit awkward. Perhaps moving the hand up to the waist, rotating the wrist so the thumb points towards her back, would look more natural. But again, this is a nit-pick. I only mention it to keep us continually thinking.

The next thing concerning the composition I’d like to discuss is the background. I like the alleyway. It’s a nice contrast to the beauty of the subject. But the placement of the subject needs to be adjusted. I’m can’t help but notice the dark line running through the subjects head. There’s a nice, dark blue building that abruptly stops and turns to bright white right behind the subject’s head. One thing we could do is move the camera around to the right, filling up the entire background with the dark blue building. This would give a consistent color behind the subject, which would be less distracting. Now, of course I have no idea what is to the left, if it would even be possible to do this. But assuming the blue building continues, this would be a much more pleasing background.

Lets say, however, something prohibited us from moving the camera, and this angle is all we have to work with. Another thing we could do is center our subject’s head between the blue building and the telephone pole. This would better frame our subject’s head. If there isn’t enough room, and I cringe as I type this, we may have to do a minor bit of photoshop to remove the pole. I cringe because we must strive to capture the perfect image in the camera. We should NEVER rely on photoshop to fix sloppy photography. Slow down, think it through, take the shot. More times than not, we are able to fix any problems we have, before we shoot it. If we commit to being disciplined in this manner, we are then able to use photoshop for creativity, not for fixing poor photography. (okay, stepping down from the soap box now…) If, as a last resort, we have to remove the telephone pole in post production, at least there wouldn’t be anything intersecting her head – always a plus =).

All in all Brad, you’ve succeeded in creating a nice image. If you are new to the craft, you have a good eye on which to build. Keep up the great work and check in from time to time to let us know how things are going!

Now, go out and shoot something!

First Friday Photos (on the 2nd Saturday)

2010-03-13T09:53:00.005-06:00

So its finally First Friday Photos!! Though, its actually the second Saturday. Its been crazy around here for me, a roller coaster of sorts. Along with everything else, I've got a confession to make. You know the term "starving artist"? I find myself identifying with that label more time than not. You see, I'm in the beginning of this career called Photography. I don't have it all together. I'm not rolling in dough. I have to hustle for every dollar I can get, just to make ends meet. And that's fine with me. And more importantly, its okay with my beautiful and loving wife. She is more than supportive. As for my confession. Well, I don't have internet connection at home. That's right, I'm in the dark ages. Why? Simply put, times are tough. So how do I do all of this internetting, with the blog posts, online client proofing, website maintaining, and online socializing? Fortunately we live in an age where there are free WiFi hotspots everywhere. I do my work at home, then head to the Library or McDonalds for blogificating or internetting. I told my wife just the other day "one of these days, we'll be past all this. We'll look back and say 'remember having to go to Panera for WiFi?'" A dear friend and mentor always says "you do what you have to do, so you can do what you want to do." This is so true. By opting out of WiFi at home, I'm freeing up that money for other things, like food on the table. Its the same reason I'm operating CS2, drive a paid off '94 vehicle, and don't have an iphone. Some things in life are mere luxuries that we don't need. Fun? Yes. Like to have them? Yes. Necessary for my life? No. Is this difficult and frustrating? At times, you better believe it is. But for us, for now, it makes sense.

Why am I telling you this? I want you to know, if you are in the same boat, struggling with some of the small things pertaining to our craft, you are not alone. I'm there with you. But my passion for what we do is too great for me to travel easy street. I'll never put down my camera. And I refuse to go into debt for the craft. I am willing to travel a hard road for a time. For how long? I'm not sure. But I am determined to make it. I will pursue this until I make it, and then keep pursuing it. I have no choice. This is what makes me alive.

Now on to my images. I've only a few - last month was slow. Some are of my daughter. And a couple of them are from even further back but never shared. Let me know what you think. Feel free to critique any or all of them. I welcome your thoughts on my work. Like many of you, I need the input of others to improve. You know, iron sharpens iron, no one is an island, and all that. Have a great weekend everyone!

Now, go out and shoot something!

Memory Cards: Speed & Class 'splained

2010-03-10T09:25:00.006-06:00

So you have a camera. It takes a memory card. So which one should you choose? What’s with all this class and MB/s mumbo jumbo? There’s a ton of confusion out there on the subject. Today we’ll look at memory card performance and how it helps us get the most out of our SLRs. An important thing to note is SD cards are the only ones to include both speed and class on the face of the card. Compact Flash and Memory Stick cards only refer to speed, and not class.

SD memory card performance is measured in one of two ways: speed, known as megabytes per second (MB/s), and class (C2, C4, C6, etc.). Understanding the difference of these measurements is often misunderstood, but essential in selecting the card that will best suit your needs.

Speed refers to continuously shooting still images in the burst mode. The speed rating (i.e., 30MB/s) designates the maximum sequential speed that data can be written to the memory card and transferred to a host device. This is also known as “read/write speed.” Lets say you have a card that has a speed of 30MB/s. This means the card will read/write up to but no faster than 30MB/s. The faster the card, the less lag time between frames during continuously shooting in burst mode on cameras that shoot at high frame rates. What’s a high frame rate? Usually a camera that shoots 5 frames per second or higher is considered a high frame rate.

Class refers to recording video. The class rating (i.e., C2, C4, etc.) designates the minimum sustained speed required for recording a constant rate of video onto the card. A card’s class rating corresponds to the minimum guaranteed data transfer rate megabytes per second. This means the card will record video no slower than xMB/s. For example, Class 4 cards are designed for a minimum sustained transfer rate of 4MB/s, while Class 10 cards are designed for a minimum sustained transfer rate of 10MB/s.

Cameras have the ability to record images in bursts up to 10 frames per second. This floods the card with a massive amount of data in an instance. These cameras demand high-performance memory cards with fast maximum write speeds. Current SLRs can produce huge files in either RAW, JPEG, or both. And RAW files can reach upwards of 20mbs. The larger the stream of data being crammed onto a card, the faster the write speed must be in order to handle the load. If a card is too slow, then shooting will pause until the card catches up to the camera, at which point shooting will resume. This lag causes missed shots, which isn’t good. But if a card is fast enough, the camera can shoot non-stop at its fastest frame rate until the card is full. So for fast shooting, a fast card is needed.

If you want to capture high megapixel still images at a fast frame rate? Then you need a card with a maximum write speed fast enough to meet your shooting requirements. Have an entry level SLR (which only shoots around 3-4 frames per second)? Then skip the high-speed cards. But if you have a more advanced camera and intend to shoot faster burst rates (say 5 frames per second and faster), in RAW format, then you will need a fast memory card. Rather than simply choosing the highest performing card in the store, you have to determine what type of shooting you’ll be doing. Then we can select the card that meets your shooting requirements.

Like it or not, we are merging photography and video. Today, most SLRs have the ability to shoot high frame rates and record HD video. And if we are going to be utilizing both, we’ll need memory cards that accommodate both mediums. If the card offers fast maximum write speeds but only a Class 2 rating, then it won’t be fast enough to record in HD. Also, if the card has a Class 6 rating but a slow write speed, then it will suffer a lot of lag when shooting in burst mode.

Again, this only applies to SD cards. If you’re shooting higher end SLRs, you only use Compact Flash cards. Then you only have to worry about speed. If you’re shooting sports, then you need fast cards. If you’re shooting portraits, then maybe not. And what about which brand to choose? Well, I use Promaster brand memory cards. The reason I choose them is twofold. 1) they have a lifetime warranty. If one ever fails, it gets replaced. In 3 years of hardcore shooting, I’ve only had one fry on me. Pretty good in my book. 2) I get a decent price on them at he pro camera shop I work part time at. I know, not nearly as romantic. But it’s a valid reason nonetheless. And to be fair, even if I didn’t work there and get the discount, I’d still choose them because they’ve been so reliable.

So there you go. Class and Speed ‘splained. Hope it helps. Happy shooting everyone

Now, go out and shoot something!

Nikki C's Image Critique

2010-03-08T09:25:00.005-06:00

First off, I want to say thank you for all the heartfelt well-wishes for my family concerning the death of my Uncle. It has been a very rough week. But, sad as we are, we are doing well.

Secondly, I missed my “First Friday Photos” last week because of everything going on. I’ll be posting them this coming Friday instead.

Now, on to this week’s image critique. The image comes to us from Nikki C. She’s submitted a picture of a baby wearing a Santa hat and a reindeer necktie. So lets get into it…

Lets first look at the lighting. The lighting is okay. Its well executed, but nothing to tell your friends about. It looks to be around a 1:3 ratio, suitable for this type of image – very safe. I do have a bit of the issue with the vignette though. Now, I am a huge fan of vignettes, using them on a majority of my images. But it has to be done well to work. A vignette is supposed to focus the eye towards the center of the image. But when it begins to overlap the subject, it simply doesn’t look right. The problem I have here is it bleeds too much into the subject. Notice the white ball of the hat and the baby’s foremost foot. They’re grey, looking unlit. And that bugs me. The band on the hat is nice and white, but the ball is muddy grey. Same thing about the skin. Most of it looks good, but that one foot looks like it has circulation problems (and if that’s the case, um… yeah, sorry ‘bout that). This image simply doesn’t need the vignette.

Next lets look at the green/red background. I get it. It’s a Christmas thing. But, ugh, really? To me this is in the same boat as selective coloring. The only time we should see this kind of stuff is many years in the future, when we open a time capsule from the 1990’s. Just sayin’. The thing is, good lighting on a cute kid is enough. We don’t need the nifty green and red to make it more than it is. He’s already wearing a cute Santa hat and reindeer necktie. What more do we need to say “this is my Christmas portrait?” Leave off the vignette, use a pure white background, and it would be a much stronger image.

The last thing I’d like to discuss is the baby’s pose/expression. Photographing babies and young children can be a very difficult. I’ve spent nearly 20 months shooting literally thousands upon thousands of images, trying to become better at photographing children - not coincidentally my daughter is almost 20 months old =). Capturing that perfect expression is hard to do. So anytime we get a good expression its a victory. In this image, the baby’s upright and alert, and the expression is pleasant. It may not be the perfect expression, but it’s a victory nonetheless.

The last thing I want to mention about this image is, well, I’ve seen it before. If you were going for cookie-cutter lower-end portraiture, then this image nails it. But if you want to truly excel at children portraiture, you need to figure out how to get to the next level. Why has Anne Gedes been able to build a multi-million dollar business? Simple - what she creates is not run of the mill baby pictures. She broke the mold, pushed the envelope, (insert cliché here). Nothing she creates is cookie cutter. I enjoy her work because its different, intriguing, enjoyable. Should we aspire to photograph babies like her? Not at all. Quite the contrary. If you are into photographing children, do so in your own unique way. But you must push past mediocre. Force yourself to become better. Strive to try new things. Break away from the status quo. Do something different. That’s what Anne Gedes did at some point. She decided to try something new, and now she’s selling books of her work with Celen Dion Cds inside. How could that not be a money maker?

Well, there you go. Yet another pair of my pennies. Thank you Nikki for sharing your work with us! Anyone else have anything constructive to say? Post a Comment below.

Now, go out and shoot something!

Good By Uncle Mike, We Love You...

2010-03-03T09:21:00.005-06:00

We said goodbye to Uncle Mike on Monday. He was 57 years old. Mike was a good man, loving husband, and wonderful father. He put a smile on everyone's face, loving life and living it to the fullest. We loved him deeply and will miss him very, very much. Here's to you Uncle Mike, you deserve the streets of gold on which you're now walking.

Stephen S's Image Critique

2010-02-28T15:03:00.004-06:00

This week’s image up for discussion comes from Stephen S. (known as “Sleven,” back in photogin’ school). His image is of a guy smoking a cigarette, the smoke of which creates a skull and crossbones.

My first reaction was, “wow, that’s a great image.” The image does exactly what its supposed to do: invoke a reaction. Its sharp, well lit, and well composed. The editorial style properly uses dead space which is suitable for text. The deep lighting ratio allows our eye to naturally lead away from the guy to the smoke, which is the real subject of the image. And speaking of the smoke, overall, its simply sick - such a good graphic! A ton of PS work I’m sure, but it was worth it. It paid off.

There are a couple of areas I see that could be improved. These are highly trivial at best. The first thing is the skull formed in the smoke. Let me preface this by saying this is nit-picky, and 99.99% of people would never see it. In fact, people reading this post won’t be able to see it because the image is so small. But when I zoom in to the skull, the edges in the eyes, nose and mouth, are a little too choppy, a little too ridged. The rest of the skull is so well done. The smoke looks very natural and wispy. But these areas look like they’ve been erased with the eraser tool in PS. Nit-picky for sure, but these edges aren’t consistent with the rest of the skull. Looking at the top of the skull and most of the crossbones, the edges look awesome. They look like wispy smoke, but are still well defined. Maybe instead of erasing the edges in question, you could replicate the areas that are so well done. Or, instead of erasing, maybe you could apply some heavy burning (no pun intended). This might give you the same effect, but without the abrupt deletion of the smoke. But again, this is highly trivial. Just an exercise in trying to improve, even when there is little room for improvement.

The second thing I think would help the image just a tad, would be to add a hair light. It kinda bugs me that the dude’s head disappears into oblivion. I think it would help visually replicate the skull and crossbones. Doing so would better tie the guy’s head and the skull together - showing what’s gonna’ happen to him if he keeps smoking.

Those are two very small things that could be improved upon. As is, the image is quite good. Nicely done Sleven! Thanks for sending it in! Keep doing what you’re doing. On second thought, don’t keep doing what you’re doing – strive to get even better!!

Anyone have anything else to say about Stephen’s photo? Feel free to post a comment and chime in! But, as always, be respectful of your fellow photog. Any ignorant or unhelpful comments will be removed and your hard drive will crash. Okay, maybe not, but it made you think didn’t it? =)

To everyone else out there reading this:: If you are interested in having your image(s) critiqued, you can email them to toddwalkerphotography@gmail.com. Large files please, I'll resize them myself (and I promise not to use them for anything other than the one blog post). Put “Critique” in the subject line. I take these very seriously, and vow to give you an honest, worthwhile assessment of your images. My goal is to improve our craft as a whole. I’d love to see your stuff, and try my best to help you improve.

Now, go out and shoot something!

Your Questions Answered...

2010-02-27T15:48:00.011-06:00

The other day I was talking with a couple of photog friends of mine. One of them said, “hey, you should explain lighting ratios on your blog.” As we dove into the topic, I quickly realized how far removed I have become from text book, school-learnin’ photography. One of them is currently in photo school, and the other is fresh out of photo school. Topics like lighting ratios are fresh in their minds. Not so much in mine. They sort of ate my lunch on the topic.

Understanding lighting ratios can be very useful. They tell us how deep the shadows will be in a photograph. Different ratios communicate differently. Its a tough subject to both explain and to grasp. But I thought its a great topic for a post. So, I whipped out the ‘ol light meter, oiled the cogs in my brain, and went to work. You may have to read this post a couple of times to get it. But I’ll do my best to ‘slpain it to you.

For this post, I’m assuming you already understand f-stops and exposure, and how to use a light meter. I won’t go into all of that. But if you have any questions, feel free to leave a question in the comment section of this post, and you are always welcome to email me at todd@toddwalkerphotography.com.

To explain how to calculate lighting ratios, we’ll be using a basic two-light portrait set up – main light positioned camera right and fill light positioned behind the camera. It looks like this:

Let’s start by setting the Fill Light to f/5.6. By itself it would look like this:

This will give a reading of f/5.6 across the subject’s face. This would be a 1:1 ratio – both sides of the face will have the same amount of light. If we shot a picture with this one light, we’d set our camera’s aperture to f/5.6, take the shot and be done. Our lighting would be okay, but fairly flat since its coming directly from the camera. But we want more a more interesting image. We need to add some dimension to the subject. For that, we’re going to add a brighter light to the right, which will better shape the subject’s face. Soooo…

Let’s set the main light to f/8, which is one stop brighter than the fill. Using both lights together would look like this:

It is paramount to understand that each time the amount of light doubles, we’ve gained one stop of light. In other words, light increased by one stop is twice as bright. Two stops would be 4x brighter; three stops would be 8x brighter; four stops would be 16x brighter, and so on. This is key to understanding how to calculate lighting ratios. Our main light is coming from the right side, and not hitting the left side of the face. This ratio would read _:2 (2x brighter than the fill). The right side of the subject’s face already has light hitting it at f/5.6 from the fill light. And since our fill light has a ratio of 1:1, adding a second light that is twice as bright would give us a 1:3 ratio. Got that? 1+0=1 and 1+2=3, thus a 1:3 ratio. Feel free to go over that again =).

There’s a lot of misinformation out there on this subject. A lot of people call this a 1:2 ratio; thinking that since the main light is twice as bright, it simply gives us a 2 on the right side of the ratio. The confusion comes from not accounting for what the fill light will contribute to the right side of the subject. One way to get a 1:2 ratio would be to move the fill light to the left of the camera, so none of its light would hit the right side of the subject. Then, since no light would be contributing to the right side, it would be a simple 1:2 ratio. Another way to get a 1:2 ratio would be to leave the lights where they are, but set the main light to f/5.6, same as the fill. This would increase the amount of light on the right side by one stop (twice as bright). Then it would be a 1:2 ratio. Make sense? Feel free to read that paragraph through a few times as well =).

Back to our 1:3 ratio. . .

Now that we have our lights set up, lets set our camera. In this scenario we would set our aperture for the main light side of the face. Remember, we have to account for BOTH the main light AND the fill light. So, f/8 plus f/5.6 would give us a reading of f/9.5. Say what? Why not set our camera to f/11? Remember, a one stop increase is twice as bright. The main light is f/8. Then we are adding half as much light (f/5.6) to that, thus we get f/9.5. That’s half a stop between f/8 and f/11. Only if both lights were set at f/8 would the brightness be doubled and equal f/11. Since we are adding f/5.6 to f/8, we get f/9.5. So we set our camera to f/9.5. Yes, you can go over that paragraph a few more times as well. Equal sign right parenthesis.

Out on the street, I have developed a tried and true way for getting the proper ratio. I set up the first light and adjust it to the desired f-stop I want to shoot. Then, if the shadows are too dark, I might simply use a reflector to bounce light back into the shadow side of the subject. If that doesn’t do it, I’ll add a second light and adjust it until the shadows are at a level I want. That’s it. I very rarely even think about lighting ratios. I use the LCD and my E-Y-E. The only time I think about them is for cookie-cutter shots (proms, school photos, church directories, etc.). I remember from my schoolin’ days that a 1:1 ratio is flat. 1:3 is safe, suitable for cookie-cutter shots. A 1:5 ratio means drama. And 1:9 is the edge of darkness. For those jobs that require safe, traditional lighting, out comes the ol’ light meter. I set my lights one stop apart. Then bang away on the shutter button.

For example, I recently had a church directory shoot. I threw up a muslin background and a bsic two-light setup, like the one we've been using here. I set my main light to f/8. Then I set my fill light to f/5.6. Thats one stop difference, a 1:3 ratio. I set my aperture to f/9.5 and started to shoot. Setting up took me all of 15 minutes. (would've been 5 minutes had my softbox been more agreeable). Here's a look at the setup ::

(The room was so tight, I had to move the fill light over to the left so I could back up enough to take this shot. But I did move it back up and behind the camera).

And here's the boring, but safe and suitable result:

Is this the most amazing photo you’ve ever seen? Of course not. I don’t know any photographer who aspires to making church directory images. But they help pay the bills. As artists, we do everything we can to pay the bills. Even the less exciting, less creative assignments. We do what we HAVE to do, so we can do what we WANT to do.

So there you go. Everything you will ever need to know about lighting ratios. Okay, well, maybe not. But it’s a start. It all may seem like an overload. But it isn’t exactly rocket surgery we’re talking about here. And it sure as heck isn’t brain science. It may be difficult to understand, but we aren’t trying to cure heart disease. At the end of the day, we’re just taking pictures. If you’re new to this lighting stuff, don’t be afraid of it. Its just light. It won’t bite. And light that won’t bite is just right =P. We have an incredible amount of creative control when we control our lighting. Understanding lighting ratios is a good thing. But if all this stuff flies over your head, don’t worry. Your camera won’t blow up. Lighting ratios can be a useful tool, but being constrained by them will kill our creativity.

As I said earlier, if you have any questions about this, or anything photography related, please post them in the comment section below. Or feel free to e-mail me at: todd@toddwalkerphotography.com

Now, go out and shoot something!

JPEG vs. RAW: Who’s in Charge 'round Here?

2010-02-24T09:13:00.004-06:00

I run into a lot of photogs who flinch anytime you mention the word “RAW”. The idea of shooting in the RAW format is so foreign, that many don’t even bother learning what it is, much less how to use it. And it shouldn’t be. JPEG and RAW both have their place in a photographer’s arsenal. Either way, we should know the difference between the two, and choose the best format for our personal style of shooting. It isn’t rocket science we’re talking about here. So don’t be scared. Lets take a brief look at the two main formats for recording images.

JPEG and RAW are the two main formats to shoot in. A JPEG is a file format that is very universal. Most software programs, computers, print labs, etc. are able to readily read and use a JPEG. A vast majority of people shoot in this format. And for good reason. When shot in JPEG mode, the camera takes the a large amount of data and applies certain levels of contrast, saturation, color hue, and sharpness to the data. This is determined by which color mode (or style) the camera is set in - known as standard, neutral, portrait, vivid, monochrome etc. Once it applies these levels, the camera then compresses the data into a JPEG file. The CAMERA processes the image. Little else is needed to be done.

A RAW file is just that - raw. Whenever an image is captured in RAW mode, the camera records all the raw data and that’s it. It is unprocessed and uncompressed. The camera has not been allowed to process the data, so you get everything recorded. The size of a RAW file is much larger than a JPEG file. A RAW file is unique to the brand and model of the camera which took the image, and therefore is not universal. Most software programs, computers, print labs, etc. are not able to readily read and use a RAW file. And, you guessed it, a RAW file still needs to be processed. If you shoot in RAW, you will have to apply contrast, saturation, color, sharpness, etc. to the data and convert it to JPEG in a computer in order to be able to use it. You get much more out of a raw file, but you have more work to do after the picture is taken. YOU process the image, not the camera.

So what’s the big deal? There are pros and cons to shooting in either format. Shooting in JPEG gives you the ability to take the image straight out of the camera and print it, email it, look at it on your TV etc. Outside of tweaking it in photoshop, once you’ve shot it, you’re done. The downside however, JPEGs tend to lack the detail and sharpness a RAW file can have. JPEGs also lack dynamic range, meaning they are limited in the amount of detail that can be recorded in the highlights and Shadows. And there is less latitude in correcting exposure and sharpness. Though they are easier to use, JPEGs are limited in image quality.

Raw files give you a ton of usable data to work with. Shooting in RAW allows you to pull the most amount of detail possible out of a file. And you gain a bit more sharpness as well. The dynamic range of a RAW file is huge, allowing you to capture more detail in the highlights and shadows. And the latitude you get can save your backside when your exposure is off. The downside is you have to do some work after shooting. You still have to load them into the computer and process them. But the amount of control you get may be worth it to you. The image quality is far superior to a JPEG.

Once I got over my fears of shooting in RAW and began to learn how to process the files, I quickly saw the advantage of the format. I can get much more out of my camera shooting RAW files. I’m so spoiled on this, I shoot everything in RAW. Even playing around the house with my 19 month old daughter. Now that I know what RAW gives me, I simply no longer like what my camera produces in JPEG. Its kinda like comparing a Lean Cuisine diner to a home made diner using fresh (raw) ingredients. One is easy and ready to go, the other take some time and effort. One is ready to heat up and eat, but the other tastes so much better when you eat it. And besides, after putting in the effort to optimize my post processing workflow, I only spend a minute or two on each image. Sometimes much less than that. I’m aware every camera shoots differently. Some produce better JPEGs than others. But one consensus across the industry is, no matter how good your JPEGs look, you can still get more out of an image from shooting RAW and processing it yourself.

So who wins? Which should you shoot? Well it comes down to a personal decision. I know several pros out there who shoot mainly JPEG. Others, like myself, forget our cameras even offer JPEG, and shoot exclusively in RAW. I also know hobbyists who shoot everything in RAW because of the amount of control it gives them, while others leave it in JPEG. To each his own. But if you aren’t aware of what RAW files are able to give you, or you’re scared to try it out, you owe it to yourself to at least give it a try. To help the transition, I shot RAW + JPEG for a few months. That way every frame I shot, I got a RAW file to learn with, and a JPEG incase I “screwed the thing up.”

Now, go out and shoot something!

Stacy F.'s Image Critique

2010-02-22T09:16:00.004-06:00

Today’s image up for discussion comes to us from Stacy F. The photo above was shot for an advertising assignment she recently had in school. She said she had gotten some negative feedback about the lighting, sharpness, etc., but nothing that helped her pin down what this image might be lacking. So she’s asking for help.

First off, lets talk about commercial photography. It’s a beast. I’ve known photographers to take several days, tens of thousands of dollars, and multi-person crews just to get one product shot. Commercial photography is not for the faint of heart. Advertising is big business and big bucks. And if a company s going to shell out the money for an image, they require perfection. So, anytime we take on a commercial advertising job, we have to be thinking perfection, lofty a goal as that may seem. I tip my hat to commercial photographers. They do some amazing stuff.

So, lets first take a look at Stacy’s composition. Most of the time you will need to include space in your image for type. The overall composition is pretty well done, and you’ve done a fair job of leaving enough room on the left side and at top for some wording. The position of the poured water is a little off. something about it draws my eye away from the product (which is the opposite of what you want). Of course there are a million and one ways to set this shot up, but perhaps you could have the water come down right smack in the middle of the frame, with the product arranged tightly on both sides. Leave a little dead space on both sides for copy. Then everything would be right there, centered, in your face. You might also either move the “horizon” line wither down (eliminating un-needed extra stuff at the bottom), or up (eliminating the un-needed void at the top). Eliminating the void at top would put more focus on the effect the water has in the foreground, which would be good, since it would allude to the essence of the product (not to mention the point of your assignment).

As far as the lighting goes… its pretty good overall. The reason I think you may have gotten some negative feedback is the image lacks a bit of punch. The background is nice , even, and pure white. The product is pretty well lit, but could use a bit more light. It seems a bit on the muddy (dark) side. Not terribly dark, but enough to notice. And the foreground is too under-lit. You have a decent amount of texture and contrast on the water between the bottles to the right. But the water in the middle and to the left really needs to have the same amount of “pop” as that on the right side. And the way we show texture (even the texture of water), is by cross (or side) lighting. The reason the water on the right pops so well is the light from your BG is giving it the proper amount of cross lighting. In the middle, the BG is being blocked by the product and you loose the cross lighting. Same goes for the left side, it lack pop. I’m not sure your lighting setup here, but if you would have had a large light source to the front and camera right of the product. This may have added jut enough pop to the product, and given a good amount of cross light to the water. If not enough cross light, you could then add a another light with a snoot aimed directly across the water. This is definitely a trial and error type of shot. It would likely take several tries to get everything just right.

As for the sharpness, overall it seems okay. But remember, we’re aiming for perfection here. And your sharpness isn’t perfect. It could be that the water caused the bottles to shift a bit during exposure. Maybe a little more sharpening in post production is all you’d need. But at any rate, you need tack sharp detail top-to-bottom, left-to-right. The pouring water is also fuzzy, obviously because its moving. But I’m surprised you weren’t able to freeze it better. I think that is what causes the viewer to emphasize the softness of the image. The water is fuzzy, and then I look at the product, and notice their not spot on either. Maybe if you’d been able to truly freeze the water’s movement, the rest wouldn’t be as apparent. And, if you were to freeze the water’s movement, if the bottles moved due to the water, they would have been truly frozen as well. I’d be interested to know exactly how you set this shot up. I’m wondering if you used flash, if you also had bright ambient lights on in the room. Then, even though the flash froze the action, a slow shutter may have caught enough ambient light to blur the water and a moving bottle or two. I just don’t know…

Overall though, I think this shot is pretty well done. I think to make it really excel, you only need to tidy up a few things. You’ve heard me say it before, and you’ll hear me say it from here on out. Slow down, think it through, set it up, take the shot. Most of the time, the difference between a great shot and a pretty good shot is simply slowing down and thinking about it more. I beat this drum so much because I need to make it my habit as well.

Thanks Stacy for sharing your shot with us. Keep up the good work!

Now, go out and shoot something!

Your Questions Answered...

2010-02-19T15:29:00.004-06:00

Today's question is: "Is it better to under expose or over expose an image?" This is a great question. There is a lot of theories buzzing the web saying we should underexpose our shots by a stop or so. Let me begin by saying our supreme goal must be to nail our exposure. In fact, get a good exposure, listen carefully, and you might just hear angels singing.

Back in the slide film days, it was better to underexpose your shots. Though the frame would be a bit dark, you still had detail to work with. But if you overexposed it, the detail was lost. It was therefore common to underexpose your film by a half a stop or so, just to be on the safe side. This practice has carried over into the digital realm.

When shooting with a digital camera (particularly in JPEG), you have a small margin of error, much like slide film. Many photographers, therefore, adopted the practice of underexposing their shots, hoping to play it safe. But here’s the problem…in digital, if an image is underexposed, there are more dark areas in the image. Noise is most prevalent in the shadows. Annnnd if you lighten a dark image, you’ll be lightening the noise in the image. Then, when you get it to the proper exposure, will it look, well, noisy. On the other hand, if you overexpose the image, there is less noise recorded. Then when you darken it, you won’t be adding any noise, and the image will look cleaner. Therefore, if for some reason can’t nail the exposure dead on, and you have the choice, choose to overexpose the image. The end result will be much better. But again, the goal should always be to nail the exposure in camera.

Here’s a fun little exercise. To see the difference, try it out. Shooting in RAW, take two shots of the same scene. In the first, underexpose the shot by a stop or two. Then bring it back up when you process it. You’ll see how the noise in the shadows shows up as you lighten the image. In the second shot, overexpose the image just to the point of blowing out the highlights. Then bring it back down when you process the file. You’ll be amazed how clean your image is.

Now, go out and shoot something!

QUALITY OF LIGHT ~ Specular / Defuse

2010-02-17T09:27:00.007-06:00

Whether you use the sun or a flash, as a photographer, understanding light will be a lifelong pursuit. You could study from sun-up to sun-down everyday till your grandkids have grandkids, and you’d still have a lot to learn about light. Albert Einstein once said he could spend his entire life trying to figure out what light is (loose paraphrase). I'm not an expert on lighting. And there are volumes upon volumes of books written on the subject of lighting. There are plenty of photographers out there who put my lighting skills to shame. But, for the sake of the industry, and for those of you reading this, I’m going to share a little bit of what I know about light. Hopefully you can gain something and be able to use it in your own pursuit of photography.

Without light, there is no photograph. The word itself literally means “light drawing” – “photo”=“light” and “graph”=“drawing”. What separates a great photograph from a mediocre one? The quality of light. The subject in the photograph may help a little, but the true difference will always be lighting. You can take two photographs of the same subject, one poorly lit, and the other well lit. The outcome will be completely different. Same subject, same pose, one looks awesome, and one looks like it needs a courtesy flush. The great Joe McNally says “Light speaks, just like language. You can make someone look like an angel, or the devil.” Light allows you to bring your vision into being. Light is photography. Not Nikon or Canon, not Photoshop or Lightroom, not actions or presets. Burn it into your brain. Photography is light. Light is photography. And recognizing good light will be the single greatest advancement one can have as a photographer. Some have the God-given ability to recognize it. Others have to work hard at learning to see it. And we all would do well to spend our time learning to see and use good light.

So what is good light? Well, good light is . . . relative. That’s right, no silver bullet here. Good light is completely dependant on the vision you have for your subject. Say you want to shoot a beautiful portrait of a woman. You want the shot to be soft, airy, serene. You will never get that shot if you are using is harsh, contrasty light. Or say you envision something edgy, dark, and dramatic. Won’t happen if your light is soft and creamy. We need to understand light. Not megapixels. Not Brands. Not bokah. Lets say it again class: Light is photography. Photography is light.

To understand how to capture our vision, we must first understand a couple of different qualities of light. The first quality of light is known as specular light. Specular light is what gives us high contrast and sharply defined shadows. Its often referred to as harsh light. Specular light comes from a very small light source. Think of a flashlight. If you are in a dark room and turn on a flashlight, you get a lot of contrast and well defined shadows. Another example is the noon-day sun on a clear day. The sun is relatively small, a mere dot in the sky. And from that small light source, you get lots of contrast and crisp black shadows on the sidewalk. To achieve harsh, contrasty light with well defined shadows, you need a specular light source. The light needs to be tiny.

The second quality of light is known as defused light. Defused light is what gives you the creamy light with low contrast and very soft shadows. Its often referred to as soft light. Defused light comes from a very large light source. Think of a picture window. If you are in an otherwise dark room and the daylight comes in though a picture window, you get low contrast and soft shadows. Another example is the noon-day sun on an overcast day. The sun is illuminating the clouds and thus the entire sky is the light source. The light source is relatively huge. And from that light source, it gives very low contrast and extremely soft shadows. To achieve soft creamy light with soft shadows, you need a defused light source. The light needs to be huge.

One thing to mention here is the brightness, or luminance. Brightness has no effect on whether the light is specular or diffused. Think of it this way. In a pitch black room, light a single candle. This is a very small light source. It is also very dim. Now, in the same pitch black room, turn on one of those LED key-chains. You know the ones that have a single LED sticking out so you can see a keyhole better. Its about the same size as a candle flame. But it is much brighter. And both create very high levels of contrast and deep black shadows. Their brightness levels are very different, and they will illuminate a subject to very different degrees. However, since they are both very small, they are very specular in nature. So again, it is the SIZE of the light source that determines specular or diffused light. Not the brightness.

Now, the quality of light ranging between specular and defuse is a sliding scale. Its not an “either/or” option. But knowing the differences between the two extremes is a great place to begin. Say you’re shooting outside on a sunny day. You want the light on your subject to be softer than what the sun is giving you. You know you need to diffuse the light a bit. The sun is a small light source (specular), and to diffuse it you have to make it larger. So how do you make the sun larger? By cheating. A handy thing to have in your bag is a large 5-in-1 reflector. One of the “colors” in the reflector is translucent. You can place this between the sun and your subject. The translucent reflector is illuminated by the sun which now becomes your light source. And the reflector, being much closer to your subject, is relatively much larger than the sun (The bare sun is a small dot, the reflector is several inches across). You have re-created a similar effect to an overcast sky. You now have made the light on your subject softer. It may not be as soft as if it were actually overcast, but it’s a heck of a lot better than direct sunlight. Now, am I saying everyone needs to have a 5-in-1 reflector? Not at all. I’ve used one a total of one time. It simply doesn’t help me achieve my photographic vision. But if it would help you achieve your vision, then by all means, use it. This is simply one scenario and one solution. You get the idea. Have a vision. Assess the situation. Set it up. Press the button.

Today, I have a homework assignment for you. Go to any of the mass photo sharing websites out there (my favorite is www.photo.net). Once you’re there, take some time looking at the type of photos you enjoy. I like portraiture. As you look through them, you’ll come across those that stop you in your tracks. When that happens, don’t just move on. Take the time to study those images. What made you stop and take a longer look? Why do you like it? What type of light did they use? Specular or defused? Then post a comment her on the blog with a link to the image and let us know your thoughts on it.

Now, go out and shoot something!

April C's Image Critique

2010-02-15T09:20:00.008-06:00

Today’s image up for discussion comes to us from April C. The image above is of a bald guy with a guitar. But its not just any old photo of a bald guy with a guitar. It’s a very well done, editorial style portrait. It has several things going for it, that make it work.

First thing that makes this such a great image is the lighting. The lighting is very fitting for the subject. The lighting is dramatic, with deep shadows, which cut out the entire image. The lighting is also very well controlled. Notice how she concentrated the light on the subject’s face and guitar. From there, the light fades outward. Our eyes naturally go to the brightest area of a photograph. By properly controlling the light, it keeps your eye right where it should be, on the subject.

This image also has a very strong composition. April has done a wonderful job of using dead space, on the right side of the frame. This dark area, along with the guitar strings direct the eye strait to the subject. There are a lot of photogs out there that say its wrong to use dead space. This is only true if you’re going for a very classical portrait, and submitting it for a PPA contest. But this image is anything but classical portraiture. But that’s what makes it so interesting. Its not normal. It has broken the rules. Its outside the box. Its. . . good.

If I were to nit-pick and find something to improve on this image, it would be to add a catch light in the subject’s eye. Now, I realize there is a lot of effort in controlling the light in this shot. It looks like there is only one light being used. It also looks like the light is either shot through a snoot, or a grid spot. And, to use this one light source and get a catch light may completely screw up the lighting of the entire image. So, if you can’t move your light around for this image, you may have to add a second light. This doesn’t need to be much, a small flash at 1/64^th power, with a very tight snoot aimed directly at that eye. Some care taken not to catch a reflection in the glasses and you’d have it. Again, this is a very miniscule, nit-picky thing to bring up. It really doesn’t need the catch light, but hey, I had to find something to push the envelope.

As always, this image is now up for comments form anyone who cares to add their opinion, for the betterment of the industry. So, what’d I miss?

Thanks April for subjecting your image to my textual lashings!! You’ve got some great stuff out there, and I’ glad you do what you do! Keep up the good work!

Now, go out and shoot something!

Your Questions Answered

2010-02-10T09:38:00.006-06:00

Time for a “your questions answered” Friday. This week’s question comes from a friend of mine - Garrett D. from Springfield, Mo! I had the honor of shooting his senior photos last year. He’s quite the creative too. You can check out some of his stuff HERE.

The question is, “How do you photograph people?” This is such a great question.

Starting out, your photography may not be at a level you think it should. Then you see someone’s work that you really, really like. So you set out on a quest to shoot just like them. This is a very dangerous venture - for a couple of reasons. First of all, you never get the respect you deserve. Lets say you really admire the style of David Hill. You think his stuff is so sick you cry when you see it. And your work isn’t anything like his. So you decide to put in the effort. You begin to read everything you can about David Hill. You spend hours studying his images trying to gain insight into how he does what he does. You find tons of articles and webisodes explaining the “David Hill” lighting technique. You invest the time to mimic his lighting. After countless months of trial and error, you perfect his post production and photoshop skills. And finally you’ve got it. You have mastered the technique. You are starting to make some respectable images. You’re proud of what you’ve done. You decide to show off the fruits of your labor. You are glowing as you pull out your newly updated portfolio. You’re beaming with a sense of accomplishment. The person viewing your images is obviously awestruck. You couldn’t be happier. When they finish, they look up, and with a huge smile they say “wow, these look like they were shot by David Hill!” And there it is. Instead of your work standing on its own, all that time and effort was spent to simply look like someone else’s work. We would be much better off spending our time and effort developing our own style. One that people will recognize separately from everyone else’s. And a side note, personal style is not developed over weeks or even months. It takes years to develop.

There’s a second reason we shouldn’t aspire to shoot like someone else. Simply put: You have something to offer. We don’t need another David Hill in the world. We need you. You already have a very unique, distinct photographic style (or you’re in the process of developing it). Its easy, natural even, to look at another photographer’s images and want to shoot just like them. Though it may be beneficial to be inspired by and learn from others, we must resist the lure to replicate their work. Stay on that quest long enough, and you find you’ve put a ton of effort into creating images that aren’t yours. And that’s the last thing the world needs. We need what you have to offer. Without your unique contribution to photography, the industry as a whole suffers. So, you’re not at the level of David Hill, Jeremy Cowart, or Drew Gardner? Starting out, they weren’t either. But they put their efforts into their craft. And look what they contribute to the industry. Its not a cookie cutter approach to photography. So embrace where YOU are at, and commit to improving YOUR photography. And don’t worry so much about it. When it comes down to it, Like Zack Arias has said, “its not like we’re curing cancer. The only job that cures cancer is the job that cures cancer.” Take a deep breath, take a look around, and keep shooting. You’ll get there.

So how do you photograph people? My answer to this is actually very simple. You photograph people the way YOU photograph people. Whatever your personal photographic style is, keep doing that, just put a person in the shot. Its as easy as that. Do what you do, and add humans. But for Pete’s sake, don’t start shooting like everyone else. We need what you have to offer. And what you have to offer is worth so much more than cookie-cutter photography.

Now, go out and shoot something!

Essential Gear

2010-02-10T09:29:00.005-06:00

We live in a time when gadgets have become essential to our everyday existence. Televisions, computers, cell phones, ipods – we all have them. Most of us are addicted to them. Don’t believe me? Take any one of those devices and give it up for a week. Most of us wouldn’t last one day. I’m not saying these things are wrong or evil. Many of these things are a must to carry out the functions of everyday life. Most of us need a cell phone to stay connected to others, or listen to music to stay focused, or use computers to, well, do nearly everything in our business.

“Where you going with this Todd?”

Look, lets be honest. Many of these gadgets are essential. However, many of us get caught up in thinking our gadget isn’t good enough – that we need the latest in order to function properly. I may need a cell phone, but do I need a new iphone 3Gs when the 3G is doing everything I need it to? New bells & whistles are great, until you realize you’re broke, the bells are annoying and you really don’t know how to whistle.

The same is true in photography. There are several pieces of equipment we must have to create images. But it seems every day there’s a new improved camera, lens, image software, lighting rig, widget and what-have-ya. The new gear promises to make you a better photographer. The truth is, however, only YOU can make you a better photographer. You are the one who has to have vision. You are the one who has to think it through. You are the one who has to work out the shot. When it comes to essential gear, YOU are the single most important component on any assignment. Concerning photography, you must be your single biggest investment. Do everything you can to hone your skills as a photographer. Read what you can. Learn as much as possible. Shoot more than possible. Mess up. Learn from it, and try it again. Meet with other photographers. Get involved in open forums, comment on blogs. Heck, start a blog. Whatever you do, put a much greater importance on developing your skills and vision as a photographer than on your gear. David duChemin has a mantra I think needs adopting by many of us: “Gear is good; vision is better.” Don’t focus on the gear. Focus on your vision. YOU are what makes killer images, not your gear – period, the end.

Only have an old hand-me-down camera that’s nearly worn out? Finish the thing off. Bought an off-brand flash on ebay? Rock it ‘till it melts. Stuck with an 18-55, non-IS kit lens? Figure out how to put the rest of us to shame with it. Still using Photoshop Elements to fix everything? For Pete’s sake, start nailing your images “in camera,” and stop having to “fix” everything later. Then you may not even need Photoshop.

For years I had it backwards. I got caught up in thinking “if only I had this camera, that light, or the other lens, then I would get better images.” Believe me, the “better” gear does not make you a better photographer. That said, different gear may help us achieve our vision easier. You see, once you begin to invest in yourself, your skills improve. When your skills improve, you begin to develop your style. As your style emerges, you might realize you can’t achieve your vision with your current equipment. Then and only then should we start looking at new gear. Many people barely know how to use the stuff they have before they want something different. If we would simply understand the limitations of the gear we have, we could then maximize its capabilities, and realize we probably don’t need the shiny new stuff. Now, if the gear you have can’t deliver what your vision demands, then its time to look at something new. But that should be the order. Vision first, gear second. An ancient prophet once said “without vision, the people will perish.” The same is true in our craft. If we get caught up in gear and never cultivate our vision, we end up with the same level of images – and a very heavy equipment bag. And we’re broke.

This post may not be what you were expecting. You may have been expecting me to tell you to buy the new Nikon D5s mark II with the DX 12-2400mm f/1.2 lens, a half dozen SB-580 EX IIIs, some Wizard Poppers and Photoshop CS9. You may have wanted me to tell you about the secret piece of gear that will magically make it all better. If so, then I’m sorry to break it to you. Gear won’t make it better. What does it take to make killer images? You. Only with hard work, determination, and a passionate commitment will we become better at your craft. Invest in yourself and master the gear you already have.

I feel I still have a long way to go in my own photography. I only have 40,000+ clicks on my three-year-old D200. Which means I have a lot of mileage left on it. And I plan to get the most out of every mile left on that thing. Maybe by then my skills and vision will demand a replacement. Until that happens though, you’ll see me out there rockin’ my “vintage” D200.

Anyone care to join me?

Now, go out and shoot something!

Jasmine K's Image Critique

2010-02-08T09:17:00.020-06:00

Okay first things first. I have been calling these things “critiques.” And I will definitely give my two cents worth. But I’d really like for what I say to be the beginning of a discussion. I would like you (even you non-photogs out there reading this blog) to chime offer up advice in the comments section below. This is another way for you to get involved in the greater photography community. I am one guy with one point of view. But that’s all I have to offer. One perspective on any given image. And as we all know, art is subjective. So, for the sake of the industry, to help each other become better, please consider offering your perspective too.

Secondly, until I am able to record these critiques as a nifty little screen-grab video where you hear my stunningly handsome voice, and see my ever so smooth mouse movements, you’ll have suffer through reading them. Think of it as vintage internetting. You know, the days of dial-up.

Lastly, what I have to say in these critiques are in no way intended to offend the photographer. I do not take these critiques lightly. And I will never make fun of or belittle another photographer who is seeking to improve. I ask anyone offering further comments to do the same. My aim is to help you see the areas that need improving. My hope is that you, and everyone reading this, can use what I and others have to say, to become better. I appreciate all the images that have been sent in. Some are awesome and I’ll have a hard time finding flaws. Others have been sent in with obvious problems, and intended to be used for the benefit of the community. And some were given, honestly asking for help.

Now, on to photo critique numero uno. . .

First image up to bat comes to us from Jasmine. The image, seen above, is of a girl with blue makeup in the woods. The exposure is accurate and the image is sharp. The composition though, needs a little help. The girl seems to be sliding down an oddly placed slab of concrete. (Is she on an overgrown sidewalk?) If you notice her feet, they look like they’re keeping her from sliding. I’m sure its not that steep of an incline, but due to the high camera angle it makes me feel uneasy, like she’s about to slide out of the picture. Maybe moving the camera down a bit would alleviate this uneasiness.

The model’s pose isn’t all that bad, but not that great either. It has that fashion/editorial feel, but she seems a little lifeless, a little stoic. Maybe this is what you were going for, but look at the eyes. The eyes are the most telling thing in any portrait. You may have been going for that “I’m an emo girl and don’t care about life” look. But her eyes have that “I’m not into this photo” look. You have to get the subjects eyes to sell the entire image. Is this hard to do?? You better believe it is! Master the eyes in a portrait, and you’ll be miles ahead in the game. One thing you could have tried would be to have her lower her chin and look down with her eyes, so all that is seen is her eyelids. This may have added to the stoic look without her staring at the camera with that “I'm not into this photo” look. It would also have highlighted the stark blue eye makeup. If you want her looking at the camera, she needs more intensity in her eyes. You may have to direct this. If you’re not getting the expression you want, here’s a little tip. Take a shot of the poor expression. Then, go show it to your subject. Let them know what they are giving you, then explain to them what you want. Once they see what’s not working its easier for them to change it (kinda like the point of these critiques). Try it, you’ll be amazed at how well it works! Again, the overall pose isn’t too bad, but the eyes need work.

A few more things to be mentioned. On the left of the frame there’s some sort of plastic Wal-Mart bag. This should be removed before taking the shot. Or you can add time to your post production and remove it in PS =). Maybe its supposed to be a trashy environment. But since it’s the only one and its mostly out of the frame, it makes me think it’s a mistake. And since I’m not sure, and I’ve spent so much time focusing on it instead of the subject, something should be done about it. Either take it out, or add a bunch of trash to add to the environment. But as is, its distracting. There’s also a shadow over there that doesn’t need to be there. If you can’t move whatever’s making it, and you can’t move your entire shot, then remove it in PS.

The last thing I want to point out is the lighting. I think its available sunlight - but it could be from a Sunpak 120j =). Either way, its very broad, semi-butterfly lighting. This type of lighting isn’t bad. For many things its ideal. But for this image it isn’t edgy enough. The model’s outfit screams “I only hang out late at night, don’t listen to my parents and I just don’t give a flying f-stop!” But the lighting is saying “I’m a member of the glee club hanging out on a nice summer afternoon.” The lighting doesn’t match the subject. The great Joe McNally says “Light speaks, just like language. You can make someone look like an angel, or the devil.” You have to make your light speak the language of your subject. For this shot, if it’s the sun, you could have moved around to the right. If you were using a flash of some sort, you could have simply moved it around to the side of your subject. In either case, the light would be coming from the side of your model, creating more shadows. And, judging by the ratio, the shadows would be nice and dark. The shot would then be more dramatic, more edgy – it would speak the language of your subject.

Overall, the image has potential. The girl’s makeup and clothing are great. With a little more thought it could be a very interesting image. If you’re like me, getting in a hurry can be your Achilles’ heel. If I’m in a hurry, I don’t think it through. If I don’t think it through, the image suffers. Right now, the biggest investment into my photography is learning to slow down. I think it is the single greatest hurdle to me getting to the next level. So, slow down, think it through, and create what you envision.

So there you go. The first official image critique. I can see already they will be a great exercise for me. I can only hope you will also find them worthwhile.

So, what’d I miss? Let us know in the comments. Don’t agree with me on something? By all means, set me strait. Those of you not photographers, you have a unique perspective that has value. Please share it. But no matter what it is. please contribute to the craft and take the time to share a comment below.

A big thank you to Jasmine for sharing your image!! Feel free to chime in and let us know your thoughts. (also, sorry if there are any typos in this post. I, simply don't have the time today to proof it)

Now, go out and shoot something!

First Friday Photos

2010-02-05T14:27:00.009-06:00

Its time for First Friday Photos! Again, the first Friday of every month, I'll be posting several images I shot from the previous month. Today, though, none of these images are from last month. They are from my 35mm, fully automatic film days.

The shot above is a milestone in my journey. Traveling abroad, I shot a ton of frames. But this one changed my life.

I was in Burkina Faso, Africa. We were there for 5 weeks. The temperature got down to 100 degrees at night, and a blistering 125+ during the day. The conditions were miserable, especially for me who is naturally well insulated. The three boys you see above became friends of mine. I lived with their village for weeks. We didn't speak the same language. But we laughed together, played together, enjoyed life together. The experience I had with these boys and their village was incredible.

After I returned stateside, I had the film developed. Flipping through the photos of the trip, one image made time stand still. This single frame, the one of the boys I grew so close to, stopped me in my tracks. It wasn't merely an image of some kids in another county. It was an image that spoke to so much more than just three faces looking at the camera. It had depth. It had meaning. And it was at that moment I began to think photography was profound. This single image altered my world. It was the beginning of my real photographic journey. It is the image that started my career. Since then, this is the image that has haunted me the most. It keeps speaking to something deep within me that screams "This is your thing. This makes you Alive."

So, today's post is a very small sample of my early work. All 7 images are from 35mm film. All were shot with zero understanding of equipment. All hold a significant place in my heart. I wish I had more to share, but I've only converted a few into digital files. At some point I hope to scan more of them to share. But for now, they're in albums over there on my bookshelf, collecting dust. Here are a few more. Have a great weekend everyone!

Here I am learning the language from the kids in Burkina Faso

An Elder of the village enjoying the shade on a 125+ degree day

Baobab tree near the village

Leaning Tower of Pisa on the left - Two of the kids in Burkina on the right

A Mosque in the courtyard of the Taj Mahal in Agra, India

Now, go out and shoot something!

Bold Decisions...

2010-02-03T10:27:00.024-06:00

Starting out, I never considered myself a “photographer.” In fact, taking photographs was purely incidental. Vacations, birthdays, get-togethers. They all had to be remembered. And I snapped what I could. The camera made everyone uneasy, but it was simply what you were supposed to do. I didn’t put much thought into it. And I sure didn’t think of myself as a “photographer.” But the images weren’t too bad.

Fast-forward to my college days. Over a period of five years I traveled to eleven countries outside the US doing mission work. Most trips were between two and five weeks in length, always with a camera in hand. Again, there was no real purpose to the photos other than the memories. However, at some point, that began to change. I experienced many incredible things overseas. So many so, I can’t even begin to recount them here. But the images . . .the images began to contain some real meaning. So much more than simply remembering where I was, these images began to speak to something deeper. Every frame was a part of something bigger, something spectacular. I began to see the incredible power of the photograph. Susan Sontag in her book “On Photography” said something to the effect of “narrative can adequately recount an event or situation. But a photograph does something different – it haunts us” (paraphrase). My photographs began to speak of the people and places I had been to in way my words never could. Photography stopped being merely incidental. I began actively seeking out my shots, visualizing the frames. For the first time, my photography had a purpose. I wanted to do much more than simply remember the people I was with. I want to expose their very being.

For the next several years, I couldn’t shake it. I loved taking photographs. In my technical ignorance, the only way I knew how to improve my photographs was to shoot more. I was chasing good images, not knowing how to get them. My camera was 100% automatic. No bells, no whistles. I was armed only with my eye. Over time I developed my eye to see better shots. I honed my vision. I got better. I wanted to shoot more and more.

Soon, my day job became less and less appealing. By this time in my life I thought I was doomed to a life of working in a job I loathed. And every other job out there seemed even worse. So it began to swell – could it be that I could actually make a living doing something I loved? I wanted to shoot. But how do you do that? How do you make money pushing a shutter button? I still couldn’t shake it. Everything in me screamed, “This is your thing. This makes you happy. This you must do. This makes you alive!” And so the struggle raged inside me. It was a struggle because a career in photography meant major change. If I were going to do this, it would be with my whole heart. It meant learning everything I could. For me, school was the best fit. It involved my wife and I moving out of state. It meant moving away from close friends, and a community of people we loved so dearly. It meant changing our entire life. It meant a huge, life-altering decision. It meant being . . . BOLD. Would it be worth it?

There aren’t many things in life worth having that don’t require sacrifice.

Well, here I am four years later. My wife and I moved. I went to school. My skills and vision have increased and continue to increase. I’m working a part-time job at a camera store, but I am building a career as a photographer. But, I’m on my way. I’m doing my thing. I love what I do. I am doing what I must do. Am I where I want to be as a photographer? Not even close. But, I fully embrace my place in the industry. I am working at it with my whole heart. I am moving forward. But most of all, I am . . . ALIVE.

So what happened? Why am I no longer stuck in a job I loath? What brought me to a better place in life? Put simply: I changed what needed to be changed. For years I wasn’t happy with the situation I was in. Well, if we continue doing what we are doing, we will always be doing what we’re doing. Don’t like it? Do something about it. Don’t be passive. Be active. Be Bold. You can do this thing called Photography. You can even make a living at it. That’s the path I’m on. And I want you to succeed at it as well. David duChemin wrote: “Whatever the next step for you is, take it boldly. These are not times for the timid; there’s no reward in tiptoeing through life only to make it safely to death.” That’s what I did for so many years. Tiptoeing around, but no real movement, no real direction. And I was unhappy doing what I was doing. Something had to change. It was time to stop tiptoeing and start taking very decisive steps towards something better. Has our move been easy? Not at all. Has the transition been smooth? Hardly. Has it been worth it? Absolutely.

So, what’s your next step? Maybe you take photos as a hobby and you want to up your game a little. Perhaps you want to make a difference in someone’s life like the guys over at Help-Portrait. Or like me, maybe you want to turn photography into a career, because nothing else will do. Maybe your next step isn’t all that clear, foggy at best. Few decisions in life are clear. But you must decide something. No matter how big or small, do something about it. Be active. And whatever the next step is for you, take it BOLDLY!

Now, go out and shoot something!

New Shiny Blog

2010-02-01T09:24:00.006-06:00

Welcome to my new (and finally consistent) blog format. Over the years I’ve made a few attempts at this, but I never kept it up. The reason for so many failed attempts was no focus, no aim to what I was doing. But this time is different. This time I have a clear vision to what I want to do.

In the past year, I’ve spent hours reading and learning from others. Photographers like Zack Arias, David Hobby, David duChemin, David Jackson and Randy Bacon (to name a few) have greatly impacted the way I approach my own photography. I have gained so much from them. I am forever indebted to them. There are many who are committed to sharing nearly everything they have for the good of the industry, to improve our craft as a whole. Instead of hoarding their skills and knowledge, they have given it all away.

And I want to join them.

I may be much lower on the photography food chain, but I am there. My images may not stack up to theirs, but I am improving. I may not have the skills or knowledge of those I look up to, but I do have something to give. And so do you for that matter. Each one of us, from the pros shooting high-end assignments, to the newbie who just picked up her first camera – we all possess something to contribute to the craft. And that’s the reason I am typing this. I want to take what I have learned and pass it on. I want to offer what I can. I want to contribute to the photography community. I want to let anyone interested to join me on my journey to make this thing a career. There is a school of thought that says the one who looses his life shall surely gain it. I believe the way to truly receive anything we must fully give everything for it.

This time around I have focus. And this focus is why I will keep this blog thing going. Over the next several months you can expect a consistent schedule from me. Mondays I will be offering a photo critique. I’ll take a photograph (submitted by anyone out there) and give you my two cents worth. These critiques will be constructive, but not sugar coated. When I was in school, some of my favorite days were photo critiques. I loved having my images stripped apart and every flaw pointed out. Not because I enjoy abuse, but because I realize the value. Only when we see what can be improved upon, can we then improve. On Wednesdays I’ll be discussing photography technique and industry news. I’ll do my best to offer you some tangible information to improve your photography. On Fridays, I’ll be answering industry related questions. Along the way I’ll give you an inside look as I go through the trial and error of building my career. Finally, on the first Friday of every month I’ll post some of my own photographs. I’ll be doing this because I am first and foremost an artist and I want everyone to see what I create.

Now, go out and shoot something!

Comming in February...

2010-01-20T15:25:00.002-06:00

Coming in February: New Blog Format...

Mondays: Image Critique ~ Wednesdays: Photography Technique/ Industry News ~ Fridays: Your Questions Answered

Plus on the first Friday of every month after that I'll be posting some of my work from the previous month for all the world to see. Hope you stop by!!

See you in February!