Tuesday 31 October 2017
How to Make the Most of Your Camera Gear and Skills
Several years ago as I was just getting serious about photography, my only pieces of gear were a Nikon D200 and a 50mm lens. I was instantly enamored with the lens and almost overnight I stopped taking photos of my family and friends with a pocket camera. Instead, I preferred to bring my large DSLR setup with me everywhere because the resulting images were so good.
However, the more I used it the more I became aware of its limitations and I once told my friend Ryan, one of two people who were instrumental in getting me started on my path as a photographer, that I liked the lens but it wasn’t very well suited to wildlife photography.
He took umbrage with that assessment, and quite rightly so because that lens can be ideal for wildlife photography!
As I slowly reversed my position over the years I started to realize that the same principle holds true for all sorts of photography types. The camera gear you have, combined with the skills you possess, can work just fine if you simply adjust your perspective a bit.
Whether you like to shoot portraits, sports, wildlife, astrophotography, nature, still life, or any other kind of images you can probably find a way to make it happen with the gear already on your shelf. The first steps involve some mental adjustments that can be somewhat difficult to wrap your head around but make all the difference in the end.
Here are some tips to help you.
Define your terms
When I made that regretful statement about a 50mm lens not being suited for wildlife photography it was partly out of ignorance because I was a new photographer. But mostly it was because I didn’t understand what was meant by the term wildlife photography.
What I had in mind were images of lions, tigers, and bears set against sweeping African vistas. There was simply no way I could get shots like that with a 50mm lens while living in a small town in the middle of Oklahoma. What I realized over the years was that wildlife photography can mean many things, and I didn’t need to put that term in such a small, limiting box.
Would you consider a turtle sitting on a rock at the edge of a college campus pond to be wildlife? At first, I did not, but now I most certainly do.
Instead, I decided to expand it to include animals I would encounter in my normal everyday routine and even bugs and insects that were literally in my very own backyard. The simple act of re-defining what I considered to be wildlife photography made all the difference in the world to me and has helped me get shots of which I am quite proud and now find great joy in pursuing.
What does it mean to you?
The question for other photographers in a similar situation then becomes: what does [insert type of photography] mean to you? If you want to start photographing people do you mean close-up headshots? Full-body pictures? Street photography? Parties and weddings?
You can even break this down further by looking at sub-genres and defining those terms to be what you want. When you think of a headshot your first mental image might be that of a magazine cover. But headshots can be any number of things and people can be photographed in infinite ways.
The same thing goes for other types of photography as well. You might think sports photography means prize-winning shots of soccer players scoring a goal. But it might also mean shooting an archery competition or even a chess match. And those require very different skills and equipment compared to a football match.
In short, don’t let your pursuit of a specific type of photography be defined by what you think it should mean or, even worse, what other people say. Let it be what you want it to be, then go out and pursue it.
Can wildlife photography mean shooting a spider on the side of your house? Of course! There’s no rule that says it can’t.
Know what you’re working with
Along with knowledge of your own perceptions of a certain type of photography, it helps to have a solid understanding of the gear you own and the skills you possess. That way you can play to the strengths of what is available to you while also understanding areas in which you could improve.
As I started using my 50mm lens for more wildlife photography I developed a much clearer idea of what the lens could do and its limitations. That helped me understand the types of animal images I could get with it.
For example, instead of zooming in on animals that were far away I learned to be patient and find ways of physically getting closer to animals. That wasn’t always an easy task, but it taught me a lot about myself and my willingness to get the shot I wanted. It also helped me understand that my humble little 50mm lens was capable of a lot more than I initially gave it credit for.
The best camera is the one you have with you
Every now and then I would get lucky and have an animal cross my path. Then almost as if it were aware of what I was doing, it would pause and wait for a picture. Of course, this type of scenario is only possible if you have your camera with you instead of sitting on a shelf at home.
No matter what type of pictures you are pursuing, by not practicing and not having your camera with you it will not help you advance. I also learned to conquer some of my fears and do what it takes to get the shot even if it makes me uncomfortable.
I made this image of a snake after seeing it crawl across the street and into my front yard. Not knowing whether the snake was venomous or not (turns out it wasn’t) I made sure to keep my distance and have an escape plan ready. But I wasn’t about to let an interesting photo opportunity pass me by.
You’ll learn what gear you need
Several years ago I took the following picture of a spider outside my house and thought it was decent. But it was not nearly as good as it could have been because my lens would not focus any closer. (Are you seeing a theme here? You don’t need to go far to take wildlife photos!)
There were also problems with the picture from a compositional standpoint: the light is too harsh, the subject is somewhat unclear, and it’s not all that obvious exactly what is happening.
One of my earlier photos of a spider eating on an evening snack. Much like the grasshopper, this picture clearly has some problems.
As I learned more about my gear while refining my skills I realized that I simply didn’t have what I needed to take close-up shots of bugs and insects. So I bought a set of close-up filters for about $35 that allowed me and 50mm lens to get much closer to subjects than before.
I also spent time studying light, composition, mood, emotion, and other principles of photography because I knew I had a lot to learn in those areas. The result is a similar image that I took recently which, in my opinion, is far superior to its earlier counterpart.
It took several years and hundreds of shots before I was able to get a photo I was happy with.
Use what you have to its potential
The lesson here is that you don’t necessarily need to buy new equipment to get the kinds of shots you want. But you do need to know how to use what you’ve got and what you know.
Are you shooting with the kit lens that came with your camera? That’s fine! Those lenses are great for wide-angle shots and short telephoto images, and you can get fantastic shots especially if you have plenty of light.
Your camera might even have features you don’t know about, like fast autofocus or good high ISO capabilities that would make it well suited for sports or nighttime photography. The more you learn about what you have, the more photographic possibilities you will see open up right in front of your eyes.
Manage your expectations
No matter what type of photography you want to pursue it is essential that you have your expectations in line with the reality of what you are attempting to do.
If you want to take amazing poster-worthy images of basketball players going for a slam dunk, by all means, go for it! Are you looking to capture some brilliant wedding photos and fun memories from the reception afterward? Or maybe you want to do like I did and get into photographing animals and wildlife.
Have patience
Whatever type of photography you want to pursue, know that you won’t get from here to there overnight. Getting the pictures you want takes years of practice, education, and an intimate knowledge of what your photography gear can and can’t do.
Pursuing those photos is certainly a lofty and admirable goal and one that is obtainable given enough time and effort. But when you start out your photos will almost certainly not look like what you might be picturing in your mind.
Be like this cottonwood borer beetle and reach for the stars! Just know that it might take a little while to get there.
Even if you can clearly define what you mean by portrait, sports, wedding, wildlife, landscape, real estate, or family photography and you have a solid understanding of your camera gear and your own abilities, your initial pictures will probably fall short of your expectations.
That’s perfectly fine, and it’s all part of the process of growing as a photographer. As long as you don’t let your initial shots get you down. Go into it with an understanding that you have time and room to grow. In the meantime, don’t let anyone tell you your pictures aren’t good enough, you don’t have the right gear, or you aren’t as skilled as you need to be.
This photo represents my White Whale: a goal I have been pursuing but always seems out of reach. I always seem to end up with images like this which are almost there…but not quite. Someday I would really like to get a shot of a bee drinking nectar from a flower, and I will keep at it until I finally get it.
Conclusion
What are some of your photography goals, and what are you doing to make those goals happen? Is there a type or style of photography you have always wanted to try but never thought you could do? Leave your thoughts in the comments below–I’d love to hear from the DPS community on this and hopefully help others find some encouragement and inspiration on their photographic journey.
The post How to Make the Most of Your Camera Gear and Skills by Simon Ringsmuth appeared first on Digital Photography School.
from Digital Photography School https://digital-photography-school.com/make-most-camera-gear-skills/
This is Trump’s New Official Portrait
The White House just published President Trump’s official portrait photo, which means the one that was released in January 2017 was a placeholder until the real official photo could be made.
The newly released portrait was shot on Friday, October 6, 2017, by official White House photographer Shealah Craighead. In case you missed it the first time around, here’s what the older “official” portrait looked like:
As you can see, Trump is looking a lot happier in the new portrait and there isn’t a strange blue color cast in the background.
Here are President Obama’s two official portraits captured by former White House photographer Pete Souza:
Trump’s new portrait was released more 9 months after he took office, and it was produced by the U.S. Government Publishing Office (GPO).
from PetaPixel https://petapixel.com/2017/10/31/trumps-new-official-portrait/
Great Photos Don’t Need to Be Technically Perfect
Do photos always need to be technically perfect? In this 10-minute video, landscape photographer Thomas Heaton discusses whether photographers worry too much about the technicalities of a photo, forgetting about what’s actually in the image.
“The best standalone images are those that tell a story, those that make the viewer feel something,” says Heaton.
This image shows water droplets on the lens, but it’s the only part of the photo that makes the viewer appreciate the horrible, rainy conditions Heaton faced on the day. Does that make this a bad photo?
“For me, those water droplets actually really, really add to the image,” says Heaton. “I have no interest in removing them. I think they help tell the story.”
But some disagree. A user commenting on his channel said they were a “shame,” and it was that comment that prompted Heaton to make the video in the first place.
Another shot shows a storm rolling in on the coast, but Heaton admits he missed the focus “by a mile.” However, he doesn’t think it matters. The scene itself, when you’re not pixel-peeping, looks great.
“Photography is full of contradictions,” concludes Heaton. “The truth is it’s all about what happens in the moment. Don’t follow the rules, and don’t shoot for anybody other than yourself.”
from PetaPixel https://petapixel.com/2017/10/31/great-photos-dont-need-technically-perfect/
What IS a Professional Photographer?
The phrase heard every day in the world of photography is “I am a professional photographer.” This statement must be viewed in the context that 8 out of 10 people with a DSLR refer to themselves as professional photographers. Of course, this statistical claim is a MUS (Made-Up-Stat). OK, the math is fuzzy, but in reality, the claim is not that outlandish.
The serious question is “What makes a photographer a professional?” The great headshot photographer Peter Hurley obviously is one, and even though a friend recently paid me for a portrait last month, I am definitely not one. So what are the criteria that allow photographers to label themselves as professionals?
Perhaps a more important question is “What is so great about being a professional photographer?” I do not want to be too critical, but much of the work that a true professional photographer produces is rather mundane, while much of the photography of “amateurs” is phenomenal. Finally, the question remains: who should and who should not be considered a professional?
In any scientific research, the source must be above reproach. My source is the acclaimed newspaper, the Washington Post. The highly respected news organization presently is sponsoring a photo contest, which in itself is interesting. The rules for entry state that “only amateurs are eligible” to enter. As I read this, the thesis question immediately entered my mind. The Washington Post did not let me down. They defined a professional photographer as “anyone who earns more than 50 percent of his or her annual income from photography.” As a math teacher, I must admit I loved this definition. It is both clear and measurable. This simply means that if one earns $50,000 a year, $25,000+ must be derived from their photographic output.
This definition makes the pool of professional photographers rather shallow, which it probably should be. After thinking about this, I probably do not personally know anybody qualified to be called a professional photographer. This is not a criticism as many of my colleagues are outstanding photographers.
Professional vs. Amateur: My Personal Definition
To me, this is a fun mathematical/logical question. Words have meaning, and we live in a world where almost everybody with a camera self-identifies as a professional. It is important to note that we are not talking about the novice or beginning photographer. We are talking about men and women who take their photography seriously. The following is a simple, but vital quote I recently came across by JP Danko:
Many so-called ‘amateur’ photographers create some pretty damn amazing photographs (take a look at most of the work on 500px) – and many so-called ‘professional’ photographers deliver some pretty awful photographs to their clients (see US Olympic Team Portraits). So, I don’t think that there is really a definable quality difference.
This is critical! The distinction has nothing to do with quality of a photographer’s work!
Back to my definition… OK. 50% income may be too simple a definition, yet it does show up in almost all research. After extended Googling, these are my personal requirements for a photographer to be considered a professional.
Website: A professional photographers must have a website with organized portfolios displaying the types of photography in which they specialize. If you are a portrait photographer, the prospective clients should be able to view 20+ unique examples of your quality work. If you do weddings, the new couple should be able to see 20+ examples of different weddings. This way the client can see a “body of work” and examine it for consistency and quality. A photographer only showing five portraits on Facebook to a prospective client is definitely not a pro. Facebook is a valuable tool, but only in that it serves to navigate your clients to your website. The maximum number of portfolios on one site should be four, according to Scott Kelby.
Insurance: A professional photographer must have business liability insurance. You should be dealing with contracts, not handshakes, so insurance is essential.
Accomplishments: A professional photographer should have “some” of the following:
- Have their work published in a magazine, newspaper, etc.
- Organized and directed a photographic outing with a group photographic novices.
- Have put on a photographic show of their work.
- Have received acclaim in a nationwide photo contest.
- Presented at a photographic workshop.
Money: The 50% is a threshold, yet it is flexible, depending on the number of the five criteria above the photographer possesses. A “beginning” professional probably should make enough to feed the hobby. Is the photographer making enough to pay for the camera and lenses? This would be the minimum. The ultimate question is, “Can I live off of my photography?”
With any profession, it is always best to omit the adjectives. By definition, I am a mathematics teacher. I would never refer to myself as an inspirational math teacher. The adjectives are for my students to assign, and believe me, there are days when they would call me anything but inspiring.
As for our photography, let the viewer describe the work. If they love it, great! If they do not, we can use that criticism to self-examine our photography. Their viewpoint may indeed be valid and taking it into consideration could allow us as photographers to grow and expand as artists.
The major point here is to not worry about self-imposed labels. Do not be hesitant in allowing the public to describe your work. Photographers such as Peter Hurley, Joe McNally, and Scott Kelby never refer to themselves as professional photographers. They simply say “I am a photographer.” If humbly calling themselves photographers is good enough for Peter, Joe, and Scott, it should be adequate for us all.
We all love what we do. The difference is that we either sell it or give it away. No one in the real world cares which. Sometimes with self-imposed labels, we are in danger of coming off as pretentious. All people care about is the quality of our work, and our job is to constantly strive to improve that quality. Let the world describe you…
About the author: Charles Levie is a photographer who has been teaching mathematics in Asia for over a decade. The opinions expressed in this article are solely those of the author. You can find more of Levie’s work on his website and Facebook. This article was also published here.
from PetaPixel https://petapixel.com/2017/10/31/what-is-a-professional-photographer/
Review: Polaroid Originals’ OneStep 2 is Familiar and Exciting
As a photographer who still uses film, 2017 feels like the industry is in a bit of a time warp. Kodak is bringing back Ektachrome, Hollywood blockbusters are being shot on film, and apparently the part of Polaroid we care about exists again.
In recent years, it hasn’t been an easy ride for the instant film market. It’s a segment of the industry that feels like it has been booming in some regards, yet on the precipice of failure in others.
While Instax has been wildly popular for Fujifilm, packfilm is well and truly dead and it would be difficult to say that the Impossible Project (IP) has had wide market traction and acceptance among photographers.
Having suffered multiple bankruptcies, Polaroid’s instant film business wouldn’t exist at all in 2017 if it weren’t for IP and their decision to purchase Polaroid’s production machinery before its planned destruction in 2008, and the difficult years that followed.
The task of making instant film again wasn’t as easy as simply switching the machines back on, and due to Polaroid’s decision in 2004 to stop producing the negatives needed to make instant film, IP had to source new raw material suppliers and rebuild their instant film from the ground up.
In spite of these obstacles, IP managed to produce a new black and white instant film from scratch only 18 months after they began and a color film followed soon thereafter; effectively saving Polaroid film from fading into extinction.
These films were improved throughout the following years, and in May 2017 the Polaroid brand and intellectual property were acquired by Impossible’s largest shareholder. With that also came an announcement of a new instant film formula, a price drop and a new camera.
The Film
While Polaroid’s black and white emulsion seems to have remained the same as IP 2.0, the color formula has seen quite a considerable improvement.
After you hear that familiar clunk and whirr of the gears you’ll be able to see an image appear on the film within the first minute or two, with full development taking approximately 15 minutes.
You have to be patient, but the images do look great and have nice color and contrast.
Between the 15-20 minute mark, you will see only minor changes in saturation and contrast.
Overall, the consistency, color and development speed of the film has improved. Some difficult lighting situations will still leave color casts, but once you know your meter and how the film handles under and overexposure, you can minimise these and know what to expect.
This film also doesn’t seem as susceptible to light shielding issues either, though Polaroid still recommends that you do shield the film for the first six minutes of development.
Black and white can still be a bit of a mixed bag, with some shots settling on a warmer tone than others seem to. Development is still quick though with the final image only taking about 5-7 minutes to fully develop.
In our tests, we didn’t use a frog-tongue and only occasionally faced the film down during development; but to be safe, facing your film down on a table while it develops is probably your best bet.
Overall, we were impressed with the images, especially compared to Instax Square which; despite having more accurate color and a faster development time, we found to look a little lo-fi and digital by comparison.
This new color formulation may not be quite as good as the Polaroid film from yesteryear, but it’s definitely usable and it’s the first time we’ve been really impressed with Polaroid film since Impossible began.
If you take into consideration the history of Impossible, and the improvements made thus far, it’s quite an incredible feat.
The colors are more saturated, tonality is improved and development is quite quick; and although you do still occasionally get edge bleeding and slight imperfections in the film, this doesn’t really present itself as often as it used to.
The Camera
Inspired by the original OneStep from 1977, the OneStep 2 serves as a low cost, easy to use, modern camera for those wanting to shoot Polaroid; and it looks great, featuring a design aesthetic that’s a throwback to the original Onestep.
Despite the ABS and polycarbonate shell, the OneStep 2 doesn’t feel cheap or poorly made. It has some heft to it and feels quite good in the hand, if a little awkward at times due to the shape.
Unfortunately, the lens has a fixed focus, but that’s part of the OneStep design philosophy and we suspect we’ll see a camera aimed at the more savvy market in the future.
Like the original OneStep, it’s simple, and it just works. Load your pack in, frame up with the wonderfully large viewfinder and click the red button.
That’s it.
The lens is made from optical grade acrylic and the images are sharp and maintain good color and contrast. A glass lens would have been preferable, but hitting that $99 price point is a smart choice and may help in penetrating a market that Fujifilm is currently dominating.
Although the price of the film is slightly cheaper than it used to be, it can still seem like a hard pill to swallow if you’re comparing the cost with Instax.
At current prices, i-Type film works out to be approximately $2 USD per shot, whereas Instax square is about $1.40 USD.
Comparing the price of film alone you might think it’s an easy decision, but if you are comparing the system price of an SQ10 and Instax square packs, Polaroid comes in with a relatively enticing offer.
It’s clear that Polaroid is trying to tap into that casual market with this camera and that may be necessary for them to grow and reach a more mass market appeal.
This is a similar strategy Polaroid took in the 70s with the release of its predecessor. In today’s money, the original OneStep only cost approximately $160 USD compared with the astronomically expensive SX70 which came in at about $1000 USD.
It has been a long, 8-year road for Impossible and in some ways, it feels like this may just be the start of a new one.
While the new Polaroid Originals film isn’t technically perfect, I think that its imperfection is part of what makes Polaroid special.
There is something to be said about the romanticism of using film, that iconic, big square frame, and the surprise as your image appears before your eyes (albeit a bit slower than it used to)
The film is improving, and I expect we’ll continue to see improvements based on IP’s track record in this area and especially so if this product gains mass market appeal.
As a system, it feels like Polaroid has finally established something impressive and it’s great to be able to just walk into a store, buy new film and a new camera and get consistent results.
The film is nostalgic, familiar, exciting to use and it just feels right.
About the author: Peter Davison is a part of Ikigai Camera, a film store based in Melbourne, Australia. The shop sells 35mm, 120, and 220 film fresh from Japan, as well as Polaroid Originals’ new products. This article was also published here.
from PetaPixel https://petapixel.com/2017/10/31/review-polaroid-originals-onestep-2-familiar-exciting/