Photography contests are attractive to photographers of all kinds, but especially newcomers to the discipline. It doesn't matter what niche or style of photography we practice, there will always be a contest designed for us. The reasons for participating in them can be diverse – from friends hinting that we should participate, to wanting the awards the contest can offer. Unfortunately, not everyone has a positive experience with contests, which is why we should take our time and analyze the different options available. Image by Joanna Kosinska
How to Analyze a Contest
The first step when deciding whether we should participate in a photography contest is to know the type of photographs the contest is looking for. We cannot participate with conceptual photography in a photojournalism contest, or with portraits in a landscape contest. There are competitions with open themes, but we must learn to evaluate them with a certain objectivity since some contests have acquired a bad reputation due to the poor practices. Often, companies unrelated to photography launch contests for the ultimate purpose of acquiring a vast inventory of images they can use in business activities, without paying for their use – known colloquially as “rights grabs.” To effectively discern the type of contest that suits us, it is worth taking time to study the information provided by the contest. Not only will they give us clear instructions on technical requirements (such as image size and format), but also a clear understanding about usage of our images, and how our intellectual property rights will be managed. Some Terms and Conditions state clearly that photographers give partial or even total cession of patrimonial rights of the photographs that they present. Image by Priscilla Du Preez The simplest way I have found to discern the intentions of a contest is to see who is behind it. So, a contest promoted by a photography magazine like B&W is more likely to be true to the spirit of photography than one sponsored by a bank or an airline, for example. The latter contests are often referred to as “spec work”, and should really be avoided because the sponsoring companies usually get the assets legally, without paying anything for them (and this applies not only to photography, but to many other creative services such as graphic design, illustration, music, etc.). Usually, serious photography contests ask for a small biographical sketch of the photographer along with a statement that justifies their photographic work. These contests are likely to ask for a title for each image and a brief description or caption. This caption should be contextual, non-technical. They ask for it because they are committed to making a more objective distinction of the image and leaving subjectivity aside. The time between the contest’s public launch and the final date for submitting work is also very important. Well-planned contests show they are serious by planning ahead instead of improvising. Some popular annual contests are even anticipated by the public long before the official announcement. The most important thing is to always closely read the offered Information about the contest. If we take time to read this in depth, we will have a very clear picture of what will happen with our photographs.
Benefits of Photography Contests
Image by Marcus Castro When we decide to participate in a contest, it's usually because we are keen to gain one or more benefits beyond the grand prize. Competitions that have an important link with photography usually bring with them some benefits not only for the winners, but also for the participants. These types of benefits are mostly “Networking” and “Exposure”. The big problem is that benefits such as “Feedback” and “Learning” are rarely attained by most participants. This loose end is the main reason why I suggest investing in a review or a portfolio review rather than waiting for this kind of return from a contest. (Some do deliver feedback, but this is not the standard). Often the participants are forgotten and don’t get to know why their work wasn't selected. The general reasons for this are many, from technicalities (that is why it is important to read the terms, to comply with the requirements of the format of the images) to the aesthetic and subjective criteria of the judges.
Do Some Research about the Contest
Image by Samuel Zeller It is important to distrust every photography contest a little, and do a little research that will provide the right insight to help us make a better decision. How to Successfully Participate
Always read the information in depth, and possibly twice.
Pay special attention to the rights of use for the images. I have read contests information in which they even get to burn all the material they receive, to protect the photographer's rights.
Make a selection that not only reflects your best work, but that is in line with the contest theme.
Do not trust all the contests that appear on the internet. Being skeptical can help you avoid a possible fraud.
Paid Entry-Fee Contests Image by Vitaly This habit usually helps filter out candidates and provides resources to magazines or platforms to operate. We must be aware that the payment is a way to attract serious photographers who are willing to pay for this dynamic, and weed out photographers who are not (yet) as committed to the discipline. We must be clear about what we intend with our participation. This way we will avoid frustration if the most likely thing happens, which is that we are not selected. I'm not being pessimistic; I’m only speaking in statistical terms. It is not bad to participate in photography contests. What is wrong is to use competitions to obtain assets cheaply through deception. This message, if I’m not making myself clear, is directed at all those people behind those fraudulent contests.
Share this article.
Things You Should Know About Photography Competitions From A Judge’s Perspective
by Tiffany Mueller
Photography contests aren't for everyone, that's a given. And rightfully so–not everyone wants to parade their work around in front of a bunch a strangers who have no obligation to protect your feelings or ego, nor does everyone desire to put in all the work it takes to actually make a successful entry into the ever expanding pool of photo competitions. The photographer at the Dark Hedges, Northern Ireland by Giuseppe MiloI used to avoid entering competitions for both those reasons–then I became a judge. This year marked my third year judging the EyeTime Photography Competition which is a really great contest that puts young and emerging talent in the spotlight. I've also judged a few other online contests, including some for the popular website, ViewBug. Since becoming a judge, I've even mustered up enough personal momentum to enter some of my own photos into competitions for the very first time in my life. So, taking my recent experiences into consideration, I'd like to share some advice with those of you who may be curious about entering their work into a contest.
The Benefits
In my opinion, the primary benefit of entering a competition is giving yourself the opportunity to grow from and develop your photography skills by presenting your work to a panel of judges and peers. In some instances, the feedback you get from entering a contest is in itself worth taking the time to submit. However, the benefits of entering your work into a competition are plentiful. In some instances, there are monetary rewards in way of cash prizes and product giveaways. Others benefit from the recognition to be achieved with winning work, sometimes adding prestigious titles onto their resume, helping them secure grants and commissioned work. These are all perfectly valid reasons to enter your work in a photography competition. The Photographer's View by Stròlic Furlàn – Davide Gabino
The Downsides
Entering a photography contest, and being successful in them, can be time consuming. For me, the most time consuming part seems to be finding the right competition to enter. One that both suits my work and isn't some sort of underhanded scam. A lot of effort can–and should!–go into this phase. That being said, once you've got a list of trusted competitions built up, the pain of scouring the internet for a fitting competition somewhat eases. Now, while we're on the subject of finding the right competition, let's talk about just how much emphasis you should put on this aspect…
This Is Really Important: Be Choosey
Not all photo competitions are created equal. It's really important you take the time to do your research, and read then re-read the fine print before you submit anything. There are a lot of credible photography competitions out there, but, unfortunately, there are also a lot of scams out there, too. These come in a variety of ways, with the most common being the ever sneaky rights-grab, as Jason Row has expands on, here. A legitimate photography contest will never ask you give them full rights to your photos. Make sure this is not a stipulation as you are reading the terms! Some best practices for deciding on the legitimacy of a photography competition are researching past winners and evaluating whether or not the contest benefited them in a way that you feel was worthwhile. For example, did the win lead to an exhibition or perhaps sponsorship? Year of the River Photography Contest by JAXPORTAnother thing to take note of is the reputation of the contest–is it a well known contest, and if so, is well known for the right reasons? A simple internet search is often enough to yield some background history on specific competitions and should help you establish a feel for whether or not it's a scam.
Do Your Research & Be Realistic
I also urge photographers to be cautions of competitions that charge an entry fee. Not only is this a red flag, the organizers are possibly in it for the money and not helping the photographic community, but for a lot of people–good photographers included–it can be a total waste of money. If you come across a contest that requires an entry, take your time to look at some of the past winners' and losers' work. If the winners historically have a style that is drastically different from your own, you may want to steer clear of the competition. Instead, spend a little more time finding a competition that prefers a style closer to your own. It can save you a lot of time and money. Of course, that advice can also be said of contests that do not require an entry fee! Lastly, it's also worthwhile to be realistic when entering competitions. Some of the larger, more prestigious competitions can attract thousands of entries and only one will be a winner. Ever if you do submit an excellent photograph, at the end of the day, all art is subjective–you have to be prepared for the fact that what you see as a perfect and inspiring image might not catch the eye of everyone else. Learning to take this in stride is part of the challenge!
Share this article.
Tuesday, July 23, 2019
Did You Score Any Gear From This Massive Amazon Prime Blooper? Need to Know How to Use It?
This week, people flocked to Amazon for some annual Prime Day deals.
But a select few got a bit more than they were expecting:
Gear that normally costs thousands of dollars… …on sale for just $94.50 USD.
It all began when an observant Amazon shopper saw that a Sony a6000 bundle was on sale for $94.50. They shared this bargain on Slickdeals, and other photographers immediately began to take notice.
Slickdeals users raced to grab the bargain, but it soon became apparent that the Sony a6000 bundle wasn’t the only thing on sale.
Consider the Canon 800mm f/5.6L, which normally comes for $13,000 USD. One Amazon customer reportedly managed to snap it up for just $94.50 USD.
The same story is true for a number of other pieces of camera kit: the Fujifilm X100F, the Sony a7III, and the Canon EOS R, all of which normally go for over $1000 USD, all marked down to $94.50.
This was a mistake on Amazon’s part. First, it’s highly unlikely they would offer these items at such laughably low prices. And the deals weren’t seen by all customers; only some folks were able to view the bargain prices.
Many have claimed that Amazon will cancel any orders made for these products. And this might make sense – if it weren’t for the fact that many items have already shipped. Some customers have even received their items.
(Though it remains to be seen whether Amazon will honor the slashed prices for backordered items.)
Unfortunately, this deal-of-a-lifetime is long gone. And only a few Amazon customers managed to grab professional-grade gear for under a hundred dollars.
Were you one of them?
And even if you weren’t able to lock in any of these accidental bargains, did you get any new photography equipment for Prime Day? Let me know in the comments!
Also, for those who did get their hands on some exciting new photography gear, I’d like to take a minute to mention our course, which is only open for a limited time: 31 Days to Become a Better Photographer.
In it, you’ll discover how to use your new gear – so you can take stunning photos, consistently!
Don’t miss out! Sign up here: https://resources.digital-photography-school.com/ref/937/
Share this article.
eBay Seller Scammed by Buyer Who Replaced New Sony a6500 with NEX-6
Most people get good deals on the Internet’s premier auction site, eBay, but sometimes people get scammed. When it comes to photography gear, it can be a particularly tragic story.
a6500 from Sony.This scam is pretty innovative if we do say so ourselves: Stealing a brand new Sony camera and replacing it with an older model in a slick switch that gets around all of eBay's procedures and takes advantage of their generous buyer protections. That means the buyer got a new camera and their money back while the seller got an older camera and was out of the selling price of the new camera. If you’ve ever used eBay then you probably already know how the scammer got around eBay’s pretty strong buyer protections. Since the older model is so similar in look and style to the new model that the scammer “bought,” eBay’s team probably couldn’t distinguish between them anyway and the scammer’s claim that the buyer sent them the older model to begin with makes the scheme that much more nefarious. Liz Moughton’s story appeared in the San Francisco Chronicle and was picked up by other news outlets from there, becoming a warning to people who sell gear on eBay. The unopened Sony a6500 with 18-135mm lens kit sold for $USD 1,400 but the scammer claimed that he received a Sony NEX-6 with a 20mm lens. Moughton said to PetaPixel, “I asked them if they could investigate the buyer, but they said no because they had to follow their procedure..The buyer returned the Sony NEX-6 camera. (It was of similar size and weight so I didn’t bother trying to get USPS involved because shipping had gone smoothly.) eBay refunded him $1,400. The case was closed.” She continues, “I requested to re-open the case with my new photos proving that I received a camera different from what I listed. I heard nothing for several days, so I called again. eBay asked for a police report. I got a police incident report, and the officer said they don’t deal with online shopping at all but that he would be happy to speak to eBay for me. I sent it in. I heard nothing for several days, so I called again. This time they asked for an affidavit. I filled that out and sent it back. No word again. I waited a few days and called in. This time the person on the phone told me my case had been denied for the second time. They didn’t even bother to contact me to tell me that.” After getting nowhere using eBay’s system, Moughton obviously leveraged the power of the pen (read: social media) and finally got eBay to refund everything after they looked into it again. Moral of the story? Seller beware and be prepared for a bureaucratic battle should you choose to sell something to a sophisticated thief.
Share this article.
Photographer Gets Burned by “Free” Stock Photo on Unsplash, Gets Letter Asking for Damages
Be careful what you upload to your website or blog from a “free” stock photo website. Pixabay from Pexels.One
photographer is learning the hard way that you have to make sure to
link back to the original image just in case anything happens with its
status you can remove it from your site. That’s because people often
steal photographs that aren’t theirs, create new user accounts, and
upload them to free stock photo websites.
Photographer Simon Palmer found himself in this situation after a
picture he got off of Unsplash turned out to be something stolen and the
user who uploaded it was banned from the website. The firm Copytrack
sent Palmer a letter inquiring about the image and asking for proof that
it was being used legitimately.
After some back and forth with
Unsplash, Palmer was told that “often, photographers are unaware that
their images are uploaded on the platform and most would certainly not
give away their images for free.” To make matters worse, because the
photograph Palmer used had a “known figure” in it, the picture was not
covered by Unsplash’s own terms of service protecting him from malicious
users uploading stolen photos.
As FStoppers points out, the relevant section of the terms of service reads:
“This
means that Photos on the Service come with a very, very broad copyright
license under the Unsplash License. This is why we say that they are
“Free to Use.” Note that the Unsplash License does not include the right
to use:
Trademarks, logos, or brands that appear in Photos
People’s images if they are recognizable in the Photos
Works of art or authorship that appear in Photos”
FStoppers further reports that Palmer believes he is the victim of copyright trolling.
What
do you think? Easy enough scheme or a genuine case of misappropriation
of someone’s copyrighted photograph? Let us know your thoughts in the
comments below.
Monday, July 22, 2019
This Back-to-Basics Photography Exercise can Improve Your Photography
The digital age has made photography easier, cheaper, and more accessible than ever before. Even people who wouldn’t call themselves “photographers” now carry a camera in their pocket in the form of their cellphone.
However, has the ability to snap a picture without skill or knowledge made photography too easy? Even for you reading this article who’ve come to this site to learn more about making better photos – has the ease of making digital photos with modern cameras robbed you of learning the basics?
Perhaps. Presuming you really do want to learn more, give the following exercise a try with the intent of improving your skills.
I’ll bet back when this grocery store was operating you could buy black and white film here.
Now, both are relics. I shot all of the mono photos in this article with a 50mm prime lens
during a photo walk, while conducting the exercise outlined.
Back to the film days
Some of you remember the film days, but with digital photography catching hold in the early 2000s, we already have a generation of new photographers who may never have loaded a roll of film. Others may never have had to manually focus a camera, calculate exposure without a meter, or made monochrome photos in the camera.
My first “real” camera – a 35mm Hanimex Praktica Nova 1B
As the risk of dating myself, here’s a little background:
Back in the “pre-digital days” (back in 1970 when dinosaurs roamed the earth), I was 16 and in high school. I bought my first real camera – a 35mm Hanimex Practica Nova 1B. It was an East German camera built in Dresden and imported to the U.S. The Oreston f/1.8 50mm Meyer Optik Görlitz lens was fast and sharp (though I didn’t know much about such things at the time). It was typically loaded with Kodak Plus-X film (ISO 125, previously called ASA) or sometimes Kodak Tri-X (ISO 400).
I learned how to process the film and later make black and white prints in a little darkroom in the corner of the garage. Working under the dim glow of a safelight, and watching the image magically appear as the photographic paper bathed in a tray of Dektol, is something young photographers today have likely not experienced.
The orange glow of a safelight and the smell of photo chemicals. Before Lightroom, there was
the darkroom.
I can’t say I miss it.
Today’s cameras are far superior. Also, the ease of working at a computer using Lightroom, where you can dodge and burn with the click of a mouse instead of with physical tools, gives so much more creative freedom. I also don’t have a wastebasket full of failed paper prints, and money spent trying to master the art.
These were things I learned the hard way with no electronic assistance from my camera. Let’s see what you can learn. Set up your camera and take a photo-walk emulating the way it used to be.
Learning to focus manually takes some skill. Note in this shot the very closest weed at the
bottom of the frame is focused, but the other portions are soft. You’ll also better learn the
relationship between depth-of-field and aperture when you work in manual mode.
Camera setup
We’re going to want to go fully manual for this, putting you in charge of setting the aperture,shutter speed, and ISO. So put the dial in the “M” mode. Turn autofocus off. You will be focusing yourself.
If you have a 50mm prime lens, that will better emulate what most of us had on those old 35mm film cameras before we could afford to buy a zoom. Composing with the “sneaker-zoom,” (that is, using your feet to move closer or further from your subject), is good practice, especially if you always rely on a zoom lens to compose.
Working with a prime lens will help teach you to compose without relying on a zoom.
Going Monochrome
Most beginning photographers, (and all of them in the pre-color era), shot black-and-white film. So to stick to the basics, we’ll be shooting monochrome as well.
Well, sort of.
The best option in a digital camera is to shoot in RAW mode, which will create a color image. Later in editing, you’ll make a monochrome image from that color file. Photographing for monochrome will also allow you to better concentrate on composition – another point of this exercise.
It is thought the term “chimping” originated from the “ooh, ooh” sounds photographers made
when reviewing their photos on their LCD screens, (not necessarily as in this case, whether
the photographer had a simian-like appearance :-D. For this exercise, you will NOT
be chimping. – Photo of/by Rick Ohnsman.
To chimp or not to chimp?
You’ve heard the term “chimping” which refers to the practice of some digital photographers to look at the playback on their LCD screen after each shot? Some scoff at the practice. Others, (count me in that camp), think the ability to immediately review a shot, check the histogram, make adjustments and reshoot is the best thing to ever happen to photography. Instant feedback, (rather than waiting days, weeks, months, whatever it was to get back the photos and only then discover your mistake?) – what a concept!
I still bow to the wedding photographers who shot film. Those photographers knew their cameras relying on skills and experience so they could trust they had the photo before ever seeing the results.
Many cameras will do this. This is a Canon 6D. Set your Picture style to Monochrome, but
shoot Raw images. The Raw file will be in color but the LCD display, (both in playback and
Live View) will be Monochrome.
So… a choice for you as you do this exercise – You have two options:
Option 1:
Shoot Raw, but set your camera so the image played back on the LCD (which is a .jpg thumbnail) is shown in monochrome
On a Canon camera, you will be using Picture Styles. On a Nikon, Picture Controls is the term. Look for Monochrome in the menu. What you’ll be doing is taking a Raw color image but forcing the camera to playback a monochrome image on the LCD.
Check your camera manual for how to set this up.
The advantage is being able to see a monochrome image in playback rather than having to previsualize what it will look like. Because your raw file will still be color, you will have more control in editing. Should you decide you do prefer the color image, you can stick with it and not convert to black and white.
If you shoot .jpg only, your image will be monochrome with no going back.
Flexibility – it’s just one more of dozens of reasons to shoot raw images.
Or …
If you set your Image Review to “Off”, the photo will not be displayed in the LCD after you
take it. Film photographers didn’t have the luxury of image review in the field and for this
exercise, you won’t either.
Option 2
Turn off or tape over the LCD screen
If you really want to emulate shooting film, (and get the most from this exercise), you will not chimp at all. There was no option to review your shots with film. The photographer had to trust their knowledge and instincts.
For those who’ve only made digital photos, (and even for those who may have used film but haven’t done so for a long time), this is harder than it might seem. The reward, however, will be learning to analyze the scene better, make necessary camera adjustments, and trust your instincts. You will make mistakes and not know about them until later, but lessons learned with a little “pain” attached will be those you’ll best remember.
I’m not suggesting you always work like this, instant LCD feedback is a beautiful thing. However, when practicing this exercise, see what it can teach you. (Don’t forget to turn your LCD Review back on completion of the exercise!)
With the Picture Mode in Monochrome, both Live View and Image Playback on the LCD
screen will be Monochrome even though the Raw file will still record in color.
When more isn’t better
Another great thing about digital photography is how many images you can fit on a storage card. Depending on the camera and the card size that can easily be hundreds, even thousands in some cases. You also don’t have to worry about each shot costing you more. If you don’t like what you see, that’s what the delete button is for.
Cards are reusable. Once you buy one, you can use it over and over.
As the saying goes, “digital film is cheap.”
Monochrome will help you better compose and concentrate on line, shape, tone, and texture.
Also, note how simulating a red filter when editing allowed the blue sky to render very dark.
Shooting film wasn’t cheap. There was the cost of the film, the cost of film processing, and the cost of printing. Nothing was reusable, and so all the shots, both the keepers and the junk, cost money. With digital, we also need not print if we don’t like a shot.
It was hard to view a film negative and judge what you had. Unless you were printing your own images, you’d almost always print everything and prints cost money. Some of us shot transparencies (slides). These were a little cheaper since you’d typically not print them. However, you had to get it right in camera as there was no editing a slide.
Beginning film photographers could spend lots of money learning with little to show for it.
There was also the limitation of how many photos could be made on a roll of film. The capacity typically measured in dozens, not hundreds or thousands of images like digital media. If you used 35mm film, you could typically get 12, 24, or 36-exposure rolls. With limited exposures and to save money, photographers wanted to make each shot count.
The downsides were making fewer images, (and thus reducing the odds of getting a keeper), less experimentation with new techniques, and a longer learning curve for a new photographer who’d be making fewer photos. The upside, however, (and this is a big factor), was photographers took more time to do it right – more time to think before pressing the shutter button.
Putting it all together
Are you ready to give this exercise a try?
I’d suggest not doing this in a session that’s important to you. If you are doing it right, you’re apt to make some mistakes. That’s okay, those will be mistakes from which you can learn.
Here are your settings and steps: Camera in “M” – Manual Mode – You will control ISO, Aperture, and Shutter Speed Autofocus Off – Focus with the focus ring. Learn to see and concentrate on what you’re focusing on. A mistake I often see new photographers make when learning to use an autofocus digital camera is letting the camera select the default center focus point when that may not be the spot they wanted in focus. Manually focusing puts you in charge of what’s in focus. Also, consider when you might need to use your aperture to increase or decrease your depth-of-field. Determine your lighting conditions and chose a “film type” ISO – Choose ISO 125 for bright daylight (emulating Kodak Plus-X or Ilford FP4), ISO 400 (to emulate Kodak Tri-X or Ilford FP5). If you’ll be photographing in low light, try ISO 800 and emulate “pushed” film. The point here is set it once and leave it there for the entire session. It wasn’t possible to change ISO with film, you were stuck with your choice for the entire roll. Use a prime lensif you have one – Learn to compose without a zoom. Decide how many exposures you have – Pick 12, 24, or 36. Sure, film photographers often carried multiple rolls, but this exercise is designed to help you make each shot count. Once you hit your pre-determined number, you’re done.
Here’s what came in a box of Kodak Plus-X or Tri-X film. Can you use this to calculate
exposure and not rely on your camera meter? Give it a try!
Calculate Exposure – By the 1960s, most 35mm film cameras had light meters, but they were primitive by today’s standard. A “match-needle” system where a needle could be centered when dialing in exposure and shutter speed was what many displayed. If you wanted to purposely over or under-expose a bit, you’d adjust until the needle was over or under as desired.
On cameras without meters, many relied on the chart typically found in a box of film. Often, these calculations were based on what was called the “Sunny 16 Rule.” It said that on a bright sunny day if you put the aperture at f/16, then the shutter speed should equal the ASA, (now ISO), film speed.
For example, with Kodak Plus-X ASA 125 film a setting of ASA 125, f/125 at f/16 would give you a well-exposed image. If you wanted to shoot at a different shutter speed or aperture, you could calculate from there. For example, f/250 @ f/11 (assuming you had the same ASA 125 film in the camera) would be an equal exposure.
If it wasn’t a bright sunny day, you were in the shade, or light conditions were different, sometimes the little printed chart could help. Mostly, it was the practice that taught a photographer what was “about right” for a given film and a given lighting condition.
That’s another purpose of this exercise; to help teach you what’s about right for a given lighting condition. See how you do without relying on the meter. At least pay close attention to what the aperture and shutter speed is for a given set of conditions.
Slow down
If this exercise teaches you nothing else, learning to slow down will make it worthwhile. With limited exposures available on a roll of film, the “spray-and-pray” style of photography was rare. Typically it was only sports and fashion photographers who had motor-drives (the mechanical version of what we now do with continuous mode).
Photographers took the time to carefully think about their composition, and what they wanted to convey with the image. What shutter speed choice might be best to freeze or blur the action? How much depth-of-field might you desire and what aperture choice would be best? Should you roll in a little exposure compensation?
All of these factors were given thoughtful consideration. Bracketing shots to be sure everything was right could be done but at the expense of more quickly eating up that roll of film. The difficulty of fixing anything in the darkroom was much greater too, and photographers didn’t have the attitude that they’d “just fix it in Photoshop.” Consequently, the concept of “getting it right in-camera” was the norm.
Getting it right in-camera is among the goals intended with this exercise. If you know you only have a minimal number of exposures available to you, each one has to count. You won’t have the luxury of shooting, chimping, adjusting, and re-shooting if you’re doing this exercise as intended.
So, slow down, take your time, think about each part of the process. And then make your best shot.
Later, you will have a real advantage film photographers didn’t have – the ability to review your images with attached exposure data.
In the film days, conscientious beginning photographers carried a notebook and wrote down their settings to recall later. Now, your digital camera keeps the notes. Chalk up one more plus for digital photography.
Why monochrome?
We briefly touched on why monochrome was the choice for this exercise. One, of course, is that it replicates what early beginning film photographers used and we are simulating the limitations of that time.
The more significant reason is without color, monochrome images rely much more on shape, form, line, tone, and texture. It is also much easier to concentrate on composition without the added distraction of color.
Working in monochrome can help a photographer better key in on those elements that make a strong image and practice those techniques.
If you’ve done much monochrome photography, you’ll likely already know this. If you’ve pretty much only made color images in the past, this part of the exercise will also be part of the process of improving your skills.
Back in edit
Film photographers typically dropped their film off at the lab, mailed it in, or sometimes did their own processing. (I love the smell of D-76 in the morning! It smells like… Victory. – Not! Sorry for the flashback, let’s resume).
You will come back with a few, (you limited your exposures as instructed, right?), Raw images on your storage card. They will be in color, but you’ll be converting them to monochrome. I will not spend the time in this article outlining the best ways to convert color to monochrome. You will find a nice collection of those tutorials here on DPS. You will find there are great ways to manipulate the tones in your monochrome conversion to create distinctive looks.
To complete the goals of the exercise, what you’ll want to give the most attention to is, were you able to make well-focused, properly-exposed, and nicely composed images with the self-imposed restrictions of the exercise? Without the electronic assistance of a modern digital camera (auto-focus, auto-exposure), what worked? What didn’t?
If this really had been film, what would you do differently next time?
The takeaways
This is a great time to be a photographer. The sophistication of our cameras and the ease with which we can do amazing things in editing is fantastic. The point of this exercise, however, is to teach you to use your brain as a photographer, to take full control over your camera, and not rely on a microchip to do it for you. I personally would never go back to film, have no desire to get back in a darkroom, and love every electronic aid my camera supplies.
The point is, I want those things to build on a solid foundation of photo ability and knowledge. That is the reason for this exercise.
The path to becoming a better photographer lies in using your brain, not a camera microchip,
to do the thinking. Slow down, pre-visualize the image, and then use the camera as a tool to
capture that vision.
I sincerely hope you give this a try. If you make great images, wonderful! If you struggle and make mistakes, fine – you will have learned something.
Either way, you will grow as a photographer.
Drop me a line in the comments and let me know how you made out. Best wishes.
One thing I learned from the "Film vs. Digital (Not What You Think!)" post is that a small but significant number of people, after using digital for years, have gone back to shooting film.
I didn't know that was a thing. Sure, for years it's been rumored that it's cool for young hipster Millennials to shoot with old film cameras. But I wasn't aware that people of middle age or more were returning to shooting film, sometimes after two decades or so of shooting mainly or exclusively digital. But we heard from a number of you in the comments to that post, which means there are more out there who are doing the same.
So I thought I'd recommend a bargain camera. 'Party like it's 1999'
The best 35mm film camera bargain in the known Universe today is "The Last Great 20th-Century Nikon," the F100. I'm not sure what actually was Nikon's last camera of the 20th century, but the F100 must be the last great one, so that's what I'm gonna call it. It came out in 1999.
You can buy a nice F100 for anywhere from $199 (eBay) to $339 (in Ex+ condition from KEH Camera*).
The F100 is a bargain because of an accident of history. Or of timing, really. The last widely-used pro-level Nikon F camera, the F5, had come out in 1996. The F100, a fresh makeover updating the aging but very popular N90s, was Nikon's "AdAm" (advanced amateur) variant, containing a considerable amount of "trickle-down" technology from the F5.
EOS was only ten years old in 1999, and Nikon was either at or not very far from the peak of its modern reputation—certainly it hadn't been long since Nikon dominated the professional market, and at the time it still ranked first in the minds of many devoted enthusiasts. However you parse it, Nikon's reputation and prestige were near their peak. And for most people, digital was still hull-down on the horizon in 1999—the best digital cameras in the late '90s were breathtakingly expensive and being purchased mainly by newsrooms, sports magazines, and rich dabblers, while the amateur digital cameras of the day were more or less toys, heady fun to use but providing only heavily compromised image quality.
Plus, it was briefly a "thing" at that juncture in time—the late '90s—for seasoned and experienced photographers, especially middle-aged and older ones, to declare their fealty to "real" film photography and denigrate digital. The paradigm shift was still a few years in the future. And the F100, as the "F5 lite" (really, that's what people called it), offered significant technical advances over many cameras that were only a few years older.
As a result, the F100 sold like ice-cold Cokes on a sweltering hot day. It hit the bullseye in the target market. They were hugely popular. It seemed like everybody and his brother wanted one. Nikon sold boatloads of 'em.
...But only for a while. Only a year later, the three-megapixel Canon D30 came out, and Michael Reichmann's article declaring that it equaled film in image quality went viral in a big way, establishing his site The Luminous-Landscape. The D30 was tantalizingly cheaper but still prohibitive at $3,000. Then in 2003 the radically affordable Digital Rebel came along, and the bell began to toll. The same photographers who had proudly purchased F100's as their "last" cameras—enticed by the fast pace of digital progress, the proliferation of digital models on offer, and the ever more accessible prices of digital cameras—started making the migration to digital. First in a trickle, then in a torrent.
By 2005, hardly anyone was buying film cameras any more. As it happened, a great many people switched to digital shortly after buying their F100, making for a huge supply of F100's out there that had very low miles. Quickly, the used market was awash with F100s in great condition, so the price went down, down, and down some more.
And there the price has stayed. 'It was 20 years ago today...'
Objectively, there are more desirable Nikons today for film shooters. In 2001, Nikon made a small-volume revival of its famous FM/FE lines of compact film cameras, a new version called the FM3a (here's a picture). In 2004, the last Nikon F film camera, the F6, was introduced. Both the FM3a and the F6 are marginally better choices for someone wanting a nice 35mm film Nikon today; the former for its superior retro chic, the latter for pure tech-and-feature horsepower. The problem is that neither of those cameras ever sold in high numbers—the historical moment for each had already passed by the time they came along. As a result, the FM3a and the F6, used, now go for approximately two times and four times, respectively, what you'll spend for an F100. I'd pick an FM3a myself. But (unless you just prefer its manual-metal-mechanical gestalt) the FM3a is not twice as good a camera as the F100, and the F6 (which you can still buy new, believe it or not) is better but not four times better. The F100 has more advantages 20 years later than just a low price. First of all, there are so many of them out there that you can be picky—you should be able to easily find one that's not only cheap 'n' decent but in truly pretty condition. It's ergonomic and not huge; it has AF and Matrix metering with AF-Nikkor lenses; it uses commonly available AA batteries, so no hunting for scarce or outlawed button batteries as with some more antique SLRs; it has built-in diopter correction, so ditto on the search for separate, screw-on diopters, a similar headache with certain old cameras for people who need diopters; I believe Nikon ARS (Authorized Repair Stations) still work on them, as do many independent repair shops; and there's a large community of film Nikon people and a large number of F100 shooters within that community, so you can find camaraderie as well as people on forums who can answer any questions you might have. And you can get Thom Hogan's Complete Guide to the Nikon F100. Finally, it's still new enough that you aren't likely to encounter problems created purely by age. The F100 was discontinued, along with most other Nikon film cameras, in the late 2000s**, not all that long ago. 'Sweetheart of the Rodeo'
Nikon put a huge amount of R&D into the F100, as it was right in the sweet spot for high-volume, high-profit sales to the enthusiast market that was the company's bread and butter. And it was an expensive camera when it came out. I reviewed one in 1999 or early 2000, and my memory is that the retail price at the time was about $1,400, which was a pretty decent whack 20 years ago. Yet it was a fair bargain at that price...as least in terms of the market conditions that existed at the end of the 20th century.
I'd be pretty relaxed today about tech specs, though. Shooting film is retro now, and should be enjoyed as such. You can use the F100 with manual-focus AIS lenses...some of which are still available new! Brand new, you can get the legendary AIS Micro-Nikkor 55mm ƒ/2.8, the same lens John Loengard of LIFE magazine used for his brilliant work. That would be fun. It would pair perfectly with the AIS Nikkor 28mm ƒ/2.8, another standout. And of course the short tele to get with those would be the famous AIS Nikkor 105mm ƒ/2.5, one of Nikon's most iconic and longest-lived lenses, which had a run from 1959 all the way through to the '90s. Here's an information page about that paragon.
The camera only offers aperture-priority exposure and center-weighted metering with manual-focus AIS Nikkors, but that's okay, because focusing it yourself enhances the retro experience. On the modern functionality side of the equation (you still want to take good pictures, after all), the camera offers focus confirmation in the viewfinder with manual-focus lenses, and actually has little arrows telling you which way to turn the focusing ring. Me, though? If I had an F100 I'd take some of the savings from the body and buy an AF-Nikkor 35mm ƒ/2D, which is also still available new. The lens is a sweetie, and with the F100 has both autofocus and Matrix metering. Beware of used models of this lens, though, at least those without the "D" suffix at the end of the name—many early samples of this lens were plagued with lubricant getting on the aperture blades, a problem that Nikon service had trouble fixing. That lens's period of greatest popularity overlapped with my tenure as the Editor of Photo Techniques, and I fielded an earful of complaints about it. The "D" version fixed the problem.
Sunday, July 21, 2019
The textbook of digital photography.
Dennis P. Curtin wrote here a very complete and comprehensive ebook about digital photography.
The author speaks about all aspect of the digital photography, as well as all the aspect of the material, the digital workflow, the post processing, how exposure affect your images, the controls vs automatics mode and so on...
Flattering portraits rarely happen as a default. Some people are photogenic, yes, and look good at every angle. But often, we work hard to get flattering photos that the sitter loves. There is no one-trick as every person’s face, form, and shape are different. We have to tailor our angles to each portrait sitter. However, there are basic fundamental tools we can use that help us achieve flattering portraits.
1. Use the right lens
Having photographed people for a decade now, I have learned that there is no great all-around lens that can do the best job for everything. Sure there are good lenses that achieve good results, but I’d favor specialist lenses for specific purposes.
Let’s take portraits, for example. A basic kit lens that comes with a camera purchase is usually an 18mm – 55mm zoom. It is expected to be good for wide angles and normal-range views. Yes, it’s good for day-to-day standard snaps. But for portraits? A longer zoom, such as the 85mm, 105mm, and 200mm, are a much better choice for stunning portraits. These give a shallow depth of field, great compression to the background and produce flattering portraits. There is no distortion similar to what you would get when using wider lenses for portraits.
You can read more about choosing the best portrait lens on here.
2. Use the right angle for the person
Many women I have photographed do not like having their portrait taken. They are aware of various imperfections on their faces, angles they do not like, and features they are self-conscious about. This is normal and certainly rings true for me. I’m the worst portrait sitter.
In order to achieve portraits that women like, I usually shoot both sides and show them the first few photos I take on the LCD screen of the camera. They choose a preferred side, and we take a few more from that angle. The worst thoughts are usually just in their minds. When they see their photos, even on the back of the camera, they realize it’s not as bad as they thought and there is a better side. They usually relax more from then on.
Generally, I photograph at slightly higher than eye level for most women. This angle hides any unwanted necklines, slims down cheeks and tapers the face down a little for a more flattering portrait.
If I’m photographing from an even higher level than usual, I ask them to look up at me just ever so slightly, and that gives me a confident posture and stance too.
With men, it is usually quite the opposite. Most male portraits get taken within seconds. I find them less self-conscious with a “let’s get on with it, over and done with attitude” in a nice way. I ask them to stand as they usually do. If they slouch, I ask them to straighten their spines a bit, square their shoulders and look straight into the camera. Sometimes I get them to lean slightly against a wall. I generally photograph men at eye-level. Children, on the other hand, I look best when photographed from waist high. That means I’m always a little lower than them – often sitting on the floor and looking up to them a bit. This means they don’t look too small, and they get a boost of confidence that they are being looked up at and not down to. Children often look down towards whatever they are holding or playing with. By shooting from a lower angle, I get to see their faces clearly too.
3. Use the right type of lighting
Simply put, short lighting is when the shadowed side of the face is closer to the camera. Being in the shadow, this side of the face is darker and therefore usually ‘shorter’ in terms of the span of the light hitting this side of the face. Broad lighting is the opposite when lit and the brighter side of the face is closer to the camera. Because it’s brighter, it appears much broader with more light reaching much of the area of the face.
Short lighting makes the face appear slimmer due to the shadows created on the face. This can also produce strong contrasts although you can soften the dark areas by using a reflector.
Broad lighting helps in making the face appear wider. Because this area is usually brightly lit compared to other areas, stronger contrast between dark and light is usually created.
Use these two lighting types to the advantage of the sitter for more flattering outcomes. You can read a more in-depth explanation of these two types of lighting on here.
4. Crop correctly
Because I always edit my photographs, I feel I can afford to change my composition in post-processing rather than always trying to get everything right in-camera. Don’t get me wrong, I strive to get my compositions right, but I have found I can always tweak it in post to improve it. I shoot fast and can’t always get the horizontals completely straight, so I correct this in post. This means I have to shoot a little wider than the final outcome.
I have no problems with cropping as long as it’s not too aggressive and there are ample pixels left in the image to produce great prints.
There are a few caveats in cropping though. For flattering portraits, never crop or compose your photos so that the edges and tangents are on body joints like elbows, knees, neck, wrist, shoulders and across the belly. These look odd and somewhat disturbing. Always crop in between or partway through the joints, so chest, arms, hips, leg, calves, forehead are acceptable. You can read more about tips on cropping to improve your image on here.
I have photographed many a woman who was very conscious of her body. For example, she was self-conscious of her arms, and yet she turns up in a sleeveless top. In those cases, I zoom in and crop the arms lengthways down so the photo only shows a third of the bare arm.
You can also crop to reposition your image and strengthen your composition as a result. I find using the rule of thirds as a very strong compositional tool and tend to lean towards it a lot. A symmetrical composition is also strong and effective. This is a good article on factors to consider when composing portraits.
I hope you found these four tips for flattering portraits helpful. If you have more tips to contribute, share them on here in the comments below.
Food photography is an art form that can entice viewers in visceral ways. To be able to capture a still-life in such a way as it looks easy and, of course, appetising is something every budding food photographer aspires to. So to ensure that your food photography journey starts off on the right foot, we've compiled 13 wonderful tutorials that will definitely ensure that your food photography is a feast for the eyes!
Quick Tips To Get You Started With Food Photography
If you aren't sure where to start, these quick tips will give you a great overview to get you thinking about how best to shoot still-life.
Use Natural Light
This is best for a beginner – move your subject to make sure that you have natural window light. Soft diffused light is incredibly appealing
Use A Wide Aperture Setting
Next up, ensure you have a wide aperture setting – f/1.8 – f/5.6. This will give you a limited depth of field ensuring that you have a lovely blurred background, and make sure you focus near the front edge of the food
Composition Is Key
Think about your composition – zoom right in and fill your frame with the food, or perhaps think about using negative space, and definitely make sure your background is relevant but doesn't detract from your culinary masterpiece
Contrast Colours
Still thinking about composition, find contrasting colours. For example, put some fresh basil (green) on your spaghetti or try a pop of red (chilli) on your stir-fry.
5. Keep It Fresh
Photograph the food while it is as fresh and as visually appetising as possible
Get A Great Introduction With These Food Photography Tutorials
Getting Started With Food Photography: This piece by Dzvonko Petrovski takes you through composition, lighting and post-production techniques to give you a great grounding in some of the basics of food photography. An Introduction To Food Photography: Chris Cockren from Shared Appetite not only gives us a great tutorial on how to start photographing food but also shows us some great examples of what not to do, which is always helpful. Bite Size Tips: Amazing Food Photography Primer: Dahlia Ambrose gives us some great quick tips as well as an overview of the gear you'll need and the techniques that will give you drool-worthy photographs of food.
5 Great Tips For Successful Food Photography: Over at Contrastly they've condensed their thoughts into 5 succinct tips that will immediately kick start your food photography success. 13 Tips For Beautiful & Tempting iPhone Food Photography: Some great tips here for anyone getting started with food photography and it should be noted that these techniques apply to any camera you are using, whether it is your mobile phone or the latest DSLR.
Take Your Food Photography To The Next Level With These More In-Depth Guides
How To Photography Food For Professional-Standard Shots: This is the big one. Here we give you the ins and outs of food photography, from composition and lighting to tips of styling the food as well. This guide is well worth your time. These Are The Secrets Of Professional Food Photographers: In this tutorial, Kent Dufault gives us pointers on everything from lighting and exposure to colour and focus. This is a great piece that reveals the tricks of the professionals.
How To Do A Food Photography Shoot: Over at the Food Photography Blog you'll find a lot of great information about this genre. This guide gives you 8 clear steps to a successful session shooting food. 8 Tips And Tricks To Improve Your Food Photography: Here Jasenka covers techniques that go beyond getting started, looking closely at composition and styling tips. Make Your Macro Food Pictures Look Like A Slice Of Heaven: This article really homes in on using macro-photography to capture food at its essence. By using macro, you'll be able to go beyond the plate!
We hope you've enjoyed these links to some amazing tutorials from here and around the web. All these tutorials have something in common, and that is reinforcing your need to understand light. One way to improve your photography is to understand light better. If you've struggled to take advantage of light in your photography to the fullest and you want a complete, in-depth training to help you with that, take a look at the guide Understanding Light: Book One, to produce great images by discovering the key concepts of light.
Image by Joanna Kosinska
Image by Priscilla Du Preez
Image by Marcus Castro
Image by Samuel Zeller
Image by Vitaly
a6500
