On-Camera Fill Flash

The small, built-in flash on your camera is not meant to be a powerhouse that will enable you to capture large groups indoors or throw light any significant distance outdoors. Most are good to about 10 feet maximum, though range can be boosted somewhat with higher ISO settings (with the increased noise price that you pay.) Some have a bit more power than others, but rarely do they go beyond a fairly short range. However, there are times when the small output can be used for adding just a taste of light to highlight a foreground subject and to bring lighting balance into a contrasty scene.

An opportunity for just that situation came up when photographing along the Rio Pueblo in Northern New Mexico last year, where the foreground sat in deep shadow. I knew I wanted to retain those shadowed forms to highlight the bright foliage, but after the first shot I thought that the shadows were too dominant (fig 1). Near my shooting position sat a small bush with the same yellow coloration of the background that did not record in my first shot.

I raised the small flash on my camera and took a shot. I liked what it did for the composition but the foreground plant looked too bright, a result of hitting it with flash from a few feet away. I then chose to use flash exposure compensation at -1.5EV, a good practice when working close like this. The resultant shot helped balance the composition and brought some visual interest into the foreground.

So next time you are working in strong contrast, and want to compose to maintain the shape and form of the shadows, consider using the small pop-up flash, along with flash exposure compensation, to add some extra visual “kick” to your images.

1
Exposure: Spot meter reading on bright bushes in background, f/16 at 1/125 sec at ISO 100; 24mm (equivalent) lens.
2
Exposure: f/16 at 1/125 sec at ISO 100, fill flash (on-camera) set at -1.5EV flash exposure compensation.

Text and images copyright George Schaub 2009, all rights reserved

Landscape and Nature Photography

“I was studying for a degree in environmental conservation at the University of Colorado in Boulder, taking classes in mountain ecology...My summers were spent backpacking in National Parks. My mother gave me a camera when I went away to school, and it seemed like a natural thing to take along. I wanted to document what I was seeing and what was exciting to me. Photography didn’t start out as my ultimate goal. After a couple of summers backpacking and photographing nature, the activity of photography grew to be more important than backpacking.”

William Neill, from an interview with Grace Schaub

The desire to incorporate the power and beauty of the natural world around us into our being is one of the prime motivations for making landscape and nature photographs. These photographs can then be shared with others to show where we’ve been and what we’ve appreciated. A landscape may depict clouds rushing over mountains in the wilds of the Rockies, or a barn or rustic farmhouse in mannered fields. Not all of nature is bucolic and sunny. Powerful landscapes can also show the power and, at times, fury of nature, even the devastating effects of man upon the natural world.

One of the keys to successful landscape photography is using visual and technical applications to capture a true “sense of place.” The aim is to record both the external visual record of the place as well as the internalized power and presence of the experienced moment in which it is recorded. The most powerful images are both visual and emotional records.

Landscape images may at times be a gift from a coincidence of sky, light, time of day, or the viewpoint offered by the road or trail. However, evoking a true sense of place usually demands patience, applied technique and a willingness to “feel out” an area prior to photographing. It also requires active seeing and contemplation on what framing, exposure and time of day will best communicate the power and beauty of a location.

One way to approach landscape studies is to leave your camera in your bag before you begin to shoot. Move through an area and make mental notes on framing, the direction of the light and the best point of view. While spontaneous moments of inspiration should not be denied (especially on days when the light is undergoing constant change), consideration of a number of photographic options prior to making pictures may be the best course. It also allows time for enjoying and appreciating the place.

Landscapes tend to be broader views of an area that encompass sky and ground or a lake with surrounding forest. Though the distinction may be slight, and the photographs may be made in the same locales, nature photography is generally on a more intimate scale. It may be photographs of wildlife or a clump of fall leaves caught in the glistening waters of a rushing stream. Nature photography often relies on chance, or serendipity, and pictures are found while enjoying a hike in the woods or a stroll down the beach. Nature can also be an excellent source of abstract forms; images made in that frame of mind become metaphors for a grander design, or touch emotions not usually engendered by the subject’s face value.

Landscape and nature studies have always been an important part of photography The earliest book of photographs by one of the pioneers of photography, Fox-Talbot, was entitled “The Pencil of Nature.” Nature as metaphor was a major theme of photographers such as Minor White, Walter Chappell and Edward Weston. The linkage of nature photography with conservation became the life’s work of Ansel Adams. Many activist-photographers carry on this work today.

Image and text copyright George Schaub 2009. All rights reserved.

Digital Infrared Black and White

Infrared light is by definition “invisible” light that resides above the threshold of human vision. It is not Kirilian, or aura photography, though it sometimes creates an ethereal, ghost-like representation that can be quit seductive. Like most things photographic that appear visionary, there is a bit of science behind the magic. This involves disabling the “normal” operation of the camera to allow infrared level light to record, something that is usually blocked by an IR cutout filter placed in the light path from lens to sensor. It turns out that without this internal filter the digital image would be “polluted” with IR, and would, for most people, create less than desirable image quality. In truth, digtal sensors often have considerably more infrared sensitivity than you might think.

In most cameras the filter is “hard wired” into the construction, which means that if you remove it you now have a fulltime IR capable camera that cannot be returned to normal use. This must be done by a service company that knows its stuff; it’s something you cannot do on your own. Some cameras come IR dedicated, mostly those used by law enforcement agencies for gathering forensic evidence. A very few can be converted in do-it-yourself fashion, such as the Sigma model DSLRs, where you can remove the lens and literally pick out the IR filter (which doubles as a dust filter), albeit very carefully, and reinsert it later. Those who are true IR fans would do well to investigate the cameras used by police departments; as of this writing Fuji makes a few such models.

Another step that needs to be taken to capture true IR images is placing a filter over the camera lens, something that is uncommon for most digital photography (as most filter effects can be added later in software.) If you shoot IR without any filters with an altered camera you will get a sort of reverse pollution of visible light, something that certainly diminishes the IR effect.

There are three types of basic filters that can be used, with one being quite expensive and, in my experience, unnecessary to gain the effect. The filters used include a red filter, something black and white film photographers might still have in their closet, (a Wratten 25A), plus two filters that block more and more visible light and do not allow for image recording below the infrared threshold. The two other filters, which go under various names and codes according to the filter maker’s markings, block light under 700 nanometers and 830 nanometers (and some higher) on the spectrum; in other words, progressively more IR light and much less visible light. The highest blocking filter (830nm and above) gets very expensive and is only for well-heeled purists and aficionados.

The effects achieved with the two blocking filters can be amazing but you cannot see what’s going on in the viewfinder, which means that you have to frame and focus prior to placing the filter over the lens and making the exposure. Some photographers view over the top of the camera for an approximate framing. The red filter, while not as “pure” lets you at least see what’s going on in the finder. If you are an IR fan then the blockers will be your choice—those who dabble in it, as I do, will find the red filter is fine.

Exposure is unusual as well. It has nothing to do with making readings and using metering patterns, since you are not dealing entirely or at all with visible light. It’s a strange concept, but that’s also part of the IR mystique—being out of normal bounds of having to read exposures and balance highlight and shadow. The best way to work IR exposures is to start at somewhere around f/11 at 1/125 second and then review the image after exposure and adjust accordingly. The view in the finder is quite different than you’d expect, so you will have to gain experience with what a processed IR image looks like according to a certain exposure level. This is the only way you will be able to make predictions about what the correct exposure might be, or at least what it should look like upon playback.

There is something in IR known as a “focus offset”, which means IR light bends a bit differently and may arrive at the sensor plane in different ways than visible focusing. This will become critical when doing close-ups, but does not have much effect, in my experience, for photos made beyond six feet. I often shoot at f/11 or narrower with a fairly wide angle lens just to take up that slack, changing the shutter speed accordingly.

The procedure some use for shooting is to purchase a filter that is a bit larger than the largest diameter lens they own (thus it can be used on all the lenses owned). They first frame and focus the tripod-mounted camera, then hold the filter over the lens when the exposure is made. This procedure takes care as it can result in some light leak from the corners, but that is usually eliminated with some practice in proper holding of the filter. Exposure is set manually. Some bold photographers shoot handheld in the same fashion, viewing over the top of the camera to yield an approximate framing and shooting a bit wider than they normally would for a “fudge” factor. They figure they can apply a more specific cropping later.

IR black and white has always been near and dear to landscape photographers, and now that high-speed IR black and white film has been discontinued by major film makers digital seems the only way to go.

Travel Photography

"You certainly don't present a negative, or even a real attitude about a place. There's no point for a travel photographer to show refugee camps. If you can show them as romantic hill tribes, fine. There's a difference between travel photography and photojournalism, and a different function to each."

Lisl Dennis, Interview, 1985

A person may live and work in the most inspiring locale in the world and rarely pick up a camera. If another person travels to that area they may be so captivated that their camera rarely leaves their hands. Travel reveals "the shock of the new", while an inhabitant may have become so visually jaded that they are blind to the amazing people, places and things around them.

The impetus to photograph when traveling may come from the need to bring back "trophy" pictures (the "I was there" shot), or simply from the fact that new places, faces, architecture and landscapes tend to open the "photographic eye". That inspiration is often enough to get the creative juices flowing.

Much of travel photography is the record shot, a virtual inventory of the obligatory sites on a tour. While there's nothing wrong with this, such shots are readily available at the local souvenir store, or from the host of travel sites that dot the web and that seem to cover virtually every popular destination. Although some record shots are inevitable, memorable travel pictures are those that take a more personal, interpretive approach to the subject matter.

The degree to which this can be done is often determined by the journey's itinerary. Covering eight countries in five days will often yield photographs that seem to be no more than a glance back at subjects that whiz by. Immersion in an area usually results in better pictures, as there is time to study and observe subjects. That study may simply be noticing when light is best on certain scenes and shooting accordingly. Observing the flow of life in the locale, and photographing people in the market, during festivals or simply going about the business of their daily lives can become the real treasures of the travel experience.

Ever since its invention, photography has been tied to travel. When getting about was a more difficult task, only available to a small segment of the population, photography served as the eyes of the world on exotic and far-flung regions. Pioneering photographers traveled around the world to bring back pictures for exhibitions, books, parlor stereographs, and later, for newspapers and magazines. When cameras and film became more portable at the end of the nineteenth century, and travel became more accessible to more people, the linkage between the voyage and the camera was sealed. Today it is almost unthinkable to travel without a camera as part of the luggage.

Both professional and avid amateurs provide many of the photographs for today's travel industry, either on assignment from tourist boards and travel publications, or as so-called "stock" photographers, who shoot on speculation. A large network of picture agencies sell stock images to the travel industry and magazines. Freelancers try to combine business with pleasure by making travel pictures when on vacation or weekends, or plan elaborate trips that are actually self-assigned photographic essays. The sheer volume of photographers engaged in this industry makes for a competitive marketplace, one where the ability to combine a travel "lifestyle" with technical excellence is key.

The eyewitness type of travel photography is a major part of the shots made today. Click on a hotel booking site and you will see dozens of images of cities and towns, along with actual shots of the hotel made by travelers (often quite different from the hotel supplied shots) and even shots of particular rooms and the view from that room! One of my favorite to browse, and the use fro booking advice from fellow travelers is http://www.tripadvisor.com.

The digital SLR is the camera of choice for those seeking to make more than snapshots on trips, although cameras with excellent optics and high megapixel counts can work as well, although care must be taken not to shoot at too high an ISO. For competitive reasons, pros often use full-frame DSLRs with high megapixel counts. In general, zoom lenses are good choices for travel, as they cut down on the amount of gear. While tastes differ, as does the requirements of different locales, a good lens kit should include a zoom in the 28-80mm and one in the 70-210mm range; this covers most picture needs. A small portable flash also comes in handy.

When traveling always carry-on the gear and especially the “take” after the trip is done. Never, ever pack anything of value in checked baggage. Personal experience has shown me that should you have something “lost” when in checked baggage results in a round of finger pointing on the part of the authorities that brings you through a circle and back again.

There are a host of accessories for the traveling photographer, including camera bag-sized tripods, photo vests, hip cases and "fanny packs". Small beanbags for steadying the camera on virtually any surface during long exposures can come in handy. While traveling with a camera is fun, lugging too much gear will always get in the way of the travel experience.

Image and text copyright George Schaub 2009. All rights reserved.

Where Does Film Go From Here?

I recently got to thinking about how future generations might come to regard film, as a sort of an odd way to store images that faded, got scratched and in the year 2020 became a neigh-on impossible format from which to make prints. Sure, there is an image on that base, but what do you do with the darn things? It’s amazing just how quickly many folks are losing touch with the film world, and indeed never experienced it in the first place. I know that more and more schools are dropping their darkroom and even film-shooting classes, and that the art of printing using anything but an inkjet and digital files will soon be an “alternative process” that gets as much use as the gum bichromate or cyanotype processes (see, you forgot those already.)

While many people in the industry were “raised” on film, we’re seeing more and more companies coming into the fold who have little or no clue about the film realm at all, and who look at you funny if you raise the medium in discussions. Take a look at the roster of companies who exhibit at photo trade shows and you’ll see lots from the computer world, those whose medium is bits and bytes and not silver halide. Look at categories like bags and tripods and flash and you’ll see that most companies are using what they must consider the magic bullet of “digital” in their product branding. What pray tell, might a digital tripod be? And any camera bag without a slot for a laptop is simply not considered viable anymore.

There’s no question why all this is happening—digital cameras have taken off like a shot and the vast majority of new cameras sold are digital. Film sales and processing have fallen off a cliff, at least in terms of year-to-year sales, and there hasn’t been any development money dedicated to film SLRs in many a year. Indeed, the only new film cameras are single-use, and even those are very few and far between.

What might have held digital up in the past, at least in relation to the convenience factor, has been resolved. The infrastructure is now in place for easy printing, what with kiosks, Internet and at-home printing solutions. And even if the image starts out on a piece of film there’s little doubt that somewhere in the chain it will be converted to binary code.

Digital has unlocked a potential for images and their use that film never or rarely achieved. The ability to share and distribute images grows each month, with web based setups that will allow people to share “content” anytime, anywhere and with anyone. An amateur in Australia can as easily show off images to someone in Holland as they can send an e-mail. Internet picture site owners talk of millions upon millions of participants, with the number of images growing exponentially each month. Photographers are routinely buying desktop storage units that can hold 500 gigabytes of image files.

So, where does this leave film? Clearly the number of companies making film has shrunk over the past years. Yet, when you talk to those still in the business of coating by the mile and selling by the yard they don’t see the loss of their competition as increasing their own film sales. Perhaps there might be some uptick, but in general the hemorrhaging of film sales in general has overcome any gains one might expect by the exiting of two major film manufacturers. Indeed, the net loss of film sales overall has continued.

Yet, yet…here’s no question that there are still millions of film users, and hopefully they will always have something to load in their cameras. It was thought that the so-called “developing nations” such as China and India would be film buyers for years to come, but this has not come to pass. The rise of the middle class in both countries and their quick leap into technology makes this market a less viable bastion for film’s survival than anyone predicted. On the other hand, a growing legion of young photographers is beginning to embrace film again. True, some gets loaded into toy cameras for so-called “alternative” looks, but some black and white silver shooters and printers are hanging in there and some schools refuse, rightfully so, to put their darkroom gear in the dumpster.

The debate of film versus digital has continued, despite the all-digital trend. There are many who point out the vapor-like quality of digital, and the fact that their film cameras are still quite viable after even ten or twenty years of use. And of course, there’s the film “quality”, the look and feel of the medium itself, and the beauty of the silver print. No argument there. But in this world it’s not always about people’s tastes or their likes or dislikes—it’s what the industries making the products deem the proper place for their R&D, marketing and distribution dollars. And as far as the photo industry is concerned it would seem that, to any objective observer, film is on the way out.

Yes, there will always be some film offered and made, but the selection will shrink as the years progress. Now that users of digital cameras can dial in any ISO, any contrast and saturation, color or monochrome and indeed almost any level of sharpening and color response (which is after all the attributes of a distinct film emulsion) why have so many brands and types of film on the shelf, or at home in the refrigerator? And how many photographers can ever again take a picture again without looking at the back of the camera to see how it turned out?

Images and text, copyright George Schaub 2009

Color the Way You Want It

Color can be a subjective experience. Yes, there are defined color spaces, and gamuts and color meters that define, measure and make suggestions for balancing color to be as “true” and accurate as anyone could desire. But for photographers color is what they see and want to communicate, not always what objective measurement might indicate. For film photographers, especially those who shoot slide film, the color “profile” is determined by how the film emulsion is structured and how one exposes and develops the film. Push a film a stop and color will change; underexpose slide film and the color will shift accordingly. For color print shooters, the color is initially described by the film structure, but very much interpreted by who is making the print and on what paper they might be printing.

Digital photographers have a wider choice about how color is seen and recorded. There are no dyes or emulsion to determine the color, just codes that can be changed with ease. Want a blue apple? No problem, just select the red or green and replace that color with ease. Want rich, vibrant color that any high-saturation color slide shooter would love? Just move the saturation and contrast up in the camera menu or later in software. Want super-accurate color? Just place a gray card in the scene, click on it later with the middle gray eyedropper in Curves or other software control and all the other colors line up like you read it with a color meter and lit it with perfectly balanced lights.

There are so many color controls in image manipulation software that any expressive use of color can easily be obtained. You can get as elaborate or as simple as you like with these controls. In camera you have color choices as well, although they are not as nuanced as those found in software. And if you shoot in Raw mode you can start with one color interpretation and very easily move onto many, many more later. The point of all this is not to confuse you with too many choices but to give you a sense of the freedom of expression now available.

Text and image copyright George Schaub 2009. All Rights Reserved

Photo Galleries: Actual and Virtual

The desire to show and share their photographic work is common to most photographers, whether it be for approval, justification or feedback or to advance the work into other fields. Taking the work out of the drawer puts it up against the standard of other work and is often a key phase in the development of a photographer. It is both a challenge and a way to build confidence, as it forces the artist to confront and then state the concept and underlying principle of his or her work. And it can be fun.

The challenge is first defining a body of work, or a theme, and then building a set of images around it. That theme can run from the sublime to the ridiculous and be composed of seemingly disparate elements that somehow come together as a group. It may be portraits, street scenes, a location or a point of view. Once the theme has been established, the work has to be created to a very high standard.

Print Quality

Perhaps the greatest demands on overall print quality are made in the gallery and collecting world. Those who view the work as curators (people who organize such shows and create a marketplace for photographic images), as well as those who consider the work as art "consumers", usually have a high degree of visual sophistication, thus often compare the work they see with the best of what's available.

The gallery world looks at every print for surface flaws and weakness of print tonality. In short, the prints are subjected to a visual "fine-tooth comb". Gallery owners and curators view prints as "precious things" onto themselves and often consider print presentation (the care in mounting and matting, as well as the smoothness and cleanliness of print surface) as a critical element in their evaluation of the work.

A Consistent Look

Unless the show is a retrospective of many years and styles of work, a cohesive approach--paper surface, print quality and even mat and mount board consistency--may be part of what makes a good impression. This is particularly true of themes or essays. A highly professional presentation, in short, is the only acceptable approach.

This is not meant to imply that the work needs to be formalized or presented in a narrow way. The environment of the gallery or display area (be it a library, bank, restaurant or bar) and the tastes of its customers give the best indication of the type of work that is accepted and expected. The gallery owner or curator may also be helpful in this matter, as will the work that is hung on the wall and the photographers that are shown.

Lighting can be merciless in galleries, though some are lit as dimly as a cozy living room. When the lighting is intense every flaw in tonality or print finish will be revealed. Extra care must be taken in printing and preparing the print for framing. When sending or transporting work to a show be sure to pack it carefully; insure the work and use a shipper familiar with the hazards. Bent frames or broken glass are all too common.

While the image itself will guide technique, consider the venue when creating work. Display lighting can be simulated by studying the work under similar conditions. Some display areas cry out for larger prints while others allow for a more intimate approach.

The frame used is a personal matter, though most photographers choose metal sectionals or simple wood frames. If the aim is to show a variety of work in different venues, consider buying one or two standard frame sizes then overmatting all work, regardless of image size, out to those standard dimensions. This will save money and allow for the changing of prints for different shows without making any further investment in frames. Though glass does transmit the image better, Plexiglas can be more practical if the show travels.

The Virtual Gallery

It’s evident that literally millions of photographers are choosing to show their work on the Internet or on their own Web page. Go to any search engine and type in photographers (or more specifically, nature...black and white...landscape...travel, etc. photographers) and the listings seem to go on and on. The idea is instant access without the need for portfolio review and the hassle of waiting a year for exhibit space. The diversity of work now on the Web is astounding, as are the different levels of quality. But there's no question that the Web has opened up new ground for those wishing to exhibit their work to a world-wide audience, one that breaks all regional and city boundaries.

The Web has also proven to be an excellent venue for gaining employment and increasing print sales of event photography. Wedding and portrait photographers now point prospective clients to their Web page for a look at their expertise and style. Commercial photographers post the progress of studio photography to clients across town or the country. Once an event, such as a wedding, is photographed, photographers post the images on a private Web site to allow those who could not attend the wedding or those who otherwise would never to see the proofs to order prints. This has proven to be an excellent way to increase print sales.

Photographers also put up Web pages for print sales. While this is arguably the toughest way to make a print sale, this method of displaying images for sale will become increasingly important as time goes on. Galleries are also showing their collectible prints on Web sites and museums and historical societies are publishing their archives as searchable archives.

For those who want to become engaged in Web display, page design can be as elaborate or as simple as desired. There are literally dozens of software programs and linked software in image editing programs, as well as web “hosts” that will build pages for you. (See georgeschaub.com for a hosted page.)

Other options include social networking sites and, for a more private showing, online albums accessible through a personal address code. This limits the number of people who can see the page, as they must have the code to access it. Professionals use this approach to show their work only to select clients.

The Web has changed the way information is distributed and gathered. It continues to do the same for photographs and photographers. The full potential of this medium will be realized when upload and download times decrease for all.

Text and Image Copyright George Schaub 2009. All Rights Reserved.

Travel Photography: Business and/or Pleasure

"You certainly don't present a negative, or even a real attitude about a place. There's no point for a travel photographer to show refugee camps. If you can show them as romantic hill tribes, fine. There's a difference between travel photography and photojournalism, and a different function to each."
Lisl Dennis, Interview, 1985

A person may live and work in the most inspiring locale in the world and rarely pick up a camera. If another person travels to that area they may be so captivated that their camera rarely leaves their hands. Travel reveals "the shock of the new", while an inhabitant may have become so visually jaded that they are blind to the amazing people, places and things around them.
The impetus to photograph when traveling may come from the need to bring back "trophy" pictures (the "I was there" shot), or simply from the fact that new places, faces, architecture and landscapes tend to open the "photographic eye". That inspiration is often enough to get the creative juices flowing.

Much of travel photography is the record shot, a virtual inventory of the obligatory sites on a tour. While there's nothing wrong with this, such shots are readily available at the local souvenir store, or from the host of travel sites that dot the web and that seem to cover virtually every popular destination. Although some record shots are inevitable, memorable travel pictures are those that take a more personal, interpretive approach to the subject matter.
The degree to which this can be done is often determined by the journey's itinerary. Covering eight countries in five days will often yield photographs that seem to be no more than a glance back at subjects that whiz by. Immersion in an area usually results in better pictures, as there is time to study and observe subjects. That study may simply be noticing when light is best on certain scenes and shooting accordingly. Observing the flow of life in the locale, and photographing people in the market, during festivals or simply going about the business of their daily lives can become the real treasures of the travel experience.

Ever since its invention, photography has been tied to travel. When getting about was a more difficult task, only available to a small segment of the population, photography served as the eyes of the world on exotic and far-flung regions. Pioneering photographers traveled around the world to bring back pictures for exhibitions, books, parlor stereographs, and later, for newspapers and magazines. When cameras and film became more portable at the end of the nineteenth century, and travel became more accessible to more people, the linkage between the voyage and the camera was sealed. Today it is almost unthinkable to travel without a camera as part of the luggage.

Both professional and avid amateurs provide many of the photographs for today's travel industry, either on assignment from tourist boards and travel publications, or as so-called "stock" photographers, who shoot on speculation. A large network of picture agencies sell stock images to the travel industry and magazines. Freelancers try to combine business with pleasure by making travel pictures when on vacation or weekends, or plan elaborate trips that are actually self-assigned photographic essays. The sheer volume of photographers engaged in this industry makes for a competitive marketplace, one where the ability to combine a travel "lifestyle" with technical excellence is key.

The digital SLR is the camera of choice for those seeking to make more than snapshots on trips, although cameras with excellent optics and high megapixel counts can work as well, although care must be taken not to shoot at too high an ISO. For competitive reasons, pros often use full-frame DSLRs with high megapixel counts. In general, zoom lenses are good choices for travel, as they cut down on the amount of gear. While tastes differ, as does the requirements of different locales, a good lens kit should include a zoom in the 28-80mm and one in the 70-210mm range; this covers most picture needs. A small portable flash also comes in handy.

When traveling always carry-on the gear and especially the “take” after the trip is done. Never, ever pack anything of value in checked baggage. Personal experience has shown me that should you have something “lost” when in checked baggage results in a round of finger pointing on the part of the authorities that brings you through a circle and back again.

There are a host of accessories for the traveling photographer, including camera bag-sized tripods, photo vests, hip cases and "fanny packs". Small beanbags for steadying the camera on virtually any surface during long exposures can come in handy. While traveling with a camera is fun, lugging too much gear will always get in the way of the travel experience.

Text and image copyright George Schaub 2009. All rights reserved.

Operation Information Overload

The pace of change in photography these days is breathtaking, photographers wondering when it will relent. Guess what—it won’t. As competition on all levels and product lines continues to grow, the pressure on manufacturers to innovate will be even greater. Long ago these software and hardware makers realized that as products and ideas become commodities the only way to realize profit was via change, with innovation leading the way. That’s why you can set your clock on when software will move to the next version or when the megapixel and sensor size ping pong match will start all over again. Even with some consolidations and buyouts in the works there still will be new players who see enough gold in the digital hills to keep the momentum going.

There are many ways to stay informed. There are web sites that dedicate 10,000 words to point and shoot cameras, and enough digicam orgs and bloggers out who fill every free hour of the day churning out reports for anyone so inclined to read them. But most people have a life, and reading the arcane and the obvious about every aspect of a camera, software or printer is not what they tend to do.

For most folks photography is a pleasant pastime, a part of holidays or special events that records memories. For travelers it’s a way of bringing back trophy shots of their trips. And for the enthusiast it’s a way to show a creative side, one that helps them escape the everyday and perhaps even put some bread on the table. For most of us, photography is an integral part of the social fabric, one that has been passed onto us by generations before as a valid way to keep close the memories of their families and individual lives.

For the many of the years I have been involved with reporting on all this, photography had been regarded as a “mature” industry, one that could be counted on to continue to grow, not fluctuate much from year to year. This point of view all seems rather naïve now, what with the pace of change the consumer electronics component brought to the mix.

We have been asked to learn many new things, to grasp the meaning of megapixels and how various levels of resolution should be put to use. We have been required to become computer savvy beyond the simple tasks of sending emails and downloading recipes from the web. Terms like optical stabilization and shutter lag, technology so obscure that only pure techies even considered them only a few years ago, are now part of the parlance. In short, we have been engaged in Operation Information Overload, and thrown a few curves in the bargain.

While the benefits of digital are many there are also a few dark sides to all this growth. One example would be upgrades. In the past that might have meant getting a camera with a better lens, or switching over to an SLR. Now it might mean that the memory card that works today might not work in a future camera with the same size memory card slot, a switch in capability without a change in format. Or it could mean buying a new computer and discovering that all the software you already own won’t operate well, or at all, in the new operating system. (Indeed, Adobe just announced they will only be developing future software for Intel-based Macs—the rest can go swim.) Or that the Raw files shot today might not be capable of being read a few years down the road. In some cases the changes are proper responses to new and better ways of doing things. In others, viewed through an admittedly cynical eye, it’s a case of flipping solely for the sake of getting us to dig into our pocket once again.

It’s selling soccer moms cameras with very impressive integral long range zooms so they can catch the action as their daughter streaks in for a goal, only to find that the camera’s intolerable shutter lag makes any hope of actually getting the shot they want slim indeed. It’s telling folks that an 8 megapixel camera can get them great 11x14 prints, only to trump that with 10 and 12 MP cameras a year or two later. It’s offering inkjet printers and even some kiosk setups that produce prints that are known to fade so quickly that future generations will never see the images from the family’s past. Indeed, one of the greatest fears folks seem to have about digital photography is that it is as temporal as their hard drive and as a corruptible as a cheap CD.

Yet, we have all taken to digital in droves, a case of technology replacement that has shocked even futurists who are paid to know better. The advantages of digital are legion and most folks quickly understood the benefits of this new form of photography. Walk through any tourist site these days and all you see are digicams; go to any family occasion and that night you’ll be able to look at, download and even order prints right off the web. There are literally billions of images loaded on servers the world over, with new personal sites and public sharing spaces coming on line every day. Digital has changed photography forever, and there’s no return to the old days, despite some grumbling from some pros and old guard film fans.

So, how do we sort out all the confusing jargon and make it less of a grind? When will we finally arrive at some standards that all can agree to so that we can make some judgments about what’s best for us and the type of images we want to make?

In many cases we will vote with our wallets and certain systems and companies will prevail. And with all the blogs and forums out there, savvy consumers will have their voices heard as well. But for now, Operation Information Overload goes on, and on.

Copyright George Schaub 2009. All Rights Reserved.

Photographer Quotes: Photojournalists

Photographer’s Quotes: Photojournalists

I have interviewed quite a few photographers over the years. Here are some of my favorite quotes from those interviews, here focusing on photojournalists.

Walter Iooss (http://walteriooss.com/) covered the 1984 Olympics held in Los Angeles. He also did much of the photography of the athletes prior to the games on assignment for Fuji Photofilm and Sports Illustrated. This was a dream assignment for a sports photographer, and Ioos handled it with a style that changed the way sports photography was done forever after. His method of work changed after the initial phase because of the changed nature of the Games in the aftermath of the Munich massacre.

“Because of the enormity of the event and its political nature, movement will be quite restricted. Security will be very tight and the restrictions on movement should make photographing the games a difficult job. I’ve always prided myself on moving around, on not duplicating everyone else’s shot. While the Los Angeles committee is doing its best, it’s going to be hard for photographers not to be caught up in the ‘one big cable release’ syndrome.”

John Isaac

John Isaac (http://www.johnisaac.com/) served as the photo editor and assignment photographer for the United Nations for many years. His work combines a compassionate eye with the discipline of a documentary photographer.

“There are two keys to assignment photography—know about the background of what you are shooting, and expect the worst. I strongly believe that pictures should not degrade anyone. The big question is: how much should a photographer intrude on privacy—where do you draw the line? I believe in trying to convey a message, to show a part of someone’s life.”

Neil Leifer

Neil Leifer (http://www.neilleifer.com/) was a staff photographer for Time magazine and later specialized in work for Sports Illustrated. His has dozens of covers and has hundreds of published images to his credit.

“You remember the pictures you liked and say, ‘How did I do that?’ And when you encounter the same situation something clicks. You take your time when you shoot and you edit and you begin to know what you like.

“I’m just curious about things. And I try to let my camera bring me in to see what things are about. I’m not suggesting that the work is easy. It’s not. The pictures don’t just happen—I’m not that good. I put a great deal of effort into them and enjoy the challenge.

“My philosophy has always been that the magazine pays my salary and they’re going to get their money’s worth.

“This job has so many things to do that have nothing to do with photography. There are the obvious things—like plane and hotel reservations—but there’s also a lot to do with just setting things up. People would be amazed if they knew what went into setting them up. But people do cooperate.

“I never fooled myself into thinking they were saying yes to Neil Leifer. They were saying yes to Sports Illustrated and Time magazine.

“ I’m always thinking about the picture I’m going to shoot for the magazine. I’m not overly impressed by the celebrities. The idea is to get the picture. There is a point when you turn out the lights and put on the projector, and the picture is there or it isn’t.

“When I look back at my experiences I know that photography has brought me to meet all these people and see all these events and has given me experiences that no money can buy.”

Digital Imaging Advances

Digital photography is advancing on many fronts these days, with each advance making some “old” tech obsolete and fostering new ease of creating very high quality images and prints. The progress in image data backup and storage, Raw file conversion and flexibility and long-lasting inkjet print output has been and continues to be impressive.

One of the challenges of being a digital photographer is image file management. It’s not only being able to track and find the images made, but being assured that those files will be around when sought later that has had photographers concerned. A digital image is a virtual thing, a collection of information that without computer, software and monitor is invisible and ephemeral. Recognizing the potential for losing images without a backup plan, digital photographers are at least becoming aware that they should not just back up images on their hard drive, but should make copies on whatever medium is available. In addition, as digital cameras routinely deliver at a minimum 1GB loads during download, and now up to 16 or 32GB, so the need for even greater memory capacity has become obvious.

Having just converted and tossed away a couple hundred dollars worth of 100MB Zip drives to DVD backup, I can attest to the fact that photographers today have to be kept aware of the shifts in mediums and backup technology. Indeed, those 100MB Zips seemed massive a few years back, but now even tiny flash memory on key chains offer substantially more storage. And what about backup on CD’s? Today they also seem quite slim on capacity, and DVD’s are an obvious move. But trumping even the 6+ GB DVD’s these days is the external hard drive, which in many manifestations is being sold at what seems like bargain-basement prices for massive amounts of storage capacity.

Indeed, photographers can get almost 1 TB storage for under $400, with a backup regiment that is as easy as drag and drop. No waiting for the CD or DVD to burn, or concern about disk warping or unreadability. And those backups can do double duty as system backups as well. And this new way of backing up has brought increased attention to the digital photography realm from companies like Western Digital (www.wdc.com). Many companies offer portable backup systems as well, wallet-size drives that are sure to become part of every digital photographer’s travel kit. Now, all one or all of them has to do is create a patch from their portable drives directly to digital cameras, especially DSLRs, so that photographers need not carry both backup and laptop on the road.

The other part of image management is software, and that’s where Raw file format comes into play. There’s little doubt that Raw yields the best image quality, and the most flexibility in image enhancement. Yet, some photographers are still more than a bit stymied by this format, and it seems shrouded in a veil of mystery for many. Why, they ask, do they have to convert Raw, and how do they go from Raw to a format like JPEG for emails or TIFF or .psd (Photoshop format) without a lot of gymnastics?

When Raw first came on the scene it was quite confusing, and for many remains so because of its proprietary nature, with each maker, and indeed often with each model from each maker, offering formats that are unreadable by generic software.

True, users can download updates of the Adobe Camera Raw (www.adobe.com/downloads/updates), or use Raw converters like those from Phase One (www.phaseone.com) and similar companies, but to some this is just too much trouble, and too confusing. And that’s a shame, because Raw is the future of digital photography, at least for those wanting the best quality from their digital cameras.

While a number of Raw converter software programs are currently vying for attention, two I have worked with recently make Raw just as easy to work with as any JPEG. Apple’s Aperture (www.apple.com/aperture), for Mac only now and in the future, and Adobe Lightroom, treat and read Raw files with ease and make image enhancement all part of an easy workflow that just might clear up any difficulty photographers have with Raw today. In my experience, Raw makes digital make sense, and makes the experience with digital both rewarding and delightful.

Nothing completes the circle of snapping the shutter like making a print. The recent PMA (Photo Marketing Association, an industry group www.pmai.org) report on printing shows that the kiosk and lab printing of digital images is still growing, and that many consumers have finally caught up with the strides the industry has made in quality and availability of the digital printing infrastructure. Equally important is the improvements in desktop printers for those photographers who enjoy making their prints in their home or studios. And one of the differentiating factors is the growing recognition of the archival quality of pigment inks and printers that deliver same.

While the knowledge of dye vs. pigment ink longevity has yet to permeate the consciousness of the majority of digital photographers, there is a growing number who understand the difference and apply it to their own work. Indeed, there are times when the cost of dye or thermal printers and the end use of the prints will determine that choice. Increasingly, however, “fine art” photographers and avid amateurs are choosing pigment ink printers for the work they want to sell, or simply want to last for many more years than the dye-ink print counterparts.

All these changes bode well for the future of photography and for its continued growth. It seems that as issues arise the industry responds with new and improved products, better solutions and innovations that answer the needs of the end users. While issues of too-rapid obsolescence, constant upgrades and unit incompatibility still dog digital photography—issues that come, I suppose, with being engaged in the computerized world—I see a constant change for the better, with image quality always on the rise. It’s ironic that film will be going away just as it seemed to reach its highest quality, at least in my working and testing experience with the new Kodak Ektar 100 color negative film. While digital still has “issues”, the pace of change is such that what we use and work with today will seem quite obsolete in a few short years. That’s both encouraging and frustrating as we all do our best to keep pace.

Exposure: Film and Digital

Exposure is the change caused by light when it strikes a photosensitive material. It has two factors—time (or duration of exposure) and intensity (the volume of light striking that material.) In both film and digital systems the time of exposure is indicated by the shutter speed, the amount of time that the gate through which light travels after it leaves the lens remains open. The volume of the light that gets through in that time period depends on the size of the diameter of the opening in the lens, known as the aperture number or f-stop. Exposure is like turning on a faucet and letting water flow through a pipe. If we leave the tap open for a longer period of time more water will flow through. If we enlarge the pipe more water can run through in that same period of time.

Exposure is calibrated with a system of stops, or the modern equivalent, EV (exposure value). If the total amount of light doubles or halves there is a change of one stop, or one exposure value. A 1 stop or 1 EV change can be made by halving or doubling the exposure time (shutter speed, for example changing from 1/15 to 1/30 second, or from 1/30 to 1/15 second). It can also be changed by opening or closing the lens diameter by one f-stop (for example, by going from f/11 to f/8 or from f/8 to f/11).

This system allows us to expose with the same amount of light and alter image effects by balancing the changes we make in aperture and shutter speed. If we use a faster shutter speed we can freeze motion; if we use a narrower lens opening we can increase depth of field. As long as we maintain a balance between the two (change the shutter speed in proportion to how we change the aperture—one going up one stop and the other down one stop) we maintain the same overall exposure. This setup is called “equivalent exposure” and is the basis for many creative techniques used in photography.

This exposure system holds true for both film and digital photographic systems, as do the image effects they create. As mentioned, the physics of photography do not change because we have gone from a film to a digital medium.

Digital SLR Photography

Your decision to work with a digital SLR (DSLR) might just change the way you make, process, store and print your images. True, both film and digital photography capture light and require processing steps to see that recording as an image. But digital imaging differs in that it begins as an electronic signal generated by light and ends up as binary code that describes color, brightness and tonality. It is in how you deal with those codes to create an image that makes digital so different.

At first, DSLR cameras can seem familiar. Placed side by side, film and digital cameras often resemble one another; in fact, most DSLRs are built inside the frame of a 35mm SLR body. There are also similar buttons, dials and controls. Terms such as shutter speed, aperture, autofocusing and exposure are all quite familiar to the film photographer. But it is in the behavior of the digital sensor where the two mediums diverge. This is especially true in the image record--the digital image file. It is so unlike the film record that it’s easy to become confused by familiar terms that mask the need for very different operating procedures.


Digital images require considerably more “housekeeping” than film. Both types of image record must be stored properly, be kept safe from damaging influences and must be archived in a way that makes them readily accessible. But you can hold a piece of film up to the light to see the image. Not so with the digital image file. It is “virtual” (mathematical, really) and requires a good deal of computation to be read. It cannot be seen without the aid of a computing device. It requires the intercession of yet more machines and mediums to be maintained, and is always tied to the “grid”—sometimes called the “digital imaging infrastructure.”

This grid is dynamic and can change over time. It can render some cameras and devices obsolete in short order. It can drop image-recording mediums entirely. This pace of change means that there has to be a fairly strong awareness of changes in the computer and imaging industry at large and how some modes of recording and reading systems will change. As you get more involved you’ll see that copying, backup and why an awareness of how recording and playback systems and formats may change over time is important.

The housekeeping extends to archiving, storage and, ultimately, to you taking in hand the actual processing of the image itself. This does not mean you have to do the math or complex programming—the camera’s on-board image processor or your computer handles that. But to get that image onto a print, or corrected or refined to meet your standards, often means your intercession will be necessary. It is this hands-on demand that can make digital so different for many photographers. Granted, this is where your creative process as a photographer comes into play, and where the real potential of this medium resides. But digital is anything but a “you push the button and we do the rest” process.

This is not meant as a cautionary tale to scare you off the digital path. It is presented in the hope that this will become an eyes wide-open endeavor for you.