The other day I happened to come across one of the more interesting art nude projects that I’ve seen in a while. Erica Simone is a New York based photographer who took a series of nude self-portraits in various public locations around NYC. The shooting style is like that of someone who happened upon her in the street and took a quick photo. I wouldn’t be surprised if she used a point and shoot as a matter of fact. It makes for a realistic viewing experience. You can check out her project here: Self Portraits Of A Bare Naked Citizen

I’d seriously fallen behind in reading my photography related RSS feeds. While catching up with them over the weekend I came across two outstanding videos on FStoppers.com. One was a super creative beauty shoot by Philippe Kerlo and the other was an over the top wakeboard studio shoot by Patrick Hall. If you’re a photographer in need of creative inspiration, here is 16 minutes of video that will get some the juices flowing!

Philippe Kerlo

Philippe is a beauty and fine art photographer based in Paris. This video features him shooting face shots through pexiglass decorated with paint and other colorful materials. The concept is amazingly simple, giving you a “why didn’t I think of that?” moment. The final results are outstanding!

Patrick Hall

Patrick Hall (one of FStopper’s founders) is a wedding and commercial photographer based in Charleston, SC. He is experienced in wakeboard shoots, but wanted to do something with it that was completely different than anything that’s been done before. He wanted to go from amazing to over-the top. He definitely succeeded!

For the past few years I’ve debated on whether digital medium format cameras are really worth the money, considering the most expensive SLR to date with all the trimmings is about $8000 (Nikon D3X) while a stripped down lower to middle of the line digital medium format starts at $10,000 and goes astronomically higher from there. For $2000 you can still get a great DSLR. That same amount in medium format may get you a lens. There is no question that the resulting image quality is better in medium format, but is it thousands of dollars better???

The Tour

I attended the Three Stage Tour event in Chicago yesterday and had the opportunity to shoot with Hasselblad’s newest creation, the H4D, for about 10 minutes or so. Not nearly enough time to do a full critique, but more than enough time to to make me want to abandon the Nikon ship (and I LOVE Nikon products!). Was it the new True Focus technology? Nah…not 100% sold on it, at least not for the type of shooting that I do. Was it the menu system? Ha! Nikon has them beat by miles in that department. It had to be the 40 – 60 megapixel sensors then, right? Nope…well, maybe a little! *grin* What impressed me most about the Blad system were the lenses and resulting image quality that they helped produce. Below are a few unedited photos I took from the event…

My Thoughts…

People always ask me to recommend a good first camera. I always tell them to start with a GREAT first lens and buy a used body with whatever is left in their budget. This is advice I wish someone had given me way back when I first started buying camera equipment. Nothing affects image quality more than lenses! Now-a-days, bodies are kept for a few years and then traded up. However, a good lens will outlive you as long as you take care of it. Hassy takes away the confusion in trying to figure out if one of their lenses is a good buy or not with a very simply solution. They only produce fantastic glass!

Pair that with the excellent new sensors and their new Phocus 2.0 software (which includes automatic lens correction and moiré removal) and you have what I consider a system that can provide you with the best possible image quality available today…bar none. Although there is a little room for improvement in the overall ergnomics of the camera, it feels very natural and well balanced in the hand.

Something that I think deserves a special mention is Hassy’s auto focus system in the H4D. In almost every single digital medium format camera I’ve used, the very first thing I notice is its god-awful auto focusing!!! It’s usually slow as molasses and often times misjudges the distance of an object (resulting in blurry photos). I didn’t think about the auto focus on the H4D until well after I put the camera down. The fact that I didn’t take notice of it while shooting is a fantastic thing, as it was performing within the range of my D2X. :-D

Is It Worth It?

Back to my original question though…is it really worth thousands of dollars more than say, the camera system in my wish list??? The answer is an absolute definite no-question-about-it maybe. It really depends on who you are as a photographer. For me, unfortunately I have to say no, as I place myself squarely in the advanced amateur category. Photography isn’t a main source of income for me right now, so I can’t justify paying $19,995 + tax for a camera and one lens. However, if I were a full-time photographer there is no way I could justify not investing in the system that I felt produced the best quality image possible, and that is Hasselblad’s H System.

Here are some fantastic HDR shots from Japan. I haven’t gotten into HDR quite yet, but looking at these get the motivational juices flowing. These were shot by a variety of photographers. Enjoy! [http://www.geekiz.com/80-photographies-de-tokyo-en-hdr]

MODEL: Amanda Furdge MUA: Andrea Samuels

MODEL: Monica Lopez MUA: Andrea Samuels

I’ve been horrible at blogging…period! Not just here but on my personal and business blogs as well! It’s not so much that I don’t like to write, or even that I don’t have anything to say at vthe moment. I’ve just been plain lazy about it! Today that ends (or so I tell myself yet again). Each day I’ll pick one topic…any topic…to blog about that relates to one of my three sites. That way each blog gets updated at least once every three days.

So today I figured I’d start with something simple…an equipment wish list! Below is a list of equipment that I’d get today if I won a sweepstakes at my favorite local camera shop…

Cameras & Lenses:

• Nikon D3X AND a Nikon D3S as a second body
• AF-S NIKKOR 14-24mm f/2.8G ED
• AF-S NIKKOR 24-70mm f/2.8G ED
• AF-S NIKKOR 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II
• AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.4G
• AF Nikkor 85mm f/1.4G
• AF-S VR Micro-Nikkor 105mm f/2.8G IF-ED

The first three lenses could handle about 99% of whatever I need to shoot by themselves, but nothing beats a good prime lens for specific tasks! Not a single lens up there competes with the “nifty 50″ for sharpness!

Lights & Stuff:

Most would opt for Profoto gear, and I can’t blame them, but I’ve come to love Calumet’s Travelite line made by Bowens. I’d go with six of their Travelite 750R Radio Enabled Monolights (with the PocketWizard radio option) and a gang of modifiers for each including:

• Gridded Softboxes (Large|Medium|Small)
• Snoots, Barndoors, and Grids
• Gels / Gel Holders
• Short stands (for background lights)
• Scrims
• And finally a couple of beauty dishes

I’d also throw in an Alien Bee Ring Flash for good measure as well as a couple of PocketWizard Plus IIs as spares. Hard waterproof cases to carry it all in would be great as well!

I’m sure I missed a few things but that’s the gist of it. I’m really interested in hearing what gear other photographers would get if money were no object. Would you scrap the dSLRs and go medium format or would you enhance what you already have? Let me know what your wish list would be in the comments below!

Many people that I’ve met who are taking up photography have a hard time understanding the ugly “A” (aperture), and how to use it. Hopefully my explanation will shed some light…

Whenever you half or double the amount of light in a photo it is referred to as a “stop”. There are three ways to control this addition/subtraction of light: shutter speed, ISO, and aperture. Collectively, these make up exposure. (There are different reasons why you’d want to change one instead of the other, but that’s another tutorial!) When dealing with aperture in particular it’s called a f-stop. F-stops tend to be the least understood of the three…

SHUTTER SPEED

Shutter speed is fairly easy to understand when halving/doubling the amount of light because the numbers involved half and double. For example, if you want to double the amount of light for a photo that was shot at 1/250 of a second, you shoot at twice the exposure time of 1/125 of a second (remember we are dealing with fractions, not whole numbers!). If you want to half the amount of light in that original photo that was shot at 1/250, you’d shoot it at 1/500 of a second. So we have…

…1/2, 1/4, 1/8, 1/16, 1/32, 1/60 (a slight skip!), 1/125 (and another), 1/250, 1/500, and so on.

As you can see, the numbers half and double each other as you go down the line in either direction.

ISO

Technically, you aren’t adding more light when you change ISO. Instead you are changing the sensitivity of your sensor (or using a less/more sensitive film). Still, the affect on overall exposure is the same. For more light, double the ISO. For less light, half it…

100, 200, 400, 800, 1600, and so on… (remember film speeds???)

APERTURE

(f-stops)
Aperture is the odd ball of the three. If you half or double the f-stop number, you are actually adding or subtracting two stops of light, not one!!! For example, f/22 to f/11 will quadruple the amount of light in the photo (again, fractions…that is why the actual number goes down when the amount of light goes up. Think of “f” as the FULL amount of light possible, which is then divided by the f-stop number). On top of that, there are crazy non-whole numbers to remember like f/2.8 and f/5.6. It took me a long time to fully understand the science behind why f-stop numbers are so odd (the inner geek in me had to know though!). Anyone who wants to know, send me a PM and I’ll forward some info to you. In the mean time, there is a very easy way to remember f-stops…

You only have to memorize two numbers, 1.4 & 2 (and a slight skip). Double the previous number to get the next stop. For example, 1.4 is the previous number to 2. Double it and you get the next stop after 2, which is 2.8. This gives you:

1.4, 2, 2.8, 4, 5.6, 8, 11, 16, 22, 32

There is a slight skip at 5.6 -> 11, but easy enough to remember. Technically the scale starts at 1, but I challenge you to find a lens that has a max aperture of 1!!!

NOTE: Your digital SLR (and some film cameras) may show weird numbers like 7.1 as an option. That means it is set to display either half or third stops. This gives you more control over the exact amount of light you let in, but does the exact opposite as far as understanding the numbers! Don’t fret, as over time you’ll come to know them as well!

I hope this helps someone!

A very common question that I’m asked by other photographers is if I shoot in RAW or JPEG. To be honest, I’m still not sure why people continue to compare the two, as they are apples and oranges serving two completely different purposes…

NOTE: For the purposes of this post, JPEG can be substituted with any other standard (non-RAW) format such as TIFF, GIF, etc.

The RAW Details

The primary purpose of RAW is NOT for end use (prints, web, etc), but rather for preservation & storage. This is why RAW images themselves can not be edited. The original data remains in tact. All adjustments & edits are stored separately and then applied when a JPEG is created from the original RAW file. It is the digital counterpart to a negative. In relation, JPEGS are the digital counterparts to prints. They are created from RAW files with settings that you adjust.

Keeping that in mind, film photographers don’t throw away their negatives after prints are made. On the contrary, they protect their negatives at all costs as countless prints can be made from them. The same goes for RAW. Just as you can manipulate a negative to produce different effects without loosing image quality in a traditional darkroom, the same can be done with a RAW file in image editing software. While you can make most of those same adjustments to a JPEG, some can never truly be changed (white balance for example). None of the adjustments can be made to a JPEG without at least some image degredation (athough usually minimal). There is also the possibility of accidentaly saving your edits on top of your original file, forever loosing it.

FYI

JPEGS made in camera ultimately came from a RAW file. If you have your camera set to JPEG only, the camera creates a RAW file, converts it to a JPEG, and then deletes the original RAW file. Again, IMO it’s like having a roll of film developed and telling the lab to destroy the negatives after making a print. Can you make other prints from an original print? Yes. Will they be usable? Maybe. Will they be better quality (or even the same quality) as if you had made them from the negative…NEVER!!!

The Final Word…

If the images aren’t of that much importance then by all means save the hard drive space and shoot JPEG. If you think there is the slightest chance that you’ll capture something worth showing off then RAW is the way to go. Otherwise, you’re throwing away the chance of producing the best possible END USE images each time you edit and/or convert.

ANTM is only holding auditions for Cycle 14 of the show in six cities. Luckily for you Chicago models our city is one of them! They will be held this Saturday, August 29th 2009 between 10:00 A.M. and 3:00 P.M. at the Hyatt Regency McCormick Place (2233 South Martin L. King Drive).

Will Tyra be there…who knows?!?!? If you are going though, I suggest you get there EARLY (remember what happened in NYC a couple of months ago!). Also, don’t forget to download and submit your application as well as review ALL of the requirements so that you don’t spend hours in line for nothing, as some for them have changed. For instance, the previous season allowed shorter models to get into the action, but now there is a minimum height requirement of 5′ 7″ (five feet seven inches).

If you go, be sure to come back and post comments about the experience here. Good luck to you all!

MODEL: Sharon Johnson MUA: Andrea Samuels DESIGNER/STYLIST: Angelica Callanta

There is a TON of misinformation out there about model releases. Many photographers and models alike are clueless as to why model releases are required, let alone the details involved. I’ve been asked about them time and time again, so I figured a great topic for one of my first blog posts would be to share a little knowledge on model releases and related issues.

IMPORTANT NOTE: This blog post is going under the assumption that the photographer is neither shooting as an employee or shooting a commissioned work!!! If so, the laws usually change greatly. The information below may very a bit depending on what state you live in. Consult an attorney in the area that the photos will be taken if you have any doubts!!!

Copyright

A copyright owner has the final say so on publishing, including print AND other media (such as the internet). Whoever is responsible for the shutter release that creates a photo (photographer) owns the copyrights to it. Simple.

Likeness

A model owns the rights to his or her likeness. In order for a photographer to use a photo with the likeness of another person in it, he/she must first get permission from that person. That is what the model release does. Again, simple.

NOTE: This does not apply to journalistic photos. Press shots are fair game, so if your photo is plastered all over CNN.com with your hand in the cookie jar don’t think you can sue to have them taken down.

Why so much confusion???

For some reason people seem to mix the two up. Some models walk away thinking that they may now make whatever edits they want to the photos, then post them online and make prints. Some photographers believe they can edit faces onto other bodies (and other likeness altering Photoshop magic) without fear of a lawsuit. Neither is true!!!

For you models…

Technically you don’t gain anything by signing a model release. You may have a CD full of images, but at any point in time the photographer may block you from publishing them. You may have experienced something similar to this if you’ve ever taken digital photos to Wal-Mart or Costco for prints. Often times they will ask you to come back with a letter from the photographer if the photos look too “professional”. In extreme cases, photographers may send a “Cease and Desist” order to websites that you have posted photos on to have them taken down.

However, you are NOT giving the photographer the right to alter your likeness in an unflattering or compromising way! This is a double edged sword though. Although rarely contested, technically you haven’t given rights to edit in a flattering way either (blemish removal, skin smoothing, etc).

Just know that signing a release doesn’t give you, the model, any additional privileges, nor does it give the photographer rights to change your likeness in the photo. If a photographer has altered your likeness in a way not agreed upon, you may send a Cease and Desist order of your own.

For you photographers…

Always always always get a model release!!! You have absolutely ZERO rights to use a photograph with someone else’s likeness in it for non-journalistic purposes unless you’re receive permission to do so. That said, if you do have a signed release, know that you are setting yourself up for a serious lawsuit by making crazy unauthorized edits to someone’s likeness in a photo. Basically, hash out what is/isn’t acceptable editing with the model first and put it in writing, this will save you both a lot of time & heartache…

I hope this helps!!!

So this is the first post on my photography website.  The current look is extra plain, but I’ll be up most of the night changing that. The purpose of the site is to both display my photography and blog about photography equipment, techniques, and happenings.  Comments and critiques are always welcome, so feel free!

;-)

MODEL: Yasmine Williams MUA: Andrea Samuels

MODEL: Yasmine Williams MUA: Andrea Samuels

MODEL: Markedia

MODEL: Nicole Rodgers

MODEL: Stacy Lane

MODEL: Erin Wright

MODEL: Nealean Washington MUA: Christa Crittle