Scott Bulger Photography

Image Critique #4

noreply@blogger.com (Scott Bulger Photography) — Tue, 22 Jul 2008 14:21:00 +0000

Todays image was submitted by an on-line retailer that goes by the name WaterRose, who has a shop on Etsy.com, which is a collection of artisans that sell their hand made goods. Product photography is a huge deal for these retailers. When a potential customer cannot pick something up in their hands and hold it, feel it, and examine it, the photograph becomes your main selling point. Typically, a photograph is only selling itself, but in this circumstance, the photograph is responsible for selling what is "in" the photograph.

Here is the image that WaterRose submitted:

The first thing I want to talk about is the background. While I'm not opposed to text as a background for this type of photo, I think I would like it just a little more out of focus so the viewer isn't trying to read it. You really want them concentrating on the product here. I would also slide the book all the way to the top of the frame so:

A. The cuff doesn't break the plane of the edge of the book (think about a portrait and how the nose shouldn't break the plane of the face)

and

B. There isn't a gap between the top of the book and the edge of the frame, adding another element to the image that is unnecessary.

The image appears to have an overall green caste to it, which in an "art" image, could be intentional, but in a product image, you should be rendering the image as close to reality as you can get it. Maybe this adjusted image is closer, and maybe it's not, but I think it would be.

I feel like the main piece in the image is a bit distorted due to the close proximity of the lens to the subject. For this particular shot, I think I would back up a little bit and use a longer lens to compress the image and reduce the distortion of the cuff.

I would give it (the cuff) just a little more room around the edges, letting it "breathe" and reducing the amount of "tension" created by the amputations. In many circumstances, tension in an image can be a good thing, but when dealing with a product, I'm not sure that it is such a good idea.

You've filled the frame with your product, and that is a very good thing. Nobody will be mistaken as to what you are highlighting here. The lighting is also very nice, and lighting is no easy trick.

Bottom Line: It's a nice job and only needs a few tweaks to be really very good. If you can't adjust the color of your image after the fact, make sure that you are using the proper white balance. If you don't have a longer lens, just back up. Since this is a product shot for the web, it's only going to be 72DPI and fairly small overall, so making a moderate crop to get it to where you want it to be isn't a big deal.

Submissions for critique are always accepted. Attach your image to an email that says "Image Critique" in the subject line and I will get to it. Keep shooting.

Anatomy of a Piano

noreply@blogger.com (Scott Bulger Photography) — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 17:23:00 +0000

A piano is surely the most amazing instrument to me. The variety of sounds that can be created by someone that is skilled in its use just amazes me. A piano can sound like rain, or it can sound like wind, in the hands of a master. The virtuoso can convey the deepest of emotions, and bring a listener to unparalleled highs and lows. One of the very few things in my life that I wish I could do, yet cannot, is play the piano.

A piano is also a beautiful physical structure, both from the outside, and on the inside. It was with this in mind, that I approached the rotting carcass of a piano that I came upon being used as an avant-garde landscape decoration. I have been back to photograph it three times before finally being happy with these two images.

I am now offering these two new images for sale.

They are being produced in a 10" x 15" print size, on 13" x 19" Ilford Gold Fibre Silk paper. These images are being produced in a limited edition of 50 each, and will come to you signed and numbered.

"Anatomy of a Piano 1"
$60.00

"Anatomy of a Piano 2"
$60.00

Image Critique #3

noreply@blogger.com (Scott Bulger Photography) — Thu, 17 Jul 2008 00:08:00 +0000

This is a tough one to talk about because I'm sure it is an emotional image to both the photographer and to the people it was done for. I'm sure that the parents of this image really loved it.

It appears that this was a spur of the moment idea that grew from a seed while doing a portrait shoot for this newly adopted child, that arrived while her new father was serving his third tour of duty in Iraq. I say that because, while I like the idea and can see the vision, there are quite a few little things that really turn me off as a non-attached viewer of this photograph.

These are in the order that I noticed them. Whether that carries any importance or not is up to you to decide.

1. Grab an iron. Iron the flag. It looks like it just came out of the package and the creases really stand out.

2. The flag is not parallel to the focal plane of the camera, causing the lines to converge. They aren't parallel to the edges of the frame.

3. I don't like the way the flag bleeds past the edges of the frame. Partial stars sticking into the frame and half a stripe on the right hand side, and a missing stripe on the left hand side are distracting at the least.

4. The toe of the bag that the child is in sticks into the blue field of stars.

5. This one is last; the baby in the bag kind of gives me the creeps.

Good Things

1. The lighting is very nice. Soft and even.

2. The colors are very nicely rendered. I might brighten the white just a bit, but it is certainly very nice as it is.

3. I'm sure that the parents loved it, and that is important.

What I would suggest:

Forgive my clumsy cutting and pasting, but believe me, this looks better than my clumsy cloning did.

Keeping the child in the bag, I would include the entire field of stars on the left and eliminate the partial stripes that were beneath it. Include all the stripes on the right. This balances the background. You can see how my "nicely ironed" flag looks much cleaner. Make sure that the flag is completely parallel with the focal plane of the camera to make sure that none of the lines are converging. I would also raise the child up, so that she was mostly above the horizontal center line, effectively splitting this image into three parts. make sure you keep her toes out of the blue.

There is a lot of symbolism in this image, and symbolism is always open to interpretation. I think I would have laid the flag down flat and let the child lay on it, wrapping it gently over her body to symbolize the way that she would be protected and comforted. In this presentation, with the flag behind and the child in a bag (constrained), I get a sense of foreboding and doom, like the overwhelming power of the flag (government) is hovering over her.

Bottom Line: Good idea that I'm sure the parents loved. My nit-pickiness is only to help you think of these things in the future. Take your time and prepare. Don't rush. Symbolically, my interpretation is just that, only my interpretation and feeling. Others, including the parents and you might just as accurately feel differently, and since it really isn't an image for public display, the interpretation of the parents is the one that matters here. But don't discount the compositional and preparational issues just because the parents like it. This is where you will really shine.

Image Critique #2

noreply@blogger.com (Scott Bulger Photography) — Fri, 11 Jul 2008 14:33:00 +0000

Everyone like flowers, well, not everyone, but they certainly are a very popular subject for training your lens. Getting a good shot of a flower is not as easy as the good floral photographers make it look.

Lets look at this image that was submitted.

OK.... Let's talk about focus and depth of field. There is very little depth of field in this image. Almost none. The only part of the frame that is in focus, is the greenery in the background and the very back edge of the bloom. If you are only going to have one part of your image in focus, this isn't what you want. You would want the focus to be in the front, where people are going to see it first and concentrate on that.

There is a large blurry stamen (if my botanical biology isn't up to snuff and that isn't what you call that thing, I'm sure someone will let me know. But hey, I'm a photographer, not a horticultural expert.), sticking out from the middle of the photograph that just gets in my way everywhere that I try to look. BAM! there it is again! BAM! BAM! This blurriness is caused by being out of focus, not from camera shake. You can tell that because parts of the photograph in the way back are very sharp. If the camera was moving, it would have blurred everything.

The third thing is the lighting. Strange and flat. It looks like flash, but I can't swear to it. Direct, on camera flash, is very difficult to use in this type of situation. You have to at least bounce it or diffuse it if you think it is necessary. If it's a P&S, turn the flash off.

I'm going to take a guess and say that this was a small part of a much larger image. I don't see another explanation for how the point of focus could be this far off unless it was intentional and I don't think it was intentional.

To do this shot right, you need a tripod and natural diffused light. A hazy day or early in the morning/early in the evening will work the best. You need good depth of field which you will get from shooting somewhere between f8 and f11, maybe even smaller if necessary, depending on your lens and how close you are to the subject. This might cause your shutter speed to be longer than it should be for you to hand hold it (see previous blog post), so use your tripod and either a shutter cable or a timer to avoid camera shake.

I hope the submitter of this image will tell me if I'm right about the extreme crop and flash.

Bottom line: You can do better than this.

If you have an image you would like critiqued (after these last couple I think my supply might dry up), please email it to me as specified in this post.

Ooooooh, your camera takes such nice sharp photos......

noreply@blogger.com (Scott Bulger Photography) — Wed, 09 Jul 2008 14:28:00 +0000

No, it doesn't. My camera is a tool and it does what I tell it to do. Your camera should do what you tell it to do too.

You need to provide your camera with the proper tools to get it to do what you need it to do for you.

The two things that will provide you with a sharper image are:

1. A tripod, preferably, a good tripod.

This is the most under rated piece of photography equipment there is. The single biggest difference between a "snapshot" and a "photograph" is the use of a tripod. You can lean on a tree, hold your breath, or glue the camera to your forehead, but none of this will improve your steadiness and the sharpness of your image like a tripod will. The rule of thumb is (please, no comments about the origins of "the rule of thumb") that your shutter speed should be at least equal to, if not faster than the focal length of your lens. If you are using a 100mm lens, then your shutter speed should be at least 1/125th of a second. If you are using a 200mm lens, then 1/250th of a second is the slowest acceptable shutter speed to hand hold your camera. Even at these speeds, a tripod will improve your image sharpness. A tripod will always improve your image sharpness, and there are circumstances where getting any kind of shot will be impossible without one.

"But I don't like lugging around a tripod."

So don't. Just understand that your images are not as sharp as they could be if you did, so don't be surprised when your shots are not as sharp as they could be, and you see sharper images elsewhere. Refusing to use a tripod is crippling your photo taking ability.

2. Good glass (lenses)

Imagine spending $1000 on a stereo system for your car or your home and hooking up $49 speakers to it. What's it going to sound like? It's going to sound like a $49 stereo system. Cheap speakers create cheap sound.

It's the same with cameras. Cheap lenses (including the cheap zoom "kit" lenses that come with most DSLR's) produce images with less sharpness, detail, and contrast, than their more expensive brethren.

Prime (fixed focal length) lenses have been the route to go, offering much better optics and apertures than the cheap zooms, but now, there are some very nice zoom lenses available that will give you excellent quality as well. There are too many options and systems available to make any specific recommendations, but do your homework. There is a reason why the Nikon 70-300 f4.5-5.6 can be had for $109 and the Nikon 18-200 3.5-5.6 ED IF AF-S DX VR is $679 and the Nikon 70-200 2.8 AF-S VR ED IF is $1,600. All lenses are not created equal.

I understand that everyone is not financially able to spend $1600 on a lens, but there are always many levels in between. There are a couple of very good third party lens manufacturers (Tamron and Sigma) that can also be options.

Image Critique #1

noreply@blogger.com (Scott Bulger Photography) — Tue, 08 Jul 2008 12:35:00 +0000

Now that the long holiday weekend is behind us here in the states, it's time to get back to business. This is the first submission that I received to my call for volunteers, (there have been many and I will get to all of you, even if I have to pick up the pace) so here it is.

Here is the first image submitted:

While I certainly see the attraction to the subject, there are a couple of things that definitely need attention. Compositionally, the subject is kind of stuck in "no man's land", meaning that it is too far away to get any of the real detail in the structure, and it is too close to put it in perspective. There is nothing else in the frame to give it any scale. Either move in and really concentrate on the detail, or back up and make it the focal point of a larger image.

For the most part, I stuck with the composition as it was presented to me, I obviously couldn't make the road trip to rephotograph the image. What I did do, was give it just a slight crop, which moved the image just slightly off center (Using the center post as the main focal point) and gave the image a 2 degree rotation clockwise to better orient it. While both of these changes are subtle, they make a huge difference in the composition.

The image was also very flat and washed out, having little tonal range. I spent about two minutes adjusting the levels, and doing a little dodging and burning. I think you'll agree that the resulting image has much more impact than the original. There is still a hot spot in the lower left corner that you could get rid of with a little cloning, but I didn't want to take this that far.

Bottom line: I like the idea and it has good potential, but the execution and presentation were lacking. Keep it up though, practice will help you more clearly express what you are seeing in your minds eye.

Submissions for critique are always accepted. Attach your image to an email that says "Image Critique" in the subject line and I will get to it. Keep shooting.

Volunteers Needed

noreply@blogger.com (Scott Bulger Photography) — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 13:13:00 +0000

Hello.

I'm going to be starting a new weekly "Image Critique" feature here on my blog. If you are interested in having an image featured AND critiqued, please email it to me
by Clicking Here and please put "Image Critique" in the header. Also include any pertinent information that you can and your thoughts behind the image if there is one. Submitting a photo means that you agree to have it discussed and will not start weeping. Discussion and opposing viewpoints and opinions will be encouraged so that this feature can become a learning tool for everyone.

Make sure that submitted images are 72 dpi and 1000 pixels in it's longest dimension for review. A smaller 500 pixel version will be posted in the blog, with proper credit and a link back to your own site if you wish. If you wish it to link back, make sure you tell me in your email.

Every image will not be selected. I will try to select images that will make for interesting discussion and have teachable points. Everyone that does submit an image will get an email back acknowledging their submission and whether or not it has been selected to go into the queue.

This feature will eventually make it's way into the new quarterly photography magazine that I am going to begin publishing in the summer of 2009.

Thank you.

Thanks for a great Opening Night!

noreply@blogger.com (Scott Bulger Photography) — Mon, 23 Jun 2008 00:21:00 +0000

Thanks to everyone that showed up at Gallery 4 for the latest Opening Night Reception of my work this year. It was a hot and steamy evening, and that just made the very cold adult beverages taste all the better.

I'd also like to thank the owner of Gallery 4, Klia Ververidis Xanthopoulos, for having me and my work in her gallery.

This show will run through July 31st, so if you have a chance to make it by, come take a look. I'm taking August off from the exhibit schedule but will be back hanging on walls again in September.

New Exhibit and Reception Invitation

noreply@blogger.com (Scott Bulger Photography) — Fri, 13 Jun 2008 14:16:00 +0000

Today's Top 10 List for Success....

noreply@blogger.com (Scott Bulger Photography) — Wed, 04 Jun 2008 23:07:00 +0000

You want to be a photographer? Pay attention.....

1. Be passionate or get rid of your camera. You can't do this (or anything else usually) half hearted. You have to love what you are doing because it isn't easy. There will be plenty of times when you will want to take up plumbing because you see some weird stuff out there. If you are passionate about photography, it won't matter what anyone else is doing. Do your own thing.

2. Be flexible, but not too flexible. Be willing to try new things. New compositions, new themes, new ideas, but retain the standards that make you who you are.

3. Be positive. Nobody wants to deal with somebody that is constantly moping around. You should be enthusiastic about what you are doing. it should give you satisfaction. If you aren't, or it doesn't, please refer back to #1.

4. Make those around you look good. Be professional and humble. Make your clients look good. If everyone you affiliate with business wise looks good, eventually, people will figure out the common denominator.

5. Be loyal. Nothing is harder to repair than a reputation. You don't want a reputation as a photographer that uses and abandons clients and employers.

6. Work hard. This should go without saying, but what you get out of this is directly proportional to two things; your talent, and how hard you work.

7. Be proactive. Play the ball, don't let the ball play you. Don't wait until there is a problem and just react to it. Anticipate the problem and head it off. Pay attention to what is going on around you. Keep your head on a swivel. (Is that enough sporting metaphors?)

8. Embrace change. Change happens. Sticking your head in the sand doesn't help. Believe me, I know this to be true. I tried to ignore digital photography and kept telling myself it was a fad that would fade away. It isn't and it won't. It's here to stay folks and film photography is pretty much already a niche business, and it's going to get more and more rare as the cost of silver drives up the cost of film and papers.

9. Speak up. Have opinions, and don't be afraid to be wrong. Engage in conversation about your craft. This is where some of the greatest ideas and self discovery is made.

10. Have fun. If it isn't fun, you aren't doing it right. If you truly love what you are doing, it isn't work.

Here's the Deal....

noreply@blogger.com (Scott Bulger Photography) — Wed, 04 Jun 2008 03:40:00 +0000

I see a lot of photographers pages with a FAQ (frequently asked questions) section, and most of them are complete fabrications. Not the answers, just the questions. People ask themselves the questions that they want to answer so they can get whatever information across that they would like to get out, and it's easier if they pretend that someone else is asking them. Now don't inundate me with "My FAQ section is absolutely true." If it is, that's terrific. The people that make them up know who they are. Even the ones that are made up aren't a big deal. No one's getting hurt and information is being passed along, which is more than I can say for a lot of photographers that act like they are dealing with state secrets or the formula for nuclear fission and no one else is worthy of knowing what they know.

"What's your point here Scott?" you may be thinking.

My point is, that there is only one question that I get asked frequently, at least once a day, and that is "What kind of camera do you use?", and that is probably the least important piece of information about a photographer that there is.

Not that it matters, but I bought my first 35mm camera in 1978, it was a Ricoh, and I bought it at Lechemere Sales at the Mall of New Hampshire. A few years later I bought a Minolta X-700 and a few years later I bought a second X-700. A few years after that, I injured my arm badly in an accident and need to change the way I worked so I bought a Nikon N90. I shot with that camera for over 10 years until I decided to go digital and bought a Nikon D50 a couple years ago and just recently upgrade to a Nikon D200. There, now you know what kind of camera I have always used......and it doesn't make a bit of difference. No camera EVER took a great photograph any more than a typewriter wrote a great novel. A camera is just a tool, like a hammer or a drill. It's the person using it that matters.

Now this information might be quite depressing for those of you that thought you could go out and spend a couple thousand dollars on camera equipment and be a great photographer. It just doesn't work that way. Photography is an art, and art is a creative process, and you can't buy creativity. You can learn it, but you can't buy it. I've been to photography exhibits where all of the images were taken with SX-70's, 110 instamatics, and other varieties of toy cameras that cost about $20.

My friend Will Michael and I were discussing an image the other day (as we are often prone to do) when he said "Seeing takes discipline, it's more than just looking." I'm always talking about needing "vision" and Will's statement just cuts right to the heart of it. You have to actually see what is in the frame. All of it, not just the center. You have to look in the corners and n the background. You have to check your horizons and your plumbs to make sure that they are horizontal and plumb.

Ansel Adams is one of the all time photographic greats and a personal icon of mine. He also has one of the most misinterpreted quotes around.

"There are no rules for good photograph's, only good photographs."

People like to interpret this as meaning that Ansel Adams is telling them that they don't need to know anything about the photographic rules, that they can just go out and shoot 300 frames per minute haphazardly and get good photographs. Sure, you might get a good frame here and there, but a blind squirrel will find a nut every once in a while as well. What he meant was that just because you follow the rules does not guarantee a great image. There are lots of rules, and Ansel wrote plenty of them. Of course it's ok to break the rules, but you have to know that you are breaking them and be breaking them for a purpose. A horizon line that is 2 or 3 degrees off just looks crooked. A horizon line that is 20 or 30 degrees off can impart a feeling or an emotion and look like it is done intentionally and not just that you are holding your camera crooked.

If you want to take great images, you don't need a fancy camera. You need heart, passion, and vision. Everything else is just practice. To see the results of my 30 years of practice, visit my web site.

Doors

noreply@blogger.com (Scott Bulger Photography) — Fri, 16 May 2008 12:46:00 +0000

"It's not what you look at that matters, it's what you see." - Henry David Thoreau

"Everything has it's beauty, not everyone sees it." - Confucius

"One does not see anything, until one sees beauty." - Oscar Wilde

"People only see what they are prepared to see." - Ralph Waldo Emerson

Opening Reception at Kimball-Jenkins

noreply@blogger.com (Scott Bulger Photography) — Sat, 10 May 2008 20:31:00 +0000

Well, last night was the opening reception of my exhibit at the Jill Coldren-Wilson Gallery that is on the campus of the Kimball-Jenkins School of Art in Concord, New Hampshire. This was my largest exhibit ever, with 24 pieces on display.

The work usually goes up a week before the reception, but I try not to go look at it prior to the opening night. I was a little apprehensive for the past few days, waiting for the time to arrive, and to be honest, I couldn't wait until 5:00 to show up. I pulled into the gallery at about 3:45 and made my way up the granite walkway to the steps leading into the old Victorian mansion that houses the gallery space. I was amazed at what the curator had done. Everything looked great, from the way my photographs were displayed, to the food tables, to the beverage carts. Everything was first class. The display of my images was beautifully done. I personally would have never hung it this way, but it really worked, causing each of the four rooms to be individual, yet connected to each other. It far exceeded my expectations.

There was a great turnout, as the reception was included as part of Art Concord, and hopefully, as this event becomes more successful, more venues can be added.

Some highlights of the evening (in no particular order):

1. Being "reprimanded" for the title of one of my images. This particular viewer felt that the title was insulting to him, as it didn't give him credit for seeing what I thought he should see in the image. It didn't need to smack him in the face.

The offending "Ghost in the Garage"

2. Listening to two viewers discuss the "faces" they saw in one image.

"Satin Rose" Do you see faces?

3. Meeting people that came from as far away as New York to see my work. I'd never met them before, and it was an absolute honor to meet them that night. Dave and Jan, I am humbled.

4. Meeting Jill and Robert Wilson, (the gallery is named after Jill Coldren-Wilson), as they attended my reception. They are wonderful people, and invaluable to the local art community.

5. Being referred to as "the Georgia O'Keefe of photography". However uncomfortable I might be with that comparison, it was very nice of them to say.

Georgia O'Keefe-ish?

6. Being offered a teaching position at the Kimball-Jenkins School of Art. Beginning in July, I will be teaching photography to the students at the art school.

For anyone that was unable to attend the reception, but is still interested in viewing the installation, the gallery is open from 10:00 AM to 6:00 PM, Monday through Friday and other times by appointment. This display runs through May 29th.

I'd also like to take a moment to specially thank Ryan Linehan, the Director of the Kimball-Jenkins School of Art for all that he has done for the local art community, and for me personally.

Inspiration in the Closet

noreply@blogger.com (Scott Bulger Photography) — Thu, 08 May 2008 17:22:00 +0000

I'm not going to pretend otherwise, so I'll just come out and say it. I hate housework. I don't like doing dishes, laundry, sweeping, or dusting. I'm fortunate that my wife does the bulk of those things in exchange for me mowing the lawn and building things. I'm also responsible for killing any bugs, removing any snakes, and tending to anyone that might be bleeding. Sometimes though, I get the urge to clean out a closet or something similar. This is usually because I have just gone into said closet to try to find something and have been unable to do so. I get angry while digging through all of the junk that I have stored in there and decide to get a garbage bag and empty it out.

If only if was that simple.

You see, I like to keep old magazines. Don't ask me why, but for some reason, I think I might need to reference something I read in one of them, and I would be unable to find it on the internet. So, I save the magazines. There is something comforting about actually holding the pages in your hand while reading the article you were looking for.

So, I start to clean the closet. The job that should take 10 minutes, is bound to take me three hours because I need to read through all of the magazines I have stacked in the corner to make sure that I'm not throwing away anything that I absolutely can't live without.

After about 20 minutes, I'm feeling pretty cocky because I haven't actually decided that there was anything worth saving. My first bag is full, and I go get another. Almost as soon as I sit back down on the floor, I pick up an old copy of "Life" magazine. The one that had those amazing photos of a fetus in the womb. I studied those photographs, amazed by the focus, and the red, yellow, and orange compositions. I am simply amazed while looking at the photos of the tiny fingers and subtle facial features. I muster all of my strength and stuff it into the bottom of the new garbage bag. 40 years is long enough to hold onto a magazine.

I continue weeding through the pile for another 20 minutes or so until I come upon an old issue of "Sky and Telescope" magazine. Flipping through it before heaving it into the reject pile, I notice a series of early photos from the Hubble Space Telescope. The images are amazing. The shapes, the densities, the colors; another set of groundbreaking images that while of very specific things, have a very abstract look and feel to them. Someone not knowing what they are looking at in either of these photographic collections, might not know exactly what they are looking at. In my own mind, I instantly connected these two very different sets of images. They are both their own world within a world.

How can I do something like this? Again, nearly instantly, my mind makes another connection. What if i did a series of images of the inside of a flower? Not the typical beautifully sharp focus "look at this flower" photo, but something much more abstract, highlighting the shapes and the colors and the very fine focus points? Tulips would be the right flower to use because of the way they are closed up, protecting their delicate interiors. Using a very small depth of field, I can accentuate exactly what I am looking for.

This full size series of images will be debuting at my Exhibit at the Jill Coldren Wilson Gallery at the Kimball-Jenkins Estate in Concord, New Hampshire in May of this year (2008).

Fortune Tellers, Palm Readers, and Weathermen

noreply@blogger.com (Scott Bulger Photography) — Mon, 05 May 2008 12:51:00 +0000

What do they all have in common? About a 50% accuracy rate, that’s what. Oh how I wish I could only do half of my job right and still be a celebrity in town and get paid for it too. Not that their accuracy was any better 20 years ago, but now, with everyone on the news being some sort of character in a bizarre 30 minute sitcom, I’d at least like them to recognize that they are correct in their prognostications far less than they should be. Someone who gets paid to analyze the weather and predict to the public what is going to happen SHOULD be able to do a better job than I can by looking at the satellite loops on the internet.

Saturday was Opening Day for the local Little League baseball. While watching the “news” Friday night, against my better judgment, I stuck around for the weather report. It looked to me like it was going to rain, but let’s see what the professionals have to say. Now understand that at this point, Saturday morning is less than 8 hours away. I’m not looking for a 10 day forecast (now there is a joke), I just want to know what the weather is going to be eight hours from now.

Saturday – Mostly Sunny with temperatures in the low to mid 50’s

Sunday – Mostly Sunny with a chance of an afternoon shower creeping in

Saturday morning arrives and it is pouring rain and in the 40’s. Well, maybe it will clear up by noon time….

Noon comes and it is still pouring out and in the 40’s. 150 kids marching in the Opening Day Parade, all soaking wet and shivering. 150 kids standing on the field being introduced to the fans, who are also all soaking wet and shivering. Everyone standing in the rain eating soggy hot dogs and potato chips, while soaking wet and shivering.

Almost forgot, it rained all day Sunday as well.

Nice job Mr. Meteorologist. Thanks for the help.

(The photographs included in this blog are obviously not from this weekend. They are samples from last seasons photographs)

Are Hobbyists Bad for Business?

noreply@blogger.com (Scott Bulger Photography) — Fri, 02 May 2008 16:34:00 +0000

Pricing of art/craft work is always a hot topic, with some people feeling that those with lower prices undercut the market and hurt the professional artist. I am not of that opinion.

There are several different types of Artisans.

Type one is the Professional Artisan. They create out of the love for their craft, and charge accordingly. Sales are not the priority, they are driven by creation, but they are supported by the income derived from their work.

Type two is the Hobbyist Artisan. They create for the fun of it, to pass time, maybe hanging out with a group of people and all doing the same thing at the same time. They sell their work simply to finance doing more of it. Their time is of no value, they seek to recoup their costs for materials so that they can do it again tomorrow.

Others work hard at what they do, trying to generate much needed income to help support their families or themselves. These people are stuck in the middle, being underpriced by the hobbyists, and not feeling like they can't sell enough at the higher prices.

It's tough to be in the middle. I learned a very long time ago that people either want to buy the cheapest, or they want to buy the best.

One of the co-op's that I am involved with recently had someone that knitted apply to be juried. Her work was of excellent quality. Her prices were between $15 and $20 for something that would take her about 6 hours to make. She was rejected because her items were inadequately priced for what we were trying to do.

Items that are inadequately priced skew the marketplace for everyone, but in this internet world that we live in, it is an inevitable issue that the folks in the middle will continue to have to deal with. People with the top quality work will continue to get top quality prices as long as they have the backbone to ask for them.

Invitation to Reception

noreply@blogger.com (Scott Bulger Photography) — Mon, 28 Apr 2008 01:15:00 +0000

Mark it Down!

noreply@blogger.com (Scott Bulger Photography) — Tue, 22 Apr 2008 17:35:00 +0000

April 22nd, 2008....the snow is finally gone from my front yard. It took 80 degrees today to do it, but it is finally gone. Oh, did I mention that I had to spend the last week chipping away at the 4 foot piles, spreading it around the yard to get the sun to melt it a little quicker? Today finally ends the 150 consecutive days of snow covering my lawn. I was beginning to feel like I should be on "Nightline".

"Scott's Lawn Held Hostage, Day 149, Hello, I'm Ted Koppell....."

In honor of my grass being freed from the grip of it's icy shackles, I'd like to share a few images that always warm me up.

I'm really going to enjoy this summer. It's been a long time coming.

When does a photograph stop being a photograph?

noreply@blogger.com (Scott Bulger Photography) — Wed, 16 Apr 2008 14:57:00 +0000

I've seen the question asked a thousand times, and I've had it asked to me several times recently, so here are my hopefully coherent thought on the subject.

When does an image stop being a photograph and start becoming something else?

This is a discussion that has been going on for some time and will never have an answer that everyone agrees on.

Please understand, that my point of view is colored by being someone that I consider to be shooting "straight" photographs.

The key to me is "Representation". How are you representing your image? As long as it is being represented accurately, then no one should have a problem with however you choose to express yourself. Someone superimposing an image of a gigantic moon behind the silhouette of a sailboat and claiming it is an "authentic" photograph, even though it would have been physically impossible to create the image with a single exposure is being misleading.

Now it gets even stickier. Where does "manipulation" begin that would force you to represent your image as something other than "straight" photography? To me, it is the introduction of elements that were not in the original, or, other manipulation that is obviously something that would not be seen by a person with normal eyesight. Any processes that could easily be done in a darkroom (dodging, burning, saturation/desaturation, etc...) that simply enhances an image will still allow me to call my work straight photography. If I go to a balloon rally and take 8 photographs of 8 different balloons, then come home and use my computer to put them all into a single frame, I can not represent that as a photograph without a clear explanation as to what was done to alter it from the original state. It can still certainly be art, and some will probably still call it a photograph, but I couldn't represent it as such. I could call it a "photo-montage" or a "photo-mosaic" or something similar. I couldn't represent it as such even if I had done the work in a traditional darkroom by using multiple exposures or overlaying negatives.

Part of this reasoning is what I feel is my responsibility to any aspiring or beginning photographers that might see an image and be inspired to reproduce it without knowing how heavily manipulated it really was. They would go out time after time, attempting to recreate an image and would be unable to do so, possibly becoming discouraged and stop trying. Everyone wants to be able to create something they consider beautiful. They should be given all the information to do so.

Maybe something that is created as art shouldn't have to be explained...maybe it should just be able to stand on it's own and be admired without it being labeled or categorized...maybe something beautiful to look at should be just that....

Odds and Ends

noreply@blogger.com (Scott Bulger Photography) — Wed, 09 Apr 2008 14:49:00 +0000

I've been pretty busy, so I haven't had a chance to blog for a few days. I haven't had time to put together a coherent article for today either, so I'm just going to drop a few nuggets in here.

My photograph, "Bullfight", is being used as set dressing for the upcoming movie "The Assassination of a High School President" starring Bruce Willis. This film is being released in September and the according to the art director on the project, my photograph is being used in a Spanish classroom.

Another photograph of mine, "Wood End Light #4", is being used in the film "Tell-Tale", starring Josh Lucas and Lena Headley. This film will be released sometime in 2009 as they are just wrapping up filming now.

Ansel Adams once said "Twelve significant photographs in any one year, is a good crop." Don't think that every shot you snap is a keeper. Family and friends are one thing, but if you are trying to create "art"....well, most photographers need to be much better editors of their own work. The last three times I've shot, I haven't printed a single image.

Do you want to know if your work is any good? Do you really want to know? Don't ask your mother, your best friend, or any other relative. Ask someone whose work you respect. Not whose work you like, someone whose work you respect. there is a difference. You want to be able to respect their opinion, not like it. Be prepared for the truth, and sometimes, the truth isn't pretty, but the truth will make you a better photographer.

Crooked horizons are a result of laziness. They are easy to check and to fix. Check them and fix them.

Blown out highlights kill an image. Just kill it. Portraits, landscapes, still life, it doesn't matter.

Vacation Photography

noreply@blogger.com (Scott Bulger Photography) — Fri, 04 Apr 2008 16:57:00 +0000

Everyone takes pictures while on vacation. The only problem is, that not everyone does it well. Have you ever have someone offer to show you their vacation photographs? What was your initial reaction? Ugh, thanks, but I have to get up early.

The key to good travel photography is to bring the viewer with you on your journey. You need to make them feel like they are remembering their own trip, as opposed to just looking at a photographic record of yours. To do this, you need to make a record of the places you visited and the people you met. In order to do this, you need to actually go places and meet people. Get off of the beach and out of the hotel. Your family and friends already know what you look like, they may not know what a butcher shop in Mexico look like.

Don't miss out on the local cuisine, architecture, and flora by staying quarantined to your resort or hotel. By experiencing the actual culture of the country that you are visiting, it's easier to capture the essence of the culture in photographs.

Take pictures of the sunset and the pool and the beach, but don't forget to take pictures of where you actually are.

Time to Build a Portfolio

noreply@blogger.com (Scott Bulger Photography) — Wed, 02 Apr 2008 14:51:00 +0000

Do you want to get serious about your photography? Fancy yourself a professional? Let's talk about putting together a portfolio. If you want to show your work, if you want to get more business, if you are looking to start a business, If you are looking for representation or trying to get shown in a gallery, nothing will have more impact than your portfolio.

If you want to be perceived as professional, you have to act and appear professional and this means having a professional looking presentation. In other words, a three ring binder with clear page inserts isn't going to cut it.

Here are a few things to take into consideration when putting together your book:

Your portfolio should consist of between 15 and 30 images. Less than 15 doesn't show enough depth and experience, and more than 30 becomes cumbersome and tedious to look through.

Especially for novices and upstarts, the portfolio is often their weakest link. This is usually due to the fact that they are drawing from too little work. Be your own harshest critic. Look at the images you are considering closely. Try to find reasons to keep them out of your book. If you can't find a flaw, put them in. "This is good enough" is NOT good enough. Only your absolute very best images go into your book. I cannot stress this enough. You have never met a more critical person than a photo editor, so no matter how tough you think you are being on your work, it isn't tough enough.

Don't make excuses for your work. If it's not right, it's not right. Leave it out. If you specialize in wildlife photography, and you have an image that is great in every way except that the subjects eyes are obscured or out of focus, do not include it. If the viewer notices and says something like "too bad about the eyes", what do you do then? Make excuses? That isn't going to fly.

Make sure that your work speaks for itself and doesn't require an explanation. It's quite possible that you won't be there when your book is viewed.

Your portfolio needs to have a consistent theme. Don't mix landscapes with portraits. Don't mix still life with architecture. Don't mix color with black and white. Specialize at least in your books. If you want to promote different styles of photography, have different books. Make sure all of your images are the same proportions. Do your cropping with your camera so you aren't cropping after the fact and changing the proportions of your image. If you have to crop after you have already taken the shot, keep the proportions consistent. Don't have a book of 13 x 19's and then have an 8x10 and a 12 x 12. One book, one size.

The images should flow from one to the next; much like music on an album will flow from one song to the next. There should be a beginning, middle, and an end. Start strong and finish strong.

Personally, I have some nice leather looking books with high quality plastic inlays, but these can sometimes be problematic if the lighting isn't right. A glare from the plastic can be a real momentum killer. There are many different display modes; figure out what will be the right one for you. Don't be afraid to be imaginative or creative. For the time being at least, electronic methods still don't make the grade. Decision makers still want hard copies so that they are easy to pass around and really see what they are looking at. 72 DPI electronically displayed images don't hold a candle to an actually printed image.

Make sure that you name is displayed on your portfolio. You want to make sure that the viewer knows whose work it is and that you get it back. Follow up with a thank you note after your appointment.

Hopefully, these tips will help you out.

Terra Perma Gallery Exhibit

noreply@blogger.com (Scott Bulger Photography) — Mon, 31 Mar 2008 00:55:00 +0000

Beginning on the first of March and running through the end of April, the Terra Perma Gallery in Laconia, New Hampshire, is playing host to an exhibit of photography, comprising of more than twelve photographic artists from around the country. I was honored to have my work included in this exhibit.

This past Saturday, from 1:00 - 3:00 PM, the gallery hosted a reception for the participating photographers. There was a great turnout for this event, with the community showing great support for both the Terra Perma gallery and for photography as an art form.

Scott Bulger Display

Many superb artist were included in this exhibit, including Alicia Bock, Irene Suchocki, Madelaine Adelaide, Amy Wilson, Kevin Sperl, Cathy Thorsell, Scott Sughrue, Andrew Thompson, Gillian Martlew, D. F. Dunn, Tarren Bailey, and Linda Ost.

The owner of this gallery, Ana Gourlay, has done a beautiful job with this space, and even though there were many photographers in this show, each one had their own very distinct style, so a tremendous variety of work was available for viewing.

I'd like to extend a sincere thank you to both Ana Gourlay (Owner) and Sue Quimby (Gallery Manager) for the service they are providing both to the art community and the community in general, making these exhibits available to the public.

The Terra Perma gallery is located at 676 Main Street in Laconia, New Hampshire. Please stop by and check out this great exhibit if you are in the area.

Life Imitates Art

noreply@blogger.com (Scott Bulger Photography) — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 17:08:00 +0000

Caution: Potentially Offensive Rant Ahead.

Well, I suppose that it was only a matter of time before this finally happened. Photography isn’t competitive enough, what with having to compete with everybody that has access to a digital camera, now we have to worry about BLIND photographers using up valuable funding, gallery space, and publicity? Are you serious? Somebody must have just seen the movie “Pecker” and thought this would be a good idea.

I can see blind people participating in a number of the arts, sculpture is a very tactile art, even painting where they could feel the brush strokes and use their hands, but photography? How would a blind person compose a photograph? How would they see the result?

I can see it now, “this guy must hate blind people”…I don’t hate blind people, but I do hate this politically correct namby-pamby world that we have become where no one can be left out of anything regardless of their actual inability to do it.

Some people can see and some can’t. It doesn’t make either one of them better than the other as a person, but it does make them better at doing different things than the other, like seeing and the art of photography. Heck, I've seen plenty of sighted people that have no business owning a camera, but that's a rant for another day.

"Good Enough" is not "Good Enough"

noreply@blogger.com (Scott Bulger Photography) — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 03:10:00 +0000

The photographers arch-nemesis....Good Enough. No, good enough is not good enough. If you ever hear yourself say "This is good enough" delete it. Your work should mean more to you than that. You should do everything in your power to insure that every image you produce is as good as you can possibly make it.

Photography is an exacting skill. I can look at every image that I have ever shot and find something that I would like to improve. Every one. Every single one. But at the time that I shot them, I had done all that I could do to make them as close to the image I had in my mind when I shot them.

Now sometimes, this takes only seconds. You are out in the field with your camera and happen upon a scene you want to photograph. Before your camera comes up to your eye you should have a very good idea of what you want your final image to look like. You might have to take a few shots, and you might have to do some post-processing. You might even have to wait for the right conditions or for the plan to come together in your mind.

This particular image was six weeks in the making. I first spotted this wooden vase six weeks ago and I knew I had to incorporate it into an image. How was I going to do it? I started to formulate ideas in my mind.... worked on compositions in my head. Thought about color palettes and lighting. When I got it to where I wanted it in my head, then I had to find the pieces to the puzzle. The vase I had already found. So I needed the pedestal and the flower. Then I needed the right colored wall with the right texture with the right wainscoting in the right relationship to windows for natural light. Piece of cake. So six weeks later, I was ready to shoot. The stage was set and my camera set up. I placed the camera on the mandatory tripod and framed it up. I adjusted the individual pieces of the composition and framed it up again. I readjusted the items and reframed it. Then I moved my tripod and framed it again. OK, ready to shoot....wait, the light isn't right. Five hours later, the light was right. I snapped one frame and looked at the preview on my LCD. Not quite right due to the little bit of extra space that doesn't show through the viewfinder. I reframed it and snapped one more frame. This one was right. Just as I had seen it in my mind. I got it loaded on to my computer and opened it up full screen. No cropping, a little bit of dodging and burning, a little unsharp mask and it was done. Six weeks to plan and execute and less than an hour on the computer. I can say that this is as good as I can get it. There is nothing that I would change. At least, not right now.