If you have  a car in the foreground on the right, you do not need an identical car facing the same direction in the background on the left. You can avoid this if the two subjects are different enough. Consider these two statues. They’re almost identical, but have different expressions. This isn’t an ideal image, but it still works.
Likewise, if you have  a car in the foreground on the right, you do not need an identical car facing the same direction in the background on the left.

This image is a good example of an unbalanced image.  All of the subject matter is on the right hand side There is nothing at all to balance out the door.  Even an interesting shadow or distinguishing mark on the wall could improve this image.

On the other hand, this is a classic, albeit boring, example of balance.  The fountain on the left balances the statue on the right.  It’s a good place to start, but hopefully you can come up with a more interesting shot.

The balance in this image is far more interesting.  The subject is the plate of sushi.  A faceless chef is in the background and is balanced by the blurred food in the right side of the foreground.  The plate in the left foreground helps to balance the wood in the right background.

Here’s one more example of a balanced image. Notice that the children in the foreground are balanced by the fireworks in the background. If either were missing, this image would seem incomplete. Fireworks and mud don’t make for an interesting photo. Neither do four people looking away from the camera. Luckily, the two elements work well together. The key to balance is ensuring that your viewer doesn’t find any boring areas within your photo.

A balanced image will always play better than an unbalanced image.  Try to keep this in mind when taking photos and when choosing which photos to display.

"Decisions, Decisions" by Caleb Long

Those who have been following Shutter Photo for a long while are already aware of my appreciation for self portraits as a learning tool.  Among many other reasons, one of the main reasons for my mantra is simply access to talent.  You are going to be your own best model.  But there’s nothing like dealing with a model.  And that was the first thought that went through my head when I first saw Caleb Long’s photo, Decisions, Decisions. There’s only one problem:  My gut was wrong.  Caleb was not working with a model.  The model is Caleb.  Of course, my misunderstanding serves me well regardless…as I can once again preach about how shooting self portraits is a great learning tool.

Like many photo admirers of art, I cannot depend on my first impression alone.  I will browse a series of photos and bookmark those that I initially find interesting.  When I return to my small collection, I’ll look deeper.  Many will inevitably get cut.  The balance either make the cut, or get saved for another day.  But the few special photographs will grow on me.  Decisions, Decisions was one such special photograph.  Each time I returned, there was one or more elements that I grew to admire more.  As I read comments left on the photo, I grew to appreciate more and more things.  As one commenter pointed out, the color of Caleb’s shirt nicely mimics the color of whatever is in the jar – repetition, a cousin of the pattern building block.  I’m kicking myself for not noticing that myself.  But it’s a sound observation, and certainly one of the many of the many great details as to why this photo deserves to be spotlighted.

Caleb is a modest photographer, a wonderful asset for one with such a limited amount of experience behind the lens.  But that short time was spent wisely, as his work clearly demonstrates.  As you browse Caleb’s photostream, you will be introduced to a world of inspirational works.  Yet among the discussions attached to each photo, you will find time and time again examples of his humble admissions of luck.  In the case of Decisions, Decisions, Caleb admitted to lacking experience with artificial lighting.  He fell back on the old 45° tilt/bounce method, and it worked.  I have no doubt that Caleb learned something substantial from this photograph.

But lets get back to the basics for a moment.  The shot is well composed.  Caleb’s face is framed by the jar on the right side, the carton on the left and the glass shelf below.  The reflection, an element that offers vertical balance, is included in its entirety.  Additionally, one of my pet peeves was appropriately addressed:  Eye contact.  The eye contact rule of thumb is a simple but significant rule:  The subject should either make eye contact with the camera (the viewer), or whatever is drawing their attention should be readily apparent.  It is clear to the viewer, in this case, that the eyes are focused on the jar.  This is further emphasized by the hand reaching for the jar.  The hand placement makes the shot for me.  This is a well acted moment, mimicking the exact emotion one might feel when exploring the refrigerator.  But what keeps the viewer’s focus on the eyes and face?  Depth of field.  The depth of field used here nicely holds the shot together.  The jar is just barely out of focus, a nice visual cue that tells us that the jar is merely context, not part of the subject.

Yet there is room for some improvement.  To be fair, it is much easier for me to pick on a shot than it is to plan for such a shot.  The photo as it is presented is a great photo.  But there are a few items that I’d like to point out for the benefit of our readers.  First is the background.  The picture frame on the wall can be distracting.  A simple solution would be to get the flash closer to the subject, if possible.  The framing is tight, so it would be quite possible.  However, it’s possible that relocating the flash would lose the reflection, an element I consider to be essential to the shot.  An alternative would be to pull the flash into manual mode and crank up the power.  This would mean a much faster shutter speed, possibly enough to black-out the background.  But again, I need to point out that Caleb admitted to being inexperienced with artificial lighting.  With that in mind, this shot is quite well done from a lighting perspective.

So Caleb is certainly a person to watch.  If you are a member of Flickr, I highly recommend that you add him as a contact so that you can easily track his Photo 365 project.  He’s got a lot of great ideas, and it seems like the quality of his work is growing exponentially every week.  That alone is inspiring.  So be sure to visit Caleb’s photostream.  And also be sure to visit his personal website:  Caleb Long Photography.

The principal quoted above was coined by William of Ockham, a 14th century English Franciscan Friar and philosopher.  The principal is commonly known as Occam’s Razor (don’t ask me why it’s spelled differently, I’m just a photographer).  In the science world – and even in the detective world – Occams’ Razor serves as a basis for problem solving – often the simplest explanation is the most likely explanation.  It can be applied when hypothesyzing about an unknown outcome (scientific research); and it can be applied when trying to explain an unknown scenario (crime investigations).  For that matter, it is often used when designing a procedure or a process by eliminating as many steps as possible so as to eliminate failure potential.  Today, we are going to apply Occam’s Razor to photography – both forensically and procedurally.

Occam’s Razor and the Photo Forensics

No, we’re not trying to solve a murder mystery.  Yet the goal of photo forensics is to solve a mystery:  How was a specific shot taken?  To clearly analyze a photograph, you need a little bit of wisdom and some luck.  Truth is, there are several ways in which to achieve an affect – so you have to make some assumptions.  Occam’s Razor helps to some degree.  The principal is not a scientific law – it’s just an exercise in probability.  There is always a chance that someone didn’t perform a task in the simplest of manners.  But chances are – if they were aware of the easiest method, they probably used it – unless they’re masochistic, but we won’t go there.

Lighting is possibly the simplest example, so we’ll use my recent self-portrait as our subject.  Let’s start with a simple question:  How many light sources are there?  Well, there is clearly a light source to the left.  There doesn’t appear to be much evidence of multi-directional lighting.  There is possibly a reflector or a very dim light source to the right for fill, but that might not necessarily be the case.  The simplest scenario is a single light source to the left and a little forward (towards the camera).  Having shot the photo, I can definitively say that this take did use a reflector.  But what I actually did isn’t important as what is possible.  It is possible to achieve the same lighting quality without a reflector (and I did in this same session – but I blinked).  So if you were to apply Occam’s Razor, there is only one light source as it is the simplest explanation.  Now that is perhaps an over-simplification…so let’s try a different example.

What is the light source?  We can deduct a lot from the shot without having a clue about the light source.  Directionality is clue enough to tell us it’s not an on-camera flash.  We see hard light, so we know it’s a directional light source and that it’s not diffused.  That eliminates most traditional incandescent light sources as well as umbrellas.  The light is pretty intense (a strong contrast between the shadows and the bright spots), so it’s got to be a fairly powerful light source.  That leaves light sources such as consumer floods (home depot), bare always-on studio floods and bare strobes, among others.  Any of these are equally as simple and when Occam’s Razor is applied hold equal weight.  But again, the process isn’t as important as what is possible.  Since each is equally simple, it doesn’t matter which you assume.  You at least have enough information to reproduce the setup.

The important take-away here is that your goal is to eliminate the most complicated methods.  The actual method might have been the most complicated method possible, simply because the photographer wanted to have fun.  But that doesn’t have to be the only possible method.  What you are striving for is simplicity.  And that leads well into the next discussion.

Occam’s Razor and the Photographic Process

Photoshop has come along and given us a massive tool set to work with in post processing.  It has replaced many of our physical tools like filters – and that’s just scratching the surface.  But is this necessarily the simplest method to achieving an effect?  In some cases, if you’re experienced, it might be.  But in many cases, it might not be, which is why you hear many experienced photographers (myself included) preaching the concept of getting it right “in the camera” – not in post processing.  Exposure, for example, can easily be corrected in post processing.  But if you are able to get it right in the camera, it’s still the simplest and fastest means to achieve a perfect exposure.

In this case, Occam’s Razor is simply a philosophy.  You’re striving to simplify because it inevitably saves you time, patience and frustration.  If you’re a professional, time and efficiency is incredibly important as it impacts your bottom line.  So when considering how to set up a shot, you should consider your options and opt for the simplest – and in turn most efficient – method.

As an example, I share one of my favorite photos from my portfolio:  Happiness in Motion. In theory, I could have achieved (most of) the same effect in Photoshop, though it would be incredibly time consuming to get it right.  Despite that fact, many people consider Photoshop the easiest method.  So when considering this shot, I knew that panning was the way to go.  It’s difficult to do, and it requires some practice and perfect timing.  But with enough practice, it’s fairly simple to do.  I think it’s the practice part that deters people – it’s frustrating and time consuming.  Truth be told, I wasn’t very well versed in this technique at the time.  As I waited in line for my niece to board, I practiced the technique dozens of times on the ride in progress.  In all, I took nearly 100 shots just to get this shot (should I be admitting that?).  But even so, my post-processing was reduced significantly.  All I had to do was reject the ones that didn’t achieve my goal, select from the balance, and run a couple of minor procedures on the winning photo.  In the end, I was able to save myself a great deal of time – at least a few hours (though probably more).  Occam’s Razor serves well as a philosophy to benefit the photo process.

Final Thoughts

As I mentioned, Occam’s Razor isn’t a law.  It is simply a principal that can be applied many ways.  My examples here today are simplified so as to help you understand the benefits of the principal.  But if you were to apply Occam’s Razor to more complicated scenarios, you’ll find that it helps you to reach your goals effectively.

"La Piedra Tallada #6" by Daniel Horacio Agostini

This week’s inspiration, which comes from the camera of Daniel Horacio Agostini, is a nice follow-up to last week’s learning article (Key Elements of Great Black and White Photos). Agostini’s photo, La Piedra Tallada #6, (shown here) is a fine example of Black & White photography.  But it’s also an alluring photo of an exotic location that not only inspires us photographically, but makes us want to get away.

When observing black & white photography, I like to first ask the question:  Why black & white?  I am not one to stir the debate of “black & white vs. color” – I think both mediums have their place and their purpose.  And I shoot equally in both.  But there are certain circumstances where one has more power over the other.  I think La Piedra Tallada #6 is one such case.  Though I have not seen this location in color, I am hard pressed to believe that this photo would be more powerful in color.  I think a color version of this shot would cause us to miss two very important details:  The doorway to the right, and the tunnel (doorway?) at the end of the alley.  These two elements give us context – this is not just an alley, this is a place that gets used.  There is depth here, and we would have missed that if we were distracted by the greenery (maybe not…but it would at least have less impact).  Additionally, the way the light reflects off of the polished, much trodden cobble stones might also have been missed in color.  In color, this photo would be a great scene – a location.  In black & white, this photograph is able to tell a story – the story of the hundreds of feet that have smoothed these stones, or the countless inhabitants that have wandered this alley, or entered these portals to the inside.  This photograph is an exceptional use of black & white, and I’m glad that Agostini chose to eliminate color from this shot.

From a technical point of view, this photograph meets every checklist item of last week’s article about shooting black & white.  It’s composed well, it’s exposed well, and contrast is readily apparent:  There are absolute blacks and absolute whites in the shot.  But I’d like to focus on the Dynamic Range.  When I spoke last week about dynamic range, I perhaps wasn’t clear about one point in particular:  The gray area.  Yes, we want some grays in our photo.  But that has led some to believe that the shot should be predominantly gray.  There are surely going to be cases where the bulk of a photo’s histogram falls within that mid-range.  But that doesn’t mean that high-key and low-key photographs don’t make great black & white photos.  Quite the contrary.  As we see here, La Piedra Tallada #6, is a low-key photograph.  The histogram reveals a strong presence on the dark side.  But there is still a presence across the histogram, revealing enough data for our eyes to distinguish features.  Enough differences of shade so that we can clearly differentiate textures, surfaces and edges.  Too much contrast, this detail is lost to darkness.  Too little contrast, and the shot appears muddy.  Agostini strikes a nice balance here.

A photo is not great unless it can strike up an emotion in an observer.  My first thought when I saw this photograph for the first time was simply:  Where is that?  It looks like a great place to visit, or even live.  In fact, I think I would love to live off of this cozy little alleyway.  Pull up a bench, and that’s where I’d be writing my articles – out in the fresh and private air.  It wasn’t until I stopped daydreaming that I realized all of the technical and compositional qualities of the photograph that I mentioned above.  That is exactly how it should be.  A photo should grab your attention first, and then reveal its inner secrets.  We should all strive to do exactly that.

So be sure to visit La Piedra Tallada #6 on Flickr to add to your favorites.  Also be sure to visit Daniel Horacio Agostini’s Flickr Photo Stream and observe the fantastic body of work that he has exhibited.

"Modern Rails" by D. Travis North

Black & White Photographs are among my favorite style – both to observe and to create.  Shooting for black & white is challenging.  You immediately eliminate one of your building blocks of design:  Color.  That’s one less tool that you have to compose with.  But working in black & white can be quite rewarding as well.  Personally, I am drawn to the beauty that is created by black & white.  If done well, it can help the viewer to focus on textures and shapes as opposed to symbols.  There is great beauty in black & white photography, but to do it right…you need to account for a few key elements:

• Exposure – Exposure is always important, even in color.  But when it comes to black & white, it’s even more important.  In a photo devoid of color, there is a very narrow margin for error.
• Contrast – A good black and white photo should have absolute whites, and there should be absolute blacks.  Don’t get discouraged if you don’t get it right in camera.  So long as your exposure is correct, you can tighten up the contrast in post-processing.  TIP:  Shooting in natural light?  Circular Polarizer and Neutral Density Filters help you to get great contrast between colors.
• Dynamic Range – In other words…there should be some gray tones as well.  The more grays you can work into the photo, the better.  This is where your color filters (either physical filters or photoshop both work well) will help you to separate colors from each other.  TIP:  Unless you’ve got a lot of experience with film, there’s very little reason for new photographers to use physical color filters.  You have more control in post-processing with your editing software.
  
• Composition – Color is obviously eliminated, but you still have five building blocks to work with.  Each carries more weight in the final composition now.  Texture, especially, becomes magnified without color.  Don’t let this be a hindrance, use this to your advantage.
• Patience – If you’re not used to shooting black & white, expect to make some mistakes.  You will need to get the knack for seeing a color scene as if it were black & white.  You’ll need to learn how some colors will appear in black & white, and the only way to learn is through practice.  For practice purposes, if your camera has a black & white mode – use it.  I don’t recommend using that mode for production as you eliminate a lot of the control you would have at post-processing.  But it’s a good way to learn how to visualize a scene – just check it on your camera’s screen.

"Evening Backyard Walk" by Sue Thompson

If you haven’t yet been inspired by Sue Thompson’s work, then you haven’t been a part of our Shutter Photo @ Flickr Group.  Sue is a perennial of the Flickr Group, and we’ve spotlighted her work a few times here at Shutter Photo.  From a statistical point of view, Sue has contributed the most photos to the group, and could very well have left the most comments.  I will admit a bit of a biased opinion:  I love so much of Sue’s works that I could probably spotlight something here every week.  But to be fair, I try to avoid that.  But when Sue started brandishing her brand new D-SLR, the quality of her work skipped up several notches – not because of the camera, mind you, but because she clearly outgrew her old point-and-shoot camera.  Sue used her old camera to the absolute threshold of its abilities.  And now that she has a better camera with better lenses, we can see what she can really do. And so I introduce you to one of her recent works, Evening Backyard Walk, shown here.

This is a classic macro shot of a flower.  Focusing is so close – almost to the point of abstraction – that we can see detail reflected and distorted through the lens created by each water drop.  A shot like this is possibly influenced by the works of Georgia O’Keeffe.  O’Keeffe worked in paints, but many photographers are inspired by the close-crops of her flower paintings.  Her work transcends the medium into the world of photography quite often.

When dealing with such a close shot, even with a focal length of 55mm, you’re dealing with such a narrow depth of field.  If you imagine this flower at natural size, you can visualize just how small this depth of field is.  We’re talking milimeters, no more.  And that is why it’s important to focus manually, as Sue did in this case.  Manual focus is the key to close-up and macro photography.  I know very little about Sue’s old camera, but I can imagine she’s quite happy to have a smooth focusing ring on her lens with all the close-up and macro photography that she shoots.

Here’s where the shiny new camera really shows it’s mark:  The light.  Her old camera, A Canon Powershot S5, was a pretty decent point and shoot.  But it had a relatively small fixed lens.  The maximum aperture was nowhere close to the capabilities of her new camera and lens.  This is a big deal with Macro, because light is scarce when dealing with such a small area of focus.  Having a nice wide-open lens gets the light in there to help you get your shot.  And judging by the EXIF information, it would appear as though this shot could have been taken hand-held at those speeds.

The last thing I want to discuss about Sue’s work today is simply practice.  As I mentioned, Sue recently changed cameras, but I don’t feel that the quality of her work, even the early shots with her new camera, have suffered in any way.  She shot macro so many times and so often (literally hundreds upon hundreds of shots each month), that the equipment doesn’t matter.  I am inspired by Sue’s work mostly because of the consistency of her growth and the fact that equipment really truly does matter little.  I would put up much of her work against someone with better equipment – better lenses, better filters, fancy tripods and accessories – yet I believe that Sue would create a better photo.  Why?  Because she has an inner vision and a skill that only comes with practice.  The work she was able to do with her Powershot S5 was proof of that concept.  Her recent upgrade to a Rebel XSi has simply made her job easier with a better technical quality.  But technical quality is only a fraction of the finished product.  The bulk of it is composition and vision – and that is clearly not a stumbling block for our dear friend.  And the best part:  She does it with the innocence of a child.  She admitted to me once that she doesn’t often think each composition through before snapping the shutter.  But as I’ve preached many times before: The rules aren’t a guide to creating great photos, they are simply a way for the uninspired to understand art.

So pop on over to Evening Backyard Walk on Flickr, leave a few comments and then head on over to her photo stream to browse some more.  You will quickly learn why we here at Shutter Photo love Sue’s work so much.

Shot on film - what can you learn from this shot? Not as much as you could learn from a digital photo.

In the days before digital photography, it was difficult to learn from other people’s works.  First and foremost, you had to find the work.  You had to go out of your way to browse galleries museums or even craft shows to find good examples of photography.  As you’re learning photography, you did what you could to afford yourself such opportunities.  But there was only so much you could do.  In many cases, the works were so far above your skill level that you had no concept of how a specific shot might have been taken.  For that matter, you spent so much time finding such works, the little bits of inspiration that could be garnered were often lost.

I was one such young photographer.  Early on, I shot with a dated camera with few automatic features and only in natural light (no flash).  I bought books for learning, books for inspiration and I visited as many galleries and museums as I could.  I was fortunate enough to have a very good museum nearby that focused only on local artists – a great source of inspiration in those early years.  But at my skill level, I couldn’t learn very much without asking questions of artists that weren’t interested in returning my calls.  I essentially had two options:  1)  Pursue a career in photography and become an apprentice or 2) Just keep shooting and learn through failure.  Obviously, I ended up choosing the second option as photography was not my primary career interest.  It was a long and rocky road, and my growth was slow.  But again, that was all before digital.

Easy Access to Inspiration

Possibly the most obvious benefit to digital photography is the ease in which our work, and the work of others, gets shared.  Sites like Flickr and DeviantArt exist for this purpose.  I joined DeviantArt many years ago.  On the surface, sites like it are a great place to find inspiration – the works of others that give you great ideas for your next session.  But once I started posting my own photographs, I learned another source of inspiration – those who comment on your works.  If you can learn to take constructive criticism, there is plenty to be learned from what people say about your works.  I’ve learned countless new techniques through such comments.  Better yet, getting noticed inspires you to do more and shoot more and challenge yourself.  The more that you post, the more feedback you get and the more you learn.  It’s a circle, and it helps you grow tremendously.

Easier to Dissect and Learn From Photos

Almost every digital photo has EXIF data attached to it – information that will tell you details about shutter speed, aperture, whether a flash fired and so on.  This is only technical data, and many would argue that it’s only scratching the surface.  After all, such data does not tell you about the design intent.  But knowing such information might clue you in to the intent.  Or if not, it will at least help you to understand how the shot was composed.  Either way, it’s information you wouldn’t have observing an analog photo or a photo in print.  So it gives you a leg up on trying to understand a shot.  Knowing that a flash wasn’t fired, for example, will inform you that there was an alternative light source.  Is it natural light?  Perhaps an incandescent?  These things can’t explicitly be determined through EXIF data, but you can arrive at a conclusion through process of elimination.

Hive Learning for Hobbyists

In the days before digital, professionals learned from other professionals.  This was their collective – their hive, if you will.  By right, professionals of today still learn a great deal from professionals and there are many trade secrets that are passed down from one photographer to another.  But never underestimate the power of experimentation – and hobbyists will always experiment.  When one hobbyist tries to mimic the style of a professional photographer, they will uncover a few techniques that have helped them to do so.  These may not necessarily be the same techniques the professional used; but if they work, it doesn’t matter.  Well, that person will share his newly acquired wisdom with his own hive – the other hobbyists who are also working towards a similar goal.  Some of the people within the hive will experiment some more and add to the overall technique, possibly making it better or easier.  This sort of collaborative learning is often referred to as hive learning.  It has many benefits, but the most important benefit is that we learn best by doing.  Our experimentation as a hive has helped us to uncover some incredible techniques – some that even professionals have benefited from.  The online communities that surround Flickr, DeviantArt, ImageKind and so on have made the hive much more accessible to everyone.  We have all learned a great deal from the works (and failures) of others – all through communities that have sprung up primarily due to digital media.

Tara O’Brien

Tara got back to us fairly quickly, and it sounds like she’s pretty excited to have won.  We’ll be shipping the bag out to her as soon as possible.  Maybe we’ll check in in a few weeks to see what she thinks.  Of course she’ll love it.

Again, if you missed the review, you can read it here:  Lowepro Passport Sling Review

This is now our second giveaway, and we had a pretty good turnout.  We hope to continue to do these giveaways, so keep an eye on the site. Thanks again to all who entered, and thanks for getting the word out about Shutter Photo.

Crooked Crow performing live

As many of you may already know, I involved in a fairly well known non-profit organization called LIVESTRONG.  Founded by the family of Lance Armstrong, their mission is to rid the world of cancer through education and preventative medicine.  Now I won’t plug the organization too much, but I wanted to give you a little background as to how and why I came to photographing a live music show.  The thing is that my team held a fund raising event at a local pub.  To help bring some people in, we recruited some bands to play live at the event.  Well, as organizations go, we wanted to get some photos to document the event.  Who better than to do that than the only team member who is also a photographer.  Yes, me.

I have a confession to make:  I was nervous shooting the event.  I am not experienced shooting live events.  I’m not used to having so many people around while I’m shooting.  I am not used to using my strobes where they could be a nuisance to other people.  For that matter – I wasn’t used to shooting with strobes on the fly with moving (playing) subjects.  It was a steep learning curve, but I’m glad I did it.  I’m glad I went outside my comfort zone to capture a few good photos (and a ton of bad ones).  And while I don’t think that any of my photos from that night are necessarily that great, I feel that I learned a lot.  For your benefit, I compiled this short list of things that I learned to maybe convince you to give such photography a chance.

• No one really knows what you’re doing – As I mentioned, one of my biggest fears was shooting among a large crowd.  I’m don’t like to be the one being watched, and I felt as though I’d be on stage with my camera.  Truth be told, a few people asked a few questions.  But I quickly learned that most people either ignored me or didn’t have a clue what I was doing.  Basically, no one was in the position to criticize.
• Speak with the performers ahead of time - In speaking with one of the band members, I learned that it is a great idea to speak with the performers before the show.  No one at this event seemed to mind me trolling around with a strobe.  But he alleged that he has met a few people that are greatly displeased by the use of flash.  As is always the case, I don’t like to displease my subject.  So if there are any restrictions the performers might place upon you, you better find out beforehand.
• Be aware - There’s a lot going on at an event like this.  Everyone’s attention is fixed to the stage, many a drink were passed around, there were people with plates of food and it was generally a dark room.  I quickly learned that I needed to be aware of everything that was going on around me.  Not just so that I didn’t cause problems, but to protect myself and my gear.  Fortunately, I had no mishaps – but I could have easily tripped someone by accident or gotten a beer spilled on my gear.
• A flash is brightest in a dark room - I’m used to working in controlled environments when working with strobes.  I’m not used to photographing in places where there is a 50-70% difference in the light between the performers and the crowd.  What worked for the performers was far too powerful for shooting subjects off-stage.  I blew out at least a dozen photos until I got into the swing of things. (Note, I am not in the habit of using my flash in TTL mode)
• Carry business cards – Considering this was a charity event, I was quite surprised to find I gave out nearly 20 business cards that night.  Some to the band members – but a lot of people from the audience were curious about my work.  Some were looking for portrait photographers – but at least one person checked out my portfolio and wrote to me to tell me their thoughts.
• Be sure to capture everyone - One of the drummers joked that he never ends up in photos because he’s in the back line.  So I made sure to get a couple of shots of him as well.  But the same goes for all the performers.  The lead singer is the face of the band, but it’s still a team effort.  Capture everyone as best as you can.
• ISO is your friend – Even with a flash, the photos weren’t turning out the way I wanted until I raised the ISO.  By doing so, I was able to cut a lot of my flash and get the fill light that I wanted.  My camera is a little dated at this point, so my higher ISO (anything about 400) gets grainy.  But if I were to continue shooting live performances, I might wish to invest in a camera with better performance at higher ISOs. 
• Low angles are awesome - Of all the shots I took, the ones from low angles look best in my opinion.  The performers look powerful, and their stage presence is amplified by the way you frame the shot at low angles.  Next time, I’ll spend more time  crouching. 
• Shoot now, drink later – I made a pretty big mistake by ordering a beer just as the first band was taking stage.  I now had an extra item I had to lug around.  My beer kept me tethered to a place where I could put it down.  I didn’t move nearly as much as I should have.  I also missed a few good shots because of the beer in my hand – no time to put it down at a live event.  So skip the drinks, or at least limit them to when the performers take their break. 
• Seek help – For several of my shots, I recruited a friend to hold the flash as specific locations.  David Hobby of Strobist refers to this as a “voice activated flash stand”.  Even though my friend didn’t really know what I or he was doing, I simply explained what I wanted him to do and how to hold it.  Things worked out fine.  Some of my best photographs from the event were when I was using my voice activated flash stand. 

Side note:  For all interested parties, the band, Crooked Crow, is out of the Washington DC area, but they play all over.  They’re quite good, and I would highly recommend that you check out their music.