a photo or two

Lessons from the Project, Pt. 1

noreply@blogger.com (Tony Martin.) — Thu, 22 Mar 2012 10:57:00 +0000

As some of you know, I've been working on a project since September wherein I take at least one photo every day for a year. It's called the 366 Photos project, and we're currently at day 198. However, I thought I'd share a few of the lessons learned so far. There are a dozen that I've recorded, and and will share more over time, but we'll start with the first three. All the example photos are B&W, but that's just the way it worked out.

1. You won't become a good photographer on the weekends.
Photography requires lots of practice for many reasons: to learn how to use your camera without having to think about it; to learn what constitutes good composition; to understand exposure and how to bend it to your will; to develop your own style; to discover what photographs move you so you can create more of them. To this end, you need to do as much of it as possible, so make sure you make the time to create photographs on the weekdays, not just the weekends. I'm proof that it's possible, having done it for every day for over half a year. It's hard for myself to fathom how much I've improved my skills so far on this project. You'll find your own improvement amazing, too.

This photo was taken on a Wednesday evening. You really can get good photos on weekdays :)

2. You can take photos more than once a day.
When the project first started (and still, on some of my busier days), I would complete my required photograph for the day, then feeling relieved that it was done and I could relax a bit. However, this can sometimes lead to missed opportunities if you then turn off the photographic part of your brain. When I realized this, I started keeping my eyes open for photos all the time, even after I had completed the photo for the day. As a result, I have been out to shoot photographs up to 3 different times during the same day. I now tend to think of the day as a continuum of opportunity, rather than planning a single outing or photo session. I've caught some excellent photos the second or third time I was out during a given day that I would have otherwise missed.

This was taken during a second photo session for the day.

3. A photograph starts with a concept, but its success or failure lies in the details.
During the project, I've had many ideas for interesting photographs. I get all enthusiastic about them, and excited to create the image based on the concept. During the early days of the project, I'd take some of those photos, and find myself disappointed in the result. It didn't take long after some analysis to realize that there were some details that would have made the photograph more successful had I paid more attention. Make sure the composition is just how you want it, pay careful attention to the lighting, double-check that you're getting the depth of field that you want, make sure your shutter speed is high enough to create the level of sharpness you want, select the correct lens for the effect you want (wide angle for intentional distortion or interesting closeup effects, telephoto to flatten the apparent depth, etc.). I've found that, where possible, it's extremely helpful to review the photos you've taken on the computer before you complete your session. When I do this, I often spot some flaws, like a lack of depth of field, or too much dust, or slightly incorrect lighting, or a stray element that distracts from the composition. This allows me to re-shoot those compositions, correcting the problems before I'm done. So make sure that once your concept is in place, that the details support your concept and bring it to life. It can make a huge difference.

Several versions of this photo were taken, reviewed, and then re-shot because guitar and musician positions were not quite right, and the lighting was not quite centered properly. The result is a significantly better photo.

Thanks for reading. Three new lessons on the next posting. Feel free to share your thoughts and favorite lessons that you've learned.

Basic Photo Processing

noreply@blogger.com (Tony Martin.) — Sun, 09 Oct 2011 23:47:00 +0000

Hi everyone. Recently I've been asked questions like, "How do you get your pictures so clear and sharp?" So I thought I'd answer it. Mind you, it's a question with a long answer, but hopefully useful. It assumes the use of Photoshop, though you can use equivalent tools in other software.

To start with, let's select a photo as-shot, with no processing, either in our out of the camera. This means that the image was shot in the raw format, instead of JPG. This is the first step. It is not possible to do much processing on JPG images, as the format has already discarded a lot of the information we need to improve the photo. Here is our example image we'll start with in the raw format right out of the camera:

So what's wrong with it? A lot, actually:

Too light: it may be a little overexposed
Looks flat: there is very little contrast
Lifeless colors: not very bright are they?
A little on the dull side: it needs sharpening

We can take care of a lot of the contrast and color range problems with the Curves adjustments in Photoshop. Take a look at the photo above and notice that the blacks in there aren't very black. The whites are fine, they're nice and bright, though the clouds seem to lack detail (the detail is still there - we just need to bring it out). We will use the Curves dialog to tell Photoshop to make the darkest parts of the image black, which will also darken the rest of the image proportionally as well. Here's what the Curves dialog looks like before any adjustments (access the dialog using Ctrl+M):

The histogram in the middle of the box (the gray chart) represents color information in the image. Darkest colors are on the left, and lightest on the right. Notice along the bottom a large gap between the left edge, representing black, and the start of the color data. This means that black isn't really black. The same would hold true for the right side: if there was a gap between the data and the right side of the graph, it means the whites aren't really white. Our photo does not have that problem: The color information goes all they way to the right edge.

So what do we do about it? See the little black triangle under the chart at the bottom left corner? Use your mouse to drag it over to the point where the color information begins on the left. You're telling Photoshop to change the value it sees as black, and making it the same as the actual darkest point on the photo.

In addition, you'll notice the diagonal line through the histogram. You can use this to adjust colors. You can click anywhere on the line to create a new point that you can move around. For example if you click in the middle of the line you can adjust the midtones in the photo. If you drag the point up, it makes the midtones lighter. Drag it down, it makes them darker.

Click a point on the line about half an inch down and right from the upper-left corner and leave it there. We're doing this because we don't want the bright colors to change, and this point will keep the line in place. Now click another point about half an inch up and right from the lower-left corner. We're going to drag this point down just a little bit so we can darken the shadows in the photo. This is what it should look like when you're done:

The resulting photos should now look something like this:

We've already vastly improved the photo! Our shadows are darker, there's more contrast, and our colors are better (less washed out). So why bother with anything else? What else is there to do? Well, we're going to brighten our colors just a tiny bit more. Many people use the Saturation setting, but this can very easily over-saturate the colors in your photo.

The Photoshop Vibrance adjustment is what we want. It's more subtle, and works primarily on the midtones of the photo, instead of the whole thing. It's a simple slider. Access the Vibrance option from the Images/Adjustments menu. I set it to about +35, and got the following result (there's not a lot of difference, but it does add a subtle edge to it):

Lastly, we need to sharpen up the photo. Should we use the Sharpen filter? No! This filter is almost always too harsh, and gives you no control over the process. We'll use the unfortunately named Unsharp Mask filter. It actually does sharpening, and gives us more control over how much and what gets sharpened. Open the dialog by selecting the Unsharp Mask option from the Filter/Sharpen menu. It looks like this:

There are 3 settings to work with here: Amount, Radius, and Threshold. Start with Amount since it's the most obvious. The larger the number, the more sharpening that is applied. It works by looking for edges in the photos and sharpening them up. Drag the slider back and forth, watching the preview until it shows the amount of sharpening you want. This will vary from photo to photo.

The next setting is Radius. The higher the number, the more it sharpens around the edges the filter looks for in your photo, and the more obvious the sharpening looks. Usually a value between 1 and 2 is good, but drag the slider back and forth to see how it looks. Larger numbers make a more obvious sharpening effect.

The Threshold value tells Photoshop what defines an edge in your photo. Lower numbers mean that Photoshop will find more edges in your photo, and treat smaller variations from pixel to pixel as an edge. In effect, smaller numbers cause more sharpening. A value of 0 means sharpen every pixel in the photo. I usually don't use a value lower than 1, and often use higher values to prevent over-sharpening. As with the other settings, drag the slider back and forth to see what looks good for your particular photo.

I used the following values:

Amount: 75
Radius: 1.2
Threshold: 2

My biggest single recommendation with sharpening: don't overdo it. It will be tempting to sharpen a lot, but don't, or it will look over-processed and unnatural. Here's how our photo looks now, and it's pretty much done:

And lastly, let's take a look at what we started with and what we ended up with. Here's a version of the photo with the after version superimposed on the before version:

Now that we're done, let's have a little more fun and make a black and white version of this photo. There are plenty of ways to do this, but we'll use my favorite: the Photoshop Black and White adjustment. Access this feature by pressing Ctrl+Alt+Shift+B (a crazy shortcut, but there it is). It's also on the Image/Adjustments menu. The dialog looks like this:

They way this dialog works is that it lets you lighten or darken selected parts of your image, based on the colors that were there before it was black and white. For example, dragging the Blues slider to the right with lighten anything in the image that was originally blue, and dragging it to the left will darken anything that used to be blue. Same for the other color sliders. Here's what the photo looks like before making any adjustments:

I darkened the blues, cyans, and greens to darken the sky, and lightened the reds and yellows to brighten up the rock. The result looks very different from the original:

Note that the conversion to black and white is a very subjective process, and this is just one of many interpretations for this photo.

So you've seen some of the standard processing steps I tend to use for most photos. Over time you learn what works and what doesn't, and you get a good feel for when to use a step and exactly how to adjust it to meet your needs. As a final bit of advice, I recommend playing around a lot and see what all your options are and how the various Photoshop adjustments work. The more you do, the more you understand your available options.

Good luck and good night :)

Just Because

noreply@blogger.com (Tony Martin.) — Wed, 05 Oct 2011 12:18:00 +0000

Not all your photography has to be planned, preconceived, thought-out, loaded with irony, angst-laden, or created as a commentary on the socio-political landscape. While these photos certainly have their place, you can also create images that are simply there because they're pretty. If you see something you like, capture it!

Photos like this can be highly liberating - they're easier to create because you're doing something you like, and because you're responding to something that strikes you emotionally. Example: I was wandering around a local park, and the sky was gorgeous - full of dramatic clouds and excellent light. I stopped and took about 50 photos in a matter of 20 minutes. It didn't take any planning, only enough experience and skill to be able to create a decent photograph from a beautiful scene. I caught myself smiling through the whole process.

As Bryan Peterson once told me, appreciate not only simplicity in a photo, but also the sometimes simple act of creating it.

So go take some pretty pictures. It will feel like vacation :)

From my afternoon at the park:

Nikon D300s, Tamron 10-20mm f/4, 1/1000 sec, f/16, ISO 200
Adjustments: size, unsharp mask, curves, vibrance

Nikon D300s, Tamron 10-20mm f/4, 1/320 sec, f/16, ISO 200
Adjustments: size, unsharp mask, curves, vibrance

Creative Photography

noreply@blogger.com (Tony Martin.) — Fri, 23 Sep 2011 12:45:00 +0000

The 366 Photos project is starting to have an effect. I've used up a lot of my old photography tricks, and am now being forced to think outside them, looking elsewhere for inspiration.

I started thinking about an issue many photographers talk about: is is right or ethical to stage a photo? People do it all the time, but how far can you go? I believe most of their objections lie in the area of trying to pass off a staged or edited photo as an un-retouched or natural image, and where the line should be drawn.

My personal belief lies in the area of intent. If you are trying to fool someone into thinking something false is true, this is the same as a lie. However, people stage photos all the time with no nefarious intent. Most portraits are staged, for example. The photographer is not trying to make you think it wasn't. Some portraits are staged, yet made to look more natural or candid. The photographer is often leaving the interpretation open to the viewer. Candid? Not? You decide.

In the end, photographers are almost always just trying to create compelling imagery. Their intent is rarely to deceive for immoral reasons (outside the areas of questionable journalism, anyway). When you approach photography in this way, you get into the realm of Creative Photography, which I'm just discovering can be a lot of fun. It takes a little while to open your brain to more possibilities, but when it gets there, you can create some fun and absorbing photographs.

I created the following image yesterday as part of my daily effort to stick to the 366 Photos project. I decided to think more along the lines of creative photography, rather than just capturing something that I saw. Yes, I staged the photo. But it is just a photo. There was no compositing or crazy editing in Photoshop. So it is still all photography. And it was a great deal of fun to create. Watch for more photographs from me in this vein - I'm hooked.

Nikon D300s, Nikkor 50mm f/1.4, 1/5 sec, f/3.5, ISO 200
Adjustments: size, unsharp mask, curves

More from the 366 Photos Project

noreply@blogger.com (Tony Martin.) — Sun, 18 Sep 2011 23:42:00 +0000

How many ways will I be able to say "another photo from the 366 Photos Project"? We're on day 12, and still have 354 days to go. I'll have to get creative.

I rather like how this one turned out. One thing I'm realizing is that you can get a lot of good photos, and become a better photographer, really quite quickly if you stick with it for an extended period of time. Hope this trend keeps up!

Nikon D300s, Tamron 90mm Macro f/2.8, 1/60 sec, f/3.8, ISO 200
Adjustments: size, unsharp mask

Photography = Happiness

noreply@blogger.com (Tony Martin.) — Thu, 15 Sep 2011 16:25:00 +0000

I was having a discussion with one of my photographer friends recently, and he had shown me some photos he shot on vacation, from which he had just returned. He showed me a few, which were all excellent. Then he got to another photograph, and while also an outstanding image, he said it actually made him happy.

This photograph made him happy to look at, happy to have created it, and happy to share with others. Sometimes we create images that stand out so much, for any number of reasons, that they actually have the power to make you happy, more so than others of equal quality. You look at these photos, and for you, the photographer that created it, really hit home. They make the endorphins fire faster and more freely than other photographs.

The reason this is important, beyond the fact that happiness is good, is that these are the photographs we should pay the most attention to, think more carefully about why we like them. If you have a good grasp of how to make more photos like these, we can create more of them, drastically improve the enjoyment of our photography, and overall, achieve a lot more happiness.

And it's quite possible that our happiness can be infectious. If you love these photographs so much, then perhaps other viewers will also love them. So pay attention to those photographs that make you especially happy.

I was in downtown Washington, D.C. yesterday for most of the day, and came home with this shot, which like the one my pal shot, made me quite happy. When I saw it, I actually smiled outright for several minutes. So pick up your camera and make some happiness :)

Nikon D300s, Nikon 50mm f/1.4, 1/4000 sec, f/3.2, ISO 200
Adjustments: size, unsharp mask, curves, b&w

Another day in the 366 Photos project

noreply@blogger.com (Tony Martin.) — Wed, 14 Sep 2011 00:44:00 +0000

We're up to day 7 in the "at least one photo each day for a year" project. Here's the photo I came up with today after coming home from work.

I kinda like it.

Nikon D300s, Nikon 50mm f/1.4, 0.3 sec, f/4.5, ISO 200
Adjustments: size, unsharp mask, curves, b&w

It's been a while...

noreply@blogger.com (Tony Martin.) — Sat, 10 Sep 2011 16:02:00 +0000

...but here's the latest project.

On Sept. 7, I started a project with some friends whereby we all take at least one photo a day for a year. Insane? Impossible? No idea, so we're going to try it and see. But why? Why put ourselves through this?

The purpose of the project is multi-fold:

Keep the activity of photography in our minds all the time, so we can stay focused on it.
Force ourselves to do something creative each day; help keep the creative edge sharp. Already discovered a new technique for outdoor B&W.
End up with lots of photos. It's already working.

It's called the 366 Photos project. Here's a sample of what's been done so far. I'll occasionally post samples from the project here. You can see the whole pile, what's been done so far and what will be done in the future, at my Flickr account:

Tony Martin Photography Flickr Photostream

I would like to take a moment to encourage everyone to engage in a project like this. There are many variations on a project like this that you can make up for yourself, such as doing a year of self-portraits. And get some friends involved. It's much easier to complete a project like this with support.

From the 366 Photos project:

Nikon D300s, Nikon 18-200mm VR f/3.5-5.6, 1/160 sec, f/18.0, ISO 200
Adjustments: size, unsharp mask, curves, b&w

photo of the day no. 37

noreply@blogger.com (Tony Martin.) — Sun, 07 Mar 2010 23:37:00 +0000

A few nice colors for a Nice Day. And while you're at it, check out the song Nice Day by Persphone's Bees.

Nikon D300s, Nikon 18-200mm VR f/3.5-5.6, 1/25 sec, f/9.0, ISO200
Adjustments: size, unsharp mask, curves

Winter Wonderland

noreply@blogger.com (Tony Martin.) — Sun, 07 Feb 2010 23:54:00 +0000

OK, I will admit it. After today, I dislike the snow and winter a little bit less. Went out into the woods to create photographs with a good friend, and we had a great time! Got a bunch of good photos, too. I don't usually post this many photos at once, but it was a good day :)

Nikon D300s, Nikon 18-200mm VR, 1/200 sec, f/9, ISO200
Adjustments: size, unsharp mask, curves

Nikon D300s, Nikon 18-200mm VR, 1/2000 sec, f/8, ISO200
Adjustments: size, unsharp mask, curves

Nikon D300s, Nikon 18-200mm VR, 1/200 sec, f/9, ISO200
Adjustments: size, unsharp mask, curves

Nikon D300s, Nikon 18-200mm VR, 1/400 sec, f/6.3, ISO200
Adjustments: size, unsharp mask, curves

Nikon D300s, Nikon 18-200mm VR, 1/250 sec, f/9, ISO200
Adjustments: size, unsharp mask, curves

Nikon D300s, Nikon 18-200mm VR, 1/320 sec, f/9, ISO200
Adjustments: size, unsharp mask, levels

Nikon D300s, Nikon 18-200mm VR, 1/200 sec, f/9, ISO200
Adjustments: size, unsharp mask, curves

Nikon D300s, Nikon 18-200mm VR, 1/200 sec, f/9, ISO200
Adjustments: size, unsharp mask, curves

Nikon D300s, Nikon 18-200mm VR, 1/320 sec, f/9, ISO200
Adjustments: size, unsharp mask, curves

Nikon D300s, Nikon 18-200mm VR, 1/250 sec, f/9, ISO200
Adjustments: size, unsharp mask, curves

Nikon D300s, Nikon 18-200mm VR, 1/1250 sec, f/8, ISO200
Adjustments: size, unsharp mask, curves

Nikon D300s, Nikon 18-200mm VR, 1/100 sec, f/9, ISO200
Adjustments: size, unsharp mask, curves

Nikon D300s, Nikon 18-200mm VR, 1/160 sec, f/9, ISO200
Adjustments: size, unsharp mask, curves

Nikon D300s, Nikon 18-200mm VR, 1/500 sec, f/5.6, ISO200
Adjustments: size, unsharp mask, curves

Snowpocalypse

noreply@blogger.com (Tony Martin.) — Sun, 07 Feb 2010 14:22:00 +0000

I'm not a fan of snow, generally speaking. I hate digging my car out, I hate being trapped in the house, and I hate being cold and wet. But sometimes you have to set the bad parts aside and remember that everything (many things, anyway) has a good side. So in 14 degree weather, I popped out of the house for a bit to document the 30+ inches of snow we got here over the last two days.

Understand, though, that I was only out for about 15 minutes. My poor little fingers froze to bits. Maybe I'll go out again this afternoon when it's a bit warmer. Oh, wait, I need to spend three hours digging my car out. Never mind.

Nikon D300s, Nikon 18-200 VR, 1/320 sec, f/13, ISO500
Adjustments: size, unsharp mask, curves

Nikon D300s, Nikon 18-200 VR, 1/2500 sec, f/5.3, ISO500
Adjustments: size, unsharp mask, curves

Nikon D300s, Nikon 18-200 VR, 1/250 sec, f/10, ISO500
Adjustments: size, unsharp mask, curves

No Equipment = No Problem (almost)

noreply@blogger.com (Tony Martin.) — Wed, 03 Feb 2010 13:38:00 +0000

This morning there was a lovely snowfall here in Northern Virginia, and by the time I got to work (and the day was becoming a little light), I was regretting not bringing my camera bag with me. Not being one to let anything just go at that, I remembered I had my little Canon Point and Shoot with me.

I little point and shoot? To try and capture snow? You must be crazy! The exposure! The lack of control! Are you mad? Well, it was either that, or come away completely empty-handed. I went outside in front of the office building and, using the little Canon along with the few exposure adjustments it provides, I was still able to get a few shots of the snowy setting.

Canon SD850 IS
Adjustments: size, curves

Canon SD850 IS
Adjustments: size, curves

Canon SD850 IS
Adjustments: size, curves

So if you're facing a complete (or nearly) lack of equipment, it's better to improvise with what you have than miss out. And *then* rememebr to bring your camera bag next time.

impressionism techniques

noreply@blogger.com (Tony Martin.) — Thu, 09 Apr 2009 15:12:00 +0000

A reader asked me a while back, "How can I get impressionist results from my camera?" I listed a few techniques (hopefully helpful ones). I'd like to add one to that list. For the purposes of this discussion, let's classify these techniques into two categories: in-camera, and out-of-camera. In-camera techniques are those you can use in the field with only your camera, such as changing the focus, using a slow shutter speed to blur the image, etc. Out-of-camera techniques are post-production alterations to the image done with software.

What I've discovered lately is that in-camera techniques used to achieve impressionist results are much more effective. First, you can see the results in the field. Second, they look more natural and less "gimicky." Out-of-camera effects are also usually easier to spot, making them feel very artificial.

In the end, though, being analog, natural, and honest, in-camera techniques and the results they reproduce feel better and look better. You even feel better about producing them. And using them is photography, while out-of-camera techniques feel more like manipulation, of both the photograph and the person viewing it. And, as a friend of mine puts it, overly manipulated photographs leave you cold.

I'll share an in-camera technique I developed recently and like a great deal. Here is a photograph I took this morning down at the river using this technique.

Nikon D200 (IR), Nikon 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6 at 200mm, 1/320 sec, f/8, ISO200
Adjustments: size, curves, b&w conversion
Geotag: N 39° 3' 42", W 77° 22' 23"

This photograph displays some natural, sharp detail, but combines it with an ethereal feel, resulting in a sense of both reality and the surreal. Granted, part of this is due to the fact that it is an infrared photograph, but that's only a small contribution. You'll need a camera that can perform multiple exposures, like the Nikon D90 or D200.

The basic idea is to take multiple exposures of the same thing, but at different focus levels. Follow these steps:

Set your camera to manual focus.
Defocus your scene or subject until it's pretty blurry, and there are no recognizable details.
Set the camera to multiple exposure mode (this photo was done with 4 exposures).
Shoot your first exposure.
Shoot the remaining exposures, moving the focus each time a bit more towards being in focus, making sure the last one is in sharp focus.

Once your camera combines all the images, you should get a result similar to the one above.

This technique was used here in a nature photo, but that's because I happened to be at the river at the time. I plan to try this with portraits, still life, and other subject matter. Who knows what will benefit from this interesting surreal look?

One more for your impressionism toolbox. Experiment with it and see what changes to the technique work well. If you achieve any interesting results with this, let me know. I'd love to see them.

photo of the day no. 36

noreply@blogger.com (Tony Martin.) — Mon, 06 Apr 2009 11:50:00 +0000

Took my first real hike of the year this weekend on the Maryland side of Great Falls National Park. Found a nice little pond back from the river and shot this photo.

Also learned that the connector for the Nikon GPS unit on the D90 is in a very bad place on the camera body. Just a simple hike carrying the camera around resulted in a broken connector. It got knocked loose, and now the GPS won't work any more on that camera. Afraid to ask what it would cost to repair the body. Live and learn.

Nikon D90, Nikon 18-200mm VR f/3.5-5.6, 1/1600 sec, f/4.2, ISO200
Adjustments: size, unsharp mask, curves, b&w conversion

photo of the day no. 35

noreply@blogger.com (Tony Martin.) — Sun, 22 Mar 2009 16:53:00 +0000

Spent the afternoon and early evening yesterday out at Great Falls Park Maryland side. Not only had a great time with my pal Warren, but got quite a few photos with which I was pretty happy (see the rest at www.tonymartinphotography.com in the Infrared Photography section).

I decided to show this one to make two points. First, if you're shooting infrared photography, one of the nice benefits is that IR picks up more detail in clouds, things you and a normal visible light camera can't. Second, when capturing a sunset, you need not stick to color. Black and white skies can be just as dramatic and beautiful.

So with this infrared sunset, I one more time delve into my photographic obsession: capturing and presenting for the world that which the human eye cannot see.

Nikon D200 (IR), Nikon 18-70mm f/3.5-4.5, 1/125 sec, f/6.3, ISO200
Adjustments: size, unsharp mask, curves, b&w conversion
Geotag: N 39° 0' 3.60", W 77° 14' 55.20"

photo of the day no. 34

noreply@blogger.com (Tony Martin.) — Thu, 19 Mar 2009 12:53:00 +0000

Just a quick one today. This caught my eye last night sitting at a friend's house. 90 seconds later, I had this nice abstract.

Nikon D90, Tamron 90mm f/2.8, 1/40 sec, f/4.5, ISO200
Adjustments: size, unsharp mask

photo of the day no. 33

noreply@blogger.com (Tony Martin.) — Sun, 15 Mar 2009 18:08:00 +0000

Hi again. Back from a short break. Spent the morning (a cold morning at that) on the Potomac River at Riverbend Park. Every now and then, you do something and realize that much of your life is spent surrounded by the artificial - living room, office, strip mall, even the car. When you get out into the woods and stop to take a look, it feels real like so little else. What a great sensation.

Got this IR shot while I was out there. Still have some research to do with the IR camera and specific lenses, but getting there. IR photography is not simple and not a speedy process. Can't wait 'til spring!

Nikon D200, Nikkor 18-70mm f3.5-4.5, 1/2500 sec, f/13, ISO200
Adjustments: size, slight level adjust, B&W conversion
Geotag: N 39 1' 15.0", W 77 14' 41.4"

photo of the day no. 32

noreply@blogger.com (Tony Martin.) — Thu, 05 Mar 2009 22:46:00 +0000

Big day today - the D200 came home from Lifepixel, the place that converted it permanently to infrared (IR). So I ran out into the street when I got home, literally, and shot a few test photos. Lesson for today: converting your camera to IR takes care of some of the problems you encounter using an IR filter, but it still has many challenges. Learned about two of them today:

You can no longer use autofocus and have to not only focus manually, but make guesses about how much to change the focus.
Fast shutter speeds may be too fast for IR photography, resulting in images with the shutter still in the way.

More on these in another article about IR as I learn more.

For now, I'll post a photo I shot in both IR color and converted to B&W. I'll post some photos in the near future that take more advantage of the IR. However, note that the wood pole lying in the snow was actually green, but in IR, it came out blue.

Nikon D200, Nikkor 50mm f/1.4, 1/125 sec, f/8, ISO200
Adjustments: size, slight level adjustments

Nikon D200, Nikkor 50mm f/1.4, 1/125 sec, f/8, ISO200
Adjustments: size, slight contrast, B&W

Whoa! Bonus photo for today! I shot this one as well, and it really struck me, though I'm still figuring out all the "why."

Nikon D200, Nikkor 50mm f/1.4, 1/500 sec, f/2.8, ISO200
Adjustments: size, slight level adjustments, B&W

This is gonna be fun!

photo of the day no. 31

noreply@blogger.com (Tony Martin.) — Thu, 26 Feb 2009 01:12:00 +0000

Stopped by the park on the way home to test out the new Nikon GP-1 GPS unit for the camera. We'll have a short review of that thing in the near future. As a result, from now on, I'll be posting geotag information for each photo of the day. Granted, they'll all probably be from relatively nearby, but you never know.

Today's photo, taken in the mud amongst obnoxious geese and lots of sticker bushes (ow). Let me know which you like better in this case: normal color (which is fairly subtle) or the b&w version. And, if possible, why. Thanks!

Nikon D90, Nikkor 18-200mm VR f3.5-5.6 at 60mm, 1/2500 sec, f/13, ISO200
Adjustments: size, slight level adjust, minor color balancing
Geotag: N 39° 1' 5.83", W 77° 24' 18.58"

Nikon D90, Nikkor 18-200mm VR f3.5-5.6 at 60mm, 1/2500 sec, f/13, ISO200
Adjustments: size, b&w conversion, minor contrast
Geotag: N 39° 1' 5.83", W 77° 24' 18.58"

review no. 2: lens baby composer

noreply@blogger.com (Tony Martin.) — Mon, 23 Feb 2009 23:15:00 +0000

For those of you who haven't heard of the Lens Baby line of products, they are special purpose lenses called selective focus lenses. They allow you to adjust which part of the composition is in focus (called the focal "sweet spot"), resulting in the rest of the image being blurred. The effect is very cool: one spot has focus, while the rest of the image gets progressively fuzzier the further away from the sweet spot.

Take a look at the image below. It shows the latest model, called the Composer, attached to my Nikon D90. It consists of the base, which attaches to the camera, a focus ring, a locking ring, and a tilting front, which you can move around on its ball joint.

Operation is simple:

Set your camera to aperture priority or manual mode (manual works best for me)

Focus manually using the focus ring

Move the sweet spot around by shifting the front of the lens

Check the focus on the repositioned sweet spot - adjust if necessary

If you want to keep the sweet spot adjustment from moving, you can lock it down by turning the locking ring to the left

Select an appropriate shutter speed on the camera and shoot the picture

It is important to note that this is an extremely manual lens. There are no computer chips, focus motors, electrical contacts, or even aperture blades. It takes no power whatsoever. It's up to you to set the aperture and shutter speed manually to get a decent exposure. And you'll have to rely on your own fingers to focus manually.

It's also worth spending a moment on aperture adjustment. Modern camera/lens combinations take care of it with easy-to-use adjustments on the camera body. However, to change the aperture on the Lens Baby line of lenses, you physically remove a small metal ring from the lens and replace it with another that has a hole of a different size. You get a set of aperture rings ranging from f/2.8 to f/22. They do give you a nice little magnetic tool to remove and replace the aperture rings, as well as a convenient container for storage. As you decrease the aperture (smaller hole), the size of the focal sweet spot increases, and vice versa.

So what kinds of results can you expect from the Lens Baby Composer? Make sure you stop by their web site and look at their gallery. In addition, I shot a few quick examples around the house, all shot with the f/2.8 aperture ring:

Focal sweet spot to the left side.

Focal sweet spot roughly in the center.

Focal sweet spot on the bottom right.

The Lens Baby is significantly different than just using a narrow depth of field with a regular lens. With the Lens Baby, some objects are in focus (in the sweet spot) and some aren't, even though all objects might be the same distance from the camera. As mentioned, the focus also gets fuzzier the further an object is from the sweet spot.

There are other models of Lens Babies. The 2.0 model is still available (now called the Muse), and instead of a focus ring and ball joint, the lens is mounted on a springy plastic bellows (often called the "squeezy" model). The Muse offers a more organic, fluid, and ephemeral feel to your photographic experience, while the Composer reviewed here offers a little more precision. I have both, and use them depending on my mood and need. I think I like the Composer a little more.

The Composer is a great lens, but like most products, is not without its flaws. The aperture system using the metal rings is a definite productivity problem. It takes a minute to change the little rings, they can get lost, and it's almost impossible to change them in cold weather with frozen fingers. In addition, the locking ring operation is not smooth and is a bit noisy. Don't use the locking ring if you need quiet. The little protective cloth storage bag that accompanies the Lens Baby Composer is too small and results in a very snug fit. You can't get it in or out of that little bag quickly. I left it in the box.

However, even given its minor drawbacks, I love the images you can create with the Lens Babies. It's a fabulous creative tool that allows you to see your subject in new ways. As an avid practitioner of photo-impressionism, this tool will be very valuable to me. I plan to spend a lot more time with mine in the very near future. Despite its minor limitations and inconveniences, I'm keeping it in my camera bag all the time. I'm off to try some portrait work with the Lens Baby Composer, so I'll see you later.

Further Information
Typical street price: $269.95
Filter size: 37 mm
Lens Baby's site: http://www.lensbaby.com
Mounts available: Olympus, Pentax K, Nikon F, Sony Alpha, Canon EF

q&a session no.1

noreply@blogger.com (Tony Martin.) — Fri, 20 Feb 2009 12:16:00 +0000

We're starting up a q&a series here at A Photo or Two. Feel free to send any photography questions to tonymartinphotography@gmail.com and we'll answer them here in the blog. Our first question...

Q: Do you have hints regarding obtaining impressionist effects using a digital camera? I have just begun to attempt this, so nothing is too basic.

A: There are many interpretations of what impressionism may look like in the world of photography. For the purposes of this discussion, I'm going to approach it as what sort of techniques can you use to make a photograph that shows something you can't see with your eyes. This has always been a fascination for me, since you can use a camera to see things in ways your eyes can't.

We could talk all day about what impressionism is and what it means to photography. We'll skip that for now, as it's beyond the scope of the discussion, and assume you've already thought about it to some degree. But once we know what sorts of impressionist images we want to produce, then as the question asks, how do we actually go about making it happen in practical terms?

Here are some ideas I've used in the past:

Use less than accurate focus.
Often you can get an impressionistic feel through using manual focus and ignoring what the camera says - defocus your scene as much or little as you need to help achieve the effect for which you are looking. Usually, however, this is something you do in combination with other techniques.

This technique worked well on this sunset, taking the scene and reducing it to its basic shapes and areas of color (I actually put this in very large format on my living room wall):

Look through something to distort the image.
I once shot one of my favorite impressionist images through some leaves of a tree that were very close and out of focus, which obscured parts of the image in very interesting ways and added to the tenebrous nature of the photograph. You may have seen it before on this site, but here it is again:

Try shooting through other things and materials as well. I once had good results, for example, from a hotel room shooting a photo of Chicago through the sheer curtains in the window.

Use a long exposure.
Long exposures can do lots of things to your photograph besides make things blurry. When used on a tripod, long exposures can make motionless things remain motionless, yet blur objects in motion. For example, a park bench would stay a normal park bench, but the wind blowing the trees will smear them across your photographic canvas, and make a river in motion look blurred or even completely smoothed over. Example:

Also see photo of the day no. 28 for another example. Long exposure doesn't have to mean very long. This photograph was shot with a handheld camera at about 0.4 seconds. I really liked the effect it produced.

Try out some double exposures.
Some digital SLR cameras will let you do double exposures, taking 2 or more photographs in succession and combining them into one image (both the Nikon D90 and D200 will do this). This is really only limited by your creativity, and I'm sure the imaginative photographer could make some nice impressionistic effects.

Use selective focus.
There's a great little gadget out there for DSLR's called a Lens Baby. It's a very simple (and very manual) lens that allows you to focus on selective parts of your image, blurring the rest. It's not too expensive, and makes a great creative tool to play around with. Lots of fun to use as well.

Shake that camera!
Who says you have to hold a camera still? Not me. Try a slightly longer exposure and shake the camera around while you're exposing the image. I did this with some fireworks and got this result (among others):

There are also many other things you can do once you get the image into a computer and an image editing program. If you're after an artistic look, some filters can help you out, especially if you combine them. Photoshop, Photoshop Elements, and PaintShop Pro all have artistic filters built in, and you can get some extremely nice third-party filters that work in these paint programs as well, such as Alien Skin's Snap Art.

So now you have a few techniques to try out. However, be creative and experimental. Try them in different lighting situations (including night), and try combining them where possible. If you have decent image editing software, dive into that as well with further experimentation.

One last hint: keep notes on what you do so that when you find something you like, you'll be able to reproduce it. Nothing is more frustrating than not being able to repeat something that really moves you.

For more information about this topic, there are two books I'd recommend. The first is by one of my favorite photographers, Freeman Patterson, and is called "Photo Impressionism and the Subjective Image." The second, more about making art with your photographs using image editing software, is "The Art of Digital Photo Painting" by Marilyn Sholin.

A Photo or Two Impressionism resources:

photo-impressionism anyone?

photo of the day no. 2

photo of the day no. 3

photo of the day no. 5

photo of the day no. 10

photo of the day no. 19

photo of the day no. 26

Thanks for the question - keep them coming!

Tony.

tutorial no. 6: think ahead

noreply@blogger.com (Tony Martin.) — Tue, 10 Feb 2009 18:50:00 +0000

I don't know if you're the same as me in this respect, but I tend to overthink. About many things, photography included. Sometimes I associate the quality or value of a photograph with the amount of work I put into it. I feel like the more I think about or plan a photograph, the better it will be. And I'm not talking about technical thinking like exposure - everyone does that, and it's important. I mean about its intent, meaning, purpose, and other characteristics often associated with a photograph's artistic value.

There are often two side effects of this overthinking. First, it can actually hamper the creative process. You can easily become paralyzed if you can't think of a good purpose behind the photograph or reason to take it. For me, it usually sounds like, "I haven't really thought about what this photograph means to me, what it's about, or what I'm trying to say. Better rethink it some more." And as often as not, I end up shooting nothing, moving on to other ideas.

Don't get me wrong - it's important to think about your photography and why you do it. However, it's also important to enjoy the process. Read through Freeman Patterson's "Photography for the Joy of it" and you'll see what I mean. Photography can be both fun and relevant. However, for me, the thinking part works better if I do most of my pondering ahead of time so it doesn't slow me down (or shut me down) when I'm actually taking photographs.

I do lots of general thinking about photography all the time. What it means to me, why photography is important, photography as an art form, that sort of thing. I develop my own theories, figure out what photographers influenced me, and most of all, gain a better understanding of what kind of photography I like to create and what I like to say and do with it. Because I think through these issues in advance, they start to influence my shooting automatically, without shutting me down in the field by overthinking it. When an actor rehearses and learns his or her lines well,their performance is better - they don't have to overthink it while they're doing it - they've done that already.

I'm going to use a photograph I took a few years ago as an example. Here it is - you may have seen it already.

When I took this photograph, I just shot it without thinking too much. The whole thing was over in about 30 seconds. Initially, I was a little let down by it, since I didn't put a lot of effort into it. However, Bryan Peterson took a look at it and quite liked it. He had this to say when I told him of my dilemma:

"The reason you took that photo was because it was 'clean, colorful and graphic in its overall composition' and my hunch is you came upon it and simply shot it without much effort. If you associate 'feelings' with the amount of effort you put into a successful image, you will probably feel shortchanged by the reaction of your audience since they will always and most often ONLY respond to the finished image-regardless of how much time and energy (or lack thereof) went into the image - learn to appreciate not only simplicity in a photo, but also the sometimes simple act of creating it."

It was about then that I realized the photograph was actually influenced by my previous time spent thinking about photography. The photograph actually did have work put into it - it was just done well ahead of time. My photographic thinking had prepared me for the moment, and helped me quickly and easily recognize the shot as one which I would probably like. And I do like it. He also reminded me that I create photographs because I like to do it. I can appreciate the act of creating an image as much as the resulting image itself.

Bottom line: if you think about your photography well in advance of actual shooting, your photographs will come more easily, and they will start to automatically fit your photographic ideals. You'll like them better. You'll shoot more "keepers" at each outing. So invest in your photography in advance, and you'll get better results, in larger quantities, and have more fun doing it.

photo of the day no. 30

noreply@blogger.com (Tony Martin.) — Mon, 09 Feb 2009 01:11:00 +0000

Today, the case for VR (Vibration Reduction). Most people see them as a way to simply hand-hold the camera with less light. What about hand-holding the camera with lower shutter speeds when you need some motion blur? The windmill below was shot with a hand-held camera at 1/30 of a second. I was able to get some motion in the windmill (due to the low shutter speed), yet get the rest of the photo relatively sharp (thanks to the VR function of the lens).

Compared to a fast shutter speed, with the windmill stopped, this photo was much more interesting, and the motion of the windmill gave it some life.

Today's photo.

Nikon D90, Nikkor 18-200mm VR f3.5-5.6, 1/30 sec, f/20, ISO200
Adjustments: size, minor color correction

photo of the day no. 29

noreply@blogger.com (Tony Martin.) — Thu, 05 Feb 2009 18:57:00 +0000

So today I got my new Nikon D90. Only took a few shots with it so far, but one of them is a new abstract for the photo of the day today. The D90 will be my new "normal" camera, and the D200 is being sent off to LifePixel tomorrow for infrared conversion. Guess what sort of photos you'll be seeing here in the near future...

Today's photo.

Nikon D90, Nikkor 50mm f1.4, 1/3200 sec, f/1.4, ISO200
Adjustments: size, b&w conversion

Online Portfolio

noreply@blogger.com (Tony Martin.) — Mon, 02 Feb 2009 20:50:00 +0000

For anyone who wants to see more of the photographic work I've done over the past few years, stop by the new gallery page at:

http://www.tonymartinphotography.com

I'll be adding photos to the gallery site over time, so feel free to stop by often. And in the interest of shameless self-promotion (which I've never been good at), feel free to pass the site along to your friends. You can even buy prints of anything there (except for the people and portaits gallery).

Pop in for a quick visit and leave a comment or two. I'd love to hear from you.

Next: Another Photo of the Day.
Soon: A new post about getting good photographs by relaxing your brain.