Not that I’m keeping tabs... I know its hard to be original. Inspiration is found everywhere and sometimes we get inspiration from other forms of art or even from our fellow photographers or friends. But to copy your own magazine cover (it could had been a parody, I mean - the same colour tie and everything) is kind of boring... You might not agree with me but hey, that does not make it less true.

I know... trust me... I have not updated my blog in such a long time... but for the last several months work has taken over and I have not had as much time as I would had liked. So I will try to do this more often...

After all... I do have a blog so I can blog...

I have always heard, “when bad stuff happens - it could happen all at once”.

Had a client this last few days - TV station who needed simple headshots of their news anchors and reporters. 30 people in all. We had to break up the shoot and held sessions on different days as its hard to schedule (due to the nature of a news reporter job to be everywhere, specially in the middle of elections) all of them at the same time.

On the last day, ready to import the last set and ready to start generating contact sheets and start making selections - the drives on my main library took a left turn and just basically died. The imports, the last few days of shooting... All the sessions I had done, all gone. These are news anchors on their way to different locations (Baghdad for example...) so its not like you can call them back and say “sorry, we need to re-shoot... my drive died on me”.

Disaster!!

This had never happened to me before. In all the years in computers, I had only heard about people having drive problems, I had never experienced one. Never to me... So after the initial shock of noticing the library not responding I calmed down and said to myself - “No worries - I have a backup”. Fired my trusty library vault. I use Apple’s Aperture which allows me to set-up a vault drive where it stores a copy of the library as well as a copy of the deleted images in the case I made a mistake and need them back. Every one should have a backup right?

But something was not right - The second disk, the vault, has problems mounting, its taking a really long time... the data is all weird, the lights are all flashing like a crazy christmas tree (only, its September and somehow I feel Santa is not paying attention)... what is happening to the system? Then the realization of losing both my main Library, as well as the backup really hit me.

Disaster^2. I’m toast.

What are the odds of your main drive (whether a single drive or a RAID to form one drive - in my case a RAID 10 enclosure) as well as your backup drive failing AT THE SAME TIME are? At the time, I really didn’t care about the technical details and the statistical odds of this scenario happening - all I wanted was my data back so I can deliver to my customer. At the end of the day, that’s all that matters. See, when you are asked to do a job (photography or otherwise) you are really entrusted with the data, with time, with an artifact, a final product that a whole team is counting on so they in turn can do their job. Your deadline is the basis of their schedules. Any slowdown in the process, weather because you are late, irresponsible or because you had technical problems delivering the images can have serious impacts to the final product. This is when you can say “my dog eat my hard drive” and make it sound just as stupid.

I now have a TV station in need of the portraits of 30 people, who god knows when they would be able to gather again to do the shoot. I knew this... I knew better than having all the eggs on one basket. That is why I had a backup. But to think that your main library AND your backup could die at the same time... Who could had thought of that??? Who could had predicted that?

Well, I did... I knew that sooner or later it could happen. That is why I have a 2nd vault. A 2nd version of the backup. Every time I import into my main library I update not one backup but two. I also keep it/rotate it off site “just in case”. Thank you Apple for making this process simple and available. The only thing I had to put on my part was the commitment and the extra drive.

You just need to be prepared. To have a plan. To know how to execute on that plan. This is the first time not only I had hardware failure, but had to reach for my primary as well as my secondary vaults. I was back in business in a few minutes. Once I was back online I could debug and find out what had happened. It was not the drives but one of the Firewire controllers that had gone bad. This made the whole chain of Firewire drives to misbehave. The other drive was not Firewire so it was simple to recover the data quickly. I had not lost the libraries - I just needed to replace one of the drives who’s controllers was the source of my problems. This took 2 days to find out - but I could do this relaxed, knowing fully well that the data was fine and that I could work on the libraries, editing, adding and changing things while I could have the problem fixed. All knowing that my customer could had their images whenever they liked.

Is it cheap to have 2 backups? Not really, but if you think of all the money I could had lost on this shoot only because I had a drive worth a few hundred dollars died on me(who’s cost you are really spreading across many jobs - so the cost is really in the two digits or less). I say it was worth it.

So, what is your backup strategy? Do you have a backup? Get a drive and start planing how to recover from your imminent hard-drive failure. You think that because you are running a RAID x you are ok... Think again.

Go do a backup today.

For more on my backup, library management see my DAM article.

I kind of touched on this thought a while back when bloging about learning from other photographers. On that post I was implying and suggesting that photographers are some times inspired by other’s work - or that at least some work ends up been somewhat similar. I found it interesting when Chase Jarvis went through a bit of an compression on themes between what he has shot in the past and some of the photographs that were chosen at the PDN 2008 Photo Annual. In the visual arts, its not only photographers who inspire us, but painters, architects, graphic designers etc..

But some times inspiration can be too much of a good thing. Inspiration can almost lead to photocopying when not careful. Take this magazine cover and advertising piece.


LEFT: photo by Jamie Nelson for Blink Magazine, 2006.
RIGHT: An advertisement for Dexim Shoes, 2008 (not shot by Jamie Nelson).

Even among magazines, covers can also be “too” inspired, to the point of running the risk of looking way too alike.



In the case of the T Living and the Coast magazine, almost every element are the same. The concept, the napkin, the tomato slice - even the ring on the finger (the same finger might I add) contributed to the success of the image yet are all too similar. The T living was published Spring 07 and Coast on July 07.



But then again, these are examples that better illustrates inspiration among photo editors or art directors - when requesting for a specific style or frame to be used in a periodical.

But sometimes, even the best of us run out of idea. In a world of tight deadlines, of shrinking budgets and margins - as well as the desire to run famous photographers in your periodicals, magazines might run the same photograph, even months apart (such as the case of Time and Esquire, with an image made by Platon)



Or re-use the same image over and over again...


Inspiration is all that... it is the trigger of new ideas, the desire to conquer an existing subject, the opportunity to tackle that has been done before and giving it our own unique twist. With that I leave you - as that unique twist is that matters at the end of the day... its what define us and what makes us unique. What separate’s your pixels to mine... So go out-there and make it yours.

This is a weird one... A filming permit (and yes, photography is filming) is needed in most (if not all cities). Before I get into my weird story lets recap when a shooting permit is required...

A photographer can photograph, from a public place anything (s)he likes. There are very few exemptions (military installations or sensible areas). But generally you can shoot both private as well as public subjects as long as you are standing in a public space. As soon as you pull a tripod... well - you need a permit. You might get away with it - but if a police sees you, he might ask - where is your permit? and you will have to retrieve somewhere. Because I use more than just a tripod (lighting stands, MUA, Hair etc) I don’t get away with it. I try to get a permit from my local authorities whenever I can.

This means a quick call to my City of Toronto office (416) 392-8188 and promptly speak with the person who will ask you for your insurance certificate ($2,000,000 in the name of the City of Toronto) as well as the location. There might be a fee associated to the space. This takes almost no time to do.

But something weird happened just a couple of days ago. I’m shooting some ads for a designer friend as she is presenting at the Montreal Fashion Week event. I had booked the location for the shoot and everything was set. The permit is needed to make sure the space is usable and blocked for the activity. Then I got a call. It was the city. A was told that I had been “displaced” by a wedding photographer. “Displaced?” I asked - well, apparently wedding photographers have priority over commercial photographers. “How is this possible?” I asked. There are 7 models, 5 MUAs and 3 Hair stylist, not counting my assistant, stylist and my gear ready to go shoot at this location. I have already done the list of frames we are shooting. There will even be a videographer taking raw footage for a clip that will be used as part of the show. Its all planned - its all ready to go. What do you mean displaced?

Well - to all other non-famous photographers out there.... read this. On weekends, in Toronto, wedding photographers have priority. Particularly in parks (which this location was). Commercially could shoot for free on that particular location Mon-Frid as long as I have my insurance certificate. But not weekends which was the scheduled day for the shoot.

Apparently, weekends are golden to the wedding industry.

Not really complaining - but who knew? It kind of makes sense but displacement? Again - who knew?

This is where it really pays to be prepared. I had a plan “B” in case of rain/weather. So it was easy to just make a call, make sure the second location was still ok and now with my permit in hand I’m back to the preparation of the shoot. Always have a plan “B” at hand.

Photojournalism will not put up with it (as it should not). But what would we do in fashion, PR, advertising and art without the art of image alterations. So much so that Photoshop to many people is used as a verb. Photographers think about their alterations just before they shoot and subjects are counting with them to bridge the skillful gap of the photographer and their own insecurities.

Scientific American published an interested article on how to spot an altered photo and this was latter expanded by Rachel Hulin (who writes one of my favourite blogs) with examples that goes back into history and thus in technique to exemplify the wide and early use of this powerful visual aid.

But one of the most famous digital changes is the one made by National Geographic magazine who in their first use of digital imagery brought the position of the Great Pyramids of Giza closer together so they could fit the cover format. This lead to a change of the magazine’s policy and the introduction of ethics and standardization of the use of image manipulation.

But then again... where would the fashion, celebrity and advertising agency be without it? A closer look at your favourite celebrity will not entice you to to purchase their products ... There was a short selection of celebrity before and after images to give you a sense of the fantasy created for your eyes only.

You are born, you 'be' and then you are no longer... For most of us, its the stuff in the middle that really matters. To be.. is largely defined by 'what' we do and 'how' we do it. While the 'what' is largely an academic conversation in philosophy, its the 'how' what really has been calling my attention in the last little while. I'm a person that is largely driven by challenge. This challenge mindset makes me grab a camera and do something I have not done before. But its been a long while since I have done that, and even worst - I have not gone back into the things that I have tried and do more of... which means that I'm not practising what I learn.

Kaizen (改善) is Japanese for improvement. It is a Japanese philosophy that focuses on continuous improvement throughout all aspects of life. In a way I was born, I decided to 'do' photography, but the 'how' I do it has been lacking practice; and its through practice that we cycle back and enforce all those things that we learn into our workflow... I have not been focusing on my Kaizen. Travel photography - we all forget, can be done any where. I have been waiting to take a long trip to get back into the grove. I was dreaming and planning a trip to Tibet or back to Burma - but as you might had heard on the newspapers both these locations might be difficult to gain entry at the moment. Tony Fouhse, a wonderful Canadian photographer in Ottawa (my home town) had posted on his blog a wonderful view of his own backyard. Making images in his home town...



Its made me realize, I need to go out there and practice more... I need more Kaizen in my life. Its not about making the trip and capturing the image that I want... its about been ready and prepared when I'm confronted with the image that I want to capture. Only practice accomplishes that, and there are tons of ways to accomplish it... It's easier when you self assign your self a project or assignment.

Copyright is a complex and hot topic in current culture without a doubt . Its all around us, with different camps defending and attacking music, cinema and motion picture - all the way from "fair use" to "creative licences". It is meant to serve us. To protect the content owners that offers the content we consume. But in the era of the internet - sharing, using and copying content has made this all important safeguard the more difficult to enforce.

The music and movie industry has gone fast and hard on those who infringe on their content use. They have taken legal action after anything that moves - from suing every bitTorrent site they have laid their eyes on - including 10 year old girls, 66 year old grandmas - and not even the dead are immune from legal action. The idea is to inflict fear and awareness on the possible legal action that can be taken against you if you decide to infringe on their copyrighted material.

But in photography, how does that work? How does it apply?

In the music and movie industry, organizations such as the the RIAA and MPAA have taken on the battle of these problems. In the case of music, artists are signed with a record company, who in turn is part of the RIAA. Since (so the argument and theory goes) its the record company who stands to lose the most from the lost of revenue on the copyright infringement, they are the ones mounting the legal battles on behave of their artists. These legal actions are as big and as complicated as they can make them. Designed for maximum punishment. Cold war tactics has taught us that fear is often the best deterrent. The theory is that fear of large legal action will slow the illegal distribution of copyrighted material. But in photography this is not the case. In photography - most photographers (or at least the majority) are independent creators and publishers. We don't need the PPA, NPPA or NANPA as a publishing and distribution channel to distribute and sell our photography.

Except for stock agencies. The stock agency is the smaller, and somewhat similar comparison to an RIAA. A collection of artist submit their work to an organization who is then responsible for the distribution, publishing and management of the sale of the work in question. While its true that individual photographers track and find copyright infringement (including amateur teenagers having to take large commercial companies to court) and deal with them in an appropriate manner... its the latests actions and how Getty Images is dealing with them what has been noticed lately. Making Getty sound more and more like the RIAA. Now this is not about nor defending people on the misuse of intellectual and artistic copyrighted work against the law. In fact - if anything, that has to cease. Industries are trying to cope with this change in different ways - changing business models and whole different approach to this problem... No, this is about is understanding that we are not in a "business as usual" environment. The stock industry has had to deal with too many changes. Revenue fluctuation - in influx of micro-stock, free photographers and a dying and hard model to upkeep now days. Apple's iTunes is making a substantial and recognizable revenue from the way they had perceived changes in the music and movie internet download market. Why couldn't the stock industry? Behaving (and ironically, almost stealing the idea) from the RIAA and MPAA could backslash - creating the same perception problems that these organization already have. Not to mention the fact that ramped legal action has not shown the same desirable effect of deterrent. If anything - it has increased.

Learn how to profit from it. Its more effective, constructive and rewarding. It might not be easy, its hard work - and you will find plenty of resistance. But these are times where stock agencies should be more creative to make revenue instead of just projecting the old ideas and cents they have. Just an opinion.

In part one we listed many of the items that go into a photoshoot.

Lets run an scenario to see how this looks like in paper. Suppose a client is looking to create a small print run of 11x14 promotional posters. Say between 1k and 4k units. Client is a wardrobe designer and the whole idea is to create one image that the designer can use to promote their line. While the process is different for each photographer/client/scenario - I have found that its always broken in the following parts:

Concept - the concept of the visuals are discussed. How the client envisions the image to look like at the end of the day. As the photographer you might help and add suggestions if no art director is present - but at the end of the day, its the client's image. The concept drives all the costs (how many models, location etc)

Right after the concept is discussed, you can run down the costs it would take to execute on the concept. Its not the same having one model in a public park compared to 5 models in a private yacht. Aside from the obvious cost of models and location - more lighting night be needed (rented). There might also be a need to have more people on the crew (MUA/Assistants etc) to accelerate the process etc. This is when we enter a negotiation phase in support of reducing the costs and still have an image that meets its objectives. Number of models might decrease, locations are moved etc. There is much finesse as there are reasonable requests and no so reasonable requests. The reason is that the customer is trying to get the perfect image done for the smallest cost possible - and its your job to help them achieve that objective . But not at your peril nor the crew who work with you.

This is where, competitive skills come to play. There is always a cheaper photographer than you - willing to shoot it for the credit or at the expense of others. So you might have free or cheaper access to a location. You might also be able to find models/crew members who are willing to work for less in exchange of more work (say, this is the first poster in a series of 5). Exclude the need to rent equipment. A resourceful photographer is worth gold to a periodical, a client and to him/her self. But there are lines all of us have, we dare not cross. When customers start asking to use their family members for models, their neighbours as MUAs and to shoot it in their garden - its time to walk away. I typically walk away much before that - but your limits might vary. There are customers who think their nephew could shoot it for enough money to buy him lunch. This is number one rule in my books. Always be prepared to walk away from a project. My experience has shown me that overly cheap customers are as demanding as reasonable customers. So I'm left with the same level of work, effort, costs and headaches - but with a big potential of smaller revenue. So what's the point?

Ok, back to our scenario: In the process of planing the concept you start plugging numbers in your spreadsheet (I have even included a sample for you to play with). A day with a model, a MUA, a Hair stylist - no wardrobe stylist (as the customer is styling her own wardrobe), a day at the studio, basic lighting, a few processed and printed images and a graphic designer to finish the process of the poster. There might be other expenses such as transportation, extra insurance, security personnel (there are locations where the city of Toronto requires to pay an hourly fee for a police officer to be on site) etc. Knowing the prices in your local market is key. Here is an example:



In the above example the prices are made-up but not necessarily unreasonable. The photographer should already has a list of reasonable fees/prices as well as the skill-sets that each member of the crew brings to the table. Your dally rate should be based on the CODB (Cost of Doing Business or CDB depending on who uses it) and it should not be a number based of another photographer's CODB or a number out of the top of your head. Your expenses are different than mine, so don't just be using $750 just because this example says so. Remember also that your CODB is the minimum you should be making to operate your business. The growth of your business requires a the usage fee for the project you are shooting. Based on the EP set of guidelines, I would be within average range to charge $1,350.00 for the print-run of the 11x14 promotional material. The EP guidelines are based on national and periodical advertising numbers and circulation (particularly in the magazine market). That is just one way to determine the usage fee - and many other photographers use other methods. You can gain access to these guidelines by means of subscription.

Not like this is an afterthought, but price and usage is not the only thing you are negotiating. Copyright should be one of the most important things you need to have addressed, but that is a different conversation on its own.

Resources: You might also want to check out NUJ Freelance Guides for photographers or ASMP Assignment work for photographers.

(photo by Vincent Laforet)

(photo by Vincent Laforet)




(photo by Olivo Barbieri)


David Burnett's images of the Olympics are remarkable, making use of a Speed Graphic camera to capture images that other photographers where capturing with more modern equipment. Yet these images are artistic, timeless and beautifully done. Capturing on the same concept, David has also used the technique in other photojournalist assigment such as the US presidential race with Hillary Clinton (2008) and John Kerry in (2004)



(photo by David Burnett)


(photo by David Burnett)


(photo by David Burnett)


(photo by David Burnett)

Its these visual assets what has made this kind of technique so unique and started to be used in the advertising industry. Started by Mazda "Its a small small world" Campaign, as well as Toys 'R' Us campaign lead by GREY Worldwide ad agency.

Well, I'm no Chase Jarvis... who is a well known, very skilled and (by the way he writes, shares and acts in his videos) seems to be a great guy. A photographer who has fun and you would love to have a beer with. But I learned something about him today... He shoots with no light meter. Which is a bit of a surprise to me. Not that I was expecting him to use a light meter all the time - heck knows I don't. But I have learned that for strobe lighting - it just makes my life so much easier. Sure, if you are shooting with one or two strobes plus ambient, its not that big of a deal and you can use the back of your camera if you like. But since I have used more than 2 (and so have Jarvis) - I would had figured that for the sakes of speeding things up, it was easier to meter.

I was in fact a late boomer when it came to light meters. I only got one out of frustration (the first one was a gift from a friend photographer, thanks Thomas) as I noticed that when it came to strobes, ambient balance and the information my camera gave me - was not the same as I was getting once I sat to develop the image. The histogram was never the same. I would always have to tweak the exposure during development. So I gave up, borrowed one and then purchased one last year.

But what was the result? Well, I'm not surprised with Jarvis' lack of usage... can you shoot without one? yeah... If you know your lighting as well as he does then it might even slow you down. Me on the other hand... Sun moves, clouds get in the middle of things (making things more interesting and dramatic some times) and other things affect the shot when using strobes and ambient light. Its a pain some times - but I use one. In those circumstances only, its not like I use the meter 95% of the time...

I just found it interesting.

Digital equipment has created an adoption rate that every one (and their mothers) are acquiring equipment and producing photography. This ranges from one end of the absurdity where people are collecting an insane amount of equipment to the other extreme where the economics can not equalized product purchase. This is a note of the latter... of the brave, clever and some times weird DIY ideas and projects related to photography. Specifically lighting and strobes.

Via our friends at Strobist: http://www.flickr.com/groups/strobist/discuss/72157603688025081

Initially I was going to add this information into my "hidden" FAQ that I make available to clients and onlookers... but decided that some of this information might become useful to others so I have added to the blog instead...

Recently I have had new customers. Local, small, companies looking for promotional material to advertise their products. In fact, I had 3 reaching me this week alone. All have one thing in common, none of them have ever hired a photographer to produce promotional material for them. Now, lets set some boundaries before we start - we are only talking about small commercial or editorial fashion based session and your milage will always vary. There are too many variables that goes into a session but here I list the common list.


PRODUCTION EXPENSES: Well, while this should be obvious, it some times missed by clients. They think they pay one price and that is that... That price its really comprised of a number of elements.

Services

• Location (studio/location) - includes studio rental, or location permits (i.e. city permits, Club/Bar, access to a private property of some sort etc). Studio rentals are typically not high, unless a set needs to be constructed and then that construction labour needs to be counted in. Locations could get costly when custom/fancy locations are needed, but in many cases public locations are free. In my case the city of Toronto issues free permits to most public locations. Private locations need logistics to be arranged, permits, access costs, proof of insurance as well as a property release. 
• Equipment - most photographer charge a rental fee of equipment. Many photographers have a basic kit, but the number of tools needed for all occasions are impossible to have in the arsenal. Many seasoned pros rent their equipment 100% of the time. There are many economical reasons for it, but the point is that equipment rental is part of the cost of image making and its easy to forget this line item. Its easy to predict when rental is needed and this should come up early in the planning discussions.
• Processing - This is the post-production of the image... On a small photo-shoot, its typically a small fee that is applied per final image, but could be substantial depending on the amount of enhancements that an image might require, adding the number of hours per image done.
• Graphics Design - Clients some times forget that a final image is not a final product. Text, graphics, design and other artifacts are added so as to complete the final product. 

Crew

• Model(s) - if there are any models involved, model fees are needed. These varies depending on the model agency's rate structure and what department the model is based on (fashion, new faces, international department etc). These rates are typically set on a daily basis as well as on usage. Agency models can run into several hundred dollars an hour (some times with a minimum set of hours) as well experience and "look". Freelance models typically charge a per-died. Casting your models is possibly one of the most important items, and you do get what you pay for.
• Wardrobe Stylist - It goes beyond matching colour palates, it ensures that the perfect fit and look matches the intended objective of the image.
• Makeup Stylist - Makeup Stylists typically charge a base rate for one "look" and a fee per look thereafter. Ranges varies based on what its needed (fashion vs simple editorial). This is another area where you get what you pay for. Makeup can make or break a shoot.
• Hair Stylist - While many makeup stylist can do hair, it does not mean they should. A hair stylist will always bring an extra level of professionalism insuring that the right look is achieved.
• Assistant - A photographer's assistant is essential to facilitate the technical work and allow for a smoother and faster session. After all, you are paying this crew by the hour - many times an photographer's fee has already blended the assistant fee into it.
• Photographer - There are time and materials associated with the photographer's work as well as the creative fees associated with the work - this is the time that the photographer has spent working on the session and producing the final product.

USAGE FEES (aka Licensing Fee): This fee is determined by how the client is using the photographs. Typically, the larger the audience for a specific use, the higher the usage or licensing fee. For example, a photograph used in a print and web ad campaign for a consumer product would have a much higher licensing fee than a photograph used in a business-to-business company brochure — the former has an audience in the millions, the later perhaps a few thousand. There is a suggested guideline published by EP (Editorial Photographers - http://www.editorialphoto.com/) in terms of policy and usage fee. This is much about negotiation and in many cases (in the case of periodicals such as papers and magazines, these are sometimes set by them). In commercial photography these licensing fees are the bread and butter for a photographer.

EXPENSES: Yes, we all have them. These include shipping fees, travel fees if required, CD services etc..

(Now - lets take a look at the actual numbers CONTINUED IN PART TWO)

(open letter)

Dear fellow street photographer... amateur, tourist, camera holding individuals, GWC.

The world is your oyster - your castle, your kingdom. You wonder the streets of cities and towns, some times trespassing on private property taking images of your own making. You attend clubs and meetings, photographer/model parties where every one has their chance to shoot a live subject. When wonder that other photographers are shooting at when we see them pointing their cameras at something - its natural. We stop to check out what the camera is aimed to... We try to determine how we would change the composition.. "what if I were the one taking the picture".

Now, while this is all fine, when you see a photoshoot somewhere, take the time to observe. To learn, to digest the operation. Take notes of how and what they use to produce the shoot. You might even get away with taking a couple of behind the scenes pictures for your enjoyment.

"But for god's sakes, don't stand behind me with your camera taking my shot, I'm not your tripod!"

These are some of the reasons why:

• You are in my way, I will step on you when I move back.
• You can't trigger my lights, so what's the point?
• Its not polite, its not reasonable - its not nice. Besides, you have just broken the Photographer's dog salute protocol... and I will resent that...

But if there is something you should never do... is give directions on the shoot... Dude, get your own... I understand this happens often in photo clubs, where life subjects are invited and photographers eager to shoot have to take their turn, and every one else's. But when you walk by the beach, or in the city and see a small shoot happening, think that these are people working. Interrupting or getting in their way will infuriate them. So contain your self. The best solution is to have your wife near by (our wife's always keep us save from social embarrassment) but if your wife is not near by, play with your hands. I have provided a printable how-to of shadow puppets. Print a copy and put it in your wallet - give that a try, your kids will love you for it... Biting your tongue also works... Do what you must do to stay away from public humiliation. After all, you learn more by watching than you do by taking.

(PS: don't stop to chat and ask questions either, people - we are working...)

RM

Just posted an article on the description of the different phases that goes into a digital workflow. I used part of my workflow as an example. Hope you like it....

There is a known, unwritten ritual among dogs when they meet for the first time.

Picture this: Two dogs (and their owners) meet at the park... Dog behaviour protocol dictates that the two dogs check to make sure they are approachable. Then they proceed to sniff each-other. Moving from eachother's rear (which is where they start) towards each other's faces, making sure the last couple of sniffs capture the distinctive smells. Apparently, there are also rules - in general dogs do not see each other eye-to-eye as that is confrontational. Also, the least dominant dog is the first one to step back from this first encounter. This complex set of actions, rules and behaviours help each dog 'size' and 'identify' each other. That's the objective of this process... Its part of the dog's salute ritual. The need to know who is the other dog really is.

Now picture this: Two photographers meet at a sporting event. They both have gear hanging from their neck, each with a distinctive set of "things" around them. First thing they do is look at each other's "stuff" - they start checking each other out. It starts with camera model, lens size - but then it quickly moves to the other items around him. If the photographer has a camera mounted flash, then we start questioning lighting. If (s)he has fish-eye, we start questioning vision. How big is that bag he brought? You think (s)he is got enough? or does he know something I don't? God forbids there is a PocketWizard mounted on the camera as that sends us in a hunt all around us to find the lights or secondary cameras.

If (s)he seems approachable and the gear they wear is "worthy", then photographers do something very strange..... They try to read what the media pass says... not for the name of the other photographer, but to read the name of outlet they belong to. You see... apparently it makes a difference if you shoot for "Sports Illustrated" vs "The Moose Jaw Times Herald". So photographers (and I have encountered this before) head to greet you, not looking at your face, but directly towards your chest - looking for your media pass which hangs from your neck. If you shoot for the "Missisagua Creek Times" then conversation will be short. If you shoot for a known outlet in your area, conversation tends to be longer. If you find a way to permanently keep your pass reversed (that is, using a clip to keep the back of the pass facing forwards, which is what I do), then conversation starts with a "hello, so... who do you shoot for?".

This is what I call the "Photographer's Dog Salute".


(copyright, unknown)

Not that I'm comparing photographers to dogs - nothing in the like, but its the subtle, un-refutable protocol that occurs when two photographer who don't know each other meet - this amounts to the same ritual process our closest pet friends do. The funny thing is, the reasons we do it are the same... we are "sizing" them up, in the same way they do it to you. Come on - be serious, we all do it (or did it) at some point... I know because I asked. I asked every photographer I know and we all have experience (and some have admitted to actually do) this known, and un-written protocol. More seasoned photographers don't to it any more (or at least that often) - they already know every one they need and don't really care any more. But in parades, sport events - even in fashion photography, the need to "size" photographers happens all the time.

But why?

I don't think its for bad... I think its a need to learn. To see how other photographers work. I admit I'm guilty to dismiss a media photographer who came to shoot a beach volleyball game with a 600mm lens. You see, he was sitting next to me - at the sand, inside the court. I knew he was shooting facial pimples as there was nothing else he could shoot with such long lens from where he was. You could tell he really wanted to pickup pointers as he keep complaining that he could not follow the game (well, with that lens... no kidding). That was the only lens he brought. I believe this "ritual" is a way to "size" knowledge, experience. So as to establish friendships latter. Its natural that people at a similar skill level on their skills - mingle together. I have made friends due to this ritualized protocol. So I owe it that. I just find it funny the way it works. That's all.

Decided to change the look and feel of the Blog... hope it works better for you, but I'm really doing it for me

Congratulation to the winners and all the participants for such imagery, talent, content and message as displayed at the World Press Photo contest

It happens all the time... you could be an amateur photographer who just joined the photography revolution. Perhaps you are a student who just finished photography school and starting to create a body of work to gear up towards the discipline of choice. Or - a professional photographer in search of more to their craft. We are in a constant flux of learning. Learning technical material, processes - as well as (and we might do this not so inherently) vision, composition, subjects and themes... but is that so bad?

I had to give this some thought as I sat with a photo editor in my local market. While he liked the images on the portfolio, a small comment was made. You know - one of those comments that slips up without one thinking. We are looking at the port, he is asking questions and while I'm answering questions, I can see he is really engaged on the images and the stories behind them... Attention is been focused on the task at hand - eyes locked, brain working - but the mouth then says what's on the brain without the brain's permission... "These are great, love how you imitate other photographers..." well... not really imitate... you know... same subject and such... and sort of perspective... not sure why I said that... you are not imitating - I'm just saying that the pictures look like the work from such and such...

I knew what he was thinking... so no offence taken.. but this started a good conversation on vision and one's work. When we all start, we lack our own vision. We have seen images that have inspired us. Images that opened a world for us. Its like photographers say "an ok image takes 10 seconds of my viewing time and then its gone, a good image takes a comment and 30 seconds of my viewing time... a great image is burned into my memory and so my viewing time is infinite". With we are all photographers with these images (let it be photographs, paintings, drawings etc..) in our minds.... and we might get influenced by many of them. Some times we try to emulate them, some times we use them for inspiration.


(above images, from left to right: Vincent Laforet-200?, Oscar Graubner-1934, Conde Nast Cover-Sep 2006)

Its not that we are imitating other photographers and older work - but this also got us thinking - is this one of the reasons why its some times so hard to find one's own vision? Or is it the case of people who have the same image burnt into their mind, comparing work? Do our brain play tricks on us? Could we be better off having no inspiration when tackling a subject? I have heard from so many photographers in the past that its hard to have a totally creative view on a subject as many of them have been studies and tackled to much. That we are bound to find similar images of our work somewhere, some time... Perhaps there is a large percentage of validity in that idea.

Just a thought...

I'm sure he would use a digital camera...

I had found these two quotes from Ansel Adams that obviously supports my statement....

“For me the future of the image is going to be in electronic form … You will see perfectly beautiful images on an electronic screen. And I’d say that would be very handsome. They would be almost as close as the best reproductions.” -Interview with Paul Hill (1975)

“I eagerly await new concepts and processes. I believe that the electronic image will be the next major advance. Such systems will have their own inherent and inescapable structural characteristics, and the artist and functional practitioner will again strive to comprehend and control them.” -The Negative (1981)

I just found the quotes interesting and wanted to quote them