Purists vs. Processors

Let's just dive right into the week, shall we. I just came across an excellent article this morning about the great debate that has been floating around the Internet a lot this year. And, no it isn't the great Canon vs. Nikon debate.

I have read a lot of articles this year on the topic of weather using photoshop on photography is detrimental to the purity or reality of the image. Darwin Wiggett and Samantha Chrysanthou have an excellent article on the subject over at Nature Photographers Online Magazine, called Photostop and Nature Photography: How Far is Too Far?

"All graphic art should be judged on how well it expresses its subject matter, and nothing else. If the idea or story the artist meant to convey is successfully told, then the image succeeds. If not, well…time to practice some more." - Darwin Wiggett & Samantha Chrysanthou.

I agree with their concept that photography is a graphic art and should be judged as such and not judged on how "real" it portrays a scene, and for me that includes Nature Photography because in my opinion the use of filters is already manipulation as the point of capture, so editing in photoshop to me, isn't that much different. I want to create art, not just capture a scene anyway.

There is, however, a flip side to the argument that affect some forms of photography, like photojournalism. With journalism, there is a sense from the reader of a magazine or newspaper that the images they are seeing are an accurate portrayal of an event or person. We expect those images not to be manipulated and become distrusting of photos when we find they are not "real" in those contexts.

"Photos that are faked are intrinsically tied to photos that are real. They draw much of their power from the public’s belief that photos never lie. Of course all of us know “the camera always lies” and the second you pick a lens or a place to stand you’re influencing the reality of the picture in some way. But, we can’t escape that the public still wants to believe in a photograph’s ability to tell the truth. So, people who take images that appear to be truthful but are really altered beyond reality are at some level destroying this bond." - Rob Haggart

I will direct you now to Rob Haggart's article published in Outside Magazine "This Photo is Lying to You" He talks about the harm that can come from digital manipulation in the magazine world, but also fairly states that even the purists have been known to stage scene prior to clicking the shutter to get a good shot.

In closing, with all things, there is of course a balance. We need to clearly define what kind of photographer we are, making it clear to the public that we are either a journalist or an artist and be careful not to just slap the "fine art" tag onto our work to dance around the concept of photo manipulation. We either use it with intent or not at all, but we should never use it to deceive. I think Ed Freeman, who is a the principal example in Rob's article, says it best,

"What there DOES need to be, however, is a clear distinction between what we photo manipulators do – work that is increasingly an art of the imagination – and the work of documentarians and photo journalists, who record life with a straight, sober and hopefully, not too creative an eye. I'm sure they don't want to be confused with me, and frankly, I don't want to be confused with them, either." - Ed Freeman

For more reading on Rob Haggart's point of view, check out his blog, A Photo Editor, and his breakdown about his article in Outside Magazine here.

For more on Darwinn Wigget, visit his blog here.

For more on Ed Freeman, check out his blog here.

Love Comes in All Sizes - The Mini Album!

I just met with one of my brides yesterday and handed off her albums to her. I'm always so excited when I see my clients happy. When they see their albums and prints for the first time, their eyes light up and I know that my job is done. There is no comparison to have a real print in your hand. Looking at images online is nice and convenient for desktop backgrounds, and slide shows at your desk. But a real print or album? Priceless. One of the things I love the most about the album manufacturer I use is their high quality of albums. When my clients see them, they just gush over. I didn't think I could top that, but then this year they offered up new mini albums. They are little 4x4 versions of a big album. Same thick pages and print quality, same leather covers - just mini. They are perfect to keep in your purse or your desk at work and show off, leaving your big album safely at home for you.

I surprised my bride with her own 4x4 album and it was perfect because she was worried about handing around her full size album at work in case something would happen to it. I told her I had "a little something that might solve this dilemma". Oh yeah, the cute little mini album saved the day. Even though it is a nice complimentary album to a full size bridal album, it is also perfect for family photos that mom can just tuck in her purse and show off at anytime. Soft, leather, real, and they come in all the same colors as their bigger siblings. Awesome!

For your next session of any kind, think about getting a mini album that you can take anywhere and show off to anyone. I custom design each album personally, so you will get the best images and personal touch. You don't have to have a wedding to have a cute album that is all about you.

They are available in my products online under albums. You can order just one or you can get as many as you want. There is no minimum order.

Just check out how cute these are!

Going Wide with the Nikkor DX 10-24mm

Ah, wide angle is good. As Joe McNally might say "Mongo like wide". While my lenses with wider ends were in the shop getting repaired, I decided it was a good opportunity to rent a wide angle lens. I've been toying the idea of getting one for a little while for landscape work and I've rented the Nikkor 12-24mm DX in the past and liked it. This time, I opted to rent Nikon's newest wide angle lens for crop sensor cameras - the Nikkor 10-24mm DX. This lens is specifically for use with DX or crop sensor cameras. If you are shooting a full frame camera, then you should look into Nikon's dreamy 14-24mm lens. Drool.

I already own some nice full frame glass that I regularly use on my D300 (a crop sensor camera)but for wides, I really felt like a DX lens, formatted for use with crop sensor cameras, was the way to go. It would really let me get the most wide. 10mm is still the equivalent of what a 15mm lens would be on 35mm format, and folks that is getting pretty wide. If I were to shoot the lovely 14-24 on my DX body, I would get about the equivalent viewing angle of a 21mm lens. Still nice and wide, but not 15mm wide.

I rented the 10-24 from my favorite lens rental place, Borrowlenses.com for 2 weeks. One of the things I noticed right away is just how wide 10mm is. So wide, that things on the edges, get immensely distorted. This is fine if you are shooting landscapes without buildings or people near the edges. Anything that you knew should have a vertical line didn't look that way anymore if it was near the edge. The distortion can be used to your advantage to extend the sky or grassy foregrounds. It has a very nice perspective, you just need to be cautious of what is near the edges of your frame. Also, it is so wide, you need to watch that your own tripod or feet aren't in the shot. I found that while some things really wide looked great, especially if you could get close to some foreground interest, I preferred most of my wides between the 12-18mm range as the distortion was more under control and I found better framing in my shots. As you know, photography is as much about what you exclude from the frame as what you include.

The second thing that came in very handy is that while a lens hood is provided, it is not what I would call a "dedicated" or permanently attached lens hood. It is removable which allow for use with filters. This is something to consider with landscape work and probably the subject you are considering a wide angle for. The Nikkor full frame 14-24mm lens has a permanently attached lens hood as part of its design. There is no way to screw on any type of filter or add any type of rectangular "slot" style system.

I shot the 10-24mm almost exclusively with a circular polarizer attached to the front and then handheld graduated ND filters over the front of the lens. This was possible with being able to remove the petal hood. I didn't have a chance to try a wide angle filter holder like Cokin's P system. I do own their regular P filter holder, but as it is meant to hold up to 3 filter in the slots in front, it absolutely shows up in the frame. In fact, at 10mm, just the very edges of my polarizer showed up and I would have to crop those images just slightly in post process. This was another reason I preferred going to at least 12mm. My circular polarizer does not show up at all at 12mm.

Here are some sample shots taken at Mattheissen State Park in Illinois.

As you can probably tell, I really enjoyed shooting vertical orientation with the wide angle lens. It isn't that landscape orientation can't be interesting, but sometimes it is just wider or more of the scene, not necessarily more interesting. There are exceptions at times however as one of my favorites from the day was a landscape orientation. I personally felt the super wide viewpoint excelled vertically though creating more depth when showing a foreground interest and then a subject in the back of the frame. I'm still learning the best ways to use a wide angle and hopefully when I get my hands on one for more than a week or so at a time, I can learn to create really deep environments. Like all pieces of gear, wide angles have their place, but we must learn when to use them and what their strengths and limitations are. I learned quickly that if you are using a wide angle just to "get more of the scene" in your frame, then you aren't fully using all the wide angle has to offer and probably aren't creating that dynamic of an image. I suggest seeking out good foregrounds and getting in close to maximize perspective and depth and playing with the good and bad of distortion.

Will the 10-24 find a home in my camera bag? I don't know just yet. I may rent the 14-24 before I make a final decision, but unless I feel I can get by without filters on the 14-24, this lens looks promising.

When Bad Things Happen to Good Gear: Part #2

Let's all just taken a brief second and say "YAY!" with me. "YAY!!!" Okay, that feels so good. I finally have my lenses back home where they belong. It has been a long couple of months without a chunk of my gear that I use regularly. If you are not aware, It all started with my adored 18-200mm lens making bad noises, which was then followed a week later by my beloved 24-70 falling one foot to the ground with a crunch at a wedding. You can read all the details of what happened here.

To sum it up quickly. I sent my 18-200mm lens into Nikon through the local camera shop and then for experimentation purposes, I sent my 24-70mm into Nikon myself directly. In my previous article, I explained how to use both methods if you need to send your gear in for repair.

It has been seven weeks since I sent in my my first lens and yesterday I received the 2nd lens back to me in the mail. Seven weeks is a long time without your babies, I mean, tools.

After rejoicing about my reunited family, I thought I should also share with you all the details of how my experiences were with both methods of getting my gear repaired. I'll start off by saying that I highly recommend that you send your own gear in for repair. I found this method to be the best for several reasons:

#1. It is cheaper. Period. The local camera shop charges $20 to send your gear in for you. The cost for me to FedEx 2nd day with insurance straight to Nikon - $14.00 I'm already coming out ahead.

#2. You have to fill out the paperwork yourself regardless. Yep, you heard me right. You can either go to Nikon's website and fill out the required online form with the details of your repair, serial number, proof of purchase, etc. or you can either tell the clerk and the camera store or worse yet end up hand writing it on their much less clear and more cramped form. I spend far less time typing up my responses to the questions on the form than I did trying to explain it to a sales staff member that hadn't yet been trained on how to handle manufacturer repairs where I ultimately ended up hand writing it on the form myself. I think is is probably much better communication to Nikon repair staff when they can easily read your typed responses than your chicken scratches, don't you?

#3. You know where you gear is throughout the entire process. When you send in the gear directly you get direct contact with Nikon staff when you gear arrives. You are mailed a quote either explaining your gear is covered under warranty or a quote for the repair cost. You are given information to log into your own account and approve or reject the repair work and once payment has been received (if necessary) they will begin your repair. Throughout this process, you can login at anytime and check the status of your repair. I was able to see that they received my lens, processed the paperwork, ordered replacement parts, performing the repair, cleaning and shipping. I even got a slip of paperwork with my lens when it returned listing out what parts had been repaired/replaced. I was always up to date with what was going on.

I can't say the same for the camera shop. I had to call several times just to check in. I didn't know when they shipped my lens after I handed it off to them. They "hadn't heard anything yet from Nikon", and never offered on their own accord to call and check the status for me. I was told "it may be a couple of weeks" before they hear anything. I'm sorry, but what was that $20 for? I ended up contacting Nikon on my own about the lens I had the camera shop send in and guess what? They replied immediately on the same day with a status update. They were great to work with and I always had my questions answered with Nikon. They just reaffirmed my love for their products because they have the customer services to back it up. Thank you, Nikon.

So, to sum up my experience, I can without hesitation say that you should save the money and just ship your gear in for your repair yourself. The process is straightforward, you can get your questions answered easily if you need to and apparently you will have to do the work regardless since giving your gear to the camera shop doesn't mean it is worry-free for you. You aren't paying extra to have them "handle" it. If you care about your gear enough to have it serviced, then you won't be sorry you dealt with it yourself.

Oh, and just in case you were thinking maybe I had it out for the local camera shop. I must say that I am a firm believer in shopping local when I can. I like to support the local economy and local families and am usually willing to pay a little more to do so. However, like any smart consumer, I also expect that shopping local means good customer service just like I would give to my own clients. I've shopped on many on occasion at the local camera shop and they always have the gear I need or want, but Nikon simply had a better customer experience and customer service. If you need to buy something, I can happily say go shop local, they will likely have what you need, but for getting gear repaired I think you will be happier working directly with Nikon yourself.