Camera Care On Wet Days    

linda-shooting-in-the-rain

Barriere, British Columbia Star Journal newspaper Editor, Jill Hayward, asked me to discuss the use, care of, and protection of cameras, lenses, and other photographic equipment during wet conditions. She worried about people carrying and using their cameras under the wet conditions at the North Thompson Fall Fair this past weekend. She also mentioned that she meets many local photographers that have scratched lenses.

I rarely let wet days limit my photography. Nevertheless, with the exception of those expensive pro level DSLRs and, of course, a few small waterproof cameras, most of the cameras photographers use don’t have much resistance to water.

Several years ago my wife, Linda, and I took a photography vacation on Vancouver Island. The weather was forecast to be completely rainy, so we prepared with plastic bags to cover our cameras, umbrellas to deflect water off our viewfinders, hairdryers to dry out cameras and tripods every evening, and wet weather attire because we didn’t want wet clothing. The trip was a bit uncomfortable, but the coastal downpour didn’t stop us from doing photography, and we didn’t waste a day of that trip huddled indoors. We were outside, cameras in hand, every day of that excursion and returned with great pictures, and a fun experience of shooting in the rain.

We had a good experience because we were prepared. That’s the secret. I always carry an old towel in my camera bag. And when water (or soon snow) begins to gather on my camera I continually wipe it off. Those areas I worry about are around the pop-up flash, where the lens mounts, the LCD, and the info window, and anywhere else that I think water might find a way into my camera.

I keep a lens cap on my lens. But what about when one is taking pictures? I know there will be those that advise putting a UV filter on every lens.

UV filters are from a time when we had a necessity to colour balance our film and in the spring we would use (U)ltra (V)iolet filters to warm the colours. Using an old UV filter is fine, as are any of the many different clear filters manufactures are selling for lens protection, but digital sensors no longer need colour correction filters and many photographers worry that inexpensive filters placed in front of their expensive lens glass might degrade the image.

Whether you agree with that notion or not, I think that using a lens hood is much better insurance than clear protection lenses. My advice is to get a plastic lens hood for every lens. Plastic lens hoods protect our lenses by bending, bouncing, and sometimes even breaking in the process of absorbing the impact and saving the lens. Personally I feel safer with a lens hood than a tight fitting glass filter. Anyway, we should always be using lens hoods to keep glare off the lens front.

When I return home after a day of photography I remove the lens and check my equipment. I remove the memory card for downloading to my computer, recharge the battery and, especially after rain, wipe my camera and lenses.

As I already wrote, I don’t let rain limit my photography. And there are times when the rain adds something to a picture.

Country singer Roger Miller wrote, “Some people walk in the rain, others just get wet.” Those are good word for creative photographers. And for those afraid of taking pictures in the rain, another singer, Cher made me laugh when she said, “Don’t take your toys inside just because it’s raining.”

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Off-Camera Flash in Daylight  

Whatcha Got?

Perfect lighting

A little to the left

Teamwork

The right light

Ya gotta get wet

Who cares about the water

Lets see

Flash the Cadillac

 

This past weekend I lead another workshop for photographers about using off-camera flash when photographing portraits outside in bright light. As with past lighting workshops my goal was to help participants understand how to use flash in different environments during daylight, and gain techniques that I hoped would help them transform the harsh daylight of outdoor portraits into beautiful light.

I was fortunate to have a great rural location where participants began in the morning photographing our model using a speedlight and a diffusion panel in a bright meadow, then moved to a large, well lit, open barn with two-flash lighting using a shoot-through umbrella and softbox until lunchtime.

After a healthy lunch provided by Versatile Studio we set up by a small tree covered stream, getting both our feet and our model’s feet wet. We finally finished the day photographing the model posing beside an old 1970s Cadillac in a nearby field.

I enjoy guiding serious photographers through their first attempts to use flash as a tool to create better photos, I want them to think of the flash being more than an uncontrollable device perched on top of the camera when it’s too dark in a room to take the photo.

I have been offering off-camera flash courses since the early 1980’s, and still believe they are an important segment of a portrait photographer’s education.

So much has changed in photography, and yet here I am 35 years later, still helping photographers learn how to use off-camera flash. Modern cameras are amazing with sensors that are so much better at capturing light than film was. But just as 30 years ago, serious photographers realize how much more flattering off-camera flash is on someone’s face than just harsh daylight.

Off-camera flash gives a photographer the ability to choose the best direction of light.

There are times when I am forced to photograph a person without using a flash. I think “forced” is the best word, because I will always use flash if I can, and as those that have taken my advice have learned, in most instances using flash for portrait photography indoors or outdoors is better than not using a flash.

Those attending last weekend’s workshop began to get comfortable using flash.

David Hobby, lighting guru and founder of the blog, http://strobist.blogspot.ca, wrote,

“Learning how to light is incremental, creative and fun. There is almost no math involved, nor any difficult technical know-how. In fact, good lighting is less like math and more like cooking. It’s like, you taste the soup and if it needs more salt you add some salt. You’ll see that when we learn to balance a flash with the existing, ambient light.”

“Controlling harsh natural light – one of the most important things to know as a shooter is how to use bad light well. Taking hard, nasty daylight and turning it into beautiful light is actually pretty easy.”

Portraiture and the Photographer’s Use of Light

Monica aDemetra 3aMollyStephanie b6. BaileaStephanie a7. MonicaDemetraMonica  a

 

 

Photographer and author Frank Criccho states, “ The success of a photographic portrait depends as much on the photographer’s artistic and creative use of lighting techniques as it does on his or her skill with the camera.”

In an opposing remark during a recent conversation, a photographer told me that he didn’t have to worry about getting a flash for portrait photography and doubted he ever would, because he could just use a higher ISO, shoot multiple bursts, and fix everything in PhotoShop.

I don’t think that he is totally wrong, but his statement certainly demonstrates a lack of the basic understanding of how light impacts a subject’s face and how light can make the subject look younger, or older, or more glamorous, or down right unappealing.

I think in the race to purchase the latest hi-tech photographic marvel many photographers tend to forget about how lighting affects their subjects.

In my opinion, the goal for portrait photographers should always be to make the subject look his or her best, and provide an image that is flattering, and allows the person you are photographing to have a photo that impresses viewers.

One could say the responsibility lies with photographers, and not the subject, as to how good they look. Yes, I know in reality that isn’t the truth, but in my experience when one makes a bad photo of someone they will blame you, not themselves, if one makes a good photo they will thank you for capturing reality.

Many photographers just excitedly snap away without examining their subject, or posing them. Relying on luck and their subject’s talent to make that pleasing portrait, and pay little attention to how the light is making that person look.

Light and how a photographer uses it is very important. Too much contrast or side lighting shows lines and blemishes, whereas, on-camera flash, or bright, direct sunlight gives a flat, dimensionless, uninspired look.

To use the words of world-renowned photographer and writer, Joe Marvullo, “It is your ultimate decision, however, to determine what is “real” about that person and how to portray it in the photograph. You must successfully translate a distinct human personality in three-dimensional form into a two dimensional representation. This recorded image must come to life on it’s own. You, as an artist, must capture the “essence” of your subjects – their persona.”

Modern on-camera flashes are excellent if used correctly and creatively. Photographers can diffuse, bounce, and move the light off to the right or left, higher or lower, and modify that light using umbrellas, reflectors or softboxes to soften and control the direction and intensity.

I believe photography is all about the light. The lazy photographer just worries about exposure, where as the imaginative photographer pays attention, experiments, and practices creating portraits using light that are more than just documents of some person.  And as Marvullo suggests it is up to you, the artist, to capture the “essence” of your subject’s personality.

 

 

 

 

 

Photographer’s Lighting Workshop

    Sarah, Bart & Ronny

  Ronny & Candice

Sarah & Dave

Candice & Bailey

Bailey & Bart

I have just finished my first day of leading another Photographer’s Lighting Workshop. I will admit that a day spent guiding excited and, I must remark of this session, very talented photographers, does tire me out.

Participants that are willing to express opinions and aren’t shy about getting shoulder to shoulder in a process of experimenting, exploring, and learning are hard to keep up with, and their enthusiasm is infectious. I try to stand back and watch analytically, but every animated smile draws me in.  Multiply times seven each fired up photographer I was working with and there is quite an energy drain.

After over 40 years as a photographer I do have a pretty large chest of experiences in just about every aspect of this exciting medium and I was employed as a photography teacher for nearly half that time. I can easily sit a group of learners down and lecture about pretty much anything photographic and, particularly the lighting workshops that are currently all the rage for photography keeners.  My knowledge is on par with most experienced portrait professionals, and I teach so that beginners and intermediate learners can keep up with the jargon and the concepts.

I enjoy the enlivened interaction that happens when a student of photography makes the decision to participate. My job is to present information on the subject at hand and keep things going. I don’t like to be a demonstrator on a stage, and rarely pick up a camera. That’s left to participants.

Sure, they tired me out, but in the recent daylong workshop on Lighting and Posing I was fortunate to be leading a group of surprisingly skilled and very energetic photographers, and I must add, two lovely and creative young models that in my opinion were willing to work hard in a demanding environment for modeling.

The workshop was held in a rural studio minutes outside of Kamloops, British Columbia. I like this studio because it owner, Dave Monsees, has filled it with quite an assortment of lighting gear. I think there are at least eight studio strobes to choose from, all setup for wireless connection with a drawer full of senders. There are soft boxes, umbrellas, diffusion screens, reflectors and a great selection of wall-mounted backdrops.

There was even a fully equipped kitchen at the back that we made good use of, with fresh brewed coffee, pastries, and a large pot of chili for lunch. It can’t get much better than good food, great people, and photography.

Monsees is regularly adding props and stools to sit and pose on, as well as a growing selection of light modifiers.

The large, well-equipped space is a great rental studio and a perfect environment for an instructional session like mine. We started the session with one light behind a reflective umbrella, and moved on from there adding a large softbox, a shoot through umbrella, and a rim light to give depth to our subject when we used a black background.  We changed backdrops and light positions regularly. And those creative photographers really kept our models active and, heck, made my day.

Regarding portrait photography, Famous portrait photographer, Yousuf Karsh, once said, “I try to photograph people’s spirits and thoughts. As to the soul taking by the photographer, I don’t feel I take away, but rather that the sitter and I give to each other. It becomes an act of mutual participation.”

The first of our two-day workshop is over. I prefer two days because on the second we can review and reinforce what happened on the first. Now I am looking forward to spending another day and preparing to lead workshop participants into new territory.

I appreciate any comments. Thanks, John

My website is at www.enmanscamera.com

Photographers – What is your studio lighting setup?

My inexpensive and very portable "Portrait kit". Works easily for indoor or out of doors lighting.

My inexpensive and very portable “Portrait kit” works easily for indoor or out of doors lighting.

Last week an online forum in which I participated asked the question, “What is your studio lighting setup?”

Most participants were posting the brand name they used, and how many lights they owned, however, my post was about what I would call “kits”, that I used for each different situation or environment.

My opinion has always been that there are different tools for different jobs, and I have four individual lighting setups that fit particular photographic undertakings.

My “event kit” consists of four TTL hot shoe flashes. My “portrait kit” consists of three older manual hotshoe flashes mounted on wireless receivers. I also have two “studio kits”. The first studio kit, for those situations where I can find power, has a 1000w power pack with four strobe heads. The second kit is a battery-operated 280w strobe that will go anywhere.

Some forum members complained that they would have to wait till they had the money before a home studio lighting situation could be set up. I believe they only paid attention to those responders that included the manufacturer’s names for their expensive studio type lighting setups.

Yes, I agree, if one wants big powerful studio strobes there will be a considerable price attached.  And each manufacturer will hope to sell their own brand of light stands and light modifiers along with the lighting units. Yes indeed, all that will be expensive.

Most home photography studios are in the basement, or in a spare room to be quickly set up for a portrait session. However, the big name brands never discuss light volume or power vs. studio size.

My opinion is, if the room is less than twelve feet high, thirty feet long and only used for small group or single person portraits, those big, powerful, fast recycling, and expensive studio lights might be overkill, and a real hassle when one wants to soften the background by shooting a wide aperture because there is just too much power.

I wrote about the four kits that I use for different situations. The small hotshoe flashes I use for events and portraits, and the bigger less portable units I use with large groups, moving subjects, or when I just want coverage out of doors. I think those photographers intent on setting up small home studios for portraits and small groups don’t need to go to the expense of the brawny, studio type lights. Photographers can easily, and without much initial cost, set up a studio with what I called my “portrait kit”.

My portrait kit only has three hotshoe flashes, each with it’s own wireless receiver and two stands. Depending on the space a client provides for me to use, I use a small shoot-through umbrella, an umbrella brolly box, once in a while I use a soft box, and sometimes include a reflector. And it’s the inexpensive and easily stored “portrait kit” that I would recommend for most first-time, home studio photographers.

Wireless senders and receivers come in all sorts of incarnations, and can be, depending on brand and manufacturer, if one shops around, purchased for prices less than $100 for two receivers and a sender.

I use the inexpensive sender/receivers that fit under my flash, seated on a light stand bracket, and holds an umbrella, a brolly, or sometimes a softbox. And I use three Vivitar 283 flashes dating from the 1970s that I bought used.

My total cost for 3 flashes, the wireless sender & receivers, 2 shoot through umbrellas, stands, and 2 flash/stand brackets, and a small tabletop tripod that I can place behind my portrait subject was under $400 Canadian.  All of this is much less expensive, and a lot easier to store and/or move around than the big. studio-type flash units.

I make lighting tests before the person who I will be photographing arrives to get the correct exposure, and when he/she does show up, I take two or three more test shots as I move the lights for the most flattering effect.

Even if there were a wad of cash burning a hole it your pocket, my advice would be to proceed slowly, and learn how best to photograph a person first. Using hotshoe speedlights off-camera will be perfect for that educational process, and when they are no longer a good fit with your creative growth, the choices as to the next step in lighting equipment will be educated decisions instead of emotional.

As always I look forward to any comments. Thanks, John

My website is at www.enmanscamera.com

Use the Right Tool to Copy Old Photos

Harvey & Violet Walch 2  Wedding Day

Using the wrong tool usually leads to unacceptable results in one way or another, for example, when a butter knife is substituted for a screwdriver.  That was what came to mind when I was asked if I could make quality copies of old photographs that a family wanted to use for a book of genealogy they planned on publishing. They required image files with enough quality for good enlargements, and usable for the intended family book.

They began by trying to copy several images using home scanners that worked great for documents, but only produced pictures that lacked detail. I suspect many of those originals photos were a bit over or under exposed in the beginning.  Some family members tried copying the old photographs with their little digicams, however, that resulted in bright white reflection spots from the flash that obscured features in their family photos. They decided to shoot from the side hoping to reduce the glare, but only got unusable foreshortened pictures; by that I mean the closest frame edge was large and distorted and the far frame edge was small.

They told me that even though their photographs had a bit better detail the results were still unacceptable.  That is what I mean by using the wrong tool. A camera with an on-camera flash will produce glare on reflective surfaces, and angled shots don’t make for good documentation of flat artwork because things close to the camera lens appear larger and those farther away become smaller, and while inexpensive document scanners are great for documents they rarely produce quality reproductions of photographs.  The result was they were having trouble all around.

The right tool for them would have been a camera attached to off-camera flashes, with the flashes set off side from the painting at a 45-degree angle. When I copy photographs I use two umbrellas to diffuse the flash, but one could get reasonable results by placing some translucent material in front of, or bouncing, the light from the flashes off large white cards.  In any case, the light needs to softly and broadly, not sharply, expose the old photograph’s surface.  The wonder of digital technology is how quickly one can review the image and retake the photo if needed. I also recommend taking several shots at different apertures.  For that, the right tool is a camera that one is able set to manual exposure.

When photographing oil paintings or other uneven reflective surfaces I prefer working with slightly under exposed image files.  That way I can bring the detail up using PhotoShop without loosing the highlights.

If the next question is, “What kind of camera?” my answer will be that it depends on what is the desired outcome.  If it is for, as in this case, faded old photographic prints for reproduction in a book, the image file needs to be large and for that I prefer a DSLR (digital single lens reflex) camera, but for a small newspaper, or website image, a digicam that will accept an off-camera flash will do just fine.

If there isn’t access to an off-camera flash then wait for the opportunity to place the painting in “flat” daylight.  Today, as I write, I see out my window that it is cloudy and overcast, perfect for even, flat lighting. One could place the picture on any support that will allow tilting right, left, up, and down. Then as exposures are made and checked, the picture can be moved around until there is no reflection.

Two umbrellas allow me to balance the light. I lay the photographs flat and mount my camera on a copy stand that I have had for years, and use a small level to make sure the camera lens and the photographs are parallel. Then I make a test shot to check the exposure for reflection. My first and then finished image of one photo is posted ate the beginning of this article.

The final step for me is PhotoShop, which I use to color balance, then for cropping, contrast, and sharpening. I could purchase an expensive scanner, but I already have lots invested in a camera, and lenses that work perfectly well, and which I think may be faster to use.

I do appreciate your comments. Thanks, John

My website is at www.enmanscamera.com

Modifying light and keeping photograph’s exposure believable.

A few weeks ago I wrote about modifying light instead of using the direct light from a camera mounted flash.  This is a topic I have discussed many times in my years writing for different publications as I strive to persuade photographers to add flash to their portrait photography.

It seems my comments are having some success because since my blog of May 5thth I have had more than one photographer tell me they had started using light modifiers like “shoot through” and reflector umbrellas. That is a good thing, however, I’m now receiving questions like, “Now that I’m bouncing and softening the light, how come the background doesn’t look right?”

Like any photograph, inside or outside, a photographer needs to take into account how all elements in the image are exposed. That’s the reason I prefer using the manual mode on my camera. It makes it easy to set the exposure where I want to make that subject look like it fits into the environment.

Here is an example that might help readers.  A week ago I photographed a couple in a wide field alongside the South Thompson River. They wanted the white, silt cliffs that jutted up from the grassy flatlands to be visible behind them. The sun (when it poked through the clouds) was bright and cast unflattering shadows on their faces.

My goal was to have the correct exposure for the cliffs, the sky, and, of course, my subjects.  It was slightly breezy; therefore, my wife held onto a stand with a 33” umbrella and wireless flash I used to provide a fill light that would get rid of unsightly shadows on my subjects.

Indoors or out, I always start with the shutter speed. If I need it to be faster I bump up the ISO. Usually I try for 100 ISO, but sometimes I need a higher shutter speed and a wider aperture and that’s when I adjust my ISO.

I first decided what exposure would give me a nice sky and scenic white cliffs. In this instance I metered the exposure and then underexposed by two stops to give me a bit of a darker appearing landscape. Then as my subjects were positioning themselves I fired the wireless flash from different positions until I saw that the light on their faces appeared in the way I wanted it.

My exposure and flash modes were both set to manual. Using manual exposure gave me consistent control over the ambient light. To find the proper exposure for the flash I just moved it closer till I was satisfied with what I saw in my camera’s LCD.   I had balanced the light. There was a nice dark sky, the white cliffs were shining and had defining shadows. My subjects were separated from the slightly darker ambient light without any shadows at all on their faces.

The ambient light kept changing quickly as clouds moved in and a storm approached so I switched from manual flash to TTL flash, and because of troubling wind removed the umbrella from the stand, and instead used a small diffuser cup on the flash to modify its light.

With the camera in manual mode, the shutter, aperture, ISO, distance of the light to the subject, and power of our light source, all controls flash exposure. Things change with the incorporation of TTL flash.  Used together, the TTL camera and flash controls and calculates the flash exposure, and adjusts the power of the flash to deliver and determine the correct flash exposure regardless of the photographer’s choice of shutter, aperture, ISO, and subject distance.

How a portrait looks does have a lot to do with how the subject(s) are posed, but I think light and how it is applied is just as important. Using flash, on or off camera, to modify light gives a photographer more control than just using the sun, or relying on a high ISO. In addition photographers must also experiment and learn how to balance the background, or ambient light, with that flash.

The location really does not matter, whether inside or out, as long as there is enough ambient light to expose the subject. Pose the subject in front of a window or on the lawn. Then add enough light from another source to achieve the final goal of having the background, the foreground, and the subject exposures all together appear to be balanced and not looking artificial.

http://www.enmanscamera.com