Fun Stuff on the Way

It seems like every spring I load up on the stuff that I either need or want to use for the next year.  Not really huge purchases, I have all the major equipment I need, but this is the little stuff that makes work fun.

So what’s on the shopping list?

•Variety of vintage film cameras (I’m using them for a specific project, but it seems like only half of them work, so it takes several.)

•Nikon F5 (that is one sturdy camera!)

•Adapter for putting Nikon lenses on a Canon camera body

•35mm film scanner (to replace the one I had from 2001)

•100 sheet box of B&W 4×5 film (for my character study portrait series)

•New film reels and developing tank (not 100% decided on if I want to take back my B&W processing)

•Lots of rechargeable AA batteries for flashes (I go though these like M&Ms.  They say they’re good for 1000 cycles.  They lie.)

•More radio slaves (You can never have too many)

2010 is about a lot of things for me, and one of the things I’m looking forward to is engaging in more personal projects.  What is 2010 about for you?

Film vs. Digital (part 2 of 3)

If you missed part 1 of this discussion please scroll down one post and then come back to this.  If you have already seen part 1, welcome back!

I suppose this discussion should have been titled: “Should schools abandon film in their teaching?” but that seemed like a pretty long title.  I sincerely appreciate the comments that this subject has received, but I do want to make a few things clear.

A few folks asked why it had to be film vs. Digital, “Why can’t they live side by side?”  Well, that is what has been happening for years until it was recently suggested by an outside advisor that film was no longer relevant as a teaching tool.

The problem schools face is that they need to make decisions about where to best put their available funds in order to prepare their students for the big bad world out there.  Which text books to purchase, which instructors to hire, what facilities and materials will be necessary to accomplish the task of educating their students.  Any decision, big or small has significant impact.  If film goes away, then so does the darkroom.  This particular school already has an awesome computer lab and studio, so what do you do with the several thousand square feet of empty space if the dark room and lab facilities are shut down?

So I agree with many of the folks who commented, in the real world, the “digital vs. film” discussion is silly, useless, and unproductive.  In an academic environment however, a change like dropping film instruction means that resources will be allocated accordingly, and some instructors would be replaced by others, the building would have to be redesigned, and the entire curriculum must then be re-imagined.

Don’t think I’m clinging to the past Though.  I was sitting on this very advisory board over ten years ago when we decided that it would be in the best interest of the students to drop the photo chemistry course from the curriculum in favor of replacing it with an introduction to digital course.  In time, several other courses were either replaced or modified to reflect the changes in the industry.  This migration from old to new technology has been happening slowly, and to date, the bulk of the student’s learning experience after the first semester is with digital equipment.

I have intentionally held my opinion here so that I can hear from people well outside of this issue.  My full unfiltered opinion is on the way in part 3, but until then I would still like to hear more form those of you who have something to say.

Film vs. Digital…Really? (part 1 of 3)

I can’t believe this is even an issue in 2010 but here we go.  It’s been over ten years since the revolution came and went but the debate rages on.  This time in the halls of academia.

Nearly every college or university program has a board of advisers.  This is a group of professionals from the industry who guide the professors and instructors on what is current and relevant in their industry.  This helps form and evolve the curriculum and insures that students are getting their education based on the realities of the job and not a lot of outdated information.

At the annual meeting recently, one of the advisers, a photojournalist, was quite vocal in his opinion that photo schools should not begin a student’s photographic education using film.  In his opinion, using film should not be taught, discussed or acknowledged because (in his opinion) it was not something a student would use once they transitioned into the real world, therefore it is a waste of time to use it.

Naturally this began a lively discussion and before long there were many opinions being given on both sides of the debate.  I have a lot more to say, and history to share on this subject, but first I would like to hear what others have to say on this topic.

Please leave a comment with your opinion, and if you would, tell us if you attended a photo school or not.  I’ll be posting part 2 of my thoughts at the end of this week.

We Thought We Could Trust Them

When it comes to backing up your digital life, the conventional wisdom has always been to back up to CDs and DVDs.  They are seen as pretty reliable, have no moving parts and are not plugged into the wall like our computer hard drives.  The thought is that these factors make discs less vulnerable to failure due to electrical surges or aging mechanical parts.  I have clients asking for the “disc of images” all the time.  When I ask them why, the response I typically get is that they just want to “have” the photos and keep them in a safe place so that they can enjoy them in the future.

There are some major issues with that line of reasoning.

The biggest enemy of any technology is newer technology.  Your computer couldn’t read a DVD ten years ago, and it’s very likely that it won’t be able to ten years from now.  They just won’t make the drives any more.  So for people who plan to put their disk in the safe with the intention of pulling it out in twenty years to relive the good old days will need to start looking for a service to help them out.  Much like the ones who are converting 8mm film reels and VHS tapes to DVD right now.

The other problem is the stuff that the DVDs are made of.  Not really the plastic, but the colorful part that actually holds the data.  It basically a very thin layer of dye that reacts to the laser in the DVD or CD burner.  While the dye is fairly stable, it doesn’t keep forever.  much like the dyes in color film negatives, they will break down and fade over time.  Eventually resulting in lost data.

So you’re thinking: “really? that’s never happened to me.”  Well, not yet.  It’s only happened to me once, but I just heard about a friend of mine who went to load a few CDs that he had several shoots backed up on from about seven years ago and there was nothing there.  The discs had been written and he had even used them several years before with fine results.  Even trying several different disc readers made no difference.

What to do? Well first, Without getting on my soap box, I will quietly suggest that you make prints of your most prized images.  The only technology needed for that is having at least one eye with which to view it.  After that, I am an advocate of archiving to hard drives in addition to optical discs such as DVDs.  Having my data on a hard drive and then having that drive on a shelf is an added layer of protection, then when I upgrade to the next type of storage technology I can just plug in the drives and start copying.  If the drive does not work, then I’ll cross my fingers and reach for the box of discs.

By the way, have you ever tried putting a DVD in the microwave shiny side up for three seconds?  I’m not saying you should, but it is kinda cool.

Advertising Assignment #1

It’s back to school time for me!  For the  past few years I have taught a workshop style class to commercial photography students.  It’s one day per week and each class lasts for eight weeks before the students spend the rest of their semester on internship.

Two weeks ago was the first week  of class and I was ready with a challenging assignment.  I explained to them that as photographers, our job was to communicate with our images using visual cues that would elicit a certain reaction from the viewer.  I further explained that as commercial photographers, the reaction we were typically trying to get from the viewer was the desire to buy or learn more about whatever product our client was selling.

Then of course I made things more complicated by asking what do you do if your client isn’t selling a tangible product that you can place in front of a camera?  What if it’s more of an idea, or a feeling?  If you’re an insurance company, you are not likely to photograph a contract for auto coverage.  It’s a piece of paper, that would be boring.  If you are a pharmaceutical company, do you show the pill you make, or find a way to cleverly show people the benefit they might have by taking that pill?

So the first exercise was to stretch their brains a bit by giving them several words to illustrate.  Fourteen words to be exact.  Half of the words were very technical, left brain concepts that most any photo student would understand.  Concepts like high key, low contrast, exaggerated perspective and symmetrical.

The other half were very right brain, subjective words that were wide open for interpretation.  Words like rich, green, funny and soft.  The kind of words that could mean many different things depending on a person’s frame of mind.  The goal was to be able to look at the image and have the viewer identify the word without having prior knowledge of what words they were supposed to be illustrating.

I broke the class of 21 students into seven groups of three and they had five hours to complete the assignment. During critique the following week I was pleasantly surprised at the effort put forth by the students.  Several teams actually did the entire assignment in the studio.  That is something that no other class had done in the past and what that told me was that their previous training in studio lighting had left them very confident and well prepared to create images instead of just taking what nature gave them outdoors.

Next week’s assignment takes things a little bit further, but I’ll wait a bit to show you that.

Apparently Only Old People Tweet

I saw this article from the Magazine Fast Company on my Twitter feed recently and the title caught my eye.  It said that teens love Facebook, hate blogging and don’t use Twitter.  I had just returned from a photo convention that was all a buzz about the power of social media as a marketing tool for photographers, so I was very curious to see if these findings held true in my little slice of the world.  It just so happens that on Mondays I find myself sitting in a studio with 21 Commercial photography students who fit the mentioned demographic.

This is a college course with some as young as seventeen and two pushing thirty. The group has an average age of about twenty one years old, so I decided to take an informal survey to see if this article reflected reality.  I first asked how many people had a Twitter account.  Three people raised their hand, but two of those said that they have never used it, and most wondered what the point of it was.  I then asked how many used Facebook regularly and every single hand went up (no kidding).

As for blogging, each student is required to maintain a blog and to post the images from their assignments regularly.  When asked how many would keep that up if they were not required to do so, only four hands went up.  That’s a pretty definitive conclusion, and even though it’s not exactly scientific, it really backs up the story I read.

So that leads to the next set of questions:  Is Twitter just a tool for us photographers to pimp ourselves and other photogs we like by re-tweeting their workshops and other stuff?  Are we missing our real potential clients because they don’t participate in some of the forms of communication that we think matter?  Will we ever understand these kids and their damned Rock n’ Roll music? (wait, I think my Granddad just said that last part)

Hot One Awards Announced

Every year Professional Photographer Magazine calls for entries from companies and manufacturers in the photo industry and then asks a panel of independent judges to review and choose their favorite products in several different categories.  From cameras and lenses, to software and workshops, all types of products are covered.

I was actually asked to judge for this year’s awards.  It was a pretty straight forward assignment.  I looked at the list of options in each category and choose the hottest one (meaning strongest potential to dazzle) either based on personal experience or research.  I had the option to skip categories that were outside my scope of expertise and there were several of those items such as the category for best painting software or the best tripod category.

There were hundreds of products in several dozen categories.  One of the best parts about was the ability to see a few products before they had really been introduced to the industry.  My personal favorites?  I really liked the parabolic light modifier from Alien Bees.  It actually won the light modifier category.  I was already planning to buy one before that, I just haven’t gotten around to it yet.

I was also very intrigued by Nik Software’s Viveza 2 plugin for Photoshop.  I haven’t used their stuff for a really long time but am tempted to give this one a try.

There were some disappointments.  SuccessWare won for best studio management software and ShootQ did not.  I use both and can say that one makes me happy and one frustrates me.  ShootQ support and their willingness to make changes and improvements to their product based on customer feedback is fantastic.  Their proactive training both through webinars and phone support is very nice and they are the only company I have come across like that. (and just so you know, no one paid or encouraged me to say that).

To check it all out for  yourself go to ppmag.com