PixelatedImage Blog

2008. Sleeping on the train to Tunis, Tunisia. Or Sfax. I can’t recall now. Photo credit: The Legendary H.

On Friday I posted a letter from a photographer asking a very pointed question about his future in the craft. I put the note out there and invited replies from you, and boy did you ever step up to the plate! If you’ve not read the email, or the replies contributed by this community in the comments, you should do that. Thanks to all of you for the diversity of perspectives.

One of the reasons I gave, tongue-in-cheek, for not replying immediately was that y’all would just read what I wrote and say, “Yeah, what he said.” The irony, of course, after reading all your replies, is that I’m forced to do the same. There’s not much more I can add. The other reason, unstated, was that I was short on time, and throwing it out to you seemed like a good distraction. Again, the irony is that it forced me to read through over 70 comments. Next time I’ll just answer the darn question

The question, as far as I could see it, was from a photographer really wanting to know whether being a generalist, as opposed to specializing, would prevent him from becoming a successful working photographer. Those were the broad strokes I took from the question. Some of you followed this tack, other picked up on other subtexts. Here’s my reply to the question as I understood it.

Dear Doomed(?) in Duluth,

While your question begs for you to define your terms, I think that your situation comes with both potentially strong advantage and disadvantage if what you’re after is to make a living in photography, in addition to just doing it for the sheer pleasure of it. You alluded to being easily distracted. Sounds like you photograph people for a while, then move on to animals, then to landscapes, then someone shows you HDR and you’re off running in another direction. If that’s what is going on, keep at it. Follow your inclinations in every direction they lead. This is part of you and you need to be true to that. One of two things will happen; you will remain easily distracted for the rest of your life and your life’s work as a photographer will reveal a person who was insatiably curious in a limitless amount of things, or you will one day find one thing that you love to photograph so much that you slow down, and begin to focus a little more specifically in one direction. Nothing wrong with that.

That’s the advantage. You will learn so much from so many different areas, and each new thing you learn will bleed over into other things you photograph, and that’s a strength.

The disadvantage is that it’s very hard to market that if it remains so all over the map. However, what some people neglect to consider is that choosing a niche market, like being a wedding photographer shooting destination weddings in the arctic, doesn’t for a minute mean you need to limit your creative efforts or photographic exploration of other subjects or other disciplines. Shoot the weddings, get paid well for them, then come home and shoot long-exposure abstracts of hummingbirds with a pinhole 4×5 camera to your heart’s content. Elsewhere I encouraged photographers not to the let their marketing niche become their creative rut. The inverse is also true; there’s no reason your love for photographic exploration of a million different subjects should exclude you from marketing to a niche and being seen as a specialist in that market. One need not define the other and that’s one of the great things about a healthy disregard for “it’s always been done this way.”

Marketing to a niche is not the only way to do things. I wouldn’t choose to do it any other way, as marketing is really just communication and it’s a much, much harder task to talk to an undefined audience about an undefined subject. Niche marketing allows you to pick your topic and your audience and to speak with authority.  Explore to your heart’s content, follow that next shiny thing, whether it’s a subject, a technique, a new piece of gear, if you must. But if you want to make a living, you’ll have a much easier time if you pick one area to which you can direct your marketing. Do it well, charge well, and you’ll have plenty of time to pursue your hummingbird project or photographing fire hydrants with your iPhone in your spare time.

Most importantly, as others pointed out, shoot what you love. Enjoy it. Strive for excellence. If you want to make a living at it, find a niche and make it yours. Don’t sweat the rest.

Got a question that needs some group-therapy applied to it? Drop me a line via the contact link at the top of the page. I can’t promise to reply to all of them, but from time to time it might be good to sit around and bounce the ideas back and forth like this.

I got this question in my inbox this week:

In the past two decades I’ve learned at least one thing about myself:  I don’t do expert well. I do bouncing around, try everything once well.  Chalk it up to my being Gemini, too much coffee or ADD. I can get good, and focus for short periods of time but when the next shiny thing comes along – zoom, off I go.  Does this doom me to a life of mediocrity as a photographer? Does this mean I’ll never develop a “style” or “vision” that will be consistent enough to market?

Sincerely, Doomed In Duluth.

I’ve got a response. But I’m interested to first hear yours before I write mine. Otherwise you’ll totally copy me or just write, “yeah, what he said.” and we’ll miss a chance to hear other voices, encourage each other, and hold hands around the campfire while we sing Kumbaya. Or something. Seriously, how would you reply to this? It’s a good question and I know it gets asked more often than we admit, but usually it gets asked with our inside voices, the ones we try to ignore or medicate. Give it a shot in the comments.

Every week, without fail, I get an email from an inquisitive mind about the EXIF data in Within The Frame, specifically the question goes like this, and I quote from yesterday morning’s email on the matter:

I noticed that in quite a lot of your photos you use high ISO even though there seems no reason to do so, for instance using ISO 800 and 1/5000 sec exposure. Wouldn’t ISO 200 and exposure 1/1250 sec give better results ? That is, less noise and higher dynamic range. Isn’t 1/1250 fast enough ? Of course the case may be that you had no special reason for this setting at a specific photo but it seems to be quite a consistent feature.

It’s a good question. Every photographer has different priorities, different ways of shooting, etc. If I were in a consistent lighting situation I’d put my camera on ISO 400 or lower, probably starting the day at ISO 200. But the thing is, I do so much shooting in mosques, temples, and dark little workshops that it’s not long before my ISO gets cranked up to 11. And by 11, of course, I mean ISO 800. And then – here’s the dirty little secret you’ve all been waiting for – I get distracted shooting, walk outside and spend an hour at ISO 800, and the resulting high shutter speeds, before I notice. Why? Because my top priorities are the settings that affect the aesthetics of the image in the way that I am most concerned about – in my case usually the aperture and resulting depth of field.

I know, I know, the ISO affects the aesthetic, but it just doesn’t affect it ways I notice or care about most of the time. My 5D and 5D/2 bodies create great looking files if you expose the image for the most amount of data and don’t try to pull much detail out of underexposed shadows, which is why I expose the way I do (HERE‘s an article on that). I don’t use Noise Ninja, never have. I’d probably benefit from it once in a blue moon, but i generally don’t have issues with noise. Nail the exposure and even at 800 the files look great to me. But like I said, we all focus on different things and some people get fixated on noise.

So the short answer – I get distracted, see something I’m excited about and chase it. Sometimes the ISO takes a while to catch up. You have to know what’s important to you. I’d rather follow my eye and my heart and get the shot than fiddle with ISO, but usually it’s not even conscious. I wish I could give you a better answer, something about string theory and reciprocity failure and the muted tones of a lower dynamic range…but mostly I just get distracted easily.

It’s still the long-weekend here in Canada. Man, it’s been relaxing to be away from it all. Tomorrow’s a travel day so check in, I’ll try to post, but no promises.

The Big Q
A question that came out of a recent Big Q from Matt: How do you balance your vision verses the vision of the art director/graphic designers that ask for specific images? I know they are the client and you need to give them what they need but what if they are too constrained? Similarly, how do you balance planning beforehand with reacting in the field?

The Big A
Thanks Matt. Good questions and, to be totally honest, not ones there are perfect defining answers to. First of all, I am a huge believer in the notion that clients buy your time and talent because they believe your vision is a fit for their project, not because you know how to press the shutter button better than any other camera monkey out there. So you should be starting on the right foot, with their trust in you already somewhat assumed. They will give you a brief that, hopefully, clearly communicates their needs, and you’ll likely have a meeting or two to clarify things, and give you a chance to ask questions of the client about scope and specs and what exactly they’re looking to communicate. If you’re really lucky you’ve got a client who trusts you and your vision to interpret the brief and come home with something that both meets the needs of the brief, and does so without compromising your vision of things.

Any place where the world of craft and commerce meet will be rife with compromises. You may need to shoot images wider than you like, but understanding why the client wants this (we need bleed room) will help. You might need more negative space than you prefer (we need room for the masthead on the cover). You might need to shoot from a specific angle (we need to protect the identity of the child). Remember that this is not a cap on your creativity but an invitation to play with it a little more. I’ve written before about the positive effect of constraints on creativity and believe that, while frustrating at times, these constraints should push us to better work, not resign us to mediocre work.

Your second question is also about balance. I see it as the balance between pro-active and reactive. It’s not one or the other, it’s both. You do your scouting and your field prep as thoroughly as you can and lean on that prep for much of your work, but you also need to plan for the serendipitous and, frankly, for all your planning to land on its head and be completely useless. I work in the so-called developing world. We have language issues, logistics issues, and a million surprises. So much of my work relies on my ability to be flexible, patient, and to ignore what’s gone wrong and focus on how we can make the most of it. Some days it all goes well and then the planning and scouting pays off in spades. On the days it all goes wrong the planning is even more valuable because it provides a safety net – you don’t fall quite so far. But either way it only goes so far. Life happens and you have to watch for it, roll with it, and be ready when it happens.

Feel free to add your Big Q in the comments for consideration. Canucks, I hope you’re having a great Victoria Day. Within The Frame is now shipping in Canada, and is in stock in many Chapters/Indigo locations. Americans,  your favourite bookseller should have them by now. There are also still signed copies available HERE.

Two questions came out when I posted this month’s wallpaper last week. So it’s a Two-fer this week.

The Big Q
“I like this monochrome look. What was the original color/colors? Do you “see” these monochrome image when you are there shooting? Was this one of those cases where you look at the computer screen and see a grey uninteresting sky and wonder, how can I save this? Just wondering if you had this vision for the picture when shooting, or later.” – Chris

“Love your Wallpaper today.  I’m partial to the blue one, though I like both.  Was wondering how you put the calendar on the image.  Where did you find the calendar template? Or did you create it?” – Lisa

The Big A
Thanks to both of you. This shot was taken first thing in the morning en route to a location. I was truly captivated by Bangladesh. Dawn and dusk were really magical times – the light, the trees, the endless rice patties. Loved it! And as we pulled closer to our location this one morning I saw this and begged the driver to stop. I shot a couple frames with my 70-200/2.8L on my 5D MkII, and then the moment was gone. (EXIF, 200mm, 1/1600 @ f/2.8, ISO 100.)

Chris, you asked about my choices in rendering the tones in these images, so I’ll be straight up with you. The blue was a choice made specifically for this wallpaper. I’d played with it and liked the idea of doing two versions so folks had a choice – blue seemed a natural. And in the end it does echo the peaceful feeling I got from the scene. But my heart is still in the version with the green tones because it’s how I saw the scene. I’m posting the original raw file here so you can see the un-toned image. It’s had contrast added via the tone curve, and I let Lightroom Auto tone it, but other than that, nothing.

But this raw negative doesn’t speak at all to the mood and feel of the place, the greens, the humidity, the back-in-time feel, so I made adjustments to the tone curve, added a couple gradient filters, punch the clarity to boost mid-tone contrasts and then used the Split Toning – blue in the highlights and green in the shadows -  to give it the mood I felt when shooting. I also did some tidying up with the clone tool to get rid of a couple errant branches on the edge of the frame. Here they are side by side:

As you can see there’s nothing wrong with the sky, I could have gone several ways with this image but saw it through, I think, very nostalgic eyes, so wanted to interpret it that way. I don’t ever see it as fixing, but interpretation.

Lisa, you asked about the calendar element. I can’t tell you how much email I get about this. Shocking. It’s a simple Photoshop image with all numbers, etc. on different layers. After I’d done a year of calendars I had versions with all seven variants of which day the month begins on so now it’s as simple as turning on or off the 31st day every now and then. February is a couple extra clicks. Anyways because I like you, I’m going to upload a layered PSD file for all your calendar needs – I’ve changed the fonts to Verdana to be sure you all have the font on your system and to make it a little more generic in an effort to encourage y’all to add your own personality. Click the Calendar thumbnail above – or HERE – to download a zipped PSD file.

Any questions? Class dismissed! Don’t forget that tomorrow the Twitter-view between Peachpit Press and myself, conducted live over the Twittersphere in 140 character bites. More information HERE. It’s a bit of an experiment; should be fun!

The Big Q
“David, I’m an avid reader of your blog. Further, I cannot wait to get  my hands on your book as a source of inspiration. I’ve read all of the  available excerpts and am hungry for more.

I’m curious, how much directing do you have to do when out shooting.  In other words, are all of the scenes in your book, or in general,  candid, or are some of them posed? This might make a good blog post,  unless of course, it’s already in the book. It’s just something that  I’ve wondered about when I see great photography with pictures of  people in it.” – Paul.

The Big A
First, thanks for the kind worlds, Paul. Frankly, I can’t wait to get my hands on the book either. I should be getting one of the first copies off the press and FedEx could be arriving at any moment with a book with ink still wet!

Yes, this is answered in some part in the book, but perhaps not so directly. I think my images are a real mixed bag of candids, and portraits. The candids and street photography are, by nature, un-directed. The portraits, well that’s a mix too but there are certainly times when I will direct things. If you look at my work for World Vision, those are commercial images. Real children in real situations, with real animals. But I do what I need to in order to get the right angle, the right light, and other considerations. For example, if a dress or article of clothing is torn in such a way that it is immodest, I’ll safety pin it. My work isn’t journalistic and the client has policies surrounding issues of child-protection, so I do what needs to be done to get an image which is beautiful, honest, and complies with the clients’ needs.

I think what is often forgotten is that almost any presence on our part, and especially when there is interaction, is a directoral interference of some sort. And beyond that we chose our angle, our lens, our apertures, etc. So I assume I’m involved in process that’s already pretty invasive in terms of the “Is this real or posed?” question. The answer, even when the image took some work to get, even some posing, is – I hope – yes. Yes, it’s posed, but also real. Increasingly I’m shying away from images that are so camera-aware, increasingly I’m chasing portraits, both formal and posed, where there are less smiles, finding other expressions, possibly deeper ones even.

I think what’s important to remember is that if you endeavor to create images that are honest, respectful, and kind, it’s hard to go wrong. It’s more a question of taste, and what you’re trying to do with your images. (Unless you’re a photojournalist, and then your ethics force you – I hope – to a tighter standard)

Beyond that initial question is one of that addresses the How. How do you work with subjects in different languages, from different cultures, and get them to collaborate with you? The answer is this: with patience, a sense of humour, and often great difficulty.

My experience is that people are pleasers and when you point a camera at them, no matter if it’s your uncle or a man in Africa, they’ll start re-arranging things – from the expression on their face, to the tea-cup on the table that was in the absolute perfect spot. You want them to move an inch, they move a foot. You want them to ignore you, they pose and give you a thumbs-up. I can’t solve this one for you. But here’s what you don’t do: you don’t freak out, get impatient, mutter things under your breath, or do anything but treat them with patience and kindness. Remember, if you turn to a friend and say “Aw nuts, he moved the tea-cup. I was really stupid to even suggest it” – the man who speaks no English probably still knows the word “stupid” – and he hears “mumble, mumble, mumble STUPID mumble mumble,” and thinks you mean him. Not cool. I learned this in a humbling fashion from a kind man in Africa.

Be careful. Be flexible. Be patient. The people we meet and photograph are not theme park mascots, they have the right to say no, and the right to mess up your photograph with the best of intentions.At the risk of sounding overly self-promotional, there’s a longer discussion of these kinds of issues in my book, if the subject interests you.

The Big Q is your chance to drop a question in my lap. As I get busier and busier, this may be your best chance to have the question answered. Leave your Qs in the comments.

The Big Q
With all the traveling you do, you must get a lot of crud on your gear. What would be your gear cleaning routine? I’m often troubled from shooting at family dinners (kids spit, pets lick, food splatter…), and also blown dirt from coastal areas. Often a big air blower bulb doesn’t dislodge anything that’s been wet, but i hate to wipe filters and bare glass (often forced to take filters off at night) from fear of scratching the coating, even with 3M micro fibre cloths. What should I be doing? What would you do?

The Big A
Well, first of all, what I do and what you (or I) should do, are two different things. Some of you aren’t going to like this. In fact it reminds me of a conversation I had with Karl Grobl recently. We were laughing about the difference in ways that hobbyist and professionals treat their gear and this exact thing came up. Truth is, we generally don’t treat our gear so well. We protect it, but we don’t baby it. When I’m at home I clean my gear with canned air, inside and out. I know, I know. Some of you are gasping, muttering oaths and curses. But my gear is to be used and I use it well. I don’t own a lens pen or lens brush. I own several lint-free cloths, a rocket blower and an Arctic Butterfly sensor brush, and that’s it. Can’t even tell you when the last time I used the Arctic Butterfly was.  Of course looking at one of my 5D sensors you can tell that this is the case and prompted by this question I’ll dig it out and give it a proper cleaning, might even pack it up and send it to Canon for a fill cleaning and lube.

Don’t get bent out of shape about this sensor stuff. I’m sure if you try really hard you could damage the thing, and I don’t suggest you lick off the grime, but photographers have been fighting dust forever and we’ll keep fighting it. Get too bent out of shape about it and you’re really fussing about the wrong thing. Blow it out, swab it off, move along. I wipe my lenses with a cloth but have wiped them with everything from a t-shirt to a kleenex. Again, I know, and I’ll probably get kicked out of NAPP for saying so, but I have yet to scratch a coating. I put the highest quality B+W filters on the front of my lenses when it’s really crappy out, and that helps.

The Visible Dust products work well and there’s a new one I want to try called Dust-Aid.

Some outstanding questions from the past weeks, both those you left in the comments of the Big Q, and those sent by emails, etc. And by outstanding I mean they never got answered, not so much that they’re really exceptional questions, necessarily. For those unfamiliar with the Big Q, this is a new feature where you ask questions and merely answering them relieves me of the need to scour my brain for more blog material.

Wallpaper. A number of you have asked how I make the wallpaper. One savvy reader even wrote in begging me how I do it because he currently makes one in Photoshop, creating 31 text layers on a grid and painfully moving them around into alignment. So I copied his text and replied with, Heres how I do it…and pasted that sucker right back in there. I wish I coulda given a better answer, something more magical. But that’s how I do it. Open Photoshop, create a grid with guides, and lay it out layer by layer. the good news is once you’ve done one you only need to do seven versions as every month will begin on one of the seven days o’ the week. And once in a while you turn the 31 off, once in 12 you turn of the 29, and 30 too.Then I pick an image, drag this group of layers on top and I’m done. Option 2 – do a screen capture of the calendar on your Mac Dashboard, then crop it and overlay it onto your image. Easy but not as custom. As for the actual image on the March wallpaper and the work done in post-production, which is what some of you were asking, I’m working on a Here’s How/Here’s Why, kind of video thing.

Model Releases. Oh, the amount of questions I continue to get about this. Do I? Don’t I? Let me simplify this to terms that would make a litigator break into hives. A model release is needed to satisfy legal issues surrounding publication, ie USE of the image. It is not required to CREATE the image. There’s lots of places on this planet where you can get arrested for pointing your camera at anything other than a bug, there are places you need a permit to set up and shoot, and there are places you’ll just get stoned (with rocks) if you shoot the wrong thing. But model releases are not needed to create images. Do I get model releases? Yes. And no. Depends on the situation and it depends on the application for which I am creating the image. When I am working, for example, for World Vision, i have an assistant or producer who gets these releases filled out and signed and we carefully caption my images so we can cross-reference them with the releases. When I am shooting in India on my own travels I do not. Just imagine how you would react if a foreigner speaking no English walked up to you, took your photograph, and then presented you with a legal document. I don’t think so. Yes, it can be done, and it has been. But it’s not my way (you have to read this line with an Obi Wan Kenobi voice). Anything more on model releases should be gleaned from actual lawyer types. There’s an excellent on-going column in Photoshop User magazine, and as a bonus, if you buy the next issue there’s an article in there about my travel workflow.

Lens or Camera. Should I spend my money on a better lens or better camera? This depends largely on whether you have a lens or not. If you do not have a lens, your camera will work better if you get one. But if you already have both, and all other sarcasm/considerations aside…the better investment is in the glass. Why? Bodies obsolesce within about, oh, the time it takes to remove the new camera from the box. Lenses take longer. And a quality lens has a more significant effect on the look of the image than making the jump from, say, a 20D to a 30D. I try to get minimum 3 years out of a camera body, but way longer out of a lens. It’s smarter money spent on better images.

In my absence the Big Q got neglected. Let’s ramp it up again, folks. If you have a question about gear, travel, shooting, or business-y kind o’ stuff, leave it in the comments and I’ll pick one or two to reply to next week.

Some good questions came out of last week’s introduction of the Big Q, so I’ll reply to a few of them here. You remember the game, right? You ask questions, I pick one or two to reply to. Then the comments remain open each week for new questions.

Do you upgrade camera bodies every year?
Not a chance. If gear isn’t making you money it’s not an asset it’s a liability. In order for that gear to make you money it generally has to stick around and earn it’s keep. I upgrade cameras and computers about every three years.

How much for your left eye?
Way, way more than you can afford. I’m left-eyed, so you might get a deal on my right one.

You can only take one lens with you on your next trip: What lens will you choose?
Well, that depends where my next trip is, and why I am going. But for all around shooting probably my 24-70/2.8L. It’s fast and has a decent range in terms of compression. But the big question is why only one lens and who do I talk to about this cruel imposition?

This week’s Big Q, from Ron Carroll:
Okay, we all know it’s not about the gear, but… What’s the REAL DEAL with sensor pixel count. The manufacturers keep increasing the pixel counts — filling our CFs cards and HDs that much faster — but how much is enough? Better yet, what are the trade-offs in choosing one sensor size over another? Besides cost, that is. I’m currently shooting with a 12+Mpx sensor; it’s fine for my needs, but every now and then… When shooting wildlife, for example, it’s often hard to get close to the subject; so I sometimes wind up cropping to get a decent print, but I sometimes lose noticeable resolution when doing that. But for the other stuff — portraits and landscapes — how much is enough? Or, conversely, why the need the 21+Mpx cameras? Because, you know, they cost a little more. I thought with your 5D and your 5DMkII you’d have some first hand comparison experience.

Ron – This is a pretty complex issue, and you’d be better off asking a pixel peeper. The issues are myriad. More important than just pixel count is the size of the pixels involved. I read a good article by Russ Juskalian in the NYT a while ago that I’ll send you to, rather than re-counting the information I’m only getting a grip on now.

As for the other other question, why the need for 21+Mpx cameras? It depends on the photographer. For me it was the need to supply larger images to my stock house, and comments from a couple clients that they’d like larger files if they could get them. It doesn’t matter if my clients need larger files, it matters if they THINK they do. So when the 5D2 came out the larger files was a consideration, but not the main one. Other issues came into play, along with the fact that my current 5D1 bodies are getting on in years. All that said, I did this recent trip around the world for a major book contract and I left the 5D2 at home – didn’t need the file size, so my 5D1 bodies were all I needed and full sized 5D2 files would have slowed down my workflow considerably. Sometimes less is more.

HERE’s the link to the article, and it should be required reading for anyone curious about this issue because as long as we believe pixel-count to be the big issue the camera companies will make that their priority instead of more important issues, like dynamic range.

Thanks for playing along. There were a couple questions about model releases that I’ll address some other time. In the mean time, comments are open – what’s your Big Q?

I love the community growing up around this blog; I get more and more emails every day and I welcome them. But as more and more of you ask the same questions I can’t help but think that the answers to those questions could be benefiting more people than just the openly inquisitive ones. So, enter The Big Q. Each week I’ll answer one question left in the comments of the previous weeks Big Q. It could be a technical question, it could be something more light-hearted that you’ve just always wanted to know but were waiting for a more public and embarassing forum in which to ask it. The only rule is, I get to chose the one I answer. If I’m feeling really punchy, or the reply to your question is a quick one, I’ll answer unselected questions within the comments. I’m hoping this provides another helpful way for us to interact as well as to get some of the knowledge that’s currently flowing between only a few of us, to spread out a little.

So, who wants to go first?