Camera Work

More Lighting / Electronic Flash

"Simplifying the Complexities of Lighting in Photography"
From Lens Rentals Blog

This is a good summary on lighting.
https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2017/06/simplifying-the-complexities-of-lighting-in-photography/


"Sync Speed versus Flash Duration"
From B&H
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/explora/photography/tips-and-solutions/sync-speed-versus-flash-duration


The Brightness of Color
http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0005091


Watt/Seconds & Joules
Electronic flash units are rated in watt/seconds. This is the energy delivered to the flash tube(s) when the storage capacitors are discharged into the flash tube(s). It has nothing to do with any modifier that patterns the light.

Simply: 1watt/second = 1 joule

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Watt_second


Light output and modifiers:

Beam Candlepower Seconds (modified light, usually with a reflector)
http://www.photogenic.com/support/faq/

Studio Flash Explained:
Efficiency, Wattseconds, and Units of Measure
https://www.paulcbuff.com/sfe-unitsofmeasure.php


Lumens and Footcandles / constant output lamps
http://www.theledlight.com/lumens.html


Introduction to Portrait Lighting
http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/portrait-lighting.htm

Fill Flash
http://www.sekonic.com/united-states/classroom/fillflashtutorial.aspx





x
 
"Drawing is the honesty of the art. There is no possibility of cheating. It is either good or bad." Salvador Dali
 
from the Donal Weber answers I liked very much this sentence:

"Photography is not in the mechanical aspects but in the thoughtfulness of seeing. Interpreting the world, abetting your curiosity to get the better of you. "

Thanks emraphoto for the link,

robert
 
Certainly there are intellectual conversations that need to be had. Specifically about photography and photojournalism in our communities. The lines that resonated the most with me are the simplest though...
With photography, I can get dirty. I can crawl around, tear my pants, and nobody cares. I can go into the world, participate in life. Curiosity is aptly rewarded.

Love that
 
emraphoto said:
Certainly there are intellectual conversations that need to be had. Specifically about photography and photojournalism in our communities. The lines that resonated the most with me are the simplest though...
With photography, I can get dirty. I can crawl around, tear my pants, and nobody cares. I can go into the world, participate in life. Curiosity is aptly rewarded.

Love that
Click to expand...

Agreed. With art, you can pretty much do whatever you like (with in reason) in the name of art. I've asked private property owners, who almost never give permission for anything, to visit their property to make pictures and they say yes. Same for some industry and businesses. As long as they understand my intensions and know I'm being honest with them, approval is granted. Most recently, it was a large city agency. I see all kinds of stuff that the average person wouldn't see.

Actually today, few people are interested in anything other than the electronic device in their hand.

There is so much "photography" today that anything half way serious and well executed sets itself so far apart from the "what I had for lunch" social media photo, that people take notice. I'm also occasionally amazed at the knowledge and interest some people have in art. Maybe it was the Art History class they had in school that stayed with them. By giving permission they feel some participation in the making of the work. And indeed, they are an important participant.
 
PKR said:
Agreed. With art, you can pretty much do whatever you like (with in reason) in the name of art. I've asked private property owners, who almost never give permission for anything, to visit their property to make pictures and they say yes. Same for some industry and businesses. As long as they understand my intensions and know I'm being honest with them, approval is granted. Most recently, it was a large city agency. I see all kinds of stuff that the average person wouldn't see.

Actually today, few people are interested in anything other than the electronic device in their hand.

There is so much "photography" today that anything half way serious and well executed sets itself so far apart from the "what I had for lunch" social media photo, that people take notice. I'm also occasionally amazed at the knowledge and interest some people have in art. Maybe it was the Art History class they had in school that stayed with them. By giving permission they feel some participation in the making of the work. And indeed, they are an important participant.
Click to expand...

I suppose my experience is a bit different. Even the bulk of good work leaves me cold. I have students that are remarkably good photographers. Most are very proficient with their gear, imaginative and driven. They produce great work and the same goes for a lot of the stuff I see. The fact remains though, I am mostly unaffected.

The process of going out into the world, curious, is what drive me. Getting dirty. Engineer prints under bridges and guerilla projections. Meeting strangers. The technical aspects of photography and it's ethic's are best left to other's.

2 dimensional design, color and art history are a different matter. Therein lays the roots of the language and without some grounding in this immense world, you ain't going to be another Webb (either one of them).
 
emraphoto said:
I suppose my experience is a bit different. Even the bulk of good work leaves me cold. I have students that are remarkably good photographers. Most are very proficient with their gear, imaginative and driven. They produce great work and the same goes for a lot of the stuff I see. The fact remains though, I am mostly unaffected.

The process of going out into the world, curious, is what drive me. Getting dirty. Engineer prints under bridges and guerilla projections. Meeting strangers. The technical aspects of photography and it's ethic's are best left to other's.

2 dimensional design, color and art history are a different matter. Therein lays the roots of the language and without some grounding in this immense world, you ain't going to be another Webb (either one of them).
Click to expand...

I can only say that I've mostly thought of photography as an illusion. You take 3 dimensional big space and turn it into 2 dimensional small space, and then with B&W it's further removed from someone's reality. All that must be understood and maybe thought about when making photos. You can get into perspective and color too.

Being curious is something you're born with, like the ability to create. I don't know that these things can be taught. If someone can tell the difference between a good photo (or any art) and a bad one, there is something to work with. They don't have to like it, but must recognize it's value. From there it's all about personal taste I think.

The willingness to explore is also important. I know I have to be willing to fail at many photos. They are visual experiments. But the exploration is a road of visual growth. I'm a serious critic of my work. Lots of test prints never make the cut to a final. Adams said he would be happy with 12 good images in a year, Avedon said 10 would make him happy. I haven't come up with a number yet, but it's in the 10 or so range I guess. Many people taking pictures today don't edit well or at all. That kind of thing can be taught if the student is interested.

I look at a lot of stuff that never gets photographed. You learn over time, about the stuff that translates well into a small 2 dimensional representation of reality and the stuff that doesn't... and hopefully why.

Certain elements in a photo grab me. These may not be the same for others. If you work for an editor, it's good to know the editor's taste. If I'm the editor, it's the same.

After all the art and craft and other BS, I think it all comes down to taste.

Hope that clarifies a bit
 
40 years on: the exile comes home to Prague

"Forty years on from the 1968 Soviet invasion of Prague, we meet Josef Koudelka, the man who captured the most startling images of that dramatic week, then went on to become one of the greatest photojournalists of our time"

I posted this piece long ago on CW. Just found it and thought it worth a repost.

https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2008/aug/24/photography



x
 
Bob Michaels

Bob is a member of RFF. He posts on threads from time to time - when not traveling, I think. I try to visit his web site now and then to see what he's been up to. He's added some new stuff from his recent trips to Cuba. Bob has immersed himself into the Cuban culture over the many visits he's made to the island. The progress shows in his work. I generally don't comment on the work I post, but we can all learn a bit from how Bob has worked with this one subject over a good period of time.

Bob lives in Florida, and has some bad weather coming his way with Hurricane Irma. Stay dry Bob.

Best, pkr

http://www.bobmichaels.org/

x
 
"You take 3 dimensional big space and turn it into 2 dimensional small space"

amazingly, i have never thought of this. it will be on my mind for a few days
 
emraphoto said:
"You take 3 dimensional big space and turn it into 2 dimensional small space"

amazingly, i have never thought of this. it will be on my mind for a few days
Click to expand...

AND THEN you take what's color and make it black and white!

I think I first read Ralph Gibson going on about all this. It's the same as Garry Winogrand talking about a photo being about what something looks like photographed. Same concept. Just a different explanation.

But it's really true. Think about it when next looking through your viewfinder. You know I work in color a lot, well almost all my personal work has been b+w for a couple of years now. It's really changed the way I compose a shot. Still hold my personal rules of composition, but I've loosened up a lot.

I read two books that had a big effect on my stuff. "About Time" and a current book on Eadweard Muybridge.. and his building of a fast shutter, among other things. I've really become aware of the camera's unique ability to capture a slice of time, in a constant river of time. I don't know if I said that well, but it's had a profound effect on my personal work.

A camera in the hands of someone who is competent, allows for the possibility of showing others things they would never see. The shutters ability to capture a big or small portion of time shouldn't be taken for granted. It's something we can't do alone. We need the device (camera shutter) to do this.


https://www.amazon.com/About-Time-Einsteins-Unfinished-Revolution/dp/0684818221

https://www.amazon.com/River-Shadow...5448191&sr=1-2-spell&keywords=edward+mybridge

"River of Shadows"
From Publishers Weekly

"In the 1870s, at a racetrack built by railroad baron Leland Stanford, Eadweard Muybridge invented high-speed photography. With his camera, he cut time into fractions of a second and laid it out in slices. Never before had human eyes seen a trotting horse distinctly, and the photographs astounded horsemen and artists, especially when Muybridge set the film in motion and the horse reeled fluidly across the screen. Today it is difficult to understand the pictures' impact, but 2001 NBCC finalist Solnit (As Eve Said to the Serpent) vividly recreates the wonder that greeted those primitive movies. Although she points her lens at Muybridge, her true subject is the perceptual revolution of the 19th century when the railroad, the telegraph and the camera transformed the experience of space and time."

x
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom