Comments for Time and Time Photographer

Comment on What do you do with your old photos? by Philip

Philip — Sat, 04 Sep 2010 18:01:41 +0000

Actually I got a couple of e-mails asking something similar. So it was worthy of a post. I also do get the question from time to time from various people I meet and doing a post allows me to sit and consider my response. So in the future I’m more capable of answering the question more concisely.

Comment on What do you do with your old photos? by Leroy

Leroy — Sat, 04 Sep 2010 16:48:40 +0000

Wow! I didn’t think my question was worthy of a full-fledged posting. Thanks!

You make good points. I’d be interested in hearing what others think as well.

Comment on Down Day, Down Week by Leroy

Leroy — Thu, 02 Sep 2010 04:10:14 +0000

I have a question about cleaning your “virtual house.” At what point do you (and others) start to weed out older photos. I can imagine that you have many thousands more than I have. However, most of these are anything from marginal to outright garbage. At what point do you admit that these hold little, if any, value and it’s time to can them. Yes, storage is cheap, relative to what it has been in past times, but the amount of time to wade through the stuff, no matter the situation, is enormously expense.

Any thoughts out there?

Comment on Down Day, Down Week by Philip

Philip — Wed, 01 Sep 2010 01:53:07 +0000

That first digital was almost you Mark. You were the first photo after returning from Switzerland. You in your Con-chair the Barbarian Costume. Actually I’ve only lost time with the Drobo. It’s very true to it’s word about protecting your data.

Comment on Down Day, Down Week by Mark

Mark — Wed, 01 Sep 2010 01:33:56 +0000

Hey! That’s the Philip I know from VA!!! Sorry about the Drobo et al…
Mark´s last blog ..Brooklyn Sunset HDR

Comment on Why Watermark? by Philip

Philip — Sun, 29 Aug 2010 04:41:18 +0000

Invisible watermarks are fine as long as you have the time and resources to pursue any offenders to your copyright. If you don’t have the resources, it’s unnecessary. Personally I accept that every image I put online will be “stolen” and used in a manner I’m too excited about. So I only put up my “seconds” or images of low enough resolution that’s not worth stealing. If someone likes one of my photos and want’s to print out an 8×10 for their wall or inspiration, that’s great.

Comment on Why Watermark? by Stuart Moore

Stuart Moore — Sat, 28 Aug 2010 09:31:00 +0000

What are your thoughts on invisible watermarks that leave a “fingerprint” on images that can even survive pretty major image editing? These are of course purely about proving ownership.
Stuart Moore´s last blog ..The art of photography and incredible technology changes to come

Comment on Why Watermark? by Mark Lawrence

Mark Lawrence — Fri, 27 Aug 2010 04:20:10 +0000

Watermarking: why watermark.
Because I like see the glow of my name invade the spaces of my selectively produced photographs. Ok I just said a lot of nonsense or horse pucky. Another lame explanation is I like to waste my time.

Ok the jig is up. The tough target approach to preserving your images. The best way to protect your images is to copyright. Watermarks and IPTC codes can be removed. Making the images small at less than 100 kb in size. There is a extreme cost to this and that is the quality of your photos suffers greatly. The problem with protecting your images is the resulting quality. Only the metadata and copyrighting appears to have no affect on quality of the image.

Comment on Lens Correction and Panos? by Richard

Richard — Thu, 26 Aug 2010 15:55:45 +0000

The pano software I use, PTAssember as a GUI shell for PanoTools basically does the lens correction as part of the stitching, assuming you leave a reasonable overlap. I then use enblend to do the final merge, which handles the vignetting issues well. , which was taken with a Cannon Powershot point and shoot was done that way.

Comment on Lens Correction and Manhattan Skyline by Joe

Joe — Thu, 26 Aug 2010 04:47:09 +0000

Phil, thank you for replying to my comment with a “tip.” I was referring to the closer in shots where the buildings on the outer edge of the shot tend to fall into the center. I’ll be at Photoshop World next week and I’ll take some photos with this question in mind. Keep the tips coming, I really enjoy your shows.

Comment on Lens Correction and Manhattan Skyline by Mark

Mark — Wed, 25 Aug 2010 14:52:51 +0000

Looks good Philip, hope it was helpful for folks.
Mark´s last blog ..Haybale Glory HDR

Comment on The Photography Tip of the Week #075 by Sophia

Sophia — Tue, 24 Aug 2010 17:22:29 +0000

This is such an excellent tip! Love the detail you go into when explaining. Very easy to understand. Thank you!

Comment on Lens Correction and Panos? by Joe

Joe — Sun, 22 Aug 2010 23:12:12 +0000

I would like to this this test done on a cityscape where building distortion is more obvious. PS thanks for the podcasts.

Comment on Lens Correction and Panos? by Philip

Philip — Fri, 20 Aug 2010 21:16:17 +0000

Both panos were stitched using the same process. As far as control points, those can’t be the same since the lens correction moved those around. But I used Adobe Photoshop CS5′s photomerge with the same settings for each pass. Another interesting thing I noted, was that the photomerge of the corrected images took less time than the uncorrected. There could be other factors involved, but it was a significant difference.

Comment on Lens Correction and Panos? by Keith

Keith — Fri, 20 Aug 2010 20:54:17 +0000

Not sure it’s the len correction or just the variablity of the software… how did you stitch the images? Did you assign the same control points both time?

Keith

Comment on And How about HDRtist? by Leroy

Leroy — Fri, 20 Aug 2010 03:53:02 +0000

Unfortunately, this package only works on Macs and since I’m a PC guy, I can’t help you out. I’m just gonna continue using Photoshop CS3.

Comment on The Photography Tip of the Week #074 by Leroy

Leroy — Mon, 16 Aug 2010 21:00:45 +0000

I have known I should check this on my 4 year old Pentax K100D but this has inspired me to do so. How many generations will I find? I guess I’ll find out!

Comment on HDR Photomatix and CS5 side-by-side by Wanda

Wanda — Wed, 11 Aug 2010 21:33:53 +0000

We at gempics.com are about to launch the most exciting program available to anyone from professionals, to moms taking soccer pictures!
You can get a much clearer and vibrant look with just a click of our OPT button!
Be sure to check us out and become a beta user by signing up today!
http://www.gempics.com
It doesn’t get any easier than this.
And I look forward to hearing from you once you give it a try.

Comment on HDR Photomatix and CS5 side-by-side by Lisa

Lisa — Wed, 11 Aug 2010 18:58:08 +0000

Use both CS5 and Photomatix regularly. For me, the question isn’t which one is better. It’s which one is appropriate for the use I have at the moment. In general, I use both together to achieve my HDR images.

Comment on HDR Photomatix and CS5 side-by-side by Philip

Philip — Wed, 11 Aug 2010 13:25:14 +0000

I’m downloading the trial and I’ll see how it stacks up.

Comment on HDR Photomatix and CS5 side-by-side by Linda

Linda — Wed, 11 Aug 2010 08:14:27 +0000

Philip,
For the same reasons as you. I wondered if you had tried HDR Expose software for your HDR?

Comment on What does “photo” in photographer mean? by Philip

Philip — Mon, 09 Aug 2010 15:08:33 +0000

My intent was not to give a full greek lesson on the origins of the work photography. Sometimes I forget that my audience is a bit more wide spread than my neighborhood. Both photo and photon are derivatives of the Greek word phos (φῶς) meaning light. And graphy comes from graphē (γραφή) meaning to draw or write. My only point was that photograph is “light drawing.” Light drawing is much more broad than just what most people consider to be “photography.” I’m sorry if my over simplification detracted from the point of the article being that we as photographers are called upon to do much more than just “take” pictures.

Comment on What does “photo” in photographer mean? by Bas

Bas — Mon, 09 Aug 2010 14:29:05 +0000

Dear Phil,

You give some nice tips about photography. However your explanations are sometimes wrong. Also the word ‘photo’ is ancient Greek for ‘light’. A ‘photograph’ is a drawing (‘graph’) made with light.
Photons are the particles associated with light and they were discovered about 3 or 4 millenia after the language was matured. I’m sure ‘light’ was one of the first words they had.

I normally don’t correct people like this but it’s just frustrating that some pretty good tips get marred by bad backgroundinformation.

cheers from my sunny holidays in Greece,

Bas

Comment on Please Critique – Mirror by Philip

Philip — Mon, 09 Aug 2010 03:18:50 +0000

Then I suppose I now have to prove it and show you the two original images. Unfortunately this was a rushed shot. We only had about 5 minutes before the castle closed up. So getting this done with that mirror, was an accomplishment. We did a number of other shots with the mirror that turned out OK, but I particularly liked this concept.

Comment on What does “photo” in photographer mean? by Leroy

Leroy — Sat, 07 Aug 2010 01:33:05 +0000

Congratulations on the name change and good luck with it. I’d like to interject something about the new name. “Media Group,” at least to my ear, says more than just either photography or videography. I think of full-fledged graphic design. As anyone who has seen my website would attest, I am a design flop, even if I do occasionally have an eye for a photograph. I can’t imagine that if I were to start to do this to support a meager lifestyle that I’d ever dare to say “media.”

In seeing your work, Phil, you have the skills to support using that word. May the power of the word lend itself to your continuing and improving success!

Comment on Please Critique – Mirror by japhotoguy

japhotoguy — Fri, 06 Aug 2010 22:07:30 +0000

my critique is that without you having to tell us that she is in front of a mirror it is not immediately recognizable. I don’t know that she is. There is nothing else in the photo to suggest that the mirror is there, also, the other [post was correct, the two chairs are different. In the mirror the rail in the back of the chair turns down while the rail in the room turns up.
You are on the right track but the singular source of light blocks up the shadows, a reflector, another light source would have made this image.

Comment on Dragging Cyclists in Camera by Philip

Philip — Thu, 05 Aug 2010 11:26:26 +0000

None of the photos are cropped. I did everything in RAW because it was an evening race and I knew the light was going to change quickly as the sun set. So all I did was cull, color correct and post. Out of this batch I do like the sharpness of this photo the most and it may go into the portfolio. If it does, I’ll spend a little extra time with it and crop to give the cyclist more room to go.

Comment on The Photography Tip of the Week #002 by Philip

Philip — Thu, 05 Aug 2010 11:20:49 +0000

Actually all the photos were taken while standing at the sidelines. The first one was at the outside of turn 4 (of 6 turns.) It was the fourth shot in the sequence, but it was very first panning shot of the race. So any difference you see is most likely due to me ramping up to and getting used to the speed of the racers. It’s also a bit more difficult to hold focus through the outside of a turn over the inside.

Comment on The Photography Tip of the Week #002 by digital cameras for sale

digital cameras for sale — Thu, 05 Aug 2010 08:44:18 +0000

The first photo looks like you taken it when you are riding on a car. Am i right?

Comment on Dragging Cyclists in Camera by FotoStefan

FotoStefan — Thu, 05 Aug 2010 08:43:30 +0000

My favorite it the second one.

Comment on Dragging Cyclists in Camera by Leroy

Leroy — Thu, 05 Aug 2010 01:55:36 +0000

By the way, I’ve also used the dragged shutter technique when photographing dancers at wedding receptions. It not only helps to capture the sometimes frentic nature of the dance but also, give DJ lighting these days, can give a surreal quality to the photo.

Comment on Dragging Cyclists in Camera by Leroy

Leroy — Thu, 05 Aug 2010 01:51:34 +0000

I love to pan with cyclists. My ONLY good panning shots are of cyclists in fact. Maybe it’s a matter of speed. Maybe it’s not enough practice, but I wish my success rate would be as good as yours. (That’s why your the pro and I’m just a hack.)

As far as favorites, I would have to say it would depend on my purpose. Either of the two shots at the far left are great. The upper shot gives even more motion because you have not only the typical lateral motion but also the curvlinear motion rounding the corner.

#5, however, is spectacular. The cyclist is tack sharp (well, at this size she is anyway) for her entire body except for the lower part of her legs. This captures her persona, not just the motion blur. The only thing I don’t like about it is because of the panning, she has little room to “ride into,” even if the image is cropped differently. This is just another complexity to add to the difficulties of panning.

Don’t get me wrong though. Assuming anyone reads this comment, I love to experiment with panning despite its difficulties. Sometimes you can get stunning shots. Sometimes, you’ll get garbage. Either way, it’s worth trying.

By the way, I sometimes wonder when I’m panning with autos if people think I’m with the Department of Homeland Security. I worry that sometime someone who may be a bit outside the law might want to visit me with more than artistry on his or her mind!

Comment on The Photography Tip of the Week #072 by Philip

Philip — Tue, 03 Aug 2010 01:19:22 +0000

I noticed the misspelling but I chose not to change it. I don’t like editing other people’s comments. I reserve that for when they use profanity or inappropriate language.

Comment on The Photography Tip of the Week #072 by Philip

Philip — Tue, 03 Aug 2010 01:04:11 +0000

Here's Scott's article

Comment on The Photography Tip of the Week #072 by Leroy

Leroy — Tue, 03 Aug 2010 01:03:24 +0000

By the way, I really should proofread my comments. It wasn’t meant to be a “threat” (though some of the comments could be taken as such) as much as it should have been “thread.”

Comment on The Photography Tip of the Week #072 by Philip

Philip — Tue, 03 Aug 2010 00:44:12 +0000

Didn’t realize that Scott was doing that on his blog. I’ma about a week behind on reading his blog.

Comment on The Photography Tip of the Week #072 by Leroy

Leroy — Tue, 03 Aug 2010 00:39:54 +0000

Phil,

This is a nice segue to Scott Kelby’s blog this very day regarding 8×10 frames and mattes. Perhaps some of your readers/listeners would find that threat of comments interesting as well.

Comment on Split Printing by Leroy

Leroy — Sat, 31 Jul 2010 23:26:49 +0000

Thank you. I’m glad to see that I can be of inspiration to someone. It seems to be happening so seldom for me recently.

Comment on Split Printing by Philip

Philip — Fri, 30 Jul 2010 03:51:53 +0000

If you are having them produce commercially, then you really don’t need to do a split print since commercial printers have a lot of sizes to choose from. But, you could conceivably do this same sort of effect with a commercial printer if you had multiple photos that were in a specific pattern so when they were hung on the wall a certain way you could easily tell that they are all part of the same image. Now that you’ve given me this idea, I’m going to have to do it myself. Time to add another project to the list.

As for the setup of the image for the splitting, It is reasonably straightforward, but it’ll probably be best for me to do a video showing the steps in Photoshop. So I’ll get that together and post it soon.

Comment on Split Printing by Leroy

Leroy — Fri, 30 Jul 2010 02:59:01 +0000

I hate to ask for even more help, but when one isn’t as skilled, one has to ask. I have my prints commercially produced. How would I prepare the file to send to someplace like MPIX to do something like this?

Comment on Split Printing by Carl Evans

Carl Evans — Wed, 28 Jul 2010 12:15:07 +0000

Nice tip on being creative and using what one has to the maximum benefit. This is something I’m going to have to try. I can print 17″ wide now, but using this approach I can go “huge”.

Comment on Take a Hike by Philip

Philip — Sun, 25 Jul 2010 20:04:35 +0000

The walk I had planned out had a number of points of interest along the way. Since it was so incredibly hot, we chose to drive to the points of interest. So we had more of a Photodrive technically speaking. I also enlisted a model to use for our photographers and that was really nice since a lot of our photographers were not professionals. It gave them the opportunity to do something a bit different and everyone enjoyed themselves.

Comment on Take a Hike by Leroy

Leroy — Sun, 25 Jul 2010 12:48:33 +0000

I hope that your walk was as enjoyable as ours was in Milwaukee. I think your earlier posting about walking slowly and taking fewer photos was a definite challenge at the Brady Street Festival, which is where we were for our Photowalk.

Thank you for the great information you provide to the public!

Comment on Automatic modes is cheating? by Mrlampp

Mrlampp — Fri, 23 Jul 2010 20:43:57 +0000

Every photograph begins in the mind. The mind is analogue. What the dispute concerns is the optimization of the image of a specific historical moment. Ultimately the argument concerns the difference between the photograph and photo illustration. What bothers me is the exemption of the images purpose.

Comment on Is Photographic Imitation Theft or Flattery by Anonymous

Anonymous — Tue, 20 Jul 2010 04:45:57 +0000

I think the project of duplicating a photo is fine. But posting it online or on your website as a sample of your work isn’t right. It’s true there is nothing original under the sun, and I “steal” location ideas and poses from other photographers but I think there has to be a line somewhere.

Comment on Is Photographic Imitation Theft or Flattery by Eric

Eric — Mon, 19 Jul 2010 20:34:33 +0000

Understand that I am not advocating ripping off another person’s work or creativity. I am talking about learning how to capture and manipulate an image – any image – because I like the outcome of the combination of techniques.

Eric

Comment on Is Photographic Imitation Theft or Flattery by Eric

Eric — Mon, 19 Jul 2010 20:30:21 +0000

If I like a photo and the exact subject was available, I would try to duplicate the original to learn how the image was captured. The “original” of the two images you posted has obviously had much post production work done such that the full effect cannot be duplicated in-camera. In that case, I would endeavor to duplicate the post production techniques that delivered the final image as well.

Eric

Comment on Photo Recipe by Philip

Philip — Mon, 19 Jul 2010 00:00:28 +0000

Creepy shadows are all part of the look. Did you notice the book the model is holding. Creepy is the point.

Comment on Photo Recipe by Leroy

Leroy — Sun, 18 Jul 2010 23:07:59 +0000

I love photo recipes. I still think there are some creepy shadows on the model’s face, but I think I could get rid of them if I were to follow your basic recipe. Thanks for all of the work you put into this site!

Comment on Automatic modes is cheating? by Premkumar Masilamani

Premkumar Masilamani — Sat, 17 Jul 2010 18:09:01 +0000

I agree with you. I stopped using automatic mode in recent times and use manual modes in most of the trips. However, if I had to make an immediate shot and didn’t have the time to set the controls, I fall back to automatic mode. It really helps.

Still, deep inside I want to master all the controls and go to a position where I can set the controls for any conditions without trial and error. :)

Love,
Prem
Premkumar Masilamani´s last blog ..ரணம் சுகம் – a musical novelette