The Digital Insider

My original plan was to finalize part 2 of the series I started here a couple of weeks ago, but then I came across this piece on CNBC yesterday and thought it would be interesting for our readers.

David Pogue from the New York Times did a piece on “AFLS” - Analog Format Loss Syndrome. As he mentions in the piece, so much of the equipment out there available for consumers are simply too difficult for the average user’s patience. Not to mention that the resulting quality is lower than expected.

This really reaffirms ScanDigital’s value proposition. We completely remove the leg work from converting your photos, slides and negatives into digital format or transferring your old videos and film into a usable digital format.

To see the video, please click here (CNBC wouldn’t let me embed the video in this post):

Do you suffer from AFLS?

If you were to start exploring the process of getting your images scanned into a digital format you would quickly see that most often the price to scan your photos is lower than the price to scan your slides and negatives. You are probably thinking, “Great! I will just send in my photos to be scanned and hold onto my negatives for safe-keeping.” Unfortunately for a small savings you would be keeping yourself from receiving the highest possible quality.

When scanning a print you are not working from the original material (negative) so essentially it is similar to making a copy of a copy. No matter how much we can do to adjust an image and while the results are often great, the results from scanning negatives or scanning slides almost always allows for a higher quality digital image. Because of how the slides and negatives are chemically processed it allows for a color quality that cannot be met on a standard photographic print.

Many consumers assume that because of the larger size of the prints they would create better digital images but with the high quality slide and negative scanners available that is just not the case. At ScanDigital we use Nikon scanners specifically designed for 35mm negative scanning and 35mm slide scanning. They are designed to scan at a very high dpi (we offer both 2000 dpi and 4000 dpi) with Digital Ice technology that automatically fixes very small scratches and any small dust particles that didn’t get completely removed during the slide and negative cleaning.

Slide scanning is a particularly important thing to do as the life of these slides is short-lived. Ektachrome slides for example can start deteriorating rapidly after just thirty years. Many customers express concern over shipping their irreplaceable slides across the country, believing that they are safer tucked away in the closet. Unfortunately by not preserving them digitally they are suffering irreparable damage as time goes on. ScanDigital is integrated with UPS for safe, secure and trackable shipping so don’t wait, save your precious memories by sending in your slides today!

As a photography hobbyist and former semi-pro I have had quite a bit of experience in the arena of sports photography. For me sports photography was a natural fit as I am an avid sports fan and love the excitement of trying to snap that great shot right when the moment happens.

For me, none of this would have been possible without digital photography. By being able to immediately review my images on my laptop I am able to make all the adjustments I need on the fly. So when that breakaway goal is scored late in the second half I have had a chance to adjust and re-adjust my camera so I can capture the moment perfectly.

As a photographer, athletes are coming at you very quickly and the focus points can be tricky. I find along with that the lighting varies in different spots and angles on an indoor court and when outdoors you need to always take into consideration where the sun is overhead and the changing cloud conditions.
While I would like to take a perfect shot every time, I am just not that good nor will I ever be. That is why I never miss an opportunity to review the images I have taken. The instant feedback of being able to view my own work has been every bit as valuable as any instruction I have received. Knowing what angles are working best with the lighting and how to adjust my equipment gives me an edge I would not have without the digital format.

Many of my best shots can be considered lucky by others and that I just happened to be in the right place in the right time. But most all of them were later in the game when I have had a chance to make adjustments and put myself in a position to be successful. It’s amazing how lucky one can get when they put in the work to get there.
Photo Credit: AP Photo/Kevork Djansezian

Going to photography school with passion, enthusiasm and a longing for photographic knowledge can sometimes make the most open-minded student hang on every word a professor utters in his/her lectures. This can create a nightmare for by-the-book photo students that go out in the field thinking that the way they were taught was the best, most efficient and in some cases the only way to do something. Having worked as an assistant while completing the last semester of the photography program at Santa Monica College I quickly learned that there are several ways to skin a cat…if you take this literally, well, I really don’t like cats.

Now, whatever you learn in photography school it’s just a primer. First, there are several photographers out there that have no formal training.  Second, 99% of the potential clients out there could care less. And lastly, the bottom line is can you do the job.  No one cares if you went to Pasadena Art Center, Brooks Institute in Santa Barbara or Santa Monica Community College. Hell, technically speaking, they all give you the same education. In seven years, I have only encountered one situation where an editor actually said to me that she preferred people from a certain school. I wasn’t from that school but was hired and paid my day rate just the same. I delivered the goods and that’s all that mattered.

You are probably wondering what the hell this all has to do with the above title. Well, for the first few years out of photography school my bread and butter income was assisting two architectural photographers. One guy had several cameras, a studio full of strobe and hot lights and every gadget imaginable not to mention that he was on eBay every single day looking for more gadgets. There were glass filters with specific holders, center filters for every lens, a shutter release with a wind up timer on it; you name it he had it. And it wasn’t out of character to use 12 or more lights on one shot as a matter of fact it was common.

The other guy was a total minimalist. We would go out with a field camera, a basic Lowell light-kit (1 - 750 watt and 3 - 1000 watt lights) and one HMI. He even used his son’s old white bed sheet as bounce and he would put filters on the camera lens with blue tack and cheap plastic Lee filters.

The bottom line is that they are two of the top five and most sought after architectural photographers in southern California.

I learned a lot from working with each guy. Hence, when I was working on my own as a still photographer or doing work on low-budget independent films as a cinematographer, I employed everything I learned from both guys. If there was a budget for some gadgets I knew the most effective way to use them and if there was no budget, which was generally the case, I knew how to do the best with what I had.

So, work with anyone and everyone you can, absorb as much information as you can then go forth and do what you do.

I miss film and knowing everything about it. Okay, I knew a lot about a little…anyway, it was fun to study or just experiment with how various film reacted to light, chemistry and the calculated manipulation of both. Certain films had specific characteristics especially, the different films of the two main brands Kodak and Fuji. Very valuable information back in the day and now of no consequence in the digital age.

So begins the lament, provided that you haven’t stopped reading this which would mean that you are still reading this and this and this and… Whoa…I just woke myself up.

Learning the specific characteristics of Kodak, Fuji and even lessor known brands like Aftra films made me very good and valuable at my job and fueled my passion for my then immersion into photography. Yeah, I just patted myself on the back and smacked my ass saying you da man. I worked 30 hours a week at a professional photo lab and was enrolled in photography full time as well as working as a photo assistant periodically and working freelance for the school newspaper. That just prompted some warm nostalgic feelings. Forgive the drooling reminiscent tone but damn those days were exciting and memorable.

Kodak’s film characteristics were a little magenta. And if you pushed the film, especially slide (E-6) film in the chemistry it would start to go really magenta after about 1/2 stop. Fuji was a bit on the green side for negatives but there slide film Provia RDPIII was awesome. You could push it in the chemistry up to 1 1/2 stops before there was a noticeable difference in the natural colors on the film. This could be a life saver if you are shooting something and for whatever reason your light meter reading and/or assistant mis-read the exposure by a stop, you could push it in the chemistry 1 stop and another 1/2 stop if that wasn’t enough and still maintain the color integrity of what was intended, not to mention that the grain structure would also hold damn well against this strain.

You still there? Get us another beer wouldya.

Quick lesson if you don’t know: pushing and pulling films are terms used in a lab during post production. If you push the film you increase the exposure on the film as well as time in the chemistry. Hence, pulling film is the opposite. Your are trying to remove some exposure/overexposure from the film when pulling. Film reacts more drastically in terms of color shifts when pushing film than pulling it. Also, grain is increased the longer the film is exposed to the chemistry, etc.

My favorite thing to figure out was how different films reacted when cross processing them. If you don’t know, all negative film is C-41 which is the lab or professional reference and E-6 is the reference for all positive or slide film. Now, each of these has a very specific and different type of chemistry and process including temperature for developing. You develop a negative and you still have to print it on paper to see the positive image or photograph. A slide on the other hand is a positive image and once developed you, in affect, have your picture. Going back to my aforementioned favorite, if you take pictures using positive or slide film (E-6) and process it in negative (C-41) chemistry that is called a cross-processing. And yes, it’s called the same for going the other way - negative film C-41 developed in positive E-6 chemistry.

Without visual examples you will have to take my word for it when I say that when you figured out how different films reacted, and/or didn’t react. Cross-processing film would create photographs with a texture, vibrancy and mood that was so much fun to play with. A fun example is one photograph I took while hanging out in New York with my friends. The printed photograph looked like it was painted. It was a relatively calculated event. I knew that by shooting and then cross processing Kodak EPP (E-6) film in negative chemistry that the finished photograph should have an overall cyan hue, with saturated colors and more than normal grain. I had also remembered a photographer that shot for Billabong had mentioned to me that they did a few campaigns with this idea and that they used hot lights as the light source. If you don’t know, hot lights or any incandescent light is yellowish-red or warm in color temperature. For whatever reason, this made colors pop with the aforementioned process. Meanwhile, back in New York, I’m looking at the Brooklyn skyline from Manhattan totally front lit by the sun on a clear spring day at dusk. My calculated and educated guess ended up producing one of mine and my friend’s favorite photographs for quite some time and people still see it and think that it was manipulated somehow. Well, it was…by film, chemistry and a warm evening sun.

From time to time I’ll wander the internet for something new and absolutely intriguing. Usually when this happens it hides behind account sign ups, which I’d probably forget the usernames and passwords anyway. If I like my latest discovery, I tend to research it and learn more about it only to bump into a few people over the weekend who shoot down the one I’ve picked in favor of something better, faster and easier than what I’ve stumbled upon. The way it seems to go more often than not as the speed of development and innovation continues so quickly it is hard to keep pace.

Recently I learned that Adobe was gearing up to move its full software line to the web. I was intrigued and began to investigate. There are a handful of companies trying to take Adobe like applications online and meet that challenge (Snipshot.com, Picnik.com, Fauxto.com just to name a few). Soon these startups will be beat or acquired by Adobe in its quest to move these applications to the web. Photoshop, the software on the lips of anyone doing image editing, is about to be integrated into a webpage. Well, to be fair “about” is a stretch I suppose. Rumor is that it will take up to a decade to make the full-blown version online, but within the year there should be a free version available.

This simply makes sense… the whole idea of having software sit online somewhere. This way the company knows exactly who’s using the software and when. No more pirated software, no need for updates/upgrades, and it pays for itself with advertisements! Yeah, I’m not too thrilled about that last part either, but I’d hope that if you subscribe to their program, you’d get those removed. Plus, it seems everyone has their pictures online somewhere to share with other people, why not fix them up a bit online first.

Now, Picnik and Snipshot are free so I’ve played around with their sites. They’re basic, but considering these applications sit within your browser, it’s amazing. Plus the average user does not need the wide spectrum of photo editing tools offered by a program with as much complexity as Photoshop. Fauxto’s site requires a sign in and going against my personal guidelines, I created an account. Now that I’ve tested a handful of these, I would say Fauxto comes the closest to Photoshop by providing layers and effects along with other goodies. I’d say check it out, but be careful before you go bragging to your buddies at the bar about your latest discovery… the next best thing is probably waiting just around the corner.

In my first semester of attending photography school full time I had a professor who was a very successful working photographer. I actually wondered sometimes why he taught. Especially after visiting his home studio in Venice. There was no doubt that he had done exceptionally well for himself. Anyway, during our first week of class he told us that we had to put together a book with tear sheets from magazines, et cetera that we liked. Now, that was broad yet, specific to the individual. He went on to explain that it could be anything for any reason. Whether you liked the lighting, the colors, it turned you on or repulsed you for whatever reason. It could be a photographer’s work that you admired or hated.

The exercise later revealed his reasoning. He had us take a lupe and look at the eyes of the subject in the photograph; especially studio photographs. By doing this it was a bit confusing at first but then completely obvious. You could see the lighting in the subject’s eyes. By studying the eyes you can generally determine where the light source was coming from and the shape of the light source. You could see if it was round, square, rectangular and the size and angle of the light. His suggestion was to find a photograph that you liked, look at the eyes, determine how it was lit and duplicate it. After recreating it, ask yourself what would I do different and do it.

It was a great idea and learning experience for any beginning photographer and/or student. It’s easy to look at something and think to one’s self that, “I can do that”. Well, this exercise was a way to prove it. I made such an attempt at duplicating a beauty shot I saw and it was difficult but exciting all at once. Nonetheless, it worked.

Currently and forever the only slight problem with the exercise is the blessing and curse of advancing technology in photography especially as it relates to Photoshop. A great tool for so many things whether creative and/or purely maintenance on photographs it can limit one’s learning experience in the aforementioned example. Primarily because the eyes can now be retouched to the extent that it makes it very difficult if not at times impossible to see the lighting scheme in the eyes.

Alas there are still great painters to study. Light is light and it hasn’t changed much over the centuries. Paintings are like photographs in that it takes a 2-dimensional medium and by using or manipulating light creates a 3-dimensional piece of work. The information is all around us. You can look at the way the light falls on your date or mate’s face when sitting at dinner or how the light bounces off a building in the late afternoon creating a warm and soft glow. The information is still in the eyes, your eyes.

As I committed last winter to be the photographer for my friend’s wedding this fall I was almost immediately regretting saying yes. First, although trained/schooled as a photographer, I’ve never shot or even assisted a photographer for a wedding. Nor have I ever had the desire to do so. Second, my friend’s are very simple folks that live in a mountain town two hours south of Lake Tahoe with a population of around 300. Third, I doubted that they could afford to pay a real wedding photographer and they expressed the fact that they didn’t want anything, “fancy”. Lastly, I’m a bit abnormal - a bit is being quite generous - but although there is a ton of money to be made and you are documenting this wonderful event of a bond between people in love, I don’t like wedding photography because of the pressure and the general guarantee of a normal human being turning into bridezilla on the “most important day of her life”. I spend my days playing poker and golf…not too normal.

Anyway, the day finally came and as I expected once me, my girlfriend and our mutual friend drove 5 hours to get there, Bridezilla greeted us with open arms. Forgive me, I’ll get back to the lesson at hand.

Most of my days are spent in relative calm regardless of the chaos around me but when it comes to my photography I’m a bit anal retentive. Hence, when I work I usually have a backup for my backup and my motto is the same as Christian Slater’s character Clarence in True Romance. It’s better to have it and not need it than to need it and not have it. Well, the mountain air amongst other things must have gotten to me before I left LA to go forth and be a wedding photography caped crusader. I borrowed a digital camera from a friend and fellow photographer because I haven’t caught up with technology…yes, I still shoot film.

Now, as aforementioned, my friend’s don’t have much in the way of discretionary income and developing a bunch of rolls of film can get a bit expensive. In addition, I felt that I would want to take a quick peek at what I’m shooting during the posed family photos. To make a long story longer, I borrowed the older digital version of Canon’s prosumer cameras, the 10D. I’ve used it in the past and when shooting RAW files it’s more than sufficient. As well as the fact that I needed to borrow one of my friend’s shorter zoom lenses (28 - 80mm) and the lens only works with the 10D. I only have long lenses (70 -200mm and up). There was a 5D available to borrow but that puts me back to having to rent a lens, etc. I wasn’t getting paid for this gig and really just wanted to enjoy the wedding and get hammered with all the locals at the wedding and reception. But alas I lost my mind and thought that shooting the wedding would be fun and a piece of cake.

So, I borrow the Canon 10D with one battery, a 28 - 80mm zoom lens, a TTL flash along with two 1GB flash cards and one 512K flash card. I’m stoked. I can shoot the wedding and pick off candids at the ceremony and the reception as a bonus. They only asked for some ceremony shots - the ceremony lasted less than 5 minutes which is extraordinary in itself but super awesome given the fact that I had just attended a Catholic wedding two weeks before…stand up, sit down, sing, stand up, sit down, have communion, stand up, sit down - and the obligatory posed shots with family members, etc.

Well, after waking up hungover from the after rehearsal dinner party at pretty much the only bar open past 8pm in this small old west town, I checked everything that I had set out and charged the night before. It all was working as we left in the crisp mid-afternoon air to witness my friend’s union.

Let me go back for a second. In the morning as we all stumbled awake it was gray and there were extremely light snow flurries. I’m loving this because overcast days provide the best lighting for photographs especially in the middle of the day when the sun is directly overhead. The clouds act as a giant soft box. The flip side of that would be shooting in harsh overhead sunlight in the middle of the day that creates awful racoon eye shadows. Well, of course, the overcast skies didn’t last long and it turned out to be a beautiful fall day with moderate temperatures and clear skies. A brides’ dream and my nightmare.

As we indulged in the hair of the dog and such in the morning prior to heading to the spa for the day’s event(s) - held on the grounds of the spa where she works, the backdrop is gorgeous with the mountains, waterfalls, cabins and a cute little wedding arch - I double checked the camera gear again and even put the battery on the charger once more to be sure that it was fully charged.

We were all standing outside waiting for the ceremony to kick off. I’m taking some test shots of my girlfriend to dial in the flash as a fill for the harsh eye shadows and was ready to go. Right at that moment, I turned to take a candid shot of my buddy standing with his mom about to walk down the aisle when it happened. As I pressed the trigger the camera ceased up. I look at the display screen to see the camera battery icon flashing saying it was dead. Almost simultaneously, the wedding planner - who I know as this cool local chic and awesome skier who hasn’t had a season pass for years because she hikes for her turns - look at me with her pretty smile and ask me if I’m ready. In a panic that was only noticeable to my girlfriend I calmly ask for 5 minutes. She says no problem and I proceed to faint right there. Okay, I wanted to but I didn’t. I saw one of the locals that I’m pretty good friends with a camera and promptly pull him aside and tell him that I’m having a minor issue with my camera and that I would like to borrow his just as a backup. He agrees and all was still in chaos. I had to use his camera which was a film camera and I kept taking the digital camera battery out and putting it back in the camera. I would get a few shots off then it would give me an error message. I continued to do this through the ceremony and the posed family shots and backing it up with my newly borrowed film camera.

Finally, the lesson. No matter how little or laid back the job, always be prepared and have a backup for your backup. I left LA with only what I borrowed from my friend. I even said to myself before I left that this is a bad idea and I don’t feel comfortable but I went unprepared anyway. I did bring a few rolls of film which in affect saved me even though I didn’t bring my film camera like an idiot/amateur. I have no idea what happened with that battery nor does my friend but the bottom line is that by not being prepared and having backups I jeopardized everything…a one time event. I still wasn’t sure if the film camera worked because it wasn’t mine nor had I done any tests with the film before I shot it. Not to mention that I brought 400 ISO film and used the 10D which was rated at 100 ISO as a reference for my exposure while totally under the gun. Again, no one knew any of this was going on except my girlfriend and still no one knows. I got the film developed and I’m pretty sure I saved myself. But don’t ever, ever, ever do anything relative to photography without being prepared which includes having a backup for your backup.

Whew…I need to go hit some golf balls and have a few cold beers.

About the Author:  Al Wortham is a Photo Editor with ScanDigital.  Al brings more than 10 years of professional photography experience to his roll at ScanDigital.  He has worked for years as a freelance professional photographer shooting a wide variety of events from individual weddings to the MTV Video Music Awards.  Al has also worked as a photographer’s assistant for photographers with Sports Illustrated, the Golf Channel and several major architectural firms.  Al also worked as part of the world renowned team at A&I Photography Lab in Santa Monica, CA.  Al has a degree in Finance from American University and a degree in Photography from Santa Monica College. 

What do you do when someone asks you to take there picture for them. Do you simply point and shoot, or do you create a photograph by framing and directing your new models? Either way, quicly applying a basic knowledge of lighting patterns can significantly help your snap shooting abilities and make
pictures pop.

Lighting patterns have been used in paintings for centuries. Painters and photographers use lighting patterns to give shap to there models with the use of shadows caused by light direction.

Once you have a good understanding of the four basic lighting patterns you will be able to quickly decide which pattern could potentially help your model. Photographically, lighting patterns can help slim or broaden models. For example, a split lighting technique can dramatically reduce the size of a person by revealing only half of the person making the person seem much smaller. Lighting patterns also be used to create a mood or dramatize a subject. The shadow on the face caused by the directional light is what creates a lighting pattern.

The four basic lighting patterns are a Paramount, Loop, Rembrant, and Split.

Paramount:
A Paramount is created when the light source is straight on the subject from above or behind the camera. The light would be at about 6:00. This light direction causes a shadow just under the nose. The shadow resembles an upside down triangle. The length of the shadow depends on the height of the light source. Therefore, if the sun is high in the sky, and almost directly above the subject, the shadows will be long. Remember that if you do have a high light source to keep the models chin up to avoid shadows in the eyes, find a piece of white material to hold under models face to reflect light back into those deep shadows. Paramounts are great for narrow faces, because nearly the entire face is lit making the models face to seem wider.

Loop:
Loops are created when the shadow on the models face travels to either side resembling a loop effect. That’s caused by the light being slightly off camera at 7:00 or 5:00. Loops are great all face types and add a bit of charm to a photo.

Rembrant:
This pattern was made famous by Rembrant himself. He used this light on nearly everyone of his subjects. Rembrants are used to create a mood or a dramatized effect often used in comic books and old detective movies. This pattern helps slim down broad faces and can look very beautiful if used correctly. Rembrants occur when a loop travels even further across the face connecting to the shadow on the edge of the face near the ear. That means the shadow side of the face is nearly completely covered except for a small triangle of light just under the eye. The light direction must be coming from a 8:00 or 4:00 position off camera.

Split:
The split lighting pattern is the most dramatic of them all. The light is coming directly from 90 degress left or right off camera. At theis point, one half the models face will be completely covered in shadow. Very, dramatic, and great for really broad faces.

Hopefully these tips will help improve the lighting and quality of your next digital photos.

About the Author: Chris Callaway is a Photo Editor with ScanDigital. Chris is a graduate of the prestigious Brooks Institute of Photography. He has worked closely with well-known photographers Roberto de Este, John Russo and Richard Radstone.