A learning experience...

For those of you that were fans of the "Before & After" series of MMA fighters I had the best intentions to create a second series of images by shooting another EFL event this past weekend. I planned my lighting setup, loaded up all my gear, arrived at the event, and basically completely failed to execute my plan.


After a hour or so of shooting mostly test shots (and two fighters) I loaded up my gear and went to Winstead's for a double with chesse and a 50/50. Although I didn't produce what I had hoped I did learn from the experience and at the end of the day that is all you can hope for. Sometimes I have to remind myself that "progress and not perfection" is the goal.

A response to the experiment....

Early this morning I received an e-mail from a disgruntled reader of my blog who just happens to be my brother. My brother Jeff has been a photographer for longer than he would care for me to mention and without question he has made a huge impact on me as photographer. I think it is an interesting dialogue so I thought I would post it.

Here is what he had to say about my last post " A little experiment" (and yes he makes no regards for proper punctuation):

i have tossed and turned over your little experiment.
grabbed some actions and have ridden across the countryside to stand up for digital.


and here is even your fancy dancy border - so think twice before you bash my pixels again you racist. the "4 x 5" polaroid is just a better composed shot. the highlight on the ground, the low angle and the framing with the background all make it a superior shot.


The racist comment is a bit strong (and used for comedic purposes) but he brings up a couple good points. First, could my digital image be made more interesting with some post production work? Absolutely as he shows by running a few photoshop actions, adding the funky polaroid border, the digital image is more interesting, in fact it looks more like a film image.

Second, the "4 x 5" image was a better composed image and that is the reason it is a stronger image.

I agree that the "4 x 5" is a better composed image (the highlight was a result of a change in light over the time it took me to setup the "4 x 5" and shoot) but that is part of the point of my post if the process alone makes me slow down and take a better composed image isn’t that evidence of it being a better tool for the job at least for me? Also, and I didn’t make this a part of the post and I should have, all of those images are basically out of the camera. I increased the contrast a bit on each image but that was it. I know that digital could be made to be stronger but I wanted to compare just the shooting and immediate results of the image taking process. I see the post production process as something entirely separate....and besides if your digital post production process is just to make the image look more like film why not just shot film in the first place? That is if you could find a lab to process it...

A little experiment...

At the Lake I conducted an experiment that I think provides some interesting insight to the digital vs. film debate. Of course I don't know that you can even call it a debate any more as the photography world has completely embraced the digital world to the point where it is difficult to find a lab in Kansas City that will process my favorite slide film. But as usual I digress...

My experiment went like this. I shot the same subject (a sign outside a church) in a similar fashion in every format that I work with. Basically I wanted to see what differences would exist between the images that were taken from a similar vantage point and as close together in time as possible.

First I shot with my Nikon Digital SLR:


Next I shot it with my Holga (a "toy" plastic camera that costs under $30) using Ilford black and white XP2 film:

I also shot it with my medium format film system (A Pentax 67 system) with Kodak SW color slide film but as I said earlier in my post finding a lab based in Kansas City to process the film in house has been a challenge. Once I have that film back I will repost with the medium format results.

Finally I shot the sign with what I call "the big boss hog" which is a Calumet "4 x 5" large format system that my dad passed on to me. It is a monorail camera that really isn't made for field work but that hasn't stopped me from trying to use it like a field camera. I used Polaroid Type 55 film which adds the funky border to the image:


I think the results speak for themselves. The digital image is a little too "snapshoty" to my eye. The Holga has its typical look and feel which just can't be replicated by anything else. To my eye at least the "4 x 5" is just at another level which didn't surprise me. With a large format camera you have a number of additional controls at your disposable. In addition I think the process and time it takes to setup the camera take an image literally forces you to slow down and carefully compose and execute the shot. Whereas with digital you can just shot and "chimp" as needed.

So here is my bottom line....Digital is great (and getting better seemingly everyday) but in my humble opinion the digital SLR can't hold its own against a large format system. If I am shooting something that needs to be captured quickly the digital runs circle around the "4 x 5" but if I have the time "the big boss hog" definitely takes the cake.

I like the analogy that Ken Rockwell (a good online resource for camera reviews) uses in regards to the digital versus film argument by comparing the two as cars. In his opinion the digital is like a fancy sports car and large format film system is like a bus. Both can get you to your destination and the fancy sports car is going to do it faster but you can fit alot more in the bus.

The Lake...

Thanks to those who took the time to send your regards about Alexis or as we liked to call her "Sexy Lexi" (she had more nicknames than Apollo Creed from the "Rocky" films).

After a tough couple of weeks I was happy to get away on two separate trips to get a little rest and do some shooting. It was refreshing to pour all of my attention and energy into making some images for my own enjoyment. Here are a few early selects I will post more soon. 

Our first stop was the Lake of the Ozarks or as locals like to call it simply "The Lake."

Goodbye to a great friend...

My life has felt a bit like a country song lately. We lost our dog of 12 years last weekend to pancreatic cancer. Alexis was a wonderful companion and one of my favorite subjects. She never told me how to do my job or asked me to retouch her wrinkles.

I am taking some time off over the next two weeks to recharge my batteries and do a little traveling (and shooting) with my family. I will be back with my usual assortment of images and random posts soon. Happy 4th everyone!

Lifelock Campaign...

I shot these images for a national Lifelock campaign back in Phoenix back in March. Should be seeing at least one of these ads running in some parenting magazines soon. If any of you see it let me know.

Agency: Mindspace
Art Directors: Brent Shelter and Melissa Brenneman
Hair/makeup/styling: Laura Flagler

Why my job is hard..

While I am on the subject of my job....let me tell you about what is the most challenging aspect of my work. Direction. Generally I spend more time talking about what "direction" my clients want the shoot to go than actually shooting. Whether it is a photo editor of a magazine, an actor who needs updated headshots, or an art director that needs an image to function as part of an ad campaign. The toughest decisions are all the little decisions that determine whether in the end a photo works or not. Of course whether or not that final photo works is all in the eye of the beholder, but I digress.

So what determines the direction of the image, everything. The talent or subject, wardrobe, the hair/makeup, the lighting, the setting, the posing, the expression, the angle the image is taken from, and the list goes on. Literally hundreds of decisions are made before the shutter is clicked for the first time.

Some of the funniest things I have heard on a photo shoot have taken place as all of the people present on a shoot are trying to make decisions on all these little things. Always the biggest concern is if something is "too" (fill in the blank). Too sexy, too conservative, too LA, too girl next door, too happy, you name it and it is possible for it to be too much whatever it is.

I often find myself trying to read people's minds and body language to determine if what we are doing is the direction they wanted to go. In some instances I am surprised that we wade through the waters of all the decisions and manage to produce anything that anybody likes because we have spent so much time talking about it and weeding it down to meet everyone's needs that it ends up being shot with nice soft lighting with no shadows against a white background and the talent is wearing a blue shirt.

I always find it interesting that my industry has created a commerical look that is really far from reality yet we all accept it. For example you see all these ads at Petsmart with a perfectly groomed happy older man (also insert woman, couple, child) at a park with their beautifully groomed golden retriever (also insert lab, weirmariner) the light is glowing golden rays on both their happy faces. I spend a lot of time at the park (I have two kids under the age of three) and I have yet to see that scene in the real world. Generally people are in sweatpants with a couple plastic bags from Price Chopper hanging out of their back pocket trying to listen to their Ipod or talk on their cell phone while "Fluffy" is sniffing around like their is fresh meat covering the ground. But maybe that is just the part of town I live in.

Photography and the ad business in general have created this hyper happy worlds that we all see continuously as we are out and about in the world or even just watching television. If you start to pay attention to the images you see(or become a photographer that creates those images) you will see what I am talking about. Just don't ask me if your shirt makes you look fat, because we all know that it isn't the shirt :)