3 new Ebooks

<p>Hi All,<br>

I’m happy to announce my very first Kindle project is up and listed at Amazon.com. It is a three part tutorial about framing and posing. Although there is a small fee charged for each part, I have set it up so you can borrow each part for free from Amazon (one at a time) if you are signed up for Amazon Prime. Feedback very welcomed.</p>

<p>http://www.amazon.com/Portrait-Framing-Posing-Part-Digital-ebook/dp/B00KR10L3I/ref=pd_rhf_gw_p_d_6</p>

<p>http://www.amazon.com/Portrait-Framing-Posing-Subjects-Digital-ebook/dp/B00KR275JK/ref=pd_rhf_gw_p_d_6</p>

<p>http://www.amazon.com/Portrait-Framing-Posing-Full-Length-Subjects-ebook/dp/B00KR279KU/ref=pd_rhf_gw_p_d_6<br>

Thanks for your interest.<br>

Steve Sint<br>

steve@stevesint.com </p><div></div>

<p>Thank you! I'm heading over there now to take a look, as I have always enjoyed and learned from your online tutorials.</p>

Thank you Steve. You are very knowledgeable and I will give a look over the summer to learn some new things from.

<p>Just out of pure curiosity. Why is it "for digital age?" Is it somehow different from what you'd do in "analog age?"</p>

<p>Hi Marcin, <br>

Thank you for noting that! In the very first section I point out that a lot of portraits were shot as verticals to fit traditional, printed on paper publications, but in the digital age many of the formats used are horizontal (video, TV, and computer monitors) and how difficult it is to crop a vertical image to fit into horizontal space and vice-versa. But I also used the term because I find it ironic how many photographers feel that now that they've switched to using digital as a recording medium they feel that all of pre-digital photographic history (and everything learned from that history) no longer applies. It seems to me that doing so dooms those who do not study history to repeat the mistakes that were made before...over and over again.</p>

<p>Although out cameras have changed people haven’t. The still have big noses, slouchy shoulders, lobster claw like hands, and on and on. I find it ironical (to quote Robin Williams in Good Will Hunting) that many of today’s photographers are totally willing to spend 20 minutes fixing something in Photoshop, Lightroom, or other imaging program that they could have changed for the better in 10 seconds if the bothered to look at their subject before they pushed their shutter button. </p>

<p>Thanks for the comment.<br>

SS<br>

steve@stevesint.com</p>

<p>Very nice, but what about the square format? It is popular with instagram and the like, kind of sad that there are few native square options around. If well composed can really set you apart from the run of the mill.</p>

<p>Hi Bob,<br>

I have nothing against shooting squares if that's your cup of tea but the reality is it's a dead format. Personally, after shooting square format Hasselblads for over 40 years, I think the native square format's real advantage was moving the choice of deciding between a vertical and a horizontal composition from a pre-shooting decision to a post-shooting decision. It meant you saved seconds deciding between deciding on which of the two arrangements to use before shooting, made for sturdier, more balance camera tripod mounting, and eliminated the need for the agonizingly slow working swing flash brackets on rectangular format cameras. But the simple truth is, a 6X7 RZ blew the 6X6 (well 56X56 mm actually) blew the Hasse out of the water when it came to image quality.</p>

<p>But, as I said above, if that's your cup of tea it's not really that hard to crop to a square in the digital age...except then you'll find it hard to fill the frame for an art director (or other client) for either the printed page or the horizontal monitor...so you're saying you'll give up filling the frame on both primary medias (traditional print work and monitors/tablets/TVs/Kindles/Pads/etc) just because you like the static square. If that's the case (and you're not being argumentative just for the sake of being argumentative) then, crop your images to a square format and go for it. As for the popularity of low-res Instagram photos, the quality of the images produced when published there can just as easily be produced using a mediocre phone camera.</p>

<p>Regardless, at this point in time, with the demise of every square format native solution, the square format has become a niche format at best. Apologies for my disagreement with you on this but then again, it's just my opinion.</p>

<p>Thanks for your comment.<br>

Steve<br>

steve@stevesint.com</p>

<p>Bob H wrote:<br>

Very nice, but what about the square format? It is popular with instagram and the like, kind of sad that there are few native square options around. If well composed can really set you apart from the run of the mill.</p><div></div>