brian yarvin

<p>These are really straightforward setups - get a few good books and take a basic course at a nearby photography school. Your camera and lens have little to do with it, it's all about lighting and styling.</p>

<p>Thank you for the kind words and best of luck with Getty, they are tough and worth the effort.</p>

<p>I myself keep images exclusive and currently divide my collection between Getty, Alamy and a small boutique agency. I would suggest putting at least part of my output with Getty - they have huge reach and are taken seriously by many buyers. However, if you have the possibility of doing better than Getty - go for it! I would too. I just don't know of any agency that can do it for me.</p> <p>My work at Getty Images:<br> http://www.gettyimages.com/search/2/image?artist=brian%20yarvin&excludenudity=false&page=1&sort=best</p>

<p>Hi, interesting question. Travel stock is always a challenge! There are actually several challenges layered here. The first is which of these agencies will accept your work in the first place. In my experience, Getty will be the most profitable and Alamy will be the easiest. In addition, Alamy will be the easiest to work with. Istock is just a division of Getty, BTW, the process of getting in won't be all that different.</p> <p>After being involved with stock photography for over forty years, I've noticed that the harder an agency is to work with, the more money they'll return. There's a reason they're demanding.</p>

<p>Wow Brian S., I salute you!</p> <p>A guy comes on the board looking for legal advice - which is wrong in itself - and you give him what he actually needs; real, sane, mature professional photography counsel. Where were you when I was starting out?</p>

<p>By far and away, for working high-end professional photographers, the biggest advantage to medium format backs is the amazing service that those dealers offer. If you've having trouble with a Canon, I can assure you that nobody from the company is going to drive out to your studio with a couple of loaners to try while they troubleshoot your gear on-site. PhaseOne will have somebody there, period.<br> <br />There are also differences in the nature of the files that some retouchers and printers call "thickness." That is; somehow, the files these backs produce are easier to retouch and don't fall apart in a sort of sawtooth histogram so easily.</p> <p>As for the "format related perspective," the differences are there, but pale when compared to the way dealers treat you. The differences between raw conversion software or the way certain lenses render are much greater.</p>

<p>Ray, some people need more power, especially for extreme closeups. But the most powerful designs date back to the time (ending about ten years ago) when it was common for commercial still life shots to be done on large format film. If you were shooting a can of tuna with an 8x10 camera and filling the frame with it, you'd stop down to f64 and then have a bellows extension factor of many more stops. You'd need lots of flash power for that!</p> <p>Today, most people would shoot that same product shot with a full frame digital camera that's a couple of stops faster and requires far less bellows draw. Even in those extreme cases, I don't use more than four or five hundred watts per pop.</p> <p>Different gear, different needs.</p>

<p>You're welcome! I thought it would be a good choice for you. Keep us posted and tell us how things work out!</p>

<p>Craig, I would say that since you are enjoying what many of us would consider vintage gear, get an older pro body like that 50d. Or even better, a 5d with no crop factor.</p> <p>Good luck with your new camera!</p>

<p>Andy:<br> <br />It's impossible to judge a photo from a reduced web image. Instead, put a 100% crop of the disputed area on Alamy's own discussion forum, there, people who are facing submission issues every day can give you a sense of what issues you face.</p> <p>Best of luck with your work there!</p>

<p>I believe that actual talent comes from combining an innate eye with solid technique. If you learn lighting, exposure, production, etc ... and find that your images continue to improve as these tools are incorporated into your arsenal, you are on the way to excellence.</p>

<p>Yes, and a very formidable tech support contract at that.</p>

<p>It's all about dealerships and distribution. PhaseOne dealers are few and far between and offer stellar service - highly trained people that are really there for you. You can buy Hasselblads in places like B&H where I've experienced a good compromise of price and service or from high-end dealers like Foto Care, it's your choice. Pentaxes are sold at the same shops that sell their other gear. Many have knowledgeable sales people, but it's not the same thing.<br> <br />None of them treat you like a movie star (you'll have to buy a Leica for that), but if you face lots of tough technical issues all the time, PhaseOne will help in a way the others can't. And looking at it from another angle, the only people who can pay the price are those with big challenges every day.</p>

<p>PhaseOne backs come with Capture1, a really great image processing program. Be aware that nothing you read on the web will prepare you for the image quality these backs deliver. It takes some getting used to.</p>

<p>I'm a big White Lightning fan and I think that on the lowest power settings, you'll get exactly what you want. The lowest powered version is the x800. The best part is that you can set the power of the flash and modeling light independently. So ... an easy to see modeling light and and tiny pop of flash.<br> <br />You can go lower by putting an ND gel in front of the strobe head and behind the bank.</p> <p>Best of luck.</p>

<p>Martin:<br> <br />You don't get what you deserve (or worse, what you think you deserve), you get what you negotiate.</p>

<p>Kyle:<br> In my experience, megapixel count isn't part of the reason for using medium format for portraits and other studio work. Instead, the biggest feature is the viewfinder which makes it much easier to see (some would say "visualize") your subject. For several photographers I know - including myself - their vintage medium format gear with vintage digital back is the lowest pixel count camera they have, but it isn't the number of pixels.<br> <br />That being said, there are photographers - portrait or otherwise - who demand big pixel counts. They are very likely to be thrilled by these new cameras. </p>

<p>Both cameras should have an X sync setting somewhere on their lenses. Make sure it's set properly - on X of course - plug in the sync cord that came with the strobe, and fire away.</p>

<p>Oh no! I think there's somebody out there working on a cookbook called Squidnami - or maybe not.</p>

<p>A Manfrotto Magic Arm with a camera bracket attached to a good ladder has done the trick for me.</p>

<p>Wonderful!!</p>

<p>Kyle:<br> <br />I'm getting the feeling that the problem you're trying to solve is "what are the most robust and scalable options for me in portrait lighting?" And it sounds to me like you're ready for real strobes right now. Two or three monolights in the 400 -800 ws range will give you a solid studio start.<br> Best of luck in the new year!</p>

<p>JDM, I'm glad you're with me. I can easily understand working hard to make a really big splash in a pool you've been in for half a century (or more) but can't get why a company would divert important resources from their successful markets to untested ones - especially if there's no obvious path consumer-wise.</p> <p>I suspect that medium format digital has a pretty bright future, perhaps from new entrants like Leica and Sinar (now merged together) and certainly from legacy companies like Pentax and Fuji. </p> <p>Photography is always changing!</p>

<p>I'm going to guess that Ricoh's bosses said it was okay because Pentax had a long history of producing medium format cameras and a large base of customers who already owned lenses for it. Fuji could well be working on something along the same lines - they might not have the lenses, but their medium format rangefinder cameras had a formidable reputation and they have plenty of practice working with Hasselblad.<br> <br />I am older than Ellis and I can't remember a medium format camera that either Nikon or Canon produced and marketed under their own brand names and this makes me doubtful too. It's not that medium format digital camera's can't be made profitably, it requires different skills and culture inside each company.</p> <p>What would be best though would be some sort of invocation of Murphy's Law - because I said it won't happen in an important public venue, that will make it happen. As always, the best outcome is when I'm wrong.</p>

<p>My first choice would be Vermont. It's beautiful covered in snow and offers both great scenery and plenty of winter activity.</p>