aricmayer

Another angle to your project might be to look at how the subjects you want to look at--

prostitution, red light districts, and ethnic areas--have not been irradicated at all, just

moved. As someone already pointed out above, Hunts Point in the Bronx is one such place,

although it has already been popularized in a long running documentary series on HBO.

I leave my cameras outside the tent in below freezing weather to keep the condensation

down. I have never had anything freeze, but I know you can have your cameras lubed with

thicker "winterized" lube that should keep that from happening.

If your camera was frozen solid, either the lubricant froze up or moisture actually

condensed inside the camera and turned to ice. If it was ice, be sure to let your cameras

cool slowly to keep them from condensing when you first go out. Warm metal and glass in

cold air draws down a lot of moisture. You don't want it to freeze.

Whoops, I didn't switch to html. Here are those links again.

<a href="http://www.asmp.org/tips/tsa.php" >ASMP</a>

<a href="http://www.tsa.gov/public/interapp/editorial/

editorial_1248.xml" >TSA</a>

Thanks in part to the lobbying efforts of the good folks over at the American Society of

Media Photographers, photographers are allowed an extra carry-on item for camera

equipment. You can read the press release at asmp's site,

<a href="http://www.asmp.org/tips/tsa.php" >ASMP</a>

or check out the <a href="http://www.tsa.gov/public/interapp/editorial/

editorial_1248.xml" >TSA</a> policy here

I have tried several times and never got a hand inspection at Heathrow. Also, never had a

problem with their x-ray machines either.

I think Eric Waller reads the New York Post, which incorrectly reported last year that the

MTA had banned photography on the subway. The correct story is that the MTA proposed

a ban that was open to public debate. The public was able to submit their thoughts and

arguments regarding the ban up until Jan 10th, 2005, after which the MTA will make a

ruling one way or the other. There is no specified deadline that I know of for that ruling.

The current

policy, as laid out on the MTA website as of today, February 7, 2005 is as follows:

"Photography, filming or video recording in any facility or conveyance is permitted except

that ancillary equipment such as lights, reflectors or tripods may not be used. Members of

the press holding valid identification issued by the New York City Police Department are

hereby authorized to use necessary ancillary equipment. All photographic activity must be

conducted in accordance with the provision of these Rules."

So, shoot away, just leave your strobes, tripods, booms, cranes and generators at home.

I have a Pelican case with the LowePro OmniTraveler insert. I highly recommend getting a

case that fits a camera bag inside. You get the best of both worlds. The case I have may be

a bit small for your needs. I carry basically the same kit except with a Hasselblad SWC

instead of the 500 C/M. For that it already is a tight fit. I think there is a larger version

with the LowePro camera bag inside, though. Definitely look for that one. If you are

working out of a vehicle-- car, boat, airplane-- the cases are perfect. They sit stable and

are practically indestructable. Consider getting some kayaking dry bags as well. They are

rubber/nylon bags that have a roll down top and are waterproof/dust proof. I put all my

exposed film into one and then keep it in a cooler when I am working out of a vehicle.

There is no right way to find your voice. Some people work best with a clear conceptual

idea and make their work in a linear way. Others let the work develop on its own and find

the thematic content in the work naturally.

There was a great show of Robert Adams' work at Reed College in Portland, OR. The

curators re-examined his work in a non-linear way. They found in his large body of work

constellations of ideas centered around a variety of themes... Sunlight, Solitude, Wreckage,

Flowering, Artifact, Citizen, Democracy, Scintillae, Home and Innocence. These were not

chronological, but were spread out over his entire career. I doubt, especially at the

beginning, that Adams' thought to himself, "I'm going to make a body of work that follows

these ideas over the course of my life." I think it just happened.

For many, one just works, and the content or meaning of ones work will start to

constellate on it's own. You will find themes that repeat themselves and you can start to

revisit them. I'm not a big fan of getting images out of your head and onto the celluloid.

For me the magic of photography is meeting the world and discovering a chemical

reaction between events in space and time and your own eye. You work to develop your

eye and the world continues on with all its drama and meaning, waiting to be captured in

your pictures. When the two work together, wow.

Try not to try too hard. Those images in your head are good places to jump off from. But

unless you want to go into the studio and meticulously create them, you are never going

to get them onto film exactly as you see them. So let the world do it's thing and you do

yours and something special will happen in the middle.

After taking some of the best pictures of my life with the lens cap still on my SWC, I came

up with a solution. I took two pieces of black gaffers tape and taped them to the ridge

across the center of the cap. Each piece extends out from the cap about an inch. Then I

folded the pieces back onto themselves so they don't stick to anything. They stick out on

both sides of the cap and are visible through the viewfinder, so you won't miss them when

you go to compose. If you use a lens hood, just make the flaps longer. They are flexible

and don't really get in the way. Since doing this, I haven't made the lens cap mistake once.

(Knock on wood.)

The exact MTA regulations regarding photography are as follows:

"Photography, filming or video recording in any facility or conveyance is permitted except

that ancillary equipment such as lights, reflectors or tripods may not be used. Members of

the press holding valid identification issued by the New York City Police Department are

hereby authorized to use necessary ancillary equipment. All photographic activity must be

conducted in accordance with the provision of these Rules."

It looks like New York's finest was just doing his job.

you are, for the time being, allowed to photograph in areas like the MTA and GCS. But, to

use equipment other than a camera, such as lights, tripods etc, you must have a press

pass issued by the NYPD. Perhaps banning a monopod seems a little rediculous, but a

generous interpretation of the law would probably prohibit that as well.

If you could tell us why you were unhappy with your program, what it was lacking for you,

what you need for your photography, and what you would like to achieve in another

program, maybe we can be of more help.

You can also check out

http://www.disc-info.org/

On that site is a set of specifications agreed apon by a ton of magazine publishers and

printers: Time Inc., Conde Nast, Hachett Filipachi, Quad Graphics to name a few. They

spell out exactly what they want and how they want the digital files to be submitted, from

file size to color space to compression to metadata. If you use the DISC (Digital Image

Submission

Criteria) guidelines, you will get a huge boost in delivering the best file for your

magazine's purposes.

Yep, it's a shame. But you do get a pretty good synopsis for $40.00 or so. The last time I

was there, the Pratt Institute Library had an original copy of one of Albers' books that you

could check out with gloves on in some gaurded room. I guess no one wants to pay for the

printing job that the originals require anymore.

I don't know if this directly has anything to do with your problem, but I was recently

printing a portfolio of intaglio prints for a friend of mine. They are grey scale images, so

there should be absolutely no color issue with the file itself. When printing on epson

glossy photo paper using the Premium Glossy Photo Paper setting, the images came out

with a magenta cast. With all things being equal and exactly the same, I printed the

images on Matte paper using the Premium Heavyweight Matte Paper setting and the

images came out perfectly neutral. I have noticed this magenta cast issue myself and

wonder if it isn't in the paper or paper type setting.

If you call Epson Technical assistance, ask to speak to a level 2 specialist. I spent two

hours recently working on another issue with the first person that picked up. They couldn't

help. Called back a few days later for another half hour with someone else. Still no fix.

Then she told me I needed to speak to a "level" 2 person. This guy had absolutely no sense

of humor and was a bit like robocop, but he fixed my problem in less than 10 minutes. It

was worth the wait.

Check out Joseph Albers, or for something a little more complex, Johannes Itten. He wrote

a great book called The

Elements of Color. They both were Bauhaus teachers. Most color theory classes for fine

arts are built around their theories of color perception.

Rick,

One way you can do it is as follows.

1. Make a mask for the background and save it.

2. Create an adjustment layer for curves.

3. Open up the curves so the background is as light as you want the light to be at its

lightest point.

4. Load the mask for the background as a selection--make sure that it is the background

that is selected.

5. Click on the mask window of your curves adjustment layer.

6. Select the gradient tool.

7. Set your foreground/background colors to black and white.

8. Select the radial gradient option.

9. With the selection for the background loaded and the mask window for your curves

layer active, draw a radial gradient behind your subject. Depending on which way the

gradient goes, you will either get a glow that is behind your subject or the opposite, a

shadow. If it is backwards, simply hit apple/control i to invert the mask.

10. Now you can adjust the curves layer to lighten and darken the background however

much you like. You can reload the selection and redraw the gradient mask for the curves

layer as well to get whatever soft lighting effect you want.

I hope that makes sense. I don't think I left anything out. I shoot that way frequently and

jazz up the flat background a bit in photoshop just the way I described. Cheers, Aric

Thanks, Larry.

I figure it has to be the viewfinder. I've never had a problem leveling my

horizons. Plus, it is consistent in one direction. It can't be the lens since rotation there

shouldn't be a problem. I should do some more scientific testing with it to be sure. The

bright lines in the viewfinder pretty much line up with the edges of the edges of the frame

on the body. That's what has me stumped.

I have a Bessa R2 that I keep for a backup body. It gets carried around a lot, so it sees its

fair share of bumps but doesn't get used too often. My M7 was in for a CLA and so I used

it for the first time in a while. I was shooting in a harbor and the horizon lines came out

crooked, all at the same angle. I didn't have much to drink, so I'm pretty sure that wasn't

it. Is there an adjustment that I don't know about? Can I fix this myself, or do I need to

send it in?

Thanks,

Aric

Ooops, sorry.

I confused Falwell with Jim Bakker, his predecessor. Or was it Jimmy Swaggert? It's hard to

keep them all straight, they are so crooked. What ever happened to Tinky Winky anyway?

Cheers.

If Jerry Falwell's actual track record regarding illicit sex is taken into account, I think he'll

yawn too.

Dan, I wish I was so lucky to get such a find. The lens is remarkable. Let me know the next

time you go looking through the trash. I'd like to come along.

As far as the focusing screen goes, of course you can put one on the back of the SWC. But

after all the expense and trouble of all this modification would likely make it senseless not

just to buy a 501cm body. The beauty of the SWC is that it is lightweight and easy to use

for excellent results. The chassis is built to the strengths of the lens. If you use the spirit

level to control perspective and compose with the gunsight to determine frame

edges, you get great results, without the ground glass back.

If one went through all the trouble of building an extension for the lenses, and adding a

bayonnet mount to the chassis, and then using a ground glass back for focusing and

composition, you would have a camera that does basically what a 501CM does, except that

it does it a lot slower.

Now that I think it through, though, I do kind of like the idea. Just a simple tube with a

bayonnet mount that goes back to a Hasselblad film holder. That should be pretty easy to

make from the trash heap. There's a certain elegance to getting rid of the prism and

mirror.

Or, you could put the lens mount on an old set of rails from a 4x5 camera and make a

system that would take Hasselblad lenses, plus arcflex and large format lenses that could

swing and tilt. Now that would be fun. I don't know how well the rails would support the

weight of the Hasselblad lenses, though.

Academically this should be possible, if you want to cut your beautiful Zeiss 38mm Biogon

off the mount. Why you would do such a horrible thing is another question.

However, the other lenses in the system would be mostly useless on the SWC mount

simply because their depth of field would make them impossible to accurately focus and

control DF without using a measuring tape. Can you imagine using a 150mm or longer

lens without looking through the glass to focus? Even the wider angle lenses have a

shallower depth of field and would exagerate the problem.

1. Drink more.

2. Shoot more.

3. Travel more.

4. Sleep more.

5. Ditto to Al's #1