bruce_hooke

I'm no lawyer, but that text seems pretty clear to me...by sending in your picture you loose any right to make any use of the picture in any way in the future. I certainly would NOT submit any photograph of mine to such a contest.

 

One rule one of my teachers passed on to me regarding contests and suchlike -- only enter contests that have a real potential to advance your career. There are lots of "cheap" contests & shows out there, some of which are basically looking for free pictures, like this one, and others of which are simply not that significant. The publicity and "resume line" you get from such contests is rarely worth the trouble of entering...

I have a couple of Wolf Faust's 35mm IT-8 targets and they seem to work fine. What I have been starting to notice (or think I'm noticing) is the downfall of the IT-8 target no matter who makes it -- it does not do a great job at dark, saturated colors. I understand that Hutch Color's targets are better on this count (http://www.hutchcolor.com), but of course they are also more expensive. You also need to check to make sure that the software you use to build your profiles can accept the Hutch Color targets as input.

Two brief thoughts:

 

1. From the looks of the pictures you posted, you've done a good job of getting the light smoothed out, which is usually the big first challange with a setup like this. In fact, you've smoothed the light out so much that the image now looks flat to me. Unless you like that flat look I would now try to add a bit of directional light to create some shadows that will help define the shape of the objects you are photographing. You may also want to consider whether you want to light the backdrop in way that is less flat as well. The "classic" approach is to let the backdrop fade to black as it goes up, but to do this you will need a lot more depth on your table setup than you have now. I should note that this "fade to black" approach is somewhat "flashy" and has been done a lot, so for fine art purposes you may want to try a different approach to the backdrop.

 

2. If you do decide you want to experiment with some frosted mylar you should be able to get it at any decent supply store. I have also used white ripstop nylon, which should be available from a decent fabric shop.

You don't remove it off the spool at all. Once you have exposed the last frame you crank until the film is all wound up on the take up spool and then open the back and use the tape provided on the roll of film to seal it down so that it doesn't unwind. Then comes the key part...there is now an empty spool on the side where the new roll of film is to go -- it is the spool that the previous roll of film was on when you loaded it. This spool gets moved to the other side as the new take-up spool and then you install the new roll of film...

First off, read this primer if you haven't already: http://www.photo.net/learn/studio/primer

 

The poor man's solution to this problem is clip lights with 500watt tungsten bulbs in them and frosted Mylar in front to diffuse the lights, or to go one step up, lights on light stands still with Mylar in front to diffuse the light. From the sounds of it the bulbs you have are the existing bare bulbs used to light the basement. You should assume that these will be turned off when you are taking pictures. Bare bulbs have many problems including that they are too far away in your case, you can't reposition them, and they are likely not going to be bright enough.

 

Tungsten bulbs are cheap (make sure you use Tungsten film if you are shooting in color) and hardware store clip lights are cheap as well (make sure you get the kind with a ceramic socket rather than a plastic or metal and cardboard socket -- you will be exceeding the rating on the clip light so only keep the lights on for short periods of time and NEVER leave the room with them on). If you have a bit more money then proper light stands are the way to go and are not really that expensive.

 

The key is that you need something to diffuse the light. The best low cost diffuser I have found is a sheet of frosted Mylar attached to a wood frame (actually more like a "shadow box" with a Mylar back) that is, say 45 cm x 75 cm. You have to get clever to find ways to position the diffuser in front of the lights. For small still-lifes you can stand the diffusers right on the table that has your subject on it. Make sure you don't get the diffusers right up next to the bulbs or you will melt the Mylar. There needs to be good air circulation around the light bulb so don't try to seal the bulb into an enclosed space. I have never had any problems with this sort of setup, but you need to use your head and pay attention. 500 watt bulbs generate quite a bit of heat. Also, watch out how many you plug into one circuit and use good extension cords.

 

For many subjects the ideal lighting is a big diffuse light source directly above the subject pointed straight down with a second light source off to one side to cast shadows and a much smaller light source (or simply a reflector) on the other side to keep the shadows from getting to harsh. The lighting can be fine-tuned with sheets of black and white foam core to act as shades and reflectors. You can, of course, get boom lights to do the overhead part, but boom lights are big and expensive and you still need a diffuser. With some ingenuity you should be able to rig up something that you can build and hang from the ceiling yourself.

 

Of course these days most pros go with strobes of some sort, but that is a much more expensive route. Also, playing around with hot lights is a good way to learn about lighting.

 

I have used a setup like this to take portfolio photographs of artwork that get the artwork in question into national caliber shows and in one case I got one of my photographs published in an art magazine, so you can do good work with this sort of a setup if you practice with it and have some patience.

6500K is the white point recommended in Real World Color Management, so while others may like other white points, you are certainly on solid ground using that as your white point...

I'd be willing to bet that when Bruce said 11 x 14 he meant inches, so that works out to around 27 x 35 cm or what you might call A3 size. If you are shooting 35mm film don't go beyond (bigger than) the size at which your prints still look sharp.

 

Inkjet prints can be done by a lab but most people probably make their own with a desktop photo quality printer hooked up to their computer. C-prints are done by a lab. Both can produce good results, the key is to be consistent.

The first thing you need to do is color profile your monitor. Unfortunately, this requires both hardware and software that you probably do not have. I use Gretag Macbeth's Eye-One Display 2 package, which includes both the software and the sensor you mount on your screen to create the profile. This packages will cost you around $230, but if you are serious about color matching there is really no way around this step. Slightly older versions of this software and hardware are available from places like eBay and would most likely do just fine for you.

 

Once you've got your monitor profiled then you can see if there is still an issue. I find that the prints I get from my Epson 2200 are slightly less saturated in the reds than what I see on screen. I am able to visualize 98% this using Photoshop's "Proof Setup" function on the view menu, but for this to work you need the profile for the printer, which you likely do not have if you are sending out the files for printing.

 

If you want to really get the full picture on color management get your hands on a copy of Real World Color Management by Fraser, Murphy and Bunting.

Picking up on what Edward said, once I'd narrowed my options down a bit I found www.luminous-landscape.com VERY helpful in making the final decision. This site does not cover every inkjet printer out there. What it does do is go into great detail on the printers popular with serious photographers and that detail is based on actual tests conducted by Michael Reichmann, who runs the site and is a serious photographer and therefore knows what serious photographers are likely to want to know about a particular printer.

For someone who is just starting out (in the gallery scene) I wonder if the escalating prices model really makes sense? It seems like it would work better with someone who the collectors know and know about this policy. For someone who is just starting out it also seems like it might be better to keep more price flexability while feeling out the market and trying to figure out how much to charge.

 

I do think that edition numbering makes sense because it tells people "this is a rare item," which people like. It seems to me that the editioning system can be kept pretty simple, as in 1/100, 2/100, etc., with the image name or some sort of catalog number providing identification beyond that point if there are different croppings or print sizes that become different editions.

I'm glad to hear that someone else likes the good old 3-axis heads. That's what I've got on my 3001 Bogen legs and both have served me well for something like 17 years now, supporting both 35mm and medium format cameras. This tripod has been everywhere from Alaska to the Namib Desert. I've taken shots where the bottom 3 feet of the tripod (as well as the bottom 3 feet of me!) where in an icy river, and shots where the bottom of the tripod was in salt water, and still the tripod keeps on working. About 10 years ago I built a backpack with a special carrying space for the tripod right in close to my back where I feel the weight less, and with enough space in the rest of the pack for camera gear and regular hiking gear.

 

I use a tripod a lot when I am taking pictures but I almost always compose the picture first with the camera in my hands and then I go through the routine of "OK, the bottom of the camera should be above that pebble and at belt height," and then try to get the tripod in that position, which makes me dream of a tripod that would allow me to move the camera around in space and then when I find the right position just lock it in place! A studio tripod on wheels comes pretty close but of course a studio tripod does not work very well on a rocky shoreline!

At the least you need to go into the project fully aware that to do much more than just take the snapshots that many other guests will be taking you will need to spend most of your time in "photographer mode" rather than "brother of the groom mode," which basically means you don't really get to enjoy or experience the wedding. You won't have time to dance or chat with your relatives because you will be taking pictures of the people dancing and chatting, you won't be able to really listen to the toasts because you will be thinking about the best way to get a picture of the person making the toast...and so on throughout the wedding.

I always use a light box. It is much easier to jump back and forth between images to make comparisons, as well as simply being much easier to use than setting up a slide projector. You don't need a fancy light box as long as it has a color-corrected light source. What does make a lot of difference is a good loupe. It is easy to spend more on the loupe than the lightbox...

The title of that image should have been "Rocks, Ice & Snow; Deer Isle, Maine" -- I hit the enter key by mistake as I was entering the title...

I have a Seagull and it was a useful introduction to the world of medium format and TLR. The pluses and minuses of the Seagull are, as I see it:

 

A. It's cheap...big plus!

 

B. Because it is cheap you don't need to be scared about repairing it yourself. One of the rollers over which the film passes was slightly bent when my camera was new and as a result it was scratching the film. Some judicious bending of the roller and some clean up work with fine steel wool solved that problem. More recently the screws that hold the little lever that adjusts the aperature came loose and the camera repair place said they couldn't fix it. I was able to fix it by drilling through the front to gain access to the area and then fabricating a new lever that I could attach from the front.

 

C. If you need consistent reliable results get another camera. I've taken some nice pictures with my Seagull, but you should not expect the sharpness of a more expensive camera and you should not expect that you will get consistent results at different aperatures and shutter speeds.

 

All in all, if the camera appears to be working I would certainly consider it worth 3 quid if it is something that interests you.

 

Below is a picture I took with my Seagull. I've blown it up to 8x8 and it looks quite good at that size...<div></div>

A few quick thoughts...

 

While you are in a great situation being able to take classes from the same teachers who teach the MFA students, it sounds like the class you are in is not actually with the MFA students, but is instead with other "outside" students like yourself. This is a difference that is not insignficant because it has implications for the experience level and commitment of the other students, and thus major implications for both how the teacher approaches the class and for the level of discussion that is likely to take place at critques.

 

That said, by all means do talk to your teacher about your goals. Someone in her position should have all sorts of suggestions, and may also start to push you a bit more once she knows what your goals are. Also, if there are specific topics that you feel are not being covered in the depth you had hoped for, talk to the teacher about that as well...with a teacher who is teaching MFA students there is likely to be a reason for her approach (maybe that most of the students in the class are not ready for the information) and she may be able to help you learn more about those areas once she knows your interests. The great thing about most art classes is that even at the intro level there tends to be a lot of one-on-one, which gives the teacher more chances to give motivated students like you more information on topics that interest you...

"I want to learn the basics of photography, I don't feel that i need to learn the artsy fartsy stuff since art is objective and everyone will have their own opinion of things like that..."

 

While art may be subjective that does NOT mean that there is nothing that can be taught about making art! If you want to be a fine art photographer you should expect to spend a lot of time seriously studying how to make good art, and one of the best ways to learn for most people is by getting constructive input from other people, and constructive input from a great teacher is especially valuable. Whether school is the right place to do this is a separate issue. I came up through the academic art world and so it should be no surprise that I think school is an excellent place to learn how to make better art, but others have clearly succeeded via other routes.

 

"My ultimate goal is to become good enough that I could make a living as a photographer...I want to learn to be a better photographer both technically and artistically. I already have a BS, so I was trying to avoid going back to school for a MFA because it would entail going back and taking lots of art classes that I were not required as I was a business major."

 

A lot depends on what sort of photographer you want to be. For some types of photography getting the technical stuff nailed down and then becoming an assistant to a good photographer is probably a fine way to go. For other types of photography that MFA will matter a lot more, and if you want to teach at the college level then an MFA from a good school should be pretty much a given, and note that I said "good school" -- in the realms where an MFA matters, it also matters what school you went to.

 

I think part of what you are discovering (in a roundabout way) is what you miss by not going the MFA route -- one of the big advantages of going to a good school with other very serious students is that you are surrounded by people who are as serious as you and who can provide good feedback in critiques (as well as be useful contacts in the future). If your fellow students are not really ready to learn about things like composition and exposure adjustments then the teacher may well be on the right track by focusing on the more basic topics (note that this is a modification of what I said before). The teacher ultimately has to tailor the instruction to the level the students are coming in at.

 

Ultimately, it is not really reasonable to expect some $500 courses to take the place of an MFA, but whether an MFA is necessary depends on what you want to do.

 

I would encourage you to consider taking some classes at one of the summer workshops like Maine Photographic Workshops if you can swing it. This is a good way to work with really great teachers and be around serious students without committing to an MFA. Maine Photographic Workshops also has more extended courses of study that might be a good intermediate route between what you are doing now and and a full MFA.

 

If your teacher is good, he or she should also be able to give you some advice on how to get where you are trying to go in the larger scheme of things. It is also worth asking him or her about things like the teachers at summer workshops, because while they are all almost always excellent artists, some are better teachers than others.

I have taken a couple of photography classes as well as quite a few others sorts of art classes and in my experience it is relatively rare, especially in beginner level classes, that there is much discussion about "what makes an artwork 'good'" (from an aesthetic perspective). This is a very difficult subject to nail down because as soon as someone comes up with some "rules" someone else breaks them in an interesting way. It also takes a skilled teacher to bring up this discussion in a way that helps each student grow in their own direction rather than becoming to some degree "clones" of the teacher. Critiques are the usual format for discussing what works well in an artwork and what does not.

 

I should say that when it comes to more practical issues (such as how well a teacup will work) that HAS usually been part of the art classes I have taken (where it would be relevant). Photography is a bit of a special case in that regard, because to some people photography is "pure" art and very few rules about things like composition are hard and fast, and in other areas (e.g., wedding photography) it is probably easier to come up with quite a few "rules" that will serve the average wedding photographer quite well (even if the best find interesting ways to break the rules). I should note that I certainly hope your teacher is addressing the basic technical issues of how to get technically good results. That should be the focus of a beginner level class!

 

It is necessary to learn how to handle the technical issues before someone can advance very far on the artistic front. If your fellow students are rank beginners then that may well be part of what is going on. HOWEVER, I would expect that even in an intro class they would start to bring up issues like when the light meter may mislead you, how to handle the human interactions inherent in street photography, and so on. I do not agree with the idea that beginners cannot handle any ideas about the art side until they master the technical side.

 

If there is little or no instruction going on besides helping people deal with technical problems as they arise then I do think you have some reason to be concerned. If you are considering taking a more advanced class I would certainly talk to the teacher and ask about what is covered in the class and express your concerns.

 

Ultimately, you will need to consider your goals and options. How you proceed will clearly depend on a lot on what your long-term goals are. If you and your fellow students are just taking these classes for "personal enrichment" then you should probably not be so surprised if the classes are not highly rigorous (but more rigorous classes may well be available if you look for them). On the other hand, if your goal is a BFA or MFA in photography or a career in photography then you I would recommend looking around and finding the best teachers and the best programs and figuring out how to get there, even if it means picking up and moving to the other side of the country. I should note that school is not the right route for everyone, but the idea that you should aim high no matter what route you take is, in my opinion, rarely wrong.

 

As a start, however, I would certainly talk to your teacher about your immediate concerns. At the least they may be able to suggest some additional reading or give you some additional feedback once they know that you are, possibly, looking for more than the average student.

One trick is to make the photograph a day or so before the real full moon -- if you can get things right the moon will look full but the foreground will still have the light of the sun on it. The problem you are up against is that the moon is nearly as bright as a sunlit daylight scene. Depending on the scene a graduated neutral density filter might also work, but that, of course, compounds the problem of needing a fast shutter speed to capture the moon without motion trails.

I'm using Gretag MacBeth EyeOne Match 3 and I'm happy with it so far, but I have not had it that long. What I mostly wanted to say is if you are venturing into color management for the first time I highly recommend the book "Real World Color Management." It will help you really understand and put into practice color management for your entire workflow...

I used to cut my own mat board, and I do still at times, but in my opinion the price charged by Light Impressions is cheap enough that it just does not make sense for me to try to cut my own mats regularly. Note as well that Light Impressions offers quantity discounts. On the other hand, I do feel like I can do better on actually assembling the picture, mat, and frame than what the one local frame shop I trust would charge me. I do go to them for UV glass and their prices are pretty reasonable for that. I suspect that they have, of necessity, built into their framing rates the 30-60 minutes they frequently spend with a customer picking out the mat and frame.

 

You need to seriously consider what "level" you are aiming at. If you are hoping to sell your prints for upwards of, say, $100 to $150 each, then I would say that you need to use archival materials and techniques, and you need to do things right in terms of the details like making the bottom of the mat wider than the sides and top. All of which rules out getting pretty much any part of the frame, mat or glass from local craft discount stores and the like. A wood frame, even if it is solid black, is also a nice touch in many cases (but some images do work better with a narrow metal frame).

 

On the other hand, if you are selling your images for, say, $40 each, then cheap frames and cheap glass are clearly essential to keep the price of the framing from exceeding the selling price. Remember that spending an extra $15 on the mat and frame can add at least that much value to your pictures (assuming, of course, that the actual photographs are high-quality).

 

If you really want to delve into the details of archival framing techniques get a copy of "Curatorial Care of Works of Art on Paper." It goes into great detail on the "proper" way to frame works on paper. There is not that much about photography in particular in the book, but most of what it says should apply to pretty much any work of art on paper. Of course it is worth keeping in mind that the pictures going into your first show do not need the same level of care as a $2 million Warhol! :-D

My observation has been that the really low cost tripods are usually flimsy, and since the whole point of a tripod is to hold the camera steady, this is not a good thing.

 

At the other end of the scale, the really fancy tripods either have features that are nice but not essential or they are made of expensive lightweight materials.

 

So, I would aim for good but not fancy...

 

I have a basic aluminum Bogen tripod with a basic pan & tilt head (three seperate adjustments to move the camera) that is almost 20 years old and still going strong.

 

Good ways to save money include going with simpler head and going with a tripod that will not get the camera all the way up to the range of 6' above the ground.

 

You might also went to check the used dealers like KEH...

One possible explanation is that both your image software (e.g., Photoshop) and your printer driver are applying color management in the printing process. If this is happening you will have color problems in the prints. I usually use the Photoshop printing controls to set the printer profile and then turn off color management in the printer driver. This may be what you are already doing but it is not clear to me from the way you asked your question.

 

As a general rule I do not actually covert the image to the printers color profile but rather I tell the software what profile to use for the print.

Light Impressions has always done well for me:

 

http://www.lightimpressionsdirect.com

 

They also know how to cut a proper mat -- neat corners with no overrun on the cuts.

I used to tell everyone who asked me this question to get a Dell. My second computer after a Tandy from the dark ages was a Dell and it served me well for a number of years and had very few problems, as did the Dell laptop I was issued at work and the Dell desktop my father bought on my recommendation. Unfortunately, I cannot say the same of some more recent Dell's with which I am familiar, and I have heard similar things from some other people. So, I am not sure what to recommend. Dell may still be the way to go, but I would try to do some research to find out whether there are more widespread issues cropping up with Dell. One of the things I like about Dell is that you can pick and choose what you need, so you can get, for example, a nice big, fast hard drive for storing all those pictures but pass on the fancy graphics card designed for gamers. For someone who uses your computer as you do a machine aimed at small businesses will often fill your needs better than one aimed at a home user so when shopping at places like Dell I check both the "home" section and the "small business" section (you don't need to be a business to buy from the latter).

 

I assembled my current computer myself and I like the results so far but I would not recommend that route to anyone who is not already reasonably familiar with both the hardware and software that make a computer work. For people who like to do things like build computers it can be hard to remember that most computer users do not know the difference between and IDE drive and a SCSI drive and don't want to!

 

I would also definitely not recommend going with the cheapest computer in any company's line. To make that super-cheap computer they are most likely using the cheapest parts available, which means that some of the parts are almost certain to not work up to spec or to fail before their time.

 

It should be noted that the problems you are having all sound like software problems so you might well be able to revive your current computer by scanning for viruses and spyware and diligently working on repairing anything that is not running properly. If all else fails you could back up all your files and then wipe the hard drive clean and reinstall the software (assuming you have all the installation discs), but if you are not at least familiar with things like what "drivers" are and where to get them and install them it would be a good idea to find someone who is to help you with this process. Still that might be a lot cheaper than buying a new PC.