jlee

Hey Noah, look like you've got plenty of good answers but I thought I'd drop

my .02. I'm a 29 year old going for a second degree in Photojournalism at

Western Kentucky U. You can certainly make it in this field without this

education but it is extremely competitive and I wanted to give my self every

advantage. So, I asked around, visited some schools and am convinced I am

at the right place. Not only am I learning to be a better story teller but I am

getting the chance to build relationships with people in what is a very tight knit

field. Just like in any other, if not more so, "networking" is extremely valuable.

I can't say enough good things about WKUs program where fellow students

take the little free time they have to help each other. It's a great team

environment and is largely what has kept WKU at the top of the list of the best

PJ schools in the country.

Check us out at wku.edu and take a look at the www.mountainworkshops.org

Good Shooting, JLee

Khiem,

Cute child, he should provide a willing subject for a few years to

come. The vertical shadow on the rock behind his head is the

most distracting element IMHO and the harsh flat overhead sun

light makes the picture seem a bit flat as well. You did good to

get down closer to a childs level. Keep experimenting. Adjust

your subject at different angles and in different kinds of light to

get the results you want and always be very concious of the

backgrounds. I like the fact that you put sunglasses on him to

work with the light you had but still would like to see a similar

shot much earlier, much later, or on an overcast day with some

good eye contact.

Keep at it, JLee

J. Jason Lee: Originally hail from Conway, SC bedroom

community to Myrtle Beach, the "Redneck Riveria." 28 years old.

Citadel Military College Graduate c/o '96. Former Realtor now

pursuing a career in Photojournalism. By Sandy's definition I'm a

"professional" WHOOPEE! Some freelance for local papers,

weddings, corporate... Just finished first year at Western

Kentucky University in Bowling Green, KY. I discovered where I

needed to be about the same time I discovered the right camera

for my needs. M6 & 35 'Cron for the last 18 months.

Ana, good work getting posted. It still seems a hit or miss

proposition for me even when I think I've followed all the

instructions.

As for photographing people and shyness. I've just finished the

first year in a program that requires us forego our fear and get

out there and shoot strangers, often under tough circumstances.

I can tell you that most people don't mind an even welcome the

attention and it becomes much easier with practice. Often a nod

and a smile will do and telling people you are a student (aren't

we all?) often has wonderous effects.

I think the greatest problem occurs when you feel self concious

and demonstrate that through your actions: sneaking quick pics,

etc. If you feel and act as if you're doing something wrong, other's

read that and react negatively. So, my greatest (perhaps

underqualified advice) is to be very straight forward in your

approach to people photography and act as if nothing is unusual

about making your photographs. Be prepared to hear a

thousand wonderful stories and to meet some interesting

characters. Be respectful, offer, and follow through with prints to

those who show interest in your work.

I can honestly say that this approach has resulted in the best

year of my life not only in terms of photography but in personal

relationships. Good luck, JLee<div></div>

I wouldn't consider it "too busy" if it had something to draw the

eye like the aformentioned cat on the sill or a shadowed figure

walking on the other side of the window. I guess a kid on a bike

would be too much to hope for? I also agree with Jack. The

bushes don't add to the image and should be cropped out.

However, I really like the shadows and patterns and think the

shot has a lot of potential. It's the kind of location I'd keep

returning to. Best, JLee

Kristian,

The news photographers I know do not do "candid set-ups" all

the time (or any of the time) and would be appalled even

incensed at the suggestion. Many magazines, including National

Geographic do "Photo Illustrations" which are a whole different

animal. I've not heard of Steve McCurry setting up candids and

would be interested to know what images and documentation

you've seen to that effect? He is well known for portraiture as well

as documentary work and I wonder if you're referring to those? I

would be surprised if he directed Indian women to hunker down

behind trees during a sandstorm for instance. Respectfully, JLee

Maybe you're right, Bob, regarding Essayist vs. Photojournalists.

However, the genre' looks very much like what photojournalists

call, a "Photostory." In fact, the terms Photo Essay and Photo

Story are often used interchangably. I am working on one now

for my final project in which my subject volenteer's for the Red

Cross. One of her duties is helping victim's of fire get back on

their feet. There hasn't been a fire since I started this project

(thank goodness) so my subject suggested she take me out to

the scene of the last fire and maybe call members of the family

to meet us there. I, of course, refused to stage that shoot . Had I

done so and anyone found out I doubt I would have any future in

this business not to mention the moral question of whether

what I was doing was honest.

Maybe what Mr. Smith did was acceptable in his time or for his

genre. I know that he spent a great deal of time with his subjects

to better understand their lives, to tell their truth, and I respect

him for it. However, I just can't look at his beautiful body of work

in the same way. It makes me wonder, for instance, if he set-up

my favorite shot from the "Midwife" shoot where children are

peering in the window at the newborn. Maybe staged images

should come with a heading of "re-enactment."

The way I see it, most of us are willing to suspend our belief

when we know something is a work of fiction but greatly dislike

being fooled.

I personally was shocked to find that Eugene Smith, often

considered the father of the photo essay, sometimes arranged

his subject. In W. Eugene Smith and the Photography Essay, the

working methods that were revealed shocked me as a student

photojournalist. Smith is even quoted justifying his actions by

saying he "rearranged" while maintaining "the spirit of truth and

the actuality." Examples of these arranged photographs:

"Country Doctor" (walking w/ gear and lamplit) He also

reportedly dodged, burned to the effect "so radical as to create a

new picture.." In "The Spanish Village" where a family is

mourning the death the father, he dodge the pupils of the

widow's eyes to direct them toward the deceased. Further he

replaced backgrounds in a portrait of Albert Schweitzer.

Smith was so highly regarded that maybe he could get away with

this. However, in photojournalism, we are taught that credibility is

the only thing that makes our pictures worthwhile. If our methods

cause viewers to question our credibililty, what value is the

image beyond fine art?

Most news papers and organizations now have strict standards

in regards to documentary photography that fobids directing

subjects or changing the image in any way beyond the basic

darkroom techniques.

That said, we are taught that every photographer must draw their

own lines. Some even argue that adding flash to the scene

changes it beyond credibility for instance while others say that

it's OK to move a chair that a subject will likely sit in to enhance

the composition. There seems to be a very fine line.

I switched from an M6 to a D1 and am now back. It's still a tough

call. I missed the Leica badly with it's abilities in low light with

fast film, it's size and simplicity. I simply enjoy shooting with the

Leica more than I do with a large auto SLR. I was spending

countless hours behind a computer screen and it wasn't nearly

as much fun as time spent in the darkroom. That said, there was

certainly an advantage in not being concerned about amount of

film I shot and in the instant feedback on screen. I was generally

pleased with the results that a pro printer could get even from the

older D1 Fine files. My conclusion is that I will have to have both

and use the digital when time is of the essence or when I need

longer lenses (sports etc.) I can't afford it yet but selling the

Leica is just not an option any longer. I missed it too much.

Currently I'm buying my film in bulk and having it developed only

for $1.50 per roll and scanning the selects. It's a little slower but

worth it for now. YMMV.

James,

I'd like to reiterate Steve's advice: to spend more time working

with the 35. You've been getting great answers about traditional

portrait focal lengths but you didn't specifically ask about a

portrait lens. I've been shooting for a long time but have only

recently become a serious student myself. Therefore, I'm very

familiar with the tendancy to throw a new piece of equipment in

when my pictures aren't good enough. Most of us are also

reluctant to approach people which is another reason that

newcomers often find themselves looking for a longer lens.

When Capa made his famous remark "if your pictures aren't

good enough you're not close enough," I don't think he was

talking about not using a long enough focal length. I think he was

talking about an intimacy with the subject and you just don't get

that from standing back at a distance trying to grab shots. So my,

(it seems unpopular) advice is to work with that 35 until you know

it extremely well and work on getting ever closer to your subjects.

Then, start thinking about other lenses. When you do, you might

find yourself shopping for an even wider piece of glass.

Good luck, JLee

Jason,

As a fairly new M user as well, two things come to mind that I

haven't seen mentioned here in regards to making people shots:

1) When you're walking about with your M make a habit of

changing the settings to assure that you have a something close

to working exposure in any situation. 2) Determine what distance

that you most often will be photoing people and set your focus

accordingly. Then it's a quick matter of fine tuning when you bring

the camera up to shoot. Things happen fast, expressions

change so be ready. You'll also quickly learn to walk to that

pre-set distance and compose. I'm using that as a training tool

to remind me to get closer and to learn to pre-visualize

composition. When I first started with my 35, I had my focus set

to 10'. Now, it's sitting at 6' and it's probably time to move go a bit

closer. Good luck and let us know how it goes.

JLee

I think in terms of paces since the length of my stride is

approximately 3 ft. Thus, 3 good paces to my subject is about 9ft.

I've practiced with the tab on my 35 so that I can loosely focus by

feel before bringing the camera up. Then it's very quick to fine

tune when shooting with a large aperture. Above 5.6 and even

that's normally not necessary.

Have you considered a Lowepro belt with other types of

pouches? I just went to a Deluxe belt with a "Utility Pouch" and

slightly smaller "Film Organizer" for my incidentals while my

cameras are normally slung over my shoulders. Neither of those

pouches are too heavily padded and I believe either would fit a M

w/ lens with room for a few less incidentals. With my kit, I keep

about 15 unexposed rolls of film, a SB-28 flash, 3 shorter Nikon

lenses, Sekonic meter, flash cords, dozen batteries, cell phone,

etc. A friend of mine keeps his extra M in a S&F 50 Case with a

50 cron attached. A slightly more expensive option is the

Kenesis design of which much is written on the photo.net forum.

They also have built in rain covers which may come in handy on

the "lightening" assignment I'm doing tomorrow. With both those

systems you can mix as match as per equipment required. I've

only used this for about 10 days but it's amazing what a

difference it makes on the shoulders during a full day of

shooting.

Chris - A couple more suggestions: Try the film change as

described above with the camera hanging from it's neckstrap.

That way you can just flip it over and go to it. I rarely even let the

hindged back flip open. Just drop in the canister, pull the film

across, close it up and begin shooting. The only other thing

that's slowed me up was getting the back (bottom) open with a

lack of fingernails. This was cured by placing a little piece of

gaffers tape around the bottom loop giving me something to

grab.

As everyone else mentioned, before long it may be quicker than

easier than other manual cameras. I found myself cursing the

loading of my F3 with motor drive the other day as it seemed

cumbersome compared to my M6.

The aperture ring on my pre-asph is a bit loose at the larger

settings from about f2-f4. Can create a slight annoyance as I

sometimes knock it 1/2 - 1 stop off. Even more so since I rarely

use the internal meter (battery's been dead a while) and

therefore sometimes don't notice the change while shooting. If I

were shooting primarily chrome I'd have sent it in by now but as I

generally have B&W print film loaded, it doesn't seem critical or

worth the trouble.

Naked Cowboy - shoot for student NPPA Shootout "Nashville

Nights." After talking to him found out he's become something of

a national legend. His website is www.nakedcowboy.com<div></div>

BTW: Abell's image here:

http://www.digitaljournalist.org/issue0206/sam05.htm

1) It really doesn't matter. I'd just like to make one of those

enduring images one day. That's enough to dream for without

caring much whether it's black or white.

2) My favorite images seem to change daily but the first one that

came to my mind is Sam Abells fishermen setting nets that are

partially in silohette. It's at least one that I never tire of seeing.

Oddly, many of my favorites are largely monochromatic or very

subtle color images.

I don't think their is any problem with the distance between the

two foreground subjects but I agree that the negative space

would work better if their was subject movement in the

background figures. The dark figure on the left needs at least

some light on the face in my opinion. Is their further detail in the

negative that could be drawn out. Personally, I don't want to see

the eyes if they are looking at the camera but need some detail

in that shadow. I am interested in what you were trying to convey

when you shot this though and might like it BECAUSE it causes

me to ask questions.

Thanks for sharing that Mark. My prayers will be with you during

this trying time and the days to come. I lost my grandfather and

closest friend two years ago and much to my latter display did

not make the images I would like to have of his last graceful

days here with our family. May you find some sense of comfort

from the images you already have and will make tomorrow. God

bless you and yours.

Sincerely,

Absolutely. I taking a lesson from a good player the other night

(I'm not one) and he said that I'm overly aggressive and tend to

get tunnel vision on the chessboard. He kept yelling "patience!"

at me. Couldn't help thinking that the same could be said for the

way I tend to approach photography. Working on both games

though.