joe_willmore

I've got a new e-Book out on Amazon entitled: "Hummingbirds: Attracting and Photographing Hummingbirds of the Mid-Atlantic." Out just in time for the arrival of the little buggers.

 

<p>If I want to see if any photos that I've posted online have been taken without permission and posted on a website or used for an add, what options do I have besides using Google Images? Any other sites or search engines you'd recommend to find out if a photo has been copied and used without permission elsewhere online?</p>

<p>Frank,<br>

First, welcome to the USA and I hope you and your family have a great trip. You certainly have a lot of great possibilities you can see.<br>

Second, seeing National Parks is great. But you're in a part of the USA (especially Northern Arizona and Southern Utah) where the scenery is spectacular even without hitting a national park. For instance, something that isn't on your list but I'd highly encourage is to take the time to stop and visit a slot canyon in Northern Arizona or Southern Utah. There are hundreds of them that are not that inaccessible. The most famous ones are the Antelope Creek ones (upper and lower) in Northern Arizona.<br>

Third, as others have pointed out, Yosemite is in the opposite direction. But to be honest (and this is coming from someone who has been to Vegas a couple of times, has family in Utah so have been there maybe 60-70 times in my life, plus taken a couple of visits to Arizona), as beautiful and diverse as all of those places are, to me the two greatest national parks in the USA are Yosemite and Yellowstone. It would be a major drive to get to Yosemite but if that were all you saw (with it's amazing diversity...the waterfalls, El Cap and Half Dome, Merced river, Tuolumne Meadows, the entrance to the Valley, bear sightings and other wildlife), I'd pick Yosemite over all of the other options--it really is that incredible of a location.</p>

<p>Here's a blog with the experiences of Simon Stackpoole who was shooting for a soccer/football magazine (Offside) in Brasil 2014: http://www.oldredliontheatre.co.uk/a-photographers-world-cup-blog.htm<br>

While it won't answer all of your questions, it will give you a better idea of how some of the working sports photojournalists approach this assignment (especially an extended one).</p>

<div></div>

<div></div>

<div></div>

<p>1. I use a Mac (several actually). It's really critical to have a large screen/monitor. I'm lazy and do some edits on a 13" laptop. But usually I use a 14" x 20" monitor (that's just the size of the screen). Color settings matter a lot (b/c what you see on the screen may not reflect the resulting edit).<br>

2. Save all work you get paid for. No telling when you mail off a DVD and it never arrives. Or the DVD arrives and the client insists it's unreadable. Or your edits need work of some sort. Or the client threatens to sue claiming you didn't send 90% of the shots and you need to show a lawyer how much work you did or how many edits there were. And as a general rule, having a backup to what's on your computer is critical. As for me, I have an airport express (Mac) backup plus a couple of portable hard drives (depends upon category). Two are just for unedited RAW files that I save. Okay, I'm anal. But the point is: if it's a paying client then you want to save it.<br>

3. You're asking multiple questions on #3. If it's a model, you want to have them sign a release. It can be paper and you scan it in and email them a copy. Or it can be an electronic release. If they're restricted on what they can do with the photos then your best best is a watermark on the actual photos or a stamp on the back indicating that printing or copies are prohibited (though there are plenty of ways around that). If you're just going to give them a CD and then they print the images, any effort by you to restrict (their ability to make additional edits or make a gazillion copies) is extremely limited and you ought to admit defeat going in...just include a notice saying something like "please don't make a gazillion copies" and recognize that 50% of your clients will do so anyway.</p>

Several thoughts about the Rosenthal picture and some of the comments in this thread:

1. It was taken while the battle was still going on. Mt. Suribiachi (where the flag was flown) was the high point of the

island and it's peak had been seized by the Marines. The battle would rage on for another month. There were still

spider holes and bunkers on Suribiachi that held armed Japanese. it's true they didn't raise the flag under a hail of

gunfire. But it's also true that there were still Marines fighting and dying on Suribiachi when the second flag was raised.

2. There was film of the flag raising. Watch it. It's nothing spectacular--almost boring. It's a powerful message about

our art...about how still photography can freeze and emphasize a particular moment. The guy doing the filming was right

next to Rosenthal, if you do a stop-action on the film, you can see Rosenthal's photo. But in the hurry of movement as

the group of Marines raises the flag, that dramatic pose get's lost.

3. There are many reasons why the photo is powerful. But for people who know nothing of WW-II, the military, or even

war, it's still a powerful photo. It's a dynamic photo--while the poses are frozen you see and can predict the movement,

you can see the bodies seek to surge forward. And basic photo composition rules will tell us that a diagonal line is the

most dynamic you can have...it provides energy to a photo. And then you have a geometric shape (pyramid or triangle)

formed by the flagpole and the line of men. So you have a still photo that screams movement and energy and dynamic

nature. I understand the reasons why the absence of faces is symbolic from a military standpoint. But think of why B&W

is powerful for some photos...it emphasizes form/lines and hides or de-emphasizes other elements (that would otherwise

be distractions. The absence of clear faces (and identities) allows us to focus on the physical effort, the dynamic

movement in the postures. We don't get lost in thinking "well, guy #2 looks like a hunk or a movie star" or "guy #3

certainly hasn't shaved but #4 has...or he could be young and not have facial hair." To put it another way, take off their

uniforms and have them dressed as telephone workers and have them raising a telephone pole and it's still an

impressive, eye-catching photo for some of the composition reasons I've mentioned.

<div></div>

<div></div>

<p>Ray, it's really more an issue of topography than it is of geography. In other words, it's a little tough shooting sunrises and sunsets in the mid-Atlantic piedmont area b/c of the rolling hills and all of the trees. But if what you want is a sunset that disappears in to the water, you're probably better off shooting this in areas that don't have an ocean. My experience shooting sunsets on the Pacific is that you're more likely to get clouds that obstruct the sunset than if you're shooting over a lake or river. <br>

I live near Washington DC (in Virginia) so very East. Within 45 minute drive of my house, there are plenty of bodies of water (Potomac River, Tidal Basin, Burke Lake, Lake Accotink, Occoquan, Patuxent River, Anacostia River) where I can shoot a sunset with the sun disappearing in to the water. It's all about the location and angle I'm shooting at.</p>

<div></div>

<div></div>

<div></div>

<div></div>

<div></div>

<div></div>

<div></div>

<div></div>

<div></div>

<p>I'm joining the dance late but here's my contributions on DC:<br>

Keep in mind that in DC proper, there are building height requirements so there is nothing like the NYC or Chicago skyline. Best skyline shots of a stereotypical city would be of Crystal City and Rosslyn (Virginia just across the Potomac). Also, it's tourist season now with many schools out of session so expect the Mall (where the Smithsonian and many monuments are located) to be a disaster...tons of buses, people wandering. Okay, those caveats noted:<br>

1. Arlington National Cemetery: rolling hills with uniform headstones and maybe the best panoramic view of DC from the steps of the Lee Mansion looking across Memorial Bridge to the Lincoln Memorial and DC.<br>

2. Tidal Basin and Jefferson Memorial plus the Cherry Trees (the older trees are more interesting...gnarly misshapen trunks).<br>

3. USAF Memorial (also in Virginia but a nice overlook of DC) also has a good vista and is a unique landmark.<br>

4. Go to the base of the Washington Monument. It's on higher ground than the rest of the Mall area, the circle of flags and the vista...nice view.<br>

5. National Cathedral is scenic and also in one of the higher areas of ground in DC (DC was basically built on a swamp).<br>

6. The Kennedy Center (outside on one of the plazas) has some nice panoramic views. Catch a free concert at the Millennium stage while you're there. <br>

7. Walk across Key Bridge in Georgetown and shoot down the Potomac River.<br>

8. One last idea: there is a big ferris wheel at National Harbor (in Maryland on the Potomac). I bet at the top of the wheel would provide a splendid vista.<br>

9. Shot ideas that are less about vistas/panoramas and just nice shots: Albert Einstein statute, Vietnam Veterans Memorial ("The Wall"), Korean War Memorial in fog or rainy weather or snow, the atrium at the National Portrait Gallery, Iwo Jima Memorial, US Institute of Peace, the rotunda of the Library of Congress main reading room, Tomb of the Unknowns and the changing of the guard, US Botanical Gardens, Hirshhorn Sculpture Garden (especially near sunrise or sunset so you get the shadows from the sculptures), shadow and light patterns inside the National Museum of the American Indian, the Newseum (anyone interested in photojournalism needs to go there plus multi-stories with a glass front and interesting stuff to shoot), Meridian Hill Park (considered by most DC photographers to be one of the best photo parks in the City).</p>

<p>Also, I'm chagrined to say that I forgot to mention Dave Levingston. He's located in Ohio. Superb portfolio of nudes in nature. http://davelevingston.com</p>

<p> </p>

<p>It's alway a good idea to really know your manual. And then buy a book not written by Canon that is about your camera body...that author will have opinions and recommendations that someone writing for Canon (or any other body the manual is for) can't express and get approved.<br>

But if you want to learn more about being a photographer, creating lovely photographs, learning how to manipulate aperture and ISO and shutter speed and depth of field and white balance and under stand composition better, I suggest you check out Bryan Peterson. He has videos on Adorama TV (the Adorama website with short videos). Start with the basic ones. If you like what you see and his style/approach connects with you, than buy one of his books (he's written many).</p>

<p>Let me make a couple of points:<br>

1. The right answer is individual...b/c fit is individual. The backpack or messenger bag or sling that rides well on me may very well cause bruises and blisters on you. Getting recommendations is nice but if 20 of us all agreed on the same bag, it could be a disaster for you. Don't buy until you try it (or a facsimile) on to see how it rides.<br>

2. Depends on how you shoot. If I was going from point A to point B, I'd probably get a backpack. If I was going to be shooting along the way, I'd get a sling or holster (b/c it sucks to take a backpack off, open it up, pull out gear, protect the backpack or put it back on, shoot, take backpack off, repack gear). I know you're going to be doing a range of photography, but ask yourself some hard questions about how you're likely to use it and shoot. Will you be carrying a tripod with you? Swapping lens frequently as you shoot? Shooting outdoors (with risk of rain or dust)? Serious threat of thieves around you as you shoot?<br>

3. I've got a bunch of things I have to carry my gear. When I travel (i.e.: fly), I have a soft-sided black duffle I stuff gear in and surround with clothes and toiletries. It's carry-on but will hold my tripod, multiple bodies and lens and everything I need. I also have a holster (most frequent carrying device, especially when I'll be switching in and out while I shoot) that holds a body with 3 lens). I've got a messenger back that I put a Timbuktu insert into that I use when I also want to bring a laptop. I have a cheap backpack that holds multiple bodies and lens, has a waterproof cover and I can strap water and a tripod to (rarely used...most when I am hiking to a location then unpacking, shooting, packing up and hiking back). I also have a fanny pack for hikes that holds two bottles of water on the side, a body with zoom and some smaller gear (batter, SD cards, ziplock bag in case it rains, filters, microfibre cloth). None of them is my favorite (though I use the holster the most given what and how I shoot). What I pick depends upon the nature of my travel and of my shooting.</p>