Strob'n

I can recall my first use of a non-built in camera strobe/flash. It was pretty significate, so the date sticks out like a sore thumb for me. 
The first time I used one was to shoot U2. Yes, the band- U2.


Here is a brief back story:
    I was getting in to photography, really feeling my oats so to speak. I had been looking at the idea of adding a strobe to my mix. However, I knew once I got it there would be a ton of settings, configurations, etc that I wasn't ready to take on yet. So I put it off. After all, I was an available light only sort of shooter. Why bother adding?! (Literally: Little did I know....)
    Then U2 released it's semi-autobiography: U2 by U2. They also announced a support run of bookstores in three cities. One turned out to be New York City, a no brainer for a band who owns places in that city. There were contests for fans to get a copy of the book signed, and I failed that entry. However a buddy of mine in the Baltimore area won. I won my own lotto of sorts when I said I wanted to get a press-pass to shoot the band. I was in!
However, here is where the problem started: It was indoors along side some of the biggest news sources in America. I couldn't shoot available like and be any bit serious. I didn't have a spare $300 for a strobe, and very little time toprepare. So I asked for help from a friend who I knew would be there, and had a strobe to lend me for the event. Thats right, I went in to shoot U2 with a borrowed strobe with no clue how to use it, no experience, and very little idea of what I was trying to do.
I think I wound up getting some decent shots. However it drove me, I had to face the monster- strobes would be something I would need to bring in to the arsenal.
(The ATU2 flickr set of the event)
    Since then I have moved away from available light. I have gotten almost snooty. For instance, my daughter was making sugar cookies with my wife this week. She was having a BLAST. Of course I wanted to shoot it... available light would have been awful. Bouncing the light was bad shadows... so I HAD to get out a lightstand and shoot thru-umbrella to give a wonderfully soft light to the fun. If I attempted the photos with the pre-strobe me, they would have been flat, grainy, and blech. Now I almost didn't take any photos because I wasn't happy with the light I was able to get. Thankfully my gear was nearby.
What was the differenece? A lot of reading, looking at how-tos, discecting photos, and not being happy with what I achieved. Even from my little photo shot of cookies being made, I still added some decent editing to make the image even better.


Here is a list of five sites that have helped me tremendously:

• Strobist
• S.U.M. on Flickr
• Digital Photography School
• Zach Arias
• And a TON of practice.  =)

City of Blinding Lights- adventures in advertising

The image that started this.

I had originally wrote most of this for @U2's series called Like A Song.

With the use license up for the image, I thought it was time to tell the story behind how I got one of my images printed in magazines like ESPN the Magazine and Rolling Stone.

I was contacted by an advertising agency in September of 2010 asking about the image seen to the right. They were looking to use it in an up coming Budweiser ad campaign called "Grab Some Buds." It wasn't anything I had heard of but the dollar figure they quoted made me seriously consider it. 


This also proves that a shot from anywhere can be had. This image was a mistake, as outlined in the piece below. I didn't mean to take it. I almost deleted it as soon as I took it. But I kept it... not only kept it, but had mind enough to shoot at my Canon S70's highest resolution. I also backed all my images up, so I was able to pull it my from archives. Lastly, this was my 8th photo EVER to be posted to Flickr back in 2005. Never forget that almost anything can be used, a mistake with P+S camera, and one of my first posted images via Flickr. Amazing.
I was worried though. This was an image from a U2 concert, not something made for selling beer. I emailed some U2 photo friends, and some "in the know" U2 friends to ask advise. The end result was that I should go for it, but in the contract to include an indemnity clause protecting me in case U2 world came at the advertisement with lawyers. 
The thing was, I had no idea if U2 had copy-written their shows. As in, something that was uniquely theirs, and any attempt to make it pass off as someone else's or to sell another product was illegal. If you know what you are looking for in the image above, Edge is in there. 

Image used in ad in ESPN the Magazine

Well, now you know my story. I've only seen the image in ESPN the Magazine, as seen to the left here (October 4, 2010 issue), and Rolling Stone in the store. [interesting on the opposite side of a page involving Edge]
Now with some of the personal back story to this image and song.


The follow piece is taken from an article I wrote for @U2.


When I first heard "City of Blinding Lights," I was impressed. It was a big song for U2, and I thought it should have been the first song on the album. I had no idea when I first heard the song that it would twist through my life and supply me with distinct memories: from inspiring me in song, to inspiring me to help, to repaying me. 


MARCH 26, 2005 – LOS ANGELES

I was in San Diego early to take in the first two nights of the Vertigo tour. I was assisting with the @U2 pre-concert party, and hanging out with two great friends, fellow @U2 staffer Sherry and her other half, Steve. We took the day to drive to L.A. because we had time, and of course, U2 was rehearsing. If this was going to be a U2 vacation, we were going to geek it up. Then, the magic occurred. Fans who were gathered at the L.A .Sports Arena were let in with the radio contest winners to watch the last rehearsal for the Vertigo tour. To see a preview of what's to come for free before opening night was like winning a golden ticket. They opened with "City of Blinding Lights," and it was just magical: the confetti sprinkling down, the sheer joy of the moment, Bono singing "Oh you look so beautiful tonight" at full tilt. It was a defining moment in my U2 fandom, one I doubt I will be able to top. The song was perfect for opening the show, just as "Zoo Station" was perfect for the Zoo TV tour. It set the tone for the entire show.

MAY 14, 2005 – PHILADELPHIA

An accident occurred at this show for me that turned out to be somewhat magical. During the opening of the concert, Bono "appeared" to rise up under a shower of confetti at the front of the ellipse. I wanted to photograph that moment with my fancy point-and-shoot camera. I made sure the flash was turned off. While I knew what to expect, I missed the moment entirely -- I snapped too early. The resulting image, however, has easily become one of my favorites. I have moved on to more serious photography interests, from a point-and-shoot camera to a digital single lens reflex camera. I have had opportunities to officially photograph U2 for @U2 at events like the "U2 by U2" book signing, Bono receiving the Liberty Medal, and a couple U2 concerts (1, 2, 3). My interest in photography and U2 led me to the African Well Fund, where I organized three different photo auctions of U2 material by fans. The auctions raised more than $20,000 over the three years it has occurred. I put that image of "City of Blinding Lights" up for auction twice and was amazed at the money it raised for the cause. FALL OF 2010

An ad agency contacted me last fall about using that same image for a high-profile ad campaign. The money they paid me allowed me to upgrade my camera gear -- something I couldn't do easily with a young family, and one thing I couldn't have dreamed of when I took the photo five years earlier.  Every time I hear the song, I think of those distinct moments in my U2 fandom, from golden tickets and mistake shots to helping a Bono-inspired charity, and how they all came full circle in giving something back to myself.

11/11/11 A football game- recap

Shooting sports is not something I do that often, though I think I really like it. Therefor- it is VERY hard for me and I get frustrated.

As I predicted, my 70-200mm lens was on my 7D body for 95% of the game. And as the game was under the lights, I was glad for the usable higher ISO and the low low f/2.8. Getting the right angles, figuring out what is important, and following the action is even more interesting. (read hard) I think if I had more pratice and more of a direct goal, it could/would be easier. I do know a 70-200 is not going to get me very far in the sports photography world. I would need at least one more body and a 300mm or 400mm prime lens. The 70-200 is good for 'closer' up photography... in my case, it was the best I had and I 'happy' with the results.

I took well over 500 photos, but it was easy as the Canon 7D made shooting 7 fps much easier to snap crazy.

It was also a little frustrating as a lot of the action wind up being away from me, run away from me, or generally not easy to shoot. However, I did position myself to snap, as it turned out, the winning score. It was right in front of me, and I recognized the play pretty much right away.

Woot. Life is good for that one.

For the rest of the set, check my flickr set for them. It helps to have a relationship with the subject in question. I've shot other games, and I was able to call the day of and get permission to shoot this. Thank you again Calvert Hall.

Impromptu photo assigment

I hadn't planned to shoot tonight.... not at all. However, as I will not be in town for the annual Turkey Bowl I won't have a chance to shoot it like I have in the past. (2010, 2008)

I realized yesterday that Calvert Hall was in the play offs for the MIAA championship. They play tonight under the lights at CHC, and I figured- what the heck?

I called, asked nicely, and they said sure. Gonna be cold, gonna be a bit windy. So layers, gloves, etc are in order. I got plenty of cold weather gear, not worried about that.

Haven't shot a sports game since I got my Canon 7D though. I think the 70-200mm f/2.8 IS is gonna be glued to the body for 90% of the game.

Gonna be fun, never 'officially' shot a CHC game at home before. Will offer the images up to the Alumni Office if they want any of course. Won't be like Ravens Stadium, but at least I won't be hedged to the stands.


Off to charge batteries and make sure my Patagonia Capilene doesn't stink.

U2 in Pittsburgh- a photography review

(my set of photos on Flickr)

     First off, it was relatively easy to get my 70-200 f/2.8 in to the venue. A huge lens like that, and you would think I would need some cloak and dagger to get it in, you would be sort of right. But that is not the subject of this post. (I guess it could be really) If I feel generous, I will add it to the end of the write up.

I had planned to be in the unwashed masses with General Admission for U2. Get there early, line up, grab my spot and wait. Turns out my ticket didn’t appear until 5:30pm. In the mean time I happened to get a very pricey ticket given to me for the Pittsburgh show- a Red Zone ticket. Someone couldn’t make it.

I would up third person in from one rail and on my own rail. (more on the Red Zone) I had my Canon 7D with 18GB of memory, and the following lenses with me- 15mm f/2.8 fisheye, 50mm f/1.8, 17-40 f/4, and 70-200 f/2.8. The 50mm was my decoy lens on the camera to get in the venue.  As it was used in Chicago almost two years ago!

      I talked up the security in front of me, a nice lady who pretty much could care less if I had pulled a professional video camera out. As long as I was not interfering with others and it wasn’t harming others (or the band), they could care less. This was also confirmed by the area supervisor who turned out to be a really nice guy. I quickly made friends with the folks around me, informed them of what I was doing, and they were all cool with it.

      The show started after nine, and I was very hesitant about getting the 70-200 out of my bag, and using it. After the first two songs, I pulled it out and realized I saw no one even looking at me. I continued to use it without hesitation for the entire show.  I kept looking for U2’s security to come around because I was so exposed in the spot I was in, that the big white lens would be easily spotted. I was my only check to keep using it.

     The only things that slowed me down were the weight of the gear and my own internal check for interesting photos. I had not expected to be able to use the 70-200 for 2.5 hours. That’s a lot of weight to keep up in front of my eye for stretches of time.   (3.2 pounds for the lens plus 1.8 pounds for the camera body)

     I realized the day after that I had violated a (generally speaking) cardinal rule for photography with a long lens- keep your shutter speed one stop above focal length. This caused me to lose quite a few shots. *sigh* I still got a great deal of really outstanding photos.

     Afterwards U2 friends asked me after hearing how many photos I took, “so, did you enjoy the show at all?” My response was something like this, “If I wasn’t photographing during the show, all I would have done was think about photographing it.” I think I was admitting having an addiction.

Quick hits:

•  Was trying to get some different feeling shots that just didn’t turn out in post the way I had thought they would.
• Going through 1,700+ photos is never fun, but Lightroom made it much easier.
•  During the bonus song of Bad, there was VERY basic lighting which made for very bland photos. An AMAZING song, but not so much for the photographer in me.
• For Ultravoilet, there were two techs right around Bono doing the smoke machines to help with the suit of lights Bono had. Very very distracting.  Very hard to shoot around.
• $3.50 for a bottle of water wasn’t TOO bad. Thankfully I could go refill it at a water fountain and disperse the cost.
•  Amazed at the number of empty seats.

Simple gear dilemma

So my birthday just passed and I got some cash to buy photo gear. I know what I would LIKE to get, however the budget is not that expansive! I would love to get the Canon 5D Mark II, or the 24-70mm f/2.8, but that is not realistic at all. Not when the lens is about $1300 and the Canon body is $2500.

What can I get that is cheaper and usable? Now that is a pickle.

So far I have decided on:
Op/Tec raincover
Digital Timer Remote
Two new replacement Batteries
Some Conkin P series adapters for my 70-200 lens

I am debating on several other items, such as an additional Compact Flash card, maybe trying out a cheapie beauty dish/ring light. But the debate rages in my head on what would make photographing the kids easier. At this point, unless I get a separate high ceiling room in my house with a full-time setup for portraits, not much rings a bell for me right now.

I've built some DIY gear like gridspots, light tent, gels for strobes, and some other fun stuff. But how much homemade stuff can I do?

So basically I have hit a practical wall- there are not much else I can do with small items unless I spend more time and energy to put in to the hobby to learn and grow more. I am very comfortable with my results, but I know I can do better. So whats next? I don't know if I can get there from here with the time and energy I have available.

Maybe I should just get a nice new hiking camera bag.

New soup container Strobist style hack

A friend bought some PF Changs for us, and one of the items was in a large soup container. My mind was working once I saw it. I have done a "similar" mod to a smaller soup container. But this one was more of a portrait style light mod.

Disclaimer- yes, it does look silly. Show up with this to a paid gig and prepared to be laughed at. However, the same can be said of the Fong stuff. People say it looks like a taco tip container!

So here is the setup:

What you can see is the soup container with a dual paint job. Inside is half painted white with plastic friendly spray paint. The outside is half painted with plastic friendly spray paint. The top is the same but it is completely covered to help bounce the light out the front.
I measured my strobe on the bottom, and cut out with a box cutter. (very carefully!)

First, here is a bounce light shot:

While very easy and helpful, there are always shadows on people's face. This is caused by the light coming from above and not in front. A straight up strobe to the face is usually over whelming.
Setting up an umbrella is not always easy nor quick. So I thought, why not try to do a quick and dirty mod?

Here is the result:

Not saying it is perfect, but it is a drastic improvement in the quality of the light source.
The downfall is that the strobe has to stay in one direction- I cannot go to horizontal grip for shots with this mod. If I did, I would be lighting to the side and not the front!


[update with self photos, thank goodness for timers]

1/8 power bounce off ceiling:

Notice the shadows and barely lit. Normally in these conditions I go up to 1/4 power and adjust from there.

Strobe test- 1/8 power with mod:

Strobe test- 1/8 power direct with built in diffuser:

Strobe test- 1/8 power direct:

And yes, I couldn't see for a little bit. Yozzers.

Winning!

"I hate to lose" or something like that. Conversely, "I love to win" or "I'm very competitive." That's all the basically the same idea. I've read that in several places on several different sites about photographers and their take on photography. The ones who go down this path more often than not are in photojournalism or sports photography. They have deadlines, they have high pressure clients, and they have a lot of competition to get the shot. Just get it done.

I suppose there are some wedding photographers who have that view- win the client over. Get a great result for a winning response. But that is so loosely viewed through the lens of the person with the job. What is validation for some is not for others- money, clients reaction, being as professional as possible.

It comes down to the person taking the photos- are they happy with the results? Are they happy their photo is on the front page or the back page? Are they happy they have a job? If they enter a contest, if they don't get first, are they happy?

The results in photography are not as clear cut as the score in a baseball game.

Where do emotions mix in with photography?

The statements above in quotes all have a similar theme- emotions. Getting the shot at your own pace is one thing, but getting mad that someone else got it, or did it better is something completely different. I can see reasons for "winning" a photograph:

·         Pride to be the best

·         Motivation to be prepared

·         Knowing your best shot is going to get the job done

·         Motivation to go the extra step

·         Learning from your own failure

·         Expanding to different information and techniques

I've never been competitive in photography. I do it because I like it. Now and then I randomly get a complement I wasn't expecting. It is a nice validation of my results, but I don't go out of my way to do so. Such as submitting a photo to a contest, or selling my photos actively. (ok ok, I have submitted some to micro-stock sites) I do it because I find it fun, interesting, and a way to share. I don't know if I would have that competitive hustle needed to be a professional. I would need motivation, like this is how I am feeding my family now.

Being able to control and harshness that emotion is also very important.

How long can someone keep going like that, to be emotionally invested in the outcome for years before it really gets to them? To know that you will never ALWAYS win, that there is only so much preparation you can achieve would just eat at me. Lastly, to know there are always new people coming in to the field. They might be just as hungry, but the crowd of amateur photographers don't have to be as good as consistently as the professional- they just need to be lucky. That would drive me nuts as a professional- lucky rather than good.

With photography, I have learned that what I thought was a 'whatever' shot can be prized by someone else. It is interpretation. Things I thought that rocked the house, were received with coolness by others. The important thing is to find a client, whether it is a newspaper or school year book, or whomever likes your results.

            I think to be a professional and successful one, you need to be a bit competitive. That provides motivation, that provides focus, and ultimately a method of validation- pay, success, more jobs, whatever makes you tick.

Just don't get eaten by the monster of emotions which could easily be done. There is little difference between love and hate.

Vastly underused

It has been several months since I last posted anything in this blog... I am horrible, I know. I counter with, I work full time, going back to school, and I got two kids under 2. So *pppppppptttthhhhhhh* to you! (assuming you wonder why I don't update this blog that often)

In the mean time, I have some photography accomplishments to post about! Figure I might as well toot my own horn for a bit:

• My Flickr account went past 1,000,000 collective views back on February 11th. It took 6.5 years to get there.
  
• My photos from the Calvert Hall v. Loyola annual football game were used in the Calvert Hall Alumni newsletter. Matter of fact, one of my shots was on the cover.
  
• I sold an image to be used on the cover of an upcoming book about Bono. Small academic book, but still- its a cover image!
  
• An image I have of Sierra was selected for a national dog food advertising campaign.
  
• Another image I have was used for another national advertising campaign. If you can find it, good on you. I also wrote about the image story for @U2.
  
• I got a Canon 7D camera body. =)

In other news:

My RSS feed list for photography stands at 33 sources.

Liking Flickr's new sharing methods!

Been using Twitter more for commenting on things I find now photo-related.