Thanks TL. I liked the concert but its a story in the making. He played well - but mostly all new material and not much old. He is very interesting in his approach to the blues - with the coolest jazz chops blended in to give it a freshness.
That said... I asked Michael Saba last week how to get credentials to shoot the concert. We had already asked the venue what the policy was and they said no cameras due to contractual obligations with the artist. Michael suggested contacting the artist or the promoter and offering a trade-off. So... i wrote to Robben's wife and just asked her to run it by him. He replied with a friendly but firm "no thank you". So - I took the camera with me to Chattanooga but didn't take it to the concert site. First come first serve seating so we got there early to stake out good seats. Got third row on Robben's side.
We were hungry so we went into a sandwich shop next to the side of the stage and was introduced to one of the people in charge of the show. She said cameras were OK and there was no restriction. So i went back to the car and got mine out with the 70-200 and went back to my seat. Keep in mind - public park and free admission - something the city does in the summer.
After the warmup band - the lady i talked to in the sandwich shop came up and told me they were going to shut down the cameras so she wanted to let me know personally since she had given me approval. The MC comes out and says just that and the show starts. For three or four songs -everybody and their brother got their point and shoots, Rebels and dToys out and blasted him blind.
Finally he looked at me and said "please stop with the cameras". I was sitting there on the end of the third row in a clear path of site with the Mark III in my lap with the big white lens and no flash - so I guess he thought it was me doing all the photography. Most of the night went by with people shooting their crap cameras and cell phones and by the middle of the second hour of the show - there were so many goons there with their junk cameras standing in front of us - that we couldn't see anymore. Good thing its music - cause i wanted to hear him play live and that's what i did. It was good and I recommend his new CD "Truth" to anyone who even slightly likes the blues or jazz.
Drove around today and went up to Chickamauga dam and shot Blue Herons until the BNSF came over the old iron drawbidge over the Tennessee river. At one point there were at least 10 Herons in sight either along the banks or on the bridge. Shot that and then headed for home.
I was playing with the ISO custom function that changes the ISO to match the shutter/aperture/meter settings. Not so sure i like giving up the shot and getting grain.
I want to go back there sometime around sweet light - maybe a road trip for the ATL photo gang?
Birds, trains, boats, river, rust, bridge... what's not to love?
sometimes, it's just a fresh eye needed in the same old place. Things that JB were excited to shoot in Chattanooga weren't really on my list as I'd seen them a million times...
Having said that, I'm all about using "I need a fresh view" as an excuse to go somewhere cool...
I keep going back to that same lesson in "Photography and the Art of Seeing" book that said to shoot the same thing at least 20 times - 20 different ways and only then will you start to see it photographically. It can be exhausting - but it forces you out of your box.
How many people from somewhere else - want to come to Atlanta for whatever reason. Same goes for Chattanooga or Nashville or anywhere else. What is old hat to Mark is a fresh new view for me. But i don't want to make a special trip for 2.5 hours just to go back and shoot it.
I keep going back to Jones Bridge Park and Fellini's and I try to find something different every time i go. I've got a lot of shots at Fellini's and not one of the series is the same. By now - it seems the shots are getting harder and harder to make different - but its a work in progress. Maybe one day, I'll get the shot I'm after that i don't yet see.
Same goes for exciting distant locations - if you can't see it photographically - you will probably come back with shots you are less than excited about. So develop your eye on the local stuff and you'll be ready when you do make that trip.
I've been getting my butt kicked for about a week now. I finally caved in and started submitting images to a couple stock agencies. One called me about 2 weeks ago and asked me to submit some of my work and there have been quite few through email who have done the same. I just wish they'd tell me which images struck them as worthy of submission as I'm baffled by their scrutiny. Some of what I thought were my best shots and some that have sold well on the website - were the first to get bounced... "composition" & "marketability" being their favorite words so far. I guess i better go back and learn to "see"!
AltP - Some of those shots are priceless - but the rest all suffer from depth of field issues. The head is sharp but the rest of the body is lost in a sea of blur. It would be better to stop the lens down just a little so that the whole dog is sharp. If all you want to be sharp is its face, then get in tighter or crop the shot down to its face. The backgrounds and the blurry legs and hair just cause too much distraction. Shot #3 in particular shows up the horizon line is wonky and you throw your socks on the floor - is that necessary? Not if you are trying to take a good shot of your dog. Same goes for the last shot - the horizon line is tilted and in this case the dog's body is out of focus.
I think your shots would be improved greatly if you paid a little more attention to these kinds of details.
jbear2000 wrote:
Jon U - as always your pup shots are remarkable!
AltP - Some of those shots are priceless - but the rest all suffer from depth of field issues. The head is sharp but the rest of the body is lost in a sea of blur. It would be better to stop the lens down just a little so that the whole dog is sharp. If all you want to be sharp is its face, then get in tighter or crop the shot down to its face. The backgrounds and the blurry legs and hair just cause too much distraction.
+1
Atl, any of your lenses will be fine in this situation, mainly the difference will be working distance which varies from dog to dog. Some don't like people in their face and others love it.
JU has some well composed and well shot pics. But, I think you will find the biggest difference is in his post processing. He's found a really good balance in saturation and color tones. He also has some subtle vignetting going on that really focuses your eyes where he wants them to go.
He's been shooting and practicing a ton and is getting good results on his time investment. I know I could certainly use some time like that myself...
1) Clean backgrounds. As Mark mentioned I like to process a certain way that includes a vignetting. Sure some people think it is no chic but I love it. It is a hold over from the days of processing film. So when I shoot I tend to take the little guy in the back yard and shoot down on him so all I have is grass in the background. Or if the sky is nice I shoot up to get some of that drama. This last batch had some yard mess...and if I wasn't shooting so much I would probably clean it up.
2) I tend to love the "compressed" look of longer glass when I am doing portraits...which what these are really...just with a pup. So I either use the 70-200 or the 135L. If I had a 85L I highly doubt it would ever come off the MKIII. I would have to buy another body to use my other lens. I do use flash on people through a softbox. The pup moves around so much that I don't use it here. None of my pup pics was shot with a flash.
3) I tie the little guy up and play with him. Get him all worked up and then wait for him to take a "break". He will either sit with that long tongue hanging out and lay down and chew stuff. Calling his name a couple times usually gives me that "look" I want. In your photos I think you are shoot him/her to close. You need to get him/her in the back yard, get them busy doing something, then step back and shoot. Maybe get the wife/girlfriend out there to to keep the dog busy while you step back and shoot.
4) White - Balance. If I am lazy I use auto and correct in post. If I am not I use my Exposedics.
5) Post - I love vibrance and contrast so I boost more. This may not be just my secret...but I boost the blacks. I boost clarity and bump up the recover a tad. Then I had a vignette because I love them....and bob is your uncle.
Now...I shoot wide open, meaning 2.8, because I love that dreamy, creamy bokeh. It takes practice. Focus on the eyes and you should be set. If you are having a hard time stop down one or two till you get it.
Last thing I will say is this....In my opinion I think EVERY picture needs some work in post. Some people may be able to nail it in camera, I can't at this point so I do some work in post. Not a lot. I am not a journalist, I am a photographer and I have to please myself first before anyone else. I like the look of my shots...and tend to get the same response from others so I must be getting close to where I want to be. I am not sure how I would set my camera up any differently to achieve most of what I want in a good photo straight from camera. I have heard other people mention that all photos need work post...and I am a firm believer of that so far....
