Continued after the jump from part II
28 January Q&A answers, part III
February 11, 2020 by
28 January Q&A answers, part II
February 8, 2020 by
28 January Q&A answers, part I
February 5, 2020 by
Here goes: after the jump, a distillation of answers to your questions from the 28th of January post. Thank you for contributing – some of these proved to be very interesting to think about! Remember, the most relevant answer may have already been given previously, sometimes in great detail…
Discussions: Commonly encountered photographers’ dilemmas
October 25, 2018 by
Choices, choices
Today’s post is a series of open topics to be discussed in the comments: ten choices we we regularly encounter as photographers I suspect we have our own general stand, but tend to adapt to the situation. Nevertheless – I find these sometimes philosophical choices can have a huge impact on the outcome of the image.
Discussion points: photographic rules
December 29, 2017 by
Much has been written about photographic guidelines or rules that are supposed to guarantee you – or at least lead to a high chance of success – an interesting or balanced image. I’m not about to reinforce those, but neither am I about to dismiss them completely. Instead: let me offer you an alternative take on The Pantheon of Photographic Dogma like ‘the rule of thirds’ and ‘best light at dawn and dusk’ and ‘blur only your backgrounds’ etc. Important: it is not to be confused by the limitations imposed by the physiology of the way we see: we cannot help notice bright colours because this is the way our brains and eyes are wired. We cannot help but notice abrupt highlight clipping (but not black shadows) – because we cannot change the way the cells in our retinas are laid out. Apply some scepticism to internet pundits who can’t differentiate between man-imposed rules and those which are physiologically limited. With that, let’s move on to the discussion background.
Discussions: On going pro
June 10, 2017 by
Something different for the first post with Robin: a transcribed discussion between us about the realities of ‘going pro’ in the current market environment. I think it’s pretty clear that the last ten years have been rather turbulent times for the industry, both for service providers/ creatives and the hardware manufacturers; consolidation has been the underlying theme but also a drop in barriers to entry and a real extension of possibilities at the high end – but only in very rarefied air. It’s become harder than ever, I think, and I’d definitely have liked to have the benefit of experience of somebody who managed to make the shift stick in recent times and who understood the climate; Robin and I have decided to publish this conversation in the hopes that others in the audience might find it useful too. Think of it as sitting in on a conversation rather than a traditional article in the in the usual style of the site.
Advance warning: this may be a lengthy post. MT&RW
Discussion points: Influences
May 29, 2017 by
From the series ‘Only The Clouds are Truly Free’, inspired by the work of Magritte
Following on from the previous article on finding inspiration – it makes sense to throw another question out to the audience – who are your inspirations? Hopefully, you might find something you’ve not seen before. The more I’ve been asked this question, the more I’ve found myself allowing increased weight to non-photographic themes: creativity is a fluid, difficult-to-define thing, and sources can be pretty much anything: other photographers; artists in different media; music; a season; muses; objects; locations; even (ahem) hardware.
I’ll go first, after the jump. MT
Discussion points: An ideal format?
March 2, 2017 by
Flexible? yes. Practical? Not exactly…
Today’s post will be the first in the experimental ‘discussions’ theme proposed a little while back.
We all know there is no such thing as the ‘perfect’ format or system – there are myriad considerations for selection, based on creative properties and technical ones – for example, depth of field, dynamic range, ‘graphic-ness’, color depth, shooting envelop, ability to deploy under certain conditions that might be weight restricted, system completeness for specialised lenses, camera movements etc. And this is before we even get into any thoughts around cost (for hobbyists) or return on investment (for pros). In most cases, we’re left either stuck with a single system that fills all needs but perhaps not perfectly, or multiple systems and formats and the inconvenience of both overlap and lack of it. For example – I love to create graphic images with a lot of compression and infinite depth of field, but this requires a narrow angle of view and thus longer equivalent focal length. I could do it with my H6D-100c, but the sensor on that is so large that I can clearly see a difference in focal plane at f8 and just 150mm-e, with a subject 100m away. Clearly, this is not workable – so I also have an E-M1.2 and Canon 100D with their respective telephotos for that kind of work. The graphic intent of the output means that limited dynamic range and crushed blacks aren’t so much a problem as desired most of the time.
Ming Thein | Photographer 