Kaslo BC - Canon G11

I write this post from BC Canada, on a vacation at Kootenay Lake with my family. I brought a photo backpack loaded with my D700 and a few choice lenses, flashes, other miscellaneous doodads, plus my tripod. After 8 days, I’ve not put one click on it. Not that there isn’t enough material. It’s beautiful out here, and I like landscape and nature photography. It’s just that I have two young children and can’t seem to get away on my own for any significant amount of time to concentrate on my photography. I could bring the gear along wherever we go, but it’s so clunky. It’s big, heavy, and since it’s expensive stuff I have additional reservations about leaving it in the car for any length of time, at daily stops when it’s not practical to schlep it along (say while getting groceries or grabbing lunch etc.)

Continued…

And trying to control my daughter (3 years old and non stop activity) in all kinds of potentially dangerous situations (at the edge of some cliff, or near deep water, traffic, etc.), with that brick of a camera hanging around my neck and all the gear in tow is not an easy task. I’d surely end up banging it on the ground or drop it in the water or something while trying to stop her from the inevitable excitement and mayhem she creates.

On the other hand, my trusty little Canon G11 that goes almost everywhere with me in my… well it’s a shoulder bag that looks sorta hippie meets military issue… but to all you pure macho types out there, yes it’s a murse (male purse). I’m middle aged, married with children, driving a mini van…. so I’m beyond caring about image. Convenience rules. I even call it my “fag bag” when referring to it in conversation with my wife.

I really wonder if I should be selling my D700 kit for something more practical. There are times when having a big camera is good, aside from the fantastic image quality it produces, like when I’m snapping pix at a kid’s event. Other people with point and shoots sorta get out of the way. And often the eyes of the subjects find their way to the guy with the bad-ass looking gear.

Overall, the big expensive gear is getting very little use though. I’m starting to dig the smaller technology. The little G11 can’t be as versatile as the D700, nor can it even come close to the noise performance and the wonderful bokeh capabilities of the D700 with a good lens. I’m really interested in this new Fuji X100. If, in a few more years, the manufacturers can produce a camera like that with interchangeable lenses, I’d be ready to dump a lot of excess baggage in favour of that more compact kit. I like the 4/3 system, cameras like the Olympus PEN. But what I’ve always wished for was a camera that was like the digital version of my old Pentax ME Super. Metal, solid, compact, almost indestructible, dead simple, not so many bells and whistles, and yet a true SLR. This new Fuji is about as close as it gets so far… but not quite there yet.

Finally, outdoor photography is usually best in early morning or late evening light and, again I’ll spinelessly place partial blame on life with children though it’s also about my laziness, I can’t seem to catch these hours while I’ve been here in beautiful southern BC.

Okay, so this example kinda sucks, but you get the idea

No I don’t mean breaking down like your 1981 Ford Fiesta. I mean breakdown as in divided into parts for analytical reasons. I have known amateur photographers that had great equipment and a very competent technical knowledge of their equipment, but still had a hard time capturing images that any random group of seasoned photography enthusiasts would overwhelmingly deem to be more than just a “nice snapshot”. That’s when I realized that old saying some of us guys have heard before, “it’s not the size of your tool, it’s how you use it,” was actually true. Well, at least in terms of photography equipment.

continued…

Though some experienced photographers say the vision is everything, and even go so far as to say something like “I shoot jpeg, because I get it right in camera- no need to shoot RAW (insert macho growl sound here). But I believe I have captured a reasonable number of “better than snapshot” images over the years, and I will say that for me it’s been 60% vision and 40% (pause…EEEK!) post-processing. I know I am no wildly talented photographer, but I do think I have a better-than-average knack for post-capture vision; taking a photo that borders on ordinary and doing something with it that makes it visually interesting- at least to those of us  that aren’t purist snobs. So anyhow, my message to anyone who cares…. you know who you are… Carl!… is that we are not all blessed with the amazing vision for composition and capturing a moment like the greats of professional photography, nor are we always in glamorous environments with interesting material, so for the average joe like me, we have to have a vision that incorporates post processing to some degree if we want to make the most out of our daily captures…. Amen.

Here is probably the first time I photographed people in a church, or at least first time in this church for sure, with flash. I had no assistant and was not about to bring lightstands or tripods into the church, so it was on camera. I did okay, but for future reference here were some mistakes and observations:

Continued…

I had my SB-600 flash set -1 EV, with the built-in diffuser engaged. I had my Nikkor 35-70/2.8 zoom on (wishing once again that it was the 24-70/2.8…wahhhh!). My thoughts on lens choice were that my 16-35/4 would be too wide and distorted through most of it’s lower end of the range, and would not get me long enough for some headshots. Plus I wanted a wider aperture to throw the background out of focus on some shots. My 50mm or 85mm fixed 1.8s would be great for bokeh, but too restricting in terms of focal length and I was not into switching lenses or employing ”sneaker zoom”. These events are too fast paced for that. So I believe my lens choice was about right given my selection.

For the group shots, my perspective was too low. I was kneeling down to stay out of the way of the photographers behind me. Considerate, yes, but the back rows of kids are barely seen. And the flash lit up only the first row or two, exacerbating the problem. Lighting-wise, I would have been better off to do one of two things: either put away the diffuser and angle the flash at full power up to the ceiling at about 45 degree angle (with a bounce card if I had one for that flash), or just jack up the ISO and shoot available light, no flash.

I have to really pay attention to the background. I keep forgetting to do this where it really should be engrained into my brain by now. Although I didn’t have a lot of freedom, mainly because I’m always trying to be considerate to the other parents/shooters, I would have been better to be a little more centered in front of the subjects and to pay attention where the crucifix was in relation to the subjects. This is for the individual shots of the children posing for photos with the two Fathers. I stayed off to the side so that each child’s parent could get that prime real estate when their turn came. The angle I was at meant I wasn’t getting direct looks into the lens, which may not be all that bad, but it also meant that in some shots the crucifix on the back wall looked like it was growing out of Father Ed’s head.

Lastly, I should have set the camera’s exposure comp at somewhere from +1/3 to +1 to counter it’s reaction to the excessive amount of white clothing. I guess this might be a common thing with wedding photographers. I think +1/2 or +2/3 would have been perfect. The sensor sees all that white and tones down the exposure to compensate. I had to boost pretty much all the images I shot that session by .5 to .66 in post processing.

Live and learn….

Lighting in Photography | Light Painting Technique & Tips.