Tripods

Posted on May 4th, 2007 by HuthPhoto.
Categories: Skills, Equipment, Photo, Teaching, PhotoJava, Rants.

[b]Beatrice in Japan Asks (a Ninja!):[/b]
…sorry I couldn’t help the Ask a Ninja Ref

Mother’s Day is around the corner and my husband wants to get me a tripod for my gear. It is waaaaay overdue! I am on the brink of a migraine and tears trying to figure out what to purchase. Could you make a recommendation based on the following information?

+ Canon 20D w/battery grip
+ Canon 580EX flash
+ largest lens: Canon 70-200L IS f/2.8 w/collar
****************snip**********
(note: and she’s on a military base and so can play with options much)

[b]Ken Says:[/b]
You know, I hate tripods and consider them a necessary evil… so my advice is about what I use, and not up-to-date review filled with love for tripods :-)
I have an old, lightweight[b] Slik tripod[/b] I love. It seems like this one:
Slik U212 Universal Deluxe Tripod with 3-Way Pan Head #212
for $99 here:
http://www.adorama.com/SLU212D.html

:idea: I love that it’s legs can go out seperately, has a quick release for the camera, level, rubber and spiked feet and flips pretty easily and versatilely for copystand work, etc. Even though it’s light, it should be fine for a normal digital setup as you describe.


:x I used to own a Bogen/Manfroto which was super heavy. You buy those legs, then head of your choice. It was nice and solid, but a bit of a pain then to drag around. But do you know the real reason I didn’t like it?? The stupid flip-style leg locks really hurt when opening and closing… Maybe I’m just a dufus, but I couldn’t find a way to not pinch my fingers in every photo session. So fortunately it was stolen and I didn’t have to keep getting pinched :-)
So do consider which leg lock setups it has. I don’t like the spinning lock as it’s harder to tell when they are tight, they get loose easily, etc… YMMV. Also how the camera will attach and quickly be removed.

My life is hit and run, so I like speed releases. I’m also a fan of the heads that you grip to let loose, then the ball gives total swivel positioning. BUT it MUST be a top-quality, expensive one or it can slip or be cheesy quality. Good ones are very easy to use and lock down tight.

I used to work at camera stores in college and my first year out, so I’ve been around a few tripods… but that’s 20 years ago now. I am interested that my Slik is still made. I think that’s a good sign for it. Also, tripods aren’t high tech and don’t change often.

Great husband, BTW to do that. Military and supporting the photo habit. Tell him I say he rocks.

0 comments.

Proof Marking and Sharing Photos on the ‘Net

Posted on March 16th, 2007 by HuthPhoto.
Categories: Shoots, Personal, Teaching, Internet, Rants.


As Weird Al might have put it ‘Don’t Download This Photo‘


Melanie, who’s checking out the Aperture & Lightroom class asked this question:
I am just starting out to become a professional photographer and I wonder if you might answer a question. In looking at your photographs to try and learn from them, I noticed that you don’t have any kind of watermark on them. Is there a reason?

And here are my thoughts on watermaking my images on the ‘net, giving clients and subjects extra value, and how cool it is that we can easily be generous:
A quick first thought… remember why you got into photography… How fun it is to take a good shot and give it to a friend. Please don’t let business crowd out the pure fun of great images being seen by lots of people and making subjects and clients excited by your work!

Now on to the practical list:

• I don’t really do the sort of work that I’m trying to sell as stock, or resell. It’s really PR/Journalistic/Theatre work that I do.

• I always felt I make my money shooting, and while I try to make a bit extra here and there on print orders, etc… but the goal is to make enough shooting to not be pushing for sales of this or that

• I’m an open-sourcer at heart and really buy into the whole thing about the ‘net and sharing. If someone I photograph wants to snag a low-res shot I’ve posted online and put it on their Myspace or blog or whatever, I just think it’s part of the cool way the web works. I’m also a Christian, and like to be working in a positive, generous, caring way… and giving back to subjects (that often put up with a lot from us shooters!). I think photogs have always been anal about rights and reuse fees and scratching for every last cent. I realize I’m totally on the outside on this issue compared to other shooters. I remember reading a newsletter from one of the big photo associations and it was all about ‘clients pushing me for this, and they’re awful jerks because of that, and so cheap’ and I thought… ‘wow, what fun meetings they must have’ ;-)

• In a business sense, I think that looseness can be good advertising. The site gets tons of traffic. Like I’m very liberal with theatre playwrights (like Greg Coffin Convenience and Five Course Love ) and will let them post shots from plays I’ve shot that they’ve written… I just think it’s cool how we can do that now with digital: Give that extra value with minimal work on my part.

• I think watermarking usually looks tacky and ruins the look of the image. It says loudly ‘I care little about how this image looks but tons about your stealing it from me (you big nasty thief visitor to my site)’ ;-)

• Being loose with this an reuse just seems like the most justifiable position to me… it’s what I’d want if I were on the other side hiring a photographer. (For more on my reuse policy, read HuthPhoto.com’s ‘Clients Info’ area.) Related story: I caught myself scraping to save a few bucks by buying equipment online (and not like buying at B&H, but trying really to go cheapest places). I felt bad about that, and really try to give the local guys a chance now. I’ve also had some bad online buying experiences (with expensive stuff and big companies).

How’s that for a bouquet of reasons. YMMV. Every photog makes her own decisions, and if your work were one of a kind art, that needed to be posted high-res, and you were dependent on sales of prints… then you’d have to protect your images. But you also have to price reasonably for the market so that they are willing to pay it. It’s the iTunes theory of music download. Most people won’t steal stuff if it’s reasonably priced and simple/fun to get. And then there’s a hardcore percent that will steal it anyway and crop (or clone) the watermark out.

The other side of the issue:
Just to be fair, you can do a small watermark, like I have to do with my online lab Here

Also, I really don’t like when business clients try to publish photos I give them for editing and design…If you check out my client info HERE, I note that the big issue there is quality. Just using a photo that’s not been prepped is a crapshoot and makes us both look bad. I only charge $10-$20 to prep an image, and I think that’s a fair amount for a business to pay to ensure they look fantastic in print. And from a business, it’s just respectful to pay a photographer to use his images.

The same would be true of someone swiping images off of my site for any business purpose… that’s obiouvsly wrong, and if you’re in business, you should be able to pay for photos you want to use.

Hope that helps as you are making your decisions. Thanks for getting me thinking about it…

(PS: The Photos Above…that’s Mom & Dad and my Niece Alexa with boyfriend Drew from a family reunion)

Let me know your comments below.

powered by performancing firefox

0 comments.

Cut it Out with the Megapixel Questions!

Posted on March 12th, 2007 by HuthPhoto.
Categories: Shoots, Equipment, Photo, Rants.

If someone asks me one more time on a shoot ‘Hey, how many mexapixels does that camera have??’ I’m going to scream.

Stop it! Stop it! Stop it!

Hhhhh, whew, that felt good.

Cameras ALL have enough megapixels now, they have for several years and any camer you buy will have enough resolution to make photos 8×10″, 11×17″ and if you want bigger, Genuine Fractals is only a few dollars purchase away. With GF you can get (from a nice file) any size image you need.

So relax with the pixel questions… I’m sure folks are just trying to be interested and that’s the thing they know to ask (or show they are hip to digital photo lingo ;-)

What should we ask?
Ask me if they camera has any cool features, or what my favorite cameras are now, or how to improve shots you are having trouble with, or ANYTHING but about the specs of my camera.

I’m bored stiff about MP and it shows the marketing twonks who sell cameras have people focused on buying more than they need and avoiding the real needs like good menu systems, bright lenses, flash that looks good, etc.

(end of rant)

0 comments.

« Newer