Making a Splash

I grew up playing deep-sea diver, cowboys and Indians, and playing war games. My parents encouraged it, I don’t know why. I would have never called dolls I owned “dolls” but soldiers and warriors and my time was spent setting them up to kill the bad guys.

So here I am, years later, still playing with dolls, no longer playing war but instead tossing them into a tank of water, adding bubbles and watching what happens over and over again as I capture a fleeting nanosecond of time with my camera at different heights, at different speeds and stuffed with different amounts of lead shot.

This could just be the greatest job in the world next to being the guys out there mapping the Titanic in 3D.

Wrapped Up © D.A.Wagner

Photography is a very physical business: the act of shooting can involve a lot of physical activity, as well as setting up and striking sets, carrying cameras, lights and grip equipment, climbing ladders, loading trucks, and working with Photoshop (okay, maybe that’s going too far). Is that a fitness regimen, manual labor or self-flagellation?

According to John Medina in Brain Rules, our ancestors walked about 12 miles a day in the search for food, water and safety – and that developed “Olympic-caliber bodies” that supported that wet stuff between our ears (you know, our brains – duh). We learned while we were on the move.

Medina is convinced that we humans need a comeback and exercise is as close to a “magic bullet” that exists, as it has a big payback in intellectual and health rewards, keeping us out of the doctor’s office and increasing our cognitive skills.

Does that mean that photographers are smarter and healthier than our sedentary counterparts? A 1988 News Photographer Magazine survey of 2000 photojournalists (hey, that’s the most recent info I could find) showed that health-wise, even though we smoked less (probably didn’t have the time to pick up the habit), we had more dry skin, eye, ear, throat and sinus problems and miscarriages than the general public, most likely from darkroom chemistry – something most of us have left behind for digital processing. However, back pain was the most common ailment reported (see my post on back pain), which is no surprise considering how physical our jobs can be.

As for smarter–I didn’t find anything on this one. So to give photographers the benefit of the doubt, I’ll say yes, we’re smarter. I’m saying that based on the fact that so many of us are entrepreneurs and inventors. And since we have to think on our feet, as our ancestors did–often in the presence of an audience (clients versus saber-tooth tigers)—we’re great at creative problem-solving.

There appears to be very little research and even fewer hard facts on how smart or healthy we are, but in my own conclusion, yes, we are a smart, healthy bunch – even if we are stressed out.

One Girl Cookies Sign

One Girl Cookies is a homey bakery on Dean Street that has a simple understated sign hanging outside that only says “cookies.” Inside is more like what you’d expect to find in a small town, not Brooklyn, there’s even a family tree of the owners, Dawn and Dave, hanging on one of the walls. It’s also much bigger than it looks. Kind of like the Tardis from Doctor Who.

I’ve been looking for a place to start shooting for my editorial portfolio and One Girl was perfect. Thankfully, Dawn and Dave welcomed the idea of letting me wander around the shop for a few hours unattended.

No, I didn’t steal anything.

One Girl Cookies - the store, the seating area, cookies and cupcakes

Weasel in Cage © Stacy Lynn Baum

Based on a true story. The names and sandwiches have been changed to protect the innocent.

——-

An assistant to a customer calls his local favorite sandwich shop. Rufus the Gourmet Sandwich Guy answers the phone and the assistant proceeds to place the order.

Hey Rufus, Bob’s assistant here, he’s got a simple sandwich he’d like you to make.

What kind of sandwich would he like?

Oh, anything you make would be fine. Just make it tasty.

What kind of meat?

I dunno, whatever you choose is fine.

It would really help if I knew what he wants. Turkey, pastrami, ham, roast beef, pork, chicken, salami. Do you know what kind of bread?

Whatever you do will be okay.  Just put the meat in the middle. The assistant sounds mildly annoyed.

So Rufus takes a guess based on Bob’s previous orders and puts together a white bread and turkey sandwich with a red pepper mayo and sends it out for delivery via his employee.

A few minutes later the phone rings. This is not what I expected, the assistant says. I thought it would be darker.

Darker? Asks Rufus. Okay, sure, I can do that. Just tell me, what do you mean by darker?

An unexpected burst of anger comes from the phone. Darker! You know. Darker. He likes his darker. Just make it darker, okay?

And, so, not wanting to further offend anyone, Rufus proceeds to make a pumpernickel and roast beef sandwich, when the phone rings with Bob’s assistant on the other end.

You know what, Rufus? Throw in a weasel, would ya? I know that’s what Bob would want.

A weasel?

Rufus gets a short, staccato temper. Yeah, a weasel! Rufus is now thinking this guy is totally insane, but trying not to offend his regular client, he sends his employee out to the local pet shop and buys a weasel in a cage.

Both items go out. A few moments pass before the phone rings yet again. This is too dark, he won’t like it. And make it warmer.

What do you mean warmer, sir? Rufus asks.

You know what I mean, make it less dark and warmer, so it’s not so light. There’s no mention of the poor weasel.

Rufus, feeling totally frustrated and confused with no idea of what to do, goes back to the original sandwich of turkey and red pepper mayo, makes it with toasted white bread instead of plain white bread and sends it back over with his now exhausted employee who is on the verge of quitting.

The phone rings yet again. This time it’s Bob. Great sandwich, Rufus, but we can’t pay this bill, it’s way to expensive; I didn’t order three sandwiches and a fucking weasel.

—-

Ah, the way things are done in our business.

Gyoza in Oil (After Dennis Dunbar)

Twitter works. Maybe in mysterious ways, but it works.

Since I started tweeting a little less than a year ago I have been asked to write for Leaf Digital, Photocrew, The Photo Argus and other photo communities and blogs. I’ve met some pretty interesting photographers, retouchers, assistants and art directors. Many are just people I follow or who are following me, and then there are the dialogs that have turned into great friendships.

Take for example, Dennis Dunbar, a terrific retoucher from L.A. He’s a founding member of UPDIG (Universal Photographic Digital Imaging Guidelines) and is an ever-present constant in the world of Photoshop retouching known for his tutorials and lectures. Out of the blue one day, I find Dennis is following me. I check out his creds and start to follow him. Pretty standard stuff until we start DMing about each other’s projects and he suggests we work on a personal project or two. Okay, Dennis, I’m in.

I’ve got this series I’m working on with water tanks and there are challenges to deal with. Water is always cleverly unpredictable, no matter how well planned, or there can be food particulate in the water, and then there are a lot of foods that are buoyant. Water is a challenge. Fun, but a challenge.

Gyoza in Oil (Before Dennis Dunbar)

Photography with a creative team is always exciting and now Dennis was coming in fresh as a key player, so there would be a new dynamic with the results. I had worked out a stylized shot of a single dumpling being fried in oil with stylist, Corey Earling. Couldn’t really shoot it in boiling oil (I guess we could have, but the idea of working with boiling oil seemed kind of dicey), so we gelled the lights on the water, pinned the dumpling into the strainer and connected a couple of airstones to a fishtank pump for the “boiling” oil. So far so good, but not good enough. As always, I wanted more out of this shot. So I upload the select dumpling shot with notes and suggestions onto my FTP site for Dennis. What followed was a truly collaborative dialog of exploration and expertise, what proved to be an amazing transition from original to final.

3000 miles separate me and Dennis, yet we were able to meet, collaborate, communicate and produce an effective final image.

Hey, Twitter, what else you got for me?

Detail - Water Tank and Smart Wash

There’s nothing I love more than discovering the textures, reflections and character of stuff in front of my lens, yeah, even if it’s a product. And, even though I may have trouble remembering faces (just ask my students), I can remember the curves and folds, texture and reflectivity, color and smell of nearly everything I touch or shoot. Hell, I can even tell you about the knots in a piece of wood I worked on 20 years ago.

It might be a progressive disease, I don’t know, but it’s definitely different for still life shooters. We spend years of our lives checking for dust and looking at fine details, studying every little thing in ways most people never do and then shooting it. I clean the chrome on my kitchen sink the same way, as if I was putting it on set. But I may be revealing too much here.

Maybe only art directors, writers and clients can appreciate this behavior.

But, hey, it works for me.

C.J. Pascoe’s Sandusky, Ohio photography studio in the late 1800s

Light

Before 1880 being a photographer entailed a fair amount of knowledge in chemistry, science and physics in order to make a camera, mix up a batch of emulsion (film), and develop and print the photos. Light was almost exclusively relegated to the great outdoors and those privileged enough for studios with oversized windows and skylights. The alternative was controlled explosives. Still life photography was mostly a daylight hours event. (Hey, I’m a still life guy, so this is my take on it.)

And although Humphry Davy invented the very first documented light bulb around 1800 and Englishman Sir Joseph Swan invented and patented the first incandescent light bulb in 1878, it wasn’t until 1880 that Thomas Edison developed his light bulb with a brighter, longer lasting filament. Even today, one hundred and thirty years later, we still use that basic design (fluorescents, however, are taking over). Edison’s light bulb and his concept of an integrated system of underground distribution of electric light into private houses made his invention successful, starting with Pearl Street in New York City in 1882.

Photography

Coincidentally in 1880, George Eastman of Kodak fame, introduced his first “dry plates,” a precursor to ready-to-use roll film and the hand held, pre-loaded Kodak camera (originally with 100 exposures!), which eventually made photography available to the masses, lessening the amount of technical knowledge necessary to take photographs to nearly zero. You bought the Kodak camera. You took your photographs. You sent it back to Kodak for developing and prints. (Oh, the horror! Now everyone can do it.)

Convergence

It was at this point in time that amateur photography started to evolve into a nerdy hobby, eventually transforming basements and bathrooms around the world into darkrooms for developing and printing everything from family portraits to pornography. Some of these amateurs became notable professionals, like Count Sergei Lvovich Levitsky (the Annie Leibovitz of his day), introduced in my last posting.This convergence of these inventions eventually led to the widespread use of controlled artificial lighting in professional photography and the emergence of the motion picture industry.

Note: I’m skipping over my personal hero, Harold (Doc) Edgerton (with all due respect), the inventor of the modern pulsed xenon strobe, because that’s a different story involving M.I.T.

Anyway, this history lesson is now over.

But on a personal note, what is all this griping about digital cameras, Photoshop and computers making it easy to be a photographer? It makes it easy to take pictures.

Being a photographer? Now, that’s hard.

Embrace change.

C.J. Pascoe’s Sandusky, Ohio photography studio in the late 1800s

Light

Before 1880 being a photographer entailed a fair amount of knowledge in chemistry, science and physics in order to make a camera, mix up a batch of emulsion (film), and develop and print the photos. Light was almost exclusively relegated to the great outdoors and those privileged enough for studios with oversized windows and skylights. The alternative was controlled explosives. Still life photography was mostly a daylight hours event. (Hey, I’m a still life guy, so this is my take on it.)

And although Humphry Davy invented the very first documented light bulb around 1800 and Englishman Sir Joseph Swan invented and patented the first incandescent light bulb in 1878, it wasn’t until 1880 that Thomas Edison developed his light bulb with a brighter, longer lasting filament. Even today, one hundred and thirty years later, we still use that basic design (fluorescents, however, are taking over). Edison’s light bulb and his concept of an integrated system of underground distribution of electric light into private houses made his invention successful, starting with Pearl Street in New York City in 1882.

Photography

Coincidentally in 1880, George Eastman of Kodak fame, introduced his first “dry plates,” a precursor to ready-to-use roll film and the hand held, pre-loaded Kodak camera (originally with 100 exposures!), which eventually made photography available to the masses, lessening the amount of technical knowledge necessary to take photographs to nearly zero. You bought the Kodak camera. You took your photographs. You sent it back to Kodak for developing and prints. (Oh, the horror! Now everyone can do it.)

Convergence

It was at this point in time that amateur photography started to evolve into a nerdy hobby, eventually transforming basements and bathrooms around the world into darkrooms for developing and printing everything from family portraits to pornography. Some of these amateurs became notable professionals, like Count Sergei Lvovich Levitsky (the Annie Leibovitz of his day), introduced in my last posting.This convergence of these inventions eventually led to the widespread use of controlled artificial lighting in professional photography and the emergence of the motion picture industry.

Note: I’m skipping over my personal hero, Harold (Doc) Edgerton (with all due respect), the inventor of the modern pulsed xenon strobe, because that’s a different story involving M.I.T.

Anyway, this history lesson is now over.

But on a personal note, what is all this griping about digital cameras, Photoshop and computers making it easy to be a photographer? It makes it easy to take pictures.

Being a photographer? Now, that’s hard.

Embrace change.

Russian Writers - Ivan Goncharov, Ivan Turgenev, Leo Tolstoy, Dimitri Vassilievich Grigorovich, Alexandre Vassilievich Drujinin, and Alexandr Nikolievich Ostrovsky by Count Sergei Lvovich Levitsky

How did painters react when Count Sergei Lvovich Levitsky won the first ever gold medal awarded for a photograph at the Paris Expo in 1849? It might have looked like this:

October 7, 1849

Jules Breton

http://www.FrenchPaintersOnLine.com/Landscapes/JulesBreton

This sucks! I spent months finishing my landscape for the Expo. I worked so hard my fingers bled. The Count? How come he gets the gold? He puts his camera on a tripod and presses a button. Then, some dude in a white jacket slogs over in the mud to a wagon twelve feet away, mixes chemicals and makes a contact print. He was done in a couple of minutes. This isn’t fair, it hurts our business. It’s just too damn easy to take a photograph.

Hmmm.

Levitsky was also known for his use of decorative backgrounds in photography and posing his subjects in different poses and changes of clothes instead of the standard of the day: taking one picture. He was already retouching his negatives to enhance features and remove blemishes. He also proposed the concept of using artificial electric light in studio photography long before it was practical.

Now, how about guys like Levitsky? What might he have said when George Eastman created the Kodak camera already loaded with film and later, the Brownie camera, prepackaged film and ready-to-mix chemistry, taking photography to the masses. Here’s my take:

June 10, 1885

Count Sergei Lvovich Levitsky

http://www.HireTheCount.com

Wow, this is remarkable! I just got my Kodak and shot 40 rolls of the Russian Imperial Family in my St. Petersburg Studio. And, since I got the electric lines in last week, I closed the skylight and used my Edison light bulbs for the first time. It looks like the electric light bulb is finally worth bringing into the studio. Awesome! Every frame had consistent lighting and I really got time to talk with the Prince for a change instead of dealing with the cloudy weather. My painter friends just got Kodaks, too. Check out everyone’s results on the Flickr, St. Petersburg shooters page. Great stuff!

BTW, I just let go of my chemist and printer. Sorry to Kostya and Pavel. Things change. You can pick up your checks on Monday.

Okay, so maybe it hurt Kostya and Pavel to find out they were fired on the Count’s blog. But, overall, what’s the point?

Flickr and Photoshop CS5 aren’t hurting the photo business – it changes the business. That’s all. And changes like this have been happening since 1849.

So, what’s the big deal with Flickr, or the new version of Photoshop CS5 for that matter?

Embrace the change. Sergei did.

Nastutium + Tomatoes

I’ve been trying to match a hundred or so photographs from my Shooting from the Hip series into complimentary pairs. A lot of questions came up regarding color, texture, light, camera angle, and a myriad of other qualities. But the one overarching question was, what makes two photographs viewed together, side by side, visually more interesting than one?

That lead the discussion back to my last posting, where Feature Integration Theory was mentioned. Okay, I’m not out on the street taking in the sights (or in caveman style, looking for food or danger), but sitting at a table with a carpet of two inch thumbnail prints I’m jockeying around like a board game. Intuitively I arranged pairs of little prints on the fly – instantly, they either matched or didn’t. Of course there were some gray areas where I couldn’t decide. In many cases however, I simply took two images I had glanced at and instinctively paired them, left and right.

In Feature Integration Theory, “Preattentive Stage” is the first stage of seeing, when we recognize color, shape, direction of light, etc. I researched this a bit, but didn’t find anything substantial online about differences in perception between the left and right eyes when viewing two different images. But I have to think there is something in our brain that definitely favors seeing a particular color or shape on either the left or the right. Probably has something to do with predatory animals attacking from our left, because they are mostly right-pawed or something like that.

Maybe I should have been a researcher so I could get funding and figure this out.