Lighting Services, Inc's LumeLEX 2000 Series - Blue Hero

My client, Lighting Services, Inc. makes simple, elegant track lighting fixtures. And while this doesn’t look like anything revolutionary, it is. It’s green inside, not in color, but as in low energy use LED technology.

I loved teasing out the gradient textures and giving shape to the parabolic mirror. Even the 1980s style blue highlights in the lighting effects, as requested by the client, were fun to do. It brought me back in time…

Now, I’m trying to figure out where I can fit a few dozens of these in my place. The electric bills are killing me.

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.

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.

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.