Does that manual come with a manual?

I've rounded out my medium format collection after acquiring a Mamiya RB67 Pro S through eBay. It was a pretty good steal for a total of under $300. I had to win 2 auctions - one auction was for the entire kit consisting of body, 90mm lens and film magazine, and the other auction was for the waist level finder.

In case anyone cares, it's a completely manual camera. No batteries required. So why the heck would you want a completely manual and mechanical camera? No batteries required, fewer electrical components...BUT, more mechanical parts that will eventually wear down.

I've also got a Hasselblad 500CM that's also completely manual but it's sans lens...plus I need to get a decent film magazine because the one I originally bought is a pain in da butt to wind with.

But back to the RB67...it's a frickin' beast...like big and heavy. I think the box it was delivered in said it was about 8 lbs...but that also means it's built like a rock. There's a lot to be said about all manual cameras. They never require batteries, which these days are pretty expensive. Back in the day, they weren't cheap, but they didn't cost $40+ but nor were they rechargeable like they are now. Those familiar with SLRs will remember the Nikon FM2 which was probably the most resilient all-manual camera that could shoot at 1/250th of a second, or even the venerable Pentax K1000 which was the students' choice for a beginner-level SLR.

I just love reminiscing. Of course my daughter will grow not knowing what the heck 35mm film is.

"FerrrrrrrrAAAAARRrrriiii"

Nothing much to post about. Just the coolest TV ad if you're a Formula One racing fan, Ferrari fan, car fanatic, or just like ads. If you're none of the above, watch it anyways.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6keMAMmn8B4

Apparently it cost $3.9 million to make, which according to Shell, is the most expensive ad made for TV.

And if you're a real Ferrari fan, get some free stickers on the Shell website.

That's all...go back to your TV watching.

Okay so I've offended some...

...but that doesn't mean that I'm not entitled to an opinion. That's the power of free speech. When I'm wrong about facts, I'll admit to it. When my opinion has changed based on new facts, I'll correct myself. So here goes...

So I was contacted by the photographer about my posting about their website and some comments and observations I made during a photo shoot. I'm going to try to make amends here and posting any corrections to facts on the original post as well.

1. The sitting fee for the photo session was actually $25, plus a travel fee of $50, plus some other payment that was made that no one has information on. So that being said, $25 is not a bad sitting fee. I say that because $15 at Sears Portrait Studio will get you photos, but those are cookie cutter photos, and not necessarily anything avant-garde nor extremely creative.



2. The photograph of the tree that I went on and on about was not her choice. Personally I would have mixed emotions about posting that photo, but given that the photographer's website is not secured by client, they really didn't have a choice but to post it.



3. The photographer would like a better camera (wouldn't we all like a better camera?).



4. I'll re-state that I'm a camera snob, but I'm also a camera aficionado, so that's where most of my opinion about cameras and how they themselves can project an image about a person comes from. I could write an entire thesis about it, but the photographer disagrees with me about this point, which they are more than entitled to. I'll also say that her argument about the camera not being indicative of the person behind it is true in practice - the photographer that I assisted for many years ago used a manual focus Nikon in addition to a medium format camera. But shooting a wedding with a manual focus camera was a little strange to me given that auto-focus SLRs are so pervasive. But he was a good photographer and he knew how to handle his gear and how to manage their limitations.

After my last post, the photographer was dismayed (understatement) that I took my complaints public without talking to her first. First off, my complaints were observations and my opinion based on my experience and my own bias. Take those for what you will. Secondly, I'm not a disgruntled client, but I do admit I should have taken my concerns to the photographer first. That's my mistake and I take responsibility for that. Be that as it may, I'm not the one who commissioned the photos so I don't know if I had the right to make contact nor speak for anyone else. My opinion was solely my opinion and not of anyone else's. There's the disclaimer.

In hindsight, my critique was heavy-handed in a very Simon Cowell way. I didn't need to tear someone down to get my point across, so for that I apologize to the photographer. They have started their own business, gotten some favorable reviews and happy clients from their work so the photographer should be proud of that. I'm not going to take that away from them. I will also say that she was very professional throughout. She took the initiative to make sure the family members were satisfied coming away from this.

That being said, my opinion on all other things in the post stand as they are. And those are just that - opinions. If you don't like them, you can rebutt and try to change my mind based on facts, but you can't take my opinions away from me either. You're free to make your own opinions known here as well...anything juvenile or irrational will be ignored.

So, that's it about that matter.

As for me, I'm still contemplating about what I want to do with photography. I enjoy it...it's what gives me joy, but to make it my job might make me enjoy it less...so that's what I'm grappling with now. Maybe I'm just chicken-sh!t. I did learn that my friend Michelle and her husband are planning a business shooting weddings as a business on the side. Good for them!

I hope everyone mentioned in this post continues to be successful, I don't wish anyone ill will...Can't we all just get along? Maybe we can when I'm having a better day.

Thinking about a second job...

Editor's Note: Parts of this post have been corrected based on comments from the photographer mentioned here. I've also added any supplementary opinions that have change based on those comments.

So someone in the family had booked a photographer to take some photos of the family (my wife and in-laws, nephews, nieces, etc.). We had to chip in for the $100 sitting fee which was no big deal. So we arrived in the atrium of the hotel where we were staying to meet the photographer.

UPDATE: The sitting fee was actually $25. There wa a travel fee of $50 (because the photographer drove a decent distance to get to the hotel), plus she was given another $25.

The photographer arrived. She was a younger woman, and she was carrying a small SLR case, basically enough to carry the SLR itself with plenty of padding and not much else. Off her shoulder was the strap to her camera, a Canon Rebel XTi, which is your garden-variety, entry-level, digital SLR, with a Canon Speedlite attached on the camera hotshoe. At that point I thought it was peculiar that a photographer that we were paying (in my book, if you make money being a photographer, whether it's part-time or full-time, you're considered a "professional"), had an entry-level camera.

I'm admittedly a bit of a camera snob. I judge people by the type of camera and brand of camera they use, especially people who are working photographers. I would think that someone we're paying $100 sitting fee would have a better camera. It would be the equivalent of getting your hair cut by someone using a pair of safety scissors. Mind you, a camera is just a tool and the photographer is the person using the tool to create a photograph. The photographer still determines lighting, composition, and the creation of the final product. So even if this person showed up with an old Canon AE-1, I would still hold my opinion in check until I could see how they worked. So that's what I did.

Ed. Note: I'm going to re-state that I AM A CAMERA SNOB. A photographer's equipment is not indicative of their skill. I would think in fact if they could produce great results with lesser equipment, they're probably a better photographer to be able to manage their limitations of lesser equipment. Be that as it may, I wouldn't hire a limousine driver if their fleet consisted of pick-up trucks. Note that I *did* say in the original post that "...even if this person showed up with an old Canon AE-1, I would still hold my opinion in check...".

So she began with a big group shot with all of us by a small tree in the atrium. Now, in my experience, posing by a small tree, or trees in general for that matter, have rarely led to the best results unless all the tree branches are covered by an abundance of leaves. The reason being, you have these branches that stick out, and in the resulting photograph you often have branches that appear to be sticking out of the people's heads. And in this photo, that's exactly what happened. My other concern was that even though there was a lot of natural light coming through the glass roof of the atrium, that typically results in shadows in the eyes. To counter that, you would use a flash to "fill in" those shadows (thus the type of lighting is called "fill flash") and create a nice catch light in the subject's eyes. Well, that didn't happen with our pictures because the photographer didn't use the flash she had mounted on her camera.

UPDATE: The shot of the tree that I spoke of above was not chosen by the photographer, it was suggested by the client.

Now, as someone who has shot a couple of weddings and assisted on many as a 2nd shooter, I have quite a bit of experience with photography. I'm not trying to brag, but that experience counts for something. I wasn't going to point out to this photographer that she use a fill flash or pose away from the tree, because we're PAYING this person to take our pictures. I would EXPECT them to know things about posing, lighting and composition. UPDATE: See update above about the tree photo. Also, if I were the photographer, I wouldn't take kindly to the subject telling me how to do my job, rightly or wrongly. I thought it was a courtesy that I let her do her job and we'd see how the results would come out.

Well, we moved on after the atrium shots to some other locations inside the hotel lobby. In there, you just HAD to use a flash so those photos came out better, lighting-wise. UPDATE: She did use a flash with the photos in the lobby.

Overall, the photos didn't look "professional". Now I'm not going to show you or directly link to that photographer's website because it's not my intention to completely embarrass or slam her. Now if you were to somehow find your way to the photographer's website (linked removed at the request of the photographer), you'll see what I mean. Even to the untrained eye, the photos don't look polished, especially for $100 $25 sitting fee. Especially when I can go to Sears Portrait Studio and pay for a $15 sitting fee. They're not bad photos at all. Some are pretty good photos, but they're not consistently great photos. I just don't feel we got $100 worth of photos.

UPDATE: I really shouldn't say that I don't feel we got $100 worth of photos. I don't speak for anyone else but me. My critique and my opinion are mine and only mine. I don't speak for the other people involved in this. If they feel that they got their money's worth, then that's fine. In reality, we only paid a portion of the total fee. The photographer made the point that we were not making her job easy with cell phone calls and kids running around, and that is an acceptable argument to make. I think given the somewhat uncontrollable (from a photographer's point of view) setting we were in, and how everyone was distracted with what-not, she made an admirable effort in getting everyone together. That I will say, unfortunately, that resulted in the photos (which have since been taken down). I say that is an acceptable argument, but I don't know if it's a valid argument because it's the photographer's job to control and mitigate the environment. I think everyone did the best that they could, but she needed an assistant present to help her out.

Now this is SOLELY my opinion. I'd like to think my limited experience as a professional photographer and as a full-time student studying the photographic arts gives some weight to those opinions. I'm not some lunatic bitching about something just to bitch about something. That's not even my style. If anything, I'd say my opinion is more of a critique than anything else, and I would say that some of the points about lighting and composition would come up if anyone with professional photographic experience reviewed those photos. Also, I have no bone to pick with this photographer. There's no grudge or ulterior motive. I'm giving my opinion just like anyone else is entitled to give.

UPDATE: I'm going to say this one more time...IT'S MY OPINION. Nobody else's. I don't speak for anyone else in the family, outside the family, or anyone in-between. Do not take my opinion as the barometer for how everyone else feels about the photos. If you are still seeing this as otherwise, that's no longer my problem.

So this has led to me to do some thinking. I KNOW I could do better, so why don't I? I FEEL that I could make a worthy try at producing photos of a higher quality. It's pretty much gotten me thinking that I could do portraiture as a side-business. These days, the only things I take pictures of are my daughter, but it's kept me in practice with everything I had learned in photography school and my time as a photographer's assistant to some degree.

I've even posted some of my old photos from over 10 years ago (back in the day when the only DSLRs were over $10,000) on Flickr.

Anyway, I've been thinking about it seriously and not-so-seriously. We'll see what happens.

LAST UPDATE: My opinions and observations of the actual event have changed given the points that the photographer made in her response to my posting. I did sympathize with the situation, but that's part and parcel of that type of job, especially when you're not working in a controlled environment. Beyond that, I should add in my observations that she was a very professional person to deal with.

I should apologize for not contacting her about my concerns rather than blogging about it. I mean, if you're dissatisfied with a service or product, you would try to have the service or product corrected, right? Well, I didn't give the photographer that opportunity so that is admittedly my fault. This photographer has had happy customers, produced good work, and is doing something she enjoys, and for that she should be commended.

Okay, now that we've taken care of that...my opinion on everything else still stands. One thing that is difficult in life, regardless of what you do, is hear criticism. I've studied visual arts and photography and have gone through enough critiques to get some value of them. While my opinion may have strayed beyond a professional critique, I felt I made some valid points. I know that doesn't get me a free cup of coffee anywhere, but I'm open and honest about it. I don't try to sugar-coat things because if all you hear are good reviews, that doesn't help you develop or improve as an artist. I hope the photographer got that much out of my rant (if she decides to read this). What I didn't do successfully (or at all) was point out the things she did well, such as interacting positively with everyone, getting the kids to cooperate, not getting frustrated about the setting, and being a complete professional...so it wasn't a "fair and balanced" critique.

That's all folks.

Inside the Business of iTunes

Here's an interesting article about the business of iTunes. The article talks about how the iTunes Store has as much influence on record sales as MTV once had.

I found the link to the article on TUAW.

Citizenship - what it means to me

First off, I'm not a citizen of the United States...just a plain ol' Alien Resident, a.k.a. Permanent Resident, a.k.a. Green Card Holder. So I have a unique and enviable position of being able to apply for citizenship. Having a Green Card, some might wonder, "why bother?" It's a difficult decision to make...do I want to become a citizen of the worst global images, when I'm currently a citizen of the country with the best image in the world.

Having lived in the States for the past 6 years, I share the opinion that the political climate needs to change, and I feel the need to express that opinion through a U.S. citizen's right to vote. As a spectator through the last presidential election and having witnessed how George W. Bush has led the country, and feeling completely helpless and useless in not being able to make my vote and opinion count, I feel that applying for citizenship now, when the country needs a boost in its global image and a paradigm shift in its dealings with the rest of the world, is the best time to do it. Besides, after paying U.S. taxes for the past 6 years and not have anything to show for it, I think it's about time it did.

One major factor in my decision is that I wouldn't have to surrender my Canadian citizenship. If that were not the case, I think my feelings toward U.S. citizenship would be different.

Another factor has to do with the requirements for being eligible for citizenship. They're fairly easy if you aren't a complete dumbass or lowlife. I found some sample civics test questions online got some lulz out of them. They certainly made me feel at ease over how incredibly stupid you can be before they give you the rights of a U.S. citizen.

For example:

Q: How many colors are there on the U.S. flag?
Q: What color are the stars on the U.S. flag?
Q: Who is the 1st President of the United States?
Q: Who is the current President of the United States? No, you can no longer use the search term of "miserable failure" on Google to find the answer to this question, but you still can on Yahoo.

Granted these are the simple ones, but it's sure to test the 5th grade knowledge of most people who were actually born in the U.S.

Oh yes, another requirement is that I may actually have to take an english test. Me....take an english test. Me...who came from an English-speaking country where I lived for over 20 years. Heck, I can do the english test in French. I can write and speak english than most natural-born citizens! I'm not bragging, but maybe the fact that I can blog in english should be an equivalent qualification for an exemption from the english test.

Mind you, I had to go through something similar when I had to get my Missouri drivers license. I had been driving for over 10 years in Canada and I had to go through a driver's exam (written and road tests) to get a Missouri license. I mean, we all drive on the same side of the road, the road signs are the same and in the same language (except there are no polar bear crossings in Missouri), the traffic light signals use the same colors, so why the presumption that I can't drive?

I didn't have to go through anything similar in Texas, even though everyone here drives like it's a different country altogether...go figure.