Andrew T Trembley

I'm going to attempt to use the new Photoflex strobe and 3x4' softbox for PenWAG on Saturday.

On the smart side, I've set up and disassembled the softbox itself twice this evening. It's a little, well, I can't say futzy, because futzy doesn't really describe springing 4 heavy fiberglass rods into an aluminum mounting rig. Once I sorted out which holes not to use (this is the mounting ring for the 7' octagonal softbox, and it's got a few threaded holes that I need to avoid) it turned out to be manageable. Packaging it back up is a bit more of a nuisance. It doesn't just collapse down into a sensible compact form like an umbrella does. That's a lot of material to wrap around just 4 (removable) rods.

I haven't tried actually using the head yet. I have tested it to make sure it works and installed the modeling light. I will need a few extra test shots to dial in the exposure. I expect I'm going to be using a much tighter aperture with the lumens this thing puts out. I'm also going to have to get used to full-manual no-remote-control optical trigger lighting.

Nobody ever said it would be easy...

I want a new pocket-sized camera. But I'm not spending my tax refund on that. The pocketable camera I have is good enough.

I want a new wide-carriage printer. But I'm not spending my tax refund on that. The current printer works just fine for now (even if I have to fight with the ink system from time to time).

I did spend a little money on an Eye-Fi Pro X2 wi-fi SDHC storage card. It's pretty cool. If the card is connected to a network and your computer is connected to a network, it can transfer pictures to your computer while you're shooting. Sound like a waste of money? Well, paired with "auto-import" in Adobe Lightroom, it's a really easy way to simulate "tethered" shooting where you can view your pictures on the computer immediately after you shoot them, without cables. Best of all, it works the same regardless of what camera the card is inserted into.

I haven't got "ad-hoc" network support working yet (because I haven't been able to test it out away from my home network), but that's a big bonus in the "Pro" model card. The others require you connect to an access point that doesn't require a web-based login, and that knocks out a bunch of hotel networks. Ad-Hoc networking lets the Eye-Fi and my laptop directly connect without an access point in the middle.

...with Adobe Senior Systems Engineer Rick Miller (scroll down the page a bit).

At work.

So not all of this is Rick's fault. A lot of it isn't.

So the downside: The class description wasn't that great. It suggested much more Lightroom focus than Photoshop focus. It was also populated by folks with a wide range of skill levels, and a 6-hour class was already stretching things. We spent a lot of time working through things that were difficult to see on the low-ish resolution projector (Adobe software is nothing if not a screen-landscape hog). We spent a lot of time on basics that people had to be led through. I think Rick would have done better with more time or with a more advanced class.

The upside: I came out with some work-related knowledge (alas, the most important parts had more to do with the classroom than the subject of the class). I got two big answers covered. One of them isn't well (if at all, for that matter) documented. It turns out that, in the Library Module of Lightroom, keywording behaves very differently in the Grid and Loupe views. I haven't seen that explained before.

More time would have been good, mostly because there would have been time to show how so many of the neat features in Photoshop and Adobe Camera Raw that Rick covered are so much easier and more flexible in Lightroom. If nothing else, this class is a good introduction so people can go buy Kelby Training books and DVDs and have a head start.

So my brain is kind of trashed, but it was worth it.

I've been getting quite a few "I hate pictures of myself, but this picture you took looks like me and I like it" comments.

Don't get me wrong. I like comments like this.

The "producing a technically good exposure" part is something I'm getting better at, helped by a newer camera with wider exposure latitude and better noise characteristics at high speed. There's still a question of the quality of the light, though. Unflattering light needs to be recognized and avoided. Flattering light can be produced, if necessary.

The "making sure the right stuff is in focus" part is something I'm getting better at, helped by figuring out how to make the autofocus work for me and by getting better at managing depth of field. Making sure that everything that's not important (not your subject) is out of focus is a very basic and very "professional looking" skill. It's also something that requires the right equipment (part of the reason that being able to do it is "professional looking").

The "putting together a pleasing composition" part, that's the obvious (to viewers) and somewhat difficult one. The biggest composition issue? The setting. Backgrounds. Reduce distracting elements and things that just look like they don't belong. Avoid lines intersecting with the subject's head. Blur out the background if it's not important. It's all about learning to look at a scene and figure out what the camera is going to see, and that's difficult. I'm working on it, but I still miss horrible background flaws that can ruin an image all the time.

Where the magic comes in is in the subject.

I'm at my best when I'm a sniper. If I've got a room full of people relaxing and having a good time, I can capture some really great moments.

Otherwise? It's a crap-shoot.

Because I'm not good at instructing subjects.

Because a lot of people get self-conscious when they're conscious of the camera.

Now I'm working on instructing and posing subjects. It's not something that's well-covered in books, though. It's a matter of practice, trial and error. On the other hand, I'm only peripherally interested in formal portraiture. Learning the associated techniques are just a means to an end.

Getting people to relax (or better yet, have fun) in front of the camera? That's the big deal. When folks get self-conscious and freeze or mug badly the pictures just end up looking artificial. It's worse when the subjects believe that they always look bad in pictures; there are few more reliable self-fulfilling prophecies. Subjects who have been plagued by bad photographs are going to freeze up and look unhappy.

How do you get subjects to relax? That's another thing I'm working on.

Showing folks representative and attractive photos of them that you've taken is a great way to get repeat subjects to let their defenses down and let their character and personality come out in photographs of them.

New subjects? Besides shooting them when they don't expect it? I'm not very good at reassuring chatter while shooting. I'm generally not great at talking in the first place while shooting. It's something I've got to work on, though.

...about half went into the recycle bin immediately. Doing post-production and tossing out some of the least interesting that still remain. Should have them posted in the next day or three.

Flickr uploads suck from work. I think our packetshaper is throttling me. Flickr uploads from home, even while BitTorrent and Mozy are running, are more reliable and faster.

LCD displays are pretty cheap these days. Yeah, some of the "pro" color LCD displays are still expensive (as in $1k for a 22" unit), but there are some under $500 and a normal 22" display will come in under $200.

Now I've got an old (probably 6 years at least) LCD monitor in the studio that has seen better days. I could have replaced it for around $350 with a high-gamut display. Still, I went out and spent $500 (well, $450, and in the end $400) for a monitor & printer profiling and calibration tool.

ColorMunki Photo is a simple spectrophotometer. It comes with simple software to profile and calibrate displays (including projectors) and profile printers. How simple?

Display calibration is practically magic. Just hang the device in front of the monitor and run the automated profiling routine. At the end it shows you "before" and "after." Chances are the difference will be drastic. A background task on your computer uses this profile to adjust your display colors.

Print profiling is almost as easy. Print a sample page, wait for it to dry and scan it. Print a second sample page wait for it to dry and scan it. It generates and installs an ICM profile from the collected data. There's an "AppSet" tool that will even automatically set up CS4 apps to use the profiles automatically.

Mind you, the software isn't perfect. There can be a bit of twitchiness involved in getting the spectrophotometer drivers to load (they're in the program directory, if your machine can't find them to install). There's a bunch of additional crap (like .NET 3.5 and some other SDK pieces) that are poky to install.

Still, $400 to calibrate displays on 3 computers (the license is good for 3 computers, Mac, Windows or a mix) is a pretty good deal, particularly if some of them have integrated displays that you can't switch out for something better.