Tag Archives: review

Brief Thoughts on The Life of a Photograph

The image I posted earlier today both here at the blog and on Google+ got me thinking about the various ways that a photograph can “come to life.” This particular image followed a path that several other images that I consider to be among my best followed – namely, it languished in my raw file archive for nearly a year before I rediscovered it recently while going back through the old files. I recognized this pattern some time ago, and I now make it a habit to revisit all of my (thousands and thousands of) raw files about a year after I shoot them.

Why didn’t I “see” this image when I first reviewed raw files right after the shoot? I’m not entirely certain, but several ideas come to mind. Sometimes at the time of the shoot I have a strongly fixed notion of how I want to portray the subject , and as I shoot I’m already categorizing exposures by how well they correspond to this preconception. So when I initially go through the raws I may be mostly looking for what fits my expectations as opposed to looking objectively at what works on its own merits. Coming back a year later allows me to better see the image for what it is, without having my judgment so affected by prior expectations.

Related to this is the sheer number of images and how one deals with them in the post-processing workflow. I may begin with what I think are the most promising couple of images from a shoot and then take them all the way to a print-ready (or actually printed) stage. Once I’ve done that with the first selects from a given subject, I’m more likely to move on to other subjects – and potentially leave other good images in the dust.

There is a lot more to say about this, I think, but I’ll save the longer explication for another blog post in the future. Does anyone else make a practice of doing a full review of raw files at some future date?

Canon 24-70mm f/2.8 L II vs. 24-70mm f/4L IS vs. 24-105mm f/4 L IS (and more?)

Anyone who spends any time in photography forums discussing Canon lenses has seen this topic come up regularly: the comparisons between the 24-70 and 24-105mm L zoom options. If you follow this subject you are familiar with posts asking which of these lenses is “best” or claiming that one or another is great and the others are poor, and with the ensuing debates. Rather than re-writing what I have to say about this every time the subject comes up, I thought I would post once here and then link back to this article.

(Update 1/4/13: Things have changed in significant ways since I first posted this review back in 2011 – primarily with the introduction of two newer Canon 24-70mm L zooms. I have made a few updates to this post to reflect those changes. I have now had the opportunity to use the updated Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II lens. It is also a very fine lens and a great performer. In addition, there is now a Canon EF 24-70mm f/4.0L IS USM lens as well, and the Canon 24-105mm f/4L F/4.0L IS lens is still available. Canon shooters have an over-abundance of good lenses that cover the 24mm to whatever-mm focal length range at this point. All three of these current lenses are excellent options and the functional differences among them now are the primary basis for selecting one over the others. If you need f/2.8 and are OK with a smaller focal length range and not having IS, the 24-70mm f/2.8 could well be your choice. If you can get along without f/2.8, are OK with the smaller focal length range, would like IS, can make use of semi-macro capabilities and want a smaller lens, then the 24-70mm f/4 IS lens can be a great option. If you don’t need f/2.8,  but do value image stabilization and a significantly larger focal length range, the 24-105 is a wonderful choice. )

(Update 1/8/15: And now there is yet another lens in this general category from Canon, the EF 24-105mm f/3.5-5.6 IS STM Lens. I have incorporated some information about this option below.)

Continue reading Canon 24-70mm f/2.8 L II vs. 24-70mm f/4L IS vs. 24-105mm f/4 L IS (and more?)

Review: “Light & Land” by Michael Frye

Over the past few weeks I have had the chance to go through Michael Frye’s new ebook, “Light and Land: Landscapes in the Digital Darkroom.” Many are no doubt already aware of Michael’s reputation from his photography, his workshops, and his other publications including his “Photographer’s Guide to Yosemite” and “Digital Landscape Photography: In The Footsteps of Ansel Adams and the Masters.” I have the .pdf version of “Light and Land”, and I understand that an iPad app version may also be available.

Light and Land - Michael Frye
Light and Land - Michael Frye

It is typical for photographic “how to” books to focus on specific techniques, and to be organized around a presentation of these techniques – perhaps with a section on curves, a section on black and white conversion, and so forth. This approach has its place, especially for certain types of learners and at certain points in the learning process. It is important to understand the basic techniques and operations that are available in the “digital darkroom” of such programs as Photoshop, Lightroom and so forth. That said, the bigger and more important issue is how to call upon these techniques creatively and effectively and appropriately in order to make photographs. Not all “how to” books do an effective job of illustrating this.

Michael’s “Light & Land” takes a different approach, and one that more accurately and realistically reflects the thought process of a photographer who is calling upon this arsenal of techniques in the service of creating beautiful photographs.  He writes:

“The digital darkroom gives us tremendous control over our images. We can make them lighter, darker, add contrast, change the color balance, increase saturation, turn a color photograph into black and white, remove telephone poles, blend exposures with HDR, combine ten images to capture infinite depth of field, or put a winged elephant in the sky.

But what do we do with these choices?” Continue reading Review: “Light & Land” by Michael Frye

Two Holiday Rituals

I have two holiday photographic rituals this time of year. I have begun one and will soon get to work on the other.

Today I began going through all of my raw files from 2010. I don’t even know how many thousands of files there must be, and it is perhaps better that I don’t know! Each time I do this year-end review I find a number of photographs with potential that I did not see right after I made them. Sometimes it simply takes a bit of distance in order to see what is there; other times I just moved on to another project before I was truly finished with the previous one. Don’t be surprised to see of these photographs posted here over the next few weeks.

Soon I’ll begin the second task, trying to pick my favorite photographs of 2010. I also enjoy this since the process lets me revisit and relive some of the experiences I had as I made the photographs. Given that I work from my “daily photograph” pool, it should be easier than reviewing the raw files – instead of thousands of files there are only a few hundred. However, it always turns out to be harder than I think it will be. I think there are perhaps two reasons. First, while most of the raw files are not really worth a second look, the photographs from which I select the “favorite of the year” images are all images that I like. This makes it very hard to narrow the selection down to perhaps ten or twelve photographs. Second, in some ways I am the least qualified to understand my photographs. That may sound odd, but no one else can see them in the same way that I do since I was there when they were made and thus know things about them that only I can know. Other viewers are perhaps better able to simply view them “as photographs.”

Regarding the second task, feel free to share your ideas and suggestions concerning the selection process or even to suggest specific photographs that might have connected with you.

G Dan Mitchell Photography | Twitter | Friendfeed | Facebook | Facebook Fan Page | Email