Happy New Year! Here's one from the shoe box in the closet.

Alma. Former chef at Jeffrey's Restaurant.

I hope all the VSL readers had a wonderful time ushering in 2014. We looked at tea leafs, looked at the portents and the alignment of the stars and decided that the upcoming year will be a good one for many, many people. 

I spent the last few weeks of vacation time thinking about the year we just finished. I felt so scattered. Instead of concentrating solely on photography I seemed to be stretched in a bunch of different directions. We did more video than in years past. I traveled a bit for work. Spent time in Berlin and New York for Samsung and also had my web debut as an on-camera talent for the kind and wonderful folks at Craftsy.com. I felt like a writer, shooter, pitchman, actor and business guy all wrapped up in one slightly disconnected package.

With that in mind I was straightening up the studio today and paused to look at some transparencies in an old box. It took me back to the era when all I did all day long, all week long and all year long was the practice of photography. For profit. For Art. For Fun. It all seemed simpler back then. I'd get a phone call, we'd check the calendar and if everyone's schedules lined up the art buyer or art director would plow through the details of a shoot and we'd get started with the routine planning. Then my assistant and I would go out, scout, meet our subject, light up a space and then shoot until we knew we had something good. We used bigger cameras, bigger lights and bigger film back then so the physical part of a shoot was a bit more tiring but we had a good groove to work in and it was always, always fun.

This is an image I made for an article on Austin chefs back in the 1990's. It was shot on a Hasselblad 6x6cm camera with a 100mm f3.5 Planar lens. I was experimenting with moving away from my almost addictive use of the 150mm Sonnar lens that we used all the time.  Like most of my location portraits this one was done with a big, soft main light on one side and a passive fill, like a collapsible reflector, on the opposite side. We figured out a good exposure for the background with a Polaroid test and almost certainly "dragged" the shutter along with the flash exposure in order to get the background to read and add some dimension. 

We had dozens of expressions to choose from and I'm certain the art director used a different one than the one above but I wanted to see what this looked like big so I scanned it.

I decided to put it up on the blog today, at the start of the year, to remind me of my real passions in photography. I love portraits. I love making location portraits. I would like to do many more of them this year. I'd like to really dig into this type of photography and regain my internal feeling of mastery for the holistic portrait experience. A re-invention of sorts. Or maybe just a return to a well loved genre of image making...

It always seems to be good to start out with at least a vague plan. We'll see just how diligently I can stay with the program. 

I wish everyone everywhere a very happy year in 2014.

VSL Executive Team performs embarrassing victory dance! Winner: Top Class of the Year at Craftsy.com

Hi All, 

I just got this in my e-mail folder from Craftsy.com! My class, Family Photography, is the Top Class of this year. I am amazed as we just launched this class in November. Nearly 1,000 people have signed up in the last six weeks. The graphic below was saved as a Jpeg for the links aren't live but here's a live link if you want to go and see what all the fuss is about: Kirk's Class!

There are two other classes. One is Studio Portraits and the other is the Free Class on Family Photos.

Check them out. (They're cheaper than a workshop and you can repeat them over an over again if you need to at no additional cost!).

This award is a fun way for me to end up the year. I hope you'll sample one or more of the classes and I hope you come back to the blog for more fun give and take in 2014.  Thanks!  Kirk

Enroll today in the top class of the year! | View Online

With over 500 students, we're declaring the winner of this popularity contest:

Now is your chance to enroll for just $24.99 (that's 58% off!)

Praise for Family Photography: Candid Moments & Storytelling

"What a great class! Kirk is an excellent instructor, and I learned so much. Thanks Kirk!" – Craftsy Member Miss Regtien

 

Another look at the Panasonic G6. Walking on a cloudy day with an old, Olympus Pen 38mm f1.8 on the camera...

It's been a long week. We got prepared for Christmas and I wrapped up a couple of last minute jobs. We spent some time traveling and seeing relatives. Today was the first day of swim practice since monday and I was ready to work out some kinks, dissipate some routine aggression and get out of breath for an hour or so. But by mid-afternoon I was itching to get out of the house and go for a walk through the Austin downtown.

I wanted a camera that wouldn't hang on my arm or slow me down and I wanted something that was a straightforward, good street camera so I cobbled one together. Something light and quick but competent and highly usable with older, manual focusing lenses. I grabbed for the Panasonic G6 and headed out the door.

Why do I like this little camera so much? Well, it may be because the focus peaking is really good and convenient. It may be because it has a really nice EVF and, combined with focus peaking, it creates a focusing/viewing system that rivals any other manual focusers I have. It could be because the chunky little battery seems to last forever. I keep putting a spare in my pocket but now I have to remember to rotate batteries because I never seem to get around to using the pocket back up.

It may be because the files are nice and neutral and able to take a good bit of post processing before falling apart. It may be because the function buttons are well labeled and everything I want to push or rotate falls right where my hands think the switches and buttons should be. It may be because the +/_ compensation control is perfectly placed and designed. 

But to be honest I like this little camera so much because it feels like a real camera and it looks so cool. It seems to track my philosophy that the camera should recede instead of being the center of your attention or the center of the subject's attention. Since the entry price was so cheap I don't worry about the  camera being damaged or lost. It just works. And when the camera becomes more and more transparent making photographs seems to get easier and easier. And, on the off chance that you don't see anything you want to shoot on your walks the camera is so carry-able that it makes affable company even with the lens cap on.  That's my take today. 

Accuracy is only important if you are aiming at the right target.

Production Still from "A Christmas Story" at Zach Theatre.

It's interesting to read comments which make sweeping statements about what professionals need, want, use, demand, etc. Recently a commenter on our site made the sweeping statement that for professionals it's "all about the ultimate image quality."  Now, if all of us who are engaged in making a living from imaging were in the employ of packaged good marketers, creating lifelike still life photos to represent products most clearly I might agree. But if I were engaged in making portraits of high school kids with bad skin then ultimate image quality is something I might avoid like the plague. 

When I thought about the comment I thought about how I make a living. I mostly make images and video of people. Most of the people who end up in front of my cameras are not professional models. They are not always corporate officers of multi-nationals who've been through media training and are practiced at presenting themselves to the unrelenting stare of the lens. No. They are every day people who might represent some profession or company and need a portrait. Sometimes our attention (and our cameras) are focused on them because of a story. They have achieved something of note. They have been awarded or recognized by their peers. Or we have cast them as "real people" models who match our (Kirk and attendant ad agency) idea of what an engineer should look like or what an upscale mom might look like.

They are generally unaware of how much their faces and expressions change from minute to minute. Many are nervous or self-conscious and are fearful of what imperfections the cameras (and the unusual scrutiny) will reveal. And they may be part of a concept we're working on which requires me to gain their willing collaboration in our plan. Getting a subject relaxed and settled into the moment is so much harder (and always has been!) that getting a sharp image or a low noise file or some other technical detail. 

In fact, here's my list of how professionals prioritize the goals and aspirations for a shoot, and they are listing in descending order of importance:

1. An idea. (What will make this photo or this ad unique and interesting to a viewer!)

2. The concept. (how do I turn my idea into a visual construction = what is the concept)

3. The production. (does the scene and lighting I'm creating support the idea and concept?)

4. The casting. (Is this person the right representation of the concept? Can they give me the emotional message I need?)

5. The rapport with the subject. ( Can I lead and direct the person in front of the camera into the right pose and expression I need to fulfill my concept and make it look natural and believable?)

6. Are we all on the same rhythm? ( have we found a flow in the shooting of the images which allows all of us to work as a unified team, without conscious effort?)

7. Have I selected the right focal length for the visual effect I wanted?

8. Is the camera making files correctly such that I'll be able to use them in the media the client has chosen. 

And finally:

9.  Is the quality of the optical system and camera sensor and the attendant image processing sufficient to the task at hand? Does it appear sharp and well toned? Are the colors what we need them to be?

We can compromise a bit on  point 9 if we have not compromised on the first eight requirements but falling short on any of the other parameters means failure.

Most cameras in use by professionals now, be they 12 megapixel micro four thirds cameras or 36 megapixel full frame cameras, are capable of getting the important stuff like color and tone and focus just right. In fact, the mirror less cameras may do a better job hitting focus with precision. There is no uniformity of color quality by price point. Many users prefer the color from lower resolution Olympus cameras than from high res Nikon or Canon cameras when it comes to proper (or preferred) rendering of skin tones and color. All of the cameras are quite capable of delivering files that will print well on a single magazine page. All of the cameras will deliver files that exceed the abilities of all but a few pricy monitors to recreate. In effect, unless you are laboring in the lofty realm of routinely making images for double page, high quality printed magazine spreads the argument of quality between cameras is more or less moot. 

We stand on the threshold of an age wherein all cameras can deliver the goods but now we get to work on the stuff that makes a camera a pleasure to use. From the viewfinders to the grips to the total weight. Even the clarity of menus. To say that "professionals" use X specifications to choose their tools now is incorrect. They are choosing the tools they want to work with based on how much fun they are to work with. They are comfortable with the (proven) concept that all the cameras in the running for their attention will deliver the goods.

Here's an incomplete list of cameras I am interested in that will delivery results I want:

Pentax K-3, Olympus EP-5, Olympus OMD, Panasonic GX7, Sony RX10, Samsung NX 50, Pentax 645D, Fuji X series, Nikon D610 and Canon 6D. None of these are "traditional" pro cameras. All of them will get the job done.  If you need a better camera to do real work with then you already know what you need for your specialty; your niche. 

The market has changed. The targets have changed. The budgets have changed. The styles of imaging have changed. And, by extension, the cameras have changed. The barriers to enter got lowered again. But the skills with which to make a living remain the same, and they are encapsulated in the first eight requirements above. 

Skill drives the machine. The machine does not drive skill.

This is an image of a roasted chicken.

 God save us from those people who need to read, hear and do everything by the numbers. They have no idea about art. They are giant sponges sucking the spilled fun off the linoleum floor of life...

Oh No!!! Only three days till Christmas and Kirk's still using that cheap Olympus lens! That won't do....

I know that many of you think it's just wrong for me to be using this lens instead of the new 12-40mm f2.8 lens. I acknowledge your beliefs. But in reality I love the lens because I don't have to care about it. It has its own aura of insouciance and I find it delightful. I also think it's a darn good lens. No ad. Just opinion. 

The VSL Five Star Award of the Year goes to a camera I don't (currently) own. The Olympus OMD EM-1

The new Millennium Falcon of cameras. The EM-1.

I'm being silly this year and doing silly awards for cameras I think brought cool stuff to the table. I've already made a plug for my favorite economy priced camera, the Panasonic G6 but it's only going to appeal to the kind of practical people who make their own coffee at home and drive no nonsense cars for ten years at a time. It's a sensible choice. There are lots of other cameras this year that deserve some kind of mention for moving the game forward for their loyal band. In the Canon camp I think the full frame 6D camera is a great way to get into a professional system at a much lower cost than ever before. As a high ISO machine it's pretty much right there in the top ranks. And I'd say the same thing about the Nikon D610. It no longer seems to squirt industrial waste onto the sensor like the camera it replaces and that, coupled with great sensor performance, is a good thing. Even the Pentax K3 deserves some kudos for being a rock solid and very advanced last decade sort of camera. 

But the reality is that there are two cameras that have captured the fascination of the camera cognoscenti and the battle between them for dominance is as unexpected as can be. After handling and researching both cameras I am even more fascinated by the logical results of an in-depth comparison. There is a clear winner if your objective is to find a camera that feels like a perfect artist's brush or a well broken in pair of running shoes. There is a different winner if you are in a race for bragging rights for maximum horsepower and maximum straight-line acceleration. But the Devil is in the hairpin turns...... (enough car analogies, it brings out the real car nuts and then things heat up quick....).

The two cameras I'm talking about are the two cameras that come from antithetical extremes of camera philosophies and yet the same company makes the sensors inside of both cameras. One is the highest res tool one can buy today in the FF format while the other is perceived as the lowest pixel count class of what might be considered as professional quality instruments. I mean cameras. I'm am, of course, writing about the Olympus OMD EM-1 and the Sony A7r. 

On paper the Sony has everything but in reality it's all a compromise in terms of usability. The Olympus camera seems like a staid upgrade of a decent predecessor but one cobbled with a low pixel count, and much smaller, sensor. One is priced like a pro-tool while the other is priced just in the middle of the hobbyist-indulgence category. But in real world use the Olympus is a svelte, alluring seductive temptress that combines a tactile rightness with a wonderfully muted and understated shutter noise and action. It's EVF finder is probably the best in world and all in all the files are just what most photographers are looking for.  Right and thick and ready to be used with little heroic effort. It's the charming kind of package that emulates what the introduction of the Leica M3 must have been like to image makers working in the 1950's. Quiet, quick and disciplined. 

I first used one at a dinner with the president of Olympus USA while I was in New York and, like some insidious addictive drug once I got some on my skin I've been orbiting closer and closer to the camera with each passing cycle. In point of fact I had no interest in the camera before I used it in the flesh. None. And now I'm making lens buying decisions with the near certainty of that camera's acquisition in my overall plans. 

My experience with the Sony A7r is quite the opposite. I learned about it ahead of the initial announcement and my excitement built by the day as my introduction to the camera at the Photo Expo show drew nearer. My first thoughts were that this camera would be a wonderful partner to the Sony a99 I already own while adding more resolution, sharpness and more lens flexibility at a much lower initial price. In fact, I had liquidated my cropped frame Sony cameras and lenses in anticipation. And then the day came. I was supposed to be in the Samsung booth but before the show started I walked over to the Sony pavilion and played with the product. It was then that my whole plan began to fall apart like wet cardboard box.