Which one will you end up with? And what will you want in six months?

The Canon 5D mk 3 and the Nikon D800 are both incredible cameras.  Absolutely incredible cameras.  Each is a wonderful machine with which to make digital images.  But if you were working with a clean slate and a big, fat credit card, which one do you think you'd plump down for?  Which system calls to you with the ultimate siren song?  Or is it like the choice between two great Bordeaux wines?  Both are incredible but you can only open one...

There are some among our numbers who will own both.  A few contemporaneously and most, serially.  If I didn't have a stitch of Canon or Nikon glass and no other legacy bodies what the heck would I do?

I've played with both and I'm stumped.  The Nikon has image quality galore (especially if you are a DXO true believer) while the Canon 5D mk3 shoots much faster and whips through its buffered images quicker. Some people think the Canon has a better auto white balance while others prefer the Nikon.

The bottom line, really, is that both camera are great photo machines and for most people the choice will be simple.  If you have a bag full of L glass the increase in ultimate resolution is probably not enough to push you to change.  You know logically that if the Nikon breaks all kinds of sales records Canon will have a camera to match it in a matter of months.  In the meantime you can walk around pontificating about how 21 megapixels is really "the sweet spot for pro's..."  and you can talk about how much quicker your post processing is and how few hard drives you are filling up by comparison.  Now, there is that pesky light leak thing....  I'm sure someone who used to design LCD panel systems for Canon has been banished to Sigma or some other level of industrial hell for his most grievous errors.

On the other hand, if you shoot Nikon cameras you'll lunge, without a doubt, to embrace the Nikon D800 and won't even cast a curious glance across the fence because, for all intents and purposes, the grass (for once) is greener right in the middle of your currently occupied field.  Enjoy the camera right now.  If you can get your hands on one...

But, if you have neither system, and you were contemplating buying into one, which way should you go.  As you might expect I have opinions about that.

I've been on both sides of the fence.  Most recently I owned a bunch of Canon stuff.  I owned Nikon stuff right up to and including the D700.  I'm pretty familiar with the lens selections in both camps and I think I can make some good judgements.

If you are involved in video production and you think or know that you'll want to use your camera as a primary shooting tool I'd have to give the nod to the Canon.  Not because I think the images will be better or the sound will be better but because it's so easy to use legacy manual focus lenses from so many sources on the Canon.  With the Nikon it's just not as simple.  Leica R lenses, old Nikon lenses (usable on both) and a slew of other stuff.  Zeiss cinema lenses are a good argument in favor of Canon, for the moment.

But if that's not your concern I'd steer you to the Nikon D800.  Why? Because they seem to have figured out (after the devastatingly dismal DX years) what consumers want and how to deliver it.  They want great files, total in camera lens corrections in Jpeg and raw, and they want low noise at high ISO's.  With the D800 you get most of that and you buy into a system in which a backup body such as the D3s gives you all the high ISO performance you can ask for in the market today.
Easy choice.

Which one will I buy? Now that's a bit more difficult.  See, I think all these cameras should have really cool EVF's instead of last century prism finders.  For the moment I'll be content sitting here with my Sony SLT a77's and waiting (patiently?) for the introduction of the much anticipated Sony a99 full frame SLT camera.  If you can believe the pervasive rumors we'll be looking at a body with this century's viewing mechanism coupled with the same chip as the one in the Nikon D800, weatherproofing and lotsa of super cool extras.

For most people in the market for a new camera right now I'd say, "Wait a month or two and just get the new Panasonic GH3.  It will be smaller, lighter, cheaper and for all intents and purposes, as good as anyone will need for any medium or practical use we're looking at today."  If you can't wait for the GH3 then get an Olympus EP3 or OMD.  Heck, they're more fun to shoot than all the bigger cameras I've played with. But if you go with the Olympus cameras don't forget to bundle in the miracle lenses.  Those are the 12mm, the 24mm Leica Summilux and the 45mm.  And don't you dare buy an EP 3 without a VF-2 finder.

Finally, all these cameras have one thing in common.  They'll shoot better video with LED light panels than they ever will with flash.  Pick up one of the Fotodiox 312AS two color LED panels.  Then, at least you'll be able to see what you're focusing on.....

For current Canon and Nikon users the pathways seem fairly clear cut.

http://www.kirktuck.com

Will Crockett always makes me think in new ways. I follow him because he understands customers.

https://shopshootsmarter.com/index.php

Admiration for a simple approach.  Most photographers I know love to complicate a process.  We have all kinds of slogans like, "K.I.S.S. Keep it simple, stupid" but in the end we always look for the process that has, at least, the promise of perfection...if only we can grind down into the details and master it.  But that isn't always what our clients are looking for.  And, truth be told, it's not always what suits us best.

I've always been interested in creating slideshows and kinetic presentations that blend images and video but I've always been put off by the "official" methods of creating them "at the highest levels."  There are times when having to have the best or coolest of everything just makes a process a lot less fun. And if it's too much drudgery you reconcile yourself to waiting until a paying client pokes you with a sharp stick until your actually learn a new technique.

But then, out of the blue, my old friend, Will Crockett, sent me a copy of a DVD he'd just done.  That's a scan of it, above.  The program is aimed at amateurs and even beginner pros.  A lot of the DVD deals with what you can do with smaller cameras and micro four thirds system cameras.  And, guess what???  Will also thinks that because clients ARE demanding "blended" products (video and still images ) the lighting of the future seems to be...LED's.  Wow.  How about that?  (I know, I know, you just love your strobes to death and you have absolutely no interest in video.....)

The video shows, from simple to "better," how to put your images into a moving video program, complete with music and effects = for free.  And then it takes you through the ways you can share the video or use it in your business.  It's really an eye opener for me.  I've been struggling to master Final Cut Pro X but I tossed together eight or ten images in the space of five minutes and, with a website called, Animoto, I made and uploaded a fun little video.  The video costs around $40 and you might know lots of stuff that's on there already but it's a pretty good overview of what you need to know to get started if you are trying to create fun products for yourself or your clients without committing to the major time sink of full bore video production.

Here's my first attempt with some downtown Austin photos.  All videos  under 30 seconds are free on Animoto.

http://animoto.com/play/GHEqiNYECMAKPR2MMOmiAA

Will this revolutionize my world? Naw.  But it opened my eyes to all the free and low cost services out there that can help me share video and still images with friends and clients.  And I have to thank Will for that.  He does a great job explaining technical stuff and his websites are a treasure trove of common sense stuff.  If you want esoteric, look somewhere else.

Empty. Gone. Measured and prodded. We lost the patient when we did the exploratory surgery to find out where the magic lived.

 Photography? It's not in the camera.  It's in the heart.

Lighting is not a substitute for having something to say.  A new lens isn't the same as new understanding.  A new camera is no substitute for knowing your own heart...

The Laramie Project. Ten Years Later.

The Laramie Project (parts one and two) is a play about the murder of a gay college student in Laramie, Wyoming.  It's a powerful play about a heartrending event.  Zachary Scott Theater is producing the original play and it's follow up wherein the original writers go back to Laramie ten years later to understand the aftermath and the changes in the town.

It's a tough play to photograph and even tougher to watch.  It's an important piece of theatrical art that speaks to our ideas of tolerance and diversity in America.  These are images from the dress rehearsal of the "Ten Years Later."  (Click on any image to go to the gallery).

Photographic notes:  I used two Sony a77 cameras to document the dress rehearsal.  As always, I did all of the photo documentation without any supplemental lighting.  I used the 16-50mm 2.8 lens and the 70-200 2.8 G lens; one on each body.  Both bodies were set to 1600 ISO, medium size Jpeg (12 megs) at the extra fine setting.  I stayed close to the fully open apertures on both lenses and varied the shutter speeds to compensate for changing light levels.  I didn't meter but depended on the electronic viewfinder to assess my exposures.

I learned a few technical things after my first attempt to use these cameras to shoot low light theater photography. I'd left the cameras set to DRO auto which tries to expand the dynamic range of each shot.  That works by boosting shadow tones which increases digital noise.  This time I worked with that setting off.  The files are much less noisy.  I also used the medium Jpeg file size instead of the largest size.  This also reduced apparent noise.  The camera locks on focus like a badger and shoots as fast as I could ever want it to.  Being able to see what the image will look like, vis-a-vis exposure and color has changed the way I shoot theater.  I shot over 1200 files and lost very, very few to exposure errors.  It's a very elegant way to shoot.

The play is wonderful.  The Zachary Scott Theatre cast brought a level of feeling and emotion to this performance that defines, for me, the power of live theater. 

http://www.kirktuck.com/site/home.html 

For me, taking a portrait is a process of reduction.

When I make a portrait I don't consciously think about what we're doing.  I ask my subject to sit comfortably in the studio and I try to look seriously at their face when they are not "on camera" so I can see what they really look like, and then I look again to see what they look like to me.

I may have paced back and forth before the person arrived and I may have set up some elaborate lighting constructions, the undertaking of which was no doubt a therapeutic way to keep my hands and my brain busy so I wouldn't have time to contemplate the very real possibility of failure.  Of inviting someone to my studio and then being unable to create an image/portrait/photography during the time spent together that either of us would like.  So I typically spend hours setting up lighting designs and testing them and then modifying them or changing directions altogether.

The first few minutes of a session are the most nervous for me.  I want to get right into the action of taking portraits but I know, intuitively, that I'd better slow down and start patiently so the person on the other side of the camera has a chance to settle in, get comfortable with the space, and make their peace with the camera.  Even though I am, in truth, a terrible introvert I feel the need to engage and entertain.  I don't want people to be bored in my space.  I don't want their boredom to negate our purpose.

If I'm shooting film I talk to the subject about the process.  I tell them that, unlike the endless supply of frames in a digital camera, we'll have to stop after every twelve frames in order to change the film. I tell them that the process will take more time than they might be used to.  I explain that, while in the movies about photographers the photo-protagonist leaps about like a gymnasts and screams out frantic and non-stop directions that keep the models constantly swirling and stumbling from one pose to the next to the beat of incredibly loud house music, our session won't be like that.

I explain that we'll move slowly so I can see what angles and expressions really look good in the camera.  When we find a look I like we'll try to hold in that basic set and make micro adjustments till we get everything just right.

Now, in the days of all digital, all the time, I've compromised a bit and given up shooting Polaroid tests.  It helps my process of rationalization that Polaroid no longer makes test film for my camera and Fuji doesn't make the kind I like.  So I take tests with an random digital camera set to the same ISO as my black and white film.  Once I've shot digital tests from a bunch of different angles and looked at the images on some sort of screen I am ready to proceed.

I can't rationalize shooting film in 35mm anymore.  It's different than digital but it's not what I learned on and it's not how I cut my teeth in portraits.  I shoot with a square, medium format camera.  Usually a Hasselblad 501 CM.  I nearly always use the 150mm Planar lens.  I like the 180 as well.  So my camera is on a tripod and the lens is well shaded from flare and other glancing light.  Kind of important since I'm standing right at the edge of my giant soft light.  I'm so close I bump my head into the side of the soft box, or the edge of the frame, a lot during the shoots.

On a small table next to my tripod is a stack of loaded film backs.  As I shoot I'll reach down and grab a new back from the table when I hit the end of a roll.  The used back goes on the table, but upside down.  That's my cue that the film in the back has been used up.  I have six 120 backs so every 72 frames we take a little break and I download the spent film and put it into an envelope.  Then I load all six backs with fresh film, put them back on the little table and we start again.

When we first start the shoot I think I'll want a fill light and a back light but as soon as I start looking at test shots these extra lighting instruments go away.  There's generally one light on the background and one light in a really big softbox or octabank.  These stay but the big light might get pulled in closer or raised, if the spirit moves me.

I know we're on the right track when the subject and I both feel a kind of electric excitement because we've discovered an angle, an expression and a gesture that feels so right.  I know we're done and getting stale when we start suggesting conventional poses.  These days I'm rarely looking for a portrait with a smile, unless it's genuine and unscripted.  I calm and quiet face is my secret for getting beautiful eyes.  A calm and quiet session is my secret for being able to reduce the noise, reduce distractions and reduce movement until we have a stasis and a balance that feels right.  Almost like a guided meditation.

And at some point, like an arrow shot into the air, we hit a high spot where we both know that we're "on" and that we're getting beautiful images, and then, like the arrow it all falls back to the earth.  We both know we're done.  And we thank each other profusely for the part each of us played and we promise each other we'll do it again soon.  And I hope we will.  Because almost everyone I shoot is so beautiful.


http://www.kirktuck.com/site/home.html

Your portrait is a critical part of your branding strategy.

Busy business owners often question the need to have a great public relations portrait of themselves. But in today's incredibly connected and visual culture often the face of a business owner or key employee is the critical first impression potential customers will experience.  When people take the initiative to look for products and services they want to know about the companies with which they are considering doing business.  Most people browsing a website to research a purchase drill down into the site looking for clues that will tip their decision in one way or another. The more important or costly the purchase the deeper they will drill for visual and written information.

They are mostly looking for some sort of human connection that will resonate with them.  A look, an attitude, a gesture or a genuine smile.

The image above is of the CEO of an international hotel chain. The image is warm and welcoming.  Almost playful. The environment symbolizes an archetype of a palatial and well appointed hotel lobby. Altogether the elements combine to create a distinct visual marketing message. It supported their brand for a number of years.  And it did so in multiple media.

Businesses have an opportunity to augment and nurture a brand identity with every piece of advertising they create. But they only have the opportunity to make a positive first impression with the materials they put in front of potential customers the very first time someone clicks on their site or opens up a brochure.  People respond to faces.  They unconsciously infer ideas and attributes to the company that the people pictured represent.  It's powerful marketing.  And it's powerful because it's authentic.  It's human-to-human marketing.

Using a well crafted image of a CEO in company advertising implies a promise or warranty of the value proposition. In a way the executive is giving you his or her assurance that they product or service will be good.  Portraits are part of the brand strategy.  And it may be the part that works best. Images of your people are multi-lingual and they work hard 24/7.

Professional photographers would be wise to consider the potential value their intellectual property adds to the expression of a client's brand.  If we accurately add up the primary and secondary value of a well done and enduring photograph it would be a simple task to justify our charges and to ask for the ample time, and "buy in" we'd like to have to create exceptional work.

http://www.kirktuck.com/site/home.html

Being out where the photos are is a good strategy for taking photos.

It's been a great weekend to be alive and to be a photographer.  At least for me, here in Austin.  Belinda and I celebrated our 27th wedding anniversary,  I watched Ben run well in a 5K race.  I shot a wonderful job on Saturday evening for a long time and very appreciative client.  Belinda, the dog and I had a long walk this morning and breakfast all together at Trianon Coffee House.

Then I headed downtown to see what the Austin Art Festival was all about.  I expected to be underwhelmed but I went away feeling really positive about the art I saw and really happy to live in a town that lives its art.  The city blocked off several major streets and a bridge for the art festival and artists from all over the U.S. were there.

I strolled around with a camera and made candid images of people that I found interesting. I think the gentleman in the image above was one of the artists who had a tent in the show.  He was taking a break in a section set aside for food and refreshments. He was engaged in conversation with a friend but he looked up at me.  I raised my eyebrows and my camera.  He gave me a small nod and went back to his conversation.  I shot ten very quick frames (not hard to do with an a77 on continuous high), smiled and walked away.  When I looked at the images later this afternoon I was very please with all ten in the series.  This one seems to catch him just as he's about to speak.  And I like that.

I made the image with a Sony a77 camera and a 55 to 200mm Sony DLT zoom lens.  I tend to keep the aperture of most of my lenses near wide open and shoot in aperture priority.  The aperture was f5.6 at 1/800th of a second.  ISO 400. I like the contrast the man's hat makes with the bright area behind him and I love the tilt of his head.

I used the camera's black and white function, which I think is pretty darn good, but it always needs just a bit more contrast and a bit more black.  Reminds me of Tri-X, if I go ahead and add in a little grain.