I decided to bust out the ‘ol Canon 5D and 100mm macro lens tonight to take a photo of my shredded mail. Looking at a 100% crop of the image got me thinking that even though there’s been so much hooplah about the 5D Mark II that was just announced, the original 5D is pretty darn amazing too.
On Sunday night I was granted the opportunity to attend a glitzy Hollywood party, thanks to my girlfriend Anna who works at InTouch magazine. All-in-all, it was an absolute blast. Being the photo junky I am, at first I wanted to bring my best photo gear to document the night. But on second thought I figured it would be best to go with my more discreet Canon G9.
Just how war photographers prefer the smaller size and general unobtrusiveness of Leicas and other rangefinders, I found myself feeling the same way with my G9. While the hired photographers were fumbling around with their Nikon D3s and Canon 1Ds Mark IIIs (which were bulked up even more with flash rigs), I was able to get right down into the trenches and pull off some decent candids where a larger camera would have been a distraction.
You’ll notice that I took a lot of pictures of Paris Hilton because, well, when you’re a photographer standing next to Paris Hilton there’s not much else you can think of doing.
Click the photos below to view them larger - enjoy!
One of my favorite lenses, if not my absolute favorite, is the Canon 70-200 mm 2.8L IS. I also have the 2X extender, but am sometimes a little hesitant to use it because I know it blurs the imagery a bit, as well as decreases the maximum aperture to 5.6.
So a while back I did a little side-by-side comparison to find some of the benefits and drawbacks to using the 2X extender. Let’s have a look, shall we?
Below are two photos taken with my 5D - the one on the left is using the 2X extender and the one on the right is not. Both shots were taken handheld at ISO 400, f5.6, and with a shutter speed of 1/400:
Clearly, there’s no parking on Wednesdays from 8:30 to 10 AM. Also, you shouldn’t litter. So let’s increase the image on the right’s resolution from 300 to 600 (2x) to compare it:
Cool. Now they’re the same size and the real comparison can begin. First and foremost, the image on the right (no extender, enlarged in PS) looks a little punchier, even though the image on the left (2X extender) is slightly sharper. It’s an interesting comparison because they both have their good and bad aspects. So let’s sharpen the image on the left and have another look:
Now that’s what I’m talking about. In the above image, I think it’s pretty clear that the image on the left with the extender is the winner here. So let’s take it a step further and enlarge them both. You know, for shits and giggles and stuff:
By now they’re both pretty much starting to look crappy. But it’s important to note that it’s possible to make out the “DEPT OF TRANSPORTATION” on the image on the left, and not on the right. To me that sealed the deal.
So my conclusion is that when there’s plenty of light and I’m trying to zoom as close as possible, I’m better off using the 2X extender. When there’s low light, however, my guess is that you’re better off not using the extender because you’ll need that 2.8 aperture to stop as much motion as possible. But that’s a comparison for another day. Or should I say, another night. And that right there is the funniest thing you’ll read all day.
As if the hipsters in Williamsburg weren’t dirty enough, one of the area’s largest laundrymats just burned down this morning.
On my way to get a bagel I saw thick black smoke rising in the distance and heard sirens. So I did what anyone with a decent sense of self preservation would do - I ran back inside and grabbed my camera.
Most of the action had died down after I’d arrived, but at least I was earlier than most of the news crews. As I was leaving the scene to go home and eat my bagel I saw at least two phototogs scrambling past me in the opposite direction, multiple cameras and bags flopping around them like tentacles. Suckers.
Enjoy the rest of the photos on my Flickr account.
The Cleverest reader and photographer Salvatore points out that my recent shots of the Brooklyn sky looked manipulated, and that he’d like to see an original for comparison’s sake. So I’m taking the time to do another quick Lightroom tutorial to show some of the work that goes into making the style of photography that I enjoy making, which for lack of a better word, I call “it” photography.
The original photo. Roll-over to see step one:
The sky in the original shot may look too bright, but since I was shooting RAW, it wasn’t blown out. Some with some of the darker areas of the street - they look a little dark on screen, but I know that since I made a well-exposed raw file, I’ll be able to lighten those parts and bring out some of the detail hiding behind those pixels.
After sliding the “Recovery” up and the “Contrast” down, I played with the “Temp” and the “Tint” to make the sky a little less flat, adding a nice blue hue. The human eye sees blue as a dark color, which also helps to darken the sky’s overall appearance.
So now the sky’s looking good but the street’s way too dark. Let’s move on the Part 3.
The sky’s looking good - now he hit the streets.
Now we use that magical slider called “Fill Light.” What that does is brighten up all the areas of the photo that looked dark and flat and boring, and suddenly the photo starts to look more evenly exposed.
After the addition of slight color adjustments to make the color temperature a little chillier, I added a slight vignetting around the edges of the photo to subtly draw you in and add an increase of about 30% to the photo’s total perceived awesomeness.
So there you have it. If you found this interesting you might also want to read a similar tutorial about the homeless campaign I recently shot.
I had a pretty exciting adventure yesterday afternoon. While taking pictures for an upcoming project I found myself at one of New York’s most visible yet rarely visited landmarks. I say rarely visited because in order to get there you need to take two elevators, enter a private penthouse office, climb up a 20 foot vertical ladder, have the building’s super struggle to push aside a wooden hatch cover for 5 minutes, and prop a workman’s ladder against a 12 foot parapet.
The most amazing thing about being on the roof of 450 7th Avenue, (also known as Nelson Tower, the tallest building in NYC’s Garment District), is that when you look up, pretty much the only thing you can see is sky. This is a strange feeling knowing you’re in the heart of midtown Manhattan. The roof itself isn’t flush with the top of the building, instead it sits about 12 feet below a retaining wall, cobwebbed with decades of unused or ailing electrical wiring and other rusting things I couldn’t identify.
It’s not until you prop up a ladder against the wall and start to climb before the expanse of the city takes shape beneath you. Being at the top of the ladder is a strangely exhilarating feeling that the photos don’t do justice to. Basically you’re balanced between two falls. Fall backward and you’ll break some bones. Fall forward and you’ll die. Bitchin.
In a related note, the super told stories of the roof’s popularity during the depression as a great place for forelorn businessmen to commit suicide. He even showed me the ladder they’d use, laying on the ground covered in rust and mold. I’d never seen a “suicide ladder” before, but I’ll be damned if I see ever another ladder that looks more suicide-y.
Keep reading for more photos…
Came home from work today and the sky scared the crap out of me.
As far as advertising photography is concerned, there are two main types that stand out for me. The first type is imagery that looks pretty much like it did straight-out-of-the-camera (SOC). These are the shots that get the job done and make everyone happy. The second type are the “it” photographs. It’s hard to explain exactly what “it” is, but like the Supreme Court’s definition of pornography - you know it when you see it. These images usually have a slightly hyper-real quality that makes them look “advertising-y”, and are the result of a mixture of complicated lighting setups and skilled time-consuming retouching.
It looks like the homeless awareness campaign we did at DCF advertising is finally being posted around the city. And if I may say, it’s looking pretty good. One of the benefits of being a creative director is you get to use yourself as the photographer whenever you damn well please. And that was the case here. I’m going to post a step-by-step Lightroom tutorial of how I got the image to look all “advertising-y” from the original photo, which looked pretty ordinary straight from the camera. Stay tuned.
UPDATE: Just posted the tutorial above…
Thanks to this tutorial, I was able to combine some of my Flickr photos with a custom Google map, officially creating my very first mashup. Isn’t it just adorable? Pass the gravy.
By now, many of us are aware that you can replicate the characteristics of a tilt-shift lens with Photoshop. But I’ve always been curious about just how closely Photoshop can recreate the complex bokeh (image blur) that results from a real tilt-shift lens. So with this burning question in my head, I rented a tilt-shift lens and went to work…
While leaving work today I was slightly miffed to discover that the 6 train was out of commission due to a water main break. But thanks to my trusty G9 (which I’d forgotten I was carrying), I was able to venture back above ground and photograph some of the commotion.
After growing tired of watching the fat, overpaid city employees staring slack-jawed at water pumping equipment as if they were professional mouth breathers, I realized that I was only a block away from where they found Heath Ledger’s corpse. So I went over to 421 Broome St and took some snapshots there as well. The photos aren’t the best in the world, but they’re photos I wouldn’t have if not for my Canon G9. Canon should use me for one of their commercials.
Keep reading for the photos.
UPDATE: More info about my thoughts on the Canon G9 can be found here.
Being somewhat of a photography nut, I recently set out to buy a second camera to carry around for those times when my Canon 5D and slew of lenses would be overkill. After doing a bit of research I settled on the Canon Powershot G9, and last week I finally picked one up. So far I’ve been very impressed with the camera, but I wanted to see how it would hold up against the 5D in an unscientific yet unbiased comparison. And the results were pretty surprising. Sample photos and descriptions for the über photo geeks are below…
Hopefully the knowledge that I almost died on multiple occasions taking the following photographs will make them that much more enjoyable.
Enjoy!
I took tons of photos at the marathon today. Click on the thumbnail to view the images large and help me name these people in the comments section!
