I recently decided to have a go at this type of shot myself, and did so today.

Rich used a Glock 29, but I decided to use a real gun (sorry — gun humour).

Firstly, here is the image I produced this afternoon:

The Smoking Gun

Now I’ll explain how I created it.

I vaguely knew how Rich went about creating his image, but I decided to take a slightly different approach.

While Rich did it in one shot, I decided in advance that the final image would be a composite of two images: one of the firearm, and another of the smoke.  I didn’t want to rig the set to capture both elements in one frame, and more critically, the lighting setups for each shot would be different, and wouldn’t work together.

The image of the firearm was shot with one lighting setup, and the image of the smoke was shot with a different lighting setup.

To photograph the firearm, I did the following (not in this particular order):

• set up the firearm on a table, and angled it to point upwards at roughly 45 degrees;
• placed a non-reflective black backdrop 90cm behind the firearm;
• mounted a Canon Speedlite 580EX II on a light stand, positioned at 45 degrees camera left;
• mounted a 42″ white translucent (shoot-through) umbrella on the stand;
• configured the flash for half-power at 24mm zoom;
• placed a white backdrop under the firearm to bounce light under the barrel assembly;
• mounted my camera (with 135mm lens and remote shutter release) on a tripod, composed, focused and dialled in 1/160th at f/11 and ISO 100; and
• attached PocketWizard PLUS II transceivers to both the camera and the flash.

In conclusion, a few important legal and safety-related notes:

1. Yes, this firearm is real.
2. Yes, it is mine.
3. Yes, I am licensed to possess and use handguns.
4. No, it is NOT loaded.

It was an epic seascape shoot, with people everywhere.  We managed not to get in each other’s way, which is quite something, given the number of shutterbugs.  Fortunately, there is plenty of room, and compositions are bountiful.

The conditions were superb, with a brooding sky and rich red/orange colour on the horizon from the rising sun.

Whale Beach, which I’ve only shot once (further around at Devil’s Cauldron) features lots of rocks and rock shelves which are great for shots of cascading water.  The conditions this morning were very favourable, with a near-full tide and a decent swell.

Here’s one of the images I captured:

Whale of a Cascade

It was a very fun morning, and I met a few of the better known Sydney seascape photographers whose work I follow, but whom I had never met or seen in action.

It was a great bunch of people, and a very fun morning, resulting in some pleasing images and new friends.

Back in 2010, I published an article on Tips for Safe Seascape Photography.

Earlier tonight, I encountered the following Australian-produced video segment, hosted by Andrew Ettingshausen, about rock fishing safety.

While the video is primarily aimed at rock fisherman, fishing isn’t the focus; the advice is generic, and applies equally to seascape photographers, who, like rock fisherman, stand on slippery rock shelves in sometimes dangerous conditions in pursuit of a nice ‘catch’.

The video echoes some of the advice I provided in my article, but also includes some extra advice which is food for thought, and may well be worth following.

Safety is always an important part of seascape photography, and there’s no time like the present to remind oneself of the dangers, and brush up on mitigation strategies.

Safe shooting!

It’s been quite a while since I photographed one of Sydney’s ocean pools.  A few years ago I was working on a project to photograph all of Sydney’s ocean pools.  I shot 23 of the 30 pools before I became disinterested and shelved the project.

Mona Vale Pool, which I photographed only once before in 2008, is one of the most interesting of Sydney’s ocean pools, as it sits on a sand bank a good distance from the shore, and has beaches and breaks on both sides of it.  Consequently, in the right conditions, waves crash into the pool and water flows over the edges, producing lovely cascades which are great to photograph.

This is one of the images I shot:

Mona Vale Pool Revisited

This morning’s weather was quite patchy, and the sky wasn’t great, but was better than a cloudless sky.  In the time I was there in the darkness waiting for Brent to arrive, I saw cloudy skies, clear skies, cloudy skies again and everything in between.

Rain also hampered our efforts for a while, as did the horrid sodium vapour light adjacent to the pool, which illuminated only for a short while before it automatically extinguished, freeing the pool from the hideous orange colour cast with which it was previously inflicted.

I did manage to land this image and a few other compositions.

It was nice to be standing in water as the torrents spilled out of the pool and gushed past me.

The most dramatic image from the shoot would have to be this image:

The Great Cathedral by the Sea

All of the elements were aligned: the sky was moody, the water was flowing, and the rocks were colourful and texture-laden.

I spent a fair amount of time post-processing this image last night.  I originally ran three of the exposures through Photomatix Pro, but I opted instead for my usual technique of manually blending seascape exposures, and altogether, I preferred my own results.

I may publish a post-processing tutorial on this image at some point, but in the mean time, I am enjoying simply viewing this image.

Cathedral Rocks really is a stunning place to photograph, and I’d encourage any seascape within a 200km radius to visit and photograph the place.  It’s enjoyable enough to view with one’s own eyes alone, but photography was my intent, and the morning’s conditions were ripe for dramatic seascape imaging.

As its name indicates, it’s a neutral-density filter which reduces the light intake by ten stops.  When fitted to a lens, the Pro Stop ten-stop filter reduces the light intake to about a thousandth of the light otherwise seen by the lens.

This significant light intake reduction allows for blurring of water, cloud and other movement in bright light, which can result in some dynamic, striking images.

I’ve been wanting a ten-stop ND filter for quite some time, and as a user of Lee ND and GND filters, I had hoped to procure a Lee Big Stopper; but this filter is unfortunately very hard to obtain, with long waiting times.

In the mean time, the newer version of the Hitech ten-stop ND filter has been receiving some positive reviews and gaining popularity amongst photographers like myself who are keen on long exposure imaging.

One of the big advantages of the Hitech filter is that it has a rubber/foam gasket on the rear side of the filter, which shields the lens from light spill between the filter and the filter holder.  It’s also cheaper than the Lee filter, and is made from resin rather than glass.

I’m looking forward to experimenting with this filter in my seascape, landscape and cityscape photography.

The location, which has been on my ‘must shoot’ list for too long, consists of stunning volcanic rock formations, and its main feature, from which it gets its name, rises out of the water, making a fantastic focal point for seascape images.

The trip down the coast this morning was challenged by rain and very thick fog, but I knew that there would be substantial cloud cover at Cathedral Rocks, which is always a good thing.  A stormy sky is always a pleasure to see, but there’s also the chance for some stunning colour to break through as the sun rises.

Here are two of the images I shot this morning.

Dawn at Cathedral Rocks

Cathedral Onslaught

More images are to follow.

I thoroughly recommend this location for seascape photographers.  The rocks are rich with texture, and the ‘cathedral’, surrounded by crashing waves, commands attention.  In strong seas Cathedral Rocks would be an even more spectacular location.

Some background:

In 1999 I bought a VHS-C video camera, which I used on two overseas holidays and various social events.

For many years, the 18-odd VHS-C tapes I shot have been my only copies of the footage I captured long ago, and about a year ago I started thinking about transferring the footage to DVD media.  I’m not a fan of analogue media, and magnetic tape has a tendency to deteriorate with usage, and is sensitive to strong magnetic fields such as my amplifiers.

I looked at the Elgato Video Capture package about a year ago and took note of it, but decided it wasn’t a priority.  When I was at the Apple Store a few weeks ago to buy an iPhone case, I again looked at the package, and this time decided to buy it.

Tonight I started the process of digitising my many hours of home-made video.  To my mind it made far more sense to store the video footage as digital files on a computer rather than format-shifting from VHC-S to DVD.  (I’m not a fan of optical media either.)

The Elgato package consists of a dongle-like hardware device with a USB cable on one side (for connection to the PC), and RCA and S-video connectors on the other end (for connection to a video camera or VCR).

It also includes a very simple-to-use, step-by-step software package (for both Mac OS X and Windows) for performing the digitisation, which, as one reviewer commented, even your mother could use.  You simply connect your PC and analogue output source to the dongle, run the software, click a few buttons and away you go.

After stopping the recording, the software provides a simple, effective interface to trim any extraneous footage from the beginning and end of the recording, which saves post-production in video editing software if the footage has been shot such that it doesn’t need any other editing.

After completing the capture, the software provides quick shortcuts to play the video, upload it to YouTube or load it into iTunes.

As I type, I’m in the process of digitising my second tape.  It’s such a simple and elegant package which gets the job done nicely.  Having reviewed the footage from my first tape, as well as another video I digitised earlier, I am happy with the result.

I have many hours of digitising ahead of me, but once I have completed this long-overdue project, I will have peace of mind, knowing that my legacy video footage has been digitised, is more accessible for viewing, and most importantly, is backed up.

That’s quite a good return on my $200 investment.

Seaweed

The first image above was taken shortly after arrival, and in the pre-dawn darkness, the moving water is abstracted to the point where its movement is almost invisible.  A sense of calm is evoked as the clump of seaweed sits stranded on the sand bank.

Nearly an hour later, I shot this image:

Northern Aspect

The above image is very different to the first, in that the distant brooding sky, turmoil in the water and calm, warm tones of the rocks provide contrast within the image itself, and also contrast with the earlier image.

This goes to show that it’s possible, in the same shoot at the same general location, to achieve varying images with a distinctly different look and feel.

At 4:45am, I met Tony at Turimetta (a veritable ‘Mecca’ for seascape photographers) on Sydney’s Northern Beaches, and we headed down to the famous Turimetta gorge on the southern end of the beach.  My original intention was to shoot the northern end, which I’ve only shot once; however, there was plenty happening at the southern end.

There was some patchy rain and some thick layers of cloud, which I could tell would make for some dramatic seascaping that would be easy on exposure.

After a few early compositions in and near the gorge, I found something further out on the rock shelf which grabbed my attention.

Here’s the result:

Turimetta Triumph

It was a fantastic feeling to be out on the rock shelf, splashing around in water and having fresh, cool ocean water surround me and my tripod as the waves and swell came crashing in under a tempestuous sky.

I’m pleased that my first seascape of 2012 was greeted with very favourable conditions, and I’m looking forward to my next shoot at a more exciting location on Saturday.

In the coming days I’ll have some fresh images from this morning’s rewarding shoot.

I’m back.

Due to circumstances and dramatically changing weather (which basically foiled our plans for Lake Moogerah), we didn’t end up shooting much at all, but on the way down the New England Hwy between Toowoomba and Glengallan, I spotted a windmill in Allora, which we decided to stop and shoot.  We then found another windmill across the road, and shot that also.

While we were there, a storm cell could be seen to the south/south-east of Allora, and shortly after shooting, a few drops of rain started.

By that point, knowing that clouds, rain and storms were in the area, we had bailed on Moogerah and headed back to Cedar Creek via Brisbane for dinner.

Here’s the result of a 560km round trip, which basically yielded this image:

Allora's Distant Storm

Here’s a map with a GPS track log overlay showing our path from Cedar Creek.

The windmill is marked on the bottom left of the track.

Bunya Mountains GPS Track Log - 05/01/2012

As can be seen, Lake Moogerah via Bunya Mountains was a bit of a trip.

My photographic output was generally lower than my efforts over the previous five years, but my focus in 2011, when I did shoot, was cityscapes, architecture and HDR imaging.

Looking back at my seascape efforts in 2011, I headed out for only a handful of shoots, and on one occasion the light was decidedly so bad that I downed tools.  I became decidedly disinterested in seascaping, and was generally not motivated.

In the past few weeks, I’ve started to get the seascaping ‘itch’ again, and have decided to return to seascaping in 2012.

I have a shoot planned for Saturday at a location which has been on my list for quite some time, but which I’ve never managed to visit.

And while I’m still on leave from work, I’ll be venturing out for a few other seascape shoots, commencing this week.

In the mean time, here’s an early morning image I shot during our recent holiday to the NSW Central Coast.

The Channel

I am feeling motivated, I’m wanting fresh, dramatic images; I’m re-connecting with seascape shooting buddies, and combined with the time I have available to me over the next three weeks, it’s time to make hay while the sun shines; so some new seascape images can certainly be expected of me this year.

While we were there, I managed to get some dawn and dusk seascaping and some location recce done.

I shot Norah Head, The Entrance, Soldiers Point, and also did some recce at Forresters Beach and Spoon Bay just to the south. I wasn’t fully equipped to shoot Forresters, and my plans to shoot Spoon Bay this morning were abandoned in favour of sleep after a long day yesterday.

I’ll have some fresh images over the coming week, but in the mean time, here’s one from the main beach at The Entrance, a mere five-minute walk from where we were lodging.

Dusk at The Entrance

While photography wasn’t the main reason for the trip, it was nice to have the opportunity, some decent skies, and the desire. It’s always good when those three elements align.

Since arriving this afternoon, we’ve gone to Norah Head Lighthouse, and as I type this, I’m sitting on a rock on Soldiers Point, a fantastic rock shelf two minutes south of Norah Head.

I decided to recce this place today with a view to coming back here at dawn tomorrow.

Right now the light is entirely wrong, but I’ve taken a few snapshots of locations along the point which would make for good seascape images.

It’s cloudy and there’s a strong south-easterly blowing, but I’m hoping tomorrow’s dawn will produce a magical sky. It’s my first foray back into seascaping after a long hiatus and I’m hoping I score.

There are some really great nooks and crannies here, and I cannot wait to come back and shoot it properly.

In September of 2010 I photographed a fantastic young model called Sarah Jane Kelly.  The shoot took place at Berrima in the NSW Southern Highlands.

I had photographed Sarah once before, but I wanted a country setting and some beautiful golden hour light.  I hit pay-dirt.

I landed some nice images of Sarah on the day, but only processed and published a few of them after the shoot.

Today I started looking at a few of the images, and found some, which after some time and with fresh eyes, stood out and looked worthy of processing and publishing.

Here is one of the images I captured of Sarah, which really shows what a wonderful model she is.

Sarah Jane

While I had my lighting equipment with me, I decided to make use of the fantastic natural light I had.  The sun was low in the sky to the rear right of Sarah, so I had an assistant hold a golden reflector dish to bounce the rich, warm light towards her face.

I had sent some images for the magazine’s competition, and when he received them for review, he saw a story in one of the images.

The image which captured his attention was one in which I had used a variety of light painting techniques in the darkness to produce an interesting image.

So began my foray into the world of article writing for magazines, with a story on creative light painting.

It was quite a difficult experience, as space in magazines is extremely limited, and for someone as liberal with wordsmithing as I tend to be, there just isn’t sufficient space.  As such, I had to come up with some creative ways of preserving all of the information I wanted to get across, while fitting within the limitations.

I submitted my first draft, and after some minor edits, the article was published in a six-page spread, along with numerous light painting images I have produced, and stories about what went into them.

Here’s a preview of my article, which features in the November, 2011 edition of Australian Photography.

Feature Article in Australian Photography Magazine - November, 2011

I hope those who read my article learn something new, enjoy what I have written, and gain inspiration to go out and try some creative light painting.

Last weekend I decided that I might shoot a macro image of the petals of one of the roses.

I decided to shoot in natural light, and sprayed the petals with a water gun to produce the water droplets.

After setting up, I bracketed exposures from -1EV to +1EV and then produced an HDR composite, on top of which I applied manual exposure blending and Calvin Hollywood’s ‘Freaky Detail’ technique to bring out even more details.

Here is the result, with which I am quite happy.

Happy Anniversary, Baby

I’m not one to shoot flowers at all, and macro is something with which I dabble only very occasionally.  In this case, it was worth the effort.

Unfortunately the roses aren’t looking as healthy now as this one did when I photographed it!

I had never published it until now.

Lonely Darkroom

To create this image I used a combination of fluorescent white light and a red cold cathode light to illuminate the bunker in the night sky to create an eerie and dramatic effect.

The image is a composite of four images, all shot with a Canon EOS 5D and 16-35mm f/2.8 lens for 30 seconds at f/5.6 and ISO 200.

One image was created with a powerful fluorescent light, which bathed the scene in white light to reveal details; the remaining three exposures were made while I wandered in and around the bunker, shining rich red light on parts of the concrete with a cold cathode light.

I needed to be careful as I moved throughout the scene, ensuring that the source of the light remained hidden from the camera’s view so that bright, distracting trails and hot spots were avoided, leaving only the red glow.  Because I was moving and hiding inside the bunker, the long exposure prevented the camera from capturing ghosted images of me in the scene.

Post-processing in Adobe Photoshop CS4 consisted of raw conversion, manual blending of the four exposures using layers and masks, minor cloning of hot spots, vignetting, mild desaturation and colour adjustment in the sky area.

We pulled over and decided to go inside.

We were warmly greeted by one of the custodial staff, who gave us some information about the cathedral and encouraged us to explore.  A short time later I asked her if photography was permitted, and to my delight she said yes and encouraged me to take some photos.

I dashed out to the car, fetched my rig, and then proceeded to spend the next 40 minutes photographing the interior of this beautiful cathedral.  During our time there, we were treated to some fantastic music from the cathedral’s large pipe organ, whose powerful pipes boomed music throughout the cathedral as the organist played.

For some time, I have been wanting to shoot a series of interior architectural images of cathedrals, and unfortunately, some do not permit photography, or are otherwise not open all the time.

This unexpected opportunity turned out to be a real treasure, as I walked away with some pleasing images.

Here are three images I’ve published from the series thus far.

I hope you enjoy them.

St Peter's Anglican Cathedral, Adelaide

The Altar

Lady Chapel

What I didn’t mention is that there was something else in the making with regard to the magazine.

One day in August I received a call from editor Robert Keeley regarding my cover image submissions.  Later in the afternoon he called again, and I presumed it was about the status of my cover image, but he needed to discuss something else altogether.

On his desk were prints of two of my images I had weeks earlier submitted to the magazine for its regular photography competition.  He was impressed with the images, but one of them really grabbed his attention.  He told me that he saw a story in my image, and asked me if I’d consider writing a feature article for the magazine on the type of photography I had been practising.

That was an unexpected but pleasant surprise!

The catch was that my image could not be entered into the competition if it were to form part of a feature article.  I was told to give it some thought and let him know which path I wanted to take.

Competitions are a dime a dozen, but the invitation to write an article isn’t something that comes along very often, if at all.  Freelance writing for photography magazines is something I had never even considered.

A few days later I called Robert and gave him my decision.  At this stage there was no rush to complete the article.  However, a week or two later, I received another call.  Through circumstance, he needed my article sooner than expected, so I needed to quickly commence writing.  I sent him ten images relating to my article’s subject, and he expressed interest in eight of them and asked me to write about them.

He ran me through the motions and requirements and provided me with the editorial guidelines.  He was keen for me to make sure I got it right so that he could easily run the story.  The man is insanely busy and the process of putting the magazine together is even more frantic and insane.  Contributors need to get it right to make the process easier for the editor, or else being left on the editing room floor is a very likely outcome.

This week, I commenced working on my article, and submitted my first draft.

Today I received a call from the editor, and to my shock I was told that the article was 90% of the way there in terms of suitability.  There are a few minor changes to make, and some other formalities to handle, but after the time I spent on my article this week, and my associated worry over the draft article’s suitability to his and the magazine’s requirements, I was relieved that I had reached this point without needing to do any major re-work.

My article is to appear in the November issue of the magazine.

What I can say about this journey, apart from it being quite a privilege and new experience, is that writing for a magazine is very difficult, as space is extremely limited.  My writing style is fairly liberal, but unfortunately the world of print-based feature article writing doesn’t permit the sort of latitude I’d like; it’s far removed from blogs and Internet forums.

Condensing my article’s content and trimming details upon which I’d prefer to have elaborated was not an easy task, and I expected that my content would be ruthlessly edited.  Of course, it’s still subject to editing before it finds its way onto paper!

I’ll post an update once the magazine has been published.

One of my seascape images, Long Reef Longing, was chosen to feature as the cover image for the September, 2011 edition of the magazine.

While I’ve had an image published in the magazine once before in one of its competitions, this is the first time my work has been featured on a magazine cover.

Here’s a photo of the front cover of the September edition of Australian Photography:

Featured on the Cover of Australian Photography Magazine - September, 2011

It was naturally quite rewarding to receive the magazine this afternoon and see my image on the front cover.

I took my gear with me to work last night on the off-chance that the sky would be interesting, but by the time I departed the office after 4am, I was tired, and despite some potentially interesting cloud, I decided to head home.

After sitting at home for maybe 20 minutes, I came to my senses and went back out into the darkness.

The destination was Sylvania jetty.

Here are two of the images I shot this morning:

Sunrise over Holt's Point Jetty

The Boat Ramp

This was my second visit to Sylvania jetty in recent months, and while I generally don’t return to the same location within a short interval of time, the tidal and sky conditions were right, and it wasn’t a great effort to head there.

I’m glad I visited again.

It was pleasant just being there to see the colour of the sky and watch the world awaken, knowing that I’d soon enough be home in bed after working throughout the night.

The sky was mostly plain, with the fairly typical annoying clump of dark cloud right on the horizon.  The very few patches of good cloud were mostly in the wrong places.

The conditions, apart from being utterly boring, were extremely difficult for exposure, even with GND filters.

I made the decision not long after being there, that I wasn’t going to shoot.

The light just was not right, and for some landscape/seascape and even wildlife photographers, the light and combination of sky and cloud, is crucial to the shot working or not.

So, this raises the question:  If the conditions are not right, should you shoot, or should you not shoot?

Some people would take the view of making the best of the present situation, or shooting anyway, since they are already there.

Others decide that good enough is not good enough, and that they want a certain type of image which requires a certain type or quality of light.

For me, while the notion of making the best of a bad situation has a certain positive outlook about it and is otherwise commendable, I am extremely fussy about light and want a certain look, quality of light and feel to my images, so I elect to back off the shutter release if the conditions are unfavourable.

I’ve noticed that the hard-core ‘scapers whose work I follow, rarely ever publish an image captured in in sub-optimal light.

I’m not a bird photographer, but I’ve also noticed that those guys are very fussy about light and tend to favour images of their favourite feathered friends basking in golden hour light.

At the end of the day, it comes down to good light or bust.

Fortunately I have the liberty to decide that pressing the shutter release isn’t worth it; the only demand I face is that I set for myself in capturing the image I want.

Quite simply, it is a table which lists, in third-stop intervals, every unfiltered shutter speed from 1/8000th to 30 seconds, and the corresponding shutter speeds to use after reducing light intake from a range of one to six stops via the use of one or more ND filters.

This may come in handy for landscape photographers, and will save a bit of mental arithmetic when chasing the light in the pursuit of images.

My ND Filter Shutter Speed Cheat Sheet can be downloaded from the following URL:

http://www.xenedis.net/ndshutterspeeds.pdf

I recommend that photographers print the cheat sheet and carry it in their camera bags to serve as a quick reference whenever it’s necessary to determine the correct shutter speed to use after, say, stacking two ND8 filters in front of the lens.

I hope people find it useful.

The name of the technique I’ll explain is “Water Intensification”.  It is a technique I originally learned a few years ago from fellow seascape photographer Brent Pearson.

The aim of Water Intensification is to bring out more contrast, detail and drama in water depicted in seascape images.  It can be applied to still water, but it really shines when applied to cascading or churning water.  It can also be applied to cloud-laden skies.

Brent’s technique differs marginally from mine (notably, he uses Nik plug-in software I don’t use), but the outcome is more or less the same.

Firstly, here are the ‘before’ and ‘after’ images to show the difference when Water Intensification is applied.

Before Water Intensification

Water Intensification - Before

After Water Intensification

Water Intensification - After

See the difference?

The water is darker, contains more details, and contains more contrast.

How to Apply Water Intensification

Now I’ll explain how to apply Water Intensification, using my method.

It is more or less a technique of enhancing captured details and applying local contrast and darkening.  Note that if the highlights are blown (clipped), this technique will not recover detail that was never captured.

So, to apply Water Intensification non-destructively, here’s how:

1. Make all layers visible and select the top layer.
2. Stamp visible layers (Cmnd-Opt-Shift-E on a Mac, or Ctrl-Alt-Shift-E on a Windows PC), which creates a new composite layer from all layers below, but preserves those layers.
3. Add a B&W adjustment layer and use a preset or tweak the sliders manually.
4. Add a curves adjustment layer and use a preset or manual adjustments to apply rich contrast.
5. Merge the ‘merged’ layer with the B&W and curves adjustment layers (at this point you should now have a single, high-contrast B&W layer above your previous top layer).
6. Add a layer mask to the B&W layer, invert it (ie, change it to black) and change the blend mode to Multiply.
7. Using a soft brush at 10-20% opacity, paint the flowing water areas on the black mask using a white brush.

To see the technique in action, Brent Pearson has published a post-processing video tutorial on Water Intensification.

After applying the Water Intensification technique, the water in your seascapes will exhibit a much more intense richness, showing the fantastic detail in the case of cascading or churning water.

It is a technique well worth applying to seascape images.

Note that the technique does darken and desaturate the areas of the image to which it is applied, so a further step would be to add lightening and colour saturation as desired using adjustment layers.

Thus far, I’ve published two images from the shoot.

The following image was captured earlier in the morning than the previous image I published, but in my view, and apparently in the view of many who’ve seen it, it’s the stronger image.

Stormy Lurline

Of the two images, I much prefer the drama of this image.

This image is a single, two-minute exposure, made at f/5.6 and ISO 200.

I normally shoot ‘scapes at ISO 100 and f/11, so under those exposure settings the shutter would have been open for 16 minutes.  By then, the scene would have blown out, as the light intensity at dawn increases very rapidly.

What makes this image work for me is:

1. the colour contrast between the rocks and sky/water area;
2. the colour saturation (blue is a favourite hue of mine);
3. the streaking cloud resulting from the long exposure;
4. the contrast of the rich rock texture against the smooth water and streaky sky;
5. the use of darkness I added in post-processing;
6. the simplicity of the composition; and
7. the balance between land, sky and water.

Now, while it might seem a little conceited to critique one’s own image, I consider it important to analyse one’s own images to see why they work or what about them is appealing.  This can also help with critiquing other people’s images.

I hope those who see this image enjoy viewing it as much as I enjoyed creating it.

This was my first seascape shoot since December, and my first dawn shoot since September.  I had been taking a long break from dawns and seascapes, but felt like venturing out again this weekend.

Here’s one of three or four compositions on which I concentrated this morning:

Lurline Bay Cascade

As you can see, the sky was moody and there was a little rain — perfect conditions for seascaping.

While the colour of a glorious sunrise would have been nice, I also love the broodiness of clouds such as what you see here.

As long as it’s not a plain (or mostly cloudless) sky, I’m content.

It was a morning which produced pleasing images.  Just what the good doctor ordered.

We went yesterday.  I hadn’t visited PMA since the Brisbane show in 2008, and before that the 2006 show in Sydney, which was then called Photo Imaging World.

There was a lot happening at the show.  As well as all the usual product and service displays, there were talks, numerous photographic exhibitions, and the judging of the APPAs (Australian Professional Photography Awards).

We arrived a little after 10am, when the show opened.

On the gear front, I didn’t look at much, as I am not in the market for anything.  However, I did look at a few Canon L-series lenses.

I took the opportunity to look at the Canon EF 800mm f/5.6L IS USM, which was about one of the only super-teles I had not seen or used.

Afterwards I had a play with the Canon TS-E 17mm f/4L.  A friend of mine owns this lens, and I had used it once, but we were chasing light and I didn’t have much time to play with the lens, as I was more interested in getting the shot.  It’s a lens I would find useful for my interior and exterior photography, but it’s definitely in the ‘want’ category rather than the ‘need’ category.

I also took the opportunity to look again at the Canon EF 200mm f/2L IS USM, which I first inspected at PMA 2008 in Brisbane.  It’s a superb lens, but again, not a need, and at $6K or so, it’s good to not need it.

Lastly, I looked at the new, and not-yet-available Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II USM.  While its predecessor is unquestionably a stunning lens, on par with its 300mm cousin, what floored me the most was the weight — or the lack thereof.

The original 400/2.8L IS weighs 5,370g, which is too much for hand-holdability.  The mark II weighs an incredible 3,850g, which is a significant reduction in weight and for me, makes it quite hand-holdable.  It’s similar to the 500/4 in weight, but the objective element is closer to the camera, so the rig is not as noticeably front-heavy.

One thing I did buy on the day was a Think Tank Hydrophobia 70-200 Rain Cover.  We happened across the L&P stand and when I saw this, I seized it.  For a long time I have been needing a splash guard for my seascape photography.  I have taken a few hits from big splashes and waves in my time, and have even lost a camera to the power of the ocean.  Thus, I needed adequate protection for my gear.  The rain cover is an excellent unit, and will accommodate a 70-200mm lens.  While I don’t use mine for seascaping, it’s good to have the capability.

One of the events we wanted to attend was the judging of the APPAs.  During an Easter weekend in the Hunter Valley this year, we met Canberra-based landscape photographer Chris Morrison and his wife, and had planned to meet up with them at PMA.  Chris had several images in the APPAs, and to his and our delight, one of his images won a gold award.  There was a lot of judging taking place, and some very good images on display.  Unfortunately with three judging booths and a rapid pace, there is too much happening to absorb in a single session.

Throughout the day, I met up with a few people I know, and ran into a few other familiar faces  I also took the opportunity to meet William Long, who is an active campaigner for photographic freedom and photographers’ rights.

At 2pm we attended a talk by Darran Leal on travel photography.  Darran runs a company specialising in photographic tours, and the company is the only licensed travel agency in Australia which designs and operates photographic tours.  We’re considering taking one of his tours, as he travels to destinations most people would never see, let alone photograph, and the tours are designed with photography in mind rather than tourism.

Later in the day I also took the opportunity to chat to Ken Duncan and see how things are going with his rally against the bureaucratic rules and laws eroding people’s rights to photograph in iconic Australian locations such as Uluru, Sydney Harbour and Bondi Beach.  Last August, Ken held a public rally in Campbell’s Cove to raise awareness of the issue.  Ken told me that there has been some traction, and that positive legislative changes are close at hand.  After speaking with Ken, we headed to the Arts Freedom Australia stand and picked up a couple of “I’m a photographer, not a criminal” tee-shirts.  We spent a while chatting to one of the AFA reps about issues and experiences.

All in all, it was a full day with lots happening.  While I looked at a few items I’m not planning to purchase (and as an aside, it’s a very good position in which to be, when gear is not the limiting factor in one’s photography), there was more value to be found in talks, exhibitions, the judging of the APPAs and meeting and greeting.  I did come home with a much-needed item that had been on my list for a while, as well as making a contribution to an organisation whose aim is to protect my photographic freedoms.

In a discussion I had elsewhere, someone told me he only produces his HDR images from raw files, and another participant was curious as to whether doing so was a bad idea.

I decided to perform an experiment to compare the JPG method I endorse against the raw method.

Using Photomatix Pro, I produced two HDR images.

Five images (shot a stop apart, with identical framing, aperture and ISO) were merged with Photomatix Pro, and tone mapped using the ‘Fusion – Default’ preset.  Other than resizing and saving in JPG format, I have performed no post-processing to the images Photomatix produced.

On the first run, I used high-quality JPGs, which I had produced from raw images.  I applied the following settings in Adobe Camera Raw:

• Camera Profile: Camera Standard
• Sharpening Amount: 50
• White Balance: Auto
• Temperature: 5250
• Clarity: +30

Here is the result:

Photomatix HDR from JPG

On the second run, I use unprocessed Canon raw files.  In Photomatix Pro, I used the following raw conversion settings (there are no other options for raw conversion):

• White Balance: Auto
• Color primaries HDR based on: sRGB

Here is the result:

Photomatix HDR from CR2

And finally, here is my final image, the HDR image of which was produced using high-quality JPGs, and to which I applied my own post-processing in Photoshop.

White Bay Wheels and Pipes

Based on the results above, my advice is to perform raw conversion first and work from JPGs rather than feeding raw images straight into Photomatix Pro.  In my experience, Adobe Camera Raw does a much better job, and Photomatix Pro produces a clearly superior result when it is fed high-quality JPG images.

Over the last few years, thanks to software such as Photomatix Pro, it has been possible to automatically produce composite images using bracketed exposures in order to bring out rich detail which is impossible for a camera to capture in a single frame.

It has been done with varying levels of success.

Unfortunately, many who have dabbled with HDR imaging have produced horribly over-processed, garish images which have unnaturally saturated (almost radioactive) colours, higher-than-acceptable levels of noise, halos around tonally contrasty areas, and an altogether illustrated look which depletes the subject matter of any photo-realism.

The sorts of grossly over-cooked HDR images on the Internet has led some people to believe or state that HDR is an abbreviation for ‘Hardly Done Right’.  And they’d be correct.

Early this year I began experimenting with HDR imaging.  Looking back at the 23 images I have shot and published so far this year, 15 of them have been HDR images.  That’s two thirds of my 2011-shot images thus far.

When I started, I aimed specifically to avoid producing the cringe-worthy over-cooked images so prolific on the Internet.  I wanted to use HDR imaging techniques to bring out, in a natural way, the details our eyes can see.  I wanted to depict reality, not fantasy.

I think I have achieved that, and avoided what some call the ‘Photomatix look’.  Anyone who knows the dynamic range limitations of a camera operating in a high-contrast scene will realise that my images are HDR images, but hopefully, those who don’t know much about cameras and to whom the letters H, D and R are random letters of the alphabet, won’t realise that my HDR images are HDR images.  The idea is that my images should look like what one would expect to see if one were at the scene at the time of capture.

What I find difficult to understand is how, using Photomatix, people can over-cook images in such a ghastly manner.  Photomatix has some presets, two of which I consider way over the top; but using some of the more subdued presets, it is possible to produce photo-realistic images without really doing much work.

My first HDR image was a Photomatix-merged composite of seven images I had shot within the -3EV to +3EV range.  What Photomatix produced was very photo-realistic, albeit flat in tone.  I didn’t need to tweak any sliders or fiddle with any settings to produce something realistic and pleasing.

I have found that HDR processing tends to suck the black tones out of an image, so it’s necessary in post-processing to boost the blacks and mid-tones so the image doesn’t look so flat.

Depending on the subject matter, with Photomatix, it requires some conscious and deliberate effort to produce a ghastly HDR image.  It’s astonishingly easy to produce a realistic image without going to any trouble.

HDR imaging can produce spectacular, photo-realistic results; but my view is that, like any post-processing, less is more; and that one must at all costs avoid clicking the ‘Process the Hell Out Of This’ button, and exercise restraint.

These days when I shoot, I shoot with HDR imaging in mind, and my technique begins at the capture phase.

I firstly use a solid, rock-steady tripod to ensure consistent framing in each bracketed image.  I then capture a series of images of the same scene with the exact same framing, a stop apart.  Depending on the available light at the scene, I will bracket five or seven images.  More contrast-laden scenes require more images to capture the entire gamut of tonality, whereas less contrast-laden scenes will not require as many exposure values.

Naturally, I shoot in raw mode so that my source images are as unprocessed as possible, have no white balance settings locked in, and don’t sacrifice details by dropping the bit depth and applying compression, as is the case with JPG mode.

Back in the digital darkroom, I apply consistent raw conversion to all of my images, whereby I set the white balance, apply raw pre-sharpening, choose a white balance either from a preset or a custom value in degrees Kelvin, boost the clarity and maybe occasionally boost the vibrance or black tones.

Once I’ve dropped my series of bracketed images into Photoshop, I drop the bit depth to 8-bit and save them all as JPGs using the highest quality value (12).

I then drag the JPGs into Photomatix and at the tone mapping phase select the ‘Fusion – Default’ preset.  This is a fairly neutral preset that produces realistic results.

Once I have my tone-mapped TIFF image, I open it in Photoshop and apply my normal post-processing workflow (which can and does vary from image to image).

One of the first things to be done with a newly-generated HDR image is to apply a levels adjustment layer and increase the blacks (drag the left-most slider more to the right) and adjust the mid-tones by dragging the middle slider.  The image will inherently gain more contrast and tonality with that simple step.  Then it’s a matter of applying whatever other processing one would normally apply.

The key to successful and realistic HDR imaging is not to overdo it.  Too much contrast or too much colour, which can be the result of an aggressive tone mapping preset, can result in garish images which have the ‘Photomatix look’.  Saturation and contrast can be easily and subtly added in post-processing, but if the HDR-merged image has too much saturation or contrast from the beginning, it looks dreadful and takes more work to remove (assuming it’s even possible to restore reality to the image).

I have barely six months of experience with HDR, but I am fortunate in that I’ve found a way, with little effort, to produce realistic, pleasing images that avoid the pitfalls across which so many have stumbled.

Less is more, and more is less.

Saturday evening consisted of a single composition of Circular Quay at twilight.  Positioned on the steps of the Sydney Opera House, I shot this image of the Quay during blue hour:

Autumn Quay Twilight

I was quite pleased with how this image turned out, in terms of colour and composition.  Blue hour makes for such pleasing images — postcard material, even.

This morning’s shoot was of a subject matter entirely outside my usual choices.

The old White Bay power station in Rozelle hosted an open day this weekend, with 15-minute guided tours of the turbine hall on Saturday, and open access from 10am to 4pm on Sunday for photographers.  Tripods were allowed.

The place was an absolute mad house, with photographers descending from all corners of the globe to gain a rare view of the inside of the power station, which closed down in 1983 and is not publicly accessible.

I shot a series of images there this morning, focusing on a few key compositions.

This is the first image I processed and published:

White Bay Wheels and Pipes

I wanted to emphasise the rusty old machinery, and gritty, dirty charm of this place.

All in all, it was a very rewarding weekend, resulting in some new images which are pleasing to me.

I purchased a:

1. Manfrotto 055XPROB tripod;
2. Manfrotto 322RC2; grip ball head and
3. Manfrotto MBAG80PN 80cm padded tripod bag.

It all came bundled as a kit.

Manfrotto 055XPRO Tripod

I recently researched tripods and decided I wanted the 055XPROB, as it is taller than my old 190D, meaning I don’t need to lean forward when looking through the viewfinder.  The extra height also means I don’t need to use the centre column, which is an important factor when it comes to stability.

The 055XPROB also has a great feature whereby the centre column can pivot such that it is parallel to the ground.  This is enormously useful when shooting macro images in which the subject needs to be below the tripod.

I wasn’t interested in carbon fibre, as it’s lighter and therefore less stable, and given I have a habit of ending up in surging sea water, more stability is a must.  Carbon fibre is also pricey, and a lightweight rig isn’t a consideration for me, as I head out specifically for photography, and don’t need a small, light tripod for incidental carry.

Manfrotto 322RC2 Grip Ball Head

I had originally planned to purchase a Manfrotto 498RC2 ball head to replace my dead 488RC2 ball head.  The kit I purchased included a 322RC2, which has a single grip control to adjust all movement of the head.  Upon inspecting it, I decided it was a better option, as I found the dual controls on my 488RC2 to be cumbersome and less efficient.

The beauty of the 322RC2 is that the grip can be adjusted for left hand use.  I switched it to ‘left-hand-drive’ from the default right-hand drive position, and was good to go.

It’s rock-solid, and nothing budges when the ball is locked upon releasing the grip.  The weight capability of the 322RC2 is 5kg, whereas the 498RC2 can support 8kg, but given my heaviest lens is a 300/2.8 (2.5kg), the extra weight support isn’t necessary.

Manfrotto MBAG80PN

My kit included a padded tripod bag with a shoulder strap.  This, as I’ve discovered, is rather handy for lugging a heavy tripod.  I hitherto never had a tripod bag, and always lugged mine by hand.  Now I have a spare hand for either carrying other gear or steadying myself when rock-hopping.

All in all, I’m pleased with the new equipment I bought, and having used it tonight for a twilight cityscape shoot, it’s working quite nicely and is a joy to use.

Our flight path took us in a northerly direction along the northern beaches.  We banked sharply right around Barrenjoey Head and headed back south, banking right towards Sydney Harbour, where we banked left over the Sydney Harbour Bridge before heading back to Rose Bay.

The weather forecast for this weekend indicated dangerous swells along the coast.  Looking down over Turimetta and Canyon X (Warriewood) from an altitude of 1,600ft or so, it was clear that the coastline was copping a pounding and would have been dangerous territory for seascape photography.

Naturally I shot quite a few images and high-definition videos from the aircraft.

I’ve long since lost interest in shooting the Sydney Harbour Bridge and Sydney Opera House, but here is a somewhat cliché shot of both icons from an altitude of 1,000ft or thereabouts, looking south-west over the city (I was in the co-pilot’s seat).  An aerial view of Sydney Harbour is too good to miss, even if its two main attractions have been shot to death.

Sydney Harbour from Above

Post-processing is a constantly evolving process, whereby one learns new and in some cases better ways of doing things.

I decided to re-visit a series of dawn landscape images I shot at Mount Mee in Queensland back in April of 2010, and give some HDR treatment to a previously unpublished image.

While I applied HDR imaging to a series of four bracketed exposures, I also applied very selective processing to various parts of the image to control saturation, brightness and colour.

Here is the result:

Mount Mee Morning

I hope this image is as pleasing to others as it is to me.

This view looks along part of the 300-acre property on which we stayed at Rothbury.

Rothbury Countryside

Here is the result:

Tulip Droplets

A couple of key points:

1. I rarely shoot macro images; and
2. I don’t photograph flowers.

Yet, I photographed a flower with a macro lens.  That goes completely against ‘the rules’.

So, why did I shoot it?

I was recently given a nice bunch of tulips, and after I watered them during the week with a water spraygun and noticed the beaded drops of water on the petals, I thought with the colours of the tulips and the effect of the water, it would make a great subject for a photograph.

So this afternoon, I set about photographing the tulips.

This image did not come without its challenges, however.

Firstly, macro photography is not my forté.  Secondly, flowers just don’t interest me photographically.

From a more technical viewpoint, macro photography is challenging due to the extreme lack of depth of field.  The macro lens I have has a longer-than-usual focal length of 180mm, resulting in even less depth of field.

It was simply not going to be possible to have the whole tulip in focus with my primary subject being the water droplets.

How did I shoot it?

I positioned the tulips on a window sill to use natural light.

The camera was tripod-mounted, and I used mirror lockup and the countdown timer to make the exposure, after pre-focusing the lens and composing.

I held a blue tee-shirt behind the subject to provide a more interesting and colour-rich background, and I flashed an LED torch at the water droplets to provide a catchlight.

I hope the result is worthwhile.

I wanted a cityscape, but not from one of the usual locations (eg, Sydney Cove) and not containing the usual subjects (ie, the SHB or SOH).  After some recce at Balmain East on the weekend, we headed to a spot which looked promising.

I was hoping for some golden hour goodness, but due to the cloud cover the golden hour was very brief (less than a minute!) and the light wasn’t hitting the spot (literally).   Twilight was also on the agenda, so here is the result:

Sydney Skyline from Balmain East

I haven’t been shooting much at all this year, but I am still around.

While there’s plenty else happening, and while I’ve been reasonably comfortable with my significantly-diminished pace and rate of output, I have lately had a slight itch to pick up the light-gathering machine again and produce some images.

We’ll be away a few times in the near future, and country-side landscape photography is prominently on the agenda.

I also did some recce yesterday at a location I had not visited before, and which will suit one of my present subject matter interests.  It has potential for some different views of an often-photographed place.

Stay tuned; I’ll have something new in the near future.

Graduated neutral-density (GND) filters were used in the days of film to lower the contrast (sometimes expressed as ‘dynamic range’) in a scene.

When shooting a landscape or seascape image (especially when shooting towards a rising or setting sun), the difference in brightness between land (or sea) and sky can be significantly different, in the order of up to seven or eight stops.

The solution to this problem is GND filters, which are positioned in front of the lens, and optically even out the brightness levels between sky and foreground by darkening the much brighter sky via a semi-opaque darkened portion of the filter and transitioning to a non-filtered (ie, 100% transparent) portion of the filter.

Neutral refers to the grey, non-colour-altering property of the filter.

By positioning the filter such that the darker portion covers the sky and transitions to unfiltered where sky and land meet, the dynamic range in the scene can be reduced, which makes exposure easier.

GND filters come in various grades of darkness, measured in stops.

• GND2 or 0.3 = one stop.
• GND4 or 0.6 = two stops.
• GND8 or 0.9 = three stops.

One major brand even offers intermediate GND filters, such as 0.75 (2.5 stops).

Transitions are ‘soft’ or ‘hard’, with soft GND filters transitioning subtly from dark to light, and hard filters transitioning more abruptly.

Soft filters are best used for uneven landscapes (eg, mountains) and hard filters for horizons (eg, oceans or flat landscapes).

So, what does ‘GND8′ mean?

There is a simple formula for translating the filter nomenclature into the number of stops of filtration offered by the filter.  The formula is as follows:

GNDx = 2 ^ y stops of darkness

Examples:

• GND2 = 2 ^ 1 (ie, one stop)
• GND4 = 2 ^ 2 (ie, two stops)
• GND8 = 2 ^ 3 (ie, three stops)

Are GND Filters Necessary?

In the digital age, some people might propose, as an alternative to optical filters, exposure bracketing and blending of multiple exposures either manually, or using Photoshop’s own gradient filters.

My own philosophy is that while you can do this type of work in post-production, attempting to decrease the dynamic range in a scene during the capture phase makes capture and post-processing easier in the long term.

Depending on the nature and intensity of the light and cloud cover, the use of a GND filter at the capture phase may eliminate the need to employ exposure bracketing and blending in post-processing at a later stage.  In other cases, even stacking multiple GND filters may not produce a balanced single-frame exposure.  I have certainly experienced cases where the sky is still blown out despite me having stacked my two-stop and three-stop GND filters.

My approach is to use both GND filters at the capture phase, and blending during the post-processing phase.  I want to give myself the most flexibility and ensure I have a good range of exposures to cater for the dynamic range in the scene I have captured.

Recommended GND Filters

I personally use and recommend the Lee creative filter system.  It is a modular system, consisting of a filter holder, an adapter ring (for mounting the filter holder onto the lens) and the filters themselves.  Lee GND filters are 4 x 6″ (100 x 150mm) in size, and made of resin.

A filter system such as this is quite handy, as the filters are large enough to cover ultra-wide lenses without introducing vignetting, and if you have lenses with different filter thread sizes, all you need to do is buy an adapter ring of the appropriate size.  Adapter rings are quite inexpensive.

Unfortunately, the filters themselves are very expensive.  I chose the more expensive Lee filters because I had heard good things about Lee filters, and I had also heard about, and seen, the magenta colour cast introduced by Cokin filters.  Unfortunately the magenta colour cast issue is far from a simple case of brand, as I have personally experienced a magenta colour cast with my Lee filters when stacking GND and ND filters (both Lee-branded).  It may be a combination of the colour of the light, the white balance, the filters and even the camera.  The jury seems to be hung, but in my experience with Lee filters, colour casts have not been problematic for me with the exception of one dawn shoot.

Many people use the much less costly Cokin filters, which are more readily available, and have also shown themselves to work quite well.  Someone using the Cokin system may never experience magenta colour casts.  In my case, I decided not to risk it, so I opted for the Lee brand, which generally had much better feedback.

In Conclusion

My recommendation is always to give yourself the most options when it comes to capturing images.  You cannot easily add what wasn’t captured, and in my experience, using filters can eliminate the need for exposure blending.  However, I still bracket so that I have the most options, and I will mostly continue to blend exposures that were captured with filters.

Where filters can also help is in cases where there is movement in a scene.  Wind has a nasty habit of blowing branches and leaves, and if these are in the sky portion of a scene, blending multiple exposures will be somewhat tricky, whereas the use of a filter can eliminate that problem.

I hadn’t shot a ‘scape since January, so it was time I headed out.

I decided to shoot the Archibald Fountain in Hyde Park.  I arrived quite early and had some time to sit, think and watch the happenings around me.

I shot some daylight exposures, but naturally that wasn’t the light I sought, and I knew it.  Once the light was right, I shot properly, and this is the result:

Archibald Fountain at Twilight

This image is an HDR image blended from six identically-framed exposures ranging from 2.5 seconds to 80 seconds.

Evening twilight light is calling me.  I’ve done enough dawns for a while.  Evening twilight is much easier to manage.

One thing to note about this location is that achieving a good composition is difficult.  There’s a lot of subject matter at the scene, and a lot of background clutter in the way of trees and other distractions.

In my case, for my composition I wanted the fountain itself (the main subject), the cathedral (secondary subject) and the royal blue twilight sky to all feature prominently.   I also wanted to use typical rule-of-thirds composition, and position the waterfall so that its water spray was placed against the sky rather than the background clutter.

I wasn’t shooting; I wasn’t meeting with like-minded people; and I wasn’t reading or posting much.

Last year I did gain some inspiration, and very recently (only this week) was inspired by the HDR images of one of the members of a photographic forum I frequent.

Consequently I started experimenting with HDR this week, and have had some very pleasing results so far.

After a few shoots and some pleasing imagery, I am convinced I have rediscovered my photographic mojo.  I never felt I lost it; it was just pushed aside for a while, and I knew I’d get back into it; it was just a matter of when rather than if.

In the process of so doing, I’ve found that I have moved away from my usual subject matter of dawn seascapes and models.

I have a new direction, and my photographic work this year will consist of photographing scenes of Sydney during evening twilight, as well as capturing some of the city’s splendid interiors and producing HDR images along the lines of my recent work.

The project is called Blue Sydney.

For now, I’m parking seascapes and models.  I’ve found that I just don’t have a strong drive in those areas at the moment, and frankly, over the past three years I’ve shot a lot of dawn seascapes and plenty of models.  I’m not saying goodbye to these subjects altogether, but they’ll definitely take a back seat to what is currently driving me.

I cannot force myself in a particular direction; I have to wait as long as it takes until something taps me on the shoulder and really makes me take notice.  The new imagery I have created, and am in the process of creating, as well as the broader theme behind it, has done precisely that.  I will go with it until it’s time for a change of scenery.

It’s a new year, and there is some new photographic direction.  Bring it on.

This is one of the images I shot:

Darling Harbour by Twilight

This image has been given HDR treatment with Photomatix Pro, with four exposures used to composite the HDR image.  Post-processing included:

1. increasing overall exposure;
2. manually blending parts of the lightest exposure into certain parts of the scene;
3. increasing the blacks and mid-tones marginally;
4. selective darkening of the sky;
5. increasing the contrast in the sky;
6. increasing the blue in most of the scene;
7. cloning out of a few sensor dust bunnies in the sky;
8. cloning out of some rubbish some cretin had left on the deck;
9. increasing overall contrast; and
10. sharpening.

I also had two ND8 filters and a GND8 filter attached, as I wanted long exposures to blur the clouds and ‘silkify’ the water.

Note that this is my first outdoor HDR image.

Since that article, I have bought a Photomatix Pro licence and produced my first HDR image from a series of seven bracketed images I shot of the same scene inside Sydney’s Queen Victoria Building early this morning.

The images are a stop apart in exposure, ranging from -3EV to +3EV.

Here is the result of my first serious attempt at HDR imaging:

Queen Victoria Building Interior

I hope it does not look overdone.

HDR imaging has a rather bad reputation in photography circles due to the tendency for many people to completely overcook images, which results in halation, psychedelic, over-saturated colours and an illustration-like appearance.

I am interested in photographic realism, and producing what the human eye can naturally see in terms of dynamic range.  No camera can capture in a single exposure the dynamic range of the interior of a cathedral, which consists of deep shadows, rich mid-tones and excessively bright highlights from the light entering the cavernous building from the windows high above.

The cathedral images I saw actually inspired me to try HDR imaging.  I downloaded the trial version of HDRsoft Photomatix Pro, and I’m creating HDR images from bracketed images I’ve already shot.

Early this morning I photographed some interior scenes of Sydney’s Queen Victoria Building (QVB), bracketing seven images (-3EV, -2EV, -1EV, 0EV, +1EV, +2EV and +3EV), and I plan to produce an HDR image from that series of images.

If I can produce a realistic, tonally rich, pleasing image, I will buy a Photomatix Pro license and work on producing more photo-realistic HDR images.

One thing that’s criticially important to me — other than producing pleasing images — is to avoid the over-processing pitfalls exhibited in so many HDR images.

This is a new challenge, and hopefully it will be inspirational and motivational for me, as my photography of recent months has really taken a back seat.

Hitherto, my camera bag rig consisted of a Lowepro Mini Trekker AW and an often-used 12-year-old shoulder bag which needed replacement.  I also have a Crumpler 5 Million Dollar Home (Canon EOS edition) which came with my Canon EOS 5D Mark II, but it’s way too small to be practical, and being bright red, stands out from a thousand miles away.

The Mini Trekker AW is a fantastic backpack, and even accommodates my Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS USM along with camera, Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM and both the 1.4x and 2x tele-converters (even with smaller equipment, I can fit a lot into it), but I’m long past the point of wanting to carry a large-ish backpack around, and particularly when I travel (flying especially), I want a smaller shoulder-carry bag for my camera gear.  It was not unusual for my camera backpack to weigh 10kg when flying inter-state.

Today I brought home a new Lowepro Nova 190 AW.  Oddly enough, this was the bag I was considering the last time I looked into this issue and looked at bags.  I looked at the Lowepro Nova 200 AW, which is longer and deeper, but I found it to be too large, and in terms of size, it wasn’t a great deal different from my Mini Trekker, so I went back to the Nova 190 AW, which is more pleasant to carry around.

While the Nova 200 AW will hold more gear and would undoubtedly be a great bag, I wanted something smaller and less bulky.  The Nova 190 AW will easily hold the camera and three or four fast (ie, f/2 or faster) primes or two f/2.8 zooms.

Important to me was the bag’s ability to hold my Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM.  The salesman in the store grabbed a 5D II and 70-200/2.8L (non-IS, but close enough in size), and the Nova 190 AW easily accommodated that rig, plus had plenty of room for another couple of decently sized primes or zooms.

For those unfamiliar with Lowepro nomenclature, AW designates ‘all-weather’, meaning the bag has an integrated rain cover.  As a seascaper, and one who tends to get rather wet, it’s important that my gear is protected, and the integrated rain cover will easily keep splashes and rain at bay.

I’ve just packed it, and it very nicely holds a good rig of equipment without being too heavy, or increasing in bulk due to the gear I’ve placed inside it.

At the moment, it contains my:

1. Canon EOS 5D Mark II;
2. Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM (including hood);
3. Canon EF 85mm f/1.2L II USM (including hood);
4. Canon TC-80N3 Timer Remote Controller;
5. Lee filter wallet containing GND4, GND8 and two ND8s;
6. Lee filter holder and 82mm adapter ring;
7. Hoya 82mm circular polarising filter;
8. Hoya HMC 82mm ND8 filter;
9. hotshoe-mounted spirit level;
10. spare SanDisk Extreme III 4GB CompactFlash card;
11. Princeton Tec FUEL headlamp + spare batteries;
12. Lenspen;
13. neoprene lens cleaning cloth;
14. plastic bags and ziplock bags; and
15. business cards.

Quite a lot of gear!

All in all, I am very happy with this bag, and I will keep it packed as above for the most part, as it contains my seascaping rig, plus my 85/1.2L II, which I don’t normally carry on ‘scape shoots, but which will give me extra reach when needed.  I can easily swap that for my Canon EOS 135mm f/2L USM if I want even more reach.

It’s just as easy to swap out some gear for a bag of fast primes and flashes.  It’s very versatile, holding a decent rig of equipment without being bulky or too heavy, and when it comes to flying, it consumes a lot less room in the overhead luggage compartments, or could just as easily sit under the seat in front of me.

My Lee filter wallet and the case for the filter holder both consume considerable space.  If I needed more room or wanted to take a 70-200/2.8 as well as my 16-35/2.8L II, I could find an alternative way of transporting the filters, as they are flat sheets of resin, measuring 6×4″ at the most, and could be stacked together with tissue paper separating them, and a ziplock bag containing the lot.

The Nova 190 AW offers plenty of options for configurability and holds a surprisingly large amount of equipment for its size.

It was definitely a good purchase; all I need to do now is head out for a shoot.  With my state of mind over the past three or four months, that’s proven to be more challenging than finding a suitable camera bag!

It’s a good opportunity to see the work of this famous photographer, and priced quite affordably.

Afterwards we may toodle over to the Powerhouse Museum for the 1980s exhibition.  It’s slightly frightening that we’re at a point now where the 1980s can be considered nostalgic!

I’ve been on a hiatus of sorts, and generally disinterested in photographing or being involved with much concerning photography.

On Wednesday night I took Brisbanite Dave to Long Reef, a location on Sydney’s Northern Beaches which has always been a source of pleasing images.  It was a location Dave had not visited before, and with it being one of the best seascape locations in Sydney, he had to experience it.

Unusually for me, this was a dusk shoot (I mostly shoot dawns), but the timing was right as far as the tide (Long Reef really needs a low tide for best results), and we both were secretively (or perhaps not so secretively) happy not to be getting out of bed at 3am.

Here is an image I captured minutes before sunset:

Summer Sunset over Long Reef

I’m very pleased with this image in terms of the sky, the composition and the colours.

This scene alone was well worth the trip.

Here’s the result:

Lonely Path

When Dave and I arrived much earlier in the evening, there was barely a cloud in the sky, and what little cloud existed wasn’t in a particularly useful place.

As the evening progressed, some dramatic cloud formed and blew over where we were shooting, which resulted in a beautiful sunset as well as a tempestuous sky as can be seen here.

This was one of the scenes I photographed there.

Hay Bale in the Approaching Storm

Our timing was splendid indeed, as a large storm system that had been building throughout the day (with huge cumulonimbus formations off-shore) decided to let loose, and the dramatic, moody sky combined with the afternoon light produced a pleasing view.

Plus, I had never seen or photographed hay bales, and this place offered a perfect opportunity.

Here’s how it appeared from my vantage point:

Storm Cell over Manly

Please forgive my lack of dynamic composition, style or execution with this image; I wasn’t there for landscape photography, and was carrying my camera and 35mm prime on the off-chance there would be some snaps at the social gathering.  I didn’t have time, a tripod or the right position to compose the type of landscape image I’d have preferred; I just happened to be there when the sky started getting dramatic, and this grab-shot shows it.

In an almost hilarious act of utter retardation, in Kuwait, the Ministry of Information, Ministry of Social Affairs and Ministry of Finance have decreed that photography should be used for journalism only, and as a result, DSLRs have been banned in public places.

Of course, we all know that DSLRs are more dangerous than a Heckler & Koch MP5 submachine gun, and should be outlawed so that the human race may be saved.  Naturally, the ban does not apply to compact cameras and mobile phone cameras.

Read the Kuwait Times article for more.

Now, I’m not new to shooting landscapes, models or using off-camera lighting, but I always like to attend such workshops, as it rounds out my knowledge and experience, and I get the opportunity to mingle with people I’ve met as well as new people; and I have the potential to come home with some pleasing images.

To my delight, I achieved all of those objectives.

Here are two images from the session.  One features the funky Jackel in her inked glory, and the other features the elegant Chanelle.  The crazy makeup was the work of makeup artist Glitta Supernova.

Saucy Vandal

Star

If you have an interest in off-camera lighting and portraiture and have little or no experience with both, Brent’s off-camera flash workshop is well worth attending.  Even for someone seasoned, there is always the opportunity to refine knowledge or think about things differently.

I haven’t shot much, I haven’t published much, and I haven’t written much, either here or on a photography forum I frequent.

I am not feeling inspired to even read the forum or some unread photography magazines that have been sitting unread for many weeks, and I haven’t been to my camera club for over two months.

I suspect it’s a combination of several factors:

1. it’s that time of year when I find myself very tired and in need of a rest;
2. the fact that I have had and continue to have a fair amount going on both personally and work-wise; and
3. a lack of recent ‘wow-factor’ images that inspire me to shoot more.

It’s probably just a phase that will pass with time.

Last week my laptop’s hard disk decided to fail.

The other day my Canon EOS 5D Mark II’s battery charger also decided it would stop working.

The notion of continuity of operation simply doesn’t apply to me.

When I plug the charger into the mains, connect the battery and switch on the power, nothing happens.  No blinking LED to indicate any status at all.

My battery is at 92% capacity now, but it will eventually deplete and I’ll be out of action again, unless I can get a replacement charger before that time.

It looks like I’ll need to ring Canon and see if a replacement can be provided.

It’s barely five months old.

Fun times.  Again.

It would be nice to experience a week when something doesn’t go wrong.

Back in July a good friend of mine invited me along to photograph the iRace Round 7 meet at Eastern Creek International Raceway.

Now, I’m not particularly interested in sports, know practically nothing about motorsport and have no interest in cars, but it was a good opportunity to try a form of photography I’d otherwise never consider, and with which I’d had no prior experience.  Sometimes it’s good to get radical and step well and truly out of one’s normal comfort zone.

Knowing it was sports and that there’d be distances involved, I went armed with my camera, 70-200/2.8, 300/2.8, 1.4x TC and 2x TC.

Here are two of the better images I shot today:

Chris Farrell at iRace R7 (Eastern Creek)

Andrew MacPherson at iRace R7 (Eastern Creek)

I came away with some key learnings today:

1. motorsport photography is not easy;
2. it’s necessary to shoot a lot of frames;
3. for every good or great image, you’ll shoot hundreds of not-so-good images;
4. windy conditions (50km/h westerly) make shooting with long lenses more challenging, and lens hoods are basically wings;
5. it’s easy to photograph a moving car, but harder to produce a great image of a moving car;
6. images with blurred wheels and blurred backgrounds are much more dynamic; and
7. panning a 4kg camera rig to follow a car moving at 300km/h isn’t all that easy.

The day was a new experience, both photographically and in general.

Yesterday I booked an appointment with the Apple Genius Bar and took my machine there.  I explained to the rep the system freeze I had experienced during an innocuous operation, and that during my diagnosis the disk repair utility decided it could not repair the disk.

He booted my machine off a portable drive, and at that point I was able to copy my most recent important data from my drive to my portable drive.  This meant I didn’t lose a week or two worth of data since the last backup.

The rep then performed some more diagnosis on the disk.  During a disk check, fsck complained about I/O errors, which I knew was not good.  I already figured that the disk had physical problems (bad sectors, perhaps) and that a replacement was a likely outcome.  I was already mentally prepared for the inconvenience of downtime and a lengthy rebuild.

Unfortunately Apple didn’t have in stock a hard disk with the specs I needed (7,200rpm and 500GB).  I asked Apple to order one, but I explained that I’d also try and find one somewhere else.  The rep had no problem with that approach, and told me to inform the Apple rep who’d later call me that I’d no longer need the disk.  It’s a part that isn’t a special order, and would get used eventually by another customer.

Today I sought a new hard disk from a supplier, and found a suitable model for a significantly lower price than Apple was asking.  I picked up the new disk on my way home, replaced the faulty disk and set about the long and tedious process of installing the OS, my applications, configuring the machine and restoring my data from my backups.  I didn’t need Apple to install the disk or the OS, as I could do both of these things myself and rather conveniently avoid the associated service fee.

It’s been an inconvenient, time-consuming experience, but thankfully it wasn’t as bad as it could have been had I not been so religious about backups and redundancy; but in spite of it, I have come away with some key learnings, which I intend to put into practice.

Tonight after returning from an interstate trip my MacBook Pro decided to lock up during a browser bookmarking activity and it refused to boot after I powered it off.

It sits at the grey screen indefinitely. I tried repairing the disk, and the disk repair utility told me the disk could not be repaired. It then stupidly told me to back up my files. Just how I can do that when the machine won’t boot is just too advanced a form of logic for my mind.

Thankfully I have backups of my data. Anything new in the last week or two at most will have been lost, however.

I am now in the situation of having to take my Mac to Apple for repair; ie, replacement of what appears to be a faulty hard disk.

I don’t know when that can happen, how long it will take or what it will cost. Being a Mac, it will not be cheap, and naturally the machine is out of warranty by several months.

Since my Mac laptop is my actual computer (I don’t have a desktop) its state of deadness effectively renders me mostly offline for some unknown period of time.

It means no photos and basically not much activity in any online photographic capacity, which is where much of my online time is spent.

I have an iPhone, so I am not completely offline, but as a surrogate computer it is not at all convenient, and in the time it had taken me to type up to this point, I could have read “War and Peace”.

Once I get my Mac back, I will have the fun job of installing my software and restoring my data, plus all the fiddling and tweaking that it entails.

Oh, and unless Windows XP can natively read OS X’s filesystem format, I won’t be able to access the data on my backup disks by using another machine.

Fun times.

Over and out, sort of.

Last night I had the alarm set to 6:50pm, but it went off one hour earlier.

This afternoon I tried setting it for a specified time, and discovered it didn’t go off at the specified time.

I looked around the Web, and found a discussion about the problem.

There seems to be a bug triggered by daylight savings time taking effect.

One post on a forum suggested setting the timezone to Vladivostok, Russia (GMT +11), but I tried this to no avail.

Another post indicated that the problem occurs with recurring alarms.  If the alarm is set to a one-off occurrence, it signals at the correct time.  When I tried this, the alarm went off when it was supposed to do so.

Until Apple fixes the bug, users have two options, both of which are non-optimal:

1. set recurring alarms to one hour later; or
2. set one-off alarms every time.

Hopefully this advice will help those who have been bitten by the bug, or who will eventually be bitten by the bug, with disastrous consequences.

The image is titled Riedel.  Here it is:

Riedel

As simple as the image appears, so, too, was the work that went into creating it.  It is surprisingly straight-forward.

The image consists of four Riedel wine glasses.

I photographed them inside a light tent, with a blue backdrop.  Using a ruler I aligned them precisely so that I could produce a symmetrical image.

The lighting setup consisted of two desk lamps (one with a tungsten globe and the other with a fluorescent globe), each placed on the outsides of the light tent on the left and right.  This produced the orange glow visible on the stems and bases of the bowls.

The backlighting was achieved with my Canon Speedlite 580EX II positioned outside the light tent, to the rear.  I triggered it wirelessly with a pair of my PocketWizard PLUS IIs.

There was very little post-processing involved: just some simple straightening, cropping, contrast and sharpness adjustments, plus some clone-stamping of a few distracting specular highlights.

A simple setup, but an effective result to my eyes.

Our location for tonight was Mahon Pool and the surrounding rock shelves at Maroubra.  This is a location I’ve shot twice before (incidentally, once with Kajo), but I had not been there at twilight.

I fired off many frames, but have so far published two very contrasting images.  The first conveys a sense of serenity, with soft, pastel colours and implicit stillness.

Mahon Twilight

The other image tells a story much closer to the truth.  The sea was big, and the tide was rising.  I spotted numerous large waves, including a few ten-foot dumpers, which naturally resulted in massive splashes and surges.  I got reasonably wet, too.  Here’s a glimpse of how tempestuous it was:

Wicked and Wild

So, tonight I produced two very different images, with dramatic contrast in look, feel, action, story and even colour; yet both were shot at the same location within the space of 20 minutes.

I came away with some pleasing images.  Let’s see what becomes of dawn tomorrow.

The first is scheduled for early November, but due to high demand it’s looking like he’s already needing to get a second session running.

It’s a one-day intensive workshop with a lot of theory and four model shoots, complete with models, lights and makeup artist.

Check it out his Off-Camera Flash Workshop at his site.

I had never been there at twilight, nor been there when the tide was high; but this is definitely a location best shot at high tide.  During low tide there is a lot of mud.

I wanted silky smooth water and twilight colour, and I’m pleased to say that I achieved both.  Here’s the stand-out image I captured:

Gwawley Bay at Twilight

The sky didn’t put on a magical show, but there was some nice pink cloud in this image which nicely offsets the cool blues and greens.  It’s enough to add interest in the sky.

There was a fair amount of ambient light at the time, and I achieved this shot by stacking my two ND8 filters with my GND4 filter to blur the water.

Exposure was for 30 seconds at f/8 and ISO 100.

For those inclined to buy waterscape images, this image can be purchased at RedBubble.

Beyond the famous Kiama blow hole is a basalt rock headland extending a fair way out and affording some spectacular views from a reasonably high distance from the water.

The conditions that morning were somewhat deceptive.

That weekend, the swell had been quite large, and it had been reported on the news the previous day that teen solo sailor Jessica Watson had returned to Sydney in big seas.  Her little boat was being thrown around even in calmer waters.

On the morning of our shoot, the tide was nearly in.  The swell was a good three metres by my very rough estimate.

I photographed this image from the headland past the blow hole:

Kiama Dawn of Death

It was mere moments after the capture of this image that a very large wave pounded the side of the cliff below and sent a positively huge surge of water up and completely over me.

At the time of impact I was changing a filter, and the ocean was in my sights.  All of a sudden, I saw what was coming, and within seconds I recall a wall of water descending upon me from a great height, almost as if I had stood under a waterfall.  The force of the water was so strong that it nearly knocked me over.

The filter went flying, and both me and my camera rig got completely drenched.  There wasn’t a dry inch on me, and I was stunned by what had just happened.

I was completely caught out by the ocean, and it was an exercise that essentially cost me $4,000 in destroyed equipment, and could have cost me a whole lot more than money.

I earlier said that the conditions were deceptive.  We had been shooting on that cliff for a while, and had seen the ocean and the sets of waves rolling in.  In my image, a look at the rocks on which I was standing shows that there had been no recent contact with water.  We were reasonably high up from the water (10-15 metres by my estimate), so the conditions, despite the large swell and near-full tide, seemed safe.  I spend a lot of time by the ocean, and I certainly didn’t feel I was taking a risk being where I was at that moment.

I sure got it terribly wrong!

I think I was hit by what people call a “rogue wave”.  The ocean’s waves have typical cycles, with a larger set of waves coming in every so often.  Every 30-40 minutes or so, there can be a much larger wave.  Possibly a combination of a reasonably large wave and a faster-moving large wave converged and produced the “rogue” wave which hit me.  My recollection was that I was not directly hit by the wave; rather that the cliff face sustained the impact and what hit me was the splash.  Certainly it had a lot of force, as it nearly threw me off balance.

Such is the power of the ocean, and every now and then it decides to show us humans how small we really are.  Peter was quite lucky, as he was also on the cliff, but was around 10-15 metres back from where I was standing.  He was going to head over to where I was; what great fortune that he didn’t!

After the incident, I decided to get the hell out of there.  The gravity of the situation didn’t really dawn on me (pardon the pun) at first, and my concern was for my gear rather than the fact that I could have been swept off the cliff and down into the tumultuous conditions below, where being pounded against sharp rocks by a large swell was a very real possibility.

Within a short period of time, I knew my camera was written off, and my iPhone, which was on my belt and obscured by the jumper I was wearing, was also written off.  Miraculously my lens survived, and I also found my neutral-density filter which had gone flying out of my hands when I was struck.  It was on the rocks in the receding water a short distance away.

I was cold, wet, tired, shocked, and had a 90-minute drive home knowing that I would be up for around $4,000 to replace my dead camera and phone.

To give you an idea of the conditions that existed that day, here is another image taken earlier, looking out past the location at which I was standing when I was hit.

Illawarra Fury

To give a sense of scale and location, the place where I was located when I was hit was just behind the part of the cliff on the left side of the frame, much closer to the splashing water than the edge of the image.

By my estimate, the height of the rocks on the left from which the which the water cascades, is a good four metres.

That small, vertical protrusion from the distance cliff, silhouetted against the clouds, is a beacon, about the height of a human, if not taller.  It’s been years since I’ve been out there, so I’m only going by memory.  Suffice it to say, the splashes from the ocean were large!

It was quite a dramatic morning that could have been a whole lot worse.

Fatalities:

1. Canon EOS 5D
2. Apple iPhone 3GS 32GB

Survivors:

1. Me
2. Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM
3. Lee filters and filter holder
4. Flash card with images to tell the story

I came out on top after all, but it forced some thinking, and I was inspired to write an article on tips for safe seascape photography.

Hopefully my experience will also be beneficial to the people who read about it, and will remind them that the ocean is very big, and we humans are very small.

Filed under: Outdoor Photography, Seascape Photography Tagged: Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM, Canon EOS 5D, Danger, Dawn, Kiama, Ocean, Safety, Seascape, Water ]]> http://xenedis.wordpress.com/2010/09/17/kiama-dawn-of-death/feed/ 3 xenedis Kiama Dawn of Death Illawarra Fury http://xenedis.wordpress.com/2010/09/12/berrima-shoot-with-sarah/ http://xenedis.wordpress.com/2010/09/12/berrima-shoot-with-sarah/#comments Sun, 12 Sep 2010 01:50:30 +0000 Xenedis http://xenedis.wordpress.com/?p=329 Continue reading →]]> Yesterday I headed down to Berrima in the NSW Southern Highlands for an afternoon portrait session in the country with Sarah.

The theme was country girl, and for a while leading up the shoot I had a particular type of shot and setting in mind.  The challenge was to find a location that resembled what my mind saw.

I’m not sure if I quite found what I pre-visualised, but we did find a nice location five minutes from the centre of town, with a paddock containing horses, countryside hills in the background, a rusted, old barbed-wire fence, some old, rusted metal junk on the other side of the fence, and some distinctingly Australian bush and trees.

I shot a variety of images, but one of the images that I liked the most was this tightly-framed head-shot:

Berrima Girl

I took my lighting gear, but hardly used it.  I specifically wanted natural golden hour light, and I was able to achieve that with my gold-coloured reflector.  I was facing roughly north-north-west when I shot this image, and the rapidly-setting sun was dipping below at 45 degrees to the rear of Sarah’s right.  By having my assistant hold my reflector dish at the right angle, I was able to bounce the beautiful golden light right back at Sarah to make her shine.

I have quite a few more images through which to sort, but this one was the most pleasing of the session, and one, typical of my style, which omits the background.

During my processing of the images from a few recent sessions, I’ve found that I’ve gone for high-contrast black and white treatment.

I think black and white really works well for portraits.  Sometimes colour can be distracting, and if you’re using moody lightning like I often do, black and white treatment, with its removal of the potential distraction in colour, makes shape, form and tone more prominent.

Here are a couple of examples of where I think the black and white treatment has worked well.

First, the talented Jess:

I'm Not That Innocent (B&W)

In this session, I went for dramatic, high-contrast lighting and seduction/sexyness as a theme/feel.  With this sort of lighting and prominent shadow from which the model emerges, the monochromatic treatment highlights shape and form.

Compare this image to the colour version.

When I photographed Sarah recently, even during the shoot I was pre-visualising black and white.  As it turned out, I prefer the images of her when processed in black and white.  Here’s an example image (and one I quite like):

Post-Lyric

While I haven’t published the colour version of this shot (yet), I think the black and white version has more appeal.

In processing portraits lately, I’ve adopted the multi-layered, non-destructive approach I apply to my seascapes, with heavy use of lightening and darkening curves adjustment layers to selectively add pop to certain parts of the image and darken others and/or apply vignetting.

I have taken to using two black and white conversion layers and applying a green filter to the base black and white layer, and an infrared filter to another layer which I apply only to the eyes using masks.  This really makes the eyes stand right out, and the eyes are the most important parts of a portrait (in most cases).

In the future I might publish a post-processing tutorial on one of my recent black and white portraits.

The first, this month, is a landscape/seascape workshop conducted by photography mate Kajo Merkert.  I am an experienced seascaper, and my initial thought when Kajo approached me was that I didn’t need to attend another workshop; but I later thought about it again, and decided to sign up.

While one can be experienced and proficient at some given form of photography, there is always something that can be learned, and it will be interesting to learn about how Kajo approaches seascapes.  There is potential for gains: new ideas, new approaches and new images.

The second workshop I am attending, later in October, is a portraiture workshop held by Emeritus Professor Des Crawley.  Des has a lot of experience, and given that portraiture is my other main photographic subject of interest, it’s a great opportunity to add Des’s knowledge and experience to my own.

So, my advice is to attend workshops whenever the opportunity arises; there’s always something to be learned, and it’s never wise to stop learning.

In an article I published three days earlier I expressed my frustration and dissatisfaction with the state of camera club-level photography competitions.

It was only between 5am and 6am this morning, after looking at the images the others captured, that the relationship between these two separate items entered my mind like a bolt from the blue.

One of the people who attended, Sue, shot some arty, abstract images at Turimetta.  The images honed in on the smaller details rather than showing the type of vista typically depicted of this location.

The rest of us shot more literal, scenic representations of the place.

It then occurred to me that Sue’s images are abstract interpretations that convey more of a message than “here is a beautiful scene, shot very nicely”.  Sue does quite well in club competitions, whereas I generally don’t.

Perhaps what judges want to see is creative interpretations of a subject rather than visually striking pictorial records of a place they can buy on a postcard or photograph themselves with similar equipment in similar conditions.

What also dawned on me when comparing Sue’s images with mine is that she is an artist and I am a technician.  We both recognise that about each other and about ourselves.  Sue shoots freely, somewhat randomly and in a flowing manner, using her creative side to throw a very different view on a subject.  That’s not to say she doesn’t pre-visualise.

My style is structured and precise, and less free-flowing.  I want a particular image or type of image and I set up accordingly.  I don’t consider myself creative or artistic; rather, I consider my images predominantly technical with artistic creativity as a secondary (if present) consideration, and I think my images reflect my mindset and approach, just as Sue’s reflect hers.

Now, crucially, there is nothing wrong with either approach.  I am happy with my lot as it were; but when it comes to competitions, a photographer with my approach is probably not going to be as successful as someone with Sue’s approach.

For me, my photography is what I want it to be, on my terms, and not to be squeezed into some arbitrary mold to win points, either literally or figuratively.  Competitions do not drive my photography; my photography is driven by producing pleasing images, and by whatever reaches out, grabs me and really holds my attention.  I am completely comfortable with that, even if it greatly diminishes my chances of attaining much success in club-level competitions.

Of course, neither school of thought needs to be mutually exclusive, but if one wants to do well in competitions one has to play the game and show the judges what they want to see; and I am not interested in playing games.

The irony of the situation I’ve just described, and my realisation of it, is that Sue also shoots what she wants and how she wants without regard for what some judge will think of it.  Her creative images will generally have more appeal to competition judges, however.

I cannot force myself to photographically conform to someone else’s standard if it is not inherently in my nature or spectrum of interest.  I also cannot easily force myself along a given photographic path.  What I shoot and where I shoot reaches out to me, not the other way around.  I didn’t wake up one day with some vision to be a seascape photographer; it simply evolved over time.  When something appeals to me, I give it a try.  If I like it, I run with it and pursue it to the Nth degree.

The other great irony is that for a photographer who is so structured and particular, where I’m going, when I’m going and how I’ll get there is largely outside of my conscious control.  That’s not entirely a bad thing, and provides something of a counter-balance to the structure and habitual nature of how I do what I do.

Unfortunately my wish for a good sky this morning yet again did not come true; the sky was plain and very bright.

I didn’t shoot much at all, and gave up out of frustration, packing up my camera quite a while before the others were done.  I’ve had a frustrating few days.

The conditions were wrong in every way; the sky sucked, it was blowing a gale, the tide was too high and much of the famous Turimetta gorge was filled with sand, covering the great rocks for which this location is well-known.

However, during the pre-dawn light I did land one gem thanks to some light painting I did with my trusty Maglite 6D torch.  Here it is:

Solid Gold

Thankfully my companions got to experience some dawn seascaping, and for some, a fairly new form of photography.  On parting they expressed to me their thanks and enjoyment of the morning.

All was not lost, and hopefully they are keen to explore this subject more.

Firstly, Rob’s article:

http://www.predatek.com/wowfactorpix/signoftimes.htm

This is well worth a read.  Rob very candidly goes into what he was doing (which was in no way wrong, perverted or insidious), and relates in horror what happened to him when the police officer turned up in response to anonymous, well-intentioned but grossly off-the-mark concerns by members of the public about a middle-aged man photographing children with a telephoto lens.

Rob handled the situation very well, as you’ll see upon reading the article.

Des Crawley responded to that story, and has some very wise and passionate advice to offer on the matter.  Here is his response:

http://www.predatek.com/wowfactorpix/signoftimes_dcrawley.htm

This alone is well worth a read, even if you hadn’t seen Rob’s story.  As it turned out, I read Des’s response before reading the article it was addressing, but the advice is generic enough to stand on its own.

Please, read both of these articles, be aware of what we face (as if you weren’t already), and take on board Rob’s approach to handling situations like what he encountered.

I’ve come back from another competition night at my camera club, where I failed to pick up a single award (I entered three images) despite favourable comments from the judge.

This has been a constant theme this year.  For the last two months (and for most months this year), I’ve also failed to pick up an award.  The last awards I picked up were two merit awards at an inter-club competition in July, where the judge had previously overlooked everything I’d entered in a regular club comp.  Those same images won me merit awards in June (awarded by a different judge).

I am in the A-grade category at a large camera club with an extremely competitive contingency, and I produce strong, comp-grade images (I’m very fussy about what I enter), but I cannot even get in the top 50%.

Of the 27 images I’ve entered this year over a period of nine months, I’ve picked up awards for only four images.

I constantly see very ordinary images getting awards, in spite of less favourable comments from the judges.  Yet images which get good commentary (be they mine or other people’s) get overlooked.  Even the quality of A-grade entries in general has really gone down over the last few months; I’ve seen stronger B-grade images than some of the material that’s appeared in A-grade.

The problem with club competitions is that the goal posts are constantly moving.  There are different judges, with different biases.  On one night I saw one judge pan one of our B-grade members’ images (which in my view was badly composed and motion blurred, and lacked anything visually or conceptually strong), yet the same image appeared in the following month’s competition and won an award from a different judge!

I am thoroughly confused.

Even in an online competition in which I participate just about every week, I have only managed to win once, and it was a tie.  I appear in the top five quite frequently, but cannot manage to get the top spot.

I really have no idea what it takes to succeed in photographic competitions.

So, to that end, given the fact that:

1. there’s no consistent playing field with competitions;
2. my lack of success is seriously discouraging me and eroding my love of this hobby; and
3. the levels of competitions I enter don’t amount to a hill of beans as far as photographic accolades are concerned,

I’ve decided to completely withdraw from entering any competition at any level.

I’m completely over it, and it’s just not worth it.

I used to own one of these, but I later sold it.  I have no need or desire for a 50mm lens, as the focal length doesn’t appeal.

However, given the enormous popularity of this lens, I think it’s worthwhile to point out what’s good about it, as well as what’s bad.

Anyone considering purchasing one can take these simple facts into consideration.

What’s Good?

1. It’s light.
2. It’s small.
3. It’s fast (as in wide aperture).
4. It’s sharp.
5. It’s inexpensive.
6. On an APS-C camera, it provides classic portrait framing.

What’s Bad?

1. Its barrel and mount is plastic.
2. It has no distance gauge.
3. It has no ultrasonic focus motor.
4. It’s slow to focus, and noisy, too.
5. The focus ring is awkwardly positioned and small.
6. It has a five-bladed diaphragm, producing unappealing pentagonal bokeh.

What the lens does provide is a lot of bang-for-buck.  It’s ridiculously inexpensive for what it delivers.  Of course, if one wants a fast 50mm lens and can live with the negative aspects I’ve itemised above, it’s worth having.  Even if the lens turns out to be unappealing after all, it won’t be an expensive learning exercise.

I’ve had another model shoot since, so I have been working on other images from that session, but I came back to an image of Lalita I particularly liked, and completed the processing.

Firstly, here’s the image; and following that, I’ll offer an explanation about why I like the image.

Guitar Grrl

In my mind a few things stand out about this image.

Composition

I typically go for a very tight composition to draw the viewer’s attention to the model rather than the background.  Rarely in my portraits is the background important, and in this case it was a black background, so it was even less important.

Lalita is a little off-centre (I’m not a fan of central composition), and my Les Paul Standard occupies much of the right side of the frame.  I love this guitar, and while the image is in black and white, it still looks good here.

The last thing I like about the composition is Lalita’s feet and dress shoes dangling in the background.  They’re blurred, but not to the point of indistinction.

Black and White Toning

The second thing that stands out is the black and white toning.  I have lately experimented more with high-contrast black and white, and for portraits I love it.  I like white whites, deep blacks and a range of mid-tones.  Black and white removes the distraction that colour sometimes introduces.

For this image I wanted very high contrast with lots of tonality.  The lighting I used helps to achieve this.

Expression

I love Lalita’s expression here.  The expression and mood is the most important thing of all.  Her eyes sparkle, and she looks almost besotted.  As far as poses/expressions, this was one of the best images Lalita delivered on the day.

Filed under: Portraiture Tagged: Female, Girl, Guitar, Lalita, Les Paul, Model, Portrait, Rock Chick ]]> http://xenedis.wordpress.com/2010/08/28/guitar-grrl/feed/ 0 xenedis Guitar Grrl http://xenedis.wordpress.com/2010/08/25/post-processing-tutorial-the-narrabeen-gorge/ http://xenedis.wordpress.com/2010/08/25/post-processing-tutorial-the-narrabeen-gorge/#comments Wed, 25 Aug 2010 13:06:45 +0000 Xenedis http://xenedis.wordpress.com/?p=249 Continue reading →]]> In July I headed to Narrabeen for a Sunday dawn shoot.

Narrabeen and nearby Turimetta is a location I’ve photographed a few times before, but on this day the sky was moody.

One of my standout captures of the morning is The Narrabeen Gorge.  Here it is:

The Narrabeen Gorge

On this particular morning the conditions were perfect for photographing this fantastic gorge, into which water from the oncoming waves dramatically flows, producing thrilling splashes and photogenic cascades of water.  Combined with the moody sky, it was an image I had to have.

In this article I will explain the post-processing techniques I applied to this image.

Firstly, some details about the capture phase and equipment:

• Camera: Canon EOS 5D Mark II
• Lens: Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM
• Filter: Lee 0.9 (three-stop) graduated neutral-density
• Focal length: 16mm
• Shutter speed: 0.4 seconds and one second
• Aperture: f/8
• Sensitivity: ISO 200

The final image is a blend of three exposures.  I shot many frames of the same composition, as there was much action and I wanted to give myself the most options in terms of interesting water movement.

The three images I used for the final image were exposed as follows:

1. ISO 200, f/8 and one second;
2. ISO 200, f/8 an 0.4 seconds; and
3. ISO 200, f/8 an 0.4 seconds.

As can be seen, the settings for the latter two exposures are identical.  Here is where there was different water movement, and I later blended the water from both images to create a more appealing composition.  I will explain that later in this article.

The earlier exposure was longer, and while exposure was not a problem in these conditions, as is my usual practice I under-exposed and over-exposed the scene marginally to maximise my potential for capturing detail.  I used the longer exposure to brush in rock details in the foreground.

As part of this tutorial there are two screen captures to view:

1. my raw source images (after initial processing in the raw converter); and
2. my Photoshop layer stack (showing my various adjustment layers).

These will both be helpful when you read about the processing I did.

Here are my raw source images:

The Narrabeen Gorge - Source Raw Images

And here is my Photoshop layer stack:

The Narrabeen Gorge - Photoshop Layer Stack

Now, onto the processing.

Step 1 – Raw Conversion

I loaded my raw images into Adobe Camera Raw and made the following adjustments:

• Camera Profile: Camera Standard
• White Balance: Auto
• Clarity: +60
• Sharpening Amount: +65

I then loaded the three raw images in Adobe Photoshop CS4.

Step 2 – Distortion Correction and Horizon Straightening

A 16mm lens (even a pro-grade lens) will generally result in the horizon bowing, especially if you compose as per the rule of thirds as I mostly do, and your horizon is therefore towards the edge of the frame.

When shooting in the dark and looking through a viewfinder (even a full-frame viewfinder) or live view screen with no grid as reference lines for straightness, the horizon is often very slightly crooked, by a matter of maybe only half a degree to two or three degrees.  I am quite fussy, so I correct that as much as possible.

I fired up the Lens Correction filter (Filter -> Distort -> Lens Correction) and tweaked the barrel distortion and horizontal perspective sliders to correct the image as much as possible.

I cropped away as minimally as possible the undesirable borders and edges introduced as a result of image rotation.

Step 3 – Merging the Source Images

At this stage I had three separate, horizon-corrected images.  I needed all three images to be merged into the one file, with each image occupying its own layer.

I decided to use the lighter exposure as the base or background layer.  I then selected the first darker exposure, copied it and pasted it on top of the lighter image.  I repeated the process with the other darker exposure.

I now had a single image with three layers:

1. the lighter base layer; and
2. the first darker layer with particular water detail; and
3. the second darker layer with different water detail.

The next step was to start manually blending the three exposures.

Step 4 – Water Blending

I now had desirable detail from three images.

In the base layer I wanted the lighter (but not over-exposed) detail in the rocks.  There is no cascading water in the base layer, so I added a layer mask to the second layer (ie, the first water cascade image), inverted it (ie, changed it to black) and brushed in much of the detail from the second layer, including the darker, moodier sky, and the cascading water.

That first darker exposure contains some nice water cascades, but the jagged rock positioned left of the middle of the frame is lacking water.  In a later exposure I had captured water cascading off this rock, and I wanted that detail in my final image, so I added a layer mask to that third layer, inverted the mask and brushed in only the water that was cascading off that particular rock.

The result was now a more dramatic, fuller image with interesting water movement throughout the scene.

Step 5 – Contrast Boost

The next layer I added was a curves adjustment layer to boost the contrast.  I used the Linear Contrast preset, which subtly adjusts the highlights and shadows without going overboard.  This simple adjustment boosted contrast and colour intensity in a subtle, but noticeable way.

Step 6 – Sky and Water Darkening

While I had a decent-looking image, there was still more to be done, and what I wanted at this point was some darkening in the sky and water to create more mood and increase the contrast and the drama.

To achieve this I added another curves adjustment layer and dragged the curve downwards to apply uniform darkening by about a stop or a stop and a half of exposure value.  Because I wanted that darkening only in certain areas (namely the lighter part of the sky around the sun, and the water in the mid-foreground, I added a layer mask, inverted the mask to disable the effect, and then brushed in the darkening in the areas where I wanted it applied.

Step 7 – More Sky Darkening

I wanted a moodier sky, so I added another curves adjustment layer, dragged the curve down, added a layer mask, inverted it, and then brushed in the darkening effect in the sky portion only, especially in the lighter areas to the right of the scene.

Step 8 – Sky Lightening

In the previous step I darkened the sky using a curves adjustment layer.  Why, pray tell, would I then lighten the very sky I had darkened?

Quite simply, I considered the sky occupying the left side of the scene to be too dark, so it needed lightening.  It is a good idea to keep lightening and darkening (or dodging and burning) actions in separate layers for ease of management.

In this case, I wanted a more evenly-toned sky, so almost identically to the previous step, I added a curves adjustment, but this time I dragged the curve upwards to lighten the sky.  I added a layer mask, inverted it and brushed in the lightening effect only in the portion of the sky I considered to be too dark.

Step 9 – Rock Lightening

In this step I added another curves adjustment layer to lighten the rocks and bring out some more detail.  To my eyes the rocks were a little on the dark side — not too dark to retain detail, but dark enough to warrant mild lightening.

On my layer mask, I brushed in the effect of a lightening curve to bring out those rock details a little more.

Step 10 – Rock Warming

Those who are familiar with the light at various times of the day will recognise that dawn light, especially under cloud cover, is very cool in colour temperature.  To my eyes the rocks were tonally too cool, so I wanted to inject some warmer colour into them.

To achieve this, I added a photo filter adjustment layer.  I chose the Warming Filter (85), which is a nice, warm orange, dialled in 41% density, and brushed in the warming effect onto the rocks via an inverted (ie, black) layer mask.

At this point the image was looking better, and within a predominantly cool blue scene there was some warmth to those rocks to balance the warm sliver of light on the horizon.

Step 11 – Saturation Increase

I tend to often apply selective saturation adjustments to my seascape images, as it gives them more visual appeal and more life.

I created a new hue/saturation adjustment layer, and as per most of the steps performed thus far, I added a layer mask and inverted it.  The benefit of inverting a layer mask is that by default the effect is not visible due to the black mask, which blocks the effect.  I learned a while back that it is easier to brush an effect in than globally apply it and then, somewhat counter-intuitively, brush the effect out of areas where it is not wanted.

In this case I brushed in the increased saturation (+30 on the slider) in the sky and rock areas; the white water was left untouched.

Step 12 – Colour Balance

At this point I still found the image too cool in colour temperature, so I decided to tweak the colour balance globally.

I added a colour balance adjustment layer and started fiddling with the sliders until I achieved a result that was visually appealing.

I worked only on the mid-tones, and settled on the following adjustments:

• Cyan-Red slider: +12
• Magenta-Green slider: 0
• Yellow-Blue slider: -10

In short, I’ve added red and decreased blue by very similar amounts.

The image was looking much more tonally even at this point, and had a warmth which offset the cool blue inherent in the scene in those conditions.

Step 13 – Vignetting

One technique used by landscape/seascape photographers like Peter Eastway and Brent Pearson is the use of a vignette to draw the eye into the scene.  Within the last few months I have found this simple but subtle treatment to be very effective in my seascapes, and it has now become a regular part of my seascape image processing.

To create a darker edge to draw the viewer into the action, I added a curves adjustment layer, dragged the curve down, added a layer mask, inverted the mask, and lastly brushed in the effect around the edges.  I used fairly aggressive opacity to darken those extremities.

Step 14 – Sharpening

My post-processing is, for the most part, non-destructive, in that the adjustments I make via adjustment layers do not modify the original pixels; the effects are merely stacked on top of the source image(s).

In just about all cases, my final step is destructive, but I perform it non-destructively (yes, it sounds crazy, but bear with me).  How I achieve this is by creating a new layer which is a composite of all layers beneath it.  At this stage I already had 12 layers.

The way to create a new layer consisting of all lower layers is to:

1. select the top layer first (this is very important); and
2. press Apple-Option-Shift-E (on a Mac) or Ctrl-Alt-Shift-E on a PC.

I then had a new layer combining all of the previous post-processing I did.

Using the selection tools, I selected all areas other than the sky and applied the smart sharpen filter at 40% or 50% to boost the gritty sharpness of these areas.

All done!

And that concludes my post-processing tutorial on The Narrabeen Gorge.

He’s learned of a Web-based tool called SkippySky Astro-Weather Forecast, which shows a visual map of cloud cover, including percentages, with breakdown of cloud cover (ie, high, middle, low and total).

This tool might prove very handy for seascape/landscape photographers who, like myself, long for good clouds in the sky.

Check it out at http://www.skippysky.com.au/Australia.

Making use of SkippySky could certainly avoid the immense frustration of turning up somewhere to be assaulted with a plain sky which is utterly boring and extremely difficult to photograph when facing the east in the morning.

Kajo’s first workshop is scheduled for September, 2010.  He will announce dates shortly, so keep an eye on his blog for more details.  His blog contains full details of what the workshop will cover.

If you are a keen on landscape/seascape photography and want to learn from someone who produces great images, check it out.

One of the models I photographed was Jess.  We decided to do a sexy/sultry theme, and she worked hard, struck some great poses and allowed me to capture pleasing images.

I shot a lot of pictures of Jess, but this one would be one of the standout images from the session:

The Look of Lust

This look says it all.

I asked Jess to place the tassels in her mouth, along the lines of the rose stem seen in some sexy portrait images.

The angle, the pose, the look in her eyes and the composition all make this image really work for me.

Lighting was provided by a couple of Canon Speedlite 580EX flash units, with the main light at camera right being shot through a softbox, with a shoot-through umbrella for fill from the left.

My portraits tend to be tight head-and-shoulders shots, but I have some wider shots of Jess which I’ve yet to process and publish.

Finally after both of our schedules aligned, I took her into the studio today for a rock chick-themed shoot as an introductory session.

I plan to do a specific outdoor shoot with her as soon as we can. I’ve pre-visualised what I want, explained it to her, and she’s quite keen; but for a first meet I figured a studio shoot would be a good approach and logistically easier.

Here are two preliminary images from our session.

Are You Gonna Go My Way?

I really like the pose Lalita struck here.  I wanted attitude, and the aviator sunglasses she brought (which aren’t just props — she was wearing them when I picked her up) really suited the theme.

I was very conscious of the issue I’d have with softboxes reflecting in Lalita’s aviators, but I like the result here, and it gives the image more pop in my eyes.

The guitar is mine.

In my portraits, I like tight head shots which show the model’s face, so here’s a tightly framed shot, with attitude and aviators to go:

The Lovely Lalita

I’ll post more images at a later date.

Some people might be thinking “Wait, you’re a seascaper — why do you need lighting equipment?”, and fair enough; but seascaping is not all I do; I also shoot portraits and still-life, and for both of these, good lighting is important.

So, without further ado, here is a breakdown.

Flashes

I use two flash/strobe units, almost always off the camera.  I don’t like on-camera flash, as it is harsh, and frontal lighting obscures texture and form, and is unflattering on people.

The two flash units I have are the Canon Speedlite 580EX and Canon Speedlite 580EX II.  With a guide number of 58, these are the most powerful flash units Canon offers.  I tend to use the mark II more, but in most cases I shoot with both flashes, using one as a key light and the other for fill.

Umbrellas

I have three 42″ umbrellas in my rig:

1. white translucent (shoot-through);
2. white reflective; and
3. silver and gold reflective.

I use my shoot-through and silver/gold umbrellas mostly.

The benefit of a shoot-through umbrella is that the light is diffused rather than bounced; it is softer and created a mood reminiscent of window lighting. Unlike a conventional umbrella off which the light is bounced, the outside convex surface of the umbrella is facing the subject, and the light shoots through the translucent material.

Of my reflective umbrellas, I use my silver and gold umbrella the most.  The benefit of the dual-colour umbrella is that the gold material produces warm tones, which is great when shooting people.

Here’s an example of one of my portraits in which I used only my gold and silver umbrella:

I'm Looking at You, Mister

In this shot of model Stacey Reibelt, I placed my stand-mounted Canon Speedlite 580EX II to the left, 2.5m away and at a 45-degree angle.  On the flash I dialled in 1/8th power and 24mm zoom.

The ambient light was quite overcast and flat, but with a silver and gold umbrella I was able to create the appearance of afternoon golden sunlight.

Softbox

A more recent addition to my lighting rig was a softbox, albeit a small one at 40 x 30cm.  I picked this up in Melbourne incidentally, but have used it for a few shoots.

My softbox is a Photoflex LightDome Q39 XTX-20XTXS.

Like a shoot-through umbrella, a softbox contains translucent material through which the light is projected.  The difference between a softbox and a shoot-through umbrella is that a softbox contains black material on the rear, so there is no light spill.

The larger the softbox, the more soft and even the light.  I’ve had success using my softbox for model shoots as a key light, with an umbrella serving as a fill light or a hair light.

Light Stands

I have two flashes, and therefore two light stands.

The light stands I have are excellent, and I cannot recommend these highly enough.

The brand is LightPro, and these are 3.1m air-cushioned stands.  At 3.1m, they have plenty of height (more than I need most of the time), and the air-cushioning prevents the flash from impact in the event that a column drops suddenly after loosening the column screws.

These aren’t small sands, but they are light, have a good spigot, and have the capability to mount horizontal tubing for backdrops.  The spigot itself can also be positioned such that is parallel with the ground as opposed to the regular perpendicular arrangement.  It simply provides more options.

Triggers

What I have not discussed so far is how I trigger my flashes.  I use wireless (radio-frequency) triggers.  I have three PocketWizard PLUS II transceivers, which are industry-standard, very reliable, work at distances of up to 1,600ft, and offer four frequencies.

These units, being transceivers, can both send and receive signals.  Other wireless trigger systems work on the basis of a receiver connected to the flash, and a transmitter mounted on the camera’s hotshoe; PocketWizards do both in one unit.

I have three, as I need one on the camera, and one connected (via a PC sync cable) to each flash.

The only negative thing that can be said about PocketWizards is that they are very expensive.  I paid $350 for each unit, so it’s quite an expensive proposition to buy three in one hit, which was what I did.

What that money buys is reliability and peace of mind.  I have never had a problem with a PocketWizard; these units just work every time, and do not misfire.

One further down-side is that these units do not support ETTL.  I don’t consider that a show-stopper, as I shoot my flashes in manual mode and have always done so when working with off-camera lighting; but ETTL support could be handy.

Reflector/Diffuser Dish

Also in my rig is a Glanz 80cm five-in-one reflector dish.  This unit, which folds down to a 30cm (or thereabouts) diameter, contains a central unit containing white translucent material, and a reversible cover.  Each side of the cover contains a different surface, with black, white, gold and silver.  This gives the most flexibility, and the black material can be used as a backdrop when shooting table-top still-life images, or a flag to prevent light spill.

I also use it for a technique I’ve introduced to other photographers, and what I call “swooshing”.  The technique involves rapidly waving the dish near a model to make her hair blow up or back in the wind.  Here’s an example:

Terror

It can yield some interesting results.

Light Tent

The last item of lighting equipment I use is a light tent.  Mine is a Glanz 80 x 80 x 80cm tent made from a white translucent material.  A light tent works by creating a large, enveloping light source, with the illumination coming from lights positioned outside it, shooting through the fabric.  The light is bright and soft, and with backing fabrics it’s possible to create a seamless backdrop.  A light tent is great for product photography.

So, there’s a summary of my lighting equipment.  I’ll discuss the rest of my equipment as part 3 in a subsequent article.

Tonight I broke with tradition and shot at dusk.  Sure, I’m still incredibly fussy about light and tend to avoid the bright, glary stuff which is present for most daylight hours, but dusk produces some pleasing results and is much easier on the system (no 4am starts).

Some friends and I headed to Camp Cove in Watson’s Bay, and shot this hut-like structure as the day’s light was rapidly fading behind the city in the distance.

Camp Cove at Twilight

It was an enjoyable night, spent consuming cheese, crackers and wine, and having plenty of laughs.

I brought my trusty Maglite 6D torch and light-painted the hut, which would otherwise have appeared in silhouette.  My Maglite’s batteries are somewhat elderly, so the light’s intensity has diminished considerably, as well as taken on a warmer tone.

I think the warm tone nicely complements the cool wintery blues in the sky and water.

An enjoyable night, and an image different to my usual offering of dawn seascapes.

Fire or Flood? was my image of the night, created as a result of a collaborative effort at the capture phase.  Here it is:

Fire or Flood?

In this article I will explain how I created this image, from the capture phase to the post-processing.

Capture Phase

Firstly, this image is a composite of four images of identical exposure, selectively blended together in post-production to result in what you see.  More on the post-processing later.

The lighting effects were all produced in camera.

Here is a view of the four exposures I used to create the final image:

Fire or Flood? - Source Raw Images

Each image was captured with a Canon EOS 5D camera and Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM lens at 16mm.

The camera was mounted on a tripod, and each exposure was triggered with my Canon TC-80N3 remote shutter release.

For each of the four images, I’ll now explain:

1. the exposure settings;
2. how the lighting was created; and
3. how the image would be used in post-processing.

First Image

The first image (top left) was exposed for 13 seconds at f/8 and ISO 200.  The purpose of this white-light image is for a base exposure.  The idea is to paint the entire scene with light, and use it later in post-processing for texture details.  While this is considered the base image, when I processed these images, I didn’t use it as my base layer, but the image turned out to be quite important.  (More on that later.)  The light source was a 48W fluorescent light globe powered by 240V AC in a belt pack I was wearing.  The 240V AC was supplied by a 350W inverter taking a DC feed from a 12V rechargeable battery.

Second Image

The second image (bottom left) was exposed for 60 seconds at f/5.6 and ISO 200.  This was to be one of the creative lighting exposures to be used for the dramatic lighting in the final image.  There are three interesting elements in this image: the fire, the night sky with blurred cloud movement, and the warm glow on the surrounding concrete as a result of the fire.  I created the fire by going into the room on the left of the corridor and spraying a can of deodorant into a cigarette lighter for two or three seconds.

Third Image

The third image (top right) is another variation on the second image.  It was also exposed for 60 seconds at f/5.6 and ISO 200.  One of the other participants in the shoot (there were four of us in the group) took the can of deodorant and cigarette lighter into another room on the right, and sprayed flames all throughout the doorway during the minute-long exposure.

Fourth Image

The fourth and final image (bottom right) was quite fun to create, and very dramatic on camera.  Like the second and third images, it was exposed for 60 seconds at f/5.6 and ISO 200.  The funky blue lighting, which resembles smoke, was created by myself and another member of the group using a length of electro-luminescent (EL) wire.  This is a fibre optic-like neon cable which emits a rich blue light.  When it is wiggled around, resembling the movement of a slithering snake, it produces a smokey, misty effect during a long exposure.  The two of us wiggled the EL wire near to the ground from the front of the scene to the top of the stairs in the distance.

More About the Images

I actually captured many more exposures using the fluorescent light, a length of red EL wire, and camera flashes with pink gels attached.  I manually fired these inside the windows on the left to produce a rich pink glow from behind the bars.  However, I didn’t use any of those other exposures for the final image.

What’s important to note is that during some of the exposures, I was either in the scene and visible to the camera, or in the scene but hidden from the camera’s view.

For the base exposure, I stood behind or beside my camera when I painted the scene with light.  In this image the bright light source was not visible to the camera.  The fluorescent light in an otherwise pitch-dark scene is very bright, hence the shorter exposure time and narrower f/stop.  The exposure was around one eighth of the other three exposures.

For the fire shots, myself and another photographer were hidden inside the rooms along the moody corridor.

For the smokey shot with the EL wire, another photographer and myself were walking along the corridor in plain view of the camera.  We did not appear in the image because it was a long exposure and we were constantly moving.

The fire and EL wire images are examples of images where the light source is visible to the camera, as is the effect.  In the base exposure, only the effect of the light source, rather than the light source itself, is visible.

And that brings me to the end of the capture phase.

The capture phase was all about creatively illuminating a scene with a variety of lighting effects during multiple long exposures.

Now, onto the post-processing.

Post-Processing

I loaded my four images into Adobe Camera Raw for raw conversion (where I also applied white balance, clarity and saturation adjustments) and then dropped them into Photoshop.

Let’s first look at my layer stack, and then I’ll explain the different layers.

Here is my Photoshop layer stack:

Fire or Flood? - Photoshop Layer Stack

First Layer – Fire in the Doorway

I used the third image (fire on the right) as my bottom layer.  In hindsight, looking at how my post-processing has developed since then, and considering that I only used a small portion of that frame, it didn’t make sense to use that as the bottom layer, but at the time it probably did make sense.

Second Layer – Lightening Curve

As can be seen above, the second layer is a curves adjustment layer whose visibility is switched off (no eye icon to the left).  That layer was a lightening curve to brighten the flames on the left and the surrounding walls illuminated by the flames, but I decided it was too much, having lost details in the flames, so I didn’t use it.

Third Layer – Fire in the Hall

The third layer is the second image, containing the fire on the left of the scene.  I used almost the entire image, but masked away the flames on the right, which I preserved from the bottom layer.  See why the bottom layer doesn’t make sense in that capacity?

At this point I had a composite of the two exposures containing the flames.

Fourth Layer – Punching the Sky

The fourth layer is a curves adjustment layer, which I used to add punch to the sky.  I masked out everything except the sky and applied a reasonably dramatic S-curve to boost the saturation and contrast in the sky and clouds.

Fifth Layer – Smokin’

The fifth layer is my blue smoke exposure.  I added a layer mask, inverted it, and brushed in only the blue “smoke” from that exposure.

At this point my composite image consisted of the two fire images blended with the blue smoke image.  It was starting to look exciting, but there was more work to be done.

Sixth Layer – Got the Blues

The problem I had at this point was that the rich blue in the “smoke” was a completely different blue to the rich blue in the sky.  Two different blues, which are both appealing, yet distinctly different, causes what I consider to be a visual clash.

To get around this, I added a hue/saturation adjustment layer and created a clipping mask to bind the layer mask to the previous layer, in which only the smoke was visible.  This eliminated the need to manually create another mask, as I’d already done the work previously.

I adjusted the hue setting to -17 to bring the blue more in line with the blue in the sky.

Seventh Layer – White Light

Remember the white-light base exposure I made with the 48W fluorescent light?  Here’s where I made use of it.

Up to this point, I had a blend of three exposures: two containing the fire and warm glow on the surrounding concrete, and one containing the blue “smoke”.

The problem was that there was a very dark, detail-less mass of black on the wall near the far left edge of the frame.  That wall occupies most of the left third of the frame, so it was a significant amount of darkness.

There was also considerable darkness in the concrete at the top right of the frame, as well as the rusty beam in the centre of the image.

Using the white-light exposure and a layer mask, I brushed in the rich, gritty textures I had captured in that base exposure, which achieved two things: firstly, it eliminated the large expanses of black throughout the image, and secondly, it provided great texture detail which shows the grittiness and character of Middle Head Fort.

Eighth Layer – White Curve

The next adjustment I made was the addition of a curves adjustment layer to tweak the white light I had brushed into my image in the previous layer.  I again made use of the clipping mask feature to re-use the layer mask I had created in layer seven, so as to apply the adjustments onto the concrete and beam where I had brushed in my white light.

I applied a gentle, semi-straight S-curve to marginally darken the white light textures and pop the contrast.

Ninth Layer – A Handy Removal

My ninth layer was somewhat necessary, as my hand (and the deodorant spray can) was captured when I was creating flames in the left-most window.

I added a new layer and then made use of the clone tool to remove (as best I could) my hand and the spray can.  I did this in a separate layer so as to maintain my non-destructive processing workflow.

I think I did a bad job of the cloning, but it wasn’t an easy task, and while it’s certainly not perfect to my eyes (and probably wouldn’t be noticed unless you looked hard or knew it was there), it looks less obvious than it would have done had I not performed the cloning.

Tenth and Final Layer – Dodge and Burn

The final layer of this image is another plain layer, whose blend mode I changed to soft light.  I then used the white and black brush with 10-20% opacity to dodge and burn respectively.  I lifted the brightness of some areas and darkened others.

Fait Accompli

This brings me to the end of the making of Fire or Flood?.  I hope you have enjoyed learning about what went into the production at this image, both behind (and in front!) of the camera, and behind the computer screen.

1. Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM; and
2. Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM.

Very frequently in photography forums, the issue of which lens to choose arises — often enough that it is worth an entire article to break down each lens’s strengths and weaknesses in order to provide an objective assessment.

For some people, choosing between these two lenses is quite difficult, so hopefully the information I provide will help people make the choice that suits their circumstances.

Firstly, let’s look briefly at the pros and cons of each lens before going into finer detail.

Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM – Pros

• one-stop wider aperture (f/2.8 vs. f/4);
• smaller minimum focus distance (0.38m vs. 0.45m); and
• lens hood size suits all focal lengths (more on this later).

Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM – Cons

• larger;
• heavier;
• more expensive; and
• has less telephoto reach at the long end.

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM – Pros

• smaller;
• lighter;
• less expensive;
• has longer telephoto reach; and
• has image stabilisation.

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM – Cons

• one-stop narrower aperture (f/4 vs. f/2.8);
• larger minimum focus distance (0.45m vs. 0.38m); and
• lens hood is fixed and designed for the 24mm focal length.

A word of warning: do not look at the number of items in the above lists and draw the erroneous conclusion that more points on the positive side means the lens is a better choice; it is far from that simple, and as is the case with so much in photography, one size does not fit all.

Before going further, let’s look briefly at some features common to both lenses:

• 77mm filter thread;
• non-rotating objective element;
• weather sealing;
• rugged construction;
• constant aperture across all focal lengths;
• fast, quiet, ultrasonic focus motor;
• inner/rear focusing;
• full-time manual focus;
• aspherical elements (minimum of two); and
• distance gauge.

Let’s now look in further detail at the differences between the features of both of these lenses.

Aperture

The 24-70 offers a brighter f/2.8 aperture (the brightest available in any Canon or Nikon zoom lens), whereas the 24-105′s widest aperture is a stop narrower at f/4.

For some people, f/2.8 is the be-all and end-all.

A brighter aperture offers a few advantages; namely:

1. the ability to achieve a shutter speed twice as fast;
2. easier focusing and composing in lower light; and
3. more diffused background blur.

Depending on the type of photography, the need for a faster shutter speed may be paramount.  Such photography includes bands, stage performances, weddings or any other photography of moving subjects (mostly people) in dimly lit environments.

Now, the difference between f/2.8 and f/4 is one stop.  It could be said that simply increasing the camera’s ISO sensitivity by one stop is a legitimate work-around, and in some cases it is.  Current DSLRs have much better noise handling than earlier generations, and even at ISO 1,600, some cameras produce very decent results.

Depending on the ambient light, the ISO adjustment may be insignificant (eg, 200 to 400), but when shooting at higher ISO settings such as 1,600, the difference between one ISO setting and the next may be quite significant in terms of sensor-induced noise.

While the same exposure at a particular shutter speed can be maintained by increasing the ISO by one stop to compensate for the one-stop narrower aperture, one thing this cannot do is increase the diffusion of the background blur.

Depth of field is affected by three things: aperture, focal length and subject distance.  Where the focal length and subject distance remain the same, the aperture is the differentiating factor, and the difference between f/2.8 and f/4, especially at longer focal lengths, can be quite significant.  If background blur is an important quality, the 24-70 would be a better choice.

Similarly, for low-light shooting where people are subjects, the 24-70 would be a better choice.

Focal Length Range

Without a doubt, the 24-105 is the superior lens if having more reach in a single lens is important to the shooter.

However, many people who own a 24mm L zoom also own a 70-200mm L zoom (especially one of the f/2.8 offerings), so to those people, having an extra 35mm may not be a big draw-card.

Where the 24-105′s extra (and quite useful) focal range is particularly beneficial is for travel photography.  Some travellers may be quite constrained by size and weight, and when travelling, particularly on a non-photographic trip, swapping lenses may not be ideal.

We all know that the main benefit of buying an inter-changeable lens-based camera system is the ability to change lenses, and that buying one lens and never changing it is akin to buying a convertible sports car and always driving with the roof closed; but there are some circumstances in which changing lenses is either impractical or completely undesirable.

A wet or dusty environment is a classic case.  When it comes to travel, a traveller may be in a tour group or need to be able to move quickly, and changing lenses could waste time and delay people, or, worse from a photographic perspective, cause the shooter to miss a time-critical shot.

For other people shooting in environments not constrained by size, weight or time, having a separate telephoto zoom lens in the 70-200mm range may mean that the extra 35mm of reach in the 24-105 is not a highly attractive feature that would tip the scales in favour of the 24-105.

Size, Weight and Cost

For many people, the issues of size, cost and weight are significant enough to tip the scales in favour of one lens over the other.

Let’s look at the differences between size and weight.

The 24-70 weighs 950 grams, whereas the 24-105 weighs 670 grams.  For a lens of this size, that 280 gram difference is substantial.

The 24-70′s maximum length is 123.5mm, whereas the 24-105 has a maximum length of 107mm.  1.65cm probably doesn’t make a huge amount of difference, but the 24-70 is noticeably longer.  It is surprisingly narrower, but by a very small amount (83.2mm vs. 83.5mm).

Cost is variable depending on where you buy and when, but without getting into specifics, the 24-70 is generally going to be $400-500 more expensive in the Australian market.  This may be the most significant factor for some people in choosing between these two lenses.

Image Stabilisation (IS)

The presence of Canon’s image stabilisation in the 24-105 adds complexity to the decision-making process when evaluating these two lenses.

What IS allows is for up to three stops of hand-holdability.  This means that it is theoretically possible to achieve the same shutter speed an f/1.4 lens would allow, and achieve a sharp shot, which makes the 24-105 more desirable than the 24-70.

What’s crucially important to understand about image stabilisation is that it is only useful for static subjects; it does not freeze subject movement.  The only way to freeze subject movement is with a sufficiently fast shutter speed, which requires more light, or more light-gathering ability.

When shooting static subjects, IS is fantastic.  When shooting moving subjects in low light, the only way to achieve a sharp image is with more light, either from flashes, a brighter aperture, a higher ISO sensitivity or any combination of those three factors.

Some people claim that IS is not useful on standard or wide focal lengths.  I disagree.  I believe that IS is useful at any focal length.  It is to be remembered that not all photographers have good lens handling technique, and that a shutter speed for one person may be too slow for another to achieve a sharp image.

IS also helps when instability is introduced by external factors, such as gusty wind, or being on a boat or jetty which may move with the water.  IS can also be beneficial when standing on uneven ground or when otherwise placed in an unstable or awkward position on order to land the shot.

If IS is more important than light-gathering ability and subject motion in low light is not a consideration, the 24-105 makes for a better choice.

Minimum Focus Distance

There is an 8cm difference between the minimum focus distance (MFD) of both lenses, with the 24-70 having a shorter MFD at 38cm.

While neither lens could remotely be considered a macro lens (the 24-70 has a maximum magnification of 0.29x at 70mm, and the 24-105 has a maximum magnification of 0.23x at 105mm), it is possible to get quite close to a subject for a larger view.

To that end, the 24-70 is the superior lens because it allows the lens to be closer to the subject, increasing the apparent size of the subject in relation to the frame.  Additionally, the f/2.8 aperture allows a narrower depth of field (if this is important to the image).

Lens Hoods

It might seem strange to discuss lens hoods when comparing two lenses, but the differences between the hoods of both 24mm L zooms are significant enough to warrant particular mention, notably because the 24-70′s lens hood mechanism is unique to that lens.

The 24-70 has a very large hood that is designed for the 70mm telephoto focal length.  How does it work at 24mm?  Good question.  The hood attaches to the lens barrel, and not the rim of the lens which extends and contracts.

The 24-70 uses a “reverse-zoom” feature, where the lens is physically longest at its shortest focal length.  To zoom out to 24mm, the barrel extends.  To zoom in to 70mm, the barrel contracts.

Because the hood is not attached to the moving part of the barrel, when zooming out to 24mm, the objective element extends towards the end of the lens hood, and is positioned at a suitable distance from the edge of the lens hood to match the 24mm focal length.

When the lens is zoomed in to 70mm, the objective element is recessed deeply, and the hood therefore provides a greater depth suitable for that focal length.

This is unique to the 24-70; no other zoom lens with an extending barrel (including the 24-105) in the Canon EF lens lineup incorporates this clever design feature.

Because of the lack of this design in the 24-105, its hood is only useful (for preventing flare and increasing contrast) at 24mm.  It is a shallow hood, meaning that at 105mm, it is not useful or suitable for the focal length.

I do not consider the hood design of either lens to be a differentiating factor in choosing between the two lenses, but I do consider the “reverse zoom” a very clever and practical design feature, and in the case of the 24-70, flaring is far less likely to be an issue.

But Wait, What About Optical Performance?

Astute readers will have noticed that I have not discussed the optical qualities of both lenses.  That alone is a separate subject, and there are plenty of reviews out there, some of which go into considerable detail.

What I will say is this: both lenses are sharp and produce nice colour and contrast.  I have not compared in any detail the differences between them, as for my (fussy) liking they are both excellent.  Some say the 24-70 is superior, but that’s an individual assessment.

I have owned one of these lenses and shot with both; neither one of them left me wanting more image quality.

If the finer points of optical quality are of particular interest, I recommend reading The Digital Picture’s Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM review and Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM review.

Conclusion

Both lenses are solid performers.

While the individual’s needs, wants and constraints are very much variable, I can offer a few general points of advice.

1. If low light capability and subject movement is an issue, choose the 24-70.
2. If background blur is important, choose the 24-70.
3. For general-purpose outdoor/travel photography, choose the 24-105.
4. If size, weight and cost alone are limiting factors, choose the 24-105.

Choosing between these lenses is not an easy task, and having been there myself, I can speak first-hand of the difficult choice it is.

Hopefully the points I have discussed here will make it easier for you.

There have probably been more arguments over use of UV filters than there have been Canon vs. Nikon skirmishes.

My own position on the use of UV filters is well documented and places me very firmly in the “against” camp.  I do not believe UV filters are necessary or beneficial, and I specifically will not use them.

To explain why, I’ll firstly explain why people might buy these filters.  The two main reasons are:

1. to filter out UV light; and
2. to protect the lens.

Filtration of UV light might be one reason for the use of such a filter, but in the digital age, and unless you’re shooting at high altitudes, it’s not necessary to use a UV filter, as digital sensors are nowhere near as sensitive to UV light as film.

The second reason concerns “protection”, and I use the term very loosely, as I do not believe a UV filter provides effective protection for a lens.

Firstly one must define what sort of protection is desirable.  A person might use a UV filter in a protective capacity to prevent any or all of the following:

1. dust;
2. moisture;
3. fingerprints; and
4. impact.

Let’s look at each of the above undesirable elements and assess the effectiveness or merit of a UV filter for that form of protection.

1.  Dust

I do not consider dust to be a problem.  It blows off.  In as much as dust can land on a lens’s objective element, it can also land on a filter.  Either way, it’s going to be necessary to remove dust in order to clean the glass.

2.  Moisture

Like dust, water can be removed from a lens’s objective element.  It wipes off.  It doesn’t harm a lens, and when shooting in inclement weather or conditions that would otherwise cause water to contact a lens (eg, sea spray), there is going to be some time spent wiping water off glass.

Some Canon lenses specifically require a filter (the type of filter is not specified) to complete the weather sealing capability of the lens, as the objective element moves as the lens focuses or zooms.  One such example is the Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM lens, whose objective element moves as the focal range changes, but this movement is within the lens’s outer barrel; in other words, the lens’s entire structure does not change in length, but the recessed lens does move along the inside of the barrel’s construction.

3.  Fingerprints

Some people might use a filter to avoid getting fingerprints on a lens.  Again, fingerprints can be removed.  Personally, I have never found fingerprints to be an issue; I simply don’t get them on my lenses, and as I’ll discuss later, there are more effective preventative measures.

4.  Impact

This is the clincher.  Many people buy UV filters in the believe it will protect their lenses from impact.  What sort of impact?

The scenarios can vary widely, but let’s look at an extreme example.

Firstly, there’s the dreaded lens drop.  People drop lenses.  I’ve done so myself.  A UV filter offers absolutely no protection whatsoever from an accidental drop.  Simple physics explains why.

In most cases, the objective element is recessed into the front of the lens, ironically due to the need to provide a rim for the mounting of screw-in filters.  With the exception of a few lenses (ultra-wide rectilinear lenses and fish-eye lenses), the objective element does not protrude beyond the rim.  In the case of ultra-wide rectilinear lenses and fish-eye lenses, these protruding elements are protected by an in-built, non-removable lens hood.

In the unlikely event that a lens were to hit the ground face-first, it would be even more unlikely for the objective element to strike the ground or an object on the ground.  In terms of probability, it is more likely that some part of the lens barrel will strike the ground, owing to the fact that there is far more surface area comprised of the barrel.

Now, in the rather unfortunate event that a lens did strike the ground or something on the ground at such an angle for the objective element to make direct, blunt-force contact, what would a thin sheet of glass to do protect it?  Absolutely nothing.

The filter would smash, and the lens it was intended to protect would still bear direct impact.  Furthermore, the shards of glass from a shattered filter would quite possibly scratch the fine coatings on the objective element.  That’s not a situation I consider acceptable or sensible.

It is also to be remembered that the objective element of a lens is far thicker and far tougher than the glass in any filter.  It would take significant force to crack an objective element.

As I mentioned above, I have dropped a lens.  A few years ago I dropped a reasonably heavy lens from waist height onto bitumen.  Now, the lens was wearing both its front and rear caps, but the damage the entire unit sustained was very low, and surprisingly so.

The part of the lens that actually hit the ground (after which it bounced and rolled away) was the side of the barrel, towards the front.  There was a minor dent to the exterior of the barrel.  The fact that the lens was wearing its caps made no difference, but I’d prefer caps on than caps off.

Naturally there was no UV filter on the lens.  Had a filter been present, the shock force of the impact would likely have shattered the filter and left shards of glass in direct contact with my lens’s objective element.

One last issue to consider with the use of a filter in this scenario is that if the rim of the filter strikes the ground, it will almost certainly be deformed, and may be impossible to remove, as the impact can compress the metal of either the filter’s rim or the lens’s filter threads, thus permanently damaging them.

Impact can also take the form of less-brutal contact with glass, such as a tree branch or some other object still coming into contact with the lens, but not with the velocity of a drop or a flying stone thrown up by a passing vehicle.  My belief, as I will explain further in this article, is that hoods offer more effective protection.

The Negative Effects of Filters

While the use of a UV filter can demonstrably be shown to be useless at best, or ineffective at worst for protection, there are also some negative consequences that arise as a result of using filters: image quality degradation.

Image quality degradation is more often the result of using cheap, non-coated UV filters, but I have seen first-hand image degradation when the filter was a Hoya HMC (Hoya Multi-Coated) filter, so even the better filters can still produce undesirable results.

The first negative side-effect is a loss of contrast and sharpness.  There are examples on the Internet showing the same scene captured with and without a filter, and a visible loss of clarity is apparent in the image captured with the filter attached.

The other issue is flare and ghosting when shooting at point sources of light.  This problem is likely to be encountered at night when shooting streetscapes and cityscapes, which often feature bright sources of light (eg, street lights or building lights) in the darkness.

This is what happens:

Light from the distance point source enters the lens.  The light reflects off the lens and falls upon the inner surface of the UV filter, from which it in turn reflects back into the lens.  The result is ghosting and flare.  Utterly undesirable.

Multi-coated filters generally reduce this, but as I mentioned, I have seen it occur even with a multi-coated filter.  In January of 2010 I took a friend from Queensland to shoot the Sydney Harbour Bridge and Sydney Opera House from Mrs Macquarie’s Chair, and while we were there, another photographer was also shooting night scenes.  Her images weren’t turning out well, and when we removed the filter and she took the same photo again, the image quality visibly improved.

Based on that first-hand experience, I would not endorse the use of any UV filter when doing night photography in locations where there are point sources of light.

My Approach

I stated early in this article that I do not use UV filters.  I believe they do not offer adequate protection, and have seen that they can degrade image quality.  I do not consider either situation acceptable.

What I instead advocate and practice is the use of lens hoods when shooting, and lens caps when not shooting.  These provide far more protection than any filter.

Lens hoods do three things:

1. reduce stray light hitting the lens at oblique angles and thus causing flare;
2. increase contrast as a result of keeping angular ambient light out; and
3. keep the objective element well away from hands and other foreign objects.

If a lens is dropped, the hood or barrel (as described earlier) will be more likely to take the hit.  In most cases, lens hoods are made from plastic, so they will flex when they come into contact with a hard surface at significant velocity.  This cushioning, much like a car’s shock absorber, absorbs the force of the impact far more effectively than the rigid surface of a filter rim or the lens barrel itself.

Lens caps are simply essential to protect the front and rear elements of a lens when it is not in use.  Dust, moisture, fingerprints and blunt-force impact are all kept well out of harm’s way when caps are attached.

It would be remiss of me to neglect mentioning Hoya’s HD (high-density) line of filters.  These have up to four times the breaking strength of a normal filter.  Videos on YouTube show people deliberately slamming these into the corner of benches to demonstrate the strength of the glass.

While I have not seen these filters, they certainly have more merit than a regular UV filter for impact protection purposes, but I still believe that direct impact to the objective element of lens resulting from a drop would have velocity which exceeds the strength of the HD filter’s glass.  I’d trust my hoods before I’d trust a filter.

So, hopefully this article provides some insight into what UV filters can and cannot do — mostly what they cannot do — and also explains my philosophy behind refusing to use these filters on my lenses.

In parting, the advice I would offer to anyone who would still use a filter is this:

1. buy the highest quality filters available;
2. remove the filters when shooting night scenes with point sources of light;
3. do not rely on these alone as protective devices; and
4. use lens hoods and lens caps.

However, and somewhat at odds with that ideal, I also believe that quality equipment is a vital part of the ingredients that go into producing a great image.

Put simply, high-quality equipment will both reduce gear-induced limitations as well as produce images of better quality.  It is to be remembered, however, that the world’s greatest camera in the hands of the world’s worst photographer will produce an expensively bad image.

Philosophies aside, this first article of several is intended to explain the camera and lenses I use and for what applications I use them.  Further articles will go into the details of other equipment such as lighting equipment, filters, supports and other accessories, as these are equally important in achieving my images.

While I love good gear and have a significant amount of it, I’d prefer to be using that equipment to capture good images than sitting here talking about the equipment; but be that as it may, many photographers are interested in knowing what gear other photographers use, so without further ado, here’s a breakdown of my camera and lens equipment.

Camera

I use only one camera: a Canon EOS 5D Mark II DSLR.   I purchased this in May of 2010 to replace my Canon EOS 5D, a camera I had been using since 2006, and which was destroyed by a dramatic encounter with the ocean at Kiama.

The biggest feature of the Canon EOS 5D line of cameras is the full-frame sensor.  A full-frame sensor is the same size as a frame of 35mm film (ie, 36mm x 24mm), and there are multiple benefits of a larger sensor than the smaller APS-C (1.6x crop) sensors in most of Canon’s other cameras; namely:

1. less digital noise due to a physically larger sensor;
2. easier composing due to a larger viewfinder;
3. easier focusing due to a larger viewfinder;
4. a brighter viewfinder due to the larger size; and
5. no cropping of a lens’s native field of view.

One significant point needs to be made on the issue of digital noise.  One of the critical factors that comes into play is the pixel density.  Simply put, the more pixels you cram onto a given surface area, the closer they must be in proximity, and the higher is the likelihood of digital noise resulting from heat.

The 5D was known for its low noise, and likewise, the 5D Mark II also offers very low noise. I have shot a band at ISO speeds of 3,200 and 6,400 and landed very good results.  Granted, at 100% magnification, the image is very grainy, but it is completely impractical to view a 21mp image at full-size.  When viewed at more realistic sizes such as 1,024 x 683, the low level of visible noise is very acceptable indeed.

My first DSLR was a Canon EOS 20D, which I purchased in 2005; and prior to that, my first digital camera was a Canon PowerShot S45, which I purchased in 2002.  This was a high-end compact camera, which at 4mp, had the highest pixel count available at the time.  This camera also offered raw mode, video, and had manual exposure controls — all for the handsome sum of around $1,300.   A current-model, entry-level DSLR can now be bought for under $1,000. How times have changed!

See my gallery of images captured with the Canon EOS 5D Mark II, my gallery of images captured with the Canon EOS 5D and my gallery of images captured with the Canon EOS 20D for an insight into these cameras’ capabilities.

Lenses

More important than the choice of camera is the glass in front of it.  At the time of writing I have seven lenses, all being from Canon’s “L” range, and all having the widest apertures in their respective focal lengths.

I use my various lenses for different purposes, and the following paragraphs will provide some details on each lens.

1.  Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM

This is my seascaping lens.   I use it exclusively for seascape and landscape work, and while it is a zoom, I tend to shoot it like a prime, rarely deviating from the 16mm setting.  I like the ultra-wide, 108-degree diagonal field of view this lens offers at 16mm, and for ‘scapes it produces wide vistas and allows a foreground subject to be given striking prominence in the frame.

I have also used this lens for an indoor band shoot, but I tend to prefer faster primes for their increased light-gathering ability.

The 16-35 is very sharp, and with the brightest aperture currently available in 135-format lenses, it offers a brighter viewfinder which assists with autofocus.   The f/2.8 aperture of this lens also allows creativity in non-landscape/seascape scenarios.

I mostly shoot it at f/8 or f/11, but as above, it can be used to somewhat diffuse the background in a photograph whose foreground subject is within close proximity.  Granted, producing much background blur with an ultra-wide lens isn’t going to be easy nor practical for most of the purposes for which such a lens is used.

See my gallery of images captured with the Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM for an insight into the lens’s capabilities.

2.  Canon EF 35mm f/1.4L USM

This is a great general-purpose lens when a wide aperture is needed.  On a full-frame camera the 35mm focal length is quite useful, in that it is wide, but not too wide; and it is not too long such that the framing is tight.

I use it for bands and portraiture (when I want a wider view than my usual telephoto view), and any other general indoor photography.  It works well for over-the-table people images at dinner parties and the like.  I also used it for a wedding shoot.

It is extremely sharp, works very well in low light and produces nice background blur at f/1.4.

See my gallery of images captured with the Canon EF 35mm f/1.4L USM for an insight into the lens’s capabilities.

3.  Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM

This highly desirable and excellent performer of a lens is desirable to many photographers, and it has a place in my rig.  I consider it to be a general-purpose, fast telephoto zoom.  I don’t use it a great deal, but it’s hard to beat when I do need a lens of its range.

My main uses of this lens include portraiture, bands, aviation, sports, wildlife and general photography.  I’ve also used it for a wedding.

It’s hard to comment negatively about this lens, as it is tack-sharp even wide open and is quick to focus.  It is also compatible with Canon’s tele-extenders, but I would not recommend using the 2x tele-extender, as image quality will invariably suffer, along with the light loss of two stops.

See my gallery of images captured with the Canon EF 70-200mm f/1.8L IS USM for an insight into the lens’s capabilities.

4.  Canon EF 85mm f/1.2L II USM

This extremely fast tele is my staple for portraiture.  The moderate telephoto length is perfect for portraits and the very wide aperture not only allows subject isolation, but produces a creamy background blur distinctive to this lens.

My other main use for this lens is band work or any other low-light indoor setting in which moderate telephoto reach is needed.  When shooting bands, even with an aperture of f/1.2 it’s still necessary to push the ISO into four-digit territory.

I have used this lens for the odd still-life image, but I have found that the combination of the 85mm focal length and the minimum focus distance (MFD) of around 90cm does not produce ideal framing, and instead I use longer lens with an almost identical MFD.

The very narrow depth of field and slow focus-by-wire autofocus of this lens makes it more challenging to use than other telephoto lenses, but when you get it right, it delivers magical results.

Unusually for a Canon L-series prime, the objective element extends from the barrel as the focus is adjusted.  The large, heavy objective element may explain the slower autofocus, as the motor has to push a very heavy piece of glass backward and forward.

See my gallery of images captured with the Canon EF 85mm f/1.2L II USM for an insight into the lens’s capabilities.

5.  Canon EF 135mm f/2L USM

The 135/2L is a mind-blowing lens on several counts:

1. at f/2, it is very fast for the focal length;
2. it produces very creamy bokeh;
3. it’s light and small (for its specifications);
4. it’s one of the least expensive L-series lenses;
5. it has a very short (for the focal length) MFD of around 90cm; and
6. its autofocus is stunningly fast.

I’ve never experienced a lens which focuses as quickly as this one does.  It’s ready before I am, and I daresay its AF is faster than that of my 300/2.8 super-tele.  That’s saying something!

My main uses for this lens include portraiture, bands, weddings and general-purpose telephoto photography, but I have found it to be a very good lens for still-life photography due to its frame-filling focal length and short MFD.  Quite a few of my still-life images were captured with this lens.

It would also do well for indoor sports, although a sports shooter  I am not.

The 135/2L is a ridiculously sharp lens and will deliver very pleasing results.

See my gallery of images captured with the Canon EF 135mm f/2L USM for an insight into the lens’s capabilities.

6.  Canon EF 180mm f/3.5L Macro USM

This is a specialised lens, and one I use for only one thing: macro photography.  I don’t shoot a lot of macro images, so it sits on a shelf most of the time, but when I need it, it’s hard to beat.  Its longer focal length provides greater working distance, but the down-side is the reduced depth of field, and macro lenses have inherently shallow depth of field in the first instance.

Even when shooting at f/11 at its MFD, this lens can be challenging to use.  However, it is extremely sharp, and I’ve found that images captured with it require no sharpening during post-processing.

A macro lens (focal lengths of 100mm and greater are typical for macro lenses) can also double as a portrait lens, although given I have four other telephoto lenses which get used for portraits, I don’t find that capability particularly useful in this lens.

Unlike all of the other macro lenses in Canon’s lineup, the 180/3.5L Macro is compatible with Canon’s tele-extenders, which allows even greater magnification than that 1:1 (life-size) magnification this lens natively offers.

See my gallery of images captured with the Canon EF 180mm f/3.5L Macro USM for an insight into the lens’s capabilities.

7.  Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS USM

This is my longest, largest, heaviest and most expensive lens.  It could also be considered my sharpest, but in my experience, all of my lenses are sharp!

It is one telephoto lens a lot of people want, and it sure delivers fantastic results.  I use it mostly for aviation, wildlife and astrophotography, but I have used it for portraits and band photography.

I often combine it with my Canon Extender EF 1.4x II and Canon Extender EF 2x II to provide 420mm at f/4 and 600mm at f/5.6 respectively.

Despite the size and weight, I almost always shoot hand-held with it.  I can quite comfortably shoot with a lens of its weight all day without issues.  However, for shooting subjects like the moon, a tripod is essential.  For sports, a monopod can help, but during the very little sports photography I have done, I still found hand-holding was more to my liking.

See my gallery of images captured with the Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS USM for an insight into the lens’s capabilities.

Tele-Extenders

As mentioned above, I have the Canon Extender EF 1.4x II and Canon Extender EF 2x II.  I generally only use these on my 300/2.8 for the very useful and approachable reach they provide, but three of my other lenses are also compatible with these: 70-200/2.8L IS, 135/2L and 180/3.5L Macro.

I tend not to use the tele-extenders on these three lenses, as I don’t need the focal length increases the combination provides, and in some cases I can achieve the equivalent or a marginally longer focal length with a brighter aperture.

The 1.4x tele-extender is universally considered to be the better of these two units, with greater image degradation (and two stops of light reduction) occurring with the 2x tele-extender.

What convinced me to buy the 2x tele-extender was a set of images posted by someone who paired it with the 300/2.8L IS.  The images were very sharp, and image degradation was very minor to the point of being unnoticeable (if it even existed).  My own results with this combination have shown it to be a good match.  However, I’d only recommend the use of the 2x tele-extender with the absolute fastest of super-teles (eg, 200/1.8L, 200/2L IS, 300/2.8L IS and 400/2.8L IS).

See my gallery of images captured with the Canon Extender EF 1.4x II and my gallery of images captured with the Canon Extender EF 2x II for an insight into these tele-extenders’ capabilities.

So, there’s a summary of my camera and lens equipment.  I’ll discuss my other equipment in subsequent articles.

The forecast was for periodic showers, and driving down in the dark, I experienced downpours and the occasional flash of lightning.

I looked at the sky, and was delighted to see clear patches here and there, which indicated that the morning would not be a completely overcast, grey mess.

As the light increased, some great shooting opportunities presented themselves.

South of Wollongong Harbour is a fantastic rock shelf with a lot of great views.  Here’s one:

Gong For Shore

Wollongong Harbour and the surrounding area has such enormous photographic potential, with so many interesting scenes to shoot, that it easily warrants a good three or four visits to shoot the area properly.

Photographic interest includes:

• rock shelves;
• tidal pools;
• two lighthouses;
• two breakwaters;
• jetties;
• moored boats;
• concrete walls and structures; and
• old cannons on the hill.

Here’s my view of one of the cannons overlooking the sea:

I Shoot with a Can(n)on

I have a few more pleasing images from this morning’s session, and will process and publish those in due course.

All in all, Wollongong Harbour makes a great location for a photoshoot and has a lot to offer.  We were lucky that the conditions this morning were moody, dramatic and easy on exposure.

I have been photographing digitally since 2002, and in my early days I found a method of filesystem organisation which works well for me.

My backup strategy also works well for me, and as I’ll explain further into this article, provides me with disk-level redundancy as well as geographical redundancy.

1.  Filesystem Organisation

At the time of writing, I have 32,969 image files (ie, with a filename extension of .bmp, .cr2, .gif, .jpg, .png, .psd and .tif).  Another 1,075 files are .xmp files, which contain metadata written by Adobe Camera Raw during the raw conversion phase.

That’s a lot of files!

It would be impossible to manage without a good directory structure.

The system upon which I decided in the early days was to have one directory for each year, and within a given year, a directory for each shoot, named after the shoot.  Also a part of the directory name is the date of the shoot, in YYYY-MM-DD format.

Here is a slightly dated screen capture of my directory structure:

My Image Directory Structure

As can be seen, each shoot has its own aptly-named directory within the year in which the shoot took place.

Now, some people place the date first, but my mind is wired to remember the location or event rather than the date it took place.  To my mind, “I shot at Long Reef at some stage this year” holds more meaning than “I shot somewhere on the 21st of March”.

Other people break down their directory structure further, with a subdirectory for each month.  Again, the specific date on which I did a photoshoot doesn’t rank anywhere near as important as what the subject was.  Being able to pinpoint a shoot to a specific year by memory is as low-level I need to get with dates.

As for image filenames, I don’t rename the files the camera produces.

If I shoot an image and the camera calls it IMG_0001.CR2, and I decide to process it, I will end up with at least three more files:

1. IMG_0001.XMP (the metadata containing the non-destructive adjustments applied in Adobe Camera Raw);
2. IMG_0001 Processed.PSD (the 16-bit, multi-layered, Photoshop-processed version of my image); and
3. IMG_0001 Processed.JPG (the 8-bit JPG exported from the PSD file).

I may produce smaller versions of my images for specific purposes, or black and white versions, and in those cases the exported JPGs would be called “IMG_0001 Processed 1024×683.JPG” or “IMG_0001 Processed Black and White.JPG” respectively.

I don’t keep any lower-level directories for processed versions, ‘keepers or any other category; all files from a single shoot are in a single directory.

Naturally, the image filename counter on a camera will reset once it reaches a certain frame count, and as it stands, I have three IMG_0001 files in some cases, but filename duplication is not a cause for concern, as a directory containing a single photoshoot’s images will never have two identically-named files.  On the few occasions when I have used two cameras to cover an event (such as a band), I have kept each camera’s images in its own subdirectory.

One organisational strategy I don’t employ is image tagging.  My existing filing strategy has been in use for quite a number of years, and I haven’t found a need to search for an image’s contents based on something I remember being in the image, or any other criteria for which tagging  would be useful.  I’m able to find what I’m after by recalling the year and the event/shoot, based on the naming convention I use.

2.  Backup Strategy

I take backing up quite seriously, and I have adopted an approach that provides disk-based and geographical redundancy.

My PC is a Apple MacBook Pro (17″) with a 500GB hard disk.  All of my image (and other) data is stored on it.  In my home office I keep two LaCie d2 Quadra 1TB external hard disks, which have a FireWire 800 port offering faster data transfer rates.

I keep a third external hard disk off-site to ensure geographical redundancy in case my local external disks suffer loss, theft or damage.  My off-site disk is a 500GB Western Digital My Passport Essential.

My approach is to manually back up my data to these drives, generally every week or two.  This method might sound cumbersome, but it works for me, and I employ a very structured filing system, not only for my image data as outlined above, but for all of my data.

At some stage I should investigate a more automated method, but this manual approach has worked for a number of years.

The end result is that I have four copies of all of my data, some of which goes back 16 years.   (The current value of that 16-year-old data is questionable, but I am sentimental.)

In the past I used CD media, and later DVD media, but as my volume of data increased, and as image file sizes and the byte count of individual photoshoots also increased, optical media quickly became cumbersome and insufficient, and that was when I invested in external hard disks.

The other issue is that I don’t trust optical media.  Sure, hard disks can fail, too, but the key is not to rely on one disk.  Hard disks are much more convenient to use, a lot faster, and they store a lot more data.

To conclude, my key advice on data backups is:

1. back up regularly (weekly or fortnightly is good);
2. back up to multiple storage devices, never relying on one alone;
3. keep your data in at least two geographically separate locations; and
4. use the most effective and reliable storage media of the day, and update when needed.

It got me thinking.

While it is incredibly humbling and satisfying to receive such nice, genuine compliments, what I do is not something that others cannot achieve with some passion, know-how and practice.

There are a lot of very good seascapers out there, doing similar things to what I do.  It is certainly achievable, so to that end, I figured I should share my approach.

This article will address what goes into my seascapes, and will hopefully give insight into how I achieve my images.

I will discuss my philosophy, equipment, techniques and post-processing.

Warning: This is quite a long article.

1.  Why Seascapes?

The first question to be asked is why one would shoot seascapes.

When I got seriously into photography, I didn’t set out to be a seascaper.  While most of my images nowadays are seascapes, the process of reaching this point was evolutionary rather than pre-determined.

Why do I like seascapes?

Firstly, there’s something about water.  Humans are drawn to water.  Water is essential to life, with most of Earth’s surface, and indeed most of the human body, consisting of water.

Secondly, there is the light.  I shoot my seascapes in the very early hours of the morning, from first light through to the morning golden hour.  The light at this time of day is most spectacular, colourful and visually striking, all of which contribute to a pleasing image.

The low light at this time also means a slow shutter speed can be used, and is often essential.  The result is smooth water or blurred cloud movement, which can be used to create dynamism in a static image, or provide abstraction of water and cloud details.

I have become very fussy about light, and generally won’t shoot at times other than dusk, dawn or total darkness if the light is going to be a significant aspect of the image, or affect the subject matter.

Early morning light, and early morning in general, is a peaceful time.  There is very little activity, and being out there by the ocean, greeting the dawn of a new day and seeing the first signs of life, is a rather pleasant way to spend a Sunday.

On top of all of the above, I like the look of seascape images.  Water is very photogenic, and not unsurprisingly, often features in postcards and tourism literature.  At dawn and dusk, and during the blue hours, it can look spectacular.

2.  Equipment

Naturally, certain equipment is necessary for dawn seascape photography.

2.1.  Camera

The first item I use is a Canon EOS 5D Mark II DSLR camera, which has a ‘full-frame’-sized sensor; ie, it measures 36 x 24mm, which is the same size as a frame of 35mm film.

The larger sensor allows for lower noise, more dynamic range, a brighter viewfinder and a larger viewfinder, which makes focusing and composing easier.

2.2.  Lens

In the lens department, I have seven at the time of writing, but I use one lens specifically for seascape and landscape work: my Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM.  This is a fast, ultra-wide pro-grade lens which delivers fantastic image quality and a wide vista I like in a seascape image.

Most of my lenses are prime lenses, and my 16-35 is one of only two zooms I have, but I tend to use it like a prime, with it rarely deviating from the 16mm setting.  I simply like a wide view with soaring skies and foreground detail which, depending on the angle of the camera, comes right up to the tripod legs.

That brings me to the next item.

2.3.  Tripod

A tripod is an essential item for landscape/seascape photography.  The primary reason is for stability and sharpness, especially during long exposures.  A secondary, but equally important reason, is for exposure bracketing, which I will discuss with my techniques.

As for head units, I have used both a ball head and a three-way head.  Both types have their advantages.  A ball-head is more convenient to adjust, but doesn’t allow the precision offered by a three-way head, which, as the name suggests, is adjustable in three ways: pitch, roll and yaw.

2.4.  Remote Shutter Release

The next essential item is a remote shutter release.  When shooting exposures longer than 30 seconds (which I often do), it is necessary to use the camera’s bulb mode, which keeps the shutter open indefinitely (battery life notwithstanding).  It’s not practical to use bulb mode by using the camera’s shutter release button, as it’s necessary to physically hold it down, which could introduce camera movement during a long exposure, thus ruining the shot.  A remote release allows control separate from the camera.

The model I use is the Canon TC-80N, which is a timer control/intervalometer unit, offering me the ability to dial in shutter speeds and have the shutter automatically shut once the pre-determined exposure has been made.  I can also use this unit in conjunction with whatever shutter speed I’ve dialled in on the camera, with the advantage that the lack of physical contact with the camera’s shutter release doesn’t introduce the risk of minute movements from the pressure and weight of my hand actuating the shutter release.

2.5.  Filters

The final essential item I use in my seascape photography is filters — specifically neutral-density and graduated neutral-density filters.  They are both similar, but have a significant difference between them.

A neutral-density (ND) filter is a dark filter which reduces the amount of light hitting the sensor.  It is employed when a photographer deliberately wishes to use a longer shutter speed which the ambient light would not allow.  These filters come in various light-reducing levels, usually measured in stops, although some also have half-stop intervals.

A graduated neutral-density (GND) filter is also an ND filter, but there is a transition from dark (filtered) to clear (ie, unfiltered).  The idea is to even out the brightness levels between sky and land, as the sky is almost always brighter than the land, often by quite a few stops.  Like ND filters, GND filters come in various densities.

I use the Lee creative filter system, which consists of a slotted holder, into which three filters can be placed in a stacked fashion; a lens adapter ring (for fitting the holder to the lens’s filter threads); and resin sheet-style filters, measuring 150mm x 100mm (GND) and 100mm x 100mm (ND and other types).

Filters of this size are the same size as what Cokin calls its Z-PRO system, and a filter system of this size is necessary for wider lenses to avoid equipment-induced vignetting (dark edges due to parts of the filter or holder being visible to the lens).

My own filters consist of a 0.9 (three-stop) GND, 0.6 (two-stop) GND and two 0.9 (two-stop) NDs.  My GND filters have soft edges, meaning the transition between light and dark is more gradual and thus less abrupt.  Soft-edge filters are best used for uneven landscapes, whereas hard-edge filters are useful for ocean horizons.  I currently don’t have any hard-edge filters.

The last type of filter to use for seascape photography is a circular polariser.  I have one for my 16-35, but tend not to use it much.  Its main advantage is the reduction of glare and reflections, which at dawn I tend not to find problematic; but a secondary advantage is a reduction of two-to-three stops of light, making it a make-shift ND filter for lack of a real ND filter.  Polarisers also intensify blue and green hues, which in some situations may be desirable.

2.6.  Other Equipment

When out shooting I carry other equipment as well.  The most useful and essential of these is a headlamp.  When I am travelling, it is dark, and I need to navigate uneven, unlit and sometimes dangerous coastal territory in order to get to my location.  The advantage of a headlamp is that it keeps my hands free (of torches) and also lights the area where my eyes are looking.  The model I use is a Princeton Tec FUEL.  It is an LED-based, AAA battery-powered headlamp with three brightness levels and a strobe mode.

Other useful equipment includes clothes/towels, plastic bags for covering my equipment, a lens cleaning cloth and a spare CompactFlash card.

Now that the equipment is detailed, I’ll explain the meat of what goes into my seascapes: technique and post-processing.

3.  Techniques

The techniques I use at the capture phase of my seascape photography aren’t unique or in any way special, but it’s worth explaining how I approach my work.

3.1.  Camera Settings

Firstly, a word about camera settings.

I shoot in M (manual) exposure mode 99% of the time.  I like the absolute control over shutter speed, aperture and ISO that this mode affords me; I don’t want the camera making decisions about these things.  The only thing automatic is the metering.

I dial my ISO down to 100 for the best image quality.  Lately I have been using ISO 200, as it still offers good image quality and very low noise, but also allows me to halve my shutter speeds, which in some lighting conditions can be critical, as the light changes quickly.  I’d rather expose for one minute than two.

One thing I consider important is that the long exposure noise reduction (LENR) feature be disabled in the camera’s settings.  The reason for this comes down to time.

The LENR feature works by firstly exposing the scene, and then immediately afterwards, making a black exposure (ie, with the shutter closed) for the same length of time, and combining the images using a technique called dark frame subtraction.

This obviously doubles the amount of time it takes to produce one image, and when the light is changing so rapidly, I cannot afford to lose time.  Not only that, but if the image is a dud, I’ve lost precious minutes and need to shoot again.  Additionally, noise reduction is something I’d prefer to do on a much more powerful computer rather than the camera, the latter of which I consider to be a capture device rather than processing device.

Speaking of processing, I shoot in raw mode only.  A raw image is the raw image data captured by the camera, without any white balance or other processing (sharpness, contrast and colour) applied.  My camera offers a 14-bit raw capture mode, which captures a lot of detail and more brightness levels than an 8-bit JPG can offer.

My advice is to capture the best quality image a camera can deliver, which means choosing the highest resolution the camera offers, and choosing raw mode.  You cannot add what was not captured.  Having the highest resolution, least-processed image available affords the most options when it comes to post-processing (especially when it comes to recovering details from under-exposure or over-exposure) later.

3.2.  Calculating Exposure

My shutter speeds vary quite considerably based on the light and the effect I am trying to achieve.  In the dark, pre-dawn light, I am shooting long exposures, which introduces a challenge in calculating exposure when the camera’s longest exposure is way too short for the meter to even register the calculated exposure.

The technique I use for determining a shutter speed comes down to simple mathematics.

Of the three exposure settings (shutter speed, aperture and ISO), I already know the settings I want for two of them: aperture and ISO.  What varies is the shutter speed.

If it is very dark, I will tend to shoot at f/5.6 to halve my shutter speed, as I usually shoot at f/8 or sometimes f/11.

I will either choose ISO 100 or ISO 200; typically the latter in very dark conditions, again for exposure time reduction.

Based on a shutter speed of f/5.6 and an ISO setting of 100, I adjust the aperture and/or ISO to the brightest settings to try and bring the camera’s metering onto the radar.  If f/5.6 and ISO 100 is too dark for the meter to register an exposure of 30 seconds or less, I dial the aperture back two stops to f/2.8.  If I can see the exposure indicator in the display, I can tell what kind of exposure I need.

For example, if I use ISO 100, f/2.8 and 30 seconds, and can see that the metered exposure is right in the middle of the exposure meter (ie, correctly exposed), then I know that in order to shoot at f/5.6 (two stops apart), I will need to quadruple my shutter speed.

ISO 100, f/2.8 and 30 seconds = ISO 100, f/5.6 and 120 seconds.

This is a simple example, but depending on the light, using the brightest aperture of my lens with a shutter speed of 30 seconds may still be inadequate.  In that case, I increase the ISO as far as necessary for a correct exposure to register on the meter.  Using simple halving/doubling mathematics, I again double my shutter speed for each stop of ISO I decrease, or for each stop down of aperture.

For example, if I can achieve a shutter speed of 30 seconds at ISO 1,600 and f/2.8, in order to shoot at ISO 100 and f/5.6, I will need a shutter speed of 1,920 seconds (ie, 32 minutes).

Let’s break it down by firstly decreasing the ISO, but leaving the aperture wide open:

1. ISO 1,600 + f/2.8 = 30 seconds
2. ISO 800 + f/2.8 = 60 seconds
3. ISO 400 + f/2.8 = 120 seconds
4. ISO 200 + f/2.8 = 240 seconds
5. ISO 100 + f/2.8 = 480 seconds

After adjusting the ISO to suit, let’s stop down the aperture to achieve more depth of field, remembering that each stop down doubles the required shutter speed:

1. ISO 100 + f/2.8 = 480 seconds
2. ISO 100 + f/4 = 960 seconds
3. ISO 100 + f/5.6 = 1,920 seconds.

Sure, this is a rather extreme exposure, but illustrates the logic and mathematics which goes into calculating a long exposure when the desired ISO speed and aperture are known, and when the light is sufficiently dark that the camera cannot calculate a 30-second or shorter shutter speed based on the metered light.

3.3.  Composition

Once I’ve found a suitable subject, I position my tripod-mounted camera and compose.  I use both landscape and portrait orientation.  I’ve never considered how I compose; it’s just something I do naturally, and I tend to stick very close to the rule of thirds, in that the key focal point is positioned along one of the intersection points that would exist if the frame was divided into thirds by lines across the horizontal and vertical planes.

I also position my horizons on either the top third or bottom third, depending on whether the land or sky respectively is to be given more prominence in the frame.

Without getting much into the details of composition, things I am unconsciously doing include the use of leading lines, S-curves and filling the frame, as well as the rule of thirds.

One of the techniques I like to use in my photography is subject isolation.  I want the subject to be very obvious, fill the frame and dominate the scene.  Examples of this can be seen in my images captured at Long Reef, where I isolate a single boulder on the reef and place it very prominently in the foreground, with the beautiful colours of the water and sky receding into the distance.

Of course, subject isolation with a wide lens and narrow aperture is not as easy to achieve, but it can certainly be done.

So what I am I looking for?

Mostly, drama.  I want to see photogenic rocks, beautiful colours in the sky, interesting clouds, sky reflections in still rock pools, odd-shaped rocks, waves crashing over rocks and cascading water.  There needs to be interest in the foreground, middle ground and background.  It is not easy for me to verbally describe what I see or what I want; my eyes just know it when they see it.

3.4.  Focus

How do I achieve focus, especially in the dark?

There are two techniques I use.  If it’s too dark to focus, I generally look for a distant light and point my camera’s central focus point at that. The contrast between the bright light source and the night sky allows the camera’s autofocus system to achieve focus.  From a depth of field perspective, this is not the most reliable way of focusing, but I have found it works quite well for me.

In better light, I focus on subject material a third of the way into the scene.  This provides the best form of focus, and combined with a relatively narrow aperture of f/8 (used most often) and a wide lens (which has inherently greater depth of field), I can achieve the best compromise of image sharpness and deep depth of field.

In the dark, a torch or headlamp (or even flash) can be handy for temporarily illuminating subject matter in order to allow the camera’s autofocus system to work.

Once I have achieved focus, I switch the lens to manual focus, but since upgrading to the Canon EOS 5D Mark II from my previous Canon EOS 5D, I have taken advantage of the separate AF button on the rear of the camera, and disabled the control of AF via the shutter release button.

This means that I can meter and capture the image independently of autofocus.  If I want autofocus, I use a separate button on the camera for that purpose.  A by-product of this separate AF functionality is that I need not toggle the lens’s AF switch to manual focus mode.

3.5.  Capture

At this point, I have composed an image, calculated an exposure, dialled in my various settings, and I’m just about ready to shoot.  When shooting into the lightening sky as I typically I do, I attach either my three-stop GND filter, or both of my GND filters (giving me five stops of darkening in the sky) and adjust the horizontal position of the gradient to suit the light and the composition.

Here is the key.

While I use filters to even out the exposure, I am interested in giving myself the most options when it comes to post-processing my images later on.

What this means is that I employ exposure bracketing and manually blend components of lighter, medium and darker exposures to maximise details and colours.

I will typically shoot five or six images of the same scene, varying the exposure by two thirds of a stop, or a full-stop, with each exposure.  I will deliberately over-expose marginally in order to capture the details in foreground rocks, which, being away from the increasing light in the distance, are often shrouded in darkness.

I will also under-expose by several stops or increments thereof to achieve a dark, richly-coloured sky.

Lastly, I expose for the ‘just right’ scenario, and if I am shooting water crashing into rocks, I will shoot numerous frames at the same exposure settings to capture the unique moment when the water is moving over the rocks.  I can then blend the best parts of multiple exposures in post-processing.

So, the key to my seascape photography and the amount of dynamic range I can achieve lies in the use of both lens-based GND filters and manual exposure blending.

My experience has told me that GND filters are helpful, but cannot get it 100% right in much of the light in which I shoot.  They sure help, but manual blending of multiple identically-framed exposures taken at different speeds gives me much more flexibility.

Of course, it all depends on the light.  I have shot in conditions where a GND filter alone was sufficient to achieve an even exposure with good dynamic range; but even then I will still tend to employ exposure bracketing and blend in a darker sky.

This brings me to the final phase: post-processing.

4.  Post-Processing

I have recently published articles detailing the processing techniques I use on my images, and I intend to publish more in the future, so in this section I will not go into the finer details, but instead will briefly explain some of the techniques I use.

My basic workflow consists of raw conversion (with white balance, contrast and sharpness applied in Adobe Camera Raw), followed by blending, lightening, darkening, colour adjustments, contrast and sharpness all applied in Adobe Photoshop CS4.

My workflow consists of non-destructive processing techniques using adjustment layers and layer masks.  This is where the blending of multiple exposures is done.  When I have a stack of identically-framed images, I create a layer mask, invert it, and brush in the content I want from another frame.

I use curves quite extensively for selective lightening and darkening of parts of the scene, such as the sky (typically darkened) and foreground rocks (typically lightened).  I also use curves for vignetting, which is simply a form of edge darkening intended to draw the viewer’s eye into the scene.  Selective or whole-of-image contrast is increased with curves adjustment layers, too.

Other techniques I apply with adjustment layers is the use of selective warming or cooling filters, saturation and desaturation, or individual colour channel adjustment.

As this section was only intended to give an overview of the sort of processing techniques I use, please see my post-processing tutorials for more detailed walks-through.

5.  Conclusion

Hopefully this article provides some insight into my choice of subject matter, the equipment and techniques I use to capture it, and how I work my images in Photoshop to bring out the final result for maximum visual impact and technical correctness.

This should also serve to illustrate that there isn’t a lot of magic involved in seascape photography, but fairly simple techniques and equipment that can be used by most people with a little know-how.  Most of the magic lies in the conditions of the sky and water at the time, and in my experience, it’s unpredictable (the sky, at least).

So, armed with my experience and the philosophies and techniques I have shared, all you aspiring seascapers should get out there and give it your best shot.

The result was Drinking Problem.

Drinking Problem

This image took me over three hours to create, as a fair bit of setup went into it.

The splash was generated by moving a platform, to which the wine glass was affixed, across the camera’s path, and abruptly stopping it precisely within the lens’s field of view so that the momentum would cause the liquid to splash up and out of the glass.

I built a dolly and platform using wheels and rails so that I could easily and consistently slide the platform along the same horizontal plane. I had pre-focused the lens (I used a 135mm lens for this) and wanted the glass to always end up in the same place, and be in focus.

I placed a heavy object at the end of the dolly to stop the platform dead in its tracks.

I used Blu-Tak and copious quantities of packing tape to attach the base of the glass to the platform, as I’d broken another glass earlier in the night during “dress rehearsal”. I had practiced slamming the platform into the weight to make sure I’d get a splash, and see what sort of splash I’d get (each splash is unique and can never be repeated).

Unfortunately the Blu-Tak I had used in the rehearsal was, of itself, not enough to keep the glass affixed, and during one run it lost its grip and fell into the weight, breaking in the process.

As for the background and lighting, I used the same staging I built to create Wine is a Primary Industry previously. I pointed a strobe at a white backdrop, dialled in the right amount of power (1/32nd at 24mm zoom), and using a radio trigger I fired it from the camera at the moment of exposure.

On the camera I used a remote shutter release so that I could push the platform with one hand, and fire the camera with the other hand at the moment the platform struck the weight. I wasn’t looking through the viewfinder when shooting; I physically couldn’t do so, and didn’t need actually to use the viewfinder, as I knew exactly where the glass would be at the critical time.

There was a surprisingly little amount of liquid spillage as a result of doing this (I had counted on a lot more), but I was prepared, and placed my strobe and radio trigger in zip-lock bags to protect them from the liquid.

So, there you have it.

On Sunday morning I was fortunate enough to capture this scene in all it glory, under a moody, yet colourful sky.

The Narrabeen Gorge

I wanted dark, moody drama with a churning ocean and water cascading off the interesting and photogenic rock formation. The conditions were perfect.

In the near future I will post full details of the capture and post-processing that went into creating this image, so please stay tuned.

Update: My tutorial covering the post-processing of this image is here.

While most of the group lingered around the tidal pool at Narrabeen, I splish-splashed my way north to Turimetta.  The high tide prevented access to Turimetta Beach and its famous gorge, but I did capture some pleasing imagery nearby, such as this:

Turimetta Blues

I captured quite a few dramatic scenes of the gorge a little further south at Narrabeen, and will post those at a later stage.

It was definitely pleasing to be greeted with a colourful, cloud-laden sky.  It makes shooting so much easier and so much more enjoyable!

Areas such as the Sydney Harbour foreshore and Uluru (aka Ayers Rock) are strictly regulated as far as photography is concerned.

In many cases it is no longer safe or even permissible for parents to photograph their children performing in school activities or playing sports for fear of being branded sexual perverts by ignorant members of the general public, or told “no, you cannot do that” because some commercial photographer has exclusive rights over photography of an event.

Well-known Australian photographer Ken Duncan is organising a rally in Sydney to be held at Campbell’s Cove on 29 August, 2010, from 10am to 12pm to raise awareness of the issues that are eroding photographers’ rights.

Full information about the rally can be found at the Arts Freedom Australia site, and Ken has posted a video (see above) explaining the situation and encouraging photographers to stand up for their rights.

I for one will be attending, and I’d urge anyone in Sydney to attend this rally and collectively defend our rights to photograph the world around us without being restricted or totally outlawed by bureaucracy, ignorance and paranoia.

Only the Lonely

When I posted this image on a photography forum someone asked about my post-processing.  I decided to post a complete walk-through of my post-processing workflow for this image.

It’s always good to learn from others, and many are curious about the processing that goes into images.

That being said, I figured it’d be a good idea to share my post-processing techniques so that others can learn.

Indeed, post-processing was something I learned from a combination of experimentation, picking up things from other people, Internet tutorials, etc., so the more information available, the better.

Without further ado, here’s an explanation of my processing technique for this image (which tends to more or less apply with most of my images).

Firstly, I loaded two identically-framed exposures into Adobe Camera Raw.  The properties of the two exposures were as follows:

1. ISO 100, f/8 and 10 seconds; and
2. ISO 100, f/8 and one second.

As you can see, quite a variation between exposures.

After opening both images in ACR, I selected them both and applied the following settings:

• Camera Profile: Camera Landscape
• White Balance: As Shot
• Clarity: +60
• Sharpening Amount: +65

I made no other changes in ACR.

When I dropped the images into Adobe Photoshop CS4, I had two images: the lighter exposure (which I wanted for the detail in the rocks) and the darker exposure (which I wanted for the sky and water).

Here is a screen capture of my two raw images:

Only the Lonely - Source Raw Images

I used Photoshop’s Lens Correction filter to straighten the horizon and remove barrel distortion.  The same settings were applied to both images.

I then selected the darker image, copied it and pasted it as a new layer onto the lighter exposure.

I now had an image with two layers:

1. the lighter base layer; and
2. the darker layer I’d use for the sky and water.

The next step was to start manually blending the two exposures.

I created a layer mask on the top layer (darker image) and inverted the layer mask.  When inverting the layer mask, it becomes black, meaning you can see what’s in lower layers.  This way I then paint in the effect rather than painting out what I don’t want changed.

I used the brush tool, set the opacity to 20% and painted in the darker sky and water on the layer mask, preserving the lighter details in the rocks.  I didn’t use a contrast mask on the rock in this case, as there’s strong enough contrast and it’s easy to select it in order to mask it out or otherwise avoid modifying its pixels.

Numerous times I brushed over the areas I wanted darkened to bring the richer, darker colours through in the sky and water areas.

Next, I added a curves adjustment layer to boost contrast and saturation.  I chose the Linear Contrast preset, but then tweaked the curve manually to add more contrast.

I then added a saturation adjustment layer, as the colour towards the edge of the frame on the horizon was lacking punch.  I set the saturation to +20, added a layer mask, inverted the mask, and the brushed in the saturation in places where I wanted it.

I wanted to lighten the rock, so I added a new layer and set the blend mode to Soft Light.  I took my brush tool, dialled in opacity at 10%, chose an appropriate brush size and then painted over the rock to subtly lighten it.  I probably selected the rock first to avoid lightening the water adjacent to it.

At this point I was close to a final image.

While the top-most layer (Dodge) was selected, on my Mac I hit Apple-Option-Shift-E to create a new layer by merging all lower layers.

I called this layer “Merged and Sharpened”.  It was here that I’d apply the final step before exporting to JPG for publication.

I selected the rock using the magic wand tool and applied the Unsharp Mask with Amount set to 10%, Radius set to 50 pixels, and Threshold at 0.  Lastly, I used the Smart Sharpen filter at 30% to sharpen the details in the rocks.

Throughout the process I applied a bit more brushing here and there, but otherwise, that’s the workflow I used.

It’s easier to see things than read about them, so please see this screen capture of my layer stack in Photoshop:

Only the Lonely - Photoshop Layer Stack

Hopefully this might help people with their processing.

It has materialised that some people do not feel they can or should comment on other people’s images if they feel they lack experience, artistry and technical know-how.

Myself and some other commentators have encouraged such people to comment on images.

Why?

Simple.

The majority of people who look at your photos are going to be non-photographers.

By the same token, if you’re a famous musician, most of the people who will listen to your music are non-musicians.

Sure, many people who do see or hear your work are also going to be people who also produce images or music themselves, and they will be your harshest critics; but it’s always good to take the opportunity to learn from those people, as they can offer you advice about your work that can only come from someone accustomed to the creation process, as opposed to someone who can merely see an image and like it, but not create it themselves.

Don’t ever feel you cannot offer something if you don’t see yourself as being at the same level as those whose work you critique.  What you can offer other photographers is the important stuff: the human element about why you like the image and how it strikes you, and not the sharpness, focus, depth of field, bokeh and other techno-babble you can read in any book.

By way of example, a while ago, someone bought a large canvas print of one of my images to hang in his office, and he emailed me to tell me that he spent a lot of time at that location when he was younger.

My image reminded him of good times from the past; I’m sure he didn’t give two hoots about the fact that my exposure across the image was good, that I composed as per the rule of thirds, that the depth of field was deep and that the colours were fantastic; for the person who looks at my image every day, it’s about his time growing up.

Nobody’s ever going to remember your images for being technically correct.

To me, that discussion goes to show that to the viewer, an image is about emotional impact; about times, places and people the viewer considers important.  Only photographers get caught up in all the technical stuff.

Sure, matters of composition, exposure, focus and the like are important, but they are merely building blocks for an image, and we as photographers should not lose sight of the fact that we are producing images that will have some sort of emotional impact on the viewer, and that is the value to be remembered.

I am also a musician, have been playing for 25 years, and last year retired from the band of which I played lead guitar for some six years.  In addition to that, I was doing photoshoots for other bands.

When I was asked to shoot the Rubber Band (great guys and girl, BTW), I welcomed the opportunity on multiple levels:

1. I’d get to hang with the gang again;
2. I’d produce some images of which both the band and myself would be happy; and
3. the shoot would open the door to future opportunities.

The shoot produced some very pleasing images, and to my delight the band loved them.

Here’s one of Michelle belting out a song:

Michelle's Magnificence

I also did some video work on the night, and that renewed my dormant interest in video/cine work.  Once upon a time I wanted to become a cinematographer.

It was a fun night, and one of the rare opportunities these days I get to hear a live band without playing in it!

The experience renewed my interest in shooting bands, as well as video/cine work, which I never thought I’d want to do.

I’m looking forward to working with The Rubber Band again, and I can see some great opportunities ahead.

Here are a few more images from the shoot:

Joel in Sound Check

Paul and the Amazing Technicolour Stage Truck

David and Kane have recently established a new Brisbane-based business venture called Grasstree Photography.

One of Grasstree’s offerings is digital photography courses.  David and Kane are offering very affordable courses in portraiture, dusk/sunset landscapes/cityscapes and star-trail and night photography.

While I haven’t attended their workshops, I have known David and Kane for some years and shot with both of them, and I’ve also been given a preview of the course materials, which are comprehensive and easy to follow.  With that in mind, I have every confidence their workshops will be of great value to new photographers looking to learn, or more seasoned photographers looking to try a new avenue of photography.

I don’t often shoot the moon (it’s been done to death, and I had great success during the 2007 eclipse), but given the easy opportunity and the lack of effort required, I went outside with 600mm of focal length and captured this image of the partial eclipse:

Lunar Eclipse on 26 June, 2010

I used my Canon EOS 5D Mark II, Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS USM, Canon Extender EF 2x II, a tripod, remote cable release and mirror lockup.

Photographed at 9:16pm on 26/06/2010 with a Canon EOS 5D Mark II at 600mm for 1/160 sec at f/8 and ISO 200.

I produced Wine is a Primary Industry.

Wine is a Primary Industry

I knew some time prior that I wanted to create this type of shot.   I saw some incredible images along this line, created by another Flickr photographer.  This inspired me to actually do it.  I had been busting to create at the time, and this guy’s work got me revved up.

The setup was quite simple, but took a long time to arrange.

I spent around an hour and a half just setting up this shot, and 1/200th of a second actually capturing it.

The amount of work that goes into setting up a shot like this is quite time-consuming and very fiddly.  One needs to be exact, as you’ll see.

A while back, I bought some food colouring, knowing I wanted to create this type of image.

I knew how I wanted to light the scene: pure white backdrop, with backlighting.

The first thing I did was set up the “studio”.  The white backdrop was simply my 800 x 800 x 800mm light tent.  It was collapsed flat, and I leaned it against a wall.

I grabbed my Canon Speedlite 580EX II, positioned in behind the wine glasses, and pointed it at the backdrop.  I attached a PocketWizard PLUS II to trigger the flash remotely.  Some fiddling around with heights was done, as was some fiddling around with the flash power output settings.

The final flash setting was 24mm at 1/64th power.  This was sufficient to illuminate the backdrop and not blow out the detail in the glasses, or bleed light around the edges of the glasses.

Camera-wise, I had an 85mm prime and another PocketWizard attached, all mounted on a tripod.

I placed one of the wine glasses on a pedestal (a moderately large box).  I took some reference shots to check the exposure, and make sure that what my mind saw translated to the camera’s chimp screen.  I fiddled with exposure settings, and went with 1/200th at f/5.6 (my base exposure settings when I’m using strobes).

I soon found that my 85mm lens didn’t give me the nice, tight framing I wanted, and its rather long minimum focusing distance (MFD) of around 90cm prevented me from moving it closer to the subject.  I knew that I needed my 135mm prime, whose MFD is also around 90cm.  This gave me much nicer framing.

To set up the wine glasses, I used a plastic cutting board.   I used large blobs of Blu-Tak to stick the bases of the glasses to the cutting board. I used a T-square to line them up evenly.  The glasses had to be affixed to a flat surface, as the entire assembly would be tilted on an angle, and I couldn’t risk the chaos of the subjects moving out of alignment, or far worse, sliding right off.

I placed a thick book under the left side of the cutting board to tilt the glasses to the right.  The slant is around 13 degrees.

I tilted the camera so that the tops of the wine glasses were parallel to the top edge of the frame.

The next part was the liquid.

I pre-mixed the red, blue and yellow food colouring with water.  I used way too much colouring at first (half a cap full), and with the blue in particular, it was too dark.  The yellow was also too rich, and appeared orange.  I then diluted all of the mixtures considerably so that they were saturated enough to look nice, but not too saturated to appear dark on camera.

I poured out even measurements of the liquids into a jug for dispensing into the glasses.

Unfortunately at first, I used the same amount of liquid in each glass, which meant that the surfaces of the liquid in the glasses did not line up.

I then had to disassemble the subject, wash and dry the glasses, reassemble the subject and pour the liquid again carefully so that the surfaces would line up such to give the appearance of a continuous line of liquid.

Now, pouring liquid is actually fiddly business.  I discovered quickly that using the jug wasn’t a good idea, as there was too much splashing (even when poured slowly, as I was doing), which meant that there were droplets of liquid on parts of the glass above the liquid line.  It was also harder to control the amount of liquid dispensed.  Back to the sink for a wash and dry.

When setting up again, I reached for a funnel, and used that to complete the job.

There was still a little bit of splashing, so I used cotton tips to touch-dry those little droplets on the inside and outside of the glasses.

Finally I was ready to shoot.  I ended up capturing three images.  I captured the second because I’d missed a spot on the blue glass.  The third and final frame was captured because there were a couple of droplets on the stem of the yellow glass.

Third time lucky.

To say I was pleased with the result is an understatement.

However, as I’ve outlined, just getting to a point where I was ready to actually shoot was very time-consuming, consisted of trial and error, and was fiddly.

There was very little post-processing:  just conversion from raw, contrast adjustment, tighter cropping, some sharpening (not really needed), and a bit of dodging of the not-so-white corners where the light faded off.

Oh, and the wavy lines above the liquid lines are a result of the geometry of the glasses; they have a swirled pattern which protrudes away from the curvature of the glass.

To top off the experience, I later won an award for this image at my camera club.

The first is Brent Pearson, who has developed and run a series of successful seascape and and night light painting workshops.

I attended the first workshops Brent ran on both of these subjects/styles, and they were very informative and enjoyable workshops, which landed me some very pleasing and award-winning images.  Both workshops run over a consecutive Saturday and Sunday.

Seascape Workshop

In the seascape workshop, Brent takes course participants through the theory, equipment and techniques used in seascape photography on the Saturday afternoon, followed by a twilight/evening seascape shoot at Turimetta Beach at Warriewood in Sydney’s north.

Sunday commences very early with a dawn shoot at Turimetta, followed by breakfast and a morning of post-processing theory and practice using Adobe Lightroom and/or Adobe Photoshop, as well as plugin filters from the likes of Nik Software.

On the Sunday morning when I attended, two other hard-core seascapers and myself headed north to Turimetta head, while the rest of the group stayed at the south end of the beach.  This was one of the images I captured:

Fire Water Burn

Light Painting Workshop

The light painting workshop begins on a Saturday afternoon, whereby Brent takes course participants through the theory and practical challenges of light painting.  During this session he demonstrates the various lighting tools he has, and shows examples of what these can achieve.  Participants can “oooh” and “ahhh” at the pretty lights and funky effects in the comfort of a darkened room.

The evening finishes with a dinner and a photoshoot at Middle Head Fort, where participants get to shoot creative long-exposure images using the lights.

Day two takes place on a Sunday afternoon, and covers the theory and practical components to the post-processing and compositing of the images which participants captured on the Saturday night.

The following image was my pièce de résistance for the evening:

Fire or Flood?

In a future blog entry, I’ll provide details on how I shot and processed this image.

In Closing

Both courses are well worth attending, and will expand the horizons of any photographer looking to take a step up, or branch into something new.

Both courses were attended by beginner, intermediate and advanced photographers, and the course material caters for everyone.

Stay tuned for a future blog entry, in which I will introduce the newly-devised Brisbane photography workshops conducted by photographers David de Groot and Kane Gledhill.

Southern Mist

With the processing of this image, I decided to do two things:

1. apply more aggressive, dark and moody post-processing; and
2. use curves for most of my post-processing.

In this post I’m going to take you, step-by-step, through everything I did to produce the final result you see above.

A few preliminary words, though.

Firstly, it’s imperative to have a good source image (or set of source images).  I was fortunate in that the low-contrast light and very moody, threatening sky made exposure easy and also made for pleasing imagery.  Post-processing generally cannot turn an inherently weak image into a stunner.  The light is crucial.

Secondly, I advocate as much as possible the concept of non-destructive processing.  The only pixel-modifying work I do is final contrast and output sharpening after all other processing has been done, and this is done on a separate layer which consists of all lower layers merged.

Some details about the capture phase and equipment:

• Camera: Canon EOS 5D Mark II
• Lens: Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM
• Filter: Lee 0.9 (three-stop) graduated neutral-density
• Focal length: 16mm
• Shutter speed: 13 seconds
• Aperture: f/8
• Sensitivity: ISO 200

The image is a blend of two images.  One was exposed for 13 seconds and the other for 10 seconds.  In the darker exposure (ie, 10 seconds) there was more water on the rocks, and it was visually more appealing, so I brushed much of that into the image.  More on that later.  From an exposure point of view, I didn’t need two images.

As part of this tutorial there are two screen captures to view:

1. my raw source images (after initial processing in the raw converter); and
2. my Photoshop layer stack (showing my various adjustment layers).

These will both be helpful when you read about the processing I did.

Here are my raw source images:

Southern Mist - Source Raw Images

And here is my Photoshop layer stack:

Southern Mist - Photoshop Layer Stack

Now, onto the processing.

Step 1 – Raw Conversion

I loaded both of my raw images into Adobe Camera Raw and made the following adjustments:

• Camera profile: Camera Standard
• Sharpening Amount: 65
• White Balance Temperature: 7,350 degrees Kelvin
• Clarity: +60

I then loaded the two raw images in Adobe Photoshop CS4.

Step 2 – Distortion Correction and Horizon Straightening

A 16mm lens (even a pro-grade lens) will generally result in the horizon bowing, especially if you compose as per the rule of thirds as I mostly do, and your horizon is therefore towards the edge of the frame.

When shooting in the dark and looking through a viewfinder (even a full-frame viewfinder) or live view screen with no grid as reference lines for straightness, the horizon is often very slightly crooked, by a matter of maybe only half a degree to two or three degrees.  I am quite fussy, so I correct that as much as possible.

I fired up the Lens Correction filter (Filter -> Distort -> Lens Correction) and tweaked the barrel distortion and horizontal perspective sliders to correct the image as much as possible.

I then cropped both images and merged them into the one image, with two layers.

Step 3 – Water Blending

As I mentioned above, I wanted the water detail in one of my two exposures.  On the top layer, I created a layer mask, inverted it and brushed in most of the water detail and a fair bit of sky detail from the second exposure.

Step 4 – Cloning

There were a few annoying elements in the scene which needed to be removed.

The first was a fishing boat not far off the shore positioned on the top right intersecting point that exists as per the rule of thirds. The light from the boat was blown out and was otherwise distracting.  I created a new layer for cloning, and cloned out that boat using the clone tool.

There was another boat on the horizon whose light source revealed a spec of light significant enough to be annoying. Adios to that.

There was yet a third boat over on the right near the remote headland, so that got cloned too.

A specular highlight from the Kurnell oil refinery on the left headland was also visible enough to be annoying, so I made it vanish too.

Lastly, I had a few dust spots (yes, on my brand new 5D Mark II which has had only one lens on it for the whole time, and has in-built dust cleaning – this is obviously an outrage).

Step 5 – Rock Lightening

I wanted the foreground rock shelf to be brighter than it appeared in my base exposures, so I created a new curves adjustment layer. I inverted the layer mask to be black.  I tend to do that so that I can brush an effect into the scene rather than brushing everything else out.

In the curve, I dragged a couple of points (around 30% and 65% horizontally) northwards so that I had a convex curve, thus lightening the rocks.  Using the paint tool and varying degrees of opacity I cannot remember, I brushed the lightness into the rock shelf which really lifted it from the darkish scene.

Step 6 – General Contrast Increase

I created a new curves adjustment layer for general across-the-board contrast boosting, and lucked out with the Auto curve.  This not only increased the contrast, but corrected the colour to my liking, so I tweaked that no further.

Step 7 – Water and Sky Contrast

I decided that I wanted to further boost the contrast for the water and sky only, as they lacked a bit of punch and I wanted to make these more broody and dramatic.  I created a new curves adjustment layer and inverted the mask.  On the curve, I dragged a point downwards from around the 25% mark (horizontally and vertically) and used the paint tool to brush in the curves effect on the water and sky areas.  This darkened the water and sky to my liking.

Step 8 – Warming Filter

The image had a rather cool feel about it, and I wanted to warm up those rocks to contrast with the blue/grey hues of the water and sky.  I created a photo filter adjustment layer, inverted the mask, chose an orange colour, dialled in 55% density and brushed in the warming effect on the rock shelf and the “island” rock on the left.  This one step made a significant visual improvement to the image.

Step 9 – Saturation Increase

I felt that the rocks lacked sufficient saturation, so I added a hue/saturation adjustment layer.  As I wanted to apply it only to the rock shelf and isolated rock, I already had a mask from my previous layer (warming filter).  In order to use the same mask on multiple layers, I created a clipping mask, which bound the new hue/saturation adjustment layer to the mask I created previously in the warming filter layer.

This is a very handy feature.  If you want to use the same mask on multiple adjustment layers, the clipping mask is your friend.

Back to the saturation.  I boosted this to 16% and I was done.  No brushing involved, as the mask was already locked in due to the clipping mask.  A nice time-saver.

Step 10 – Vignetting

One technique used by landscape/seascape photographers like Peter Eastway and Brent Pearson is the use of a vignette to draw the eye into the scene.  I don’t usually apply this to my seascapes, but have done with some of my portraits.  This time I wanted a darker edge (in the literal sense) to the image.

I created a new curves adjustment layer, inverted the mask and then using a large brush, brushed in the effect around the edges and in a few brighter parts of the water.  I used fairly aggressive opacity to darken those extremities.

Step 11 – Final Contrast and Sharpening

This is the destructive step I mentioned in my preamble.  To do destructive editing non-destructively (yes, it sounds crazy, but bear with me), I created a new layer which was a composite of all layers beneath it.  At this stage I already had nine layers.

The way to create a new layer consisting of all lower layers is to:

1. select the top layer first (this is very important); and
2. press Apple-Option-Shift-E (on a Mac) or Ctrl-Alt-Shift-E on a PC (I’m not 100% sure on that).

I then had a new layer combining all of the previous post-processing I did.

I applied the unsharp mask at 15% to increase overall contrast, and then using the magic wand tool, I selected the rock areas and applied the smart sharpen filter at 40% to boost the gritty sharpness of these areas.

So, there you have it.

Hopefully this provides you with a good insight into my post-processing workflow, and the results that are possible.

I repeat that it’s important to have good source material, as no amount of post-processing will turn an inherently bad image into a masterpiece.

I have a somewhat dated (but still very capable) Epson Photo Stylus R210 photographic ink-jet printer (I bought it in 2003 or s0).  However, it cannot print any larger than A4.  I wanted big prints.

Enter RedBubble, which currently has an extra 10% discount on prints, tees et al.  As I have a gallery there which features the two aforementioned images, it was simply a matter of ordering the largest prints available, and receiving a further discount on top of what I already receive when purchasing prints of my own work.  Score!

So, last week I ordered 600mm x 400mm prints (approximately A2 in size) prints, and they were delivered today.

I’ve just hung them on the loungeroom walls, and they look great!

These are the images:

Together Alone

Southern Mist

So, if you have an image which you really like, print it and print it big!

There’s nothing quite like seeing your own work as a fine-art print.

It’s written by photographers, for photographers.

This project has been quite a success, and has international reach, with a large presence in Australia and New South Wales in particular.

Being an avid outdoor photographer, I decided to contribute to the project by writing guides to Cronulla’s tidal pools, Avalon tidal pool, La Perouse and Bare Island, and Dee Why.

The Free Photo Guides Project is well worth a look for any photographers looking for interesting places and subjects to shoot.

Visit today!

Now, admittedly I do not practice all that I am about to preach, but my experience has prompted some thinking, I am much more conscious of the safety issues, and I will be putting some of these measures into practice.  Knowing that I could get injured or killed and never be found again is a frightening thought, and it’s not just myself to consider.

So, here is my list of tips, in no particular order.

1.  Tell someone where you’re going.

It’s a good idea to tell someone where you’re going, especially if you’re going at dawn, dusk or late at night when such places are more isolated, or if they’re isolated locations in general.

Many Sydney seascape locations such as Turimetta Head (Warriewood), “Canyon X” (further north of Turimetta Head), “Devil’s Cauldron” (south of Whale Beach) and Cape Banks are quite remote, can take a while to reach, and can be dangerous to reach (Canyon X in particular).

If you do get into trouble, it could be difficult if not impossible to find you, so tell someone where you will be and when.  Arrange to call someone you know at a pre-determined time to check in and advise that you are safe and well, and make sure you do make the call.

On that note…

2.  Make sure your mobile phone has sufficient charge.

Ensure your phone has sufficient charge so you can make your pre-arranged call, or in case you otherwise need to make a call. Of course, if you’re in a location with no mobile coverage (generally not an issue along Sydney’s coastline), that’s a risk which requires mitigation.

3.  Never under-estimate the power of the ocean.

The ocean is very powerful, and its appearance can be deceptive.  Don’t assume that an area is safe because it looks safe.  Study the ocean for a while; observe its patterns.  It has a rhythm to it, and every so often, larger waves will come in.  I’ve been told that every 40 minutes or so, a larger-than-usual wave (I’m hesitant to call it a rogue wave) comes in.

Look for signs of recent water contact from splashes and waves as opposed to a previously high, outgoing tide.

Be aware of the tide.  Know its direction and when it will be high, as it could leave you stranded. I use the Manly Hydraulics Laboratory to check the tide, and I also have the Pocket Weather AU app on my iPhone, which sources data from the Australian Bureau of Meteorology, and in the paid version, provides tidal information.

Never turn your back on the ocean; a “rogue wave” can come out of nowhere and pound you. It happens very quickly.  Keep an eye on the ocean and be prepared to retreat.

Having experienced the fury of the ocean on more than one occasion, I can relate personally how powerful it is.  The velocity of secondary water contact (ie, splashes after a wave hits a rock) can knock a person off balance.  The volume of water can be huge, and will thoroughly drench a person and everything nearby.

The danger also lies in the fact that the water must recede back into the ocean.  The “rock current” can be quite strong, and its speed, combined with slippery rocks and unstable rock shelves, can sweep a person into the ocean.  There could be jagged rocks on the shoreline, or submerged dangers.  A strong swell can pound a person into those rocks and cause severe injury or death.

Don’t put yourself in harm’s way; a fall or a powerful wave can mean the end of you.

4.  Watch your step.

Seascape photography often involves navigating rocky shorelines, often in darkness or near-darkness if you’re a dawn or dusk shooter.  Dangers include uneven terrain, slippery surfaces from moss and moisture (some moss is black and hard to see), crevasses, rock pools and other pot-holes.  It is not difficult to mis-step and scratch a leg, or worse, sprain or break it.

5.  Be visible, and be able to see in the dark.

Wear high-visibility clothing in case you do run into trouble.  Wear a battery-powered headlamp for navigation in the dark.  This is far superior to a hand-held torch, as it keeps your hands free (which you need for balancing or carrying other gear) and also points where your eyes point.  These are essential for navigation in the dark, and can also assist with autofocus.

6.  Protect your gear.

As I’ve experienced, electronic equipment tends not to like being wet.  Invest in a weather-resistant camera bag, and also carry plastic bags which can cover your camera in case it rains or in case a splash makes contact.  Use zip-lock bags for smaller items you wish to protect from water (eg, mobile phones, GPS units, wallets, keys, remote shutter releases, memory cards, etc.).  Bring towels, a chamois and other drying equipment in case it’s necessary to dry yourself or your equipment.  If you’re not using some item in your gear, keep it in your bag; this will prevent it from being lost or damaged if water comes into contact with it.

Insure your gear, and make sure your insurance policy covers accidental damage, and also covers your equipment while it’s out of your home.  Having it insured only while it’s in the home is useless for a device that was intended to be portable.

7.  Go with someone.

Seascape photography can often be a solitary hobby, but being alone in remote, dangerous locations in the dark can add to the general danger level.  It is better to go with at least one other person.  If either of you runs into trouble, the other can lend assistance.

Having a mate with you can also be handy if you encounter other dangers, such as aggressive, drunken fools out in the streets (or partying in an isolated location) after a Saturday night on the turps.  You’re less of a target to would-be attackers if you’re not alone.

8.  Dress for the occasion.

It is essential to wear shoes which both provide grip, and can get wet.  Hard-core rock fisherman have metal cleats on their shoes which provide good grip.  I personally have a black pair of Dunlop Volleys which have good rubber grip, are inexpensive, light and can get wet.  I throw them into the washer and dryer with no problems.

Now, I have slid on rock shelves whilst wearing these; they’re possibly not the most effective shoes for rock-hopping, but they do a fairly decent job.

Wear shorts, not jeans or other heavy long pants. I wear shorts even in the winter.  There are two benefits.  Firstly, you can be knee-deep in water without having drenched clothing.  Secondly, if you do get swept into the sea, it’s less weight to restrict your mobility or weigh you down.  The down-side is that your legs are exposed to the cold, and to sharp rock edges which could scratch or gouge you.  A light weather-proof jacket is a good idea, too.

Seascape photography can be dangerous business.  Hopefully the above advice will prevent you being injured or killed.

You may like to view Brent Pearson’s video on extreme seascape photography at Devil’s Cauldron to see how dangerous the ocean can be, and how suddenly it can lash out.

As I have become more and more involved in various photographic communities, I have been inspired to create my own blog in order to share:

1. images I’ve captured;
2. the adventures behind my photographic outings;
3. general photographic advice;
4. information about gear; and
5. my post-processing tutorials.

Hopefully readers will find some value here.

I have some pre-written content I’m looking forward to sharing here, so stay tuned for some handy advice and some post-processing tutorials which show the behind-the-scenes work which went into some of my images.