Category: Artist

Posted on

It Doesn’t Have To Be a Portfolio Shot

Car wash. Wet color.

Of course we want to build a great portfolio, but don’t stress too much. Sometimes it is best to just go shoot and see what happens. In other words, not every shot has to be a portfolio shot.

A portfolio shot?

We all probably have one or more “portfolios” we maintain. Maybe you don’t formally build a physical portfolio box or book. Now days it is probably one or more Lightroom collections (or albums, depending on which flavor you use). That is a separate discussion.

The portfolio represents our best work. Typically there will be multiple ones for categories like landscapes or portraits or street photography, etc.

It should be a very limited set. A maximum of 20 works well. If you have 200, either you are a truly exceptional artist or you haven’t edited enough yet. Editing hurts. It is painful to take out a favorite. But the reality is that every one removed makes the remaining set stronger. It is healthy to constantly challenge our portfolio. Test to see if new images are better than existing ones. If they are, replace the old one.

So my point here is that it is easy to get in our head and not take a picture of a scene unless we are sure it is superior to anything already in our portfolio. This freezes us into fear and indecision.

Be mindful

Photography should be a process of mindfulness. We should be present and open wherever we are. This helps us to actually see the possibilities in what is around us at the moment. Being there and being in the moment lets us make the most of whatever situation we find.

Self-censoring fights against mindfulness. When we pass opportunities because they will probably not make portfolio images, we are building a mental wall to exclude things. It constricts our thinking and leads us to miss great shots that come unexpectedly.

Practice the craft

If you are a musician you practice hours a day. Even simple scales train the musical senses. If you are a gymnast you practice hours a day. Strength and flexibility exercise is as important as working on routines.

Why should it be different in the arts? Our art is part craft. Practice makes us better. We need to be very fluid in handling our equipment. Exposure decisions should be quick. Composition should be almost automatic because we have built such a large base of experience.

So we need to spend a lot of time just taking pictures. For the practice, if nothing else, even if we discard most of them. It makes us a more virtuoso photographer. The great majority of this practice does not produce portfolio shots. But it sets us up to skillfully make the great shot when we find it.

Get in the flow

A lot gets written about flow states. here are reasons for this. One is that it is a simple concept most of us can relate to. Another is that it is a powerful and compelling experience. Everybody seems to understand the basic concept, so I will not define it.

It is hard to force a flow state. You kind of fall into it and don’t realize it until later. To get there you have to be working – hard. Not working on getting into a flow. Working hard on our craft. That means being out doing it. Not just dabbling in it, but spending significant time and attention. As we immerse ourselves in it for an extended time we may find that we have hit a groove. Time seems to stand still. The stars align, so to speak, and everything seems to work better; ideas come freely; we are on a creative high. We feel good about what we are doing and the results are above normal. It seems to flow.

Looking back on it with a warm glow we may realize we were in a flow. It is important to realize that the flow is not the goal. The experience we feel and the work we produce is. Flow helps enable that.

Be surprised

And by being out and shooting freely with less self-censoring, I often am surprised by what I get. Maybe it is from being more mindful. Perhaps it is when I am in a flow. But regardless of why, I am frequently pleased with images that I thought at the time would be boring. And I am glad I shot them.

The famous Wayne Gretsky said “You miss 100% of the shots you don’t take.” I think there is application to our photography. Just thinking about a shot does not create an image. Thinking about a shot and deciding not to take it means no image. But when something tickles your subconscious and you go ahead and grab the shot, you might find gold. Even when you are relatively sure it will not make it into your portfolio, it might trigger another thought. Which might trigger another thought. And so on. It can bring you to a better way to see the subject. We can surprise ourselves.

So don’t be quite so picky. Be very picky in the excellence we demand in our craft. But be careful in prejudging our shots. Do your best with what is there and see where it leads. It could be that it is not a weak subject that is at fault. It could be that we aren’t letting our self think about it very well.

Today’s image

I’m a sucker for these. I love shooting them. You never know precisely what you will get, but the surprise can be fun. I really like this one. It is also a great exercise for working on timing. Being able to recognize a shot and execute it. It fascinates me that a few tenths of a second or a slight movement of the frame can make all the difference.

Posted on

They Told You Wrong About ISO

Candles, Catholic Church, Regensburg Germany.

Many of us have a wrong idea about ISO settings. I will just say they told you wrong about ISO. It was a misunderstanding. Whoever “they” are.

Statement of faith

It is stated as a “strong suggestion“, especially when we are learning landscape or portrait work. Never shoot with ISO over 100. Maybe it is stated as only shoot at the native ISO setting for your camera. Either way, these are given as rules.

I hate rules, especially for my art. Rule of thirds. Rules of composition. Never put the subject in the center. Never shoot at midday. Always use a tripod. The list goes on.

Like with religion, most of the so-called rules are based on good ideas, but over time they are repeated as commands and the underlying reasons are lost. Just do it. (I don’t think that is what Nike meant.) The rules become a statement of blind faith that cannot be challenged.

What is noise?

All digital cameras have noise. Noise is randomly generated in the sensor and in the electronics of the signal path until the pixels have been digitized by the analog to digital converter (ADC). The noise is a fundamental property of physics.

The question is how much noise is there relative to the desired data. This is called signal to noise ratio in engineering. When we amplify a signal by increasing the ISO setting, all the signal including the noise is increased. This is why images shot at high ISO settings tend to look noisy. The image is usually not less sharp, but there is more noise obscuring things.

It is true for a low cost point and shoot camera or a high end medium format camera. What changes are the relative amounts of noise and the limits the image can be pushed to.

What is ISO?

You’re familiar with the exposure triad: the combination of aperture, shutter speed, and ISO that determine exposure. That’s it. Many other things affect the composition and quality of an image, but only those 3 control the exposure.

Aperture is the size of the diaphragm opening in the lens. It controls, among other things, the amount of light coming in. Shutter speed is the length of time the shutter is open to let light come in. And the ISO setting is kind of like a volume control. It sets the gain or amount of amplification of the sensor data.

Going way back to early film days, there were no agreed on standards for the measure of how sensitive film was. So a couple of the largest standards organizations (the ASA and DIN scales) came together and created a standards group under the International Organization of Standards. They adopted the acronym of the standards organization (in English) as the name. By the way, officially “ISO” is not an acronym, it is a word, pronounced eye-so.

Long way around, but now there are defined standards for exposure. For a given combination of aperture and shutter speed, the ISO settings on all cameras give the same exposure.

Why use higher ISO settings

OK then, in concept, the ISO setting is a volume control for exposure. Turning it up (increasing the ISO value) amplifies the exposure data. But as I mentioned, it is not free. Amplifying the exposure also amplifies the noise in it.

It is true that low ISO settings produce less noise in the captured image. Modern sensors are much better than early ones. This is one of the wonders of engineering improvements that happen as a technology matures.

Then, we should not use high ISO settings, right? Well, everything is a tradeoff. We need to use a minimum shutter speed to avoid camera shake when hand holding or to stop subject movement. We need to use a certain aperture to give the depth of field we want. These decisions must be balanced in the exposure triad, often by increasing the ISO.

Can’t I just underexpose?

When you accept that we must use the lowest ISO setting, the logical conclusion is that you could massively underexpose the image and “correct” it in post processing. Unfortunately this doesn’t work well. You are still boosting the noise unacceptably.

The camera manufacturer knows more about it’s sensors than your image processing software does. The camera’s built-in ISO amplification can take into account it’s characteristics and do a better job. And modern sensors and electronics do a very good job.

Are you wrong about ISO?

If you are following a rule dictating you must or can’t do something, yes you are wrong. There are no rules in art. No ISO-like standards body specifies what your image must look like. There are always groups wanting to do this (are you listening camera clubs?), but they have no authority.

If you are hand holding a shot, it is better to boost the ISO to steady the movement than follow a rule about using low ISO. The noise will be secondary to the reduced shake. Or I sometimes use the lowest ISO setting in my camera to create blur. I enjoy intentional camera movement (ICM) shots and will occasionally force an artificially slow shutter speed.

If it is night and you want to shoot stars or street scenes, are you not going to do it because you would have to violate a rule by the ISO police?

Use the ISO setting that lets you express what you want to do. It is your art. There are no rules. Besides, luminance noise looks like film grain. It can be an interesting artistic technique in itself. Do what feels right to you.

Apology

I used fairly strong language about this. The reality is that most photography writers have softened their recommendations on ISO. Most of them freely recommend using high ISO. This is healthy.

But I know many of us were “imprinted” by early mentors who left us feeling there was something dirty about going above 100 ISO. I want to free you if you still have those self-imposed limits. Using even a very high ISO and getting the shot is always better than missing it because you wouldn’t want to chance increased noise.

Today’s image

Since I’m advocating it, here is an extreme case that I’m happy with. This was shot hand held with an old Nikon D5500 camera – at ISO 22800. I have corrected out some of the luminance and chromance noise and I am perfectly OK with what remains. Getting the shot made me happy, even if the noise is high.

Posted on

A Selfish Pursuit

Patterns, lines, chaos, wonder. People going through.

When you think about it, most art, photography included, is a selfish pursuit. That is, it is about us, the artist. It is our expression. Is that bad?

Revealing what things look like

Go back to the mid 19th Century for photography and maybe a hundred years or more earlier for painting and one major reason for creating a work is to show people a (relatively) objective view of what a place looked like. People didn’t travel much back then, especially just for pleasure.

In the late 1800’s, unless you lived close to them, you would never have seen Niagara Falls, or the Rocky Mountains, or the Grand Canyon, or the Colombia River. Not in person. So there was a need for artists to show us these sights.

Artists like Bierstadt painted rather romantic and exaggerated views of scenery, like the Rocky Mountains. I hate to break it to you, but the Rockies don’t really look like this. A big selling point for photography was that it quickly captured “reality” (whatever that is). So photography brought views of places to a larger audience. This helped cement the false opinion that photographs are “real”.

Its been done

That was then. Now is different. Virtually every place has been photographed. I have a friend who specializes in wilderness photography – places few people have seen. But that is the exception, not the norm.

Now people travel long distances comfortably and relatively cheaply. And it is estimated that about 3 trillion photos are taken a year ( a trillion is 1012, that is 1 million millions). So nearly every place people want to go has been visited millions of times and they have taken millions of pictures there.

We don’t need another picture of Niagara Falls or the Grand Canyon just to show people what it looks like. They have seen it. Many times. Too many times.

What is an aspiring artist to do?

Art now is about expression

What there is to do is to show a fresh, new point of view. I won’t say we must make a creative picture. That can easily lead to producing something different for the sake of being different. This leads to a lot of difficult to understand work that may not mean anything, but it is different.

It may be better to suggest we create work that is authentic. That is, it expresses our feeling or point of view and is also well done and artistic. Supposedly authentic work is fresh and unique because it expresses our own uniqueness. I cynically put the “supposedly” comment in because I’m not sure that many people actually have a refined point of view. A lot of people copy what they have seen someone else do.

Anyway, authentic work that expresses us should have a well reasoned and optimized composition, a look that is consistent with our other work, and an approach to the subject that reflects our feelings about it. It does not have to be of exotic locations or subjects unless that is what we are drawn to. Actually, the subject matter can be mundane and common if we have a fresh approach to it.

I have to do it first for me

Therefore, I claim that art is a selfish pursuit. I have to do it for me, to express what is drawing me to the subject. If it is liked by other people, that is a plus. But if I create the work mainly to please others, I lose sight of my own uniqueness. I miss out on bringing the viewer something new because it is something that comes out of me.

So in this special case, be selfish. Think of yourself first. Create art that pleases you. Other people will be drawn to the passion that is obviously there. They will ignore lifeless copies of what they have already seen.

Today’s Image

This was in downtown Denver one time. I was grabbed by the patterns and lines and reflections. I had to do something with it. The herd of people traveling through in a protected bubble, probably oblivious to most of the beauty around them, really got me.

Posted on

Why Do It?

Zig-zag shadow

Here’s a dirty secret of the photography world: we don’t make much money on fine art sales. Then why do it?

Crowded market

The art market in general is crowded, over-saturated, cutthroat. And photography is even worse. Everyone is a photographer. Trillions of images are shot every year. If only 1 trillion pictures are taken a year, that is an average of over 2.7 billion pictures a day. Who has time to look at anything anymore?

And people have come to view photographs as some pixels on their phone screen. They quickly scan through hundreds of them a day. That devalues art in general and fine art in particular.

Even if your work is excellent, how do you get people’s attention? Not many people go to galleries. If you are looking for a nice image to go over your couch or fireplace, where do you go? Etsy? Art Marketplace? Amazon? Maybe, but you will quickly drown in choices. Some of them are good.

Other channels

The fine art photographers I know who are making money sell through galleries or art fairs. But even that generally does not support them.

No, most “professional’ fine art photographers support themselves through conducting workshops or selling online courses or writing books. There is still money to be made there. Seems like everybody is a perpetual beginner and needs training. A photographer who makes a name for himself can do well teaching other people.

Fine Art

I keep saying “fine art” photography. That is what I generally do and what I like. It is a small niche of the overall photography market.

People whose main motivation is selling art are told, rightly, to go to Art Marketplace or Amazon or places like that and research what people are buying. Then do more of that. Following the crowd is a sure strategy to sales.

That is not what I do and I do not want to do it. I am interested in creating art – exploring and using my creative vision – instead of copying what other people are doing.

Self motivation

I would love to sell more of my prints. ( photos.schlotzcreate.com or contact me ed@schlotzcreate.com 🙂 ), but maybe not for the reason you would first think.

In my view, my art will be expressed mainly as prints. A print has many great qualities that are well beyond what a screen can provide.

I want people to appreciate my work enough to pay for a large, excellent quality print to put in their home or office. Something they want to look at frequently over the years because it stirs something in them. It creates a relationship between us, between my vision and its effect on their life. I want to know who is buying the print and why. To me, another nice nighttime shot of the Dallas skyline they buy off Amazon does not do that.

I spent a great career as an engineer, but I kept alive a secret desire to express my creativity through photographic imagery. It is one of the important things I do to keep growing as a human. I don’t actually have to support myself financially through my art. I can be selective. Call me privileged if you want, or call it good planning and knowing how to build a good life.

Can’t not do it

So I have a strong desire to share my works with people, to have them resonate with some of them enough to decide to buy them to look at for years to come. I hope my art will add something to their lives.

But if no one sees my work and no one buys my prints, I still have to do them. Ultimately, my art is for me. It is something I need to do, that I am driven to do. My art completes something in me. It is something I can’t not do.

I have long since given up on the romantic notion of becoming rich and famous through my art.

Today’s image

I can’t pass up something like this. The simplicity and distinct graphic lines grab me. In this case, I risked getting fired, because I took it at a company I worked for where they had a strict no camera policy. But I walked in this door every day and when the light was right… Well, I couldn’t stop myself.

Posted on

Another Way to Copy

Photographing a true icon - The Eiffel Tower

My previous article talked about using presets to make our work look like another artist‘s. This is going to continue talking about another way to copy another artist. Not directly or intentionally, but with the same result. That way is going to the same locations.

Trendy locations

It seems like locations are as trendy and popular with photographers as clothes styles are with some other people. Can’t you look at a lot of popular photography and score pretty well in a “guess the location” game?

Some locations get over-photographed to the point of becoming cliche. Do you get tired of seeing pictures of Iceland or Greenland or the Antarctic or Africa? A little closer to. home, how about Yosemite or the Tetons or the Palouse region or fall images from Vermont?

It is not at all that these places are not beautiful. Just that there is a herd instinct to rush to do the same thing. It seems like a photographer publishes a nice image of a fresh new location and everybody wants to follow to get, what, the same picture?

The problem of visiting iconic locations

There is nothing wrong with these locations. Absolutely not. They are iconic because they rightly deserve to be. The problem is our own and what we commonly do when we get there.

From my own experience and from reading others’ experiences it seems there is a common trap we fall into. An often photographed location causes a certain amount of awe and wonder. We see the famous image we have dreamed of and shoot it. And then we are kind of done.

Most of us can’t, on that first visit, see beyond the obvious. This is common. The location is famous and grand and set apart in our mind as this special thing. We have always seen it a certain way and we are locked into only seeing it that way.

Access is important

What is the difference between our shots of iconic locations and the, probably better, work we do routinely? One significant difference is access. I want to thank Brooks Jensen, the editor of LensWork magazine for helping me see this insight in issue 152, Editors Comments. He, in turn, was inspired by a comment of David Hurn. He proposed that the most important aspect of a potential subject is that we have access to it.

What we routinely see and shoot we become very familiar with. We become analytic in looking at it. Having the freedom to frequently return to the location gives us the opportunity to see and evaluate it in all seasons and weather and lighting conditions. From all angles and possible views. It becomes an old friend we know well. When we take a shot of it, it likely captures its true personality. We know its best side and its worst.

These familiar scenes may not be the grand locations most people think about. But we can represent them in meaningful ways, because we know them well. And we know them well because we have access to them.

Access, frequent return visits, is what builds this familiarity.

Approaching an icon

So what strategy can we use when we get the chance to visit one of the. icons? I agree with Mr. Jensen that photographing exotic locations is actually more difficult than photographing the familiar.

Don’t avoid. traveling to these places! Travel is usually worthwhile for many reasons. But perhaps we need a strategy for approaching the great locations.

I suggest that when we get there, give in and have fun shooting all the normal tourist views. These are your first impressions. Then when that is out of your system, slow down and start being more analytic. Be suspicious of the conventional scenes you just captured. Try to look beyond them. Find a new point of view you have never seen. Ask yourself how you feel about this thing or place. How you relate to it and perceive it. Why are you taking this picture? Stop and think and just look a while before proceeding.

Make it a mini photo project. That involves having a theme, a point of view, knowing what you want to say, maybe having a story behind it. You will probably find that few if any of your initial “wow, I’m here” shots make it into the final project. The important ones will be the more thoughtful views where you were interacting with the subject on a deeper level.

Go your own way

We can even use that learning to take back to the familiar subjects we see every day and have easy access to. The familiar should not be less exciting. Probably it should be more exciting, because we have the access and opportunity to get deep into the subject.

Sometimes I go out among my familiar surroundings with nothing in mind. My plan is to just react to these familiar subjects in, hopefully, a fresh way. Sometimes I go out with a project in mind, looking for opportunities to add to it. Either way works, because of the frequent and easy access I have to the material. On our home ground we have an advantage. No one else gets so much access to the subjects you are intimate with every day.

Never try to copy another artist, unless you are doing it for your education, to learn a new approach. Do not publish these as your original work. You are copying. Trust that you have a viewpoint and believe you have something to say with you work. You do.

Today’s image

No challenge guessing the location. Yes, I shoot icons. Everybody does. This was not my first visit to it, so I approached it differently. I didn’t want just another tourist shot of the famous Eiffel Tower.

After walking around it for a while, I was drawn to this composition. I felt inspired by its immense size and beautiful curves and lines. I didn’t have a wide enough angle lens to capture it in one shot, so I had to shoot multiple and manually stitch them together.

Maybe this is still a common shot of the icon, I don’t know. I don’t look at many others. But is seems different to me and I like it. It is one of my best memories of it.