"Swimming Pool Vicinity"

There are four traits that I recognize in many, if not most, of my favourite photos. Flat picture space. Strong geometry, typically square angles and no curves. An active frame: the photograph is created by its boundaries, rather than existing independently within them. And words.

"Swimming Pool Vicinity" combines all of these elements in one image, making it the most 'typically me' photo of any of my recent work. When I look at it I see the larger sign first, followed by the second sign; then I examine the detail in the wall. The sweeping clouds are what I look at last, and their implied movement brings me back to the wall and the idea that there's something beyond it.

I suppose there is a fifth element that is typically me: detachment. I may exult in geometric expression, but the photo is an act of precision, not passion. The viewer is invited to examine the scene in detail: to count the bolts, to notice the shifts in the concrete wall, to appreciate the humour of the warnings inherent in the deep end of a shallow pool. But we're a very long way from dancing about architecture.


Comments, questions, thoughts? You can find me on Twitter or via e-mail.

Considering Favourites

I was recently asked to put together a portfolio of seven photographs for review. Setting aside the specificity of that number, and my musing about how they chose it, the part of the request that struck me is that the prints need to show a range of interests and approaches.

I've spent the past year working on cohesive series, which is sort of the opposite of that.

The ones that I've provisionally chosen – i still have a week to finalize my choices – span almost two years. Three of them were taken in New York, across two separate one-day visits, but I haven't pulled any images from my trips to Montreal, Chicago, or Ottawa.

Over the next couple of weeks I'll take a look at some of the photos that I pick. Many are already included in my personal favourites, but I've reworked several of them and am looking forward to seeing them as prints.


Comments, questions, thoughts? You can find me on Twitter or via e-mail.

Little Jumps Forward

It's been a busy week.

A couple of things have happened. One is a small breakthrough on my Time and Motion project: I've finally found an aspect ratio that I like and can use for all of the prints. Since I've been working in three different formats – and counting – each with a different aspect ratio, this is a way to unify all of the photographs. It will require custom matting, but commercially produced frames should remain an option. I'm very excited about this.

I always enjoy being able to do a first pass with my photographs, to solidify my ideas on how I want them to look, and then let them sit for a while. In every case it provides better results, and sometimes those results aren't what I expect. I idly flipped one of the photos from colour to monochrome on my computer screen, and really liked the results. Encouraged by that, I then tried it on one that came out too rough for me to like in colour. Black and white suits it, and while I'm not sure if it will be part of the "finished" series, it's fun to have in the collection.

The other new thing this week is some camera-industry news. Nikon astonished me by proving the rumour websites correct, and announced the replacement for my D700 with three times the resolution. I pay minimal attention to rumour sites, partly because I have enough trouble keeping track of the cameras that actually exist, but the idea that Nikon would definitively restart the megapixel race was just too outlandish to believe. Never let it be said that I have a perfect track record.

I'm not one of those people who expects art-viewers to maintain a respectful distance from large prints and not notice blur and pixellation: if a print is big I want to be rewarded by additional detail. Clearly, my Time and Motion project depends on mood instead of minutia, but I did go to considerable effort to increase the starting resolution for my Lakefill series. A high resolution digital camera certainly isn't something that I would say no to.

But I'm not ready to say yes to the Nikon D800, either. It's not quite right for my needs, and my D700 and I still have a few years left together, but I'm certainly interested to see what else Nikon can come up with.


Comments, questions, thoughts? You can find me on Twitter or via e-mail.

Software Upgrades

I refuse to consider that I might now qualify as an 'old dog'.

I'm not adverse to learning new things. I quite enjoy coming up with new solutions and techniques to improve my results. I just prefer change when it's my idea.

I use Adobe software as the core of my image editing routine. Lightroom handles 95% of it, while special tasks are farmed out to an older version of Photoshop. I use a specialist program to drive the two scanners for the film that I use, and a nifty little program for focus stacking and super-resolution processing with some digital images.

But nothing lasts forever. The next version of Photoshop will be my last chance to upgrade at a reduced price, and after that they're getting rid of their policy that lets people skip generations without penalty. There's nothing in the new versions that I need, but the raw files from two of the three digital cameras that I routinely use aren't supported in the version that I have. This affects my ability to easily merge multiple photos into layers or panoramas, and is generally a nuisance.

Lightroom is also changing. I've been using it longer than most people, and stayed with it through three generations. Now LR4 is in its public trials, and it looks great – but I've developed a few decent tricks in soon-to-be-old versons. My favourite was to work with the exposure and brightness controls in opposition to each other: exposure is global, and can cause highlight clipping, but brightness will try very hard not to clip, and only influences the brighter parts of the image. The contrast control works to change the range that the brightness influences. Between those adjustments an amazing range of control could be had, and it was quick and easy to create the results that I wanted.

Lightroom 4: no more brightness control.

Nobody says that I have to upgrade. I can stay with what I'm doing, keep the results I already have, and not need to do anything differently. But what fun is that?

So it's inevitable that I'm going to need to learn new tricks sooner or later. Lightroom Four is almost certainly in my future. But this also seems like a good time to re-evaluate what I want my software to do, and consider some new options that weren't out there when I first signed up with Adobe. I'm hearing interesting things about Apple's Aperture, and DxO Optics has a reputation as the best choice for photographers who want to squeeze the best from their cameras and lenses. That sounds fascinating – and they all offer free trials.

I may need a new computer soon.


Comments, questions, thoughts? You can find me on Twitter or via e-mail.