A few months ago, I embarked on a remarkable journey, joining an ocean conservation vessel on a mission to combat illegal fishing in the South Atlantic Ocean. As a member of the ship’s media team, my responsibilities involved capturing the beauty and challenges of the open sea. This entailed quite a few challenges: One was filming from a small boat, often in turbulent conditions. Another was the complexity of flying a drone from a constantly moving ship.
I had to explain to a non-industry person what residuals are and why they are so important to writers, actors and directors. I realized that most people don’t understand the concept of getting paid for your work beyond the initial “job”. So I thought I’d share some background here on what residuals are for those of you who aren’t in the biz.
Just a few months ago I reviewed the Sony FE 20-70mm F4 G lens, an intriguing lens that went wide enough at 20mm that many people could use it as their wide angle lens while still getting a “normal zoom” that reached as far as 70mm. I found it a great lens for travel, and I agreed with the argument from Sony that with modern, high resolution cameras it is relatively easy to crop in for more reach, but that doesn’t solve the problem of going wider. Tamron seems to have mirrored that argument, but taken it a bit further.
Their newest lens is the interesting Tamron 17-50mm F4 Di III VXD, a lens that essentially works in reverse of the Sony design. Sony essentially take a standard zoom and made it wider, while Tamron has a taken a wide angle zoom and stretched it to reach 50mm. What’s more, their lens is an internally zooming lens that makes for a really intriguing gimbal lens due to the balance point staying constant. They have also aggressively priced the 17-40mm F4 at just $699 USD, which helps alleviate the biggest negative feedback I heard about the $1100 USD Sony lens; it was just too expensive. But is the Tamron a worthwhile option? We’ll explore that in the video review below or in the rest of this article.
If you’ve ever heard this from a client or a friend or in a review, you know it! They’d go “Can you add more bokeh in this photo?”. The answer is easy! No! You can not.
And it’s not because you can not make the background more blurred. It’s because it just does not make sense. Bokeh and shallow depth-of-field (DoF) aren’t equivalent. Yes, Depth of field has some impact on bokeh, but it’s not the same thing, and you can not use those phrases interchangeably. Phrases like “give it more bokeh” hurt our sensibilities because it is nonsensical.
With many things in life, simpler is usually better. Not over-complicating a thing can usually return an increased sense of enjoyment. This includes photography.
For many photographers, myself included, collecting cameras and different lenses, or just fondling photo gear is all part of the fun. I get it. But before you camera bag packers start fist-pounding about simplifying, just hear me out- all I’m saying is that sometimes it’s not necessary to bring 5 cameras and 27 different prime lenses with you on a trip. Even if you plan to shoot long exposures.
I loaded my gear into my truck last week and headed 12 hours north to the mouth of the Chilko River, my first trip since the amputation. I drove the same route a year ago, through towering mountains and golden aspens, my mind less on the bears I would photograph and more on the looming surgery.
If I didn’t change my mind, I’d have my leg removed below the knee in a few months. I spent that entire drive trying to calm the voices in my head, the ones asking if I was crazy, the ones wondering if I’d ever drive this kind of trip again or actually do the things I was replacing my foot to be able to do in the first place. What if you can’t? What if you don’t? What if you are?
It’s not often you get to take a family portrait just before the baby decides to be born. But above all, it is not often that you are photographed with a camera of more than one square meter.
We work in a very large format. The camera is called Bertha, and it has a bellows reach of around four meters. It’s also capable of reaching a magnification of up to 3:1.
A decade ago, I stumbled upon a page where someone detailed their process for crafting their own instant film, something similar to Polaroid Type55 or the New55. At that time, the instructions seemed too complex for me to tackle, and I never ventured into the world of instant film creation.
Fast forward ten years, and I’m now prepared to give it a shot. The reason? There’s now a lot more information and instructions shared by others who have explored this fascinating process.
“I can’t take awesome wildlife images because I have an entry-level camera.”
“My images don’t look excellent. Hmm, I think it is because my camera is not full frame; it does not have high dynamic range and high ISO capability. It’s time that I upgrade to a higher camera version.”
Does this sound like you? Are these types of thoughts stopping you from making beautiful wildlife images? Well, I have good news for you. Today, I will show you the five simple composition techniques I use to create stunning wildlife images. And the best part is: these composition techniques work great with any type of camera.
I’ve just spent two days with the new iPhone 15 Pro Max, the latest and greatest top-of-the-line new device from Apple. It’s the best iPhone camera ever, but read this to save some growing pains.
It isn’t a stretch to say this is the best camera Apple has produced, with more choices (ultra-wide angle to real telephoto) better low-light performance, image quality and overall usability than prior models. (Whether you want to spring $1,000 and up for yet another phone is up to you, and of course, you may not care for, nor need the new features.)