I'm writing this after doing about 20 prints (today and yesterday). And I have to tell you - I have to confess - that as much as I hate to say it - the majority of the film shots have a better presence - oh - let's just say it out loud - look better than the prints from digital capture.
I'm not able to explain it - in any scientific way. I could say things like: the dynamic range is greater with film, but that can be countered with sandwiching techniques with RAW images.
You could say it's the smoothness of digital - but I've pushed some of the captures through GrainSurgery with sampled grain - and it just ain't the same.
There is absolutely no doubt - digital is much more convenient, and I won't count the ways. You know that.
But honestly, I can see myself beginning to work in both worlds again. I wouldn't give up digital for what I'll call "assignments" which come along once in a while. I would probably use it for "events" where I'm going to be shooting a lot.
But I may just go back to film for my usual walking around no direction known work. Most probably the Canon Elan 7N.
Don't start some big flame over this - because it is just my personal (what else could it be) opinion (after a year plus of digital capture). Plus - I'm only talking about for b&w. If I do get the urge for color - once in a blue moon - that would still be digital.
Barrett - do you have any of my HP5 left?
8/02/2005
Publishing 2
Yeah. I would not expect to see any new images in here for a while. I'm deep into the publishing thing now - trying to get the bricks together for the building. The last piece of this puzzle right now is trying to get the output to look right in the PDF and fooling around with what exactly the Acrobat Distiller is doing to my images - i.e. it seems to be pixilating them right now.... some setting somewhere...keeping the size of the PDF down... and like that...
The layout, in terms of creating "master pages" is pretty much complete for the picture part of the book. The size is set: it is going to be a square 7.5 x 7.5
I like the way that both vertical and horizontal shots fit in this format.
The gutters have been cleaned. The bleeds have been staunched.
And on top of that - orders are continuing to drop by for a visit. Summer is a good time to do all this since I rarely get anything shooting in this heat /light / humidity anyway.
I notice in the Gibson interview that he sold 22,000 books the first year. I hope to exceed that.
The layout, in terms of creating "master pages" is pretty much complete for the picture part of the book. The size is set: it is going to be a square 7.5 x 7.5
I like the way that both vertical and horizontal shots fit in this format.
The gutters have been cleaned. The bleeds have been staunched.
And on top of that - orders are continuing to drop by for a visit. Summer is a good time to do all this since I rarely get anything shooting in this heat /light / humidity anyway.
I notice in the Gibson interview that he sold 22,000 books the first year. I hope to exceed that.
8/01/2005
Publishing a Book
What a headache. Literally. I plunged into InDesign. Great program, but of course I had to keep looking up lots of stuff. But I've got the basics down.
As I may have mentioned, I'm starting off with the simplest layout you can imagine - and I'm going to call the book and organize it into 7 "chapters." Each chapter will have a roman numeral to separate it from the others. What the 7 chapters mean - what these groupings mean - I'm not sure yet. It is like tossing down Tarot cards at this point.
The name: VII Photography Groupings
That is as obscure as you can get without leaving the title blank. I wonder whether there has ever been a book called, "untitled." Sort of like the "white album."
I've been reading as much of the Lulu.com stuff as I can. Some of the usual "my book looks horrible" in the discussions; and others very happy with the results. Talk about "what color space" is Lulu using with their printers etc. That seems a mystery.
I've already created a couple of test PDFs with sample pages - and of course they look great with the inkjet - but what they're going to look like from Lulu - time will tell. I decided that it doesn't make sense to order someone else's b&w book from Lulu because whether it looks good or bad, I won't know who to blame. I'm just going to have to take the plunge myself. And there is a proof mechanism (I'm pretty sure) where they send you a copy before you really print up a batch.
And even if I'm not happy with the result - I will have a hardcopy at the end of all this - man - I'm pessimistic. I do have a way of anticipating all the things that might go wrong. I suspect that is leftover from my computer days... No - can't blame it on computers - it began when I was about eight years old... Lot's of responsibility as a kid - that's what did it.
As I may have mentioned, I'm starting off with the simplest layout you can imagine - and I'm going to call the book and organize it into 7 "chapters." Each chapter will have a roman numeral to separate it from the others. What the 7 chapters mean - what these groupings mean - I'm not sure yet. It is like tossing down Tarot cards at this point.
The name: VII Photography Groupings
That is as obscure as you can get without leaving the title blank. I wonder whether there has ever been a book called, "untitled." Sort of like the "white album."
I've been reading as much of the Lulu.com stuff as I can. Some of the usual "my book looks horrible" in the discussions; and others very happy with the results. Talk about "what color space" is Lulu using with their printers etc. That seems a mystery.
I've already created a couple of test PDFs with sample pages - and of course they look great with the inkjet - but what they're going to look like from Lulu - time will tell. I decided that it doesn't make sense to order someone else's b&w book from Lulu because whether it looks good or bad, I won't know who to blame. I'm just going to have to take the plunge myself. And there is a proof mechanism (I'm pretty sure) where they send you a copy before you really print up a batch.
And even if I'm not happy with the result - I will have a hardcopy at the end of all this - man - I'm pessimistic. I do have a way of anticipating all the things that might go wrong. I suspect that is leftover from my computer days... No - can't blame it on computers - it began when I was about eight years old... Lot's of responsibility as a kid - that's what did it.
Lulu (On Demand Printing)
Okay. I have my work cut out for me. I began to design The 11th MAN (photography by me, story by A.G.) with InDesign yesterday. At the same time - started to look at print on demand sites. You don't (as far as I can tell) give up any rights to your work, and frankly - the process looks straightfoward. I can sell them from my site, from their site, and depending on which plan you have - there is a chance to get them into some distribution channels.
Lulu looks like it may do the trick - at least to get me started. Sizes, prices, workflow - all look clear and there really is no money up front - just my labor (what else is new).
I will do the book (yes all black and white) with four color process (which is much more expensive than grayscale) but the paper is better, as well as image reproduction of black and white.
I'm seriously thinking of doing a simpler book than the 11th MAN first with them - to get a feel for the quality and the whole process. Maybe: 50 IMAGES - VOLUME 1. I still have the Bronx Book on the backburners (3 years plus) but that I also seeing as having a lot of text.
Anyway - the more pages, the more expensive, and for me, something without a lot of text editing will be a simpler layout. I'll just model it after some photography book that I like - say Apres Paris by HCB and see how it goes.
That will get me up-to-speed with InDesign and help me determine whether Lulu is the way to go for the 11th Man which I can see will be a much more complex / creative endeavor.
If anyone out there has used Lulu for a b&w photography book - well - let me know how it came out.
Lulu looks like it may do the trick - at least to get me started. Sizes, prices, workflow - all look clear and there really is no money up front - just my labor (what else is new).
I will do the book (yes all black and white) with four color process (which is much more expensive than grayscale) but the paper is better, as well as image reproduction of black and white.
I'm seriously thinking of doing a simpler book than the 11th MAN first with them - to get a feel for the quality and the whole process. Maybe: 50 IMAGES - VOLUME 1. I still have the Bronx Book on the backburners (3 years plus) but that I also seeing as having a lot of text.
Anyway - the more pages, the more expensive, and for me, something without a lot of text editing will be a simpler layout. I'll just model it after some photography book that I like - say Apres Paris by HCB and see how it goes.
That will get me up-to-speed with InDesign and help me determine whether Lulu is the way to go for the 11th Man which I can see will be a much more complex / creative endeavor.
If anyone out there has used Lulu for a b&w photography book - well - let me know how it came out.
7/30/2005
Scraping By
Print orders have been coming in fairly regularly, (more for this time period than any previous year) many from repeat customers - but when I go over my books - I'm still just keeping my fiscal nose above water. I'm going to raise the prices about 20% this weekend.
Of course I'm living a bit better these days - not cooking my own beans and rice staple anymore. In fact not cooking at all. Food is from the great Mexican bodega on the corner. And I did buy a lot of supplies going into digital land which I'm still paying off.
And speaking of money - I just ordered another Maxtor II (250 GB). The one I have is now working flawlessly thanks to the firewire connection. I've been shuffling large amounts of data to it this morning and she's working fine.
Craig had asked a while back what the speed of the old Maxtor II 120 GB was. I don't know. I usually get my stuff from CDW - and they don't list the speed. They do list the speed for the 250 GB as 7200.
Of course I'm living a bit better these days - not cooking my own beans and rice staple anymore. In fact not cooking at all. Food is from the great Mexican bodega on the corner. And I did buy a lot of supplies going into digital land which I'm still paying off.
And speaking of money - I just ordered another Maxtor II (250 GB). The one I have is now working flawlessly thanks to the firewire connection. I've been shuffling large amounts of data to it this morning and she's working fine.
Craig had asked a while back what the speed of the old Maxtor II 120 GB was. I don't know. I usually get my stuff from CDW - and they don't list the speed. They do list the speed for the 250 GB as 7200.
7/29/2005
Street Photography
"street photography is anything shot that you did not expect to find... no matter where or what it is..... your article about it is wrong. Please consider removing it.... "
Posted by Anonymous to Dave Beckerman Photography at 7/29/2005 02:25:31 PM
Actually, I couldn't remember what I wrote or where about street photography - but now that I've read it - I'll let it stand.
What is street photography? Let's define it by it's intentions: to capture some sense of contemporary life, usually in cities, and always non-commerical.
Some sense of contemporary life is an interesting phrase because it can include things that mankind has created, anything from a smashed soda can to a skyscraper. How we live. What we feel. What we think. What makes us laugh. This is the attempt. It has nothing to do with the street and it has nothing to do with what tools are used to create it. But it is always non-commerical in nature.
Non-commercial: the attempt is not to sell a product; not to beautify a bride; not to pounce on a profit for somebody selling hamburgers.
But then what is the difference, if any between documentary photography and street photography?
The line is blurry, but in street photography, the photographer often searches for connections beyond the mere documentation or anthropoligical. At it's best, it can find humor or pathos in ordinary situations by a process of combining subjects in ways that we might not ordinarily see. The street photograph is as much a portrait of the photographer's thoughts as of his subjects.
The long lens photograph of a baseball pitcher releasing the ball that struck out the criticial hitter, is not street photography. It is taken to document a certain moment in time; not to find personal expression. The background is blurred and you can't find two or more elements in the shot. And it usually serves a commercial purpose.
However, if you were standing on the field during the game, or the sidelines, with a wide angle lens, and the third baseman, trying to make a catch fell into the stands, and knocked the hotdog vendor down, and if you were lucky enough to catch the hotdogs flying all over. That would be a good "catch."
And just because a shot is taken in the street doesn't make it street photography either. Fashion shoots are routinely done "in the street." Snapshots of friends and family are taken by the millions in the streets around the world.
The motives of the street photographer are as important as the results. The sensibility is one of the hunter. Hunting without searching. Stealth, as well as a willingness to confront danger come into play. Techniques about how to be there and not be there at the same time obsess you. Like the hunter, you may need to put the equivalent of branches on your cap. It may not be the danger of a wild beast charging at you, but it may be as simple as the fear involved in photographing strangers doing normal things.
It is also involves a willingness to be unappreciated financially. No matter how good you are at it, you are intrinsically not making images that are going to make a money for someone else. If you want to make a better profit, make models look beautiful, or their clothes, or their teeth.
Take beautiful pictures of beaches, landscapes, or famous people.
My print of Promenade, for example - which is the best selling print I have - is not street photography. It doesn't mean that I went out to make a commercially viable print, I didn't. But it is not street photography. It is landscape photography. It is almost documentary photography. Ten years from now there's a good chance that you could go out and recreate Promenade (Poet's Walk) and that it will look the same.
And the idea that street photography is dead is silly. It will fall in and out of favor. Street photographs taken today will age well. They will become more important in fifty years because they will show us things about how we lived that we don't care about today. The clothes people are wearing will change (I hope). Buildings will come and go down. Cell phones, which are so much the rage today will become smaller and more difficult to photograph. In that sense, it has something in common with documentary photography. But on top of that, it will show something unique, that comes from the mind of the individual photographer who was working at the time.
It really doesn't matter whether the photographer is working in digital, or whatever comes after digital super-digital. It doesn't matter if every human being in the world has a camera and is constantly snapping away. Everyone has a pencil today but I don't see an improvement in the literature of the times.
Spelling (my own included) has gotten worse because of spell checkers. The majority of photographs will get more banal. But this will only make the unique photographers of the times, more valuable.
I am not a "pure" street photographer. I enjoy creating fiction. I don't care that much whether a shot has been posed or not. I don't see anything wrong with paying models to stand and kiss on steps surrounded by real passersby. I haven't done this, but I don't see anything wrong with trying to photograph something that you see via imagination rather than fact. I often have an idea and I want to see it happen. If I can get it spontaneously, great. If I need to cojole someone to look a certain way - I will do that. Believe me, I am not a purist.
So hold on to your intentions and let the excitement, the experiment, and ultimately the loss - because you are almost always doomed to failure when you photograph prey that only exists for a split-second - let these intentions be your companions during your urban quest. And as they used to say, good hunting.
Posted by Anonymous to Dave Beckerman Photography at 7/29/2005 02:25:31 PM
Actually, I couldn't remember what I wrote or where about street photography - but now that I've read it - I'll let it stand.
What is street photography? Let's define it by it's intentions: to capture some sense of contemporary life, usually in cities, and always non-commerical.
Some sense of contemporary life is an interesting phrase because it can include things that mankind has created, anything from a smashed soda can to a skyscraper. How we live. What we feel. What we think. What makes us laugh. This is the attempt. It has nothing to do with the street and it has nothing to do with what tools are used to create it. But it is always non-commerical in nature.
Non-commercial: the attempt is not to sell a product; not to beautify a bride; not to pounce on a profit for somebody selling hamburgers.
But then what is the difference, if any between documentary photography and street photography?
The line is blurry, but in street photography, the photographer often searches for connections beyond the mere documentation or anthropoligical. At it's best, it can find humor or pathos in ordinary situations by a process of combining subjects in ways that we might not ordinarily see. The street photograph is as much a portrait of the photographer's thoughts as of his subjects.
The long lens photograph of a baseball pitcher releasing the ball that struck out the criticial hitter, is not street photography. It is taken to document a certain moment in time; not to find personal expression. The background is blurred and you can't find two or more elements in the shot. And it usually serves a commercial purpose.
However, if you were standing on the field during the game, or the sidelines, with a wide angle lens, and the third baseman, trying to make a catch fell into the stands, and knocked the hotdog vendor down, and if you were lucky enough to catch the hotdogs flying all over. That would be a good "catch."
And just because a shot is taken in the street doesn't make it street photography either. Fashion shoots are routinely done "in the street." Snapshots of friends and family are taken by the millions in the streets around the world.
The motives of the street photographer are as important as the results. The sensibility is one of the hunter. Hunting without searching. Stealth, as well as a willingness to confront danger come into play. Techniques about how to be there and not be there at the same time obsess you. Like the hunter, you may need to put the equivalent of branches on your cap. It may not be the danger of a wild beast charging at you, but it may be as simple as the fear involved in photographing strangers doing normal things.
It is also involves a willingness to be unappreciated financially. No matter how good you are at it, you are intrinsically not making images that are going to make a money for someone else. If you want to make a better profit, make models look beautiful, or their clothes, or their teeth.
Take beautiful pictures of beaches, landscapes, or famous people.
My print of Promenade, for example - which is the best selling print I have - is not street photography. It doesn't mean that I went out to make a commercially viable print, I didn't. But it is not street photography. It is landscape photography. It is almost documentary photography. Ten years from now there's a good chance that you could go out and recreate Promenade (Poet's Walk) and that it will look the same.
And the idea that street photography is dead is silly. It will fall in and out of favor. Street photographs taken today will age well. They will become more important in fifty years because they will show us things about how we lived that we don't care about today. The clothes people are wearing will change (I hope). Buildings will come and go down. Cell phones, which are so much the rage today will become smaller and more difficult to photograph. In that sense, it has something in common with documentary photography. But on top of that, it will show something unique, that comes from the mind of the individual photographer who was working at the time.
It really doesn't matter whether the photographer is working in digital, or whatever comes after digital super-digital. It doesn't matter if every human being in the world has a camera and is constantly snapping away. Everyone has a pencil today but I don't see an improvement in the literature of the times.
Spelling (my own included) has gotten worse because of spell checkers. The majority of photographs will get more banal. But this will only make the unique photographers of the times, more valuable.
I am not a "pure" street photographer. I enjoy creating fiction. I don't care that much whether a shot has been posed or not. I don't see anything wrong with paying models to stand and kiss on steps surrounded by real passersby. I haven't done this, but I don't see anything wrong with trying to photograph something that you see via imagination rather than fact. I often have an idea and I want to see it happen. If I can get it spontaneously, great. If I need to cojole someone to look a certain way - I will do that. Believe me, I am not a purist.
So hold on to your intentions and let the excitement, the experiment, and ultimately the loss - because you are almost always doomed to failure when you photograph prey that only exists for a split-second - let these intentions be your companions during your urban quest. And as they used to say, good hunting.
7/28/2005
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)