“Out of the camera shot”

We often see “photographers” (quotes are intentional) post photos in the internet and says, “This is a straight out of the camera shot”. Really? What exactly is an “out of the camera shot”? When you create a photo you see a JPEG interpretation of the photo you’ve created on your camera LCD; which means, unless you shoot in JPEG and you upload it to an image hosting site that doesn’t have a compression algorithm built around it, then you can convince me it’s an out of the camera shot.

“This photo is not photoshopped.”

You’ll definitely know someone who knows what they’re talking about if they’ll admit they’re using tools to better their lives. I have never met someone who doesn’t use a pen, writes with his own hand in paper and says “Writing with bare hands makes things easier”. Tools are there to be used so if you are not using them, you are a total idiot. By saying “This shot is not photoshopped”, you are actually saying, “This photo is photoshop, or… errr… might be photoshopped….hmm… I’m not sure if it’s photoshopped… yeah, this is an outright lie, read between the lines”.

If you really know photography, you’ll give your photo editing software due credit. Try attending some photography class wherein you will actually pay something and see if they’ll tell you not to use any editing software. Tools are invented to make our lives easier so why not use them? Have you actually shared your photos in the web and compared someone else’s work with yours? Did you not wonder how good their works are compared to yours? Have you asked yourself how they do that and concluded that it is photoshopped? Of course you did. I am sure 99.99% of the time, you did.

Do you know who Marc Adamus is? He’s one of those few photographers whose work I often viewed for inspiration. He composes his photos really well and he spend a lot of time planning those shots. He’s often bashed by “photographers” and someone actually made an effort to create a blog site (“MARC ADAMUS LIES”…LIES! and Marc Adamus Lies 2.0). He has been the focal point of all the ridicules simply because he is really good. The only mistake I think that he made which caused several people to not like him is that he “sometimes” denies using a photo editing software to better his work and he boasts a lot about his work while saying that. He has something to say anyway, and a lot of people who envy him thinks he’s being arrogant. Bottom line, he is good at what he does because he knows his tools and he knows how to use them.

If you are doing a documentary, photos should not be edited, other wise, I think a little bit of correction there, done tastefully well, would not do any harm.

“I don’t need a tripod”

Sure you do or at least in some occasions  you do. The mere fact you’re saying that means you don’t know what a tripod can do or what’s it for. Try googling some time, you might find the uses of the tripod there.

“Location is key to any good photograph”

If you are really that good, you’ll know that by planning your shot, you can take home really good pictures; no matter where the location is. I seldom raise my eyebrows whenever I see posts in a social networking site pointing that we can’t get good photos if we don’t go out of the country and go to Marlboro land or something similar. Yes, I would agree that the landscape, the people, the culture is really different from one place to another but the place doesn’t make the photo good; it’s the technique behind the photo employed by the photographer who created it that makes it good.

“I can correct it in post”

I may have been guilty about this at times but I think this should not be our attitude when  we take photos. We should at all times aim to do it right so we don’t have to do much in post aside from color and contrast correction. From experience, the less post processing needed, the better.

So yes, we all say stupid things, but think before you speak.

Facebook

Facebook will definitely get the upper hand when it comes to sharing your photos. If you want your photos to be popular, post it in facebook and make it public. I usually share my photos in facebook just for the sheer popularity of the website. 90% of my friends have facebook accounts and 80% of them always logs into Facebook for various reasons; even people I don’t know add me up in Facebook because they usually see photos I share publicly through friends and friends of friends. Without a doubt, Facebook can create an audience for anyone and as such, the default choice for uploading photos.

However I think you would agree that photos you upload in Facebook turns out to be really crappy after you upload it. The main reason for this is because Facebook compresses your image even if you’ve chosen the High Quality option when you uploaded your photo. As of the moment of writing, Facebook Help enumerated things we should bear in mind so that our photos will look nice when uploaded:

1. Resize your photos to the following sizes:
   • Regular photos – 720px, 960px, 2048px
   • Cover photos – 851px by 315px
2. Select the High Quality option when uploading a 2048px photo.
3. And to avoid compression, keep the size of the photo to less than equal to 100 KB.
4. Save as JPEG with an sRGB color profile.

I tried a little experiment using these guidelines in mind. I created a JPEG file, uploaded it in Facebook and took the before and after info and here’s the result:

The original image is 720px by 480px in size at 300 dpi resolution saved to have a size of 25 KB. Since I chose the High Quality option, I am expecting that the image when uploaded will have the same size as the original image.

After I’ve downloaded the uploaded file, I checked the image info and it turned our that the image is converted from 300 dpi to 72 dpi. I think that compression is reasonable and I understand that Facebook, being the largest repository of photos today or I assumed it is because of the sheer number of photos uploaded per day, need to save storage space; but what I don’t understand is the change in the Color Profile from sRGB IEC61966-2.1 to C2 (Facebook Color Profile). I am not sure why is there a need to change the embedded profile and I am not sure how the C2 color profile will display in different browsers. I have to research on those and the answer should be in another blog entry. For now, I have just proven that no matter how you conform to Facebook’s standard, the website will still compress your image and much worst, change the color profile of your photo.

Flickr

Flickr is more popular for photographers who wants to show case their work because it can handle the display better than Facebook. But like Facebook, you are limited to a couple of options when uploading photos. To quote from the Flickr Help Page, here are the limitations you have when you upload photos to Flickr:

1. File size limit:
   • Free Account – 30MB
   • Pro Account – 50MB
2. Flickr officially supports JPEGs, non-animated GIFs, and PNGs. You can also upload TIFFs and some other file types, but they will automatically be converted to and stored in JPEG format.
3. As you publish photos, they’re compressed and resized by Flickr (if necessary) in the following sizes:
   • 75×75 pixels square
   • 150×150 pixels square
   • 100 pixels (on the longest side)
   • 240 pixels
   • 320 pixels
   • 500 pixels
   • 800 pixels (since March 1, 2012)
   • Large (which will be 1024 pixels if it exceeds that length)
   • 1600 pixels (since March 1, 2012)
   • 2048 pixels (since March 1, 2012)
   • The original size (if you have a pro account)

Just like what we did with Facebook, I did a little experiment to check the validity of what is written in the Flickr Help Page. Here are the before and after info:

There was a significant change in file size which is ok since Flickr is a free site. I’ve checked the resolution of the two files and they are both the same; hence the compression might have been caused by the removal of some miscellaneous information that would not affect image quality (EXIF data for instance). Another thing that is good is that the color profile did not change. Thus, this will ensure that your photo’s color will display the way you intended your photos will display in the web.

500PX

Launched in 2009, 500px has gained popularity amongst professional and aspiring photographers alike. It has become a venue to seek gain exposure, connect with photographers and find inspiration. For me, 500px is a better version of Flickr in terms of organization and display of portfolio. The site also has the rating system for photos similar to that of Facebook. However, unlike Facebook, the option to sell your photos only means that you should only post your best photos in 500px. In 500px, looks matter. You must have a coherent portfolio to bump up your “Pulse“.

Unfortunately, image quality has decreased and the 500px Helpdesk team has announced that they did something with the compression. Here is what they are saying:

How much compression are they doing to your photos? I uploaded a 1440px by 908px at 72dpi with an sRGB color space. After that I downloaded the displayed image and compared it with the original photo. Here’s the result:

If you are wondering how I’ve downloaded a 500px displayed image even if there is a right-click and drag-drop restriction on the photos in 500px, I will discuss that in a separate entry since it is too long to discuss here. So stay tuned and frequent this site.

Personal Webpage

If you don’t  want any compression happening to your photos, consider creating a personal website. Of course you  have to compress your photos manually so that your site would load faster but that is the level of control that you would find necessary. Usually, social sites have APIs that would help you promote your site and everything you upload in your website so creating a following is not that far out of reach.

At the end of the day, the method in which you would like to share your photos is really irrelevant. What matters is that your portfolio contains photos that looks great and when viewed, has the consistency that will identify your vision and style.

Updates 05/21/2013:

Flickr has updated the look and feel of their website to have more of the 500px look. However, I checked on the previous functions and they’ve maintained the previous compression logic which is rather expected because that would be a drastic change. The change in layout is really great, albeit 500px being better.

Canon Powershot A520

When I started photography way back 2004, I started with a 4MP Canon Powershot A520. My friends sported a Canon 450D at that time but the price of any DSLR camera during those time was beyond my reach. And since I am starting to learn photography at that time, I opted for a point and shoot camera with manual controls. For two years I’ve used that point and shoot, trying everything I can with the limited settings I can do with it. Even with a point and shoot camera, I was not ashamed to join photo walks with my DSLR bearing photography buddies and participating in various contests using the photos I took with my handy point and shoot. Being active in photography activities even with a point and shoot camera left me wanting to learn more until I decided to save up money and finally buy a DSLR.

Nikon D80

After two years using a point and shoot camera, I finally decided to get a Nikon D80. I chose it over a Canon 450D because it has a larger sensor, a larger view finder, a larger body frame; which is very comfortable when I’m holding it, and a better overall image quality. I find 450D photos a little bit softer when compared to the Nikon D80 photos. Furthermore, I think that Nikon D80 has a better auto white balance than the 450D. So I bought it. I used it for another two to three years with the kit lens until I exhausted myself into trying every possible uses of the D80 within my creative limits. I finally upgraded to a Nikon D90.

Nikon D90

The choice in upgrading into a D90 was simple and stupid at the same time. Simple because it goes without saying that you can never go wrong to use a Nikon when you have been using a Nikon before.  Stupid, on the other hand, because when I bought my Nikon D90, I sold all my D80 gear. So it’s like “I should’ve bought a Canon camera” moment. Anyway, I never thought about that way back then. Truth be told, when I went to the store in Hidalgo named Mayer, the owner: Mang Ramon asked me what to get and he gave it to me. Nah, not as literal as you think but when I told him that I did not have enough cash on hand to buy the camera that day and I will need to go back tomorrow to get some more; without asking, he gave his assistants an instruction to pack the camera together with the Nikkor 18-200mm f3.5/5.6 lens and give it to me. He then said that I could just deposit the remaining balance anytime to his account before the week ends. It surprised me that he was very trusting. Maybe because I have been giving him customers since I bought my Nikon D80. I am not sure. I also don’t know if he would remember he did that, but it was a marketing strategy I’ll remember for the rest of my life.

Canon 5D Mark 2

As I continuously learn photography, my ultimate dream was to get a Full Frame DSLR. And I finally got it. I finally decided to go with the Canon bandwagon. It was a very easy choice. The primary reason why I bought a Canon is because of the Live Exposure Simulation that Nikon never had. It made composing for a shot a lot easier because I can see how my picture would look like in the final shot via the live view mode of the camera. No computation required *(see footnotes below). That, and the carefully placed control wheels and buttons, made my life easier until such a time came that I need to sell my full frame camera. At first I decided to sell my Nikon D90, but it seems like no one is really interested in a cropped body anymore. There are people who asked, but they are not really serious in buying so the Nikon D90 got stucked with me.

I thought really hard if I would sell it, but what convinced me are these reasons:

1. Photography is not my main source of income. 
2. I still have my Nikon D90.
3. I still have the option, in the future to get one.

I think what struck me the most is #1. Selling my full frame would give me the money I need for now, and since photography is not my major source of income, I think I can settle for a cropped body. Anyway, its been with me for a while now and it seems that it will never leave me. It’s really hard to let go; but for now, practicality should take precedence. And if there’s one thing I’ve learned in photography, it is: “If you’re good, then you are good. No camera can dictate how good you are.”

Or maybe, I am still in a state of denial. Who can tell?

Footnotes:

*Live Exposure Simulation will only work up to 30 seconds of exposure.  Beyond that, you will have to use your judgement. 

Don’t wear your bling bling.

Screenshot from AccuWeather

Some people think that wearing your camera like a necklace is cool. Yes, it might give you a look like you can afford expensive things; but it just shows that you don’t know anything about camera care. Ever heard of the term “Dew Point Temperature” ?  Simply put, the Dew Point Temperature  is the temperature at which the water vapor in the air will condense. Have you ever wondered why your camera lens moist when you move from inside an airconditioned place and then go out outside where it’s warm? It’s because your camera temperature is not above the Dew Point Temperature and water vapor starts to condense on your gear. And when condensation happens, fungus starts to creep in.  So I would suggest, keep your camera in your bag. Let the temperature rise above the dew point before bringing it out. Let it acclimatize. Moreover, don’t break your neck by hanging too much weight on it. Cameras are not jewelries, so don’t wear them.

Don’t be innocent.

Don’t shoot in P mode or any equivalent automatic setting. Yes it is there, but you are really not maximizing the value of your gear if you are using the “auto modes”. Use the manual mode and learn the exposure triangle. Learn the terminologies so that when you converse with someone, something with sense would come out of you. Always read your camera manual. There’s a reason why a DSLR is expensive. Read through your manual to find out why. If you still don’t understand your gear, ask someone who can help you. Believe me, it’s always good to say “I took that using these values…blah blah..” rather than “Well, I used the P mode.”.

Don’t brag.

It is ok to post photos in the internet, but don’t act out like you’re the only one who can take those kind of shots. Take criticism in but don’t take offense seriously. It’s always good to learn. And since you just bought your camera, be humble and try to absorb as much as you can by asking for opinions. Criticism won’t kill you.

Last May 2 to 5, 2013, this site was out of service because of some issues with the data server the site was hosted on. The primary reason was a DDOS attack that locked out the website’s access to the dataserver. Unfortunately, our data service provider wasn’t able to recover the contents of this website. Having an I.T. background myself, I should’ve backed-up the website and the website database since I had access to my cPanel. Although, by default, my provider should have a backup of the website and should be able to restore as needed. I think there’s nothing wrong about expecting my provider to have a backup because that is a standard industry practice; not to mention having redundant backups.

Recovery

Since, they don’t have one, I am forced to re-upload from what I have. I have copies of the uploaded photos but for some reason, I can’t seem to find the backup of my blog entries; or as it turned out I didn’t have any backup in the first place. Hence, I resorted to using Google’s cached pages. I googled the internet for the possible blog titles and clicked on the cached pages link. When the cached page appeared, I just clicked on the text version and voila; I found my blog contents. If you plan to use Google’s cached pages, Google’s cached pages would recover text but would not recover any media content such as photos and videos.

I also found out that you can use Google Cached Pages link:

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:

and append the URL of your website or the page you wish to recover. For example, say the original link to the blog entry “You don’t say…” is http://www.ryancapulong.com/?p=1568, the Google cached page for that that page is:

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:www.ryancapulong.com/?p=1568

Implementation and Security

Upon recovery of the website, I performed a quick sanity test if all the functionalities are working as expected. I found out that the contact page is not working; emails are not being sent properly. Apparently I need to tweak some SMTP settings. To make life easier, I figured out I’d use a website plugin for that. However, that option would require me to provide the credentials to my email. I didn’t need to do this before the “event” happened so I am using my Google Apps account email as the recepient/sender for contact information. Now I can’t use that email account because I don’t want to provide my login credentials for that email account.Furthermore, security is weak on that email account because the 2-step verification feature of GMail is not enabled for that account. Hence, I need to create a new email and enable the 2-step verification feature.

For the geeks out there, here are some useful links regarding this:

• 2-step verification
• Google Authenticator for WordPress
• Google Authenticator for Android

Backup

After the recovery, rebuilding and sanity testing has been done on the website, all I have to do is backup the entire site. At first, I did the backup manually, but a friend of mine suggested to use Backup to Dropbox and I am liking it a lot. What it does is that it backs up your web files as well as your site’s databases (SQL dump script) into a Dropbox folder. The first backup is slow;  which is expected since it copies all of your files into the designated Dropbox folder. However, for succeeding backups, it copies only the changed files hence making it a little bit faster. Moreover, you can schedule the frequency of the backup as well as the time when the backup will be performed. Ergo, I don’t have to worry about my website’s backup.

Just Sharing

This entry is not photography related although I think it is useful to anyone with a personal website/portfolio. Some concepts presented might be technical so if you have any questions, please feel free to leave a comment and I’ll try to help you out.

Credits

Thanks to Edwin Martinez and Jay Jallorina for the time spent mentoring us about landscape photography. You guys continue to inspire us. Thanks also to Bong Bajo for the inspiration. To all Chasing Light Batch 11 and friends, you know who you are, thanks for sharing the passion. Finally, thanks to Ramon Tan of extremedeals.ph for sponsoring my JYC intervalometers. They are one of the vital elements in creating this time lapse presentation.

More time lapse photography to come!

Here’s the photo I am talking about:

Sampaloc Lake

Note: When I started writing this blog entry, I tried to explain how/why the photo worked. However upon reviewing what I wrote, It seemed that the narrative have a lot of bravado in it, or at least it seemed like that to me, so I opted to scratch everything out and rewrite this entry to explain the thought that came to my mind when I created the photo. This way, it will help the readers (that would include you) to understand the thought process on how the photo was created and allow them to decide if they will agree or disagree with the thought process.

Anticipation

We went to the site at around 3AM anticipating the 5AM sunrise. I had a frame in my mind even before the trip began based on the research I’ve done several days before. But we were there early because we haven’t been there before and we need to find a good vantage point. From what I saw online, it made me conclude that the location will dictate and limit your composition. I knew that the sun would rise at the back of Mt. Banahaw and the mountain would be my focal point. I also knew that water lilies grow in the lake and my mind was set to find a place where there are an ample amount of lilies that I can use as my foreground. The only thing that would require a lot of prayer is the condition of the sky. When we arrived there, the sky was completely covered with a vast cloud cover. Nonetheless, we stayed there because were hoping for a small window to open up in the cloud cover so that the entire array of clouds would be illuminated by the sun when it rise. I guess we made a correct decision to wait.

Technicalities

1. Composition

I’ve asked some of my friends who are doing photography way longer than me to analyze why the photo worked. And some of the responses they gave aligned with what my thought is during the creation of the photo. Here is a summary of what they’ve said:

1. Foreground element (lily pads and lilies) draws attention to the viewer and it draws viewer to look deeper into the photo.
2. Diagonal lines from the foreground leads the eye to stop at the middle ground where the mountain is.
3. From the mountain, the viewer will notice the contrasting colors from the sky.
4. The sky seems to arc towards the focal point (mountain).

That is exactly the intention of the composition; to draw the viewer to explore the photo by the use of a foreground element, a middle ground element, and implied lines leading towards a focal point. One of the perks of using an ultrawide angle lens is that tilting it up or down a little would create distortions in the photo and most of the time create implied diagonal lines. To create this photo, I intentionally tilted my lens to point downward towards the lily pads. This resulted into the lily pads appearing larger than their actual size. This resulted as well into the clouds seeming to originate from the mountains and extending towards the edge of the frame. The problem with this method is; if the lens was tilted too far downwards, the mountain would appear as though it is falling back. To fix that problem, I just need to walk closer to the lily pads and lower my tripod a little; close enough to avoid tilting the lens too much and low enough so that the mountain would not appear like it is falling back.

2. Color

We only have a window of about less than a minute when all of the colors in the sky came bursting before our eyes. We didn’t have the time to adjust the white balance of the camera. We just have to fire away or else, we won’t get any decent shots. Luckily I always shoot in RAW format. Here is the version of the photo with the original white balance as shot and the version with the corrected white balance:

Before and After White Balance Correction

I once posted the version with the original white balance in my Facebook page and comments from photographers flooded; discussing topics about white balance and how it is one of the subjective aspect of any photo. It got flooded so fast that I have to delete it for reasons I can’t tell you here. Anyway, I am posting this again to show you how white balance can affect the overall feel of a photo.

In this photo, I’ve adjusted the white balance to correct it based on memory colors; that means that lily pads must be green, skies must be blue and lilies must be pink or magenta. If you’re color blind, you’ll have a different interpretation of the colors I just mentioned but I think you’ll get a hint of what I am saying here. To me, correcting the color of the photo gave the photo another interesting aspect to look at. After correction, you can see yellows amongst blues and reds amongst green; colors that complements each other.

However, I am not advocating the usage of the RAW format to justify not using the correct white balance when shooting. All I am pointing out is that color is a one of the major consideration when it comes to composition and should merit a lot of thought when we are taking pictures.

Je pense, donc je suis.

I would like to go to this place again and shoot it in a different light. I have a couple of frames in mind and a few things to improve on after writing this entry. I might be over thinking things at times, but I hope this over thinking is helping the readers of this blog.

Did this blog entry helped you in any way? Please post your comments in the comment box below.

Yes, we use everything we know to get the exposure right before we click the shutter.

Some of you might not agree with me on this but I think photographers (specially landscape photographers) don’t speak much very often. They speak however if they need to review or endorse a product, when asked a photography related question and when needed, describe their work. Most of the time, they’ll ignore certain thoughts or comments regarding almost anything about their work. However, there are things they can’t just ignore.

#5 When you say “Your camera takes good pictures”.

While this might be true 80-90% of the time, a photo is created not simply by pointing your camera at something and clicking the shutter release. Certainly, without a doubt, you can “technically” take a better photo given a higher end gear but if you don’t know your gear that well, you’ll just end up with a “technically good” photo; one that might not be aesthetically pleasing but in all technical aspect a good one. Photographers spend most of their time reading the camera manual; if not tinkering with the controls of their gear. The relationship between the price of the gear you are using and the overall quality of the photo is not directly proportional. It takes the technical “know how” to realize what your limitations are using a specific camera gear and based on those limitations, dictate or direct the aesthetic aspect of your photo. So simply saying “Your camera takes good pictures” is like saying to a chef: “Your pot cooks good food.” or to a programmer: “Your IDE creates good code”. You just don’t say that.

#4  When you say “I downloaded your photos from your site and they look nice in print”.

Usually when photographers print photos, they are sized accordingly to the desired paper size with a resolution of 300 dpi, sharpened for print and soft proofed for printing considering the paper and the printer that will be used. For most printers it would be Adobe RGB, but different printers have different color profiles for each paper type. Photos posted in the web are usually configured to have a resolution of 72 dpi and an embedded sRGB profile. So I am not sure how a photo taken directly from the web and printed on paper would result to a nice print.

For the geeks out there, this is a complete explanation of dpi: Dots per inch

#3  When you say “I saw your landscape photos, they look great! Can you take pictures of my family?”.

There was this one conversation with my grandmother (God bless her soul) where she asked me if I could fix her TV because I took up Electronics and Communications Engineering when I was in college. I used to laugh at that conversation; but if you think of it clearly, she took me for an electrician rather than an engineer. If she was another person I didn’t know, I’ll probably talk back to her differentiating an electrician from an engineer and how the two professions differ even if an engineer can do the same thing as what an electrician can do. I think it’s the same thing with any  photography genre. While the rules of photography applies to all genres of photography, there are intricate differences between each genre. For example, landscape photography needs filters and portraiture needs strobes. Of course all photographers (at least all that I know) know the basics. However, I think it is unethical most of the time to praise them from what they do best and ask them to do other things just because you can assume they can do it anyway.

#2 When you say “Did you photoshop your photos?”

The problem with the digital age is that every thing beautifully done when posted in the internet poses a notion that it’s photoshopped. I won’t say it wasn’t but what’s the difference with the workflow of the photographers today with those in the film days? During the film days, photographers take their negatives to the darkroom and processes them by exposing them to light and to chemicals at periodic amounts of time. Film photographers dodge and burn and they do it in the darkroom. That being said, I think there’s nothing wrong in using photoshop (the modern darkroom) when you need to correct the color, contrast and sharpness of the photo that is normally lost when you upload it into your machine. If you think the photo is beautiful, you just ask “How did you do it?” and not “Did you photoshop your photos?”.

#1  When you say “Wow that’s awesome, is that taken by you?”.

I think I don’t really need to explain this one. You just don’t say that.

Yes, I am promoting this event because my friend Randall Cipriano is there. See him and other Fujifilm ambassadors in their full awesomeness! See you guys there!

To confirm your attendance, please SMS this number: +63 933 720 3689.

Please do comment if you like the tutorial, as well as if there are other tutorials you would like to see in the future. Thanks for watching!