In this season’s photo book selection, we look at early color photographs by urban street photographer, Mitch Epstein; Elaine Mayes’s portraits of hippies and oddballs at the height of Haight-Ashbury’s counterculture scene; a reprint of William Eggleston‘s famous Chromes; whimsical portraits of Swedish farmers and villagers from the early 20th century; and a special edition of Kikuji Kawada‘s Chizu (The Map), one of the most sought-after photo books of all time.

Mitch Epstein, Silver + Chrome – 112 pages, hardcover (Steidl)

Related: Walker Evans’ American Photographs, and five other photobooks worth checking out

Mitch Epstein was one of the first photographers to champion the use of color film in the 1970s, at a time when “art photography” was B&W. A former student of Garry Winogrand, he once asked his mentor, “Why not color?” to which Winogrand apparently had no good response. With his blessing, Epstein began working with Kodachrome.

His work was first exhibited in 1977, in New York, and he was immediately seen as a serious photographer. This new book shows the transitional period when he was shooting both B&W and color, with photos from 1973-1976, many of which have never been seen before. They highlight the energy and effervescence of cities like New York, Los Angeles, and New Orleans, the sexual liberation occurring at the time, and reactions to the Vietnam war.

Elaine Mayes, The Haight-Ashbury Portraits 1967-1968 – 96 pages, hardcover (Damiani)

The Summer of Love in San Fransisco lasted just one season. It started in 1967, and quickly went downhill as people from around the United States flocked to the city to take part, motivated by press accounts of the sex, drugs, and rock and roll that were freely available.

Freelance photographer Elaine Mays, who was living in the Haight-Ashbury district of the city—which was ground zero for the counterculture—had photographed the Monterey Pop Festival in 1967, and began photographing the hippies and other counter-culture oddballs around her the following year. Instead of just taking street photographs, she took portraits of the people she encountered, asking them to pose naturally.

“Natural” was different for each person, and this collection of portraits shows a wide range of people and how they presented themselves to the camera during this pivotal time for American youth culture. The wide range of subjects in this book is a window on the type of people who gravitated to San Francisco in this time, some of whom may still be there.

William Eggleston, Chromes – 432 pages, hardcover (Steidl)

This three-volume set from William Eggleston’s early career was shot between 1969 and 1974. First released in 2011, it went out of print fairly quickly. The contents of the set were curated from a collection of more than 5,000 slides, including photographs made on both Kodachrome and Ektachrome, many of which had never been published before.

Eggleston’s approach to photography was “democratic,” which, to him, meant that anything could be a subject. As such, some may find his photos simplistic and boring, but when looking at a collection of his work, you can see how he views the world, and how his framing of subjects makes sense.

He spoke of these photos as “poetic snapshots.” And the combination of the unexpected compositions with the saturated colors of the photos—most of these photos were printed using the dye transfer process—makes them jump off the page. Eggleston’s work is an acquired taste, but anyone who appreciates these photos should get this book now, because it’s unlikely to be reprinted.

John Alinder, Portraits 1910-1932 – 256 pages, (Dewi Lewis)

Every now and then, an unknown photographer is discovered whose work went overlooked in their lifetime. A recent example is Vivian Maier. Her mesmerizing street photographs spanning the 20th century weren’t uncovered until shortly after her death in 2009. However, she is now recognized as an important photographer.

John Alinder was the son of a farmer in Sweden and a self-taught photographer. In the 1980s, a curator discovered more than 8,000 glass plates of photographs he took between 1901 and 1932 of people in his village. The subjects are mostly dressed in their Sunday best, unsure of how to pose for a camera, and there is a sense of whimsey in many of the photos, as people stand on chairs or logs, some making funny poses, and others looking very serious. Somewhat like August Sander‘s portraits of everyday people, these photos lack pretension and show a glimpse of a world that is on the cusp of the past and modernity.

Kikuji Kawada, Chizu (Maquette Edition) – 272 pages, (Mack)

One of the most sought-after Japanese photo books has long been Chizu, which means “The Map.” Photographer Kikuji Kawada first visited Hiroshima in 1958, photographing the dome that remains as a memorial from the atomic bomb explosion in 1945. Over the next few years, he continued to photograph the site and was notably moved by the stains on the walls and ceiling of the dome.

On August 6, 1965, Chizu was published, the book featuring photos of these stains, along with photos of Japanese war memorabilia. The current edition is a reproduction of the original maquette (the pre-production dummy), in two hardcover volumes, together with a paperback volume, which discusses the history of the book, and includes an interview with the photographer.

In The Photobook: A History, Volume 1, Martin Parr and Gerry Badger describe Chizu as, “the ultimate photo-book-as-an-object,” adding that, “no photo book been more successful in combining graphic design with complex photographic narrative.”

The style of photos and the unconventional crops give the book an abstract quality. This is especially true of the original edition, which included fold-out pages. The maquette edition is much simpler, without the gatefolds, but it still shows how powerful this book is.

The post Portraits from the Summer of Love, and four other photo book picks appeared first on Popular Photography.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.

Andrea Sacchetti, an Italian photography student, is in trouble for blatantly plagiarizing Aïda Muluneh, an acclaimed Ethiopian artist and photographer, and exhibiting his knock-off at the 2021 Milan Photo Festival. What’s special about this instance is just how obvious the plagiarism is—as well as the venue in which it’s displayed. 

It’s also a useful jumping-off point to talk about the difference between inspiration and plagiarism. 

The whole theft thing

But first—a quick recap. 

In 2014, Muluneh shot a series of images interpreting Dante’s Inferno for an exhibition at the Smithsonian National Museum of African Art. The 99 Series featured a model covered in white paint with red hands against a gray background. It’s an incredibly striking series. 

Then earlier this month, the African Women in Photography Twitter account spotted Sacchetti’s “eerily similar” work in a group exhibition at the Milan Photo Festival. Understandably, they called it “another case of theft” and “unacceptable.” 

According to PetaPixel:

The Istituto Italiano Fotografia assigned students to interpret Dante’s Inferno, and Sacchetti indisputably plagiarized Muluneh without attribution nor permission, producing a series of diptychs that used a model painted in white with red hands, photographed against a gray background. 

The Milan Photo Festival, in a now-deleted Instagram statement, claimed: “there was no will to plagiarize against such a prestigious author and we know that the young photographer has already apologized.” 

Which, to be honest, seems like a bit of a cop-out given the similarities between the images. Muluneh seemingly feels the same way, saying she takes “this quite personally” and that Sacchetti’s apology is “not the end of the conversation,” in a Twitter statement. 

Copyright doesn’t come into this

Many people’s instant response in a situation like this is to mutter something about copyright. However, as I explain in another article, only individual artworks can be copyrighted, not concepts. 

If Sacchetti printed a copy of Muluneh’s work and displayed it in Milan, that could potentially be a breach of copyright. But, because he recreated the work himself, he holds the copyright to the new work. 

Could Muluneh sue him? Maybe, but the court case would be expensive, probably not get very far, and be run in Italian. This isn’t really a story of illegal behavior, but rather immoral behavior. 

Inspiration versus theft

There is no hard and fast line between being inspired by something and plagiarizing it. It’s a scale with most instances falling somewhere in the middle. 

In this situation, Sacchetti claims (through the Festival’s now-deleted Instagram statement) that there was “no will to plagiarize.” From that, I’m guessing we’re meant to assume he was merely inspired by Muluneh’s work. 

And this is where things get iffy. 

There are plenty of ways Sacchetti could have been inspired by Muluneh without plagiarizing her:

• If he wanted technical practice, he could have copied her photo as closely as possible—and then not exhibited it.
• For a more art-driven approach, he could have used her work as a jumping off point to explore different colors, hand placements, subjects, and the like.

But that isn’t what happened. The photo in question is clearly a knockoff. It certainly seems too similar to not be deliberate, while falling short both technically and artistically. 

Part of the problem here is that Muluneh’s work is so distinctive. This isn’t some overdone photographic motif—like a double exposure shot of a person and an outdoor scene or a selective-color photo of a rose—but a genuinely original and brilliant piece of art. 

Other considerations

There are other situations where plagiarism is almost impossible. 

Well-known tourist attractions like the Empire State Building have been shot from almost every imaginable angle. The odds are whatever your idea is, someone else has done it before. This doesn’t mean capturing your shot is plagiarizing theirs. Instead, you were likely both just inspired by the massive existing catalog of Empire State Building images. 

Falling closer to the middle of the scale is a common situation for landscape photographers who often scope out what other photographers have captured at a location before visiting. If someone stands in the same place and takes a similar photo to one they saw online is it inspiration or plagiarism? 

Well, it depends. 

How many other people have taken that photo? Are they putting their own spin on things or trying to copy it as closely as possible? What is their intention in the moment? 

It can be very hard to tell, which is why cases of plagiarism and image theft are so contentious. They’re almost never as clear-cut as this one. 

The post Riffing off vs. Ripping off – When does inspiration become plagiarism? appeared first on Popular Photography.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.

Step aside, Martha Stewart: Photo- saturated under-the-radar publications with names such as Kinfolk, Cherry Bombe, and Backyard Bill are redefining the good life—and the way we look at it. With a focus on the homegrown and handmade, this new wave of magazines and blogs is aimed at folks seeking a new style of living—creators, hipsters, and DIY-types whose alternative looks and semi-subversive values are unlikely to show up on the pages of Martha Stewart Living anytime soon. And the photographers who make the images that fill their pages are bringing an unadorned aesthetic to their work that belies its careful production.

The democratization of the visual world over the past decade has allowed fashion and lifestyle blogs like Bill Gentle’s Backyard Bill to flourish. Gentle believes lifestyle photography today is “the peoples’ photography; for the people, by the people.” Nicole Franzen, who shoots for small-circulation publications Cherry Bombe and Kinfolk as well as power players like Bon Appétit and Martha Stewart Living, agrees. She notes that this up-and-coming lifestyle aesthetic represents an “approachable luxury.” She explains: “I think it’s the young people striving to be better. I think we’re trying to change. We’re kind of rebelling against corporate America.”

Franzen’s work in particular reflects a pared-down photographic look that has grown up along with the DIY and farm-to-table movements of the aughts and the longing for authenticity that these types of magazines emphasize. She says photographers of her milieu are “trying to find the soul in things” with simple sunlit scenes that convey a feeling of approachability. “I like finding the beauty in everyday things that may be mundane,” she says. “I’ve always been a minimalist by nature.”

Former Dwell photo editor turned photographer Aya Brackett—who shoots food and still-life editorial for several of the same publications that Franzen does—says her assignments call for work that’s “beautiful and approachable” with a general trend toward natural light. Brackett conceptualizes her shoots the way she would compose a painting, she says, thinking about the play of color blocks, texture, and daylight-balanced strobes (or actual daylight when it’s available) to re-create a sunlit scene. Her process yields graphically striking photographic stories, and recently a cookbook, focusing on “slow food” and locally sourced organic cuisine. Her favorite work tends to be the “messy” food shots she does for clients like Cherry Bombe magazine, which puts a fashion and fine-art spin on food photography, and a recent personal series about “food that’s fallen to the ground and rendered inedible.”

Gentle too, is concerned with finding the extraordinary within the ordinary. “I like to play with light and colors; I like blown-out foreground textures and shadows casting interesting patterns,” he says. “I think it’s hard to decipher; that’s the magic, the umami. It’s what your eye sees at that particular moment.” But it wasn’t until after he developed his blog in 2008 that his visual language of “classic portraiture, street style, and a twist of quirky comedy” developed, he says.

The rise in this genre of photography is directly related to a cultural shift that’s taken place in creative communities in urban centers throughout the country, says Brooklyn-based Franzen. “It’s about going back to our roots. People are recognizing beauty in things made by hand. We want to know who is making things and the artistry behind it; it’s really appealing. Everyone from chefs to fashion designers to floral arrangers to furniture makers are doing unique things with their hands and taking time to master their craft.”

Gentle echoes Franzen’s sentiment: “I think what we are dealing with now is a much younger side: people who have really learned a trade and skillfully know their craft; [the photography] is more specialized and personal” than in mainstream publications, in part because of its subject.

Georgia Francis King, editor of the quarterly Kinfolk, says her publication is a reminder that another existence outside of the digital world is possible. “The rise of new technologies—and all of the amazing innovations that have come from that boom—are incredibly important to our society. However, it would be a pity if this new world replaced the old one instead of just being a welcome addition,” she says. “We’re there to remind people to slow down and focus not just on the things in your lives but the people and the stories that surround them.”

King calls her magazine’s look “clean, balanced, and detailed.” She says she looks for “original ideas and expert execution,” giving photographers mood boards pre-shoot. “It’s also important for us to constantly be staying ahead of ourselves and not becoming a stereotyped style. Too often we see photographers pitching us work that personifies Kinfolk as it stood two years ago; being able to create new work that moves our aesthetic forward instead of replicating it is key.”

But these magazines don’t deny their mainstream roots; in fact, they embrace them. Magazines like_ Kinfolk_ “are a simplified reaction to the more ornate Martha Stewart era, but that doesn’t mean that both don’t still have their place,” King says. Claudia Wu, who cofounded Cherry Bombe with Kerry Diamond (the pair originally met at Harper’s Bazaar), explains that the Brooklyn-based biannual magazine dedicated mostly to women interested in food, design, and style wouldn’t exist if Martha Stewart hadn’t paved the way. “[Martha Stewart Living] really had a huge impact on both Kerry and me. The magazine really revolutionized the food/lifestyle publication world.”

Franzen calls the first time she shot for Martha Stewart a “dream.” She sees the success of indie publications as coming from their ability to keep “a fine-tuned eye” on a smaller and more easily identifiable audience, whereas larger publications have to paint with a broader brush.

Brackett says she works much differently for clients like Martha Stewart, for example, where “the stories are totally gorgeous and beautiful, but not always edgy,” she explains. “Like, you wouldn’t put a cigarette or something on a plate. You have to keep it a little more tasteful.” She says larger magazines actually tend to be easier to shoot for because of the high production value, but the additional artistic freedom she gets shooting for smaller publications and her own projects can be the most rewarding. “It’s really hard to shoot if you don’t feel inspired, or aren’t working on your own instinct. It’s hard to get anything good if you’re just doing what you think is going to be pleasing, but not what you believe in.”

The post The New Look of Lifestyle Photography appeared first on Popular Photography.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.

The progression of camera technology from the late 1800’s and early 1900’s through today has steadily made street photography easier to accomplish. Focusing distance scales on lenses make it easier to grab shots without adjusting focus through a finder or on ground glass. Advancements in film sensitivity, and later the sensitivity of digital sensors, have further expanded the realm of acceptable shooting conditions. Smaller and less noticeable cameras have helped shooters attain truly candid moments. Finally, cell phone cameras have allowed a vast number of people to capture scenes at a moment’s notice and often without being noticed. Here are 10 examples of cameras that have helped define street photography through the years.

We haven’t found absolutely conclusive evidence that Strand used this particular camera for the shot. However, his use of this camera in that time frame is well known and the details of the print have led us to believe that it is the camera used for the shot. Originally sold in 1905, the Idento is a folding camera that could be used to shoot glass plate negatives of varying size, though Strand is believed to have shot on 3 1/4 x 4 1/4 inch plates. The camera could also accept various film holders sold at the time. Shutter speeds ranged from 1/2 second to 1/100 second with an option to hold the shutter open as long as the photographer wished (which we now know as Bulb mode). According to Anthony Montoya, former director/curator of the Paul Strand Archive, Strand used a prismatic lens for this shot to avoid being seen shooting.

Everyone can agree, though, that she made many wonderful images. While she used multiple cameras throughout the years, lots of people associate her with twin lens reflex cameras. She is known to have owned a Rolleiflex 2.8C. Introduced in 1952, the year after Maier moved to New York, the 2.8C employed a Schneider Xenotar 80mm f/2.8 taking lens and a Compur Rapid MXV shutter with a self timer.

With a lens that swings as it captures an image, the Widelux provides a view of the world unlike most 35mm film bodies. Known to be a favorite of the actor and living embodiment of zen Jeff Bridges, it was also used by the noted photographer Harold Feinstein, who includes some wonderful examples of panoramic street photography on his blog.

Like the Nikon Coolpix A and Ricoh GR of today, this Contax joined cameras such as the Nikon 35Ti and the original Ricoh GR, to offer a true high-end shooting experience in a small camera. The T3 also boasts a good-looking and durable titanium shell. While there’s autofocus, the camera also has a manual focus option that will work well with zone focusing, if that’s your thing. Plus, the top shutter speed of 1/1,200 second improves nicely on the T2’s top speed of 1/500 second.

The body is on par with pro-DSLRs with integrated vertical grips in terms of size. With an 80mm lens, the Mamiya 7II weighs 2.6 pounds– not bad for medium format. A true rangefinder, the 7II has automatic bright line selection for 65mm, 80mm, and 150mm lenses. The lenses have leaf shutters and the body has a dark slide so you can change lenses while film is loaded. If 65mm (32mm equivalent) isn’t wide enough for you, there are 50mm and 43mm options, though they require separate finders. On 120/220 roll film, the Mamiya 7II makes 56 x 69.5mm images. A 35mm panoramic adapter lets you use 35mm roll film in the Mamiya 7II to create 24 x65mm images.

Indeed, there is something very special about using a Leica that is not easy to put into words. Beyond that special something, these cameras are also built to last. You can still buy a working Leica from the 1930’s on eBay and hit the streets to capture the hustle and bustle of the world. It is said that Winogrand’s wife sold his the last M4 he used to a family friend so that it would continue to be used after his death.

While not the first cell phone to let you make images, the iPhone ushered in the notion of really embracing the cameras built in to the various devices we carry with us everywhere. Furthermore, successive generations of iPhones have continued to improve on the built-in camera in meaningful ways. The latest and fanciest, the iPhone 6 Plus, includes an 8MP sensor with built-in phase detection, an f/2.2 maximum aperture lens, and optical image stabilization.

Recently, DxOMark named the Samsung Galaxy S6 and S6 edge the best smartphone camera; the two models share the same camera module and software. The S6 has a 16MP sensor and a fast f/1.9 lens with optical image stabilization. DxOMark notes that the camera has, “very fine detail and low noise levels when shooting in bright light,” and has, “a good level of detail preserved in low-light shots.” They also note that it has fast autofocus and, “nice white balance and color in all outdoor conditions.”

Indeed, it is lightening fast. If you’re looking to shoot on the street and are on a budget, the A6000 makes a nice choice. Plus, if you use your smartphone with Sony’s PlayMemories Mobile app to control the camera, you can get all the benefits of stealth that come with smartphone photography with the better image quality that comes with the A6000’s larger APS-C-sized sensor. If you’re not on a strict budget, Sony’s A7 series offers even better image quality with the full-frame sensors found in those models.

While the cameras don’t use a rangefinder for manual focusing, they do let you display a distance scale with an indication of depth of field on the LCD screen and/or in the electronic viewfinder. The company is clearly looking to satisfy the yearnings of shooters who admire, but can’t afford, a Leica. Fujifilm even makes an adapter to use Leica M glass on their bodies. But, given the selection and exceptional quality of Fujifilm’s X-series lenses, you might be tempted to sell off any Leica lenses you have to fund your new Fujifilm habit.

The post Gear Trend: The Gold Standards For Street Photography appeared first on Popular Photography.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.

“More snapshots are being made every day than ever before,” says Preston Utley, a Denver-based wedding photographer who also produces The Snapshot Diaries, a website dedicated to his everyday pics. “Photography has become the universal language, and photo sharing sites like Snapchat, Instagram, and Facebook have made snapshots the most popular way to share experiences.”

The better these everyday photos, the better we can share the passions, emotions, and simple details of our lives. And the pros we interviewed all agree that taking more engaging day-to-day snapshots improves their professional images, too.

For many of us, our best snapshots can feel like photographic gifts of fate. But not for these pros. More often than not, they bring the same focus and planning to snapshooting that they bring to their day jobs.

“Snapshots aren’t necessarily reality,” says Lucy Schaeffer, a food and lifestyle specialist based in Brooklyn, “but instead they are what a photographer chooses to present as reality.” Her best are often constructed but appear “spontaneous, real, untidy, emotional, surprising, and compelling,” she says.

“I will often ask my kids to do something again if I missed it the first time, or ask them to do something again, ‘but bigger,’” says Schaeffer. Often, in the middle of a family activity, if she thinks the scene is too somber, she will let loose with a joke. “That way I get the action I want, but with real smiles. I don’t hesitate to move people closer to a better background or to the other side of the room for better light or camera angle.”

Based in Venice Beach, California, lifestyle pro Pascal Shirley does the same. “Most of my pictures are orchestrated snapshots,” he says. “First I decide on the location and the lighting. Then I might move some things around or take away elements that I don’t like. I don’t get caught up shooting in one location; I keep moving around for different backgrounds.”

Direct your subjects, but don’t force anything, advises Shirley. You have to pick up on emotions as they happen, but if your subjects start to zone out, it’s time to move on. “Over-directing is a classic mistake. Having a tolerance for uncertainty will lead to better snapshots. These moments are sometimes not staged but are what I call ‘in between’ moments. Stay fluid, listen to your subjects, and look for these moments.”

Utley agrees that consistently good snapshots don’t come about by luck. “Road trips, family gatherings, walking the dog, or moments around the house when the lighting is nice” are times when great snapshots happen, he says. Plan such moments in advance and have plenty of memory cards and charged batteries on hand.

For Schaeffer, great snapshots often come as the result of creative camera angles. “I rarely shoot snapshots of kids from [my] eye-level. Getting [the camera] really low adds drama and brings you into the kids’ world. Standing above and shooting straight down is also fun and graphic,” she says.

Capturing kids and adults while they are interacting with the people they love is almost always rewarding, says Schaeffer. “Sometimes I just stand back and let it happen, while other times I’ll nudge the moment along.”

Her main goal? To tell a story. “I shoot pulled back, then zoom in to middle distances, and finally zoom in even closer for more detail. Together, the whole package should have a nice flow,” she says.

Whatever you do, keep firing. “If you shoot for a while, your subjects forget that you’re there and they forget to be self-conscious,” says Schaeffer. Another reason? Shoot a lot and you will have far more pictures to work with later. And editing, she says, is the secret; “Half of great photography is great editing.” Utley recommends that if you’re working with a phone or camera with a slow lens you probably won’t be able to isolate a subject by defocusing the background. If everything will be sharp, work with that. “Create layers within your compositions, where near-, middle-distance, and background subjects form some kind of relationship, interest, design, or balance.”

And watch out for group shots with everyone looking at you. For Shirley, a good posing technique is waiting for your subjects to look in different directions. “If you find people all staring at your camera or at one particular object in a scene, it can look fake. Humans are not statues, so get them to move and look around. Movement adds energy and makes for stronger images. Going for walks always leads to great snapshots,” he says.

With kids, get ridiculous, adds Schaeffer. If you want little kids looking at you and laughing, she says, “tell them things that are just plain wrong, preferably disgusting. ‘I heard your favorite food is smelly socks’ usually gets a smile or laugh,” she says. “And then take it to the next level: ‘What do you like to drink with your socks? Coffee?’”

Watch your framing and be familiar with your camera controls. “When snapshots fail, it’s most often due to composition and lighting errors,” says Shirley. “Cluttered backgrounds, camera shake, and exposure errors—either too dark or too light—are the most common problems,” he says. Master those camera controls.

How should you set exposures? For spontaneous kid shots Schaeffer almost always shoots in aperture-priority mode. “That way I can control depth of field, which is the thing I care most about. I keep an eye on shutter speed, trying to keep it to at least 1/60 sec or, ideally, 1/125 sec. If it drops below that, I bump up the ISO. I shoot wide open in low light and constantly adjust the autofocus points as I shoot, because I don’t always trust my eyes to confirm focus as quickly and accurately as my camera’s AF system can.”

But you don’t need a fancy camera. “Almost any that you actually take with you will have the potential of capturing great snapshots,” says Schaeffer. But a camera that’s too cumbersome or unresponsive is not the right tool for snapshots. “My iPhone is always in my pocket, and I shoot snapshots with it daily,” she says. Shirley thinks that zoom lenses are crucial for taking better snapshots, because you can compose more quickly and by zooming out for the bigger picture, you create more options for editing and cropping later. “I would stay away from slow cameras with frame rates lower than, say, 5 frames per second and/or quickly filled burst buffers,” he says.

Larger cameras, lenses, and lighting setups don’t work for snapshooting for the obvious reasons. Besides, says Shirley, smaller cameras are less threatening. “I like the Fujifilm X 100-series cameras, the Ricoh GR, and the Sony point-and-shoots.”

Keep to natural, ambient light, he adds. “You really don’t need artificial lighting these days; digital sensors are so good in low light now. Don’t be afraid to push the ISO. I’ve printed great snapshots with ISOs as high as 3200.”

Schaeffer likes available light in all its forms. “Windows, iPad screens, the end of tunnels, anything, really. I often turn off artificial lights in order to use nice window light,” she says. “Food looks best in daylight, and kids do too. I bump up the ISO and/or shoot wide open to milk any available light that I can find.” Utley agrees. “Natural window light and whenever the sun is low in the sky make for better snapshots. If you’re forced to shoot during harsh midday light, try to move your subjects to wherever there’s shade,” he recommends.

As for backgrounds, simple is better than cluttered. “If something in the scene isn’t contributing to your picture, remove it,” says Shirley. “Remember, everything in a picture can be considered a prop and, as the photographer, you decide what stays and what goes. Usually, you can’t go wrong with natural backgrounds.” Bring your snapshot sessions outdoors whenever possible.

All three of our photographers agreed that great snapshots come their way because they always have a camera on hand. “The more often you carry your camera and use it, the more pictures you will take, and the better photographer you will become,” says Pascal Shirley. And not just when you’re taking snapshots.

The post How professional photographers take snapshot photos appeared first on Popular Photography.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.

Jack Simon shot this San Francisco street scene with a Fujifilm X100S and an exposure of 1/2000 at f/8, ISO 640. Photo: Jack Simon

_Thanks to digital photography and instant online image sharing, street photography is enjoying a revival. Now anyone with a camera can head out and shoot whatever he or she thinks is street photography, then beam it to the world with a click. So a lot of good—and bad—street imagery is proliferating in cyberspace. What do the pros think? Here three established street shooters tell us about their approaches and how this challenging art form has evolved. _

San Francisco–based psychiatrist Jack Simon started seriously shooting street scenes about a decade ago, just as the digital era kicked into gear. “There seem to be many more people doing street photography now,” says Simon, a longtime fan of the genre, “but galleries or museums are not necessarily part of this revival.”

To advance his craft, Simon frequents online discussion forums. “I’ve improved my skills, educated myself further, and learned about competitions and photography festivals to enter,” he notes. “I joined the international collective Burn My Eye, and it has become an important part of my photographic life.”

Simon often updates his Flickr feed—where the May 2014 scene at right first appeared—and he uses the platform to enter and win various photography festivals. “I’ve been interviewed in several blogs,” he says, “which has also increased my exposure. One video interview of me has been viewed on YouTube more than 60,000 times.”

Shooting with a Fujifilm X100S—“it’s small, light, and quiet,” he says—he relies on spontaneity. “I don’t have a specific theme or idea in mind of what I am going to photograph,” says Simon. “I am using the street to find complex, colorful, and sometimes cinematic views. I prefer when the story is not clear and it is left up to the viewer to put his or her own interpretation on the scene.”

_Melanie Einzig shot this candid with a Nikon D600 and 35mm f/2D AF Nikkor lens, exposing 1/1000 sec at f/8, ISO 400. Photo: Melanie Einzig _

Melanie Einzig

Melanie Einzig started shooting street photography at age 15, “without being aware that it was what I was doing,” she says. After assisting Joel Meyerowitz while in her thirties, she decided to “put a whole lot of time and effort into making pictures on the street.” She counts Diane Arbus, Ben Asen, Brassaï, Helen Levitt, Raghubir Singh, Weegee, and Garry Winogrand as influences.

Einzig avoids shooting with any preconceived ideas about what she wants to photograph. “That’s when my photography seems to falter,” she says. “Enter with a kind of openness to see what is really there, not what you want to see or think you should see.”

Einzig allows that confrontations happen “once in a while,” adding that “they’re not fun and kind of scary.” When her subjects notice her, she prefers to “look the other way like you weren’t photographing them at all. Then they feel like they may have been imagining you were taking their picture.” If you are confronted directly, apologize, she advises. “I’d rather people feel happy that I made an interesting photo of them.” Einzig relates that after she photographed a parking attendant recently, “he said to me in a totally charming way, ‘You can put this on YouTube, my tube, whatever tube you want!’”

A former black-and-white buff, Einzig has been shooting in color since 1997. “Something about color is so beautiful to me, so alive,” she says. She uses a Nikon D600 with a 35mm f/2D AF Nikkor lens; she also keeps a Sony RX100 in her bag for those times when she doesn’t want to bring her big rig. “Choose a camera that feels right,” she advises, “and rely more on your eye and your heart than on all the technologies.”

She used a Nikon F100 for this candid shot. Photo: Melanie Einzig

_

_

Shot with a Leica M9 and a 35mm f/2 Leica Summicron-M ASPH lens with a 1/1000 sec exposure at f/10, ISO 800. Photo: Richard Bram

Richard Bram

In the early 1980s Richard Bram started shooting side scenes during business events he was being paid to photograph. These days, he counts among his major influences his fellow members of the street photography cooperative iN-PUBLIC. “People connect emotionally with photographs made directly from reality,” Bram says, “and iN-PUBLiC represents the gold standard of contemporary street photography.”

Bram has mixed feelings about the current climate. “Social media has given voice to a very large number of great street photographers,” he says. “There is a coolness factor to street photography these days.” On the downside, he says, “It’s completely unfiltered. Good images are almost immediately buried beneath scads of ordinary ones.” To rise above the noise, Bram uses social media as a means of networking with traditional curators, publishers, educators, and gallery owners.

And he shoots a lot. “I always have a camera with me—therein lies opportunity,” Bram says. “You are always looking, but you rarely know what you are looking for until it’s in front of you.” He usually carries a Leica M9 with a 35mm f/2 Summicron-M ASPH lens, as well as a 24mm f/2.8 Elmar-M or sometimes a 50mm f/2 Summicron-M. “Buy the best you can afford, with minimal shutter lag,” he advises. “Keep it simple.”

On the street, Bram tries to be “very fast and very quiet. People rarely know if I have made a picture of them until after I’ve done so. I almost never ask permission because the result would not have been what drew me in the first place.” The ubiquity of cameras, Bram notes, have made the attitude toward shutterbugs on the street “more suspicious than it used to be.” He avoids potential conflict with “a fast smile and a humble manner.”

Shot on a Leica M9 and a 35mm f/2 Leica Summicron-M ASPH lens with a 1/350 sec exposure at f/6.7, ISO 400. Photo: Richard Bram

The post The State of Street Photography: How Has the Digital Era Changed a Classic Discipline? appeared first on Popular Photography.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.

Teen Brain, Girl Culture

ABU GHRAIB PRISON

NYC: Superstorm Sandy

Launched in its current incarnation in 1990, American Photo’s existence parallels a time of incredible transformation in photography. The birth of digital changed the way images were made, and then the Internet and, later, social media transformed the way images were shared. Bigger pictures made their way into big museums, while little ones exploded in the devices in our pockets. Editorial budgets shrank and stalwart magazines disappeared. The last roll of Kodachrome was shot. Despite—or perhaps because of—all of this change, photography is as alive as ever. Here’s our look at the past 25 years in pictures: the images of a generation.

The post Images of a Generation: 25 Year Timeline of What Mattered Most in Photography appeared first on Popular Photography.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.

By now, you’ve almost certainly heard about the meteorite that did a low flyby over Russia last night. After streaking across the sky, it exploded in the air, sending shockwaves through the city, injuring 400 people and causing untold damage. In fact, you’ve probably seen video of it. And not just one video, either, but dozens. But why are there so many and is this a good thing?

The answer to the first question is actually pretty simple. In Russia, it’s not unheard of for con artists to jump in front of moving cars or purposely cause accidents in hopes of making a quick buck. In order to combat this practice, many drivers have started using on-board cameras, not unlike a GoPro, to capture their commutes. Many cyclists do the same thing in big cities where unfortunate incidents with motorists are common.

Those car cameras represent a large number of the meteor videos that are currently doing the rounds. Of course, there are plenty of non-car camera videos, too, but many of them start in the middle of the event, making them seem less spectacular in some instances.

We’re in a time right now where images and videos of current events propagate with lightning speed. As soon as images are uploaded to Instagram, you can see comment sections filling up with news editors asking for permission to run them. Still, the speed at which we were able to remotely experience this meteorite event is unprecedented and that’s because of the “capture everything” mindset.

The idea of wearing a camera to capture your entire life isn’t a new one. Just recently a few start-ups have introduced products meant to do just that. Most actual products take a time-lapse approach, snapping a photo at a regular interval throughout the day. But, it seems clear that the eventual goal is full-on, crystal clear video footage of every single thing that happens. Even the Google Glasses project seems to be hinting at it.

Right now, the technology is a hurdle, but it’s a hurdle that almost never stays standing. The newest GoPro HD Hero 3 Black edition is capable of capture 4K video at 15 FPS. It’s not smooth to watch as a video, but the jump from 15 fps to 24 fps is almost certainly coming. Storage is an issue, for now, with a 16 GB card able to archive between one and two minutes of 4K footage, but compression algorithms are always getting better, and flash memory is constantly getting cheaper.

With enough memory cards and batteries, you could capture your entire day in 4K — 15 images per second at 12-megapixels each — right now. It’s only getting more real. And that’s using a camera that costs just $400.

The effect this kind of thing has on the way we experience current events is undeniably profound. Videos of the Russian meteorite are plentiful, coming to us from across the world almost instantaneously. Not only can we watch it, but we can watch it over and over again from almost any conceivable angle.

Flash back just 12 years ago to 9/11. It was one of the most tragic and important events in modern US history. There are several videos of the incident, but almost none of the first plane hitting the tower. In one of the most crowded cities in the world, almost no one managed to capture it. In a constantly recording world, there would be seemingly infinite angles of it. Same with the recovery. Video from inside the buildings before they collapsed. We would see it all. But would we want to?

On a more personal level, it would likely have similar implications. You’d never miss a shot. You wouldn’t lose details to age and you wouldn’t be able to idealize things in your memory as time passes. Singular photographic and video mementos would be replaced with a surveillance camera-like stream of images. Just like the Russian car cams or New York bike cams, would you merely be collecting evidence of your life?

While there’s clearly are clearly broad cultural implications of a world constantly filled with running cameras, the affect it has on photography in general is even more profound.

The death of the “decisive moment” has been on the tongues of writers for years. “F/8 and be there” would be replaced with simply “be there.” In a way, it turns photojournalism into even more of an extreme sport. You don’t have to worry about using the camera, you just have to be willing to put yourself into increasingly harsh environments to get images of things that would likely otherwise go unrecorded. In fact, some photojos have been using camera phones in conflict zones simply to help them blend in better. This is further along in the evolution.

Don’t get me wrong, I have faith that true photography will always endure. For every shaky video we saw of 9/11, there were dozens of incredible images, composed and exposed with purpose. But that takes time and that’s not something the currently news cycle allows in most cases. Getting a picture turned around in a matter of hours used to seem incredibly fast. Now, if the video isn’t uploading via WiFi seconds after it was shot, it will likely get passed over for someone with a faster connection or a quicker finger to the upload button.

We’ve also gotten to the point where shakiness and flaws, in some cases, lend credibility to a photo or video. To an extent we have come to equate high levels of image quality with being staged. Composing with aesthetics in mind rather than pure documentation can make an image or video feel more like a piece of art than a piece of evidence. Commentors on the internet are even quicker to offer the ever-present rally cry of “fake!”

Looking to the future, it’s hard to know what we’re really going towards. It seems like science fiction to imagine people with bionic camera eyes and heads full of flash memory, but it’s already more real than some may think. And I have to admit, if they start doling out robotic camera eyes, I’m definitely getting one. I’m just not quite sure, yet, what that says about me.

The post How Is The Growing “Capture Everything” Attitude Changing Photography? appeared first on Popular Photography.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.

If you’re a member of any online portrait, wedding, or maternity photo groups online, you have probably seen photos of this dress. I had seen it—or others like it—but I wasn’t aware of just how large a following it had until I saw a few discussions on the Mastin Labs user group on Facebook (which has quite a few talented photographers). I casually mentioned it to a friend of mine and she admitted she had a small stack of them at her apartment to use during portrait and maternity sessions. This $15 lace gown—which is sometimes referred to as “The Dress”—has amassed an impressive status with some photographers, so I ordered one in order to give it a try.

What is it?

There are a couple different versions of The Dress online, but this one seems to be one of the most popular. It ranges from $15 to $18 depending on the size you order and the company that does the fulfillment. I would actually err on the smaller side to make it form-fitting since the high waist isn’t always flattering if it doesn’t fit snugly. The model for the picture in this post is of average height with a strong, athletic build, and the medium size still seemed a little loose.

It comes packed flat in an envelope since the material doesn’t take up much room. I ordered a medium as I didn’t have a particular model in mind, and several women who tried it on said it actually fit like they would expect a medium to fit, despite the warning on the website about it possibly running small. However, this seems like the kind of product that’s susceptible to variance depending on what size you choose or what vendor actually fulfills the order.

Right out of the bag, it doesn’t look all that elegant.

Quality

Ultimately, it feels a bit like a doily that you might find on your grandma’s coffee table. The threads are thin and it can look a bit scraggly if you get in tight on the details, but none of that should be surprising. Once you step back, many of the imperfections fade away. It loves to get snagged on sticks and branches when walking through the woods, but we didn’t experience any major tears, just a few broken strings.

How does it look in photographs?

Backlight really can make this cheap dress shine. Literally. If you hit it with backlight it glows in the frame. It almost looks like a sheer fabric, but it still maintains some of the detail from the lace pattern. The fade from in-focus to out-of-focus creates a nice effect if you’re using shallow depth of field.

It looks like it should have a flowing quality about it and it will blow around a bit, but it’s not what I would call billowy and it doesn’t trail like a big wedding dress might. That said, it could totally work as a cheap wedding dress under the right circumstances.

How see-through is it?

The dress has a lot of negative space, but despite its lacy nature, it does a surprisingly good job in terms of nipple coverage. I personally have nothing against nipples of any kind, but several other large social networks certainly seem to, so it’s something to consider. The closer you get, the more obvious the sheer nature becomes, and visibility is also affected by other factors such as the amount of differentiation in your model’s skin tone. It can’t hurt to keep some pasties on hand if it’s a big concern.

The rest of the dress provides a lot less coverage, so if you want to keep your images safe for social media, it’s advisable that the model wear bottoms. The bottoms will definitely be visible, though, so it’s a creative decision that needs a bit of consideration.

Is it worth it?

The Dress certainly won’t appeal to every client, but for such a low price, it really does beg to be used to try things. It would probably be great in water or even dyed to match a desired color. I’ve seen some truly beautiful maternity work done with the dress and I’ve already had a maternity client contact me about using it in the days between the first shoot and the time of this writing. Is it super original? Not really, especially now that I’m blowing up its spot a bit (sorry about that), but it can work really well if it fits the aesthetic that you and your subject are looking for. And hey, even if you hate it, it was only about the price of dinner at Chipotle.

Buy it here

The post This $15 Lace Dress Is One of the Trendiest Portrait Photo Props Around appeared first on Popular Photography.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.

Digital equipment and image manipulation software give contemporary photographers the chance to control almost every aspect of their images. But control is what artist and curator Jerry Spagnoli enjoys deferring when making his daguerreotypes. “[Working] with an older process, it is going to do what it wants to do, not what you want it to do,” says Spagnoli. “With Photoshop, you can compel the image to be exactly what you want . . . But you learn to look, I think, by not knowing exactly what you’re going to get.” It is precisely the unpredictability in these archaic methods that he finds fascinating.

Sally Mann, Untitled (Self-Portraits), 2012

Spagnoli has assembled a group of contemporary artists working with these older photographic techniques in his exhibition for the Howard Greenberg Gallery in New York. A New and Mysterious Art: Ancient Photographic Methods in Contemporary Art brings together an international cohort utilizing the 19th century photographic techniques of daguerreotype, calotype, camera obscura, and more to produce vibrant and evocative images. Takashi Arai, Dan Estabrook, Vera Lutter, and Sally Mann are among those included in the show.

A Maquette for a Multiple Monument for B29:Bockscar, 2014

The exhibition is a sister event to the Daguerreian Society’s annual 19th-Century Photography Conference and Show, which will be held in New York October 19–23.

View from Talbot’s Grave, 2012

From its advent in 1839 until its industrialization decades later, photography went through a period of great experimentation regarding photographic techniques.. Practitioners helped to shape the course of the medium through trial and error, acting both as designer and manufacturer of equipment in addition to capturing and developing the photographs.

“Pablo,” Letters to my grandchildren, 2016.

Spagnoli chose these artists primarily because they are hands-on in every part of their practice. “I wanted to put together a show where everybody actually manufactures the material that they shot on. All of the processes that are in the show, even in the 19th century, are referred to as primitive photography,” he says. “It was a period when no one really knew what the medium was, what it could do—there were a lot of open questions about how the techniques should be done. Everybody had idiosyncratic ways of going about it. I think it personalized the work.”

Black Veil, 2002

The collection of images on display demonstrates this careful, considered approach. “I like photographs that draw attention to the fabrication involved in the image,” says Spagnoli. “The vitality [that exists] in work [which] is basically handmade.”

A New and Mysterious Art: Ancient Photographic Methods in Contemporary Art is on view at Howard Greenberg Gallery from Sept. 15 until Oct. 29.

Craig Tuffin, SUB, February 15, 2014

The post Ancient Photographic Techniques Make a Comeback appeared first on Popular Photography.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.