Photographs, Photographers and Photography

June 29, 2008

Canon and Goebbels

Filed under: Hall of Shame — Thomas Pindelski @ 8:35 am

Imitating the Great Liar

That infamous master of propaganda, Joseph Goebbels, remarked that if you tell a big enough lie and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it.

Generations of politicians, lawyers and marketers (many of these know all about lying, of course) have taken that to heart, none more than Canon in their advertisement for their latest consumer grade DSLR. This sells for $750. Doubtless a competent and effective tool and you can see their slick ad here.

But that’s not the point. Clearly the TV ad is advertising their inexpensive mass market camera body.

No. What gets my goat is that there’s another video wherein Canon prides itself on explaining just how the ad was made – the second one of the choices on the right. A minute or so into it and we are told that no fewer than ten Canon EOS 1Ds Mark III cameras were used by the pros to take the snaps in the ad video. Last I checked those run $7,800 a pop or some ten times the cost of the featured product.

So how, pray, do pictures taken on a $7,800 camera end up misrepresented as having been taken on a consumer DSLR one tenth of the cost? And why, if the new cheap model is so good, was it not used to take the snaps in the ad? Never mind the carefully chosen words in the above (”….real photographs taken by Canon digital SLR cameras….”) the opening shot of the ad shows Mrs. Housewife clearly using the consumer DSLR, immediately cutting to the snaps taken by pros using the top of the line $8k honker. Not that you would know, of course. Anyone watching the ad would conclude exactly what Canon and its sleazy US management and lawyers intend – that all the pictures you see were taken on the camera shown.

Shame on you, Canon.

June 27, 2008

Macro Day

Filed under: Photographs — Thomas Pindelski @ 7:14 am

Finally a solid field test.

Flowers? Fughedaboutit! I don’t do flowers. Millions do, all better than me, so why bother?

Give me a choice between Yosemite and the local workshop (mine!) and the latter wins every time. Used motor oil smells far nicer than all that foul fresh air. And flowers.

So when it came to find a serious subject for my macro rig, I would have to suggest that that posits the issue backwards. I bought the rig because of my intended subject, rather than having to go in search of something to macrosnap (my word!). And given that I’m an engineer by graduation and a mechanic when time permits, it can hardly come as a surprise that my object of choice was the machine. Or machines, to get it right.

Those poor deprived masses who have never attended a motor race are missing three things, only two of which can be recreated in the home theater. Sight and sound. But unless Nintendo is about to perfect it – quite possible given the genius of the Wii – you cannot get the third, the missing ingredient. The smell. You have to go to the races to enjoy that. Same with horses I suppose, though I never trust anything which eats while you sleep and lacks a gearbox. And let’s face it, horses stink.

Thus Tuesday found me at Laguna Seca, not 2 hours north of the old estate which I call home, in the paddock, surrounded by some one hundred vintage race cars, from million dollar Ferraris to plain vanilla Austin Healeys. As a design maven I’m generally more fixated on the unity of form and function than I am with speed on the track, so my happiest times are spent in the paddock. As this is an amateur event, the teams are very friendly, and only too willing to show off their machines. You can get close to anything with no questions asked.

While the hand-held combination of Canon 5D/100mm Canon Macro lens/Ring Flash looks cumbersome, it is, in practice, very easy to handle and with the 5D’s magnificent autofocus most of your attention can be devoted to the subject rather than the technology. In bright sunlight, which was the case at this event, the ring flash – inherently shadowless lighting – acts as a dynamic range enhancer by filling in the shadows. The circuitry in the 5D balances the natural and artificial light sources, so original shadows are preserved and not unnaturally duplicated (as would be the case with off-axis flash) and the whole thing becomes a printer’s dream rather than a nightmare. Just check the natural shadows in the snaps below.

It was simply striking in the extreme how all this automation frees the photographer to focus on the subject. After several dry runs at home, my confidence level was such that I never once felt the need to consult the LCD screen on the 5D after the first snap. Unlike Apple hardware, It Just Works. Thank you Canon and thank you El Cheapo Chinese aftermarket manufacturer of the ring flash.

After some two years I have got sick and tired of all those landscape prints decorating the garage, so I reeled off a dozen of these on the HP DesignJet 90 and will have them mounted and framed by the weekend. As I write this the last few are rolling out to the accompaniment of the merry clack-clack of that wonderful printer and the foul smell with which HP sees fit to invest its printing inks.

Technically there are actually quite a few limitations. First, your shutter speed has to be 1/200th or slower to accommodate the 5D’s needs. Second, if there’s any depth in your subject you really need to stop down if you want things sharp all over. Third, because you have to use slower shutter speeds, in bright sunlight that means cranking down the ISO to 50 or 100. I found myself wishing more than once that the 5D had what I call a Kodachrome 25 speed. You know, ISO 25. Really slow. Finally, while the 100mm macro gives you nice lens-to-subject distance, you will struggle getting a parallel plane relative to high horizontal subjects. (Reread and work it out! It means standing on tiptoe ….)

Here are a few of the snaps whose primary goal was to focus on the abstract beauty of man-made machines.

What of the quality of the originals? My rejects were deleted owing solely to composition issues, never because of a lack of sharpness. As I use shutter priority (to avoid going faster than the maximum sync speed of 1/200th) the 5D selects the aperture and this seems to have varied from f/4 to f/22, with ISO anywhere from 100 to 320. Regardless of the aperture used, the originals are critically sharp (after the usual sharpening of the RAW originals in Lightroom) and easily scale to 30″ x 45″ on the screen. And not a burned-out highlight to be found. Stick your nose in the dozen 18″ x 24″ prints I just made and your biggest risk is personal injury – your schnozzer is likely to sustain cuts from the incredible sharpness and resolution in the print. You could probably improve on this with a large format camera – 4″ x 5″ say – but the ergonomics and miniscule depth of field that gear suggests would simply make the rig unworkable.

On a closing note, I am constantly reminded of Charles Coburn’s line in Monkey Business when a very curvaceous Marilyn Monroe, as his secretary, exits the room to the adoring glances of Coburn and Cary Grant. Grant looks quizzically at Coburn who shrugs and replies “Anyone can type”. With this rig, “Anyone can do macro”.

June 26, 2008

Form and Function

Filed under: Photographs — Thomas Pindelski @ 1:54 pm

Not something to be found today.

Leather hood straps are de rigeur on any sporty automobile with claims to classic status but rarely are they as exquisitely crafted as this one with a built in tensioning spring.


Bonnet strap on an early Miller racer, c. 1925. 5D, 100mm macro, ring flash

June 21, 2008

About the snap: Gamblers

Filed under: About the Snap — Thomas Pindelski @ 6:46 am

Date: January, 2000
Place: Bay Meadows race track, San Francisco’s South Bay Area
Modus operandi: Troubled
Weather: Indoors
Time: 2pm
Gear: Leica M3, 50mm Summicron
Medium: Kodak Gold 100
Me: Ugh!

Imagine if you can a system which takes money from those least able to afford it and legalizes it. The concept behind the Coliseum cynically updated.

Because that is what California has accomplished though its legalized gambling. Some is state sponsored (our government seeks to exploit its citizens’ weaknesses to make hay), some privately owned like the Bay Meadows race track just south of San Francisco. And, of course, if you are an American Indian you can trade on the white man’s guilt and the sky is the limit, Indian tribes being the largest casino operators in the state. Hardly surprising – congressmen are cheap to buy.

Into the gambling hall at Bay Meadows and there they were, like so many academics, whiling their time and milk money away.

The glow from the objects of their attention – TV monitors with all the latest odds – adds to the opium den feel of the whole thing.

June 20, 2008

Tools

Filed under: Book reviews — Thomas Pindelski @ 8:39 am

Another fine lesson in macro.

A few years back I developed tendonitis, meaning that if I stress my wrists too much everything from elbow to wrist hurts like hell. One likely cause is that many years of woodworking as a hobby did a number on my tendons and, as I understand it, these are not things that readily mend.

In the event, it was probably a timely warning. I still had all ten fingers attached where they should be and, let’s face it, I wasn’t giving Chippendale any competition, so the woodworking tools were sold and the proceeds applied to converting the workshop to a home theater. Suffice it to say that all those newly white walls made for a fine photography exhibition space in addition to a great place to watch movies, play pool, throw the occasional dart and …. well, you get the idea. American leisure at home.

From those woodworking days, I recall that easily the best magazine addressing amateur woodworking is ‘Fine Woodworking’ published by Taunton Press, a specialty publisher with a very high end focus on content, presentation and photography. One of their editors, a superb woodworker, published this labor of love a few years ago:

Not only are the tools depicted beautiful art works, the photography is stunning. Great care has been taken with settings, backgrounds and lighting and the whole thing is a masterpiece of table-top photography. Best as I can tell, Nagyszalanczy is both writer and photographer.

It remains available at Amazon for very little money.

June 19, 2008

Flies

Filed under: Book reviews — Thomas Pindelski @ 7:20 am

An unlikely source of inspiration.

You know your home library is a good one when you come across books you never knew you had.

Which is exactly what happened to me the other day when in search of inspiration and education about good macro photography. I have no earthly idea how I came to own this book, but I am most certainly glad to have discovered it.

While the subject may be unusual the photography contained in the pages of this book is some of the best macro work I have seen.

Atlantic salmon flies are tied as much for their looks and display appeal as they are for real fishing. This book covers the gamut from fly tyers interested solely in emulating pre-WWI techniques (!) to those interested in the very latest designs using synthetic materials. The interviews with these artisans are almost as good as the photography.

As the book was published in 1991, before large frame digital existed, all the work here is on film and, while it’s hard to make out from the picture of photographer John Clayton on the jacket cover, was probably done on large format. The lighting, posing and choices of backgrounds all speak to a work of love and exceptional effort.

No longer on Amazon, look for this book in the remaindered catalogs. The excellent Alibris has it. Highly recommended for the beauty of the subjects and the photographic execution.

June 16, 2008

Phil Brown – photographer

Filed under: Photographers — Thomas Pindelski @ 7:37 am

An original and moving project.

The power of focusing on a project has been mentioned many times here. A perfect example is the work of guest photographer Phil Brown from London.

I’ll let him speak for his images – you can see more on his web site.

* * * * *

“Of the 155 homicides in the Greater London area in 2007, 26 victims were teenagers: 18 were stabbed, eight were shot. The shootings have a particular resonance, with the UK being a country with strict gun control laws. These are the streets where these eight shootings occurred.”

I originally thought up this unconventional project in November 2007, whilst reading about the latest teenage shooting in London. It may have remained only an idea had I not read a 5B4 blog review of ‘The Forest’ by Paul Seawright the following day. This book seemed to be based on the same idea – ostensibly dull scenes, quite neutrally captured, devoid of people, but rendered horrific by their accompanying captions which convey the inhumanity of what has taken place there. Seeing how someone else had successfully developed a similar idea gave me the impetus to actually see the project through, for once, rather than adding it to the ever-growing list of ‘potentials’.

Generally speaking I feel, or rather stubbornly compel myself to feel, safe walking around any part of London. I’ve been here for long enough to know where the good and bad parts are and to know the mannerisms of people well enough to gauge the potential threats. That said I felt suitably unsettled in all of the eight places I went to photograph this project. I think the fact that they weren’t generally in the more salubrious parts of the city, coupled with the knowledge that I was standing in spots where bullets had flown and people had died, made me feel unusually vulnerable. Several of the streets were dead ends (hence the name of the project) which also added to the sense of dread. After the first trip out (which featured a run-in with the police who were in the middle of a double drug bust and couldn’t fathom what I was doing wandering around) I started leaving my wallet at home and only taking the essentials to get there and back and a couple of rolls of film for the thankfully worthless camera I was using (semi-functional Canon QL17).

The challenge, besides the probably misplaced fear generated by my over-active imagination, lay in trying to make something interesting out of the largely deserted and otherwise forgettable inner city housing estates. The quality of the pictures that my light-leaking, meterless camera produced is such that the whole project has probably been rendered unpublishable in any form other than on my website (and now Mr. Pindelski’s, thanks to his encouragement). However, I think that a visually coherent gathering of such images makes a valid point and should, at least, serve to give pause for thought.

Dead Ends


War Memorial, Stoke Newington. Pass not without Remembrance.


Streatham Ice Arena. James Smartt-Ford, 16, shot on 3 February.


Fenwick Place, Clapham. Billy Cox, 15. Shot at his home on 14 February.


Long Walk, Plumsted. Philip Poru, 18. Shot on 14 October.


Clevedon Close, Stoke Newington. Etem Celebi, 17, shot on 14 November.

* * * * *

Thank you, Phil, for the opportunity to show your powerful documentary work.

June 15, 2008

It was twenty years ago today ….

Filed under: Photographs — Thomas Pindelski @ 6:50 am

…. Sergeant Pepper was left behind.

Things looked pretty good twenty years ago. America was vibrant and confident, its residents affluent and optimistic. Sure, the losers didn’t like things but, then again, the America of 1988 was not for losers, unlike now. You sank or swam, depending on your capacity for hard work and willingness to succeed. Brains had nothing to do with it.

Today, those practicing thrift (you pay your mortgage timely) and self discipline (you are not 100 pounds overweight and do not smoke) are punished. The responsible are expected to subsidize the losers. An unhappy time.

No matter. For me optimism prevails and I believe we will turn around our nation and move onwards and upwards, A dose of losers is no bad thing to remind us where that path lies.

For me, June 1988 was a very special time as it was when I became an American citizen. Having lived here since 1977 and after some ten years of unspeakable incompetence on the part of the Immigration and Naturalization Service (a sort of anti-American cartel, really) I finally took the citizenship test and swore fealty to the greatest nation on earth. Believe it or not, one of the questions was “Who is the President of the United States?” to which I merrily replied “Nancy Reagan”. I still got in.

So now, while my American wife and son are safe, I can still be deported if I commit a felony, confirming that the finest attribute of most Americans is but an accident of birth.

In those wonderful twenty years I have been fortunate to see much of America and even to commit a small fraction of what I saw to film. And here are some of the things I have seen:


Anchorage, AK


Guggenheim Museum, NYC


Matanuska Valley, AK


Puyallup, WA


Central Coast, CA


Thanksgiving Day parade, NYC


World Trade Center


Delicatessen, NYC


Yellowstone National Park, WY


Arco, ID


Utah


San Luis Obispo, CA


Los Angeles


Santa Fe, NM


Colorado


La Jolla, CA


Tombstone, AZ


Los Angeles


Chinatown, San Francisco


Little Italy, NYC

Whether we are at an end of empire or just catching our breath for the next innings, I do not know but I earnestly hope it is the latter. All it needs to make that happen is a leader willing to say that most important and shortest of words.

“No”.

For my part, looking back on those twenty years, it has been the best, the happiest, time of my life. Love America or leave her.

June 14, 2008

Brand awareness

Filed under: Cameras — Thomas Pindelski @ 6:59 am

We are all guilty of it.

There’s a car that is one of the fastest in the world. It is exceptionally affordable. It is supremely reliable, has very high engineering standards and comes in red, if you want. It’s possibly the fastest production car made yet the manufacturer cannot give them away because the brand is wrong. It connotes nothing so much as beer-bellied ol’ boys at the ball park on a lazy Sunday afternoon. Not the image you quite want for something that is meant to advertise “I am single, available and sexy”.

That car, of course, is Chevrolet’s Corvette. A Ferrari with like performance and looks (OK, like performance) is five times the price.

A branding failure, no matter how much GM tells you it’s there to reinforce the message of Chevy excellence. I wouldn’t be seen dead in one.

It’s the same with watches. We have all been told a thousand times that a quartz Timex keeps time as well as anything, and that is correct, yet I have two manually wound timepieces in the desk drawer which cost egregious sums to acquire and are anything but accurate, not to mention needing constant, costly maintenance. I wear neither so there they are, waiting for …. I know not what. But the makers, unlike Chevy, got the branding dead right. Low production volumes, word of mouth advertising, scarcity, exclusivity. That’s what makes a brand.

It used to be that way with cameras.

The esteemed brands which shared the qualities of those watches were few. In the ’50s the Speed Graphic (crude and effective) and the Linhof (anything but crude, and equally effective) ruled, but only one was a brand in the sense of this piece. It was not the Speed Graphic.

Rolleiflex has always been a brand and remains so to this day. Any number of great photographers used waist-level Rolleis, ungainly as they may be, and some great studio work is being done to this day with their ne plus ultra medium format, single lens reflexes. I owned one of these nuclear deterrents many years (a 6003 Pro) and it was as easy to use as any medium format camera can ever claim to be easy to use. And it was a real Brand. When you locked that Zeiss Planar or Distagon lens on the body you were not the sort of person to be messed with.

In the ’60s there was really only one 35mm brand. The Leica. Cartier-Bresson used one. That’s all you had to know and no advertisements were needed to remind you of that.

The final years of great brands were the ’70s. A fading Leica gave way to the Nikon F which is to the Leica like Hulk Hogan is to Audrey Hepburn. Neither breaks easily, but one also doubles as a blunt weapon. Thanks to an America which appears yet again to have invaded the wrong country, Viet Nam gave the Nikon F its baptism. Thereafter there were no excuses needed for its Far East provenance. It had become a brand.

Then something funny started to happen to the whole brand idea. Maybe taking a leaf out of Chevy’s book they reasoned “We have the Corvette. Why not make some econoboxes. The brand might wear off.” So Canon, Nikon et al started making genuinely horrid consumer cameras, emblazoned with their name in a prominent, contrasting shade on the front. Now Aunt Maude could make sure everyone knew that she too, like Donald McCullin, used a Nikon.

Others came at it from the opposite direction. So desperate was Olympus to be seen that they gave British birdman Eric Hosking several sets of gear to displace his aging Zeiss Contarex. It worked. The former maker of toys was suddenly being taken seriously. Pentax did the same with David Bailey and Sam Haskins while Minolta did it with David Hamilton. More recently, new brands have piggybacked on their reputations in other fields. Ricoh and Casio make great copiers, so why not cameras? Samsung of TV fame? Why, cameras of course. And there’s no need to go on about Sony and HP.

So brand identity, in a strange way, lost its elitist leanings. First, counterculture chic dictated that the rich be seen wearing Swatch watches and using disposable cameras (for their equally disposable photographs). Second, who was to know whether your Leica was the cheapy Panny from China with the red dot, or the more-money-than-sense M8 (probably also from China but they aren’t telling)? Labels, in other words, had obsoleted brands. If you can get millions to buy your Benetton emblazoned T shirt so that you can go motor racing, then clearly the label means more than the brand.

So rather than further rue the demise of Great Brands, let me just let you gaze at some of the finest, most of which I have been fortunate to use and exult in.

June 13, 2008

The Man who was Never Caught

Filed under: Photography — Thomas Pindelski @ 7:41 am

Cycling pays.

Only the most naïve think that professional sports are clean. I’m at the other end of the spectrum, depending on that old rule which applies across all fields of human endeavor:

“Go where the money is”.

Or, stated differently, I would bet that nearly all professional sports are rigged. Whether it’s the obvious – like professional wrestling – or the less so – like baseball and American football, there’s simply too much money at stake to attract the virtuous. Those icons of American entertainment are rigged, you say? Surely not.

Well, check out the most famous baseball game ever (generally referred to as “The Shot Heard Around the World”) or the New England Patriots’ more recent cheating. Rigged.

At least I take comfort in the knowledge that the only sport I actively follow – Formula One – is totally rigged. The guy with the best stolen secrets and the biggest pocket book wins every time. So at least we know where we stand. It makes the entertainment that much better when you are realistic about its parameters.

Which brings me to cycling. After weightlifting it’s hard to think of a more corrupt sport. I very much doubt that any winner of the Tour de France has been ‘clean’ in the sense we think of that description. It’s just that some are smarter than others. And boy, is there money in it or what?

That showcase of displays of wealth, Architectural Digest, profiles one such famous cyclist’s home in the current issue. Go to the home theater and there are his seven TDF jerseys, signifying an unbeaten winning streak. And one good thing about AD is that the interior photography is pretty interesting from a technical perspective, even if the displays of money on the walls leave me cold. And to show you just how much money there is in the game, the famous cyclist’s home is on the cover, no less.

The photography is great. The home of The Man who was Never Caught.

If you like good interior photography – thought some HDR might help occasionally – pick up a copy of Architectural Digest. Just don’t look for the pure of heart inside.

June 12, 2008

Patrick Demarchelier

Filed under: Photographers — Thomas Pindelski @ 9:45 am

And the diva.

Take a look at the engrossing movie The Devil Wears Prada and you will hear the Meryl Streep character (an amalgam, one imagines, of the two great Vogue editors of recent times, Anna Wintour and Diana Vreeland) ask on several occasions “Can we get Patrick?”.

I cannot remember a time when Patrick Demarchelier – yes, that Patrick – was not famous. With just cause. Click here and you will see what I’m writing about. Pair this superstar photographer with a true, like-they-used-to-make-them, superstar actress whose looks match her acting skill, and you have Hurrell’s Hollywood recreated. Angelina Jolie is a Star in the old sense of the word. Sure, there are the bizarre tattoos (self expression, if you ask me) and all those adoptions (how many starving kids have you saved recently?), but, heck, that’s just modern times. There’s no denying the woman’s acting skills, her commitments to charity ($8mm donated in 2006 alone), and for lady readers, the hunk that passes for her soul mate. Did I mention that she’s gorgeous?

Thanks, Mr. Demarchelier, for making life that much happier for this fan.

Attention spans

Filed under: Photography — Thomas Pindelski @ 8:47 am

Blame Google.

The Atlantic, an East coast monthly magazine focused on political science (arguably as big a contradiction in terms as ‘military intelligence’) has a beautifully written article in the current issue titled ‘Is Google Making us Stupid?”. On the cover they spell it ‘Stoopid’ which seems more apt. The thrust of the piece is that Google and its ilk have forced us to reduce our attention spans to the point where the writer says he can longer read a book. He exists solely on news snippets. Sad.

But there’s more than a smidgeon of truth in this piece. Deal with anyone these days, not just young people – anyone – and chances are you will find that attention spans have indeed fallen. Communicate in monosyllabic grunts and you get what you want. Ask politely and make some small talk and you are switched off by the listener. Efficiency has relegated decorum to a back seat.

But you and I are guilty, too. You are reading one thing on the screen then ‘ping’, the machine announces an email and you dutifully jump into email at the computer’s bidding. What you were reading fades forever from memory. I can only hope that you were not reading this when that email arrived ….

Do the same symptoms affect photography? I think the answer must be a resounding ‘Yes’. As one example look at the demise of the photographic print. Why pay for something large, static and unwieldy when you can zap into it with a few clicks and look at it for 2 seconds on that miserable screen attached to your computer? You move on, the image as forgotten as that article interrupted by the email ping. You tell yourself that you are using time effectively where, in fact, you are wasting it horribly by flitting between incomplete tasks, nothing learned.

Here’s a snap I took back in the ’70s – unconsciously reflecting the surrealism of Cartier-Bresson with whom I was besotted at the time:


Speakers’ Corner. Leica M3, 35mm Summaron, TriX/D76

Appearances apart, there was very little unplanned about this picture, whose goal was to show political isolation and passivity. The flag’s position is no accident – I waited for the moment; the chap on the grass was in no hurry, after all. The London pigeon was a stroke of luck (missing from the other snap of the same subject taken that day), it’s true, and maybe adds to the overall effect, but the point of the picture is not readily grasped in a two second glance. It rewards thought.

Now open your favorite news magazine and this is what you will see:


Today’s news snippets

These are actually incredible events, all three. The nation’s highest court has just slapped down the President on constitutional grounds (you or I would be in the slammer for like behavior), yesterday’s prima ballerina at a leading Wall Street brokerage is now no more and the guy in charge of our largest bank has just closed the business he got over $150mm for a year ago en route to the executive suite of the buyer. All major, earth shattering, news events yet most will scan the above , shrug and move on. There are lessons here about hubris, corruption, power, politics, perception, strategic skill and on and on. So much to be learned. Yet the word on Wall Street has it that “…the broad at Lehman got whacked”. No analysis. No opinions. Just the facts, ma’am. No time for discussion. Get to the bottom line.

And while I grew up on Wall Street and have mostly good things to say about it (Greed is Good) I rue the days before Google for they seemed, to me, a more civilized time. Back then you repaired to Harry’s Bar after a tough day for conversation and conviviality. Now you get on the Internet. We no longer pause to sniff the flowers, we merely ask the price.

So does that obsolete the wall mounted photographic print? For many, I’m afraid the answer is ‘Yes’.

But they are not my audience and, if you read these columns, they are not yours either, for I cannot imagine my world without the luxury of time to stop and gaze at a beautiful photograph.

June 9, 2008

There goes another $50,000

Filed under: Hall of Shame, Photography — Thomas Pindelski @ 4:40 pm

Who wrote this claptrap?

Sometimes you have to think that anyone can make a living in the great country that is the USA. After all, Kodak just paid some fool in advertising to blow $50,000 of their rapidly disappearing shareholder’s equity to run this monumental piece of garbage in today’s Wall Street Journal:

Let’s pause to analyze what is wrong:

  • The audience demographic is completely wrong
  • There’s not a product in sight
  • There is no message
  • When you read that “The emotional truth of pictures is under attack”, you quickly conclude that the best use for this page is as a barf bag

You can only agree with the second paragraph. As have the markets:

But worst of all, Kodak, what on earth was wrong with that brilliant little ditty you paid copywriters for a hundred years ago? It goes something like this:

“You take the pictures. We do the rest”

Simple. Magic. Still works well. Saves ink and shareholders’ money, too. Shame on you, Kodak.

June 6, 2008

Photography books and wine

Filed under: Book reviews — Thomas Pindelski @ 7:58 am

Sampling books is much like drinking wine.

I make it a habit, as summer approaches, to pick a photography book from the bookcase for relaxation on the patio in the afternoon. What struck me as rather funny the other day is that I found myself perusing the shelves much as a wine drinker might select a wine for dinner. Now it’s true that I grow Zinfandel grapes, but I rarely drink wine. Just not my thing, even if the grapes make for prize winning wines. So I really cannot pontificate how a wine drinker makes his choices as I have little idea, but I found that I was consciously thinking what genre and emotional pallette I wanted when it came to book selection.

With the perfume of jasmine in the home, thanks to the lovely plants on the patio, I migrated to a book of flower pictures. Plus I’m getting into the whole macro thing.

And a fine choice it was, with no hangover.

If you would like to see my complete library of photo books, click here.

By the way, I never buy new photo books, only remaindered ones. No idea where they got the pricing data but I seem to recall paying well under $20 for this one.


Star jasmine on the patio. 5D, 100mm Canon macro, ring flash, 1/45, f/19, ISO 200

June 1, 2008

Shutterfly

Filed under: Printing — Thomas Pindelski @ 8:18 am

You can’t beat a print.

My first computer, bought in 1981, came with a 3 inch monochrome cathode ray tube screen which was nearly impossible to read. Not that it mattered as you couldn’t display pictures on it in any case. After many unhappy years with PCs, with screens growing to 15 inch (and still huge CRT boxes) 2000 saw the first of many Macs join the household. The screen was 17 inch, crystal clear and made for a photographer. Currently, my MacBook uses a Samsung 21.6 inch screen when at home and it’s the best photo processing hardware I have used so far.

One day I would love to make that screen into a 30 inch Apple Cinema Display (there are only so many trendy movies to watch and each just raises desire with all those huge screens on show) but the ridiculous cost lets “I should” wait upon “Don’t be silly”. It also amuses me no end how the happening set always use Apples on the big screen while the losers in government stick with PCs. That’s a good thing. A cheap government computer beats a costly one and any government that locks up daily is doing its job in this voter’s eyes, regardless of party. Ironman anyone?

Yet now that my screen is larger than any of the many photography books in my library, I still prefer to luxuriate in the pages of a book to looking at the screen, no matter its size. Maybe having grown up without computers, and with lots of books, has prevented me from fully accepting a screen as the display medium of choice; what’s more, I like the look and feel of a book when it comes to looking at pictures. Plus you can read when you shave – try that with a computer!

All of which reminds me why I so much like Shutterfly and what it does for my snaps. Every now and then we put out a calendar showing our son’s growth and interests. (’We’ means the mother who does the sets and the father who presses the button). It goes to relatives and invariably ends up on a wall somewhere.


The bald one’s the surgeon, if you must know

Having used the service since it started a few years ago, I can only sing its praises. An intuitive user interface, easy upload and arrangement of your snaps and a beautifully printed calendar in your hands in a few days, all at reasonable cost. What’s not to like?

And a printed picture beats a screen anyday.

Powered by WordPress