Another life lesson learned .....

A while ago, I went looking for a model with either a bald or shaved head.  I had a picture in mind and the bald head was key to it.  I also had visions of a special headpiece and that the makeup would be done using an airbrush rather than the expected way using brushes and sponges.

I put out the feelers on Facebook but got virtually no response.  I put up a note on Model Mayhem - zilch, nada, nothing.  Then a friend of mine mentioned a friend of hers (I know - a friend of a friend) who was going to shave her (very) long hair to raise money for cancer treatment for a young girl here in Ireland.  I contacted her and met her so that we could size each other up and see if we fitted together,  I explained the shot, explained she would basically painted, the shoot would take about 4 hours, the photos would be used in competitions and might be in salons and could be on public view in exhibitions.
We had our coffees, chatted some more and then went our different ways.

I had a MUA friend of mine who uses a person who makes headpieces that are incredible.  I got in touch and asked her if she could make one especially for me.  We met, discussed the shape and concept, materials that would be used, the cost and when I needed it.  While I was there I also saw some other pieces that I agreed to hire for the day.  All was going well.

Now all I needed was the airbrush artist .....

I was talking to a friend of mine in Dublin Camera Club and he mentioned that "one of his guys" did airbrushing.  Maybe he could provide what I wanted so I described to him what I was looking for.  The colours would be subtle.  If I said gold I meant a gold tint and not gold-gold.  Head and chest would be a gold tint.  The face would have an oval of silver tint as though someone was shining a spotlight on her.  I wanted a soft jagged band of black across her eyes and hard black stripes coming from the forehead converging at the crown of her head.  I also said that money was scarce so it would be a deciding factor in whether I went ahead with the airbrushing or not.  If not then I would modify my approach and probably use the 'normal' methods.  I mentioned €50 as a starting negotiating price.

The following week my friend came back to me, told me he had discussed it and €50 would be okay.  I got the guy's contact details and

26-Feb 14:46

Paul: Hi,

I'm the friend of YYY that's looking for the airbrush job on a woman with a shaved head! Any chance we could meet and have a chat?

Paul Timon.

27-Feb 21:21

Paul: Have you changed your mind about the job?

Paul Timon.

Christian: Sorry man,just been really busy we can meet up in the academy on Friday at 1 if that suits ?

Paul: No problem. Yes, that suits me fine. See you then. Thanks.

1-Mar 12:12

Paul: Might be 5 mins late.

Christian: Sure no worries

We had our meeting.  I described what I wanted to Christian and I could see from his reaction that €50 was not going to be enough and suggested €100 to which he agreed.  He started doing a sketch of my description in Photoshop and said he would finish it another time and send me a copy for discussion in "the next few days".  One of the things I repeated over and over was that all the colours were to blend with each other - no hard lines - except for the lines on her head.
Christian had a problem with the date we had arranged for the shoot - the 22nd so I spoke to Louise and changed it to the 23rd to suit him.

1-Mar 17:27

Paul: 23rd is fine. 12:00 - 16:00

Paul T

Christian: Cool

Nearly two weeks had gone by without any sketch.

13-Mar 17:56

Paul: Anything to show me yet?

Christian: Not yet ill get a look at it this evening

Another week has gone by with no sketch.  I have given up expecting one.  I now decided I would just send him details of the shoot just to confirm them.

21-Mar 13:03

Paul: Saturday, 12:00 at Dublin Camera Club.

10 Lr Camden St.

Text me when you're outside.

I got a phone call from him telling me that he couldn't make it for 12:00 but would be there at 1:00 pm.  I called Louise and changed the time to 1:00.

22 Mar I see an email timestamped 21-Mar 23:55 where he says:find attached sketch for look on saturday in gold and silver there will be alterations depending on the size of the models head etc.. let me know if there you want to make any changes

This is the sketch I received the day before the shoot.

 

The day before the shoot at 6:22 pm I get the following text.  No phone call,just a text.

22-Mar 18:22

Christian: Hy Paul I won't be able to do tomorrow for you but I've given all the materials and equipment to an excellent make up artist called XXX  she is more than capable of creating the look your after and will be at the camera club at 12 her number is XXX

The replacement was not the same standard as Christian.  However I went with what she was doing and did my shoot.  I checked if she had been paid and she told me she hadn't so I gave her the €100 - the full amount.  But I had already paid Christian €50 so asked for it back.

26-Mar 17:52

Paul: I gave XXX the full €100 since you didn't give her the €50 deposit.

Please give YYY the €50 to return to me.

Thanks.

Christian: The deposit was 50 for materials which I gave to XXX the price for the job was 100 total price was 150

Paul: The number €150 was never mentioned at our meeting. It went from €50 to €100. Are you refusing to return the €50?

?

Christian: At the meeting I said 50 for materials and 100 for the day no make up artist would work for less than 100 for a make over especially with the airbrush

Paul: Considering all that has happened since I started this project, this is the last straw.

Christian: My going rate for a day is 350 I reduced the rate since you were a friend if YYY , you can check with him at the end of the day you got the job done for practically half the price

Paul: This is not over.

• So.... I was told by his 'boss' (?) €50 would be okay.  But the discussion quoted €100.  No mention of an addition of €100.
• I was promised a sketch of what we discussed in the following days after our discussion on 1-Mar.
• After no sketch and no communication I had to ask about the sketch again on the 13-Mar and was told "Not yet ill get a look at it this evening"
• On Thursday 21-Mar (shoot on Saturday) I send him confirmation details of the shoot only to be told he can't make it for 12:00.  What if I hadn't contacted him?
• On Thursday night at 11:55pm he sends me the sketch I had expected weeks before and it is NOT what we discussed.  I don't see it until Friday 22nd.  I decide I'll try and steer the work on the Saturday.
• 6:22 pm on Friday 22-Mar I get a text telling me he isn't going to be there but has assigned a replacement.
• He also estimated it was two hours work.  His rate (now I find out) is €350 for the day.  Assuming an 8 hour day then 2 hours would be < €90?

I didn't get the person I had a contract with.

I didn't get a sketch in time despite asking for it twice and it was wrong.

I was overcharged.
I was given virtually no notice of replacement or asked if it was okay.

Would you use Christian Kotey?

3 into 1 can go

A friend of mine, Glynis Casson, calls on me from time to time to help out with stage performances that she puts on in various places.  She has a bit of a pedigree!  Her grandmother was Dame Sybil Thorndike who won't mean too much to most of you but she would have been the Judy Dench of her day.  Her father was Christopher Casson who came to Ireland in 1946 and worked on stage initially but was probably more well known for his part as Canon Browne in an Irish soap called "The Riordans".
Down through the years she has played various parts in various musicals and other performances and now has put together a number of productions in which she plays the solo part or as part of a collaboration with other singers or musicians.

A recent creation was with a friend of hers (and mine), Irene Gaffney, who is no stranger to the stage herself and whose father was well known around the country for his lead roles in musicals as well as performances on radio and television.

Glynis and Irene, with some critical direction from another involved in stage - Tom Singleton - put together a collection of words and songs designed to entertain and illicit a laugh or two.  Think Victoria Wood but twice.

I went to see a preliminary performance (a sort of dress rehearsal) and enjoyed it immensely.  I felt it needed to be advertised a little better than by word of mouth and suggested that maybe a poster with the right design could do this.  That initial suggestion became a goal and I volunteered to come up with an idea.

So ......
Their production is called "Ladies who Lunch".  Some of the witticisms and humorous songs portray "Ladies who Lunch" all too well.  I saw wealthy women of indeterminate marital status who would regularly meet to 'do lunch' and wear clothes and jewellery to show off their status and vie with each other to be the most stylish and well-to-do.  All this and just missing the mark.  I envisioned them with cocktails and also wanted to suggest that they were in a posh restaurant - probably a hotel.  I described the idea to Glynis and Irene and they were very enthusiastic.  We enlisted Tom as the waiter advising him that his face wasn't really needed - just the body as a prop!  Before I go into any more detail, this is the finished photograph that will be used by the graphics designer to create the final poster.

I wanted to photo to have a mono feel to it without actually being mono.The only real colour I saw in it was their lipstick and the waiter's waistcoat. Their outfits are black and white.  Glynis (on the right) is wearing a hat that has blue in it but that's almost mono.The jewellery is a little over the top as are their outfits.  The waiter suggests posh with the white gloves and the silver tray.  I deliberately chose the back view so that his face didn't distract the viewer's attention from the two ladies. I did a series of poses with mobile phones, having 'gossip' conversations and 'pointing' out the not-so-stylish people who might also be in the restaurant.

My original intention was to shoot all three together and then we'd review them and pick the best one and maybe tweak it by shooting slight variations of it.  As is usual with the best laid plans of mice and men, things didn't go quite to plan.  First of all, Tom had to leave early for a rehearsal so while the MUA was working on the two ladies I shot Tom on his own.

The lighting setup was fairly basic.  I was lighting everybody the same way - two long strip boxes, one on either side of the background to light it.  A large and smaller softbox to the front to give butterfly lighting.  So Tom's shots were ....

I did a few different shots just in case.  I had told Tom that he was just a prop and not a person in the photo so he wouldn't be too put out.  I finally chose a shot of To that was close to what I wanted but it needed a bit of fixing.

The shot on the left is the original.  The one on the right is the one I used.  Besides the creases that needed a bit of 'ironing' (not too much) the two biggest problems were the apparent curve in Tom's back created more by the lighting than Tom, and the gaping sleeve on the right.  I fixed those and now had my starter picture.

Then it was the ladies' turn.  I was hoping that I could use a single shot of the two of them since they were acting off each other.  I gave them a couple of ideas like talking on their phones, people watching and judging, etc.  The collection is below.  I'm not sure whose idea it was to pinch Tom's bottom (probably Irene) but it seemed like a good idea and it was the one we all agreed to go for.  That is the shot bottom left in the group of photos below.  However, they agreed that a different shot of Glynis should be used and that was the picture top left.

Pic of Irene cut from original and pasted into the composite.  I felt her hair was a little unbalanced so ...

I copied her hair from the right side, flipped it, placed it on the left side, made a few edits.

Then added some burning and dodging to her eyes and eyebrows.

Added Glynis .....

A little dodging and burning and a finished picture.

Tada!

Geek Time .....

A long time ago I invested in the development of a gadget called Triggertrap.  At the time I was using an intervalometer to do some time-lapse photography and I also had bought a remote trigger to operate the camera from a distance such as in a theatre.  With these thoughts buzzing in my head I read this investment opportunity where the device could trigger my camera or flash.  The trigger source could be sound, light change or laser.  It would also boast time-lapse capability, trigger a camera that had infra red remote control capability and the triggering thresholds could be adjusted as could the delay in triggering and retriggering.
Well, time passed.  So did the deadlines for delivery.  But it did arrive.  I had a brief look at it and, being busy, put it away for another time.

A couple of weeks ago I was passing by a shop and saw that it had air soft pistols for sale.  I remember wanting a simpler version of these when I was a boy.  The used lead pellets, were a one-shot deal and not very accurate.  I know because one or two friends of mine had one.  Today, it's a whole new scene.  The BB guns are replicas of the real thing.  So much so that the Gardai will not concede there is a difference as far as they are concerned.  The words "gun", "triggertrap" and "balloons" went through my mind so I bought a gun - a Taurus PT 92.  Why that one?  'Cos it had my initials in the name.  Yes I am that spontaneous and reasoning at times.  The gun will hold 26 BB projectiles that are 6mm in diameter.

Two BBs (or not 2 bb)

Last week I did some homework to see if I could possibly photograph a BB projectile bursting a balloon.  There were several variables.  Some I hadn't even considered.
The first was the speed of the BB.  The box had the figure of "407 fps" written on it.  That's very exact so I naturally immediately mistrusted it!  Preferring to work in metric I converted it and it came out at 124053 mm/sec.
I figured the only way to freeze that kind of motion was with flash.

Most people think that flash will freeze any motion but it won't simply because of the way it works.  A lot people think that reducing a speedlite's power is the equivalent of reducing its light output but it's not.  It's reducing the length of time the speedlite is putting out light.  Full power is the same level of light for a longer time.  Minimum power is the same light level for a shorter time.  So to get the BB to be frozen I needed a real short time.

Off to the Internet and I found this guy (Andy Gock) who had measured the flash duration of a number of models at different settings.  If I accept his findings as true then there was a surprise to find that the more expensive and well-known brands turned out NOT to be the ones with the shortest duration at minimum power.  In fact, the Yongnuo units I bought from China had the shortest times at 1/23041 sec.

Power	μs	s
1	3200.0	1/313
2	736.0	1/1359
4	356.0	1/2809
8	202.0	1/4950
16	124.0	1/8065
32	79.2	1/12626
64	54.8	1/18248
128	43.4	1/23041

Now that I had (probably) the fastest (shortest) flash times, the payoff for that was low light.  But I had another gizmo - a bracket that holds three speedlites so that would help.



So variables ........
I would pull the trigger.  There would be a bang and the BB would theoretically be travelling at 124053 mm/sec.  The sound from the bang would be travelling at (roughly) 340 m/sec or 340000 mm/sec so the sound would reach my triggertrap much quicker than the BB.
Working on the basis that a ballon and the triggertrap would be about 3 metres from the gun I worked out (roughly) that the sound would reach the balloon/triggertrap in about 0.0088 sec or 9 ms.  The BB would reach the same area in 0.024 sec or 24 ms.


                              Sound =====================>
        Gun bang =>                                                              Balloon / Triggertrap
                                   BB ======>
So theoretically I would need to build in a flash trigger delay of 15 ms to allow the BB to reach the balloon when the flash went off.

Well that was the theory.  Practical tests blew that out of the water!
I set up a board with some targets to see if it was close.  I used a series of small rectangles made of foam core and hinged to a board so that if the BB lost power going through the first or second target it could still knock over the next target.  It became clear that the foam core was too strong because the BBs were embedded in some of them and bounced off others so didn't necessarily travel in a straight line.  At one stage I just put up a  group of 3 targets together and shot them.  You can see from the photograph that the flash has gone off after the BB has hit 'cos they're in the air!

This particular BB has me puzzled.  It looks like it has bounced off the first target on the right but there is a 'comet tail' behind it that suggests it is travelling down from left to right.

 The BB is nowhere to be seen but the timing and placement are about right.

I spent 3 1/2 hours setting up my test case and the only thing I had to show for it at the end was that the gun at about 3 metres was about right, I had a collection of used BBs and bits of foam core all over the floor.  I called it a day.

Next day I was joined by Javier Leite who was interested in what I was doing and offered to help.
We set up a series of targets made from photo paper at roughly where the balloon and triggertrap would be and set about trying to find where the BB would be at a specific delay set on the triggertrap.  Once we had established where the BB would be when the flash went off we replaced the targets with the balloon on a stool.

After a few shots we found out some more.  Some balloons were fighting back!  I had asked Javier to bring safety glasses for himself and I was wearing glasses with plastic lenses.  We needed them.  The power of the gun is limited to less than a Joule so it won't break skin but it will hurt and probably could injure one's eyesight.  You can see from the picture below that the BB is rebounding from the balloon and heading back towards me!  I shot myself a few times and the BBs went in several different directions quite a few times.

They fight back you know.  You can see the depression on the right hand side where the BB has pushed into the balloon and will soon be heading back in my direction.

With trial and error we built in a delay into the Triggertrap to set off the flash 3 ms after the bang was detected - a long way from the 15 ms I had thought would be needed.  We also figured the gun needed to be at full pressure before each shot so charging it became a ritual each time.  Even so, even keeping as much as we could as constant as we could we still found some shots were taken after the balloon was burst and others we could see the BB at least a metre away.  That could be down to tiny variations in the BB, the firing mechanism, the Triggertrap's reaction time, we have no idea.
But we did get some shots and, on the plus side, it kept me off the streets where I'd only be stealing cars or mugging little old ladies.  ;-)

 This was our first success.  Sad the things you get excited about ....

 This is where I had the ambient light (used to allow me aim the gun) a little too bright and you can see the balloon before and after shooting.

 One of those shots that we couldn't predict.  The balloon is burst and the BB is on its way out.

 Another BB exit shot.

 This was interesting.  The BB was trapped inside the balloon.

The BB has burst the balloon and is on its way through.

 The setup.

A - shooting position.

B - 3 speedlites set at 1/128 power

C - Triggertrap

D - Camera position

E - Board to absorb BBs.

Casualties.

Next time ....
I'm hoping to set up something more spectacular so it's a picture rather than a record of a balloon bursting no matter how fascinating that is to see.  And then the Triggertrap has other triggering methods such as the laser sensor which will trigger when sensed or broken.  That could need a rig .....


References:
Andy Gock's flash duration measurements tables.
Speed of sound: Wikipedia  and Google

What?! A photo blog post with no photos!

Yep, a photo blog and no photos.  Bear with me ....

I went to see movie 'Lincoln'.  I have to admit it was on my list of movies to see but not my first (or even second) choice.  However the others would have involved me waiting around too long and Abe started in half an hour so ......

For the impatient among you, the movie is great.  In between taking photographs and editing I occasionally like to see a movie and enjoy a little escapism.  I know what's involved in making a movie.  A screenwriter has to rewrite the story to make it compatible with a movie format and also make it flow.  A storyboard has to be created that shows the vision the director has for each second which generates the sets, lighting requirements, costumes, actors, extras, etc., etc.  All movies need special effects to some degree or another.  Some require Computer Generated Imagery to a huge extent like Avatar or some of the SciFi movies.  Others require subtlety like Castaway - did you think Tom Hanks stood on top of his island and surveyed all around him?  It was done on a small set in a car park!  The point is that the great movies need all the elements to work and the sum of them to be greater than the whole which is probably why there aren't that many memorable ones.

If a movie can absorb me to the point that I forget all that and just immerse myself in the story then it's great in my book.  This movie had that magic.  The feel of the movie was 1865.  The clothes looked like those you see in museums where they seem to lack that finesse of modern clothing.  Their clothes look heavy and slightly badly fitting - a kind of clumsiness.  The attention to detail was amazing.  The dialogue also felt of the time.  Daniel Day Lewis is a method actor and immersed himself in the role three months beforehand and, it may come across as being a prima donna (for a man?), but insisted that the crew refer to him at all times as 'Mr President'.  Could be one of the reasons he's nominated for his third oscar.

But, to me, this was a masterclass in lighting, composition and photography.  Right from the outset I was looking at how much the scenes were reminiscent of of the photographs of the era and even more remarkably they moved!  Every photographer who has done studio or location work knows that the lighting is usually right for one viewpoint and the subjects as well.  Here were scenes where actors walked across what appeared to be dark areas but yet were lit by 'invisible' lighting.  The other thing I noticed was that if you looked around the scene there was just enough light to allow you to see details of objects in the shadows.  There must have been huge discussions, planning and probably arguments about designing and dressing the sets.  Composition was amazing.  I kept noticing that the lighting and the framing made me look where the director wanted me to look.

So being a photographer I was a bit distracted by the technical side of the process somewhat like a musician will analyse a concert's performance and that of the conductor.  But, having said that, I think I got more from the movie than most people would have.  Trouble is I'll have to go back and watch it again.  But that won't be a trial.

Uncertainty

I ask for your forgiveness in advance as it may take some time before I get to a conclusion in this blog.  My mind is sort of rambling around a few related subjects.

On a regular basis - about once a month - I voice a feeling that maybe I should give up photography and do more administration or tutorial work.  This comes from the notion that "Them that can, do.  Them that can't, teach".  This is usually because my creative mojo has deserted me or I've made fundamental mistakes like misjudging depth of field or one of a plethora of other reasons.

I'm also asked for my 'expert' opinion on various photographs.  I maintain I am not an expert but this is usually dismissed as false modesty.  The problem is that a photograph (or picture) is judged by people subjectively.  Oh yes, there are rules and guidelines that they should conform to and if they don't then they can be seen by viewers as 'off' even though they don't know why.  Judges often use this to mark down photographs in competitions where there are photographs of equal worth and it gives them an 'out' or where they are judging photographs from what should be separate categories like a landscape versus a studio portrait.

A couple of weeks ago I had a long photo session with a friend of mine (Kay Fagan) who also goes under her performance name of PostModern Sleeze.  This was my third time to photograph her and we had decided to divide the shoot between us - my shots and hers.  Kay has a lot of tattoos and piercings.  Her performances and a lot of other photos portray her as 'alternative'.  Her image, aggressive and rebellious,  belies her real character which is generous, soft and full of common sense.  I wanted to show the contrast and so took the following photos of her.

 Kay is not a ballerina but is practising.  The pose is not a ballet pose.  But I had hoped that the pose, piercings and the tattoos would convey the contrast.  The second shot was a straight pose.  I take a few shots of poses like this and will try to tweak the pose until I get what I want.  However that also can make the pose look wooden and when I ask the model to repeat the pose I don't get the original one.  So .... sometimes I have to take the best I can get.  I liked this pose but realised that her left side was a little 'bumpy'.  Sometimes I would take more shots to solve it.  Other times I would use Photoshop to fix it.  However this time I decided to leave it.  I recently had a few conversations about Photoshop and its controversial use to make 'perfect people' in magazines that gives young people (girls in particular) a false impression of what is normal.  I liked the muscular aspect of the pose so I left it as is and wanted to see what reaction it would get.

I entered these in my camera club's competition.  The judge gave the ballerina shot 44 out of 50 marks and the second shot 42 out of 50.

Before I go any further I'd like to state for the record that I always respect judges' criticisms and listen intently to their comments on other's photos as well as my own.  I may not always agree with every single judging but would never challenge a mark.  I've judge a few competitions and it is a hard job.  I've taken the photos home with me a week beforehand so that I can absorb the photos, see if I have missed something in the first viewing and see if my first choices still hold after a few days.  I also like to make notes that I can give the club for the people who have entered the competition.

His remarks on the ballerina shot was the pose was not the best and the photo did not show off her tattoos to the best and the highlight area on her back was blown out.  I was prepared to accept that more or less but was hopeful that the second shot would do better.  But it didn't.  Two marks less.  The main reason for not liking it was the pose that produced the bumpy left side.  So, I should have fixed the body.
What was more intriguing was that another photo that I thought would be dismissed as a 'bit of nonsense' scored the highest with 46 marks.

Yep, a self portrait of sorts.  I usually ask my models to pose for a shot with me at the end of the session.  Recently I have been trying to make these humorous and, more often than not, self-belittling.  We had set up two versions.  This one was the one I went with - me pretending to wipe off a smudge on her latex.

So I'm a bit confused.  No I'm not arguing that I should have come first.  I think the people who did deserved it. What compounds my dilemma is I very recently gave my 'judge's comments' on a selection of photos that a friend of mine is considering for entry into his local camera club competition.  If I am so far off the mark with my own, how can I advise another?

If I was a woman this would be time for chocolate ice cream!!!  :-D

A BIG rant!

To put in a short sentence - I am disgusted!  I don't make blog entries often enough and I try to make them positive and photography related so I am not happy that this is a rant but ....

Today I went from a very pleasant visit to Fusion Sunday in Newmarket Square where I had the pleasure to talk to very nice friendly people to an appalling display of rudeness and shoddy organisation.

I went to an event that is known as "The National Shield".  This is a competition under the direction of the Irish Photographic Federation (IPF).  The website defines it (kind of) but it is essentially submissions from camera clubs around Ireland that are panels of colour and monochrome prints selected from their amateur members.  The definition of what constitutes an amateur is also listed on the website page.
The judging is usually done by visiting people (usually the UK) who have some recognised standard.

So .... there are individual awards and best panel awards but the premium accolade is the "National Shield" which is the best camera club.  It is regarded as being an important event to do well in.


I arrived about 3:45pm, went in the front door and was 'accosted' by a man who wanted me to fork over €5 for raffle tickets.  Nothing else was mentioned.  From my years of experience when I was involved on various committees, I know that raffles can be one of the main sources of revenue so I coughed up.  It was only when I had walked away that I noticed there was an admission ticket to the event stapled to the three strips of raffle tickets.  I don't know if it was free to get in and I bought raffle tickets or there was an admission fee and I got free raffle tickets thrown in.  No matter.  I would have ended up with the same rubbish in my hand and €5 lighter anyway but I realised I might have had an option that wasn't given to me.

I went straight to the panels and came across a couple of my pet irritations.  The first was "d'expert".  You know the type - holds court in front of the pictures you are trying to view but you are 'mister cellophane' and can't be seen.  He extols the virtues and faults of the pictures and seeks agreement from his followers that they understand.  Understand how wonderful he is rather than whether what he has said is good or bad.
I usually plant myself somewhere irritatingly close to these people so that they get the message that other people want to view the pictures.
The second irritation is people who choose to hold conversations unrelated to the panels of pictures they are standing in front of!  There were a lot of these!  A firmly placed hand on their elbow or a fairly heavy nudge with an angelic "So sorry!" usually clears the way but usually to the panel on the far side so repetition is required but at least they have been 'trained' and are easier to move.
My memory may be fooling me (it does often these days) but I think there was enough room to space out the lines of panels so there was less crowding so why didn't the organisers do this?

Anyway .....  The judges came back and were giving comments on the panels while they were being projected (badly) on a wall.  This was my third irritation.  Around the area everybody was talking at their normal decibel levels.  To each other.  On mobile phones.  There are a few people in the Dublin Camera Club who are equally inconsiderate.  The HAVE to make comments on whatever the visiting person who is making a presentation has to show and say.  It's not always easy for people making presentations.  They can be nervous for a variety of reasons - first time, insecurity about a new subject, intimidated by the status of the audience, etc.  To have people in the audience making comments that are 'stage whispers' will not help and certainly are sending out the message that what the presenter is saying is not worth listening to.  Apart from this rudeness I hate to have one of these gobshites sit beside me because now he is breaking my concentration with his inane remarks.  I have made it clear on occasions I'm not interested and have on more than one occasion told them to shut up.

I can't be sure what the judges from the UK made of the people there but the message seemed to be clear.  We're not interested in what you have to say.  We have no intention of showing you any respect.  Just give us the results.

My fourth irritation was that when the medals were being awarded they quoted the person (where appropriate) and the club and the picture title but if you wanted to see what had merited this award then you would have had to dash around the panels and by this stage the area between the panels were stuffed full of people so that wasn't going to work.  Since the organisers had files of the pictures I would have thought it would be a small extra step to project these on the wall for all to see and nod approvingly?

I gave up and retreated to a back area of the venue to see if I could get a coffee.  There was a place.  It looked more like one of those places you see in a house on a building site where there are two tables thrown together and all the bare necessities are thrown on the table.  I wasn't sure if that was for the public or for the organisers but I gave it a miss.

Then came the raffle! Okay, I might win something.  One of my strips won!!!  I headed towards the woman in charge and proffered my strip while someone else also did the same.  Luckily she spotted that his strip had the wrong serial number so my strip was deemed to be legitimate and hieroglyphics indicating their veracity were scribbled on a piece of paper and I was given 'documentation' to give to the people looking after the prizes.  Oh yes, the prizes weren't there.  They were in a different area.  So off I went.  No queues here - you're in Ireland pal.  We don't do queues.  A mad throng!  The stuff I did see was rubbish.  Fireguards that Hector Grey would have given away!  When it came to me, I gave her my strip and she seemed confused.  It was then I realised all the prizes were gone.  She went off and came back with a Photo Ireland book.  On reflection it was probably a far better prize.  I don't know what I would have done with the other stuff.  They had 12 rubbish prizes.  What I'm wondering is why didn't they spend the money on one decent prize?

So my lasting impression from a supposedly premier event had nothing to do with photography but with the bad organisation, cheap impression and the rudeness of Irish people.  That's one I'll be giving a miss next year.  On another note I only saw one other DCC member there.

Back in the saddle ...

Yep, it's been a while.  Again.
Partly because of some turmoil in my personal life and partly because writing about shoots that I do or other photography related subjects usually involves mentioning people and it's not always positive or of interest to those of you who read this blog and speaking about people in less than glowing terms can also attract more turmoil!  But enough of this.  I don't live in Syria.  I don't have a mortgage.  I have a few genuine friends.  Etc.  So happy days.

The photograph above has been in the planning stage somewhere in my complex brain for over a year.  It's probably not art or acceptable by those whose photography seeks to represent something esoteric but it's mine and I'm happy with it.  Could it be improved?  Of course, but first let me tell you about it.

I had the idea in my head (as I said) over a year ago.  The idea sprang from me falling into the trap of 'judging a book by the cover' on a few occasions - something I always tried not to do had felt like I had let myself down when I did.  I have judged a few people without actually knowing the truth.  However, to my credit I hope, I had allowed that my judgement might need to be adjusted and it had, and I did.
I wanted a way to show this in a photograph and a humorous version of it germinated in my brain where the people who 'judge' would be represented by pink, clean, elegant ballerinas and the person being judged would be the antithesis represented by a Goth or a punk who had a desire to dance but retain their individuality.

I had lined up a number of 'girls' (anyone younger than me is a lad or a girl) to do the shot.  Unfortunately whenever I tried to organise the shoot there were always a list of excuses - not reasons - for not doing it.  I couldn't get them to let me know what leotards, tutus, ballet shoes they had so I could co-ordinate the colour.  Organising everyone to be free at the same time was almost impossible.  Looking for a place to shoot was similarly almost impossible.  So after several failed attempts I decided to stop frustrating myself and park it away for another day.

Recently, a girl I know (Rebecca Flynn) who is not only a ballet dancer but also teaches ballet asked me if I would take photographs for her website.  We agreed a deal part of which involved me being allowed to take my 'ballet' photo at the shoot.  We discussed what kind of shots she and I wanted from the shoot and then the logistics began.

A shot like this is 90% technical and logistical and 10% photography.
We knew the shots we wanted.  Some were rejected because they relied to a large degree on the beautiful location for effect.  The ideal setting for the shot would have been a dance studio with white walls and dance bars and maybe mirrors.  The reality was that the ones that were available cost more than we were prepared to pay or were too far from the majority of the children's homes.  So, eventually, Rebecca found a school hall that more or less met our compromise of the ideal.

Next was my gear.  I needed a white background.  Luckily I have a Pro360 kit that consists of two stands and 4 interlocking poles that form a bar that a large background roll can fit on with room to spare.  I also had a cheap roll of whit background purchased from Poland that is a curious material.  I haven't quite figured out what it is but it looks like a weave material that has been plasticised.  It behaves more like a bed sheet than paper or vinyl but at about €10 a roll I can afford to throw it out and get more if it tears or gets too dirty.

I have 4 Bowens units.  1 x 750, 1 x 500 and 2 x 250.  I also have a range of umbrellas and softboxes as well as a few other reflectors.  For this shoot I used the 250s with shoot-through umbrellas to light the background.  I pretty much crossed the units - aimed the flash at the opposite corner of the background to provide more even illumination.  The use of the brollies gives soft even light but the position of the brolly on the unit is important.  If you install it too far away from the flash tube you can get direct (harsh) light spilling forward onto the floor and your models.  You can see this in the picture below.

Moving the brollies nearer the flash tube means the tube is more or less behind the brolly and most of the light that is important to the shot is diffused.  You can see the difference below.

I also use the 250s at full power.  I set my camera at ISO 160 and want to have my background almost at complete white (255 in binary).  That is assuming I am shooting at f8 to f11.  If I take a reading with my flash meter at the background it should read f16 which is about 1.5 to 2 stops overexposed in relation to the aperture I'm going to shoot at.  I have two ways of checking my background exposure besides using the meter.  One is a feature on the Canon camera that, when switched on, will flash alternately black then white if it's overexposed.  This can be useful even when you've used the meter because there may be a hotspot you haven't seen.  The second way is more related to the model.  I ask him/her to hold a piece of white towelling, make an exposure and check it on the view screen on the back of the camera, zoomed in as close as it will allow to see if the towelling has texture.  If it's overexposed the texture will be missing.  If it's correct it will be white but with texture.  Simples!

So the two units at the back are lighting the background and some of the forground.  Now I use either the 500 or 750 with an octobox.  Because of its size it gives a lovely soft light and virtually no shadows but I don't normally use this as a key light.  I treat it as a fill.  My key light will be either the 500 or 750 with a beauty dish.  This reflector is somewhere between a harsh reflector and a softbox.  It consists of a slightly matte surface (probably sandblasted) reflector but also has a second small reflector that is situated in front of the flash tube.  This prevents a hot spot and harsh light getting to your subject and reflects the light into the matte surface of the larger reflector.  I sometime use this on a flash unit in front of a large softbox when I'm doing a portrait.  The combination gives me soft light with areas like the nose, cheek bones, collar bones, etc., given a 'pop' by the beauty dish.  So the octobox and beauty dish are both set to give me f8.

This arrangement worked well for me.  I also got a bonus from the setup.  Because I had 4 units all pointing at a white background I now had a giant softbox.  I didn't realise this until I turned around and found a group of the children were lined up along the opposite wall watching what I was doing and interacting with each other.  I wondered .....   I increased the ISO to 400, took a quick shot and, based on the histogram, increased the aperture to f5.6.  Later I adjusted the exposure in post processing by 1/3 stop but not bad.
The shots have a warm tone to them that I like (luckily) and I think it might be a reflection of the wooden floor.  Extra bonus.

So, my shot.
I needed a small group of scared ballerinas reacting to the presence of a scary ballerina and one of the little girls pushing her somewhat reluctant adult teacher to make her leave.  The first hurdle was the background was not wide enough but I knew that I had figured on making two exposures.  The point to watch out for here is perspective.  If you shoot the two shots from the same point it will be wrong.  The brain will know it is wrong even if it doesn't understand why.  If the people in the shot are 20-25 feet apart (about 8 metres) the angle you shoot the people on the left will be significantly different from the angle you shoot the people on the right.  So when you're doing two exposures you need to compensate by shooting the 'left' people from the right and the 'right' people from the left.  Confused?  Take a look at the diagrams below.

The ideal situation

The diagram above shows the ideal situation.  I'm using cubes with a groove in the top surface in place of people.  The background they are sitting on is as wide as I need and the three views below the camera show what the camera would see.  from the viewpoint of the camera, the groove face of the left block is on the left and the right block is on the right.
But unfortunately my background paper is not wide enough so I must shoot in two stages.  To maintain the correct perspective above I must shoot to maintain the point of view the camera had above.

So with the real size of background I shoot the left and centre block from the correct angle to mimic the ideal setup and ......

shoot the right and centre block from the opposite angle.
That means when I put the two photos together I have the correct angles of the subjects that obeys the laws of perspective.


The second hurdle is to NOT rely on your subjects understanding the technical logistics of what you're attempting to do.  Explain - yes.  So I needed interaction between the children and the baddie.  So when I was shooting the children and the adult ballerina (Rebecca) I asked Kay to stand off to the side of the background so as to give them something to react to.  Similarly when I was shooting Kay, I had Rebecca stand in so Kay had somebody to play to.

Posing and knowing when to stop is the next hurdle.
Originally I had the child pushing Rebecca and Rebecca was stepping forward as though she was really being pushed.  I changed that to her being anchored to the floor as though she too was a little scared of Kay and was resisting being pushed into a confrontation.  Rebecca (I believe) is used to taking direction and was a pleasure to work with. The little girl doing the pushing was brilliant.
The other girls were grouped in a circle (my instruction) and it looked static so I asked them to pretend they were afraid of Kay and hug each other in fear.  Born actresses!
Kay is performer and also a model so is used to posing.  She listens to what I say, takes it in and gives me more poses than I ask for.  All I had to do was tweak the pose I wanted and she nailed it.  Attitude!

I later took the two selected shots, put them together separated by space I wanted and then blended the hard edge using a layer mask filled with a black to white gradient.

No, it's not art.  It's a picture that has produced raised eyebrows of delighted surprise and smiles.  It's an original idea (for me) and it took planning, expertise and hard work.  Could it be improved?  Of course.  I'm satisfied ....... for now.