Danny Lyon fans may also wish to glance at:
Sunday, April 26, 2009
Good article on Danny Lyon at The New York Times this weekend:
Stubbornly Practicing His Principles of Photography
"Mr. Lyon, who has been awarded two Guggenheim fellowships, one for his film work, has called his work advocacy journalism and does not deny that it purveys ideas — if only the idea that everyone should be more aware of the pain and struggle around them in a consumerist, media-saturated world that tends to encourage isolation and apathy. “I think I try to hide it,” he said of his worldview in his work. “But I’m a highly politicized person, and it’s in my blood.”"I hadn't known about his film work, so I had to go and look it up. Turns out you can find reviews of his significant work in documentary filmmaking going back into the early 1970s. I'm not sure how to see these today, however.
Screen: By Danny Lyon: The Program
"The Films of Danny Lyon," the new program at the Film Forum, is a collection of three documentary films by the 31-year-old Brooklyn-born still photographer turned film-maker. The two best films in the collection, "Llanito" (61 minutes) and "Soc. Sci. 127" (21 minutes) are defined less by a developed cinematic style than by compassion for the subjects.
Saturday, April 25, 2009
There's been a lot of interest in shooting video with still cameras in the last year. I don't mean stop-motion, but rather the HD capabilities that have shown up in a few of the newer DSLR cameras. It's certainly an interesting development, but there's a downside or two.
For one: crappy audio. None of the current DSLR cams allow quality sound recording, so if you are aiming to do something with reasonable quality you'll need to work "dual-system" -- meaning you need a separate sound recorder, and you have to somehow synchronize it with your video.
For two: there are some technical issues. Filmmaker magazine has a nice mini-article on the phenomenon, and it's the first time I've seen some of those technical concerns made clear.
Filmmakers disclose how they are shooting movies with still cameras.
“I was very afraid about the sensitivity of the camera to movement. I’d read a lot about how the rolling shutter in the Canon 5D can sometimes give a jelly effect. If you look at the focus push at the second mark, (26 seconds into the trailer at http://searchingforsonny.com) you’ll see what a lot of people are having problems with. We stayed away from handheld shots, more as a stylistic choice. We did a test before the shoot with handheld, some parts were a little too shaky. I think it’ll be a new camera technique to master. On the dolly, we used sandbags to weigh down the tripod. But even with a nice dolly with good track, we had to rehearse the shot over and over again. Every little bump could be seen on camera."
Tom Quinn had similar concerns. "These cameras are really meant to be operated on a tripod — the handheld has a few issues. For one, there is no optical image stabilizer for the video, so the small vibrations that a video camera would neutralize are present. Also the CMOS sensor creates a slight waver to the image on fast horizontal movement when shooting telephoto. For these two reasons we’ve been using a mix of monopods and tripods.”
Friday, April 24, 2009
It's time to try working in Manual Mode on your DSLR.
Turn the big knob on top of the camera to M, point the camera at your subject and press the shutter halfway down. You'll see in your viewfinder if the camera thinks you are underexposing or overexposing -- there's a little indicator that will let you know. Then you can change your settings -- I recommend changing one at time -- to get the exposure you want.
A good way to learn to estimate light levels is to try the "Sunny f/16" system -- and see if our guess at the light level matches what our camera meter thinks. It's sunny outside today, so we can practice working this way...
1. Set your ISO to 400.
2. The "Sunny F16 Rule" tells us that on a sunny day we can set the shutter speed to match the ISO setting. Your camera probably won't have a 1/400th of a second setting, so round off to 1/500th of a second. Close enough for a first attempt.
3. Look at the shadows the sun is casting. If it is clear and bright, you'll probably see hard shadows, but as it gets more overcast the shadows will get softer or disappear. So:
a. if you see hard shadows, set your aperture to f/16
b. if you see soft shadows, set your aperture to f/11
c. if you see no shadows, set your aperture to f/8
d. if the light level seems even lower, set your aperture to f/5.6
That's all. Set your camera to M. Set your ISO to 400. Look at the shadows and set your aperture. Point your camera at your subject, press the shutter halfway down. Your camera may have a little triangle, or a light or another indicator that lets you know if it thinks you are over or under on your exposure. Adjust if you agree, or go with your guess. Take the shot.
Look on your viewscreen, and see if you've got it right -- and then act superior to anyone using automatic modes.
Thursday, April 23, 2009
Now here's the type of article I like. It's all about me, me, me and me. (At one point, two other people are mentioned, but then luckily the story gets back on track, returning to being completely about me. Perfect.)
Actually, it's a good read, even beyond being entirely all about moi.
Indie Filmmakers Q&A Series: Part I
Wednesday, April 22, 2009
Annie Leibovitz and her approach to portraiture came up in my Thursday night class last week, so I wanted to link to some good "behind-the-scenes" video from Vanity Fair. I think her use of lighting in these is well worth the view, especially the episode with Nicole Kidman and Baz Luhrman.
The 2009 Hollywood Portfolio Shoots
Tuesday, April 21, 2009
Hey, did I mention that the Frugal Traveler: Grand Tour series is nominated for a 2009 Webby Award? It must have slipped my mind.
Okay, okay, I've mentioned it....
In any case, I just checked, and while we won't have a result from the Judges for a few weeks, in the People's Voice voting the show is currently in second place.
So go vote for it. Have your friends check it out, then vote for it, too.
Details, and link to the series episodes at Your Vote is Appreciated.
A nice overview of the ASU screening by Cassandra Nicholson, the Phoenix Film Examiner.
ASU Art Museum Film Festival Showcases National, International Talent
"The second of two New York City submissions came from Ted Fisher in his light-hearted documentary, “12th & 3rd in Brooklyn,” which focused on a group of men known as “Brooklyn’s Best.” Their annual stickball match holds historical, cultural and familial connections for them, as it is held every year on the same street where they played the game as young children."The first New York submission? Bill Plympton's "Santa: The Fascist Years." I just love Plympton's films, so it's an honor to be in the same program.
(Of course, please note, it's not just my film -- it's co-directed by Maya Mumma and Iris Lee also.)
Monday, April 20, 2009
There's a nice article on Saturday night's screening at ASU. Fun photo with the story, so follow the link....
Short film and video festival draws more than a thousand people
"ASU Art Museum’s courtyard was packed with lawn chairs, picnic blankets and a sea of people watching social commentaries and silly cartoons on a big screen on Saturday night. About 1,300 people were reeled in to watch film reels at the 13th annual ASU Art Museum Short Film and Video Festival, held outside the museum. The free festival showed 19 selections made by a globe-spanning collection of independent directors, hailing everywhere from Germany to New York to Arizona. The films represented an array of genres from confessional documentary to campy video animation."
Saturday, April 18, 2009
Ah, the paparazzi.
I think the horse may have mistaken them for zombies.
Madonna falls from horse in Hamptons after paparazzi spook animal
"Madonna was tossed to the ground Saturday when her horse was startled by photographers while riding on a Hamptons estate. The Material Mom was rushed to Southampton Hospital with minor injuries and bruises after a fall while riding at the Bridgehampton farm of celebrity photographer Steven Klein."
The web series I produced / edited last summer -- Frugal Traveler: The Grand Tour -- is nominated for a 2009 Webby Award.
We'll see what the judges decide, but you can vote for the show at the People's Voice site.
Please do. It would be much appreciated.
How it works: click on "sign up now" and give an email address (you can opt out of receiving anything) and make up a password. They email you a link, then you follow that to a ballot.If you haven't seen it, here's the series:
"Frugal" is under "Online Film / Video" in the "Travel" category.
2008: Frugal Traveler: The Grand Tour (14 Episodes)
One day, I'm going to be able to go to all of my screenings. I look forward to it.
For now, some of them happen without me....
12th and 3rd in Brooklyn, our short film on stickball, is screening at the Thirteenth Annual ASU Art Museum Short Film and Video Festival tonight at 8 p.m.
Friday, April 17, 2009
More often than you'd expect, the topic turns to cat photography. In my Thursday night class, I mentioned Tony Mendoza's Ernie: A Photographer's Memoir -- so I'm posting the link to it.
If you like it you can purchase via Amazon as well:
Thursday, April 16, 2009
I often talk to my students about the placement of the eyes when framing a photograph or video image. For example, I tend to lead them toward a starting composition that places the eyes about 1/3 from the top of the frame. Usually, if one attempts that first, you can naturally slide into a composition that works well.
But what about the horizontal placement?
Two papers by Christopher W. Tyler address the "hypothesis of a consistent positioning of one eye relative to the center of the portrait" in a way I haven't seen done before.
AN EYE-PLACEMENT PRINCIPLE IN 500 YEARS OF PORTRAITS
Eye Placement Principles In Portraits And Figure Studies Over The Past Two Millennia
"Is there a consistent placement of the eyes relative to the canvas frame, based on the horizontal position of the eyes in portraits? Data from portraits over the past 2000 years quantify that one eye is centered with a standard deviation of less than + 5%. Classical texts on composition do not seem to mention the idea that the eyes as such should be positioned relative to the frame of the picture; the typical emphasis is on the placement of centers of mass in the frame or relative to the vanishing point in cases of central perspective. If such a compositional principle is not discussed in art analysis, it seems that its manifestation throughout the centuries and varieties of artistic styles (including the extreme styles of the 20th century) must be guided by unconscious perceptual processes."
Wednesday, April 15, 2009
If you enjoyed the Frugal Traveler: The Grand Tour series from last summer, you can vote for it at the Webby Awards People's Voice site.
It takes two minutes. Click on "sign up now" and give an email address (you can opt out of receiving anything) and make up a password. They email you a link, then you follow that to a ballot.
Pick the shows you like. "Frugal" is under "Online Film / Video" in the "Travel" category.
If I've told you once... Photography is simply dangerous.
Is Lindsay cracking up? Now wild-eyed Miss Lohan hurls eggs at photographers
Tuesday, April 14, 2009
Monday, April 13, 2009
I don't know which is worse: roughing up a photographer or making a zombie movie in 2009. Both seem a touch passé, don't you think?
Woody Harrelson claims he mistook photographer for zombie
"I wrapped a movie called 'Zombieland,' in which I was constantly under assault by zombies, then flew to New York, still very much in character," Harrelson said in a statement issued Friday by his publicist.
"With my daughter at the airport I was startled by a paparazzo, who I quite understandably mistook for a zombie," he said.
Saturday, April 11, 2009
Ah, news from London. Clearly a world capital of photography -- after all, "Thomas" from "Blowup" took a few snaps there -- but lately so confused on the role of photographers.
Should they be feared or feted? It's a city saturated in surveillance cams, but lately on the edge of making public photography a crime, or at least a warning sign that you must be a terrorist.
The unstoppable rise of the citizen cameraman
"The social impact of this revolution has still to be fully understood. Usually its consequences have been written about rather darkly, in terms of CCTV cameras and the surveillance state, but recent events in Britain offer a different verdict. The digital camera is an egalitarian piece of technology - cheap (most mobile phones have them), easy to use, convenient to carry and quick to produce images that can be spread throughout cyberspace in seconds. What we are witnessing, as any professional photojournalist will tell you, is the unstoppable rise of the citizen-photographer. Last Thursday, at the demonstration outside the G20 summit in east London, I saw them at work. A small war of cameras. Police were stopping, searching and photographing demonstrators at Canning Town tube station; the demonstrators photographed the police as they took their photographs; sometimes - a third viewpoint - a video maker turned up to get both sides in the same shot. It seemed to me then that the camera, so often accused of spreading violence by its fixation with physical aggression, could also be one of violent behaviour's great restraints."
Wednesday, April 08, 2009
Ah, wedding photography. You never know when those skills may come in handy. You know, like in jail.
Couple threatens to sue over wedding night DUI arrest
"The couple filed a complaint with the Harris County Precinct 8 Constable's Office and plans to file another with the federal government over the way [the bride] was allegedly treated while in jail. The couple said a photographer was allowed to take a picture of her in her wedding dress. The photograph appeared on the Internet and on television."
Tuesday, April 07, 2009
It's tough being a photographer these days. You might get shot, or get hassled, or get smoked.
So you'll probably decide to get away from it all, head out into nature and maybe take a few bird pictures. What could go wrong?
BIRDWATCHING PHOTOGRAPHERS UNDER FIRE
"Photographers' behaviour has been blamed for a fall in the survival rates of nesting dipper birds in the Derbyshire Peak District, prompting an appeal by conservationists.
'Unfortunately, disturbances at one or two of the key dipper sites has had a direct and negative impact on their nesting success in recent years,' said Phil Bowler, senior reserve manager at the Derbyshire Dales National Nature Reserve."
Monday, April 06, 2009
The amusing thing about documentary filmmakers? In a field that's always dogged by the perception of being boring, they're generally certain that you'll find their work captivating. In fact, I'm starting to realize that's a prerequisite for making docs -- the ability to convince yourself that whatever topic you are dealing with is fascinating.
The reason I'm thinking about this?
Well, in 2007 and 2008 we participated in the International Documentary Challenge and made it into the finals. This year, unfortunately, our film didn't make it. It was a tiny bit of a shock -- after all, we thought it was a very good film. Of course, having been through a lot of judging, and occasionally serving as a judge, I know that this sort of thing is just bananas -- there are many many many reasons why a person scores one film higher than another, and that's just the way it goes. We had two lucky breaks, and one unlucky one. Fine.
But I laughed out loud when I received a note from the event organizer. Apparently, so many of the non-finalists were emailing him that he just had to respond.
What were they writing? They were sure their films must have been disqualified somehow, and they wanted to know why. Because otherwise, of course, their film would have won. Obviously.
Saturday, April 04, 2009
The relationship between filmmaker and subject in making a documentary is always a tricky one. Usually, there's a balance between exploitation and value: by definition, the filmmaker is "using" the subject, but usually it's in a benign way, and often to the subject's benefit.
But not always.
I'm eager to see Guest of Cindy Sherman -- since I love both photography and documentaries about photographers -- but I have to admit any film made by an "ex-boyfriend" has a lot to prove....
While her depiction in the film is overwhelmingly positive, Sherman’s enthusiasm for the film has waned since the relationship ended. “I was and still am extremely ambivalent about the film, not that I don't think Paul will do a great job, but that I'm in it,” she told The Financial Times in 2006. “I wish he could tell the story without mentioning me.” And though she had given her blessing for friends, colleagues, and staff—among them, John Waters, Carol Kane, Jeanne Tripplehorn, and Ingrid Sischy—to speak on camera, Sherman sent a mass e-mail before the Tribeca Film Festival premiere to disavow the project, labeling it a “big mistake.”
Friday, April 03, 2009
This week was the first class of my six-week "Seriously Fun Photography" class. So what did we cover?
We learned that to control exposure, we need to work with three related elements:
This is the ISO "speed" of a digital sensor or of film. ISO 100, 200, 400, 800, 1600 and 3200 are available on many cameras (but not all), and you should take some test shots with yours to find out if the higher ISO settings are usable or not. Figure out the fastest ISO speed you find produces acceptable shots on your camera -- you'll need to switch to it sooner or later. Notice that each ISO speed is twice as sensitive (or half as sensitive) as the next.
The f/stops to memorize are f/1.4, f/2, f/2.8, f/4, f/5.6, f/8, f/11, f/16, f/22. If you forget these, make two columns, and at the top of the left one write 1.4 and at the top of the right one write 2.0. Now double each number as you go down the column (rounding off when needed). Changing one stop lets in twice as much light (or half as much, depending on which direction you go. f/2 lets in a lot of light, f/22 lets in very little light. So if you took a picture using f/8 and it seemed a little too dark, you would switch to f/5.6. If you took a picture using f/8 and it seemed a little too bright, you'd switch to f/11.
The common shutter speeds are:
1/1000th of a second
-- As a rule of thumb, if you are moving and you're subject is moving, you'll want to be shooting at 1/1000th of a second to get a sharp picture.
-- If you are still but the subject is moving along, it would be good to be at 1/250th or faster.
-- If you and the subject are both relatively still, you can probably handhold the camera as slow as 1/60th, but slower than that and you'll get a soft picture because of camera shake caused by pressing the shutter.
-- At speeds that are slower, you'll need a tripod to steady the camera, and probably want to trigger it using the self-timer or a release.
-- Many decent cameras have higher shutter speeds, and these are very useful for action or sports.
Notice that the relationship of these shutter speed settings is also doubling (or halving) the amount of light that hits your sensor.
Then we decided to start applying our general knowledge about the relationship between apertures and depth of field. While we start to get the idea when we say "f/2 -- shallow depth of field and f/22 - deep depth of field" actually trying this out in with some real world shots is always a good experiment.
So we set up an experiment that can be repeated at home: set your camera on a table or a tripod, and in front of it arrange people or objects in a receding line. Put the first person or thing just 3 feet away from the lens, and have the furthest be at least 12 feet away. Now set the widest aperture you can -- I use a lens that goes to f/1.4 for this -- and focus on the closest person or object. You'll probably find that the people / objects behind that are out of focus. Now run through the whole series of aperture settings you have available (you'll probably want to be in "aperture priority mode" so that the camera sets the corresponding shutter speed for an acceptable exposure. Or you can set that yourself). Try this and compare each shot -- more and more will be in focus until you should be able to get everyone in focus.
Now, keep in mind there's one other factor here -- the focal length you shoot with. Usually the effect of getting a main subject in focus and the background out of focus is much easier to achieve if you use a lens of at least 50mm or set as zoom to 50mm focal length or a more telephoto setting.
Many photographers think that "telephoto lenses have shallow depth of field and wide angle lenses have deep depth of field" -- it turns out that isn't exactly true, but for pragmatic purposes it isn't a bad way to think. If the goal is a sharp subject and a blurry background -- grab a 90mm or set your zoom lens about there.
(For a discussion on why the wide focal lens = deep depth of field idea isn't precisely true, read Do wide-angle lenses give you greater depth of field than long lenses?.)
Another thing that comes up at this point: some lenses allow your camera to reach to f/1.4 or f/2 or f/2.8, but many times the "kit lens" zoom that comes with a DSLR or the zoom lens built into a compact camera will not go to that wide-open an aperture. And to further add to the confusion: many common lenses that go from 18mm to 55mm (or 70mm) let you go to f/3.5 when using the widest focal length (18mm) but only to f/5.6 when you are using the long end of the lens (55mm or 70mm). That's just how those lenses are built.
Now, once we know a technique to control depth of field -- go towards f/2 to get a sharp person, blurry background or toward f/22 to get subject and background both focuses -- we want to think about why we would do it. Well, it's that kind of control that lets us emphasize or deemphasize what a viewer sees in a photograph, so we want to master it so we can control our images. Need to photograph a person against a cluttered, distracting background? Use selective focus. Need to show that a person has kids but keep the emphasis on the person? Use selective focus to make the kids visible but de-emphasized.
So, from a technical standpoint, as we approach any photo situation we'll want to decide on an ISO setting, a shutter speed and an aperture. The three are interrelated and all use a doubling / halving system so it is easy to calculate how to change them when needed.
Wednesday, April 01, 2009
"Helen Levitt, a major photographer of the 20th century who caught fleeting moments of surpassing lyricism, mystery and quiet drama on the streets of her native New York, died in her sleep at her home in Manhattan on Sunday. She was 95."