RSS
 

Posts Tagged ‘Away’

Select Sony stores in Japan are giving away adorable mini camera kits with the purchase of a real kit

04 Nov

If you’re lucky enough to be in Japan at the moment, select Sony stores will give you a free — and downright adorable — mini camera kit if you purchase a Sony a7 or a9 series camera system.

The limited-time promotion is going on through November 30 at the Sony Stores in the Ginza, Sapporo, Osaka and Fukuoka Tenjin districts. The mini kit includes miniature versions of the Sony a7R II and either a 24–70mm F2.8 OSS or 100–400mm GM OSS lens.

The promotion appears to be limited to these stores, so unless you happen to be in Japan amidst this global pandemic or know someone who is (that’s also willing to buy an a7 or a9 camera for you), you might just have to keep an eye out on auction sites when people inevitably end up trying to sell these miniature mirrorless cameras and lenses online.

Articles: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)

 
Comments Off on Select Sony stores in Japan are giving away adorable mini camera kits with the purchase of a real kit

Posted in Uncategorized

 

Hubble captures supernova 70M light-years away as it briefly outshines its host galaxy

06 Oct

The Hubble Space Telescope recently captured images of an exploding star 70 million light-years away. The event was recorded as part of an ongoing program to measure the expansion rate of the universe in order to better understand its age. For a moment, the explosion outshined its entire host galaxy and the resulting energy was ‘equal to the radiance of 5 billion Suns.’

NASA has assembled its images from the Hubble Space Telescope to create a new time-lapse sequence, seen below. The supernova explosion took place in the spiral galaxy NGC 2525. In February 2018, Hubble began its observation of SN2018gv after a Japanese amateur astronomer, Koichi Itagaki, first detected it in mid-January. The supernova has been used to help precisely the expansion rate of the universe, which is itself critical to our understanding of the universe.

The time-lapse sequence above spanned nearly a year, with the supernova first appearing ‘as a blazing star located on the galaxy’s outer edge. It initially outshines the brightest stars in the galaxy before fading out of sight.’

Nobel Laureate Adam Riess of the Space Telescope Science Institute (STScI) and John Hopkins University says, ‘No earthly fireworks display can compete with this supernova, captured in its fading glory by the Hubble Space Telescope.’ Riess is the leader of the High-z Supernova Search Team and the Supernovae H0 for the Equation of State (SH0ES) Team.

The NASA Hubble Site news release continues, ‘The type of supernova seen in this sequence originated from a burned-out star—a white dwarf located in a close binary system—that is accreting material from its companion star. When the white dwarf reaches a critical mass, its core becomes hot enough to ignite nuclear fusion, turning it into a giant atomic bomb. This thermonuclear runaway process tears the dwarf apart. The opulence is short-lived as the fireball fades away.’ SN2018gv is a Type Ia supernova. You can learn more about supernovae and the characteristics of each type in this article from BBC’s Sky at Night.

NASA, ESA, and A. Riess (STScI/JHU) and the SH0ES team Acknowledgment: M. Zamani (ESA/Hubble)

Supernovae like SN2018gv peak at the same brightness, which allows them to act a type of standard, ‘standard candles.’ With the actual peak brightness known, scientists can determine the distances of host galaxies by comparing visible brightness. With this information, it is then possible to measure the expansion rate of the universe itself. You can learn more about how Hubble has aided in our understanding of the universe’s expansion rate in this article.

Articles: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)

 
Comments Off on Hubble captures supernova 70M light-years away as it briefly outshines its host galaxy

Posted in Uncategorized

 

The gear that got away: reader responses

06 Jun

Gear that got away: reader responses

After sharing our own stories of selling gear and later coming to regret it, we heard from our readers with their own tales of woe – and we weren’t quite prepared for the emotional rollercoaster ride it would be reading your comments! From an unlikely reunification, to a camera left behind in combat, to a sturdy lens that wouldn’t quit (until a spider moved in) your stories have all the excitement of a summer blockbuster. Take a look at a selection of our favorites.

Yashica Electro 35

CMCM: For purely nostalgic reasons, somehow and somewhere I lost track of my very first camera… a rangefinder Yashica Electro 35, bought in the Cu Chi, Vietnam PX in early 1967. This was apparently the first electronically controlled camera (hence the name “Electro), in which you selected the aperture and the camera automatically chose the shutter speed. It had an excellent fixed 45mm f1.7 lens, and my copy had a non-working light meter for most of its life. I used it sporadically until about 1979, when I got a Canon AE-1.

I’ve recently been digitizing old slides, and I’ve been amazed at how lovely the photos from the old Yashica could be. Wish I knew what happened to it! However, for fun I recently found an absolutely mint one that appears to have never been used, and even the light meter still works!

Panasonic LX100

The Jimmy 86: I’ll always somewhat regret selling my LX100. I was very much a fledgling photographer when I got (and arguably still am) but I took some of my favorite photos with it. The aspect ratio selection switch was just a dream and the camera was essentially good at everything.

I’ll likely never sell a camera when I upgrade again.

Olympus Trip 35

Photo by Marc Lacoste via Wikimedia Commons

BoborTwo: My 1st ‘proper’ camera, an Olympus Trip 35 (the David Bailey one, as my mum used to say).

It opened my camera eye, and led to me selling photos … but stupidly, I traded up to an OM10 on it, and it was gone forever. I tried to get it back some 2 years later, but it had been sold on to random customer in the Jessops in which I traded it.

I deeply miss it, I knew its limitations – there were many, but it took a long time for me to find something I loved as much – a Minox 35 GT – I will never let it go.

Nikon D700

philm5d: My Nikon D700. I had taken it to Scotland on Honeymoon however. Looking at the pics I wished I hadn’t got rid of it – lovely images and also a degree of sentimentality. A chap in Europe had bought it. Two years later I found his eBay name on an old email and offered to buy it back. He wrote back to say sorry he’d sold it on but if he came across the buyer’s details he’d tell me. Six months later he wrote to say he’d found owner two’s username details back in UK.

SO I messaged guy no.2. He said sorry he didn’t want to part with it. I put his eBay name in favourite sellers and two years later he’s selling a guitar. I offer to buy the guitar AND the camera and lo and behold he offers to list the camera at a crazy price (to dissuade others) + “offers” and tells me what he’s accept which was £450. So now I have my camera back after its travels. It’s slightly more worn with 45000 clicks but works perfectly. The serial number tallies with my honeymoon pics etc and I am happy. Beat that if you can!

Vintage photography magazines

valosade: Complete editions of Modern Photography and Popular Photography magazine from the 70s and 80s. When I moved I put them in a paper collection. I was insane, especially Modern I like to read every day …

felix from the suburbs: In my case, I had several decades worth of Modern Photography and Popular Photography nicely stored in cardboard boxes in the basement. We went up north one week-end and came back to a burst pipe in the basement right over where those boxes were kept. The magazines were turned to mush. Much heartbreak that day.

Leica M-2R

Leica M2 photographed by E. Wetzig via Wikimedia Commons

Rodger Kingston: It was 1973, and I was newly married and new to photography, still on my first “serious” camera, a Minolta SRT 101 SLR (which I eventually ruined by backing into a swimming pool at a wedding rehearsal, but that’s another story).

A friend offered me a new Leica M2-R with a Dual Range Summicron and Close-Focus Attachment for the ridiculous price – if I remember correctly – of $ 250, with the proviso that if I didn’t like the camera, I had to offer it back to him at the price he sold it to me for.

A complete newbie, I’d gotten used to the tunnel vision of an SLR, and found the inscribed frame of the Leica rangefinder unsettling to use, so after a short time I sold it back to him.

Now, a lifetime later, my favored cameras have been rangefinder/viewfinder style for many years (including a few Leicas), but none as sweet as that M2-R that I let slip away because I didn’t have the sense to learn how to see with it.

Olympus C-8080

Photo by photophile with Olympus C-8080

photophile: I purchased the huge, brick-like C-8080 it in early 2005 – and loved it straight away. THAT lens was astonishing at resolving detail. The supermacro mode was to die for, the flip-out LCD was really handy for shooting flowers & bugs at ground level and those direct on-body buttons to change metering mode and shooting mode etc – wow! BUT – it was slow to focus and RAW write speed was snail’s pace plus it was a bit noisy above ISO-200. So when the E500 came out, I thought it was time to ‘upgrade.’ As the SLR wasn’t cheap, I sold the C-8080.

The regret was immediate. Yes the new toy was great – but it seemed a bit sterile, too easy to use! Bizarrely, I actually MISSED having to fiddle and fidget with the C-8080, I especially missed the on-body buttons – hated having to trawl through menus on the E500.

Bought a used/abused unit in 2009. And I still have it. Love pressing buttons and turning dials, making it whirr and chirp as it struggles to lock focus. Bit like me!

Rollei 2.8

Photo by Sputniktilt via Wikimedia Commons

mikegc: I took my Rollei 2.8 to Vietnam in 1969. I was a combat photographer with the First Infantry Division. During an assault, the Rollei took a hit as I was running. The bullet passed through the body of the camera that shattered the viewfinder lens and the focusing control. I left it in the jungle and I’m very sorry I did that. It would make a great conversation piece.

Yashica Penta J

Photo by Rick Oleson

ikon44: In my student years in the mid 1960s I sold my UK-made Corfield Periflex 3a for a Yashica Penta J a 35mm film camera with selenium-gold clip on light meter (that was the good decision). The meter clipped on over the shutter speed dial, you chose a shutter speed and the meter gave you the ‘correct’ f stop. It was really easy to use and I found it very reliable.

I sold it in 1970 for an Olympus Pen F and have kicked myself ever since. Many of my friends had (and raved about) the half frame Olympus Pen F. I sold the Yashica for the Pen F and have never recovered from the mistake of thinking I could do better with ‘someone else’s’ idea of the right camera. I now have Nikon D750, and D610 and Fujifilm XT2 and am happy with them all… each for its own purpose.

Panasonic Lumix GF3

Wingsfan: Laugh if you want, but I traded a Lumix GF3 in on an Olympus E-M1 Mark II when they were offering $ 200 for any camera on trade on the E-M1 Mark II. I don’t regret it, because the Olympus is a much better camera, but I forgot how simple and fun it was to use the GF3. Plus, even though my daughter got to inherit my Lumix G5 out of the deal (she had been using the GF3), she still reminds me how much more she likes to GF3 to this day.

Canon PowerShot G12

davesurrey: A while ago I made a spur of the moment decision to reduce my camera collection and sold, amongst others, a Canon G12.

Then every time I saw the space on the shelves where that little fellow had sat I felt nostalgia over take me.

It was far from the best camera I possessed, even then, and it wasn’t even the one I instinctively grabbed when I went out. But there was something about it that I enjoyed.

So I solved the problem and now have a lovely G12 sitting on my shelves again which does get the occasional use.

Was it logical buying another again? Of course not, but what’s logic got to do with passion.

Canon EF 100mm F2 USM

Photo by Ashley Pomeroy via Wikimedia Commons

aceflibble: …For more technical reasons, my first copy of the Canon EF 100mm f/2 USM. That lens was absurdly sharp and well-corrected and had, by far, the fastest and most confident autofocus on the 1Ds cameras. I stupidly sold it when I got the EF 85mm f/1.2L II and immediately missed it. Tried the 70-200 f/2.8 IS as well but still wasn’t happy, so sold both the 70-200 and 85 and bought another copy of the 100. Sadly, that copy was nowhere near as good as my original. Sold it and got a third copy, a bit better but still not quite there. Somewhere out there is a world-class copy of the 100mm f/2 and I hope whoever has it appreciates what they have.

Nikon FM

Photo by Callum Lewis-Smith via Wikimedia Commons

tcab: Traded my Nikon FM film camera & 105mm lens for a film Pentax point and shoot before an overseas holiday. Walking out of the shop I happened to look around and saw the shop owner fondling the Nikon gear with a huge grin on his face. I thought maybe I had made a mistake, but left it at that and went on my holiday.

Twenty or more years later I look back and think – what was I thinking! I loved that camera – it was my first, too. Sure I have all sorts of better cameras now, but still regret selling that classic Nikon.

Articles: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)

 
Comments Off on The gear that got away: reader responses

Posted in Uncategorized

 

The one that got away: the gear we sold – and now regret letting go of

25 May

The gear that got away

We’ve all been there. You needed some cash, or you went overboard trying to downsize your gear stash. Selling that camera or lens seemed reasonable at the time, but in the razor-sharp clarity of hindsight, you know now it was a terrible mistake.

Since misery loves company, we thought we’d share our own stories of the gear we let go and shouldn’t have and offer a space for you, reader, to share your tale of woe. Think of it as a kind of group therapy session.

So take a deep breath, count to five as you exhale, and read on. Leave a comment with your own story of the gear you let go of – we’ll be publishing a few of them in a follow-up article soon.

Richard Butler, Technical Editor

Photo by Richard Butler with DX Nikkor 18-70mm F3.5-4.5

I usually end up using cameras until they have little to no resale value, and I have no real regrets about selling my last DSLR. Oddly, though, I do regret selling the lens I bought it with. The DX Nikkor 18-70mm F3.5-4.5 wasn’t a great lens, in the grand scheme of things, but we’d been through so much together.

That lens: a longer and slightly faster alternative to the standard kit lenses was the thing that finally settled the Pentax vs Canon vs Nikon decision I’d been agonizing over for weeks (months, maybe). Over a decade of extensively using every maker’s cameras has just reinforced the idea that picking the right lens was more significant than trying to choose a ‘right’ brand.

It vignetted like crazy at 18mm F3.5, which was the setting the impetuous younger me used most often, but 70mm F4.5 was appreciably more useful than 55mm F5.6, and the sturdier build made me feel a bit more ‘serious’ and a bit more confident that it would survive my misuse.

I don’t have any use for a DX DSLR lens anymore, but as the lens I used every day, and that helped me appreciate the value of upgrading your everyday lens, I sometimes wish I’d held onto my Nikon ‘super kit lens.’

Dale Baskin, Editor

Photo by Dale Baskin, taken with the Canon S300 Digital ELPH.

The Canon PowerShot S300 Digital ELPH was my first digital camera, purchased in 2001. To be honest, I never really loved it, but that’s beside the point. I was planning a cross-country road trip and figured it would be a good opportunity to experiment with digital. Back then, choosing between a 2MP or 3MP sensor was a pretty big decision, but I ultimately decided the third megapixel wasn’t worth hundreds of dollars more, which is mostly how I ended up with the S300.

Off I went into the sunset shooting digital for the first time in my life. I loved the instant feedback and I have fond memories of uploading photos at night on a 28.8 Kbps modem. Good times. Eventually, I moved on to other cameras and sold the S300 to a guy who wanted to use it for SCUBA with a dive housing.

So why, after all these years, do I wish I still had it? For a simple reason: it was my first. We all have memories of various firsts in our lives: first kiss, first car, first time falling in love, etc. The S300 was the first camera that allowed me to shoot in a new way that would eventually change my life, influence my career and spawn adventures I never would have dreamed of so many years ago. I’ve thought about buying a used one for nostalgia, but it wouldn’t be the same. It could never be the same as my S300.

Carey Rose, Reviews Editor

Photo by Carey Rose, taken with Nikon 85mm F1.8 D

I got my Nikon 85mm F1.8 D lens in college chiefly because I had a D80 that produced pretty horrific images when you cranked the ISO. And I found I was cranking the ISO pretty often while photographing for the college rag in wintertime in Bellingham, Wash. The days (if you can call the interminable grayness ‘day’) provide only eight hours of light, and so often my cheap secondhand F2.8 zooms just didn’t cut it. The small, light, snappy 85mm quickly became a favorite.

Fast forward a few years, and the 85mm became a staple for my wedding photography, and may as well have been permanently glued to one of a pair of DSLRs. But as I was now making some of this thing called ‘money,’ I found myself taken by a lens that would of course be superior in every way: Nikon’s 85mm F1.4 D. I found one at a price I could stomach and promptly put the 1.8 up for sale.

Cue the regret and sad trombones. Turns out, though that F1.4 lens was optically fantastic, the autofocus was far slower than the F1.8 I had so carelessly cut loose. For everything I really liked shooting, from weddings to concerts to street photography, it made such a difference that I never used it anywhere near as much as its more humble cousin. And with today’s modern sensors, I would happily trade the extra light for the extra focus speed. I still think about getting another F1.8 D someday.

Dan Bracaglia, Editor

Photo by Dan Bracaglia with the Fujifilm X100T.

The gear I most regret selling is my Fujifilm X100T. I purchased it when it first debuted in late 2014 and owned/loved it for two straight years; it was my go-everywhere, document-everything camera. But eventually I grew tired of using it and the images it produced and felt compelled to go back to shooting film in my free time. And so I sold off my X100T and replaced with a well-worn Leica M6 and went on happily shooting for another few years. But eventually I too tired of film’s limitations and once more craved the freedom of a lightweight personal digital camera.

Fortunately by the time that feeling crept it dawned on me: it’s OK to switch back and forth between film and digital for personal work. And so this time I held on to the M6 and picked up an also well-used X100F to satisfy my digital cravings. These days I still love and shoot with both as my personal cameras (along with a few other film buddies) and I’ll never be so quick to sell off gear again.

Sound familiar? Share your story of the gear you regret letting go of in the comments below – we’ll pick our favorites to include in a follow-up article.

Articles: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)

 
Comments Off on The one that got away: the gear we sold – and now regret letting go of

Posted in Uncategorized

 

Mendel Mendlowits, founder of Adorama has passed away

15 Apr
Photo by Joe McNally, used with permission.

Mendel Mendlowits, the charismatic founder of camera retail giant Adorama, passed away on the morning of April 8, 2020 at the age of 76. The company he founded in the 1970s announced the news yesterday on its blog.

‘If you ever had the honor of speaking with Mendel Mendlowits for any more than five minutes, you weren’t likely to forget him. His piercing, curious eyes stayed riveted on you throughout the conversation. His insatiable curiosity could turn a quick “hello” into an hour-long discussion. It was this curiosity, and his unstoppable drive to do what others thought could not be done, that made Mendel Mendlowits such an influential figure in the photography industry for more than 40 years,’ reads the tribute.

Mendlowits was born in 1943 and is a Holocaust survivor, along with his sister, who hid him away in a bunker at the Bergen-Belsen concentration camp. Once the Allied forces liberated them in 1945, him and his sister, along with their father, moved to the United States and settled in Williamsburg, New York.

At 17, he started working for his family’s business. His experience at Brooklyn-based Mazel, a wholesaler of film, batteries, and photo-finishing equipment would inspire him to open his very first Adorma storefront on the 34th Street in Manhattan. Adorama is derived from the Hebrew word ‘ador,’ a tree used to fortify the borders of ancient Israel. He also created a word starting with ‘A’ so it would be listed towards the top of aggregated business indexes.

Mendlowits immersed himself in the photography community starting in the 70s. He sought to understand every aspect of the craft. Through his connections, he became adept at finding the best products and deals – often advertising them in the top publications of the day such as Shutterbug and Modern Photography. His ability to diversify aspects of his business, combined with his acumen, helped Adorama become a household name that competes directly with other major retailers including Amazon and B&H Photo to this day.

‘If you ever had the honor of speaking with Mendel Mendlowits for any more than five minutes, you weren’t likely to forget him. His piercing, curious eyes stayed riveted on you throughout the conversation.’

In 2014, Mendlowits handed the business over to his son Eugene who will continue its legacy alongside CEO Michael Amkreutz. ‘The entire Mendlowits family, as well as the Adorama family, will continue to honor him and his memory. As we mourn this great loss, our gratitude for Mr. Mendlowits grows. We recognize, during this especially uncertain time, how a strong foundation can uphold an organization.

We thank the entire community for the outpouring of love and condolences, and we will honor Mendel and his legacy by continuing to dedicate ourselves to Adorama and its very bright future,’ concludes the announcement.

Articles: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)

 
Comments Off on Mendel Mendlowits, founder of Adorama has passed away

Posted in Uncategorized

 

Wet plate photographer shoots portrait of subject 4000 miles away via Zoom

08 Apr

Life is difficult when you are a portrait photographer and social distancing restrictions prevent face-to-face meetings with anyone beyond the people you live with. Not one to let a global virus pandemic get in the way of a good picture, Shane Balkowitsch combined modern and ancient technology to create a wet-plate photograph of a friend who was almost 4000 miles away using video-conferencing application Zoom. From his studio in Bismarck, North Dakota, Shane photographed Morgan Barbour in London, England, as she streamed video of herself to his computer screen – which he photographed using a 10x8in large format camera with a wet collodion plate loaded in the back.

Morgan in the Zoom video conference on Shane’s screen

Shane tells DPReview that the idea came about when Morgan asked him to make a wet plate image of her. He was going to copy a previous print he had made of her, but having just been introduced to video conferencing the week before it occurred to him that he could make the picture ‘live’ using the computer screen. He sent instructions to Morgan about how she could set up the lighting in her house to create a silhouette and they had a conference call to make the shot.

‘I’d never shot this way before’ Shane explained ‘and I didn’t know what to expect, so I decided that instead of trying to capture a “well lit” portrait we could go for a silhouette. It would take us back to when photography was first invented and the very simple, honest photographs of 180 years ago when photographers were just trying to get any proof of the photograph.’

‘The two plates we made are rather lovely in their simplicity and mood. Our first attempt, which is now known as “A Distance Exposure In Isolation”, is the better of the two. The light reflecting off her upper body adds just the right degree of femininity for me.

Shane tells us that he would usually expect an exposure of ten seconds for his wet plate portraits but this one needed Morgan to remain still while he counted down a full minute.
‘I wasn’t sure how the image on the screen would come out, or if it would come out at all. The wet plate process relies on ultraviolet light to make the exposure, and I didn’t know whether there would be some sort of UV filter on the monitor to protect users’ eyes. Fortunately, however, that turned out not to be the case. It still needed six times the usual exposure to activate the silver on the plate though, and that was for a backlit silhouette. If I’d wanted to get detail in her face I’d probably need two to three minutes.’

Shane says he is stunned by the mixture of technologies that exist 170 years apart, and how the light traveled from Hampstead in London to his Bismarck studio 3961 miles away. ‘There’s no truth in the light I recorded!’ he exclaims. ‘It has been transfigured and translated so many times. It passed through the background in Morgan’s house to reach her phone, where it was converted into zeros and ones to travel across the globe via the internet before reaching my screen. Here it was turned back into light again before passing through my lens and on to the plate. It’s amazing.’

The final image – note the cursor in the top left corner. A sure clue to the mix of technologies

To avoid capturing the texture of the screen Shane says he focused on the outline of Morgan’s lips and nose, and then pulled the focus back a little to blur the pixels of the screen and to create a softer feel to the picture. ‘I didn’t know if I’d get reflections off the screen too, but they don’t seem to show in the picture. There was an odd mark on the plate that I noticed as the image developed. I didn’t know what it was at first, but when I came to remove it I realized it is the arrow cursor from my computer left in the picture area by mistake. Kinda funny!’

Shane’s darkroom, where he sensitizes and develops his plates

Shane will have the chance to practice the process once again this Friday as a model from New York has contacted him since seeing the pictures of Morgan to have her portrait taken. ‘We’ll see what we can come up with. We just got off the phone together, we have never met but she has wanted to have her portrait taken by me for some time.’
Shane says ‘If we ask ourselves, “why would you even attempt this?” the answer is simple – out of necessity. I am usually booked 7-8 months ahead for my Friday sessions in my natural light wet plate studio, but right now I’m having to cancel all those sittings. Now I can shoot remotely. Take that Coronavirus! You think you can stop us from creating? I think not.’

Self-portrait with one of his wet plate cameras

Below you can see the video of the conference call during which Shane made the picture, which also shows the process of sensitising the plate and developing it after the exposure. You can see more of Shane’s wet plate work on Instagram and on his website.

Shane may be the first to shoot a wet plate image directly from a live subject on computer screen, but Robert Matheson used a similar process to record portraits from a live image projected onto a wet plate during the interview below.

Articles: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)

 
Comments Off on Wet plate photographer shoots portrait of subject 4000 miles away via Zoom

Posted in Uncategorized

 

Iconic photographer Terry O’Neill passes away at 81

19 Nov
Photo credit: Misan Harriman/Iconic Images, used with permission

Only two months back, Peter Lindberg, Charlie Cole, Fred Herzog, and Robert Frank passed away within days of each other. Now the photography world has lost another icon. Terry O’Neill, best known for capturing the essence of the ‘Swinging Sixties’ with his photographs of legendary performers from the era including The Beatles, David Bowie, Elton John, Barbara Streisand, and Clint Eastwood, succumbed to a long battle with prostate cancer on Saturday night at the age of 81.

O’Neill was known for capturing his subjects authentically and in an unconventional manner. As Elton John reflects, ‘looking at Terry’s photographs is like gazing through a window at the most extraordinary and exciting moments of my life.’ Born on July, 30 1938 in Heston, West London, O’Neill was on track to become a priest but found his true calling in music. ‘I was told I had too many questions to be a priest,’ he remarked.

Photography would find O’Neill by accident. An aspiring jazz drummer, he sought out employment at British Overseas Airways Corporation (BOAC), now British Airways, in hopes that as a steward he could travel to New York City’s jazz clubs in between work breaks. There weren’t any steward positions open at the time. Reluctantly, he took a job in the airline’s photography department.

Working with Peter Campion in BOAC’s photography department is what changed the course of O’Neill’s career. Campion immediately knew he had an eye and would give O’Neill photography books to peruse for inspiration. A chance encounter with then Home Secretary Rab Butler, asleep on a bench in a BOAC terminal, would yield a photo that was published in the Daily Sketch. O’Neill was immediately offered a job on the Fleet Street beat and worked at the paper for a few years before striking out on his own.

One of his earliest assignments happened to be of a musical group that would define a generation. ‘I was asked to go down to Abbey Road Studios and take a few portraits of this new band. I didn’t know how to work with a group — but because I was a musician myself and the youngest on-staff by a decade — I was always the one they’d ask. I took the four young lads outside for better light. That portrait ran in the papers the next day and the paper sold out. That band became the biggest band in the world; The Beatles,’ recalls O’Neill in a quote published by his agency, Iconic Images.

He would go on to photograph The Rolling Stones during their formative years. Their manager, Andrew Loog Oldham, credited O’Neill’s images as being fundamental to the band’s success. ‘Terry O’Neill captured us on the street, and that made all the difference. Terry captured the time.’ He continued on his path, photographing more famous faces that defined the 60s including Michael Caine, Audrey Hepburn, Elizabeth Taylor, Terence Stamp, Jean Shrimpton, and Frank Sinatra. Notably, he was one of the first photographers to work with Sean Connery as he portrayed James Bond. O’Neill worked as a photographer on all the Bond films in the coming decades.

Although most of O’Neill’s work focused on the glitz and glamour of celebrity life during his six decades as a photographer, he also captured prominent athletes and politicians. He photographed the Queen of England twice and also caught Winston Churchill leaving the hospital in 1962. ‘Terry was a ‘historian’ whose camera captured the resurgence and energy of this revolution,’ says Michael Caine. ‘I can think of no other photographer who has contributed so much to our heritage.’

O’Neill went on to capture classic images into the 70s including David Bowie’s ‘Jumping Dog,’ which premiered at the V&A Museum in London, along with riveting moments from Elton John’s ‘Rocketman’ tour – many that were used as reference material for the recent film. It was his portrait of actress Faye Dunaway, ‘Faye at the pool,’ that would establish him as an icon. Dunaway brought her Oscar statue, an award for her role in the 1976 film ‘Network,’ to the Beverly Hills Hotel pool the morning after she won. This atypical ‘day after’ take is recognized as one of Hollywood’s most iconic images to this day. O’Neill and Dunaway would go on to marry in 1983 before splitting in 1987.

At the start of the 21st century, O’Neill started focusing more of his efforts on exhibiting, publishing, and discussing his work. In 2011, he was awarded the Royal Photographic Society Centenary Medal in recognition of his significant contribution to the art of photography plus an Honorary Fellowship of The Society. Earlier this year, he was awarded a Commander of the British Empire (CBE) for services to Photography in this year’s Queen’s Birthday Honours list.

Robin Morgan, the former editor of The Sunday Times Magazine and CEO of Iconic Images, the agency that represents O’Neill’s work, sums up his career with the following statement; ‘No other photographer worked the frontline of fame for so long and with such panache. Terry chronicled the cultural landscape for six decades from HM Queen Elizabeth II, Winston Churchill to Nelson Mandela, The Beatles to Amy Winehouse, Muhammad Ali to the biggest stars of film and stage. They all dropped their guard to his mischief, charm and wit.’

Adds Morgan, ‘By the end of his life his work was hanging in more than 40 galleries and museums around the world.’ To this day, O’Neill is one of the world’s most collected photographers. He is survived by his son, actor Liam Dunaway O’Neill and current wife Laraine Ashton.

Articles: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)

 
Comments Off on Iconic photographer Terry O’Neill passes away at 81

Posted in Uncategorized

 

Do Cheap Photographers Take Work Away From the Rest of Us?

22 Sep

The post Do Cheap Photographers Take Work Away From the Rest of Us? appeared first on Digital Photography School. It was authored by Anabel DFlux.

Price tends to be one of the biggest points of contention with photographers. What is too low? What is too high? What’s just right? Running a profitable business is never easy. Whatever price you set, someone will likely have an opinion or two about it (solicited or not). Which leads to the biggest elephant in the room… do cheap photographers who price low take business away from those that price higher?

Do Cheap Photographers Take Work Away From the Rest of Us?

My answer?

No.

And here are 6 reasons why:

1. There is a client for everyone

Do Cheap Photographers Take Work Away From the Rest of Us?

This is business 101 that we often forget (and I am guilty of forgetting sometimes too!). Artists tend to be very emotionally tied to the work and the service provided, and photographers are certainly not exempt from this fact. As such, losing or not obtaining a client can feel like a personal jab even when it has nothing to do with us at all. You have to remember, there is a client for everyone!

This rings especially true in the tumultuous price debate. A client who is focusing on the price will not be looking for an expensive photographer. Likewise, a client who is focusing on high quality will often assume that cheap photographers cannot provide the quality that they seek. A Lamborghini is not concerned over the lower price of a Honda Civic because the Honda Civic buyers are not looking for a Lamborghini.

Alongside this, often price equates to years of experience. Photographers who are brand new may be absolutely fantastic and have beautiful quality images but aren’t able to charge the same as those that are seasoned professionals. Likewise, some clients do value quality work but simply cannot afford a seasoned professional. These two tend to find each other and work together well.

2. Client priorities are not always the same as yours

cheap-photographers-take-work-away

As photographers, we naturally (and rightfully) value professional photographs highly. From capturing memories to creating beautiful new stories, photographs are essential. However, the priorities we hold as photographers may not always ring true for the subjects in front of our lenses.

Some clients would rather invest their money into something else – something that holds more importance to them. Whether you agree or not, that’s not your decision to make. Some clients look for less expensive photographers because their finances are tied into something that they find to hold more worth to them (and thus receive what they have paid for). And that’s okay – let them.

3. Some clients will eventually understand the price versus value point

cheap-photographers-take-work-away

This is something that tends to happen to me often. A client will go to a very low-priced photographer, end up unsatisfied with the experience or the end result, and quickly learn the general value of the price. They then come to me and ask to shoot their concept once more. This does happen quite a bit. This is why staying firm on your policies and pricing is important (and tends to command respect).

Wait, wait.

This is assuming that the low-priced photographer has a quality that doesn’t match that of the higher-priced ones. What if a great quality photographer prices low? Doesn’t that cut into my jobs? 

cheap-photographers-take-work-away

Some photographers have a different business model than the rest – known as the “low price and high turnover model.” This model works on the idea that you charge low, service many, and turn over a profit much like a photographer that charges high and services one.

However, what many don’t see behind the scenes, is the reason this model works is much of the process is automated or simplified. It allows the photographer to have a lower output of effort that matches their price. This service is not individualized, and generally not specifically tailored for the individual. It’s the difference that is similar to “ready-made” versus “custom-made” clothing. But this doesn’t work for all clients. The clients this does work for are likely not your clients if you have a traditional photographic business model.

Many major brands have a high-end and a low-end to their business. Take the car company Toyota, for example. Their high-end line is called Lexus – a luxury brand of car. Their consumer-grade line is just good ol’ Toyota. Both cars are great, hardy, and will get you where you need to go in comfort. A Toyota is not worse than a Lexus. The Lexus is just intended for a different kind of buyer.

Well, now that’s said…how do I justify my price? 

4. Express your value and stand by your worth

cheap-photographers-take-work-away

First and foremost, confidence speaks volumes. If you set a price and are confident about it, stand by your worth and be firm.

That being said, every price needs something to justify it. Show the client what the value in investing in your work is versus someone else’s. Do you do something unique and different? Is your client experience above and beyond what the rest do? What do your years of experience or high-quality gear bring to the table? Do you have any awards or honorable mentions? These are all important topics to cover with your client when explaining what you offer and how much you charge for your offering.

5. Find your demographic and market to them!

cheap-photographers-take-work-away

Marketing is what makes or breaks a business. If people don’t know about you, how can they book you? Marketing is extremely important, especially in the social media age. Marketing is the act of spreading awareness about your business, whether it be through digital advertising, partnering with local businesses, or launching billboards!

If you’re finding that the clients you are marketing to keep choosing a photographer that prices lower than you, that is a big sign that this client base is not the right demographic for you. Demographics are particular sectors of a population that are divided by factors. For marketing purposes, factors tend to be interest, age, location, income, and more.

As a business owner, you need to find the demographic that relates to the service you are offering. Look at income levels that tend to align with your price point, and for clients with interests that may be more aligned with your offering (e.g., pet photographers will look for clients with interest in animals), and age group can also be a big factor. If you’re a family photographer, look for moms and dads, or youth sports – keywords like that!

Remember, you must segment your population based on more than one factor to find the right demographic. Filling out location and interests in the minimum is a good starting point.

6. Stop worrying about what others are doing and charging

Do Cheap Photographers Take Work Away From the Rest of Us?

Everyone has a different ideology when it concerns their business. They use the business model that suits them, dependent on variables you likely do not know about. As such, the running of their service (and what they charge for it) does not apply to you. It’s best to stop concerning yourself with what others are doing and focus on what you are doing for you!

The industry is changing, and society has changed its view on the value of art.

Conclusion

Do Cheap Photographers Take Work Away From the Rest of Us?

You’re not losing jobs because your competitors are cheap photographers, you’re losing jobs because you either haven’t found your right client base or you need to get better at expressing your value.

Focus on your business and what you can improve in your work, and the right clients will come! The world is not as small as it seems; there are thousands of potential clients out there for you.

Do you agree with this or do you think cheap photographers do take work away from us? Or perhaps you have some other valuable points to share? Share them with us in the comments section.

 

cheap-photographers-take-work-away

The post Do Cheap Photographers Take Work Away From the Rest of Us? appeared first on Digital Photography School. It was authored by Anabel DFlux.


Digital Photography School

 
Comments Off on Do Cheap Photographers Take Work Away From the Rest of Us?

Posted in Photography

 

Influential photographer Robert Frank passes away at 94

11 Sep
This Super 8 footage, shot in 1971, would later be repurposed for The Rolling Stones 1972 album Exile on Main Street.

Legendary Swiss-American photographer, filmmaker and artist Robert Frank, who is best known for his 1958 book The Americans, as well as his behind-the-scenes work with rock band The Rolling Stones, passed away from natural causes on September 9th at the age of 94. His death, which occurred at the Inverness Consolidated Memorial Hospital in Nova Scotia, Canada, was confirmed by his gallerist and longtime friend Peter MacGill.

Frank was born in Switzerland on November 9, 1924. He emigrated to the United States in 1947, after releasing his first hand-made photography book, 40 Fotos, landing in New York City where he secured employment as a fashion photographer for Harper’s Bazaar. He also started hanging out with an eclectic crowd that included Beat Generation poet Allen Ginsberg and On the Road author Jack Kerouac. Kerouac provided the introduction to Frank’s seminal photography book The Americans.

The collection of 83 black-and-white photos, captured on a cross-country road trip that began in 1955, with a Leica 35mm camera, exposed the neglected aspects of American life. In an era that glorified family values, clean-cut figures, and a booming postwar economy, Frank’s dark, grainy imagery was subversive. While The Americans was not well-received initially, its eventual success would present a level of notoriety that made him uncomfortable.

As a result, Frank pivoted to creating experimental short films and autobiographical documentaries. This would lead him to develop a relationship with one of the world’s most notorious rock bands, The Rolling Stones. The group commissioned him to create photos for their 1972 album, Exile on Main Street. Thrilled with his work, they invited him to shoot a documentary about their return to America and supporting 1972 concert tour.

The Rolling Stones were thrilled with Robert Frank’s work for the cover of their 1972 release, Exile on Main Street. However, they would go on to block the widespread release of his documentary Cocksucker Blues.

The resulting work, titled Cocksucker Blues, exposed rampant drug use and escapades including excessive orgies that the band deemed unflattering for their image. A restraining order was put in place to limit where and how often the documentary could be screened. It was ultimately shelved in favor of the documentary Ladies and Gentlemen: The Rolling Stones which consisted of strictly on-stage footage.

Upon hearing of Frank’s passing, The Rolling Stones posted the following statement on their Facebook page: ‘We’re very sad to hear the news that the visionary photographer and filmmaker Robert Frank has died. Robert collaborated with us on a number of projects including the cover design of Exile On Main Street and directed the Cocksucker Blues documentary. He was an incredible artist whose unique style broke the mould. Our thoughts are with his family and friends at this time.’

View this post on Instagram

Robert Frank has passed away at 94. As one of the key figures in postwar American art, Frank has never wanted for recognition. Few works in the history of photography have landed a punch as woozying as that book, “The Americans.” An unconsoling portrait of his adopted country, the 83 photographs in the book are a record of the Swiss-born Frank’s on-the-road travels in 1955 and 1956. It is a country of empty highways and drained faces in barrooms, divided by race and income. Frank’s people seem bereft, beaten. It’s a portrait by an outsider identifying to his fingertips with other outsiders. “In America, they had another tone, the pictures,” Frank told @nytmag in 1994. “One became aware of white cities, black people, no money, no hope. The noise. The violence. How brutal people were. A brutal country. Still is. And I began to be part of it.” Read the 1994 piece at the link in our bio. #RobertFrank photographed by @eugenerichardsphotography

A post shared by The New York Times Magazine (@nytmag) on

In a poignant moment from his first video project, Home Improvements, created in 1985, he films his own reflection through a glass door and reflects on his method with the following quote: ‘I’m always looking outside trying to look inside. Trying to tell something that’s true. But maybe nothing is really true. Except what’s out there, and what’s out there is always different.’

‘I’m always looking outside trying to look inside. Trying to tell something that’s true. But maybe nothing is really true. Except what’s out there, and what’s out there is always different.’

Frank’s lasting impact includes being deemed ‘the father of ‘the snapshot aesthetic.’ His ability to create compelling images on-the-fly inspired influential artists including Jeff Wall, Mary Ellen Mark and Ed Ruscha. Critic Sean O’Hagan, writing for The Guardian in 2014, said The Americans ‘changed the nature of photography, what it could say and how it could say it. [ . . . ] it remains perhaps the most influential photography book of the 20th century.’

Frank experienced personal tragedy in his life. He lost his first daughter, at the age of 20, in a plane crash. Twenty years later, his son Pablo took his own life after suffering from schizophrenia. He is survived by his second wife, June Leaf.

Articles: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)

 
Comments Off on Influential photographer Robert Frank passes away at 94

Posted in Uncategorized

 

Astropad 3.2 update shows it isn’t going away anytime soon—and teases a Windows version

08 Jun

Astropad may have been ‘Sherlocked’ with Apple’s announcement that the ability to use an iPad as a secondary display will be baked into macOS 10.15 Catalina as a feature called Sidecar, but that hasn’t stopped Astropad from updating its third-party solution.

Yesterday, Astropad 3.2 was released with a few new updates and a note from its founders saying they have no plans to stop Astropad development, even amidst Apple’s Sidecar announcement.

Astropad 3.2 brings along your normal bug fixes and under-the-hood fixes as well as a fix to minimize pixelation. According to the update notes, the development team re-engineered the data flow from Mac devices to iPads ‘in order to push data more efficiently between devices.’ This fix should mean pixelation is ‘significantly reduced’ when your iPad is connected to a Mac device over strong Wi-Fi networks or USB. Astropad notes the changes should especially be noticeable when scrolling through text documents and websites.

On iOS, Astropad Studio 3.2, Astropad Standard 3.2 and Astropad Mini 3.2 should all be available to update in the iOS App Store if you currently have the apps on your device. The macOS app should automatically update to the latest version, but if not, Astropad has a dedicated download page where you can manually download the updated version.

As for future plans, Astropad’s founders have written up a blog post explaining that Astropad isn’t going anywhere anytime soon. Under the headline ‘We’re not going anywhere,’ the note reads:

We’ve spent the last five years building innovative products like Astropad and Luna Display that cater to true creative professionals. Our team has always doubled-down on delivering rich features, deep customization, and low-latency input. Why? Because that’s user-driven and that’s what we do.

So while Apple’s Sidecar merely scratches the surface of a Mac-iPad workspace, we went all in on the bells and whistles. What does this mean for you? If you have basic needs, Apple’s Sidecar may do the trick. But if you’re a pro, we’ve built Astropad to cater to your creative workflow.

Oh, and one more thing: the message from the founders also hints that a Windows version of Astropad is in the future. ‘We see a bright future in that exciting new space and we hope you’ll join us along for the ride,’ reads the message. ‘So while we may be the underdogs, we’re ready to charge head-on because we’re just as committed to creative pros as we’ve always been — whether that’s via Mac, PC, or beyond.’

Articles: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)

 
Comments Off on Astropad 3.2 update shows it isn’t going away anytime soon—and teases a Windows version

Posted in Uncategorized

 
« Older Entries