Month: October 2013

  • When Should You Retire Or Replace Your Memory Cards?

      QUESTION:
      One of the most common issues among both hobbyist and new professional photographers is the lifespan and “safe retirement” of memory cards. When is a good time to retire a memory card, or relegate it to “secondary usage only”? Well, any number of things can start happening to a memory card, from images going corrupt on the card noticeably often, to weirder things such as in our case today, where a professional wedding photographer noticed that their 16 GB memory card briefly appeared to only be 8 GB in capacity for no apparent reason. Sound like a harmless glitch? Think again! Even this subtle “weirdness” can be an indicator for impending total failure and data loss.

      ANSWER:

    The very first thing that comes to my mind as an expert in this area is, …where did you buy the memory card in question, and what “class” / speed and brand is it, plus of course how has it been treated overall?

    In my opinion, there is a good chance it is time to at least relegate such a memory card to secondary duty.

    HOWEVER, this “wrong size” issue is a common telltale sign of faux Sandisk cards from Ebay / Amazon third-party sellers, in which case you are at HIGH RISK of losing either half the card, or the ENTIRE card at any time, without further warning. And often times in this particular case there is no chance of data recovery, compared to how easy it can be to run a 100% successful recovery on a “legit” professional-grade memory card.

    I know this sounds terrible and maybe even a little bit paranoid / overreacting, however considering the cost of memory cards these days and considering that wedding photographers in particular are paid professionals who are capturing once-in-a-lifetime images, I see very little reason NOT to replace such a card immediately.

    I honestly just buy entirely new complete sets of memory cards every few years, card wallet and all. (After a few years of heavy use, the Think Tank Pixel Pocket Rocket that I love so much can admittedly start holding CF and SD cards a little loosely, so that’s why I buy a new card wallet too. Plus I like to keep my old memory cards around, for emergency use and personal high-volume shooting.)

    Of course I shoot every new memory card to 100% full a few times on non-essential casual work, (I shoot a lot of timelapses, which is a convenient hobby) …just to test out the card. Or you Nikon users can just set your cameras to TIF mode, and fill a card in just 100-200 shots! Yes, I have had to send back a few cards over the years but that has only been when I tested out low-budget cards. The pro-grade, name-brand memory cards, purchased through an authorized reputable dealer such as B&H Photo Video, have NEVER let me down.

    Anyways my point is, the safest thing to do is to start fresh every few hundred thousand images. I now have three separate card wallets, and in a pinch if I have to shoot 5-6 days of weddings back to back I might start using the older cards to “mop up” dance floor reception shooting at the end of the night, while using the more reliable cards for shooting earlier in the day. Again keep in mind, when I say “more reliable” I’m not even referring to cards that have given me issues in the past, I’m just talking about replacing perfectly functional cards that are simply 2-3 years old. Personally, any card that gives me a serious error such as this, gets immediately taken off professional duty, and goes in the bin for “random timelapse footage” and quick around-the-house shooting only…

    So, it doesn’t have to be that OCD / complicated. All I’m saying is, if this is your profession; be ready to invest in its upkeep / wear-and-tear!

    Take care,
    =Matt=

  • Help! My Images Look Bright On My Camera LCD And Dark On My Computer Screen…

      Question: On certain cameras, (in this case the Nikon D700) …images seem to look nice and bright on the back of the camera, but then when they are on a computer screen they look much darker and under-exposed. What’s up? This hasn’t been noticeable on previous cameras…

      My Ramblings:

    Yes, the Nikon D700 is just the same as any other camera, although it doesn’t have auto-brightness LCD options however I dislike those anyways. (Some Canon DSLRs have that option, and you can try it and see if you like it if you own a Canon, but I don’t recommend it)

    I set the camera LCD brightness to be +1 or +2 in extremely bright sunlight, and -1 or -2 in extremely dark conditions.

    However other than that, I simply rely FAR more heavily on my histogram and my “blinking highlight warning” than the LCD itself. Never trust the LCD, especially if you find yourself shooting in dark conditions often like I do. (Wedding receptions, milky way in the middle of nowhere, etc….) The bottom line is that your LCD lies to you. There is absolutely no correlation between LCD brightness and a proper exposure, within reason of course. What I mean is, I’ve seen images that look “good enough” on the camera but are actually 2-3 stops under-exposed when you check the histogram.

    Unfortunately, calibrating your monitor will usually do very little other than correct the colors. Even a calibrated monitor can still “throw you off” if the brightness settings are wrong, actually.

    However I don’t think this is the problem in most cases, because 99% of the time people have their computer screen too bright, not too dark, for accurate tonal adjustments. That, and you really really really ought to get an IPS display with a 178 degree VERTICAL (not just horizontal) viewing angle. This will make a world of difference when gauging your shadow detail brightness on your computer. You know how on your laptop usually, you bob your head up and down and the brightness of shadows changes dramatically? Yeah, that’s what you want to avoid like the plague.

    Anyways, I think that’s the main problem here, the camera LCD brightness, NOT the display. So start using your histogram and highlight warnings more!

    Of course if you have an un-calibrated monitor it is good to get it calibrated at least once, especially if it’s a PC display. If you don’t want to invest in a Spyder etc. device, you can usually rent them from a local shop for $5. Unless your display is on at full brightness ALL the time, you really only need to calibrate every few months or so. And honestly your monitor probably shouldn’t be at maximum brightness for proper color correction, anyways. But follow the instructions for monitor brightness and contrast for whatever calibration device you rent.

    Last but not least, just know that your in-camera settings are never going to match what Adobe gives you. The bottom line is that Adobe’s default RAW processing is disgusting. It’s flat, dark, and un-exciting. However that is what presets and advanced RAW processing are for. It is unfortunate that our RAW images look bland compared to the vibrant beauty of the in-camera processing, but then again if our images were THAT perfect in-camera, we’d just shoot JPG anyways right? (And hey, some do!)

  • Professional Photographers, are you feeling burned out and over-worked? Here’s What You Must Do…

      Every advanced photographer, professional and hobbyist alike, feels burned out at one point or another. But for a professional, it’s extra tough because your livelihood depends on your ability to perform, to “bring your A-game” to a wedding or portrait session. If you’re not careful, you can slip away from the passion and even the talent-infused results that are currently paying your bills. So, how do you advoid professional burn-out, as a wedding / portrait photographer? (Or any self-employed photographer really, but for the sake of this ramble, we’ll refer to weddings and portraits.

      My Ramblings:

    This happens to everybody, especially this time of year when the money might be coming in less but the back-end work is just increasing. That’s just the way this career goes. But as long as you can get safely through annual slog then you’ll feel great in a few months.

    To be brutally honest however, if your goal is to continue truly LOVING photography as much as you once did, all-year-round, some very dramatic changes might be in order. At the very least, you need to try and minimize your weekday hourly slog. This career can downward spiral very, very fast if you get too buried. Trust me, I know. Out-sourcing your post-production is a huge thing, but not necessarily the only option. Many photographers simply adjust their workflow production time and get each wedding / session turned around in just a few hours, instead of weeks or months… I do highly recommend BOTH mastering post-production and figuring out a good out-source option. Both business models can work very well, you just need to figure out which is right for you. Sometimes it’s a little bit of both!

    The bottom line is that you need to make more time for yourself. I don’t care how fun photography is as a career, if you’re working 80-100 hours a week, that’s not cool. You could work a white collar job for 40-50 hrs a week, make way more money, and be an ordinary human being on nights and weekends. Because I don’t care how “soul-sucking” a corporate / blue-collar 9-5 job is, if you make a good living and work only 40 hrs a week, it’s actually a pretty cushy life.

    So, you need free time, plus a photographic hobby or you will go insane. I have lost count of how many people think that they’ve fallen in love with photography and that shooting weddings / portraits is their “calling in life” …yet for the past 1-2 years they haven’t touched a camera except to use it for paying their bills, or maybe to snap the obligatory cute kid / pet photo or two. (That wind up never getting edited and shared…)

    I’d blow my brains out if that were me. In fact that was me for a year or two, and it was indeed pretty depressing. But I learned my lession: no matter how passionate you are about using your camera to make money, you still need to use your camera to feed and liberate your soul. Whether you want to goof around with camera-tossing (yes that is exactly what it sounds like) …or get serious about landscapes or architecture photography, you gotta find something.

    And personally, I don’t even count portraiture as a “hobby”, since that’s part of what I do for a living. I like to do something completely opposite of what I shoot for work. I understand that some people’s “personal projects” might include themed portrait shoots, and I love doing those too, however I guess I just always categorized themed shoots with “work practice / expanding my style”, not my personal hobby…

    So, that’s my advice. 1.) Find a way to ONLY work 40 hrs a week, (or so ;-) if you’re currently bogged down working 80-100, and 2.) Find something that you’re passionate about, and keep it entirely separate from whatever you do to pay your bills.

    Of course it also goes without saying that you may or may not need to raise your prices, in order to afford this new-found free time. But everybody is currently charging something different and that’s tough to gauge except on an individual assessment.

    Take care, and feel free to let me know if you have any other questions!
    =Matt=

  • What Should I Buy – Nikon SB700 versus SB910

      Ever since Nikon made the SB900 to replace the SB800, every professional or experienced photographer (note that the two aren’t always connected, but I won’t go there today LOL!) …every professional or experienced photographer seems to have forgotten about the SB800, and now the new SB700 which seems to be deemed only acceptable for amateurs. So, this is a question I see ALL the time: “Should I buy the SB900, or the SB910?” Or, every now and then, someone actually considers the SB700 as well, but the bottom line is that most everybody else who is giving recommendations out there seems to always recommend the SB910 and nothing else.

      My Ramblings:

    Yes, the SB900 has issues with shutting down due to the overheat protection feature, and yes if you turn off the overheat protection feature you may have zero issues….or you may explode your flash. So if someone put a gun to my head and made me decide between the 900 and the 910, I’d pick the 910. But I’d like to know, who is that “someone” who keeps putting guns to peoples’ heads and making them decide absurdly random stuff? That’s not the real world.

    In the real world, if I could choose any Nikon on-camera flash on the market, for me it would be the SB700 hands-down. It is every bit as functional as the SB900 / SB910, but it’s a fraction of the cost. And for some this is even more important- it is also way, way smaller and lighter! I hated how top-heavy the SB900 was, I stopped using it the day I got an SB700 as a backup actually. The SB700 is that good.

    Sure, the SB700 is slightly less powerful than the SB910, however I’ve just never had a problem with that I guess because I also rely heavily on wireless flash for my job, which is wedding photography. In my opinion, if you’re trying to bounce off ceilings that are so high that you can’t use an SB700 and you absolutely MUST have the slightly greater 1/1 flash power of an SB910, …well then you’re doing something wrong!

    BTW, I have another jag about flashes- Never, ever waste money on buying a brand new one. There is almost nothing under the sun that could go wrong with a flash that doesn’t void your warranty. Really the only thing that ever goes wrong with flashes is either you drop them, or you explode them. In either case, Nikon will just laugh at you when you try and ask for free repair under warranty. This is why I have been buying used flashes since, oh, 2006? (I have purchased 6 Nikon SB flashes in that time, and innumerable generic brand flashes for testing at SLR Lounge…)

    Just about the only reason I would consider buying a new flash is, if I were also going to get the third-party warranty, the “drops and spills” warranty. Because 90% of the time, the Nikon warranty is worthless.

    So, if you see a Nikon pro out there with the SB910, you can just snicker at them a little bit. Not only because that pro simply doesn’t know how awesome the SB700 is, but also because the SB900 / 910 has been known to be SO top-heavy, that it can cause connection (misfire, or no-fire) errors with certain DSLR bodies! (Most notably the D700 BTW) It is a serious issue that very few people actually know about; they always just dwell on the fact that the SB900 was so horrible because of overheating, and they just assume that the SB910 is the only professional choice. Well, I am here to tell you that it is not, in fact for anyone who has to use a flash on their camera for 8-12+ hours per day on a regular basis, such as wedding photography, I highly recommend, no I ONLY recommend, the SB700.

    I’ve been using Nikon SB flashes since the days of the SB80DX, and SB800 / SB600, and I gotta say the SB700 is by far my favorite out of every single one I’ve ever used. Maybe if you have a Spare SB800 laying around you can stick with that. Mine served me very well for many years. And if you can find a used one for under $250 that might be awesome. But other than that, buy a used SB700, or if you buy it new get the extra “drops and spills” warranty.

    Take care, and feel free to let me know if you have any other questions!
    =Matt=

  • If you already have the Nikon 70-200 VR mk1, should you buy the Nikon 70-200 VR mk2? Why or why not?

      Here’s another very common question- If you already own the mk1 version of a 70-200mm f/2.8, should you bother buying the mk2 version?

      My Ramblings:

    Having tested every Nikon f/2.8 zoom since the old push-pull 80-200mm to the newest 70-200 f/4 VR, I have got to say that there isn’t much sharpness to be gained by going to the mk2. In fact the f/4 VR is the sharpest of them all, if you care about sharpness most. To be honest, after thorough testing I bought the 70-200mm f/2.8 mk1 for wedding photojournalism.

    Why? Not just because it’s “more than sharp enough”, but also admittedly because I hate the weight and I try not to use my 70-200 whenever possible. If I really, really need the extra resolution; say for example I get a D800 some day instead of my current beloved setup of dual-D700′s, …well then I would much rather turn to an 85 or 135 prime for “the ultimate sharpness”, than to a 70-200.

    So, that’s just me. I love what 70-200mm affords me while shooting church ceremonies and reception toasts, but other than that I try to minimize its use and grab my primes instead…

    Therefore, I suppose if someone were absolutely fine with dragging around a 70-200 all day, to both weddings and portrait sessions, then the mk2 would be a good buy. More important than any sharpness upgrade, it has a little bit FASTER FOCUSING, and the VR is a little bit better too. Those are honestly the much bigger differences. Compared to these advantages, I barely noticed a difference in sharpness..

    CANON SHOOTER DISCLAIMER: The Canon 70-200mm f/2.8 situation is a little different. Their older f/2.8 L lenses (both IS and non IS) were never really amazingly sharp, they were mostly just “usable”. Yes, innumerable pros loved these lenses and used them daily to make tons of money. However that doesn’t make them the best lenses ever, they were simply the only option and they got the job done.

    Oppositely, Nikon has been turning out ridiculously sharp f/2.8 zooms since the 80-200mm f/2.8 with SWM. (silent wave motor, the new type of AF)

    So if you are a Canon user I do highly recommend considering the upgrade to the 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS mk2. The mk1 is really only “awesome” if you plan to stick with it as a photojournalist lens that you shoot mostly in mRAW (the 10-12 megapixel range) and certainly not with whatever 40+ megapixel behemoth is just around the corner. At that point, the older 70-200 2.8′s are going to start showing their resolving limits. Of course the same goes with Nikon- If you have the Nikon D800 instead of my D700′s, you could see a bigger difference between the mk1 and mk2 f/2.8 VR zooms.

    Although again personally, Canon or Nikon it doesn’t matter: I’d still rather have an 85 and 135 prime for those situations when I really really need the most resolution. For me personally the 70-200mm is purely a candid / documentary photojournalist tool, not an all-day multipurpose type thing. I know that many probably don’t feel the same way as me, but shoot enough triple-headers and you just might… ;-)

    Take care, and feel free to let me know if you have any other questions!
    =Matt=

Calendar

October 2013
M T W T F S S
« Sep    
 123456
78910111213
14151617181920
21222324252627
28293031