Showing posts with label opinion. Show all posts
Showing posts with label opinion. Show all posts

Monday, March 15, 2021

Instagram and Me - A Rocky Relationship

Scouting New Locations

Ah, Instagram

I have been on Instagram (you can find me here - @valencia32photo) for a few years now and have somewhat of a love-hate relationship with it. I love sharing my work and receiving feedback, but I also find myself comparing my work, along with number of followers, likes, comments, etc.…., with others and becoming disappointed. Why did Jimmy (obviously not his real name 😉) get two thousand likes and I only received ten? He has how many followers? My work is ten times better and I do not have anywhere near that many! This is despite telling myself that it does not matter, I am not competing against Jimmy – I am competing against myself; challenging myself to get better each time.

My Instagram Feed

I am primarily a landscape photographer, but you can find a little bit of everything in my feed – nature, flowers, wildlife, macro, still life, you name it. The only thing you will not see a lot of is portraiture – maybe an occasional self-portrait or an environmental portrait of someone but that is about the extent. It just is not a genre that has ever excited me. My portrait work is mostly private and restricted to family and friends.

I try to publish new work on a regular basis but since the pandemic hit in March 2020 things have been a bit hit-or-miss. I do not get out nearly as often as I used to but try to make the most of any time that I do have. This past year has seen me embark on a “Backyard Boredom” project that I documented in my Instagram feed – follow #JoeValencia_BackyardDiscoveries and #BackyardBoredom to follow along. The #BackyardBoredom hashtag is also being used by others so you can follow their adventures, too.

My Followers

I do not have a lot of followers – there are 436 as-of this writing – but the core is very faithful, been with me for a long time and very supportive. I started March 2020 with 325 followers, steadily increasing each week. I am happy to see a 30% increase but still puzzled by the low number. I do know that in the last year I have (almost) always started each caption with a quotation appropriate to the image, along with a paragraph or so about the image – what, where, why, how, etc.… - and tried using the most efficient hashtags.

Who I Follow

There was a time when I followed a lot of people with the hope of getting a reciprocal follow. There were a lot of accounts showing up in my feed that I just did not enjoy; I decided to only follow accounts I was truly interested in and to constantly update the list. There are 533 accounts that I now follow, and I usually end up adding one or two a week, on average. These accounts make up a wide variety of genres of photography, but they are not all photographers; over the years I have followed painters, sketch artists, sculptors, celebrities, and “normal” people posting photos of their friends and families. I follow accounts for a variety of reasons, too. I like to be entertained and I also like to see what other creatives are doing – not so that I can copy them but to draw inspiration.

My Featured Work

You may be aware of “Feature” accounts on Instagram – they, typically, do not produce original material but rather feature the work of others that fit their focus of their account. If you want to get a chance at being featured, you use their hashtag – they monitor the images and choose the ones they deem worthy. This is a great way to get your work in front of people who might normally never see it. All the images used to illustrate this post were featured at one time; clicking on the image will take you to it. I have also had features in #SimplyNJShots, #NJspots, #NJinBloom, #NJShooterz, #NewJerseyHikes, and #SignatureShots; some have featured my work more than once. If I have forgotten any, I apologize for the oversight. It is exciting to see your work deemed worthy of a feature and to read the comments that follow. If you are interested in trying to get your work featured, you can try these accounts or search on Google – “Instagram macro photography feature accounts”, for instance.

Hashtags

I have already touched upon hashtags a little bit, along with some that I frequently use. Choosing the “right” hashtags is a tricky thing and I have no idea if I am doing it right. You want to use popular hashtags because that is what people are using to find things, but you do not want to use extremely popular ones because you end up being a drop in the ocean, making it difficult for you to be found. I usually include any equipment manufacturers involved in the image - #TeamCanon and #MadeWithMeFOTO being two of the most common. I also have made up hashtags for people who want to follow me, specifically – like #JoeValencia_Photography, #JoeValencia_BackyardDiscoveries, and #JoeValencia_Macro. I have a worksheet in Excel with 100’s of hashtags, many grouped into categories, so I can copy-and-paste the ones I need for an image.

Here is a list of New Jersey hashtags that I frequently use - #BeautifulNJ, #CentralJerseyExists, #GardenState, #GetOutStayOut, #HikeNJ, #HikeVibes, #JerseyCollective, #Just_NewJersey, #KeepItWild, #NewJersey, #NewJerseyHikes, #NewJerseyHikes_, #NewJerseyHiking, #JerseysBestCreators, #NewJerseyIsntBoring, #NewJerseyOutdoors, #NewJerseyPhotographer, #nj, #NJDotCom, #NJInBloom, #NJIsBeautiful, #NJRadiant, #NJOutdoors, #njPhotographer, #njShooterz, #NJspots, #NJSunriseSunset, #NJSunset, #OnlyInNewJersey, #OptOutside, #ScenicNJ, #VisitNJ, #WildNJ, #Allaire, #AllaireStatePark, #SharkRiverPark, #SharkRiverParkNJ, #HowellNJ, #WallNJ, #NeptuneNJ, #ManalapanNJ, #ManasquanReservoir

In Conclusion

Instagram is a great way to share your creative work, family photos and short videos and, if you manage your expectations, a lot of fun to use. I hope you enjoyed this post and hope you will take some time to check out my Instagram account – follow me if you like what you see!

Until next time – stay safe, be healthy and enjoy life!

If you enjoyed this post, please do me a small favor and share it with others. You will find buttons for many of the popular social media platforms at the bottom of this post. Thank you!



Saturday, March 28, 2020

Photography is a process....

Photography is a process, not a result. - James Popsys

I follow UK photographer James Popsys on YouTube and was going thru some of his older videos the other day. I came across, The Photography tips I wish I'd known sooner..., and just before he ended the video he gave one last tip - "Photography is a process, not a result."

It took a few seconds for the full effect of the quote to sink in but when it did I realized how brilliant it is. Well, brilliant may not be the most appropriate word - maybe inspired is better. The more I thought about it, the more I came to like what he was saying and decided to see if I could expand upon it.

The Process

Ah... the process. This is the drug, isn't it? I look at the process, for me as a nature/landscape photographer, as looking for the next composition. Looking for new places to explore or simply finding new ways to look at old subjects. There are a few subjects - a couple trees and an old house, in particular - that I go back to time and time again. I am always looking for a fresh approach or the perfect conditions. This is what gets me out of bed at god awful o'clock on a weekend to stand on a beach in sub-freezing weather to capture a sunrise or arrive an hour or two before sunset so that I can find just the right spot to set up my tripod.

The process is what turns us into pack mules carrying gear to the top of mountains hoping to get the perfect foliage image or stand in the middle of a swift flowing stream for just the right angle on a waterfall. We lie on our belly in the mud to get an unusual perspective on an oft-photographed object. It is hard to explain to someone the high we feel when everything comes together and we know that we have witnessed something truly remarkable. We have taken a brief moment in time and immortalized it in a way that only we saw it.

For me, the process is all about feeding the soul.

The Result

I don't mean to make short shrift of the result - in this case your final image - but it seems, to me at least, to be almost an after-thought sometimes. Well, again, maybe after-thought isn't the right word but you know what I mean. The image is your showcase, the end-product.

We get back to our computer, upload images, sort thru and edit "the keepers." Then, most of us, post some of the best on various social media platforms and sit back to collect the accolades. Am I right? I mean, we fight the elements to capture this wonderful image and it would be selfish not to share it with the world. I may be getting myself into trouble here....

Whereas the process is about feeding the soul, the result is more about feeding the ego.

And so....

The point that I am clumsily trying to make is that photography is all about creating a lasting memory and, at least for me, that doesn't necessary mean creating a tangible product - i.e. a photograph. Can we think of the process as being a commodity and the result as being the product? In a sense, yes. I often use photography as a substitute for a therapist couch; when I have a camera in my hand the woes of the world cease to exist. I don't even have to press the shutter.

The perfect summation of the process can be found is a quote from Annie Leibovitz - "One doesn’t stop seeing. One doesn’t stop framing. It doesn’t turn off and on. It’s on all the time."

So? What do you think? Is the quote true? Is photography a process and not a result? I would love to hear your thoughts on the topic - leave me a comment below.



Friday, September 20, 2019

Is It Real or Is It Photoshop? Does It Matter? Part III – Everyone Else

Note: This is the third, and final, installment in a three-part series titled, “Is It Real or Is It Photoshop? Does It Matter?” The other installments are The Purist and Anything Goes.

The Argument

Is it okay to "Photoshop" your images or is it the ultimate photographic sin?

I have already written about “The Purist” and "The Anything Goes". I conclude the series with “Everyone Else” but before I get into that I want to discuss something I forgot in the first installment; Photojournalism. It is never okay for a photojournalist to manipulate an image - in fact, many (most? all?) news agencies will not allow something as minor as color correction.

Everyone Else

Then we get to the other 99% of us (I am one of you now) who use the computer editing tools to fine-tune our image and make it represent what inspired us to make it. We don't have a problem with adding a touch of magenta to a sunset sky or getting rid of a garbage can in an otherwise beautiful landscape. Yes, I have done both and more. We are the folks

Conclusion

It wasn't until I was having a discussion with a friend (thanks Chris!) that I changed my outlook. He made me look at Photoshop as the digital darkroom that it is. I have come to use the phrase, WWAD - What Would Ansel Do? - to describe my attitude change. Lightroom and Photoshop are nothing more than electronic darkrooms. When I was young and just learning photography I had an old-timer tell me I couldn't call myself a "photographer" until I was able to handle myself in a darkroom. Why does that same mindset now scoff at the electronic equivalent?

In the "Old Days" of analog photography the only "straight from the camera" images were slides (transparencies) and the image was influenced by the film manufacturer and, to some extent, the lab processing the roll. When you shot negatives you had the same influences of the film and the added aspect of interpretation in the printing process. The black & white photographer would dodge and burn his images to get the tonality he wanted - the same for the color photographer but they also had the ability to tweak colors. Then there were the characteristics of the paper used to make the print.

I now shoot in RAW format and edit each of my "keepers"; first in Lightroom and then, if needed, Photoshop. I don't usually go terribly heavy with the edits and very seldom will I remove something from an image. I try to get everything "right" before squeezing the shutter - exposure and composition - but there are times when distractions just cannot be avoided. I don't see any reason why a rogue branch, or other distractions, cannot be removed in post.

While I have no problem with the "Anything Goes" mindset, I have one caveat - if you created something that didn't exist, tell people! Now, I don't mean that you have to explicitly tell people that the collage was "shopped" or anything else that is blatantly obvious. I am talking about when you take two different images and create something - for example, you take an incredible shot of a full moon with an 800mm lens and put it rising behind a shot of the Statue of Liberty. I believe in this instance you should divulge that it is a composite.

I am okay with focus-stacking and exposure blending but some other techniques are a bit more "gray" for me. I have recently heard about "focal length stacking" where you use two different focal lengths and combine to a single image. For instance, if you are hiking thru the mountains and find a peak beautifully framed by trees but it appears a bit small in the composition - you shoot a frame of the peak with a telephoto and the over-all shot with a wider lens - then you composite it in Photoshop. Is this okay to present without explanation? If it is not a dramatic difference, I don't think you have to - what do you think? The same with running water - I have seen photographers take a long exposure to get the silky smooth water but then take a few more at higher shutter speeds to freeze some of the water, and then they combine the images in post. Is this something that should be divulged to your audience? Once again, I think I am okay with presenting the image without explanation.

So, we have come to the end of the series. What do you think? Where do you fall in this spectrum? I would love to hear your thoughts - leave me a comment below.



Wednesday, September 18, 2019

Is It Real or Is It Photoshop? Does It Matter? Part II - Anything Goes

Note: This is the second installment in a three-part series titled, “Is It Real or Is It Photoshop? Does It Matter?” The first installment, The Purist, can be found here.

The Argument

Is it okay to "Photoshop" your images or is it the ultimate photographic sin?

I began the series with The Purist and now move on to The "Anything Goes".

The "Anything Goes"

This is an interesting, and oft-maligned, category of photographer. There are times when images are processed to the point that you cannot even realize it originated inside a camera. I recently saw an image that was purposely made to look like an oil painting; I, myself, have created some images that people mistook for a painting though on my part it was unintentional over-processing. If you have an image you like but the sky is dull and listless - replace it with one you like! In this realm, there is nothing wrong with that and, if done well, no one would be the wiser. Have you ever wanted to ride a camel? Go to a zoo, get an image of a camel and put yourself on it. Are you carrying a half-keg around your waist and want six-pack abs? I saw a Photoshop tutorial about that once - go ahead! You can even fill your yard with a whole menagerie of wild creatures if you want.

My Thought on "Anything Goes"

I don't have any problem with the anything goes mindset. This group never takes "straight from the camera" as a completed image and can spend hours working on a single image that looks nothing like what the camera saw. They take pride in their editing prowess and how they can create what never existed in the physical world. I am one who thinks that photography is an art form and, through extension, photographers are artists. The job of an artist (in my opinion) is to interpret life and present that interpretation to the audience. We tend to categorize artists by their medium - painter, sculptor, photographer, etc... - but at the end of the day they are all artists. I do think, however, there may be a tipping point from being a photographer creating artistic images and an artist using photography as a medium. Does that make sense? Could it be that the "Anything Goes" photographer is actually always the latter and not the former?

Your Thoughts

Are you an Anything Goes photographer? If so, I would love to hear from you and know why. If not, what are your thoughts on the subject?

I will take on "Everyone Else" in my next blog post.



Monday, September 16, 2019

Is It Real or Is It Photoshop? Does It Matter? Part I - The Purist

Note: This is the first installment in a three-part series titled, “Is It Real or Is It Photoshop? Does It Matter?” In each post I will present an image with the question, "Real or Photoshop?" The answers will come in the last installment.

The Argument

Is it okay to "Photoshop" your images or is it the ultimate photographic sin?

If you have been around the photography world for any length of time you have undoubtedly heard people "discussing" the use of Photoshop. I'm sure this argument is as old as photography itself but under various guises, such as photo-manipulation, darkroom manipulation, etc.... There are those who consider themselves "purists" and frown upon any editing - many of these photographers brag about "getting it right in the camera" and label their images as "straight from the camera" or some variation. There are others who fall on the side of "anything goes" and all is fair. I believe most people fall somewhere in the middle - I tend to be one. I will discuss each of these schools of thought in a series of posts.

I will begin the discussion with someone I call, The Purist.

The Purist

It has been my experience that The Purist is the most vocal in this group and, to be fair, counted me as a member at one time. They believe that photography is a representational medium and should only show things as they were at the time the image was made. You can't remove something that you wished wasn't there and, *gasp*, you can never add something that wasn't there. Changing colors, changing hues, adding clouds, removing garbage cans, etc... make veins stick out of the sides of their neck. They don't consider that to be photography. These are also the souls who will argue that you cannot call yourself a photographer unless you shoot manual, but that argument is for another day.

My Thoughts on The Purist

As I mentioned, I used to be a purist. When I first started with digital photography I shunned the idea of processing an image and lived with the jpeg given to me by my camera. To be fair to myself, my first digital camera only allowed for jpeg and my editing suite consisted of whatever Canon gave me with the camera. That said, I was still on the side of only "minor" tweaking such as exposure compensation like you would get from a one-hour photo printer. When I hear someone say, "I like to get it right in the camera." and describe their images as "Straight from the camera." I tend to chuckle a bit. Don't get me wrong - the former is quite important while the latter is not.

It is important to get it right when you squeeze the shutter, if only to reduce the amount of post-processing time. However, it isn't always possible to do that with a single image due to dynamic range and your camera, among other factors. What I take issue with is the "straight from the camera" guy who thinks post-processing is a sin. I argue that you are relinquishing part of your responsibility to the image by allowing the camera to decide what the scene looks like. The jpeg is just an image that was processed based upon the algorithm developed for your particular camera. You let a programmer decide what is important in your image and what it should look like. Imagine that you painstakingly composed your image, manually focused, many set your exposure and then let some software decide what it should look like!

Your Thoughts

Are you a Purist? If so, I would love to hear from you and know why. If not, what are your thoughts on the subject?

I will take on the "Anything Goes" photographer in my next blog post.



Thursday, May 2, 2019

Does Your Gear Matter? No, It Doesn't! Yes, It Does!

Does Your Gear Matter?

This age old question pops up all the time and I have heard many "definitive" opinions on both sides. I decided to give my own definitive answer - gear does and does not matter. Yes, you can have it both ways. Let me explain.

Gear Doesn't Matter

This is very true - to a point. I have heard a lot of photographers say, "It isn't the gear, it's the photographer that matters." I have also seen more than a few (most?) of those same photographers walking around with very expensive gear.

Ansel Adams once stated, "The single most important component of a camera is the twelve inches behind it!" and he was absolutely right. If you don't understand composition and exposure, you have to count on luck to get a good image. If you give a five year-old a Canon 5D Mark IV and an experienced professional a disposable camera, I would put my money on the professional making a better image. You have to learn the craft - how does shutter speed affect the image? Aperture? What is the "Rule of Thirds"? Is it okay to have a centered horizon? The answer to the last question is - maybe. The important thing is to learn when it is okay and when it isn't.

Learn the rules and learn when to break the rules - I wrote about this last September in Should We Teach the "Rules" of Photography to Beginners? If you haven't read it, I hope you will when you finish here.

"Play" with your camera and learn what everything does. This doesn't take a $3,000 camera body, you can learn with even a basic point-and-shoot if it allows you to control exposure. At this point you are learning about light and composition.

Gear Does Matter

Here is what I mean by "gear matters" - the quality of the image is, in large part, a function of the gear. All things being equal, you will get sharper images from a Canon "L"-series lens than you will with a "kit" lens. You will get better image quality from a camera capable of a 50 megapixel image than you will 8 megapixel. The dynamic range of the high-end camera is much better than the low-end, you typically get better/faster focusing, better low-light capability, less noise at high ISO, etc....

I was recently watching a podcast on YouTube when they were discussing this issue - one of the photographers said something I thought was interesting. He said that when you are shooting a wedding, the gear says a lot about you as a professional. Now, I paraphrased but that is the meaning of what he said. I believe that to be true; if you are hired to shoot a wedding and show up with a Nikon Coolpix you won't be taken seriously, even though you may produce spectacular images. When dealing with the public, perception matters.

So, What's The Answer?

The answer is, as I stated earlier - gear matters AND gear doesn't matter. I quoted Ansel Adams earlier and I think I will use another quote from him, "There is nothing worse than a sharp image of a fuzzy concept." That is why gear doesn't matter until it does. When you are consistently producing good work it might be time to think about upgrading. I said "think" about upgrading because you don't have to. I am currently shooting a Canon EOS Rebel T3i that I bought in August 2011 - it's a great, crop sensor, camera. It has served me well and many professional photographers carry crop sensor cameras, particularly wildlife photographers. Upgrading isn't an automatic thing - if you are happy with your results, save the money and take a vacation. If you find that your gear is limiting you artistically - by all means, upgrade to something that will help you achieve your goals.

Personally, although I cannot complain about my T3i, I am ready to upgrade. I have been frustrated lately with some of the results I have gotten and the frustration is directly linked to my gear. It isn't all camera related, it is all around; tripod, filters, lenses, camera body, etc.... The crop sensor is great on the telephoto range but it's frustrating that my 18mm is actually 28.8mm. I also find the results unacceptable when shooting at night and/or ISO over 400. The tripod is nice but I had trouble when wind was blowing and shooting in water or at the beach has caused trouble at times. I could go on about filters and other things, but you get the point.

The header image is one reason I wrote this article and one of the reasons I think it is time for me to upgrade. If you are a regular reader you may recognize it from Shooting the New York City Skyline, a post I published in March. I was happy with the composition but noticed a lot of noise (even at ISO 100) and there was camera shake even though the camera was mounted on a tripod set as low to the ground as it would go. I also protected it from the wind as best I could.

So, what do you think? Does it matter gear you have? What are your experiences? Let me know in the comments below. Tell me what I got right, what I got wrong, what I may have left out.


All photos are copyright Joseph S. Valencia All Rights Reserved They may not be used in any way without express written permission of the photographer. If you wish to use any of the photos you may contact the photographer at valencia32photo@gmail.com

Tuesday, August 15, 2017

Product Review: MeFOTO RoadTrip tripod

MeFOTO RoadTrip tripod

On YouTube

I published a video review of the MeFOTO RoadTrip on my YouTube channel. In the video I demonstrate using the tripod and discuss it's features. You can check it out here - https://youtu.be/LoCVEsTgsnc

First Impression

I recently received a MeFOTO RoadTrip Aluminum tripod - orange - and took it out in the field to try it out. My first impression when I opened the box and took it out from the carry case was very positive. The tripod folds up to a nice, compact size (15.4 in / 39.1 cm) making it easy to carry and the legs quickly fold back into place when you are ready to shoot. It weights in at 3.6 pounds (1.6 kilos) and can hold up to 17.6 pounds (8 kilos). The tripod comes with a dual action ballhead with Arca-Swiss style quick release plate. I have both the standard "black" release plate and an "orange" plate to match the tripod. The ballhead moved smoothly and stayed put when locked down. The addition of a bubble level in the head was a nice bonus. There is a spring-loaded hook at the bottom of the center column that can be used to hang some weight for added stability.

In The Field

I decided to head out to one of my favorite locations for my first tests - the Visitor Center at Monmouth Battlefield State Park. I wanted to shoot a variety of images, including low-angle, fully extended, and panorama. I shot mainly with my Canon EF-S 18-135mm but also brought my old Sigma 400mm f/5.6 to see how the tripod - especially the head - stood up to it.

I started out shooting a panorama with the camera in landscape. This is where the bubble level in the head comes in quite handy. I set the legs out to full extension and the center column most of the way up - the least stable configuration. I leveled the head, mounted the camera and took a 4-shot panorama. I had the lens at 18mm (29mm equivalent) giving me a horizontal field of view of about 60°. I mention this because I used this figure to determine how much to rotate the head for each shot. The ballhead has markings along the base representing the degrees on a compass. I wanted about a 25% overlap so I rotated the head 45° between shots. I then turned the camera 90° to shot the same panorama in portrait. I wanted to use the registration marks for this panorama but they get obscured by the camera and it is too hard to use.

From the panoramas, I turned to my 400mm - I wanted to see how well the tripod performed at full extension. I mounted the lens to the tripod and took a number of shots. A telephoto of this size (640mm equivalent) was going to show any camera shake there may be. I didn't notice any sign of shake in the final images - quite impressive. I spent some time with the tripod in a variety of positions from fully extended to compact. I put the tripod at odd angles with each leg at different extensions and angles. It performed beautifully throughout.

When I was done with most of the testing, I removed the center column and one leg and then screwed them together to form a monopod. I used the monopod with the Sigma 400mm mounted on the camera. I chose to use these this lens because it is the lens I most use with a monopod and I wanted to see how well they performed together. The monopod worked beautifully - from fully extended to compact. The monopod functioned flawlessly throughout my tests. I have owned, and used, a Bogen monopod fitted with a Cullman ballhead since the mid-1980's but that is now retired. There is no longer a need to carry a separate monopod.

The next day I took the tripod out again - this time I was shooting ground-level, with a shutter speed around 1/2 second. I found this spinning toy while driving through Old Tennent Cemetery and thought it would make a good subject. I set the tripod as low as I could go and adjusted the legs to balance the setup. The place I saw shooting was on the side of a hill and there was no flat ground. This was a good test; as a landscape photographer I don't often get a nice, flat surface to shoot from. Once again, the tripod worked as-expected and was quite solid.

Pros

  • It's orange!
  • Compact design
  • Lightweight
  • Very solid
  • Easy to use
  • Converts to monopod
  • Hook on center column
  • Center column reverses for low-angle photography

Cons

  • The bubble level is on the head, not the body of the tripod. It isn't helpful if the platform is set vertically
  • The level is also all white and rather small, making it difficult to see well
  • Using the "spiked" feet requires removing rubber and installing spike - could be easier
  • Registration marks aren't easy to use in "portrait"

Final Thoughts

Overall, I really can't say enough good things about this tripod. It does everything it is expected to do and it exceeded my expectations. I tend to be a bit leery of things that are somewhat "non-traditional", such as flashy colors. I find many times that the color, or whatever the "hook" is, turns out to be the best part of the product. That isn't the case with the MeFOTO RoadTrip - it delivers on all of it's promises and does so while giving you a little bit of flash. While I was running through my tests I got a few looks from passers-by and one even stopped to ask about the tripod. I haven't had a chance to do any extreme long exposures but have a few in mind and don't expect any trouble.

The bubble level is a nice idea but I don't think it is particularly useful in it's current configuration. It might be better if it were yellow or green and a bit larger. It truly was difficult for me to see. It might also be a good idea to move the registration marks to a collar separate from the head and have a mark on the head.

The bottom line is that I highly recommend this tripod to anyone looking for a "go-to" travel tripod. The MSRP for the RoadTrip Aluminum is $199 and the RoadTrip Carbon Fiber is $349. You can pay a whole lot more buying someone else's tripod or you can buy a MeFOTO and use the rest of the money for some filters or other accessories.

Manufacturers Specifications

Note: The specifications listed below were taken from the manufacturers website and are accurate as-of the writing of this review. They have not been independently verified by the reviewer
ALUMINUMCARBON FIBER
Maximum Load17.6 lb17.6 lb
Max Height w/Column Extended61.6"61.6"
Max Height w/Column Retracted53.1"53.1"
Minimum Height15.4"15.4"
Folded Length15.4"15.4"
Max Height Converted to Monopod64"64"
Number of Leg Sections55
Leg Lock TypeTwist LockTwist Lock
Center ColumnYes. Attaches to leg section to convert to full size monopodYes. Attaches to leg section to convert to full size monopod.
Tilt Range-45° / +90°-45° / +90°
Drag ControlYesYes
Spiked FeetYesYes
Panning Range360°360°
Separate Panning LockYesYes
Quick Release (QR) PlateArca-Swiss Style (PU50)Arca-Swiss Style (PU50)
Bubble LevelYesYes
Head Mount Thread Size3/8"-163/8"-16
Weight3.6 lb3.1 lb

For More Information or to Buy


All photos are copyright Joseph S. Valencia All Rights Reserved They may not be used in any way without express written permission of the photographer. If you wish to use any of the photos you may contact the photographer at valencia32photo@gmail.com

Wednesday, March 22, 2017

My Responsibility as an Experienced Photographer

I recently read an article that someone posted on Facebook titled “4 Questions Amateur Photographers Need to Stop Asking”; it sparked a debate and got me to thinking. When I saw the title I thought it was about amateurs pestering professionals about how to make money with photography. That is not even close to what the article is about – a more meaningful title would have been “4 Questions Novice Photographers Need to Stop Asking.” I am an “amateur” because I make very little money through photography, this is despite having more than 40 years’ experience. Having said that, I can honestly say that I still ask “What are you shooting?” when I come across someone with an interesting camera/lens. I don’t mean it to be “Gee, if I had that I could make better pictures.” but rather “I would love to know what you think about your gear.”

Here are the “dreaded” questions and proposed “alternative” questions:

  • What kind of camera do you have? - Why do you prefer your camera over others?
  • What settings are you using? – What was your process for taking this shot?
  • What Photoshop filter did you use? – What post-processing techniques did you use?
  • What is __________? – The blank could represent anything and was considered lazy. Look it up via Google or YouTube and only ask for help if you are still confused.

The author of the article took exception to these questions because he felt it showed laziness and lack of understanding on the behalf of the person asking. He was outright insulted by the Photoshop question. While the alternative questions might be better and elicit a more helpful answer in the long run I think it might be asking a bit much of a rank novice. I would look at the “dreaded” question as insight into the level of photographer asking the question and present the answer to the “alternative” question.

I have been asked the first two questions while out shooting and happily take the time to chat, if I can; especially if they are carrying a camera with them. The only time I might get a bit “testy” and brush someone off is if I am obviously in the middle of something where a distraction might cost me a shot, such as if I am stalking an egret or approaching some other wildlife. I am otherwise more than happy to answer your questions; you might even get more than you bargained for.

Throughout the years there have been many photographers who have helped me in some way. Most of the time it was in a formal setting such as a camera club or an organized photography outing but there have been times when I saw someone shooting and asked “what and why” or I would be shooting and someone would approach me to give me some pointers. Without this interaction who knows where I would be in my art today. Now that I am “the old guy” I take that role seriously and believe it is my responsibility to share what I know.

So, what do you think? Are the “dreaded” questions really bad? Would you scoff at someone asking them or help them gain a better understanding?

image - https://pixabay.com/en/photographer-camera-photography-2032135/

header image - https://pixabay.com/en/question-mark-photographer-woman-1651149/


Self-portrait is copyright Joseph S. Valencia All Rights Reserved They may not be used in any way without express written permission of the photographer. If you wish to use any of the photos you may contact the photographer at valencia32photo@gmail.com

Featured Post

Macro (and Close-Up) Photography - A Whole New World

Macro (and Close-Up) Photography - A Whole New World All photos are copyright Joseph S. Valencia, All Rights Rese...