Thursday, August 12, 2010

concrete and steel

The photography seminar was jam packed with information. First we took a look at our photographic roots, from the camera obscura to the Daguerreotype, and even into speculation of what the future holds.


There was a portion covering equipment, and a large chunk of time was given to post production, but it was all using an expensive editing program that I do not have, and do not intend to purchase any time soon. It was informative, nonetheless.


I came away from the seminar seeing that I was already using some of the techniques for better photography, but wishing that I had a fast (f 2.8) telephoto with built-in image stabilization. That fancy editing software and some of the latest hardware wouldn't hurt, too. For now, I plan to use my tripod and flash more, and look around at garage sales to see if I can buy $200,000,000 worth of Ansel Adams glass plates for $45.


The seminar's location was downtown, on the campus of the University of Chicago. Between sessions, I hurriedly took a snapshot of this rock pigeon. I like it, because concrete and steel and pigeons are good representations of the big city... and so is hurrying. Here is one thing that I did not expect: Attendees were informed that we needed to bring our camera, then surprisingly, we did not do any hands-on camera work for the seminar. Gotta go now... lots of work to catch up on.


Gaelyn said...

Always nice to get tips and find out you're doing something right already. Love your concrete and steel with pigeon representation of Chicago. See you did use your camera there.

imac said...

Is that how you send your messages then Craver?lol.

George said...

You need cameras but have no hands-on opportunities at the seminar? Well, at least you had your camera so you could get this picture. It's good to know you are doing many things correctly.

This Is My Blog - fishing guy said...

Craver: What you learn is knowledge you can use later on in life.

Carletta said...

What's a photography seminar without hands on? Pfft... :)
When you find those glass plates of Mr. Adams' I'll gladly go in half!!

Craver Vii said...

Gaelyn, I have never taken any photography classes. The reason I knew some of this stuff is because of a little inquisitiveness on the internet, and blogging friends who spur me on to keep trying.

I never liked the idea of using carrier pigeons, Imac... mainly because I have a talking dog. Unfortunately though, he has a nasty habit of stretching the truth.

George, one thing she does differently is that she always shoots raw. I will experiment with it, but she has a super-powerful editing program, and I don't. Also, she has a niche--nature photography. I, on the other hand, am a novice who needs to take lots and lots of pics, but I don't have lots and lots of time. So, I'll probably shoot mostly JPEGs.

That's what I hope, Fishing Guy.

Carletta, do you mean Saint Ansel? That's how the speaker referred to him.

mrs. craver said...

Awwww . . . I love pigeons!

SAPhotographs (Joan) said...

One can pick up great tips at these places. Many years ago when I started doing photography, I heard so many people say "you must have this, you must have that" and I went out and got it all. All of it is still laying in boxes after 20+ years and never used as I found that the needs of one person is not the same as another.

There is this big hype going on now about shooting in RAW and I have discovered that the format is so much larger than normal and takes up LOTS of gigs on the computer and in the end, I can do the same post processing in normal jpeg so why bother with RAW??

Over the years I have learnt to follow my own instincts and not listen to all these things which comes along and you should do the same. :)

lime said...

glad you had a chance to participate even if it didn't quite meet expectation and glad you got some useful information for the stage you're at now. i look forward to seeing future photography :)

Chris said...

Cool I hope that this is gonna help. At one point we all need this kind of info and I'm reading regularly books about photography to remind myself some tips ;-)

EG CameraGirl said...

I was at a short photography seminar on Friday (photography in the garden) and was a bit frustrated that the speaker kept crashing his computer. His PowerPoint was was doing something weird! I couldn't help but think that sometimes less is more.

Better luck to both of us on the next seminars we attend. :)

Harold Stiver said...

I'll bet the history portion was fascinating.

You can get a lot of excellent processing done with Photoshop Elements which is more reasoable in price than the full package.

Craver Vii said...

And I love YOU, Mrs. Craver!!

RAW data sure is a hog for space, Joan. I'm going to give it an honest effort, but it seems to me that it is immensely more practical to go JPEG when I'm in a photojournalist mindset as opposed to trying to capture one spectacular scene.

Lime, that's the key, I think... "the stage I'm at now." Since I'm relatively new at this, I want to try to soak it all in, before sorting it all out. Perhaps one day I will have Image Stabilization and high-end photo editing software, but but I hope to do my best without them for now.

That gives me an idea, Chris. There is one photography book on my shelves that I like more than the others. I wonder what other people find to be most useful.

That's too bad about the crashing computer, EG. I am glad that we did not have any major technical difficulties here. The speaker wore a wireless lapel mic, and it had to be placed funny, because of what she wore. I have run sound for 20 years, and I wanted so badly to go up there, reposition the mic, and adjust the EQ... but I didn't. I was a good boy and pretended it did not bother me.

You know what Harold? That was a great way to begin the seminar. I think I appreciated that part more than any other segment of the day's programs. The piece that almost knocked me out of my chair was to see how useful and powerful the Daguerreotype was, that it came on the scene in such an overwhelming fashion, and then how quickly (instantly, really) it became obsolete. Honestly, I found that to be more than a little unsettling. I wonder how things will be different in five or ten years from now.