GETTING THE IMAGE

It seems to me that there are two types of stock photographers. There are those who shoot prepared themes under controlled lighting conditions using models. Others get outdoors and photograph whatever they feel like shooting.

I guess I’m one of the latter. The problem with this modus operandi is that I’m either in a perfect situation with perfect lighting but forgot to bring my camera (or with no time to stop), or I scout a place and return to it again and again, never to see that perfect light again.

Like most outdoor stock shooters, I’m constantly seeing potential pictures while driving. The trouble is, these scenes are often from a freeway where only emergency stopping is allowed, or they’re far from home with little chance that you’ll return.

That’s why vacations are often the best time for me to plan some consolidated shooting time. While we can’t control the weather, we can at least take the time to explore, see something new, and return to locations again and again until the light’s right.

Every now and then, a little serendipity happens. Not to say that this is the best photo I’ve ever taken, but the photo of the cottage on the lake under a full moon is one of those. (This and other Ontario images can be viewed at my Ontario Travel Gallery). It was sheer luck that I happened to look out of the window after dinner and see the moon rising. I grabbed my tripod, camera and cable release and sprinted down to the beach.

After firing off a few frames, it was apparent that the difficulty in shooting under these conditions was that the camera’s metering system always tries to average the scene to an 18% grey. On the one hand, the majority of the scene is dark, so the camera attempts to make it unrealistically light. Opposing that is the moon, which reflects enough light from the sun to be as bright as daylight (albeit, in a relatively small part of the scene). My solution was to apply negative exposure compensation so that the foreground appeared realistically dark. Since the LCD screen on an SLR is not to be trusted, the histogram was referenced to ensure that this was happening without losing shadow detail.

Of course, with such wide latitude in the scene, something had to suffer. Since the moon was so bright, its surface detail was clipped. Luckily, I had previously shot a slide of the full moon at dawn, in which the brightness of the moon more closely matched the brightness of the sky and surroundings. This provided perfect surface detail. By setting the resolution and size to match the cottage shot, I was able to clip the detailed moon out of its background and drop it in as another layer in Photoshop. Adjusting the transparency gave it a very subtle, realistic look (although hard to see in the small image here).

Photo ops are everywhere, but fleeting. As outdoor stock photographers, we have to be patient and make the best of our environment. Over time, we will be rewarded with a diverse collection that eventually will attract the attention of photo buyers who like what we’re into.

IS FILM DEAD?

I’ve been called a dinosaur. It happened in a photography seminar a couple of years ago when the instructor asked for a show of hands from those still using film. Actually, I was one of two dinosaurs that he labelled. Not an encouraging ratio for a class of about 20 people.

It’s no surprise that professionals (like our seminar leader) have largely abandoned film, given the breakneck speed at which improvements in digital camera resolution and colour accuracy are taking place. Gone are the days of carrying packs of Polaroid film and camera backs for verification of exposure and lighting. Now, we simply check the digital camera’s LCD screen and its histogram, and make instant adjustments.

One harbinger that struck home recently was when I took my 120 format film to my favourite camera store, a.k.a. my reliable old local film processing facility. They informed me that their machine was acting up and that they likely would not be replacing it if it failed. If I was to continue to make my big, beautiful transparencies, I was likely going to have to mail my film to another city for processing. Until, that is, their machines also croak.

You can’t blame them. They make their money selling digital cameras to a new throng of consumers who previously couldn’t have been bothered with getting films developed.

My disappointment doesn’t stem from the fact that I dislike digital. In fact, I shoot largely with a digital SLR now, and started scanning my 35mm films long before digital cameras achieved their current popularity. I also license my images online. In other words, I’m firmly entrenched in the digital photography realm.

I think it’s more a case of nostalgia. Only in recent years have I been able to afford quality medium format film gear, albeit used and decades old. They’re built like tanks and have lenses made from high quality glass. Yes – they’re heavy and awkward, but the image quality is phenomenal. After shooting grainy 35mm slides for decades, I was now ready to emulate work done by real magazine photographers. I even purchased a scanner that allows me to scan the larger format films.

So, do I now sell off my antiques and scanners, only to replace them with the best and newest digital SLR? Well, judging by the amount of used film gear being bought and sold online, I would say - not so fast! Yes, some companies have dropped out of the business of supplying films and processing chemicals (AGFA), but others like the UK’s venerable ILFORD (black and white only) and film giants FUJI and KODAK are picking up the slack. New film products are even hitting the market! And others, like Freestyle Photographic Supplies, are doing what they can to keep the art alive by supplying film, darkroom supplies and film cameras.

Where this is leading me is that I can continue to use my film gear for as long as I’m willing to develop my own film, if necessary. The simplest by far to process is black and white, so when push comes to shove, that’s what I’ll be shooting. With my scanners, I’ll be able to convert the films directly to digital without worrying about printing with an enlarger.

Is film dead or dying? There is no doubt that the professional’s workflow today is predominantly digital. But, there is enough film equipment still working and in the hands of both professionals and enthusiastic amateurs that I can confidently predict that film will be around for a long time. In the meantime, I'm continuing to shoot film as part of my collection, which can be reviewed at www.realworldphoto.com