How To Get the BEST Photos - What's Right and What's Wrong

Is natural light or strobe/flash the best way to go?  What camera, lens setting should you use?  For that matter, what camera and lens?  In a studio or on location?  The simple answer is whatever gives you the results you want.  And that will be different for each person.  For me, I prefer natural light, if possible.  I was just watching Photo Week on CreativeLive, and on one program the photographer strongly preferred artificial light (strobe/flash) and said everyone should learn this.  On the next program the photographer said she had only used natural light (she has been listed as Australia's best portrait photographer).

Whichever you use, you have to know how to use the light.  With both, you will be using light modifiers (reflectors, translucent panels aka scrims, etc.).  A reflector can be hand held, or you can use a building, reflections of light from sidewalks, sand, etc.  You can also block light (shade from trees, umbrellas, buildings, etc.).  The smaller and farther away the light source, the harder the light.  How do you decide which ones will work best to get the results you want?  Experiment and practice.  And take classes (free from CreativeLive).

All the photos below were taken at the beach (Dockweiler Beach in Playa Del Rey, CA) on September 19, 2015.  They were shot with a Canon EOS 40D and a 24-105mm lens.  The first few images were shot in the wrong mode, causing the exposures to be off by about two stops (was supposed to be Aperture prioity, which means I set the aperture and camera determines the speed), but the dial was set to Manual exposure.  The dial may have accidentally rubbed against something and moved from Av to M.  I had shot maybe around 30 images before I found the mistake.  Luckily, I shoot in RAW mode (gives more leeway as all the information from the image is there, unlike shooting jpg, which does in camera processing and throws away of lot of image information), and combined with post processing in Lightroom, was able to get the following images.  Because the exposure was off by at least two stops, the resulting images, after adjusting the exposure, were grainy/noisy.  To minimize that, the images were smoothed out, which is why they are not needle sharp.

All the same applies to the next two photos, but one was taken in direct sunlight around high noon, and the other in shade.  In all these photos, the sand acted as my reflector.

 Direct Sun

Umbrella Shade

Umbrella Shade - Adjusted White Balance for more accurate color

Should you shoot in Manual, Aperture Priority, or some other setting?  There are those who will say to always shoot in Manual, and you should know how to do that.  Depending on what I'm shooting, I will either use Av or M.  If the light is not going to change, or if there is a lot of white or black that might trick the meter, then use M.  For most of the photos on this day, except where I had made a mistake, I used Av and it worked fine.  Especially around sunset, when the light changed fairly quickly, as in the shots below.

After dark, with flash, Manual works best for me.  If you set it to Av in low light, the shutter will remain open far too long to hand hold the camera, and if anyone moves, you'll get some weird results!  Here's a couple of flash shots at night in Manual mode.

So, a summary of what you should do to get the photos you want:
1.  Read and study the camera manual.  Perhaps there is a book about it, too, you can read.
2.  Learn about composition, lighting, lenses, etc. through online courses, books, etc.
3.  Practice, practice, practice - using different settings, f-stops, times, ISO's, lighting, composition, etc.
4.  Keep repeating the above.
5.  Oh - don't be afraid to ask someone like me any questions.

Hope you've enjoyed these photos, and have a wonderful weekend.

It's Out There (and You Should Use It)

No, I'm not talking about aliens, although who knows if they are out there.  I am talking about information on the internet.  More than you can ever use, but you have search engines such as Google, to filter it and to find what you are looking for.  Have a question about love?  There are over 5 Billion results for the word "Love" on Google.  And over 3 Billion for the word "Health."  I mention these two because on most peoples lists of the most important things in life (btw - almost 6 Billion listings for "Life"), these two would be in the top five.

However, to use this information, you need to sort fact from fiction, truth from lies.  This means you need to verify the information you find.  You need to determine if there are conflicts of interest with what is said, if someone can profit from their point of view, etc.  For example, if I was selling vitamin C and said it was the best thing ever for preventing this or that, you should check other sources to see if they agree, figure out which ones are most reasonable and accurate, before you buy what I'm selling.

As many of you know, I talk about health and photography the most on this blog.  And recently, about vaccines and their effect on health.  Many articles contain references to further check your search for accurate information.  For vaccinations, many references go to the CDC and VAERS sites.  Or to the manufactures site to check vaccine package inserts which contain a list of the ingredients and possible side effects.  The more informed you are about these, the more informed decision you can make about whether to take a chance of getting vaccinated.

Here is a recent article by Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.:  Vaccines.  At the end of the article are comments also worth reading.  I have been talking about vaccines because of the law they just passed in California about mandatory vaccines, and also because a FB friend called those who don't vaccinate "callously stupid" (this was a stupid comment, in my opinion, as those who choose not to vaccinate are anything but stupid - they are usually smart and informed; or they may have been injured from vaccines).  The RFK Jr. article will tell you why you can't believe the media regarding vaccines and your health, and why you need to do your own fact checks.

This blog post only covers the most basic things to think about regarding what is out there.  Hope it helps a little in your search for the truth.

As I See It - Cost of Internet Courses & Products

Having received so many offers for internet courses and products, I always wonder how they come up with their regular price.  Perhaps a few CDs and a 50 page book will be $397.  That seems totally detached from reality, or completely ridiculous.  Of course, then they offer a one time discount if you act NOW.

For example, I got an offer for a photography related course.  The offer was listed as 67% off the original price of $297, for just $97.  I'm pretty sure no one would pay $297.  But where does that price come from?  I know they know what they really think it might be worth, which is the $97 offer, but that is even over valued.

For example, let's say there was a course in Photoshop reduced from $399 to $99.  Well, for $30 you can buy a book on Photoshop from Amazon (even less if it's a used book), which probably gives you a lot more information than the course.  Or you can Google "PhotoShop" for free and find the answers you need.  And the answer would usually be quicker and easier to find.

Another example:  A while back I found an offer for an organic super green and herbal mix powder, advertised by a Beverly Hills doctor (I wonder if he was really from BH).  The formula of ingredients looked excellent.  He claimed if you bought all the ingredients separately, you would pay four times his price.  Well, I did some searching for all of the organic ingredients and the price was about 1/4 his price.  Maybe if I had looked for the most expensive sites I could have ended up paying more, but that's the benefit of the internet - you can shop and compare.  I even added a few more super food powders to the mix and still paid a lot less.

The point is that I think most people pull prices out of the air, so to speak, then reduce them to get people to think they are getting the deal of their lives.  But in reality, I believe we are not even getting a deal.

Bottom line:  It pays to be a smart shopper, check around, and save.

Vaccination Posts on FB and Things to Think About

Every day there are several post on FB about vaccinations.  I read most of them.  I want to be informed, as should you.  Next, depending on what these posts link to and say, I check the facts.  For example, if a post claims vaccinations are very safe, why did the U.S. Supreme Court call them unavoidably unsafe?  Who's telling the truth?  Well, this is where logic comes in - who is the more logical one to believe, those making a profit from vaccinations (drug companies, doctors, CDC, FDA, media, etc.) or the Supreme Court?  I almost forgot - if vaccines are so safe, why are they the only things anywhere that carry absolutely no liability?  Why has the so called "vaccine court" awarded over $3 billion to families of injured and killed children (for each death a family receives $250,000, for injuries the amount varies depending on what may be needed, short term or life long care)?  Do you still believe they are telling the truth when they say vaccines are safe?

Next, in several posts I have read that by not vaccinating your kids, you are exposing others to danger.  Well, if vaccinations work, and the other kids are vaccinated, how are your kids exposing them to danger?  And if they don't work, why would you get vaccinated with vaccines that contain toxic ingredients?  But at least you should have that choice.  If you believe the media, go for it if you want.  Or not.

Then we have immune compromised children.  The media, etc., tell you that your unvaccinated kids are putting them in danger.  But the package inserts with the vaccinations say that recently vaccinated people also put them in danger.  And if they are in the general population, they may be exposed to lots of diseases for which there are no vaccines.  We know, too, that vaccines don't work for everyone, especially the flu vaccine, so they are still in danger.  What's the most logical thing to do?  Keep immune compromised children out of school and other places where they may be exposed to something, and away from recently vaccinated people.

One last thing on this subject for now - With the current vaccine schedule, you have to bring your kids to the doctors office a lot, and what else is at the doctors office?  Sick people, increasing you and your children's exposure to disease.  Wouldn't it be nice if they had a separate room for healthy check-ups and another for sick people?  Wouldn't it be nice if emergency rooms (where many recently vaccinated children end up visiting) also had separate rooms for trauma and disease?

You will probably keep seeing the same arguments above from the media - vaccinations are safe, you're putting your children and others in dire danger if you don't get them vaccinated, etc.  The truth is a whole lot different.  All you have to do is look at the statistics relating to the increase in health problems since the advent of all these new vaccines.  Which way you and your children will be in more danger is up for debate, which is why you must have the freedom to choose, or soon you may have no freedom.

As Time Goes By....and Vaccinations

A chart that shows the increase in vaccinations and the corresponding increase in autism.  Plus other related disease increases in the article Here.

Here's the chart from the article:

A Historical Look at the Vaccine Schedule

1983 Schedule

• DTP (2 mo)
• OPV (2 mo)
• DTP (4 mo)
• OPV (4 mo)
• DTP (6 mo)
• MMR (15 mo)
• DTP (18 mo)
• OPV (18 mo)
• DTP (4 yr)
• OPV (4 yr)
• Td (14 yr)

Autism Rates in America

• 1975: 1 in 5,000
• 1985: 1 in 2,500
• 1995: 1 in 500
• 2000: 1 in 150
• 2004: 1 in 125
• 2006: 1 in 110
• 2008: 1 in 88
• 2010-2014: 1 in 68

Sources: cdc.gov, autismspeaks.org

1994 Schedule

• HepB (birth)
• HepB (2 mo)
• DTP (2 mo)
• OPV (2 mo)
• Hib (2 mo)
• DTP (4 mo)
• OPV (4 mo)
• Hib (4 mo)
• DTP(6 mo)
• OPV (6 mo)
• Hib (6 mo)
• HepB (6 mo)
• MMR (12 mo)
• Hib (12 mo)
• DTaP/DTP (15 mo)
• DTaP/DTP (4 yr)
• OPV (4 yr)
• MMR (4 yr)

2015 Schedule

• Influenza (pregnancy)
• DTaP (pregnancy)
• HepB (birth)
• HepB (2 mo)
• Rotavirus (2 mo)
• DTaP (2 mo)
• Hib (2 mo)
• PCV (2 mo)
• IPV (2 mo)
• Rotavirus (4 mo)
• DTaP (4 mo)
• Hib (4 mo)
• PCV (4 mo)
• IPV (4 mo)
• HepB (6 mo)
• Rotavirus (6 mo)
• DTaP (6 mo)
• Hib (6 mo)
• PCV (6 mo)
• IPV (6 mo)
• Influenza (6 mo)
• Hib (12 mo)
• PCV (12 mo)
• MMR (12 mo)
• Varicella (12 mo)
• Hep A (12 mo)
• DTaP (18 mo)
• Influenza (18 mo)
• Hep A (18 mo)
• Influenza (2 yr)
• Influenza (3 yr)
• DTaP (4 yr)
• IPV (4 yr)
• MMR (4 yr)
• Varicella (4 yr)
• Influenza (5 yr)
• Influenza (6 yr)
• Influenza (7 yr)
• Influenza (8 yr)
• Influenza (9 yr)
• Influenza (10 yr)
• HPV (10 yr)
• Influenza (11 yr)
• HPV (11 yr)
• Tdap (12 yr)
• Influenza (12 yr)
• Meningococcal (12 yr)
• Influenza (13 yr)
• Influenza (14 yr)
• Influenza (15 yr)
• Influenza (16 yr)
• Meningococcal (16 yr)
• Influenza (17 yr)
• Influenza(18 yr)