Today Gavin leads us through a brief look at photographic history. He talks a bit about how classical art can help us as photographers and finishes with a look at essential concepts that will make us better at our work.
On this shorter episode Gavin takes a look at what he learned with another month on the road. A discussion of 4×5 film, a look at learning and working conceptually, and a little practice session on evil laughs.
by Gavin Seim (updated 07/11): HDR simply means High Dynamic Range. But lets face it. A lot of this HDR looks a lot like clippings from a spoof horror movie. It’s the Flickr HDR. I think this happens because many don’t really grasp what HDR is all about and how to use it well. This includes many HDR software developers. They fall for the fad instead of thinking of it as a serious photographic tool. It’s can be so powerful if used with balance.
Back in the day there was film. Then came digital. Then came HDR. First we merged light and dark images in special ways to get a wider range of light. HDR merging was not perfect and was often overdone, but it could produce beautiful results. Often results that looked edgy and bold. Young guys like me thought we were so cool. Capturing detail that was never seen before.
Then I started looking closer. Studying what the film forefathers had been making for years. Looking at the dynamic range and detail. I realized that HDR was really not so new. Film photography had high dynamic range also and I saw images that astounded me. Images, that had I not been told they were on traditional film, I would have assumed were digital HDR. It helped me realize something.
HDR is not a trend of over-processed, super amped, ultra edgy photos. I think many architectural photographers got this memo, but most others didn’t. I’ve talked about balance in HDR processing for some time, but what I’ve come to further realize and started teaching in Lights & Shadows Workshop is that HDR is about controlling tone. It’s about understand and managing light. Digital in itself does not yet have the dynamic range that film did, so we compensate. Just as a film photographer might have used filters, various film types and chemical process to get dynamic range in their images, we use digital manipulation. HDR photography is little more than the new film.
by Barry Howell: I have been a professional photographer since the early 80’s and am in the throws of embracing change like I never could have imagined. I have photographed hundreds of weddings and thousands of high school seniors. I was honored with the first ever Haga Wedding Album award for the best wedding album in Minnesota, and have entered many competition prints over the years. I began shooting weddings for a couple of studios, worked part time on my own for several years, and bought a very large studio operation in 1995. My first digital camera was a Fuji S2 and that is where my journey into the digital world really began. A good friend (and former employee) encouraged me to take a look at Lightroom and then Gavin Seim’s presets from Seim Effects.
My years of experience (and significant volume) causes me to very careful how much “post production” we commit to. Having studied with the likes of Monte Zucker, Frank Cricchio Don Blair, David Ziser and others, I learned to produce near perfect images in the camera. There just wasn’t much editing we could do with our C-41 in-house lab printing from medium format Hasselblad negatives. I am the “techie” guy that loves everything shiny, new and cool, but I didn’t jump into digital until I felt the cameras and output options rivaled film quality. My journey from film to digital has been a long and at times very frustrating path. If you are just starting out (i.e. have never shot a roll of film-I know you’re out there), appreciate my story and be glad you can develop a workflow without transitioning from anything else. Take the time to think about ways you can do it right from image capture to customer delivery.
by Gavin Seim: I find myself fascinated with film of late. I don’t use it anymore, but I realize that some are pretty passionate about it. I posted on Pro Photo Show recently with a few thoughts and a poll on the topic. Quite a few still use film it seems. Why? Is it the texture, grain, color, or is it just the reminiscence of really old photographers? Kidding, not that old. I used film when I started out. By the time I started getting good however I had moved to digital, so those romantic feelings some have towards film are not strong in me.
I’ve been taking notice though. Thinking about how film looks and how we edit these days. Don’t get me wrong I love a well processed photo, but I’ve started experimenting a little. Making effects that use classic tones and film inspiration. Here’s an article I found where Travis Easton compared a MK2 digital file to a Velvia image. What’s remarkable to me, is how even without editing it the film image looks great. Here’s another look at film vs digital over on Luminous landscape.
Now I don’t intend to start shooting film, I just don’t think it makes sense. But understanding what makes a great image is my livelihood. I want to know what it is about film and use that knowledge to make my photography and my effects better. We should always learn from the past, even if it’s grainy.
As a test I decided to try for the Velvia look, so I spent awhile very subtly tweaking a LR preset. If you mouse over you’ll see the before/after of what I’ve come up with so far. You’re also likely to see more in future updates of my effects. Bottom line though. I think what we’ll see over time are the good things from both mediums converging and becoming a better digital than ever. Neither film or digital will be the same as the other, but I think the future of digital will look and feel great. What say you?