Part 4 people of the series "Controlling ur point and shoot cam " , where u learn to understand how ur cam "thinks" .
Video from www.youtube.com/user/DigitalPhotoGuy
A place to share the knowledge and experience, others and I gain on our photographic journey .
Part 4 people of the series "Controlling ur point and shoot cam " , where u learn to understand how ur cam "thinks" .
Video from www.youtube.com/user/DigitalPhotoGuy
Posted by Semary at 1:48 AM 9 comments
Posted by Semary at 1:36 AM 0 comments
Posted by Semary at 1:02 AM 0 comments
Posted by Semary at 1:00 AM 0 comments
Long ago in post 4 of underwater photography , i was planning on posting this article , yet i decided it was wiser if i explained the underwater cam system first , and we did that in parts 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , and now were here . Just to remind u guys of what we discussed under the topic of underwater shots :
1) Basic problems & solutions
2) A vid demonstrating the use of a wide angle lens and a red filter underwater
3) Hints for the innocent
4) Underwater housing systems
5) Housings in more detail
6) Ports
7) A video of the whole system put together
Posted by Semary at 12:53 AM 0 comments
Posted by Semary at 11:39 AM 0 comments
Posted by Semary at 7:04 PM 0 comments
Guys this technique is extremely easy but will give u some amazing results with good impact , i personally LOVE IT . Its called cross lighting , and its basically just using flash to light ur frame in a direction opposite the sun . Or u can say balancing sun and flash . Strobist explained this in 3 full posts , technical details on how to balance included MUST READ.. Remember our reverse engineering post , if u reverse engineer these shots u'll find there are only 2 light sources , daylight , and a single flash .
Posted by Semary at 11:02 PM 1 comments
For those of u who are following along , ud know we have an ongoing series called THINGS U SHOULD KNOW discussing topics like copyright and licensing ... Those of u who just joined , or who werent paying attention we discussed :
1) Copyright
2) Licensing
3) Royalty free
4) Third party distribution rights
Today we discuss : Shooting on spec ...
What's wrong with shooting on spec?
Shooting on "spec" (or speculative) means to shoot to a client's specifications without the guaranteed payment of an assignment. It can be a tempting opportunity, especially when first starting out, that comes from speaking with an Art Director who mentions, for instance, that they have a story coming up in your area. While they don't have money for an assignment, continues the AD, they'll be looking for photos of X, Y, and Z and they'd like to see your stuff. Often, the AD will mention that these shots will probably be great stock shots for you to have anyway in an attempt to convince you to go shoot them. If this is true, and the images really are good, generic, saleable stock images, then by all means, go build your stock library and submit some images. But be careful. Do not let the client dictate what it is they are looking for to the extent that the images become too specific to be of any future value. For instance, a recent "stock" request mentioned, "There's a great overlook of the James River about 3-4 miles from the Balcony Falls Trailhead. A road does follow the River in some spots, but there's one bend that the road veers more north, making it possible to have a nice wilderness-like photo. " This sounds pretty specific and more like directions that should be given in an assignment. After all, when else will you ever have the chance to license an image from 3-4 miles down the Balcony Falls Trail, overlooking the James River, showing only a wilderness view, not the road that also follows the river?
The problems with shooting on spec are many. First, you're the only one guaranteed to be laying out money for expenses like film and processing, travel, road meals, packaging, and FedEx, not to mention the time involved to travel, hike, shoot, return, visit the lab, sort, label, package, and re-file the returned images. You're by no means guaranteed to make the sale and if you think that they're going to just sit around and wait on you to submit stuff, you're wrong. If they wanted that, they'd give out an assignment. They'll also be calling other eager shooters and probably combing stock libraries as well, so the chances of yours being the only images they'll see are slim at best.
Second, even if you do make the sale, you must first cover all of your own expenses, leaving little money left to pay for your time. In contrast, if hired for an assignment, your client should pick up the expenses of the trip, the film and processing costs, and then pay you a fee on top of that. Many a spec shooter has made a sale, only to discover that it ended up costing them money, just for the privilege of being published. Flattering, but not a very smart way to try to stay in business. Remember, we should never be so desperate or so vain to simply get published that we forget that the goal of getting published is to make a living.
Finally, shooting on spec erodes the number of assignments available by once again proving to an AD that there will always be a photographer more desperate to get published than to make a living.
As tempting as spec shooting may sound, no opportunity is free. As businesspeople, we must always weigh the benefit of an opportunity compared to all of its costs, tangible and intangible, current and future, and only then can we decide if this is a good deal for us at this time. For instance, the potential benefits of shooting on spec are: POSSIBLE publication; POSSIBLE income of a few hundred dollars; POSSIBLY beginning a relationship with a new client; and finally building stock that has only POSSIBLE future value. The costs are: DEFINITE commitment of time for travel, shooting, sorting, packaging, and filing; DEFINITE costs for film and processing; DEFINITE costs for gas and a day's travel; DEFINITE costs for packaging and shipping; and DEFINITE erosion of available future assignments. It seems that if you were to take this on, you would be the only one with DEFINITE commitments, while your potential client remains just that -- a POTENTIAL client -- and assumes none of the risk. This doesn't seem like a win-win situation or a smart business decision.
Article from http://www.editorialphoto.com/resources/faq.asp#anchor14
Posted by Semary at 10:19 AM 10 comments
YAS YAS YAS..!! Its here ..... THE TALENT SPOT ......
Posted by Semary at 7:47 PM 49 comments
Ok today were wrapping up the underwater cam system , after talking about housings , and ports , today were discussing strobes , mechanical arms , and a small video so u can see what the system looks like when its put together . :) Lets g0 ------->
Posted by Semary at 6:19 PM 0 comments
Posted by Semary at 6:18 PM 0 comments
As promised in part 4 of underwater photography, we said we'll discuss how the underwater cam system works in more detail . So today were gonna talk about housings .
Posted by Semary at 4:05 PM 0 comments
Posted by Semary at 8:36 PM 0 comments
Still on the underwater topic ! I was planning to make part 4 about cam maintenance ( quick reminder we discussed "probs and solutions" in part (1) , posted a vid about using a wide angle lens and a red filter in part (2) , and talked about the "reality check" in part (3) ), then i thought to my self , lets explain how the underwater cam system works , just so that u guys know what ure maintaining . So lets get to it ! .. Oh and one more thing , the part about explaining how the system works is probably gonna be explained over a bunch of more posts .
Posted by Semary at 10:21 PM 0 comments
Posted by Semary at 12:28 AM 67 comments
Continuing parts (1) , (2) , (3) , where we discussed copyrights , licensing , and royalty free , today we discuss third party distribution rights .
What are "third party" distribution rights and why should I care?
By law, the right to control and profit from the distribution of images lies with the copyright holder. Many clients' contracts will attempt to claim that right for the client, as in, " the right to reproduce, distribute, adapt or display [the image]", or the right to, " transferorsublicense [the image]". By allowing this language to stay in a contract, you are effectively agreeing to allow the client to re-sell your images, perhaps even in direct competition with you, and keep the fee!These contracts ridiculously attempt to claim that because the client has licensed the use of the image once, or even paid for its original creation, that the client then has the right to continue to profit from the image in the future. This is in direct conflict with both the intent and the letter of US Copyright Law and should be stricken from every contract.
The only time a clause like this should be allowed to stand is when you are intentionally allowing a third party to act as your agent, on your behalf, and when there is a specific agreement spelled out for the sharing of both responsibilities and revenues. A typical assignment, and especially stock sale, has no business including a rights-grabbing clause demanding third party rights. To protect help yourself, be sure that you include language to the effect, "No third party rights are granted and this agreement may not be assigned, transferred, or sold, in whole or in part. By granting this license, photographer in no way relinquishes, assigns, transfers, or sells his/her copyright," on everyestimate, contract, usage license, and/or invoice as appropriate.
Article fom : Editorial Photo
Posted by Semary at 5:39 PM 0 comments
Posted by Semary at 12:05 PM 0 comments
Posted by Semary at 8:28 PM 0 comments