FILTERED BLACK AND WHITE

After the last article on the impact of light temperature in converting a color image to black and white, a different color-related concept was relayed to me and, of course, I just had to play with it.

Artist and friend Travis Little suggested adding a fill layer with a very light red, and then reducing the opacity of that layer to a level appropriate to the image and/or effect desired. Travis had used the effect himself on at least one of his digital paint images with impressive results. The concept was well worth trying.

Running through my mind, of course, was exactly what color would work best. While the red layer worked well for Travis' image, would it necessary be the same for a photograph, and what other options might be worth exploring?

To answer that question, we took detailed crops from images of Amber Lyn shot outdoors this past summer. The natural late afternoon light provides a much softer gradient than does studio lighting, making the conversion to black and white often challenging. Regular photo filters, such as those provided in Photoshop, fail to merge with the image in a good way; just lying there like a piece of acetate over the negative.

So, working with seven different images, we applied to each a fill layer of a different shade. Since the images were different, care was taken to keep the black and white conversion method and other factors exactly the same from one image to the next, creating as much comparative consistency between the images as possible. The opacity of the fill layer is set at 10%, which seemed more appropriate for red and blue fills than it was for others.

Keep in mind that the quality of actual image output is going to vary based on the calibration of one's monitor to the printing device being used. Not everyone may see significant difference from one image to another if the viewing monitor is not properly calibrated, especially with the low resolution samples below.

Which color is best? As with any conversion, the answer lies wholly within the judgment of one's taste. The softer the lines, the more likely a red, violet or orange fill will give that subtle nuance one wishes to achieve. With harder lines, a blue or green fill may take the image closer to the feel of a silver gelatin print.

Results may vary greatly depending on the textures and complexity of colors involved in the original photo as well. Blue, green and violet fills are likely to perform better with images that have rougher textures and deeper lines.

Below are the samples we processed. The color of the fill layer is listed below each. Consider the effect carefully. There are certainly some circumstances where utilizing the fill layer definitely improves the quality of the black and white image.



Light red fill


Light blue fill


Violet fill


Orange fill


Green fill


Dark red fill


Dark blue fill

COOL BLACK AND WHITE

Since first making the move from film to digital photography, achieving satisfactory black and white has been an obsession that never ceases to call for scrutiny, revision and experimentation. In short, I'm never satisfied. It is rare that a digital black and white photograph, which must be converted from color at some point, achieves the same results one might have expected from quality black and white film, especially when printed.

In recent conversation, a colleague mentioned that he was going to "cool" a picture some before converting it to black and white. Having long advocated that a good color photograph is necessary to produce a good black and white photograph, the thought that one might achieve better results with a cooler image was intriguing. So, when shooting a familiar subject recently, I decided to experiment and see just how much difference cooling an image might make to the final outcome.

From the outset, a couple of caveats and explanations are necessary.

First, one must appreciate that, as with many aspects of photography, exactly what makes a black and white image "good" is a totally subjective matter. I look at the quality and smoothness of the gradient, the depth and density of the most black and most white portions of the image, and the translation of similarly colored detail. Opinions inevitably vary.

Second, the true test of a black and white image is in the printing. Calibration of individual monitors inherently alter what one sees in an online image, making any low resolution examination somewhat unreliable. If, in looking at the images below, one does not see black and white, one may need to examine the monitor settings.

Then, by way of definition, one should know that when speaking of "cool" and "warm" we are referring to the relative light temperature on which the camera's white balance is set. Most commonly running in a range from 2500 (cold) to 5500 (hot) degrees, the measurement refers to the temperature of the light in which the image was taken. As a reference, standard household bulbs have an average temperature range of 3300 to 3500 degrees, which gives an image a warm amber tint. By contrast, the temperature of sunlight at noon in the northern hemisphere generally exceeds 12,000 degrees, even in winter, delivering a very bright, white tone to an image. Most higher end digital cameras allow photographers to adjust the white balance before taking the photograph, and then processing software such as Adobe Photoshop provides for further adjustment if necessary when importing an image.

Now, onto the image of discussion. Knowing that the images needed to be converted to black and white, the camera's white balance was set to a cool 2800 degrees. Importing the RAW image with only mild contrast adjustment yielded the following base image:



Note the blue hues inherent in a "cool" image. Under more normal circumstances, one would make severe adjustment to bring the color to a more natural and accurate state. However, since we are converting the image to black and white for this experiment, we left the image as is.

Making the conversion using Adobe Photoshop CS4, we applied a black and white adjustment layer to the image using the following settings:

Red: 70
Yellow: 120
Green: 30
Cyan: 50
Blue: 2
Magenta: 46

Additionally, adjustment layers were made for minor level and contrast adjustment, but none that dramatically effected the final histogram. The results provided the following image:




The image is largely acceptable. The whites are not too intense, though somewhat higher along the cheek area than is my personal preference. The blacks are bunched together a bit, which makes discerning detail a little more difficult for this image, but still within the realm of one's personal taste.

Now, for the comparison. Going back to the original RAW image, we adjusted the overall temperature of the image to a nice 3400 degrees, resulting in color more true to the original setting. If we were processing this as a color image, we would have made additional enhancements for the sake of balance, vibrancy and saturation. However, doing so would tremendously alter the conversion. So, to keep the comparison as pure as possible, we left all the settings the same as were used for the cooler image.



Notice the absence of blue and a more more comfortable, eye-pleasing amber in its place. Leaving all the settings for the black and white layer, as well as contrast and level adjustment exactly the same as with the cooler image, the resulting conversion looked like this:




Should one have difficulty seeing much difference in the two images as presented here, the histogram comparisons tell the bulk of the story. In the warmer image, the blacks are not as intense and are spread across a wider range than with the cool image. However, the whites are considerably more intense and come very close, though not quite, to over exposure.

At a personal level, we found the severity of the white levels unacceptable in the second image. There is simply too much definition lost and the risk of blowout on printing, depending on the printer's own calibration, is too high. However, one must ask the question whether, if importing the warmer image first, the black and white conversion settings would have been the same. Almost certainly, we would have chosen different settings had we converted the warmer image first. So, going back to the same warmer RAW image, we re-converted the picture using the following settings on the black and white adjustment layer:

Red: 30
Yellow: 85
Green: 120
Cyan: 50
Blue: 0
Magenta: -61

This required making less severe adjustments to the levels and contrast, resulting in the following image:




Right away, one notices that the new image brings back some of the darker intensity to the blacks, but without losing all the breadth of the previous image. At the same time, this conversion pulls the whites well away from the danger zone, facilitating a much better print than would the previous image.

Of the three images, my personal preference would be for the last, revised warmer image. For my tastes, the cooler image failed to provide a broad enough gradient, causing too much detail to be lost in the darker regions. While different conversion settings would spread the gradient out to some degree, doing so would also introduce an unacceptable grade of noise to the image.

That's not to say I'm totally pleased with the third conversion, either. In finality, I will probably merge the second and third images using layer masks to bring out detail in the mid-range of the gradient while maintaining appropriate white levels at the high end. But then, that's a totally different subject all together.

And, as always, your results may vary.

BENEFITTING FROM TEAM WORK

One of the most common challenges experienced by amateur and free-lance photographers desiring to work with models is the presumption that they can, should, or must do everything themselves. Whether born from sheer lack of experience, absence of known resources, or misguided attempts to maintain complete control, too many projects suffer needlessly under the weight of insufficient staffing.

Objections to multi-staffed projects range from costs to disparate creative visions, but in reasonably populous areas such objections are sufficiently addressed through creativity, a bit of planning, and proper communication. While certain situations leave photographers with no choice but attempt the project alone, almost every photographic situation is best completed utilizing a team of professionals.

Ideally, a full project team includes at least a make-up artist, hair stylist, wardrobe stylist, art director, and technical assistants. Depending on the number of models and general complexities involved in the project, additional assistants, carpenters, and technicians may also be necessary. Traditionally, such full sets have been primarily limited to well-funded commercial projects where attention to detail and skill is requisite. However, rare is the situation where a photographer must go it alone. Make-up artists, hair stylists, designers and other creatives all need images for their own portfolios, just as does a photographer. While some minimal costs might be involved to cover consumables, working with even a modest team significantly raises the quality of the images and reduces the stress from working alone.

Photographers working with a team for the first time find that doing so requires some significant changes in how they plan and approach a photo shoot. The ultra-spontaneous concept of just showing up and hoping inspiration falls from the sky doesn't play well when multiple people are giving of their time. So, here are a few considerations toward finding success when using a creative team.

• Choose a team with a common artistic vision. This does not mean that everyone agrees on the exact method, but that there is cohesion of style, concept and artistry among the team. For example, period pieces duplicating styles from the early 1900s require specific knowledge of hair and make-up practices of the time. Choosing team members with no interest or experience in that style face greater difficulty and may not be able to produce the quality level desired.
• Work concepts that are creative and original. No one needs photos that are plain, boring, and over-done. Explore concepts that present unique but obtainable challenges for everyone on the team.
• Communicate effectively with all team members. As simple and obvious as those instructions sound, communication deficiency is probably the primary reason creative teams fail to meet the desired vision. The matter can be especially challenging for photographers who have been working alone for some time and simply don't think to tell team members of changes in a timely manner. Mind readers are rare. Talk about what you're thinking.
• Leading is good, dictating is bad. Every team needs a leader and most often that role falls to the photographer. However, good leadership gives everyone room to express their creativity and develop their ideas. Give everyone on the team plenty of room to utilize the talent they bring without unnecessary interference.
• Never assume one person on the team does things the same way as anyone else. Make-up artists use various methods and products to generate a common look. Individual hair stylists take an entirely different approach to achieving the same style. Any artistic work is best judged by the quality of the results, not the steps taken in getting there. Allow for individual styles and adjust as necessary.
• Budget sufficient time to allow everyone to complete their work without being unduly rushed. An inexperienced photographer once mentioned that, "no make-up should ever take more than fifteen minutes," thus demonstrating a tremendous ignorance in the artistry of applying make-up. A good make-up application requires anywhere from 45 to 75 minutes, depending on complexity. Complicated period hair styling can easily take an hour or more. Build that time into the schedule and set expectations accordingly.
• Avoid the temptation to nit-pick over each other's work. No one works well with someone else standing over their shoulder, picking at their work. Even more important, no one appreciates having their work criticized by someone outside the field. Photographers using a professional make-up artist for the first time should be prepared for a heavier application than is necessary for every-day wear. Experienced hair stylists may use more severe methods for the camera than they ever would on a normal client. Nit-picking is unprofessional and undermines the success of the entire team.
• Choose team members whose styles and personalities match the project. If one is working on a project whose subjects are highly religious, utilizing team members whose language and mannerisms are ribald might not be the most appropriate path to success. By contrast, if planning a project that might be potentially (or even intentionally) offensive to a given population, one does best to select team members who, ideally, hold an agreeable opinion on the topic, or at least are unaffected by the offense.
• Be respectful of everyone on the team, even when disagreeing. Differences of opinion are inevitable among creatives as it is part of one's artistic nature to be highly subjective. However, at no point is there ever any excuse for disrespect toward a team member. Diplomacy, encouragement, and quite often, compromise are required for a team to work well together. Arguments on set are always inappropriate and should be avoided at all cost. In the event of a severe disagreement, any discussion should be conducted privately, away from other team members, and in a manner that preserves the dignity and professionalism of everyone involved.
• Give credit where credit is due. Team work produces fantastic images and everyone involved deserves appropriate accolades for their involvement, no matter what their role. The person who unlocked the building is important. The person who swept up the mess afterward is important. Spread the praise generously so that everyone benefits from their effort.

Understand, building a cohesive team that works well together and consistently produces quality imaging takes time. The results from the tenth project together will inevitably be better than the first outing. Matching personalities, styles, and methods to form a common compatibility can be challenging. Acknowledging that some creative temperaments simply cannot work together is not a reflection on the professionalism or talent of anyone, but simply recognizes that we are all unique individuals. Persistence in finding the right combination of creatives inevitably pays off with a higher quality work.

For some, this discussion leads to a rather obvious question of where one might find sufficient creatives to compose a workable team. Those in more metropolitan areas have a considerable advantage here over photographers in more rural environments. Here are a few sources that may be worth checking.

• Local hair salons are an obvious place to start, especially those catering to higher-end clientele. These stylists are often eager to show off their work and may be anxious to obtain quality images, especially if they've not updated their portfolio in a while or are looking to change markets.
• Beauty schools can be a source of very eager and creative young talent desperately needing to build a portfolio. Talk with instructors about connecting with more advanced students.
• Recommendations from models and other photographers are often valuable and may bring a surprising amount of experience that has gone unnoticed.
• Online ads such as those on Craigs List can be helpful in finding niche and period-specific artists. Often these creatives do not work in a regular salon and are therefore a little more difficult to locate, but are generally very talented in their field of expertise and make valuable team members.
• Local colleges with photography studies can be a good source for eager assistants. Photographers who shoot on a fairly consistent basis may want to consider creating an internship so that the student(s) can receive credit for their time and effort.
• Artists in other media make wonderful assistants and can also add value as art directors. Having a visually creative person on the set who sees through a slightly different perspective can help catch details that might otherwise be missed.
• Local department store buyers and department managers may be a good source for wardrobe stylists. Employees of upscale stores such as Macy's and Von Mauer are likely to have knowledge of what styles are most prominent and may also be able to help secure pieces for specific projects.
• Internet databases such as One Model Place and Model Mayhem may provide some level of resource for hair and make-up artists if one's back is against the wall and other resources have failed. These profiles are best approached with caution as information presented on these sites is often less than accurate and may not represent the true quality of work. Extensive vetting may be necessary before adding someone from these sources to a critically important project.

Once one begins to experience the benefits of working with a team of talented professionals, the difference in quality becomes quite obvious and the desire to work without them wanes considerably. Having a good, solid team in place makes the photographer's work much more enjoyable as one is able to give one's attention more fully what what is happening in front of the camera without worrying about ancillary details. Having a good team on set also tends to reduce the amount of post-processing effort necessary, placing more emphasis where it belongs, in front of the camera, and less on processing tools such as Photoshop.

When creatives find a project in which all their talents can be equally displayed the results can be absolutely astonishing. Every ounce of effort put into assembling a workable team is worth the tremendous leap in quality and substance of the images. Photographers do well to fight back the urge to do everything themselves and enjoy the benefits of creative collaboration that comes from a good artistic creative team.

A MOMENT IN THE SUN :: TONE AND SHADOW

Spring is a wonderful time for shooting outdoors. The warmer weather encourages exploration, wandering through nature, and free expression. With spring comes bright colors, the full spectrum of greens, blossoming flowers, deep azure skies. The photographic opportunities of spring are so great as to send any shutterbug, amateur or professional, rushing out into nature at every opportunity.

When doing so, however, we do well to follow the lead of the late Ansel Adams and exercise some patience and sensibility regarding when and from what angle and perspective we photograph a subject outdoors. Not all outdoor light is the same, and the sun represents a constantly transient source of illumination that changes not only in direction but in intensity and heat. While Adams is credited as having said, "Sometimes I do get to places just when God's ready to have somebody click the shutter," he also said, "A good photograph is knowing where to stand," and "A photograph is not an accident – it is a concept." Those familiar with his work know how often he waited for hours, and sometimes days, for just the right light. Such discipline is responsible for his reputation as one of the greatest photographers to date.

Unfortunately, in a society bent on instant gratification and following one's impulsive desires, too many photographers pick up a camera, rush outside, and start shooting without regard to the elements nature is providing. The result, far more often than not, is totally inferior photography of under developed concepts. Again, to quote Adams, "There is nothing worse than a brilliant image of a fuzzy concept."

The challenge here is that sunlight is never going to be exactly the same from one day to the next. Atmospheric conditions, clouds, air temperature and the earth's natural rotation all factor into how sunlight illuminates a specific object in a specific position at a particular time of day. To observe light at 7:10 AM today is an insufficient indicator of where and how light falls at the same time next week. One must be part astronomer, part mathematician, and part meteorologist to accurately predict sunlight on any given day.

Fortunately, for most photographic work, one does not need exact measurements. There is generally a range of a few minutes that is reasonably acceptable for quality photography. Even then, however, one must be keenly aware of what changes occur as the sun moves across the sky. As the sun rises higher in the sky, the increasing temperature of the light (not the air) effects the reflective tone, while the angle and position of the sun effects the direction and intensity of shadows.

To illustrate, consider the following images of an antique ceramic wash basin and pitcher. The white ceramic does a wonderful job of reflecting the tonal temperature of the sunlight in the early morning.

T
The three images, taken approximately thirty minutes apart, demonstrate a distinct change in tonality resulting from the increasing temperature of the sunlight. In the first image, taken at 7:21 AM EDT (-6:00 GMT), there is a distinct and recognizable amber hue reflected by the bowl and basin. The second image, taken thirty minutes later, still shows a hit of amber reflection, but one can see that the effect is considerably diminished from the earlier photograph. By the time of the third image, taken just over an hour from the first, there is only the slightest hint of amber left, the sunlight having changed considerably.

Which image is best? When is the better time to shoot?

The answer lies in defining the concept of the photograph. If the purpose is to accurately portray the colors of the bowl, then the third image is better. In fact, one might want to wait another fifteen to thirty minutes to completely remove any trace of amber reflection. However, if one's purpose is more artistic, leaning toward capturing the hue of an early spring morning, then perhaps the first image is more suitable to that end.

When working with people, often the earlier light is preferable, depending on the person's skin tone. Especially when working with individuals who have very fair, almost translucent skin, the amber tone of the early morning or late evening brings much needed color to the image and helps prevent over exposing some of the natural trouble spots. However, if the subject has been spending countless hours in the tanning bed getting ready for summer, the amber tone may cause the skin to reflect a ghastly orange, making a warmer light preferable.

The second factor one has to consider when shooting outdoors is shadow, not merely in terms of position, but intensity as well. Angle of the sun and of the camera in relation to the subject both play tremendous roles in determining where and how shadowing effects a photograph. Generally speaking, shadows are longer, and softer, when the sun is less than thirty degrees above the horizon. However, unless one is shooting in the middle of a desert or on an ocean beach, the sun is likely to be obscured by trees, buildings, and other obstacles that eliminate much of that period from exhibiting usable light. If the concept requires capturing the softest shadows, one may struggle to find a location with clear access to the horizon. Workable shadows may be present, depending on conditions, up to a 45 degree angle of the sun above horizon, but beyond that shadows become quite short and very harsh.

Just how quickly shadow changes is illustrated in the following set of images, converted to black and white to emphasize the shadow gradient.




Again, the most distinct difference is observed between the first image, taken at 7:22 AM EDT, and the last, taken at 8:20 AM. The red marks provide points of reference for marking noticeable changes in the location and spread of the shadows. One can see how with the time progression the shadows shorten and become more intense toward the back of the bowl, the side furthest from the sun. The gradient that is soft and gradual in the first two images, becomes much more hard and defined within a relatively short period of time.

Softer shadow gradients are generally preferable when one is photographing people. Long shadow gradients soften facial features and, in some cases, can even be useful in hiding problem areas. Short, intense gradients may cause a person to appear more stern, chiseled, and hard by comparison. Shorter gradients benefit architectural images, providing sharp definitions to lines and intricate features that might otherwise be missed.

Shooting outdoors is something of a paradox. One one hand, photographers need to know what manner of light is going to be best suited to the subject and schedule their work around the optimum time for achieving that light. At the same time, however, one can scarcely predict with accuracy whether the weather and other atmospheric conditions will actually provide the light desired. Spring weather can be surprising in how quickly it changes, requiring tremendous flexibility on the part of the photographer and anyone else involved. Certainly, there are those times when nature seems to hand one the perfect setting, just add camera and click. But the professional photographer knows knows that such luck comes partly from knowing what time of day nature is likely to deliver such an opportunity and having the skill to best take advantage of the gift.

Nonetheless, Spring offers one a delightful opportunity to break free of the constraints of artificial light, breathe a bit of fresh air, and enjoy the natural world. Setting one's alarm early and going out with camera in one hand and coffee in the other can be an exhilarating start to the day and create an opportunity for truly amazing images. There is a little of Ansel Adams in all of us. Take a moment in the sun and enjoy!

PROFESSIONAL BEHAVIOR ON THE SET

Recent conversations with colleagues have often centered around the topic of behavior, specifically how some models act and the sometimes shameful manner in which those with cameras behave. Such dialog is often referenced verbally with terms such as, "that is not professional behavior" but is rarely quantified in any meaningful manner that is widely available to everyone. "Professional behavior" is a term thrown around haphazardly with total subjectivity in its definition. Most professional photography associations have their list of rules of conduct, but even those are generally vague on most matters.

Complicating the task of defining "professional behavior" is that fact that personal style and familiarity both factor strongly into what might or might not be considered appropriate on any given shoot. A photographer and model who have worked together frequently and developed a strong relationship between them are going to have very different standards for their conversation and actions compared to the model who has never met the photographer and between whom there is no expectation or reason for communication outside the immediate shoot. A photographer accustomed to being surrounded by a large staff conducts a shoot considerably different than the one who generally works alone. To expect that every situation is going to elicit identical behavior is ludicrous.

However, there are some standards that deserve to be stated and applied across the board, regardless of whether the photo shoot is a major commercial production or an impromptu meeting taking advantage of a unique opportunity. Such standards apply not only to models and photographers, but to make-up artists, stylists, assistants, and anyone else who may participate in a photo shoot. Please, pay careful attention to the following list.

• Respect everyone on the set at all times. While there is an unquestionable hierarchy of management on a shoot, everyone present is there for a specific purpose and deserves the respect of all others with whom they are working. Showing disrespect for anyone on a shoot is extremely distasteful and should not be tolerated. Foundational to this concept is arriving on time and with attitude in check. There is no room for tardiness and no space for divas among professionals. If one feels they are unequipped or otherwise unable to perform as expected, they have a professional obligation to find a suitable replacement as quickly as possible. Cancellations less than 48 hours before a shoot, or worse, not showing up at all, are in extremely bad taste and should be avoided at all costs.
• Safety is everyone's responsibility. The principal maxim is "Don't damage the model," but safety issues go well beyond. No one on the set should be expected to perform in an unsafe environment. All electrical outlets should be grounded. Extreme care should be taken when using potentially hazardous materials. Spills should be mopped up immediately. Perhaps most importantly, the person in charge of the shoot should be aware of any medical conditions and/or allergies that might effect anyone on the set. Acts as simple as setting out a bowl of peanuts can be fatal if someone on the set has an allergy to peanut oil. Commonly used materials such as latex and baby oil are also frequent allergens which may require hospitalization for the person who is allergic to such materials. Further more, to have knowledge of a potential health issue and not be equipped to deal with it properly is medical neglect for which the person in charge of the shoot is liable. Hiding medical conditions such as asthma, diabetes, epilepsy, and heart disease are unprofessional. Ignoring such conditions on set is just plain stupid.
  
• Know your place in the shoot hierarchy and adjust behavior accordingly. Shoots don't go well when too many people try to play boss. Projects go much smoother and are completed with higher quality when ONE person is in charge. People with good management skills know how to involve a team in the whole creative process without dissolving the necessary hierarchical structure. Ultimately, only one person can make the artistic decisions that result in a quality image. A typical hierarchy on a major photo shoot might look something like the example below, but may vary greatly depending on circumstances.
• Art director
• Set director
  
• Photographer
• Wardrobe stylist
• Make-up stylist
• Hair stylist
• Model management
• Model
• Production assistants
• Technical assistants
• Arrive well prepared and ready to do your job. Shoot time is valuable and should not be wasted. Everyone involved should understand the concept before they arrive and come sufficiently prepared to bring the concept into reality. Granted, any unknown element has the potential to throw the best laid plans right out the window, but such challenges are most efficiently countered when everyone is unified and committed to the concept. The only time pure "winging it" is acceptable is on impromptu shoots, which should be minimal.
  
• Do not bring additional people, including assistants, without permission. Many photo shoots are conducted in spaces considerable smaller than the large, commercial studios designed to handle a full staff. As a result, available space is frequently an issue on a significant number of photo shoots. Even with commercial studios, there is a limit to the number of people who can be on set without sacrificing efficiency and quality. Always check with the person in charge before bringing anyone other than yourself to the shoot.
  
• Give everyone the space and opportunity to do their job without interference. Art directors should not need to look over a photographer's shoulder or double-check every shot. Stylists should be treated as artisans and not be subjected to anyone knit-picking over their work. Models should be given the freedom to explore posing options within the parameters given them. Assistants have a right to expect clear instructions so that they can do their work efficiently. Part of behaving like a professional is yielding to the professionalism of others. Let everyone do the job they were asked to do.
• Don't second guess the work of another professional. If an art director says they want the concept shot with a red filter, one has to assume there is a stylistic reason for them making that request. When a photographer insists a specific light array, she/he does so with a purpose in mind. As a courtesy, when working among professionals, explaining unusual methods helps keep the team together and focused, but because such an explanation is not forthcoming does not give one reason to challenge the work. This is especially true in the relationship between models and stylists. Models should NEVER re-do make-up, adjust wardrobe, or mess with their hair once the stylist declares the work done. One should always assume that professionals know what they are doing.
• Be efficient and precise in your work. Anyone who has been on a set with an account executive holding a stop watch, or had pay docked for using excessive rolls of film understands this concept quite clearly. In photography as in most any other business, time is money and, therefore, one must use it wisely. Probably the most common offense in this regard is photographers who over shoot, keeping their fingers on the shutter button in hopes of catching some random shot that will propel them to greatness. Know what images are wanted, get them, and move on. Know what poses are needed, provide them, and move on. Know what looks are desired and don't bother with a half-dozen variations unless requested. A model's time in front of the camera should rarely exceed fifteen to twenty minutes for a single look unless the concept is so complicated that each pose requires delicate and deliberate handling. Standard make-up looks generally do not require more than 90 minutes' application, and less for faces with good complexions. Basic hair styles should be completed in well under an hour, less with healthy hair. This does not mean that one should rush through their work carelessly, but every effort should be made to utilize time in the most efficient manner possible.
• There is never a good excuse for sexual harassment. Understanding that what constitutes harassment is open to some subjectivity, sexually based comments or actions that cause someone else to feel uncomfortable or embarrassed, or pressures someone to commit acts to which they are otherwise opposed, is harassment and is illegal. If any form of nudity or sexual connotation is planned for a shoot, such should be disclosed to all parties involved at the time they are contracted for the project. If physical contact between the model and anyone else on the set is required, that should be explained and discussed before the shoot ever begins. Once boundaries are established, there is no reason for crossing them and no excuse for pressuring one to do so.
• Be as accurate as possible when estimating and deliver as promised. Many aspects such as processing time and set construction may require estimating both costs and completion. Giving false estimates is tempting when one fears losing a job if the cost of work is too high. However, professional behavior requires being as accurate as possible in such situations and making every attempt to deliver what is promised. In such situations where estimates prove to be insufficient, one has the obligation to inform the affected parties as soon as possible and make adjustments to the work if necessary.
• Flexibility and courtesy count. Despite one's best efforts and the most carefully managed plans, things do go wrong on a set and changes have to be made. When such events occur, one is responsible for quickly assessing the severity of the issue, consider reasonable alternatives, and communicate to others within the parameters of their role within the team. Alternatives can usually be found for most on-set challenges as long as everyone involved is willing to change and is courteous in doing so. Models may need to swap wardrobe. Stylists may have to apply a different technique. Photographers may have to adjust the lighting scheme or shoot from a more challenging angle. Every reasonable effort should be made to complete the project without complaining or griping about the circumstances. Shoots should only be canceled when either safety or reason leave no other choice.
• Seek quality above all. Everyone involved in a photo shoot should arrive on set determined to make this set better than the ones before it. For photographers, stylists, and models who display portfolios publicly, there is a professional obligation to meet, if not exceed, the same level of quality as displayed in their portfolio. "I'm not feeling well," or "I was tired that day" and other excuses are unacceptable from a professional. Every effort should be made to give each shoot the same attention to quality as any other. Never should a professional accept work that is less than their best.

Professionalism is a standard to which everyone involved in photography desires to achieve. Even with these standards, there is still plenty of space of individual styles and there will always be special circumstances that warrant some moderate exceptions. However, in a day where sleazy photographers, fake make-up artists, and pseudo-models seem to be in proliferation, those who are truly professional cannot help but stand out from the murk and mire of those whose desires and intentions are less than honorable. Those who are professional understand these concepts and find no issue with them. Those who are not professional will instantly begin making excuses.

SHOOTING DIRT :: LEARNING THROUGH RANDOMNESS

An experienced photographer, his thinning hair white with age, stood over a light table examining the recent work of a significantly younger colleague. "You are improving," he said. "Still some issues, especially with depth of field, but you're learning."

"How can I learn more?" the youthful photographer asked. "I'm still so very far from keeping up with you. Can I speed up the process or am I going to be old before I'm any good?"

"Shoot dirt," came the seasoned reply.

The young man blinked in confused disbelief. "Shoot dirt? As in, go find a pile of dirt and take pictures of it."

"Sure, why not," the older man said dryly.

"I don't see how that is going to help any," the rookie said. "Dirt doesn't move. It's boring. There's no interest there."

"Sure there is, you just have to find it," came the matter-of-fact reply. "You're getting good at taking pictures, but you're still not thinking like a photographer. There is nothing, nothing, that cannot be photographed with interest, whether it's a blade of grass, a pile of dirt, or pigeon droppings. You're worrying so much about whether your aperture and shutter speed are right that you end up missing what should be the focal point of your picture. Get out. Shoot dirt. Find the interest in every-day objects, and it will change how you do your work. You'll improve faster than years worth of classes, I promise."

The grizzled veteran with more than 40 years behind the camera knew well of which he spoke. Among photographers, especially those newer to the field, there is a compulsion to obsess over the technical aspects. What's the shutter speed? Is the aperture correct? Are you using the correct lens? While those and others are all appropriate concerns, there is a point at which one must cease fiddling with the camera and take the time to actually look at the subject. What is really the focus of the shot about to be taken? What is the potential?

Consider the following image, taken during a walk on a fall afternoon:



This shot was taken in a rather heavily wooded area just off a jogging trail. The shutter was set to 1/500, the aperture at f/11, with the ISO at 800. There was no overwhelming reason to take this shot, no requirements, no external compulsion, so why bother?

Take a careful look at the photo and consider what all there is to see. First, there's the technical aspect. Notice that the shot is taken directly facing the sun, but that the trees tremendously diffuse the direct light. It is also worth noting that even at 800 ISO the sunlight did not completely over-expose the frame. The effect of spot-lighting a central piece of ground against the silhouette of tree trunks gives one an anticipatory feeling as though perhaps an angel or some other character is about to appear on the stage. From a purely technical position, there is much to consider.

Look beyond the technical, however, and one may see an image of hope, breathing through from the darkness and fear of thick overgrowth into the sunlight. Symbolically, there is warmth, freedom, happiness and blue sky just ahead, an end to darkness and despair, new opportunities and perhaps even an escape from trouble. Is that a picture worth taking? Absolutely! But if all one sees are leaves and an annoying glare of light, then the camera is likely to remain in the bag as the hike continues.

One does not have to limit themselves to nature. Almost anything one sees can become an object for study. A car. A clock. A table. A coffee cup. Sometimes the most simple and seemingly uninteresting objects can generate surprises when one takes the time to study them carefully through the lens of the camera.

The following picture is a good example of an object that, on first observation, may not seem too terribly interesting. The playground equipment in a public park may seem somewhat straight forward and almost utilitarian. After all, slides and jungle gyms haven't changed too terribly much over the past fifty years--unless, one gets down low to examine the equipment from the perspective of a small child. Suddenly, the playground can take on a very different appearance.



From an architectural perspective, the playground now becomes a study in the intersection of shapes and forms. Parallel lines intersecting, arches reaching toward a blue sky. For an adult, the image may even border on having some artistic quality.

Now, put yourself again in the position of a small child. Look up with a little imagination and what do you see? A space ship? Giant butterflies? A monster baring its teeth? Seeing this suddenly large and frequently backlit world through innocent and sometimes frightened eyes dramatically changes one's perspective, and the way one shoots a given object.

Taking random photographs also provide the photographer with a chance to practice on subjects that really don't care how the final image looks. The image below is a section of a climbing wall on the same playground as the image above. The curves, structure, and texture of the wall provided ample opportunity to study depth of field, contrast, color depth, and white balance.



This particular image is one of a set of three hundred shot over the course of a weekday afternoon, when few children were present. The images display not only changes on the camera, but changes in the light quality as the afternoon waned into evening. As the temperature of the sunlight cooled and shadows deepened, changes in white balance and lens speed revealed more texture and depth than did similar images taken just an hour earlier. Within the set are images that one would not likely consider acceptable for public display, but even those images teach us what doesn't work within the given parameters.

Photography can at times appear to be a very complex and daunting field. One sees the finished work of experienced photographers and perhaps wonders just exactly how they managed to make a given situation work when one's own attempts in similar settings have proven less successful. There are not great mysteries or hidden secrets to photography, however. The more we shoot, the more we learn. The more one explores, the greater one's discoveries.

What is critical is that one take the lessons learned from "shooting dirt" and apply them to the more serious work. The changes one may discover from photographing all the various angles and perspectives of a coffee cup can be applied to how one approaches any other object with similar height-width proportions. Observing how curves and lines come together in a structure may have application in posing a model in front of a linear background. Almost everything one learns from studies of seemingly "boring" subjects has a practical application in other aspects of photography.

And sometimes, such adventures give birth to something greater. One learns to see life differently, more observant, more aware of the things that are missed in casual passing. It is here that one learns to think and to see like a photographer, moving past the pedestrian street view of life to see how things might appear through the lens, even when the camera is still in the bag.

Returning exactly 24 hours later to the same park that yielded the random studies above provided the opportunity to put into action what had been learned the previous day.





Practice. Learn. Apply. Improving your photography skills doesn't require rooms full of equipment or expensive excursions to distant seminars. Everything one needs is right within one's reach. Here's an assignment you may want to try:

Nature gives us ample opportunity to learn and observe. The next time the weather is appropriate for doing so, go outside, pick a spot in full sun, lie on the ground, and shoot 60 frames, one per minute for a full hour. With each shot, adjust aperture or shutter speed. Look through the lens carefully and adjust the focal point (not necessarily the focal length) from the closest object to the furthest possible with your lens. At the end of the hour, upload your images and use a digital lightbox application to compare the images. Using the camera's metadata as reference, note what elements changes from image to image compared with changes in aperture and shutter speed. How does depth of field change? How does the light change? Which settings generate the best contrast?

Equally important, what changed in your scenery over the course of the hour? Did bugs or insects come into frame? Did wind blow anything across your range of vision? Did shadows increase or decrease? Did your perspective change any? Take careful notes of your impressions for later consideration.

Now, go shoot some dirt.

BUT IS IT ART?

CAVEAT: The following article addresses a highly subjective topic for which there is little authoritative documentation. Opinions expressed herein are based on research, observation, and experience, but are ultimately just one person's thoughts on the matters addressed. Readers are encouraged to explore the topic thoroughly through this and other sources, being reminded that all opinions, regardless of source, contain some measure of validity in their argument.

Henri Cartier-Bresson. Robert Mapplethorpe. Ansel Adams. Helmut Newton. Eve Arnold. Jock Sturgis. David LaChapelle. Petter Hegre. Dorothea Lange. All these names represent photographers whose work behind the camera is legendary and awe inspiring. Many of their works have been framed and hang on the walls of prestigious museums. Some have been sold at auction for hundreds of thousands of dollars.

Yet, despite how wonderful these images may appear, no matter to what degree the skill and precision is appreciated, society still finds itself needing to ask the question: is it art? While it is understandable that the question would be asked during the 19th century when the medium was in its infancy, that photographers, buyers, and critics still feel the compulsion to add their opinion to the compendium of answers delivers a disturbing realization that we are no closer to definitive decision than we are eliminating cancer.

Many photographers regard the mere raising of the question in a most defensive manner. How dare anyone question the artistic nature of photography? Has the medium not proven itself over time? Does not its increasing acceptance by art dealers and museum curators promote photography's artistic validation? Has not public and academic opinion of photography elevated it to hang within the hallowed halls of artistry?

Those in opposition remain just as adamant, however, that photography, by its very nature, can never be art, will never be art, and that to consider photography as art is to fail to grasp the very nature of art itself. Changes in methodology and technology only serve to further solidify their arguments. As an increasing number of people pick up cameras and point them at various objects, the argument for photography as art, in the opinion of its critics, only erodes.

From the very outset, one does well to accept that simply because one picks up a camera and takes a picture one does not automatically become an artist any more than does using a paint brush or a chisel. Not all photography is intended to be art, regardless of how it may be gathered and exhibited. The pictures of a child's party on their fourth birthday, while endearing, are not art. Photographs of the winning score in a championship ballgame are memorable, but not art.
Images of the family pet chasing its own tail, while amusing, are not art.

Consider the following photograph, taken in the staging area of a major New York City event:

The picture is interesting in that it provides the viewer with the seldom-seen perspective of what happens before the "big show." Spontaneous and un-posed, the image smacks with the sort of realism that makes for interesting conversation and endless speculation as to exactly what is going on. Without question, there is a story here just waiting to be told. Still, this photograph is, at best, editorial and, in the opinion of those more conservative, pornographic and exploitative.

Given that so many billions of "pedestrian and vernacular" photographs exist, one must immediately modify the question to consider whether perhaps some photographs can be art while others, such as the image above, are not. Applying such discrimination to the medium, however, may not make the argument in favor of photographic art any easier, for such magnified inspection inevitably brings to greater light what some might consider the artistic shortcomings of the field.

Arguments against photography as art are strong, despite the fact they fundamentally have not changed since the camera was invented. When questioned, most critics will point to the following matters:

1. Photography is mechanical. No matter what the photographer and/or their staff does to prepare, control and manipulate the set, the fact remains that it is the camera, a mechanical device, not the photographer, that captured the image. Challenging photography as an artistic medium, Ayn Rand wrote:
   

   Photography is a mechanical means of producing whatever is put in front of the camera. When you speak of an "artistic" photograph, what you mean is that the photographer exercised [some] choice in his [selection and] arrangement of the material which his camera is to reproduce .... But the mere process of photographing, the mechanical part of it, is not art because no choice is involved: the camera operates the same way regardless of the nature of the material. [Fiction-Writing. Lecture 1]

   
   One might attempt to argue that through the manipulation of shutter speed, aperture, ISO and white balance photographers are exercising at least as much control as a sculptor. Still, it is the camera, not the photographer, making key decisions as to how to interpret color, light, texture and form. All the photographer does is set what are, by any argument, fairly wide parameters within which the camera does its work.
   
   Additionally, art historian Edgar Wind wrote:
   

   What precludes photography ... from becoming 'entirely art,' although it may have 'something artistic about it', is the crucial surrender of the pictorial act to an optical or chemical agency which, however carefully set up and controlled by the photographer, must remain automatic in its operation. [Art and Anarchy, pp. 138-140]

   Modern advances in photography such as auto-focus and digital manipulation only serve to make the argument of automation stronger. Automatic features, software filters and digital processing submit even more of the act of photography to pre-determined outcome. Rather than the questionably fluid control of chemical processing, modern photographers use technology to apply techniques whose outcome was determined by a software engineer in Palo Alto. Can one truly say they are being artistic when so little actual control lies in their own hands? Photographers do well to lose sleep in answering the question.
   
   
2. Photography voids uniqueness. With most any other art medium, there is but one original, signed by the artist. There is evidence of the artist's hand on the art. Photography defies that singleness, the concept that an image may be one-of-a-kind. Indeed, hundreds of thousands of prints can be generated from a single negative. Digital images can be shared electronically with millions of viewers simultaneously. While some might argue that this development brings art 'within the reach of the masses," the ability to mass produce images renders them pedestrian and common-place. There is nothing "fine" about a work for which there are 150,000 exact copies.
   
   Walter Benjamin wrote in 1936:
   

   The technique of reproduction detaches the reproduced object from the domain of tradition. By making many reproductions it substitutes a plurality of copies for a unique existence. [Illuminations. "The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction"]

   Benjamin's argument, which he applied not only to photography but also to recorded music and film, echoes a consistent criticism from the art world that one can never look at a photograph and be sure of its origin nor how many other exact copies of the work are hanging elsewhere in the world. Essentially, photography defies the uniqueness that has long separated art from manufacturing.
   
   This argument does not deny the skill or vision that may be present in a photograph, but equates photography to more utilitarian crafts such as furniture making or rug weaving. A finely produced chair may be quite beautiful in its design and construction, but that that it can be duplicated so as to fill a thousand different living rooms negates its ability to become art. Carpet designers in North Georgia may create intricate templates for astonishing rug patterns, but that one may walk from room to room to room and observe the exact same pattern on each floor and then have that pattern placed in one's rompus room without disturbing the display denies any pretense of art.
   
   Over the years, some photographers keenly aware of this shortcoming have attempted to compensate by destroying the negative after a single print is made. Indeed, such extreme measures may help to inflate the value of a piece, but with modern digital photography even that option is no longer present. With the technical ability to retrieve even deleted documents and images from a hard drive, multiple copies of an image may exist long before it is ever committed to print.
   
   
3. There is no selectivity to photography. Photography does not create, it merely captures. Photography is inherently tied to reality in all its detail and, increasingly, high-definition form. No matter what one may do to an image in processing, the fact consistently remains that, at some point, the base element had to actually exist long enough to be photographed. Photographers cannot simply select an image from their mind and transfer it to the camera. What one photographs must be real.
   
   This puts photographers at a disadvantage and, arguably, defies art. Painters and sculptors may create whole masterpieces from pure fiction and imagination. While they may use models and even photographs as reference, they are not bound to duplicate what is real, but can alter immediately any form or element they wish.
   
   With other forms of art, the viewer may ask of any element, "Why is that there?" and know that the answer relies in some fashion upon the artist's choice of inclusion. Photography yields a very different answer, however, in that objects exist in a photograph because they existed in reality. While finely composited photographs such as those of David LaChapelle may seem to defy this argument, even those elements of composition must each some how, some where, actually exist before they can become part of his final image.
   

These are but three primary objections to photography as an art form that persist to present day. Other perhaps less enthusiastic objections are made in terms of the photograph's relationship to history, the relationship of photography to randomness and its subjectivity to accident, and the argument that photography is ultimately a scientific process that needs neither human intervention nor creativity to exist.

Perhaps one of the most valid criticisms of photography comes in the writing of the late Susan Sontag, whose intimate relationship with celebrated photographer Annie Leibovitz post-dates much of what she wrote on the subject. In her 1978 book, On Photography, Sontag wrote:

Photography is acquisition in several forms. In its simplest form, we have in a photograph surrogate possession of a cherished person or thing, a possession which gives photographs some of the character of unique objects. Through photographs, we also have a consumer's relation to events, both to events which are part of our experience, and to those which are not - a distinction between types of experience that such habit-forming consumership blurs. A third form of acquisition is that, through image-making and image-duplicating machines, we can require something as information (rather than experience). Indeed, the importance of photographic images as the medium through which more and more events enter our experience is, finally, only a by-product of their effectiveness in furnishing knowledge dissociated from and independent of experience. [On Photography. Harmondsworth, Penguin, 1978. p. 154]

To the extent that photography is just that - acquisition - one might make the argument that it can never be art, no matter what intention or inclination might be applied by either photographer or viewer. If all one is doing is to capture an event, a time, a place, a setting, then wherein lies the creativity, the originality, the imagination requisite in any art form? If a photograph can be duplicated by another photographer and the two set side-by-side as identical, how can the medium ever deliver the truly original work of art?

Photographers do not aid the argument regarding art when they themselves attempt to label as art those inferior images so poorly constructed that they would have best died on the camera, or so horribly mis-processed as to generate embarrassment. Novelty is not art. Perhaps the most frequent fatality to photographic art comes at the hands of the amateur digital shutter bug who is overly and unduly impressed by merely desaturating an image, creating a sloppy and ill-conceived form of an image that suffered miserably in color and is only slightly less offensive in black-and-white. Equally destructive is the image to which any number of Photoshop filters are mis-applied across the entire photograph rendering it obnoxiously obscene in its loathsome void of artistic merit. How can one possibly expect the medium of photography to be taken seriously within a well-established and entrenched art community when too many psuedo-photographers continue to pompously claim as art those images so void of even minute aesthetic interest as to cause the viewers eyes to bleed?

Photography cannot be taken seriously as an art medium so long as those who stand behind the camera approach the work in a cavalier, profit-minded, shoot-till-you-get-something attitude. Such a mindset reduces photography to a frivolous past time, an energy-consuming hobby for the busy body with not enough constructive tasks to perform. Photographs taken without consideration for genuinely artistic element have less value than the paint-by-numbers picture sold by a dirt-encrusted child at a flea market.

If photography is to be taken seriously as an art form, it must present to the public a level of aesthetic presence sufficient to overcome the criticism laid against it. While the imposition of strict rules or tests would be largely inappropriate and stifling to creativity, photography must adequately address four very basic and fundamental concerns before it may raise itself to the elevated status of art.

1. Form. More than merely a definition of genre, form speaks to the very construction and composition of a photograph. Simply pointing a camera at the horizon and calling it a landscape is not sufficient. Merely undressing a young woman and taking her picture against a black background does not create art. The flowers in one's garden may be quite beautiful, but stepping outside and popping off a few quick shots does nothing more than create a record of the flowers' growth.
   
   Form is about substance, composition, framing, and presentation of one's subject. Thousands of people have taken pictures of the arid grounds across the Amercian West, but it is Ansel Adam's careful attention to form that sets the standard for landscape art. Hundreds of images exist of migrant workers during the era of the Great Depression, but it is the form of Dorothea Lang's "Destitute Pea Pickers in California. Mother of Seven Children. Age Thirty-Two. Nipomo, California" that brings the image to our attention and wonder how such things may be. Untold millions of pictures of nude women exist, but it is form that sets Helmut Newton's work apart from the pornography that plagues our senses.
   
   Form requires that a photographer actually think before snapping the shutter. Art is not created by happenstance or accident, but through willful construction in studying and understanding the subject, giving due consideration to perspective, how the image will be viewed, the balance of light and shadow, the play of reflection and the tone of color. For photography to be more than just "acquisition" of what exists, the Form of the image must excite us, extend beyond the ordinary of what the eye may casually see and assist the viewer in seeing something more than the mere reality of an every-day world. Without form, all one has is a most vernacular snap shot.
   
   
2. Function. What is the purpose of a photograph? Whose agenda does the image serve? What message is intended, or inferred, by this picture? Function addresses the question as to why an image exists. Fashion photographs exist to sell clothes. Editorial photographs exist to portray news and events. Scientific photographs exist to document what is.
   
   Art, by contrast, must go further in its function. Insufficient to be simply aesthetically pleasing, artistic photography necessarily invokes symbolism, inference and ambiguity as tools for portraying a message or telling a story. Artistic function may certainly be all about the portrayal of beauty, but in doing so the photograph must excel in the manner through which it declares such beauty in original methods not ordinary to human experience.
   
   The artistic photograph must hold at its core that its purpose is to first be art. There is no room for blatant commercialization or profit-seeking. Pandering to the unwashed masses with images of depravity, violence and gore run counter to any artistic merit. Whatever the message, whatever the symbolism, the foundational function of art is that it be art first and foremost.
   
   
3. Quality. Artistic photography must stand out from the mundane, the ordinary, the contrived, and the plebeian. Here is where photography must challenge the criticism of being mechanical and void of selectiveness through the creation of images of sufficient quality as to make evident the hand and spirit of the photographer.
   
   Artistic photographs must deny any form of cheap digital trickery or painful attempts to cover a lack of talent and vision. Regardless of the processing methods that may be applied, the base image must be of superior photographic and artistic quality before any processing begins because there surely will not be sufficient improvements to quality applied after the fact. Attention to exposure, depth of field, noise levels, highlight and shadows and print quality are all paramount in creating an artistic image.
   
   The quality of an artistic image must be strong enough to allow the viewer to not notice its presence. A quality photograph allows the viewer to ponder, to think, to linger over an image without being distracted by a cumbersome shadow, a blown-out highlight, or disturbing noise. Neither does a quality photograph distract from itself with "hey, look what I can do" Photoshop antics. Th person viewing a work of art should never have reason to wonder how an image was achieved, but given the freedom to marvel in its glory and delight in its presence.
   
   
4. Value. What makes this photograph unique? What separates one image from all the hundreds of thousands taken from the same location under the same circumstances? What prevents another photographer of similar skill with similar equipment from taking exactly the same shot and achieving identical results?
   
   To call an image a work of art is to infer that there is something special about that image, that what exists on the paper is irreplaceable and deserving of careful attention so that it might be preserved. Art longs to be cherished, prized, and set apart from the contrived and mundane elements of life. Therefore, that an artistic photograph establish value is critical.
   
   To that end, photographers must first strive to be original and unique in their compositions, a task which is not getting any more simple. Each photographer must explore their own ideas and concepts and not allow themselves to be snagged into duplicating the work of others, or even themselves, simply because the concept is popular, even when it may be profitable.
   
   Photographers must also learn to jealously guard against the over- and mis-use of their photographs. Allowing too many copies to become circulated, or excusing the infringement of copyright not only devalues the works involved, but everything the photographer produces, and at a larger extent, lowers the public perception of photographic art as a whole. Art that is too readily available looses its value and dilutes its meaning beyond any hope of repair.

Given such high standards for any photograph to achieve status as an artistic image, one becomes aware of just how few photographs have deservedly earned the title of being an artistic photograph. Without question, truly artistic photography is an almost minuscule proportion of the pictures produced . The number of photographers whose work demonstrates true originality in form, depth of function, attentive quality and legitimate value is significantly smaller than those who dare to claim such a position.

Photographers who think they can foist onto the art buying public myriad black-and-white photographs of what lies between them and the horizon, or clever application of digital gimmicks are playing the role of fools. To those who truly know and understand all that art is and should be, photography is still a questionable medium whose place in the art world, though gaining some acceptance, is still highly suspect. The continued inundation of gross and inferior photographs diminishes the value of all photography and accentuates the criticisms leveled against it as an artistic medium.

There is a strong desire on the part of many in the art world to find artistic merit in photography, and one can legitimately argue that there are sufficient examples to place photography within the hallowed realms of fine art. Since 1993, major art auctions have sold major works of photographic art for hundreds of thousands of dollars. There is a willing and anxious market waiting for truly artistic photographs.

However, the burden is squarely on the shoulders of photographers to create works that rise above the noise of mediocrity and deliver images that are more than mere "acquisition" of a subject. Photographers must bring to their work a sense of purpose, a reason for being, and the ability to extend beyond what simply exists. Without such commitment and attentiveness to form, function, quality and value, photographs are nothing more than image recordings and photographers are merely machine operators and none are anywhere close to art.

LENS CARE :: OUT, DAMNED SPOT!

Almost every photographer knows the frustration of looking at a print, or bringing up an image in Photoshop, and finding dust spots speckling the image like some flesh-eating disease. One spends hundreds, sometimes thousands of dollars on high-quality optics for a camera and yet the glass can become permanently ruined if one does not take proper precaution.

Dust has always been an enemy of most any optic from the glasses on one's face to the large lenses of space telescopes. Increasingly, however, digital SLR lenses have become more complicated and, as a result, so has their care. Cleaning methods that might have worked with the old analog lens one used in high school may well ruin the new digital lens for which one just paid $1,200. Extreme care must be taken to adequately preserve the investment made in such equipment.

An Ounce of Prevention

From the outset, one needs to understand that every camera lens is comprised of four basic parts: the lens elements, diaphragm, lens coating and focus mechanism. Any of those parts are likely to attract and hold dust. Therefore, keeping the lens and mount caps firmly in place and storing the lens in an appropriate dust-free container goes a long way in keeping down the amount of dust.

Even storage is not totally safe, however. Dark, humid conditions are perfect for the growth of lens fungus. Under normal circumstances, a lens that is being used on a regular basis is safe from this danger. However, combating this problem is relatively easy. Chances are the lens was shipped with a small bag of sillica gel or pellets. Sillica gel is a natural dehydrant. By keeping that small bag stored with the lens, air-born moisture is much less likely to become an issue.

Traveling also increases the dangers to lenses as changes in atmospheric pressure, weather, environmental conditions and general mishandling can all damage a lens while one is not looking. While keeping frequently used lenses in the camera bag may be more convenient, camera bags generally lack the protection a lens receives from being in its own hard-cased container. Such containers not only protect the lens from dust contamination, but also from damage due to inadvertent contact with other hard objects.

Lenses made specifically for digital cameras also carry the burden of needing to be kept well away from magnetic sources. This is especially true if the lens itself contains a digital component of any kind. Treat these lenses just as one would any computer-based media, keeping them well away from any electromagnetic field.

Good habits are tough to break

Many factors relating to good lens care are simply a matter of habit; things one can and should do every time we're dealing with our lenses that can help preserve the quality of the optics and extend the life of the lens. Five critical habits come to mind:

1. Avoid touching the prime element (front glass surface) with your fingers. Fingerprints on the prime element can be deadly, especially when not removed quickly. Modern camera lenses are coated with a very thin layers of chemical that both reduces reflection and increases the amount of light passed through to the media. This coating is very sensitive and prone to decay should any other contrasting oil or dust, such as is commonly found on fingerprints, come into contact with the element. Always handle the lens by its casing and wear surgical gloves when cleaning the lens.
2. Use a rain hood when shooting in any damp environment. This may seem common sense for rainy conditions, but many photographers forget that the light mist from a waterfall, or park fountain, or a heavy fog can all do severe damage to the lens. Chemicals present in most all water can etch the prime element. In less than 24-hours, droplets from a heavy fog can render a lens unusable. Don't take any unnecessary chances.
3. Do not use amonia-based glass cleaner or water to clean the element. Remember that coating? Most home window and glass cleaners contain chemicals that will completely eat through the coating in less time than it takes for one to put down the spray bottle and grab a rag. There are several good optical cleaners that do a good job of cleaning the lens while preserving the coating. Photographers do well to keep such cleaner in their camera bag at all times.
   
4. Only use a microfiber cloth on the prime element. Sure, it's really tempting when one is on location and sees a smudge on the lens to just wipe it off with a tissue, shirt tail, or a moist towelette from the local rib joint. None of those are entirely safe, however, and can do permanent damage to the lens. Tissues and towelettes are both paper based and can easily scratch the optic. Towelettes may also contain chemicals that would damage the coating. Cotton fiber, such as is found in many shirts and other garments, may feel soft, but can leave behind lint, which in turn attracts more dust. Even leather-based chamois, which is soft to the touch, can damage the prime element. Keep a clean microfiber cloth in the camera bag, next to the cleaner, and all should be safe.
5. Turn off the camera before switching lenses. This is a frustrating element for photographers accustomed to working with film cameras. Old guard photogs are quite proficient at reaching into their camera bags, grabbing a new lens and switching it out without missing a beat in their shoot rhythm. Digital cameras disrupt that flow. When the camera is still on, there is a very small amount of electric current running between the body and the lens mount. Swapping lenses with the camera still on has the potential to create a short, wiping out the electronics on either side. Digital cameras and lenses perform best when the lenses are changed while the camera is off, and the mounting cleaned before adding the new lens. No, this is not a time-efficient procedure, making the use of multiple cameras almost a necessity in fast-paced environments. Yet, one could lose the equipment entirely if the camera is continually left on while changing lenses.

Those five things should become so strongly embedded into a photographer's methodology that one doesn't need to think about them, they simply happen. On these factors there is little room for compromise.

Separate myth from fact

Much of the damage done to lenses is the result of well-meaning but misinformed actions of photographers following the advice of buddies or colleagues, who may not themselves be aware of the damage done to their own equipment. Here are a few of the more common myths that regularly pop up in conversation among photographers.

Myth: Pressurized air is the best way to clean loose dust from a lens.
Fact: Pressurized air is too powerful for most optical lenses. Loose dust can actually be blown into the coating and the seals, ruining the prime element. A bulb blower (not a blower brush) is the safest way to delicately remove loose dust from any surface of the lens.

Myth: Attach the lens cap to the lens to prevent loss.
Fact: Even a plastic lens dangling in the wind can whip around and scratch or even crack the optical. Keep the lens cap in a pocket and use it often, to be sure, but misused they can do serious damage.

Myth: UV filters are the best way to protect the lens.
Fact: After spending hundreds or thousands of dollars on a high quality lens, does it really make sense to distort that quality by slapping a $25 piece of glass on the front? While a filter does provide a modest barrier against dust, should it shatter in a fall the breaking glass is quite likely to scratch the optical behind it. At the same time, cheap filters distort the image, which is never desirable.

Myth: Soft-haired brushes are good for cleaning lenses.
Fact: No matter how soft the brush, one runs the risk of dirt becoming embedded in the bristles and scratching the optic. Brushes are more appropriate for non-glass elements but even then care must be taken to make sure the brush remains unquestionably clean.

Myth: Once discovered, lens fungus cannot be stopped.
Fact: Lens fungus (detectable by tiny lines stretching out from what appears as a single grain of dust) is actually quite treatable in most cases, but extreme care must be used. Using a microfiber cloth, place a small amount of lens cleaner on the cloth and use the softest touch possible to wipe the fungus from the prime element. If that fails to remove the fungus, one can use an electronic flash gun and fire it repeatedly into the prime element. In most cases the repeated flash kills the fungus. Photographers who live or work in more humid climates do well to fire a flash into their lenses on a fairly regular basis to help prevent fungus from forming in the inner elements of the lens.

Other factors of lens care are basic common sense. Do not leave lenses in a hot car. Do not expose lenses to rapid changes in environment (such as leaving a warm house to take pictures in the snow). Do not expose lenses to water. Protect lenses from blowing dust and sand. All of those items should be so obvious as to not require discussion. Yet, every year hundreds of thousands of dollars are wasted as lenses are ruined by simple carelessness.

While it is true that a good photographer is not limited by his/her equipment, good equipment helps good photographers take great pictures. Taking proper care of one's lenses is an important part of making sure your photographs are among the best.

THE FINE ART OF CRITIQUE

"Here is a picture I took. Please let me know what you think, both good and bad."

Such statements adorn the forums of too many Internet pages from presumably professional photography sites to social networking spaces. Among photographers, and artists in general, there is a somewhat egotistical but nonetheless genuine desire to know that one's work is accepted, understood, and appreciated. Novice photographers who are sincere in their desire to improve know that advice from those with more experience may well aid them in their own education.

Unfortunately, too often the replies generated by such attempts at public discourse are either dismissive drivel such as "nice shot" or "I like it," or horrific diatribes of venomous hate and ridicule. Rarely do such conversations contain reasonable, well-thought knowledge and even more rarely is the proffered advice of any actual constructive value. As such, unmoderated and unprofessional forums are largely a severe waste of one's time and energy, satisfying only the over-inflated egos of those whose self-serving comments are a weak attempt to masque their own short comings.

Despite the failings of these plebeian parlors of pontification, genuine and knowledgeable critique is immeasurably valuable to photographers and artists at most any stage of their career. Academic critique provides direction, guidance and encouragement in a manner that is clear, useful, and well-thought, void of knee-jerk reactions, unnecessary homiletics, and accusations of inferiority. Criticism is best a gently applied tool offered with the understanding that photography, like any art, is largely subjective and that, in the end, the only opinion that really matters is that of the person hanging the picture on their wall.

Art criticism follows a standard four-step process of Description, Analysis, Interpretation, and Judgment. Each portion is applied in order so that the criticism is delivered through a careful and intelligent examination of the work. Through this process, both the reviewer and the photographer should come away with a better understanding of the work and its impact. Applying the same process to all manner of photography is perhaps the closest one may come to achieving the most constructive level of comment.

To better understand the process of critiquing images, let us consider the contents of each step.

1. Description. Look, carefully, thoughtfully, expansively at the picture. Consider first not one's immediate opinion of quality, but rather define exactly what is there to be seen. What photographic elements are present in the image? Which technical elements have been applied? Are processing methods obvious enough to be identified and, if so, what are they?
   
   Also important here is information from the photographer such as the title of the work, camera settings, environmental considerations and, if available, the photographer's statement. The purpose of this step is to identify as much information about the work as possible before making any subjective comment.
   
   
2. Analysis. Consider the work as a complete and thorough composition. Here, one's understanding of the technical aspects of photography, art and design come strongly into play. Elements requiring attention are:
   
   
   • Contrast
   • Lighting
   • Framing
   • Grain/Noise
   • Focus
   • Depth of field
     
   • Processing
   • Print quality (where applicable)
   • Line
     
   • Space
   • Form
   • Color
   • Perspective
   • Balance
   • Proportion
   • Movement/Rhythm
   • Emphasis
   • Harmony
   
   Without a thorough consideration of each element, a criticism is incomplete and any further evaluation is ill-conceived.
   
   
3. Interpretation. Here is where one's personal views first come into play by describing what emotions and thoughts the piece invokes. Relate how one feels when looking at a picture. Is the subject familiar? If so, how is this photographer's point of view different or similar to other photographs of the same subject? How does one particular photograph relate in terms of style and content with similar works by the same photographer? Does the photograph seem to have a specific message or meaning, and if so, how well does the image accurately portray that message?
   
   One must take care in the choice of verbiage one uses when constructing this portion of the criticism. Words such as pretty, ugly, beautiful, horrible, have little place or value. Use a vocabulary that is non-threatening and avoids being trite, condescending or self-serving.
   
   Do not shy away from asking questions that the picture may not seem to immediately answer. Questions such as, "what was the photographer's relation to the subject?" are wholly appropriate and the eventual answer to that question may shed considerable light on the interpretation of the piece.
   
   Finally, consider here how the image relates to photography and society in a larger sense. Is there a similarity between this image and that of other photographers? What are the social connotations of this image? Is the average person without knowledge of photographic elements likely to understand and appreciate the image in the same way as the photographer?
   
   
4. Judgment. The primary purpose of this step is to establish and explain the value of the photograph. Historically, it is at this point many art critics question whether photography contains artistic merit at all, primarily based upon the perception that the pedestrian qualities of the field belie the need for either talent or skill, thereby eliminating value. Therefore, a primary consideration at this juncture must be the sometimes painful question: does this picture demonstrate qualities representing a quantity of talent and skill sufficient to establish a measure of value? Simply saying that a picture is good or ugly is woefully inadequate. What makes this picture valuable on both a personal and professional level?
   
   Also essential to establishing value is the question of originality. What makes this particular image different from other photographs? Does that difference generate positive or negative response on the part of the viewer? If the photograph is similar in concept and composition to others, are there still sufficient elements to cause this image to stand out from the others, or is it merely another square in a mediocre mosaic?
   
   Does the photograph fulfill its purpose? Not every picture taken is intended to be a work of fine art. If an image is to be used in advertising, does it adequately sell the product or brand? If a photo is used as illustration, does it adequately reflect the point being presented? Would the intended use be better, worse or the same were the image not present?
   
   Finally, address the long-term value of the photograph. Will the message and emotional impact viewers feel today still be present fifty years from now? Here, the bar is set necessarily high and those whose images clear it are preciously few. Pictures such as the raising of the American flag at Iwo Jima, Ansel Adams' carefully timed and constructed landscapes, and Helmut Newton's nudes are among the select group who pass this critical test. Selectivity is essential and often short-sighted. One must be careful to neither underestimate nor over value the impact an image might have on a generation not yet born. Yet, the matter is worthy of evaluation.

Obviously, any well-considered critique that follows thoroughly all four steps is going to of greater length than a couple of quick sentence fragments. Providing genuine and helpful criticism takes considerable time imposing upon the schedule and expertise of the critic. Anyone seriously desiring such a level of serious consideration is not likely to find such in an online forum. One is better served approaching a respected authority privately and with an offer of some renumeration for the effort.

One is obligated to seriously consider the responsibility of accepting a request to provide criticism of another's work. Should one's schedule not contain sufficient time for due consideration, or if the request is made outside one's area and level of expertise, one may do greater good in declining the request. When the need to critique is valuable and appropriate, one does well to apply the following considerations.

• Do not give criticism where it is not requested
  
• Be professional in both tone and manner
• Avoid cliche
  
• Think twice before committing to words: is the comment appropriate and helpful
• Sarcasm is neither appreciated nor appropriate
• Do not confuse the artist with the art; just because one has personality conflicts with another photographer does not mean they are incapable of producing good work.
• Use language known and common to the field of photography
• Be gentle; caustic diatribes severely lashing a work are seldom well received and generally a waste of time
• Do not hesitate to ask questions
• Take responsibility for your opinions
• Do not assume that of which you are not 100 percent certain
• Remember there are no absolutes; using words such as "never" and "always" are rarely appropriate
• Avoid long, anecdotal response; stick to the facts and stay on topic
• Become familiar with the photographer's greater body of work before considering any one picture
• Know that criticism should always build, never destroy

Equally important to knowing how to provide criticism is knowing how to receive it. There are important elements to consider before offering one's work for criticism:

• Do not ask for criticism when one is only of the mind to accept praise
• Criticism from those who are not familiar with one's work is inevitably lacking in perspective
• Do not expect a critic to deliver praise on an inferior image
• Be gracious rather than defensive when shortcomings are revealed
• Provide sufficient information about the image so that the reviewer has a sense of what you were wanting to achieve
• Even when the review is generally positive, look for elements where one might improve

Ralph Waldo Emerson wrote: "Good criticism is very rare and always precious." In a society where too many people find morbid satisfaction in the verbal destruction of others' work, those words ring more true than ever. One cannot improve if one is not aware of a deficiency. However, criticism should always be a tool and never a weapon.

May all our words regarding the photography of others be applied as delicately as a diaper to a newborn child.

DON'T DAMAGE THE MODEL :: SAFETY ON LOCATION

"Expect the unexpected" is an over-used cliche that rarely lives up to the marketing hype to which it is attached. Yet, it is a reasonable mantra for any photographer planning to shoot on location. Once the confines of the studio have been left behind, one becomes subject to forces of nature, physics and humanity that are wholly unpredictable and, at times, quite dangerous.

Shooting on location can be quite exciting. Roaring waterfalls, crashing waves, breathtaking skies, and ebullient models are among the very reasons one picks up the camera in the first place. Unfortunately, in the fervor one often feels for getting "the shot," too often overlooked is the cardinal rule:: DON'T DAMAGE THE MODEL, which, by extension, applies to the photographer as well. One's haste and zeal to secure image to media should never, whether by intent or ignorance, create danger that might cause the next photograph to be one's last.

The days when photographers were generally stout men lugging a hundred pounds of equipment up the side of a hill are well in our past. Photographers today often gripe if their camera body weighs over five pounds. As a group, we do not generally cast as imposing a shadow as did our predecessors, while our increasingly digital equipment becomes all the more attractive to the snatch-and-grab thief. Most elements of location safety are but common sense if one takes the time to give the matter any serious thought. Yet, reviewing the basics, along with a few specific self-defense ideas, is well worth a few moments consideration.

1. AVOID GOING ALONE. Sure, there are times one wants to just grab the camera and get away from the noise and hustle. There's something peaceful about lying on the ground and waiting for the sun to hit just the right place for that perfect shot. Yet, for the majority of situations, and certainly any time a model is involved, there really is no legitimate reason to not have someone else tagging along.
   
   Having a third (or fourth) person increases the safety factor considerably. Both the photographer and the model must necessarily focus on their work, which often means blocking any external distractions that might occur just off set. While such attention is imperative to good photography, it inherently puts both the photographer and model at risk. A third, largely uninvolved, person need not be distracted and can watch for changing weather or approaching danger.
   
   In the most extreme situations involving personal assault, it may be possible for a would-be assailant to grab hold of two people, but almost certainly not three, leaving one person free to call for assistance. While one hopes to avoid such life-threatening situations, reports of such incidents have increased significantly over the past five years, giving cause for greater diligence in this matter.
   
   
2. Scout the location in advance. Chances are, any responsible photographer is going to scout a location anyway. However, in addition to considerations relating directly to the shoot, one should also consider safety factors. If shooting outdoors, consider:
   
   
   • the terrain: is the ground flat and soft, or rough and rocky?
   • Is there traffic nearby and, if so, what potential dangers might it pose, not only in terms of getting hit, but air quality that may cause breathing issues for anyone with asthma or other related conditions?
   • if shooting on a beach, what are tide conditions and when do they change?
   • is there a potential for acrid smells from nearby industrial facilities?
   • If shooting in water such as a stream or creek, what is the condition of the water and its bed?
   • what is the likelihood of encountering bees, wasps, snakes, or other potentially dangerous creatures?
     
   
   When shooting indoors at a non-studio location, consider:
   
   
   • what is the condition of the electrical facilities?
   • is running water available?
   • where are the nearest fire extinguishers?
   • are floor surfaces slick or stained with questionable material?
   • how many fire exits are available?
   
   Many of these items merely require a glance around the area and won't require much, if any, adjustment to one's shoot preparation. However, knowing this information can save considerable reaction time in the event of an emergency.
   
   
3. Maintain a first aid kit. Minor cuts and scrapes are the most common injuries experienced on location. A variety of bandage sizes, cotton balls, alcohol swabs, and anti-bacterial gel will usually address any minor problem that might arise. When shooting in the spring and summer months, one may want to add some form of mosquito repellent, skin lotions with sunblock, and possibly even a snake-bite kit. A thermal blanket is always an important item to guard against shock in the event of a fall or severe injury.
   
   Additionally, photographers should inquire of models whether they have any specific allergies or medical conditions that may be triggered by elements on location. Persons suffering with various forms of asthma, which is the most common issue, usually carry personal inhalers with them, but photographers should be aware of the disease and knowledgeable in providing assistance should an attack become severe. Diabetes and epilepsy are additional conditions that, while generally kept under control with medication, photographers should know how to address in the event of an emergency.
   
   Scented oils and lotions are the most common source of skin irritants, and unfortunately, may be allergies to which the model is not aware. Photographers are best advised to use unscented materials to avoid such unexpected reactions. Generally, there is little that can be done to offset skin irritants. Minor rashes may be reduced with zinc oxide. Calamine lotion helps with reactions to poison oak or sumac, but doesn't do much to help the shoot continue. If the source of the irritant is unknown, wash the area with warm water and seek medical attention.
   
   
4. Watch for changing weather conditions. When shooting outdoors, weather may be an obvious consideration. After all, the entire shoot is likely dependent on the weather meeting expectations. One tends to let down that guard when shooting indoors, though, which may result in unexpected excitement in the middle of the session.
   
   Lightening poses the most unexpected danger. The sun may still be shining on the model when changing conditions create lightening on the leading edge of a storm. The instant lightening is observed at a range close enough to hear the resulting thunder, photographers must make the decision to either move the shoot to an indoor location or cancel completely. During any weather event in which lightening is involved, there is no such thing as a perfectly safe outdoor location. Even indoor facilities with large windows can present unacceptable risks.
   
   No matter what time of year, atmospheric conditions can change suddenly and without much warning. Just prior to this writing, weather conditions went from an unseasonably warm 51 degrees to a chilling 20 degrees in less than three hours, spawning everything from rain, hail, tornadoes, and snow, leaving meteorologist scrambling in an attempt to keep up. While that situation might be rare, it does illustrate how rapidly conditions can move from favorable to dangerous. Photographers are responsible to maintain an awareness of environmental conditions and, when necessary, cancel a shoot to maintain everyone's safety.
   
   
5. Consider clothing dangers. What one wears on a shoot may seem unimportant to many inexperienced photographers. Yet, more than a few life-threatening conditions have been suffered simply because someone was wearing clothing inappropriate to the conditions.
   
   Over exposure to both heat and cold leave photographers and models at risk often without immediately realizing the danger. Fashion concepts are frequently shot during the opposite season for which the fashion is intended, resulting in models wearing long sleeves and heavy fabrics in warm weather, or swimwear and light fabrics in winter. Keeping everyone well hydrated and limiting the amount of time the unseasonable fashion is worn help eliminate potential problems regardless of the season.
   
   Footwear is important when shooting on or trekking through uneven terrain and/or in shallow water. Even the most sure-footed explorer is subject to injury when footwear is inadequate to provide sufficient guard against slipping or puncture.
   
   Hats and gloves may at times seem to get in the way, but are crucial both in regards to maintaining an even body temperature and avoiding sunburn.
   
   Finally, be extremely careful with clothing when using any type chemical or open flame during a shoot. Unlike fabrics in clothing designed for children, few adult fashions are made with flame retardant material and some synthetic materials may deteriorate simply from the fumes of certain chemicals such as paint solvents. Exercise extreme caution any time such potentially dangerous material is utilized.
   
   
6. Let someone else know where you are going and what time to expect your return. Both models and photographers should follow this rule no matter where they are going for a shoot. Even if the time frame for a shoot is uncertain, establish a period where everyone "checks in." In the unfortunate event that everyone involved is incapacitated, the ability of rescue officials to locate your party is critical to saving lives.
   
   
7. Keep food and water handy. Dehydration is one of the most significant, and most overlooked dangers one faces when shooting on location. Regardless of the season or temperatures, the body loses moisture with any level of physical exertion and more with any exposure to the elements. This slow, quiet loss of fluids may result in headaches and loss of coordination, and may trigger myriad otherwise dormant medical conditions. Since many models don't want to complain about what seems to be minor physical discomfort, problems seldom become evident until the situation is critical.
   
   In similar fashion, keeping some manner of food, such as fruit bars or hard candy, can help fight against anything from hypoglycemia, which is common when models haven't eaten for a while, to scratchy throats and coughs. Prepackaged food items travel easy and provide minimal sustenance in most emergency situations.
   
   
8. Hard cases are more useful than soft. Over the past few years, many photographers have taken to carrying lighter-weight soft bags for their equipment. Tear-resistant fabric and foam padding are sufficient to protect equipment from minor bumps and abrasions. However, soft cases may not be the best choice for photographers who frequently shoot on location or under any variety of challenging conditions.
   
   While any photographer does their best to protect their equipment, accidents invariably occur and the more one shoots the more likely one will fall victim to such an event. Soft cases do not protect lenses from falls greater then two or three feet. Digital camera bodies are essentially mini computers and subject to all the dangers from bumping and exposure to electrical and magnetic fields as would be a laptop. Furthermore, many soft cases are wholly inappropriate should something happen and the camera bag decide to go for a swim.
   Hard cases, whether made of rigid plastics or more sturdy titanium-based alloys, provide a much higher level of protection against both the elements and accidental mishandling. While their weight may be greater, what little inconvenience that may cause is immediately offset when the case protects against damage that would otherwise require the purchase of new equipment. In the event of extreme emergency, hard cases may also make formidable weapons as well.
   
   
9. Equipment can be weapons. No one likes to think that they will ever be placed in any degree of physical danger while on a shoot. Yet, as previously mentioned, cases of assault against both photographers and models have increased over the past five years. Most generally, such instances seem to occur in highly populated urban settings where the digital equipment is seen as being easily-pawned sources of cash (few would-be thieves have any idea how little value cameras hold at a pawn shop). While every effort should be made to avoid such situations, when confronted photographers are not without options in fending off would-be attackers.
   
   Tripods can be especially effective in extreme circumstances. Most modern tripods allow for their rubber tips to be screwed upward, revealing pointed tips designed to hold in soft soil. While the points are not sharp, their appearance can be menacing and, if necessary, may be effective in fending off attack long enough to secure additional assistance or call for help.
   
   Using the "test" mode on most flashes can also be an effective tool against assault. A flash set to full power and aimed directly into an assailants eyes causes momentary shock and blindness, giving one opportunity to run for help.
   
   No matter what the circumstances, photographers are best advised to apply only sufficient force as is necessary to escape a dangerous situation. The loss of equipment or other valuables is insignificant compared to the loss of life.
   
   
10. When in doubt, leave. Obviously, there is no way one can ever plan sufficiently to anticipate every possible danger that may occur while shooting on location. Who expects a curling iron to explode, or a flash to upset nesting hornets? Given enough time in the field, one is likely to encounter numerous circumstances which would never have been imagined while sitting quietly in the studio. The world is wild and adventurous and unpredictable, which is exactly the way we want it.
    
    One should never question their own uneasy concern, however. If a situation doesn't feel right, even if the dangers cannot be immediately identified, the more prudent move is to leave and re-schedule for another time. Neither model or photographer should ever feel compelled to shoot in an environment in which they are uncomfortable. Such photographs are not likely to be of usable quality and, at the very least, waste everyone's time. There is no shame in being safe and looking forward to shooting another day.

Hopefully, these considerations are sufficient to guard against the majority of safety concerns one might have when shooting on location. As previously stated, a little common sense goes a very long way in keeping everyone and everything safe. Our hope would be that every shoot would be incident and worry free, but for those occasions when something goes wrong, it is a relief to know that one is prepared.