Stamp

As part of my ongoing project to produce a book about Iceland, I've had to dig out my biography and look at what might be relevant for the release of the book.

It's almost a ridiculous thing to say - but I'd completely forgotten that in 2007, one of my images - an image of Selfoss waterfall in the north east of Iceland, was used on two stamps in a fetching panoramic design.

I got in touch with Grafískur hönnuður, the graphic design company who worked on this for SEPAC (Small European Postal  Administration Communities) organisation. Borgar, my contact there - sent me the original Photoshop file today, so we can include it as part of the intro wrapped inside the dust jacket of the book.

All this digging up the past, has unravelled a few things for me. First, I'd forgotten about the stamp and I hadn't made the connection between it and my forthcoming book. But also, Borgar told me that the stamp won 4th place in the Deutsche Briefmarken-Revue “most beautful stamp in Europe competition” 2007!

How great is that?

Well, I guess that's a really nice surprise for today. It makes me wonder, just where I've been, and where I'm heading. My iceland book seems to be evolving (still - considering that I thought that the design was complete). So when a piece of work is done, it's never truly done is it? Things have a way of resurfacing and coming back full circle into your artistic life. Be it revisiting a place, revisiting work you did, or working on something new. The act of creating new work based on themes from your past can uncover so much and it's always worth taking a moment to consider who you were then and who you are now. It's only with some distance that I'm often able to be objective about 'what I am'.

New e-Book - Personal Exposures

Last thursday I released a new e-book and notified everyone who subscribes to my monthly newsletter about some special offers on the entire set of 10-ebooks that I offer. The special offer was a great success and finished last night at mid-night. If you'd like to be kept up to date on new workshop announcements or special offers, then please do subscribe to my newsletter - which you can do on my home page.

Over the past four years, I've been writing on this blog about the photographic process - which I feel is mostly to do with ourselves, rather than the equipment. It's been a really enjoyable process - putting to words, what I've been feeling and thinking.

So I felt it would be really nice to collate some of the best entries from this blog into an e-book. Inside, you'll find entries about finding inspiration, ways to approach editing your work post-shoot, the use of ND-grad filters on a range-finder camera, working out the dynamic range of a scene for correct exposure, and many other distractions from every day life :-)

I have to thank Mike Green (who has a very interesting blog) for suggesting it. I was talking to him just a few weeks back about some new e-Books that I'm writing. They're quite intensive to complete, because there's a lot of 'soul' being put into them - a lot of though to how best to describe some technical and logistical information. Mike asked me if I was ever going to do a compendium of entries from my blog. I didn't really think I've ever had much to say (feign mock modesty, etc, etc - I know I perhaps have too much to say at times). It was only when I went through my blog and had a look at what I've covered, I realised there was a lot of material, buried here, that if it was put together into a nice presentation, could make for a really nice e-Book.

I think it's turned out to be more than just a collation of blog entries though. The entire e-Book, in some ways, feels like something that is greater than the sum of its parts.

If you're interested, you can get it here.

Are you an image designer?

The answer should be yes. All photographer's are trying to instil an emotional reaction in those that view their images.

In this talk, Richard Seymour discusses how design of beautiful things is all about feeling, rather than thinking, but he goes beyond this to discuss how as a designer, he has to win viewers of his designs over in nano-seconds. I feel this is exactly the same thing that all photographer's have to do. All photography is about feeling, and sometimes, we think too much, and that gets in the way of 'feeling beauty'.

New Zealand

Way back in 2001, I visited New Zealand. I didn't get much of a chance at the time to explore the country, but what I did find, was rather beautiful. My brother now lives there - in Christchurch. I'm hoping to go and visit him some day, and this morning I found myself browsing through the collection of books I bought whilst there. I seem to have a habit of buying as many photography books as I can from local photographers on my travels.

One particular copy that I liked very much, and looking at today for the first time in years - is Scott Freeman's book. I think it's interesting for me to go back and view this book, because I am seeing his images as a very different photographer from the one I was eleven years ago. I know I've progressed, learned a lot, and am always learning. So I think it's always an interesting thing to go back and view the work of others when you're at a different stage in your own creative development.

And what a revelation it is for me to enjoy Scott's book, almost like I'm seeing his images for the first time. There are compositions in it that I maybe found hard to understand back in 2001, but now feel a connection with. He has an eye for symmetry in his work, and his understanding of light and contrast is very good too.

He makes me want to return to photograph little barrier island, and Tongariro National Park. I also would love to return to Abel Tasman National Park too. And of course, Milford Sound.

I also feel he's given me a chance to go back and reconsider how I approached shooting the Moueraki boulders on the east coast. Certainly, I feel these days that what seemed like a place that held potential for maybe a few hours, could be a complete study of its own over a few days.

That is perhaps how much more considered I have become in my attitude to locations over the years.

So, I guess I'm building up a bit of a 'bond' right now with New Zealand. I feel I need a change, to go somewhere different, do something new. I never really 'got' New Zealand first time round, but I think that's because I wasn't ready. Some places, I feel, have a certain character, and require a certain ability, to be photographed well. They also need to be discovered at the right time in your development as a photographer.

So maybe I'll return to New Zealand sooner than I'd imagined. Maybe it will help spur me on to think more about those trips to Australia and Tasmania that I've long considered. Time will tell, and I think what Scott Freeman's book has allowed me to do - is to start the dreaming process of falling in love with a place.

It is this 'falling in love', that I often need to guide my attention and inspiration. If we dream it, think about it - we invite it into our hearts and minds, and it soon becomes part of our lives.

That's certainly how I get my inspiration and focus or 'drive' for moving forward in my own work.

Book design complete

A few days ago, I was down in Nottingham, working on the final press book design for my 2nd book. If you've not been reading my blog of late, then maybe you don't know that I'm planning on releasing a 2nd book this Autumn / Winter. The book is about Iceland and it's mostly a monograph, but it does have a few stories and experiences from my time shooting there.

I'd like to say a big thank you to Darren Ciolli-Leach at 22:22 Design for his invaluable assistance and experience. Darren has been instrumental in turning my mockup's into something more professional looking. He says - in his own words that he's a 'font-aholic'. I particularly like the fonts that he suggested for the book covers.

I'm intending to release the book in a few variants:

1. Basic edition

2. Book with special limited (to 300 copies only) slipcase.

3. Book with slipcase and limited edition print (125 copies only)

4. Deluxe version with slipcase and three prints that make up a triptych (45 copies only).

There will be more details about the book and my special guest photographer who has written the preface for the book in this month's newsletter (due out on the 27th).

If you don't subscribe to my newsletter, than you can do it on my home page. Each month I always notify people of new workshops and special offers firstly through the newsletter, so it's a good idea to subscribe if you want to be one of the first to know about workshops before they sell out, for instance.

As for my current book, the limited edition print versions of Loch Lurgainn are almost sold out now, so if you were thinking of getting a copy with one, then time is running out :-)

Creative people Commit

A few weekend's ago, I was in Torridon conducting a weekend workshop. One of the topics that came up was the abundance of choice that we have as photographers. It's a well worn path of discussion for me, and something I've got very firm views on. I believe that when we have more choice, it does not equate to better creative control.

In fact, I think my motto on occasions has been that 'less is more'. One such instance is in lens choice. I don't believe that having zooms makes for a better approach to improving composition, and that by using fixed focal length lenses (primes) we have a lot of advantages over those who believe that having a zoom will allow them to cover all scenarios.

Let me explain. Primes force you to hunt the landscape. You have to move, to find the right composition and fit it to work with your lens. Zooms make us lazy and we tend to stay rooted to the same spot. We don't engage with the landscape so much. Also, if you are a beginner, then zooms make things more complicated because I believe that if you have, say, 3 fixed focal length lenses such as a wide, standard and telephoto, you get to know them well and in particular - start to 'visualise' in those particular focal lengths. It cuts down decisions and allows you to get on with the task at hand - making images.

It's a complete folly that having lots of lenses, lots of camera bodies, and carrying everything with you all the time - means you're ready for anything. In truth, you've lumbered yourself down with a lot of dead weight, and too many options.

There's an adage 'the best camera and lens you have - is the one you have with you'. If you have one lens, you'll work with it. Get the most out of it. If you have five lenses, you've got to make your mind up which one to use, and until you're really experienced in using them - you'll only add confusion to the process of trying to make good images.

So what is my point?

Well, I've not really got to it yet. So far, you've just been listening to a pre-able, and what I'd like to really discuss is that anyone who's wanting to work on their photography and improve on it, needs to be able to commit. Make decisions and stand by them. Those that go out with all the lenses in the world to capture 'everything' are only distancing themselves from making any firm commitments.

We seem to live in an age where we want endless undo features. We wish to be able to capture 'everything'. Well, we can't be omnipresent. That's someone else's job. Not ours. No. We have to compromise, accept we won't capture everything, and nor will we be able to get everything 'right'. Those that think they can by taking every available lens with them is only fooling themselves.

And my point is: the same for post-capture editing.

I'm always fascinated when I show groups on my workshops the endless undo facilities of LightRoom. Compared to Photoshop, you can undo anything at any time, days, months or years after you edited it - in LightRoom. But you can't with Photoshop. Once you crop and save that file, quit the application - you've lost any possibility of going back in the history, because Photoshop is destructive: it only remembers your edits during the current session. Not for the rest of your life.

So you better get it right.

Or maybe that should be - you better get used to living with your decisions.

I make bad choices all the time. But by looking back at what I did, months, years later, I see that I'm developing and learning. I need to make mistakes to improve. I need to commit and believe that what I chose as a suitable edit - was right - at that time.

So my point is - I don't think having endless undo capability in LightRoom is really that important. Yes, it's nice, but it's not really a feature I seek or feel is vital to any editing application I use - because I don't look back. I don't waste time thinking that I might have got that edit wrong. I make a decision in Photoshop, do the crop and move forward.

I'm aware that during the editing stage, images become photographs. I'm aware that their personalities change. They become something else. Each edit closes a door of what they might have been, and opens a door to what they are becoming. I embrace the future and I'm excited to wonder just which direction the editing will take the image in.

Sure, there's a valid reason for having undo features. I use the history in Photoshop all the time. If I'm not sure just where I'm going, I'll revert, go back a step or two, compare, and see if I think the current edit I'm doing is justified. But once I save that file, I'm committed. I don't look back.

I believe in myself, and my fallibleness too.

It reminds me of each time I make an image on my film cameras. Once I shoot a frame, I know I can't go back and change it. I live with it, embrace it for whatever it may be, and whatever it may become, once it's scanned and loaded into my digital darkroom.

No, to think you have endless undo possibilities, and can 'go back' at any stage is for those who lack conviction, or confidence in their own artistic-leanings.

Perhaps the message in this post is to trust yourself.

Accept that you won't always get it right, that anything we do in photography is a learning process, a stepping stone towards better images in the long run.

After all, a good artist is one that is open to growth. And growth only happens when we open ourselves to letting things go with the flow and being free enough to see what might happen, and not worry too much if what we create appears to be a failure (I would argue any failure probably holds a lesson for us).

Maybe you feel this posting doesn't apply to you. Maybe you feel you've achieved a level of 'perfection'. I think one attribute all creative people should possess is that of humbleness. If you feel you're creating perfection, then maybe you're in more trouble than you really know.

I'm certainly aware that I'm on a journey and that what might seem good today, may feel wanting tomorrow. But I don't hold myself in high regard and nor do I give myself a hard time about my decisions. I just try to let things flow. Everything is of its time. I try to be kind to my own creativity. If I'm kind to it, then it will be good to me.

Creativity is a constantly learning journey. Being extremely kind to your mistakes is really important. But also holding true to your convictions at the time of the edit is really important too. The images show who you were at that moment.

So for my money's worth - I'm not too bothered about having that undo safety net that Lightroom offers. It's a distraction on the path of creative learning. I make my decisions, I live with them and only by living with them, I learn. But in order to learn, I have to commit.

Screen Calibrators

You may remember a few weeks ago, I wrote a very brief report on my purchase of a BasICColour Discus screen calibrator/profiler (see photo). The Discus is a 'relatively' expensive screen calibrator, built of extremely high quality components.

I'd read a lot of reviews of the product before buying it, and the calibrations I'd seen were so tight, that I felt that this was the product for me. My old screen calibrator broke last year, and I'm in the process of preparing my images for a 2nd book, so I really wanted to make sure the images were as accurate as possible on my screen.

I've just done some tests comparing the Discus to a Spyder 3, but before I show you the results, I'd like to make some things very clear about calibration and profiling:

1. Not all screen calibrators are created equal.

2. Not all screens are created equal. I've found some screens - particularly laptop screens - a nightmare (or impossible) to profile.

3. Yes, when your calibration software says 'calibrated successfully', what it is really saying is that the device has calibrated/profiled your screen to the best of its ability under the circumstances.

4. The circumstances that can affect a successful calibration are things like - type of monitor you have, how well it can be calibrated, and also, the settings you wish to calibrate to. For instance, I had difficulty getting good calibrations out of my Eizo CG241W monitor and BasICColour support (which was excellent and very responsive) told me that my monitor, or a lot of modern monitors don't like to be calibrated below 120cmd. By moving the brightness up a little on the monitor from 110cmd (my preferred luminance), I got a tighter calibration. They also asked me to adjust the black point calibration too. So I know my monitor is not ideal, but i suspect that this is the case with everything - everything is a compromise right? The other circumstances are the kind of calibrator you have, and how 'tight' it is calibrated itself. As I say, everything is a compromise.

Below are two graphs, showing you how 'tight' the Spyder 3, and also the Discus calibrations are. In essence, the colour graph shows you how far the calibration was (the achieved value) compared to the desired value. Green and amber suggest calibrations that are 'acceptable' while red indicates anything that is not. You can see in the Spyder calibration that it failed to calibrate the blacks well, and the achieved result is quite different from what was intended.

BasICColour-Display (the software used to calibrate and profile my monitor) says it failed to get the screen within an acceptable range under the conditions I wished to have it calibrated to, by using the Spyder 3. This does not mean that the Spyder 3 is a bad device - you get what you pay for to some degree, and I would argue that the profiles it creates on most systems are more than acceptable for most users - if you're an amateur looking to get your screen 'within range', then I'd say it's fine.

Now comparing the results from the Discus above, you can see that the delta-E (the difference between the target and achieved profiling) is much tighter. The calibration / profiling has been successful. You can see there's still a difference in dark tones - particularly the dark blues for some reason - are a little off, but overall, I know the calibration is within an acceptable range.

I think the Discus is a very professional, tightly-calibrated device. Apart from the build quality (like picking up a piece of Tank accessory), it does seem to deliver on giving some of the best profiles around at the moment for under £1,000.

Of course, I guess you'd have to figure out if it's worth it to yourself, and whether it matters that much. As someone who is preparing images for print in books, I think colour management is vital. I need to know that what I'm dealing with on screen is very close to what is inside the file. To me, screen calibration and colour management in particular, are as important as what camera I choose, or what tripod I buy.

As with all reviews on the web - you should really consider doing your own tests - if that's possible. You may find that cheaper colourmeters like the X-Rite Eye One Pro, or the Spyder series are more than acceptable for your needs. But I suspect, if you're the kind of person who must have the best (it's certainly a fault of mine), then you may wish to look higher up in the price bracket (the Discus sells for £850 here in the UK) for something with tighter abilities. But only you can really test to see if you notice a big difference to the profiles they build.... the ultimate test really, is in viewing a profile-test-target on your monitor against a daylight illuminated print in a viewing booth.

I don't offer this posting to say if one calibrator is better than another, and my posting is not intended to slate the Spyder 3. As I say, the Spyder 3 may be more than acceptable to you and give you profiles you're more than happy with, but I think if there's a message in this post - it is that even if your calibrator says it's done it's job and calibrated and profiled your monitor successfully, it's the degree of how well it's done it that is the point. Colourmeters can only get your monitor to within a certain range of the target calibration.

Just how close, and whether you'll notice the difference -  is perhaps the most pressing question. You'll only find out by doing your own tests. I would say though, that in order to confirm how good a profile or calibration is - you need to verify it, and that's only really possible by comparing an evaluation target in Photoshop (colour managed) against one that is displayed under a daylight viewing booth.

More cover mock-ups

I'm heading down to Nottingham on Monday to work on my 2nd book layout. Darren has been sending me some ideas on the cover and slipcase, and these have been feeding back into my own mind and resulting in more changes.

The choice of a font, can really make a huge difference to how a books is received. We conjure up expectations based on how the cover of a product looks, and in these mock-ups, the font is more 'modern' than the one's in the previous mock-ups.

I find this all very exciting, and full of surprises. I've been living with the previous mock-up in my mind for some time, and was imagining the book sitting on my bookshelf, and now, what was becoming 'real' is now becoming fiction for me again... something fluid, changeable. It makes me wonder just how different the book will actually look once we've got the design complete, which I would imaging, should take a few more weeks of fine tuning once Darren and myself have gone through setting up the initial look.

The other good news is that the preface has been written by my very special guest photographer. More news about this at the end of the month in my monthly newsletter.

Variations on a theme (read location)

This image was taken at one of the many times I've been down at the waters edge of Reinefjorden.

I can't seem to stay away from the place, and I've shot it under vastly different lighting. The above shot was taken in February as part of a Safari I was running. We did come back in March too, and we got the light you see in the image below:

Quite a marked difference in light. Partly to do with the sun being more directional, hitting the edges of the Lofoten 'wall', this shot was very much a 'throw-away' effort at the time. But I'm glad I decided to stay put and just shoot. Literally a minutes walk from where we were staying, it was from a slightly different vantage point. But it was the same fjord, and the same mountains, just from a slightly different angle, and with much different light.

But I also shot this image in March too, of the same fjord:

But I think the last image is more a 'standard' landscape image. It shouts 'vista-shot', which is no bad thing, but just perhaps a little too 'expected' for my own liking. I much prefer the first two efforts as in each of them, there is a very strong message that I feel is less evident in this shot.

I think that what I'm striving for in every image I make, is some form of presence, or individuality. Certainly the first two are very unique. The first is mostly a play on lighter tones and calm reflections, with a dominant mountain in the frame, while the second image is mostly about directional, moody light.

Returning to the same location time and again, always yields something new, because each time the location is new. We are reactionary beasts and in photography, I feel that means we react very much to the differences in the quality of light - if we choose to observe, and notice those differences.

When impressions don't match results

When I'm out making images, I have to trust my intuition - it's part of being a film shooter - I can't see what it is I've captured until the films are processed much later. I would say though, that after shooting film for over 20 years now, that I feel I've got a fairly good grasp on how well things are going at the time of capture.

But there have been a number of occasions of late, where I feel that what I created, once home, and reviewing the transparencies, did not equal what I thought I was achieving at the time. In some instances, the final images have surpassed what I felt I captured. This was evident last summer when I visited Iceland. I had a terrible head cold and felt that the entire shoot was a disaster. So much so, that I came home early, feeling very despondent and assured that the whole shoot had been a disaster.

When they returned, and I finished work on them, I discovered I had this collection of imagery:

I was a little overwhelmed at just how well the final images turned out, and in particular, how the images are perhaps some of my personal best work, despite my belief at the time that things weren't working for me whilst on location.

I'm curious as to just what it was, that helped me make such a strong collection of images, despite my belief at the time that the images were no good?

I feel, that we should always be willing to review not just our work, but also ourselves. I little bit of introspection - or self-awareness is no bad thing, and in fact, I think it's perhaps the most important thing in photography. We often overlook the most important ingredient in image making - ourselves. I've written about this on several occasions now, and I've even gone to the trouble of writing an ebook about it too.

So I'm no stranger to being surprised by my own efforts - a creative person should find himself surprised every now and then, and if he isn't - it's maybe because he never re-evaluates himself, or the work he's created.

Above is a contact sheet for my first escapade to the Lofoten Islands last March. I feel this too, is a very strong body of work. The only difference between this and my Iceland shoot, was that I knew I was capturing something of merit at the time.

So this year, I've been to Lofoten twice. I'm in the middle of editing the final images from two shoots - one in February where we had the most spectacular light and plenty of snow, and a second trip in March where the snow was fast disappearing and I didn't feel that enthused about what I was capturing.

Again though, I'm surprised. The latest (and most disappointing shoot) seems to be providing the most thought-provoking images out of the two shoots. Which is not what I anticipated.

I think there are perhaps numerous reasons why we should have such a disconnect between what we anticipated and what we actually get. I'll try to cover some of them (as I see them) here for you. Maybe you'd like to suggest some others that I've missed?

1. Lack of experience is the obvious one. But as I've said, I feel I've become pretty proficient at what I do, but there are still those moments where my vision seems out of sync with my ability.

2. Being overwhelmed by the experience of simply being there. Some places are more pleasant to shoot than others. But this has little impact on the final image. A rainy day can make the whole experience feel worthless, yet we can still come home with some surprising images. Part of this is because we have to learn that the quality of light that we find pleasing and enjoyable to be in, is not the same as the quality of light that a camera prefers to record. Camera's like low contrast light.

3. Energy levels. If you feel like crap, you can't really be that objective about what it is that you're doing. If you're unexperienced, you  will most probably let it influence your shoot as well. More proficient photographers (although not immune to this), can often still come home with good images because of the amount of experience and technique they've built up.

But i'm wondering, if you're not entirely there - if you're feeling sick, or your mind is distracted, and you still come home with good images, then what is going on? Is perhaps the illness taking your mind off things a little? Is it acting as a distraction? A distraction that allows the mind to think more laterally, and come up with things it ordinarily wouldn't?

Your comments are welcome.

3.