Monday, 27 December 2010
Friday, 24 December 2010
Tuesday, 5 October 2010
This is after working on the image using adobe lightroom, I mainly got lightroom for processing Raw files, but its a great programe, I prefer using it to photoshop or paint shop pro (and I prefer paint shop pro to photoshop) I think photoshop is just to complicated. Lightroom is a lot more user freindly, and in my opinion better at doing what it does, it seems to be more geared/specific for use by photographers. I used a variety of tools in the develop tab to alter the exposure, contrast, brightness and clarity in certain areas of the image. I also used the luminance and saturation tabs in the colors to enhance the blue and clouds in the sky, giving the same effect as a polarizer filter. Also used the green and yellow saturation to enhance the color in the tree. Taken with my Canon 30D, Raw capture, iso 100, at f11.
Monday, 4 October 2010
Callum trying to watch kids t.v. Another example of b/w using Nik Silver Efex Pro, a brill programe with lots of presets. It will even replicate the look of various popular film types, but I prefer to alter it manualy using the exposure, contrast and brightness tabs until it looks right to my eye. This was taken with my Canon 10D, and Sigma 18-50 EX. 1/15sec at f2.8 focused on left eye. Raw capture processed in adobe lightroom, b/w using Nik Silver Efex Pro and resized using picasa.
Thursday, 9 September 2010
Thursday, 5 August 2010
I came across the following quote in a book iv been reading, and would apply the same sentiments to my own images above:
From a previous life: 1978-80 travels with a Kodak Instamatic. I took the above images long before I became a serious photographer, back in 1978 - 80, I was 19 or 20 years old at the time. I travelled overland to India, well that was the plan, I became sort of stranded in Tehran, Iran for 3 months during the onset of the Islamic revolution. I quite like some of the images, even if I say so myself. I wish I had have been into photography back then, I could have got some great documentary type images in Iran. I have a lot more then this, I just scanned some I liked, the original prints are small about 3inch square, and are not in great condition, mainly because of their age. And the Kodak instamatic camera I used to take these were not great cameras, just a cheap compact type camera, it was not even 35mm film, something smaller, the film was in a cartridge which just pushed into the back of the camera, I remember it had rotating flash cubes you could mount on it, LOL. Footnote: All the above images in this post are Copyright Tim Everett Photography.
Tuesday, 25 May 2010
As I said in my last update I like both film and digital and will continue using both mediums. I have addressed my reservations regarding B/W prints from digital files after discovering the excellent Nik Silver Efex Pro, a powerful tool for creating B/W prints, used as a plug in with Photoshop or Lightroom. (Though I still prefer the look of film for B/W work) I plan to upgrade my DSLR, either a 40D or 1D mk2, carnt decide which to go for. I think the 1D mk2 is a nice compromise between full frame and the x1.6 crop sensor, at x1.3 crop my 20-35mm zoom would still be quite wide on the 1D mk2. When it comes to photography the most decisive, important piece of kit is the person behind the camera. I often think photographers get to bogged down in the technical side, of course you need to be competent in that area but at the end of the day you can only use what you have at hand, and aslong as you know its limitations and how to get the best from it, you can concentrate on being creative. The image above is a B/W conversion of one of my Ilkley images, visit my website to see more images from Ilkley.
Tuesday, 11 May 2010
Thursday, 11 March 2010
Friday, 12 February 2010
Having had some time to use my 10D, I can now say I like both Film and digital, I enjoy processing raw files using adobe lightroom. After learning about the mega pixel myth (i.e. theres a lot more factors impacting on the final image then just how many pixels you have, such as sensor size, Lens etc) I had the image above, which I took over the xmas holidays enlarged to a 12x18inch print and was impressed with the results. Its true what they say about the mega pixel myth. I shot it in raw, tweaked it a bit in adobe lightroom and saved it as a full size jpeg before having it enlarged.
However I have a lot of reservations regarding b/w images from digital files, iv been experimenting with b/w conversions from my 10D and find it difficult getting monochrome images anywhere as near as I can with film. Maybe if I had a top quality photo printer and the best paper money can buy I would see a difference, but all that is extra cost. Considering I enjoy the traditional wet process method, and get far better results for b/w work, it make more sense for me to simply use my film cameras. I will use both digital and film in the future, at the end of the day its the person behind the camera that takes the image, not the camera itself!
I still don't understand this constant obsession with image quality amongst digital photographers, of course its a consideration, everyone wants nicely exposed sharp images, but at the end of the day the image content, framing, subject etc should be the main concern, even more so if you consider photography as art, some people believe sharpness is overrated, I remember watching a t.v. programme about the photographer David Gepp shooting Venice with one of his home made pin hole cameras, with fantastic results, great artwork. The use of diffusers were very popular at one time for Portraits. When I decided to check out digital photography, I did some research to determine which model to buy, (if money was no object I suppose I would have just got the latest high end pro model) and came across some reviews of different models, on one someone had taken the same image with various models at various ISO settings, then blown up a particular small area to compare noise levels, Hello, whats all that about, the human eye and brain just cannot do such things in the real world! People don't see with their eyes, they see with the brain, the eyes just been like the lens of a camera. That's why in my opinion this obsession with image quality is bull crap, you get the same thing with new T.V. systems now, blue ray, sting ray, High definition, super duper high definition etc, etc. If people had superhuman vision, and Opticians became jobless overnight there might be some point to it. In the met museum of modern art in N.Y. City, you will find photographic prints hanging taken over 50 years ago, not because of image quality but because of the subject content.
The late great A.Adams foresaw the digital era:
"I eagerly awaite new concepts and processes. I beleive that the electronic image will be the next major advance. Such systems will have their own inherent and inescapable structural characteristics, and the artist and functional practitioner will again strive to comprehend and control them" - Ansel Adams forward to his book 'The Negative' published January 1980.