Polarizing Filter: The right application and where to use them.

Polarizing filters are among the fewest filters needed in digital photography. The days of lugging around a massive collection of filters to use with the film you are shooting are, well, over. Inside my camera bag I have one filter. A SunPak Polarizing Filter. I have had it since I have had my DSLR. It has been a great addition to my camera bag. I am going to show to examples of what a Polarizing filter is needed and used for.

I have a pair of not-so-expensive pair of sunglasses that I bought last year. I bought them at the mall, thinking they look great, but they wont be that great. I was wrong. They are polarized with a warm tone to them. Yes, I said warm tone. They offer a warmth about them that combined with the polarizing lenses makes viewing everything more beautiful and enjoyable to look at.

 

 

I have been thinking about landscapes a lot more lately as the weather is getting nice and the trees are filling in. On my way into my studio last week I finally decided to stop and make a few photographs of this one particular area that I pass quite frequently. I took out my camera and my filter and mounted it to the front of the lens. Now, before I got any further, I must explain that filters can be a little tricky to use. During my search to find the right page to link to that has the filter for sale, I found negative reviews about the product. This particular filter requires a little bit of knowledge before you just go and slap it on and make photographs. The two sets of images below will give a visual to assist in the explanation. A polarizing filter is designed to intensify the blue in the sky and make the photograph pop. It also adds a little bit of contrast to further increase “the pop” that the photo will have. 

 

Without Filter                       With Filter

 

 

If you look closely at the image on the left you will see that it is over exposed. You could take the image into photoshop and or lightroom to bring down the exposure and brightness a little bit. However, this is one more step to your work flow that could have been avoided by using the filter. While I was making these photographs, I did not have the intention of writing this article. But, it came to me while I was shooting. So, what I did was take the filter off and made a  photograph. Both sets of images, the top and bottom, all have the same camera settings. The photograph without filter is set to ISO 100  F4.5  1/180 sec. Which is the same for the photograph with the filter If these numbers are alien to you. Let me explain, ISO acts like what film speed used to, allowing the light to pass in fast. F 4.5 is the f-stop the size of the opening of the lens. Rule of thumb I created when I was young, smaller the number the larger the opening, which allows the most light to come in, 1/180 refers to 180th of a second, the time needed to make the exposure. It took 1/180th of a second to expose the photograph.

Basically when you are going to use the filter you have set the camera to give a slight over exposure. As you can see in both sets of images, the scene is over exposed. When you place the filter on the lens it brings down the exposure. Polarizing filters require more exposure in order to function properly. Polarizing filters require a +1 - +2 increase for exposures. (If you notice the image of the filter above, you will see that it is very dark for a filter, in comparison to a UV filter, which is clear and used to protect the front of your lens) This means if the meter in the camera reads the landscape at 1/250 you need to pull it down to around 1/180 with the filter.  One thing that I did see while reading the very harsh reviews of the filter was that it was hard to focus the lens in. If this is the case, simply set the camera to manual focus. 90% of my images are made using manual focus. This allows me to set the focus to get the sharpest image possible. I have noticed with some lenses, using it on auto focus can leave the image with a slight blur. Regardless, if you do experience a blur, just make sure you set the camera or lens to manual focus.

 

Without Filter                                           With Filter    

  

 

Landscape photography is basically the only application in terms of using a polarizing filter. Think water and sky when you think you need to use a polarizing filter. You wouldn’t want to be using one for shooting portraits. Using a polarizing filter will cut down on the editing and post-processing you will need to do to your photographs. The image with the filter has a slight vignette to it and that is it. Everything else was made in camera. If you decide to search for other reviews of the lens, make sure they discuss how to use it before the make accusations about the quality or worthiness of the product. The review that I read makes no warrant as how the product functions or the application (landscape) in which needed. It is a review written without idea as to how it works, functions, or when a polarizing filter is needed. Filters are sold based on peoples ability to use them. Though the Sunpak is a cheaper more economical purchase, it functions just as good as the pricier ones. And the examples above show for this. 

Wikipedia and Filters

 

Hoya Filters are arguably the best to use. They are more pricier.

 

Below are three examples of HDR images that I used a Polarizing Filter on to increase the dynamics even further.

 

     

Portraits

A few times a week I pass this location. In fact, I pass by a few times a day depending on how much running around I have to do when I am not in the studio. It has been about 2 years now since I have seen this composition. Today, (image on the left) the window was open and the curtain was knotted. I passed by saying “today is the day I make the photograph.” So, I ran and grabbed my camera and went back and spoke with the barber shop owner. Delighted, he took a seat and posed as how he can be found sitting on most days. 

It may have taken two years for the right moment to happen. But it is an image that I have not forgotten about. There is a moral to this article, never forget about the simple compositions and if you see the right moment, do not pass up on it. After 2 years I am finally satisfied with having made this photograph.

Videos: Interesting Youtube videos.

 

Canon 5D Mark II DSLR Review

 

 

Contemporary issues facing photography.

I just finished reading two great posts on Frank Wards blog The Coruscating Camera. Frank is an outstanding educator. As a photographer he is equally gifted and talented. His blog always provides a wealth of resourceful information that at times still further educates me in various parts of the photographic industry. AIPAD or iPad, one of his recent posts describes his trip with colleagues to AIPAD Photography show in New York City. The AIPAD show, "70 of the world's leading fine art galleries" brings together some of the most noteworthy and iconic photographers we have seen. I have for years wanted to make it to AIPAD, but it just seems that every year it comes around, I am working on something and can not take the time away.

As I progressed through the article that Frank wrote, I started to think about some of the contemporary photographic issues that we are starting to see. Digital photography has made it easier for Joe Average to go out and buy a camera, make some images, edit them beyond near recognition as a photograph, and call himself a photographer. This Joe average falls into what I like to call, a happy snapper. The individual who takes pictures of everything and anything he sees with minimal creativity or technical and compositional know-how. This issue can make it hard for pros trying to do their job. This is most prevalent at weddings when cousin Tommy has a camera with him and tries to piggy back your shooting hoping he can get the image that you are and give it to the couple as a gift. This in theory can take away from your business as a professional. This is a staggering issue that I see. However, I have a feeling that we are going to see a social plateau of photography very soon.

People are still getting acclimated with digital photography as the industry is pushing away from analog (film and darkroom, i.e the disappearance of film) and making way for more technological break thorough in terms of camera capabilities, digital printers, and new contemporary practices such as HDR Photography. HDR Photography makes possible images that were once traditionally almost impossible to get. I say almost, because a photographer that truly knew how to make images and use the darkroom could potentially make photographs that fell into the spectrum of high dynamic range (HDR). Which presents shadows, highlights, and mid-tones in one photograph. At the present, HDR is most notably seen as the over saturated process of producing some highly surreal photographs. There is an influx of people running out and making the most surreal images they can think to compose. Which is great in all, but soon that will slowly fade away as this is a social fad that we are seeing.

It may seem hypocritical of me to say this, as below this post are images that are produced using HDR techniques. However, I do not strive to achieve the overly surreal aesthetic that some people adore. My photographs have been described as that "old Technicolor process” that came before my time. Back to Frank's post about the AIPAD. As I was seeing familiar names in his article, I was thinking about how he describes the cost of images are rising. I have known for years that traditional silver prints and images made using alternative processes, (non-digital) are still widely collected, desired, and sought after. This leads me to another photographic issue. With all the advancements that digital has made, where does that leave digital fine photography?

Digital photograph is an ease of use. Making prints is seemingly easier than actually processing film and going into a darkroom. In terms of makinng prints I would drop the word seemingly and say that digital printing is much more easier. Digital allows you to make a bad photograph great in post production with leaves out the technical proficiency to make a photograph that requires minimal editing. What does this really mean?

It means people rely way too much on technology to make a good photograph. This translates even further to people care less about knowing what goes into making a well composed, properly exposed, photograph. Instead they care more about what goes into post-production in terms of editing and manipulating their images. A bad image becomes good when it goes from being to dark to properly expose-d in photoshop or what ever other medium they are using to edit their images. This is what still separates the pros from the happy snappers, which can be called the over-editors of the contemporary photographic generation. Even with the internet being overloaded with thousands of articles and tutorials, online resources, online video tutorials, people still tend to just overshoot, over edit, and care less about the proper mechanics of making photographs. It is easier to just rely and fall back on technology to fix what could have been avoided.

Another photographic issue is the disappearance of film and darkrooms. Film is fun. Shooting films means you really need to know how to use your camera and equipment. If not, you will be making costly mistakes. As film is being faded out of the industry, collectors are still seeking those iconic images made using traditional techniques, processes, and film. I have heard very little about digital fine art photography being correlated with galleries in regards pieces being collected. Frank once asked me what I thought the major difference was between digital and film. My response was tangibility. There is a tangible quality that film offers that digital does not. You can hold a negative in your hands after having physically made the photograph. Digital does not provide this physical quality until the output of the print. Even then there is still a generic and false aesthetic to them photograph.

I can provide this argument on the premise that I essentially grew up in the film generation. Even after digital made its introduction to the industry, I still used film for a number of years. My formal education with photography is in traditional practices. 400 Tri-X stole my heart and will always remain dear to me. Two projects I am currently working on, which are scheduled for exhibition in the next year rely on film, darkroom, and large format printing.

As photography progresses, we are going to see a drop off in the happy snappers. Social networking and digital photography are still infantile to us and people are still adapting to these new resources of communication. How does social networking factor into photography? Well, that is simple. People use social networking, i.e Facebook and Myspace to share photographs. There is direct link between the two. That link is people and the social responsibility to share images. Photography has always been a social tool used to create art, document, provide a visual queue to news and media issues, and lastly bring people together in terms of posing for that snap shot or portrait depending on who is photographing you, the pro or Uncle Ned, the happy snapper.

Photography in general is still very young in comparison to painting. There are a lot more advances to come. Some are great, some not so great. Fads replace photographic movements, such as pictorialism, impressionism and the photo-successionist movement. If you have a desire to learn more about things like this take a History of Photography course and familiarize yourself with contemporary practices. Academic institutions are still very much educating students in traditional processes of photography. But even so, a restructuring of the educational curriculum is being implemented as film is being pushed out.

As I was writing this article I came across this site: http://www.rleggat.com/photohistory/process1.htm I think it is every bit worth the time invested to read some of the interesting topics included. You can also find links to pictorialism and other movements within this site as well as complete history of the medium including the contributions that women have made. Women have always had a massive and influential role in the medium. As photographers and models, women have helped to shape, mend, and mold the medium. This in of its self is another history class that can be taught. A women’s role in photography was similar to the social networking role in the contemporary practice of photography. I suggest reading and researching the impacts that women have made to photography. It is way to much for me to cover at this point in time. But in conclusion I will say this, if you get a chance to shoot film before it disappears, please do so. Even if you do not get into the darkroom, you can still scan your film and work with it digitally. But knowing you’re holding a tangible piece of photographic evidence (the negative) speaks much more loudly than any memory card ever could.

Boston: Water and wet, a few photos.

So today I took a trip to Boston and Cambridge to do some visual research for a project I am working on. This project is leading to an exhibition this coming fall. (September-November 2010) Against my decision to not go, I went anyways. Hoping that the rain would not be an issue. Well, I was wrong. It was quite a down pour. The sever wind and rain made for some miserable walking conditions. I did not suffer as bad as some people did. The most common sight that I witnessed today was the wind destroying and taking umbrellas right out from above people. All over the city I saw the remains of umbrellas just laying there on the ground. I did manage to get a few photographs in though. One that I am very happy about. An image that went right into a separate portfolio I have been working on for about a year now. Though I am not going to post it here. However, I will post the following that sums up what it was like in the city today. A little over saturated and wet, but still exhibits the conditions people had to face today.

  

   

 

Abandonment: The human disappearance. Part II

Last week I made a post, the one below, containing images from a documentary project I am working on. I made a third trip to this location this morning. There is maybe one more possibly two more trips left before I will have completed the project in terms of photographing the location. Here are the images that I made this morning. Over the course of this week I will be scanning the film that I shot early last week. Working without a darkroom is very hard to do and requires a little bit more time to get the film processed. As you can see from these images though, I am focusing on the remnants of the human presence. Nothing in these photographs has been constructed to add to the composition. Everything that I have photographed was and is left in the disarray that I have found it. There are a few more images to be made that really emphasizes the sudden and abrupt disappearance and abandonment of this property. Though the area outside of the building is shaping up for development, it really begs to question, why all of a sudden were only certain belongings taken and so much more left behind. On that note, I will end with this: there are more photographs to come that show the quick and impromptu vanishing of people. 

 

 

 

Abandonment: The human disappearance. A photographic essay.

Passing this location three times a week I began to notice the changes that were being made. The house began to change, fade away, become a memory. The changing landscape is paving way for a new development. The human presence has taken a once beautiful home and vacated it, leaving nothing but waste, debris, and memories. As I was passing this location 3 days prior I noticed the sunlight hitting a set of mattress in the back of the house. This image is what compelled me to investigate the property. Twice now, using two different formats, (film and digital) I have made photographs that show the remains of the human presence.