I mentioned re-doing my website recently. I've put a new one together. It's sleeker than the last one.

I've been in the mood for a website change for while. I lazed about looking at different design options. In the end I found a program that struck me as kind of whimsical and the demo felt easy to use. I downloaded it from the Apple Store and immediately ran into a problem. The program wouldn't open. I tried stuff but my toolbox, as regards fixing aggravating stuff on computers, is poorly stocked.  I decided to get in touch with the company's support and sent an e-mail describing my issue then I sat back and started retouching images on a different project, convinced that I'd be in for the same long wait that seems to be part of most company's "support."

I was astonished when less than 15 minutes later I had an e-mail from one of the developers telling me exactly what I needed to do. Turns out it was an Apple Store download issue and not an issue with the software. I spent a day getting used to the interface, reading the documentation and playing around with the little boxes and the typefaces.

The next day I got to work in ernest and started putting together my fairly simple, four page website. Frankly, the hardest part of the whole process is trying to decide what images go into the galleries and which ones are left along the side of the road like a crushed cigarette butt.

The second hardest part of being your own website designer is writing about yourself and your business. The last time I meandered down the road of auto-biographical pontification I felt like I was being too folksy and light-hearted. This time I feel as though I might be erring the "overly stern" side. But the wonderful thing about fun and simple to use software like the app I used to do the site is that the site can change all the time. Almost blog-like in it's topicality.

The software I used is called Sparkle and it's made for Apple Computers. It's not for anyone who needs an e-commerce site or lots and lots of moving parts. It's perfect for a smaller business that just wants to present the products and services to interested clients. My site is mostly an online portfolio and I know I'll be adding to it with more galleries of images and also video.

I'm asking my friends for their feedback before I send any links to clients or prospective clients. Crowdsourcing the code?

At any rate, here's what I put up today: www.kirktuck.com

If you see the same old site you might need to refresh your cache...

More as it comes in.

Edit: 3:03 pm. Yes, It's already changed. Wow. that was quick....

Edit: 8:32 pm. Well, we're on revision 6 and everything works well except the boxes around the testimonials on the "about" page. Hmmmm. There's always tomorrow.

The Video Snapshot. A twenty second, unplanned clip. Still testing the fine art video waters with the Olympus OMD EM-5.2... :-)

Olympus OMD EM-5.2 short field test from Kirk Tuck on Vimeo.
I was testing the OMD EM-5.2 with a Pansonic 12-35 when two women walked into my frame...

I have a day long assignment to make a video for a restaurant on Weds. I'll be shooting with a friend so we can get a lot of coverage. We'll be working all day long and the restaurant will be open for business and filled with customers. I want to do the whole video hand held so we can move quickly, don't have to take up floor space with tripods and other clutter. Since that's my target I am pretty much set on taking the two OMD EM-5.2 cameras and a bag full of lenses that we can share. But I'm always testing, testing, testing to see what we can get away with so I was out today getting more and more familiar with the camera and the Panasonic 12-35mm lens. I figure the more automatic my processes are while shooting the more and better moving images I'll be able to get.

It was bright and sunny today and I was shooting outside for the most part. I stopped by the Graffiti Wall and shot some stuff and everything looked really good. Extremely fine detail, like distant, blowing grass, still aliases more than I'd like but the close in stuff --- like we'd want to use in a restaurant video --- is very well behaved and looks good.

Since the light levels were high and I was shooting the All-I, 77mbs format at 24 fps I wanted to stay at 1/50th of second shutter speed. I wanted to stay at ISO 200 for best quality and I wanted to stay under f11 to minimize diffraction effects. It all added up to exposure chaos until I put the six stop Tiffen neutral density filter on the front of the lens and then everything fell into place.

I'm always trying to think of how to do video differently and I like the idea of very short videos as "snapshots." Inadvertent street photography-type video. Today two woman visiting the wall walked into my frame as I was practicing holding the camera still. I let the camera run for 20 or so seconds and the video above is what I got. It's a selfie wielding woman in a black skirt and the back end of someone else. For some reason, when thrown together I think it is interesting (and funny).

Between now and Weds. I am also experimenting with the Nikon cameras on monopods for the project. We'll see which version makes the cut.... And gets into Final Cut.

Thanks, Kirk

(I initially tried to embed this video using the blogger service but the compression was amazingly huge and extremely bad. I took down that version and uploaded the video to vimeo instead. Ahhhh. Much better. )

World's finest portrait lens? Or my own personal crutch?

World's finest portrait lens? Or my own personal crutch?

I had an assignment yesterday to go to an office on the 26th floor of a very nice building and make portraits of three men. I had shot in the office space before and had taken advantage of the beautiful, indirect light coming through the floor to ceiling windows on the north side of the building. The architecture in the space is very modern, with lots of clean lines and interesting diagonals. The method that worked best for me the last time I shot there was to use the natural light from a three quarters angle and add the barest touch of fill light to add some spark to the image and a nice catchlight in subjects' eyes. I knew I wanted to shoot fairly long and to drop the background out of focus so the lines all softened and created a contrast in sharp and soft between my subjects' faces and the shapes in the background. 

When I last shot there I was using the Nikon D7100 and the Samsung NX30 with each makers 85mm lenses. The 128mm equivalent focal length (when compared to a lens on a full 35mm frame camera) was just a bit too long and a bit too compressed on the APS-C cameras to be visually comfortable for me. There was a friction between the tools I had and the vision in my head. I wasn't close enough for a really effective (and quiet) rapport when I got to a distance that allowed me to shoot with the composition and head sizes I wanted. The images were fine but it always bothered me that I couldn't quite get exactly what I wanted. 

 In anticipation of yesterday's assignment I rummaged through the drawer full of Nikon stuff in the studio and dutifully loaded the 80-200mm f2.8 zoom, the 85mm f1.8, the Sigma 50 Art lens and even a 24-85mm zoom. Almost as an afterthought I also grabbed the diminutive Nikon 105mm f2.5 ais lens. It had served me well on a similar assignment last week during which I got over any fears of manual focusing this lens on the D610 and D810 cameras. 

The Nikon 105mm f2.5 is a five element lens with four groups that seems to me to mark the high point of quality among affordable, non-esoteric lenses that people can actually afford and would actually want to shoot with. It is dense with glass and metal and the focusing ring of this aging optic makes the "fly-by-wire" focusing rings of most autofocus lenses feel cheesy and toy-like. Since it is an Ai (auto indexing) lens it works in aperture priority and manual exposure modes, with full metering, on any current (or recent) professional Nikon cameras, including APS-C cameras like the D7000, the D7100 and the D7200. It also works with any of the full frame cameras, as well. 

I set up my camera on a tripod with a giant wall of windows to my left and the subject in the middle of a wide space, turned 45 degrees toward the window. On the shadow side were pure white walls which made for good natural fill. I used a new flash and flash trigger that the people at Cactus sent me to test. The flash is the RF60 and the radio trigger is the V6. I set the flash onto a light stand with an umbrella stand adapter and a 48 inch white umbrella. The fun feature of this flash and radio trigger combination is that one can control the manual power settings of the flash from the camera position via the trigger mechanism. I was able to keep dialing down the flash power until its effect was very subtle but very effective in cleaning up the portrait image and adding catch light. This rig was portable enough to bring along in my rolling case and takes about a minute to set up. At 1/32nd power the flash could sit there and pop all day long. I only needed the system to do so about 220 times.

Once I had the balance of light the way I wanted it I concentrated on comping my shot and getting just the right camera to subject distance to give me enough person for context but a shallow enough depth of field to make the background soft and unobtrusive. I used f2.8 for all of the waist up, horizontally framed shots and I dropped down to f4.0 for a little deeper focus with the tighter "chest and head" portraits with each person. This made fine focusing critical. I've been reticent to trust the focusing screens on the camera since I could never sharply focus any manual lens on the D7100 or D7000s I had. I would always double check by going to live view and punching in on the magnification. 

I did that a lot last week but every time I checked the magnified view matched what I was seeing in the finder and also matched up with the green confirmation dot in the finder of both of the D610s and the D810. Yesterday I put the 105mm on the Nikon D610. I recently put a +2.0 diopter on the eyepiece to bring the correction on the dial back to zero for my eyes. It seems to have made a difference for me in how well I can see focus on the screen. 

I did the live view mag. confirm focus thing a couple of times and then I became reasonably convinced that I had finally mastered manual focus with this body. The images were just as I imagined them when I looked at them with my naked eyes. The tonality of the lens and the dynamic range of the camera sensor added up to portraits that were convincingly sharp when zooming into my subjects' eyes but without the harsh sharpness that sometimes plagues newer (amped up) glass. 

When I did my first round of post production there were only three images I needed to trash because of focus problems. The the colors, textures and general feel of the images was just what I wanted. The lens isn't quite as contrasty as more current lenses but that's a very simple thing to fine tune in post processing. And while the broad contrast is lower the micro-contrast is highly competitive. Maybe it's this reverse application of contrast qualities that makes this lens such a spectacular portrait lens...

At any rate, when I finished shooting I was so enthralled with the overall performance of the lens and the cameras in combination that I searched KEH.com and ordered a second one. I bought another late model Ais (the last version made) in excellent condition and it should arrive next week. 

Why on earth would you buy a second one?

My answer? The lens has a particular look and feel. It's not made anymore. The supply will eventually either dry up or become much more expensive. If this lens really is the sweet spot for my particular vision of portraits is the small, extra expenditure to ensure access to its unique set of features wasteful or wise? I vote wise. 

Edit: The additional copy of the lens arrived today from KEH (three days quicker than they promised) and it is absolutely perfect. I can hardly wait to shoot an interview with it.

Black and white portraits. I like them because they aren't confusing or cluttered.

I still find myself shooting in black and white. Actually setting the camera to black and white so I can preview and review it on the monitor.  With the D810 I just turn the camera profile to monochrome and shoot large Jpegs. Same with the EM-5.2. Both look pretty good out of camera with the contrast turned up and a "green" filter selected in the tweaking menus. Once in a while I shoot in the largest, meatiest raw format and use DXO FilmPack to make a conversion from the color files. When I do that I also get sidetracked into trying the color slide film emulations as well.

I love the look with got shooting in black and white with medium format film but I think we're in the ballpark now with the availability of high resolution digital files.

The image above was done on film. 

Can we talk about drones and photography again? Oh let's.

I recently plunged in and researched ( a lot) about using drones in commercial photography. And when I say I researched it's not because I was trying to find the best performance or price; no, I was trying to find out what the rules, regulations and laws are regarding the use of drones to take images for commercial (money paid to me) use. And what I found out was a bit startling considering how many stories I read about professional photographers and videographers using drones in public areas.

My interest had nothing to do with me wanting to fly a drone and get a different point of view. You want a good picture of your neighborhood from the sky? Hire a helicopter. And a licensed pilot. And get an approved flight plan. That's my way of thinking. But no, I had a client who was interested in doing the drone copter thing and I wanted to come into this part of the business with my eyes wide open.

I had no desire to own or operate a Phantom or a some other brand but if I hire a sub-contractor for a project it's important to me to know what my liabilities are going to be. And my client was not a small, under the radar, sort of enterprise that was interested in flying now and asking forgiveness later.  They are a large utility provider operating under a  regulatory microscope.

So, here's the deal. If you are an amateur you can operate your own drone as long as you are not charging for images or imaging services. You are limited to a ceiling height of 200 feet and you must have line-of-sight on the drone at all times. There are plenty of places you can't fly your drone for issues of public safety. These include (but are not limited to) over streets,  within (seriously) five miles of an airport, over public gatherings (outdoor concerts, protests, marches, races) and, while not everyone knows and abides by these rules they are in place and enforced (though enforcement is variable).

The game changes with professional use. You can fly higher but...... You need an FAA (Federal Aviation Agency) operator's license and you need an FAA exemption (form 333? for each event) in order to make any flight for commercial use. Any flight except on your own private property. But even if you are flying on private property you need to enforce a 500 foot diameter exclusion zone around your drone position to ensure public safety. While, from a copyright and privacy point of view, you are allowed to photograph people or property that is viewable from public airspace, in order to overfly private property for the purpose of commercial photographic drone-ism you MUST get signed releases or waivers from every single property owner in your flight path. The penalties are big.

The rules are still in flux but  sources in counter-intelligence say that the small drones one can buy from camera stores, video dealers and online for around $1,000 are destined to be the favorite weapon of terrorists for the next ten years or more. The breaching of the White House airspace by a consumer drone (quadcopter) was a huge wake-up call for intelligence agencies and the people tasked with maintaining our national security. With cellphone control technology advances and ever shrinking bomb and nascent molecular explosives technology their biggest fear is not from a large, lone drone but a swarm of smaller, armed drones. Only one needs to get through the countermeasures to cause real damage and loss of life.  Normal citizens should also fear the ability of close flying drones to carry electronics that can intrude on private information networks and capture vital personal and financial data.

The defense industry is already deep into countermeasures which might include radio white noise fields around key installations. The radio white noise kills the wi-fi connection to the drone, bringing them to ground. The Chinese military is experimenting with mid-powered, multi-spread pattern lasers to kill incoming drones but the energy consumption in mobile field applications is still problematic. An undisclosed government is experimenting with directional EMP (electro magnetic pulse) devices that would kill the silicon in the drones. I favor the fully automatic shotgun for incoming drones. The shorter barrels on the automatics give a wider spread so less range but better kill potential. How about cannons that shoot fine mesh nets into the flight space? It's all out there being worked on.

So what will the first successful terrorist drone attacks on western civilian targets mean for photographers? I think the industry that makes and markets the drones will suffer from a wide range restrictions and licensing. In popular culture I hear people flaunt the current rules all the time and usually without consequences but I think there will come a time when people will respond to the presence of drones in a very negative way and it will be very hard to successfully incorporate them into functional photographic businesses.

My point of view is that the widespread use of drones and the plummeting cost of ownership is akin to putting fully automatic weapons into the hands of children. After doing my research I am amazed that makers of drones have been allowed to mass produce and disseminate them. I think we are one horrific event away from a regulatory environment that will essentially kill this niche----and probably for very logical reasons.

While there are valid uses for drone technology there is also a very valid and long list of reasons to tightly regulate their use. Now I will duck and let the comments fly.

For a more lighthearted approach watch this trailer: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O1Hhvdpvp5o

And the backlash begins: http://petapixel.com/2015/06/05/1350-camera-drone-whacked-out-of-the-air-by-an-angry-neighbor/

That particular commercial drone was being operated unlawfully. /\

Just wanted to keep you in the loop. I'm hard at work producing a brand new website for www.kirktuck.com. It's not up yet but it's coming along much quicker than I expected.

Candidate for first splash page shot on the new website. 

I know you are a very curious person and the fact that I am making a new website is probably a lot less interesting to you than a discussion of which software program I am using and how I am making the whole thing simpler and more compact. So I thought I would tell you right now. 

I put up my first website back in 1996. It was pretty good for 1996. I designed the look and a bright, young kid coded it for me and helped me figure out how to get it hosted. When flash sites were cool (for about six months) one of my advertising friends designed a site for me and his partner did the coding. It was also great---except for one thing; I couldn't change stuff on the site by myself. I couldn't update images, etc. without going back with my checkbook in hand and enduring the process. 

When Apple, Inc. launched iWeb I was ecstatic. Finally, a drop and draggable WYSIWYG web building application that didn't require me to learn how to code. I've been using it for years and I liked the way the basics of my site looked. It was also very easy to make changes to everything. Which I probably did too often...

Eventually Apple pulled the plug on iWeb and I've been living in anxiety trying to prepare for the moment when the OS would no longer support my favorite web design program. My anxiety was so complete that I more or less stopped changing the site because I feared I'd screw something up and not be able to go back and repair it. Irrational? Yeah. But that's just the way my brain works (or doesn't). 

But we all hit some sort of tipping point in our decision making processes and when my friend, James, launched a new website and recharged his marketing I started searching for my new web tools. 

I wanted a drop-and-drag, no code needed, simple to use application that would allow me to make dynamically resizable galleries. I didn't need templates or themes but would welcome help if it was included. I'm trying out a program called, Sparkle, that is engineered for easy use on the Apple OS. I first stuck my foot into the water with the free trial but after a couple of days of (non-crashing) fun and easy designing I went ahead and bought the program. 

A quick aside: I had a problem with the install and I e-mailed the software company's support people. I had an answer back, which fixed my problem, in less than fifteen minutes. I liked that.  

Now I am confronting the bigger issue which is: what to show?

I wish I could just put every image I've ever taken up on the web in some sort of art director portal and crowdsource the final selection. Maybe pare it all down from 7500 or so favorites to maybe 25 or 30. Occasionally, my award winning graphic designer wife looks over my shoulder and gently says, "You don't have to include everything...." Or, "Bigger type isn't necessarily better type..." But she's left me to make most of the rookie errors no doubt thinking that she'll drop in and help me clean it up before we launch.

I love the month after re-launching a website. You then have good reason to market the hell out of yourself and maybe even re-invent parts of your business. 

We'll see how it goes since I live my career so publicly. But do me one favor, if you really hate the new site maybe just send me an e-mail with suggestions. I actually have good reading comprehension skills---they are much better than my picture editing skills.

I came across a black and white portrait, shot long ago, that I had almost forgotten. I like it.

Joe McClain. Austin Lyric Opera.

I'm racking my brain to remember exactly why we were photographing Joe. He was one of the founders of the Austin Lyric Opera way back in 1986 and I remember this being shot around 1992 or 1993 for one of the city magazines. The image ran big and well printed at the time and later the ALO used it on their printed collateral without my permission. I didn't make a big deal out of it. I knew that the organization had been started and was operating on a limited budget and that Joe was working overtime to get the organization moving forward.

While the web mythologizes nearly everything having to do with photographic assignments this one was typical of the times. There was no art director on the location. Nor was there a make-up person or a second assistant or even a first assistant. I called Joe and asked when we could shoot and if he could suggest a location at the Opera. They has a big storage area full of stage props that we both agreed would be visually interesting. It was. 

I met Joe there at the appointed time, we chatted for a few minutes and then I saw the chair and asked him to sit. I reacted to the interesting pedestal hovering over his head the the matching diagonal of the   furniture on the right of the frame by standing up and aiming the camera down include everything I wanted. We tried a few different expressions and a few different gestures but this one was just the right combination of stuff for me.

I didn't light the scene because it looked just right to me for a black and white image. I just metered Joe's face, handheld the camera and fired off as many frames as I needed to get an image in the finder that I liked. 

This was shot on Tri-X black and white film and no doubt processed in D76 diluted 1:1. Since it was an assignment for a magazine I printed it on resin coated paper to save myself a long wash time and an even longer drying time. 

Funny in retrospect to think that so much of the work we were doing for editorial clients was so unstructured. The only two questions I asked when I accepted the job (by phone -- no e-mail back then) were: "Can I shoot this in black and white?" And, "Do you want a horizontal or a vertical?"

The art director trusted me to deliver something that would work so when I showed up with just the one print no eyebrows were raised. 

We worked. We delivered. We billed. All of the drama seems to have arrived recently, and I'm not sure it helps the process very much...

Another Austin Summer is Upon Us and Once Again I'm Getting Ready to be a Tourist in My Own Town.

Noellia on the banks of Barton Springs.

We've had our torrential rains, our flash floods and our soggy studios. The weather forecast says the next ten days are going to be sunny and bright. We'll get the mold out of the allergy forecasts and the waterways will settle down and get clear. I'm ready to step into Summer and make Austin my personal tourist attraction. I've got my tourist cameras ready. On one shoulder is my dandy still camera, the Olympus EM-5.2 in chrome. Usually sporting some sort of cool, prime lens. Right now it's the 25mm Leica Summilux. Tomorrow it might be something from Sigma. On my other shoulder is my tourist video camera. It's also an EM-5.2 but it's got a 12-35mm Panasonic zoom on it and that lens is sporting one of three neutral density filters that help my video settings cope with full sun. It's also got a little shotgun microphone hanging off the hot shoe. 

Remember Super-8 film from the 1960's and 1970's? Even Lady Bird Johnson was into the "tourist film" aesthetic and took her 8 mm and then super-8 mm camera with her on every trip. That's what I want to do. I want to take the "professional" out of the process and just react to the stuff that comes along. Stuff that's Summer-y. Stuff that's cool. 

I might just start editing a little two minute film once a week and post it here to counteract all the exciting new, cutting edge, super tech stuff we get inundated with. It could work.....

And what would my Summer be without the Western Hills Athletic Club pool?

Get ready to see it from every angle!

I hate working in the Summer. Everything seems to slow down and clients drag their feet when it comes to giving approvals and making selections for images that need to be retouched or videos that need to be edited. I like it best when the pace picks up again in the Fall and we can get into being busy instead of being sporadically poked by projects. 

I shot yesterday with my EM5.2. It was on a job. It reminded me why I like to shoot with the Nikon D810. But today I shot with the Nikon D810 and it reminded me why I like to shoot with the little Olympus. Go figure....