Comments on: Thursday News Stuff

By: James

James — Fri, 25 Jul 2008 04:03:13 +0000

Washington Post article from Thursday on photographers being stopped from taking pictures in Union Station. At least Congresswoman Norton convened a hearing on the issue.

So you can’t take pictures in a public building in DC but now you can carry a handgun. Feel safer?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/07/22/AR2008072202671.html

By: Richard

Richard — Fri, 25 Jul 2008 03:59:46 +0000

It seems the reason there is so much controversy in the USA Today post is that the caption under the photos is incorrect. It says one was taken in the sun and the other with flash (instead of In the shade as it was). That happens with newspapers —a lot of controversy abut incorrect information.

By: Ken

Ken — Thu, 24 Jul 2008 23:35:15 +0000

Scott,

I did my first real estate shoot for an agent. Not the best first time, but the guy you spoke about Scott Hargis, has been very helpful on the Flickr group as a member. Great Guy.

This mini horse farm (10 acres) home has 5+ thousand sq ft , horse barn listed at 1.9 mil….So sell you gear and buy this place, lol. They own the horse that won the Arkansas Derby, Horse not included in sale(LOL) but my photo of the filly is. I hope you will think about doing some blogs and Kelby training (which I belong and love it) on real estate photography. I sort of fell into it. Did another shoot today. Tell McNally to buy this farm with all the moo la he is making off those books.

Ken from KY
This the link I built in lightroom. I sent this to the agent for proofing.

http://www.kblawson.com/horsefarm/index.html

By: Greg Reinacker

Greg Reinacker — Thu, 24 Jul 2008 23:30:32 +0000

I think the problem with the USA Today article and the comments on it is the caption of the picture. The caption says

“Examples from Scott Kelby’s book show a photo shot in the sun with harsh shadows, left, and one shot using a flash.”

That caption sort of implies the model was in the same spot (out in the sun), and the only difference was using a flash on the second one.

I read this before reading what you said you actually did, and looked at the pictures, and I was with the skeptics; you couldn’t have achieved exactly this effect if the model was in the same spot (out in the sun) and you used flash. Could have reduced contrast on her face, but there would be no way to brighten up the bushes behind her without lighting them separately.

Then I came back and read your post here, where you said she was in the shade for the second shot, and you used flash, and it all became clear how the shot came together.

Anyway - perhaps a possible explanation for the skeptical comments on the USAT article.

By: Trenton

Trenton — Thu, 24 Jul 2008 22:57:36 +0000

Scott,
If you really do read all of your blog posts you’ll be very interested where you (and the rest of the photoshop guys) have landed yourselves. I guess if you spend your life with photoshop a “disaster” or two are bound to come at some point.

http://photoshopdisasters.blogspot.com/2008/05/photoshop-world-photoshop-user-tv.html

By: Mark K.

Mark K. — Thu, 24 Jul 2008 20:11:06 +0000

Hey Scott,

In case you don’t know: The new Drobo is out. Improved USB 2.0 and FireWire 800 (finally!).

Peace,

By: Alessandro Rosa

Alessandro Rosa — Thu, 24 Jul 2008 18:31:11 +0000

Wow! Tough crowd over at the USA Today website! What was up with the taking the cap off of the toothpaste crack! The obvious in photography isn’t so obvious to everyone.

Any hoot, you may want to get in touch with USA Today and have them post a correction, lest people think you don’t know your light sources from your lithographs. In the White Balance tip when they ask “Ever notice how a picture taken under fluorescent lights has a background that seems very yellow or orange?” They either need to change it to Tungsten lights or need to change it to seems very green….

By: Josh C

Josh C — Thu, 24 Jul 2008 18:23:57 +0000

Here’s a random image I came across that I think is amusing so I had to share. It’s a true cameraphone!

http://www.slipperybrick.com/2008/07/a-true-cameraphone/#more-11862

By: Arun

Arun — Thu, 24 Jul 2008 18:18:47 +0000

Hey Scott - Just thought I would post this link highlighting the situation in East Africa.
http://defendfaithandfamily.blogspot.com/

By: Harold

Harold — Thu, 24 Jul 2008 15:55:13 +0000

Scott,
Great lighting tips as always. I can see why it threw some people; when you look at the enlarged versions, the hair/sunglasses difference is obvious.

It’s funny though, when people have an “opinion” they will stick with it no matter how much concrete evidence there is to the contrary.

If we actually follow the pros advice our pictures will get dramatically better. I am always amazed when I learn a new tip and how much better my photos look. Unfortunately many people use their camera like someone trying to install those tiny screws on their glasses with a butter knife.

By: Lou Adzima

Lou Adzima — Thu, 24 Jul 2008 15:35:07 +0000

Scott
I know what a font lover you are, you have to see this video.

http://www.collegehumor.com/video:1823766

By: Seim Effects

Seim Effects — Thu, 24 Jul 2008 15:03:56 +0000

I know what you mean about that harsh sunlight Scott. Makes a bigg difference.

What us pro’s are always looking for is tips on making them look good in harsh sunlight. Not because we like it, but because sometimes we have no choice. I’ve made a few presets that RQ sunlight shots a bit, and help out, but I’m still looking for the magic bullet.

Gavin
SeimEffects.com
ProPhotoShow.net