Do you refresh?

If the answer is yes then this might seem like the most obvious piece of advice ever, but do you refresh your camera's batteries?

48be9543-420.jpg

Not every battery charger has a refresh feature but if yours does then you should be using it. As far as I understand it, the idea is that it drains the battery's charge way beyond what happens with normal use, so when you recharge the battery it will be able to hold the charge for longer.

Before I started refreshing my batteries it had reached the point that I was charging four of them every day and they were all exhausted by the evening. A single battery would last for maybe half a football match. A battery used for a quick job early in the morning would be showing low charge by the beginning of the next job an hour later. If a battery wasn't used at all that day, and wasn't recharged the next morning, it wouldn't make it through the first job of the day.

Since I started refreshing my batteries I can usually charge all five on a Sunday afternoon and they'll see me right through the week. In a really busy week I'll need to recharge two of them by Wednesday.

Canon's recommended refresh rate is once per month if you're using the batteries extensively every day, so I would imagine it would be the same for other brands.

 

Give me more POWER! Or less sun.

While the Strobist movement goes from strength to strength, I'm afraid I've gone back to using big strobes for nearly everything nowadays. That can sometimes present a problem when you're working outside but thanks to my willingness to knock on doors, and the generosity of everyone whose door I've knocked on so far, I've always been able to find a power socket to plug an extension cable into.

I've been wanting to shoot skateboarding for ages. If you're into lighting then it's the must-shoot sport. After a few false starts over the last couple of weeks, today we finally had the right weather. The guinea pigs were some of the pupils from Invergordon Academy who are doing skateboarding as part of the P.E. syllabus. (Why did we never have lessons like that when I was at school?!)

To cut a long story short, the day was both a success and a failure. It was a failure in that I only got one shot that was anywhere close to what I wanted. But it was a success in that I've learned how to do the lighting so next time I can concentrate on nailing the action shots.

Here's the one shot that I sort of like a little bit:

341x0903-420.jpg

And here's the lighting set-up:

341x0918-470.jpg

Even with both of the 1Kw strobes on full power and the sunlight behind the subject, I still had to shoot at f/22 to make a dent in the ambient. If you look at the full-size version of the action shot then you'll see that there's some ghosting around the subject as the sync speed for the strobes is 1/125s and I wasn't able to stop the aperture down enough to kill the ambient. Now I do have three 500w strobes that I could set-up next time to give me a total of 3.5Kw but I think the better solution, if at all possible, is to do the shoot when it isn't so sunny. Today's shoot was around midday, next week's it's 2-3pm so the light should be less intense by then.

By the way, the reason why one of the strobes is positioned slightly closer to the ramp is simply so its slave cell could see the flash from the other one, which was triggered by Pocket Wizards.

 

No sunshine? No problem!

Photoshop is much maligned by some and much loved by others. I'm firmly in the latter category. Granted it doesn't (and shouldn't) have much use in editorial, but for commercial work it can make the difference between getting the job done on budget and not getting it done at all.

One extreme example that I've mentioned before was the high dynamic range portrait of a truck when a little bit of computer trickery enabled a stunning, colourful image to be created on a horrible, rainy and overcast day.

The photos that I'm posting today aren't quite that extreme, but they do illustrate one way in which you can use Photoshop to your advantage. I have a list of about a dozen photos that I need to do for an electrical contractor's web site, and of course we want the exterior photos to be bright and sunny. In February. In Scotland. The chances of this mythical day ever arriving are slim, and even if it does happen, the chances of getting all the photos done in one day are non-existent. But maybe Photoshop can help?

Take a moment to think about what a "bright sunny day photo" looks like. The key elements are: Blue sky, a fairly strong contrast between light and dark, and a subtle yellow hue.

When you break it down like that, you realise that Photoshop can do a lot for us here: If there's any blue at all in the sky then we can make it look as blue as we want it to. (But don't try to make an overcast sky look blue, it doesn't work!) If the sky isn't too overcast and the sun is low then we'll have contrast, and we can enhance it as much as we want. And that yellow hue? Obviously that's a 2-second job.

So with that in mind, rather than waiting for a bright sunny day that will probably never arrive, all we need is a day that isn't totally overcast, with a low sun. Those days come along much more often.

Photoshop might be commonly used to fix images that weren't done right in the first place, either by accident or lack of skill. But here we have an example of a situation in which you can deliberately take the 'wrong' photos, with the plan all along being to knock them into shape later on.

Without waffling on any further, here are four example photos. Note that none of them are bad photos as such, they just look a bit gloomy and wet, which is exactly what the weather was like.

glenmorangiebalblairkincraig.jpg

And here are the finished versions. Notice how each of them sells the idea of it being a bright and sunny day, but in different ways. In this first one the deal makers are the little bit of blue sky and the enhanced yellow hue in the plants to frame left.

341x0779-420.jpg

In this picture it's the yellow hue added to the grass, and those long shadows. The overcast sky was pushed as far as possible but the picture still works with it being a bit washed out, rather than the rich, vibrant blue that would be ideal.

341x0879-420.jpg

Here it's the enhanced blue of the sky and the increased saturation of the brickwork. As I'm typing this I can see that more work needs to be done to bring out the red of the chimney, but as it is the photo still works.

341x0848-420.jpg

This one was more heavily edited which is why the red of the chimney is better. Again it's the blue sky and saturated brickwork that sell the idea of the photo being taken on a much nicer day than it really was.

341x0856-420.jpg

The point I'm making here isn't that Photoshop is good or bad, because that's an old argument and you've already made up your mind one way or the other.

No, the point is that IF you accept Photoshop as a part of your workflow, then learn to include it in the planning stage too. If you know what you can do to your photos on the computer then you know what you don't need to do in the camera. That's going to help you with scheduling, quotes and budgeting. You'll be able to take on jobs that you might have otherwise had to decline. You'll be able to complete existing jobs that have become unexpectedly difficult. And you'll have a nicer number at the bottom of your bank statement.

You may find that there are other advantages too. For example, look at those heavy gas cylinders in this house photo… 

341x0315-circle-420.jpg

While preparing for the photo we moved a few bits and pieces and uprooted a large pole that obscured part of the house. But why waste time disconnecting the gas cylinders and moving them out of the way when Mr Photoshop can do it for you in a couple of minutes or less?

341x0315-420.jpg

Seaboard over-90s making headlines

It has been a busy week for some of the more senior ladies in the Seaboard Villages of Hilton, Balintore and Shandwick.

The three villages boast 17 women in their 90th year and older, with their longevity attributed to a life of hard work, fresh air, no smoking and only the occasional alcoholic drink. Nine of the women got together on Wednesday in the Memorial Hall in Balintore, where they were interviewed and photographed for a feature in Thursday's Press & Journal.

The story was then picked up by the Daily Mail, and on Friday afternoon the BBC came to speak to three of the women, one from each village.

This photo shows Barbara Skinner (90) of Balintore, Isabella Vass (91) of Shandwick and Katie Ross (90) of Hilton, in the living room of Barbara's home with BBC Scotland reporter Craig Anderson and cameraman Norman Strachan. No doubt many video recorders were whirring in the villages that evening when the three ladies were featured on the Scottish national news.

48be9512-420.jpg

Golspie win SWL Cup 2008

Congratulations to Golspie Sutherland Football Club for a spectacular comeback in Saturday's SWL Cup Final at Seaboard Park in Balintore. Muir of Ord dominated the first half and the scoreline was 1-0 to Muir at half time. But then came the turnaround and Golspie's Andrew Keveren scored four goals in the second half to secure a 4-1 victory and the silverware went north.

341x0221-470.jpg

golspieswlcupfinal2008.jpg

As an aside, Golspie's victory highlights (again) the problem with some of our local papers relying on spec shooters to get their sports photos. Muir of Ord is a Ross-shire team, so the Ross-shire Journal commissioned photos from this match in case Muir won. Golspie is a Sutherland team, so the Northern Times should have commissioned photos, but didn't. As it turns out, Muir didn't win so the RSJ probably won't use a pic from the match, but they still pay, and that's how it should be. Meanwhile, when any Golspie players or supporters look in their local paper, they won't see any photos of their team's victory because nobody shot the match on spec and the NT hadn't commissioned anyone. This is bad for the team, it's bad for the supporters, it's bad for the sponsor, and it's bad for the newspaper, but that's the way it works round here and I'm not seeing any signs of it changing.

Ebay song

Someone's home-made video for "Ebay" by Weird Al Yankovic. There are several versions floating around but I think this is the best…

 

[youtube:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HYokLWfqbaU]

 

More from Strathpuffer

Lots of my Strathpuffer pics in the Ross-shire Journal and the North Star this week. Shame that all four of the ones in the North Star were wrongly credited to a different photographer but oh well…

strathpuffer_rsj_ns.jpg

Strathpuffer

If you're a keen mountain biker or a stupidly-enthusiastic photographer in the north of Scotland then chances are you'll be needing a good night's sleep tonight, as no doubt you'll have been getting plenty of exercise at the 24-hour Strathpuffer mountain biking race.

Here are a few of the photos I did for tomorrow's Press & Journal, all of them using a combination of ambient light and subtle flash light to create a slightly surreal but still fairly natural look.

a6cd9184-420.jpg

How's this for a close-up action shot? It's wide angle @ 24mm, not telephoto.

a6cd9187-420.jpg

That bony fellow on the right of this photo is Bill the Biker, a skeleton made of bicycle parts that lives about a mile from the end of the course. I was absolutely shattered after walking to the location with all my gear to get this photo, and the only really good angle had a vehicle parked in the background so I had to settle for this less interesting angle.

a6cd9247-420.jpg

More of the Kessock Bridge fireworks

These are my four favourite photos of the Kessock Bridge fireworks. If you saw today's P&J then you'll have seen that they used the staff tog's pic from somewhere in South Kessock, and I can see why, but on this occasion I do think mine from North Kessock were stronger images. I wanted to show the scale of the fireworks in context and I think my photos achieved that fairly well.

Several people have been posting photos of the event on Flickr, and a search will find lots of blurry and badly-timed examples but also some very nice ones, especially this one by a guy who actually got into the water near where I was standing and made great use of the shoreline in the foreground to produce a superbly rounded image. Best I've seen so far. (I've seen some from high above the bridge that could have been really good but unfortunately they're way too soft.)

I'll also take this opportunity to link to Inverness graphic designer Sarah Patience's web site, for no reason other than she linked to mine in her blog and I'm always happy to give a shout out to anyone else representing north Scotland on the web!

Anyway, here are the pics…

341x9496-430.jpg

341x9498-430.jpg

341x9494-430.jpg

341x9492-430.jpg

Kessock Bridge fireworks

Short but perfectly formed, I think that would be a fair description of last night's fireworks display on the Kessock Bridge in Inverness. I'm sure the surprisingly short run-time will add more fuel to the fire of complaints about it being a waste of money, but I liked it. It was tasteful and elegant, and some parts were very clever. Have you ever seen fireworks dance before? I just wish it had been longer!

The P&J's staff photographer did the torchlit procession and fireworks from somewhere in South Kessock, I did the fireworks from the end of a very slippery ferry ramp at North Kessock, and then the lovely ladies at the picture desk will decide whose work makes it to print.

I'll post some more pics early next week, and link this one to a larger version, but for now here's a small version. Just look at the scale of the display! That bridge is a mile long, and the display must have spanned at least half a mile.

Update: Now linked to a larger version, and click here for more.

341x9496-430.jpg