This time, via Vogue, an ad for Burberry.
First, the vertical.
Burberry Body ad, vertical.
Now, the horizontal:
Burberry Body ad, horizontal.
Which would you rather see?
The original article: http://www.imagemakerchronicles.com/2012/04/24/the-new-horizontal/
Via Amateur Photographer:
The London 2012 conditions state: ‘Images, video and sound recordings of the Games taken by a Ticket Holder cannot be used for any purpose other than for private and domestic purposes and a Ticket Holder may not license, broadcast or publish video and/or sound recordings, including on social networking websites and the internet more generally, and may not exploit images, video and/or sound recordings for commercial purposes under any circumstances, whether on the internet or otherwise, or make them available to third parties for commercial purposes.’
Really? REALLY? The phrase, “Fuck you, you fucking fucks,” comes to mind here.
What kind of insane idiot came up with this? Have we seriously gotten to the point where an iPhone shot of an Olympian will suddenly lessen the overall value of, and potential profits for the Olympics?
What’s the reasoning here? I’m seriously starting to feel like we’re living at the dawn of a bewildering, unintelligible, dystopian age whose primary characteristic is the pervasiveness of incomprehensible stupidity.
Changing habits is tough. I used to, for the most part, use my iPad in portrait orientation. Now I’m trying to break that habit.
Ditto for things on the shooting side. At one point, I used to leave a vertical grip on my 5D Mark II and shoot in portrait mode. Most of what I shot was vertical, and I loved it.
Now? Not so much.
The obligatory iPad hero shot, by Apple.
I’m shooting more horizontals. I’m consuming more content in that orientation too. And, like any self-respecting geek obsessed with the underlying reason behind things, I wanted to know why.
I think I’ve figured it out.
I’ve heard this one too many times: you can’t do x, y, or z on an iPad.
You know what? I call BS on 90% of it. Like…
Except all the books from the Kindle store, the Barnes & Noble (nook) store, and the iBookstore. All all those other ones from the Gutenberg project. And the magazines from Zinio. And the various iPad magazine apps that don’t exist on any other platform. And PDF files, text files, epub files, .mobi files, .prc files.
Bullshit. I wrote 2000 words on an iPad. In one go. On the glass screen. If you prefer, you. Can. Use. Any. One. Of. These. Keyboards. With. An. iPad. Too. Or. One. Of. These.
I guess you can’t. Except maybe you could use it to edit photos with FilterStorm Pro or Photoshop Express or PhotoGene or Snapseed. And maybe videos, with iMovie or Avid Studio Express. Or, okay, music with Garageband or Pocket Wavepad HD. And maybe those apps that Atomic Tom used to perform a number from their album on a New York subway car.
No. It’s not. That’s because it’s not a friggin laptop.
…
So, yeah, there.
And: Why yes, I do love my iPad.
Pixiq.com is reporting that ten journalists were arrested in a peaceful protest in New York City last week. Two of them filmed their arrests and in both, there is no doubt that the cops knew they were arresting reporters. Both of them repeatedly claim they are journalists and one of them even presents his press credentials.
Seriously? We’ve seen photographers shot at with rubber bullets by cops covering their nametags with duct tape, university cops spraying peaceful, non-resisting students with pepper spray and more. Now they’re just picking reporters off the street? At what point will the ACLU step up and sue these police departments? At the very least, I see a violation of these reporters’ First Amendment rights and perhaps their Fourth Amendment rights as well. What probable cause did the cops have for arresting those photographers in NYC last week? What possibly excuses the use of pepper spray – which resulted in chemical burns in at least one case – against peaceful students? That’s cruel and unusual punishment – without due process (and there go those students’ Fourth and Eight Amendment rights).
Why?
Just posted to the Blog@BorrowLenses.com: Top 5 learning resources for photographers: http://blog.borrowlenses.com/2011/09/our-top-5-learning-resources-for-photographers/
I spend a lot of time on these sites and asked a few people for suggestions too. These are the 5 that were the most popular.
Latest article up on the BorrowLenses.com blog is up, talking about the PowerMC2 and AC3. I’ll be breaking the lighting down in a separate post this week… http://blog.borrowlenses.com/2011/09/coming-soon-radios/
TTL with a studio strobe? Maybe.
Here are the settings for the images above:
Aperture: f/16
Shutter speed: 1/125
ISO: wait for it…
Lights used: One Einstein 640 as key, camera-right, through a Photoflex 3′x4′ softbox. One 580EX II Speedlite through a Lastolite Exybox Hotshoe for fill. Both triggered with a PocketWizard MiniTT1 on a 5D Mark II with an AC3 Zone Controller. Speedlite was on a FlexTT5 and the Einstein had a PocketWizard PowerMC2 receiver.
Here’s the kicker. One image is shot at ISO 100. The other is shot at ISO 400. I didn’t touch the settings on the lights for either one.
Over the last few months, I’ve had the pleasure and pain of working with a lot of photographers as part of my job. The net sum of these experiences has been positive. But as in all things, it’s the negatives that have got me pissed off to no end. Continue reading
Cripes!
Peter Lik, a self-taught Australian landscape photographer, has sold one of his photographs for a whopping $1 million to an anonymous private art collector. The photograph, titled “One”, was shot on the banks of the Androscoggin River in New Hampshire just after dawn. Only one print of the photo will ever be produced.
via Australian Landscape Photographer Peter Lik Sells Photo for $1 Million.
My friend Jason and I go back and forth on whether photography can be considered art, so moments like these put a huge smile on my face. If a private collector can pay $1 million for an image, then surely it puts photography right up there in the pantheon of fields recognized as fine art.
Peter Lik, by the way, has apparently sold about $150 million in limited edition prints so far. So not only can photography be considered a fine art, it can also be considered that rarest of art forms – one that doesn’t require a Van Gogh-esque life of destitution and madness.
Your move, Mr. Jason?