Tag Archives: photography

Photoshop Friday Week 9: Vignetting

May 9, 2008 – 7:00 am

This week’s photoshop tip is brought to you by Jan (father of this not so little anymore baby), who asked me to talk about the vignetting I use on 99.8% of our pics.

colorado springs engagement portrait

First of all, to the sticklers out there, I apologize for calling it vignetting. Actual vignetting is a lightening as the picture goes toward the edges, like this (not the world’s best example, but you get the idea).

But in today’s trends, that kind of vignetting isn’t what people mean when they talk about vignetting. In fact, they mean the opposite (which is actually called fall-off)…the photo gets darker as it goes toward the edges.

I love vignetting (the dark kind). I think it really frames a photo and makes the subject pop. I tend to be more heavy-handed in my vignetting than some photographers (especially with my black and whites) because I adore it so.

Vignetting can occur naturally or be an added effect.

When I use a wide angle lens on my 5d, I get some “fall-off” naturally…and some people call that a “con” of the 5d, but for me, it’s like AWESOME! Saves me some time in Photoshop!

But usually, I’m adding the vignette, not “correcting” it. Here are the four ways that I add vignetting.

The free way:

When I first started our business this was my method:

Use the “burn” tool in Photoshop. Make a duplicate layer of your background photo, burn the edges or general background area, and then lower the opacity of that lower until the vignette looks as good as you want it.

colorado wedding photographer tip

Pros: Free if you already have photoshop. Total control over where your vignette is (which is why I still occasionally go with this method).

Cons: You can’t burn in anything that is totally white, so if your sky is completely white, you’re out of luck.

The free-if-you-have-Lightroom way:

I use this 75% of the time now.

Go to the lens correction panel and adjust the sliders. Farther to the left the top slider, the darker it will be. Move the midpoint slider to bring the vignette farther into the center of the photo.

colorado springs wedding photographer vignette tips

Pros: Easy peasey and almost free.

Cons: It applies the vignette to the pre-cropped photo. (Lightroom 2.0 does a post crop vignette, but call me crazy–it doesn’t look as good)

The $150 way:

(Before getting Lightroom, I used this 99% of the time…now I use it 24% of the time)

The Totally Rad Actions by Boutwell Studios has an “e-z burn” action that makes a very pretty vignette with the press of a button. Most photogs find this to be too strong and really drop the opacity. I usually use it at around 80%:

colorado springs wedding photographers screenshot

Pros: Easy. Awesome.

Cons: Expensive if you are only using it for the ez-burn action. If it’s used over a really light area, you can see it halo out toward the center and I’m not in love with that

The Other Expensive Option:

1% of the time, the Starburst Vignette in the Kevin Kubota Action Pack II is my vignette. It creates a star shaped vignette (looks way less god-awful than that sounds, so stay with me) and is best when you have a photo that needs a vignette, but you don’t want that haloing from the Totally Rad E-Z Burn and you can’t be bothered to burn it in yourself with the burn tool.

vignette by colorado wedding photographer

Pros: Subtle shape of vignette.

Cons: I hardly use it. The set is expensive if you’re just buying it for a vignette action that hardly gets used.

If anyone else has any requests for photography tips or photoshop tips, ask away!

By Colorado Springs Wedding Photographer | Posted in Photoshop Tips | Also tagged Photoshop Tips | Comments (2)

Photography Tip Tuesday - Week #9: Golden Light

May 6, 2008 – 8:23 pm

colorado springs engagement portrait

This week’s tip is simple and easy because I have a date with a movie rental tonight.

Evening and morning light creates beautiful images.  The soft light and long shadows are dramatic and flattering.

Of course, if you live here in Colorado Springs, you’re at a disadvantage because we don’t have much of a sunset–the sun drops behind the mountains before it really sets.  But if you are determined, you can catch our amazing morning light (thanks to those endless plains stretching toward Kansas).

So if you’re going to pull the family outside for a quick family portrait, don’t do it at noon.  Wait until after dinner for some nice evening light.

By Colorado Springs Wedding Photographer | Posted in Engaged, Photographer Tips | Also tagged engagement portrait, Photographer Tips | Comments (0)

Scrapbook Saturday–my albums

April 12, 2008 – 11:55 am

(I think there are only three people left in the world that don’t know about this method of album-using yet, so this post is for them. For the rest, this might be a little boring.) :)

About two years ago, Tara Whitney shared with the Garden Girls her method of scrapbooking. It was fantastic and I fell instantly in love. The rest of the scrapbook world had moved past “chronological scrapbooking”–scrapbooking their photos in the order they were taken. Photos were now supposed to be scrapbooked as inspiration struck and put in albums or piles haphazardly.

I just couldn’t do that because I’m obsessive. I wanted my photos to be seen in a linear fashion, so I kept an album for each year and filed my layouts accordingly. The problem came when I wanted to try 8.5×11 inch layouts, or when I didn’t know what to do with my digital layouts that I printed as 8×8 layouts (the photo paper to print a layout as a 12×12 is just too expensive to make it feasible). My solution then was to mount anything smaller than a 12×12 on black 12×12 cardstock.

When I saw the new solution, though–using 3 ring American Crafts albums to store a variety of page sizes in a variety of sizes of page protector–I was thrilled. The whole thing looked so interactive and awesome.

Here are a few shots of my 2008 album so far:

Colorado Springs wedding photographer shares her scrapbook albums

Digital layouts get printed as 8×8 (on 8.5×11 photo paper and then cropped), 8.5×11s get housed in their various page protectors (though you do have to punch an extra hole in the landscape oriented 8.5×11s to get them to go into the three ring albums), and 12×12s in theirs.

Because I’m sort of anal about keeping everything in order, I do keep an eye on my album and try to create layouts accordingly. So if I do a 12×12 of pictures in January, I’ll try to do another 12×12 of January pictures. Because otherwise you have an empty backside or a layout that is out of chronological order. But I don’t ALWAYS do that, I live with it if I haven’t (or plan to make a layout to fill that space). (In the case of the cool lace cardstock, I make a layout almost identical to the front on the back of the lace to preserve the see-through look (as shown above).

Ali Edwards recently started using this technique, and I loved her idea for making her own size of page protectors. Will painted his first picture at a neighbor’s house, and I wanted it to go straight into the album–no layout, but just that cute little picture. It was 12 inches wide and 9 inches tall. So I just snipped off the top of a 12×12 page protector to make it fit. (And stapled a little journaling block on there explaining that it was his first painting.)

I love that this method is more free and allows you to scrapbook in a more old-fashioned way–putting things in there of different sizes and shapes that aren’t even necessarily layouts. I think a lot more paintings and report cards will find their way into my albums in the coming years.

It’s a great way to deal with pictures that are too intimidating and important to scrapbook, too–just print them off as an 8×8 or 8.5×11, pop them into the page protector, and maybe add a small journaling block. That way you still get to look at it, even if you’re too scared that the layout you would make wouldn’t be perfect enough!

In many years, when the albums are less a work-in-progress and more a finished project, I plan on transfering them to post-bond albums (I’ll punch new holes in the page protectors if need be). The three ring is fine for now but I do love the way post-bond albums eliminate the center gap and look more formal. So when I’m an old lady in a nursing home, I’ll be sitting there with my hole punch, finishing off those albums.

By Colorado Springs Wedding Photographer | Posted in Scrapbook | Also tagged albums, Crafts, family, photographer | Comments (2)

Photography Tips: Week #6 - Lenses (part 2 - my lenses)

April 9, 2008 – 10:29 pm

Continuing with our lens themed week (yesterday I wrote about basic lens information and last week I wrote about what to consider when purchasing a camera), today I’ll cover what lives in my camera bag (as well as the lenses that got booted from it).

Sorry Nikon photographers…this is a Canon post.

My Lenses

Canon 70-200 f/2.8 L IS

It is hard for me to pick a favorite lens, because I love them all, but if I had to pick just one favorite, it would probably be this one.

Pros: I love the beautiful bokeh it creates for portraits, and being a long (telephoto) fast (the maximum aperture is f/2.8) lens with 3 stops of image stabilization (I can take pictures in places that are three times darker), it is my best friend at indoor wedding ceremonies. I recommend it wholeheartedly to wedding photographers–I wouldn’t want to be without it. I also use it a lot for portraits–long lenses are more flattering, they condense a scene making it possible to bring a mountain or city skyline closer to your subject, and long lenses can also isolate a subject from a cluttered background better than a normal or telephoto lens.

Cons: It’s expensive. I think it would be hard to justify this lens if you couldn’t make money from it. People also complain about the weight…but I don’t think that’s a good reason not to carry the best equipment for the job. And needing to carry heavy equipment is a great reason to stay in shape. :)

Canon 135mm f/2.0 L

Since purchasing this lens last month, it has been a disproportionate amount of time on my camera. It definitely comes a close second to the 70-200 as my favorite lens. It’s the lens I keep on my camera for taking family pictures.

Pros: This is a long fast lens, so it has all the benefits of the 70-200 (with the exception of image stabilization). It’s faster than the 70-200 (f/2.0 instead of f/2.8) so the bokeh from it is even more amazing. It’s relatively lightweight. And this is one super sharp lens. The pictures I get from it are incredibly sharp and it focuses very quickly. A fellow photographer and friend of mine calls this her “magic lens.” At $900, it’s also a fantastic deal for such beautiful quality.

Cons: This is a fantastic focal length for my style and on my full frame 5d camera, but on a 1.6 FOVCF body (rebel, 20/30/40d, etc) I can see it being too long (or too “zoomed in”) for many people’s liking.

Canon 24-70 f/2.8 L

This was our first lens, and it is a fantastic multi-purpose lens. Many pros list it as their favorite lens, or the one lens they would keep if they could only have one.

Pros: It is fast, sharp, focuses quickly, and has a great range–a perfect “every day” focal length range.

Cons: I like the 24-70 more on a 1.6 FOVCF body than I do on the 5d–it’s a little too short for my style on a full frame body (but is great in tight quarters or for groups). This is another on-the-big/heavy-side lens.

Canon 17-40 f/4 L

This is our wide angle lens, and it does a great job of that. Perfect for wide angle wedding scenes.

Pros: It is a great wide angle lens. It is a fantastic deal–$650 and fairly small and lightweight. When I need a wide angle shot, I know I’m going to get a great one.

Cons: I’m not a huge fan of wide angles (though I know they are popular right now in portraits)–I prefer the flattering telephoto lenses. So this lens doesn’t get used much.

Canon 50mm f/1.4

This gets my vote for the one I recommend most to new photographers. If you are on a tight budget and can only get one lens, this is the one to get.

Pros: It is very fast, fantastically inexpensive ($250), and has beautiful bokeh (unlike it’s cheaper illegitimate sister, the 50mm f/1.8). This one also spends a lot of time on my camera at home. It’s wide aperture and multi-purpose “normal” focal length makes it a great bet for family photos. It is tiny and very lightweight. (And it’s the least expensive lens in my bag, so if something gets dropped or damaged from being out, at least it’s not an expensive loss!) You are also able to get very close to your subject with it–it has a minimum focusing distance of 1.5 feet, which means I can very nicely fill the frame with my little two year old subject.

Cons: Can’t think of any. Unless not having a pretty red “L series” stripe can counts as a con.

Lenses I have kicked to the curb

Canon 70-200 f/4 L

Pros: This baby is a fantastic value. One of the least expensive L lenses. It is sharp, relatively lightweight, and a great lens for traveling. We broke this one out for vacations and it was fantastic.

Cons: As a telephoto f/4 with no image stabilization, this was not a good indoor lens. The 70-200 f/2.8 IS kicked its butt, and then when we got the 135mm, we sold this one.

Canon 85mm f/1.8

Another prime lens (so far I’ve discussed the 50mm f/1.4 and the 135 f/2.0). Prime lenses are my faves and I plan on discussing the difference between primes and zooms later this week. But in short, prime lenses are usually a totally fantastic value because they only have to do one thing, and they can do that one focal length extremely well.

Pros: A lot of people like this lens.

Cons: I was not one of those people. To be fair, it IS a nice lens with great image quality and fast focusing at a great value (around $350). I think on a 1.6 FOVCF I would like this lens, but it was useless to me on the 5d. Every time I framed the shot how I wanted it, it would turn out I was too close and I’d have to take a step back. It has an almost 3 feet minimum focusing distance (compared to the 50mm’s 1.5 feet). I bought the 135mm to combat this problem (it also has a 3 feet min focusing distance, but being a much longer lens means that I can frame the shot just how I want it from that distance).

By Colorado Springs Wedding Photographer | Posted in Photographer Tips | Also tagged camera, canon, lenses, Photographer Tips, photographers, review, tutorial | Comments (3)

Photography Tip Tuesday: Week #6 - Lenses (part 1)

April 8, 2008 – 6:50 pm

Hurray! It’s the day to talk about lenses!

Last week for Photography Tip Tuesday I covered advice for purchasing a camera. This week we get to talk about my favorite subject: lenses. There is a lot to say, so I’ll be breaking this “lesson” up over the course of the week so that no budding photographers give up and stop reading.

Lenses are important investments

Brace yourself: you will probably spend much more on lenses (or at the very least just as much) than you will on the camera body that holds them. But there is good news.

As I said last time, your dSLR is pretty much disposable. You purchase it, it will decline rapidly in value over the next couple of years, and then you’ll upgrade to a newer better model that has made your old body seem ridiculously slow, noisey, and old in comparison (not unlike a first wife–ha ha ha).

Lenses are much better investments. As long as you keep the lens in great condition, you can expect to sell it on ebay or a photography forum and lose only $50-$100! If you purchased the lens on sale or with a rebate, you can even expect to charge what you bought it for–I recently sold a lens for the exact price I purchased it for–all I lost was the shipping fee of $15 (not a bad price for using a lens for five months)!

This is a great argument for purchasing less camera than you can afford in order to buy better lenses than you can afford. When allocating money, the emphasis is safely placed on your lenses–it’s money you can get back. Not to mention that a fantastic lens will make a bigger difference on your images than whether you shoot with a 40d or 5d.

The numbers

When you shop for lenses, the numbers at first look a little alien. Let’s use one of my favorite general-purpose lenses as an example:

Canon 24-70mm f/2.8 L

The Canon part is easy–it’s a Canon lens. The “L” at the end stands for “luxury” and means it’s an L series lens–the optics and build quality of the lens are professional. L series lenses also either have a red stripe at the end or are cream all over. This is so that when you’re out and about with your lens other people can ooh and ahh over how awesome you are for having an L series lens. :P

Focal Length

The first set of numbers (24-70) is the focal length of the lens. The higher the number, the more zoomed in you are.

50mm is considered the “normal” focal length. When you look through a 50mm lens, you see what your eye sees. Anything larger is “telephoto” (or seems “zoomed in”) and anything less is “wide.”

50mm lens on 5d - \

telephoto lenses smush backgrounds, making the buildings seem closer

wide angle engagement portrait

These guidelines are based on 35mm film cameras. Most dSLRs have a “crop factor.” (The notable exceptions to this rule are the Canon 5d and Nikon D3). In the case of the Rebel, and 20/30/40ds, they are 1.6 FOVCF bodies, meaning any lens focal length will need to be multiplied by 1.6 to find out its real focal length on that camera body.

So, a 50mm lens isn’t really a normal lens on a Rebel, because it acts like an 80mm (50mm x 1.6) lens.

The next number–aperture

When we bought our first two lenses, I thought we were set for life. We had a 20d, a 24-70 f/2.8 L, and a 70-200 f/4 L lens. In my thinking, we had 38mm-320mm covered (remember that 1.6 FOVCF). We were set. (Luckily Nic knew better and bought me my first fast prime lens–the 50mm f/1.4…and then I was hooked.)

A lot of newbies make that same mistake–looking only at the first set of numbers. The second number, the one after the “f/” is equally important, because it affects how much light you need to take a decent photo without flash.

The lower this number, the wider your lens can open. Why does this matter?

When your lens has a narrow opening, you get a large depth of field–your foreground will be in focus, as well as your background. But because only a little light is getting through, your shutter speed will need to be longer. When your lens has a big opening, your subject will be in focus, but everything else will be blurry. Much more light is able to get in, so you are able to have a much shorter shutter speed.

This is why lenses with a large maximum opening (like f/2.8 or lower) are called “fast” lenses–because they have the ability to open up wide and allow lots of light in, they can have short shutter speeds.

Time for examples. For this group shot, everything is in focus–the feet in front, to the grass in the back.

larger depth of field for a big group

This shot shows a much narrower depth of field–only the front pamphlet is in focus. The rest melt into the background:

shallow depth of field means the booklets melt into the background

Why wide apertures are awesome

When the aperture is wide, not only do you get beautiful background blur (called “bokeh”)…

the individual blades of grass in the field disappear into a pretty yellow blur

…but you have a lot more flexibility indoors and at night. In dark situations your lens will let in enough light that you can still have reasonably short shutter speeds.

The difference at the low end of these numbers is huge. The difference between f/16 and f/11 sounds like a lot, but it is really only one stop of light. f/2.8 and f/2.0 also represents a one stop difference. If the kit lens that a camera comes with is an f/5.6, the difference between it and a good fast lens like the 50mm f/1.4 is four stops of light! You would need a shutter speed four times slower with the f/5.6 lens than with the f/1.4 lens…and that will kill you indoors!

“Image stabilized” or “vibration reduction” lenses [as with the 18-55mm example] compensate for that hand shake, but they won’t compensate for your subject moving all over the place [as with a child]. Image stabilization isn’t a reliable substitute for a fast lens, but it is a great complement.

What is a reasonably short shutter speed?

The minimum shutter speed you can use without getting “hand shake” (blur from your own movement) is relative to your focal length. There is an easy mathematical trick for knowing what your minimum shutter speed is when holding a camera:

1/your focal length

If you have a 50mm lens on a 1.6 FOVCF body, the slowest you want your shutter speed is 1/80 sec. (In this shot I braced myself, held really still and squeezed 1/50 sec out of it)

a fast lens captured this scene without needing a flash

Whew!

I could go on and on and on (and will in the coming days), but for now that is the basic info. Next I’ll cover the lenses in my bag (and the ones that once lived there) and then finally my recommendations for different situations and budgets.

By Colorado Springs Wedding Photographer | Posted in Babies, Engaged, Families, Photographer Tips | Also tagged canon, equipment, lenses, photographer, Photographer Tips, review | Comments (3)