News in brief: The Fujifilm guide to restoring water-damaged images

I’ve heard lots of people say that if there were a fire in their home, something that they’d try to rescue would be their photos. (I’d be quite interested in getting out alive, although I can see how old albums can be important.) But what about the opposite of fire? What about water damage? It might feel a bit hopeless if you find troves of images that are encrusted with mud or sand, stuck together, or just horribly water damaged, but you might be able to salvage them. And Fujifilm has the perfect guide to explain what you need to do.

Depending on the type of prints that you’re trying to salvage (silver halide, dye sublimation, dye-type inkjet, or pigment-type inkjet) and how they’ve been damaged, you’ll need to use different techniques. Whatever the print, though, you’ll need a very decent dose of patience and remember to dry them in the shade and don’t use anything like a hairdryer.

Everything that you need to know is over at Fujifilm.

What is this? - In our NewsFlash section, we share interesting tidbits of news. Think of it as our extended twitter feed: When we find something that get our little hearts racing, we'll share it with you right here! Loving it? Great, we've got lots more News Flash articles - and, of course, we're still on Twitter as well, for even shorter news tidbits.

When time and space swap places

What happens when you want to interchange time and space in a video? Watch and find out, in this video by Last Future.

On the Vimeo page, he explains... "I was sitting in a train traveling through The Netherlands recently when for some odd reason I decided I had to take a video of the landscape passing by. I had no real use for it but decided to try and make something of it.

I remembered slit-scan photography, a method where a slit is moved across the picture plane essentially taking a temporal image, where different times of the scene are captured on different parts of the film."

Combining the technique of slit-scan and a spot of video editing, he came up with a brilliantly unique video...

Watch the video:

Temporal Video Experiment from lastfuture on Vimeo.

And there's a 'making of' explanation, too:

Temporal Video Experiment - Making Of from lastfuture on Vimeo.

Switching space and time

What happens when you want to interchange time and space in a video? Yep, it can be done: watch and find out, in this video by Last Future.

On the Vimeo page, he explains… ‘I was sitting in a train traveling through The Netherlands recently when for some odd reason I decided I had to take a video of the landscape passing by. I had no real use for it but decided to try and make something of it.

I remembered slit-scan photography, a method where a slit is moved across the picture plane essentially taking a temporal image, where different times of the scene are captured on different parts of the film.’

Combining the technique of slit-scan and a spot of video editing, he came up with a brilliantly unique video…

Temporal Video Experiment from lastfuture on Vimeo.

And if you want to try to wrap your head around how he did it, there’s a making of video, too!

Temporal Video Experiment – Making Of from lastfuture on Vimeo.

Glamour of the Gods at the National Portrait Gallery

We might think that media stars have very carefully controlled images today, what with their agents, their publicists, and the cavalcade of lawyers that protect their interests at every given turn, and in Kate Moss’ case, Oxfordshire Police who cheerfully closed roads through two villages for her recent wedding. But in reality, the paparazzi and every Tom, Dick, and Harry, and Emma, Jo, and Sarah having cameras on their mobile phones makes them quite accessible. Definitely not so for Hollywood stars from the 1920s to the 1960s; their images really were administered with rods of iron by their studios.

Louise Brooks, 1929 by Eugene Robert Richee © John Kobal Foundation, 2011

Studios wanted people to think that their stars were inaccessible and imbue them with air of mystique, so the only photos available of them were the photos released by the studio, taken by a small pool of photographers who worked closely with them. Photographers included Davis Boulton, Ruth Harriet Louise – the only woman to run a studio photo gallery – and Clarence Sinclair Bull. It wasn’t usual for one photographer to build up a relationship with a star, either.

Interestingly, these photos were usually marked ‘copyright free’ so that they could reach as many people as possible, and draw them into cinemas. These stars’ images would be everywhere, but it would be precisely the images that the studio wanted to project of them, and who knew about the photographers?

The NPG’s new exhibition Glamour of the Gods brings together 70 vintage prints, some iconic and some previously unseen, taken by nearly 40 different photographers, of film stars from 1920 to 1960. All of the images have been drawn from the John Kobal Foundation.

Marlon Brando for Streetcar Named Desire, 1950 by John Engstead © John Kobal Foundation, 2011

Kobal collated an extensive collection of these images, at first because of his interest in the films and their stars, but later because of the relationship that he built with the photographers behind them and his desire to see their work preserved and acknowledged. What with the images being ‘copyright free’, it was all too easy for the photographer to be forgotten.

If you get the chance, do wander along to the NPG and marvel at the product of a now-dead studio system. Enjoy the publicity shots that needed to encapsulate a film in one image; the perfect presentation of these gods of the silver screen, and the work of photographers who might otherwise have gone unrecognised.

Glamour of the Gods runs from 7 July to 23 October 2011 at the National Portrait Gallery, St Martin’s Place, London, WC2H 0HE.

(Featured image: Clark Gable and Joan Crawford for Dancing Lady, 1933 by George Hurrell © John Kobal Foundation, 2011.)

June photo competition winner!

We picked water as our photo theme for June. It seemed somehow appropriate, what with large swathes of the UK being told that they were in drought conditions and then hours of play at Wimbledon being lost to rain delays. You did the theme proud, though, submitting some gorgeous photos for us to ‘ooh’ and ‘aah’ at whilst we tried to settle on a winner. We managed to pick one, though; it’s amazing what you can do with one pin, one girl, and one water balloon…

Dainty Rasengan, by Lindsay Stott

Many congratulations to Lindsay Stott for this perfectly captured moment. We were very impressed! Do get in touch so that you can claim your fabulous prize from the dudes at Fracture.

Thank you to everyone who entered. We really enjoyed selecting a winner this month and we’re looking forward to seeing what you come up with in July!

Our July photo competition

Hello All. It’s the first Wednesday of the month, which means it’s photo competition day. For no other reason than we felt like it, this month’s theme is red. (Okay, so maybe me buying a brand new red dress had a little something to do with it, but only a tad.) Let your imaginations run riot with red. We can’t wait to see what you drop into the Flickr pool, and to choose a winner, who’ll get a gorgeous 12″ Fracture.

You’ve three weeks to submit a photo, so you have from today (Wednesday 6 July) until Wednesday 27 July. It’s only one photo per person, and they need to go in the Small Aperture Flickr pool.

If you’ve any questions, please be in touch. Otherwise, I’ve reproduced The Rules, just in case. Good luck and have fun!

The Rules

• If you decide to enter, you agree to The Rules.
• You can’t have written for Small Aperture or be related to either me or Haje to enter.
• One entry per person – so choose your best!
• Entries need to be submitted to the right place, which is the Small Aperture Flickr group.
• There’s a closing date for entries, so make sure you’ve submitted before then.
• You have to own the copyright to your entry and be at liberty to submit it to a competition. Using other people’s photos is most uncool.
• It probably goes without saying, but entries do need to be photographs. It’d be a bit of strange photo competition otherwise.
• Don’t do anything icky – you know, be obscene or defame someone or sell your granny to get the photo.
• We (that being me and Haje) get to choose the winner and we’ll do our best to do so within a week of the competition closing.
• You get to keep all the rights to your images. We just want to be able to show off the winners (and maybe some honourable mentions) here on Small Aperture.
• Entry is at your own risk. I can’t see us eating you or anything, but we can’t be responsible for anything that happens to you because you submit a photo to our competition.
• We are allowed to change The Rules, or even suspend or end the competition, if we want or need to. Obviously we’ll try not to, but just so that you know.

Darkening a room by adding light

I was doing a photo shoot a few days ago, where I was photographing a lemon suspended from a piece of thread. I wanted to make it look as if it was hovering in pitch darkness.

Upon seeing the results, someone asked me an interesting question: Isn’t it difficult to focus your camera in the dark? Well, no, because the photo was taken in the daytime, with my lights on. So, how come does it look like it was taken at night?

That, my friends, is the power of contrast in lighting. You have to remember that you don’t need a dark room in order to make a background completely dark – you just need to ensure that your foreground is significantly brighter than the ambient light. Here’s how and why… 

It’s all about relative brightness

To take the lemon photograph, I used a pretty simple set-up: A couple of flashguns aimed at the lemon, from a very close distance. Because the flashes were so close to the subject (they are just out of frame, in fact), it adds a lot of light. If you’re curious why that is, check out the inverse-square law on Wikipedia.

Say 'bonjour' to the magical space-lemon. It's citrus powered, awesome, and magical. Oh, and it hovers in space, clearly. That's what makes it awesome. If you want to take a closer look, click on the photo!

The reason why the photo came out as it did, is because of the camera settings: The camera was set to ISO 100, with f/9.0 aperture and 1/200 second shutter time. If you can’t visualise what those settings would do in the circumstances described, I welcome you to try that right now. Don’t worry, we’ll wait. Set your camera to precisely those settings, and take a photo indoors, without using a flash.

If you can’t be bothered to do the experiment: Even in a relatively well-lit room, that will result in a very dark photo indeed.

So, as far as the camera is concerned, it is taking a horribly underexposed photo. Which is perfectly fine, because I want a dark background. It’s the foreground that is important, and that is where my flashes come in.

Let me get this straight, you’re taking photos that look like darkness in a well-lit room?

This portrait was also taken in a relatively well-lit room - but again, because of the high flash output and the fast shutter time (in this case, f/8.0 and 1/500 second at ISO 100), it looks like it's taken in pitch darkness. Groovy. Clicky for bigger.

Short answer: Yup.

Slightly longer answer: Yup. You can do this by settin your camera to manual, and use an exposure which results in a dark room (by choosing a fast shutter time). The next step is to use your flashes to light the subject.

Of course, this doesn’t work if the light from your flashguns spill onto the background (you’re trying to keep that as dark as possible, remember?) so it is a good idea to use a snoot or a honeycomb grid to ensure that the flash light isn’t accidentally re-lighting your background, because then you’re back to square one.

Can this be used for anything else?

Well of course. Always remember that it’s all about the contrast in lighting: If your flashes are more powerful than the light you are photographing in, then you can ‘darken the room’ with your camera settings, and use the flashes to light your scene.

Hell, if you’ve got enough flashes, you can turn even broad daylight into night. Don’t believe me? Check out this article on ganging flashes, and scroll down to “Turning Noon Into Night With High-Speed Sync”. Pretty impressive stuff, but there’s a pretty ridiculous amount of money in flash equipment being used right there.

You don’t have to go to those extremes, though – using flash outdoors on a shady day can give great effects, because when done well, your subjects look as if they are brighter than the surroundings. When done subtly, it can look bloody fantastic – your eyes are automatically and subconsciously drawn to the main subject – always a good sign in a photograph.

Book review: Northerners

It’s easy to stereotype the north of England into men in flat caps, women with their hair in curlers – just like Hilda Ogden – pints of bitter, pies, and incessant rain. But it’s a whole lot more than that, and this is something that Sefton Samuels has been capturing through his lens for over forty years. In his Northerners: Portrait of a no-nonsense people he takes you well beyond the cliches, showing you humour, poverty, graft, and talent.

You get to look at ordinary people doing ordinary things: kids making their own fun as they jump from stairwells onto piles of mattresses; street-sweepers, cobblers, and even rag-and-bone men going about their business; bingo halls on a Friday night; football terraces on a Saturday afternoon; and even a day at Chester races.

But there are also portraits of people who would have brought colour and excitement to their lives, too. There’s a chisel-jawed George Best, Morrissey showing his best side, a resplendent Daniel Barenboim conducting the Halle, and a contemplative Harold Wilson smoking his pipe.

Samuels has been called the photographic equivelent of Ken Loach. And whilst maybe that’s true, there’s something of L.S. Lowry about his work, too. It’s simple, it captures the moment, and it’s unmistakeably northern. Whatever this ‘northern’ thing is meant to mean, Samuels has it going on in his pictures, just as Lowry had it in his paintings. So perhaps it’s incredibly fitting that Lowry described Samuels as his favourite photographer.

Samuels’ photographs show you a life that was in many ways slow to change, but when change did come, it was swift and brutal: riots in Moss Side and Toxteth in 1981; the miners’ strike of the early 80s; and the aftermath of the Manchester city centre bombing in 1996.

My favourite images probably come from the Deep Trouble series, which depict the pitmen of Bold Colliery, St Helens. The pictures illuminated only by the miners’ lamps convey perfectly the dark claustrophobia of working deep underground, peril constantly on their shoulders. Whilst they’re very beautiful pictures, there’s also something very matter-of-fact about them, too. No-nonsense, I suppose.

Yes, this is a portrait of Northerners, told with honesty and with love. Love even for Everton, Moss Side, and Toxteth. Samuels is, after all, himself from the North. Looking through it, you get a feeling for these people, for what makes them tick, for their environment, for their lives. But I think that I’ll give the final word to my dad, though, as he’s one of these fabled northerners – Manchester born and bred – so he knows what he’s looking at here: ‘Yes. That’ll do it.’

Northerners: Portrait of a no-nonsense people, by Sefton Samuels. Published by the Ebury Press and available from Amazon UK and Amazon US.

Photographing in public: When the police gets it wrong

When they start reaching for handcuffs, something's gone a bit wrong.

A few days ago, I received an e-mail from a reader who had been through an interesting ordeal by the hands of UK police. They wanted a bit of advice, and I figured more of you might like to learn a little bit more about what happens when you are given a stern talking to by police about taking photos in a public place.

Also, let me point out right at the beginning that I'm not a lawyer, and that nothing in this post must be construed as legal advice - I'm merely a photographer who has a (probably more than healthy) interest in the aspects of the law pertaining to photographers.

Tim writes:

"I've been an amateur snapper for a while. I favour street photography but will snap most things if I find them interesting. I tend to visit events like steam rallies, street parades, music events and such as they are a good source of fun street shots, as a rule. At the weekend I decided to attend a car rally with the intention of snapping some old cars and bikes, and the people there to see them, plus the bands playing."

"All was well and good, it was nice day. I'd been there maybe a couple of hours and was thinking about leaving when I was approached by a police officer, who asked if he could have a word. Of course, I said. He told me, rather apologetically, that they'd received a call from a member of the public who was concerned I might have been taking 'inappropriate pictures'. I had to push him for him to add 'of children'. I wasn't overly shocked. I know numerous people this has happened to. There is a lot of suspicion among the ill informed, particularly stewards at such events. Officer asked if I'd have any objection to showing him the photos on my camera and I said no, of course not, feel free. He took camera and handed it to colleague who was in the police car which had drawn up."

Comments: A lot of people at this point feel they have done nothing wrong, and are more than happy to help police along. The thinking goes as follows: Police are people too, and if they take an interest in my photography (even if they have just accused me, indirectly, of being perverts), then it can't harm to show them the images.

Do remember, however, that a police officer demanding to see your photos is almost certainly on shaky grounds. There are a few laws under which they can do so, but the application of these laws is generally restricted to high-risk areas.

Tim writes...

"I was entirely confident I'd be on my way in a minute or two, once the images had been viewed and it became obvious I'd taken none, inappropriate or otherwise, of kids. First officer continued to be friendly and apologetic, and I assured him I understood the situation. I didn't point out that it's in fact entirely legal to take pictures of anyone in a public place, irrespective of age, as I do understand the genuine concerns some people may have in this modern world. However I was somewhat miffed as to how someone might have thought my behaviour was suspicious enough to call the police, considering I go out of my way to avoid taking pictures of children and am always entirely open about what I'm doing. Having taken tens of thousands of street snaps, I am yet to have my first run in with a person I've photographed, largely because I use my common sense don't go poking my camera anywhere just because I might have legality on my side."

Comments: There are a few important things to keep in mind here: If it's in public, you have the full rights to take photos of anything you can see. Police (or, indeed, anyone who so pleases), can ask you very nicely if you pretty please, with sugar on top, won't stop taking pictures.

It may be, for example, that you are at the scene of a horrific traffic accident, and a 9-year old boy has been badly maimed by a car. If the parents are present, and clearly deeply in shock and in discomfort about their son being photographed, police might walk over and say something like "Hey, mate, if you don't mind awfully, you're upsetting the parents a lot by taking these pictures, it'd be great if you could move along". It's up to you whether you decide to stop taking photos or not, but as a human being, you are, in my opinion, being a bit of a douche if you don't.

Tim writes...

"Anyway, driver gets out of car and I had a sinking feeling when I saw he'd left my camera in his car. I asked him if there was a problem and he replied, incredulously, that yes, of course there was a problem. 'There are lots of pictures of people on your camera. PEOPLE! Do you know them all?' I admitted the no, obviously I didn't. 'Then you don't take pictures of them, simple as that. You can't just go around in public taking pictures of whoever you want!' I was astonished by his obvious ignorance of the 'public places' law but remained polite as I pointed out that yes, I could, because photography in a public place (car show was held in a public place, not on private land) was entirely legal and street photography was an increasingly popular niche - and one of my street snapping buddies is himself a serving police sergeant."

Comment: Okay, this is where the police officer is quite clearly completely wrong about the law. You are, as Tim says, fully in your right to take photos in a public place.

This is where you realise that you are fighting a losing battle. Police officers, like everyone else, are some times wrong. If they mis-perceive a situation, it might be that you get arrested for something that you should't ever be arrested for. However, remember that the main reason why you get arrested in the UK is to 'allow a prompt and effective investigation'. At this juncture, you probably have three choices:

• Delete the photos off your memory card
• Encourage the police to contact their sergeant ('skipper') or inspector ('governor')
• Get arrested, explain the whole situation at the police station.

Now, to go through these options in order:

Deleting the images is something you should only do as an absolute last resort. Police officers on the ground have no right to tell you to delete anything; any 'destruction' has to be result of a court order. That it's relatively easy to recover the images once they have been deleted is a separate matter, of course: If you are confident in your skills in image recovery, go ahead and delete them (don't format the card - just choose 'delete all'), and then recover them later; but this isn't something you should ever have to do.

In the UK, if a police officer tells you to delete something, simply refuse. If they make motions to delete something from your memory card for you, tell them to stop right away, and tell them that it would be illegal for them to do that. Technically, a police officer deleting images from someone's computer would fall either under criminal damage (a common law offence) or under "unauthorised modification of computer material" under the Computer Misuse Act of 1990. If they do delete your images, make sure you don't touch that part of the camera (fingerprints!), take their shoulder number, and go to the nearest police station. At the front office, make a formal complaint, and don't leave until you have a crime reference number. You'll probably have to hand over your camera, but make sure that the officer who takes it knows what has happened, and that the camera will need to be forensically analysed.

Encouraging them to seek advice is something you have to do carefully. Telling someone "you don't know the law you bastard, how about you call and ask your boss" will obviously come across differently than "Uhm, I think you may be mistaken, but it's a complicated piece of law. Is there any chance I could wait here whilst you call your superior for some advice?". If you do manage to convince them to call the boss, you'll probably be sheepishly let go, pronto; most sergeants have the sense to either know the law or to seek advice from the CPS (Crown Prosecution Service), at which point you'll be sent on your way. If you subsequently want to make a formal complaint (you probably should - formal complaints are taken very seriously, and cause a huge machinery to roll into action. At the very least, all the police officers in that borough will be given a stern reminder of the rights of photographers), that's up to you.

Get yourself arrested... Finally, if it all goes wrong, then tell them that you aren't going to give them your camera, and that you won't delete any images. Most importantly: tell them that you won't tell them your name or address. This means that they will have to arrest you to take it any further.

Now, in the UK, arresting someone is a long, drawn-out procedure, which makes police officers think twice about arresting someone, at least if they aren't completely sure if they have valid grounds for arrest. Once you make it to the custody suite, the custody sergeant will probably not even authorise detention, which means that you'll never see the inside of a cell.

Tim writes:

"The first, more civil, officer had by this time also viewed the pictures on the camera. I am pretty much certain if he'd been alone I'd have been on my way with an apology for the inconvenience and a thanks for cooperating at that point. But the driver was clearly determined to continue his tirade and not just let it go. He indicated to the first officer to take my details. I asked why they needed my details when I'd proved my innocence of the non-crime (I didn't actually say that) of snapping kids. Driver asked me if I wanted to be arrested. I have responsibilities and couldn't afford to be out of commission for hours or more so just gave the first officer my name and address and DOB, knowing I had no record of any kind and nothing to fear."

Comment: If this were me, at this point, I would have just let them arrest me. It'll be a few hours of inconvenience, but ultimately, if you're sure that you haven't done anything wrong, you have nothing to fear. It's worth remembering that 'getting arrested' sounds dramatic, but isn't punishment in itself: It is simply one of many tools in a police officer's toolbox. Getting arrested won't get you a criminal record.

Tim writes:

"People had been gawping as they passed by and I was now 'invited' to get into the car. 'Don't worry, you're going to be arrested,' said first officer. Of course I wasn't, I'd done nothing wrong, but the continuing detention was making the onlookers think something iffy was going on, when I should have been on my way long since."

"Got in car and first officer remained outside, on radio, checking details. Driver then said he'd show me what he had a real problem with. He brought up a picture of a woman sitting on the grass watching one of the bands. 'You've obviously seen her showing a bit of leg and decided to take a picture, haven't you?' I told him I was taking pictures of the audience in general. He repeated the question almost word for word, and I did likewise in reply, to which he said that I was really starting to annoy him with my 'innocent act'. He said I'd clearly come out with the intention of snapping young ladies. He brought up another picture of a young woman - this one was giving a sweetie to her dog. He laughed at the suggestion that I was focusing on the dog taking the sweet, not the girl. He ignored the obvious fact that around 300 of the 324 images featured elderly men, young men, middle aged men, singers and bands (male), some dancers (mixed sex, mostly middle aged), some people dressed in Roman costumes, about 130 pictures just of vehicles, some pictures of the sun on the sea, boats, a plane etc. None of the pictures were of things such as bums or cleavage close ups. There was nothing on there that I wouldn't have been happy to show anyone, including kids or nuns or the people who appeared in the snaps."

"There then followed a 15 minute lecture from the driver about how wrong taking pictures of people was. He again said people had a right to privacy in public places. He made a big deal of a picture I'd taken of a woman drinking champagne on a balcony of a house overlooking the rally site. He said her husband would be within his rights to 'fill me in'. Her husband (or partner) had in fact raised a glass cheerfully to me when I'd taken the shot, though he wasn't actually in the shot. I could still see them up there and said he could ask them if they objected. He completely ignored me. Finally the other officer got back in the car and confirmed that I didn't have record, wasn't a known danger to the public/kids, wasn't on the run or wanted etc."

"But the driver wasn't done yet. He said that image of the woman sitting on the grass 'showing a bit of leg' could amount to indecency. If there had been 'three or four' such images in a series, I'd be under arrest and would be placed on the sex offenders register. Did I want that? Did I want my life ruined?"

Comment: Oh, wow, that's showing another pretty grim misunderstanding of the law. The Indecent Photographs thing the officer is speaking about in this case falls under S1 of the Protection of Children act 1978 as amended by S85 of the Criminal Justice and Public Order act of 1994 and s45 of the sexual offences act of 2003. It states that it is an offence to "take, make, or permit to be taken; Show or distribute; Possess with a view to distribution; Publish any indecent photograph (i.e. an image in any form) of a child (a person under the age of 18)". The discussion as to whether the woman was acting 'indecently' is irrelevant if she doesn't appear to be under 18 - and I think most people would agree that anything you see on an average beach (with the exception of 60 year old men wearing Speedos) cannot reasonably be argued to be indecent.

Tim's e-mail continues with several more thinly and not-so-thinly veiled threats, but it all ended well:

"Eventually I was driven back to my motorcycle and told that they'd wait over the road and make sure I left the area 'for my own protection'. Which I did."

Comment: Obviously, I have only Tim's side of this story, as I haven't been able to speak to the officers in question. If everything happened the way he perceived it, it appears that he has run into a copper who was having a ludicrously bad day - and a formal complaint may be in order.

There are a lot of lessons to be taken away from this encounter, however. A good exercise for photographers who take photos in public places, for example, would be to go through the account above, with the thought 'What would I have done in the same situation' - in the knowledge that this could very well happen to you.

You could do a lot worse than reading up on your rights of taking photos in a public place in the UK, Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and the US (and those of your local country, of course), and to be aware of the rights you have to your own images.

Finally, if you do get 'hassle' from the cops, stay calm, but stand your ground. There's nothing wrong with taking a few deep breaths and giving an eloquent reply instead of blurting out whatever you are thinking. Ultimately, police have more important things to worry about than a photographer minding his/her own business, but it could be (like in this case) that the odd police officer have their own axes to grind. The best way to dodge out of that is by asking them to take advice from their bosses, and to stand your ground.

How about you?

So - have you ever had any nasty experiences whilst out taking photos? Leave a comment below and tell us about it!

Steve McCurry: The Iconic Photographs

I don’t happen to be in the habit of splashing out £250 on coffee table books. Mostly it’s because if I had £250 to spare I’d probably spend it on something else, but, believe it or not, there are no coffee tables in the mansion either. (I should rectify that, I think.) However, if I did have a random £250 kicking around my bank account for a coffee table book (wouldn’t that be lovely?), then I could probably do a lot worse than put it towards Steve McCurry: The Iconic Photographs, which has just been published by Phaidon.

Procession of Nuns, Burma © Steve McCurry

The large-format book has a print run of 3,300 copies and each of those comes with a print signed by McCurry. Yes, it does feature the Afghan Girl, but there are 164 other photographs, too, photographs taken right across the globe that have that characteristic, arresting burst of colour and glimpse into another world. It’s an inspiring collection of McCurry’s images that spans his entire career.

Boy in mid-flight, India © Steve McCurry

If you’d like to know more, or perhaps just ogle it a bit more, head over to Phaidon’s website.

10 awesome photography projects on Kickstarter

Kickstarter: Exciting times for creative types

Do you believe the world needs more creativity? I certainly do. There's something awesome about people going out there, having fun, outlandish, or downright genius ideas (sometimes all three at once), and then turn them into reality.

Guess what, you can help... Kickstarter.com is a pretty nifty website, which in a very short period of time has developed into the world’s largest funding platform for creative projects, and your dollars can go towards any project of your choice.

A lot of photographers and inventors of photography gadgets have embraced Kickstarter - and I've rooted out the top 10 awesome projects that are worth a closer look

Police Tape

What's the idea? Police Tape examines the impact of police recordings over the last 20 years, and how controversial police recordings are often withheld from public view.

Why is it worth your hard-earned dollars? When the police screw up, who finds out about it? With the advent of modern recording devices on dashboards of police cruisers, as well as ride-along camera crews, it’s baffling how many police officers still get away with infringing on citizen’s rights.

Help a Berkley student get his project out to the masses, so perhaps something can be done to affect change.

Funding goal: $1,500
Currently funded: $2,390

Check out Police Tape on Kickstarter!

Naked Sea

What's the idea? Showcasing the importance of the Dead Sea, which is slowly disappearing, and its importance to the neighbouring cultures of Israel, Jordan, and Palestine.

Why is it worth your hard-earned dollars? Ari Fruchter and famed photographer Spencer Tunick team up to boost the significance of the dwindling Dead Sea by doing something no one has ever done before – taking nude photos.

Ok, nude photos have been done before, but by bringing together the three nations who surround the sea and photographing them nude has certainly never been accomplished, and will provide contributors with some fantastic original photos.

Funding goal: $60,000
Currently funded: $116,270

Find out more about Naked Sea on Kickstarter!

Ethiopian Wolf

What's the idea? Documenting the extinction of the Ethiopian Wolf.

Why is it worth your hard-earned dollars? Less than 500 of these unique furry creatures exist today, mostly due to human decimation of their natural wildlife. With the help of donors researchers and photographers can document the species and help bring more attention to the wolf, hopefully to help it survive.

With over six months of research already invested, this project is using local and world-wide researchers to give the Ethiopian Wolf the best chance possible.

Funding goal: $13,500
Currently funded: $13,705

Read more about Ethiopian Wolf on Kickstarter!

Red Pop

What's the idea? An iPhone accessory for true photography lovers.

Why is it worth your hard-earned dollars? Remember when your phone was all buttons, how satisfying it was to push them? Now it’s all touch screens and slides, and even taking a photo isn’t fun anymore.

Red Pop hopes to put some of the ‘click’ back into your iPhone use, by providing an accessory that makes the iPhone feel more like a real camera. So, if you feel like a dork every time you take out your iPhone for photos, here’s an accessory you can really get behind!

Funding goal: $20,000
Currently funded: $47,151

Find out more about Red Pop on Kickstarter!

Go Pano Micro

What's the idea? Turns your iPhone into a 360° camera!

Why is it worth your hard-earned dollars? Whether you love your iPhone, love photography, or just enjoy panoramic pictures, then perhaps a small investment in this add-on would make your day.

By adding the Go Pano Micro to your iPhone you can record meetings, sports, or just take great 360° panoramic videos and photos. Imagine the possibilities!

Funding goal: $20,000
Currently funded: $169,209

Find out more about Go Pano Micro on Kickstarter!

Camera Lens Cap Holder

What's the idea? Unique lens cap holder that attaches to the camera strap.

Why is it worth your hard-earned dollars? If you’ve tried everything to keep track of your lens holder to no avail, then this is the camera accessory for you. The holder lives on the strap, so when you remove the cap it is help onto the strap. No strings, no stickers, and no more lost caps.

Innovative, original, and definitely useful, this little guy will definitely take off, and you can be the first to own one!

Funding goal: $3,900
Currently funded: $14,623

Find out more about the Camera Lens Cap Holder on Kickstarter!

Olloclip

What's the idea? Expands the photo and video capabilities of the iPhone by offering additional lenses.

Why is it worth your hard-earned dollars? Amateur photographers who are limited by the lens capabilities of their iPhone can now get satisfaction with the Olloclip, which gives you convenient lens options including fisheye, wide-angle, and macro lenses.

The pocket-sized holder takes just a few seconds to open, pick a lens, and attach to the iPhone, so you’ll never get stuck with the wrong lens again.

Funding goal: $15,000
Currently funded: $68,201

Find out more about the Olloclip on Kickstarter!

Lens Loop Camera Strap

What's the idea? A solution to bulky, expensive camera straps.

Why is it worth your hard-earned dollars? While the strap that traditionally comes with your camera is a pain in the neck, upgrading to a new, more comfortable strap can be exorbitant. Luxury straps are usually also too bulky to be packed away when not in use.

But now there’s Lens Loop! Design from recycled car seat belts and featuring nickel-plated steel hardware, this product is comfortable, convenient, and comes in a variety of custom colours.

Funding goal: $5,000
Currently funded: $2,952

Find out more about the Lens Loop Camera Strap on Kickstarter!

Capture Camera Clip

I posted about the Capture Camera Clip a few days ago here on Pixiq, and it's one hell of an awesome idea.

What's the idea? Innovative locking camera clip that attaches to your belt or bag strap.

Why is it worth your hard-earned dollars? Honestly, why has no one thought of this before? No more dangling cameras weighing down your neck, instead your camera is attached to your belt or bag strap via a handy locking plate system.

The quick release button ensures you can quickly have your camera ready, while the redundant twist lock keeps it safe and secure when not in use. A truly great product that nearly every camera enthusiast will find useful!

Funding goal: $10,000
Currently funded: $271,383

Find out more about the Capture Camera Clip on Kickstarter

Triggertrap – The Universal Camera Trigger

Why will you look at that, I found a way to tell you about my own project that's currently gaining momentum on Kickstarter - the Triggertrap!

What's the idea? Open source hardware project to create a universal camera trigger.

Why is it worth your hard-earned dollars? This camera accessory is not only convenient, it’s also super-cool! You can choose from a pre-made TriggerTrap, which will trigger your camera by laser-interruption, sound, time, or pretty much anything you can think of. Or, you can opt for the open source version, which provides you with a kit so you can build your very own TriggerTrap. Finally, as if you need any more reasons, the Kickstart campaign for TriggerTrap lets you get your hand on a versatile camera trigger for less than half of the cost of similar products. Sweet!

Funding goal: $25,000
Currently funded: $9,748

Find out more about Triggertrap on Kickstarter or on Triggertrap.com!

Go spend some money!

There you have it – ten great projects! Whether you have cash burning a hole in your pocket, are looking for some awesome new camera accessories, or love to support the arts and tech of photography there is certainly a Kickstart project that you can really get behind.

Don’t hesitate – these artists and innovators really need your assistance to get their projects off the ground.

News in brief: Sony World Photography Awards - now in 3D

Oh hell’s bells. I’ve only read the press release and already my head is aching. Sony and the World Photo Organisation have just announced that they’re adding three new categories to the 2012 World Photography Awards. And the reason for my headache? No, it’s not because the list of categories is already breathtakingly long; it’s because the three new ones are all in, heaven help us, 3D.

There are two 3D photography categories: panoramic and still – the themes of which can be anything that catches the photographer’s imagination. Then there’s a 3D video category. Again, whatever floats your boat can be the subject. Whichever category you enter, though, your submission must’ve been shot in 2011 and on a camera or video camera that uses ‘true 3D technology’.

The deadline for entries is 4 January 2012, and as with the rest of the awards, winners will be announced at a swanky ceremony in London next April.

Lots more detail on the website.

What is this? - In our NewsFlash section, we share interesting tidbits of news. Think of it as our extended twitter feed: When we find something that get our little hearts racing, we'll share it with you right here! Loving it? Great, we've got lots more News Flash articles - and, of course, we're still on Twitter as well, for even shorter news tidbits.

Real-life cloning

Every now and again, I stumble across something that makes me 'wow' out loud. Much to the confusion of my fellow bus passengers, no doubt. This was one of those things...

It turns out that a small team of science boffins have been able to create a live (well, as good as live. I think we can live with a 40 millisecond delay) object-cloner for use in video.

I know they use stuff like this in special effects in movies all the time, but seeing it happen right in front of your eyes is a whole 'nother level of magic.

Enjoy:

The Making Of: Triggertrap pitch video

I think my favourite part of the video is where my hand shows up in frame. It breaks the fourth wall nicely.

With the fantastic response on my Kickstarter project so far, I've had quite a few comments and questions about the pitch video that accompanies the Triggertrap over on Kickstarter, including two High School teachers (hi guys) who wanted to make videos with this with their kids.

First of all, have a quick look at the video as a reminder of what it was all about:

This video is mostly stop-motion animation.

Step one: The audio

Since I knew that I wanted the video to be short, I had to think about what I actually wanted to say. In the film world, this means that you have to write a script. In my case, I've written quite a few voice-over and radio scripts before, as I studied journalism under the rather illustrious Richard Rudin, who is a bit of a broadcasting legend in his own right. Of course, this was all ten years ago, but some of the key points still stuck in my mind.

Eventually, I landed on a script that was going to be about 2 minutes long, which I figured would be a good length for a Kickstarter video. From my days at T3 (I used to edit the gadget website T3.com), we did a fair bit of research about video length etc. Later, when I was producing FiveFWD, we discovered that 2-5 minutes was the perfect length for a web video, but that the longer videos only 'stuck' with people if they were patient and interested in the product. There are examples from Fifth Gear and the Gadget Show, if you're particularly curious.

Anyway, so I decided to make my script as short and to the point as possible. I spend 10 seconds introducing myself, 5 seconds setting the scene for what I've done before, and then, only 21 seconds in, I tell my audience what the idea is, and what it does. 26 seconds in, the hard sell happens, in that I rattle off the main bread-and-butter features of my device, and then at 41 seconds, I start what I believe to be the 'killer feature': The auxiliary port, which opens the device for use in god-knows-how-many-ways: A hackable camera trigger for people who aren't hackers.

Next, I recorded the audio with the video function on my Olympus E-P1. I do have both better cameras (the Canon T1i springs to mind) and better microphones than the one that was built-in, but I wanted to keep it a little bit lo-fi.

When recording the videos, I did re-takes whenever I stumbled over words (you have no idea how hard it is to say 'auxiliary port'. Or 'pressure sensor'), and then edited the audio together in Final Cut Express. I kept the video of my face whilst editing the audio, because it's often easier to edit audio smoothly when you can visualise it, as well. I don't know if you can tell, but the final audio track has about 20 edits in it. The only one that's very obvious is the one where I go from live action (i.e. the very first 4 seconds) to recording sitting much closer to the camera.

The audio recording and editing session took about 90 minutes in total, I think.

I then put my script into Google Spreadsheets, and went through the audio, and timecoded the whole thing. By using a little bit of spreadsheet magic, I was able to automatically calculate how many frames of animation I would need for each phrase or idea in my script, and so I had a shot list.

The full script, should you be curious, is downloadable as a PDF here.

In the original script, I didn't have everything in capitals: Usually, only the words you would emphasize are in capitals, and you would also include extra punctuation to remember to take breaks whilst you're speaking.However, when the time came to start doing the shots, the odd capitalised word was distrating, so I put it all in caps.

Like this: in the ORIGINAL script, I didn't have everything in capitals ... Usually, ONLY the words you would EMPHASIZE , are in capitals ... and you would ALSO include extra punctuation , to REMEMBER to take BREAKS , whilst you're speaking.

It takes a bit of time to get used to reading scripts like this, but once it becomes second nature, it makes it a lot easier to read 'naturally' into a microphone.

Planning the shots

With a solid audio track, I started planning out each one of my shots. My lovely girlfriend Ziah (who has worked in the film industry for many years) helped by asking lots of difficult questions about how we were going to visualise everything. 

The video was going to be a mixture of stop motion (i.e. moving toy cars around and taking photos of them), animation (i.e. drawing an idea or a sketch, and taking a photo every few lines, so it would look as if the thing is being drawn right in front of you), Collages (basically, still frames shown on screen) and live footage (Me speaking to camera). As it turned out, once we got about half-way through making the video, it turned out that the sheer amount of rapid cuts we used would have turned the original video into a sensory overload. It is already pretty intense as it is - imagine the same video with another 20 or so cuts added. It wouldn't have been very pleasant to watch.

Anyway, so we reduced the number of shots we needed, and instead expanded the length of some of them a little.

Stop motion animation

Stop motion is when you move an item a few millimeters, take a photo. Move a few millimeters, take a photo. When the photos are played in quick succession, it gives the illusion of movement - hence stop motion. Let's start with an example:

For the stop motion animation of my video, I used the fantastic iStopMotion, by Boinx software to put it all together. It's really easy to use, and if I had a decent video camera (or a good web-cam), it would have been very fast to do the actual animation, too.

Sadly, I didn't have the appropriate camera, so I used a Canon EOS T1i instead, with a home-made remote trigger. I did consider putting together a quick clap sensor (clap your hands, take a photo) especially for this, but figured a quick button to press would work just as well.

In the video, the part with the robots and the Arduino and the chips moving around is all stop-motion animation.

Animation

Now, my particular brand of animation wasn't exactly super high tech; cell animation (like what you expect from old Disney movies, for example) is a lot more work. Instead, I was inspired by a video I saw by PhD comics:

Dark Matters from PHD Comics on Vimeo.

Of course, there's a pretty big difference between PhD comics and myself: They know what the hell they are doing, and I, quite clearly, do not.

But that has never stopped me before, and I decided that whilst nobody would back Triggertrap with a single nickel if I showed the final drawings, perhaps if I animated it, it would come to life a bit more. I gave it a shot, and it looked like it worked well.

Creating the animation was pretty simple: Set up the camera above the drawing paper, tape the paper to the table, and take a photo. Draw a bit of a line. Take a photo. Repeat.

Again, I imported all the still frames into iStopMotion, and exported them as a movie file. This movie file was then imported into Final Cut Express, and matched up with my audio track.

Editing it all together

Editing this beast turned out to be a royal pain in the arse. After all, I had more than 700 frames of animation, a load of video clips, some photos (of the books and the Triggertrap), and it all had to be edited down to a 2-minute video. Ouch.

For the stop motion, Lightroom turned out to be a complete lifesaver: I was able to make the photographic adjustments to just one of the frames (color balance, crop, spot editing, contrast, etc), and then just copy the settings over to all the other frames, too. If I would have had to do that manually, I think I would have just given up.

Of course, we didn't animate anything more than we absolutely had to, which means that I didn't have any extra footage to 'cut into'.

This is where the still frames came in handy - At the end of each animation, I used the same frame for a few frames (usually about 15; so half a second) to give the reader a visual cue that there was a cut coming. That makes it less stressful to watch, and it saved me from having to come up with extra bits to animate.

The final brainwave I had when I exported the video the first time: The animation doesn't lead the viewer's eye very well, so it's not always clear what I want you to look at - so I introduced 'video movement'. This is basically done digitally, where there are slow zooms out or in (or, in the case of the segment about the auxiliary port, fast movements from important bit to important bit), to help the viewer fix their eyes on what is important.

Then, finally, I discovered that none of the timelapse footage I had shot myself was particularly suitable for the video. I tweeted out a cry for help, and within seconds Tim Haynes sprang to the rescue, and allowed me to use a snippet of his awesome Calanais Sunset timelapse video. You've simply got to love the internet.

After a few hours of tweaking and fiddling, it all came together nicely in Final Cut Express. I added some final credits, and decided that would have to be good enough - there's only so much time I was going to spend on a video, after all. 

The whole thing - from script writing via sound recording, to animation, to final edit, was about 20 hours of solid work, and Ziah helped me for about 6 hours as well, animating part of the video (the bit with the mad scientist is hers, that's why it looks way, way better than the bits I did myself), and coming up with clever ideas for some of the segments.

So, there you have it - The making of the Triggertrap pitch video.

I know you're just itching to see it one more time, aren't you? Awesome. Head over to Kickstarter and press 'play'. Then, if you're impressed enough by what the Triggertrap actually does, why not pre-order one? You know you want to...

Triggertrap - the universally awesome universal camera trigger

Haje describes himself as a technonaut and geek – amongst other things – and he also has boundless energy and enthusiasm. This means that he’s constantly inspired to try crazy photography-inspired experiments (who else would think to build a macro lens from a Pringles can?) and they invariably work (I’ve the Pringles macro thingy in my box of photography tricks). This is why I’m bouncing up and down at the prospect of his newest project: Triggertrap.

Triggertrap? What the hell is a Triggertrap? Ah, good question. It’s a universal camera trigger.

That is, a properly universal camera trigger. Yep, it’ll make your common-or-garden time lapse, you can trigger it with a laser beam or with sound, and it can make non-linear time-lapses, too, to give your animation the illusion of speeding up or slowing down. But it has something else far more groovy going for it. It has an Aux input. You can connect your camera to just about anything you like to trigger your camera’s shutter.

From ringing doorbells to boiling kettles to rising suns, anything can be used to take a photo. This baby is eminently hackable.

Haje’s already been working on the design. Doesn’t it look shiny, with its display, touch-sensitive buttons, and water-resistant-ness?

But in order to make it actually happen, he needs to raise a few fist-fulls of cash, for things like prototypes and to ensure that it really is the affordable gadget that he wants it to be. This is where Kickstarter, and hopefully you, come in.

If you’ve not encountered Kickstarter yet, it’s a crowd-sourced funding platform where anyone with a project that they’re desperate to unleash on the world, but don’t quite have the capital to realise it, can appeal to like-minded dudes to help them out. Here’s how it works:

Kickstarter. Here's how it works.

It’s small-scale, socially-oriented venture-capitalism with a creative bent. Reckon you can help? Here’s the page for Triggertrap on Kickstarter.

And if you want to know more about the project from Haje, he’s even made a video to help explain what it’s all about. It’ll only take two minutes to take a peek, so rock on:

Triggertrap has its own website on the surprisingly-named Triggertrap.com. You can find Triggertrap scattered about other bits of the internerds as well; it’s on Flickr and Facebook, and project updates will be tweeted via @Photocritic.

But dammit, let’s make this universal camera trigger properly universal, yes?

Is 500px encouraging copyright theft?

The problem is the 'embed' functionality that's built into 500px. In the social networking box, there are your standard 'like' on Facebook, 'tweet' on Twitter, Submit to Stumble Upon and all that jazz.

One of these buttons reads 'Embed', and gives you a HTML snippet that makes it easy to embed photos into your blog. In fact, the Embed code goes further, and actively encourages it: "Copy the code to your LiveJournal or Wordpress blog".

I don't want to be difficult, but I haven't given permission to 500px to dissaminate my photos like that. Not without my permission, not without a licence in place, and (probably) not without paying me.

If I find a series of my photos on someone else's website, where they are being exploited commercially, I'd send them a takedown notice and an invoice.

The problem, then, is that 500px seem to be encouraging its users to commit copyright infringements of my copyrighted materials. They claim, apparently, that it is "good exposure" for the photographers. Personally, I strongly disagree - I'll decide what is good exposure for my own photos, thank you very much.

Right-clicking on a photo on Flickr has a completely different outcome: You get a pop-up reminding you that the content is copyrighted.

Against their own T&C

Okay, I'm showing off my geekdom properly, in admitting that I am actually reading the Terms and Conditions on the sites I visit, but allow me that.

On the 500px site, in the Terms of Service, it states "By submitting photographic or graphic works to 500px (...) you agree that this content fully or partially may be used on 500px web-site for promotional reasons (such as photos at home page)". 

There is no mention whatsoever about re-distributing my images to a wider audience, whether via blogs, LiveJournal, Twitter, Facebook, etc. Enabling (nay - encouraging) users to embed my copyrighted photos on their own blogs, then, is against 500px's own terms and conditions.

Thanks, but no thanks

I understand what 500px is trying to do: Opening the internet is admirable, and wanting to share content all over the place is a great idea. But it's only a great idea when you own the content, and when you've decided that this fits in with your business objectives, and your approach to copyright.

500px deciding to share my photos with the world, encouraging people to commit copyright infringements via a feature I cannot turn off, is not my idea of a well thought-through website.

Let me turn off Embed feature, at least...

...Unless you are happy to receive a ream of invoices from me, of course. In which case, carry on, and could you send me the address to your invoice payable office, please?

Hat tip to @phillprice for the tip re: this article

News in brief: Cute Slideshow - now with video!

It’s awesome when developers listen to your suggestions! A while back I had look at Cute Slideshow, a simple-to-use iPhone app that allowed me to turn my pictures into a slideshow, insert text, and even set it to music. I loved the idea, but it had one major flaw: the slideshows were stuck there in my phone (unless I had a cable to watch them on a monitor, which I probably did… somewhere… ). What it really needed was an export function.

Lo-and-behold, the latest update to Cute Slideshow includes an export function compatible with the iPhone 4 and fourth generation iPod Touches. All for £1.79 (US$2.99) from the App Store. Super stuff!

What is this? - In our NewsFlash section, we share interesting tidbits of news. Think of it as our extended twitter feed: When we find something that get our little hearts racing, we'll share it with you right here! Loving it? Great, we've got lots more News Flash articles - and, of course, we're still on Twitter as well, for even shorter news tidbits.

42nd Street Photo: One to Avoid

New York is a city that's the home to many a fantastic photographic retailer. Between the rather fantastic B&H, the solidly competent Adorama, and - if you're going to shop online anyway - the ever-reliable Photo & Video section at Amazon, there shouldn't really be any reason to go anywhere else... ...As aptly confirmed by the nightmare of an ordering scenario a friend of mine, Sarah, had just before Christmas at the tail-end last year.

What happened?

Sarah lives in London, but her parents live in California. She decided to order a couple of cameras (given how much cheaper camera equipment is in the US, that makes sense), and have it shipped to her parents address. Sound pretty straightforward, right?

It probably would have been, if it hadn't been for the fact that she decided to try and use 42th Street Photo to place her order. Here's what happened;

On December 17, Sarah ordered a Canon Powershot S95 and a Canon EOS Rebel Digital T2i, but because her shipping address (in California) was different from her invoice address (in London), the order was blocked. Fair enough, I suppose, there's a lot of credit card fraud out there.

Dodgy card charges

So instead of trying to confirm with Sarah that this was a genuine order, they call the shipping address, where her mother answers the phone. Now, I don't know much about credit card security, but it sounds to me as if they are worried about that, they should call the invoice address - not the shipping address. I'll leave this thought for you: If you were a fraudster, would you be at the shipping or the invoice address? Exactly.

Interestingly enough, Sarah's card was charged on Friday December 17th, so they clearly didn't care much about the security anyway. Also, by the time the 18th rolled around, the order status on 42 Photo had already updated to 'shipped'. So why did they call? Well.. when they spoke to Sarah's mother on the 21st (four days after the card was charged and the cameras had supposedly shipped), they tried to upsell to faster shipping (even though their website, they said that shipping was only going to be 'less than 10 days') so the order could get there in time for Christmas. Then, they tried to add memory cards to the order, stating that "the camera wouldn't work without them".

Weird upselling

Parents come in all sorts of shapes and sizes - and amounts of photography knowledge. It just so happens that Sarah's mother's photography knowledge is, well, shall we say, somewhat lacking. So when somebody calls her and tells her that Sarah must have made a mistake, and that she must have forgotten to order a piece of the camera which is needed for it to work, what should she do?

I find it curious anyway, that a phonecall to someone at a delivery address should potentially be enough to add additional charges (shipping; memory cards) to a credit card that was already charged and authorised via a website, but that's by the by.

In addition, if you check the 42nd street Photo website, you'll find their terms and conditions state "Although you have received an email confirming your order, we do not charge your credit card until the item is ready to be shipped and all customer adjustments if any are applied" (emphasis mine). Since the card was charged on the 17th, and 42 street Photo started calling Sarah's mother on the 21nd, that was clearly ignored as well.

Shipping... Too late.

Then, eventually, Sarah receives a shipping confirmation on the 22nd of December, via UPS, stating that the items had been shipped, and were scheduled to be delivered on December 30th - 3 days later than expected.

Now, most people are perfectly happy to wait for another three days, but there was an itsy-weeny problem: Sarah was going to leave the country on the 29th, and needed her cameras with her. Since the order was placed on the 17th, and the 42 Street Website promised a 10-day delivery (at most), Sarah figured she would have a couple of days leeway. Instead, the cameras would arrive two days too late.

What have we learned?

Between the slow shipping (5 days to ship an order of cameras that are marked in stock?), charging the credit card too early, breaching their own terms and conditions, trying to upsell memory cards and shipping (the latter, presumably, to cover their own ass for being too slow in shipping the items in the first place), trying to get a person unrelated to the transaction to authorise additional spending on a credit card, rude one-line replies to genuine customer service woes, and an apparent lack of care about fraud prevention...

I don't know about you, but I don't think I'll be turning to 42 street photo for my photography needs in the future.

The power of going viral to “kickstart” your project

“Wow” seems to be the only word that entrepreneur Peter Dering can say about the response he’s received for his first product, which has the twitterverse buzzing and the photography world salivating.

Dering, a former civil engineer and amateur photographer, quit his engineering job last April to develop an idea he’d had for two years. He spent the better part of last year developing the Capture Camera Clip System, which is a small device that allows you to clip your SLR securely to any strap (belt, backpack, etc.)

Click-and-go

Dering was hoping to solve the problem that many SLR users face: where can you keep your camera so that it’s easily accessible but out of your way to use your hands, yet still well protected? Wearing a camera strap around your neck is great for access, but a heavy camera dangling around your neck is both uncomfortable and dangerous for the camera and lens. A camera bag offers great protection, but you may miss some great shots without your camera readily at hand.

Dering’s Capture System solves this problem with a small, lightweight device that has two components: one clips onto your strap and the other clips into your tripod mount on your camera. When the two components are secured, you have a quick and easy way of mounting your camera on your belt strap or backpack strap - or in the future your bicycle or the roof-rack of your car. There’s a quick-release button for easy access, but there’s also a redundant twist lock you can use for times when the quick-release might be accidentally triggered.

It’s a clever little piece of kit, and it was bound to be well received by the photography community - however the speed at which this is happening is what’s truly remarkable about this story.

Enter Kickstarter.com

Dering decided to use Kickstarter to try to fund the first production run of his device. His Kickstarter project went live on May 2, and by the powers of the viral qualities of the internet, he had reached (and quickly surpassed) his $10,000 funding goal by May 4.

At the time of writing this article, the project has 3,859 backers who have funded the project to $251,746 - a far cry from the $10,000 initial goal. So, how did this happen? How did a device go from no one hearing of it to being the next must-have photography gadget seemingly overnight?

The news of the gadget traveled far and wide through the type of viral speed and growth we’ve come to expect only from funny youtube videos. News was spreading fast via Twitter, Facebook, and tons of blogs. Loads of tech & photo websites, such as Gizmodo, Peta Pixel, Digital Trends and Photo Weekly Online all did articles about the Capture clip. It didn’t take long for this rush to “capture” the imaginations (and wallets) of the internet photographers.

Get involved!

The project will be funding until July 16 - so if you want to be one of the first to get your hands on the device you can pledge at least $50 on Kickstarter . Once the first run is done, the normal retail price is expected to be $70 plus shipping.

Perhaps Kickstarter is going to the next great tool for creating buzz around your photography ideas and gadgets - certainly many of the most successful projects on the site have come from the photography universe. Peter Dering seems to agree, and his gratitude is palpable: “This is absolutely mind blowing.  Backers, bloggers, facebook status updaters...thank you, thank you, thank you.  Thank you!!!”

My own Kickstarter project

So, independently of Dering's project, I have started a Kickstarter project of my own. It's photography related, it's awesome, and it's here.

This article was written by Ziah Fogel, who is part of Team Awesome: The gang working on my Kickstarter project.

SOS, Drowning in Lens Choices, Send Help

“Only a complete idiot would pass up the opportunity to grab a 14-50 f/2.8 Zoom EFS EX IS USM ASPH L DFS OMG LOL Mark II at that price”. You may have heard this sentence (with fewer made up acronyms at the end) from some grumpy camera store owner who decided to bite your head off because you dared to consider buying a lens beyond the kit lens your new DSLR came with. (disclaimer – only 94% of them are like this, some are nice). Intimidated by the camera shop troll, you decided to go online, where the user ratings were either “5 stars! Buy this! Remortgate your house it’s worth the £3,000!” or “0 stars! Avoid! This lens gives you smallpox somehow!” and nothing in between. Well now you can relax, because here at Small Aperture, we’re going to help you on your way to a relaxing, informed first lens purchase.

Lens Terminology Explained

First off, let’s look at an example lens name and go over what each part of the description means, so you know what features you’re looking at. I’m going to use the Canon EF-S 55-250mm F/4.0 – 5.6. I’ve picked this lens purely for the name, as it has the most commonly occurring type of description and it will allow me to run through what it all means.

Canon EF-S is the brand name and the fit of the lens – it tells us what kind of cameras it will fit on. I’m a Canon user, so if you have a Canon, take a look at your camera now. If it has a red dot and a white square, your camera can use lenses that are described as either “Canon EF” or “Canon EF-S”. If you only have a red dot, you can only fit EF lenses to the camera. It’s worth pointing out at this stage that you don’t have to buy only Canon lenses as a result of this – any lens that is described as “Canon-fit” will be OK for your camera. If you’re unsure, your best bet is to take your camera with you to the shop, endure the eye rolling and see whether the lens you’re after will fit your camera. It’ll give you a chance to test it, too.

On location, my "walkaround lens" allows me to zoom out and capture environmental detail which my prime would have trouble with.

55-250mm indicates the focal length range. Simply put, the low number is how wide your lens will go (literally how much width and how “zoomed out” your point of view can get) and the high number is how far you can zoom in. For reference, a 17mm focal length will give you a decent amount of width for landscape images and 250 will give you a decent amount of zoom for basic wildlife photography (although those looking to travel abroad on safari and the like would probably be interested in a higher zoom, something like 500mm).

F/4.0-5.6 describes the maximum aperture at both ends of the focal length range (more on aperture in our first PCoF here, read this first if you’re not sure about aperture). In this example, F/4 is the lowest aperture you can set at the “wide” 55mm end of the focal length range, and F/5.6 is the lowest aperture you can set at the “zoom” 250mm end of the focal length. You will notice that some of the more expensive zoom lenses only have one number here, for example the Sigma 70-200mm F/2.8. This means that the lens is able to be set to its lowest aperture of F/2.8 at any focal length, be it 70mm or 200mm.

These are the most commonly occurring suffixes to a lens name that you’ll need to know and understand. There are many, many other suffixes – some that describe features, some that describe the particular product range that brand of lens is in. For example, “L” on a Canon lens is referring to the top of the range series of lenses that Canon make (indicated by a red ring around the base of the lens) whereas “USM” refers to “UltraSonic Motor” and refers to a small motor built into the body designed to aid speed of autofocus. There are so many of these and they tend to be company-specific. In addition, they tend to be half product description, half marketing tool, so don’t get too dazzled or excited by these things.

So Which One Do I Buy?

To know what lens to buy, it’s important to ask yourself what kind of photography you undertake the most.

I took this using a 50mm prime for the extra detail it provides me.

Portraiture

As a portrait photographer who takes a lot of head / head and shoulders images, my main lens is a Prime Lens. A prime lens is one that has a fixed focal length: that is, you can’t zoom in nor can you zoom out. A fixed focal length means that there are significantly fewer moving parts inside the lens. This allows the glass inside the lens to be much more precise, allowing for sharper, higher quality images. This is exactly what you need for striking portraits. The other advantage is that this sometimes brings the price down. I don’t want to be seen as endorsing a particular company over another, but I have used the Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II for a few years and it is dirt cheap for the quality it provides me. You can pick one up for about £80. For balance, Nikon have an equivalent lens of the same price, the Nikkor 50mm F/1.8 is a good buy and also seems to get very good reviews. Another good reason for using a prime is it teaches you to think about composition more, as you can’t just zoom out or in more to get the desired crop.

Landscape / Architectural

If you are a landscape and architectural sort of person, you will want a lens with a good wide-angle focal length. I only dabble in landscape for my own enjoyment, so I find my walkaround lens (see below) serves me just fine with a wide focal length of 17mm. Those that are serious about landscape will want to look at how wide the focal length goes (14mm is good) and the actual quality of the lens glass itself. Detail and sharpness are of the most importance for the landscape photographer. Maximum aperture is less of a problem, because you will be looking at setting your aperture to ranges of f8 -f11 and beyond anyway, to get all the detail of the landscape in. As I say, my Tamron walkaround creates landscapes that are sharp and vivid enough for me, but those of you looking for more might want to take a look at the Canon EF 17-40 F/4L (where it starts getting pricey), the Tokina 12-24mm f/4 which fits Nikon cameras (very wide angle) or you might even want to go super wide with the Sigma 10-20mm f/4-5.6 EX DC.

All this lens talk is making me want to buy things.

Close Up, Abstract and Insects

If you like looking at ants up close (weirdo) or if your photography is all about extreme close up, abstract work, you need a Macro Lens. These are lenses with very high levels of magnification, and are used for insect and other high-magnification photography. I can’t say I’ve done much of this but it sure looks like a lot of fun! I don’t have time for fun. I would advise reading up extensively on the subject if you’re serious about macro photography.

Don't forget that you can play around with the rules - here I've used a landscape lens to create a portrait. What a rebel!

Stop Trying to Pigeonhole Me you Square! My Photography Transcends Categories, I Photograph All!

If you do a bit of everything (and even if you don’t) you’ll want to find a good “walkaround lens”. This is a term used to describe a general purpose lens that will always come in handy for most situations – something that will do a variety of jobs to a decent level of quality. When on assignment for a magazine commission, I take my both my walkaround lens and my prime for portraiture. Again, not wanting to advertise, but you will find that many people recommend the Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8. Now if you’ve been paying attention, you will see that this means the lens has a maximum aperture of f/2.8 at both 17mm and 50mm focal lengths. You can pick one of these up for around £320-£360 these days and, for the price range, the image quality is excellent. Put it this way: I have been using it for published magazine work for over a year now, and my clients have been more than happy with what we’ve ended up with. It’s good for me because I can use it for portraits but also I can zoom out and grab some surrounding environmental detail aswell.

So who’s feeling spendy? Is spendy a word? Does anyone care? It’s Friday, which means tomorrow is Saturday, which means it’s time to buy your very first lens. Hopefully, by applying what you’ve learned from this, you’ll be able to stride into the camera shop and bellow “SHOPKEEP, PROCURE ME A CANON-FIT PRIME WITH A 50MM FOCAL LENGTH OF THE FINEST QUALITY, SPORTING AN ULTRASONIC MOTOR! MAKE HASTE!“. Go on, do it. I double dare you.