57 Soft-Heeled Stealings

~~~~~~~~~~~~

Trembling and broken, the light seeking shelter

I could not find what I need

Though finding it not as important as seeing

And seeing the start of belief

I sought just a bit more than I ought

Fought just a bit more than I could

Gently teasing with soft-heeled stealings

I found the light where I should

Do I go on toward ... where?

I don't know

Or is this the light from the proper shore?

Trembling and broken in this soft, healing shelter

I know I need search no more

(c) Glen Goffin 2009

~~~~~~~~~~~~

Peace,

Glen

54 The value of experience and ... rubber, numm nummm

I remember just last October when I first … umm … “tried” … Photoshop. “Tried” being incredibly generous. What I really did was stare … and poke … and then stare some more … and then poke some more ... and then mutter things about the Adobe family lineage and where they should put their stupid program.

I felt as if I was trying to read a newspaper in Chinese. The pictures and the icons made sense but the words were complete gibberish. Do I read up and down or side to side? What the heck is a channel? A layer? A mask? How is an image different than a layer? Filters are for coffee ... not craqueleure. Why were there menus but then also side panels? How is it that paintbrushes can paint simple colors but I keep getting cat prints, hearts, scratch marks, fractal patterns and even blood stains!? It was all CRAZY BUSINESS!!!

Now it makes sense, of course. I just needed to see somebody actually using it.

With that in mind, I want to heartily recommend a PDF tutorial written by Mitchell Kanashkevich that is now available here at his website. Note that much of this tutorial uses Adobe Lightroom but there is a lot of PS content as well. And the LR techniques can be accomplished using PS alone.

Mitchell dared to ask if this was worth $12 dollars. Gee, let me see ... ummm ... you're going to save me hundreds of hours of experimentation. You're going to show me how you make images worthy of magazine publication and awards. You're going to save me from buying $100's of dollars of programs that I just don't need. ... hmmm ... let me get back to you on that.

This tutorial is great and worth MUCH more that $12 bucks. Just buy it. Thank me later :) Better yet, thank Mitchell!

The image at the top is an example of why you don't over-knead bread dough. If you do, it gets rubbery and doesn't feel quite right. Photoshop is great but too much is too much. One of the best messages in Mitchell's tutorial ... know when to quit! I clearly didn't apply that lesson in this image.

When your bread turns out like rubber ... make croutons. Here is my crouton version :)

Joy and peace,

Glen

49 Canon Mystical Mojo?

Is there a mystical Canon mojo? Are there secret color correction algorithms that have been handed down to Canon engineers by Tibetan monks over thousands of years? Or, in this case, Japanese monks, I suppose. Perhaps, as they were endlessly standing on the tips of bamboo poles perfecting their Kung Fu, they were mentally working out lens correction equations ... like say the five fingered exploding heart technique or, in this case, the 50mm exploding bokeh technique.

I've heard tell many times that Canon has a 'magic'. Initially I lumped it as stiff-necked partisanship and religious zeal since I was already stiff-neck-edly (neckedly!?!) partisan toward Nikon myself. I mean, hey, I spent a TON of $$ on that gear! (disclaimer: engineers define "ton of $$" as anything more than the cost of lunch.)

Before going any further, let me say, Nikon use-ability is brilliant. I find every aspect of the feel and use of the D80 to be intuitive and easy. If Canon has the tao of imagery, Nikon has the zen of useability. Ok, with the sugar comes the vinegar. I also find that the pictures I get from the D80 are just that ... pictures. What does that mean? I have no idea. It doesn't mean anything until you see an image that is much MORE than a picture. They have life. They're strong and don't need any help. With my D80, I have to use PS to resuscitate my pics ... to give them life ... to act as a photo-AED (auto-electronic defribillator). CLEEEAAR!!!!!

Sometimes though, I wonder if it is like looking at your sister? She may be drop-dead gorgeous but you can't see it because ... well ... she's your sister!! If I make a 5D mk II part of my family well ... emmmm ... hmm ... eww

Then there is this weird thing that keeps happening. This little voice in my head that says "AHA!!" every time I see a spectacular image that came from a Canon. I think that is the part of me that can't accept that my photography skills stink so it blames the camera. Not sure. It seems to be pretty consistent and pretty accurate. Could I survive a blind-fold test? Doubtful ... but ... well ... maybe.

I'll ramble on about this more later. Meanwhile, I would LOVE to hear your opinions!

PS - if you don't know what I'm talking about, visit some of my fave photogs like Kathleen Connally, Ami Vitale, Mitchell Kanashkevich ... and on and on. Kathleen does very little PP'ing to her images.

Peace and love,

Glen