Last week, I had the pleasure of joining with my buddy, Derek for some night photography in Downtown Atlanta. One of my favorite pastimes is photography, and more specifically I love long-expose photography. There is just something about it that is fun and entertaining for me. Night photography is not something everyone is good at, and to be honest, it is quite easy to do.


Don't get scared when I say this, but photography in any form is like a mathematical equation. It is all about compensation. With digital photography, you can easily change the ISO (or ASA) of each image you take. In the digital world, ISO is the CCD's sensitivity to light...it is mimicking the "film speed" in the classic film world. The higher the number, the more sensitive your film is to light. From there, you have the different settings with the lens, such as focal length (measured in mm) and focal distance (the distance you want in focus). What makes this easy for me, is I have captured images on film and compensating the lens just comes second nature to me. I often find myself looking at something and asking "If I were taking a picture of this, how would I shoot it?" That is the eyes of the photographer in me looking observing.


Long exposures are what makes night photography the best it can be. During daytime photography, you strive for the shortest exposure time...but in night photography, you want the longest exposure time. This is how I am able to capture the lights of the vehicles passing by. Doing a long exposure image is what tests your compensation skills the most. You have to be able to manipulate the ISO and f-stop (iris) of the camera to let in the amount of light that you need to "burn in" the image to film or CCD.

Have you ever tackled a night photography image? How did they turn out? What could you have done differently?

-Ken

Labels: compensation, digital, film, focal distance, focal length, long esposure, night, photography

One of the most controversial topics in film making today is digital projection. Some film makers are completely for the conversion from film to digital...others are against it. I have realized through film school and in comparing video to film the many differences of using the film medium. You can do some beautiful stuff on either medium, it is all in the way that you light it and capture it.

I will always love film as a photography medium, but I would have to say... it is an old technology. Digital film making is quickly taking the lead over the original film medium. In fact, I would have to say I love the way digital projection looks on the big screen. I am a firm believer that it looks cleaner than film. In the big picture, I believe that it is more economically friendly to shoot and project on a digital medium keeping in account that film does not age very well. Many older films have to be cleaned up or remastered in order for them to be played time and time again. In the digital world, the film is shipped out on a hard disk to be played back into a digital projection system. That therefore eliminates the tech work of maintaining and exchanging very large spools of film. Keep in mind though, Digital is not a flawless medium. The projectors still have to be cleaned and maintained in order for the most pristine image to be displayed on the big screen.

This afternoon, I have the joy of going with my class to the Regal movie theater on Alafaia, here in Orlando and we went up to the projection booth to see many different kinds of projection systems...This includes a SONY 4k digital projector, 35mm film projectors and IMAX. All are a beautiful sight to see.

What are your thoughts on this?

-Ken

Labels: 35mm, digital, digital projection, DLP, film, IMAX, progression, Sony