What do I mean by this title? The fact that a photographer is not an artist who makes on his canvas the unreal world or the world quite far from the reality. Photographer is not also a magician who can change the reality itself. The photographer only captures the reality. Yes, a good specialist in photography can embellish it. To remove on a photo a wire protruding from the wall, for a example. Or to correct the curved curtain, or to shade in the smoke detector which looks not aesthetically pleasing, or to correct the colors at all and so on. But photographer can’t make the image of your building ideally clean from the extra items in case he have to photograph the facade, entirely crowded with, say, the parked cars. (The photo below as an example made not by me). Of course, even in this case he can fill up the cars with the pieces of facade and asphalt. But believe me: it will be looking blatantly unnatural and terribly ugly. Even if only because it’s unreal to make it the way not only the asphalt in front will look naturally darker than under the lights, but also the road at all will keep its geometrical and textural perspective. Yes, such a trick can also be done in theory, but it still won’t be looking completely natural. Moreover, no photographer will not spend the whole working day just for retouching a single photo. Well, only if you as a customer agree to pay him for this day separately, beyond the main order. That means you will pay for this single photo several times as much as for the whole rest images. And you will get a photo still far from the ideal! As they say: not worth powder and shot. In a word, I just want to say that if you heard from someone the thing like “The Photoshop makes wonders!” – do not take it too literally. This program hasn’t the magic button called “correct everything”. The quality image processing in it is a painstaking work demanding patience, experience and knowledge. I can say the one thing which is trivial and obvious for someone but probably unexpected for many others: absolutely any human activity making on the highly professional level is the serious labor and many years of studying. No matter what exactly this activity is be it the bridge design, biathlon, surgery or juggling with burning torches on monocycle. (This photo below made by...
Read More
After I finished the previous article (“A few words about interior photography“) and during my work with another order, I had a few more thoughts. Besides, I got the feedback on previous article. As a result, I decided to write some sort of addition with more detailed explanations and examples of good and bad interior photographs (according to readers wishes). First of all, I have to say that interior photography isn’t such an easy thing as many people think, including some professionals in other photography spheres (wedding pro, for instance). I do not mean that wedding photography is easier than interior one. Furthermore, I think that any activity performed at a high professional level is complicated itself and demands not only rich experience and different (often very expensive) tools, but also high working capacity, dedication and even intelligence. I just want to say that each field of applied photography has its own peculiarities and subtleties. And if you don’t know them, you won’t get the good result. For example, the wedding photographer automatically takes his flash when he comes into a room. But that’s good only for wedding shots. For interior photography, it’s a real evil and unprofessionalism (clarification: I mean the on-camera flashes, not the impulse light sources with diffusers and other caps). Why I think this way? Because in wedding photography, the people, and their relationships, and emotions are the objects. We can see them during just a moment. After a second, anything changes and we cannot restore the lost moment. And interiors, even the most beautiful ones, are just a background. So, we have to use a flash. In interior photography, on-camera flash is contraindicated, because firstly, it damages the light pattern and balance which were conceived by a designer to emphasize some room’s advantages and interior details. Second, flash will never give the equal amount of light for the all room: objects in front will be overexposed and, in distance, opposite – underexposed. Third, the flash always gives sharp, almost black shadows. Fourth, it makes too bright glares on glass and polished surfaces that are disadvantages too. Finally, fifth, the flash often spoils the colors of close objects and even, if the object is curtain, for instance, shines it through destroying the tissue density on the photo. Thus, there’s the opposite approach in the interior photography: even in the dark room, they don’t use a flash, and do use the long shutter speed (sometimes, more than 20 seconds) and it demands the tripod. I told enough about falling verticals in previous article. The only thing I can add is that the wedding photographer may not...
Read More
For those 8 months since I’ve quit from my job and became a self-employed photographer (most of all, interior photographer), that means I don’t spray myself for any other activities besides of photography – since then, I face very often with the fact that every person makes his own sense in the meaning of quality photography. No, I don’t mind at all that all the people are different and everyone has own possibilities (first of all, financial one), every person earns his money the way he can, and so on, and on, etc. But… how could I put it mildly? I am dejected by the very low bar of inquiries from the vast majority of potential customers and, at the same time, blatant illiteracy of so many competitors. I will explain. Nobody doubts that advertisement is the engine of the trade. In the case of real estate, restaurants, hotels, bars, cafes, country clubs, camp sites and others, i.e. all those who meet clients with the interiors – obviously that interior photography is that “locomotive of the trade”. The same about construction companies, real estate agencies, and ordinary people who decided to rent or sell their apartments. So, why most of them are satisfied with frankly lousy pictures? Photos made with a phone, with falling verticals and angled horizon, with unpleasant yellowish, greenish or violet shades of artificial light? For instance, nobody will appear on business meeting dressed in a crumpled, dirty and foul-smelling suit even it has a Hugo Boss label! Honestly, I’m at a loss! Now, about the competitors. A huge bunch of them appeared lately. The proudly screaming on their websites that you’re really lucky to meet them because only they can make high quality photos of your property. They’re a team of real professionals! Moreover, they are quite earnestly (and right I should admit) describing all the cons of your own attempts of interior photography and the pros of referring to a specialist. But the problem is that they have images in their portfolio that I can only call as a frank hackwork. Especially considering the money their customers pay them. (By the way, one of them is the very respectable hotel in the center of Saint-Petersburg! But be quiet, do not tell anyone! 🙂 ). I don’t mean that I’m a mentor who wants to teach anyone, no. I’m just a conscientious and responsible professional interior photographer, in love with his work. Michael Bulgakov wrote great words: “My dear heart, that is nonsense! Second freshness – that’s what is nonsense! There is only one freshness – the first – and it also the last. And...
Read More