Author Archive: ken

I was just looking at my blog and realized it has been more than a month since my last posting, and even more than that since I posted photos. Since I’m way past due, I’ll post a variety of photos I’ve been shooting recently. I hope you enjoy them.

Gabby

Gabby

Night shot for an advertising client.

A fitness shoot.

A fitness shoot.

A fitness shoot.

Soldering at a manufacturing facility.

A macro shot of a Mont Blanc fountain pen nib.

Caitlin.

Hopefully I made up for the recent drought in posting photos. 🙂

As always, thanks for reading and remember you can see more of my work here just click on a category. You can also see more on my Facebook page. Be sure to click the “like” button.

-Ken.

Sometimes, I get really disappointed with people’s online actions and their concept of ethics. Today’s blog is going to deal with just photography, although the problem is pervasive all over social media and the Internet.

Sadly, there’s almost the expectation that when you post an image online, someone will steal it and use for their own purposes. We see it every day and, for the most part, there is little recourse. It’s frustrating and annoying, but if you want to do business, it’s just something you have to contend with.

It’s seems like theres two types of culprits that pilfer other people’s images. First, there’s the person that knows it’s wrong, but does it anyway because they need the image and: 1) they don’t have the talent to create an image of that quality, or 2) they can’t afford to use stock photography. The second kind of person either doesn’t know/think it’s wrong or finds some twisted rationality to do it anyway. For instance, they think because other people are stealing images, it’s OK for them to do it. Basically, it’s OK because “everyone” is doing it.

I think these are the same people who, in an office environment, will shamelessly steal someone else’s ideas in order to secure a promotion. They are too lazy to create for themselves and don’t mind standing on other people’s backs in order to get ahead.

At this point I have to point out that most art is based on earlier works. There’s no doubt that inspiration plays a large part of creation and innovation. But that’s not what I’m talking about. I’m talking about someone profiting directly (financial or otherwise) from someone else’s heavy lifting. I think it show a lack of character and ethics.

Sadly, there’s a lot of this going on.

OK, sorry to end this post on a down note, but it’s frustrating to witness these things. Rant over.

Thanks for reading and allowing me some therapy. 🙂

– Ken

First, let me say that this comparison is not scientific by any means. Here’s it is in a nutshell: A friend of mine just got a new Canon 24-70 MkII lens. I’ve used the original 24-70 for a number of years and it is one of my favorite lenses. It’s relatively fast (f/2.8), it’s sharp, and its the color, contrast, resolution, and all other aspects of the lens are great. My only complaint is that the front section on the lens moves in and out when you zoom. More on that later.

When the new MkII version of the lens came out I was curious how much they improved the lens. So when my friend got one, I couldn’t wait to give it a try and compare it to my MkI. The comparison was simple, we shot both lenses at 70mm and photographed some various stuff at a distance of just under two feet away. Then we shot the lenses across the studio (about 15 feet) at 24mm and at 70mm. Both lenses were shot at the same aperture for each test.

One of the first things you notice about the lens that on the MkI when you zoom to 70mm the front part of the lens retracts into the lens body. On the MkII, it does the opposite. When you zoom to 70mm the front of the lens extends out. While it’s strange that this happens, it really makes no difference in usage. That’s one thing I dislike about either lens is that you possibly expose the internal components of the to dirt and dust because of the movement of the front section of the lens. Another physical difference is that the lens hood on the MkI mounts on the lens body and doesn’t move with the front part of the lens. The front part moves within the lens hood, so the lens hood protects it against lateral impacts when it is zoomed in or out. On the MkII the hood mounts on the front part of the lens and moves with it. This offers much less protection.

When it comes to real life shooting, the lenses are similar when you are pixel peeping. When shooting up close it appears that the MkII back focuses slightly where the MkI front focuses slightly. The focus point on both lenses was very sharp. When zoomed in at about 2 feet, the MkII appears slightly brighter and warmer than the MkI. An interesting difference is that MkII field of view slightly larger at 70mm. So it appears that the MkI has just a tad bit more focal length.

When shooting across the room the images also tell the same story. The MkII is slightly brighter and a little warmer than the MkI. The MkI has a bit more focal length when at 24mm and at 70mm.

So the final verdict, in my opinion, is that overall the MkII is a tad bit sharper and warmer than the MkI. The build quality is comparable, but the MkII is said to be better sealed against the elements. You can find many reviews that say that the lens’s price ($2300) is unjustified, but I disagree. If I didn’t own the MkI, I would be investing in the MkII. The lens is worth the money. But I don’t think the slight differences between the MkI and the MkII justify an upgrade.

Like I said this is not a scientific, lab test. It’s just me pixel peeping at some realistic comparisons. If you look at the bench test charts, the MkII is a sharper lens than the MkI. But in daily shooting, I doubt that you’ll see much difference between the two.

That’s it for this week. Once again, thanks for reading!

-Ken

I’ve said it before, one of the great things about being a commercial and portrait photographer is the diversity of the work. Getting to work with a variety of locations and subjects really opens your eyes to the beauty that surrounds us all. Most people will recognize the beauty of colorful sunset, or that of a majestic mountain range. But there are smaller, but still beautiful things and places we overlook everyday.

If you are photographer I encourage you to step out of your comfort level and try photographing something entirely different. This kinda goes with my last post about looking at different mediums for inspiration. But this time I’m suggesting that you stay within the medium, but look at shooting different subjects. For instance, if you normally shoot action and sports, give dramatic portraits a try. If you are a wedding photographer, try shooting birds and nature. You get the idea.

I believe you will find the experience will improve your overall work. For instance, learning to shoot a bird in flight may help your skills with shooting a football game or a wedding reception. Anything that helps you expand your skill set around different types of photography, will help make you an overall better photographer.

So, get out and go take some pictures that challenge you and help you grow. 😉

Thanks for reading and if you want to see diverse and strange photos visit my Personal Projects page.

– Ken.

OK, don’t take this wrong but some of my friends are kinda kooky. Your first reaction may be “are you talking about me?”. You know, if the shoe fits…

But really, I have a really diverse group of friends. Some are married June and Ward Cleaver types, they have regular jobs, have 2.5 kids, and are super nice people. Some of my other friends are a bit different. I have some friends that have no idea what normal sleep patterns are (actually I have several friends like this). I have some friends that love tattoos and piercings. I have friends that are computer programmers. I have friends that are artists. I have friends that are musicians. I have friends that are accountants. You get the idea.

Now, why does this matter? Well, I think you need a broad group of friends to keep you challenged. While it’s great to have friends that are much like you, having a diverse group of friends will keep you on your toes.

Art is the same way. As an artist it’s a good thing to look at art that is outside your normal medium and field of experience. For instance, I’m a photographer, while I enjoy looking at and being inspired by other photographer’s work, I am also inspired by other forms of art. I like to look at and be inspired by graphic design, typography, paintings, pottery, music, etc. Be open to inspiration from everything around you. Be inspired by song lyrics, works of art, sculpture, dance, etc. Appreciate what when into creating that piece of jewelry, that flyer, those vases, in general the things around you.

The appreciation and inspiration from having diverse influences (whether it be friends or forms of art) will help make your life a little more interesting and maybe keep you a little more inspired to create.

Thanks for reading!

-Ken

I admit it. Even though I’ve been doing it for years now, location photography can be stressful. Sometimes you are going to an unfamiliar place with unknown or unpredictable lighting and weather conditions. You can have a very demanding client who is concerned that his money is being well spent. It can be intimidating.

The key is to be prepared and have really strong photography skills. That goes without saying. However, there are a few other less obvious tips that can also help. For instance, make sure you have the gear you need. But that doesn’t always involve having tons of lighting gear or a massive selection of lenses. Sometimes, all you need is a piece of duct tape to save a shoot.

I always carry a small duffle bag dedicated for storing miscellaneous stuff. These are things that can save a shoot but aren’t photo equipment. Here are some of the things I carry:

A white bed sheet.
A 6x6ft piece of black felt.
A roll of duct or gaffer’s tape.
Medium binder clips.
Large pring clamps.
Heavy duty fishing line.
A multitool.
25ft of nylon cord.

These are some of the things that I have found to be really helpful to carry. There may be other things you can think of, but these are my basics for McGyvering a bad situation.

A more obvious tip for shooting on location is to always pack you gear the exact same way. This includes all gear, not just camera gear. By being consistent, it makes it easier to find things. It’s much less stressful to know exactly where everything is than it is to have to rummage thru bags to find something. There’s also another benefit. If everything has a place, it’s less likely that you will accidentally leave gear behind.

Anyway, I hope this helps you work on location with a little more confidence. You can checkout more my website here.

Thanks for reading!

-Ken.

If you follow what I do you’ll know that I shoot a lot of industrial and product photography. It’s not always the most glamorous type of photography, but it can be satisfying on many different levels.

Every now and then it can be fun, challenging, and creative when things come together to make for artistic shoot. Below is one of many images that I shot today that turned out pretty well.

Copyright Ken Rieves Photography

Seldom do machined steel parts become art. 🙂

Also, I recently did a photo shoot a local warehouse. My pal Jacob filmed the shoot for me and here is a link to final project. A special thanks to Jacob, Peyton, and Gary.

Thanks for reading and if you want to see more of my commercial photography click here.

-Ken

OK, let me say first off that I am not a wedding photographer. However I have some friends that are and they are seeing a trend in the requests by brides and grooms (B&Gs). A few years ago, everyone wanted wedding albums that documented their wedding along with great portrait of the couple.

It seems that a growing number of couples want their wedding photos on a disk and have no interest in prints or albums. I can understand that, with current technology, people can prepare their own albums and print their photos. They can usually do it cheaper than going thru the photographer, but sadly that’s what they are going to get… cheap photos/albums.

Here are some of the problems with getting your image on a DVD:

– What people don’t consider is that DVD’s have a shelf life. The plastic degrades and eventually the data is lost. So, in a few years the DVD will be worthless. The images must be transferred to another media and maintained there.

– Currently DVD’s are media of choice for most computers, but that can change. (Remember floppy disks?) You may have the images on a DVD, but your new computer may have a Blue-Ray or some other kind of drive.

– The standard image format for photos is JPEG. The problem is that, in a few years, there may be a better format and JPEG’s may become obsolete. To preserve the images, you would need to change file type.

– If the photos are printed at a drug store or big-box store, they will probably be created using an inkjet printer. Unless archival inks are used the photos will degrade over time. On top of that, the actual print quality will be much poorer than a photograph created at a color lab.

I guess my point is that may be better to hire a good photographer (check out Elizabethmphotog.com) that uses professional printing companies and color labs to preserve your wedding memories. Otherwise you may find yourself with a DVD that’s unreadable, some faded prints and a lot of regrets.

Thanks for reading!

P.S. Every time I would like to thank wedding planners for Event Security services, who also can take care for all my cameras and stuff.

-Ken

When I starting learning photography, I used to shoot 95% black and white film. There are several reasons for this. First of all, black and white images force you to look at the subject and composition without be distracted by color. This gives you a lot of power and allows you to create a sense of drama that you can’t obtain with color. Also, black and white can be more forgiving when you are working in a home darkroom. The chemicals aren’t as temperature sensitive for black and white processing as they are for color. In addition, shooting black and white is much less expensive than color.

The images below started off as color digital images and were converted to black and white. While there are always exceptions, one thing I look for in a black and white image is dynamic range. I ask myself questions such as are the black tones in the image truly black without crushing all the detail? Are the whites, really white without blowing out detail? And are there ample gray tones in between.

Sometimes, depending on your subject, the lighting, and the environment, it’s difficult to get the dynamic range you want. For some edgier images you may want more contrast and less gray tones. Sadly, I have seen photos where the contrast was exaggerated in order to disguise a poorly exposed and/or lit image. Don’t do that.

This was shot using available light image from a large window.

I used a ring flash and drug the shutter to get the sense of motion. I think this where a higher contrast works for the image.

This was a studio shot using a large soft box and a reflector.

This is an available light photo. I like this images because of the simplicity and the dynamic range. There are tones that range from pure white to solid black and everything in-between.

Remember that the key to good black and white conversions, it to manipulate the color image prior to conversion to gain the most dynamic range.

That’s it for this time.

Thanks for reading!!

-Ken

When I started my obsession with photography, digital images were the dreams of science fiction. Everyone shot film. While digital has come long way, there were some advantages in shooting film. The camera was just a machine for exposing film. You could change the look and quality of your images by the film you chose. It was kind of like having an interchangeable sensor in a digital camera. As a result, digital cameras become obsolete as the quality of sensors get better. Sadly it’s the nature of the modern beast.

OK, now I’m wandering off topic a little. One of the under appreciated joys of the old film cameras was the 35mm rangefinder camera. While they had their problems, they also had some distinct advantages. First of all, you might be wondering what is a rangefinder camera? Simply put, a rangefinder uses an optical viewing window to aim the camera. The “rangefinder” is usually part of the top frame of the camera (on some cameras they could be detachable or interchangeable). This eliminates the need for a mirror that is found in an SLR camera.

While rangefinders have a different set of problems (parallax, focusing, magnification, lens compatibility, etc.) they offer some real advantages over an SLR. Because you don’t have a mirror, the camera body can be made thinner, it is much quieter, and there are fewer moving parts. Because the body is thinner, the film plane can be moved closer to back of the lens and therefore lenses can be made smaller and lighter. A camera that is smaller, lighter, and quieter is more discrete. This is an advantage for shooting weddings, street photography, and photojournalism.

While a good digital rangefinder will not replace a DSLR, it would make a useful addition to a photographer’s tool bag. The problem is there are few digital rangefinders on the market. The most notable is the Leica M series. They are incredible cameras with an amazing lens lineup. The disadvantage is price. The cost of the camera bodies and lenses are difficult to cost justify for most professional photographers.

However, it appears that other camera makers are discovering that there is a need for these cameras. Most recently Fujifilm has been working on a line of digital rangefinders. While some of the earlier incarnations have been described as quirky and clunky, it appears that they may be working the bugs out. The early review of the X100s have been very positive, so it sounds encouraging. The only obvious flaw with this model is that it does not have interchangeable lenses. As the model becomes more available, I may have to invest in one. If I do, I’ll write a review and post it here.

This is my early 1950's Canon Rangefinder along with a 50mm 1.8 lens.

Come on camera makers, get on the digital rangefinder band wagon!

Thanks for reading!

– Ken.