Author Archive: ken

OK, I’ve been working on this image for a while and I think I finally have it the way I want it. The image is sort of a homage to the video game/movie franchise Resident Evil (notice the Umbrella Corp on the garage door). It was a fun image to create and I will probably make some tweaks to it before I have it printed, but this is basically the final image.

The next step is to figure out how I want to print/mount it.

Thanks for reading!

-Ken

One of the amazing things about what I do is the variety. Every day is a new challenge and a different job. It’s what really keeps this job interesting. Below is a few recent photos as examples.

I love shoot such diverse subject matter because it helps develop the ability to deal with and to adapt to different situations. Lessons I learn from one shoot helps solve problems at future shoots.

Anyway, that’s it for this week. Thanks for reading!

-Ken

It seems that I’ve been neglecting my blog lately. I think Christmas got me out of the habit and it’s been difficult to get back into the swing of things. I’ve been shooting lots of really diverse things and people, which keeps it fun and challenging.

Below are just a few samples.

This is a drill press that uses a lubricant to make cutting easier. I liked the way the fluid followed the rotation of the bit.

I believe these are axels for a popular brand of motorcycles.

A black and white shot of a local model, Peyton. A simple one light setup.

Well that’s it for this week. I promise I’ll try to be better about keeping the blog updated.

Thanks for reading!!

-Ken

This morning, I was trying to decide what to blog about. I was looking online at some portraits that seem to be so over re-touched that the subject’s skin looked plastic. The effect was so heavy handed that an otherwise good photo was ruined. If there are blemishes or unsightly scars I certainly agree that it’s OK to remove them. But skin has texture and pores. It just does. Leave it alone. I know there have been a gazillion blogs about this and now there is a gazillion and one. 😉

I know as professional photographer we get pressure from portrait clients to retouch images to look like Vogue covers, but try to resist the impulse and explain to them it is just a fad. It’s kinda like selective colorization. It was big in the early 2000’s, but it’s now regarded as a way to distract the eye away from the fact that it was a bad photo to begin with.

While I do a lot of composite images and other Photoshop trickery, I do really enjoy shooting simple black and while portraits. I feel there’s an honesty to them. All the distracting backgrounds are eliminated, colors become shades, and you really see the subject.

I shoots lots of different styles of portraiture, everything from fashion/editorial style to environment portraits, but I have a soft spot for a good, simple black and white portrait. It may come from spending years shooting, processing, and printing my own photos. While I was looking thru some old images this morning I came across this senior portrait from 2007.

A portrait like this never goes out of style. It has drama and a certain reality that a color photos misses. If your monitor is calibrated you will notice while the left side of her head is dark, there is enough light on the background that she doesn’t blend into it. The tonal range stretches from almost pure white (her eyes) to pure black (her hair on the left).

Plus her skin looks normal, not plastic.

Thanks for reading and you can see more of my black and white portraits (and some color ones too) by clicking here.

-Ken

The other day a friend of mine posted a photo of his grandfather’s old 8×10 view camera on Facebook. It was really cool looking old camera probably from the 1950’s. Seeing that camera got me thinking about the cameras I’ve owned over the years and it struck me that I still have all the cameras that were milestones in my life. I wonder if subconsciously kept these camera for some reason and why I never sold them.

My wife would tell you it’s because I’m a pack rat, but I like to think that these camera meant more to me than their resale values. 😉

The first camera is a Polaroid Swinger model 20. Why is this camera important? It was my first camera. I got it for my 10th birthday and it was awesome. My parents also gave me enough film for a month (so they thought) I burned thru it all the first day. After that, film was being rationed to me.

The next camera was my father’s old Canon right rangefinder. Every once it a while I could shoot with it, but it was his baby, he almost had a BabyTrend Expedition Jogger stroller for it. He had carried it during the Korean War. It was my first experience with a real camera. My older brother has had the camera since my father’s death and recently sent it to me where it has a treasured place in my lobby.

My first “real” camera was an old Graflex that was a gift from my uncle when I was around 12. He gave me the camera along with some darkroom equipment that he no longer used. The centerpiece was an old Omega B-5 enlarger. It was monster, and if I remember right, it had a nice sharp Schneider lens. Anyway, the Graflex and I became fast friends. The medium format negatives were great to work with and the camera really taught me photography. With 8 exposures per roll, I learned to make every shot count. During my Freshman year of high school I actually used the camera to shoot basketball for the school newspaper and yearbook.

I guess the last camera that was a milestone for me is my Canon F-1. It was my first professional quality camera and it was part of a camera system. At that time, you had camera and lenses but Canon had developed a camera system with a variety of components that were all designed to work together. There were different viewfinders, motor drives, and other tools beyond just lenses. Now I had a camera that allowed me to shoot in a variety of situations that were simply impossible to shoot with the Graflex. Plus, the F-1 is an extremely tough camera. It is completely manual and functions in extreme conditions. The battery only powers the light meter so if it dies, you can continue to shoot. Because of its durability, the Canon F-1 was popular with journalists. About 15 years ago I had to replace the shutter. But it still shoots like new.

I’m glad I kept these cameras. It’s nice to have them as old friends that have marked early parts of my life in photography. While I love my digital cameras (I am currently shooting a Canon 5d mk III and Canon 7D), they are built to be obsolete in 24 months or so. Sadly, they have become a business expense and not a milestone.

Thanks for reading. If you want to see some of my commercial photography click here.

-Ken

There, I said it. I am easily amused. People that know me, know this to be true.

Part of what I do is industrial photography. Some photographers find this boring and would rather shoot weddings or babies. While there’s nothing wrong with shooting either, photographing the places and things that make the stuff we see and use everyday can be interesting.

Last week I was shooting in a manufacturing facility that makes all kinds of stuff from different metals. It’s interesting to me to see how mundane things like muffler brackets or RV fenders start off as rolls of steel and end up in their final form. It can be an amazing transformation.

While some of the technology in manufacturing hasn’t changed much since the 1950s (brute strength machines like presses are still needed), the amount of high tech machines is increasing. Below is laser cutting that is making short order of 1/4 inch steel plate. It cuts it like a hot knife thru butter.

After the steel is cut, bent, stamped, and shaped you have the final product. Some of the patterns of the stacked product I found quite interesting.

Thanks again for reading and you can find more of my commercial work here .

-Ken

OK, I’m going to blog about this since it’s fresh in my mind. This afternoon I attended a short seminar on copyright law. Now, I already had a pretty good understanding of it, but this seminar kind of reinforced what I already knew.

As a photographer, the moment I click the shutter and that image is recorded on my memory card, that photograph is copyrighted. I have 100% legal right to give the photo away, license it to whomever with whatever conditions we agree to, or even to sell the rights to the image. The only time I need to register the copyright is if I need to litigate for copyright infringement.

Just for the record, I never give up or transfer copyright on any images. I will, however, offer a variety of licensing options based on compensation.

Sadly, I see more people “borrowing” images from other peoples websites. Some are even representing other people’s work as their own. That’s lazy, sad, pathetic, and just plain dishonest. Those people need their melons thumped.

Thanks for reading and be sure to check out some new portraits I added.

-Ken

Earlier this week I posted a question on Twitter asking what my next blog posting should be about. I got several good suggestions, but decided on this one – “What about a throwback post? Talk about a photo from earlier in your career–something memorable or a demonstration of your growth?”

I thought that was a good question and made me contemplate how much have I grown and in what direction? For one, my ability to control light has improved and become more purposeful. This is true for my commercial work as well as my portraiture. As a result my images have grown more complex, delving into composite images where all elements have to be lit consistently.

In terms of my portraits, I’ve always liked a sense of drama. Before opening my studio, most of my portraits were either business head shots or photojournalistic images. Having my own business allowed me to express myself more freely.

My first day in business was April 1, 2006. How appropriate that it was April Fool’s Day. The photos below were taken in May of that year and show that I tended to like darker, more dramatic images in opposed to bright, shiny portraits.

Copyright Ken Rieves Photography

Copyright Ken Rieves Photography

Copyright Ken Rieves Photography

Even though the last image is more of a high key photo, there is still a certain amount of drama in it.

If I was to re-shoot these images today, I would certainly shoot them differently. Maybe I would add a little subtle rim light here or there. Maybe add a reflector to add a touch of light to the shadow areas. But the essence of the types of images I like to create can be seen in my earlier work.

I hope you enjoyed a glimpse of some of my older portrait work and I thank you for reading. Maybe next week I’ll talk more about my commercial work and how it has evolved.

To see more of my portraits click here.

-Ken.

This week I’m going to talk about 5 misconceptions that some photographers have. These are caused by having an incomplete understanding of common concepts.

#1 – You can take a color image and desaturate it to make a good b&w image. You can’t. Desaturating an images is completely different that using an adjustment layer to do the conversion. Desaturating will damage the image and you will lose contrast and detail. Here’s a simple example of why this is:

A color images of yellow and blue panels.

The image below is the same image of yellow and blue panels, but was desaturated.

As you can see, you’ve lost all contrast between the panels. So, if this was a shot of an umbrella with alternating yellow and blue panels, then the desaturated photo would appear uniformly gray. Other colors will also start blending together.

#2 – JPGs look better than RAW images. Not really true. A JPG when properly exposed will sometimes look better than a RAW image. The reason being that a JPG has been manipulated by the camera. JPGs have the saturation, vibrancy, and other values exaggerated in camera. When compared to an unmanipulated RAW photo the JPG will be more colorful and brighter. However, the RAW image in most all cases can be adjusted to look better than a JPG. Another advantage of a RAW image is that there are more parameters that you can control (like white balance) that are difficult to control on a JPG. Shoot RAW when you can.

#3 – It’s better to spend money on a better camera when possible. Sorta. That’s true if you are already using top quality professional quality lenses. While the latest, greatest camera body may have an awesome sensor in it, you are depending on the light passing thru the lens to be able to keep up with the sensor. So if you are using a poor quality lens, even on an awesome camera, your images will have poor contrast, color and sharpness. I’ve heard people complain about their camera being inconsistently sharp, when really it was the lens. Some inexpensive zoom lenses produce inconsistently sharp images based on focal length and aperture. For instance, at 80mm and f/8 you may get a nice sharp image. But if you zoom out to 35mm, the image is less sharp at the same aperture.

#4 – If someone has lots of “likes” on a photo it must be good. Not true. When you look at social media, such as Facebook, there are wide variety of folks that participate. Many of them are simply not qualified to critically judge the quality of a photo. Most people judge photos by just looking at subject matter. A photo of a cute kitten will still be a cute photo even if it’s not in sharp focus or is underexposed. That’s not a bad thing, but it’s not a basis for judging someone’s photographic abilities.

#5 – If a light source is too harsh, then move it farther from the subject to soften it. Totally false. Here is the general rule: The larger the light source is the softer the light will be. The smaller the light source, the harsher it will be. When you move a light source further away, its size, relative to the subject, will decrease and the light will be harsher. Simple as that.

That’s it for this week and if you want to see some examples of some of my personal projects click here.

Thanks for reading.

-Ken

I hate to sound old-school and talk about the good old days of film, but a conversation with a friend last week got me thinking about it. My friend told me her 16 year daughter was getting into photography (and getting really good at it) and has been taking classes at school. In these classes the students are, not only required to shoot film, but also must process their own film.

You might be thinking that this is taking a step back in technology, but I think that would be the wrong assumption. I think by starting with film, it makes you a stronger photographer in all respects. For instance, in these classes the students are shooting with fully manual 35mm camera. This forces them to have a intimate knowledge of the relationships between shutter speed, aperture, depth of field, and ISO. Since film and processing is expensive, it also forces them to pay attention to what and how they are shooting. Wasted shots cost money.

Learning to process film and to print your own images also makes for a better photographer. 90% of the things you can do in Photoshop can also be done in a darkroom. It is obviously more difficult, but it provides a deeper understanding of how/why you manipulate an image.

OK, I may have a bias because shot film since I was 10 years old and worked in a darkroom since I was 13. But the students starting off shooting film with a manual camera have a decided advantage over those who start off shooting digital and lack the basics of how a camera works. And, for Pete’s sake, if you are shooting digital, shoot in manual mode not auto. 😉

Ok, that’s it for this week. Be sure to check out my galleries here.

-Ken