I mentioned that we played hooky one day last week at the Hayden Run falls. Here are some pictures from that jaunt. Above, the falls, being captured by my wife’s iPhone. Yes, she is getting just a little testy with my meta inclinations. But she graciously put her phone back up so I could create this shot after I whimpered and gave her my best puppy-dog-eyes.

Almost as soon as we arrived, we spied a great blue heron landing in the creek. It explored a little bit, then moved out to the wider river. They aren’t terribly rare along the rivers of Columbus, but it is just so darn cool to see a bird that big.

Just a few steps down the trail after spotting the great blue heron, we spied a green heron. I don’t know that I’ve ever encountered these two birds in the same outing. I’m not sure I remember the last time I saw a green heron in the wild. That day, we saw two green herons and one or two great blues (hard to know if it flew off and came back, or just flew off). The green above spent a long time hunting in the shallows of the creek and was really cute to watch as it slowly, deliberately watch for unsuspecting fish. In the 10 minutes we watched, it didn’t go after a single fish.

The area under the Bethel Road bridge is easily accessible, and provides for some interesting photographic opportunities. I’ll definitely keep it in mind for a future band shoot.

And finally, I’ve repeated the image of us shooting each other, ’cause I love it so much. Good times playin’ hooky.

(Inspired by another Facebook friend posting 10 essentially identical pictures in a set of 10 pictures) Here’s another easy way to make yourself look like a better photographer (and a subject I’ve harped on before): don’t post everything you shoot. In fact, you should probably delete most of what you shoot. Above, the screen shot of the 8 photos I posted to Facebook from some time I spent with my daughter and her friend at their horseback riding lesson. I took (I’m guessing here) around 100 pictures in that 90 minutes. And I deleted the majority of them.

So the lesson here is that if you shot 30 identical pictures of a band or a kid at a birthday party, people really only care about the 1 or 2 that capture the moment. Your challenge, if you accept it, is to look at your pictures and pick the best ones. And when you do that, you’ll immediately appear better. And if you do that consistently, you’ll actually get better.

My daughter has been taking horse-back-riding lessons for a few years, and last week, while playing hooky, I pulled out the camera during her lesson.

I played with a couple of different lenses, but almost exclusively, I ended up looking for back-lit opportunities.

Or side lit.

Horses are just awesome. The light in the barn is just beautiful. I just wish I wasn’t always worried that the horses were going to bite my ass.

Actually, this shot is my interpretation of a recent DPS post. Besides, I was bored while watching my son’s soccer practice.

So my tip is that as soon as you learn about a ‘rule’ in photography, see what it feels like to break it. In my MPEX class, I make the point that in photography, ‘rules’ are more like ‘usually’. For example, the ‘rule of thirds’ says you should put your subject on a 1/3 line, or mo betta, on an intersection of two 1/3 lines. And this makes sense for some compositions, but definitely not all. Sometimes, the subject just has to be centered. Kiss it, rule of thirds.

Taken by my wife

Here’s a pro-tip for anyone wishing to improve their photography, no matter the device: pay attention to your background. Above, a picture my wife created as part of a set to commemorate a new set of soap she received from Haldecraft. She called this “Han has a bad feeling about this.” In this case, the story is more about the background than the foreground–Han, “The Roguish Smuggler”,  is being watched by a barely visible Darth Vader, standing with a  AT-AT. I really like this image BECAUSE it tells a story, and has multiple meanings in it. In this particular case, the background is what makes the image. But the concept of ‘pay attention to your background’ can be applied to most any photograph, and is what pro photogs spend an enormous amount of money on: getting the background to look exactly the way they want.

And there are some easy ways to deal with messy backgrounds, in order of easy to costly:

• Get a higher or lower angle on the subject. This will usually cause the subject to be cast against the ground or the sky, respectively.
• Remove distracting elements. The above was taken in my son’s room, which is totally full of distracting elements. My wife created this photo, paying attention to not only Han and the soap, but also the elements behind Han. She had to remove the detritus to get just the background she wanted.
• Hang a background of some sort. This is where you may think you’ve got to spend some money, but for big objects (e.g. people) it can be as easy as a sheet or blanket you’ve already got on hand. For smaller objects like flowers, a black or white shirt can do wonders to isolate a subject.
• Buy a lens with a large aperture, or (way cheaper) use the blur function in Instagram to isolate the subject.

My favoritists people ever. They are there to support me though thick and thin and just will be crazy when we are hanging out but always support me and believe in me. I have no idea how I will live without them next year! I will love you all forever and ever.

This was my shot of a group of 8th graders at the end of their final middle school dance (pics on Facebook and Flickr). One of them reposted it to Instagram with the above description, providing me with the perfect example for why I shoot those dances. I do it for them. I do it to document their fun and their relationships, and to capture a nano-second of their rapidly changing lives. This was the single most important lesson that I learned the first time I shot a dance–that it isn’t about the photography. They don’t care about my light set up, or the depth of field, or the focal length. They care about the result: the people in the image. Of all the volunteers at the dance, I’m pretty sure I have the best job.

Kids waiting in line for me to take their picture.

There are about a thousand different challenges when I shoot bands in bars. From crappy (or non-existent) stage lighting, to arrangement of the performers, to behavior of the fans, to musician interaction, to sound-guy attitude–every shoot/performance is unique. And that’s part of what I love about the process.

In this particular venue, Lounge 62, the stage light was high-quality modern LEDs… on the floor. So the performers had that spooky under-lit glow. And they were standing in front of frosted glass windows, so the first performers were contrast-killing back-lit. For later performers, I decided to strap a flash to a central support post in the seating area of the bar. But my normal strap was about 12 inches too short to go all the way around the “post”, so I had to get a much longer one from my car. Fortunately, getting permission to hang the flash on the post was a cinch.

With the flash in place, I had a second set of decent performance shots but there wasn’t a lot of cross-musician interaction. The most challenging member of the band to shoot, was, of course, the drummer. He was almost always in the shadow of the lead singer. Such are my challenges.

The third group to perform had some great interactions, especially between the lead singer and guitar player. There was clearly some connection between them, so I kept waiting to capture those moments. But the moment has to be at a time when my flash isn’t casting a nasty microphone shadow, and I have to have the shot composed, ready to capture the moment. Sometimes I can start to pick up on rhythms in the performance–not the notes played on the instrument, but in the way the musicians are moving and feeling the music. Some times the rhythm and the light and the composition all fall into place. I was poised, a little behind the stage, shot ready, waiting. When I saw the shot develop through the viewfinder, and pressed the shutter release, I thought I had just captured the best shot of the night. When I glanced at the LCD a moment later, I knew it was the best shot of the night. It was not the image above (sorry, just yankin’ your chain there!). It was this one.

Last night, I got one of the biggest compliments of my photography career. After shooting Bobbi Floyd Townes and her band Fresh Wreckage, and a number of other bands, Bobbi was getting their fans arranged for a group shot to help memorialize their record-label-signing party. When she introduced me to the crowd, she said “This is Rick Bennett. He’s _OUR_ photographer.” She then pointed out that all the pictures on the tables, on the CDs, and the poster that the fans had been signing were all my pictures. That was sweet. Thanks Bobbi for the love.

A recent tweet from my favorite Irish photographer, Roger Overall, got me thinking:

I get as many request now for #free #photographs as I do for paid ones. I wonder when the tipping point will happen

I’ve had some requests to use my images for free, and as often as not, I give them away. But usually the images I give away are given for personal use, and are images that I shot on my own volition. But why do people look at an image, think “Wow, I like that shot, and I want to use it for [...]. I wonder if I can get it for free.” Or put more simply, “That image has value to me. I want it for free.”

Don’t get me wrong–I totally understand the inclination. We all want to minimize our expenses, and if we can get something for free (within reason) why not ask for it? But our social construct limits what we’ll ask for for free, and usually it is something we perceive as having very little value or (perhaps) very little cost to the person giving it to us. Need a napkin to wipe a kids’ runny nose? Ask a restaurant, even if you haven’t ordered something from them. Gotta go? Hit the gas station, even if you don’t need gas. Need to write something down? Borrow a pen from a stranger. Need a cigarette but you’re out? Bum one from a fellow smoker. Each of those interactions has a real, albeit small, cost. And I’m not even talking about friendship- or family-based free stuff, or goods/services specifically offered for free. These are examples of an individual needing something that has a cost, and getting that from a stranger. But we never ask for a free soft-drink from a restaurant. We never ask for a free haircut. We never ask for a free movie ticket. Each of those activities has negligible marginal cost to the producer. Why don’t we ask?

So, why would we ask for a picture for free? I think it is because, in the digital era, we recognize that the incremental cost of that image file is $0. But would you ask an author for a free copy of their eBook? Would you ask Amazon to give you a free copy of the Kindle version? Would you ask a musician for a free copy of their album? Again, I’m not talking about a) taking something illegally, or b) getting something for free that the creator is already offering for free. I’m talking about seeing the latest book from your favorite author, and asking them to send you a pdf. Would you do that? I don’t think I would.

So why do we feel comfortable asking photographers for a free version of their image? I think some of it comes from a lack of understanding of what is involved in creating some images. People think “I could have created that image, had I only been in that place at that time.” In contrast, they understand that a lot of time and effort goes into writing, performing, recording, and mixing a song. They understand that writing a book takes a lot of time, work, and skill.

Of course, some images are great, and were captured with little preparation. Except for having the right gear. Except for studying the gear and how to use it based on the situation at hand. Except for understanding what makes a great composition. Except for having the gear prepared and ready to make the shot. Except for checking the weather, sunset/sunrise time, driving, parking, waiting, watching, etc. Except for downloading the image, and modifying it from what the camera captured into what the viewer sees. Yeah, except all of that. /snark

So, does it matter if an image was created based on 10 hours worth of work and years of experience, compared to a book that took 100 hours worth of work and years of experience? They both took time and experience for the creator. We seem to recognize that for authors. Not as often for photographers.