Summer is here in NJ and we couldn't have asked for better weather. As for that matter, I have to add, the past winter and spring have been more than ideal: considering the beating we've taken the past few years weather wise.
It's time to get out in the yard, or the beach and have some fun every chance we get and run around in the water and enjoy life, by living in the moment.
Last week I had the pleasure of attending an ISES meeting at the Revel Casino and Resort in Atlantic City, NJ. Where Jes Gordon attended as the guest speaker. Talk about a great mix of the aforementioned, then add the wonderful group of event planners, whom I enjoyed meeting. All I can say about it: it was a fun evening indeed!
As a photographer, I have to mention the lines in the resort. This place was a photographers dream. I'd only wish I had more time to explore around and capture more images. Here are a few of the images from the cocktail hour and during the talk, and a small example of the lines to be seen at the Revel.
I've hit a lens wall. I initially bought the Sigma 17-50mm f/2.8. Foolishly I sent it back and decided to "upgrade" to a professional lens, the Canon 24-70mm f/2.8. It was foolish because the price difference was HUGE, $600 vs $1300, and I'm not seeing a difference in image quality, actually I think the quality isn't there.
The Canon lens arrived the other day, but it didn't work right. This was probably due to the large box it was packed in, and the big bubble to protect it from being jarred in transit was flat. I'm assuming it banged around and shifted more than a lens should, so needless to say, back it went. The replacement lens has arrived. This one works correctly, but I'm not seeing the image quality I expect from a lens more than twice the cost of the Sigma. If this doesn't change over the next few days, the Canon L lens will go back, and I'll happily welcome back the Sigma!
I think this also confirms when it's time to purchase the 70-200mm f/2.8, I'll be purchasing the Sigma lens for $1300 and forego the Canon for $2300. In many of the reviews it is comparable, if not better in regards to image quality. One last note, I didn't see chromatic aberrations in the Sigma lens, sadly, I've seen some in the Canon lens....
I guess I will not be a die hard Canon L lens fan girl. Sorry Canon, but it appears Sigma has some great lenses amongst their lineup!
For the pixel peepers who would like to compare. Here is an image from the Canon and an image from the Sigma.
Canon 70mm, ISO 100, f/2.8, 1/80
Sigma 50mm, ISO 200, f/2.8, 1/40
In looking around at other wedding photographer's websites, I've noticed one disturbing thing in common... most seem to be using Flash for the entire site.
For those of you that are not well versed in web technologies, Flash is a proprietary framework developed by Adobe that provides some nifty multimedia features for interactive sites. Flash was a necessity for many years because there was no other reasonable way to do animations or play music and videos.
But fortunately, in 2012 this is a different story. With modern browsers we can do cool animations with SVG and canvas, we can play music and video with HTML5 features and we can make sites more interactive with current Javascript frameworks (like jQuery).
Going off on a technical rant like this may be over the heads of regular web surfers, but here's why I think it's important to stay far away from flash:
- It's big, most flash sites have download indicators because you usually need to download tons of content to render a page. You also need to download the entire Flash runtime to get anything to work.
- It's horrible for mobile, Android supports Flash to a limited degree, but it's hardly a good experience. Flash does not support touch gestures so it's mostly useless on these devices. And don't forget, viewing these sites on an iPad or iPhone is impossible.
- Adobe has discontinued Flash for Andriod. Nuff said.
- It's proprietary technology, so the platform is in the interest of Adobe shareholders, not the users of the technology. The vast majority of the web is based on open standards and open source software. Flash bucks this trend big time.
- Running music on your site by default is a terrible idea. This isn't so much a Flash issue, but just horrible web design. How many times have you been in a situation where a website starts playing audio in a completely inappropriate setting? It's just a bad idea. Let the user turn it on themselves if they want audio.
- Flash fragments the web, it really does. We are at the mercy of whether Flash is supported on various operating systems (like Windows, MacOS, Linux). It took years for Linux to get decent Flash support, why put ourselves through that?
I feel like the photography industry is a few years behind in web development. The good news is that we have some incredible resources that can allow us non programers to create amazing sites without knowing how to code. Just learning the basics in setting up a Wordpress site is a great start (and easy to find technical expertise if needed).
I personally setup lisadinicoas.com over a weekend after doing a bit of research. It's not perfect, but it's a start for me. There are lots of things for me to learn, but for now I have a site that gets the job done and it's accessible to people on all types of devices. So my request to other photographers out there, look into what 2012 has for web technology and embrace open standards. The quicker the web rids itself of Flash, the better off we'll all be.
As photographers we should ultimately be looking at what we want to present. Is it with flashy web design with things to distract people from our photography? The point of the web is to present our photos to potential clients. We need to be aware of this when our web design becomes distracting from our photos. I feel our photos should speak for themselves, with our sites as their canvas.
Today on a whim (and a past suggestion of a client) I took a mini road trip down to Wheaton Villiage. I decided to leave my polarizer and flash in the car. The flash I wish I had brought with me to bounce off of some walls. In all fairness, I didn't know what to expect, but I wasn't expecting any indoor time with the camera and my uncooperative fidgety model.
I dealt with the harsh 2pm winter sun and low indoor lighting with only allowing my ISO to hit a max of 400, even though my camera can go to ISO 3400 with very little noise. The indoor images look good, but I think they could have been amazing if I had my speedlite to bounce. My lesson learned from today was to assure I always have my speedlite with me. I could have captured a few more great images, had I anticipated all the indoor time the afternoon was going to bring.
Today we got to see Nonno. Sadly, it wasn't the type of visit you wish for your 3 yr old to have with their grandfather. My son's Nonno was driving up from FL and passing through NJ on his way to CT to attend his brothers funeral. I did capture a few cute pics, no matter how much they resisted from overexhaution!