I now turn my attention to the National League as I try to hurriedly finish my predictions before we get too far along into the season. All the hours at the office don't make it easier, but the excitement of baseball being back should be enough to get me to continue to write. The NL East isn't particularly strong, and it only got worse with two of the Braves' starters scheduled for Tommy John surgery before the season even started. This is a division that should be very exciting come 2015 when the Mets get Matt Harvey back to accompany some of the other phenomenal young up and coming starters in their system, and the Marlins will be on the upswing as well in their perpetual ebb and flow of rebuilding and surging. But it's 2014 now, and here's what I anticipate:
1. Washington Nationals
2. Atlanta Braves
3. Philadelphia Phillies
4. New York Mets
5. Miami Marlins
The Nationals are loaded with pitching, and with the Braves getting hit with the injury bug, that should be enough for Washington to safely win the division. Bryce Harper is a trendy MVP candidate, and after seeing what Mike Trout has done at such a young age, it's far from unreasonable to expect one of the most talented ballplayers of the past few decades to perform on that level. Adam LaRoche absolutely needs to play better this year, which he should do, not because I think he is great, but because he does seem to up his game playing in a contract year. At the end of the day, this team is too good and too deep to disappoint two years in a row, particularly in a weak division.
The Braves begin the season with three pitchers on the 15 day DL and three pitchers on the 60 day DL. Talk about starting out in the hole. They were able to mitigate some of the damage by sweeping up Ervin Santana late in the winter free agent period, but any team that has Aaron Harang in the rotation definitely has some room for improvement. They still have the best closer in baseball at the back end to ensure that when they are ahead late in the game, it will stay that way, which is one good thing they have going for them. The downside is they are counting on the Upton brothers to deliver for this offense. As they were quick to find out, they are wasting $17 million a year on one of the most worthless hitters in baseball to man center field. It's nearly impossible to have a worse season than B.J. Upton had last year, but I still fully expect him to have a bad year while his brother Justin and Jason Heyward continue to underachieve. Chris Johnson will be hard pressed to replicate his year last year, too, so when you look at their lineup in total, it's pretty underwhelming. They make it to the second spot merely because of the weak division.
Try to name the Phillies who are not past their prime. It's hard, isn't it? When you look at this roster, it's tough to think how little it's changed over the past six years. That does not bode well for a baseball team 99 times out of 100. If there is a fountain of youth and this team found it, they'd be immensely dangerous, but with this team injuries are a when, not an if, and they are just strapped for flexibility. Their top of the rotation is still strong and they have guys who will get hot in spurts, but there just isn't enough to this team to make a race for a playoff spot. This is a last place team in 2 or 3 other divisions.
As I alluded to before, the Mets in their rebuilding process have gone full steam after pitching, and their time will be in the near future. For now, though, they are sans young phenom Matt Harvey and instead will rely on the least fit performance enhancing drug user you've ever seen, Bartolo Colon. Offensively, the team's construction seemed to try and put as many low batting average, low on base percentage, high strikeout power guys next to each other as possible; expect a lot of solo home runs from this team. There's just a shortage of major league ready talent here.
The Marlins have a young rotation that other GMs are envious of. Headed by Jose Fernandez and also featuring the likes of Jacob Turner, Henderson Alvarez, and Nate Eovaldi, this is a team that had some great potential in the rotation. No, not all four of them are top of the rotation guys, but with the oldest of the bunch being 24, they certainly have time to continue to elevate their games and have 2-3 pan out. Unfortunately, that's about the best thing to say about this team. The lineup is horrible outside of Giancarlo Stanton and Jarrod Saltalamacchia. This is a team that couldn't muster an OBP of .300 last year and couldn't even drive in 500 runs. Even with moderate improvement from some of their younger players, that is such a horrible starting point that it doesn't give them much to be optimistic about.
Monday, March 31, 2014
Sunday, March 30, 2014
Major League Baseball 2014 Predictions: AL West
The American League West should be a fun one this year. It's a division that has a little bit of everything. You've got a good deal of talented, young pitching in the division, and teams with very different roster construction. To me, this is a race that is going to come down to the last day or two of the season, and probably the hardest division for me to try and pick (save for the Astros as a lock for last place).
1. LA Angels
2. Oakland Athletics
3. Texas Rangers
4. Seattle Mariners
5. Houston Astros
It's hard to believe that a team that has $500 million tied up in three players is considered a surprise pick at the top of this division, but I think that this is a year that things click for them. Albert Pujols is doing well this spring and with a clean bill of health, he will be out with a chip on his shoulder and something to prove. I don't think there is any way that Josh Hamilton lives up to his contract, but he cannot possibly be worse than he was last year. And oh, by the way, they have the best player on the planet in Mike Trout. I think David Freese is a nice candidate to rebound to his previous level of performance after a down year last year. This pick does depart from my conventional tendency to favor pitching, as they are not a deep pitching team and will require some good performances from Hector Santiago and Tyler Skaggs (what a steal of a trade that was for them this offseason). I think what helps their chances is I believe they are the team out of the top three in the West that is best constructed to take the most games from Seattle and Houston, which may ultimately be the deciding factor.
Oakland year in and year out makes Moneyball work better than most people would ever expect. This is a good, deep team, but unfortunately for them, when you have to start tapping into your depth before the first game of the season even starts, it puts you at a little bit of a handicap. Injuries this early on to their starting pitching are unfortunate, but they are one of the few teams that can plug the holes fairly well. The lineup, anchored by John Donaldson, has some solid, but unspectacular players. They have a lot of guys that know how to get on base, but with a team that doesn't feature a particular high batting average team, there is the potential that some of those runs they managed to plate last year don't get plated this year. They are a team that needs to win close games, and Jim Johnson in the closer's role doesn't make me feel comfortable they'll win as many as they need to win the division.
When I look at the infield that Texas will trot out this year, I wonder how I put them third in the AL West. Ultimately what I see that I don't like is the way they jerk around their pitchers. This indecision makes me wonder if everyone is on the same page there. Typically when there is this rotating door of starters, people moving from the rotation to the bullpen and back again, it just doesn't lend to a nice continuity on the field. With Yu Darvish banged up to begin the year, they are already in a hole with their top of the rotation not stacking up to others in the division. Behind him, they really have a lot of question marks, too. Any team hoping to be a contender with Tommy Hanson in the rotation has some holes. Ultimately, with OBP fiend Shin Soo Choo getting on base in front of Prince Fielder and Adrian Beltre, this team will score some runs, but I think they will fall short with some of their players failing to live up to Texas' expectations.
Seattle made a splash by signing Robinson Cano to a 10 year contract this winter. What they didn't do is address plenty of other areas of need. Before even playing a game for the Mariners, Cano acknowledged they need another bat in the middle of the order. This is a lefty heavy lineup that doesn't have a ton of great hitters by any stretch of the imagination, and doling out a ton of cash for one of the better hitters in baseball isn't going to fix the rest of the spots in the lineup. Furthering their woes, Seattle starts with two of their starters on the disabled list, so their area of strength on the team is banged up right out of the gate. Of course, they have King Felix anchoring the rotation, and they have some good young starters here, so they should pitch pretty well once they return to full health. Much like his entire career, though, Felix is going to struggle to win games due to a lack of run support, and if he isn't winning games, you know the other four starters won't be either.
Houston has another painful year in store for them, but on the bright side, they have managed to build up their farm system, and a resurgence shouldn't be too far away. Couple that with the fact that they have an Angels team with some enormous contracts on the books limiting their flexibility and an A's team that is always in the process of flipping players before they get a big contract somewhere, and their rise to the top of the division could be faster than usual. For this year, though, they simply won't pitch or hit enough to compete.
AL Predictions:
Wild Card Game: Yankees over Athletics
ALDS: Tigers over Yankees, Rays over Angels
ALCS: Tigers over Rays
1. LA Angels
2. Oakland Athletics
3. Texas Rangers
4. Seattle Mariners
5. Houston Astros
It's hard to believe that a team that has $500 million tied up in three players is considered a surprise pick at the top of this division, but I think that this is a year that things click for them. Albert Pujols is doing well this spring and with a clean bill of health, he will be out with a chip on his shoulder and something to prove. I don't think there is any way that Josh Hamilton lives up to his contract, but he cannot possibly be worse than he was last year. And oh, by the way, they have the best player on the planet in Mike Trout. I think David Freese is a nice candidate to rebound to his previous level of performance after a down year last year. This pick does depart from my conventional tendency to favor pitching, as they are not a deep pitching team and will require some good performances from Hector Santiago and Tyler Skaggs (what a steal of a trade that was for them this offseason). I think what helps their chances is I believe they are the team out of the top three in the West that is best constructed to take the most games from Seattle and Houston, which may ultimately be the deciding factor.
Oakland year in and year out makes Moneyball work better than most people would ever expect. This is a good, deep team, but unfortunately for them, when you have to start tapping into your depth before the first game of the season even starts, it puts you at a little bit of a handicap. Injuries this early on to their starting pitching are unfortunate, but they are one of the few teams that can plug the holes fairly well. The lineup, anchored by John Donaldson, has some solid, but unspectacular players. They have a lot of guys that know how to get on base, but with a team that doesn't feature a particular high batting average team, there is the potential that some of those runs they managed to plate last year don't get plated this year. They are a team that needs to win close games, and Jim Johnson in the closer's role doesn't make me feel comfortable they'll win as many as they need to win the division.
When I look at the infield that Texas will trot out this year, I wonder how I put them third in the AL West. Ultimately what I see that I don't like is the way they jerk around their pitchers. This indecision makes me wonder if everyone is on the same page there. Typically when there is this rotating door of starters, people moving from the rotation to the bullpen and back again, it just doesn't lend to a nice continuity on the field. With Yu Darvish banged up to begin the year, they are already in a hole with their top of the rotation not stacking up to others in the division. Behind him, they really have a lot of question marks, too. Any team hoping to be a contender with Tommy Hanson in the rotation has some holes. Ultimately, with OBP fiend Shin Soo Choo getting on base in front of Prince Fielder and Adrian Beltre, this team will score some runs, but I think they will fall short with some of their players failing to live up to Texas' expectations.
Seattle made a splash by signing Robinson Cano to a 10 year contract this winter. What they didn't do is address plenty of other areas of need. Before even playing a game for the Mariners, Cano acknowledged they need another bat in the middle of the order. This is a lefty heavy lineup that doesn't have a ton of great hitters by any stretch of the imagination, and doling out a ton of cash for one of the better hitters in baseball isn't going to fix the rest of the spots in the lineup. Furthering their woes, Seattle starts with two of their starters on the disabled list, so their area of strength on the team is banged up right out of the gate. Of course, they have King Felix anchoring the rotation, and they have some good young starters here, so they should pitch pretty well once they return to full health. Much like his entire career, though, Felix is going to struggle to win games due to a lack of run support, and if he isn't winning games, you know the other four starters won't be either.
Houston has another painful year in store for them, but on the bright side, they have managed to build up their farm system, and a resurgence shouldn't be too far away. Couple that with the fact that they have an Angels team with some enormous contracts on the books limiting their flexibility and an A's team that is always in the process of flipping players before they get a big contract somewhere, and their rise to the top of the division could be faster than usual. For this year, though, they simply won't pitch or hit enough to compete.
AL Predictions:
Wild Card Game: Yankees over Athletics
ALDS: Tigers over Yankees, Rays over Angels
ALCS: Tigers over Rays
Saturday, March 29, 2014
Major League Baseball 2014 Predictions: AL Central
The AL Central is not what you would call the strongest division in baseball. There are some intriguing teams and players in the division, and Kansas City is looking to try and break their longest in MLB drought from the postseason, but from top to bottom, this is not a division that stacks up with most others. Here's how I think it will shake out:
1. Detroit Tigers
2. Kansas City Royals
3. Chicago White Sox
4. Cleveland Indians
5. Minnesota Twins
The Tigers are one of those teams that routinely coast through the regular seasons underperforming for their ability, but then start to hit their stride come playoff time. In any other division, they'd pay for this, but in the Central, they can get away with it. While I don't expect Max Scherzer and Anibal Sanchez to replicate their successes of last year, I expect Justin Verlander to rebound from what was a down year by his standards. The team improved defensively and in its versatility at the expense of some power by shipping Prince Fielder to Texas in exchange for Ian Kinsler, and plugging in Nick Castellanos at third base. They still have the best hitter in baseball in the lineup in Miguel Cabrera, some other good hitters before and after him, a good rotation, and a better bullpen than they have had in years. They won't win the division by as much as they should, but they'll still get there.
I almost felt like none of these teams deserved the number two spot. The Royals, while they have a team that is a trendy pick due to their stacked core of athletic position players, just don't get me as excited as everyone else. They have a lack of power, and a real lack of starting pitching. While they trot out a good defense that really helps their starting pitching, it still doesn't take away that the pitching is very mediocre after James Shields. Yordano Ventura is an X-Factor here, and he could be the deciding factor that pushes them to a playoff run, but I still think there is a lot that has to go right for this team to succeed. I will always give the benefit of the doubt to a team that has better pitching than hitting, which is not the case for the Royals due to their rotation.
The White Sox are a team I think will surprise. They have one of the best pitchers in baseball in Chris Sale, a strong number two in Jose Quintana, and some respectable arms at the back end of the rotation. They have a lot of breakout candidates on this team, and while a perfect scenario for them where they have a number of things go right and make a run is unlikely, I really feel as though enough of them will perform well for them to stay competitive and make the other teams at the top of the division nervous. Jose Abreu should be a good masher in the middle of the order, Avisail Garcia has a world of potential, and the the remainder of their outfield has a good chance of making some solid contributions. They have veteran presence in the clubhouse, and I just get a good feeling about this team.
The Indians, in my opinion, will take a step back this year, mainly because I think the White Sox have more sure things in their rotation. Justin Masterson appears to have progressed well, but his career has been up and down, so there's no telling if he can continue his more recent success. McAllister at the number two slot shouldn't excite anyone, either. Danny Salazar should have a good year, but he'll likely have his ups and downs. The batting order should improve a little with Carlos Santana taking over third base and Yan Gomes taking over catching duties, but it remains to be seen how well he will play there defensively over the course of a season. Their position players, by and large, seem closer to their ceilings, which given how middle of the pack they were in many categories last year, doesn't bode well, in my opinion.
Any team trotting out Ricky Nolasco on opening day is pretty much destined to be a bottom dweller in the standings. Their rotation is amongst the worst in the league, and their offense was pedestrian, to be kind, last year as well. The only thing they really have to play for is being better than the Astros in the American League this year, and I'd argue they'll only do that because they play in a much weaker division. The best thing about Minnesota baseball this year will just be the fact that it is no longer zero degrees outside.
1. Detroit Tigers
2. Kansas City Royals
3. Chicago White Sox
4. Cleveland Indians
5. Minnesota Twins
The Tigers are one of those teams that routinely coast through the regular seasons underperforming for their ability, but then start to hit their stride come playoff time. In any other division, they'd pay for this, but in the Central, they can get away with it. While I don't expect Max Scherzer and Anibal Sanchez to replicate their successes of last year, I expect Justin Verlander to rebound from what was a down year by his standards. The team improved defensively and in its versatility at the expense of some power by shipping Prince Fielder to Texas in exchange for Ian Kinsler, and plugging in Nick Castellanos at third base. They still have the best hitter in baseball in the lineup in Miguel Cabrera, some other good hitters before and after him, a good rotation, and a better bullpen than they have had in years. They won't win the division by as much as they should, but they'll still get there.
I almost felt like none of these teams deserved the number two spot. The Royals, while they have a team that is a trendy pick due to their stacked core of athletic position players, just don't get me as excited as everyone else. They have a lack of power, and a real lack of starting pitching. While they trot out a good defense that really helps their starting pitching, it still doesn't take away that the pitching is very mediocre after James Shields. Yordano Ventura is an X-Factor here, and he could be the deciding factor that pushes them to a playoff run, but I still think there is a lot that has to go right for this team to succeed. I will always give the benefit of the doubt to a team that has better pitching than hitting, which is not the case for the Royals due to their rotation.
The White Sox are a team I think will surprise. They have one of the best pitchers in baseball in Chris Sale, a strong number two in Jose Quintana, and some respectable arms at the back end of the rotation. They have a lot of breakout candidates on this team, and while a perfect scenario for them where they have a number of things go right and make a run is unlikely, I really feel as though enough of them will perform well for them to stay competitive and make the other teams at the top of the division nervous. Jose Abreu should be a good masher in the middle of the order, Avisail Garcia has a world of potential, and the the remainder of their outfield has a good chance of making some solid contributions. They have veteran presence in the clubhouse, and I just get a good feeling about this team.
The Indians, in my opinion, will take a step back this year, mainly because I think the White Sox have more sure things in their rotation. Justin Masterson appears to have progressed well, but his career has been up and down, so there's no telling if he can continue his more recent success. McAllister at the number two slot shouldn't excite anyone, either. Danny Salazar should have a good year, but he'll likely have his ups and downs. The batting order should improve a little with Carlos Santana taking over third base and Yan Gomes taking over catching duties, but it remains to be seen how well he will play there defensively over the course of a season. Their position players, by and large, seem closer to their ceilings, which given how middle of the pack they were in many categories last year, doesn't bode well, in my opinion.
Any team trotting out Ricky Nolasco on opening day is pretty much destined to be a bottom dweller in the standings. Their rotation is amongst the worst in the league, and their offense was pedestrian, to be kind, last year as well. The only thing they really have to play for is being better than the Astros in the American League this year, and I'd argue they'll only do that because they play in a much weaker division. The best thing about Minnesota baseball this year will just be the fact that it is no longer zero degrees outside.
Major League Baseball 2014 Predictions: AL East
First off, yes, it has been a while since I have posted. Work has been stressful to say the least, I've had housing things to take care of, had a business trip, and have just been exhausted overall. All that aside, I know I need to write more, and what better to write about than the upcoming Major League Baseball season? I'll have a separate piece for each division, and I'll start with what is thought by most to be the best in baseball, the American League East.
AL East:
1. Tampa Bay Rays
2. New York Yankees
3. Boston Red Sox
4. Baltimore Orioles
5. Toronto Blue Jays
As always, this is a brutal division and should make for a good race. I have the Rays winning this year, though it is really just a toss up. As always, their starting pitching is really good and really deep. They have several guys in the minors that would be in the starting rotation on most other Major League teams. I think Wil Myers will have a good sophomore season, which will hopefully give them more of a middle of the order presence. The thing the Rays have lacked over the years is a masher in the middle of the order, and while I still don't think they have it, they're good enough to overcome it with pitching and defense. One can't help but wonder if they hadn't made the curious move of passing over FSU's Buster Posey, an in state guy at their biggest position of need, in the draft if this team would have a World Series championship by now.
The Yankees obviously spent a ton of money in the offseason to avoid consecutive seasons out of the playoffs, but this team still has its holes. They have one of the weakest infields in all of baseball, both offensively and defensively. Even if Jeter has a bounce back year (I just don't see it), he's still going to be a liability in the field. With band-aids such as Brian Roberts and Kelly Johnson, the Yankees are really hoping they can catch lightning in a bottle. While they doubtlessly have talent, a good, deep outfield, and a pitching staff that could end up as one of the best in the American League, the infield will ultimately be their achilles heel. I also doubt C.C. Sabathia will rebound and the Yankees' number one position in the rotation will have among the worst stats in baseball relative to other number ones.
Two years ago Boston was last in the East. Last year they were World Series champs. I think these seasons were both anomalies, and this year they will float back to a middle ground. One thing that the Sox are always able to do is assemble a team that is well suited to their home park, and without looking at any statistics to back up this guess, I feel like they have to have one of the best home field advantages in baseball. This team is strong in leadership and is well rounded, but I don't see how their pitching can possibly replicate their performance of last year. They could have the comeback player of the year in Grady Sizemore, and if he stays healthy (doubtful), he could be one of the best stories in baseball this season.
I felt the Orioles were a pretty safe bet for this spot until they went out and signed Nelson Cruz and Ubaldo Jimenez. Chris Davis won't replicate his 2013 season, but he doesn't need to with a lineup that should prove to be one of the best, if not the best, in baseball. As always, pitching is a big question mark for them, and I simply am not a believer in Jimenez as an ace. To me, this is a team that will probably have a torrid run at some point in the season, but inconsistency and a lack of depth will be their downfall. If their pitching exceeds expectations this year, though, they could easily be the AL East champs.
In another division, this team could make a run at a playoff spot, but they just won't get it done in the East.
Their trade to become the Marlins 2.0 was one that set this team back big time. That summer they banked on severely injury prone players that made up the core of a last place team and signed a knuckleballer to play in a dome. Definitely not one of their better offseasons. They have plenty of guys capable of putting up a great offensive season, but due to injuries and inconsistency, they are never able to do it all in the same year. They simply don't have the pitching to stack up in this division. Ricky Romero's great season from several years ago seems further away than it was. What happened to that guy?
AL East:
1. Tampa Bay Rays
2. New York Yankees
3. Boston Red Sox
4. Baltimore Orioles
5. Toronto Blue Jays
As always, this is a brutal division and should make for a good race. I have the Rays winning this year, though it is really just a toss up. As always, their starting pitching is really good and really deep. They have several guys in the minors that would be in the starting rotation on most other Major League teams. I think Wil Myers will have a good sophomore season, which will hopefully give them more of a middle of the order presence. The thing the Rays have lacked over the years is a masher in the middle of the order, and while I still don't think they have it, they're good enough to overcome it with pitching and defense. One can't help but wonder if they hadn't made the curious move of passing over FSU's Buster Posey, an in state guy at their biggest position of need, in the draft if this team would have a World Series championship by now.
The Yankees obviously spent a ton of money in the offseason to avoid consecutive seasons out of the playoffs, but this team still has its holes. They have one of the weakest infields in all of baseball, both offensively and defensively. Even if Jeter has a bounce back year (I just don't see it), he's still going to be a liability in the field. With band-aids such as Brian Roberts and Kelly Johnson, the Yankees are really hoping they can catch lightning in a bottle. While they doubtlessly have talent, a good, deep outfield, and a pitching staff that could end up as one of the best in the American League, the infield will ultimately be their achilles heel. I also doubt C.C. Sabathia will rebound and the Yankees' number one position in the rotation will have among the worst stats in baseball relative to other number ones.
Two years ago Boston was last in the East. Last year they were World Series champs. I think these seasons were both anomalies, and this year they will float back to a middle ground. One thing that the Sox are always able to do is assemble a team that is well suited to their home park, and without looking at any statistics to back up this guess, I feel like they have to have one of the best home field advantages in baseball. This team is strong in leadership and is well rounded, but I don't see how their pitching can possibly replicate their performance of last year. They could have the comeback player of the year in Grady Sizemore, and if he stays healthy (doubtful), he could be one of the best stories in baseball this season.
I felt the Orioles were a pretty safe bet for this spot until they went out and signed Nelson Cruz and Ubaldo Jimenez. Chris Davis won't replicate his 2013 season, but he doesn't need to with a lineup that should prove to be one of the best, if not the best, in baseball. As always, pitching is a big question mark for them, and I simply am not a believer in Jimenez as an ace. To me, this is a team that will probably have a torrid run at some point in the season, but inconsistency and a lack of depth will be their downfall. If their pitching exceeds expectations this year, though, they could easily be the AL East champs.
In another division, this team could make a run at a playoff spot, but they just won't get it done in the East.
Their trade to become the Marlins 2.0 was one that set this team back big time. That summer they banked on severely injury prone players that made up the core of a last place team and signed a knuckleballer to play in a dome. Definitely not one of their better offseasons. They have plenty of guys capable of putting up a great offensive season, but due to injuries and inconsistency, they are never able to do it all in the same year. They simply don't have the pitching to stack up in this division. Ricky Romero's great season from several years ago seems further away than it was. What happened to that guy?
Thursday, March 20, 2014
The Secret to Concert Photography
In the few years I have been doing photography, the overwhelming majority of the people who are ever aware that I take photographs only know it because of concert photography. From what I have witnessed, taking concert photographs usually yields one of two category of responses. Because most people have tried taking pictures at a concert with a point and shoot or a phone, they know what a normal old photo looks like as opposed to one taken by an amateur or professional. Consequently, you have a large portion of people who are astounded at the photography because they compare your photos to the ones you took. There's a great deal of excitement and appreciation for the photos. The other group have the mindset of "yeah, it's all the camera". The truth about concert photography lies in the middle. So, if it isn't all either in the technology or being extraordinarily talented, what's the secret? What's the one thing that is most important? Is it how you set your camera? Your gear choice? Reflexes? Photography knowledge?
The secret is to be fearless, to know you are going to fail and continue to shoot anyway. I know, kind of a lame answer, right? How is this any different than other photography? Isn't practice and trying different things important for all photography? Here's why it's different: in concert photography, you are guaranteed to take bad photos. It's inevitable. No, not every non-concert photo you take is going to be good, but you are going to have so many more passable shots. After a concert, you are looking at a good sized number of photos that simply aren't worthwhile. The proportion of bad photos to good photos is so much larger than most other types of photography, and that ratio is even worse when you are first starting out. As such, it's possibly the easiest type of photography to be discouraged about. THAT is why the persistence is important. You have to accept the psychological beating that the bad photos deliver and keep going. Are all the other elements of photography important? Yes, but the fear of failure is something that works its way into your performance.
What outcome can this lack of confidence yield? Well, you don't want to continue to take bad pictures, so you start to think too much. Maybe you think that you need to take fewer, better photos. In general that is a good thing, but when you are starting out, it isn't so simple, and the end result is just taking fewer photos, which leads to fewer good photos and even more frustration. You spend more time fiddling with settings on the camera and less with your eye on the stage. You wait for the lighting to change and then you miss. You keep focused on a given area and the singer doesn't return to that focal range. Any number of things happen that keep you from getting a shot. An imperfect shot is better than no shot at all. At the very worst, it's a bad shot, you delete it, and you have zero pictures, just as if you didn't take the shot. There's absolutely nothing wrong with that.
Perhaps there are other important topics to go over, but those will be for another day. The instant I start talking about other important elements to concert photography, the most important element discussed above loses some of its significance, relatively speaking. The fearless attitude is the one thing people should take away. Go out there, take pictures, move around with confidence, and act like you are taking some great shots. A positive attitude can go a long way, and if nothing else, it will make you look less mopey while at the show.
The secret is to be fearless, to know you are going to fail and continue to shoot anyway. I know, kind of a lame answer, right? How is this any different than other photography? Isn't practice and trying different things important for all photography? Here's why it's different: in concert photography, you are guaranteed to take bad photos. It's inevitable. No, not every non-concert photo you take is going to be good, but you are going to have so many more passable shots. After a concert, you are looking at a good sized number of photos that simply aren't worthwhile. The proportion of bad photos to good photos is so much larger than most other types of photography, and that ratio is even worse when you are first starting out. As such, it's possibly the easiest type of photography to be discouraged about. THAT is why the persistence is important. You have to accept the psychological beating that the bad photos deliver and keep going. Are all the other elements of photography important? Yes, but the fear of failure is something that works its way into your performance.
What outcome can this lack of confidence yield? Well, you don't want to continue to take bad pictures, so you start to think too much. Maybe you think that you need to take fewer, better photos. In general that is a good thing, but when you are starting out, it isn't so simple, and the end result is just taking fewer photos, which leads to fewer good photos and even more frustration. You spend more time fiddling with settings on the camera and less with your eye on the stage. You wait for the lighting to change and then you miss. You keep focused on a given area and the singer doesn't return to that focal range. Any number of things happen that keep you from getting a shot. An imperfect shot is better than no shot at all. At the very worst, it's a bad shot, you delete it, and you have zero pictures, just as if you didn't take the shot. There's absolutely nothing wrong with that.
Perhaps there are other important topics to go over, but those will be for another day. The instant I start talking about other important elements to concert photography, the most important element discussed above loses some of its significance, relatively speaking. The fearless attitude is the one thing people should take away. Go out there, take pictures, move around with confidence, and act like you are taking some great shots. A positive attitude can go a long way, and if nothing else, it will make you look less mopey while at the show.
Sunday, March 16, 2014
Local Artist Spotlight: The Loudest Silence
Here you'll spot a quirk that I alluded to in an introductory post; my local artist spotlight features a band from Sarajevo, Bosnia. No, I did not relocate to Bosnia, so this band isn't technically "local" to me, but I use the term as they are a band that hasn't hit it big, or that is a relative unknown compared to other bands. In any case, I just discovered The Loudest Silence and was compelled to write my initial thoughts on the band.
The Loudest Silence are an atmospheric symphonic metal band. First off, let me say that this is a spectacular combination. Symphonic metal tends to always lean more toward the power metal or gothic metal type of music, and atmospheric metal often finds its way making its way over to the doom side or out of the metal genre altogether. The way the band melds these two elements together is quite impressive. I half expected the characterization to be one of those occurrences where a band simply tags a ton of genres that have even the slightest iota of influence just to reach more people, but that is not the case here. The first song I listened to, also called The Loudest Silence, showed off the atmospheric element without having metal in it whatsoever. I progressed onto Acheron, which I have included a video below:
One thing that stuck out to me at this point was that I didn't know what to think about the vocals. Taida has a very lovely voice, but it seems to me that at times there is some indecisiveness. My thought is that it is not easy to balance atmospheric style vocals, much like the ones in the song The Loudest Silence, which are lighter and more ethereal, with vocals that have more force behind them like the operatic vocals more characteristic of symphonic metal. I also felt she cuts off her notes early in some instances where she should have held them a tad longer and faded them out. All in all, though, this was nitpicking a little. Once I got to 1:48 in the video was when I really started to appreciate both the instrumentals and the vocals, and these small criticisms subsided as I fell captivated to what I was hearing. Taida keeps going higher and higher with her vocals, and the instrumental work get better and better as the song goes on. The keyboards in particular play such a critical role; not only do they set the overarching atmosphere of the track, but you have the more symphonic parts adding intensity in some sections of the song, whereas in others, Denijal switching the Korg over to other instruments and adding very somber elements to the track.
One last thing that struck me with this band is that they capture metal very well, yet there are still parts of their songs where I could almost see the music having appeal to more mainstream type listeners, despite it not sounding generic. This is very difficult to do, as metal is such a polarizing genre of music. Overall, I think the group has a lot going for them; they seem to take their work seriously in all facets. Their music is terrific, they have a good image and already have some good band photography done of the quintet. They'll continue to grow and perfect their trade, I have no doubt. Their biggest obstacle will be getting their name out there. I really hope that a year from now I can be writing about a big success story coming out of Bosnia! Take a listen and let me know what you think.
The Loudest Silence are an atmospheric symphonic metal band. First off, let me say that this is a spectacular combination. Symphonic metal tends to always lean more toward the power metal or gothic metal type of music, and atmospheric metal often finds its way making its way over to the doom side or out of the metal genre altogether. The way the band melds these two elements together is quite impressive. I half expected the characterization to be one of those occurrences where a band simply tags a ton of genres that have even the slightest iota of influence just to reach more people, but that is not the case here. The first song I listened to, also called The Loudest Silence, showed off the atmospheric element without having metal in it whatsoever. I progressed onto Acheron, which I have included a video below:
One thing that stuck out to me at this point was that I didn't know what to think about the vocals. Taida has a very lovely voice, but it seems to me that at times there is some indecisiveness. My thought is that it is not easy to balance atmospheric style vocals, much like the ones in the song The Loudest Silence, which are lighter and more ethereal, with vocals that have more force behind them like the operatic vocals more characteristic of symphonic metal. I also felt she cuts off her notes early in some instances where she should have held them a tad longer and faded them out. All in all, though, this was nitpicking a little. Once I got to 1:48 in the video was when I really started to appreciate both the instrumentals and the vocals, and these small criticisms subsided as I fell captivated to what I was hearing. Taida keeps going higher and higher with her vocals, and the instrumental work get better and better as the song goes on. The keyboards in particular play such a critical role; not only do they set the overarching atmosphere of the track, but you have the more symphonic parts adding intensity in some sections of the song, whereas in others, Denijal switching the Korg over to other instruments and adding very somber elements to the track.
One last thing that struck me with this band is that they capture metal very well, yet there are still parts of their songs where I could almost see the music having appeal to more mainstream type listeners, despite it not sounding generic. This is very difficult to do, as metal is such a polarizing genre of music. Overall, I think the group has a lot going for them; they seem to take their work seriously in all facets. Their music is terrific, they have a good image and already have some good band photography done of the quintet. They'll continue to grow and perfect their trade, I have no doubt. Their biggest obstacle will be getting their name out there. I really hope that a year from now I can be writing about a big success story coming out of Bosnia! Take a listen and let me know what you think.
Saturday, March 15, 2014
Byproduct of the Facebook Age
In 2014, the internet turned 25. We're a quarter century into a completely new age, and we now have children who don't know life without the internet. The internet has changed the world as we know it, both for better and for worse. Information is available within a matter of seconds in many places all over the globe. There's wider access to learning, more opportunity to discover more interests, and we have a much more efficient, global culture. On the flip side, more access to information can be both good and bad, and people have wider access to information facilitating illegal or dangerous activity. Children have so many stimuli these days that attentions spans continue to whittle away to nothing. The item I have been thinking about, though, is that in this day and age, people have a far greater inability to cope with loss. Loss, in this instance, doesn't mean death, just lost contact.
Fifty years ago, I doubt teens were drastically different at high school graduation time. Many had thought of the friends they made, how great their friendships were, and how they were going to have those friendships for life. A few short years later, they could count on one hand the people from high school they maintained contact with. It was a lesson at a young age: life is transient; you go through stages in life, and they are nothing more than stages. Every person one comes into contact with fulfills a role or has a purpose, and the overwhelming majority of these people are not there for the long haul, nor should they be. The operative word in the phrase "growing up" is growing. Latching on to the same people forever much more closely resembles stagnation than it does growth. That's not to say if you're not drastically changing your life every few years, you are stagnating, but think of the old mining towns. You grew up knowing you'd be a miner because your father and his father before him were miners, and all your friends were going to be miners, too. The ability to move on to a new chapter in life is very important to our development, but it's one that is becoming progressively less acquired.
Today that skill isn't becoming acquired to the same degree because of social networking sites. Now the friend you were going to have that deep bond with forever is one of 600 friends of yours on Facebook. Are you still best friends? No, probably not, but they're only an internet connection away at any moment. There's less and less frequently ever an occasion to say good bye to someone simply because they may never actually leave your life. If you spent your life never having moved a significant distance, it means you never had any farewells to deal with. One could argue that this is actually a neat phenomenon, but I don't share the same sentiment. It hides young individuals from the one skill that is probably most important in life: adaptation to change. Change is one of life's few certainties, and no, people no longer being part of an individual's life is not the only instance of change, but it is a significant one. There's something to be said for having the ability to learn and move on from a situation, and that may go lacking for many of the younger generation today.
Take, for example, a relationship. Suppose you are in a relationship with someone suffering from some sort of trauma or anxiety of some sort. You invest a lot of time and energy into the relationship and work hard to support your significant other because you love him/her. It's a draining process, but you don't regret it because you see something in that person that makes you want to try harder and harder each day, something that maybe others don't see. Over a period of time, the relationship doesn't work out, and maybe it doesn't end so well. Now, what is human instinct?
"I sunk so much time and energy into something, I want to see it through/I want to see the fruits of my labor".
It's a common thought, but a misguided one. You didn't do those things chasing the end result, you did them out of love. Now is a good time to take the good for what it was, to feel good about any benefit you may have had on someone's life, and then accept that you may not ever see the person's growth after that. Or maybe you do, and you're exposed to someone else benefiting from a change you helped create in a person. You have two ways to react: jealousy (I deserve that reward), or acceptance. Here's where I think lacking the ability to detach comes into play. Children and young adults are becoming so accustomed to not dealing with impermanence that situations like this, and many others, will result in reacting in a detrimental manner. Has the internet created an inability to let go? Well, I certainly don't see that it has helped. To me, it is such a huge source of stress and anxiety, and unless we identify issues like this, along with numerous others, it's only going to get worse. I am in no way saying the internet is bad, simply that it merits looking at some of the behavioral issues stemming from its existence.
Thoughts?
Fifty years ago, I doubt teens were drastically different at high school graduation time. Many had thought of the friends they made, how great their friendships were, and how they were going to have those friendships for life. A few short years later, they could count on one hand the people from high school they maintained contact with. It was a lesson at a young age: life is transient; you go through stages in life, and they are nothing more than stages. Every person one comes into contact with fulfills a role or has a purpose, and the overwhelming majority of these people are not there for the long haul, nor should they be. The operative word in the phrase "growing up" is growing. Latching on to the same people forever much more closely resembles stagnation than it does growth. That's not to say if you're not drastically changing your life every few years, you are stagnating, but think of the old mining towns. You grew up knowing you'd be a miner because your father and his father before him were miners, and all your friends were going to be miners, too. The ability to move on to a new chapter in life is very important to our development, but it's one that is becoming progressively less acquired.
Today that skill isn't becoming acquired to the same degree because of social networking sites. Now the friend you were going to have that deep bond with forever is one of 600 friends of yours on Facebook. Are you still best friends? No, probably not, but they're only an internet connection away at any moment. There's less and less frequently ever an occasion to say good bye to someone simply because they may never actually leave your life. If you spent your life never having moved a significant distance, it means you never had any farewells to deal with. One could argue that this is actually a neat phenomenon, but I don't share the same sentiment. It hides young individuals from the one skill that is probably most important in life: adaptation to change. Change is one of life's few certainties, and no, people no longer being part of an individual's life is not the only instance of change, but it is a significant one. There's something to be said for having the ability to learn and move on from a situation, and that may go lacking for many of the younger generation today.
Take, for example, a relationship. Suppose you are in a relationship with someone suffering from some sort of trauma or anxiety of some sort. You invest a lot of time and energy into the relationship and work hard to support your significant other because you love him/her. It's a draining process, but you don't regret it because you see something in that person that makes you want to try harder and harder each day, something that maybe others don't see. Over a period of time, the relationship doesn't work out, and maybe it doesn't end so well. Now, what is human instinct?
"I sunk so much time and energy into something, I want to see it through/I want to see the fruits of my labor".
It's a common thought, but a misguided one. You didn't do those things chasing the end result, you did them out of love. Now is a good time to take the good for what it was, to feel good about any benefit you may have had on someone's life, and then accept that you may not ever see the person's growth after that. Or maybe you do, and you're exposed to someone else benefiting from a change you helped create in a person. You have two ways to react: jealousy (I deserve that reward), or acceptance. Here's where I think lacking the ability to detach comes into play. Children and young adults are becoming so accustomed to not dealing with impermanence that situations like this, and many others, will result in reacting in a detrimental manner. Has the internet created an inability to let go? Well, I certainly don't see that it has helped. To me, it is such a huge source of stress and anxiety, and unless we identify issues like this, along with numerous others, it's only going to get worse. I am in no way saying the internet is bad, simply that it merits looking at some of the behavioral issues stemming from its existence.
Thoughts?
My Top Five Live Artists
First off, I am deeply apologetic for not writing at all this week; my living arrangement dictated my free time this week, which gave me much less opportunity to write. I plan on writing several post this weekend to make up for it.
Now, for the topic at hand. I've probably seen around 100 concerts in my lifetime with at least a couple hundred bands on my list. Some I've seen only once, some I've seen more than a dozen times. I've seen bands old and new, big and small, at local venues and at festivals. I have danced, photographed, headbanged, and moshed at many an event. I know others who have far more concert experiences than I do and others who have far less. Concerts are experiences that I know I will have many more of, so there's no sense of longing for the past by recounting these events whatsoever. One point of clarification is that this list constitutes solely the bands, not the concert experience on the whole from beginning to end. The distinction is I have seen great bands with lousy openers, or there are some experiences that were absolutely incredible with bands that I love where the band is really just a satisfactory live band. So, without further ado, here are my top 5:
5. Project Pitchfork (seen once) - I saw Project Pitchfork in July 2012 at Amphi Festival over in Germany. They were the musical highlight of the festival for me. The music was phenomenal live, and the visual display was impressive. Peter Stilles had a strong presence on stage, but the clincher here was the assault from the two drum kits on stage. There's no substitute for live drums in my opinion, and they really seemed to understand this. There's no getting around needing to sound good when you perform, and Project Pitchfork had it nailed.
4. Flogging Molly (seen twice) - I've seen Flogging Molly twice, and the biggest thing for me about seeing Flogging Molly for me is no matter how many people are there, they make it feel like a very intimate show. Every member in the band is tremendously talented on their respective instruments, which really shows at their live performances. Their super long version of Black Friday Rule complete with solos has to be among my top live songs. But talent aside, Dave King is what takes their shows from great to outstanding. His conversation between songs is invaluable to the show. I honestly get the vibe that I am going back to Ireland and he is telling me, an old friend, stories whenever he talks between songs. It's a truly wonderful experience.
3. Arkona (seen three times) - First of all, let me just say that the fact that I have seen Arkona three years in a row, all in the United States, is incredible and such a strong testament to Arkona and their dedication to their fans across the globe. That is NOT common amongst bands from Europe and Asia (and not a criticism of those bands whatsoever, the US can make it hell for bands to come perform here). Watching Arkona on stage is a thing of beauty; they perform with such a passion and intensity that few bands can match while also exhibiting the polish of a band that could perform in their sleep, if needed. Most of all, Masha's performance is just sublime. She really just exudes such emotion on stage; one moment it is as if she is sharing some of the beauty and mysticism of the old Russian motherland with you, then the next you have a woman, who must not even weight 100 pounds, possessed with a warrior's ferocity flying around the stage in a blur of blonde hair and wolf pelt. It's an incredible sight to see.
2. Kamelot (seen once) - Admittedly, I was not expecting to be blown away by Kamelot. They are a prime example of a band that I feel drastically outperforms their albums when they play live. The big thing for me on their recorded work is that it just didn't stick out to me, and the drums were too generic sounding on many tracks. That all goes out the window live. Instantly when I see the drum kit after the curtain is pulled back, I feel as though I may be off base with what to expect, and boy was I ever. To start, Tommy Karevik, their new vocalist, is lights out. Normally I am a fan of deeper male voices, but this guy's voice is phenomenal. He's incredibly easy on the eyes for the ladies (and interested men), too. Their performance was bold from beginning to end. You are treated to an incredible drum solo, keyboard solo, and bass solo at various points of the set. I can't include the inclusion of EKLIPSE as part of their merit, as this would go more to the performance on one tour and not to the band overall, but I had to mention their incorporation of those lovely ladies (Helena, if you are reading, will you marry me?) By the end of the night, I had a gleam in my eyes and a grin I could not wipe off my face.
1. Saltatio Mortis (seen once) - Saltatio Mortis might hold this spot for me as long as I live. I saw them in Germany in August 2012 at the Mittelalterlich Phantasie Spectaculum. Being in a foreign country and just looking forward to the experience, I didn't quite know what to expect and didn't even know how the bands or stages would be set up. Well, Saltatio Mortis played numerous sets throughout the day beginning in the daytime and ending with a night session with full pyrotechnics on display. I didn't even get the full experience as I don't understand German at all, so that could only vault them further away from the pack. What to be said about their performance, though? Well, for starters, they all are remarkably talented musicians. The mastery of the bagpipes and shawms is very impressive. It isn't just how they play instruments, though, it's the accompanying dance. They dance quite a bit on stage, and them dancing is not enough, they get the audience dancing with them. You have Alea, a tremendously charismatic presence on stage always getting the crowd involved. That in between his kicks and flips while he doesn't have bagpipes in hand. It's clear that they get out of bed each day and love what they do, and they will always give it their all for the fans. At the particular event I went to, it was pouring rain. Two things stick out. One is Alea returning to the stage, walking to the uncovered part, extending his arms out into the rain and looking into the sky, then saluting the crowd, a group that won't be denied their opportunity to see the band and dance no matter the weather. The second, and this is the coolest thing that I have ever seen at a concert, is when the sound equipment failed due to the water getting through the makeshift water sealants around the extension cord outlets (read duct tape), they just unplug the bagpipes, bring the bass drum with the reed, a bongo drum, and an acoustic guitar down and start playing amongst the crowd in the rain. A lesser band might shrug their shoulders. A more conventional band couldn't simply bring their instruments into the rain and continue the show. They're a rare breed, and not one to pass up should you ever get the opportunity.
So those are my top five. Thoughts? Anyone else have a top five?
Now, for the topic at hand. I've probably seen around 100 concerts in my lifetime with at least a couple hundred bands on my list. Some I've seen only once, some I've seen more than a dozen times. I've seen bands old and new, big and small, at local venues and at festivals. I have danced, photographed, headbanged, and moshed at many an event. I know others who have far more concert experiences than I do and others who have far less. Concerts are experiences that I know I will have many more of, so there's no sense of longing for the past by recounting these events whatsoever. One point of clarification is that this list constitutes solely the bands, not the concert experience on the whole from beginning to end. The distinction is I have seen great bands with lousy openers, or there are some experiences that were absolutely incredible with bands that I love where the band is really just a satisfactory live band. So, without further ado, here are my top 5:
5. Project Pitchfork (seen once) - I saw Project Pitchfork in July 2012 at Amphi Festival over in Germany. They were the musical highlight of the festival for me. The music was phenomenal live, and the visual display was impressive. Peter Stilles had a strong presence on stage, but the clincher here was the assault from the two drum kits on stage. There's no substitute for live drums in my opinion, and they really seemed to understand this. There's no getting around needing to sound good when you perform, and Project Pitchfork had it nailed.
4. Flogging Molly (seen twice) - I've seen Flogging Molly twice, and the biggest thing for me about seeing Flogging Molly for me is no matter how many people are there, they make it feel like a very intimate show. Every member in the band is tremendously talented on their respective instruments, which really shows at their live performances. Their super long version of Black Friday Rule complete with solos has to be among my top live songs. But talent aside, Dave King is what takes their shows from great to outstanding. His conversation between songs is invaluable to the show. I honestly get the vibe that I am going back to Ireland and he is telling me, an old friend, stories whenever he talks between songs. It's a truly wonderful experience.
3. Arkona (seen three times) - First of all, let me just say that the fact that I have seen Arkona three years in a row, all in the United States, is incredible and such a strong testament to Arkona and their dedication to their fans across the globe. That is NOT common amongst bands from Europe and Asia (and not a criticism of those bands whatsoever, the US can make it hell for bands to come perform here). Watching Arkona on stage is a thing of beauty; they perform with such a passion and intensity that few bands can match while also exhibiting the polish of a band that could perform in their sleep, if needed. Most of all, Masha's performance is just sublime. She really just exudes such emotion on stage; one moment it is as if she is sharing some of the beauty and mysticism of the old Russian motherland with you, then the next you have a woman, who must not even weight 100 pounds, possessed with a warrior's ferocity flying around the stage in a blur of blonde hair and wolf pelt. It's an incredible sight to see.
2. Kamelot (seen once) - Admittedly, I was not expecting to be blown away by Kamelot. They are a prime example of a band that I feel drastically outperforms their albums when they play live. The big thing for me on their recorded work is that it just didn't stick out to me, and the drums were too generic sounding on many tracks. That all goes out the window live. Instantly when I see the drum kit after the curtain is pulled back, I feel as though I may be off base with what to expect, and boy was I ever. To start, Tommy Karevik, their new vocalist, is lights out. Normally I am a fan of deeper male voices, but this guy's voice is phenomenal. He's incredibly easy on the eyes for the ladies (and interested men), too. Their performance was bold from beginning to end. You are treated to an incredible drum solo, keyboard solo, and bass solo at various points of the set. I can't include the inclusion of EKLIPSE as part of their merit, as this would go more to the performance on one tour and not to the band overall, but I had to mention their incorporation of those lovely ladies (Helena, if you are reading, will you marry me?) By the end of the night, I had a gleam in my eyes and a grin I could not wipe off my face.
1. Saltatio Mortis (seen once) - Saltatio Mortis might hold this spot for me as long as I live. I saw them in Germany in August 2012 at the Mittelalterlich Phantasie Spectaculum. Being in a foreign country and just looking forward to the experience, I didn't quite know what to expect and didn't even know how the bands or stages would be set up. Well, Saltatio Mortis played numerous sets throughout the day beginning in the daytime and ending with a night session with full pyrotechnics on display. I didn't even get the full experience as I don't understand German at all, so that could only vault them further away from the pack. What to be said about their performance, though? Well, for starters, they all are remarkably talented musicians. The mastery of the bagpipes and shawms is very impressive. It isn't just how they play instruments, though, it's the accompanying dance. They dance quite a bit on stage, and them dancing is not enough, they get the audience dancing with them. You have Alea, a tremendously charismatic presence on stage always getting the crowd involved. That in between his kicks and flips while he doesn't have bagpipes in hand. It's clear that they get out of bed each day and love what they do, and they will always give it their all for the fans. At the particular event I went to, it was pouring rain. Two things stick out. One is Alea returning to the stage, walking to the uncovered part, extending his arms out into the rain and looking into the sky, then saluting the crowd, a group that won't be denied their opportunity to see the band and dance no matter the weather. The second, and this is the coolest thing that I have ever seen at a concert, is when the sound equipment failed due to the water getting through the makeshift water sealants around the extension cord outlets (read duct tape), they just unplug the bagpipes, bring the bass drum with the reed, a bongo drum, and an acoustic guitar down and start playing amongst the crowd in the rain. A lesser band might shrug their shoulders. A more conventional band couldn't simply bring their instruments into the rain and continue the show. They're a rare breed, and not one to pass up should you ever get the opportunity.
So those are my top five. Thoughts? Anyone else have a top five?
Sunday, March 9, 2014
Five Handy Photography Sites
Everyone has to learn something from somewhere, right? As someone who has never taken a photography class in his life, I have relied on friends, reading, and trial and error to learn more about different facets of photography. I am further along in some areas than others. To some extent, that is just fine. Typically photographers will have a niche or two, but it is always good to be well versed in all facets. You never know when something will come up, and you don't want to be ill-prepared or ill-informed should that happen. Here are five sites covering a variety of different purposes that I would recommend to people interested in photography.
- Adorama Learning Center - Adorama is a phenomenal site. Most people will know this site because they are a prominent photography retailer, and certainly they are a good option to purchase from if you are in the market for gear. Fewer people, however, probably know about the learning center. The learning center is a fabulous resource to become better informed on a number of things, including technical aspects of photography, gear, file formats, composition, lighting, and so many other topics. They have both articles and videos submitted by Adorama's team of experts. They cover all different skill levels, so regardless of if you are picking up a camera for the first time or have been shooting for ten years, they will have something new to learn for you.
- DxOMark - Admittedly, this site might not be for everyone, but if you are a tech junkie, this site is a very thorough and valuable resource. They have very in depth gear reviews and tests alongside a pretty easy to navigate (there are some quirks, but nothing major) site enabling side by side comparisons of up to three items at a time. They have a very large database of quantitative information to go off of; for example, if you are debating between a couple of different lenses, you can put them side by side on the camera you'd be using them with, and it will rate things like sharpness, vignetting, and aberrations so you have some data to help you make your decision. I would never make a purchase without consulting DxOMark first.
- The Tumblr of Zack Arias - Zack Arias is a professional photographer and author of Photography Q&A. What some people may not realize is the book available in stores all come from questions and answers on this Tumblr page. Zack takes questions from followers and gives candid answers. Sometimes his responses may come off blunt or a tad more forceful than necessary, but the fact of the matter is he knows his stuff and took the time to answer 1500 questions for people. Questions range from lighting to pricing to confidence and everywhere else in between. If you have a photo question, chances are he has answered it before.
- Flickr - Okay, so putting Flickr on here may seem out of place. Maybe it is, as I couldn't tell you that Flickr is better or worse than other similar photography sites of that category, but I wanted to put a site like Flickr in the list. Why? I have several reasons. Having a site with user uploaded photos with message boards is a good way to see "the average photographer's" artwork and to meet new people. A site like 500px is intimidating because the photography is out of this world good. Flickr still has some high quality work, but there's the average work, or even work that isn't great (such as many of the over the top HDR images found on there). Seeing what others do helps show what things may or may not work, gives you a barometer of your work without pitting your photos up against a site full of phenomenal ones, and the social element is nice to talk photography. It's also a good way to get others to look at your work; if you comment on a photo of someone's chances are that user will look at your profile to see who you are, which means he/she will see your work.
- Craigslist - Yeah, yeah, I know, why am I putting Craigslist on here? Well, part of photography is buying and selling gear, and if you are comfortable using Craigslist, it's a good resource to do just that. You'll never get fair value trading in gear at a pro shop, and shipping a lens after selling on Amazon presents potential risks on top of the sites taking their cut of commission off the top. As far as buying goes, you never know what gems you'll find listed on here, be it old film equipment, tripods, or a great price on a gently used DSLR. Yes, there are risks involved to purchasing from Craigslist, and I don't recommend it to everyone or for all items, but there is a comfort level in being able to see and test the gear before purchasing it, a luxury you wouldn't have ordering off of eBay, for example. So yes, caution is advised, but it's good to take a peek every once in a while, even if just to compare prices on Craigslist to other online sites.
Feel free to leave other useful sites in the comments of this post!
Friday, March 7, 2014
Local Artist Spotlight: SML8
Today's local artist spotlight features a band I have photographed probably more than any other band, and they are one of the few bands I have photographed in multiple states. In fact, from February 2011 through June 2012, I didn't miss a single show of theirs. Hailing from Daytona Beach, SML8 is an industrial metal group that produces what I like to call "harmonious chaos". SML8 is the product of a number of contributing members over the years, but the one constant has been musical mad scientist, Scott Van Horn. Scott is always tirelessly working away and looking for ways to improve the band. Whether it is experimenting and working new elements into his music, adding talented musicians to the live performance for the best live show possible, coming up with ways to improve the stage effects, or thinking up new ideas for merch, Scott truly keeps busy each and every day making sure he is doing everything possible to help SML8 grow as a band.
There's no shortage of good things I could say about the band in its entirety after getting to know everyone over the years. The music offers a myriad of different elements, as you can go from dancing to thrashing to quiet reflection throughout the course of their material. Despite having a few lineup changes over the years, the band always has a great rapport, which is a product of the group being comprised of down to earth people, none more so than Scott. You'd never know just how good Scott is at what he does because of his laid back, humble attitude, but get him on a conversation about gear or sound production, and you'll know you're dealing with someone who knows his stuff. The band enjoys doing what they do, and it's so much more enjoyable to watch a group who you can connect with by talking to them (and I mean talking, not just exchanging shallow pleasantries) at the merch table, a very well organized and thought out table by Skye, I might add. Their first full length CD, Surreality, features a rare production quality and attention to detail that often is lacking with other local musicians. Overall, there's a lot to admire and respect about the group.
Now, shameless pitch: SML8 actually has an Indiegogo campaign running right now to help fund their forthcoming EP, Incept. As per usual, there are a ton of great perks available of contributing, and you'll notice that there are deals to be had. Very rarely will you find full album downloads for $5, like their deal for Surreality. If you take a listen and really love what you hear, the $50 for all of their work past, present, and future will be a steal. They've got old demos, a song cover, and other unreleased material that is definitely worth hearing, and getting all the subsequent releases makes it the gift that keeps on giving. The link to the campaign is below. Let me know what you think!
http://igg.me/at/SML8Incept/x/148216
There's no shortage of good things I could say about the band in its entirety after getting to know everyone over the years. The music offers a myriad of different elements, as you can go from dancing to thrashing to quiet reflection throughout the course of their material. Despite having a few lineup changes over the years, the band always has a great rapport, which is a product of the group being comprised of down to earth people, none more so than Scott. You'd never know just how good Scott is at what he does because of his laid back, humble attitude, but get him on a conversation about gear or sound production, and you'll know you're dealing with someone who knows his stuff. The band enjoys doing what they do, and it's so much more enjoyable to watch a group who you can connect with by talking to them (and I mean talking, not just exchanging shallow pleasantries) at the merch table, a very well organized and thought out table by Skye, I might add. Their first full length CD, Surreality, features a rare production quality and attention to detail that often is lacking with other local musicians. Overall, there's a lot to admire and respect about the group.
Now, shameless pitch: SML8 actually has an Indiegogo campaign running right now to help fund their forthcoming EP, Incept. As per usual, there are a ton of great perks available of contributing, and you'll notice that there are deals to be had. Very rarely will you find full album downloads for $5, like their deal for Surreality. If you take a listen and really love what you hear, the $50 for all of their work past, present, and future will be a steal. They've got old demos, a song cover, and other unreleased material that is definitely worth hearing, and getting all the subsequent releases makes it the gift that keeps on giving. The link to the campaign is below. Let me know what you think!
http://igg.me/at/SML8Incept/x/148216
Thursday, March 6, 2014
NFL PAT Discussion
The NFL's seemingly continuous mission to take Special Teams out of the game of professional football continues this offseason with discussion about modifying or eliminating entirely the extra point. I am not a traditionalist in that if something doesn't make sense or there is a sensible change to make, that it shouldn't be made because of "tradition". This, however, is not one of those items. Roger Goodell essentially asserts that the point after kick is boring and almost an automatic. I've seen numerous ideas floated, both from the league and from fans, on what changes should be made to the kicking game.
- Eliminate the PAT and make touchdowns worth seven points, but a point is lost if a two point conversion is failed.
- Move back the PAT spot of the kick
- If the kicking game is to be made more exciting, make longer field goals worth more points.
So what are my thoughts on this? Well, I think the argument that eliminating the extra point because it is nearly automatic, and that the NFL is always looking for ways to make the game "more exciting", is ridiculous. First of all, nearly automatic is not automatic; the fact of the matter is that a handful of PATs are missed every year. Is it enough to matter? Well, it depends on what "matter" means. Statistically speaking, the odds are overwhelmingly in favor of a successful attempt, so the majority of the time the result might be wholly unexciting. But what happens in that one in a hundred attempt where it is missed? To me, the excitement of a blocked PAT or a muffed snap that results in a failed attempt is tremendously exciting. So you mean to tell me that making a touchdown worth seven points and removing the roughly one percent chance of an exciting play adds excitement to the game? Let's see a 99% chance of being boring or a 100% chance of being boring, which one is worse? Just imagine a game being decided on a PAT. Imagine a holder pulls a Tony Romo and flubs the snap in a big moment. Can you picture the excitement/furor in a stadium were that to happen? Oh wait, you don't have to use your imagination:
No, this wasn't a PAT, it was a field goal, but it was attempted from the same spot as a PAT, and it had the same impact. Now, tell me Mr. Goodell, how is eliminating the PAT making the game more exciting?
As for several of the other ideas, I will first dismiss the fantasy football driven "longer field goals worth more points" idea as asinine. It works in fantasy football because a kicker's merits are a kicker's merits. In an actual game, it is a team sport and a long field goal, while impressive from a kicker's perspective, rewards an offense for being unable to move the football. One offense moves the ball from their own 20 to the opposing one yard line, then gets stopped and kicks a field goal for three points. They moved the ball 79 yards. Another offense moves the ball from their own 20 to the opponent's 36 yard line and kick a 53 yard field goal for five points. They moved the ball 44 yards, 35 fewer than the other team, and they get two more points? Absurd. As for moving back the PAT, does that mean you also move back the two point conversion attempt? If so, all you are doing is further discouraging the two point conversion, a play I am sure the NFL deems more "exciting". So how is making this play less frequent making the game more exciting? It isn't. It also makes a point after attempt more difficult than a short field goal. If that seems counterintuitive, it's because it is. It really leads to one thing, which is addressed next.
The guy I come out liking the most in all this is Justin Tucker, the kicker for the Baltimore Ravens. He calls it like it is; the NFL is phasing out kickers. He points out the double standards in their reasoning. The NFL wants the game to be more exciting, yet they move the kickoff up five yards. Kick returns are one of the most exciting plays in the NFL, and by increasing the number of touchbacks, they just reduced the number of exciting plays. The rationale behind it is player safety, which may hold some merit. What if longer kicks are more likely to result in injuries because there is more effort made to block it? Is the comparison valid? Well, I'd say the reduced risk of injury on kickoffs is quite a bit greater than the reduced risk of injury on kicks from these two examples, but it does highlight that the NFL does have its own agenda here. Perhaps Tucker's best quote is, “I don’t think it’s necessary to change the game every couple of years to make it more exciting. It’s plenty exciting. If you want it to be more exciting, TV timeouts could be a little shorter and we could actually play some football.” So NFL, how do you like them apples?
What do you all think: should the NFL phase out the PAT?
Tuesday, March 4, 2014
Full Frame vs Cropped Sensor Demonstration 2 of 2
Okay, part two of the demonstration. I showed you the perk of the photo quality across different ISO levels between the Nikon D5100 and the Nikon D600. I didn't necessarily touch much on the difference in perspective between a full frame and a cropped sensor in too terribly much detail. There's a lot of good documentation out there on the internet to explain that, but I figured I would give an actual example leading into the second demonstration. Each camera was mounted on a tripod and equipped with a Rokinon 85mm f/1.4 lens. Because the D5100 has a crop factor of 1.5x, this gives it an effective focal length of 127.5mm. The difference is illustrated below:
Quite the difference, eh? Now everyone knows the phenomenon of when you zoom into a photo how the image quality deteriorates because you have fewer pixels on the screen. That begs the question: is it better to shoot with the D5100 or the D600 if you are looking for range on a shot? Intuitively, one might say go for the D5100 because of the range. The reality of this question, though, is the D600 has ~24 megapixels on its sensor versus ~16 for the D5100. How convenient!? Exactly 1.5 times the amount. Stands to reason, then, that there shouldn't be that much difference between the two strictly from the pixels utilized perspective, but the D600 has the superior sensor. The following images put it to the test. I cropped the photos down to the same equivalent area, so for the D600 I had to zoom further in (1:1) than on the D5100, where I didn't have to zoom into 1:1.
D5100 @ ISO 800 f/2.8
D600 @ ISO 800 f/2.8
Quite the difference, eh? Now everyone knows the phenomenon of when you zoom into a photo how the image quality deteriorates because you have fewer pixels on the screen. That begs the question: is it better to shoot with the D5100 or the D600 if you are looking for range on a shot? Intuitively, one might say go for the D5100 because of the range. The reality of this question, though, is the D600 has ~24 megapixels on its sensor versus ~16 for the D5100. How convenient!? Exactly 1.5 times the amount. Stands to reason, then, that there shouldn't be that much difference between the two strictly from the pixels utilized perspective, but the D600 has the superior sensor. The following images put it to the test. I cropped the photos down to the same equivalent area, so for the D600 I had to zoom further in (1:1) than on the D5100, where I didn't have to zoom into 1:1.
D5100 @ISO 800 f/2.8
D600 @ISO 800 f/2.8
D5100 @ISO 3200 f/2.8
D600 @ISO 3200 f/2.8
D5100 @ISO 6400 f/2.8
D600 @ISO 6400 f/2.8
As you can see, the noise in the pictures are pretty comparable, as the math predicted. The pictures in the D600, though overall are a bit better because the sensor captures a wider range of color and exposure, making it the ideal choice even when range is desirable. Of course, this may not always be the case for full frame versus cropped sensor in general. A 24 megapixel cropped sensor versus a 6 megapixel full frame will yield a different outcome. The exercise just goes to show the difference and the perils of assuming that the crop factor automatically makes it the best candidate for shooting greater distances.
Sunday, March 2, 2014
Full Frame vs Cropped Sensor Demonstration 1 of 2
I wanted to post a demonstration of the difference between a full frame DSLR and a crop sensor DSLR that I had done for a former co-worker when I had gotten my new camera. What I wanted to illustrate in this particular exercise was how the two cameras with approximately same effective focal lengths. The difference in both the sensor technology and the pixel density impact the noise in the photo (diminished photo crispness) vary at various ISO levels. A used a Nikon D600 mounted with 50mm f/1.4 D lens and a Nikon D5100 mounted with 35mm f/1.8G (equivalent 52.5mm focal length with 1.5 crop factor).
I took three shots with each camera mounted on a tripod. The photos were taken at f/2.8, one at ISO 800, one at ISO 3200, and one at ISO 6400. The image crop is set at 100%, and there is just a slight difference due to the 2.5mm different focal lengths.
I took three shots with each camera mounted on a tripod. The photos were taken at f/2.8, one at ISO 800, one at ISO 3200, and one at ISO 6400. The image crop is set at 100%, and there is just a slight difference due to the 2.5mm different focal lengths.
D5100 @ ISO 800
D600 @ ISO 800
Already you can see the difference in photo quality between the two cameras, but the difference becomes more exaggerated at higher ISO levels as seen below:
Nikon D5100 @ ISO 3200
Nikon D600 @ ISO 3200
Nikon D5100 @ ISO 6400
Nikon D600 @ ISO 6400
It's pretty clear that especially at lower ISO levels at an equivalent focal length, the full frame camera materially outperforms the one with the crop sensor. No one would argue otherwise, but it is easier to understand when there is a visual demonstration of how the cameras are different. Next time I will show the difference between these two cameras with the exact same lens on the camera. I'll explain more why there is a difference between these two cases at that time. Until then, feel free to ask any questions!
Saturday, March 1, 2014
Car Ride Reflections
It's unfortunate that I didn't get to document all of my thoughts last night upon arriving home. Obviously it is best to capture the moment while it is fresh in one's head, but when you have a talkative mother awaiting you at the end of your trip, it stands to reason you will not be able to do anything at all for a good hour or so. As if that isn't enough to make the thoughts a little less clear, weariness had set in, and I doubted my ability to form coherent sentences, let alone properly convey all I had contemplated the previous two and a half hours. I have no doubt that I won't be able to express how I felt as well as I could have had I instantly been able to begin writing, but I figured it would be worth a shot.
I can safely say that my life has had its share of change lately; conventional wisdom is to not make too many major life changes in a short period of time, and I think I pretty consistently violate that principle. Chalk it up to an inability to sit still, and perhaps some misfortune. Car rides used to drive me crazy; I hated that I had uninterrupted time with nothing to do but think, as thinking was always the gateway to depression. My normal practice always used to be to play my music loudly. If I could hear myself think, then that meant the music was not loud enough. That works for shorter car rides, but it didn't quite work so well on the long ones. By and large, much of the last four years of my life have had quite a few long car rides alone. Many people love car rides, but many people don't go on them solo with the same frequency I did; local music was something I often had to travel a couple of hours to see, and of course the pool of interested parties in these shows was limited. Lately, though, my long car rides haven't been quite as melancholy, and sometimes not even at all depressing. Last night, though, was different, in that it was actually enlightening to me in a positive way.
A struggle of mine has always been turning my brain off; I have had this issue for more than a decade now, but it wasn't always negative. In my younger years, it was often pondering of a philosophical nature and wasn't quite as personal. I am an emotional person, but my ability to put thinking first has dominated my stream of consciousness. My greatest issues arise when thinking and emotion don't yield the same conclusion; my thought process defaults to reason, but emotions can be quite strong and unyielding. Over the years it has gotten worse, as when you make a living sitting at a desk analyzing problems all day, it's not quite so easy to turn that off afterwards. I ended up in counseling with a lovely woman, though, who focused on teaching me how to feel. She would ask me how things made me feel, and my response always began with "I think". It was so ingrained in me that it was second nature, but once this tendency of mine was revealed to me, it enabled me to actually work on not defaulting to this tendency. Certainly these habits are not easily broken, but I have made significant progress, and I saw that progress really culminate into a pretty profound time for me, one that I hope to carry over with me. It all boiled down to this for me, life, and the ability to feel, is the most absolutely incredible and awe inspiring thing imaginable.
Much of my recent history has been spent either lamenting better days that are never to return or dreaming of a future I didn't feel optimistic about. The car ride home was one filled with memories, memories that triggered more memories, and then the floodgates opened. But something different happened this time: instead of focusing on the thought, I focused on the feeling. I didn't think about how great that time was, how I wished that things could be a certain way again, but I let myself feel the sensations I felt at that point in time. I could smile. I could focus on my mood rising as I related with those sensations. And it made me think about how amazing, truly amazing, the ability to feel is. Now more than ever, people are quick to feel like the other folks in their lives are there for the journey with them, but my analogy is that the vast majority of our friends in life are merely hitchhikers. They may join you in your car for a period of time, but ultimately they have a destination that is different than your own. You have to simply enjoy the company for the short period of time you share the car with them, but not get attached and wish that the hitchhiker was going with you to your destination. That's the pitfall, both with people and with memories. The trick is to just appreciate that time for what it was but to focus on the feeling it generates. By focusing on the emotion, you retain the positive component of the experience while partially detaching it from the person or object it is associated with. It's not forgetting the stimulus, but it is honing the ability to separate the emotion from the stimulus.
That's what the car ride turned into for me, reflecting on experiences, but instead of focusing on how much I missed them, I was able to focus on the sensations they created. It left me more optimistic; I went down this entire timeline of events, and I got to re-experience such a wide range of sensations at various ages of life. My previous tendency to miss a time period or to think that a certain age represented the best years of my life went out the window. No longer was I chained down with the notion that happiness was tied to certain people or times exclusively. Ultimately, it made me truly witness the beauty of life. There's such a profound ability for humans (most of them) to feel, and to think about the breadth of experiences one can live through in a lifetime is astonishing. It gave me the sense as if life all just flowed so perfectly, that I was floating and could be free. I felt as though I wanted to just close my eyes and let my car carry me (don't worry, I didn't completely lose my ability to reason and left my eyes open while traveling 70 mph). Perhaps most crucially for me, it liberated me to believe that the future held something worthwhile, not because the future is necessarily so bright, but because whatever happens, the ability to feel will persist.
I can safely say that my life has had its share of change lately; conventional wisdom is to not make too many major life changes in a short period of time, and I think I pretty consistently violate that principle. Chalk it up to an inability to sit still, and perhaps some misfortune. Car rides used to drive me crazy; I hated that I had uninterrupted time with nothing to do but think, as thinking was always the gateway to depression. My normal practice always used to be to play my music loudly. If I could hear myself think, then that meant the music was not loud enough. That works for shorter car rides, but it didn't quite work so well on the long ones. By and large, much of the last four years of my life have had quite a few long car rides alone. Many people love car rides, but many people don't go on them solo with the same frequency I did; local music was something I often had to travel a couple of hours to see, and of course the pool of interested parties in these shows was limited. Lately, though, my long car rides haven't been quite as melancholy, and sometimes not even at all depressing. Last night, though, was different, in that it was actually enlightening to me in a positive way.
A struggle of mine has always been turning my brain off; I have had this issue for more than a decade now, but it wasn't always negative. In my younger years, it was often pondering of a philosophical nature and wasn't quite as personal. I am an emotional person, but my ability to put thinking first has dominated my stream of consciousness. My greatest issues arise when thinking and emotion don't yield the same conclusion; my thought process defaults to reason, but emotions can be quite strong and unyielding. Over the years it has gotten worse, as when you make a living sitting at a desk analyzing problems all day, it's not quite so easy to turn that off afterwards. I ended up in counseling with a lovely woman, though, who focused on teaching me how to feel. She would ask me how things made me feel, and my response always began with "I think". It was so ingrained in me that it was second nature, but once this tendency of mine was revealed to me, it enabled me to actually work on not defaulting to this tendency. Certainly these habits are not easily broken, but I have made significant progress, and I saw that progress really culminate into a pretty profound time for me, one that I hope to carry over with me. It all boiled down to this for me, life, and the ability to feel, is the most absolutely incredible and awe inspiring thing imaginable.
Much of my recent history has been spent either lamenting better days that are never to return or dreaming of a future I didn't feel optimistic about. The car ride home was one filled with memories, memories that triggered more memories, and then the floodgates opened. But something different happened this time: instead of focusing on the thought, I focused on the feeling. I didn't think about how great that time was, how I wished that things could be a certain way again, but I let myself feel the sensations I felt at that point in time. I could smile. I could focus on my mood rising as I related with those sensations. And it made me think about how amazing, truly amazing, the ability to feel is. Now more than ever, people are quick to feel like the other folks in their lives are there for the journey with them, but my analogy is that the vast majority of our friends in life are merely hitchhikers. They may join you in your car for a period of time, but ultimately they have a destination that is different than your own. You have to simply enjoy the company for the short period of time you share the car with them, but not get attached and wish that the hitchhiker was going with you to your destination. That's the pitfall, both with people and with memories. The trick is to just appreciate that time for what it was but to focus on the feeling it generates. By focusing on the emotion, you retain the positive component of the experience while partially detaching it from the person or object it is associated with. It's not forgetting the stimulus, but it is honing the ability to separate the emotion from the stimulus.
That's what the car ride turned into for me, reflecting on experiences, but instead of focusing on how much I missed them, I was able to focus on the sensations they created. It left me more optimistic; I went down this entire timeline of events, and I got to re-experience such a wide range of sensations at various ages of life. My previous tendency to miss a time period or to think that a certain age represented the best years of my life went out the window. No longer was I chained down with the notion that happiness was tied to certain people or times exclusively. Ultimately, it made me truly witness the beauty of life. There's such a profound ability for humans (most of them) to feel, and to think about the breadth of experiences one can live through in a lifetime is astonishing. It gave me the sense as if life all just flowed so perfectly, that I was floating and could be free. I felt as though I wanted to just close my eyes and let my car carry me (don't worry, I didn't completely lose my ability to reason and left my eyes open while traveling 70 mph). Perhaps most crucially for me, it liberated me to believe that the future held something worthwhile, not because the future is necessarily so bright, but because whatever happens, the ability to feel will persist.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)