• July 31, 2014

    Where are we going?

    Before and after- one front street

    Photos are getting retouched so well they could look like renderings, renderings are looking so real they look like photos.

    In 1994 this image would have looked like the one you see on the right. Harsh shadows, blown out highlights, environmental distractions. In fact, when my client asked me to reshoot their building it had been this long since the last shoot. With the power of retouching an image, we can make imperfections disappear or appear. The new images looks 100 times better than the one from 1994. But does that take away from the legitimacy of the photo? Can you even call it a “photo”? Where’s this photography thing all going? I’ve pondered this in my field. Are we retouching the photos so much they look like renderings? Are the renderings getting so real they look like photos? Which technology is going to win out? I’m not sure. But maybe the answer lies in where the power of photography started. It’s ability to freeze a single point in time that can’t be predicted/replicated by technology. But is there any commercial value in a good but “dated” photo? I’m having a hard time thinking of one.

  • July 02, 2014

    Just hit 10,000

    Flint Builders Sign at Yurok Casino & Hotel

    Like miles on a car, a camera can only take so many pictures.....

    So, I just rolled over 10,000 actuations (pictures taken) on my main camera! The camera is 18 months old. Which for a professional shooter is not that many images for a camera. But Architectural Photography is one of the "slowest" shooting genres in the industry. We're mostly photographers with cameras locked down on a tripod, methodically thinking out lighting and sun angles. The other big plus..... we don't have to worry about Architecture moving! My client Flint Builders gets the plug here for being the 10,000th shot! Thanks Flint!

Photography services specializing in fine architectural images serving the Sacramento & San Francisco Areas.