photo sharing and upload picture albums photo forums search pictures popular photos photography help login
David Mingay | all galleries >> Mynd Dagsins '15 >> Photo of the Day 2005 > Feb 16: Mike a giggin'
previous | next
16-FEB-2004 David Mingay

Feb 16: Mike a giggin'

Mike at a playing local blues bar this evening... Actually, no, he's in our 'middle' room. I used a second light to add some flare and the harsh lighting to the side of his face. Very gig like! And you know what? It was shot in B&W jpg mode with the orange 'filter' switched on. So to those that insist you should shoot in raw mode for more control I say "Phooey!" Shoot jpg and be proud! I haven't shot a single frame in raw for months... and even then I regreted it. All this raw nonsense is spouted in the photo forums by people who like playing with technology more than making photographs. In particular, at the moment it's spouted by a 'photographer' who took 70lbs of gear worth around $15,000 to a distant land, shot 5000 frames and claimed that his '75 keepers' was a good hit ratio for him. Well Mr. Raw Mode, I needed 24 shots to get this one... and all in jpg / b&w mode. Always remember, the picture is more important than the technology!(rant mode off)

My 'minimal Photoshop' for this was increasing the contrast, (contrast on the camera was already set to max), the addition some grain scanned from a frame of Tri-X and little bit of 'warm tone'. I feel bad about the grain thing as I should have just shot it on Tri-X in the first place.


other sizes: small medium original auto
comment | share
brother_mark23-Feb-2005 17:24
20D Angela? David, you've got a 20D? Sorry, I don't come around regularly so if you told us I missed it.
brother_mark23-Feb-2005 17:12
I shoot RAW pretty much exclusively. I ought to find a jpg/sharpening/color/WB that is satisfactory and shoot that for family get-togethers and other non-essential things. It is a burden processing the RAW files, but they look sharper once sharpened and saved as jpg than jpgs that have been processed in camera. Also, I appreciate the WB control that RAW permits. If I back out of a church shooting the B&G as they come out the door, I don't have time to change from incandescent to daylight or auto WB. RAW lets me make that change after the heat of the moment. I did an outdoor shot with flourescent WB in jpg mode once and could not get it quite right in PS. In RAW it would have been simple.

Cartier-Bresson certainly shot "RAW". Film is pretty raw and black and white film can be processed in so many different ways and chemicals for different "looks." And then the developed neg is totally "photoshopped" on the enlarger by the experienced B&W print-maker. Need more contrast, use more contrasty paper. Dodge and burn for highlight and shadow detail....
Michael Todd Thorpe22-Feb-2005 02:15
You're right, it's all about the picture!
Guest 17-Feb-2005 21:41
I agree on the RAW thing, I do use it but really wish the camera makers would spend a bit more attention on making some of the adjustments a bit better in camera... I like taking photos not spending years processing them. And don't get me started on colour management!!! Great photo, makes me wish I could play and shoot decent B&W photos!
joshishots17-Feb-2005 03:20
Excellent shot - the flare from behind really adds to the atmosphere, great tones.
Guest 17-Feb-2005 00:34
AMEN! I HATE shooting RAW. I'm proud to shoot jpg only!

As for this shot, wow, David, you certainly captured the atmosphere you were going for! Fantastic lighting. That B&W mode is REALLY making my head turn toward the 20D!
Ray :)17-Feb-2005 00:26
Did Cartier-Bresson shoot in RAW mode? I think not.
Dominic Kite16-Feb-2005 22:56
Well I'm forced to shoot in jpeg, but then my camera's pretty limited. I'd be more than pleased with this result regardless of the set-up!
jude16-Feb-2005 22:27
He does look like he's playing at some fancy blues club and you're his traveling photographers.. (who moonlights selling DM products on the side). Your b&w is great as usual.
I use only RAW now.. (well this morning I didn't but i knew I wouldn't need it). I'm trying to do photos for printing and jpg compression is just to evident in printed pics - especially when I want the prints large. Unfortunately, I lost 2 of my memory cards and it's a matter of looking at what I've taken already and dumping them as I go if I can see i don't like them. I know, I know.. i can buy more, i'm just lazy...LOL
Ian Clowes16-Feb-2005 22:21
cool - grain from Tri-X... wow!
Guest 16-Feb-2005 21:28
Sorry, DM, I meant to say I like this picture too! The light looks like stage lighting for sure, I was thinking that I didn't know that Mike was famous!

ALso, with regards to the RAW thing? I've NEVER shot in Raw BUT I have shot IN the raw....
Guest 16-Feb-2005 21:23
Bad WIG!!!! Simmer down!!
The Wig 16-Feb-2005 21:19
I fancy meeting THIS chap!
Si Kirk16-Feb-2005 20:22
Superb David, a wonderful photo, as a RAW shooter i say i must agree with the rant, and yeah definatly Tri-x, i just love the film i have my last roll loaded so i had better get some more.
Antonis Sarantos16-Feb-2005 20:04
Excellent musician's portrait. I like the passion in the way that he looks the quitar. The light is also great.