Q/A- a little about my books, Photography, computers and art

I recently got a few questions- here are my answers.

Is your series intended to be, in effect, a building of skill or can they be taken on at anytime the need presents? Would you recommend that I get the Colour Pipeline book before I delve into the B&W?

The Pipeline books grew out of "The Pixel Institute", a series of workshops I put together starting in '01 or so to get photographers who were moving from film to digital to do so correctly. A big problem then was that these guys needed to produce high quality images immediately, to work digital into their "product" as fast as possible to be able to pay off the massive investment and to keep their businesses moving forward. Consequently it is a "hit the ground running, and start on the right foot" approach, and you'll probably notice a good deal of reference to film and darkroom concepts- both because that's what they were coming from, and that's where I came from too. So yes, RAW shooting, using Layers and Masks, and ultimately Smart Objects is the focus of the books, simply because it is the way, well, one way, a professional needs to work. The RAW Pipeline is probably the best to start with, and B/W Pipeline certainly if you are interested in B/W. Color PL is more an attempt to explain Color Management in a way that the "gatekeepers" haven't really been able to- not only how it works, but how to use it. Smart Object PL is really where it's happening if you want to go exclusive SO workflow.

And, what is your usual workflow? Aperature? Lightroom? CS4? PS 7.0? Picasa? (just kidding on that last one)

I use Photoshop CS4 exclusively for my own work, but I'm trained (Apple certified) in Aperture (hate it) Lightroom, C1Pro, and I know a bunch of other processors. I use CS4 pretty much because I use Smart Object RAW workflow almost exclusively- it's the only system that uses SO, but I need to know the rest of that stuff to do what I do. (I'm doing a full-day training on Tuesday in Phila. on C1Pro, for example).

Most hobbyists dare not venture into RAW...

On what "hobbyists" are doing... photography has always had a vast range of skills and interest levels. I've never really cared what anyone uses, just what works for me. (You may have remembered that particularly endearing trait about me... heh. ) There is a huge array of really powerful stuff out there, even iPhoto, on the Apple side, has sophisticated image adjustments, and it comes installed on any Mac now. Adobe Elements is a great consumer solution, too. The point is, photography is accessible to an absolutely astronomical number of people now, and it's one of the most exciting aspects of digital imaging. Not only can everyone take a picture now, (often with their phone) but they can manipulate it and publish it effortlessly.

And I know you use/love Mac products, I don't. Macs, for me, are artist's tools for people who just want their computers to work so they can...

Windows/Apple? Senseless, pointless conversation. First, if I had a nickel for every person who's told me what you just said, I'd... well, you know. But do yourself a favor, and don't limit your tool set by identifying yourself with some brand. I have switched to Apple for the simple reason that the systems I support are almost entirely Apple based. I continued to use Apple because I enjoy the system. As far as the perception of which system is for what- the notion that Windows is for business and Mac is for creatives is as outmoded as, well, film. And, for the record, I've been on Windows since 3.1, and continue to work with it, again, because I have to. I've also built more systems than I can remember. And I know the Apple system just as well... just ripped my wife's Powerbook past the Logic Board to replace her DC/Sound card as a matter of fact. I'm pretty much as well-qualified on the Apple IT end of it and service side as any of the Apple techs I've worked with- with the exception of about 2 of them... who walk on water... So, I think I know what I'm talking about.

It may interest you to know, for example, that Windows runs, in my experience anyway, better on my Macbook using Parallels than it ever did on a Windows box...

So, I'll say it again. Do yourself a favor and learn a little about Apple, if this is the road you're going down... it's a great machine. The integration of applications, for one small example, is not only convenient and somewhat amazing, but where computing will be in 5 years- also something that by definition, guerilla computing by instinct runs away from- I totally understand it, I'm that way myself, but at some point you begin to ask yourself why you're limiting yourself. (I could tell you the story of me resisting the switch to CDs sometime... we basically didn't buy music anymore because you couldn't buy LPs... until my wife put her foot down... heh.) And, fwiw, the way my guerilla computing manifests itself is precisely by virtue of the Apple system. My entire music collection is on a cute little "iLamp" iMac (aka the "ET" version) and controllable from anywhere in the house, wirelessly, even via iPhone. I'm cutting little Youtube videos using iMovie, and shooting them with my D5000. I'm recording the sound with my Macbook and iMovie lets me publish directly to my several YouTube accounts. Rather than hacking the hardware, I'm hacking what the hardware can do... as far as hacking hardware goes, I leave that for my electric motorcycle conversion. (Maybe you haven't seen this bit of madness- www.evmc2.com)

I do have one odd question - when does photography cease to be photography? Some of the work out there is so much more that to me, it's no longer photography, but something else. Some of own your work looks like paintings.

As far as what constitutes a photograph. It's an interesting drinking question, and one we're working with in class right now- Creative Digital Techniques, at Northeastern, but ultimately not much of a concern to me. My job as an artist is to make art. I have other jobs as an author and teacher, but as a photographer, I need to explore and understand the tools so I can use them. The whole discussion on Photoshop making photography into something that people can't believe is the "truth", well, that's idiotic. The earliest photographs of war- Matthew Brady, were constructed, arranged, by the photographer, and people thought they were real. Now, people know better, and you have Photoshop to thank. The interpretation that has always been at the core of photography is just now more obvious, ironically by being visually undetectable. But back to the point. I take pictures. Let some philosopher figure out what I'm doing ten years down the road.

Step awaaaay from the coffee, Ted.