This is a fascinating case, particularly for me both as a photographer and a fair-use advocate. You should probably read the story for yourself, but I’ll summarize it here. Andy Baio is well-known and respected in the tech world. He produced an album (Kind of Bloop) based on the songs from Miles Davis’ classic album, Kind of Blue. He got all the permissions and rights he needed to the music, but when it came to the album art, he created a somewhat pixelated version of the original image without getting any permission. It turns out the orignal album-art photo was taken by and belongs to a great photographer, Jay Maisel. Jay sued Andy and they settled out-of-court for $32,500. Andy still feels he was right based on the concept of “fair use.” Here are the two versions: Jay’s original and Andy’s interpretation.

What do you think? Should Andy have been able to sell his album using the cover on the right without first getting permission from Jay? Would you say that Andy’s version qualifies as “fair use” of the original? It’s a tough call for me.

First, you should know that I’m a supporter of and contributor to the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), who played a role in this case, so I’m a strong believer in the fair-use concept. I believe our copyright laws are severely inhibiting creativity and are increasingly just serving a copyright consortium rather than serving the public good, as originally intended. I have some experience in copyright, trademark and other intellectual-property law, but I am not an attorney. I’m a layperson who has taken an interest in this area for decades. Most notably, I am not up-do-date on the latest details of the fair-use doctrine. In other words, I’m not qualified to give a legal opinion about who is right or wrong in this case — only an emotional one.

Given that disclaimer, I do have an opinion, event though it’s not based in law. To me, I think Andy’s image is a derivative work that goes beyond what I consider to be fair use. From a purely practical point, I can’t figure out why Andy didn’t try to get permission to use Jay’s image in the same way as he did for the music? Did he think it was somehow more incidental? If you’re a photographer, your images are as important to you as a song might be to its composer. This is an iconic album cover, which on one hand suggests that it’s fair game for fair use, but it’s also a work of art and deserves the same protections as any other.

Ultimately, Andy asks an important question at the end of his blog post (scroll to the bottom of the page) where he writes, “Extra credit: Where would you draw the line?” Is there some point in abstracting the image at which the original image is obscured to the point at which the derivative work is no longer infringing of Jay’s copyright? Is this even a legitimate way to evaluate the issue? A fascinating debate in any case. What do you think?

Update: I should have mentioned that I first heard about this from Thomas Hawk, for whom I also have great respect. In this case, however, I disagree with him. But check out Thomas’ blog post and the comments.

Once again, I’m determined to get the shot. In this case, it’s the full moon rising behind downtown San Francisco. Last night was my first attempt, but given the horrible results, it won’t be my last. I was about to delete all the images from the session, but first I decided to play with them to see how much I could extract before giving up.

Like all serious shoots, it began with research.

• The experts told me the best time to shoot is when the moonrise is 30 minutes before sunset. That’s often the night before full moon on the calendar. In this case (June 14, 2011) moonrise was at 7:48pm and sunset was8:33pm. Not a bad spread.
• To find the best position I used The Photographer’s Ephemeris, an awesome iOS app that shows you the exact position of the sun and moon on any date at any time.

Everything was ready, save for the one big fear: the fog, which everyone knows can come barreling in through the Golden Gate during the summer. But fog didn’t turn out to be the problem. Due to a moderate high-pressure system just offshore, there was no marine layer and no wind. And that meant haze and smog: a fairly heavy layer up to about 1,000 feet. Yuck.

But having gone this far, I schlepped all the gear (including a second body+tripod for a timelapse) to the location where I found three other photographers, all with Nikon gear. Two of them had pinpointed the location using The Photographer’s Ephemeris as well. It was so hazy, we couldn’t even see the moon until it was well above the skyline, so the photo below is one of the first of the evening. And one of the best. This was shot about 25 minutes before sunset.

As you can see, it’s horribly flat and dull. After some tweaking in Lightroom, I was able to recover some of the contrast and clarity:

Yes, I could have further lightened the unnaturally dark and saturated water and made a number of other improvements, but I just didn’t want to waste a lot of time on this one.

I posted the tweaked image on Facebook, where photo pal Scott Loftesness suggested I see how it looked as a black-and-white. I popped it into Silver Efex Pro 2, where I spent some time making a number of global and local adjustments and ended up with this:

What do you think? It’s still not at all the shot I’m looking for, but compared to the original, I think it’s at least a serviceable image. If nothing else, it shows that if you keep working at it and consider all the options (b&w in this case) you can sometimes salvage a shot that would otherwise end up in the trash.

Update: I went back and tweaked the moon. First I changed the mapping from RGB into b&w, then I adjusted the contrast. Finally, I used a layer mask in Photoshop to merge the enhanced moon into the original image. It gives the picture an entirely different look, doesn’t it?

Once again I had the privilege of being a guest host on the This Week in Photo podcast (#202), sharing the show with Frederick Van Johnson, Syl Arena and Ron Brinkmann, three of my personal photo heros.

On this episode of TWiP, in case of a water landing – take pictures, Getty Images acquires PicScout, Adobe gets touchy feely, and an interview with SnapKnot.com co-founder Reid Warner.

My first appearance was on episode #153, nearly a year ago.

Like any other photographer, I’m always looking for ways to improve my skills. There are a lot of options out there: books, magazines, community college classes, online videos (free and $$$) and local photography clubs. And then there are the photo workshops — they’re everywhere. I’ve attended two workshops in the past few months, and while that certainly doesn’t make me an expert, I do now feel like I know what to look for in the next one. (I’m not including the San Francisco stop of the FlashBus 2011 Tour, which was fun, but more of an event than a workshop.)

In March I attended a workshop led by Derrick Story. A good friend, Scott Loftesness, had been to one of Derrick’s earlier workshops and enjoyed it. Since I was able to talk Scott into trying another one with me, and because Derrick’s classroom and studio are in Santa Rosa, California (just an hour from home), it was a low-risk investment. The two-day workshop included eight students and cost $495. Derrick provides lunch both days, but you’ve got to get yourself to Santa Rosa and pay for a hotel room unless you’re local.

Two weeks ago I went to a very different kind of workshop: the Mentor Series Photo Trek in Santa Fe, New Mexico. This three-day program had 37 students, two instructors, a bus and driver for the first two days and cost $1,000, which included no food, housing or transportation to/from the event. Mentor Series is owned by Popular Photography and runs about a half-dozen  workshops each year all over the world.

So how did they compare? In the case of the Mentor Series Trek, it’s “trek” that’s the operative word. It’s more about the location and somewhat less about photography. Yes, the attendees are all photographers (some with some very fancy gear) but you spend virtually all your time on the go. The first two days we were on the bus getting from one scenic location to the next a few hours each day, and once we arrived, there were often miles of walking to do. Beautiful scenery to be sure, but more hiking than shooting. And certainly not a lot of time to stop and “work” a subject for an extended period. The best shooting was actually the day they dumped the bus and we walked the city of Santa Fe on foot: once at sunrise and once at sunset. [Santa Fe is one of the best cities I’ve ever shot in. You could easily spend two or three days just walking its streets with a camera. Great art and architecture, terrific light and shadows, and a community that is very accepting of (and used to) photographers wandering around.]

By comparison, Derrick Story’s workshops often include a location such as a local safari park or (as next month) an early morning balloon launch, but there’s usually just one outside event per weekend. The rest of the time is spent in his studio — he usually includes at least one model session — and in the classroom. And it’s the classroom (and the class size) that really sets the two experiences apart. Derrick spends some of his time actually teaching from a podium and he gives the students actual assignments. For example, he might send you into the studio to shoot a model using only a single strobe. That’s something you can do when there are only eight students and they break into groups of four. With 37 students — forget it; everyone is on their own.

This brings up the question of why take one of these workshops at all. Professional photographers on assignment are obviously going to shoot a lot. But we serious amateurs have an interesting challenge. When my wife and I recently went to Egypt, I would have loved to have been able to stop and spend an hour or two studying the light and playing with the composition at each location. I would have given up half or more of the less-visually interesting sites in order to have more time at a few of the good ones. But that’s just me. My wife doesn’t particularly enjoy standing around while I study and experiment, and certainly the 22 other non-photographers in our tour group wouldn’t stand for it.

In one sense this is the role that weekend or weeklong workshops play. They allow the serious amateur to immerse him/herself in photography, surrounded by other photographers in a context where their peculiar habits of stopping, studying and shooting are socially acceptable. I imagine this is why Trekkies go to conventions. Wearing Mr. Spock ears to the grocery store is going to earn you some very strange looks. At a workshop you can truly geek out. Even when you’re on a bus, it’s all photography. All the time.

And what about the other students? Looking back, it’s not too surprising that a group of 37 would include a wider range than one of only eight. But I was surprised that the Mentor Series Trek included same true novices, some with the most expensive DSLRs. There were times when the instructors had to explain the relationship of aperture to shutter speed and ISO, and that surprised me. The instructors were even cornered by students with questions like, “What is ISO and how do I set it on my camera?” or “How do I focus this camera?” (Perhaps not surprisingly, some of these technically naive students sometimes produced some of the compositionally most exciting pictures.) In the smaller group of Derrick Story’s workshop, the range of skills was somewhat narrower although it still varied more than you might expect. Derrick does a good job of giving assignments that are applicable to each student’s skills.

In Santa Fe, I had relatively little access to the instructors given the 1:18.5 ratio as opposed to 1:8 at Derrick Story’s workshop. But even in Santa Fe, they were there if you had an important question. Towards the end of the Mentor Series weekend each student had the chance to show each of the instructors five images for critique (ten images total), and those sessions were quite valuable. We each got four or five minutes of constructive criticism that was appropriate for our skills.

Another benefit of any workshop or joining a photo club is the chance to see how other photographers interpret the same objects and locations. This happens in both the small and large workshops. No matter your level of experience, there are always those moments of, “Wow, I missed that!” that are truly educational.

So which of these two (or any other) do I recommend? It depends on what you want, of course. If pure learning is your goal, then I’d recommend a workshop with the smallest number of students, even a day of one-on-one. And I wouldn’t worry about finding the absolutely best photographer. So long as it’s someone whose work you respect and has been shooting it for a lot longer than you, you’re going to learn. Of course, reviews and opinions of previous students will help a lot.

On the other hand, if it’s a destination you particularly want to shoot or if you particularly want to travel, a larger more-distant workshop might be better for you. Mentor Series, for example, runs treks to places like Switzerland, London, Hawaii, Sedona and Wyoming. If you’re drawn to one of those locations and you want to experience the places in the context of photography, these might be better choices for you.

As for me? My prejudices probably show through in this blog post. I’m signed up for Derrick Story’s Hot Air Balloon Photo Workshop in a few weeks. None of the Mentor Series treks are on my calendar. I’m going to continue looking for small-group workshops that I can get to without hopping on an airplane. I’m also going to spend as much time as possible taking photo walks with friends. For example, tomorrow Scott and I will be shooting at the San Mateo Maker Faire as we did together last year. It’s tremendously visual and there’s enough to keep you engaged for a full day or more.

I’ve been using Nikon’s light-based CLS system for triggering my SB-600 and SB-900 strobes, but as others have experienced, I’ve been running into the line-of-sight limitations of that system. Last week I bought a set of Nikon-specific PocketWizard radio triggers. Learning how they work took a little longer than I expected, but the preliminary results are good. The supplied instructions are rather terse, so perhaps the following will save you some time if you go this route. In addition, you’ll want to refer to the wiki-based online documentation. (The Nikon-specific information is in an appendix.) There are all sorts of peculiarities such as how the PW system interacts with Nikons VR lenses.

The Nikon-specific PocketWizards are primarily designed to work with Nikon’s excellent TTL-based exposure system, iTTL, although they will also trigger older PW receivers. The basic setup is to pop a PocketWizard MiniTT1 transmitter on the camera’s hot shoe and a FlexTT5 transceiver under each Nikon strobe. You then set the strobes to TTL mode, make sure all PW devices are on the same configuration (C1/C2) and you’re set. All strobes will fire in sync and the Nikon CLS will do its thing to compute the exposure. I found:

• Flash exposure compensation works as usual.
• High-speed sync (FP) works well to 1/8000 sec, and you don’t have to do anything special to enable it. It just works all the time.
• Even the modeling light works when you press the camera’s depth-of-field preview button.
• Don’t put your strobe into Remote mode. Just set them up as though they were connected to your camera’s hot shoe.
• In this basic configuration, the selection of groups (A/B/C) on the FlexTT5 makes no difference.
• Automatic strobe zooming does not work, which makes sense whenever the strobes are not in the camera’s hot shoe. You must zoom your strobes manually.

Nikon’s Commander Mode, the ability to adjust the power of remote strobes individually (Nikon menu: Flash Control for Built In Flash) doesn’t work with PocketWizards. Instead, you need to buy a third device: the AC3 Zone Controller. This gadget sits on top of the MiniTT1, which is already atop your camera. The AC3 lets you dial-in power adjustments in 0ne-third stop increments for strobes in three groups (A/B/C). Note that these have nothing to do with Nikon’s A/B/C groups. It took me a while to comprehend this. The remote strobes think they’re each connected directly to the camera’s hot shoe. When used with PWs, the strobes know nothing about Commander Mode. They’re not “remotes” in that sense.

The AC3 really is a must-have unless you’re only shooting manually.  In addition to adjusting the power for each group relative to what Nikon’s CLS/iTTL would otherwise direct, you can switch a group into Manual mode to override the CLS control. The AC3’s +/- control wheel for each channel is mapped into controlling the flash output from 1/64 to full power. Note that so long as you want to use the AC3 for exposure control, leave your strobes set to TTL mode, even if you select Manual (M) on the AC3.

I occasionally use a Sekonic L-358 flash meter, so I decided to buy the optional Sekonic RT-32N module that fits inside the meter and allows one to trigger the strobes from the meter via PW radio signals. It took me quite a while to figure out how to configure everything for this mode of operation. It required changing the internally stored configurations of the PocketWizard devices, which in turn requires that you connect them to a computer via a USB cable, then use the PocketWizard Utility, which you can download from the company’s website. It runs on OS X or Windows and is very simple to use. You can save configurations in files, which makes updating a set of devices a simple matter.

I ended up using the two configuration settings (C1/C2) for TTL and “metered” mode, respectively. Here are the configuration values I’ve used successfully:

Config 1: AC3 for TTL or Manual Exposure Control

• Strobe: TTL/FP Mode
• FlexTT5: Normal Trigger Mode, Channel 7
• Mini TT1: Normal Trigger Mode, Channel 7

Config 2: Sekonic-Meter Triggering and Manual Exposure Control

• Strobe: Manual (M) Mode
• FlexTT5: Basic Trigger Mode, Channel 27
• MiniTT1: C2: Basic Trigger Mode, Channel 27
• Sekonic: Channel 27, Group A (or other groups as needed)

With the above configuration, you can simply switch all the devices from C1 (for TTL) to C2 (for manual metering). In the manual-metering mode, you no longer have the ability to control strobe output using the AC3. Instead, you have to go to each device and set its power output manually. This is because the trigger signal is being transmitted directly from the Sekonic meter to the FlexTT5 transceivers. The camera, MiniTT1 and AC3 aren’t involved. Of course, you can still press the camera’s shutter release to trigger the strobes, which is why you need to set both the MiniTT1 (on the camera) and the Sekonic meter to the same channel as the FlexTT5 transceivers.

It all makes sense once you work your way through it. Or you can just copy my configurations as a shortcut. You might want to use channels other than 7 and 27 if you’re going to be shooting near me!

After just a few days, I’ve grown to like the PW system, as have most others who’ve tried it. On one hand there are more gadgets, batteries and things to go wrong. On the other hand, they don’t seem nearly as finicky as using Nikon’s optically based system. I can just set and aim my strobes where I wan’t. I don’t need to worry about whether they can read the signals from the camera. Now to see if I can get past the gadgets and make some good pictures with them.

As an aspiring photographer, I’ve followed the blog and work of David duChemin for some time now. Mostly, I’ve appreciated his terrific photos. But last week I just happened to win a copy of his 2009 book, Within the Frame, at the local photo club’s annual banquet raffle. I’m only 40 pages into it, but already I know I’ve stumbled upon a real gem. David isn’t just a veteran photographer, he’s also a terrific writer. (Who knew?)

The book’s subtitle is “The Journey of Photographic Vision.” As David explains, photographers are (perhaps uniquely) part Geek and part Artist. If you’re like me — the Geek part comes more naturally — this is a great book for you. There’s virtually nothing here about the technology of photography or the gear. It’s all about that vision thing. In the first quarter of the book (which I’m still reading), David explains his emotional connection to the photographic process. The remaining chapters focus on storytelling and specifically photographing People, Places and Culture. If you’re trying to improve how you translate what you see and feel into a finished photograph, David’s narrative will give you a lot to think about regarding how you approach the art of photography.