CJ Chilvers

Instead of the typical Follow Friday thing that Twitterites do, I find that the people who really deserve to be followed, really deserve more than 140 characters.

For the first installment, I’ve randomly chosen 3 of these people - mostly because I only had a few minutes of free time:

Patrick Rhone: I discovered Patrick’s main blog a long while ago and returned to it every so often, because I loved the design. Something happened this past year, though, and he’s really taken it up a notch. My favorite of his sites is Practical Opacity. Every post is not only interesting, but useful to every day life (how rare is that?). His most popular site is Minimal Mac, but you can also find his random posts on…The Random Post.

Nick Cernis: Nick is best known as the guy behind the iPhone app Put Things Off, but it’s his blog - now titled Modern Nerd - that encourages me to believe that someone out there really gets it. His article, Rise of the Tablog, was a big hit when everyone in the world seemed to link to it, but the entire archive of his blog is worth a read (good thing it isn’t very large yet). In particular, I love his contrarian view on personal branding.

Adam Howell: Back in 2003 or 2004, I hired an increasingly popular blogger/web designer for a new site I needed built for the Association of Music Writers and Photographers. It was the smoothest web project I’ve ever been a part of and never forgot the name. I looked him up on Twitter years later. I’m not at all sure he’s the same Adam Howell, but this guy always has something to say that cuts through the techno news crap.

Learning to love iPhone photography.

I snapped this during a road trip across Illinois about a month ago. It’s the workspace of President Ulysses S. Grant in Galena, IL. A rather simple space considering its time and occupant.

I posted to Twitter a few months ago about how I was cancelling digital cable and going Roku. So, of course, as in all Twitter posts, it led to an interview with US News and World Report.

From this month’s issue (March 2010), page 36:

A variety of Blu-ray players, flat-panel TVs, and other boxes such as Apple TV also can stream Web video to the living room, “but Roku is the simplest out there right now,” says Chicago resident C. J. Chilvers. “It also offers the most diversity.”

Cut the cable completely.

Chilvers lives in a condo that doesn’t have good over-the-air reception. Otherwise, he says, he would have taken the next step of cutting out cable altogether. Digital broadcasts now offer crystal-clear video and audio with an old-fashioned antenna, including what videophiles claim is an HDTV signal that’s sharper than cable or satellite. Cutting the digital tier, or basic cable, altogether can mean the loss of live news and sports that aren’t yet available online. But it can also save consumers another $600 a year.

I’m still experimenting with different options, but it’s saving me about $50 a month that used to go to Comcast.

Occasionally, I try to explain the benefits of clarity over simplicity to designers and writers. I mostly get blank stares. So, to better illustrate, imagine you need to know what time it is.

This is simplicity:

And this is clarity:

And this is what most web designers and writers would offer as a solution:

I did an interview a few days ago about the demise of the Music Press Report and plans for the future. It’s now up at Music As Follows. The interviewer’s primary language is Spanish, so a little is lost in the translation. One question was about why I closed it down:

It was out of pure frustration. Music journalism has always been treated as a lower class form of journalism. The amount of pay and respect was lower than any other form of journalism and music journalists played the part. The vast majority now see it as more of a hobby than career - and maybe that’s the way it should be - but the Music Press Report definitely approached it as a vital, important area of journalism. That was not the view of the majority of the readers.

I was also asked if there was a future for the publication:

I would love to do something more in-depth, but there has to be an audience for it and I’m not sure there is anymore. This kind of site takes huge amounts of time and energy, as I’m sure you know. I’d like to know if anyone still cares.

The truth is creating your own editorial site is a lot of fun. There’s a lot of responsibility, but when readers respond to your writing, it’s well worth the effort. I would like to resurrect the Music Press Report someday, but there’s a lot I would change.

I uploaded the most updated version of the Van Halen Encyclopedia as a free eBook on Google Books. However, Google has decided, instead, that they had permission to publish an older version of the book. Coincidentally, this version is the version for sale on Amazon.com (which apparently Google Books affiliate links to). I’m not sure I can do anything at this point to remove the older, inferior edition from Google, but a free copy of the most up-to-date version can always be found at Lulu.com.

We decided this year on a summer staycation. We’ve never been tourists in our own city (Chicago) before, so we decided to visit all the spots that are the most heavily visited and photographed in city. We ate at all the restaurants that visitors are told are the best. We stopped at all the places Ferris did. We even hit some of the places that tourists believe locals visit. 

It was an eye-opening week-long adventure.

Some things have already been said far better than we’re saying them now.

• Leverage = use
• Price-point = price
• Transparency = honesty

From Jorge Quinteros (via Patrick Rhone):

I’m far from where I would love to be as a photographer but when friends get annoyed that I took a photograph in the same place where we both happen to be and mine gets more attention, I thrive on that because it’s not about what camera we had, it was about how differently we chose to see things around us.

This reminds me a lot of interviews I’ve read with Eddie Van Halen. No, really. In fact, photography in general is a lot like guitar playing. It’s a very popular hobby with a few over-the-top successful people and an obsessive population of readers/viewers/listeners who want to know everything about the successful people’s equipment.

Jorge responds above much the same as Eddie did. There were hundreds of articles about the specs of Eddie’s equipment and he was hounded in interview after interview for years about the secret to his unique sound. But the truth was (as his fellow rock stars and guitar techs would attest to), there really wasn’t any secret. He could pick up any guitar, play through any amp, and it would always sound like Eddie. It was all in his fingers.

True art lies in what you cannot duplicate.

“Disappointment is sure to set in, because inexpensive models rarely stack up to more advanced point-and-shoot cameras or big digital SLRs. Or do they?”

The last fews month or so, I’ve noticed a trend. While hobbyist digital photographers are still droning on about their hobby in terms of specs, instead of results, the public has largely ignored this talk. A new bubble is forming.

In the past, similar bubbles have housed arguments over computers, stereos, TVs and cars. Those in the bubble have no respect for results, just specs. They have their own podcasts, conventions, books and websites to reinforce their views. Now there’s a photo bubble.

Bubbles are usually reserved for complex products that most regular people own, and, now, more and more regular people are carrying powerful cameras (their phones) in their pockets wherever they go. The thing I’ve noticed is that they’re doing so without regard to the specs. They want a good picture (a result). That’s it. They exist comfortably outside the bubble, almost unaware the bubble exists.

Of course, Apple excels at meeting this kind of demand. While Android phones went for the specs (roundly praised within the bubble), the new iPhone concentrated on making better results. Most hobbyists will never understand this. It’s in their nature to lust after the specs.

Learn to live outside of bubbles.

Think about this: How many how-to photo blogs and magazines are out there? It seems like a never-ending supply. You can spend days wrapped up in inspiring photos from the most talented photographers on the planet. Flickr can become a time suck for those of us who appreciate great technique.

But does technique matter? Or is it just like any other popular hobby/profession, jammed with publications speaking only to other enthusiasts? Yeah, that’s probably it.

Check out the nominees (in the photo-related categories) from this year’s National Magazine Awards:

• National Geographic
• The New York Times
• Virginia Quarterly Review
• Time
• Style Magazine
• GQ
• Vogue
• Foreign Policy
• New York
• Out
• W

Now, check out the Webby Award photography nominees:

• National Geographic Society
• The Economist
• The New York Times
• Snapshots Of Provence
• Hiroshi Seo

Notice any photo how-to blogs or magazines? Remember, the photography is top-notch in the how-to publications. Yet, it doesn’t rank as memorable by the public, or even ourselves, when compared to the above.

Most (if not all) of the above stuck in our minds as the best of the best because the photos told a story. In fact, most were straight-up photojournalism.

When’s the last time you took a series of photos that told a story? What would a National Geographic photo essay of your life or town look like? I bet it would be a lot more interesting than your latest set of technically perfect pics.

The funniest thing about this commercial is the vicious commentary about it appearing on the web. Never get between geeks and their gadgets.

I discovered another use for keeping a small camera on myself at all times. While the local Botanic Gardens yesterday (which seemed to have more DSLRs per capita that any place on Earth), I found myself standing next to a certain actor/director/ghostbuster, who was scolding a little girl (not his own) for kicking pebbles.

Of course, I had my s90 in my coat pocket and snapped a pic on the sly. I shared it with my friends and family on Facebook and it was good for a chuckle. However, I’m not THAT kind of Lesser Photographer, so unless they share it, it won’t be public. 

The only point is, once again - always have a camera on you. The new reason: whacky, anti-pebble kicking celebrities.

I see a lot of sites now trying to teach photographers how to “go pro.” What I don’t see on these sites is anyone asking, “Should you go pro?”

As author A.L. Kennedy wrote:

I wouldn’t be the first writer to point out that doing something so deeply personal does become less jolly when you have to keep on at it, day after cash-generating day. To use a not ridiculous analogy: Sex = nice thing. Sex For Cash = probably less fun, perhaps morally uncomfy and psychologically unwise.

The truth about professional photography, which you should not expect to find on these blogs:

From CareerCast.com via A Photo Editor:

The 200 best and worst jobs in the U.S. in 2009 based on five criteria — environment, income, employment outlook, physical demands and stress…

#126 Photographer (just below Waiter but still above undertaker)
Starting salary: $17,000 
Midlevel salary: $29,000 
Top salary: $62,000

#189 Photojournalist (sadly falls below Nuclear Plant Decontamination Technician but still above metermaid)
Starting salary: $16,000 
Midlevel salary: $28,000 
Top salary: $60,000

From the New York Times:

“There are very few professional photographers who, right now, are not hurting,” said Holly Stuart Hughes, editor of the magazine Photo District News.

From the Greg Ceo blog:

A number I recently heard someone throw out as the amount a photographer can expect to make on a picture in a major stock photography company’s collection is $10.

I’m not here to discourage you. No doubt, some of you are professionals already and some of you have made a few bucks here and there. What I’d like to shine a light on is that many blogs are pushing a content drug on you and that drug may look tempting, but the motivation is money for the pusher and it can ultimately rob you of time and effort better spent on making the pictures you love.

As I’ve linked to before, Seth Godin puts it perfectly:

Do your art. But don’t wreck your art if it doesn’t lend itself to paying the bills. That would be a tragedy.

As you focus on your art and leave the money behind, you may just discover that this focus turns out to be the secret of actually breaking through and making money.

A few links to photographers using low tech means to create original works and a few more on low tech cameras.

(2nd link via @patrickrhone)

“If you’re pictures aren’t good enough, you’re not close enough.” - Robert Capa

Back in 1999, I made this photograph of the Illinois River:

I entered it in a photo contest (which really dates it, because I can’t imagine doing the same nowadays) and it won first place ($75 and a mention in a magazine).

A decade later, I revisited the same location. Actually, I revisited the waterfalls just below this spot because the path to this location had been blocked by the local authorities under penalty of catapult (or so I’m told). The cliffs had become unstable in the last few years.

A bit deflated, my friend and I hiked down the trail and encountered two other photographers. They stopped us to ask about our equipment. We talked about the photo opportunities in the area. Then they proceeded to go on for 20 minutes about Canon lenses.

Here we were, 4 photographers in the middle of the most beautiful forest imaginable, talking about lenses. About 10 minutes in, I started inching away.  I guess you’d call it my awakening. Among the shots they missed:

Priorities.

Personally, I don’t like spending a lot of time pointing out how backwards photographers have gotten with their equipment fetishes. I’d much rather focus on who’s doing things right and what’s out there that’s truly original and unique. That’s where my little experiment here is heading next.

Where is it now? I’m going out and making things. And thinking about making other things. I keep these reminders for just such times.

Loving the iphoneography portfolio of Jeremy Edwards. Maybe it’s because Chicago is the subject. Maybe it’s because most of the photos are in wonderfully high contrast Tri-X-like black and white. But it’s most likely because the photos from this guy and his phone are better than most photos I’ve seen from expensive SLRs in the hands of even capable photographers. Check out the full portfolio for more reasons to covet your “lesser” camera.

A Lesser Example

A Lesser Example

Despite telling me on Twitter “don’t waste your time” and “you get what you pay for” when I first argued what would become the main idea behind this site, photo guru Scott Bourne now takes the exact opposite point of view in his new article on Photofocus.com.

Remember what counts. Unless you’re a pro or have tens of thousands of images, don’t worry about upgrading or joining in on any of the endless Lightroom Vs. Aperture debates about to begin. Go out and make something.

Just realized this podcast exists and I’m in the market for a replacement for the increasingly sleep inducing TWiP. Don’t even get me started on Photofocus.

A Lesser Example

8-Tracks in a camera shop window - if these people sold metaphors, they’d be millionaires.

Bald Eagle Photography with a Compact Camera. That’s me and my buddy Tom snapping pics of Bald Eagles at Starved Rock State Park. OK, so it’s ridiculous for me to attempt this with a compact camera. But that’s kind of my point - I don’t really care about Eagle photography. If I did, I would have the kind of set up Tom has. Instead, as he took his time setting up that gigantic lens, I walked around inspecting the rocks, ice, snow, shadows and patterns for photos I found compelling. To each his own. And, yes, we both brought back pics we were proud of.

Terrible composition, bad lighting, boring colors - but guess what? It’s a friggin’ car driving down the sidewalk in the middle of New York City. I was able to capture it ONLY because I had my trusty camera in my pocket.

Some tough love from Seth Godin to remind you that if you do what you’re passionate about without regard for money, you’ll create better works (and possibly make more money - but don’t count on it).

The interesting thing about this article isn’t the article itself (about the new breed of smaller Electronic Viewfinder Interchangeable Lens cameras), but the over-the-top reaction by the DSLR zealots. For example: “If they are so great, why haven’t Canon and Nikon come out with one yet?” And: “surprisingly terrible article” My conclusion: Wired really knows its link bait.

A Lesser Example

It’s easy to forget, but the old masters of photography created their masterpieces with equipment we’d consider laughably primitive. (via Kottke)

I just missed its one-year anniversary, but this is still one of the most honest photography blogs I’ve ever seen (read the whole thing, take the tutorials - you’ll thank me).

A Lesser Example. Going back a few months, this one was done on a cheap 2003 Canon point and shoot that most would consider obsolete. Speaking of cheap, obsolete cameras, this one was done on a Nikon L10 (under $100), which would explain why it could be placed at such an angle (probably something you wouldn’t even think doing of with an expensive SLR). [via @docdez]

If our little movement were to have a bible, it would be Chase Jarvis’s The Best Camera Is the One That’s With You. He proves what I’ve been saying through his photos, each one worth a thousand of my words.

Read it. Live it.

In his own words:

This book is the democratization of photography. It’s meant to inspire you to take pictures with whatever camera you have with you.