Unauthorized WPPD-branded pinhole cameras

Tom Miller posted this to Pinhole Visions and the Spitbite Pinhole Mailing List. I’m re-posting it in its entirety:

Dear Photography Enthusiast,

The Worldwide Pinhole Photography Day (WPPD) coordinators noticed that commercial pinhole cameras engraved with our name and logo are being offered for sale. This is being done without the authorization of the Worldwide Pinhole Photography Day organization.

Worldwide Pinhole Photography Day is a community service organization operated as a not-for-profit; we are not a commercial enterprise. We don’t sell anything, but exist only to benefit all people by providing information about pinhole photography and by providing a gallery open for all people to post one pinhole photograph as part of the annual Pinhole Day celebration.

While we encourage people to use our artwork to promote the Pinhole Day event, we do not authorize use of our name and artwork for commercial purposes. Please keep this in mind if you are considering a purchase of a camera with our name and logo on it, as the purchase does not benefit Worldwide Pinhole Photography Day. Thank you for your understanding.

Tom Miller, on behalf of the
Worldwide Pinhole Photography Day Coordinating Team

MAKE video poscast: make a kite arial photography rig

MAKE sez:

For this weekend project, I’ve made a Kite Arial Photography Rig (KAP). This was one of those projects that require remaking multiple times to get it so that it would fly. I started with a VEX robotics kit and then had to make lots of changes to make it lighter. Watch the video to learn more! For more instructions, please read the instructional post.

Visit MAKE for a variety of downloading options.

Cell phone picture called obstruction of justice

Neftaly Cruz was arrested in Philadelphia, PA, US, for taking a picture of police activity on the street, from his own yard, with a phonecam. This is completely legal in the US and has been repeatedly and explicitly upheld by the courts.

An NBC affiliate’s article on the incident says:

"He opened up the gate and Neffy was coming down and he went up to Neffy, pulled him down, had Neffy on the car and was telling him, ‘You should have just went in the house and minded your own business instead of trying to take pictures off your picture phone,’" said Gerrell Martin.

Cruz said police told him that he broke a new law that prohibits people from taking pictures of police with cell phones. [This is a complete fabrication. — Nicolai]

"They threatened to charge me with conspiracy, impeding an investigation, obstruction of a investigation … They said, ‘You were impeding this investigation.’ (I asked,) "By doing what?’ (The officer said,) ‘By taking a picture of the police officers with a camera phone,’" Cruz said.

It gets worse from there.

Read article at NBC10

For a disturbingly large number of similar stories, visit PhotoPermit.org

Interview with Ted Orland!

Paul Butzi writes at The Online Photographer:

I’m a big fan of Ted Orland‘s books (especially Art and Fear [with David Bayles] and The View from the Studio Door), so I’m delighted to be able to point readers to an in-process online interview of Orland.

The interview started this past Sunday, it’s still going on, and it looks like it’s going to be well worth following.

What he said! I recommend the hell out of both books to anyone who makes art of any kind: photographers, writers, painters, dancers, musicians, sculptors… you, me, them… everybody, everybody! If I grabbed you by the throat, threw you up against a wall, and pushed the books in your face while screaming, "YOU ABSOLUTELY MUST! FUCKING! READ THIS!!!", with the force of a thousand suns, it would still fall short of conveying how strongly I feel about them.

In addition to being a great author, Orland is an accomplished photographer who now mainly shoots with a Holga.

Read the interview at The Well

Via The Online Photographer

Unsolicited critique: Jessica, Tomsu Cleaners by Dan Loflin

This is the first in a series of unsolicited photo critiques (see introduction).

This photo, Jessica, Tomsu Cleaners, is by Dan Loflin. I love this guy’s work, and he’s made heaps of other interesting images, but this is a recent one that grabbed me.

Take a good, long look. This one’s better if you let it unfold yourself.

Jessica, Tomsu Cleaners by Dan Loflin

(Paraphrasing and expanding on the comment I left on the photo on Flickr:)

What I love about this is that it’s creeper weird. I look at it for a while. I see a pretty normal-looking scene, though it’s something you’re more likely to see in person rather than in a photo.

Great lighting.

There’s something a little uncomfortable about the framing. My eye wants to see the camera moved a bit to the right to eliminate the door frame and include the rest of the cash register. Then I’m glad he didn’t do that, because the subtle tension makes it feels like a real, active space that forces me to take in the whole thing rather than allowing me to snap to an immediate and pat parsing of "woman, cash register", making a bunch of assumptions, and walking away.

Great depth of field choice, it really complements the framing by letting each the foreground and background play their parts.

Then it starts to dawn on me: there’s an undercurrent here, a vaguely unsettling but quickly growing feeling. Then it’s a frying pan to the face. I really see her hands for the first time. They’re acting out their own fitful play while the rest of her is trying to go about her business. She seems interrupted, good-humored and maybe a little self-conscious, but her hands seem undeterred. It seems like Loflin’s given us a window into a long continuum of conflict and looks like a disturbingly precise portrait of functional OCD.

To me, this is a very understated but incredibly powerful decisive moment. It’s not necessarily immediately accessible—it wasn’t to me, anyway—but I think that’s part of this photo’s strength. I like art that makes me work for it a little and participate.

In music, there’s the concept of an "envelope", which describes the shape of a sound, and is broken into four components: attack (how quickly a sound reaches its full volume), decay (how much quieter it gets over how long a period), sustain (how long that quieter bit maintains a plateau level), and release (how quickly it fades out). The same applies to flavors in cooking and the emotional experience of looking at art for me. Not something to be quantitatively evaluated and used to judge work, but I’ve found it to be a useful framework for describing the rides, or plot arcs, that these things take me on.

Some photos, mostly those that rely on an effect over actual substance, give it all up too quickly. OK, you cross processed it, shot it with a pinhole or a Lomo, have a really shallow or huge depth of field, have a great tonal range, made a cyanotype, whatever, it makes an immediate and striking impression. But if you’re not saying or creating anything with that stuff beyond the effect, you’ve got nothing left after half a second. It grabs your attention but then doesn’t do anything with it. This is why de-fatted foods taste like shit: fat masks flavor and spreads its release out over a longer period of time. Without the fat, all the flavor compounds are released and processed right at the beginning, giving you a fast initial hit but leaving you a mouthful of tasteless crap to deal with.

There’s no flavorless crap in this photo. It draws me in with good compositional decisions, hintingly unfolds a little, ramps up quickly, punches me in the face, lets me hang out for a minute to put it all together, and then fades out, like having your head inside a struck bell that never quite stops vibrating. Chewing satisfaction goes on and on.

You can see more of Dan’s work at his Web site, DanLoflin.com, and in his photostream on Flickr.

New "feature": unsolicited photo critiques

I’m starting a new "feature" here on Photon Detector: unsolicited photo critiques. Generally, they’ll be of photos that I think work really well. Hopefully I’ll be able to articulate, at least to some degree, what’s successful about them to me, though I may put up the occasional "damn, check this shit out!" just because it’s awesome.

Disclaimers and notes

  • Most photos will be from Flickr, whose Terms of Use allow images there to be posted on other sites as long as they link back to the photo’s page on Flickr. Point five under "General Conditions" says:

    The Flickr service makes it possible to post images hosted on Flickr to outside websites. This use is accepted (and even encouraged!). However, pages on other websites which display images hosted on flickr.com must provide a link back to Flickr from each photo to its photo page on Flickr.

    When posting images not coming from Flickr, I will get the photographer’s permission in advance. I’ll try for Flickr images, too, but if I don’t, just know that I’m not being evil; those are the terms we agree to when we upload work there. I "we" because I have my own stuff there, too, which is of course subject to the same conditions.

  • This is all completely subjective—just one person’s opinion at a particular point in time. I may be wrong. I may change my mind at any time. I may still be wrong. You get the idea.
  • It’s about the result, not the process. The process is for the photographer, not the viewer. I don’t see "cheating" with Photoshop as a negative or "keeping it real" by coating your own plates as a positive. Likewise, no points added for Leica and none taken away for a webcam. I’m not a purist and I don’t care how you got there. What works for the image works for the image, and what doesn’t, doesn’t.

    The only caveat is that if a technique breaks the spell with its heavy-handedness, it usually detracts from my experience of the photo.

  • If I do say something negative, I’m genuinely trying to be constructive. I’m also not saying that I could do better.
  • If you think I’m not sticking to this, please bust me on it!
  • Remember that I have no idea what the photographer was aiming for when making the image, I only know what I see.
  • When I look at engaging photos, I have a tendency to go into a kind of borderline fugue state, step into the image as best as I can, and see where it takes me. Some of my comments will undoubtedly make more sense if you try to do the same, or at least know that going in.
  • If you leave a comment—and I hope that you do!—play nice. Let’s not turn this into Michael Johnston’s Great Photographers on the Internet. Be constructive and helpful. If you must attack something, attack ideas, not people. Remeber that liking something and recognizing is as effective are completely different things. I will leave comments that are respectful alone, even if they’re not flattering, and will delete any that I deem assholic.

Check out the first critique: Jessica, Tomsu Cleaners by Dan Loflin