Thursday, August 23, 2007

I, Cyclops

It is essential for the photographer to know the effect of his lenses. The lens is his eye, and it makes or ruins his pictures. -- Bill Brandt

Like the Cyclops of Greek mythology, photographers have only one eye that truly matters! (i.e., while capturing, with film or sensor, the world around them.)

Sure, you might be using two eyes -- the eyes nature gave you -- to select, size up, and artificially light whatever it is you've decided to point your camera at. But when it comes down to those moments, those fractions of a second, when you're actually capturing images, only one eye matters: That cyclopean eye that is your lens.

When we come into this world, nature gives us the skills necessary to use our biological eyes. We don't need to consciously learn or be taught to focus and adjust. We don't need special training to learn how to open and close our pupils, i.e., to adjust our natural apertures for varying intensities of light. And no one has to show us how to adjust our perceptions of color for changes in the light's Kelvin temperatures, whether we're out in bright sunlight, in a room lit with incandescents or fluorescents, or when candles are all we have to light the way.

Some of us, though, decide to become a Cyclops, a photo-Cyclops, when viewing and recording the world around us. Nature, unfortunately, doesn't help us out much when it comes to learning how to become photo-Cyclopes. (Cyclopes, BTW, is the plural of Cyclops... and, yeah, I had to look that up.) Anyway, we need to learn new skills, through practice, study, and trial-and-error, and to effectively observe and record our world with a single eye... and an artificial eye at that!

Fortunately, photo-Cyclopes have many eyes to choose from. And those choices include eyes of varying degrees of quality. It's a no-brainer figuring out the better the photo-cyclopean eye, the better the resulting images will be. That's why I often suggest that shooters upgrade their glass, rather than plunking down their hard-earned bucks for many of the new camera bodies that are routinely dangled, like carrots, in front of the noses of the world's great, camera-consuming, photographer-herds.

What's really cool about all this photo-cyclopean stuff is that PCs (photo-Cyclopes) can decide on being wide-angled PCs in one situation (in order to see and record more of their world in a single image) and then decide on being, say, telephoto-Cyclopes in a different situation. (Zooming in close on their camera-prey from afar... try doing that with your biological eyes!)

Cooler still -- beyond wide-angle cyclopean-eyes and telephoto cyclopean-eyes -- PCs have many, many more choices and selections: Primes and zooms, and from fish-eyes to wide to normal to telephoto to extreme telephoto! That's because different eyes are better suited to different subjects and different situations depending on how an individual PC wishes to record the image. (It also keeps the manufacturers of these cyclopean-eyes realizing profits.) Photo-Cyclopes can also adjust the apertures of their mono-eyed selections in order to reduce or expand the depth of field, i.e., the distance in front of and behind the subject that appears to be in focus. And for fun or effect, PCs can use filters and other accessories in order to produce different sorts of results.

The key, of course, is deciding which cyclopean-eye to use in different situations or when shooting different sorts of subjects. Medium telephoto PSEs (Photo-Cyclopean Eyes) are often preferable when shooting glamour-style, pretty girl pics. These longish PSEs are well-suited for flattening the depth of field, giving the PC better abilities to direct the viewers' attention within the images and to "pop" the subjects from the background.

I know much of this is remedial for most of you. And some of you might be dazzled by my metaphorical abilities, juxtaposing Cyclopes and photographers and lenses and eyes, while others are simply baffled by my bullshit. (I know I often am!) The point I'm making -- and yeah, I do have a point to make -- is that, in my opinion, too many shooters are constantly drooling over newly-released camera bodies when, in fact, they should be drooling over the best in glass and optics! Regrettably, I used to be one of them! A camera-drooler, that is.

Of what use are lens and light to those who lack in mind and sight? -Anonymous

The two-eyed, too-heavily-processed, pretty girl at the top is Lorena. I shot this two or three months ago. Image captured with a Canon 5D with an 85mm photo-cyclopean-eye.

2 comments:

Anonymous said...

Nice Post! I have been upgrading my glass as of late and the difference is very noticable!

One comment . . . I used to sell lights for homes (new construction) and I can totally support the fact that our eyes do amazing things to compensate for colors of light. It seems they don't care the color, they just tell our brain it looks normal. My best example is when people install a flourescent fixture above the bathroom mirror. Suddenly women begin to look like clowns in the morning because they apply such heavy colors of makeup thinking it looks good, until they walk outside and children begin to gasp and run away.

Love your work and your blog!

Eric Hancock said...

Good post. Beautiful shot, too.