mamarazzi & co.

I love this kiddo to pieces.

Mon, 01 Aug 2011 20:58:38 -0400

I love this kiddo to pieces.

Q: Love your blog! You are the number one reason I am confident enough to not shoot in Auto! Now,...

Fri, 28 Jan 2011 14:07:11 -0500

Q: Love your blog! You are the number one reason I am confident enough to not shoot in Auto! Now, I want to take some close up shots of my sons face and really focus on his eyes, but I keep getting a horrible glare and reflections in his eyes. I can practically see the entire house in them. How can I avoid this?

A: Thank you!! And how fun - congratulations!!! Venturing off auto is definitely a blast, but we can empathize what a nerve-wracking leap it can be at first :)

Regarding glare, is it looking to be something along the lines of this Isla wayback playback…?

These hot spots of glare show up in the eyes (and/or glasses, if worn) and definitely arise as issues when shooting indoors. Now, it’s an issue some people mind and some people don’t.

The most committed but relatively easiest way to learn how to control light is to watch how it shows up in your photos, trial and error style. (Then you’ll start looking at other photos to try and figure out how they were lit, too. Oh, hai? Just me? And Kimberly? Maybe… We *do* like a good geek-out session!)

Anyway, here, Isla was on a 45° angle to the patio door; she, the door and I made a triangle, if you will.

If you look closer (try not to be hypnotized… She does not, I repeat, does not need you to buy her a pony!) you can see where and what is showing up in the eyes. You can see the patio door to the side and the big, black circle in the the lens.

I won’t lie, I like showing up indirectly in her photos. But that big rectangle from the patio door, yes, we could have done without that. And the clutter from my kitchen? Never want that in there. And so on, and so on.

How to solve?

I’ve tried to play around with it, and the suggestions (other than “take them outside!”) I can start you off with include:

Face your subject towards the light source, not just on an angle.
The more plentiful the light source, the better, in terms of evening out the amount of glare/reflection seen. (ie: I *knew* we should have gotten the double back door, not just the single!)
Move your subject closer to the light source and adjust your settings accordingly. If Isla had been closer to the door, it would have cast a more even reflection in her eyes.
If you know you’re going to be doing a mini-photo-sesh, maybe take down some of the pictures off the wall in the area you’ll be. Or toss a white sheet over a bookcase that is trying to make a photo cameo. Etc.
And, if you’re really patient and into it, take it into a post-processing software such as Photoshop Elements, to fine tune the eye area and edit out what you don’t want to see.

Hope that helps you get started! When I tinker with it more for extra solutions, I’ll post back, so watch here :)

xo, Tamara

Video of Isla • “Lazy Saturday” I’ve started...

Wed, 26 Jan 2011 16:40:13 -0500

Video of Isla • “Lazy Saturday”

I’ve started playing around with what I’ve half-heartedly dubbed “hybrid video”… Basically, video clips weaved into a photo slideshow. Amateur stuff to a videographer, I know, but a very new way of thinking and execution for me.

I love this, I do. I’m not trying to be down on it; I just have so many ideas my head could explode, but am sort of overwhelmed on where to start.

Well… This is my start. :) This is among my first handful of attempts and I’m still learning, still getting the hang of it and still expanding my ideas. We’ll see, right? I mean, what’s the worst that could happen?

But, of course, my mum totally loves this (Hamish too, of course!) so that’s what matters :)

I put this together using Animoto Pro, but there is a free version as well! It’s amazing; the software does all the heavy moving and lifting of the content, but there’s a lot to be said about thinking ahead while shooting how you want the final product to look and play through. This, of course, is where I’m at - learning how to think like a time-mover and not a time-pauser. :)

365? 52? What are you doing to capture your year?!

Sun, 09 Jan 2011 01:02:35 -0500

Happy new year, mamarazzis!

We hope this will be a year full of beautiful photographs, memories and learning/mastering your toys!

New year, new start, new projects… Always fun :) Are you participating in any 365 (photo a day) or 52 (photo a week) projects? We are!

Kimberly’s tackling a 365 project over at Monkey Doodle with hopes of turning it into a book at the year’s end.

I’m in a different direction, doing a 52 project over at Good Looking Life with a twist; every week I’ll post a photo *and* a video that just about sum up those past seven days. Full embarrassing disclosure: video skills? They’re a little dusty. Hardly beta, but dusty nonetheless. I don’t expect last week’s or this week’s to be ready until next week’s (or the week after).

Maybe my video project will be a 12-type project…

And that’s totally cool! It goes to show you can pick up on whatever day you like, you can start this as soon as your heart tells you to, and you don’t have to worry about the fact that the official new year has passed. Unimportant detail :) Just get out there (or in there, wherever you may be) and start capturing your life one frame at a time. :)

We’d love if you let us know your links too so we can check them out! Answer here or send us the link via our contact feature!

Happy numbering!

T+K

Question of the Day | Is it worth the switch from Nikon?

Thu, 16 Dec 2010 11:33:20 -0500

Q: We just recently bought a Nikon D3000. We like it because it offers a “Guide” mode which is basically the idiots guide to taking a great photo. Good for a novice like myself…

But, we would like to get a few new lenses and I’m finding that not all of the lenses autofocus on this camera. We are thinking of bagging it altogether and getting a different entry level DSLR. Any thoughts on the Canon or Pentax? We feel like we are samrt people and capable fo taking great photos even without the special Guide mode. Thanks!

A: Thanks for your question! Kim and I did a two-parter to give some varying perspective. :)

• Kimberly says…

Thanks for the question, fellow Nikonian! Well, at least for the moment…

So, you’re absolutely right. Not all lenses will auto-focus on this camera - specifically, only AF-S lenses will do the job. In addition to that, if I may say, you have a couple things working against you with that model.

Guide mode, although quite handy, most other Nikon DSLRs - D60 & D90 have just as easy of a guide to navigate through, with a question mark for each topic to teach you a few things along the way. And since you and hubby are fairly quick learners, I feel you can easily get by with those alternative guides.

The D3000 has been known to be riddled with problems and has been quite disappointing based on several consumer reviews. I wanna give you the straight up goods, so here are a few of the reasons why.

LCD- Not as sharp as even the D40, (discontinued) D60 or the D90.
It’s a much slower camera, coupled with a cumbersome operation - already, me no likey. I believe it to be ergonomically challenged. :)
ISO- Not sure where you are writing from - but around these here parts - ISO can be my best friend sometimes. Unfortunately, as much as I love Toronto - it sure isn’t sunny San Diego with ideal shooting conditions and glorious light all year round. So to be restricted to 800 ISO or less, that’s definitely a no-no in my books. This leads to inferior quality of image which is *not* what you want for your precious photos!
Live view - inconvenient - you *must* hit the play button to check your most recent image vs. it automatically popping up on the screen immediately after the shot. This is big for me. With kids you have *little* time to be doing anything other than capturing what they’re doing at *that* moment. Sometimes, we only have 2 seconds to catch something great. So to make me fiddle with the camera to check to make sure that I’m on track takes away from the time I could be spending, clicking away and snapping some shots.

So- with that said, I want to offer my recommendations, keeping with Nikon- since you have the investment of the lens and well, I really like these next couple cameras! I will note the pros and cons of each DSLR and *you* can make the call on which is best for you and hubby. :) You can’t go wrong with either!

D5000 - $569.99 CDN

great price point for a fantastic DSLR
superior ‘Quite Mode’
ISO - shoots up to 6400 ( although, you’re pushing it after 3200. )
2.7” LCD
less control buttons than the D90, which forces you to rely on the menu much more
video mode
excellent image quality
easy to handle

D90 - $699 CDN

great price point for an excellent camera.
does not offer ‘Quite Mode’
ISO - shoots up to 6400 ( same as D5000 - pushing it after 3200 )
3” LCD screen - sharp, sharp, sharp!
better control buttons ( superior feature ) allowing you to get to the settings that you want *much* quicker and without having to go through the menu
video mode
slightly better technical image quality
better ergonomics - making it easier to get to the menu screen
easy handling
high performance
better in low light conditions
Older AF-S lenses will work with the D90.
The D90 has been around since 2008 - which says a lot these days with companies always feeling the need to upgrade or discontinue or modify - the D90 is a great entry level camera that has stood the test of time. At least, in camera years!

In short, for an additional $130 - you can make the jump to the D90 and have: slightly better image quality, a faster camera, larger screen, better control features, compatibility with older AF-S lenses and better ergonomics.

OR you can go with the D5000 and take that $130 and invest in a prime lens (unless you’re a zoom kind of gal! :) ) such as the 35mm f1.8? The 35mm will give you a *true* 50mm focal length, when you factor in the crop sensor with the D5000 or the D90.

• Tamara says…

I agree with Kimberly. But since saying “ditto” would be relatively short ending, I’ll say investing in a new Nikon body and keeping your family of lenses is an easy and ideal road to travel.

I don’t want to imply that, once you’ve become stuck in with a brand, you’re stuck for good. But it’s a costly switch so there is definitely an element of “switch now or forever hold onto your purse strings.”

Nikon, Canon and Pentax are industry leaders for a reason but every manufacturer has a few skeletons in their closet relating to makes and models that just aren’t up to their usual standard.

I would investigate Kim’s alternatives before making the jump. That said, if you do decide to cross over, have a peek at this post where I recommend both a Canon and a Pentax option to choose from.

Happy shopping and we hope we were able to help!

A warm welcome indeed | Kimberly Dunbar has joined us!

Fri, 10 Dec 2010 15:38:26 -0500

I’m extremely excited to post this news today; my extremely talented and all-around- amazing friend Kimberly Dunbar has joined on to Mamarazzi + CO for keeps!

As a Nikon-wielding professional photog — not to mention mama to that ridiculously adorable bundle of love up there, Nate — she’ll be on direct hand to field Nikon-related questions as well as provide her own spin on the rest of what we do around here. Even more, she’s the savviest person I know on the latest ways to capture a good pic on an iPhone. So, yeah… Consider me thrilled to have her insight around :)

Kim exercises her beautiful talents via her photography boutique at Kimberly Dunbar Photography.

You can follow her here on Twitter.

Kim’s personal Tumblr noting her day to day with lil’ Nate is here at The Little Things.

And you can start asking her questions here through our Ask feature anytime!

Welcome!!!

xo | Tamara

Tutorial & DIY | Holiday Set Ups (Part I)

Thu, 09 Dec 2010 09:29:31 -0500

Specific holiday photo set ups don’t have to be overly complex… Swearsies! In fact, the more complicated they are, the more “on” the kiddos will feel and you might not nail as natural of a shot as you might have hoped for. Over the next little bit, watch here for some ideas — both obvious and not so much — for some placed holiday photos with your little ones!

This is my niece, L…

Aperture Priority @ f/4, ISO 400

This is so relaxed, it definitely doesn’t scream ‘holiday photo’; while the tree is visible in the background and gives off all those funky fairy dots due to the 10 ft or so of space between it and the wee one, it’s not completely ‘in ya face’ as if I had L sitting right up next to it.

Aperture Priority @ f/3.5, ISO 200

This is extremely simple by design; using a holiday trinket and a party dress and plunking her on a pillowless bed in a room with tons of natural light makes it seasonal but not suffocatingly so.

Some mad, bad luck right now!

Tue, 30 Nov 2010 13:42:13 -0500

This little gem showing my lil’ babe with all those random chompers is a prime example of my bad luck streak when it comes to photographing Isla lately.

Isn’t that what you want to hear?! That it’s the blind leading the blind right now?!

I’m just keeping things real in an effort to encourage everyone that:

we all take bad photos sometimes
a better camera doesn’t guarantee a better photograph
swings move so, uh… shutter priority mode would have been helpful here. D’oy!
and finally, my personal mantra that I hope everyone remembers from time to time: It’s better to have a bad photo taken yesterday than no photo taken at all.

Yep, I wish this wasn’t blurry. I wish it wasn’t completely and utterly out of focus. But it’s still my baby having the time of her life in my favourite city in the world, New York. And because life in real time doesn’t offer many re-shoots, I feel blessed to have this at all.

Question A Day: Image Importing as Corrupt

Wed, 17 Nov 2010 10:22:36 -0500

This week I had a question.

Well, actually it was a five alarm, full on panic attack that I had to calmly, coolly collect into a question.

See, when I uploaded this photo (left), it imported into Photoshop and Lightroom as this colourful ditty (right).

Gasp. Scream. Queue the nausea. Hide under the table. Rock back and forth slowly. I just didn’t want this to be happening!

Was I overreacting? Perhaps. But my first line of thinking was how, now that I couldn’t ‘have’ that photo, *that photo* was the only one I wanted. I had snapped close to 20 different ones of Isla in and around the window, but this one… This was the one with her fingers just so, her leg just so… This was the one I wanted forever and ever.

My next line of thinking was far more sobering. What’s wrong with my equipment, and how much is this going to cost me? Is it my camera? My memory card? This flippin’ computer again? It was a spiraling descent into finger math and quick thinking on how to get myself out of what would be my fifth technical disaster of 2010.

I took to my Twitter account and reached out to Canon, the card reader company I was using Lexar, and Adobe’s Lightroom in a desperate plea for ideas to pinpoint the drama, as well as a dear and fabulous photographer friend Kimberly Dunbar (one who, incidentally, you’ll be hearing much more from in the future as our resident Nikon expert!)

The pull through was amazing and I’m appreciative at how quickly Lexar and Lightroom’s Product Manager Tom Hogarty were in touch with suggestions. I knew how quickly and intimately Twitter worked but it’s definitely inspiring and amazing all at once to have access to such expert real-time assistance.

As for the problem, I think we’ve narrowed it down to the way I was importing the photos and the connection not being… well, good enough in layman’s terms.

See, folks. I had been lazy and just plugged the camera cord into the USB drive on the side of my keyboard. Keyboard! Unthinkable, unspeakable and clearly unsuccessful. After plugging in properly and reuploading the images, all seems to be well.

I now have this…

Manual | f/3.5 @ 1/160, ISO 400 • Editing: None (SOOC)

Let the lesson be to never take a short cut when handling your digi files and, just as importantly, never panic because sometimes there’s a way around the problem. I’m looking at you, self. :)

Tutorial & DIY: DIY Soft Box Example Pic

Mon, 08 Nov 2010 12:17:54 -0500

There are several reasons I love this photo. Why, I think I’ll count the ways…

It’s of Isla, and I’m biased when it comes to her cuteness.
It’s the first photo in a long time where I instantly thought, “that’s being blown up.” Normally, I have such a hard time narrowing them down and then I get stuck and then another day strikes and, before I know it, I’ve got folders upon folder to sort through.
It was really easy to take and get this result instantly.

Manual | f/3.2 Aperture @ 1/125 Shutter Speed, ISO 400, Exposure Bracket +1.5

This was taken in a part of the room where the sun doesn’t easily reach. (It was also taken on a part of the carpet that needed vacuumed and in front of a hallway that needed decluttered. But that’s neither here nor there, right?)

It’s a problem lots of us face if we’re hanging out playing in an area where natural light doesn’t easily filter in. In order to get this setting to the level I would need to get this nice, bright picture with a smooth complexion. I solved this by busting out my DIY Soft Box lamp which I posted about the other day.

I carefully placed the soft box lamp on its side and ensured the cords were well out of reach as well as the bulb as it tends to get hot. The front was covered with a piece of winter white heat safe non-flammable fabric and clipped on with office supply clips.

The lamp was then placed securely on a side table which brought it to the same height as me, sitting on the floor, and aimed directly at her. If you look closely at Isla’s eyes, you can see two squares in each one; one of those squares is the window and the other is the soft box.

Has anyone else tried a DIY soft box?!

Question A Day: Baseline DSLR

Thu, 04 Nov 2010 20:31:00 -0400

Q: countryfair asked:

I have always loved photography but haven’t really gotten into it since high school. Now that I have a little girl, I’ve been taking pictures like crazy. I want to upgrade my camera to a dslr. I am familiar with Canon’s so will go with them, but do think their baseline Rebel XS is a good camera, or should I splurge on the Rebel T1i? I am planning on learning how to really use the camera, but imagine I will mostly use the auto settings.

Thanks for your help. I love both your websites!

A: Thanks! And thank you for the question!

Here’s the thing: the Canon Rebel line is a great line, but there are shortcomings of the XS in particular that I feel are valuable to consider.

The Canon XS is currently retailing for about $580 CAD with a kit lens. The XS came out in 2008 and, as such, doesn’t have any movie capabilities. The T1i, its big brother, does have a movie capability and a higher megapixel count at around 15MP vs. 10MP.

The T1i is currently retailing for around $800 CAD. For that extra few hundred, you’re getting a remarkably better camera that you could most definitely grow into, but if you don’t think you need those extra oomph-factor features, it’s definitely not going to be money well spent.

I know you said you’re familiar with Canon, but maybe consider looking into this other option as well: the Pentax K-x which retails for about $620 with a kit lens, making it just a smidge higher in price than the XS. The thing I like about this camera vs. the Canon XS is that it’s low noise for a high ISO, 12MP, movie capabilities and an image stabilizer mechanism that is quite, quite popular.

Automatic modes are incredibly handy, and if you’re looking for a camera that will take great pics while it does the majority of the math on the settings, this might be a great option for you. Even if you have a separate movie recording device, I know from personal experience it can be really handy having it all in one so maybe consider the Pentax just to see? I just think it might give your pics that extra edge with the increased MP count, image stabilization (never hurts with little ones!) and so on.

That said, I truly believe you buy the best equipment you can afford and you make it work with attention to detail as the user. Trust me: a $10,000 camera is just as capable of taking a bad photo as a $100 one is. After all, my first DSLR is still capable of snapping a great pic if all the settings are in place properly! It’s about practice making perfect just as much as it is about the equipment.

Enjoy, and I hope that helps!

xo, Tamara

Tutorial & DIY: DIY Soft Box

Thu, 04 Nov 2010 14:14:33 -0400

Professional photographers often use a soft box when they can’t harness enough natural light or they want to control the light more efficiently. I tend to stick to natural light but gosh-darnit sometimes you just need an extra bit of oomph.

What’s a soft box? Well, it’s a diffuser on the end of a light source that spreads the distribution of light more evenly. It’s more flattering to the skin/complexion and easier/more advantageous than an umbrella diffuser because you can get them in many sizes.

While I have a pro light kit, it’s pretty cumbersome to pull out every time I need it (which isn’t very often). That’s why a simple, small DIY alternative is just the ticket! This size is going to be ideal for one to three young children, just a portrait. It’s not ideal for on-the-move shots or adult group shots. (Though, this would work for an adult portrait as well.)

And guess what? It’s so ridiculously easy.

This old lamp has seen better days and, most recently, was crushed during a move. Not only that, but it’s chunky squared off design is going to help stabilize the lamp during use as a soft box since it will need to be turned on its side. Perfect. It doesn’t have to be pretty to get the job done right.

I just turned the shade upside down and fastened it with some heat safe glue. Then, I installed the brightest bulb I could while adhering to the allowed maximum wattage the lamp could handle. This one was 150 WATT which is perfect as 60 wasn’t going to cut it.

The last step was to adhere something white across the opening of the shade. If the lamp turns on/off via a switch on the cord, you could glue paper across for a tight seal. Since my lamp turns on/off via a knob on the neck, I needed constant access so I opted to cut a piece of white heat safe fabric and secure it to the edges with some paper clips.

The most important thing is to have a shade that is deep enough so the bulb isn’t coming into contact with the paper, fabric or whatever else you’ve used to spread over the shade. Also, don’t let the kiddies play with this. Since the shade is secured, the bulb could be knocked… Oy, the possibilities to fret over! Just remember: Safety first.

To use, again, turn the lamp on its side and prop up either on a table or with books to get the angle just right. You’re going to want to play around with the direction of the lamp and the distance between your subject and the background in order to eliminate shadows (or create them, depending on the look you’re going for.) Since this isn’t a traditional light that would fire off every time you snap a photo in varying strengths that you set, you might find an interest in having two again, depending on the type of photo you want.

As for settings, play. Every situation is going to be different, especially if you’re using this in a low light evening set up or as a supplement during the day. You can try starting in and around an ISO of 400 with an f/4 and a shutter speed of 1/160. But again, play, play, play!

I just made mine today and Isla has been napping a lot so unfortunately, it’s just the toys that have made their DIY soft box appearance. I’ll have examples very, very soon!

Tutorial & DIY: Have you switched it up lately?

Thu, 21 Oct 2010 08:51:17 -0400

Have you switched up your routine lately?

Have you changed your perspective?

Av/Shutter Priority Mode | 1/125 @ f/2.8, ISO 400. Edited using this technique.

Have you stopped to focus on the details?

Settings same as above.

Have you gotten comfortably close?

Settings same as before. Edited using this technique.

Make a point of switching up your point of view this week/end and you’ll be amazed at what comes back at you!

On rules: I broke one.

Sun, 17 Oct 2010 12:46:58 -0400

Yesterday was Isla’s first birthday and I broke one of my many rules: I didn’t get in any of the pictures with her. How silly. Completely inadvertent and total oversight but scrolling through this morning, my heart was heavy. I promise, Isla! I was there!

My point is this: get in the photos. Even the person you pass the camera to isn’t as good at composure as you’d like. Even if it’s a complete stranger and, through your smile, you’re praying they don’t run off with your digital baby while you’re sat there canoodling with your real one(s). Get in the photos.

While we’re on the topic of rules, when I switched to a full domain the other week I received some legal flack over the name of Mamarazzi. Ever the rule follower, I sat back on my heels, stopped posting and played nice worried I had done something wrong. Now that it’s all sorted and I am cleared of the suggested, I’m back and thrilled to bits about it.

Hope everyone is having a great weekend!

Best,

Tamara

Question A Day: Canon's 55-250mm

Wed, 06 Oct 2010 17:06:06 -0400

Q: Hello, I was wondering if you could offer any insight into this lens: Canon EF-S 55-250mm f/4.0-5.6 IS Telephoto Zoom Lens. I am looking for a ‘zoom’ lens for landscapes and events and my price point is pretty pathetic ($300-$400). I would like something of decent quality and no fuss but I realize my bank account may make me work a little harder. Thank you. ~Liz

A: While we’re talking about lenses this week, this is a good question too.

In a landscape lens, you’re looking for something that offers a true-to-eye perspective with sharpness in every corner. Because of this, an aperture wider (lower) than f/4 isn’t really necessary. This lens does a great job capturing mountains and mole hills, that’s for sure.

For events, however, you want something that can focus quickly and adjust well at any length it is zoomed, and I bring this up for a reason. I’ve had the recent opportunity to compare this lens to others in its range and it definitely lags ever so slightly when focusing on a moving subject. It’s not horrendous, it’s not catastrophic, and it’s a good lens with good mechanics at a good price point for its capability. But there is just that ever so slight delay which could mean the difference of nailing the shot of Grandma June on the dance floor and, well… not.

Your $300-$400 price range is hardly pathetic! But if you’re going to spend a penny over $5 for a lens, you should really know what you’re investing in. I’m a big believer you buy the best equipment you can afford and, as I said yesterday, the nice part about glass is they hold their value and are easily traded in/sold for upgrades.

That said, I definitely think you should go into your local camera store with 30 minutes to spare. Compare the 55-250mm ($230USD) with the 70-300mm ($530USD). The 70-300 has a much better reputation for autofocus accuracy and speed, as well as sharpness for the <$700 price point, although it is much heavier than the 55-250 admittedly. Also, there’s definitely a financial spread between the two, but I feel it’s worth you exploring hands on to see which is right lens for your needs and if the $300 difference unlocks a new level of image opportunities for you.

Hope that helps!

xo, Tamara

Question A Day: Sigma Lenses

Tue, 05 Oct 2010 11:23:38 -0400

Q: nosmokewithoutpryor asked:

Hi Tamara!

Question. Do you know anything about the Sigma HSM lenses? I have a Nikon D60 with the kit lens, and I also bought a “prime” lens (because I heard those are great at giving me that fuzzy, bokeh effect). I do like the prime, but it’s a manual focus lens, which I’m finding to be a big pain in the toosh.

I was reading about these HSM lenses by Sigma - there is one that’s an F/2.8 18-50mm for only $199, which seems really cheap for a lens! Do you know anything about them? Are they any good? For someone who is just an amateur photographer taking pictures of her baby for the most part, would that suffice just as well as the $400-500+ versions?

Thanks!

Henna

A: Hi Henna! Thanks for the question!

Let’s see… The prime you purchased, I’m guessing is the 50mm manual focus? I can understand the frustration of that, considering you’re dealing with a mobile subject and you want to snap fast.

I personally haven’t used any Sigma lenses but a friend of mine has and he says they can pack a beneficial punch to your bottom line, you just have to know what you’re getting into.

Essentially, third party lenses are going to generally be less money, but they’re going to lack a certain finesse that you would get with a lens from the same manufacturer as the body by default. That said, lenses are one area in photography where you really do get what you pay for, so buy the best lens you can afford. The nice part is that lenses don’t really lose their value if you treat them well, and so you can always sell or trade them in for an upgrade as your budget allows.

The reason prime lenses have such a great reputation for their depth of field and bokeh blur is that, by design, they can achieve a much wider aperture than their multi-length counterparts. The beauty of this 18-50mm is that you’ve got a nice wide aperture at any of those focal lengths, whereas other zoom lenses in that range tend to offer a spread (as in, you can get f/2.8 at 18mm but only say f/3.5 or smaller at 70mm, etc.)

The reason the HSM 18-50mm is less than other lenses is that it is specifically formatted for crop sensor cameras (such as yours) and won’t work well with full frame professional cameras. Because of this, the lens can be designed slightly differently.

Because I’ve yet to play with this lens hands on, I can’t offer a guaranteed review. Based on specs alone, I think if you’re taking personal photos of your little jam face, this lens should most definitely work. The nice wide aperture allowance is going to allow you flexibility with lighting and depth of field, and there is some room for play on your focal length. Just be mindful that the 18mm is going to funkify faces just a bit, heading into the fish eye/slight distortion realm, so be sure to know what distance from your subject you’re most pleased with the results by.

Hope that helps!

xo, Tamara

Spam apology

Tue, 28 Sep 2010 20:03:54 -0400

I was just palm-to-face flipping through Google Reader and saw about 25 Mamarazzi posts all at once that were apparently republished about four hours ago. (Er, yes, I subscribe to my own blog via an aggregator. It’s to watch for glitches such as, oh, *this* one!)

At any rate, I apologize for the inundation!

xo, Tamara

FAQ: Sometimes it just doesn't work. And that's okay!

Mon, 27 Sep 2010 09:00:16 -0400

I’ve received a few questions relating to whether or not you can fix a photo later with editing. The answer is abstractly and overall ‘yes’ but my recommendation is to try and avoid it.

It takes a lot of work to process a photo, let alone a “bad” one. Take for example these… I’m still not done, and don’t know if I will ever be. But like I said here, while these may not be smooth from a photographic perspective, they certainly satisfy my motherly requirements in a photo and that, my friends, is what truly matters and what we’re after here, right?

Manual | f/4.5 @ 1/1000, ISO 100 | SOOC

Many factors working against us here:

The background: I had to place her here to get the rocks and the ocean in, as well as to avoid the swell of tourists milling around the lighthouse (not pictured).

The weather: It was cold and windy, which meant we didn’t have much time to get a few of these snaps before she got fed up. It’s a fine line between “stage mum”-esque behaviour and doing what is best for the subject!

The sun: Sometimes you just can’t control when you arrive someplace. In our case here in Peggy’s Cove, Nova Scotia, it was a stop during a day trip and hard to schedule. We happened to get there during a high sun around lunch time. If I placed Isla with the sun behind me/facing her, it was so harsh she squinted. If I placed her in front of the sun, my exposure settings meant I lost much of the background detail I wanted. There was minimal open shade, and where there was, it was too dangerous to carry this quick session out. I cut my losses and opted for half/half, favouring the needs of the background. This meant, unfortunately, strong shadows cast on her face.

Time: She wanted to crawl and explore. Fair enough! I had 30 seconds to experiment with my settings before getting this shot. With a little more time, I might have sorted a different equation. With a lot more equipment, I would have had a diffuser for the light/shadows, a light meter to guarantee the settings, a tripod to free up my hands, and maybe a really big sale at the souvenir shop to distract the visitors off the cliff temporarily ;)

Settings same as above.

This photo was quickly edited in Photoshop, but I plan to have at it again when I get home. I bumped up the exposure on her face and deepened the colours with the soft light overlay, but there is more I could do, such as fix the strong yellow hues.

The point remains again yes, a photo can be ‘fixed’ but it’s better if it’s just ‘enhanced.’ Well, it’s a lot less work, anyway! Editing is fun, and we’ve only just touched on a few quick tips, but mastering the full functions of your camera will take you leaps and bounds towards securing the best shots. Not every shot is going to be perfect, and that’s okay. But if it still makes you happy to look at, who cares if it needs fixed or not?!

xo, Tamara

Tutorial & DIY: Fall's First Portrait @ Home

Mon, 20 Sep 2010 09:24:25 -0400

There is something about the approach of Fall that makes me think of portraits on the front stoop. Maybe it’s the whole “back to school” notion or the fact that the cooler weather makes backyard play less appealing and front yard bike-riding and exploring the absolute thing to do.

This week, we should all nab a picture of our little jam-faces at the front door, no matter how big or little they may be. I mean, why not, right? Point and shoot or DSLR or camera phone, a quick stop on the stoop before heading out for the day makes for a great place marker in any memory book.

Manual | f/3.2 @ 1/320, ISO 200

I wanted lots of bokeh/background blur so, because of that, I needed to control how sunny it was. With a wide aperture of f/3.2 the shutter speed went way up to 1/320 to reduce the flood of light, even though Isla wasn’t exactly on the move.

Manual | f/3.2 @ 1/320, ISO 200

Just by changing perspectives, see how much more bokeh there is? By tightening the frame to show just Isla, I lose the detail in the background as well as parts of her sweater. Sweet. But the 1/320 at this closeness was overexposing her face a little and her sweater a lot, so I quickened the shutter speed to 1/400 for the next round.

Manual | f/3.2 @ 1/400, ISO 200

I came in at a slight 45 degree angle and followed the rule of thirds to fill out the frame making a picture of her not looking at the camera hold more interest.

Manual | f/3.2 @ 1/400, ISO 200

Remember to mind your backgrounds (like if there is any clutter on the landing, etc.), keep tight but also grab a full body shot, rule of thirds for composition with just the head shot and, most importantly, to keep it safe if there are stairs. I was able to get away with this by using my 17-55mm lens rather than a 50mm which would have required me to be further back for the first and last photos and well out of arm’s reach. It meant I gave up a much lower aperture (could have done say an f/1.8 @ 1/640 or 1/800) with extra dreamy bokeh, but I’m a safety nut so there you have it.

Have fun!

xo Tamara

Tutorial & DIY: High Contrast Colour Pop (Photoshop)

Tue, 14 Sep 2010 13:25:01 -0400

Today’s tutorial is yet another one about photo editing. It seems that’s all I’ve been thinking about this month, so next week we’ll be back on cameras, swearsies!

In the meantime, this is for Photoshop users to apply with layers. Again, I’ll reiterate in Photoshop there are a million different ways to arrive at the same result. I received a few emails asking why I did *this* and not *that* - there are no right or wrong ways to do something so long as you get the effect you’re looking for. I’m just showing a few tricks from my Mary Poppins-esque bag that I use, and it wasn’t meant to cause doubt on what techniques others use.

This trick in particular has been my go-to for quick (and I mean quick) and easy colour pops since I first started working on layout and designs at a magazine ten years ago. I still turn to it because a) I’m a creature of habit and b) have I mentioned it’s easy? And quick?

Av (Aperture Priority Mode) | f/3.2 @ 1/200, ISO 400, 17-55mm lens @ 35mm

This is a portion of the original image as opened up in Photoshop. I’ve had a few questions about what version of PS I use; I’m on CS5 but previous versions will definitely do the same work we’re about to examine here. As for light, it was a bright sunny day and the windows and back door were all open and behind me.

So, you’re going to go to the window that shows your layers and right click on ‘Background’ to reveal this menu. Select ‘Duplicate Layer…’

Je suis lazy bones and I don’t rename the layer, and so mine is called ‘Background copy’. Anywhoodles, you’re then going to click on the dropdown menu that is just under that ‘LAYERS’ tab. At the get-go, it should say ‘Normal’ but you’re going to ultimately select ‘Soft Light.’

Then, flatten the layers together and it should look a little something like this. All of those layer merging methods are worth playing around with, as well. This one just happens to be my default.

And, of course, it’s a method not without it’s faults. The skin tones can get oversaturated and need adjusting, and the colours may need fiddled with. But it’s a great starting point and an instant eye catcher.

Have fun!

xo, Tamara

If you’d like to see more examples, there’s a whole post devoted to this series on my baby blog here.