LUCIMA Podcast

I got an email asking me to share the shoot I did in the slot canyons with Lauren Hurlbut. I have most of the pictures on Instagram but not specifically all in one link like it would be if I were still uploading things to tumblr. Oh well. The photographer wanted to reference my images for a shoot he'll be doing in a similar location. "My idea is to make my shoot along the lines of the ones you did with Lauren: poses, composition, etc. Since it is one of my first shots, I want to work along some established lines. After I will allow myself some more creativity" No. (Almost) All of the pictures are on my Instagram. So it's not that I don't want to share them. It's that I don't want you to get in the habit of referencing other peoples pictures when you're trying to create something for yourself. Pardon the rant LOL :) Nerdist with Jeremy Irons: http://nerdist.com/nerdist-podcast-jeremy-irons/ Ice House: http://lucima.com/laguna-beach-ice-house-studio-fashion-photography-workshop/ Unfinished Malibu House (Eric Lloyd Wright): https://www.flickr.com/photos/michael_locke/8097045647 Dave Hill: http://davehillphoto.com

A quick response to the podcast yesterday. To get better models you need a better portfolio. Right? Right. But is that what I said? I try and go more in depth to the response yesterday. Inappropriate photographers, variety (depth and specificity), Instagram image selection/layout, create and control your audience's attention, shooting for ArsenicTV, and more.

I kind of think that this was once a blog post or possibly even another podcast. Too bad. One of the most common questions in my workshops is "What does it take for any given photographer to do what I do?" Most often this question takes the form of, "How do I get to shoot beautiful fashion models naked like you?" Admittedly there isn't a simple answer. That said, much of what I do is managing perceptions, particularly in the form of my online presence. The podcast explores a few of the moving parts of the machine that I've created in order to do what I do.

This podcast is long. But it rewards you in spades if you listen all the way through. It's one of the few that I actually like. When was the last time you heard me say that! This podcast is the result of a conversation I had with a model earlier in the day. We talked about my style and the evolution of that style. She asked me who my favorite photographers (Avedon/Demarchelier) were and I attempted to feebly explain why I don't follow in their footsteps even though they were my role models. I continued to compare and contrast that style with the shock value style of (Juergen) Teller and (Terry) Richardson) and why I think people on Instagram do it wrong by being lazy in their execution. The podcast shifts to discuss how I shoot. What I think about when I shoot. What I need out of the "moving parts" during a shoot. And how all those considerations create the final product. And how at the end of the day the pictures define you (and not the other way around) because actions speak louder than words and historically my imagery create a consistent stylistic trend. This was supposed to be a short podcast based upon an earlier conversation today but turned out to be more much "revelating" (technically not a word) as I continued to explore the idea.

Did I just make a podcast talking about cycling pain? Jesus Christ. So why do I ride the Rose Bowl group ride Tuesdays/Thursdays? It's dangerous. Painful. And yet it gives me so much. Except what exactly does it give me? And what, if any, are the ties to photography? Listen and find out.

Disclaimer: This stuff is really technical. If you're not interested in color accuracy and listening to my thoughts about it, then this podcast is definitely not for you. This (probably too long of a) podcast is about my brief history with color accurate displays and my challenges and experiences with them. There's about 30 minutes of history as I run through what I bought and why. And then there's about 10 minutes of drawing real conclusions. That's where the real value is. If you want the Cliff Notes version of it here it is: Buy an Eizo ColorEdge with built-in calibration sensor. If you want to know why? You'll have to listen to the podcast. MONITOR HISTORY/REFERENCE 2005 Dell Ultrascan 2405FPW 24" PVA Panel (acquired ~$200) 2009 Eizo S2402W-H 24" TN Panel (acquired ~$500) 2010 Eizo ColorEdge CG241W 24" PVA Panel (acquired ~$1200 retail $2000 and returned) 2010 Eizo ColorEdge CG241W 24" PVA Panel (acquired ~$1200 retail $2000 and returned) 2010 Eizo ColorEdge CG243W 24" IPS Panel 2014 Eizo ColorEdge CG275W 27" IPS Panel (acquired ~$1500 retail $2400) 2016 BenQ SW2700PT 27" IPS Panel (acquired ~$700 and returned) 2016 Dell UP2716D 27" IPS Panel (acquired ~$700) 2016 Eizo ColorEdge CX271 (acquired ~$900 retail $1400) 2016 Eizo ColorEdge CG318-4K (the unicorn that I want retails ~$5000) CALIBRATION HARDWARE SpyderPro3 ColorMunki i1ProDisplay Eizo CG275W built-in colorimeter PRINTERS Canon Pixma Pro 9500II Canon Prixo Pro-1 http://lucimablog.blogspot.com/2009/09/sypder3-pro-unibody-macbook-dell.html http://lucimablog.blogspot.com/2009/11/eizo-s2402w-h.html http://lucimablog.blogspot.com/2009/12/whats-good-monitordisplay.html http://lucimablog.blogspot.com/2009/12/legend-nanao-eizo-cg241w-bk.html http://lucimablog.blogspot.com/2010/01/eizo-cg243w-ftw.html http://lucimablog.blogspot.com/2016/10/color-accuracy-needs-of.html

In a Facebook conversation with some photographers I wound up showing some of the shots from the last podcast. Yeah, the one where I said I was disappointed in the results because I wasn't getting proper variety and also that she was always on the ground. Well, I was wrong. Kind of. It turned out to be one of the best sets I've shot. So what gives? Did I just lie to you guys for entertainment value? Not exactly. What it boils down to is flow vs. design. You can plan all you want but when push comes to shove, you have to be in the moment. That's something a retoucher might not quite understand.

When the photographer make rookie mistakes during the shoot and the retoucher has to polish these turds. Homey don't play that! This is what happens when you think you're better than you really are. Unfortunately for me, I am both the photographer and the retoucher so basically I'm upset at myself. And yes, at some point in the past I actually thought there wasn't much left for me to learn in photography. Tisk tisk tisk.

Let's say hypothetically your model requests specific photos from the shoot? What do you do? And hypothetically, why does she even have any photos to reference? Oh you hypothetically let her take phone pics of the pictures on your camera? You hypothetical dumbass. This podcast is about process and how specific parts of the process are sacred (yes, all of it).

Sometimes we don't see the forest from the trees. Sometimes we polish turds. The point is that as photographers this is a tough lesson to learn. Also, being away gives you new perspective. Can we be more optimistic? Why should we be more optimistic? How does one cultivate creativity?

LOL :) For the record San Gabriel Valley is 200 square miles. "This is Really Hard. This is Really Really Hard."

The following is the formal exposé to the topic. It was written to Tabatha for her professors and her to read for her photography class. As such, there is much overlap between the podcast and the written version below, but not entirely: This was supposed to be a review of my experience with my intern Tabatha, but it evolved into a commentary of theory vs. practice. Let me first be clear that my time with Tabatha was short. 30-40 days spread out a couple times a week a couple hours at a time is hardly enough to truly assess someone. I think that Tabatha satisfied all the criteria of the internship. She followed me to nearly every single shoot during that time period. She assisted me with every aspect of every shoot and every task and even helped me assemble 3x 4’10’ aluminum sheet panels. Truth be told she was a better presence than I expected. I usually don’t allow assistants and interns to come to my shoots. Usually they are more of a distraction and obstacle to my workflow. Tabatha proved useful and did not get in the way of my process. My goal during this time was to demonstrate to Tabatha how I work. What I am driven by and why I do what I do. The purpose of even the smallest tasks was simply to reveal the inner workings of my mind; how I approach things, how I react to them, and most important how I solve problems. To this end, I believe I succeeded in delivering a unique and intensive internship to Tabatha. As a result, there exists no other person on Earth that understands how I work as a photographer, more than Tabatha Gallais. We routinely had philosophical discussions about my approach to photography. Admittedly Tabatha’s internship was an eye-opening experience for me. I don’t have any formal training in photography. While I am no stranger to higher education (BA in Economics, MA in Psychology and an MBA), the academic approach to photography is somewhat foreign to me. I have created several educational programs during my tenure as a photographer instructor. I created a “New Media" class at the New York Film Academy where I taught MA Photography students how to manage their websites, social media, SEO, etc. Under the LUCIMA brand, I created webinars for fashion photographers to systematically learn retouching and other aspects of fashion photography. Also under the LUCIMA brand, I created live weekend workshops that taught pre-production, production and post-production for both still photography and videography. Despite all the classes I have taught, there exists a fundamental difference between how I think-learn-teach photography and how formal education systems think-learn-teach photography. This discovery culminated at the end of Tabatha’s internship in a conversation with her assessment of my philosophy as a photographer. Her conclusion was that I had no philosophy towards photography. In my feeble attempts to explain to her and concede that many aspects to my work are not driven philosophically, I failed to define and defend my true position as a photographer. Theoretically, I am driven by a love of beauty in the female form. Practically I am driven by everyday constraints and problem-solving. It is at best a conjugal relationship between two warring factions. At the time of our conversation, I tried to explain to Tabatha that my approach to photography was more “mechanical” and that I approached photography the way a robot or a computer would approach photography. To solve existing problems. To simplify and remove all extra variables and “moving parts”. Philosophically, I attempt to distill my process down to its very core. A basic and raw interaction between two human beings through the art of fashion photography; devoid of all the bells and whistles that you would find on a typical shoot. What Tabatha visually observed was a task-oriented photographer that wasted little words and got straight to the point of achieving his desired outcome. In other words she observed a very efficient photographer at work. But I think what Tabatha could not truly appreciate was the evolution of this process. Throughout the past seven years I’ve learned much of the theoretical side of photography. I’ve spent countless hours on web forums pixel peeping and arguing with armchair quarterbacks about the ideal methodology to extract maximum dynamic range and resolution to achieve the sharpest and noiseless images. I’ve watched videos ad nauseum, about lighting, the use of lightmeters/grey cards/colorcheckers, profiling your camera/monitor/printer, and other technical and sometimes esoteric pursuits. I’ve read hundreds of pages in various forums about retouching at the highest levels, espoused by programmers that write the code for retouching software (Photoshop), scripts (like the spatial-frequency separation), and other editing techniques designed to back-solve certain styles of editing whether it be Dave Hill, Amy Dresser, or Guy Aroch. But it’s all just theory. I will borrow a reference from one of my favorite movies. Reading/Researching stuff on the Internet is like living in the limbo dream world of Inception. You can spend an entire lifetime there and still accomplish nothing. As a result, I have taken all the knowledge that I acquired on the Internet and applied it in real-life. And in that process I have stripped away all the unnecessary parts of my workflow, including but not limited to strobes/Pocket Wizards, tethering/computers, reflectors, lightmeters, spatial frequency separation scripts, Colorchecker passports, makeup artists, stylists, hair stylists, focus tuning each unique lens, assistants/interns, excess conversation with models, modeling agents, most of social media, analog film/developing/scanning, and more. 99% of my Instagram feed was created with a model, a camera, a 55mm lens, and some “light” retouching. Not only have I removed many of the moving parts from my own “machine” but I break many rules espoused by theory. I dodge and burn on the base layer in Photoshop. I retouch in 8-bit with the sRGB profile. I delete all images that I don’t intend to edit. OMG. That’s the typical reaction I get from workshop photographers. But if you apply the espoused theories (that cause the reaction of horror to my practices), you’ll find that they are often unrealistic. Think about it. Every time you copy your base layer you are doubling your file size. In a perfect world, file size doesn’t matter. But we live in the real world. I have 207,000 images in my library and multiple backups of that library. I would need twice my existing capacity if I copied the base layer of each image just once. Yes, once. If I copied the base layer twice, I would need 3x the capacity of my existing library. And so on and so forth. So I learned to dodge and burn on the base layer and I seldom make copies of the base layer. Constantly managing the size of my library requires that I delete images I don’t intend to retouch. And ultimately through thousands of edits, I learned how to retouch more efficiently, effectively bypassing the need for non-destructive editing techniques. Which is to say, I basically don’t make mistakes in editing and/or need to revert back to some lesser version of my edits. My workflow evolved through real-world constraints. What about the 8-bit files with sRGB profiles? I prefer the look of 8-bit files because they appear a little more “broken up” (256 vs. 65,536 shades of grey). Considering that many photographers add digital grain to their images, retouching in 8-bit shouldn’t require a stretch of their imagination. We are after the same thing. A less digital image with a little more texture and grit. Try it and let me know what you think. Let me reiterate. Theoretically, I am driven by a love of beauty in the female form. Practically I am driven by everyday constraints and problem-solving. Which brings me full circle back to Tabatha. The great thing about Tabatha is that she demonstrated a high-level of curiosity about everything. What I want her to learn is how to create her own questions and then answer her own questions. This is the greatest skill any photographer (or other) could ever develop. The photographer’s journey is often an independent one. Without developing the ability to wonder, try, fail (and fail willingly), you wind up sitting at your desk reading about what others have done and never arriving at any real answers one way or another to support or refute your wonder. In other words, do. As the Nike slogan says, “Just Do It”. Doing is the only answer. Doing is the only way to get from A to B. And don’t be afraid to do. Don’t put so much pressure and importance on the act of doing. Look at doing as another data point in the infinite set of data points. Never as an end point. Most of us fail not because we try, but because we fail to try. Never assume you and your principles are more important than the act of discovery and you’ll never be too afraid to push the boundaries. To do the things other people say, are wrong, not worth doing, impossible. Never cease to wonder. But most importantly never cease to try. Always try. And when you do, you’ll find that all the philosophy in the world fades away like noise in the background. And all you’re left with is what you’ve created. And all they’ll be is just what they are. No more and no less. As I often say, “They’re just pretty pictures”.

Rather than be a critical about Capture One shortcomings, I look at this question from the other direction. What the hell did I want out of Capture One? The podcast I referenced Capture One (Part III) http://lucima.podomatic.com/entry/2016-08-11T23_38_43-07_00 edit: I really wish C1 had a gradient tool!

Philadelphia is not part of New England. Listen past the point when I prematurely end the podcast. There's a "post script" portion to the podcast. I'm going to stop saying "you know", you know? Wow, there's a really rough learning lesson at the end of the podcast. Brutal. Charles you dream killer, you. Okay, I'm happier with this podcast.

Please forgive me for sounding tired and drowsy. It's a little early for podcasting (apparently). I'll try not to fire up the recorder at 8AM anymore. In this podcast I talk about philosophy of shooting. And Tabatha's critique of my philosophy of shooting. Her conclusion was that I had no philosophy. If you can get through the groggy retelling of the premise, hopefully you'll be handsomely rewarded with some insight to my style of shooting. Hopefully. And handsomely.

My 30-day trial is over. Now I have to make a decision. Do I buy it or not? My sentiments have shifted over the full 30 days and the answer might surprise you. The word of the day is CONVERGE.

Ken Scott from Digital Transitions invited me to come check their Phase One cameras. Here are my thoughts on my drive over. Then some thoughts on the DJI Phantom 4.

5 years ago I went into the local hobby shop to inquire about an RC helicopter capable of handling a DSLR payload. Sans camera and 2nd operator the estimate topped $8k. I failed to mention this in the podcast but this is probably the starting point of it all. Some more background information for you to consider. All the cool "flying shots" in all the videos I've ever done were shot with either long depth of field or failing continuously while racking focus and increasing/decreasing shooting distance. Which is to say, you either got a non-cinematic look, or we had to shoot the same shot over and over again because we couldn't rack focus while moving. I failed to mention this in the podcast as well. The rest of the stories in the podcast hold up, but keep these things in mind when I talk about technologies and drones etc. Condition One (the workshop video I shot 4 years ago that popped up on my feed recently): https://vimeo.com/27748575 Kate Compton (the grandaddy video that started it all): https://vimeo.com/46642437 Looking at my profile pic for this podcast, I could have shot something even better with a drone.

This podcast was supposed to come out before Bait and Switch (Part I) but I released them out of order. Talking about Vegas, a clients, ArsenicTV, treats!, social media, monetizing your audience. "Are we having fun yet?"

Nearly a year ago, I told you guys a story about a model who pulled a fast one on me. She agreed to shoot nudity in our texts and then when I arrived to our shoot she reneged on our agreement. (Rules of Engagement and True Intentions http://lucima.podomatic.com/entry/2015-07-29T11_47_11-07_00) So it happened again. Except the outcome was totally different. What changed? How do I feel this time? What is the effective difference between the last time this happened and this time?

Talking about gripes! Philosophical ones at least. 1. Heavy dependence upon technology 2. Some benefits come with technology 3. Staying current and how often do you update? 4. Using technology to keep things fresh 5. It's an incremental advantage/improvement that doesn't "rock my world" What accounts for the different look of the new images created with Capture One as part of the workflow? - Compounding of little adjustments with new tools (in conjunction with old tools). - 10 parts vision, 1 part post-production Improving my understanding of lighting: - Natural light doesn't mean you have to be lazy - Create 2-light setups in natural light environments

In this podcast, I delve a little deeper into Capture One and talk about the specific differences that comprise of the tangible visible difference that I asked about in the Facebook Workshop Group (https://www.facebook.com/groups/185656974814125/) . Here are the notes: - default sharpening - default noise reduction - "a bunch of little files" - Capture One vs. Lightroom programming - integrating C1 into my workflow - hybridized system like Trillian/IM+ for chat - C1 color wheel vs. curves - C1 has more refined control over details. Lr is just a little "harsher" in its control over transitions of shadows/highlights. - C1 is like Apple? Lr is like Android? Am I wrong? - Stay tuned for Part 2.5!

This podcast is about my experience with Capture One. But in order to fully explain my experience and why I'm even looking at Capture One, I have to give you an account of my hardware/software up until this point. This means telling stories about my storage setup, specifically the OWC Helios Accelsior PCIe 480GB which serves as my scratch disk (https://eshop.macsales.com/shop/Thunderbolt/PCIe_Chassis/Mercury_Helios_Accelsior_E2/Buy_Now). I talk about my raw/non-raw workflow and how I think about post-processing in general (linear vs. circular editing). Midway through the podcast I turn my attention to the specifics of Capture One and how I am integrating it into my own workflow. The conversation turns into an analysis on RAW and general post-processing workflow.

This is a podcast about how I think through questions and answers. A little "behind-the-scenes" look at how I think. If you're so inclined.

Question: Where did you learn about posing models or are you fortunate enough to have models that already know what looks good?

SD card failure update. (Re) Examining a few assumptions in my workflow that I haven't looked at in years. Raw converters, Lightroom/Capture One, Photoshop, autofocus modes. Talking about adopting (other) new technologies. As a small extension to our previous conversation(s) Art and Process talking about mental perspectives change day-to-day and how to ensure that it doesn't ruin your mojo.

In the context of shooting a couple tests in one day, I put the new Sony A7RII through the gauntlet and give you guys some very early feedback. Oh and my Sony 32GB 94MB/s card corrupts during the shoot. Thus putting me behind the 8-ball and forcing me to get creative for the rest of the shoot. Maybe I like that pressure? Blessing in disguise?

Check out (https://www.facebook.com/groups/185656974814125/) for the original post for this reaction. Read this first before listening to the podcast: This was supposed to be a podcast. I recorded it and it sounds horrible. Therefore you’ll have to suffer through the written form of the podcast. In the last podcast, I looked for some redeeming value to my perspective of “my pictures are not special”. This post is my final response to that perspective. If you’re thinking, “But you came up with that perspective?” you are correct. Basically I’m talking to myself. What else is new? This is also the written response to the podcast we had with Carey Hess and Dondee Quincena in the studio. It’s also my reaction to Tabatha being embarrassed that her pictures might reveal too much about her and my contrasting opinion that mine say nothing about me. And if it sounds like I’m talking to/about you, don’t take it personally. Honestly it’s mostly rhetorical (read: I’m talking to/about myself). You’ll understand when you listen to the followup podcast with all the examples I give. The podcast has already been recorded. I just have to edit out this written portion because like I said, I can’t stand the way it sounds. /breathe Imagine for a second that life has no meaning. Could you live with that? In the golden age of self-adulation where everyone thinks everything they do has a paramount effect on the universe, where we overanalyze every action, where everyone wants their own reality TV show... What if I told you your life meant nothing. That nothing you do has any real consequence. That you'd be forgotten in 2 generations if not immediately after you'd passed. That you think too much. Too much of yourself. And too much of your work. Or maybe just too much. Period. That you ought to stop thinking. Stop wondering what other people will think. Or God forbid how many likes you'll get. Could you for then just shoot for yourself? And for once (or at least since you first started) give yourself the freedom to shoot without consequence? While it might seem like a pessimistic perspective to think that our lives and/or work amount to nothing, the idea that we might be nothing could liberate us from the fear of retribution that holds us back. Think back when you first started shooting. Were you ever afraid you wouldn’t get enough likes if you took a bad picture? Or that you'd lose followers if you posted something off-topic? Or that you wouldn’t gain as many followers if you posted less frequently? Nope. You just did what you wanted to do. And you were happy. Why? Because you weren’t governed by fear. And you hadn’t signed your life over to [insert favorite social media]. But fear isn’t “bad". It has its purposes. But in times of relative peace there is a lack of “real” fear. And in the absence of “real fear", people create “fake fear". Things that they obsess about but aren’t real. Like not having enough followers on social media. Why? Because in times of relative peace, most people underachieve their potential. We get complacent with living comfortable lives. But deep down inside we believe that we were born for greater purpose to fulfill some destiny. In fact this is exactly how Stan Lee got rich and famous. Preying on people's desire for purpose and destiny. But unlike Marvel (and DC Comics) origin stories, people generally fail to find real purpose and destiny to our lives. Why? Because the things we come up with aren’t real. Maybe we were wired for simpler purposes? Because historically, even without superpowers mankind’s purposes were simple. Food. Shelter. Water. Protect your family. Try not to die. That was all the purpose we needed to lead a fulfilled life. And so the greatest tragedy of the current generation of people is that we over assign value and meaning to things that don’t deserve such value or meaning. Like social media. Or creating pretty pictures. So when I say “it means nothing” in reference to my pictures, it’s because it means nothing. It does not represent me. It is not the end all be all of statements about me. It is but a minutia in the grand scheme of things. I let it go and I move on. But I'm not saying our lives are meaningless. I'm saying that the meaning we look for is generally artificial. Trying to find meaning in our pictures. Trying to find meaning in how people respond to our pictures on social media. It’s not real. It’s only real in our heads. But sadly it's negatively affecting the way we feel. We either think we're more important than we really are, or less important than we really are. Neither of which is accurate. The correct answer is it doesn't matter. We've assigned meaning to something that should not be assigned such value, merit and/worth. The value is in doing. The merit is in the act of creating. The worth is intrinsic. That worth exists outside of us and social media. And regardless, is probably overstated by us all. I suppose what I'm against is false purpose. Kinda like false deities. We should all live with purpose. But living under the pretense of false purpose is pointless. The sooner we realize that the sooner we can do what will truly make us happy. And what would make us happy? Shoot more. Think less.

Round 2! FIGHT! :) Goddamnit, I just listened to this podcast and I can't remember a word of what I said. Either I didn't say anything important or I simply wasn't listening to myself. I wonder if I should be offended? Either for not saying something more memorable or for not paying attention. Thinking about this hurts my brain. Well if I missed any references that I was supposed to document, let me know!

Gallery shows, art, process Do the pictures tell the audience something about me that perhaps I'm not aware of or that the audience isn't aware of? Either obviously or subliminally? Maybe nothing? But if push came to shove I might say it tells you that I'm highly left-brained. And that's why I don't see my work as "art"? Honestly if you really want to know how I come up with these pictures, it's all in what I say (here) combined with what I do (there). Doesn't get any clearer.

Shooting at the dam but it's flooded. Now what? Leave or make do? How can I even make do? Profile shot shows the dam when it was dry.

I got this question from @the78frames on Instagram and there was a brief discussion here: https://www.facebook.com/groups/185656974814125/ "For those who think they found their personal look, what is your opinion on editing past work so it fits better [with the current imagery]?"

Working through changeups and being totally flexible. But how much credit do you get when you're working with a model like Chloe?

With models that flow through their poses, everything is dynamic. Acquire focus, compose, recompose, reacquire focus, all without stopping. Kind of along the same lines of kicking the lightstand into the right position without breaking from shooting. Also consider there's nothing you can say or do that would be more paramount to getting the shot, than allowing her to flow through her poses. Sometimes they are THAT good.

Melanie from Photogenics Rosie O'Donnell from Facts of Life Gotta get these names right. Sheesh.

Since the last podcast I've gotten a short-term intern. She's from France and studying photography so English isn't her first language. Tabitha had the opportunity to see a couple shoots and had some questions regarding those shoots. This of course gives me an challenge to not only think about those (and other) shoots differently but also address some of the things that I thought about those shoots (specifically the swimming pool/backyard shoot and the rocks shoot with Liberty).

Post-Maui progress report. Addressing the complicated topic of losing perspective as you go farther in your journey as a photographer. And how to bring it full-circle and remember that we were all once beginners.

What I'm thinking about before going to Maui. Progress report for the last couple weeks. References in this podcast: Shoot at the rocks: https://www.instagram.com/p/BFuduuIEwiP/ https://www.instagram.com/p/BFw8mu7kwmB/ Projector shoot: https://www.instagram.com/p/BFmzAPBEwou/ https://www.instagram.com/p/BFkK4nukwrR/

Balls deep part II! Pardon the sound quality. We recorded this over Skype! You can find Kevin and his work on Instagram @kevwphoto

We go balls deep into this subject this time. Yes, I said BALLS DEEP. I literally attempt to exhaust this subject of conversation with Kevin. Why do I shoot it? Who says yes to shooting with me? Why do they say yes to shooting with me? In order to properly answer this question I reverse the roles and explain why I say yes and to whom do I say yes to shooting fashion nudity. How being an amateur differs from being a professional when shooting and how models evaluate you. I will say the things that people are too embarrassed to admit over the next 2 podcasts. Nothing but the truth. Pardon the sound quality. We recorded this over Skype! You can find Kevin and his work on Instagram @kevwphoto Edit: At the 43 minute mark of this conversation Kevin interjects that he's not in photography for monetary compensation and I had a brain fart and didn't make the logical jump/conclusion regarding the models that are looking for "long-term/delayed monetary compensation". What I should have said is this: "It's all money/value at the end of the day. Even when money doesn't change hands. Even when you only want to be an *artiste*. The model that says yes to you is still looking to increase her "value" by shooting with you. There is still a "transaction" for lack of a better word and failure to recognize that transaction will cloud recognition of the working situation. They say "All roads lead to Rome". How do you know that the model's measure of stature, reputation, self-esteem, and artistry is not monetary? How do you know that she's not looking to book more work or marry well or claim her fame via shooting with you? As Joey said, "Selfless good deeds don't exist": https://youtu.be/ahDxg3hc5pM

This is a two-hour podcast. I was going to break it into two or three pieces but what's the point? You're either going to love it or hate it. I'm betting if you've gotten this far, the subject of conversation will interest you. Further. I can't remember what we talk about but really, I can't remember what we don't talk about. Brian (http://brianventh.com) is visiting LA and you might be able to catch him before he leaves. You'll find all the links to his social media and sites there. Brian was on the podcast a while back so this is his second stint as a guest.

In this podcast, I shoot fashion nudes with Brian Venth. That was funny until I imagined what that might actually look like. Anyway, Brian (http://brianventh.com) is visiting LA and you might be able to catch him before he leaves. You'll find all the links to his social media and sites there. Brian was on the podcast a while back so this is his second stint as a guest. And we really do talk about fashion nudity and other things. It winds up being a 2.5 hour conversation but this is the first segment.

2 shoots and 4 models drop out in a few minutes. This podcast talks about how I schedule shoots, how to address dropouts, and how to learn from these situations.

Defining and recognizing a cycle. Knowing how to stoke a cycle and how to get out of a funk. How I work with my own cycles.

I talk about a few shoots I've had in recent history and my thoughts about them. Sorry about the sound quality!

What am I literally looking for when I'm shooting? What am I analyzing? What am I processing? What am I aware of? What am I not looking for? I had a chance to think about these questions during a private workshop. The results were a little surprising since it's been a while since I've given this series of questions any thought. Apologies for the poor sound quality. I might have to find a better way to do this going forward!

Photographers often tell me stories where they are the victim of circumstances they create. Everything from letting models and agents choose pictures to retouch, shooting all the new faces at an agency, assembling full teams and paying for extravagant shoots for agency models... And they cry about how they are unappreciated and how these people take advantage of them. What do you want me to say? :)

Getting grilled was no fun. But now that I've had a little bit to process all the questions, I fire back. Photographer Gianni Skolnick visits the studio and I get a chance to bounce my ideas off of him. What is the major difference between a pro and an amateur? Why have I historically hated the questions about clients and money? Why do you guys have such a curiosity and at the same time failure developing your own style? I have a theory. Tell me I'm wrong.

Part I wasn't enough. I decided to push the conversation and have Jang ask me more questions. This time we talk about skin, makeup, beauty, fashion/clothes, models, nude male models (what???), white/asian/black models, racism in fashion, photographer influences, the fashion nudity movement, shooting frequency, evaluating the shoot I had yesterday... And much MUCH more.

I complain when people ask bad questions. And then when they ask good questions, I complain that they're hard questions. You just can't win with me. I invited Atlanta-based photographer Jang Choe to the studio when he mentioned he was coming to LA. Jang is one of the few photographers that has perhaps consumed everything I've ever written or said. He could probably guess how I was going to ask each of the questions but I tried my best to surprise him. We talk about a ton of things. I want to make a correction on record and say that Keith was employed at LUCIMA, Inc. for over a year. Based upon this specific podcast, it sounds like he was an intern. No one is crazy enough to intern for me for a whole year. These two recorded conversations with Jang were eye-opening for me. We hit a lot of topics and answered a lot of questions which then raised new questions. This is one of my favorite conversations ever. Brutally good conversation. You can find Jang and his work here: https://www.instagram.com/jwctp/ https://jwctp.tumblr.com/

Profile picture courtesy of Carey Hess