since tonight has seen another total lunar eclipse for our corner of the world to watch (between cloud banks) i thought i’d share a couple of similar sequences i took a few years back.

first, the total lunar eclipse of 28 aug 2007. this sequence begins (bottom right) at 8:30pm NZ standard time and ends at 10:30pm. equipment used: DSLR camera, remote shutter release, tripod, 500mm lens. of course a lot less light was coming from the moon near totality, so i had to adjust my exposure to capture the red disc – hence the white rim in later shots.

second, the partial solar eclipse of 7 february 2008. this sequence begins (top right) at 4:48pm NZ daylight saving time and ends at 5:52pm. equipment used: DSLR camera, 24-105mm lens at 105mm, homemade ND filter (crossed polars) with almost total blackout ability. no tripod needed. i really like in this sequence how you can see (except in the first overexposed image) the edge of the sun disc has a cooler red tinge, and the middle (including where the moon chops in) is yellow. the blue sky was added in post, but the colour of the sun has not been enhanced. (of course you must be very conscious of observing all eye-safety precautions when photographing the sun especially during an eclipse!)

“why do you charge this much for prints when i can go to my local self-service lab and get the same sizes for just a few dollars?” this question will be asked of most career-photographers at some stage. or, if it is not asked – you can see that they are thinking it! and at face value, this is a fair question.

today’s post was inspired by an article written on this very topic, by professional photographer Andrea Joki. Here is an excerpt:

“…One phrase I hear a lot is, “it only costs 10c to make a print – so why do you charge so much?” And if the value of the image was only the print paper cost itself, that would be a valid question. But then again, a lawyer makes several thousands and all they produce is paper worth less then a penny. So why do we pay lawyers upwards of 100 euros an hour?

The easy answer is that an experienced photographer – one who has spent years studying the craft, honing skills, and perfecting style, is going to give you a much better image than the beginner who is simply clicking a shutter button.

…One thing I really find interesting is that people will buy… all manner of luxury goods that have maybe a 1-2 year lifespan. But when it comes to professional portraits, which will last a lifetime, they base the decision purely on price. I’m not sure at what point children and family become less important than a fancy purse. But I can tell you that those who purchased high quality portraits have a beautiful reminder of a time that has past – and those portraits are still hanging or displayed while the (designer) purse has long since been thrown away.

…Choosing the best you can afford will always be the best advice given to anyone looking for quality professional portraits. As with anything hand-made and requiring an artistic eye, those who produce quality work will charge more – it compensates for the amount of time they have spent learning and perfecting their art.”

read the whole article here

and along those lines, here is an entertaining skit which highlights this issue from a different point of view

well yesterday was worldwide pinhole camera day… and i missed it! (again!) although elsewhere in the world people are still taking part, it was over where i live almost 24 hours ago. oh well – maybe next year i’ll get it together in time. (in my defense i did spend a large portion of yesterday taking photos.)

here’s an experimental pinhole photo i took a couple of years ago, using my homemade pinhole ‘lens’ (a pierced DSLR body cap). if you want to know how to make your own, leave a comment