Grand Cayman - January '06

I am a regular visitor to Grand Cayman, and I guess this means I never think of it as an exotic location and as such rarely create specific trip galleries after my visits there (although of course Cayman images form a big part of my portfolio).

So just for a change here are a selection of 50 (sorry it is so many) from earlier this month.

http://www.amustard.com/cay06/

I hope it reminds people that while we can take a well known place like Grand Cayman for granted it is an awesome spot for taking pictures underwater.

The aim of this trip was to shoot mainly for new stock! One of the happy consequences of doing a book is that it wipes out all your best stock. So suddenly it is all new again. There are no subjects that are off limits. It is very motivating.

Furthermore, the completion of The Art Of Diving and the start of 2006 left me in reflective mood to improve and expand my portfolio and hopefully become a more rounded photographer.

I am happy that developed a distinctive style, which is clearly visible in the Art Of Diving, but I hope that during 2006 I can improve and diversify my portfolio, while maintaining this.

So, I listed 4 criticisms of my photography, that I had heard others make of my pix (there are of course many more, but I thought I'd start with 4) and it is my aim to start addressing these during 2006.

For those who are interested in this thought process I'll go through these below. For those looking for pretty pictures, the link is here:

Grand Cayman Jan '06

Alex

p.s. I should add that I think that the pictures look a bit over-sharpened. They are just batched processed from the 55MB submission files for the library.

Criticisms, in no particular order:

1) A common criticism I get is that I have good ideas, but don't put enough effort into perfecting them. My images show plenty of creativity, but are often a bit slap-dash and need a bit more refinement.

This is fair. So one intention this year is to spend a bit less time experimenting and a bit more time taking fairly standard shots - using my energy to add as much polish to these shots as possible. Cayman provided a great chance to do this with model shots. Where it was my intention to do standard model setups, but to really work hard to get these as perfectly lit, framed, exposed, posed and composed as possible. This type of shooting also yields commercial style shots that are easy to sell.

2) Second up is that my strobe lighting is always flat.

Again true. I like flat even lighting in shots. I like to see the subject! But it means that my portfolio all looks a bit samey. I should try to use uneven and balanced light more creatively and particularly get better at using shadows in flash lit shots. Nearly all of my interestingly lit shots are available light/filter images. It is time to get more creative with the strobes, Alex!

I decided to leave playing with macro lighting until later in the year - when I am in SE Asia or some other macro hot spot. But decided to would try to play with more interesting balanced lighting scenarios in the caverns of Cayman (with the model) and also try shooting into the light more with available light (at stingray city).

3) I shoot too many boring fish. I need to find some more engaging subjects.

Damn these are hard to deny. I like fish and I like photographing them. But it is true they are not the most exciting subjects. It is like movies. See a movie with a real A List actor in it - and your eyes just follow them around the screen. It is the same UW. Sharks, whales, dolphins, seals, penguins. People love 'em and they love looking at pictures of them. Get them in your frame and people are automatically interested. Unfortunately there aren't any of these in abundance in Cayman (save for stingrays, which I think are B Listers). But I am going on the Wetpixel Tiger Shark trip in a couple of months, so this is coming up. Also in Cayman I was going to have the chance to shoot one subject that all people are interested in: other people. So again the model shots were gonna be high on the agenda.

4) Finally I keep going back to the same places.

Obviously there was nothing I could do about this in Cayman. But hopefully during the rest of the year I will get the chance to get to some places for the first time.

Yet despite all these changes I do want to keep my style of shooting recognisable. It is my intention to carry on shooting the same way I have been, just adding a bit more polish, a few more A-list subjects and from time to time so more interesting lighting. Anyway here are the early results:

http://www.amustard.com/cay06/

I'd appreciate any comments on the photos or on my thoughts about my photography.

Alex

Hi Alex,

Hard for me to say your work needs...well work. But I know what you're wanting so I won't go on about how much I like them

In no particular order, this is what, after several run throughs looking for any minor issues, I found:

1. The model in several shots seems to be a bit far back. In the blah zone I guess.

2. Some of the negative space with the model seems bleak.

3. For some reason, it bugs me that she's wearing shorts.

FWIW, IMHO, etc. etc.

Rand

I'll join in as well.

Alex .. I love your fish shots .. I think they are a fresh way of looking at fish so veryoften .. and I love learning about fish from you .. I actualy feel you make fish photos exciting again ... however I respect what you say about going for the exciting subjects .. living here in cayman I want that for me too .. (bring on the bahamas)

I looking at those photos .. I would say that your weakest area is your model shots. I know when I model for you it is never a set up thing .. but for shots that were with a specific model .. I am not that drawn by them. A couple of reasons come to mind.

1. Attire ... I agree with Rand on the shorts .. female dive models IMO should either be in bikini or wetsuit .. and there needs some colour in the wetsuit too (hard but possible) .. hoses and straps on BC's need to be trim to the body to give an apearance of neatness. Thats hard nowadays with BC's having 10 billion straps and clips on them. Oh and with girls .. I always like to see the long flowing hair. (sex sells baby !!)

2. The now called Blahzone .. it's not just about where the diver is .. but also their position. Hard to get right underwater .. but again IMO eyes need to be seen if close to have colour .. tank not so much unless decorated (tank cover or what have you). Fins when seen need to look neat too .. like a syncronised swimmer .. together ya know ? ... I think I am trying to say divers don't look attractive side on !)

3. Bubbles .. I think photos are ok with them in or not in ... but if they ar ein a photo .. they need to be away from the regulator and the face .. one of the snaps the bubbles take away from the model ..

4. I just realised one thing i dont like about photos with photographers in .. I don't like if it doesn't look like they are taking a photo ... hard to do modeling .. i was always taught when modeling uw .. eyes should be on subject and seen by the camera not staring at the camera .. if the model is taking a photo it just looks better if they are at least looking at the camera's LCD screen if it is a digi cam, else whats the point in holding the camera up like you're taking a photo.

Ok ... Alex hope that wasn't too harsh ... but you asked forthe negative .. and thats most of what I have ...

I think the only other thing I would say is sometimes interesting about some of your images is .. you don't mind a messy background .. on the closer up photos ... you always get the DOF blur .. and it's not drawing away from the subject often ... but you are always willing to have it there .. but i guess thats what you mean about polishing ...

Now those things being said ... I also want to positively reinforce you a little too ... one of my major interests in your photos .. and diving with you and learning from you is your constant desire to break rules .. and not only doing it well ... but with style ... so don't give that up ... polishing does not mean comprimising !!

You know I looked at all the pics (and I bet this is a fraction of all your stuff)and really wanted to make some observant, educated comments that makes sense but I am not qualified enough to do so but I will open my big mouth anyway.

Your crisp style is technical perfection with creative composition. I no doubt think there are a few guys on this site that can provide some great info, but I think you need to see Nat. Geographic/Wildlife editors and people like that who may not be directly involved in U.W to get the information and perspectives you need. It is inspiring to see YOU want to improve.

I see 1-2 hundred pics a month critiqued in my local club and I think I know what makes a good picture. Although I don't feel fully qualified here are a few observations and dare I say suggestions, Maybe I will hit on something. Picking on specifics in your pics is pointless, no one knows better than you as far as model positions etc. I will talk overall style and creativeness

-Cayman ray shots seem to have a strong David Doubilet influence. I would think

he took them himself. A guy like you would want people to say that is an Alex shot not a David shot, but when you get a few shots THAT RIGHT it is hard to pull the individual style out. I saw your BW ray shot and some over/unders I am refering to. (I like to see rules broken the ray swimming away is a

great picture BTW)

-Going with your strobe lighting note above most of your pics are glossy perfect covers or two page spreads. I could only say maybe add variety in lighting with more mood to them, maybe darker, more dramatic side lighting. Maybe some rear slave strobes. Not sure of the spelling but I am am sure you know him Espen Redkal (something like that) is a guy that comes to mind, his WA stuff is like Howard Hall's back in the day but much cleaner, but a darker mood to his pics with some softer lighting.

-A guy like you will have your style that won't change, maybe an equipment change with the same mindset, or a different mindset with the same equipment. Going with the mindset thing you said you were told they were slap dash and in need of refinement. Then you said you wanted to light the models perfectly, pose them etc. I read these two things similar as slap dash meaning "technically perfectly, evenly lit. I have done this a million times and here is another pubilshable image" within the formula of Dive magazine editors. Maybe refinement means different.

-Seems like lighting is going to be the area maybe one strobe with your 10.5 forcing your creative abilities to get something out side the box It would almost mean assistants and more elaborate setups but where else do you go when you have masterd as much as you have?

Anyaway I wish I had you concerns (as well as your library). If I think of anything else should I bother or just shut up now?

-Steve

Thanks for the excellent feedback, guys. Some of the most helpful I have had, and I agree with much of it.

There are a few points I will answer for the sake of debate, not argument.

Rand and Giles both mention that the divers are a bit small in the frame, and in some shots are lost in the background. I agree that this is a problem in these small screen images, but this problem really tends to go away when the images are viewed/printed larger. Also I have shots from the each of the setups with the diver larger - but I prefer the ones shown here.

You also both touch on the dressing and posing of models. These were conscious choices.

One of my main aims when photographing people underwater is to make them real individuals rather than the generic model. I do not like an overly posed look in the images - I prefer the model swimming through the frame - rather than stuck on with legs perfectly together. I guess there is a trade of between neatness and naturalness, here. Clothing also has a similar trade off, and I am a big fan of divers looking like real divers. So NO 1970s big oval masks, NO 1980s pink wetsuits and NO weird dive gear without all the normal hoses and a normal BC. I like to shoot real divers (although I accept that there is a difference in taste between N.American and European Editors in this regard). I take the point about the bikini bottoms - which I agree are fine for snorkelling - but I don't know a regular female diver who when not wearing a wetsuit will dive in bikini bottoms over shorts. Maybe I know the wrong girls! But again it is a trade off between fantasy and reality.

Negative space. Definitely up for debate. Many of these shots are taken with due care to negative space as this increases their ease of use editorially. Many of the diver verticals have plenty of space for cover titles and words etc.

Giles also raises the point about cameras. I chose to do a lot of model shots with cameras for several reasons. First nearly all divers carry them these days, (second to justify to the taxman why I needed the S3!), also I often need illustrations for photographic articles and finally and probably most importantly it helps build the model's character in the shot. Gives them a sense of purpose and gives the final image a stronger story. As for eyelines. Yep the plan was for the diver either to look at the LCD screen or the subject. Which I think is the case in most of them.

I do agree with Steve on his comments on my lighting. This is exactly the direction I want to try and go this year. But I do want to continue to take the clean, bright shots that are recognisably mine. I guess I want to be a bit more creative 5-10% of the time.

I agree with your comments on Doubilet's stingrays. It is pretty difficult to make your pictures different from his when you are in waist deep water with a fisheye. But for what it is worth I have always tried to shoot bright, punchy images of the rays. DD's images have always been more moody (and better).

Also when I first started shooting B&W shots of the rays, including the one that is on the front of my website, I had not seen anyone publish BW ones (although they undoubtedly had taken them).

Anyway on this trip, I was influenced my Jim Brandenberg's use of light I decided to try more creative lighting with the rays. Shooting much more across and into the light. But as a result I do think that my recent efforts look more like DD's than my older shots. I guess this is because DD and JB are both masters of light - and by trying to emulate JB my images end up looking like DD's. Back to square one, I think.

Anyway I really do appreciate all of your insightful comments. It is hard work this UW thing...

Alex

One thing that struck me was that I think that some your pictures in this gallery looks a little bit over saturated and have unnatural colours. Specially the blue colours. AM09.JPG is one example. But maybe that’s the colour of Cayman water…. Red Sea blues looks different ;-)

I think your model shot are great and it doesn’t bother me that she’s wearing shorts and regular scuba gear. I’m also not a big fan of big oval one piece masks and pink or yellow wetsuits. No one dives with them unless they are being models for an uw-photographer.

I’ll end my post with stealing a sentence from Steve…

“Anyaway I wish I had you concerns (as well as your library)." ;-)

// Peter

Hi Alex:

I’ve just reviewed your latest gallery and found it excellent as usual. As a person who is experiencing several fits and mis-starts with the new rig at the moment, I don’t know if there is much I can offer you in the way of advice. As the old saying goes, you’ve probably forgotten more about underwater photography than most of us will ever learn.

Having said that, I think there may be an element of predictability your encountering in your approach to underwater photography (hence the frequent trips to return to the same places to photograph). You may be getting yourself into a rut (and an obviously comfortable one that most of us would like to have ).

You have mastered excellent technical skills, as would a person who demands a lot in the way of creative excellence. These skills have enabled you to take abstract ideas from others such as editors, art directors, book publishers, contest judges and others and translate them into marketable commodities. This bodes very well for the supper table, and you should never relinquish these abilities.

Having read the Rob Galbraith interview, the other day, you may be finding it is time to start putting your own thoughts and convictions about the sea to the forefront, outside of an Advertising/Illustrative/Publicity context. While this may not be as lucrative at what you are doing now, it may nourish the soul and also help you to surmount the present creative hurdle you feel you are encountering. Maybe switching from advertising to editorial styles and subjects could be an answer.

Personally, I’d love to see what an individual with your background and underwater photographic skills would have to say about the way we use, misuse, or treat our marine environments.

Anyway it’s just a thought…

Wow. I really wish I had not looked at your pictures Alex. There goes any sense of pride I might have about before. I really like the gargonian shot and the yellowtail snapper. You manage to take such ordinary subjects and make them very interesting. I think that it is the blue background that really makes the shots stand apart from most people's macro.

Only critique I have: Maby it is just me, but I really dislike the rectalinear (12-24?) look of the tarpon shot, I think I would like that shot better had it ben shot with a fisheye.

Dont need to tell that they are great.. especially i see that your fish portraits going better nad better all the time.. i dont think that its can be better that that.. maybe thats the reson that you try altenative technices :-)

My favorites

2 Just great and abstact DOF make the magic

23 Wow!!!

34 i love it.. both fishes look at the camera.. very beatiful

29 & 44 you know.. I just love people photos under water

Are you using Magic filter on 29 & 44?? On 29 how the hell have you manage to have everything in focus???

Great job again Alex and dam this Cayman blue. I go crazy if i see this magic blue color in your photos...

Lambis

Just to add to the, though much deserved "Butt kissing",

I was searching my vast expanse of a desert called my brain. Looking for some Jockular and informative script writing for my next production. When I decided to give myself a well earned break ( Well 15 mins of impressive writing is long enough ) and look at the offerings of my online buddies at wet pix.

Well thanks a lot ALEX !! another 25 mins of erotic viewing pleasure. Only top shooters like yourself and enormous breasticuffed women can deviate me from my ground breaking work.

Damn you..you Wetpixel freaks of expressive photography...Damn your eyes.

Good shots though.

Dive safe

DeanB

Alex ..

I have a question about the gallery of Cayman 06.

are those photos what you would consider your best from the trip ... or are they the ..

a) exsperimentals

B) pick ups from the cutting board that aren't going to make you any money

or

c) just your favourites.

I'm sure you are liking all the compliments .. but you wanted some critique to help guide you to your next level.

I don't like a lot of the photos in that gallery. I'm not saying they aren't good ... but they really aren't as eye catching as a lot of other galleries you put together.

Oh and I stand by my earlier points even though you talked about them .. the modelling shots are very average in my mind .. and it really is because the diver doesn't stand out .. Dive equipmentis yes redundantly dull ... but there are colourfull accessories we all use ... fins ... masks ... reg hose covers ... tank covers ... wetsuits can come with modern colours too !! I have even seen red ones ... skin colour is by far the best eye catcher ..

anyways ... stop the butt kissing ... it can't be because you have gotten stuck in a rut ... ok you come back to cayman a lot .. but you go to other places too. (git) .... oh and yes .. just to reiterate .. the photos in the gallery are good .. you have some good classics in there ... but most of them are just another photo .. nothign eye catching ... oh apart from the one at the top of this thread which blows my mind .. and has nothing to do with doubilet ... thats an A Mustard photo to me.

Thanks again for the all feedback. I hope others are enjoying this discussion as I think many good general points are coming up about how to improve your photos when you have learned to make them come out. Anyway I hope it doesn't come across as totally self absorbed.

I'd just like to state I am very happy with my pix and like the style I shoot. And plan to continue shooting that way. But I am not totally satisfied with my portfolio (who is?) I want to diversify my shooting and improve.

Anyway a few quick replies:

Peter, I do agree that I sail pretty close to the wind on saturation. I guess it comes from years of shoot Velvia. Also I know when I view my pictures on some PCs they tend to look darker and richer than they do on Macs. Having seen the proofs for my book last week - my pics usually print better than they look on screen.

Paul, thanks for your ideas on assignments. I have never been much of a photojournalist. I think Eric is very skilled at story telling with pix. I have to look through his pix again for inspiration.

William, you know I am not a great fan of rectilinear wide angle, although I have to say I really started to like the 12-24mm on this trip. I do agree that that picture has that hyperspace look! I would add though, that tarpon are a real pain to light and the flexibility of the zoom was a big help on that dive.

I shoot a lot of long exposure macro - so I have the depth of field and the blue background. So those shots are not produced that easily - it actually more the disappointment of having to chuck out yet another great subject because of camera shake (the D2X is very unforgiving). But when they come off I agree that they make the ordinary look special.

Lambis, you would like Cayman water. But you get nice blues everywhere - just not everyday. Even in Egypt the sea can be a lovely colour - it is just important to notice when it is. Often it is just at one specific angle. Once you see that colour - just hunt for a subject to put in front of THAT blue!

The split level of the wreck is a composite. We were snorkelling because it was too rough to dive. I wasn't able to get the split in one shot - it was rough - so these are two halfs of consecutive frames. That is why I left the splash on the dome - so it didn't look too fake. This one is a straight shot, and the fisheye and a decent aperture takes care of the focus above and below (set focus below).

As for the angelfish spawning. Well I have just shot and shot and shot them. And lots go in the trash. Especially when doing the blue backgrounds. But perseverance paid off in the end. I am very pleased with that one.

Giles, these are a selection of what I like. But for different reasons. Some I like creatively, others because I think they are beautiful and others because I know they are what are wanted by the library and publisher and will therefore sell. I guess I am getting different kicks from different shots. This gallery is biased towards what I have been processing for the library and a book contribution, shooting for which were the main aims of the trip.

Thanks again for the all the help.

Alex

Alex... for sure I like most of your pictures – but for me... the problem on wide-angle picture with model is her diving equipment! My eyes are always stopped by "Mares", "Scubapro", "Uwatec", ... and I think this is expected by these equipments manufacturers !

As well, take care on your model’s eyes! For example, on this picture she’s looking at something… but we can’t see what!

To finish, when you say “strobe lighting is always flat†– I would say "not always, but most of time" - I learned during some French courses that working with light is as essential as composition (that's the reason I'm always using 2 different strobes) !

Hummmm... after looking these pictures, I’m decided to go there for a week in May – do you think it’s a go period? any advice ?

a+

Claude

Great thread Alex!

Your original points gave me some food for thought for sure. I also agree with some of the other critiques in terms of the models especially the girl in shorts. <_< When the jet lag thins I may be able to put together some of my thoughts.

Cheers

Todd

So many great shots, you are the Duke of Stingray City. I really liked the tarpon shot with them coming at you w/diver behind.

It is funny how people like different shots. Acroporas commented negatively about that tarpon shot above!

Also I got an email from my model today, wanting to use a handful of the images. She has seen more of them than are here, and curiously of the seven she chose only two are in my online gallery!

Alex

What Tarpon shot above..

So NO 1970s big oval masks, NO 1980s pink wetsuits and NO weird dive gear without all the normal hoses and a normal BC.

Hooray! I always find it interesting that we all want that in your face realistic depiction of marine life, but aspire to the old school formulaic shot of a female model (you forgot to mention the dive light and diagonal pose). Good on you for trying something different. That being said, she doesn't seem to be looking at a subject to photograph in most of the shots (and that's why I like the one of the model with the scorpionfish). I tend to prefer shots that emphasize the underwater life over the model's attire or lack thereof, so the one with the tarpons works for me.

The macro shots are, as usual, stunning. Love the water & bubbles (very nice for a concept stock photo).

Cheers,

Marli

There are invariably 4 phases of any adaptation of a skill.

unconscious incompetence - You have no clue what it is you don't know. (For reference...I'm right here so commenting on your photos is limited to one word...Wow! ).

Conscious incompetence - This is the epiphany one goes through when you finally realize how bad you are. Threads like this and Stephen's awesome Manatee Shots have started to bring me up to this stage. <_<

Conscious competence - This is a stage where you start to have enough skill to produce good results when you focus on the task at hand.

Unconscious competence - There are a few people right here on wetpixel who have reached this stage. You are so good and you do it by instinct. The problem with this stage is you've truly mastered your element and can almost become bored by your own genius. Growth often goes unnoticed because its much smaller and slower. In my case, going from awful to average is huge growth and it can be done relatively quickly; furthermore, the growth adds to my excitement for the art. Here are some observations I've made about my own life when I've hit this stage in other areas.

1. Step outside your comfort zone. This is almost cliche but too often we find ourselves doing what we're comfortable with. A quick example - When I was an avid golfer I was a John Daly type. I could hit the ball a county mile. It drew oohs and aahs from people around me. However my golf game never improved until I started leaving the driver in the bag on most holes. The 5 iron might not have drawn the attention but it left me in much better shape to hit the green. You have to define what that means to Alex.

2. Someone said "break the rules". Bravo! Go where no man has gone before! 4, maybe 6 strobes (impossible? Make it so) Whatever pushing the limit of reason and logic means in underwater photography then do it. I found your experimentation with blurr a classic example of this.

3. Take on a new mission or task. Someone mentioned environmental issues. Again, an excellent endeavor and suggestion. Whatever task it is, make sure its new to you. When you broaden your horizons you invest in the expertise of others who will lead you to more underwater opportunities.

4. Rekindle the passion of your art - Remember the excitement of your first few underwater photo sessions? Seek out something you've never photographed before. We all have that little Cousteau inside of us screaming for the new and undiscovered. The mating Hamlets is, quite frankly, the finest fish photo I've ever laid eyes on. Great!...now do it again with another species. If you could manage to find a couple of Tigers mating while not becoming the post-sex aphrodisiac , now that would be a photo!