Zac Doob is the photoblogger behind photoflavor.

PetaPixel: Can you tell me a little about yourself and your background?

Zac Doob: Sure. I grew up in Ithaca NY and eagerly moved to Boston to attend Boston University after I graduated high school. I got a degree in Sociology, but my focus was on playing in bands. I’ve been a piano player my whole life and was thrilled to be in such a music-friendly city where I could play with various groups and gig in all types of venues.

Throughout college and for several years after, I was trying to ‘make it’ as a professional musician. One of the necessities in promotions is design. I quickly discovered that I had a passion and a talent for exploring my creative side with imagery. This was initially uncovered while creating posters and flyers etc.

When the web became a viable means to promote my music, I dove head-first into web design. I soon found myself becoming a successful web designer, with music shifting to more of a hobby. Being submersed in the principles of design, combined with countless hours working in Photoshop would eventually prove to be a foundation to build upon with a camera.

PP: How did you specifically get started with digital photography?

ZD: While my amazing wife was completing her degree in Illustration at the Ringling College of Art and Design, she realized that it would be helpful to have a digital camera to use for photo references. Since we already had a film SLR, I thought it made more sense to just get a little pocket-sized camera so we could just take it anywhere. Thankfully, she insisted that she needed more control than one of those would offer, so we bought the ever-so-popular Canon Digital Rebel.

PP: Do you still use that Rebel? What’s in your gear collection now?

ZD: The Rebel has been semi-retired. It was an awesome camera, and I still use it when I need to have an additional body. I shot a wedding a while back and it was helpful to leave a long lens on the Rebel and use my 30D for the wider stuff.

Most of my gear is very typical… Aside from those two Canon bodies, I have a 17-40f/4, 70-200f/4, 50f/1.8, the original Lensbaby, a Sigma flash, Bogen/Manfrotto tripod, and some close-up filters that screw onto the 50mm lens. Like most photographers, I have a decent sized wish list of very expensive gear.

An interesting gear-related anecdote…

A few years ago, while I was very heavily into photoblogging, I mentioned in a post on the photobloggers Google group that I was interested in exploring medium format film. I asked for recommendations so that I could search Ebay for a cheap camera to play with. The next day, a fellow photoblogger who I had never met emailed me and asked if I wanted to borrow his Yashica 124G! He said it was just sitting on his shelf collecting dust – and that he’d rather see it in the hands of someone who would use it. I was floored by his generosity. Here is his site, here is the camera, and here is a shot taken with the camera.

PP: Can you tell me about your workflow?

ZD: My workflow varies depending on my mood, available time, types of photos… I wouldn’t say that I have a rigid process. With that said, I always shoot RAW. Generally, I move all of the photos from a shoot onto my Mac and open them in Adobe Bridge. I’d love to find time to explore Aperture or Lightroom, but just haven’t had an opportunity. Once in Bridge, I go through and delete the ones that are obviously garbage. While I’m going through that initial pass, I’ll star a few that have some initial impact or look like they can work with a little (or a lot of) Photoshop effort. If I’m feeling particularly creative or have a desire to be working with Photoshop, I’ll find an image that has a strong composition and the right kind of feeling to it that will serve as a starting point to do something interesting with. Take this image for example:

It was a very uninspiring photograph, but had the potential to be something very interesting. With some curves and levels, I was able to take a fairly stupid photo of a gull and turn it into something most people would spend more than a second looking at.

Keeping with the gull theme, here is a photo where the only processing was done in the RAW conversion:

It was another rather boring photograph, but the way the light fell made is possible to simply adjust the exposure and shadows to produce this intimate portrait of a bird. Is it an amazing photograph? No, but I like how it turned out.

Then there are some photos which can stand on their own feet without any real adjustments at all. I am usually really psyched when those happen. Here are a few:

These are all ‘right place right time’ kinds of shots – and really mean a lot to me.

What I find most appealing about photography is that I am able to capture something so personal and intimate. If you think about it… I am the only person in the history of time, and in all time moving forward that will ever have seen this exact perspective – at this precise moment. I’m able to share that with people, which is great… but more importantly, I am able to revisit that exact moment in time from the very same perspective.

Sometimes the subject may be just a fluorescent light:

or a weed in the sidewalk:

other times it may be the morning after marrying the woman of my dreams:

Regardless… these are personal, intimate moments between me and the other side of the lens – which I get to relive by browsing through my photo collection.

There’s a very strong parallel with writing music for me. One of the greatest sensations I experience is when I write a piece of music. As I’m playing it (or listening back to it if I have recorded it) I find great pleasure in the intimacy of the fact that I am the only one who has heard this. I can decide not to play it for anyone else, and keep it all for myself — knowing that I am the only person who has ever heard this piece of music… played this way.

PP: What is one thing you’ve learned that has had the greatest positive impact on your photography?

ZD: Hmmm… good question.

Recognizing that photography can be whatever I want it to be. What I mean is that I’m not taking photos for anyone other than myself. Obviously there are times (like doing commercial or wedding shoots) where this doesn’t apply as much, but overall I am in control of the images I make. Photography can be anything from a casual snapshot to a form of personal/ artistic expression – and it’s all equally valid.

PP: What is one piece of gear you’d most like to have?

ZD: Since I love shooting wildlife… probably a super telephoto lens… like the 600f/4 IS or something crazy like that.

PP: Who are some of the people whose work you follow online?

ZD: A Walk Through Durham Township, DailySnap, friskyPics, MUTE, No Traces, and The G8.

PP: What are some websites or software programs you’ve found invaluable?

ZD: Well, aside from Photoshop… I use a photoblogging script called photoblogger – which is now called Sylverblog. It was around way before a lot of these other options surfaced, and provided me with an opportunity to learn PHP. I actually ended up contributing to some of the functionality found in the latest version… though I have yet to upgrade since mine is so heavily customized at this point.

As for websites, this interview wouldn’t be complete without a huge nod to Brandon Stone. He has done so much for the photoblogging community – and I am forever grateful for the websites, connections, photography, communities etc. that he has created. There are tens of thousands of photographs I likely would never have seen if it weren’t for Brandon.

PP: If you could see one person interviewed on PetaPixel, who would it be?

ZD: I think Bob from No Traces would be a great read. He’s just so passionate about photography.

PP: Is there anything else you’d like to share with our readers?

ZD: Yes. The past decade has dramatically changed the world of photography in so many ways. The instant gratification and affordability of digital cameras has substantially increased the accessibility of photography. The sheer number of people with cameras, combined with the prevalence of the web equates to an
enormous pool of insanely talented photographers sharing their imagery online through photoblogs and sites like Flickr. It’s an exciting time to be at the crossroads of web technology and image making. I strongly encourage people to explore what others are doing and consider sharing their own work with the world.

If you want a reflector to play with lighting, but don’t want to shell out money for a real one, you might want to try making an aluminum foil reflector. They’re cheap, easy to make, and decent at providing fill light for harsh shadows.

How to Make It

What you’ll need:

• A large, flat board (i.e. cardboard box, display board/foamcore)
• Adhesive (i.e. tape or spray-on adhesive)
• Aluminum foil

The process of actually making the reflector is very intuitive. Simply modify your board to the size and shape you want, and attach aluminum foil to the surface. One thing to note is that aluminum foil usually has two different surfaces:

One is more reflective than the other, so it’s up to you to choose which you’d like to use. Instead of choosing, I covered both sides of my cardboard with aluminum foil, with a different surface on each side. This allows me to choose how much light I’d like to reflect.

Also, some people choose to crumple up their aluminum foil before attaching it to the board, since this provides a softer and less directional light. You can also spray paint the foil to change the color and quality of the light you reflect.

Here is how my personal reflector turned out:

I chose to use a cardboard box since it was cheaper than a foamcore and could be folded up and tucked away, while having enough surface area to provide a significant amount of light.

How to Use It

These reflectors can help you add fill-light to an outdoor shot where harsh lighting would otherwise cast unflattering shadows on your subject. Take the following “portrait” for example:

You can use the reflector in this situation to fill in the shadows:

Here’s the portrait that results. Hover your mouse over it to compare it to the original:

As you can see, the reflector can help you overcome undesirable lighting conditions and can add a glint to your subject’s eyes that brings any portrait to life.

While an undergrad at UC Berkeley, I took an advanced photography course in which each student worked on a semester long project with the theme “Downtown Berkeley”. For part of the project, we were told to do a general survey of the area, and I spent hours walking up and down the downtown streets.

On one particular occasion, I wandered past a seemingly tight-knit group of homeless friends, sitting on the side of Shattuck Avenue. Approaching a single stranger is often difficult enough, but I decided to try and befriend the group since I felt like the opportunity was too good to pass up. Turning around, I struck up a conversation with a couple of the guys in the group. I was also carrying some bubble gum that I often offered to people in exchange for portraits (I’ll cover this in a later post), and gave some to the group. After warming up to me, they were more than willing to have their portraits taken for my class.

I discovered that making a stranger comfortable with your presence is extremely important, and determines the kind of portraits you’ll end up with. If you can make someone drop their guard, they’ll be much more animated and natural in front of your camera.

If you spend enough time, build enough of a relationship, and take enough photographs, you’re bound to find a “keeper” afterwards. This ended up being a photograph that helped me win 3rd prize in a pretty prestigious photography contest (the Eisner Prize):

Taking portraits of strangers you meet on the street definitely isn’t as difficult or scary as you might think. You just need to be bold, friendly, and persistent.

Jonathan Day-Reiner is the photoblogger behind EighteenPercentGrey, previously known as groundglass.

PetaPixel: Can you tell me a little about yourself?

Jonathan Day-Reiner: Well lets see, I’m turning 33 in a couple of days as a matter of fact. I live in Toronto, Canada and I’m the Manager of Operations at a young tech startup called 80/20 Solutions… I’m a hard-core computer nerd – started off on a Vic 20 when I was about five years old. Hell, I’ve even had net access since about 1989 – pre WWW and all that.

I’ve been in to photography since I was about twelve, when my grandfather gave me his old Minolta Hi-Matic 7s. I still have that camera and use it occasionally – it’s a beast, but still a great piece of equipment.

Since I spend so much time working with computers, I’ve found myself gravitating towards working mostly with film. I suppose its just with me spending so much time starting at a screen as it is, its nice to get away from the whole “high tech” thing and get back to basics when I’m out shooting. I love the whole process with analog – it just doesn’t feel right unless my bathroom smells like fixer after a day of shooting.

PP: Could you briefly explain the meaning of 18% gray for those who don’t know?

JDR: Well, when our eyes perceive the tonal spectrum between white and black, 18% grey represents what most regard as the mid-point. For years the wisdom was that camera meters were then calibrated to expose correctly for that value, so much in the same way that folks use white cards to white-balance, photographers would also use 18% grey cards to calculate exposure under difficult lighting. Now it turns out most meters are probably set something closer to 12-14% grey, but if 18% was good enough for Ansel its good enough for me.

Part of it comes from the way I’m shooting these days. From 2003-2006 I ran a photoblog called groundglass. That was a mix of digital/film/colour/b&w… like many photoblogs of course. Since I took a break from photoblogging in 2006, so much has happened in my life and with me moving pretty-much exclusively to working in black and white it seemed like it was time for a new name that fit the way I see things these days.

PP: What would you say are the biggest pros of film and cons of digital that keep you shooting film?

JDR: Well, I’m definitely not approaching this from any kind of practical angle. Right now I’m living in an apartment, so that restricts my ability to have an all-analog workflow. So even working with film and developing my own negs, in the end it still ends up on a scanner and in to photoshop and up on the web. I’m not a luddite or anything obviously. I have a digital SLR, and I love to use it. But like I said, practical doesn’t factor in to the equation for me.

I don’t think I have any major cons with regards to digital – although I still challenge anyone to get the same detail on their DSLR as I can get on my 4×5 – without spending thousands of dollars in the process at least. In the end for me though its the process. Working with film is really hands-on. It has a real tangibility to the process that I just don’t get working with digital.

It’s not so much that digital has any cons that prevent me from embracing it – I have embraced it in many ways. I just get just as much enjoyment out of the entire silver process, especially working in 4×5. It’s a much more zen form of shooting in a way – after all, there’s no such thing as “spray and pray” when you’re using a loupe to focus!

PP: How much money would you say you’ve spent on photography?

JDR: Over the years, wow. Well this is where working with film can move way beyond digital if you’re just talking TCO [Total cost of ownership]. But the little things like a few rolls of film here, and some developer there I don’t keep too close a track of. It’s mostly the “big” purchases that my pocketbook remembers most.

Most of my gear I’ve managed to get on the cheap from photo shows, ebay, craigslist and used. My biggest expenses actually come from my Digital SLRs. The only film camera I’ve paid good money for would be my 4×5 Chamonix 045n1. They were great though – I’d been lusting after one for a long time, and they let me pay in installments so I could fit it in my budget. The amazing thing is, I hadn’t finished paying for the camera by the time they sent it to me. That was a great surprise.

Overall, both film and digital, since I was 12 years old I’d say about ten grand at least though. Which is a drop in the bucket compared to a lot of the hardcore gearheads I’d say.

PP: How much do you spend regularly for supplies like film and paper?

JDR: Well I only have a small stash of film paper on hand for use in rental darkrooms. So not much in the past few years on that end. Film-wise, I keep that on the cheap too. I’ll occasionally order a batch from Freestyle Photographic but mostly these days I’m shooting 4×5 on Chinese film from eBay. So that keeps the costs a lot lower for me, around $10 for a box of 25 sheets. That seems expensive at first, but shooting 4×5 is a completely different experience. If I shoot six photos in a day on four by five, that’s a pretty decent outing.

With developing my own film, using chemicals over and over again, skipping stop bath for water… I’m pretty frugal, probably only a few hundred a year on supplies really.

PP: What equipment do you use?

JDR: Well, my full compliment? Its a bit of a list.

For film, I’ll break it down by format. Although not all of these are in regular use.

4×5:
Chamonix 045n1
Super Speed Graphic
Lenses: Schneider 210mm, Graflex 135, Graflex 90, and a Kodak 150

120:
Yashica Mat 124G
Holga

35mm:
Canon GLIII Rangefinder
Minolta Hi-Matic 7s
Minolta Maxxum 9000
Konica Hexar AF
Olympus XA
(all those are fixed lens cameras except the 9000, which shares lenses with my DSLRs)

Digital:
Minolta 7D (currently dead)
Sony A100
Sony Point’n'shoot
Lenses: 50 f1.4, 28 f2.8, 18-70 f3.5-5.6, 70-200 f2.8, 16 2.8
All of them old minolta lenses except the 16, which is an old sigma. There are a couple other older cameras that are either dead or stored away that I can’t recall.

PP: What is your favorite camera body and lens combination?

JDR: Digital and 35mm, the 50 / 1.4 hands down. I love razor-thin depth of field and creamy bokeh. The lens on the Yashicamat is great too for beautiful focus and nice shallow depth of field at 2.8.

PP: Do you have any secrets to good photographs?

JDR: Well beyond just keeping your eyes open and looking at lots of great photographs, I’m not sure…

Edward Weston said “a fine technician may be a very bad artist, but a fine artist usually makes himself a fine technician to better express his thought.” and I think there’s a lot of truth to that.

Look for your own personal aesthetic, and just immerse yourself in what you love. Learning is important, but like the camera itself its just a tool to better express yourself.

PP. Are there other photographers you regularly visit online?

JDR: Yeah, quite a few, there’s a whole list on my site. Toronto in particular has a great crop of talented photographers that I turn to for inspiration. I’m not sure if there’s any one photographer or photoblogger I can point to though, but I have to acknowledge Rannie Turingan at photojunkie.ca for getting me started in this whole photoblogging thing in the first place. He’s kinda like the catalyst for the whole Toronto photoblogging scene.

PP: So there’s a strong community of photobloggers in Toronto?

JDR: Yeah, when photoblogs.org first launched probably half the photoblogs were in Toronto… Not literally, but it sure seemed that way at the time.

But even still, you’ve got guys like Sam at Daily Dose of Imagery, Matt at The Narrative, Rannie of course, Tania at doublecrossed, Carrie Musgrave, DK Photo Group, Istoica… all very talented folks, and that’s just off the top of my head

PP: Who is one person you would like to see interviewed on PetaPixel?

JDR: Hrm, if I had to select just one, I’d say David from Chromasia. He’s not only an amazing photographer but he’s got fantastic skills on the post side of things. Nice guy too.

PP: Are there any photography related websites that you’ve found valuable?

JDR: Well, for those who want to take a stab at film, APUG is one of the most valuable places you can go. I also love Jeff Curto’s Camera Position podcast. Anyone who loves to shoot can find lots of valuable insight there. Finally, a great photography related weblog is “The Online Photographer” and for inspiration, the new lens blog at the new york times.

PP: Do you have anything else you’d like to share with PetaPixel readers?

JDR: Yeah, I think one of the best ways you can improve and grow as a photographer – even just as a hobbiest who wants to make the most out of his gear – is start yourself up a photoblog. That gives you an outlet and a reason to constantly challenge yourself. It’s a great excuse to keep you shooting at least!

I had another go at the Bible Heart picture but this time with a tripod to properly hold the flash so that I could get consistent lighting and a ring instead of a UV filter.

This was my intial set up. I changed it a little bit later on but this is basically what it looked like.

I used all manual settings to see where the shadow was going at first, and ended up using some really weird settings. I was at f/20 for aperture (which I never do) and you can see that basically everything is in focus. Haha.

Ahh… Finally got the heart as I wanted it to look! The first picture is what the shadow looks like from above (obviously distorted); it’s that way because John 3:16 is more to the end of the Bible and the page heights are different. Then I had to play around with what angle to shoot from to get rid of the distortion. After I figured that out…it was time to change some settings and ring placement. I then reverted to f/2.8 so that I could pick and choose what was in focus.

Here’s an intial shot I took with the ring in focus. It doesn’t have much meaning to it though:

Here’s one of the final pictures. I made the ring out of focus on purpose and then focused on the word “loved.”

Then I really wanted a picture from that top view perspective so then I turned to the middle of the Bible and took another couple of pics.

Here’s the one I chose for the final for that:

This blog post was originally published here.