foto Priority

My recent trip to Canberra unfortunately didn’t allow much extra time for gallery hopping but generally there’s always a show or two worth checking out. With very little time to spare, my first port of call is The National Portrait Gallery

On 11 September to 15 November 2009, Portraits + Architecture seems like a cool concept for a show. Here’s what the curator had to say about it.

“The National Portrait Gallery exhibition Portraits + Architecture is an experiment. The participants have been asked to think about their creative practice in a new way. The exhibition explores the relationship between creative thinking and identity and incorporates new photographic portraits of creative individuals and groups.

The exhibition presents the work of seven leading Australian architect teams with commissioned photographic portraits by seven Australian photographers. The architect teams are known for their contemporary and highly distinctive work. They have made significant contributions to Australian architecture and design culture. The photographers work across a spectrum of fine art, commercial, and design practice and have produced bold and original photographic portraits for the exhibition.” – curator Christopher Chapman

Also hosted by the NPG is the forthcoming National Photographic Portrait Prize, which this year is offering an amazing $25,000 prize for the winner. This contest is fast becoming the Archibald Prize of photography.

National Photographic Portrait Prize 2010 Call for Entries

The National Portrait Gallery invites all Australian residents to enter the National Photographic Portrait Prize 2010. The exhibition will be displayed in the National Portrait Gallery building from 19 February to 26 April 2010 and will subsequently tour to a select number of Australian capital cities and regional centres. The Prize is an annual event intended to promote the very best in contemporary photographic portraiture by both professional and aspiring Australian photographers. Entries close 1 November 2009.

With the generous support of Visa, the National Portrait Gallery is offering a prize of $25,000 for the most outstanding photographic portrait.

Start planning your portraits and remember. “You’ll never never know, if you never never go!”

Entry fee is $25 p/entry

by Daniel Linnet

Andre Code - Fallen Angel

Congratulations this week to Andrew Code for taking out the “Shots @ The Arthouse” Shot of the Week, selected from the Shots Flickr Group. I asked Andrew to pen a few words about his inspiration along with some of the technical aspects of it’s creation.

‘The shot was inspired by one of my favourite TV shows Supernatural. The purpose was to focus on creating a simple but effective composition using a couple of lights to light the model. It was taken in my warehouse, hanging from a window on the second floor looking into it.

The lighting was a couple of cheap flood lights from Bunnings behind a diffuser. The wings were added post (after experimenting with drawing it on the floor). Taking the photo from above using the floor as a back drop really created the different look i was after. It would have been much easier to take it standing against a wall – but the result would not have been as effective.’ – Andrew Code

After much conjecture, discussion and speculation about the Intellectual Property (IP) Terms of Facebook, I finally decided to have a look and see what all the moaning and groaning was about. After all, if I’m going to be posting my images I would like to make sure that they stay mine.
What I discovered was not as bad as I originally thought, and in fact it almost seems fair. Or has it just been left open to changes in the future?

The way I understand it, Facebook is actually a portal to share your IP content and acts as a distribution point and storage facility for all the IP you post there. The terms seem to deal more with granting Facebook a license to share your content as per your privacy settings. There doesn’t seem to be any mention of whether Facebook can actually use anything for own promotion or financial gain.

In doing a little further research I realized that it was originally a lot worse. Here are both the current and previous terms for comparison. You be the judge.

Current ‘Statement of Rights and Responsibilities’ (Revised 28 Aug, 2009)

Sharing Your Content and Information
You own all of the content and information you post on Facebook, and you can control how we share your content through your privacy and application settings. In order for us to use certain types of content and provide you with Facebook, you agree to the following:

1. For content that is covered by intellectual property rights, like photos and videos (“IP content”), you specifically give us the following permission, subject to your privacy and application settings: you grant us a non-exclusive, transferable, sub-licensable, royalty-free, worldwide license to use any IP content that you post on or in connection with Facebook (“IP License”). This IP License ends when you delete your IP content or your account (except to the extent your content has been shared with others, and they have not deleted it).
2. When you delete IP content, it is deleted in a manner similar to emptying the recycle bin on a computer. However, you understand that removed content may persist in backup copies for a reasonable period of time (but will not be available to others).

…and, as it was previously

‘By posting User Content to any part of the Site, you automatically grant, and you represent and warrant that you have the right to grant, to the Company an irrevocable, perpetual, non-exclusive, transferable, fully paid, worldwide license (with the right to sublicense) to use, copy, publicly perform, publicly display, reformat, translate, excerpt (in whole or in part) and distribute such User Content for any purpose on or in connection with the Site or the promotion thereof, to prepare derivative works of, or incorporate into other works, such User Content, and to grant and authorize sublicenses of the foregoing.’

Facebook Statement of Rights and Responsibilities

Facebook Principles

How to Report Claims of Intellectual Property Infringement

by Daniel Linnet

Fishy, Fishy - Chuck Bradley

Some think that still life photography is easy. Plonk an object on a tabletop and away you go. Personally, I feel that it couldn’t be further from the truth. Still Life photography requires a tonne of patience, an incredible understanding of light, a bucket full of finesse and a vision that goes way beyond the ordinary.

Blue Moon Jelly - Chuck Bradley

Chuck Bradley is a master at extracting beauty from simplicity. From a simple wine bottle to crushed and corroded found objects, I always find his work intriguing.  More recently with his Fishy, Fishy and Blue Moon Jelly series, Chuck has vivified the still life, bringing his usual tenacity and flair to moving objects. For a little while now I have been quietly drawing inspiration from his effortless compositions which are definitely worth a look.

by Daniel Linnet

Check out more of Chuck Bradley’s work

I have often thought to myself that perhaps I should try Aperture to see how it stacks up to Lightroom, which I have been using since version one and now forms the basis of my whole digital workflow.

As quickly as the thought enters my mind, I try to dismiss it. What if it’s better? I keep thinking to myself. Am I prepared to transfer 200,000+ images to a whole new structure? The answer is always no, I just don’t have the time.

Although both software packages do a very similar job and sit in a very similar place in a digital workflow, they do it in different ways, with advantages and disadvantages to both. For now, I’m happy with my Lightroom workflow and I’m sure the people at Adobe will just keep making it better but if you’re just entering the realm of RAW photography and are using a Mac then perhaps it’s worthwhile downloading the trial versions of both and puting them through their paces because at the end of the day, you need to find a package that suits your way of thinking as well as matching your requirements.

So which package is better? Is a question I have been asked many times over the last 12 months and unfortunately I can not give a definitive answer so I let my fingers do the walking and found a ‘real world’ comparison which I thought dealt with the issue very nicely. Check out the link below. I hope it’s of assistance.

by Daniel Linnet

the Shootout