I am not normally a fan of celebrity portraits, and perhaps less so in Richard Avedon‘s case. I find his celebrity work to be somewhat gimmicky, and not typically interesting to me, however, I recently was at Barnes and Noble and took a look at “Avedon At Work: In The American West” and was very impressed by the photography (although not really by the book itself, which was really about the process, not the photos, besides the book being too expensive for what it was). This made me somewhat upset that all the normal Avedon work they had there was (primarily) his celebrity work, which, while bound and presented in a very interesting way, was not impressive to me visually.

Thus, when Avedon’s book “In The American West“ popped up on Amazon for me, I was quite happy, and since I needed the extra purchase for free shipping anyway, I snatched it up. When it arrived, I was thrilled. The book is large (as large as Schoeller’s “Close Up”, which is also an excellent book of portraits, not to mention a $1,000 collectible) but is also covered in a plastic sleeve to protect it even further, which is a welcome addition to such a gorgeous book. The cover has a great feel to it, and the pages are all a good weight and clarity. The photos are large, but not so large that you can’t take it all while holding the book at arms length. They are detailed, highly personal, and extremely complex and subtle. They are what good portraits are. In the beginning and end of the book, it has a few pages of text talking about the overall project, and some specific people, however it keeps it separate from the images, which I find to be better, since you can then simply go through the images and view them as they are, without any other context or distraction. The only accompanying text for each photo is a brief caption including name, date taken, and occupation or title (Drifter, Oil Field Worker, etc.). While often they are predictable, there are a few captions that truly add a new depth to the image they are attached to.

My only complaint in the book is minor, and takes only a few pages away from the book. There is, included in the rest, a small section of photos of butchered animal heads. They are grotesque, shocking, and not at all cohesive with the other material. And for those with stomaches that upset easily, they will come about very rudely and unexpectedly. One of the most compelling aspects of the book is the way in which it takes common people from America’s west, and gives them a sort of uncanny dignity. They are photographed by a man who made his career shooting the likes of Elizabeth Taylor and Marilyn Monroe. He does not glorify the people he shoots, but he presents them with a sort of rugged strength that goes beyond the security of wealth or fame. Best yet, the photos are subtle. The intention, story, and character of the subjects are not spelled out, but rather kept on the border of abstraction, with plenty of room for the viewer to read their own story into them. But then, mixed in, there are these 4-5 photos of animal carcasses. They are gory, impersonal, and seem to be shocking for the sake of shock. They are the few images that posses none of the dignity or strength that is so pervasive throughout all the remaining 100-some images. Personally, they are the few that I think should have been left out to keep the subject matter focused.

That one reservation aside, overall this is a great book. It is unusual to find such high quality, large printed books for a great price like this, and so if you’re considering, you should not pass this up.

This isn’t a review, really. I’ve been using this lens for about a day. But I will go through a few quick words to say what I like about it thus far.

It focuses to 1:1. If my sensor is 24mm across (I don’t really know how long APS-C sensors are; that was arbitrary), then this lens can take an object that is 24mm wide and fill the entire frame with it. There initially was a lot of debate over whether or not using smaller sensors would yield a higher magnification. For all I know this debate still exists, although I have long been away from the forums and beginning sites that typically banter about such things. But for those of you who are wondering, the answer is no. Magnification stays the same, but the width of the sensor is smaller… 24mm fills 24mm. As a point of reference, an eyeball is a bit wider than whatever the sensor on a 20D is.

Physics aside, this is a great lens. It’s crazy sharp, for those of you who are into sharp (I put it at about #3 or #4 on my list of most important attributes), and it handles decently. Obviously there’s a lot of glass involved, and while it isn’t particularly heavy, it’s long enough to feel like the weight is resting pretty far forward if you’re using a non-pro body, like a 20-40D, or a Rebel of any variety. The only real point worth saying about ergonomics is that it’s a macro lens that you can keep when you upgrade to that shiny 5D (or the 1Ds Mark III for those of you who aren’t really into yachting). If you don’t care so much about those bigger cameras, get the smaller 60mm EF-s macro.

The autofocus doesn’t really seem quick, and at 2.8 with no Image Stabilizing built in, you’re probably not looking at a great low-light lens. But it does serve well for headshots, I think. Some people will argue that you shouldn’t use a sharptastic lens to do portraits, because then you see all of a person’s pores. You’re welcome to use your dreamy soft-focus effects all you like, but I find nothing more gravitating in a photo than a fantastically sharp eyeball.

Plus, if someone decides they want to know how many pores they have, I don’t see why they shouldn’t have that option.

I haven’t done any flower photos or teeny bugs or texture details on miniature train sets, all of which would undoubtedly marginally expand my already marginal site traffic, but frankly I haven’t had that use for it yet. There have been at least ten assignments at work that would have been incomparably easier with the use of a macro lens. Consequently, if you plan on doing any studio work shooting products, it might be worth getting this lens sooner rather than later. Then you’re free to shoot all the bugs in your free time that your heart desires.

You’ll be seeing a lot more of this lens in the coming days, and probably see an update with significantly more photos for examples, and possibly, higher quality jokes. (Yachting? Who says that?)

At any rate, I’ll leave you with a quick one-line review. This is a good macro lens. Buy it if you need a macro lens. IS would be nice, but it’s not that expensive. It’s also craptastically sharp, and that’s sharp enough for me.

This will be an ongoing review. Most reviews are written by reviewers. Duh. But most of them are written by people who have a pretty wide range of experience in photographic printing, and so I’m going to give my perspective as one who has never used photo-quality printer (certainly not of this size, anywa), and yet leaped ahead to the Canon Pro9500 13×19″, 10-ink printer system.

First things first. If you use CS3, start downloading the Easy Photoprint plugin for CS3 right now, as the download in North America tends to be agonizingly slow (I am waiting for it as I speak; 8.3kb/sec right now). Also, I want to vent about every piece of software Canon makes.

Why, Canon, can you not, like everyone else on the planet, make a software program that has a “check for updates” option? And then, perhaps, just perhaps, link all of them into a single, international download database, rather than making us all navigate your poorly designed (USA/Japan/Europe) websites to find the plugin and/or update we need. It’s a shame to computers the world over.

Moving on. Physically setting up the printer was pretty simple. I mean, yes, it’s pretty heavy, but I could lift it. I can’t underestimate the importance of finding a physical space large enough to put it. My computer (Mac Pro 2x dual-core 2.66ghz Xeon, 4GB ram, 1 20″ Cinema display, plus one 20″ 2007WFP, ATI X1900XT + NVIDIA 7300GT) is set up on a 6-foot by 3 foot folding table instead of a computer desk. I thought, “Hey! I’ll set this printer next to my two screens!” Yeah, turns out it won’t fit.

Some elements of the setup are quite ingenious. The print head is (easily) user replaceable, so if it’s damaged somehow, you can change it out yourself. Each ink tank has a nice little red LED on it that lights up when the ink tank is seated properly. When an ink tank is low and needs replacing, the LED on that particular ink tank blinks, notifying you of which one needs changing right there while you’ve got it open. Very handy.

Auto head alignment is very simple… Two sheets of normal letter paper and you’re good to go.

Also, of particular note, and the deciding factor in my choosing this printer over the Epson R2400… It has a separate ink tank for both matt (which is the technically correct spelling) and glossy black inks. This is the same as the Epson, however the major difference is that they’re both loaded at the same time. The Epson requires you to swap the ink tanks when switching paper types, as well as flushing the ink out of the lines, which adds both time and cost to an already time consuming and costly process.

OK. Having finally gotten the correct plugin for CS3, I loaded it up, loaded in a sheet of Photo Paper Plus Semi Gloss (which needed a little finicking, and reading the instructions and diagrams very carefully), but as soon as it was in, I just selected borderless 13×19″ and hit print. It was incredibly simple, and looking at the print now, hot off the press, I’m amazed. The crispness and saturation seems great. My first print was actually of this file:

Some of the spotlighting you see behind him has disappeared, and gone totally black. This didn’t surprise me, as monitors obviously have a grossly higher contrast range than prints. That being said, I did not, in any way, alter my original file before going to print.

********

Those stars represent arbitrary time periods that somehow add up to about two weeks. As of now, I’ve made something like 20 prints, using Semigloss, Premium Matt, Photo Rag, and Museum Etching. I have to say, the museum etching is especially cool… It has a very subtle look to it, but man is it impressive. Of note is that none of the “fine art” papers can be printed anywhere near borderless. Probably closer to about 10×14″ print size. Maybe I could get a little closer to the long end if I used a wider cropped photo, but thus far I’ve mostly been printing uncropped work, as this is my traditional style.

Prints all have a massive 3D appearance to them that is extremely eye-catching. Already I’ve received numerous compliments on the photos I’ve printed, and I can’t blame them… It’s really a wonderful piece of equipment that makes great looking prints.

A couple quick tips before I go. 1. Museum Etching is expensive. Something like $75 for a 20-sheet pack from Adorama last I checked. However, you can get a paper sampler pack with 5 sheets each of Semigloss, Premium Matt, Photo Rag, and Museum Etching. If you have use for even one of those other paper types, it’s cheaper to buy the sampler packs, even if you end up throwing the other half of the pack away. Since Photo Rag is also very pricey, if you can use that paper up, then you’re really doing yourself a favor.

The second item before I go is one of necessity if you print any of the beautifully crisp semi-gloss papers. The ink sitting on the surface is extremely fragile. The prints need to dry several days before you can even stack prints up, and even then, it would really be far wiser to invest in some protective sleeves as well.

Long story short. Good printer. Yeah, kind of expensive, but if you plan on doing serious printmaking, it’s a pretty decent deal. You won’t likely be disappointed.

Update: I just today discovered a kind of irritating coincidence of this printer. While it is functional as a normal document printer as a last resort (although not particuarly wise, with the ink costing what it does), it will not let you print a grayscale document if you perchance are out of Red ink. While obviously not the primary focus of this printer, I feel as though it’s really a somewhat idiotic oversight in the design. While the fact that the printer warns you ahead of time that the following print won’t turn out nicely because you don’t have a color, it is somewhat foolish to not have a black and white option that really truly only uses black ink. Something to keep in mind when ordering, and realistically you should just pick up a cheapo second printer for documents.