Birth Matters

Talking to a doctor friend as I was working on the pictures that I took at the ‘Reclaiming Birth‘ march in London at the start of the week of International Women’s Day, he reminded me that one of the major aims of campaigners around this year’s events was to provide increased medical care for women while they gave birth, in order to cut down the number of women and children who die during childbirth. The call is for increasing medicalisation – and in  particular more doctors, more hospitals.

But here in the UK, the emphasis is rather different, because we have come to see the limits of the purely medical approach and campaigners are seeking to again give the women who are obviously at the centre of things a greater say in how they give birth and to centre the services provided around them, providing information, advice and support through the whole period of pregnancy, birth and baby care. Independent units such as the Albany Midwifery Practice based in Peckham, whose contract with Kings College Hospital was recently terminated, have provided models of best practice, achieving significantly better outcomes and highly satisfied mothers, many of whom were on the march, together with their children.

You can see the pictures and read more about the event  in Mums and Midwives Reclaim Birth  on My London Diary.

© 2010, Peter Marshall

Photographically the real problems were that almost everything about the march was the wrong way round. At the start of the march as people moved from Geraldine Mary Harmsworth park where they had gathered out on to the road the sun was shining strongly more or less directly into my lens as I tried to take pictures, and the same was true at the end of the march as it came up Whitehall for the rally. And when I photographed the march going over Westminster bridge with the Houses of Parliament in the background, all the marchers had their backs to me.

The sun, still low in the sky although we are approaching the Spring equinox, was a big problem. The lens hoods on wide-angle zooms are never very effective, and as usual I was doing the usual trick of trying to hold my left hand in the appropriate place to  cast a shadow on the lens. Tricky to do and impossible to avoid getting the odd frame with fingers in the top that need to be cropped out. Of course where possible I look for something in the scene that will act as a shade – perhaps a handy sign or even a placard or banner.

People walking towards you with the sun behind them will of course have their faces in shade, and you seldom have the luck to find a natural reflector that will put light into those shadows. The SB800, set to auto-fill at -2/3 or -1  stop is  a great help, though it risks over-exposure when subjects get close to the camera, and if I remember I’ll dial in a matching -2/3 stop to the ambient exposure set on the camera, which doesn’t seem to compensate itself for the extra light from the flash.

© 2010, Peter Marshall

Seeing only people’s backs as they walk towards Westminster is a harder to fix. Occasionally I ask people to turn round  or look back over their shoulders, although I don’t really like posing them at all. Sometimes people decide themselves to pose and I’ll take advantage of this – as I did with the two women with their banner from Swansea.  But I also had another idea which was to make use of the more than 140 degree horizontal coverage of the 10.5mm full-frame fisheye.

© 2010, Peter Marshall

From exactly the right place above and slightly in front of someone’s head, this lens should make it possible to see their face (though from a rather odd angle ) and also the view in front of them. Although it should work in theory, in practice it is a little trickier to perform. My ideal camera position would have me floating horizontally face down in mid air above them around 2 metres or slightly more above the ground, but I couldn’t see an easy way to do this.

The approach I tried – not entirely successful – was to walk just a few inches behind the person I was trying to photograph and a few inches to one side, holding the camera up at arm’s length and slightly forward.  Since the 10.5mm is a digital format only lens, I had it on the D300 and one of the annoying small things missing from that body is an eyepiece blind. So while one hand is holding the camera to press the shutter, the other has to be on the camera back covering the eyepiece otherwise the light entering there will mess up the exposure reading and give severely underexposed results. (Had I thought a little more carefully I would have put the camera on to manual exposure, when this particular contortion would not have been needed.)

© 2010, Peter Marshall

As you can see I couldn’t quite get the camera in the place I wanted – it isn’t far enough forward to show the woman’s face, although it does just manage the child in the push chair. I’d really need to mount the camera on a monopod and use a wireless release, and getting the orientation right would be extremely tricky.

I took quite a few frames (probably resulting in a rather worried woman) using both portrait and landscape orientation and the pictures are at least a little different. As often with a lens with such a wide angle of view the sun was also a little of a problem – and in this frame it was only just outside the picture where you can see the light area.  In the vertical version it is actually in the frame, which as you can guess made processing this image near impossible – and there is an interesting piece of colour on the pavement.

© 2010, Peter Marshall

Million Women Rise

Photographing last Saturday’s ‘Million Women Rise‘ march in London would have been rather easier if I had shaved my beard off. The march was a ‘women only’ event, although I’m fairly certain that there were a few men marching in the thick of it with their partners.

© 2010, Peter Marshall

The previous day I’d told one of the women photographers I was working with about this event, and she was able to photograph it in the way I would normally work, getting into the right position and making contact with people as she took their pictures, while I was limited by having to stay on the sidelines – except at the head of the march.

Of course there were plenty of women on the march who wanted to be photographed, and some even rushed across to make sure I photographed them, or slowed to make space so I could read their banners, but too often I was further away than I would have liked, or could not get a proper line of sight.

© 2010, Peter Marshall

So these two women from the ‘Stripping The Illusion‘ campaign against lap dancing by Object  were carrying placards in the shape of teacups, protesting against the ridiculously named ‘Spearmint Rhino’ which they have given an “Award  for the biggest misuse of the word ‘Gentleman‘” (shown on the left hand placard) but I didn’t manage to show them well enough to use an image and thus mention them when I wrote about the event. Nor did I manage to get a picture of the woman behind them with her placard about Shirin Alam Holi, a 28 year old Kurdish political prisoner in a Tehran jail sentenced to death in January for “warring against God” by working with a Kurdistan opposition group. And I’m sure there was much more I missed, both in the march and by not attending the rally at its end.

Of course I did manage to take some pictures, even some I like, but so many times I wanted to get closer and couldn’t. Standing on the sidelines I sometimes felt rather more like a voyeur than I like, having to use a longer lens than usual.

© 2010, Peter Marshall

I did step a few inches into the road to take this picture, and just a few more inches to take the next frame which showed more of the text on the banner. Immediately one of the stewards was at my elbow, requesting politely that I show my support from the pavement and not from the road.

I’m not complaining because I feel hard done by. Rather just that I wasn’t able to support the event as fully as I would have liked, and as I have managed to do at other women’s events. You can see some of what I did manage to do on My London Diary.

Tibet Freedom

I always enjoy photographing the annual Tibet Freedom March, although of course I would prefer it to be an event celebrating the achievement of freedom rather than bemoaning its loss. Although the spirit of Tibet is kept alive, China’s rise as to become the major world power seems to make any  attempts to put pressure on it to ease conditions in Tibet likely to be ineffectual; but perhaps China will develop as a more democratic nation as it gains in wealth.

© 2010, Peter Marshall

Coming in a generally wintry month here, the colour it brings makes a welcome change, and I think most years recently the sun has been out. Certainly this year London felt a little warmer than it has for some months as we gathered outside RIBA, opposite the Chinese embassy.

RIBA of course houses one of the largest collections of architectural photographs anywhere- between 700,000 and 1.5 million pictures – and more than 40,000 – not all photographs –  are available on-line at RIBApix. That makes it almost as large an on-line collection as My London Diary, where you can see my pictures from this year’s Tibet Freedom March!

If you are  “an up-and-coming architectural photographer” then you could consider the opportunity of putting your work on RIBApix

But back to Tibet and the march.  As well as being very colourful (often rather too colourful for my taste, with those strong primaries of the Tibetan flag)  the march tends to be fairly densely packed and also full of  interest. It’s also relatively slow-moving.  Taken together these things provide an ideal situation for the kind of close wide-angle work work in crowds that appeals to me.

So it was a good day to work with the 16-35mm, and I took quite a few frames at the wider end. But I could go even wider, putting the 10.5mm fisheye on the D300.

The 10.5mm is a full-frame fisheye, filling the whole sensor on the D300 and giving a diagonal field of view of 180 degrees (horizontally it is “only” a little over 140 degrees.) Its also a lens that lends itself to the use of various software tools to alter the perspective of the image. You can process the files to give a rectilinear panorama for example, though few subjects survive this treatment unscathed – rectilinear perspective seldom works above a roughly 100 degree angle of view.

So here is the march at Piccadilly Circus taken with the 10.5mm

© 2010, Peter Marshall

and its a picture I quite like, but a click in Photoshop applies the Image Trends IncFisheye-Hemi 2‘ filter to give a slightly different effect.

© 2010, Peter Marshall

It produces a result that I think is more ‘natural’ looking, in particular reducing the distortion of the figure at the extreme left of the picture and eliminating the curvature on the placard. Probably a little over 50% of the pictures I take with the 10.5mm look better treated to this realignment, though I’m not sure that Reuters or the World Press Photo would approve.

It hasn’t actually eliminated all curvature, and it actually looks less distorted than a rectilinear version would.  There are other alternatives to the Fisheye-Hemi plugin (some of which have the advantage of being free) but this is the one that most often works for me. It makes use of almost all the pixels in the image (losing a few in the corners) retaining the full width of the frame that I shot and almost all of the subject matter – the face that I placed at the left edge of the frame is still at the edge.

It works well in this case, particularly because I had the camera level when I took the picture, and so the lamp post and buildings at right of the frame become both straight and upright.

What is does lose is a little of the kind of outwards thrust and dynamic of the original image, where the woman in the centre really almost bursts out of the frame towards you. I was indeed very close to her when I took the picture; one of the problems of using this lens effectively is that you sometimes  have to really invade people’s personal space. In marches where they are moving forwards and you are walking backwards as you take your pictures it can be difficult to avoid collisions!

EDL & UAF

I didn’t enjoy photographing the English Defence League on Friday. If they had come into a pub where I was having a drink with a friend we would quickly have drunk up and gone elsewhere, and if I hadn’t have been there to take photographs I would probably have crossed to the other side of the road and walked by.

Fortunately they were on their best behaviour, and when the three of us who had walked down together decided we needed to get into the crowd of them and take some pictures if we weren’t exactly welcome we were tolerated, and after a few minutes (when we had been joined by many of the other photographers and journalists, some of whom had been hovering on the edge when we arrived) they really began to put on an act for us.

So we didn’t get any violence, and I was even able to have some reasonably sensible conversation with some of them, though there was a considerable amount of taunting particularly of a younger photographer who seemed a little nervous and a young Asian woman reporter. But all around us was a sea of obscenity and racist comments, all at the same time as they were assuring us they weren’t racists and posing with a black guy as their proof.

At first I wrote “see” and perhaps that would have been appropriate as the EDL seems very much more like some kind of twisted religion, a cult of St George, the English Flag, football, drunkenness and anti-foreignism. It isn’t exactly chauvinism and certainly not patriotism – for they dismiss virtually everything that shows Britain at its best. It’s a fear of people and cultures that are different from “us” and one that includes English people like me and the UAF and Muslims. Though of course Muslims do appear to have a special place in their demonology.

© 2010, Peter Marshall
Is that a Burkha or a Balaclava?

Earlier in the day I’d been with the UAF (Unite Against Fascism) counter-demonstration, in another crowd of people taking pictures, but this was a very different crowd, racially mixed and with at least as many women as men. I felt much more at home, these were my people, a part of my vision of the future for England. Whatever I thought about the politics it was just a so much more positive experience.

© 2010, Peter Marshall

Photographically my main problem throughout the day was the sun, but it also gave some of the pictures an added interest. I think I’m far too sensitive to flare in my pictures, and when I sat down to edit the work I shot late that evening probably eliminated some I should have kept in. Working with a wide angle – Nikon’s new 16-35 zoom – and shooting more or less straight into the sun makes flare virtually inevitable. It’s a fact of photography and really I should accept it, but I find it hard. And of course some agencies are likely to throw out pictures because of it. But I shouldn’t be working for the agencies, they should be working for me. When I have time I need to go back and think again about some of those I rejected.

© 2010, Peter Marshall
A little bit of flare – the sun was more or less at the top of the flag at top centre
I was impressed by the 16-35mm. Focus seems noticeably faster than the old Sigma 12-24, and I didn’t miss the extremes at the wide end, while the extra at the longer end is very useful. I think this will become my favourite lens, and on a bright day like this f4 was more than fast enough – the widest aperture I used was f5.6 and that was accidental. Even in dull light, with perfectly usable results at ISO3200 I think f4 is usually fast enough, though perhaps I might one day get either the Sigma 24 or 28mm f1.8 lenses for low light work. One perhaps one day Sigma – PLEASE – will send my f2.8 24-70 back and it will work properly…

Since I don’t yet have the 24-70, I was working with the Nikon 18-200mm on the D300 body and it as usual did a pretty good job, though occasionally refusing to focus. I’ve had it checked twice without a great deal of improvement. Its something that happens very occasionally with all auto-focus lenses in my experience – some subjects just won’t work, but more with the 18-200mm than I think reasonable.

In one of the melees between press and police I lost the lens hood from the Nikon 18-200, though it was no great loss, being largely decorative – you can’t really design a hood to cover this range. But all the Nikon lens hoods I’ve owned seem to be too flimsy to stay in place with the bayonet system they use – and even tend to fall off when you put the camera inside your coat to shield it from the rain. I’ve caught this one or picked it up from the ground countless times, but this time didn’t notice it in the crowd. But its no great loss, though it provided some physical protection.

More pictures from the event on My London Diary.

Flash at Holloway

Holloway Prison, the best-known women’s prison* in England, is not a fun place for anyone to be, either inside or outside, where it always seems somehow isolated and bleak even though it is in inner London. It’s next to a road junction which is part of a largish one-way system, and set a few yards back from the road behind some ill-kept grass and shrubs. Across the wide street of east-bound traffic is a defunct petrol station, and every time I’ve visited there has been an icy wind from the east blowing across the largely open space.

Thursday night it was cold, just a few degrees above freezing and the wind chill soon got into my bones. It’s a place with no shelter.

© 2010, Peter Marshall
Virtually all the light for this picture came from a Nikon SB800 on camera

Outside the prison were a small group of demonstrators with banners. Inside were three women held without charge or trial (we do have a justice system in England, but it doesn’t seem to work for asylum seekers and migrants without proper documents) accused of being ring-leaders in a hunger strike still continuing three weeks later without them in the immigration detention centre (a prison in all but name, where people are routinely held without trial) at Yarl’s Wood.

By the time I left to catch a bus an hour later, the numbers had swollen to around 50 and included a samba band whose music did do a little to warm us up. But although I’d dressed for the weather I had really needed an extra layer for the steppes of Holloway.

More pictures and more about Yarl’s Wood and the hunger strikers in my piece Holloway Protest for Yarl’s Wood Women on My London Diary (also published elsewhere.)

Normal street lighting is enough to give some fill when working with flash at night if you take advantage of the high ISOs that are now perfectly usable. But the short driveway into the prison was only lit by a few low wattage bulbs which added nothing. Essentially direct flash was the only light source for photography.

This of course has its problems. It isn’t very interesting lighting being close to the lens and gives a harsh shadow because of its small size. And there is the inverse square law.

Traditionally photographers used flash brackets to take the flash further from the lens, or held the flash at arms length, but although these may make the lighting more interesting they also increase the shadow problem.

Social photographers often use weird and wonderful attachments on their flash to create a larger light source – I used to have my own favourite device made with an old translucent bottle, some aluminium foil, a couple of rubber bands and a little ingenious copying of other people’s ideas, which although it looked a touch Heath Robinson, did the job remarkably well, but these things are not too suitable for demonstrations and don’t help a lot when working a larger distances, partly because the light source still appears small, but also because they cut the light down too much.

The compromise favoured by many photojournalists was the Sto-Fen Omnibounce, a small translucent clip on diffuser, and most flash units now come with an inferior copy of this device. It actually has very little effect (a euphemistic way of saying sod all) on the light quality according to my own tests, but it does make you feel better and gives more even light with wide-angles. So I was annoyed to find that I had forgotten to put it in my camera bag. However it probably would not have made much difference to the pictures!

I do sometimes claim to have a special derogation from the inverse square law when people ask about some of my pictures, though I seldom explain this.

© 2010, Peter Marshall
Extreme differences in lighting needed a little Lightroom magic

The inverse square law if you are not familiar with it states that the light from a point source – and a camera flash is more or less that – falls off with with the square of the distance from the source. So if you imagine a picture with one person at 4 feet from the camera/flash and another at 8 feet, double the distance, the further person gets 1/4 (4=2squared) of the illumination. Its perhaps easier to think as a photographer that 2x the distance means 2 stops down and so on.

So if you expose for the close person, the distant guy is 2 stops under; and if you expose for the distant one, your near neigbour is at 2 stops over and likely to be pretty much burnt out white. It’s something that photographers like Winogrand and Friedlander used to great effect, but digital is less forgiving of overexposure than film and it is not in any case an effect that will generally endear you to editors.

You need either to get everyone at more or less the same distance from your camera, or expose very carefully to put the closest person just on the edge of burning out. If you do that, then you can burn the over-bright areas down in Lightroom (or Photoshop) and brighten the more distant dark parts. Virtually everything I took at Holloway needed something of this treatment. The results aren’t great but they are a lot better than they would otherwise have been.

While taking pictures I was asked by the reporter for a small local newspaper if I would supply them with pictures. He was apologetic when I enquired about rates and could only offer a by-line and I declined.  I think events like this are a good example of why photographers are still needed, even when everyone has a digital camera.  And if people need photographers they have to be prepared to pay for them.

* Holloway prison opened in 1852 as a mixed prison but became prison for women alone in 1902, just in time for the suffragettes.  It was demolished and completely rebuilt on the same site in the 1970s and early 80s as a rather depressive red brick block, but some reports at least on the Internet still use the pictures of the rather impressive Victorian ‘castle’ that would have been a much preferable backdrop to my pictures!

Film and Real Photography

I met and briefly talked with someone on Friday while photographing a demonstration by the English Defence League who was still using film. We didn’t talk for long, as we were busy taking pictures, just exchanged a few sentences, but this was for some reason something he felt I ought to know about him.

And I think that says a lot. You could talk to me all day and it probably wouldn’t occur to me to mention my cameras were digital unless you actually asked me. It didn’t particularly worry me or interest me, after all I was standing outside a pub in the middle of a crowd of people whose views on politics and social issues and almost everything had very little in common with mine and managing to talk to them, so one more oddball didn’t matter.  But you do have to be some kind of a fanatic to be photographing events like this on film these days.

Of course there are still a few minute niches were film still makes sense, mainly for the kind of things which have some kind of specialist technical need where there is not a large enough market to produce a digital equivalent or its cost is extortionate. A good example is for some panoramic work, where we don’t have the equivalent of cheap swing-lens cameras like the Horizon. For some subjects you can stitch digital images, but it is often simpler to use film. And I don’t yet own a digital camera that can produce the quality I get from a Hexar F in silent or virtually silent mode. Another place where film still has advantages is in the darkroom, for making enlarged negatives for platinum printing and other ‘alternative’ printing processes (rather a silly term as platinum was a hundred years ago a very mainstream process) although virtually everyone doing these now relies on digital techniques to print enlarged negatives on a inkjet printer.

Possibly too for those people who undertake lengthy projects in remote areas, away from mains electricity and camera repair facilities, simpler mechanical cameras using film might well make sense, though some people manage to keep digital cameras running under very difficult circumstances.

There is also a question of expense. Although film is more expensive to use, you can pick up film cameras, even very good ones, remarkably cheaply now. And for people who don’t have the money or credit to buy a decent digital, the best way to take pictures may be to use film, even though you know it will cost you more.

I’ve long been a fan of real ales, as of real bread and I do still own some vinyl, though it very seldom sees a turntable. But here there are real advantages (though I doubt if my hearing is still acute enough to appreciate them for the music,) while digital whips film in every way. You really do have to be some kind of crank to think otherwise. Not that I’ve anything against that – eccentricity is a great British tradition and good luck to him.

People talk about a ‘film look’ and its generally a matter of grain and poor colour reproduction – both of which you can simulate in Photoshop if you really must (and there are plug-ins that do it remarkably well.)

Of course some photographers do find digital hard to come to terms with. Many haven’t learnt how to shoot and process RAW images to get the most out of their cameras (and for much press work there simply isn’t time.)  Back in the old days specialist printers used to make a living from their skills in getting more out of film (and a few still survive) but we now seem to assume that all photographers can process their own digital work.

It isn’t of course true. Some haven’t much idea and simply accept what the camera gives them as the final word, whereas others take the possibility of digital manipulation too far. It’s something which has caused the organisers of this year’s World Press Photo some grief, and although I’d read various pieces on this before, my thanks to EPUK for providing the link to a post by Asim Rafiqui which goes into this case in more detail, pointing out all the manipulation they were apparently prepared to swallow while choking on the removal of a small and rather insignificant detail.

Like the photographer I talked to briefly, I used to enjoy working in the darkroom, where I’d dodge and burn (and occasionally crop my images slightly.) And later I’d take some pride in being able to use a spotting brush to clean up images. I horrified one museum curator by not only removing the dust specks from the sky but some of the pigeon droppings from the pavement of one image. As I said, “it isn’t a picture about pigeon shit.” Now I do similar things on a computer screen. Real photography involves using the appropriate equipment to get the best results you can – and for most things that means using digital at all stages of the process.

More about Friday when I get the time to put those images on My London Diary. For the moment you can see a small selection of them on Demotix.

Whittington March

The demonstration on Saturday against the closure of the A&E and Maternity departments at the Whittington Hospital in north London was in some respects a typical march along a couple of miles of street with couple of thousand people. On My London Diary you can see the pictures I took as well as reading a little more about why people were marching.

© 2010, Peter Marshall

During the march most of the pictures were taken with the 16-35mm but sometimes I needed to work at a greater distance and the 18-200mm came in useful, often because it just wasn’t possible to get close enough to use the wider lens, but also to try and create a narrower background that included lots of placards and posters.

© 2010, Peter Marshall

And there were times when I wanted to concentrate on just one person – particularly the speakers at the rally, but also sometimes people on the march.

© 2010, Peter Marshall
Jeremy Corbyn MP
© 2010, Peter Marshall
The start of the march

At one point on the march I had a rather disturbing encounter with one of the marchers, a man who seemed worried that I was taking pictures of people, and wanted to know why I was doing so. I think it was just another example of the kind of paranoia some people seem to have about photography.

When I’ve taken part in marches and protests, I done so because I want to put on record my support or opposition to a particular cause that is the point of the protest. Like most demonstrators I’ve welcomed any interest shown by others in the march and particularly people photographing or videoing the march, especially because it may need to greater publicity for the cause I’m demonstrating for.

Of course there are some protesters who intend to break the law and wish not to be recognised. But the way to do that is to wear a mask of some kind, not to try and evade cameras. These days you are in any case going to be recorded on CCTV – and it was interesting to see that the prosecutions in the Gaza demonstrations were based on CCTV evidence rather than the pictures of the many photographers at the demonstration (although the judge involved had also watched the coverage by Sky News.) Still photography, which simply captures an instant, seldom produces unequivocal evidence of an act in the same way as video and can often be extremely misleading.

This was however an entirely peaceful and lawful demonstration, so I find it hard to see any rational explanation for the attitude of suspicion which one man displayed. I suppose one madman in a couple of thousand is not too great a problem.

More pictures on My London Diary as noted above.

Join CREEP

Colin Jacobson in a interesting post about World Press Photo (I found it interesting, which means he expresses rather more eloquently some of the things I thought about it – as well as a few more novel ideas) in his first contribution to his MOG (Miserable Old Git) blog, invites us to join CREEP, the campaign for the eradication of repetitive photojournalism (not quite an acronym more an anagram with an added ‘e’)  whose mission is to “to encourage contemporary photojournalists to pledge to avoid predictable visual situations” (actually Jacobson calls it a “mission statement” but that’s a term I’m already determined should be wholly wiped off the face of the planet. Unless you are David Livingstone.)

And he starts a nice list of subjects that should be banned, inviting readers to add their own visual subject matter that should be added to the embargo. As he ends by saying, “This could all get quite enjoyable.”

PDN Top 30 for 2010

It’s always interesting to look at PDN‘s ‘Top Thirty‘, the annual choice of new and emerging photographers to watch made with the help of a number of industry figures, and this year’s crop is I think a good one. As usual there are a few names I already recognise among them, but mostly they are new to me.  And most of them have work that I find interesting, and I’ll go back later and have a look through their portfolios – so far I’ve just clicked through to see the 3 pictures per photographer in the Flash presentation and read the brief biographies there.

This is the list of this year’s Top 30:

  • Levi Brown
  • Alejandro Cartagena
  • Scott Conarroe
  • Sumit Dayal
  • Clémence de Limburg
  • Gratiane de Moustier
  • Danfung Dennis
  • Lauren Dukoff
  • Matt Eich
  • Matthieu Gafsou
  • Marcelo Gomes
  • Deborah Hamon
  • Estelle Hanania
  • Ben Hoffmann
  • Sohrab Hura
  • Wayne Lawrence
  • Brent Lewin
  • Eman Mohammed
  • Adrian Mueller
  • Nick Onken
  • Alex Prager
  • Thomas Prior
  • Ben Roberts
  • Anna Skladmann
  • Andy Spyra
  • Gabriele Stabile
  • Peter van Agtmael
  • Elizabeth Weinberg
  • Yang Yi
  • Reed Young

You can still see the work from earlier years, including 2009 and also 2008 when I think they presented it rather better. Nice to have a list of photographers down the side of the page. And interesting to read them and reflect that the only ones I recognise now are probably the same ones I recognised when I first saw this list two years ago.

2007  is here and you can also access this and earlier years via the archive page, which conveniently also lists the winners from 1999-2007. Interesting to read through and find how many names are now familiar.

Crown Court Demo

Last Friday morning was a little disconcerting as I found myself walking up a road that I’ve not visited for many years, but first walked up in the mid 1950s, in short trousers and with a new blazer that was a little too big to give room for growth and satchel. I didn’t quite get as far as my old school at the top of the hill, though I saw it a little ahead as I turned off at the building before it, Isleworth Crown Court, a new building since my young days.

I wasn’t going to court but to photograph a demonstration outside it, where young Muslim boys and men who had been picked out from CCTV coverage of the demonstrations in January 2009 during the Israeli attacks on Gaza were being sentenced.

Before their trials the judge had told them he’d already viewed the evidence and advised them to plead guilty. I didn’t think this was how we usually did justice in our courts, and certainly at least one defendant who went against this advice later left the court an innocent man. But most decided to plead guilty, doubtless being advised that this would result in a lesser sentence.

But the opposite appears to be true. The judge made clear in at least some of his judgements that he was very much intending to make an example of these people aimed at their community. Actions that at other times might have been expected to lead to a smallish fine or suspended sentence led to jail sentences of a year or even two.

Protesters see the trials and sentencing as both racist and an attempt to suppress legitimate expression of  protest as well as unjust. The effects on the young men unfortunate enough to have been identified from the camera footage (mainly because, unlike many more seasoned demonstrators, they had not thought to keep their faces masked) are clearly disproportionate to their actions. Collectively they seem certain to fuel terrorism in this country, their severity and unfairness acting as effective recruitment for dissident groups. I can only hope – though it doesn’t seem likely – that their will be some review and serious reduction in these sentences after the judge has done his worst.

Stop the War had called an emergency picket of the court at relatively short notice, and probably few people know where Isleworth is or find it easy to get there early on a Friday morning (though its only 35 minutes on the Piccadilly line from the centre of London – and a ten minute walk.) So I was really quite surprised to find around 15 people there when I arrived – and about the same number again arrived while I was there.

© 2010, Peter Marshall
17-35mm f4 at 35mm

Photographing around courts can be a problem, and we were told we had to move away when we tried to take pictures of a couple of women with placards just in front of the court entrance. The protesters too had to move just a few yards away on the pathway leading from the small car park at the front of the building. But otherwise the police were helpful, even moving their car out of the park to give the protest more space.

This was my first outing with the new Nikon 16-35mm f4 lens. I’ve been using the Sigma 12-24 as my main wide-angle on the D700, and although it works well on the DX format D300, with the full frame it is just a bit extreme.  Very few pictures really work at 12mm, and although I seldom notice the stretching at the edges that results from its rectilinear design  in the viewfinder, they are only too obvious when I see the image on my computer screen or in print.

Using the physics and geometry I learnt many years ago just a hundred yards or so up the road from the court, while the distance from the the centre of a simple 12mm lens to the  sensor is – for a subject at infinity – 12mm, the distance from that same lens centre to the corner of the frame is 24.6mm, giving roughly twice the magnification. Hardly surprising it is noticeable, as the maths also applies to the much more complex arrangement of glass in a photographic lens.  The horizontal angle of view of the lens at 12mm is around 112 degrees, and anything over 90 degrees really calls for a different perspective except in very special cases.  On full-frame anything below around 17mm is seldom much use.

Nikon used to make a 17-35mmf2.8, and it was a good lens for film and for DX Cameras, but they discontinued it a while back, though it is still listed on the Nikon UK site. It was also rather large and heavy, and still sells second-hand for around a grand. With their FX camera they brought out a larger, heavier and more expensive 14-24mm  f2.8, which seems a very good lens but has a bulbous front element that you can’t put a filter on for protection. It is faster and doubtless sharper than the 12-24mm Sigma I’ve used for around six years, but considerably larger and heavier, and given a choice I’d buy the Sigma again. It does the job and the D700 (or D3s) takes away much of the need for fast lenses.

But when Nikon announced their new AF-S NIKKOR 16-35mm f/4G ED VR it seemed to me to be an ideal lens for FX, although the various boards across the Internet were full of photographers who strongly and vituperatively felt otherwise. My only disappointment was that it was quite so large and heavy – around the same size and almost as heavy as the 17-35 f2.8 – in part perhaps because of digital favouring a design that gives rays more perpendicular to the sensor, and in part because it includes VR – Nikon’s Vibration Reduction II system.

I’m not sure that I need VR. In practice I haven’t found it seems to make much difference to my picutres even on the 18-200 zoom where I’d expect it to be most valuable at the long end.  But it doesn’t seem to do any harm – most of my pictures were sharp before and they are still sharp now. But I think it does more for test exposures than in anger, though perhaps it will help in those situations where people are pushing me while I’m taking pictures.

© 2010, Peter Marshall
17-35mm at 18mm

VR also puts up the price of lenses, though I think I got a pretty decent deal considering I got the lens the day after it was launched for a price that was in three figures ( just.)  Focus is really fast and everything seems pretty sharp – usable wide open though just a little better at f5.6, but the difference isn’t big in practice. The corners seem pretty sharp, there is a little chromatic aberration which is readily corrected in Lightroom, and distortion seems reasonably low, though I’d want to correct it for architectural work – not quite as good as my old 12-24 Sigma in this respect. And it does feel like a lens built for pro use, unlike many cheaper Nikon lenses which clearly are not, although in true Nikon fashion, the lens hood can rather easily get knocked off. It’s one area where Sigma are clearly superior.

So once I get the Sigma 24-70 back from repair (soon please – its been almost a month away now – and get it right this time), I’ll be putting this on the D300 body, where it works like a 36-105.  Or for for those days when I feel I might need something longer I’ll use the Nikon 18-200 (27-300) on the D300.