Go to Google Images to check on possible copies of your work

Update:
We’ve had a lot of interest in this topic and if you have a situation where you hired a fake photographer or had your content stolen, send us the details. Get clear information, screen shots of the site, email and if possible physical addresses and phone numbers. Record any data on professional organizations that they claim to belong to. Proof is key! Send us an email through our Facebook page with the information and any attachments. We’ll create a group on that page and also here on the main page for everyone to see. A public record of these thieves for both photographers and clients to check. Remember, some of your content might be stolen but as in the Meagan Kunert case, she stole from many different ones and by exposing the thief here, you can help the entire community.

Update 2
A colleague has begun a blog post t make these fake photographer’s sites and names known. You can visit it here -Photo Stealers- and if you have something to submit there, just follow the instructions above. I’m also going to add this blog site to our main index so it doesn’t become lost in the archives.
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

To follow up from our earlier article on Meagan Kunert’s theft of multiple photographers work that she posted on her web site. Photographers are checking to see if the same thing has happened to them. In my case, I found a wedding planning site that was using one of my images as their own and have had them attribute it to me. Now a colleague has also found a direct and large scale rip off of his work on another photographers site. I’ll show you that further into this article.

First how do you protect yourself? Go to Google images and you’ll see a way see if your published work is posted elsewhere on the web. You will see a small icon that looks like a camera in the right hand corner of the search box. Click on the camera and then you will open a new window where you can check your images. Post the image URL in the search box or upload a published image from your computer. Other than Internet explorer, you can drag and drop the image to check it and use smaller web sized images to speed up the process, just make sure the EXIF data is intact as well.

Google image check step 2

You can do exactly the same thing with a site called TinEye. I would recommend trying both as Google images tends to look for ‘similar’ images and you might get a bunch of green grass shots that look similar to your green grass shot but are not the same. Another tool you can use with Google Image search is here and it works very well.

Second to check text, go to Copyscape and put your web page URL in the search box. It will check to see if your content has been copied. If you are using a WordPress Platform, you can use these various Plagiarism tools to protect your work. You could also use Google Alerts to check for certain content keywords. Yet another would be Digital Fingerprints for WordPress.

Sadly the other partial protection is to clearly watermark your images. It’s not foolproof, as a person who wants to make the effort will remove the watermark if they have the Photoshop skills or recrop the shot if the watermark is only along an edge of the shot. Also put unique keywords in your text. If you have references to XYZ photography somewhere on the page so if it’s copied, it will be more easily found.

Digimarc. If you want to take the extra step to protect your images, you could use Digimarc which is an Adobe Photoshop plugin. From the web site: allows you to embed imperceptible, persistent digital watermarks into your images to communicate ownership and other information, wherever the images travel across the Internet. A digital watermark embedded in your image carries a unique ID and can link to contact information or a website for viewers interested in learning more about you or purchasing your artwork. The watermark stays with your image regardless of the path it travels across the Internet. No matter where your digital image ends up, others will be able to determine your copyright ownership and find you.

Another case of a Professional Photographers work being stolen

Ashton Lamont is a colleague and excellent photographer based out of Reading, Berkshire UK. With all the theft of real professional’s work happening, he decided to check who might be using his work. He used some of the tools I mentioned above. Well unfortunately another photographer based in Victoria BC copied his work and posted it as his own. Really what a dumb move. The photos are clearly taken at old world locations. Victoria BC is pretty far from old world. It’s blatantly clear who owns the work.

The work that was stolen is samples of albums that Ashton has made for his clients. Creating these albums cost a huge amount of money, takes hours of design work for each album and takes time to properly photograph to present in an appealing way on his web site. To just go and rip this off is frankly appalling. What’s even worse is the photographer who stole the work is a member of several professional photography associations. A direct quote from their site:

We take our photography seriously and are bound by standards of practice and performace by being charter members of the Professional Photographers of Canada (PPOC), Wedding and Portrait Photographers International (WPPI) and Canadian Association of Photographic Art (CAPA).

So here is the work that’s been stolen in Ashton’s Album section. If you click on his link (it will open in a new window), you will see the originals that are identical to the screen shots below. The screen shots are of the pages from (how ironic is that name) Noble Photography. Now a couple of the really dumb things about this theft is, because Ashton embosses his albums with the names of the bride and groom, the thief has to use the same names in the descriptions. Very hard to hide from that. Second is the quality of the work. Ashton has a solid high quality body of work that is very consistent. If I were to assess the Noble samples, I’d recommend they get a job flipping burgers and sell their gear. They are in no way capable of matching Ashton’s work.

Now, it’s clear Ashton’s work has been used without his permission. The penalty in Canada is $1million and/or 5 years in jail per occurrence. I would hope the aforementioned professional bodies would support Ashton’s claims and strip this thief of any accreditation and also assist him in any prosecution he decides to follow. As has been discussed before, Gary Fong received a $240,000 award in US federal court for a very similar offence. Let’s hope Canada’s copyright act is equally enforced.

I’ll save you a step, share this article on Facebook on the Noble Photography Facebook page here and tell them what you think of these actions.

Yet again, another photographers work stolen.

In this case, not only the photos but the text and 95% of the entire site. Martin Leckie is a multi-award winning photographer (see below) who just discovered his site was stolen. I don’t understand the thinking of these thieves, Martin has a high profile and his site and work would be easily recognized. These people will be found and I hope face either jail time, big fines or both. I guess it’s a case of ‘So you want to avoid all the work and learning of getting to this level? Steal his entire online portfolio and jump the years of hard work it takes to be a professional.’ If you steal from someone with that type of profile, you will get caught, I hope no matter what your profile level, you are not faced with someone stealing your work. We will continue to publish articles like this to help the photographic community find and expose these thieves.

The link to the stolen work is here. Martin is currently taking actions to have this removed and is speaking to lawyers with the intention of further action. So I suspect the site will disappear shortly. Here are some screen shots of the offending site and Martins to compare. You can see more of his work here. Click on the images below to see larger versions and use the back button to return to this article.

You will see identical pages on the fake site, only the background colour and photographer's name has changed.

One for Homer Simpson. Martin's signed photo on Coleen's site. Theives always screw up somehow.

Martin used Copyscape to discover the site and it found the fake site in about a minute. If you think your website host or designer will check if the material you are submitting is stolen, think again. Swiftcreations used this web site as a portfolio example on their site until they were notified by Martin’s lawyers about the stolen content and the example was removed.

Martin’s Awards:
Martin A. Leckie L.B.I.P.P. L.M.P.A. L.S.W.P.P.

Sim 2000 UK Wedding Album Designer of the Year 2009
SWPP 2 Gold Awards for Wedding Photography 2008
SWPP UK Children Photographer of The Year 2007
SWPP Runner Up Overall UK Photographer of the Year 2007
MPA Scottish Portrait Photographer of The Year 2000
MPA Award for Avant Garde Wedding 2007
MPA Gordon McGowan Award for Innovative Portraiture 2004/ 2007
MPA Complete Wedding Award of excellence 2007
MPA 33 Awards of Excellence 1989 – 2007
BIPP Scottish Photographer of The Year 1997
BIPP 17 Awards of Excellence 1989 – 2005

I never ask a reader to do this but I feel this is an issue that needs as much exposure as possible. Copy the article to your blog, post it to a sharing site like Stumbleupon or Digg. Share it on Facebook and any place you think other photographers might see it. We need the community to find out if their work is being copied and go after these thieves.

If you have tried the tools we posted above to protect your work and found cases where someone has stolen your work, we want to hear your story. Please post a comment below. It’s important to “out” these thieves who are not only stealing your hard work but your income and very likely tarnishing your reputation and the reputation of all photographers who do an honest days work (7 days a week!)

Cheers and good shooting
-Peter Zack

Note: Links in this article might be to one of our affiliate stores. Purchases made from our affiliates through these links will benefit Enticing the Light at no extra cost to you.

Related posts:

1. Stealing photographers work to start a business – Exposed
2. Protect Your Photos with TinEye
3. Bad Photoshop Work – No Wonder the Movie Was a Flop!

Start a FREE trial at zenfolio or get up to $25 off your subscription by using discount coupon E6P-UJA-UCX

Please consider purchasing through our affiliate stores. If you visit one of the stores through the links below and place an order, EtL will receive a small commission at no extra cost to you. We hope you don't mind these ads; revenue from commissions is how we keep EtL running. Thanks!

B&H	Adorama	Amazon	eBay	Best Buy

© Peter Zack for Enticing the Light, 2012. All rights reserved, do not reproduce without permission. | Read article with proper formatting.

Images on the left side are the copyright property of Sean McGrath. Stolen images on the right were on the site of Meagan Kunert (Reed) but are also the copyright property of Sean McGrath.

Images above are the copyright property of Sean McGrath

Update
We’ve posted a lengthy follow up article here and would like everyone who read this article to have a look at how to protect your work.

Well this is old news now (about 24 hours old and in internet terms, that’s a lifetime) but a so called photographer, Meagan Kunert (Reed) of (Conway) Little Rock, Arkansas, who appeared to have some talent, decided that taking shortcuts was the quick way to a ‘rock-star’ career in wedding photography. She ripped off the work of several established pros to build a Facebook page, Flikr site, Zenfolio account, blog and web site. In fact you could find her almost everywhere as she also had a G+ site, Linkdin profile and was on [b] School. How she thought no one would notice her copying other peoples work, is beyond imaginable. The internet might be global but it’s also a small and closely watched place in so many ways.

So this exposure of stolen images went viral very quickly. The theft by Meagan Kunert (Reed) was pretty extensive. It encompassed the work of at least 5 other photographers that I was able to determine and I would assume, there were more that just haven’t become known. The thief was using this work to book business and passing off the posted work as her own. Even to the point of watermarking the stolen photos as her own work. One photographer Amber Hughes had a large section of a wedding stolen, then another and then a third. You can see the originals on her site and a few of the copies looked like this:

You'll note the new watermark on Amber's work

The following morning after this was discovered, it had gone viral before Meagan had gotten out of bed. There where a flood of posts on various forums and Facebook pages, one of the most notable being David’s Hobby’s Twitter feed (of Strobist fame). The internet in it’s various forms, exploded with condemnation and anger. Meagan began by just deleting comments but the flood kept coming. Eventually the web site, blog, Flikr account and a few others were shut down. Later on May 9th, she issued a public apology on her Facebook page but some claimed the reply comments were being filtered to only include supportive posts or ones that were less of an attack nature. Since she’s taken that apology down and it’s resulting comment section, there’s no way to know everything that was said. When I visited, the bulk of the comments were supportive.

Her Pinterest account at the time of this writing remains active. I’m sure that will change so I’ll post a most curious item in one of her boards:

The Pot calling the kettle Black.

Her blog was full of tips about how to create a successful wedding photography business and like the image above, she had stolen a “how to” blog post that was put on her site on April 17th. The post was a copy word-for-word from Shannon Holden’s Blog site found here and the top section which was stolen from Digital Photography School. Comments like :
“RESPECT YOUR FELLOW PHOTOGRAPHER”
“Operate with Integrity”
“Be honest, be bold, be genuine, be loving, and be humble. Your clients will appreciate you more for it.”

The list of ironic quotes goes on. I don’t think you need me to explain how hypocritical she was in posting the written work of others containing phases like this. The curious thing was, Shannon was freely sharing her thoughts with everyone and only asked if you posted it on your own web site or blog, that you linked back to Shannon’s site and gave her credit. Meagan took it as her own.

You can see that what was posted on Meagan's site was a copy of Shannon's earlier writings, posted in 2008.

What also interested me was Meagan wrapping herself in the name of God. Her tag line on Linkedin and Google + was “wedding photographer slash story teller. lover of Jesus” The apology on Facebook was sprinkled with “pray for me” and other religious forgiveness references. While I make no comment on ones faith, I find this abhorrent to use religion as an “Opps, I’m really a good person [because I believe in God] who made a mistake. Sorry and please forgive me and pray for me.”

If Yahoo CEO, Scott Thompson can be pressured to step down (he most likely won’t have much choice) for claiming on his resume, a degree that he never earned, then Meagan should never pick up a camera again to take the photo of a paid client. This type of fraud is all too common and and can not be supported or condoned in any fashion. Unfortunately it repeated itself in the same 24 hour period with the work of Martin Leckie based in Scotland not only had his images stolen but his entire site! Someone claiming to be a photographer based in Brighton UK, copied the site and used the web address (now closed) http://www.coleensullivan.co.uk/ as their own. [I don't have any screen shots because Martin had the site closed very quickly].

So I decided to post this editorial item as a warning to others who think image theft is a good way to skip the years of hard work to build a business. You will get caught when you steal. Either the internet and those you stole from will find you or you will not be able to produce work that comes close to the fake portfolio you put forward. Your clients will soon realize you can’t do the work you claim to do. On top of that in Canada where I’m based, the legal penalty for copyright theft is $1 million and/or 5 years in jail. The USA penalties are similar ($500K/5years). This is no trivial matter and should be punished under the law. It’s not an “Opps. sorry, I’m really a good person that believes in Jesus and just made an error”.

Update
We’ve posted a lengthy follow up article here and would like everyone who read this article to have a look at how to protect your work.

Cheers and good shooting
-Peter Zack

Note: Links in this article might be to one of our affiliate stores. Purchases made from our affiliates through these links will benefit Enticing the Light at no extra cost to you.

Related posts:

1. Photography theft and how to protect your work.
2. Pinterest. Maybe not so good for business.
3. When Photographers Go to Court

Start a FREE trial at zenfolio or get up to $25 off your subscription by using discount coupon E6P-UJA-UCX

Please consider purchasing through our affiliate stores. If you visit one of the stores through the links below and place an order, EtL will receive a small commission at no extra cost to you. We hope you don't mind these ads; revenue from commissions is how we keep EtL running. Thanks!

B&H	Adorama	Amazon	eBay	Best Buy

© Peter Zack for Enticing the Light, 2012. All rights reserved, do not reproduce without permission. | Read article with proper formatting.

If you’re at a concert in a big stadium or some other large event, your pop up flash can’t light the scene. It’s designed to light up about 12 feet and no more. I always laugh when I see some dark football stadium with a half-time concert happening and the flashes are firing all over the place. Put the camera in your pocket and enjoy the show.

What prompted this rant? Watch the YouTube video below for the first 20 or 30 seconds, and although it’s quite stunning, imagine how cool this would be if the cameras weren’t going off constantly. The second video below shows us the comparative difference. To see the entire show, view the second video after you finish reading my little rant.

Plus for those that don’t get it, look at the photo to the left taken from the video when a flash fired. If the flash could light up the clock (some were more powerful units and clearly could light the clock), they ruined the effect. The flash overpowered the lights and projector used to create the show. The resulting flash photo is a shot of the tower showing nothing special. Duh…..

Here’s the YouTube version. Like I said, just watch the first 30 seconds or so:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QjWJHEmFfPA

Now this video below must have been shot on a different night (clearly a different videographer) and the crowd must have been instructed to turn their cameras off. Only a few flashes near the very beginning. This is how it should be seen. Enjoy the show, it’s well worth seeing.

Cheers and good shooting
-Peter Zack

No related posts.

Start a FREE trial at zenfolio or get up to $25 off your subscription by using discount coupon E6P-UJA-UCX

Please consider purchasing through our affiliate stores. If you visit one of the stores through the links below and place an order, EtL will receive a small commission at no extra cost to you. We hope you don't mind these ads; revenue from commissions is how we keep EtL running. Thanks!

B&H	Adorama	Amazon	eBay	Best Buy

© Peter Zack for Enticing the Light, 2011. All rights reserved, do not reproduce without permission. | Read article with proper formatting.

by Miserere

If you just returned from a trip to the outer edge of the Milky Way, let me inform you that Nikon finally joined the compact mirrorless race with two cameras: The J1 and the more advanced V1, both using the same 10MP 13.2mm x 8.8mm CMOS sensor (that’s a 2.7x crop factor with respect to classic full frame). Many thought the Big Two (Nikon and Canon) were biding their time entering the mirrorless market but would do so with a bang when they did. Nobody knows what Canon has planned, if anything, but I’m here to tell you why I think Nikon’s release was more of a Fly’s Fart than a Big Bang.

Panasonic and Olympus have been slowly but surely improving their μ4/3 concept, offering cameras with and without an EVF (or with a detachable EVF if you want it that way), different sizes and prices, for a combined total of 5 or 6 different models. Their stable of lenses is growing, offering mostly slow consumer zooms to begin with, but now that Olympus has released its high quality, fast 12mm f/2 and 45mm f/1.8 primes, and Panasonic is finally shipping its cobranded with Leica 25mm f/1.4 (all to great reviews and applause, I should say), and seems poised to release two fast zooms, the system is reaching the point where it could replace a DSLR in many photographers’ kits. This makes sense to me, and it might make sense to you, but it makes no sense whatsoever to the folks at Nikon. You see, Panasonic has no DSLR system, and Olympus’s 4/3 DSLR system had reached maturity (according to Olympus’s bosses, anyway), so they were looking to create a camera system that would stand on its own and appeal to advanced photographers (although slimmed down models in cute colours being sold to novices and the ladies always help the bottom line and should not be neglected). Nikon, on the other hand, has a DSLR line to sell and introducing a product that would compete with its entry-level D3100 would be unacceptable, Nikon shooters be damned.

Courtesy of Nikon Rumors.

Is this a conspiracy theory? I think not. The smoking gun was found in this Nikon Rumors post where a reader plotted the area of the major sensor sizes at regular steps from the smallest 1/2.5″ to the Pentax 645D’s medium format (see graph to the right). Nikon’s J1/V1 sensor falls smack into the middle of the gap between 1/1.7″ sensor (used in advanced P&S cameras such as the Canon S95 or Olympus XZ-1) and μ4/3 sensor. This showcases a typical marketing thought pattern: If you can’t compete, create your own game. By being the only company with a sensor this size, and giving the format the name of Nikon CX (versus DX for APS-C and FX for full frame), it can position itself in a camera tier all of its own. Only a big company with brand recognition would try to pull this shit off, and by flooding the large electronics stores with these cameras, they will probably succeed.

But it’s not really the sensor size that places this camera in the beginners’ category, no; it’s the slow lenses, the colours, the lack of direct controls for many basic functions, the lack of a PASM mode dial (!!!), and the emphasis on non-technical, “power” words. Read the press release; in the first paragraph alone I caught the following stinkers: revolutionary, empower, driven, imaginative, iconic, lifestyle, unique, amazing. Marketing hype at its finest, substance at its lowest.

OK, OK, so Nikon’s marketing and sales department saw an opening and decided to increase their profits; what’s wrong with that? As a capitalist businessman, I see nothing wrong with it; as a photographer, I see Nikon just sold its photography soul and I mourn for its loss. This camera was not designed with the heart, it was designed with the shareholders’ pockets in mind.

But maybe Nikon might do like Sony and release an advanced version next year, I hear you say. Sure, Nikon, go ahead, because we all want another sensor format; it’s what the market has been clamouring for. Not. Unlike Sony, who was brave enough to offer an advanced compact such as the NEX-7 alongside its DSLR line, Nikon didn’t want to cannibalise its DX DSLR sales by offering a camera with similar specs, only smaller and lighter because of the lack of mirror and pentamirror, even if such a camera is what many people buying a D3100 would actually prefer. I doubt there will be a Nikon Pro 1, but if there is, they will still have missed their chance to wow the market and will be competing with advanced iterations of current mirrorless models from other brands, not to mention the lenses these other brands will have available by then. And with a 2.7x crop, the Nikon 1 system will not attract the adaptor fanatics flocking to the NEX cameras and their 1.5x crop factor.

The way I see it, Nikon had an opportunity here to create a true “iconic”, “unique” and “revolutionary” camera. Using its size and decades-long knowledge, they could have created the mirrorless camera that enthusiasts and advanced photographers have been waiting years for: An APS-C sensor, an EVF (on the left of the camera body!), plentiful external controls, and small, fastish prime lenses. Fuji proved it could be done with the X100 and that it was what people wanted…except maybe for the fixed lens, though that hasn’t stopped the camera from being perpetually backordered. Sony saw what Fuji did, took note, and released the NEX-7 which, despite its large (and limited number of) lenses, is being stratospherically preordered. Olympus just released two metal, high quality, fast primes. There’s talk of a new Panasonic that would be more rangefinderish than the G3. Samsung delayed the announcement of its NX20 by 6 months, allegedly to make it competitive with the NEX-7; they’ve also revealed they’re developing an NX1, a camera to sit above the NX20 line and aimed at those who want more than the NX20 will offer; and let’s not forget the many primes in their lens lineup. In short, everyone seems to have finally started listening to us, the advanced amateurs, yet Nikon has put its fingers in its ears and is saying la la la la la la la. I, and many others from what I read on the forums, had always thought that if anyone could get this whole mirrorless camera system right, it was Nikon: They built rangefinders in the past, they extract great IQ out of Sony APS-C sensors, they have a large R&D budget, excellent engineers…but it all came to nothing because the engineers and photographers at Nikon got bullied and pushed over by the marketing department.

RIP Nikon’s photography soul.

As for me, I’m awaiting the Samsung NX20, to be announced in a few weeks. Not only are Samsung’s ergonomics the best in the mirrorless segment (that’s my opinion, of course), they offer the most attractive line of fastish, pancake primes in the business, and their lens roadmap promises even more nice, fast glass in the near future. Then again, maybe Fuji will surprise us with an interchangeable version of the X100. At least that would be a pleasant surprise. Take note, Nikon!

Good light and good luck,

    —Miserere

Addendum
In case someone needs clarification: I am not saying the Nikon 1 cameras are rubbish; in fact, from the sample images I’ve seen online and some comparisons to other cameras, it looks like the J1/V1 might provide almost as good IQ as some μ4/3 cameras (though certainly not better than Sony NEX or Fuji X100), and it’s obviously better IQ than a P&S. That’s good! However, the cameras are not aimed at advanced amateurs, they are aimed at the mythical P&S movers-uppers, hipsters, soccer-mums and Ashton Kutcher’s 9 million Twitter followers. That’s what pisses me off. I seriously thought Nikon would understand that there are a gazillion (approximate number) photographers who want DSLR quality in a smaller package, with external controls and with a stable of small, high quality primes. The IQ of the Nikon 1 is irrelevant to me given how it’s packaged, and it will also be irrelevant to those who will flock to μ4/3 after this announcement. I can imagine the guys at Olympus and Panasonic threw a huge party on September 21 as they sighed a sigh of relief knowing they wouldn’t have to compete with Nikon in the mirrorless market. Mike Johnston said it best when he wrote: It was a couple of Nikons that arrived [...] But somehow it seemed like what really arrived was Micro 4/3. Exactly.

Related posts:

1. One Step Closer to a Modular Digital Camera: The Ricoh GXR
2. Shooting Macros Section 2 – The Small World
3. More Small Cameras: Leica X1 Field Report at Luminous Landscape

Start a FREE trial at zenfolio or get up to $25 off your subscription by using discount coupon E6P-UJA-UCX

Please consider purchasing through our affiliate stores. If you visit one of the stores through the links below and place an order, EtL will receive a small commission at no extra cost to you. We hope you don't mind these ads; revenue from commissions is how we keep EtL running. Thanks!

B&H	Adorama	Amazon	eBay	Best Buy

© Miserere for Enticing the Light, 2011. All rights reserved, do not reproduce without permission. | Read article with proper formatting.

While I have your attention, if you are doing or know of someone who is doing a ‘photo a day for a year’ style project, email us the link. We’d love to share them with our readers!

Cheers and good shooting
-Peter Zack

Related posts:

1. What Makes a Great Photograph
2. Shepard Fairey. Strike 2 on Copyright Infringement. Obama ‘Hope’ and ‘Jessica’
3. How to Photograph a Monkey in Space

Start a FREE trial at zenfolio or get up to $25 off your subscription by using discount coupon E6P-UJA-UCX

Please consider purchasing through our affiliate stores. If you visit one of the stores through the links below and place an order, EtL will receive a small commission at no extra cost to you. We hope you don't mind these ads; revenue from commissions is how we keep EtL running. Thanks!

B&H	Adorama	Amazon	eBay	Best Buy

© Peter Zack for Enticing the Light, 2011. All rights reserved, do not reproduce without permission. | Read article with proper formatting.

You can see one guest taking a shot of the bridal party during the service. Another is getting 'candids' of other guests while the service is happening. At this wedding there were over 35 cameras between approx 100 guests. Photo; property of PEIWeddingPhotography.com

The Offbeat Bride posted an article touting the benefits of “unplugging” your wedding. As a wedding photographer, I applaud this idea. Not because it makes my job easier, it does and doesn’t, but because it has the guests actually present during the service. No iPhone cameras clicking because you forgot to turn down the volume. No red focus lights on the faces during the first kiss. No auto focus beeps overshadowing the vows.

Another aspect of cell phones and LCD backed cameras is the bright LCD and the automatic flash. Not all guests are taking photos but can they enjoy the event when others have these brightly lit screens up in the air or they repeatedly stand up during the service to get a shot? I know I work hard to not be noticed and disruptive, any good pro does this and is very conscious of where they stand or move to. We buy these expensive cameras to avoid using the flash during the service, no matter how dark it is. Guests just don’t do this enough to realize their movements and actions can ruin the mood and block the enjoyment of the other guests. For that matter, a distraction can ruin the emotions shared between the couple during their big day. It’s tough on the minister or officiant as well when they have noise and flashes firing while they are trying to conduct a religious and emotional service. If you’ve been to a wedding at a church recently, have you noticed how many ministers and priests have said lately that there’s no photography during the service? There are 2 reasons for this and one is the subject of this editorial.

I can’t tell you how many times I’ve turned to the mother of the bride at an emotional set of vows and seen her looking at the LCD instead of watching and hearing the words being spoken. I had hoped to get a shot of her reactions to hearing those heartfelt words which, unfortunately, she missed while trying to get “the shot”. Everyone has a camera and feels the need to record everything around them at any time. A short story of mine (one of many) was having the bridal party on the beach to get a few shots. Time is always limited and one of the groomsmen was there with his DSLR. Several times we had to bring him back to the group because he was busy taking close up shots of some seashell or the other bridal party members. To me, that says volumes about how much he was committed to their wedding.

Countless stories like this really take away from the event. It becomes a photo circus. As an experienced photographer, I don’t mind and can work around what has become normal. My post isn’t sour grapes. In fact, I get some cool or funny shots when guests are trying to get a shot of the couple. I love weddings and enjoy the privilege of being part of the day. What I don’t like is how so many cameras can change the dynamic of the day. The guests are no longer participants and become simply observers, recording the wedding like reporters. They should be involved and celebrating the day with the couple. They should be able to hear the vows and watch the service. The couple put a lot of time, planning, effort and emotion into this once-in-a-lifetime day, they want the guests to experience it with them first hand. There’s plenty of time for photos at the reception or cocktail hour.

A photographer friend posted a similar set of comments on her Facebook page. One bride posted the following comment:

Husband and I were married in January this year and we had tossed around the idea of requesting no cameras, but thought it would be rude to ask people to do this and it would upset people. I thought twice about our decision when I walked down the aisle and saw nothing but bodies and cameras, no faces. In the end I think Husband and I were the main ‘upset guests’ at our own wedding.

As a wedding photographer, I get to have some interesting behind-the-scenes conversations with the couple while preparing their wedding. The vast majority want everyone there to enjoy the service and be an active participant in the love they share and all the emotion that goes with this big day.

Let me try to put this another way: If you don’t know who Oprah is, you’re living in a cave. We’ve all seen her on TV and most of us have watched at least one show and probably much more. If you had a choice to watch her camera people and editors display the show in the controlled way they want you to see it, or could go to the show itself and experience it for yourself, which would you prefer? Same for the people who went to Kate and William’s royal wedding and stood outside to see the first public kiss. Why spend all that money and time to do that when I probably had a better view watching the BBC coverage? Because they wanted to be part of the event and experience it. They wanted to share in a moment that only comes once. That is just as true for the couple who invited you to share in their special day.

When there’s a hired professional there to photograph the wedding, put the cameras away when the bride is saying her vows…please.

The full article is here: Offbeat Bride, Unplugged Wedding.

Note; you should go below the article and read the comments from brides that are piling up and overwhelmingly in favour of an “unplugged wedding”.

Cheers and good shooting
-Peter Zack

Related posts:

1. American Photo 2011 Top 10 Wedding Photographers
2. My New Favourite Wedding Photo: Lauren Bush and David Lauren. Vogue Photos
3. Wedding Planner or Photographer Scams

Start a FREE trial at zenfolio or get up to $25 off your subscription by using discount coupon E6P-UJA-UCX

Please consider purchasing through our affiliate stores. If you visit one of the stores through the links below and place an order, EtL will receive a small commission at no extra cost to you. We hope you don't mind these ads; revenue from commissions is how we keep EtL running. Thanks!

B&H	Adorama	Amazon	eBay	Best Buy

© Peter Zack for Enticing the Light, 2011. All rights reserved, do not reproduce without permission. | Read article with proper formatting.

Most photographers have a fair idea of what they’re taking photographs of. Engage one in conversation and they’ll immediately let you know if they shoot Street, Landscape, Macro, Birds, Insects, Classic Cars or Pooch Butts (you think I’m joking?). And yes, they will use capital letters for their genre of choice. Me? I shoot Street, or what I call B&W Urban Photography. It says so on my business card, so it must be true. If there’s still any doubt, I insist people visit my online gallery. And that’s exactly what I did with my friend Rod (real name changed to protect his innocence). Then the strangest thing happened, and I still wonder if he did it as revenge for me having forced my business card upon him (as I regularly do, because dammit I printed 500 of those things and they’re not going to languish in the back of my cupboard)—I had a conversation with him a few days later about The Bostonians project I’m working on, and what he said to me changed the way I will look at and approach my photography forever. For-EVER.

Allow me to paraphrase our conversation:

Miz: Did you take a look at my gallery?
Rod: I did; you have some nice photos there.
Miz: Any that caught your attention in particular?
Rod: Yes, I enjoyed your depictions of Boston’s architecture.
Miz: My…what?
Rod: The B&W photos you have in The Bostonians mainly, you do a great job of showing off the various styles of Bostonian architecture—each neighbourhood is unique and recognisable.
Miz: What are you talking about, Rob? The Bostonians is about, well, Bostonians—people, not buildings.
Rod: Yes, I did notice you included people in the photos but it was the architecture that attracted me.
Miz: Oooookay… Thank you for your compliment. I guess…
Rod: Sure. Keep up the good work!

What a lovely building, it's so typically Newbury St, Boston. Look at those stones and the wonderful steps; the wooden doors are gorgeous...shame about those guys standing in the way.

When I took the photograph above I was interested in the policeman kicking the homeless guy out of the building’s entryway. Sure, I saw the stairs, the stones and the doors, but to me they were mostly lines that I had deal with so my shot was level and they didn’t detract from my subject. Did I do a good job? I thought I did! What do you think? What was the first thing you saw in the photograph, the people or the buildings? Let me know in the comments below, I really want to know.

Is it possible that I’m not shooting what I think I’m shooting? Might I not be making my subject clear enough that anyone looking at my photo will see it straight away? Is it me, or is it them? These are important questions that I’ve been asking myself since my conversation with Rod—it’s a problem I had never been confronted with before. After ruminating over these issues for a while and I’ve reached three relevant conclusions.

1. Seek Feedback Often

I tend to accumulate photos on my harddrive that never get posted online. Not that it matters much because most of my better photos get hung in my online gallery, where people see them but they’re not commented on because that’s not the role of my gallery. What I need is a place populated by photographers I respect who will give me direct, honest feedback—photographers who will not be afraid to tell me it sucks when it does. I’ve frequented many forums and photosites but haven’t found one that fits my needs. I know a few photographers locally that I could meet with to discuss each other’s work, and I’ve heard of some local show ‘n’ critique get-togethers that I should check out. If I were looking to get into the Art scene I would talk to gallery owners and, if possible, photography print buyers and collectors.

2. Pick a Subject and Stick with It

Don’t just point the camera and think awww, that’s pretty, let’s take a pic! Are you photographing a flower or a field of flowers? Are you photographing the Sun or the sunset, or maybe the couple watching the sunset hand-in-hand? Are you photographing that cute girl with the banner, or the thousands of people gathered on the street protesting? Think about what you’re subject, your message is, and make sure that is what you photograph. Your images will be better for it. What I’ve come up with to help me with this task is NCH:

Narrow your genres: Most amateur photographers are Jacks of all trades (masters of nothing), shooting anything from macro to architecture. All the great photographers are best known for a single genre, and I’ll bet you anything you want it’s the genre they’ve spent the longest time cultivating. I’m not saying you shouldn’t partake of various ganres if you enjoy them, I’m saying that if you want to be better than average, you have to concentrate on one. Michael Jordan played golf, Beethoven composed 10 sonatas for violin and piano, and Shakespeare wrote over 100 sonnets, yet what they are best remembered for is basketball, symphonies and stage plays, respectively. It’s what they did best, and it’s what they did most. Or was it the other way around? I believe it’s both ways around, so pick a genre and concentrate your efforts on it. As you become better your message will come through clearer, and as your message comes through ever more clearly you’ll become a better photographer.

Clean your images: I don’t mean to rid them of digital noise, I’m suggesting you declutter your frame, leaving only that which is important. I see this problem often in my own photographs: I want to show a person on the street doing something (or simply looking) interesting, but there are all these other people in the frame distracting from my main subject. What can I do? Use a longer lens or get up closer to get the character to fill the frame; or maybe I need to shoot at a wider aperture thus blurring the surroundings; how about changing my perspective? There is a solution out there and I need to find it. And so do you—whatever your genre may be, your photos will benefit from removing as much extraneous crap from your frame as possible.

Highlight your subject: There are so many ways to do this, even within each genre, that you’ll have to sit down and think about how you can do it in your own photographs. Use a shallower DoF to keep only your subject in focus; if using strobes, throw more light on your subject that on the surroundings; if shooting wildlife you might have to purchase a longer lens or get closer to your subject; shooting a wedding you need to be quick at capturing wonderful gestures, because your viewer is going to be attracted to the person showing the highest emotion within the frame; composition plays a very important role in making your subject stand out—rule of thirds, golden ratio, centering, negative space…use the best weapon for each occasion.

3. Sometimes It’s not Your Fault (or Is It?)

Let’s face it, even after you’ve tried your damnedest, some people just aren’t going to get it. I don’t believe in 100% within Real Life™, so I’ll happily have one guy not get one of my photographs if 99 others do. However, rest assured I will query this guy to find out why he didn’t get it, because it might not just be statistics, it might be me not being good enough—I won’t obsess over it, though.

Conclusion

If you’re shooting just for yourself and don’t give a damn what others think, ignore everything above, but if you’re trying to attract viewers to your work, you need to ensure that what they are seeing is as close to what you’re shooting as possible. You do not want to lose your message amongst the noise created between your brain and their eyes. If you agree with me that this is an important topic, you might want to read an article I wrote over 2 years ago along similar lines: Are You Getting Your Message Across?

Now tell me, what’s your message? What subject(s) have you been photographing lately?

Addendum

Some photographs do not have a clear message, they are interpretative works, leaving each viewer to draw their own conclusions. I believe photographers taking these sort of pictures are doing so purposefully. You could say, not that their images don’t have a message, but rather that they have many. It’s much more difficult to make these types of photographs than those with a single message, the same way it’s more difficult to make photos with message than photos without.

Photographs without a message are like postcards without an address: A pretty picture that goes nowhere.

Related posts:

1. Photographing Fireworks Tutorial
2. Are You Getting Your Message Across?

Start a FREE trial at zenfolio or get up to $25 off your subscription by using discount coupon E6P-UJA-UCX

Please consider purchasing through our affiliate stores. If you visit one of the stores through the links below and place an order, EtL will receive a small commission at no extra cost to you. We hope you don't mind these ads; revenue from commissions is how we keep EtL running. Thanks!

B&H	Adorama	Amazon	eBay	Best Buy

© Miserere for Enticing the Light, 2011. All rights reserved, do not reproduce without permission. | Read article with proper formatting.

You didn’t need a Nobel Prize in economics to know that the Japanese stock market would take a hit after the earthquake on March 11, but nevertheless here are the stock prices of the 6 major camera makers in Japan, with graphs covering the last 3 months approximately (generated by the Tokyo Stock Exchange website). Note the dip after March 11 (follow the blue line), then the start of a recovery…and then a turn for the worse in all cases over the last 1–2 weeks. Hoya’s tumble (they’re the owners of Pentax) is the most worrying, while Canon’s might not be apparent because they’ve been in decline since December last year. Olympus might be the only one hanging on to their recovery.

Reading stock price graphs is a bit like reading tea leaves—the future may not become clear to you, but you’re left with a strong need to use the lavatory afterwards. Having said that, I will attempt the oft-repeated trick of predicting the future, at least as it pertains to photographic gear produced in Japan.

The Short Version

Prices will go up soon, which you might have guessed if you paid attention to the title of this article.

The Long Version

Japan was hit by a double-whammy: An 8.9 magnitude earthquake followed by a tsunami. Then Mother Nature went for the hat-trick and added nuclear fission into the mix; with electricity cut, and having been hit directly by the tsunami (right after the earthquake), the Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear power plant suffered a chain of failures and accidents that has left it crippled and on the verge of a nuclear emergency. This powerplant is located in NE Japan, the area most affected by the earthquake+tsunami, and the region where the main camera companies have factories. These factories were initially closed down, only to tentatively reopen 1–2 weeks later, but production has been intermittent and might even come to a halt. Below is a list of reasons why the natural and nuclear accidents are conspiring against the camera industry in Japan, and indeed, all industry in Japan:

• The earthquake cracked roads, slowing down deliveries to and from factories.
• The earthquake and tsunami damaged factory buildings, necessitating repairs that impaired manufacturing in the meantime.
• Aftershocks have been felt for over a month, some of them quite severe, impairing production, and even stopping it when the tremor is bad enough that a factory has to be evacuated.
• Access to running water can be problematic because of broken pipes or contaminated water supply. You can’t run a factory without water.
• Power outages are commonplace, and having the local nuclear power plant down doesn’t help when trying to run a power-hungry factory.
• Factory workers who have been displaced from their homes by the earthquake/tsunami/nuclear-safety-zone might not be able to work, and if they do, they might not be at their best, necessitating more time to finish a task.
• The issues affecting camera factories are affecting all other Japanese factories too, including smaller ones that manufacture single items such as screws, rubber rings or electronic components. When one of these factories can’t deliver their items on schedule, the camera factory can’t manufacture products that require these items. Most often it’s the small things that cost you big when a crisis like this hits your factory.
• Ports are not operating at full capacity due to damages sustained, thus limiting the number of cameras and lenses being exported.
• The glass used in lenses is not easy to come by; you need good quality raw materials and advanced manufacturing technology. If Japanese glass isn’t available, Chinese glass isn’t going to cut it (will Korean?). Will you pay full price for a Canon L lens using Chinese glass? I can just see the camera forums erupting in chaotic swearing fits should this happen.

The Japanese are renowned for their tough work ethic, but that won’t get them through weeks of power outages, missing parts, weakened transport lines and human loss. Adding to these problems is the small amount of current stock stored in their warehouses. Japanese companies have slimmed down over the years, streamlining their operations to increase benefits. One of the techniques they use is called just in time production, whereby they produce just enough product to meet demand, thus cutting down on warehouse storage costs. There are other benefits to this system, such as allowing a company to respond quickly should a defect be found in one of their products; instead of finding themselves with thousands of defective units they have to fix or throw away, they can make changes to the production line and start producing non-defective units right away, saving time and money; this is a win-win situation for both the company and the clients. The problems arise when production is halted or slowed down significantly, then they find themselves unable to meet quotas and can’t send their distributors enough units to meet demand. A basic tenant of economics is that when demand exceeds supply, prices of available units will increase.

In the coming weeks, even months, Japanese camera makers will not be able to produce enough equipment to meet market demand, so I expect the prices of cameras and lenses to increase. How much? I don’t know. For how long? I don’t know, either.

Conclusion

If you were planning on purchasing a new camera or lens in the near future, I would suggest you do so as soon as possible—some brands have already seen increased prices. If you wait, you may also find there isn’t any stock at all, like with the Fuji X100, that is currently backordered almost everywhere. Of course, if you make these hasty purchases through our affiliate stores, good Karma will come your way.

Feel free to ignore my fortune-telling tales of woe. I may very well be wrong and Japan will show the World it is able to pick itself up, rinse the radioactive water from out its shoes and rebuild in 4 weeks. I, for one, would be very happy if they did.

Good light, and good luck,

—Miserere

Related posts:

1. The Camera Industry & Today’s Earthquake in Japan
2. Camera Makers to Close Factories Indefinitely after Earthquake in Japan
3. Safeguard Your Camera by Registering It

Start a FREE trial at zenfolio or get up to $25 off your subscription by using discount coupon E6P-UJA-UCX

Please consider purchasing through our affiliate stores. If you visit one of the stores through the links below and place an order, EtL will receive a small commission at no extra cost to you. We hope you don't mind these ads; revenue from commissions is how we keep EtL running. Thanks!

B&H	Adorama	Amazon	eBay	Best Buy

© Miserere for Enticing the Light, 2011. All rights reserved, do not reproduce without permission. | Read article with proper formatting.

Photo Gallery Pier 24 on San Francisco Bay

Located almost at the foot of the Bay Bridge is Pier 24, a privately owned, 28,000 sq.ft. photo gallery. The Pilara Photographic Collection is housed in this renovated waterfront warehouse that was formerly a space used for cargo ships docking in San Francisco. The space has been extensively renovated, retaining its original character and making it perfectly suitable to exhibit the more than 2,000 images from the private collection of Andy Pilara, the site’s owner.

Andy Pilara began collecting photographs in 2003 and has collected images from very early masters, such as Eadweard Muybridge (1830 – 1904), right up to contemporary photographers. The most recent exhibit (Sept 16, 2010 – March 10, 2011) is from the collection of Randi and Bob Fisher which includes works from Walker Evans, Robert Frank, Lee Friedlander, Hilla and Bernd Becher, Robert Adams, Diane Arbus, William Eggleston and others. If the name Fisher sounds familiar, you may know that Mr Fisher is the son of Gap Inc. founder Don Fisher.

An example of some of the 28,000 sq.ft. of display space

The space is unique in a number of ways. From the web site: Born out of the desire to reinvent the ways in which photography and photographic ideas are presented, Pier 24 is a distinctive environment where art has the freedom to be seen and thought about differently. It is large and considered the biggest art space in the United States devoted to only photography. “I have not seen anything like it,” says SFMOMA (San Francisco museum of Modern Art) curator of photography Sandra Phillips, who has seen every major photography repository in the Western world. “There are photography museums, but nothing so spectacular and so personal and so giving to the experience of looking at a photograph. The whole thing is truly unique.”†

It’s open to the public but with several restrictions. You must book online to get an appointment, only 20 people per visit (2 hours) are allowed in and that only after your invitation has been confirmed at the door. The gallery is not in it for the money. There is no admission fee to visit the space and promotion has been very low-key, unlike the blockbuster ‘events’ that happen at other museum and gallery spaces. The photos on exhibit do not have any descriptive information cards and many do not even indicate the artist. The only information available is a photocopied page that indicates the photographers’ names and location of various photos within the space. Gallery hours are also restricted between 10 AM till 5:15 PM, Monday to Thursday.

The idea is to have a quiet space and remove any distractions allowing the viewer to have time to make their own connections or contemplate the works on display. My impression is that you don’t find this gallery by accident, you make it a point of getting in and being there. Given what the gallery has to offer and the limited viewing times available, if you’re going to San Francisco, book your time well in advance.

On a final note, I think the Pier 24 Facebook Page is well worth a visit. They provide information on photography exhibits at numerous venues and have a spot to subscribe to upcoming events on the extended info page.

Cheers and good shooting
-Peter Zack

Footnote:
†SFGate

References:
Art Practical
Pier 24
The Wall Street Journal

Note: Links in this article might be to one of our affiliate stores. Purchases made from our affiliates through these links will benefit Enticing the Light at no extra cost to you.

No related posts.

Start a FREE trial at zenfolio or get up to $25 off your subscription by using discount coupon E6P-UJA-UCX

Please consider purchasing through our affiliate stores. If you visit one of the stores through the links below and place an order, EtL will receive a small commission at no extra cost to you. We hope you don't mind these ads; revenue from commissions is how we keep EtL running. Thanks!

B&H	Adorama	Amazon	eBay	Best Buy

© Peter Zack for Enticing the Light, 2011. All rights reserved, do not reproduce without permission. | Read article with proper formatting.

by Miserere

The head of Sony Spain told the Spanish tech site QueSabesDe.com (translation to English) that all Alpha cameras would use translucent mirror technology from here onwards. Yes, Virginia, that includes hypothetical full frame models too. Henceforth, it is decreed that all Alphas will be SLTs (Single Lens Translucent), not DSLRs (Digital Single Lens Reflex).

How have the Alphanites reacted to this? If the interwebs are a reliable source, they are mostly bitter and unhappy. Some have already started photographing their equipment to beat the eBay rush and get more for their lenses before everyone finds out Sony is dying and nobody wants to buy used Alpha gear anymore. But there are a few who are rejoicing and looking forward to cheap used lenses that they will mount on their as-yet-unreleased A77s and A950s.

All joking aside, this is a bold move by Sony. I’ve written (somewhere on the internet) that I foresee all brands adopting mirrorless (or EVF over OVF) technology for their entry-level cameras within the next 2—3 years, with flapping mirrors disappearing even from top-end cameras eventually. I never expected a brand to do away with optical viewfinders and flapping mirrors all in one fell swoop; certainly not in 2011. But why is Sony doing this, and why now?

When Sony bought Minolta’s faltering camera division back in 2006 they vowed to become a major player in the DSLR market. That didn’t quite pan out as they hoped. Despite flooding the market with a gazillion barely-distinguashable APS-C DSLRs and a couple of affordable (relatively speaking) full frame cameras, they failed to gain the market share they so craved. I think Sony has realised it’s time for plan B.

Their recently introduced A33 and A55 SLTs, which we wrote about back in August 2010, have been quite successful with both reviewers and users alike, despite some issues with ghosting and the math police reminding everyone of the 1/3-stop light loss associated with the translucent mirror. It seems that quiet operation, lack of mirror slap, fast FPS, above-average EVF, and good video handling have won over the crowds. And why not? I’ve played with both these cameras on a couple of occasions and liked them; this in itself is positive because all the previous APS-C Sony cameras I’d handled had left me unimpressed. It’s clear Sony tried harder with these new SLTs, and I think this effort is going to pay off. Eventually, when on-sensor auto-focusing methods improve enough, I think Sony will drop the translucent mirror and send the image directly to the sensor.

For a year or so around 2009–10 Sony seemed to be lost: The much-awaited A700 successor was nowhere to be seen, there was talk of the FF DSLRs being dropped from the line, and some where wondering if Sony might not just drop the Alpha mount altogether. Then came the May 2010 announcement of the NEX-3 and NEX-5, Sony’s MILC (Mirrorless Interchangeable Lens Compact) system, with the new E mount. Then in August they released the aforementioned A33 and A55. NEX cameras seem to be selling well and new lenses for the system have already been announced; there are also rumours of a NEX-7 camera with integrated EVF and more “pro” features.

All of a sudden, it seems like Sony is on a roll again, and all it needed to do was get rid of those pesky flapping mirrors and optical viewfinders. Surely this new-found optimism spurred the development and upcoming release (in mid 2011) of the A77, the SLT successor to the DSLR A700. But what about full frame? Nothing is known, but at least it’s been a while since I heard that it had been abandoned. I suspect we’ll see a FF SLT within a year.

What has Sony learnt over the past year or so? That EVFs and mirrors that don’t flap are good things; they should be embraced, improved, and sold to as many people as possible. Furthermore, in a world of Canikon DSLRs that have stopped being innovative for fear of losing their customers, Sony’s camera line-up will stand out to newcomers. There will be no innovation unless we step onto unfamiliar terrain and commit to walking away from the old assumptions that restrain us—Sony have embraced this philosophy and will try to turn it into an increased market share. They will preach the benefits of a fixed translucent mirror in their Alpha SLTs, the benefits of losing the mirror altogether in their NEX compacts; they will boast of their audacity to take the first step into the inevitable future where DSLRs are obsolete—one small step for Sony, one giant leap for photographers. Will buyers be convinced? Or will they mutter witchcraft under their breath and buy a tried’n'true DSLR because that’s how things have always been done? Time will tell. But I applaud Sony for having the balls to go translucent.

Note: Links in this article might be to one of our affiliate stores. Purchases made from our affiliates through these links will benefit Enticing the Light at no extra cost to you.

Related posts:

1. Sony A33 and A55: Old Technology Put to New Use
2. The New Sony A77 and A65 Heat up the Camera Market and Megapixel Race
3. Pentax Finally Announce New Equipment

Start a FREE trial at zenfolio or get up to $25 off your subscription by using discount coupon E6P-UJA-UCX

Please consider purchasing through our affiliate stores. If you visit one of the stores through the links below and place an order, EtL will receive a small commission at no extra cost to you. We hope you don't mind these ads; revenue from commissions is how we keep EtL running. Thanks!

B&H	Adorama	Amazon	eBay	Best Buy

© Miserere for Enticing the Light, 2011. All rights reserved, do not reproduce without permission. | Read article with proper formatting.