"Understanding Exposure" by Bryan Peterson

Concept: 3 out of 5
Execution: 3 out of 5
Yeah, but: It's one of the best books for learning photography.

The Long Version: I bought Bryan Peterson's book "Understanding Exposure: How to Shoot Great Photographs with a Film or Digital Camera" (Amphoto Books) after reading multiple recommendations for it on several photography forums. It's one that I've read several times, and one that I've started recommending to anybody who wants help learning how to control their camera. On Amazon.com it's the second most popular photography book, only beaten by Scott Kelby's opus, Don't You Think I'm Funny In The Digital Photography Book.

"Understanding Exposure" is broken into four main sections. The first deals with the technical aspects of the cameras' controls, and does a good job explaining the relationship between shutter speed, aperture values, iso, and the whole idea of 'stops'. The explanation is as good as any I've read, which means it will probably still be confusing to many – it's a tough concept to really get – but the book doesn't get dragged down into the technical details. The point of the book is to make creative choices instead of just technically correct ones.

The bulk of the book is in the two sections that deal with aperture and shutter speed, and why particular values would be used in different situations. It provides a solid introduction to what most photographers come to know intuitively, skipping a lot of the whole learning-from-experience drudgery. It may even provide a useful summary even for those who have already put in the time. The sample photos are inspiring and clearly illustrate the techniques being taught, and Bryan Peterson sneaks a surprising amount of instruction into his stories and captions. It's something of a beginner's version of McNally's The Moment it Clicks, which is very high praise.

The book concludes with a discussion of light and special techniques which may be useful for those who haven't read similar material in every other how-to-photograph book. He includes a couple of useful tips on how to find neutral grey and other references in real-world scenes, which makes these chapters worth reading, and the final film-versus-digital section is so dated that it's quaint. Sometimes 2004 seems so so long ago.

Used Computer Parts

Concept: 4 out of 5
Execution: 3 out of 5
Yeah, but: Your mileage will vary depending on the quality of your neighbor's cast-offs

The Long Version:
I was feeling guilty that my girlfriend's computer monitor was a tiny and very old 15" CRT that was blurry and had both ghosting and burned-in areas.
How can you truly enjoy People.com when the photos are small and nasty, and the type isn't sharp?

Pricing LCD replacements gave me a case of sticker-shock, especially since I use my computer 10 times more than she uses hers, and do a lot of critical PhotoShop work that deserves a better display than I've been using.
But do I get myself a new one and then make her suffer with my hand-me-down screen?
No, that just doesn't seem right.

Recently I stopped into the computer repair and parts store around the corner to check for good deals on games and random hardware, and the used monitor section caught my attention. There were a few 17" Dell CRTs for the yard sale price of $9.99, so I figured that even with the No Returns, No Refunds stipulation it was worth a gamble.
The owner hooked my choice up to his system and let me see a very uninspiring and unhelpful desktop photo with some icons for type sharpness, but the monitor was operating fine and it just had to be an improvement, so I took the chance.

Got it home, hooked it up, did some minimal calibration with grayscale and color test images, then a little fine-tuning using my own photos. Took a shower while letting it warm-up some more, then did some additional calibrating.

The Result?
Looked so much better than the monitor I'm used to that I got really jealous, and went back a few hours later for my own awesome $10 Dell.
Had to reject two during in-store testing, but the one I eventually bought is every bit as nice as the first. A few minutes spent getting the black and white points set, then tweaking the image placement within the screen, and I could not be happier.

I would estimate that our old monitors were a 5 and a 3, while the new-to-us ones are a nine and a 9.5
This was a serious upgrade at a laughable price.
You can have your expensive LCD displays--I'm more than willing to live with bulky and hot CRTs for a few more years when the image quality approaches perfection and so does the price.
This was a steal, twice!
19 inch are around $30 in several local shops, so I may be going bigger soon.


No picture accompanies this review because there is simply no practical way to convey the quality improvement between computer monitors in a digital photograph; much like there's no way to convey the reality of a fine art print over the internet, you have to experience it for yourself.
The rare and delightful unphotographable subject.

Garfield Minus Garfield

Concept: 5 out of 5
Execution: 3 out of 5
Yeah, but: Who's strip is it, anyway?

The Long Version:

 

Garfield Minus Garfield is a brilliant piece of work. The idea of getting rid of the cat has the effect of removing the punch-line from the joke, leaving only the odd and sad story that surrounds it. As the author of the site writes, "Who would have guessed that when you remove Garfield from the Garfield comic strips, the result is an even better comic about schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, and the empty desperation of modern life? "

Jim Davis, quoted in the cleverly-headlined Washington Post article "When the Cat's Away, Neurosis is on Display" has called the remix 'inspired'. I can't really argue, and the article is worth the read. For one thing, the reporter manages to identify the creator of Garfield Minus, which was more than I was able to do. Scooped by the Washington Post -- the story of my life.

But the new strip often turns out to be very dark. Like watching Eeyore instead of Winnie, there's a real melancholy to Jon's life that cuts through the comedy. It isn't that the strip isn't funny, but rather that Jon becomes a sympathetic character. I consider a work of art or satire to be successful if it changes how I perceive its subject. Garfield Minus Garfield has done that for me.

I've actually gone back to the original -- and this review marks it's thirtieth birthday, making it just a few years younger than me -- to find the strips that include the full cast. It's still funny, but now when I see Jon, I also imagine him without a wisecracking talking cat and instead picture just a lonely man with nobody else to talk to.

Garfield Minus Garfield is a brilliant idea, but to find a ranking for it I have to consider that this is a repurposing of the original. The execution is well done, but I'm really not sure who the strip belongs to. I'm just glad that it exists, and hope that the copyright issues don't deprive us of this kind of creativity.

updated september 2008: Jim Davis has to be one of the coolest guys around.  Instead of getting all RIAA'ed over the strip, he's publishing the altered versions next to the originals in a book.  (Details here.)  Now I know what I want for Christmas.