This is one of the shots I took Sunday at the Vancouver Strobist meet. No, Joe McNally was not anywhere near this shot (long gone at that point). But I like this setup anyway. My buddies Steve and Ian went high with an umbrella for key and another one low for fill against the backlighting of the window. However, I think when I shot this one I might have somehow missed the key light.

Joe McNally was nice enough to mention the Vancouver Strobists in his blog today. Our workshop leader for the day, Andrew got a mention so I guess we are that much closer to genius. You can also see the gorgeous shots taken by Joe of our model Cindy Fay near the bottom of the post along with a quick description of his setup. A lot you can do with two speedlights, eh?

At least I can say that I moved a light panel for McNally too if I never get up to anything else semi-famous.

I would be remiss if I didn't mention what a good hostess Jessica of Pacifica Photography was who generously provided us with space for the workshop and kept our energy up with snacks and liquids.

Both the Luminous Landscape and Nikon blogger Thom Hogan have weighed in on the new Nikon D3x -- the 24mpx DSLR that Nikon has aimed at pulling in the medium format market -- and Michael Reichmann and Hogan have concluded that the market positioning for this $8000 ticket item isn't there.

Hogan writes:

The Price
Bottom line: 12 million more pixels will set you back US$3000.

We can't talk about the D3x without talking about the D3 and pricing. D3 prices have been collapsing for some time. That's despite the fact that Nikon has not lowered the price to dealers (at least here in the US; not 100% sure about the rest of the world). That's a sign of very weak demand, as in at least one advertised price I could find, the dealer was selling below what they paid for the product. Now we get a camera that is really only different in the sensor (and FX sensors cost basically the same to manufacturer, no matter what the pixel count on them [yes, there's probably a modest yield difference, but not enough to justify much of a price change]), yet we have a substantive price increase. Anyone else see the problem with this picture? Nikon's asking us to pay more for the equivalent. I say equivalent because you can look at it this way: you can buy the same camera with either high ISO and dynamic range improvements, or you can have it with more pixels. For some reason, more pixels costs US$3000. Really?

Had a rad time this Sunday with some very talented folks including -- in a surprise drop in -- National Geographic photographer Joe McNally.

Joe McNally is one of the real stars of photographic instruction these days with the excellent and inspirational book "The Moment it Clicks" which I reviewed earlier and a leader of well-respected workshops when he isn't on assignment for various magazines.

I may have mentioned this before but actor Jeff Bridges is quite a photographer. I guess when a lot of what you do in movie acting is sitting around between takes at least Bridges fills his time creatively. For his recent role in the hit Iron Man as Obadiah Stane, Bridges spent much of the time documenting the behind-the-scenes process using a wide angle Widelux panoramic camera that takes beautiful.. wiiiiide .. shots. Perfect when you consider the size of stages, rooms full of people in story meetings, it is really an interesting perspective. He's now assembled it into an online gallery.

BoingBoing today alerted us nerds to a funny and great post in Apartment Therapy itself posting a Life magazine retrospective of rock stars in the 70s posing with their families in their homes. Apartment Therapy is poking the stick at the hellacious environs with the main crime being bad carpets and terrible wallpaper.

The gallery includes Frank Zappa, Donovan, the Jacksons, and Elton John. My favourite is Elton John and his parents' bad wallpaper.