<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Constructing a photo vs. taking one</title>
	<atom:link href="http://michaelbaxterimaging.com/2010/07/14/constructing-a-photo-rather-than-taking-one/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://michaelbaxterimaging.com/2010/07/14/constructing-a-photo-rather-than-taking-one/</link>
	<description>Recent News &#38; Projects</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 17 Sep 2011 11:48:19 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Michael Baxter</title>
		<link>http://michaelbaxterimaging.com/2010/07/14/constructing-a-photo-rather-than-taking-one/#comment-3</link>
		<dc:creator>Michael Baxter</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 16 Jul 2010 14:30:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://michaelbaxterimaging.com/?p=32#comment-3</guid>
		<description>Thanks for visiting John. This image required the most lighting of any shot I have taken before, due to the scale of the architecture. Without revealing my exact methods, I can tell you that I use a variety of lighting equipment ranging from tungsten hot lights to high-powered strobes. The benefits of using hot lights (at night) are that they are often focusable, usually match the color temperature of the available lighting, and &quot;what you see is what you get&quot;. Strobes on the other hand are exponentially more powerful, run cool, and can freeze any movement unlike hot lights which require time exposure. I have used them at night when there is a strong enough wind to blur the vegetation. The down-side to strobes is that they are not focusable without specialized accessories and it&#039;s trial and error to determine a lighting effect.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks for visiting John. This image required the most lighting of any shot I have taken before, due to the scale of the architecture. Without revealing my exact methods, I can tell you that I use a variety of lighting equipment ranging from tungsten hot lights to high-powered strobes. The benefits of using hot lights (at night) are that they are often focusable, usually match the color temperature of the available lighting, and &#8220;what you see is what you get&#8221;. Strobes on the other hand are exponentially more powerful, run cool, and can freeze any movement unlike hot lights which require time exposure. I have used them at night when there is a strong enough wind to blur the vegetation. The down-side to strobes is that they are not focusable without specialized accessories and it&#8217;s trial and error to determine a lighting effect.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: John Verbruggen</title>
		<link>http://michaelbaxterimaging.com/2010/07/14/constructing-a-photo-rather-than-taking-one/#comment-2</link>
		<dc:creator>John Verbruggen</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 16 Jul 2010 06:08:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://michaelbaxterimaging.com/?p=32#comment-2</guid>
		<description>Can you tell something about the lighting you added? It&#039;s obvious that that the pooollights and the lights in the rooms of the opposite building were put on. Did you use any flash?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Can you tell something about the lighting you added? It&#8217;s obvious that that the pooollights and the lights in the rooms of the opposite building were put on. Did you use any flash?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

