Copyright Karl Shreeves 2012

Okay, you've decided to hire a photographer for . . . well, for whatever. How do you make sure you'll get photos you love? It's actually easy if you do one thing: Be absolutely, positively sure that it is fun and rewarding for the photographer.

Sure, I'm a photographer so you'd expect me to say that, but it really is in your best interest as the client. Creativity thrives on enthusiasm and a positive energy or flow. A fun, rewarding experience nutures photographic creativity (and vice-versa), which means you get more photos you like. Fair enough, but if you don't know anything about professional shooting, how do you make sure it's fun and rewarding? Here are some DOs and DON'Ts to that end:

DO give the photographer control. Let the photographer decide what lighting to bring, or not. After all, if you know how to do it, why did you hire a photographer? The more control you give the photographer, the better you will like the shots.

DON'T restrict the photographer, but DO express real limitations. That is, don't say "You can't bring a tripod," but assuming it's true, do say, "We'll be in a very small room full of furniture and people, so there won't be a lot of space." The photographer will ask you more questions about it as appropriate.

DO let the photographer choose where to shoot, and to the degree possible, who to shoot. DON'T tell the photographer how to do the job because the photographer may do what you say, resulting in you getting what you asked for, which you will hate. DO express real concerns, like "Please don't let that sign in background show -- it's an ad for our company's strongest competitor!"

DO offer suggestions that the photographer can build upon, and DO let the photographer know what you want, such as "I'm looking for a romantic shot of my son-in-law and daughter having a quiet moment," or "We really want shots of the bride and groom's first dance." DON'T criticize individual shots. It's the digital age, and many shots are steps toward THE shot. With a professional, these images won't survive the first pass through the edit software. DO, however, speak up when you see something you love, so they don't get deleted.

DO give the photographer as much time and flexibility as you can in posing, locations and light choices. DO invite your photographer to bring one or more assistants. DO tell the photographer your time limitations, but DON'T tell the photographer how to use the time available.

DON'T tell the photographer not to pose people or bring in lighting, unless its an event that makes it completely inappropriate to do so (like an inauguration or something).

DO hire the right photographer. If you want wedding shots, look for a photographer's whose portfolio has lots of wedding shots you like. If it is a journalistic event, hire a photojournalist. If it's lifestyle/fashion, hire someone who shoots lifestyle/fashion. DON'T hire a photographer to shoot something that photographer clearly doesn't enjoy shooting or shoot well. How can you tell? If a type of photography is conspicuously absent from a portfolio, or it's there but you don't like the shots, don't hire that photographer for that type of photography.

If you read my cover bio, you know that I don't shoot weddings. Generally, I don't like shooting them (there are exceptions, during which I require multiple days, a lot of control and I'm expensive), but I will for close friends and family. And yes, I do a good job, even though it's not my favorite type of shooting.

Copyright PADI 2012

In this shot, my friend Kevin Gurr is using a Beta version of the soon-to-be-released Explorer rebreather (which he designed and developed). He and I are both wearing rebreathers, which is significant because this shot would have been impossible with conventional, open-circuit scuba that releases bubbles.

This shot required rebreathers because it took several minutes and more than 20 frames to get the balance between the exterior light streaming in and my strobes where I wanted it. During that time, Kevin and I had to remain completely still, or we would have stirred up sediment that would have obscured the shot and made it look like a snow storm. With open-circuit scuba, our bubbles would have scoured silt off the ceiling, causing the same problem as it rained down on us, no matter how still we remained. But, rebreathers put out few bubbles.

BTW, hardcore wreck divers will notice that Kevin doesn't have the guideline that you usually have inside a wreck, nor three dive lights. While that would normally violate safe diving practices for overhead environments, this particular wreck in Grand Cayman has been intentionally placed and "safed" for recreational divers. For general purposes (but not training purposes) most of its interiors are considered swim-throughs, not overhead environments, because they are wide open, have lots of light, and you are never more than a few feet from an exit, like you see here. Otherwise, we'd definitely be following light and line protocols!

Copyright PADI 2012

Most of the images in my portrait gallery came about because we set out to shoot a portrait. With some that's obvious, but with others, it's not. The "it's not" type may be still be planned much as you see it, but others are happy "accidents." This one falls in the latter category -- a portrait that came about because we were shooting something else, but I saw a portait opportunity and shot. As in this example, it's not even one of the intended models or subjects (the secondary subject is though), which happens often. Most attempts fail, but some pan out, so I find it's always worth shooting first and deciding to keep or delete later.

This particular shot isn't unflattering, though it's not flattering either. But, it's genuine and it tells you something about the main subject, what she does and where she is. In post, I normally avoid the halo that can come up with some sharpening techniques. Although it's a bit artificial and obvious, in this case I like it because it pulls the main and secondary subject out of the background.

Copyright PADI 2012

This past weekend I was on a dive boat and overheard someone commenting that in the film era, you had to be a skilled photographer, but today with digital, "anyone can take great photos."

Really? Then why don't they?

There's no denying that digital imaging puts new, better tools in the hands of photographers. The potential for the average person to take superior images is greater than ever, to be sure. It's reasonable to speculate that today shooters produce far more high quality finished images than in the film era.

But, it appears that the proportion of professional-quality finished images is declining. Digital imaging has indeed made it easier to take photos, and to take them in mass, but more doesn't mean better. You only need to click through Facebook and Flickr to see that the overall quality of the average snap  (in terms of lighting, composition, retouching and creativity) is no better than in the film era. In fact, you could argue that the ability to bang off 200 images without having to reload the camera or pay for the processing has lowered, not raised, the average image quality.

Even in the digital age, good photos require dedicated effort: planning, lighting, vision, skilled execution and post-processing. As well, the expectation of a professional image is higher than in the film era, thanks to the affordability and accessibility of retouching technologies.

Digital imaging has made imaging more abundant, but it has not turned everyone into good photographers.

Copyright PADI 2012

Sometimes you get a shot that would have been very difficult to execute intentionally. In this image, I was following the model through the water-air interface to capture a post-dive expression of satisfaction, and grabbed this frame just before she surfaced.

Of course, being "lucky" has a whole string of caveats -- being in the right place at the right time with the right equipment aimed for the right composition and set for the right exposure and the right focus. This is why experienced photographers are "lucky" more often than the laws of large numbers and chance would dictate.

AEC14brinkman9-26x1-1471 Copyright Karl Shreeves 2012

Unless you're someone who shoots and retouches, you probably don't recognize the work that goes into images you see in Vogue, W, Elle and so on. I don't get to shoot as much fashion as I would like, but I apply fashion style shooting and retouching to portrait and lifestyle imaging, as appropriate. Fashion imaging is the cutting-edge of still photography and sets the bar for the photo profession. Twenty years ago, retouching wasn't expected except at the high end because it was expensive and difficult. Today it is the standard of practice for most forms of professional photography.

This is from a studio shoot a couple months ago in which we featured Stella & Dot jewelry (this was not commissioned by Stella & Dot, but the model is a Stella & Dot stylist).

If you're into fashion, by the way, check out www.socialbliss.com. It's a Pinterest style site devoted to fashion collection by member contributors. Dr. Kristen San Jose Shiele is a consultant on the social bliss project -- and also happens to be the model in this image. Jump to stelladot.com for some high end costume jewelry that's making its rounds in high fashion and the Hollywood set.

Photo Copyright Karl Shreeves 2012

I don't have a musical bone in my body, but I admire those who do, and I enjoy their work. Recently, I shot an up-and-coming teen band, Tremor -- check out my Portraits gallery for more. It was a lot of fun and they're great, enthusiastic young people. (Update: The group is no longer together, but I was great shooting them.)

Update March 2015

Although Tremor is no longer together, lead guitarist Casey Moreta (extreme left) has gone on to two acclaimed rock bands. Shortly after leaving Tremor, he began playing with alternative rock group Cherri Bomb, a popular band that already had releases available, when one band member left and he was invited to join them. After working together for a bit over a year, the foursome decided that they needed a new direction, so they disbanded Cherri Bomb. A few months later, they re emerged as a new pop/rock band, Hey Violet. Since announcing the new band, direction and name to their fans vis á vis Cherri Bomb, Hey Violet has released covers that have been popularly received, with their release of original music awaited with anticipation.