Using CTO & CTB Utility Gels for Creative Effect

As a lot of you may know, I like to use the occasional gel in my shots to add a bit of interest. Sometimes these gels are rich and vibrant colours that drench an image in saturation and other times I just want to add a little something extra colour-wise without overpowering the whole image with a synthesised coloured look.

For a more subtle colour look you'll want to use tones that our eyes are more accustomed to seeing, for example orange and blue tones are heavily present in our daily visual journeys already. Orange tones are found in sunrises and sunsets and blueish tones are often found in twilight and overcast days. These are what I call 'natural' colours compared to the rich pinks and purples or reds, these are great for adding effect but can sometimes overpower an image quite quickly. The 'natural' tones that I am referring to are measured in Kelvin and we use this value to adjust the white balance of our shots in our cameras.

So to add a more natural colour effect to your shots what better place to start than by looking at the tones already found in the Kelvin values in your camera via the the white balance. I'm sure we all know we can add a little extra warmth to a shot simply by increasing the Kelvin via the white balance  and conversely we can cool down an image be decreasing the Kelvin value.

The Kelvins

Take a look at these two images below; nothing has been changed apart from the Kelvin value in Lightroom, the left hand image is set to 4500k and the right hand image is set to 5500k. It's my personal opinion that there is no 'correct' white balance in photography and that it's purely down to personal preference. I think that both of these images are viable and if seen alone most wouldn't question the overall tone because I believe they are both within 'natural' parameters.

View fullsize

The only difference between these shots is the Kelvin input know as white balance. The left hand shot is a lot cooler in appearance with a Kelvin of 4500k and the right hand shot is a lot warmer with a Kelvin value of 5500k. Neither of these shots are right or wrong and I believe they are both viable because they both contain 'natural' colour tones. Click on the image to enlarge.

So now that we know we can create natural looking colour toned images as long as we use colours within a certain Kelvin value. But lets mix it up a little and take what we've learned to add some creative effects. To do this we're going to use coloured gels but these gels have been specifically designed to match a Kelvin value, these are referred to as CTO (colour temperature orange) and CTB (colour temperature blue) gels.

What are CTO & CTB normally gels used for?

If you aren't to bothered about this or already know it then feel free to skip on the next section.

The CTO and CTO gels or colour correcting gels as they're also known come in a few different strengths and these are usually referred to as quarter, half or full values with the 'full' version offering the highest value of conversion. Just briefly I'll explain why these correction gels exist. Most photographers don't normally use these correction gels but they're a staple of videographers who mix different types of lighting within a single scene. Photographers tend to stick to either daylight or flash, we don't often introduce constant lighting into our images because we are simply capturing still images whereas videographers are capturing extended periods of time and thus can't use flash. They have to use 'hot-lights' or tungsten lighting that is a lot warmer in colour temperature (kelvin) to flash and daylight. So if they wanted to film a person sat indoors in front of a window they would light the person with a tungsten light but that colour temperature wouldn't match that of the daylight seen outside so they would add a 'full' CTB gel (blue gel) on the tungsten light. Granted this seems super complicated when written down but when you actually put this into practice it's really obvious when you visually see whats going on. 

I've included a simple visual reference of the different colour correcting conversion gels here too, it can sometimes help to see a visual interpretation of the colour rather than a number. The Kelvin conversion values shown here are taken from the LEE Filters website. For more info you can always head over there to get super geeky on the numbers too.

LEE Filters Technical Lighting List

The Technique

Cool ok so as with a lot of my techniques lets take what we know and forget it. I only say this as a lot of the time photographers can get a bit bogged down with what's technically correct but instead lets try to concentrate on taking an interesting shot over a 'correct' one. We're going to use these correction gels against themselves because we are going to mix two different light sources in a shot that actually hold the same Kelvin value (flash and daylight) but we're going to add CTO and CTB gels to one anyway.

Let me explain, lets take a look at the super simple setup to begin with. In fact this one couldn't actually be any simpler and it will give us a great way to show off what we're doing with the colours without any complicated lighting getting in the way.

For my setup I simply used a Bowens 22" Silver Beauty Dish and positioned my model with daylight behind her. In reality this really isn't the best way of showing this setup off because I'd ideally like a lot more daylight in the shot so doing this outside with Speedlights or portable strobes would create a far more dramatic effect. But lets stick to what we've got and you'll definitely clearly see the results anyway.

View fullsize

Super simple one light setup plus daylight behind. A 22" silver beauty dish is positioned directly in front of the model with the daylight behind her. Click on the image to enlarge it.

The beauty dish is placed about 3 or 4 feet away and is set just above eye level and angled down at about 45 degrees.

Lets take a look at what the shot looks like with no gels or kelvin adjustments.

Simple one light setup in front of a window. The white balance is set to a relatively neutral point of 5500k to keep both the widow light behind and the flash key light looking natural.

For the sake of this test I am going to be using a Kelvin temperature of 5500 and a zero tint value. I will be keeping this as a constant example of a daylight value although as we've discussed earlier this may not always be the case and it could be reasonably argued this is a little on the warm side.

For those that are interested this original shot was taken on an old 50mm manual focus lens hence why this is a little 'soft' and that Lightroom isn't showing the settings but I think this was taken at around f4. For the additional gelled images I realised this old manual focus lens wasn't the best choice so I switched to a modern 85mm lens and the settings should appear in the Lightroom histogram window from now on.

Ok so that was fairly simple, one light in front of a window with daylight behind, nothing complicated there but to add a little something extra to this lets play with adding some CTO and CTB gels to our key light.

Attaching a CTO to the inside of a beauty dish is pretty simple  and can often be a lot easier than attaching it to a softbox too. Simply use a few bits of tape and you don't even need to be as precious as you might think, just as long as the flash tube is covered you'll be fine. *A word of caution, I strongly recommend removing the modelling bulb to make this a lot easier and it will also ensure you don't melt your gel.

It's really simple to attach a gel to the inside of a beauty dish, simply grab a few bits of gaffers tape and tape it over the middle. You don't need to be as cautious as you might think and as long as the actual flash tube is covered you should be fine.

PRO TIP: Remove the modelling bulb; this will not only make it a lot easier to cover the flash tube but it will stop you from accidentally meting the gel too.

Attaching a gel to the inside of a beauty dish is a lot easier than a soft box too, for one it's a solid metal surface so it's easier to get a solid bond and secondly the flash tube isn't as exposed so its easier to cover completely.

Right, now that we've attached our CTO gel to the inside of our key light lets take some more shots.

A shot taken in front of a daylight window with a CTO gel on our key light with a Kelvin value of 5500k.

Whoa! Ok so I think its fair to say that's 'Colour Temperature Orange'! Remember we haven't changed anything yet apart from the CTO addition on the Key light. But lets just tweak that Kelvin value about a bit and see if we can't fix that skin tone a little.

Shot taken with CTO key light and daylight behind but with manual adjustment of Kelvin values applied.

Nice, ok now we're getting somewhere. By playing with the Kelvin value and Tint we are able to get a more interesting and usable shot. By adding a lot of blue to the image via the Kelvin we've balanced out the key lights orange tone and as result cooled down the daylight behind her. This is personal preference of course but I actually really like this effect.

Ok so lets trying going the other way, this time I'll take out the CTO gel from the beauty dish and replace it with the CTB gel. Now lets take a shot with the CTB attached and see how it looks.

Shot taken with CTB key light and daylight behind and a flat Kelvin value of 5500k.

Oddly the effect isn't as dramatic as you might first think but remember we're using a very warm 5500k base value to begin with so the visible effect is reduced anyway, you may find that when you try this with a cooler base value that your results are stronger. That being said the subtle nature of this effect can have its advantages, lets take a look at it once it's been Kelvin 'corrected'.

A shot taken in front of a daylight window with a CTB gel on our key light with manual Kelvin values applied.

The resulting image after playing with the white balance alone is actually now quite nice, we've warmed up the image a little and taken away some of the coldness from the skin tone. As a byproduct of that you can now also see that the background has a warm glow to it, almost like its been taken at sunset. In fairness you could happily warm this up even more and the skin tones would still be more than acceptable too.

The Results

So now lets take a look at all the results side by side to see the variations achieved through a single light, colour conversion gels and Kelvin adjustments.

View fullsize

Here's the resulting images side by side. Click on the image to enlarge it.

I personally find this a really effective and super simple technique to employ if you're looking for a quick and easy way to add a little interest to a shot without overpowering it with crazy colours. I mentioned at the start that the studio environment that I used here probably isn't even the best place to give it a go to show off the effect and if I was doing this again I would use it on location where there was a lot more daylight in the background to really show off the colour a little more.

Think about adding a CTO gel and then taking a corporate headshot in a modern urban office with daylight illuminating the cold steel and concrete of the background. Tweak the white balance and that background would look great in a steel blue wash of colour. Conversely you can get that LA sun-kissed backdrop by using a CTB gel on your key light and doing a model shoot outside. Adjust the white balance and the background will go a golden brown. Also its worth remembering that I only used 'full' CTO and CTB gels, if you wanted to reduce the blue effect in the background for example you could use a CTO-half and the effect would be greatly reduced.

PRO TIP: There's just one last point I'd like to add and that this effect only really works with Kelvin value coloured gels. For example you can t just grab any old orange gel you might have and get the same effect. I'm not saying that you couldn't get close to colour correcting it out later with more advanced post production tools but you won't be able to simply adjust the white balance and expect a natural skin tone to appear. For best results just stick to the gels that are Kelvin conversions like the the CTO and CTB's.

If you're interested here's my final retouched versions from the setup  :)

I know a lot of you have already purchased these anyway but if you don't already have them I'm currently selling packs of Utility Gels that contain all the CTO and CTB combinations you need to give this technique a go.

If you'd like to pick up a pack of Utility gels then head on over to my products page to find out more. The links on there will take you to the Amersham Studio website to take final payment.

2x Full Colour Temperature Orange

2x Full Colour Temperature Blue

1x Half Colour Temperature Orange

1x Half Colour Temperature Blue

Plus:

2x Two Stop Neutral Density

2x One Stop Neutral Density 

2x Heavy Frost - Strong Diffusion

Also if you'd like to learn more about gelled lighting then why not check out one of my gelled lighting workshops. I've been running these for a little while now, they're always really popular and everybody walks away brimming with knowledge and tons of cool shots so why not check it out. Jake Hicks Photography - Gelled Lighting Workshops

Quickly and Easily Remove Harsh Highlights in Photoshop

Remove harsh highlights in portraits without affecting the shadow detail in minutes.

There are some occasions where the lighting in a shot is a little harsh in certain areas. It's human nature for our eyes to automatically go to the brightest part of an image first. Normally though we want that to be the eyes if it's a portrait for example. Sometimes there may be occasions where other areas may be so relatively bright that it distracts from the overall image. So how can we quickly and easily adjust the highlights without affecting the shadows, this very quick Photoshop technique will help to seamlessly manage this issue.

Following this step-by-step may seem a long winded technique but once you've done it a couple of times you'll be confident enough to do it under a minute or so, in fact it's so consistently reliable that you can even build an action that does it in mere seconds.

1. Open up your shot with the highlight issue.

2. Create a new levels adjust layer. Layer -> New Adjustment Layer -> Levels...

3. Rename it 'Reduced Highlights'. Hit Ok

4. Change the adjustment layer blend mode to 'Multiply' (you can also do this at the time of the adjustment layers name input in step 3).

5. You should now see that your image looks muddy and the highlights as well as everything else now looks a lot darker. We now need to separate these darker highlights without affecting the shadows and the rest of the image.

6. In the layers palette, select the mask of your 'Reduced Highlights' adjustment layer.

7. Go to Select -> Colour Range. In this menu click on the drop down menu 'Select: Sampled Colours'. Scroll down to the 'Highlights' and select it. Hit Ok.

8. Your image should now look a little odd but the highlights should still be darker and although we've reduced the darkening effect on the rest of the image we need to tweak it a little more so that we can really fine tune where the effect takes place.

9. In this step we're going to manage the mask that shows us the adjustment. Since Photoshop CS6 we've been able to dynamically adjust the feather amount of a mask. To do this we need to see the adjustments layers properties panel. Click on the adjustment layers mask and then go to Windows -> Properties.

10. We now need to manipulate the 'Feather:' option in the Properties panel. This will be different for each image based on the amount of highlights present and personal preference but with dynamic sliders we can see the effect taking immediate effect as we play with them. I tend to work at a feathering value of around 100px.

11. Now that we've adjusted the feathering amount remember we can also further adjust the amount the adjustment layer is visible via the adjustment layers opacity. Again the amount will vary for each shot but a good place to start is around 70%.

12. That's it you're all done. Like I mentioned at the start, although it seems like a lot of steps but once you've done it a few times its really, really quick and simple to do.

So there you have it, a great way to locally adjust the highlights seamlessly without effecting the shadows and darkening any other areas.

Let me know what you think and if you think it will help out with your retouching and workflow in the future. If you've got any ideas for future retouching steps and techniques for me to share then let me know.

If you'd like to see my complete workflow from Raw-to-Lightroom-to-Photoshop then why not attend one of Post-Pro workshops where I show you absolutely everything in my commercial workflow. No secrets are kept back and everybody on the full day of face-to-face training will be able to follow along and walk away with all of my Photoshop actions and over 30 of my Lightroom presets, plus everybody will also receive the complete days note via a comprehensive 50+ page PDF. To find out more then head on over to my Post-Pro training page and get yourself signed up today. http://jakehicksphotography.com/post-production-workshop/

Adding Analogue Grain to a Digital Image to Reduce Colour Banding

We've spent the last ten years of our digital revolution trying to eliminate grain and noise from our photographs but as with anything that falls out of favour, a new generation comes along to make it cool again.

View fullsize

I'm sure we've all experienced that sinking feeling after uploading a shot to an online service like Facebook. It looked great a moment ago now it looks like somebody just kicked 50 points of saturation out of it and then re-saved it at JPEG quality level 3 for good measure. Not cool. Click to Enlarge Image so that you can see that it doesn't just happen to you. Image on the left pre-Facebook, image on the right post-Facebook.

The film era of photography has given us a lot and we've certainly spent a long time with digital photography where we've strived for sharper lenses, smaller pixels and a lot less noise in our shots. But that couldn't carry on forever and over time we've fallen back in love with the nostalgia of imperfections. Lomography and its army of film shooters is more popular now than it ever was back when film was the only choice and more and more of us are shooting with vintage lenses that introduce a more 'artistic' and creative look back into our shots. In fact even the top-end New York fashion photographers who shoot on £30,000, 100 mega pixel cameras are adding noise back into their fashion shots and more and more of us are following the trend as I see more and more grainy shots being uploaded than ever before.

So is it just another retro-revolutoin or is there a reason that digital noise is becoming more prevalent in our images? Firstly I think there's a couple of reasons, on one hand I think it's nostalgic to see noise and grain in a shot and a photographer may want to convey that feeling in their image. Secondly and perhaps more importantly there's a couple of technical reasons why noise is being used. I'm sure most of us shoot on a modern digital camera that has around a 24 mega pixel sensor onboard. These cameras have the ability to shoot pin sharp images fully printable up to A3 or suitable for billboard ads but how many of us actually print anything at all any more? Even if you do print some shots the reality is that the vast majority of our images go online and are viewed  at a mere fraction of the size we actually shot them at. So most of our images are being viewed at a very small comparative pixel size and also in a smaller colour depth to what we shot them at (this is a whole other article but essentially most online viewing platforms like Facebook strip colour detail from our shots to reduce file sizes). We spend ages making our shots 'print-ready' but don't actually print them, when in reality we should be making them 'screen-ready' and there's a couple of things we can do to make that happen.

A small part of me dies each time I upload a gelled lighting shot to Facebook.

The top three shots are as they appear currently on my Facebook page, the bottom three are as I saved them  at 851 x 315 pixels in Photoshop. I think its pretty fair to say that Facebook had its wicked way with most of the colour in those shots and spat back out the horrendously  degraded version you see here.

We've all had that sinking feeling when we upload our shot and it looks like somebody just kicked 50 points of saturation out of it and then re-saved it at JPEG quality level 3 for good measure. Not cool.

On the left is how you and I see colour - on the right is how online services like Facebook see colour. The left hand shot has 9 colour tones whereas the right hand shot has only one after Facebook has compressed it. This is how Facebook compresses file sizes, by seeing 'similar' colours as the same colour.

This image degradation is especially noticeable on saturated images like mine with gels. There's a couple of reasons for this but basically most online services are desperately trying to save file size so they compress the shots we upload and in the process colour gradients can suffer greatly.  In 2013 Facebook reported that its users were uploading 350 million photos a day! Thats insane and remember its a free service and those 349 million baby pictures have to be saved somewhere so I get why they compress the hell out of our shots, but it's still depressing to see one of your shots get taken 'roughly from behind' by the big bad Facebook compressor.

Is there anything we can do?

Well there's no magic bullet but we can give ourselves the best possible chance of defending ourselves when the compressor comes a calling. Enter the digital noise.

Digital noise is a way of adding detail back into a shot so that Facebook has a tougher time degrading it. For example a landscape shot with a lot of leaves and maybe some stormy seas is going to retain a lot of its file size after Facebook has compressed it because Facebook struggles merging colours and details when theres a lot going on. Conversely a studio shot like mine with a plain background gets destroyed because it has a lot of blank areas to merge into one. To combat this I add some noise across the image to make it tougher for Facebook to compress it. The noise isn't enough to visually alter the shot when viewed normally but it adds enough for Facebook to struggle with it and limit the degradation and colour banding that we often see.

It's easy to do and once you've done it a few times you can even setup a quick Photoshop action to run once you're happy. Yes I know there's a great grain filter in Lightroom but I wanted to go over the Photoshop alternative so you smart-arses that didn't read the whole article and have just galloped to the comments section to point that out can go back under the bridge from whence you came ;)

1. Get your finished shot, do not apply any noise at any point apart from at the very, very end. Don't even apply this before sharpening.

Take your shot and add a new layer. Layer -> New -> Layer. In the Layer properties box that follows, change the layer mode to 'Soft Light' and click the box below that marked 'Fill with Soft-Light-Neautral Color (50% Gray)'. You can rename this layer Coarse Noise as we are going to use an additional layer later on as well. Hit OK.

2. With the Coarse Noise layer selected go to Filter -> Noise -> Add Noise. In the Noise options set the amount to around 15 (this is pixel based so it will be based on the pixel size of your file) It should look a bit heavy right now but we're going to do a few more steps yet.

Make sure Gaussian button is checked to keep the grain from looking too structured. Also make sure that the Monochromatic box is checked, we don't want to add any additional colour. Hit OK.

3. Next we want to soften that noise a little. Go to Filter -> Blur -> Gaussian Blur.

In here we just to soften the noise, not completely destroy it so a Radius of about of 1 should be fine. Hit OK.

4. So now that we've created our coarse noise layer we want to add a little more depth and a more realistic analogue look and feel to the effect. We are going to do this by adding a fine layer on top so go to Layer -> New -> Layer.

In the proceeding layer properties box rename the layer 'Fine Noise' and then change the layer mode to 'Soft Light' and click the box below that marked 'Fill with Soft-Light-Neautral Color (50% Gray)'. Hit OK.

5. We now want to add our noise to this layer, go to Filter -> Noise -> Add Noise. In here we want to add a little less this time so set the amount to around 5%. Keep it set to Gaussian and Monochromatic. Hit OK.

6. Again we want to soften this a little so go to Filter -> Blur -> Gaussian Blur and set the radius to even less this time. Around 0.5 Pixels should be a good place to start. Hit OK.

7. You should now have 2 separate layers of grain. One Coarse and one Fine, its up to you as to how much grain you have in your final version but I tend to lower the opacity of my Coarse layer to around 50%. This usually gives me a subtle but effective look.

View fullsize

Click on the image to enlarge it. The left hand shots have no noise applied but on the right hand shots it has. When zoomed out you can hardly tell its there so it shouldn't effect the look of your shots too much but it should help online compressors to limit the amount they crush our studio shots.

That's pretty much it, you're done. Now the effect should be subtle and to be fair once it's uploaded to the likes of Facebook you probably won't even notice it but it will help to reduce some of the colour banding that we all have to deal with by giving the image compressors something to fight with. Like I say this technique is no 'magic bullet' to better looking Facebook shots and there's a couple of other things you can do as well but this will definitely help. Try some varying amounts to see what works for you and I wish you luck and I hope it helps :)

If you'd like to learn more about some of my Photoshop tips and techniques then you can alway come along to one of my full day workshops where I go through absolutely everything in my Post-Pro workflow from Raw to Lightroom to Photoshop. To find out more and to sign up please head on over to my Training page jakehicksphotography.com/post-production-workshop/

You may also like another of my Photoshop techniques articles, this one is about 'How to Quickly Remove Dust and Hairs from Clothing'

---

:WARNING: Yup, you guessed it, self betterment opportunities lie just ahead :D

---

Jake Hicks Photography Workshops

If you're interested in learning more about my professional workflow then why not check out my Post-Production Workflow Workshop. On this full day of hands-on learning I walk you through everything from Lightroom to Photoshop including correct import and export, an in-depth look at the powerful colour correction tools of Lightroom, fast and effective studio proofing tools as well as an extensive step-by-step walkthrough of my editorial retouching techniques in Photoshop. Plus everybody on the day will walk away with an in-depth PDF of everything taught on the day PLUS over 15 of my Photoshop Actions and 30 of my Lightroom presets! Find out more here Jake Hicks Photography - Post Production Workflow Workshop

---

Jake Hicks Photography Video Tutorial

I have also just released a brand new 22 hour complete Gelled Lighting Tutorial video. I go over everything from studio lighting setups with gels to being on location with gels plus I also go through my complete retouching and post pro workflow. For more details and complete breakdown of everything that's include check out my Coloured Gel Portraits Tutorial

---

Jake Hicks Photography Gel Packs

I also offer comprehensive coloured gel packs. These collections of gels are what I use day to day to create some of the most highly saturated colours around. If you're looking at getting into gelled lighting or need to get stronger and richer colours in your coloured gel work why not check out my Jake Hicks Photography Gel Packs

First Look at the Lensbaby Twist 60

I was super excited to hear a few weeks back that Lensbaby had a new lens in the works and even more excited when I heard it was going to be a lens with the swirly bokeh effect.

The new Lensbaby Twist 60

In the past this swirly visual effect had been the money-train for Lomo and their Petzval lenses in the form of the 85mm and the soon to be publicly available 58mm. I own a lot of the Lensbaby lenses and I've been very pleased with the resulting optical effects from their previous products so I was certainly pleased to hear Lensbaby were taking a crack at the swirly bokeh effect now too. This time around lensbaby introduces the same Petzval optics but in a modern lens, and the reason I say modern lens is because the Lomo Petzval lenses were always 'remakes' of the old classics. Don't get me wrong they were gorgeous looking lenses and very well made but they also had all of the trappings of the original classic lenses. They weighed a ton with awkward focus controls and they had drop-in drop-out aperture plates to change the aperture. So as gorgeous and fun as they were, they were always a trade-off over practicality.

Cue the Lensbaby Twist 60. First impressions of the Lensbaby Twist 60 is lightweight, well made and simple to use. That may seem an obvious statement but I will come onto why that's of particular relevance later on. The lens is matt black metal with an inner gold metal collar section that holds the optics. You don't need to be a genius to figure out that the inner gold section is referencing the famous brass colouring of the Petzval lenses of old. The first thing I notice is how lightweight it is and at under 200grams this is definitely not going to be a burden in your camera bag. It has a focal length of 60mm which is a really great portrait length in my opinion (50mm vs 85mm: Which is the Best Focal Length for Portraiture?) with minimal perspective distortion. Granted it's not going to be your go-to focal length for those corporate headshots but 60mm gives you a huge range in terms of singles shots and group shots over the longer lenses. It has an f stop range of f2.5 - f22 and those apertures are adjusted via the gold metal collar in the centre. One thing to note on this is that the apertures are changed via this gold collar but this is also how the lens focuses in and out. So for example when youre focused on objects far away that gold collar disappears into that black lens housing making it tricky to change the apertures. Not a big deal really and although you can still physically change the aperture you just can't see the numbers you're changing them to.

Lensbaby Twist 60 - Nikon Mount

The Twist 60 focused at minimum distance

Twist 60 focused at maximum distance

Twist 60 on my Nikon d600

This like all other Lensbaby lenses is a manual focus lens so remember this isn't 'talking' to your camera directly so you can't adjust the apertures etc via the camera body itself. Anybody who has already purchased a Lensbaby or any other art lens in the past will be familiar with this anyway. The focusing ring is grippy and firm so you'll not be nudging it about all the time plus its not a huge thread so from maximum focus to minimum focus its only a quarter turn on the focusing ring so you have plenty of accurate control. That's pretty much all you really need to know for now, I'll post the manufacturing stats a the bottom if you're interested but for now lets take a look at some photos through it.

I just want to state that I don't pretend that this is a full review at all. I've only used this lens on one shoot so far and that was at the end of another shoot I was doing. I Just wanted to get some shots with it to see what it was like and get some first impression. I will obviously need to use it a lot more to get a firmer idea.

View fullsize

First shot taken with the new Lensbaby Twist 60. F2.8. Click on the image to enlarge it.

So first impressions are that it does exactly what it's designed to do. Its adding a huge amount of swirl (twist) to the background here. But what was the background and did it already have that swirl in there somewhere? No it definitely didn't in fact this is just a simple one light shot against a silver window blind, hardly anything overly exotic but to prove my point I also took the same exact shot with a standard 50mm lens to show you.

View fullsize

Image taken on standard 50mm Nikon prime lens. Image also taken at f2.8. Click on the image to enlarge it.

You can see in the image here how the effect is markedly different to when you're using the Twist 60 and not using it. So what do you need to do to get the effect working at its best? Well not much really, I literally just attached the lens and focused the shot and I was done there's no secret to getting it to work as the effect is all created in the optics. It's not like some of the other Lensbaby lenses that needs a bit of practice or skill to use like the Edge or the Composer Pro, the Twist does it all internally.

So what's the limitations of the lenses effects then? Thats a simple one to explain, but you have to think about this lens doing two separate things. Firstly its focusing on your subject and keeping them nice and sharp like any lens does, secondly its partitioning the outer edges of the lens to do the 'twisting'. Those two roles are fixed in the lens and you can't change them, what I mean by that is that you can't make the outer edges of the lens tack-sharp and you can't get objects in the centre of the lens to start twisting. As soon as you understand that you can stop fighting it and shoot accordingly. For example your subject is always going to be best placed in the middle of the shot and because of this the landscape format crop is going to lend itself to this composition.

For those that are interested, this was the simple one light setup. A ring flash and model against silver backdrop

View fullsize

A portrait version of the same shot. The eyes here are a little higher up than centre so they are starting to feel the effect of the 'twist' leaving them a little blurred but not drastically so. Click on the image to enlarge it.

The Elephant in the room

So lets not put this off any longer, I know the first thing I wanted to know and I'm sure the question you've been wondering is 'How does the Twist 60 compare to the Petzval 58?' Yes I know Petzval has an 85mm lens as well but it's a different focal length to the Twist 60 so I'll be comparing it to the Petzval 58 plus I have the 58 so I am able to directly compare the two. Fortunately I was able to take shots using the Petzval 58 alongside the Twist 60 at exactly the same time so lets take a look at the results. The images below show the different shots and the image descriptions appear at the bottom of each of them.

Portrait orientation of Twist 60

Landscape Orientation Twist 60

Petzval 58 - Bokeh Control Level 5

Petzval 58 Bokeh Control Level 7

Petzval Bokeh Control Level 1

Nikon 50mm

From the resulting images I'll let you draw your own conclusions of what you prefer or don't prefer. To those that don't know the Petzval 58 has the option to manually dial in a varying amount of bokeh/swirl and you can see the varying amounts on the shots above. To find out more I did a full review here where you can see more examples of the Petzval bokeh control feature Petzval 58 Bokeh Control Lens Review - March 2016

In my opinion though I really like the clean look to the swirl effect on the Twist 60 over the Petzval 58, at any bokeh control value. This is probably because its a modern lens though, its taken the swirling aspect of the older Petzval lenses and applied it to a modern chassis if you will but as a result its a little more defined. There's no right or wrong here but I do think the Twist 60 might be more practical for me day-to-day whereas the Petzval does have that more vintage traditional look but you'd expect that as its a remake of a vintage lens.

Ok so the Twist 60 creates a great effect and its comparable to the Petzval, I own a Petzval 58 and I love the shots it takes but I also have an issue with the practicality of this vintage style lens in a commercial setting. I think the Petzval 58 could take some truly stunning wedding shots for example but would I recommend lugging around a lens equivalent to the weight of a bag of sugar and a wallet full of loose aperture plates to faff about with whilst the bride patiently waits? No, of course not. The Petzval has its place and that's perhaps not in a high pressure setting, it's a vintage experience and as such you'll definitely get those unique vintage style shots. The Twist 60 however creates lovely swirly looking shots and it's in a modern, easy to use housing that weights practically nothing. I know which lens I'll be throwing in my camera bag the next time I have a commercial shoot and I want to quickly grab a few 'art shots'.

The Twist 60 comes out here in the UK on May 5th 2016. The Petzval 58 has a planned shipping date of May 2016 (they are still fulfilling kick-starter backer orders until then) so both of these lenses are coming out in the same month. The current price of the Twist 60 is £249/$279 and the current price for the Petzval 58 is £549/$749. It's also worth mentioning that for the current Lensbaby owners of the 'optic-swap-system' the Composer Pro, Edge lenses etc can actually swop out your other optic and insert this new Twist 60 optic inside instead. The price of an Twist 60 insert is £159/$179!

*I also have a discount code for you guys where you can get a further 10% off of these Lensbaby prices at WEX JAKEHICKS10 meaning you can get the Twist 60 for as little as £143

Now I don't mean to start riding around on the elephant in the room wearing a clown suit and sining the Hokey Cokey here but I think this Mays lens purchase might have just gotten a LOT more economically viable.

Additional Info and Links

The new Twist 60 comes in (the following links take you to WEX UK) Nikon, Canon and Sony mounts. The Sony mount is actually a completely redesigned lens, not just a different mount screwed on the bottom. Plus you can always simply get the Optic on its own.

Remember that if you're buying any Lensbaby lens from WEX you get an additional 10% off with my discount code JAKEHICKS10 simply enter it in the 'Any Vouchers' box at checkout.

US Links at B&H Nikon, Canon and Sony. Twist 60 Optic

The Nikon Twist 60 Specs

• Focal length - wide (mm)60
• Max aperture - wide2.5
• Max aperture - tele22
• Minimum aperture22
• Minimum focus distance (m)0.45
• Lens elements4
• Lens groups3
• Aperture blades12
• Filter thread (mm)46
• Size6.35 x 6.35 x 5.7 cm
• Weight (g)198.45

Again my apologies for not having more shots for you guys but I wanted to get this 'quick look' out there as soon as possible and I am certainly looking forward to using the Twist 60 on some more upcoming shoots real soon which I will obviously share as and when I do. So what do you guys think? Will you be getting a Twist 60 in May? Feel free to let me now your thoughts and if you have any questions about the lens feel free to fire away and I'll do my best to answer them :)

You may also be interested in my past art lens reviews, the Lensbaby Velvet 56 and also my Petzval 58 lens review.

Also if you're interested in learning more about my work then why not check out some of my workshops. I run workshops on Gelled Lighting and also my entire Post Production Workflow

Finding the People Who've Stolen Your Photographs

It would seem that night clubs are the worst offenders for image theft. They use your shot for a club night and then move onto the next. It's a very high turnover of shots as they have several club nights every week.

The digital age has brought us as photographers many benefits, unfortunately is has also brought us a few headaches as well, not least of which is the constant issue of copyright infringement.

Nearly all of us upload our photographs to the world wide web to reach a larger audience, to not do so now is damn near commercial suicide. But uploading all of our latest and greatest works puts us at the mercy of the nefarious types who believe the internet is the wild west. You take what you want, when you want it. It's on the internet so it must be free right? The polite and more diplomatic term for this theft is 'copyright infringement' but essentially it is stealing and it's where other people and companies actually profit from your hard work for free. But how do we find these people? How do we stop them from doing it and how do we get compensated for what they've profited from?

Last week a very kind member of my community got in touch to say that they had seen my work being used by a nightclub and asked if I was aware of it or was the night club using my work without consent. They were right, the nightclub had/was using my work without consent. Just a side note here but I have never worked with nightclubs on creating imagery for them and I do not know of any other photographer ever working for for a nightclub for money either. In my experience nightclubs are the biggest offenders of copyright infringement, they use a shot for a club night that has a specific date in the near future and after that club night has passed they don't need that image anymore and move onto the next one. It's a very quick turnover of images and it makes it very tricky to catch them out. The opposite of this infringement is on a more permanent basis, for example if somebody has used a photograph on a book cover, that has an indefinite lifespan. That book cover image will be used for years not weeks and is far easier to catch and to demand compensation from the infringers.

So how do we find these common thieves? Franky I take a fairly pathetic stance on this copyright infringement as a whole, I'll be honest and say that up until now I've never bothered looking for people who've stolen my shots. My argument has been 'time taken to find image thieves to bill vs. time spent creating new images that will make me money'. I've always just written copyright infringement off as the cost of doing business in the digital age and that my time is better spent creating new content not chasing around after my old work. That may well have been true up until now but thankfully there's now more and more technology on our side to do the work for us. Essentially we now get the best of both worlds, I can spend my time taking new pictures whilst technology hunts down my old pictures and fines the people using them.

Say hello to a little company called Pixsy. www.pixsy.com

Pixsy is an online service that you direct to all of your images on the web and then it searches everywhere else on the web to see where those shots are being used without you knowledge and consent.

Upon launch I directed it to my Flickr, Instagram, Tumblr, 500px and my website. But it does also give you a few other options too including Photoshelter and SmugMug for example.

It's probably not a bad idea to also use the 'Add another website' button feature too. The more places you know of that are hosting your images legitimately the less amount of work you're going to have to do in crossing off matches you were already aware of. For example if you have shots on your Model Mayhem, BeHance, PurplePort, all these places are going to pop up in the 'matches' so best to rule them out now.

 In about 30 seconds it had scanned through my 1441 shots and spat back out 4801 matches over 193 pages. I had a lot of work to do.

Literally my first page of searches found a book cover using my shot.

Ok so Pixsy finds all of these matches elsewhere on the web, now what? Well essentially you now have to go through these matches and spot which ones are legit re-posts of your shot or unauthorised ones. for example your images may appear in a news article or blog posts about you or you've personally uploaded those shots to another online service like Model Mayhem for example. Those matches are legit, you know about them or they're legally allowed to be there. The other matches are the ones you have to keep an eye out for. This is actually a lot easier than you think as you simply go to the 'Matches' tab at the top of the site and then scroll down the thumbnails until you spot something you don't recognise. In fact on my very first page I had nice little book cover I wasn't even aware of! Just another 192 pages to go!

All of these images are legit but the search functionality of Pixsy is pretty impressive. It can dig out your image from some fairly complex surrounding shots. All the images on the left-hand side of each of these 5 pairs is the image I gave to Pixsy. The images on the right-hand side of the pairs is the shots Pixsy found elsewhere on the web. 1. A magazine cover with text from a shot with no text. 2. A thumbnail of a shot surrounded by other thumbnails. 3. A heavily cropped magazine cover with a ton of surrounding text. A phone pic of a shot on funny angle with a different tone surrounded by other shots and text. 5. A clean image found from a double page spread in a different crop and surrounded by text.

So you've found the 'infringer' now what? Once you've spotted somebody using your shot in a context you're not familiar with you can follow the link provided by Pixsy to go see what page it's appearing on. If after you follow the link and you're still convinced that this is an unauthorised use of your shot and you should be compensated for it you simply go back to the Pixsy page and hit the '$ Submit Case' button.

From there, and I quote from their page 'Once you submit a case to us, our licensing team will thoroughly document the unauthorized use. Depending on the severity of the matter and the type of use, we will either contact the image user on your behalf and request a license fee payment or forward the matter to one of our attorneys.'

If they find that the case is worth tackling they'll pretty much take it from there. If you win they take 50% of the fee. That may seem like a lot but you aren't wasting any time or stressing over it, they're doing all of that and they're far better qualified to do so.

Once you've found a shot of yours that you think is being used for nefarious reasons (to be fair I don't even know what this guy is using my shot for to sell. I think its a book. Maybe.) then you can hit the 'Submit Case' button on the right hand side and Pixsy will look into whether there's a win to be had.

It seems like 'no-brainer' to me as I don't waste any of my time chasing the image parasites around the internet and I get some money in the end if they come through. I only signed up last week and I haven't had any results back as of yet but looking around the web I've found some photographers that I respect and trust to have had a few wins through Pixsy and who speak very highly of them.

So should I sell my gear and sit back and wait for the money to roll in from the infringement cases? No definitely not. I've certainly found a few of the vermin online who are happy to use my work for free but I won't be holding my breath on getting any money from them just yet. Night clubs and online book covers aren't going to get you much if anything at all but the infringers you're looking for are the big companies who still make mistakes time and time and time again. Next clothing and Top Shop have both been caught for just grabbing shots off the web and printing them on T-shirts, they were fined an 'undisclosed' amount but it's safe to say that was hefty sum. It's these cases that are worth keeping an eye out for but apart from the money side of things there's also another reason to check your images aren't being used for the wrong reasons.

A got a lot of hits for my images under the name 'JHicksStudios'. It turns out I had a copycat using my images and name to set up shoots with models on Model Mayhem. 

Whilst using Pixsy I came across around 20 re-uses of my image on Model Mayhem. Upon closer inspection I actually found that somebody had set up an account under the name 'JHicksStudios' and was posing as me online with my images in their port. Now using my images is obviously bad enough but if this guy was setting up shoots with models under my name with work that wasn't his I don't think its a stretch to say that he didn't have the best intentions towards the people involved. As a photographer who works very closely with my team I can think of nothing more damaging to my company and my brand than somebody else pretending to be me and destroying my reputation. It's bad enough that a copycat is running around producing sub-par work under my name but my industry reputation is far more important to me than a few hundred quid for a stolen book cover.

So Pixsy may find some people stealing your images and maybe even get you some money for it. At the very least you can simply keep an eye out for the big name companies who might slip up and get yourself a nice little payout but for me the biggest piece of mind is that I can keep an eye out for the 'JHicks Studios' out there and crush them before they do any real damage. Regarding that I got in touch with Model Mayhem and his account has now been deactivated.

Check out Pixsy for yourself, at present they're inundated with applicants so it took me about 24 hours after applying before I received an activation 'invite' code. All they needed was an email address and they don't take any money from you unless they win one of your cases. It's definitely worth a look and I'll keep you posted if I actually win any cases but please comment below if you've used this service or a different one to win any copyright infringement cases. For that matter just feel free to share your strangest infringement story. Whilst researching this article I actually found a guy whose shot had been used by ISIS for an 'ad campaign/propaganda'. Apparently Pixsy wasn't confident on winning that particular case but they did state 'we sent a number of take down requests for him (Brian McCarty the Photographer) and the picture was removed from the internet. We haven't received any threats yet, so that's good'. Fair play to Pixsy.

Thanks for reading guys, you may also like my articles on 'Adding Copyright Metadata in Lightroom' or 'The Reality of Actually Getting Published by Humans'

Alternatively if you'd like to learn more about how I setup my photographs, the finer details of implementing gelled lighting like I do or how I retouch my photos, why not come along to one of my workshops. http://jakehicksphotography.com/training/