About Me

My photo
Monroe, Ohio, United States
Began my photography career as most people do...the highschool yearbook. Upon graduation I attended the US Naval Photography School in Pensacola Fla. After getting a qualification in basic photography and then later attending their Portrait School,was assigned to a military operation. Experiences included USO photography for Bob Hope, Brooke Shields, Kathy Lee Crosby and Wayne Newton.Have also had the opportunity for travel assignments to places such as Beruit, Israel, Africa, Australia, Brazil, Italy, Spain and England. Upon exiting the Navy in 1984,opened up a Tanning Salon and Health Club in Oxford,Ohio and began photographing weddings, all as a vehicle to fund my way through college. I enjoy travel, sports photography, special event and Cincinnati Reds photography. I am frequently contracted as a sports photographer by parents, sports teams, and organizations,throughout the Cincinnati and Dayton, Ohio areas, to provide the highest quality sports photography, both on an individual and team basis.

July 30, 2009

Pig Pen

Posted by Cincinnati and Dayton Sports Photographer Vincent Rush of Monroe, Ohio. For more information (877) 858-6295

July 26, 2009

Final Preps

Shooting sports photography and becoming recognized as a sports photographer in Cincinnati and Dayon Ohio, has involved more that just going to the field and shooting sports photographs.

I generally always have my Nikon gear loaded up in the family truckster and am always keeping an eye out for unusual shots.

On this particular Saturday, I was driving by the football field in Monroe and saw a friend of mine and volunteer to the Monroe community, Dave Grant, getting football helmets ready for a new season of pee wee football.

Posted by Cincinnati and Dayton Sports Photographer Vincent Rush of Monroe, Ohio. For more information (877) 858-6295

July 19, 2009

Near Miss

Posted by Cincinnati and Dayton Sports Photographer Vincent Rush of Monroe, Ohio. For more information (877) 858-6295

July 16, 2009

Big Fishes

I've been shooting a lot of baseball lately, as my son Zach plays on two All Star teams, Monroe & Eaton. Along the way, you happen to come across some great captures. I've always said that photography can be like fishing at times. If you keep casting your line, you're bound to hook a big one. During a little league baseball game, I will shoot 4-500 images, of which I crop and edit them down to 40-50 of the best.

This is one of those "fish"

Posted by Cincinnati and Dayton Sports Photographer Vincent Rush of Monroe, Ohio. For more information (877) 858-6295

July 9, 2009

If Looks Could Kill

Is there anything that needs to be said about this picture? This is just one of those that, as a sports photographer, you take home and download on your computer and just have to sit back and smile about.

Posted by Cincinnati and Dayton Sports Photographer Vincent Rush of Monroe, Ohio. For more information (877) 858-6295

July 8, 2009

Loading Up

Shooting sports photography over the 4th of July weekend, I had a chance to get some nice shots of my own son, playing for one of his two All Star teams.

I attribute a lot of my signature style in sports photographs to the angle of the shot. I've said before, that at local sporting events I see a lot of "lazy" photographers stand in one or two positions the whole game and very rarely work any angles during the game.

This angle is generally done best with a mono-pod and either sitting or down on one knee.

Posted by Cincinnati and Dayton Sports Photographer Vincent Rush of Monroe, Ohio. For more information (877) 858-6295

July 7, 2009

Every Great Salesperson Was Once a Beginner

From Jeffery Gitomer

“That’s easy for you to say! You’re already a great salesman and a successful author and speaker,” someone yelled from the audience as I was answering a question about how to brand yourself and position yourself to create the law of attraction.

Now the audience was waiting for my answer. It wasn’t a time for humor. Every person was looking for the bridge between where I am and where they are. And not just an answer – a path to get there.

I began by telling them of a book I had just purchased called, Every Great Chess Player Was Once A Beginner. The title rocked my entire thought process. Although it was obvious that everyone starts someplace, it’s hard to imagine A-Rod playing little league, or Bret Favre playing Pop Warner football. Hard to imagine Bill Gates in his dorm room cooking mac and cheese on a hotplate as he struggles with his 128k computer to create the future of software. But they all did.

Then I gave them a glimpse of my beginning and my renaissance.

REALITY: No, it’s not easy for me to say anything, or do anything. Yes, I’m somewhat successful now, BUT I didn’t start with nine best-selling books. I started by writing one 750-word column. Actually I started studying sales in 1972. And made sales for 35 years. I had no idea I would write. I just loved sales and wanted to be the best salesman in the world. When the opportunity to write about sales appeared, I jumped on it. Now I write about my personal experiences, observations, and thoughts.

When I moved to Charlotte in 1988 I was starting over. Beginning again. I knew no one, and had limited capital (definition: broke). I joined the Charlotte Chamber. I subscribed to the local business journal. I networked my butt off. And I tried to get business for others. I connected and made connections. I became known as a person of value. I took a leadership position at the Chamber.

Here are the insights that drove me:
As a beginner you have to trust your instincts, and you have to “BE.”
• Be willing to risk.
• Be a constant student.
• Be a consistent performer, even in a losing cause.
• Be a value provider.
• Be friendly and likeable.
• Be passionate about your product or service.
• Be willing to dedicate the time it takes to become great.

And you must BELIEVE you can do it. Your mental strength is more important than your skill and your product knowledge. Mental strength stems from your attitude, your enthusiasm, and your willingness to work hard. It’s a struggle, what’s your point? Struggle is part of greatness. So is hard work. TV is not.

GREAT NEWS: Your earnings in sales and business are only limited by your ability to convince others to buy.
REALITY: You have to read, study, and practice.
EXAMPLE OF PRACTICE: Cold calls are a lousy place to make a sale, but they’re a great place to learn how to sell.
REALITY: Rejection is part of the game – all sports have winners and losers. If you can win 30% of the time, you’ll win awards, make president’s club, and earn a fortune – that means you’ll get rejected seven out of ten times. Get used to it and get over it.

Think of it this way: Every “no” gets you closer to a “yes.” There, that feels better now, doesn’t it?

Where do you “begin” becoming great?
What is your beginning?
Maybe you have already begun.

There are guidelines to consider:
The first is dedication. To yourself, to your excellence, and to your desire to become the best at whatever you do.
Become a product of the product.
Live your outcome and results.
Study the history of your product.
Visit customers often. Work at their place of business for a day, for free.

Yes it’s nice to have natural ability -- to be gregarious, humorous, honest, hard working, reliable, and trustworthy, and to have the knack for picking up concepts quickly.
Yes it’s nice to have a past history of success.
Yes it’s nice to have a great reputation.
Yes it’s nice to have a great home environment.
Yes it’s great to have supportive people in your life.
And yes it’s nice to have a solid financial foundation.
But these situations and characteristics are not “musts” for greatness.

If you’re trying to grab the brass ring, it comes from within. Energy, desire, dedication, and passion are integral to making the grade, or should I say the GREAT.

In just 20 years I have become an overnight success.
I wish the same for you.

If you want more beginners’ wisdom, go to www.gitomer.com, register if you’re a first-time visitor, and enter BEGIN in the GitBit box.

Jeffrey Gitomer is the author of The Little Red Book of Selling and eight other business books on sales, customer loyalty, and personal development. President of Charlotte-based Buy Gitomer, he gives seminars, runs annual sales meetings, and conducts Internet training programs on sales, customer loyalty, and personal development at www.trainone.com. Jeffrey conducts more than 100 personalized, customized seminars and keynotes a year. To find out more, visit www.gitomer.com. Jeffrey can be reached at 704.333.1112 or by e-mail at salesman@gitomer.com

Posted by Cincinnati and Dayton Sports Photographer Vincent Rush of Monroe, Ohio. For more information (877) 858-6295

Opinions on Film and Digital Photography

Spatial Resolution

Numerous measures can be used to assess the quality of still pictures the most discussed being the pixel count, presumed to correlate with spatial resolution. This is measured by the quantity of picture elements (pixels) in the image sensor, usually counted in millions and called “megapixels”. Measuring the resolution of both film and digital pictures involves numerous issues.

Similarly, digital cameras have a variable relationship of resolution to megapixel count; other factors are significant in digital camera resolution, such as the number of pixels used to resolve the image, the effect of the Bayer pattern or other sensor filters on the digital sensor and the image processing algorithm used to interpolate sensor pixels to image pixels. In addition, digital sensors are typically arranged in a oblong grid pattern, making images susceptible to rippled water pattern artefacts, whereas film is not affected by this because of the random orientation of grains.

Estimates Approximations of a picture’s resolution taken with a 35 mm film camera vary. Greater information may be recorded if a finer grain film and or developer are used. Conversely, less resolution may be recorded with poor quality optics or with coarser-grained film. A 36 mm x 24 mm frame of ISO 100-speed film is estimated to contain the equivalent of 20 million pixels.

The use of medium or even large format films gives theprofessional photographer a higher quality product than standard sized films. Because of the size of the imaging area, they have higher resolution than the current top-of-the-range digital cameras. It is estimated that a medium format film image can record around 50 megapixels, while large format films can record around 200 megapixels (4 × 5 inch) which would equate to around 800 megapixels on the largest common film format, 8 × 10 inches, without taking into account lens sharpness. A medium format DSLRs provides from 42 to 50 megapixels, which is relatively similar quality to the medium format film quality.

When choosing between film and digital and between different types of camera, it is necessary to consider the medium which will be used for display and the viewing distance. For example , if a photograph will only be viewed on a home tele or PC, (which can resolve only about 0.3 megapixels and 1-2 megapixels, respectively, as of 2008. HD sets of 1080p are around 2.07mp), then the resolution provided by a very low-end digital cameras may be sufficient. Print mediums work to far greater qualities of around 300 dots per inch (dpi).

Noise and Grain

Thermal noise is a condition that degrades shadow areas of electronic images with random pixels of a different colour. Grain and film sensitivity are linked, with more sensitive films having more obvious grain. Likewise, when used at high sensitivity settings, digital camera photographs show greater noise than those made at lower sensitivities.

The level at which current technology stands at produces random noise to the images taken by digital cameras, produced by heat and manufacturing defects. For very long exposures it is necessary to operate the image sensor at low temperatures to avoid noise impacting the final image. Film grain for visible light is not affected by exposure time, although the apparent speed of the film does change with longer exposures, a condition known as reciprocity failure.

Dynamic Range

The topic of dynamic range (DR) is very detailed . Comparisons between film and digital media should consider:

Which film? For example, low-contrast print film has greater DR than slide film’s low DR and richer gradation in recorded tones.
Which film format? Larger formats record larger images, so grain is less detectable at film’s limits of exposure and images require less enlargement for a given image size.
What size sensor? As with film, smaller sensors produce smaller images which require greater degrees of enlargement for a given image size. The more convenient pocket digicams use smaller sensors than professional-quality cameras.
What scanner? Variations in optics, sensor resolution, scanner DR and precision of the analogue to digital conversion circuit cause variations in image quality.
What counts as image and what is noise? This question defines the limits of DR within a single photograph, and may vary with subject matter.

A single comparison cannot provide enough information to show that digital or film has a smaller or greater dynamic range. Some amateur authors have performed tests with inconclusive results. R. N. Clark, comparing a professional digital camera with 35 mm film, reached the conclusion that – Digital cameras, like the Canon 1D Mark II, show a huge dynamic range compared to either print or slide film, at least for the films compared.

Ken Rockwell comes to a different conclusion: “CCDs and the related capture electronics will need about ten times more dynamic range (three stops) than they have today to be able to simulate film’s shoulder….This is the biggest image defect in digital cameras today.”

The commercial photographer as well as the consumer would see an improvement in dynamic range if the problems can be addressed by the digital industry. Some CCDs like Fujifilm’s Super CCD combines photosites of different sizes to give increased dynamic range. Other manufacturers use in-camera software to prevent highlight overexposure. Nikon calls this feature D-Lighting.

Effects of Sensor Size

All compact digital cameras and most digital SLRs have sensors that are reduced to smaller than a 36 mm x 24 mm frame of 35 mm film. This affects aspects of the captured picture and the way the camera is used. These effects include:

Increased depth of field;
Decreased light sensitivity and increased pixel noise;
For digital SLRs, cropping of the field of view when using lenses designed for 35 mm camera;
Lenses may be smaller because they only need to project their image onto a smaller area;
Increased degree of enlargement of the final image.

The depth of field of a digital camera and lens set up increases as the imaging area decreases, for a given f-number. This may have plusses for amateur compact digital cameras since they are intended for taking snapshots. More of the image will be in focus than with a larger sensor and the autofocus system does not need to be as accurate to produce an acceptable image. Conversely, commercial photographers often limit the depth of field to create certain effects, such as isolating a subject from its background. Cameras with imaging areas smaller than 36 mm x 24 mm require a wider aperture on the lens to achieve the same degree of selective focusing.

Pixel noise and light sensitivity are both related to pixel size , which is in turn related to sensor size and resolution. As the resolution of sensors increase, the size of the individual pixels has to decrease. This smaller pixel size means that each one collects less light and the resulting signal is amplified more to produce the final value. With a smaller signal, the signal-to-noise ratio decreases. More noise is present in the image and the higher noise floor means that less useful information is extracted from the darker parts of the image.

Many digital SLRs use lens mounts originally designed for film cameras. If the camera has a smaller sensor than the lens’ intended film frame, its field of view is cropped. This crop factor is often called a “focal length multiplier” because the effect can be calculated by multiplying the focal length of the lens. This figure is typically 1.5, but can vary from camera to camera. For lenses that are not designed for a smaller imaging area whilst using the 35 mm-compatible lens mount, this has the beneficial side effect of only using the centre part of the lens, where the image quality is in some aspects higher.

Typically expensive digital SLRs have full-frame sensors that are 36mm × 24 mm, which eliminate depth of field and crop factor problems when compared to 35 mm film cameras.

The smaller sensor size of consumer compact means that prints are extreme enlargements of the original picture and that the lens must perform well in order to provide enough quality to match the tiny pixels on the sensor. Most digital compacts have sensors that exceed the maximum resolution that the lens is capable of delivering. Increased sensor resolution may even have a negative effect on the overall resolution because of increased noise reduction and in camera processing.


The cameras available to the professional photographer address the problems of sensor dust and marks better than consumer cameras.

DSLR cameras are susceptible to dust problems because the sensor remains in place, where a film advances through the camera for each frame . There is a risk of debris in the camera, such as dust or sand, scratching the film; a single grain of sand can damage a whole roll of film. As film cameras age, they can develop wear and tear in their rollers. With a digital SLR, dust is difficult to avoid, but easy to rectify using a computer with photo editing software available. Some digital SLRs have systems that remove dust from the sensor by vibrating or knocking it, sometimes in conjunction with software that remembers where dust is located and removes dust-affected pixels from pictures.

Compact digital cameras are fitted with fixed lenses; dust is excluded from the imaging area. Similar film cameras are often only light tight and not environmentally sealed. Some modern DSLRs, most notably are the high end Nikon models, incorporate extensive dust and weather seals to avoid this problem.


Film produces an original , which contains only the information admitted through the aperture of the camera.

Film images are very difficult to falsify , thus in police investigation and in cases where the authenticity of an image is paramount , like passport or visa photographs, film provides greater security over most digital cameras as digital files may have been modified using a computer. However, there are digital cameras that can produce authenticated images. If someone modifies an authenticated image, it can be determined with special software.

SanDisk claims to have developed a write once memory stick for cameras and that the images once written cannot be altered.


Films and prints, processed and stored in ideal conditions, may remain substantially unchanged for more than 100 years. Gold or platinum toned prints may have a lifespan limited by that of the base material.

It is important to consider the future readability of storage media. Assuming the storage media can continue to hold data for prolonged periods of time, the short lifespan of digital technologies often causes the drives to read media to become unavailable. For example, the first 5¼-inch Floppy disks were first made available in 1976. However, the drives to read them are already extremely rare 30 years later.

The ability to decode the data is important. Digital cameras save photographs in JPEG format, that has existed for approximately 15 years. Because the instructions on how to decode this format are publicly known, it is unlikely that this files will be unreadable in the future.

Many professional cameras can save in a RAW image format, the future of which is less certain. Some of these formats contain proprietary data which is protected by patents, and could be abandoned by their makers at any time for economic reasons. This could make it difficult to read these ‘raw’ files in the future, unless the camera manufacturers were to release information on the file formats.

Additionally many companies take an proactive approach to archiving rather than relying on formats being readable decades later. This takes advantage of the ability to make perfect copies of digital media. So , rather than leaving data on a format which may potentially become unreadable or unsupported, the information can typically be copied to newer media without loss of quality. This is only possible with digital media. Digital images may be printed and stored like traditional photographs.

Convenience and flexibility

Flexibility and convenience have been the main reasons for the widespread adoption of digital cameras. With film cameras, film is normally completely exposed before being processed. Only once the film is returned is it possible to see the photograph. Most digital cameras incorporate a liquid crystal display that allows the image to be viewed immediately after exposure. The photographer may delete undesired or unnecessary photographs, allowing the photographer an immediate opportunity to repeat the image. When a user desires prints, it is only necessary to print the required photographs.

With digital imaging, images may be conveniently stored on a personal computer for modification. Professional-grade digital cameras can store pictures in a raw image format which stores the output from the sensor directly rather than processing it immediately to an image. When edited in suitable software, such as Adobe Photoshop or the GNU program GIMP (which uses dcraw to read raw files), the user may manipulate certain parameters of the image, such as contrast, sharpness or colour balance, before producing a final image. Alternatively, users may retouch the content of recorded JPEG images; software for this purpose may be provided with consumer-grade cameras.

For large format and ultra large format photography, film may have some advantages, both over price and flexibility – at least outside of a studio – as large format digital cameras use scanners rather than a single sensor, these cameras are extremely expensive and not very portable.


Film and digital imaging systems have different cost emphases. With digital photography, cameras tend to be significantly more expensive than film equivalents. With digital cameras, taking snaps is effectively cost-free. The price of digital cameras continues to fall and using film may be seen as more expensive than digital.

High quality film cameras are less complicated and therefore less expensive. The major expenses are ongoing film and processing costs. The commercial photographer will only identify unsuitable images after developing and printing have been paid for.

Film offers the photographer more control over the depth-of-field than a DSLR with an APS sensor, and the price of full-frame sensor cameras may be very high. 35 mm single-lens reflex cameras may be acquired for a fraction of the price of a full-frame DSLR. Some lenses are interchangeable between digital and film cameras; film can be an attractive introduction to photography because of this.

The costs associated with digital photography are specialist batteries, memory cards, paper, printer ink cartridges and long-term storage.

With many photographers switching to digital, film cameras and lenses are now available on the second-hand market at often much-reduced prices, allowing for semi-professional and even professional film cameras to be owned by people who would once never have been able to afford them.

Posted by Cincinnati and Dayton Sports Photographer Vincent Rush of Monroe, Ohio. For more information (877) 858-6295

July 5, 2009


Posted by Cincinnati and Dayton Sports Photographer Vincent Rush of Monroe, Ohio. For more information (877) 858-6295

Stealing 3rd

Shooting sports photography in the Springboro Baseball All Star Tourney, over the 4th of July weekend, gave me some great freeze action Sports Photographs. If I was putting a book together of my best little league shots, this one would be an instant classic.

In a game that pitted Monroe vs. Monroe, the pitcher for the yellow team was throwing a lot of wild pitches.

In anticipation of several stolen bases, I set up at a low angle and waited.

Posted by Cincinnati and Dayton Sports Photographer Vincent Rush of Monroe, Ohio. For more information (877) 858-6295

July 1, 2009

Cincinnati Reds, Brandon Phillips

I could have titled this one "A Swing and a Spit"

While shooting Cincinnati Reds Sports Photographs, I was obviously in a very good location to get this unusual shot of Cincinnati Reds second baseman Brandon Phillips as he took a mighty swing and came up short.

There is a lot of Major League Baseball & Sports Photography that is anticipation and timing, and then there is just plain luck. When shooting Cincinnati Reds photography, I will typically take a 16mg chip and shoot more than 500 photographs a game. With that number, you're bound to get lucky once in a while.

Posted by Cincinnati and Dayton Sports Photographer Vincent Rush of Monroe, Ohio. For more information (877) 858-6295