Digital photography has gained worldwide acceptance.  Last year, digital cameras far outsold film cameras (Cannon and Nikon annual reports state this fact).  There are several magazines devoted exclusively to digital photography.  Many colleges and universities now offer courses in digital photography, digital photo workshops are held nationwide and digital photography is bought and sold daily in wedding and portrait studios, at magazines, at stock agencies, in art galleries, etc.

So, now that digital photography is generally accepted, there are some ethical questions we must face as digital continues to burst onto the photo scene?

First, where do you draw the line?  Example, do you find it acceptable for an entity to take a photo of John Kerry on a College campus, then digitally place him on the stage of an anti-war rally, then print this picture in a nation wide newspaper years later when he runs for Presidential office?  "Sure", you reply, if you don’t like John Kerry.  The question still remains, beyond political party lines, is this ethical?  The answer is NO!  Okay, that may have been an easy one.

Here is another example:  A published photographer gives a speech at Grandfather Mountain Photography clinic.  He stated that he was a “purist” and used no filters to enhance his images.  At that moment the speaker was proven wrong by Hugh Morton (host of the clinic and a great photographer in his own right) and the photographer was forced to admit that he did in fact use filters to enhance his images, damaging his creditability as a photographer.  Is this ethical?  Should a photographer, when asked, reveal rather there was manipulation (digital, in camera or darkroom) done to the photograph.  If the photographer is of reputable character, he should admit the truth. 

How about this one?  Should popular magazines (i.e.: Vogue, Glamour, GQ, Cosmopolitan, Victoria Secret, FHP, and even Playboy) alter the physical appearance of their models by brushing away facial wrinkles, trimming down the waistline, or increasing bust line, or changing hair, eye color, or taking the picture on a white backdrop and placing the model in another photo environment?  This type of “touching up” goes on everyday.  Even portrait photographers have gotten in on the idea and you can know have your blemishes digitally wiped clean!  The question is – is this type of manipulation ethical?  Hmmmm, makes one think.

It is of my opinion and the opinion of other professional in the field, that unless you are a photojournalist, evidence photographer, medical photographer, or scientific photographer, you have no ethical or moral obligation to make photographs appear "accurately".  You do have an obligation to make images, as you see them, did you get that – as YOU see them.  Not necessarily as they are.  Remember, that you are an artist using the camera as your brush.  Digital is just another brush added to your arsenal.  Why was it that the realist painter, William Mangum, took such criticism for his painting of the Forest Oaks “Hole 9” all because he added three dogwood trees to the scene when in fact they simply don’t exist on that hole?  People who admire Mangum’s realistic style of painting got lost in the realism and forgot that he owes no one an accurate portrayal of any scene that he paints, and neither do you as an artist!

If the photographer wants to remember the moment a certain way, there are many photographic tools, (including digital) which can empower him to do so.  Someone may be asking, “What about reality?”  There is a concept that film-based photography represents more "reality" than digital photography – that concept is nothing short of illogical.  You can use a slow shutter speed (on a film-based camera OR on a digital camera) to blur the rushing waterfall.  Properly executed, the water will look like cotton candy.  Did that waterfall look like that to the naked eye?  Haven't you just blurred reality? Based on the strict adherence to the photo as truth doctrine, isn't that cheating?

Remember that before the birth of digital photography, photographers manipulated their images.  You might want to sit down for this next fact, ready?  Okay here we go – Ansel Adams used manipulation.  Yep, that's right.  The guy, who helped to found the f 64 camera club for straight photography, manipulated his own images.  He used red and green filters to boost the contrast of his B&W film.  He used all the traditional variables that have been available in the darkroom since photography was invented such as dodging and burning and contrast masking.  Was he cheating?  I, personally, don't think so.

The photographers with their “purist” agenda seem to permeate camera clubs these days saying that nothing short of a straight, ultra-sharp photograph should be considered photography.  When pushed on the issue of filters, auto focus, TTL flash, darkroom manipulation and the like, they defend those practices as accepted norms.  Those tools are all acceptable they say.  I will ignore their obvious hypocrisy and hope that someday soon they will see that digital photography can be practiced within the confines of those norms as well.

Unlike the purists, I don't see it as my place in this world to tell others how they should remember a scene photographically, but rather encourage individuality and creativity as an artist.  When I bring an image into Photoshop, I adjust levels, curves and color (exposure).  I lighten some areas and darken others (dodging and burning).  I make some areas sharper (contrast masking).  I sometimes will insert the moon over a mountain (double exposure).  I add blur to some images to make them more ethereal (add a fishnet over the enlarger head).  Get the point?

When I make a photograph that causes someone to think, or to smile, or to laugh or to cry, they react that way because of the visual statement I created.  How I created it is of no importance to them.  Why is it so important to other photographers?  Some people just seem to want to make everything harder than it needs to be.  Digital photography is a tool.  It is no different than a graduated neutral density filter or a special developer that adds contrast to a picture.  The tools that photographers use to tell their stories are frankly, irrelevant.  What does it matter?  The images we make are what matters!  When you, as a photographer, realize this and learn to embrace the artistic value of photography you will be on your way to the next level.

A while back I was watching the movie “The Patriot” with Mel Gibson.  There is something about that movie that brings me back to it, time and time again. 

While watching the DVD, I got to thinking about the American Revolution and how the Colonists were free thinkers and formulated a plan to take over the regime of England’s dictatorship.  Many people scorned the Colonists, while in England they declared that the Colonists would never take over the powerful English rule!  Thus, a Revolution began! 

This started me thinking about a new Revolution.  The Digital Revolution!

We have all heard the digital evangelists who declare that Film is DEAD!  We have cringed, scowled, and became irritated at them in defense of our beloved film.  I have even heard that film will go the way of the LP Vinyl Albums and that digital resembles the CD revolution.  

No, not yet – film is a ways from going down the cryptic path of the LP album.  First, let us look at the comparison of CDs and LPs.  LPs, or the record, were easily scratched and the more you played them the faster they lost their sound integrity.  They gathered dust like a magnet and were large and cumbersome.  The CDs were small, not so easily scratched, sound quality was unmatched and it could hold more songs.  At the time, LPs and most Cassettes were ready for replacements, but not film – at least not yet.

If we are honest with ourselves we must admit that film will be replaced one day, but not today.  People thought LPs were high tech and would never be replaced either.  

Let me state that I am not a film basher, I use film everyday and on the other side of the coin, I also use digital everyday.  My career as a professional photographer requires me to be proficient in both.  My personal and professional opinion is this; film is terminally ill, but not dead.

So, what is a photographer to do: stay with film or jump on the digital “band wagon”?  I will say this, if you are not digital in some way (rather scanning into a computer or downloading from your camera) you will be left behind in a few years.  The more digital knowledge you have now, the better you will be in the future.  The studio that I am affiliated with has already begun to be 100% digital by the year 2008.  Film stores, such as Carolina Camera, have stated that within the past year they have seen a big decline in film sells and film equipment!  Change is in the air.  Now, with that said let us look at the big battle brewing:

• Film and Processing are affordable and easily available (1hr photo on every corner).
• Wide variety of film speeds and types of film available
• Film cameras are less expensive than the digital counterparts.
• Films can be scanned into computers and still take advantage of digital processing and enhancing.

• Film costs and processing can add up quickly (I have saved over $550 in film costs since a year ago!).
• You have to pay for the bad slides as well as well as the good ones.
• Slides and negatives can be easily scratched and must be handled with extreme care.
• You have to wait for processing to see what you photographed.

• Digital cameras give instant feedback in color.
• Digital gives you histogram, instantly.
• Digital offers much more detail in the shadows and greater latitude than film can offer.
• Images can be loaded in the computer without scanning.
• Digital offers the option to change ISO, at anytime, without shooting the rest of the “roll” with that ISO.
• Digital files are easier to store and organize than film.

• The CCD is a magnet for dust, which can cause “digital spots” on your image (easily corrected with   
   the Healing tool in Photoshop).
• Maintaining color accuracy from camera to monitor to print is difficult.
• Long exposures (over 2-3 seconds) can cause digital “noise” (grainy look and pixilated).
• Cameras cost more than film counter part.
• Most digital cameras require a special lenses and/or special flash to help accommodate the White
   Balance.

In conclusion, you must ask yourself, “how much digital knowledge do I have now and how much do I desire?”  You should know enough to be proficient to achieve the results you desire from your inner vision.  Remember, film is not dead – but it is dying.  Digital has some hurdles to overcome before it will totally supplant film; however, that day is coming.  Remember, five years ago no one dreamed of taking photos with a PHONE! 

Shoot with film and enjoy it, but don’t have an aversion to digital or, more importantly, those who shoot digital.  When you buy your film, go ahead and buy an extra roll to place on the shelf next to the LP, future generations will marvel at this antiquity.  

Viva la revolution!

I am sitting here watching a baseball game trying to understand the hand signals and strategy when a designated hitter steps up to home plate.  This guy steps in for the pitcher who does not swing the bat.  The designated hitter has one job – hit the ball and he does it well, while the pitcher has one job – throw the ball and throw it fast and accurate.  This got me to thinking about our natural vision.  Do you know what your natural vision is?

You may be asking by now, David, what on earth has this to do with photography?  Simply put – specialist.  Yeah, think about it.  Not every photographer is equally talented in all types of photography.  Ansel Adams was a superb black and white landscape photographer, however in his own biography he relates that portrait work was not for him.

I also find it curious that we define ourselves (or our specialties) by a certain type of equipment.  I was at a gallery showing and the brochure announced the artist as a Large Format – Black and White photographer.  I ask you, would writers define themselves as word processors or typists?  I think not.  It isn’t what equipment or even the subject matter you photograph.  The important issue is how you see, what you see and what you do with what you see.  Let me illustrate this point with some examples.  I’ll begin with myself.

Years ago when I was trying to “find myself” as a photographer, I was talking to a good friend of mine from Baltimore.  He made an observation about my work as we reviewed my slides.  He noticed that all of my photographs could easily be placed into two piles – the ones that succeeded and the ones that did not.  That was not unusual to me, what was unusual was that the unsuccessful pile was a majority of shots that I had taken of waterfalls, portraits, and poor attempts at astro-photography.  These are not my strong suits. 

In the other pile the majority of the work, regardless of subject matter, fell within a range of 1 to 20 feet from my camera.  This appeared to be my strong suit and what I really enjoyed shooting.  Before this analysis I saw myself as a landscape photographer.  He wanted to show me that I have an eye for a certain scale and distance.  Once this was made known to me, I started to concentrate on subject matters within that distance and much to my surprise, my photography improved dramatically and almost instantly!  For reasons I don’t understand and can’t explain, I tend to “see” within that range.  I don’t know why.  Knowing this has drastically altered my approach to subject matters, equipment, and methods.  I have become a specialist. 

This doesn’t mean that I can’t take great photos of waterfalls and portraits; it does mean that I am more careful when doing so, because my instincts revert back to my photographic sweet spot – that of the 1 to 20 foot range. 

I had the opportunity to assist another photographer in this exercise to find her natural vision.  In her case, she favors the view camera (4x5 and even 8x10).  Does this mean she can’t have success with medium format or 35mm?  The answer is, of course not!  In fact she has made some wonderful photographs when she borrowed my Nikon 35mm.  However, she feels more comfortable and more creative with the larger formats.  Again, it is not equipment that defines her vision but her vision defining her equipment!  

I had realized long ago that I had been mimicking someone else’s style and not allowing my own vision to spring forth.  It was through a series of experiments, explorations, workshops, questions and more questions coupled with hard work and tenacity that I cultivated the ground where my style and vision started to grow and flourish.

Now, I shoot what represents my internal vision.  My prints are sometimes dark, yet full of light.  They present emotions I am trying to invoke within the viewer.  Everything plays a part to help me achieve this goal, even the paper I print on – high-end watercolor paper.  This is my vision. 

It is not necessary or even recommended that one works exclusively in a given style or with a given subject, even if it is your natural vision.  Don’t pigeon-hole yourself.  This may become stifling and mundane.  Remember, that pitchers like to have fun swinging the bat and there is nothing wrong with having fun, but they shouldn’t focus their career on a talent that is not their strongest.  Photography should be fun above all else.  If you feel that you are not having fun in photography, re-evaluate your subjects or technique and speak to others about this – ones who share your passion of photography.  That is why it is so important to belong to a photography club and become active within that club.

So, the question to you is, what do you see?  What is your natural vision? 

The breeze was slightly blowing, a temporary relief from the hot day. I was leaning against a tree, not far from the trail I had been walking on, when a couple strolled passed me. The man stopped and looked at my tripod, then at me, then out into infinity - following the path my lens cut through the air. With his camera hanging from around his neck he questioned, “What’cha shoot’n?” I replied that I was shooting a cardinal and was waiting for him to return to the branch. Without any notice the man pointed and shouted excitedly, “There he is” and begins to press the shutter of his camera. I watched as he shot the cardinal (which at that distance anything less than a 400mm would not have been a good shot). I remarked, as the shutter kept tripping, that if he would wait just a moment and be still, the bird would return to the branch (within a 150 -200mm range) and the bird would be in soft light not the dark shade. The man was caught up in the excitement of the moment that he didn’t stop to heed any advice or think about his shots.

That seems to happen to a lot of photographers out in the field. Nature can become so awe inspiring that we lose track of some ways to help our photos reach the Next Level. Here are some helpful tips I have compiled for shooting wildlife in the field.

1. Research Your Subject:  What species do you want to photograph? Are they in season? Is the environment favorable? What habitat and terrain does the animal use? Knowledge of these factors will help enhance your experience. Try the internet for information; you will be surprised how much is available on National Parks and State Parks. You can call ahead or email the park ranger with any questions and sometimes arrange for a guide who has extensive knowledge of the area and the species living there.
    

2. Plan Your Photo:  How do you want to capture your photograph? Do you want a portrait style, detail shot, macro, action, a behavior shot, eating time? Deciding this in advance will only make your shooting easier, you can go into the shot prepared. However, do not allow this to overrule your creative process when you are actually on the scene, there may be more ways to capture the subject than what you originally planned.
    

3. Gear Check:  I can not think of anything worse (well, maybe not using a tripod) than not having the right gear at your shot. This comes from not having a check list or just being lazy and not wanting to carry your gear with you, so you leave it the hotel room or car. Make sure all batteries or in working condition and fully charged. I was shooting a bird with another photographer when his digital camera batteries started flashing low charge, he ran to the car to get his replacements, but by then the bird had moved on and the shot was lost. Moral? Keep your gear with you and plan ahead! Have film out of the box ready to go, if you shoot digital have an extra memory card handy. Have your lenses easily accessible.
   Also remember, if you are uncomfortable your shots will suffer. I can count numerous times that photographers have quit in the middle of a great shot because of their own comfort, and then complain because they missed that great shot. Make sure to have warm clothes (if in the cold), light “airy” clothing for summer shots, snacks, water, first-aid kit, cell phone, small flashlight, pocket knife and raingear to name a few. This will only enhance your experience and help you get the photos you want.
    

4. Time of Day: Photograph your subject in the most pleasing light, morning or evening. Know when your subject is most active, for example feeding times. This is not to say that you can’t get a nice shot during the afternoon, just be prepared for the harsh light it can produce.
    

5. Observe Your Subject: Watch movement patterns; where is your subject going and why? Know if your subject’s primary senses are sight, smell, or hearing. Try to anticipate the animal’s path and let it move toward your direction. Wildlife often repeats behavior, so be alert! If you see interesting behavior, be patient and the creature will most likely repeat its pattern; such was the example I gave earlier of the bird flying to the branch. Capture the natural behavior and key moments of your subject’s activities.
    

6. New Angle: Try to shoot on the animal’s level for a different perspective. Other than birds, try to shoot from below. Look for new exciting perspectives to make your photos really different and unique.
    

7. Act Like a Navy Seal: Be quiet. Stealth is the key with any wildlife. Some animals will tolerate your approach, while other animals will be too timid and shy - but even those can be photographed. Be one with Nature and your surroundings, hide yourself and be quiet! Act like a hunter in deer or turkey season by hiding with foliage and brush (camouflage clothes and paint are optional). I have had much success photographing wild birds by baiting them with food. In addition to feeding them, I place a stick with a tin can on the end near the feeder, this will simulate my tripod and zoom lens and the birds become accustom to it and this allows the birds to feel more comfortable when I am behind the lens shooting.

If you keep these tips in mind, wildlife and animal photography can be very rewarding and fulfilling.

Top

Is Photoshop CS really that good?

It doesn’t matter if you shoot digitally or with film, if you use (or have thought about using in the future) Photoshop to help you enhance your photos, than this is for you.
Let me first start the wheels turning by saying that film is terminal ill; its days are numbered, though no one knows for how long. Eventually, film will go the way of vinyl albums! So, the question is, will you be prepared? If you have a digital darkroom, either by scanning or straight download from your camera – you are a step ahead and Photoshop is leading the digital way for photographers.

Now, let’s talk about Photoshop CS. I have been working with this for about 8 weeks and it is my opinion that this version rocks! If you don’t have the CS version you might want to consider getting this one. Adobe has really taken the suggestions of users and compiled a great upgrade. For example to start with you can use your RAW format images (from digital cameras) straight into CS without having to open/convert another viewer.
Another great item is the option to work with the straight 16 bit file without having to change the file to 8 bits.

Gone are the complicated techniques of changing color on an item. For example, my wife’s shirt is blue – I prefer it to be pink, with the new color brush it is much easier. If I take several pictures of my lovely wife from different angles and the light affects her skin tones differently each time, never fear- with the new tone control, you just simply click the photo of tone you like the best and the tone is applied for all the photos you select. This also works well for color tones in nature also. Another great nature tool for photographers is the Shadow/Highlight feature. This allows you to correct under/over exposure problems by lightening the shadows or darkening the highlights while not affecting the mid-tones.

A great tool for nature photographers is the added filters; you know have two warming and cooling filters along with other filters for Black and White (i.e.: red, yellow, green). If you don’t have a warming filter you can use the CS filter. However, be warned, though it does a fantastic job it does not replace the effect you get from the real filter on the lens.

There are many more improvements that, because of space and time, can not be listed here. So, you now want to go out and get Photoshop CS. If you have never installed a Photoshop version before on your computer you must purchase the whole package which will set you back a whopping $699.00 (ouch).
If you already have a PS version, than the upgrade will cost you $199.00, this is the going rate at the computer retail stores. Good news though, I have found it at B&H photo for $149.00!!! (Hey, fifty bucks saving is great!).

Overall the price you pay for this investment is well worth it, considering the enhancements to your photos.

Top

Before you take that photo, you may need permission for the following: Photographing buildings, works of art, or other copyrighted items; Photographing people; Photographing on public or private property.

Copyright

Under current U.S. law, copyright protection arises automatically when an "original work of authorship" is "fixed in a tangible medium of expression". A work is "original" in the copyright sense if it owes its origin to the author. For example, a photograph of Yosemite's Bridal veil Fall is original so long as it was created by the photographer, even if it's the zillionth photo to be taken of that scene. Only minimal creativity is required to meet the originality requirement, no artistic merit or beauty is required.

Works of art - sculptures, paintings, and even toys - are protected by copyright. Furthermore, buildings created on or after December 1, 1990 are protected by copyright. A copyright owner has the exclusive right to reproduce a copyrighted work, and photographing a copyrighted work is considered a way of reproducing it. Thus, you may need permission to photograph a building or an art work.

Here are some guidelines:

Buildings

Only buildings created after December 1, 1990 are protected by copyright. Fortunately for photographers, the copyright in an architectural work does not include the right to prevent others from making and distributing photos of the constructed building, if the building is located in a public place or is visible from a public place. So you don't need permission to stand on a public street and photograph a public building. You don't need permission to photograph a public building from inside the building (although you may need permission to photograph separately-owned decorative objects in the building, such as a statue). You don't need permission to stand on a public street and photograph a private building such as a church or a house.

This "photographer's exception" to the copyright-owner's rights applies only to buildings, a category which includes houses, office buildings, churches, gazebos, and garden pavilions. The exception does not apply to monuments (protected as "sculptural works") or other copyrighted works, such as statues and paintings.

Art

You may need permission to photograph a copyrighted work of art, for example, a statue in a public park, or a painting in a private collection or art museum. And getting permission can be tricky, because, according to copyright law, you need permission from the copyright owner, not from the owner of the work of art itself. In copyright law, ownership of the copyright in a work is distinct from ownership of the copy (the tangible item).

For example, suppose that you are taking photographs of a painting in an art collector's private home collection. The art collector probably does not own the copyright in the painting, the artist does. Unless your photograph of the painting is "fair use" (discussed later) you need permission from the artist.

When You Don't Need Permission

You don't need permission to photograph a work that is not protected by copyright (in "the public domain"). Works fall into the public domain for several reasons, one of which is expiration of the copyright term. In 1997, works created before January 1, 1922 are in the public domain. Also, works created by federal government officers and employees as part of their official duties are not protected by copyright. (This rule does not apply to works created by state or local government officers and employees).

You don't need permission to use a copyrighted work in two circumstances: (1) if you are only copying facts or ideas from the work; or (2) if your use is "fair use".

You are free to copy facts from a protected work or to copy ideas from a protected work. The copyright on a work does not extend to the work's facts. This is because copyright protection is limited to original works of authorship, and no one can claim originality or authorship for facts. Anyone can use ideas.

Fair Use

It may be that your photograph is "fair use" of the art works you photograph. If so, you don't need permission. Whether a use of a copyrighted work is fair use is decided on a case-by-case basis by considering the purpose and character of the use, the nature of the copyrighted work, the amount and substantiality of the portion used, and the effect on the potential market for or value of the protected work.

There is no simple rule to determine when an unauthorized use is "fair use". You are more likely to be able to rely on fair use for photographing copyrighted items if your work serves a traditional fair use purpose (educational, research, news reporting, criticism, or public interest). Fair use is always subject to interpretation.

Publicity and Privacy Rights of Individuals

You may need permission to photograph people due to state laws giving individuals privacy and publicity rights.

Most states in the US recognize that individuals have a right of privacy. The right of privacy gives an individual a legal claim against someone who intrudes on the individual's physical solitude or seclusion, and against those who publicly disclose private facts. Unless you have permission, avoid publishing or distributing any photo of an individual that reveals private facts about the individual (particularly if revealing those private facts might embarrass the individual).

Almost half the states in the US recognize that individuals have a right of publicity. The right of publicity gives an individual a legal claim against one who uses the individual's name, face, image, or voice for commercial benefit without obtaining permission. In case you are wondering how the news media handle this, newspapers and news magazines have a "fair use" privilege to publish names or images in connection with reporting a newsworthy event.

Be particularly careful about celebrities. Using a photograph of a celebrity for your own commercial gain - for example, posting a photo you took of Brad Pitt on your business's marketing material or Web site - is asking for a lawsuit, even if you took the photograph when you ran into Brad on a public street.

Commercial photographers avoid right of publicity/privacy lawsuits by obtaining photographic releases from people shown in their shots. If you are considering selling your photos or using them on your Web site, you may want to do the same. Experienced performers and models are accustomed to signing these releases.

Permits

If you are going to shoot commercial photographs on public property, you may need to get a permit from the appropriate government authority (usually a local or state film/entertain commission). Permission is generally not required for taking the usual "tourist type" photos (although you should obey any "no entry" signs you see).

If you are going to shoot on private property, get permission to enter and use the location for shooting and to show the premises in your work, in order to avoid trespass and invasion of privacy claims by the property owner.

The Internet

The laws and rules described in this article apply to photos used on the Internet. Copyright law and other laws do apply to the Internet, and posting a photo on the Internet exposes your photos to the eyes of the whole world.

DISCLAIMER:
This article is provided with the understanding that the author is not engaged in rendering legal services. If legal advice or other expert assistance is required, the services of a competent professional should be sought, so see my legal friends at the Law Firm of Forman, Rossabi and Black (336) 378-0172.

Helpful reading: The Law (in plain language) for Photographers, by Leonard D. Duboff

Top

With winter upon us, I thought this would be a good time for photographing the snow scenes.

I usually take a meter reading off the snow by using center weight or even spot metering. I then compensate a plus 1½  or even 2 stops overexposure to help the snow retain the white and not go grey. 

You must be careful that the meter area is completely covered by the snow and make sure that you lock the exposure reading so when you recompose your shot the meter is set and the exposure will be correct.

If the photo is taken on a bright sunny day use the Sunny 16 rule, with a bit of tweaking.

Stop down about one stop to help retain the detail of the snow.  If you use ISO 100 film speed, you should us a 1/100 second shutter speed at the stop down which is f/22.

You can also find an area in the same light as your subject that renders a middle tone gray and meter off of it, again stop down 1-2 stops.

Scene in the shade can be blue. You may want to use a warming filter (81a or b) to help bring the snow back to a neutral tone, unless you are shooting for the cold, bluish mood effect.  You might want to experience with other color filters, I have used a magenta filter to help with the morning light on the snow.  The important thing is to have FUN!