doonster: Pictures & thoughts

Signs of rain

2010-07-24T16:03:00.003+08:00

Signs of rain, Manila, July 2010

Natural lighting

2010-07-17T20:53:00.004+08:00

Lightning storm, Manila, July 2010

What did you do on Saturday night?

After the fun and games of Typhoon Conson earlier in the week, we just had a rather long thunderstorm roll through. It was putting on a great show and time and direction were just right for some photos from the back garden.

They don't really stand up to fine scrutiny - focussing in the dead of night against a dark sky proves to be rather tricky.

SoFoBoMo 2010: and another one

2010-07-07T07:13:00.002+08:00

Although I didn't really need to, I felt like putting together a second submission with some of the "rejects" from LineCurveTexture, and so The Other Things was born. I didn't compromise on selecting for editting - these are the images that I would select otherwise but that didn't fit in any way into the original project.

I was also trying to get a background transparency to work with pdf 1.4 but to no avail. The intention was that the background frame would disappear when viewing so that the images would be nicely centred on the screen with a natural border.

I'm pretty sure this should be possible, as per pdf sepcs, but can't for the life of me figure out how to get it to work properly. I think it's maybe a viewer issue (yet I use Adobe's reader) and no amount of settings adjustments seem to work.

SoFoBoMo 2010: done

2010-07-01T20:50:00.003+08:00

I've finally completed my first submission for the year. Find it here.

Some points worth noting about my experience in doing the layout:

I was limited to an all electronic process, not having commissioned a printer since moving house (fully 6 months ago). I normally print the pages on small paper swatches and rearrange the on the floor/table.
This led to problems. Because of the multiple image sizes, I had a 2-dimensional problem as i looked to balance subject and image size across the whole book. equal sized thumbnails are not suited to this. The other major headache is the number of images: about 100. This makes it hard to keep track of them all while scrolling back and forth on the screen.
As a result, the actual layout of the spreads took about twice as long as it should.

I've also realised that the multiple page size idea is better suited to larger page sizes. here it works OK, and I could get a way with a few less than perfect pictures due to the smaller sizes. For a printed version, I think I'd want twice the page size.

Page size is also an interesting challenge. having both portrait and landscape orientation actually makes it trickier to select a page size. Life would be so much easier if I'd picked all the large images in one orientation and all the small ones in the other. Then I could pick a larger size but rectangular page.

I also surprised myself about double-truck (spread across the page fold). With the right subject and composition i think is can work quite well, as it does here. But that's just my opinion.

Please feel free to leave comments on what you think.

Sometimes it's all an accident

2010-06-20T14:38:00.003+08:00

Manila, June 2010

A case in point. Carefully composed and shot as black and white. The colours are all over the place but that was never the intention. Created with the project in mind.

As I started running through the processing steps, this jumped out at me after only the first couple of moves. Just right, without it ever being the intention. No good like this for the book, but just right as a single image. A complete accident, which I may not have found if I'd run the development steps in a different order.

SoFoBoMo 2010: the editing process

2010-06-19T18:49:00.004+08:00

Manila, June 2010
One of the SoFoBoMo 2010 rejects

As a progress report, I thought it might be useful to some to go through the edit ting process I've been using. I don't do bulk edits in this way very often and so SoFoBoMo is also an opportunity for me to hone my skills in that area, too. here is the step-by-step:

1. Having imported all the photos and catalogued as normal (I had 527 frames taken), I make first cut selections. I'm using Lightroom exclusively for processing and editing as it's a quick and easy one stop shop for the whole workflow. First cut is a fast process - anything that seems like it fits the theme and appears properly composed, exposed and in focus. 226 picked, took about 15 minutes.
2. Work on the first few to develop the visual look, exposure, toning, contrast etc. That takes a few minutes per photo, maybe I spent an hour sorting that out. The key parts of the development got turned into Lightroom presets, especially the toning, which speeds up the rest of the work.
3. Work through the first-cut to pick the ones to edit. Again, pretty fast and I develop a lot, rather than waste time mulling over selection. With the presets developed I spend only a couple of minutes on most photos. A few have local adjustments which take a bit longer but I doubt I spent more than 10 minutes on any one frame. As this is about a fast turn-around, I want good not perfect works of art. And consistency is more important to me than a few individual highlights. 102 edited.
4. I developed a Smart Collection to gather up the edits as they were completed, I'll use the collection for the final sorting and selection. I'm not into the book layout proper yet but I have a few distinct page forms in mind: double-truck, full bleed, single page, multiple per page. The 102 will get ratings based on likely page type and sorted into order of pages in the collection. I may or may not use them all.
5. From there, It'll be new export presets to turn the edits into the final images for the book. Part of that preset will be automated numbering and filing so they're all in order in a separate folder on my computer. Having them sorted that way speeds up entry into the book layout.

Even though I've been working on editing all week, I've actually spent very little time each day. 100 at, say, three minutes each is only 5 hours of work to get to the final cut plus the original hour to get the visual look right, meaning about an hour a night this week.

SoFoBoMo 2010: contacts part 4

2010-06-15T07:05:00.001+08:00

These are the last (I hope) of the frames from this year's shooting. I've also processed most of the previous frames, so I already have 60 first-cut selections. Overall, this is probably the most I've had for a single SoFoBoMo book and will give me plenty of flexibility for the final product.

SoFoBoMo 2010: contacts part 3

2010-06-13T22:31:00.002+08:00

The contacts from today's photography from around the house. My plans for going out this afternoon were rudely interrupted by a thunderstorm.

The work on my book for this year is progressing well. One more trip out for some more photographs should give me plenty to select some good shots and I've got about 3 weeks to work on the layout.

Raising the bar

2010-06-12T11:22:00.002+08:00

Manila, June 2010

Some photos I've seen recently and some things I've read had me musing about the nature of the qualities and quality of a photograph.

What is a good photograph? And is a good one today, going to be a good one tomorrow? The thing that set me off have been some observations (mine and others') relating to digital making photography easy. For sure, compared the the days of film, more people can produce photos that are properly focussed, colour balanced and exposed. Objective measures of good. But is that good enough. I think not. now that we expect more from our cameras and sensors, so we (should) expect more from the final product. Not quite right isn't going to be acceptable.

But technical results aren't everything. Photography can be as much about content as execution. Not always but sometimes. Deliberately out of focus, or alternative exposures or grabbed shots without perfect composition can all pass muster. Maybe not as much as before - digital offering the opportunity to take many more exposures means many more chances to get things right. But there is still room for the artistically casual style.

The biggest benefit that I think digital is offering to the masses is a greater ability to precisely execute intent, which is an excellent measure of quality (but by no means the only one). And good photographers are, by inference, those who consistently achieve their intent in the final photographs. Intent is a broad church, and I think digital opens up a wider range of possible outcomes for intent than ever before. That can also make digital more demanding, the auto-everything approach won't cut it, and the ever increasingly complex devices that cameras are becoming can make it harder to find a way through the maze of controls.

Therein is the dilemma of quality photography. While auto cameras make it easier to achieve objectively measurable higher quality, that has placed higher demands, requiring a deeper understanding of the machine and the process to achieve good results on a relative scale - good may no longer be good enough.

No frame left behind

2010-06-10T22:43:00.003+08:00

Manila, June 2010

As I was sorting through the weekend's pictures for selections to include in the SoFoBoMo project, I realised that i was editing out a lot that were actually quite good. Mainly they are being rejected as colour images in a black and white project. However, there are enough that I could put together an entirely separate submission, with an entirely different look and feel. So that is what I'm going to do - shoot for the main project but pick up appropriate rejects for something different.
Maybe it will lead me to some insights about the things unseen when I'm out taking pictures. While the rejects were shot with one thing in mind, they're turning out to be something quite different after the fact.

SoFoBoMo 2010: contacts part 2

2010-06-07T11:00:00.000+08:00

The second batch from yesterday's shooting.

SoFoBoMo 2010: contacts part 1

2010-06-07T10:00:00.000+08:00

As promised, contact sheets of my raw images for this year's project. Click each set to see it bigger.

On a SoFoBoMo roll

2010-06-06T20:07:00.004+08:00

I started my SoFoBoMo project today, going out and getting in the first batch of photos. Despite a short session, I got 287 frames to get me going. The most I've shot in one go for some time, helped enormously by my forward planning. It's also yielded probably enough to complete the project (although I'll be looking for more and better) which takes the pressure off. As I'm focussing more on the book part than the photo part, I don't need to be so choosy about completing a story or ultimate image quality.

I thought it would be worth sharing, for those new or struggling with this, the forward planning I did that helped make this first photo expedition easy:
1. Selecting a suitable subject. My book title "LineCurveTexture" is an easy way to encompass numerous forms of abstract image which makes getting the 35 relatively easy. that was important for me this year as I want more time for the book design. In the past, I've focussed more on story and kept the book simple.
2. Selecting a suitable location. Given the subject and way I'd be shooting, I had a good location in mind - in the modern vernacular a target rich environment. There are also 2 other ready locations I can use to gather more.
3. Selecting suitable equipment. In this case I'm hand-holding my 100mm macro lens.Abstract images using a macro lens means from a relatively small area I can gather a large number of different images. I only have to move a few inches in any direction to get whole new views.

Bringing all three of these together - subject, location, equipment - makes the photography part relatively easy. And I put some though into making it so.

Whatever your goal is, putting some thought into these three aspects, keeping it quite simple and choosing them to work together will greatly improve the success rate for gathering up enough photos.

As has been done in the past, I'll be posting my out of camera images as contact sheets so you can see the process as it happens.

Under starter's orders, they're off

2010-06-01T06:25:00.003+08:00

The official announcement has gone up for the start of SoFoBoMo 2010. The start time is 00:01 on 1st June wherever you are - local time to give everyone an equal chance. Of course, you don't need to start right away just so long as you finish by the end of July.

If you've not already registered, why not?

24 hours to go

2010-05-31T00:01:00.002+08:00

Just 24h until SofoBoMo 2010 officially starts. Expect an official announcement on the SoFoBoMo website when it happens.

Of course you can start any time in the 2 month window, as long as you're finished and submit your entry by the end of 31st July. If you want to get full advantage of the 31 day window, don't start any later than 1st July.

For my part, I'll be starting next Sunday 6th June, I expect. That gets me in early and gives me chance to get in a second book if the opportunity arises (although I'm not expecting it to do so).

The rocket moon

2010-05-29T22:28:00.003+08:00

Moon shot 3, Manila, May 2010
98% waning

A bit of fun with the camera this evening, shooting for the moon. As it's nearly full and I knew it would be rising such that I would have a good shot from the upstairs balcony between the treee branches, I decided to have a go.

I didn't realise how quickly the moon moves until I tried photographing it. 500mm + 1.4 TC gives a narrow field of view, but even so, a series in rapid succession gives noticeable shift across the frame.

I can see this becoming a print for the wall.

Choosing a lens kit

2010-05-24T21:31:00.003+08:00

I've been enjoying Mike Johnston's posts on lens kits (part 1 and part 2). It's thinking I've been through many times. I thought I'd share my kit development.

It all started with the basic kit zoom as he describes. My first SLR was purchased in 1996 just after graduation. I bought the basic Canon kit -a lot of camera for relatively little money at the time (now you can get 10x the camera for the same actual money as then). Multi-purpose zoom (35-80, I think). Got the job done, until i got into wildlife photography. So I went long - a 70-300mm being the cheapest way into long reach. With limited means, that proved a nice combination. I did get a wide angle converter for the shorter lens but it's seen precious little action. I just don't see the world in wide angle and these days it's easy enough to stitch panoramas if I want that sort of thing.

However, much like Mike, I think 2 lenses generally suffices but that'll be two different for each scenario. I have many two lens kits:
The walk-around kit (actually a choice between 2 - I carry only the one)
The indoor kit
The rangefinder kit
the LF kit
The sports kit
The travel kit
The landscape kit
The cycling kit
The wildlife kit

You get the picture. I have a trunk full of cameras and lenses. But I mainly carry 2 lenses at a time, sometimes 3, although mostly one of those three is neglected. The selection I have also include a number of primes, some good, some frustrating (e.g. my 50mm f/1.8 is frustrating: all electronic, all plastic, difficult to focus but it was cheap).

So a pair for any given situation and enough choice the cover the lot.

If I was forced into just 2? Tricky. Excluding the wildlife (where the 500mm is invaluable), I reckon my 17-55 and maybe an 85 or 135 would do the job (although I own neither of those primes). Or my 70-200 of the current stock. Force me to go prime? then I'd stick with the rangefinder and the 40mm and 75mm. As nice combo for a wide range of situations.

I o see the attraction of micro four-thirds, however. Small cameras and small lenses for the longer reach I like. If a decent camera comes along, I'd snap it up with a couple of lenses to cover most of my going about, travelling applications.

Picking a project

2010-05-23T20:45:00.001+08:00

Normally I've got a bunch of project ideas and I already have several long-term projects on the go but this year I've been struggling for ideas for SoFoBoMo. Finally I've hit on a good idea that will be easy to photograph so that I can focus on the book making bit. It also should mean I can avoid too much time outside as right now the weather is far too hot to be wandering around for hours.

I'm not going to reveal the project details just yet - I'll save that for when I get started. Looks like just the one submission this year, too (compared to the 2 in 2008 and 4 last year, that makes it seem like I'm slacking).

Connections

2010-05-16T19:34:00.003+08:00

Recently on TOP was one of the "Random Excellence" posts, highlighting a series of Vietnam war shots published by the Boston Globe. looking through them I realised that this shot

From Boston Globe's "The Big Picture"
South Vietnamese marines line beaches and swim out to ships, fleeing from the northern port city of Da Nang on March 29, 1975 before its fall to the Viet Cong and north Vietnamese. This picture was taken as some marines successfully fled, abandoning scores of weapons, vehicles and even a helicopter. In the foreground, men on LSTs (Landing Ship, Tank) prepare to throw rope to marines coming up on inner tubes. Only a fraction of the city's 100,000 defenders were evacuated before its fall. (AP Photo)

was taken on the same day as this one:

The latter being me, taken a few hours later and half way around the world.

Rather sobering.

Sounding off topic

2010-05-06T18:34:00.003+08:00

Nothing to do with photography, I've a new blog as a place for me to air stuff that I've been thinking about. Rantings and ramblings, stuff I might debate down the pub etc. saves it getting all pent up in my brain. But it would also be good if some conversation/debate/argument came of it. You won't agree with most stuff I write - I think in a different way to other people. And if you want to stick to photography, no need to go anywhere.

The challenge of ambition

2010-05-04T21:40:00.002+08:00

Recently I was thinking back to one of my favourite authors from around the time I left college, Piers Anthony (this will become relevant, promise). nothing to do with his writing (which I find a bit basic these days) or the stories (not for those of strong moral principles) but more of the pieces he used to write for the back of the books. Kind of like blog posts, or extended letters to his fans: stuff on story development, creative process, correspondence etc.

One of the things that stuck (and I would look it up if the books weren't buried in a box) was a piece he wrote about the marks of a successful author. He set them thus: moving from selling what one writes to writing what one sells (the idea of the advance on synopsis) and moving from title dominating the cover to author's name doing so (where one's name is enough to sell the book).

This came from thinking of motivations for continuing SoFoBoMo and producing many photobooks. It answered my question to self: where can a create a challenge? Two years in and I've done 6 books for SoFoBoMo (yep, I went a bit mad last year). But I can challenge myself in the following ways:

Improving the photographic content
Improving the layout and design
More cohesive projects
Creating physical books (although I've done one)
Creating something others will buy
Getting properly published (we've already had a SoFoBoMoer jump that hurdle)
Creating a book as a synopsis for a bigger project
etc etc

I'm not saying the goal is to become commercially successful (but if I sold one or two, that would be a nice boon) but it shows a line of progression, challenge that is ever present. And over time I'm sure electronic delivery will develop in ways tht will create new challenges.

There is enough scope there to keep me going for many years to come. so if you've done it before and are wondering where the challenge lies, think a little more - it's there if you look for it.

Irving Penn: Portraits

2010-04-24T21:31:00.001+08:00

Cecil Beaton with Nude, New York, 1946
The Irving Penn Foundation © The Irving Penn Foundation
(from the National Portrait Gallery website)

A couple of weeks ago I spent a day in London and took the time to visit the Irving Penn exhibition at the National Portrait Gallery. It's a fairly wide-ranging collection of work, covering the entire span of Penn's career and displays a variety of print types from early vintage silver prints, through his later reprints and includes a number of his Pt/Pd prints as well.

The space is divided chronologically from the earliest works as you enter, working through a series of sections dedicated to periods largely grouped by photogrpahic style as Penn moved from full-length portraits to more and more intimate and close-up work as time progressed. Overall it's a pretty impressive collection of work.

One thing I think could have been included is a small section showing the development of Penn's printing technique. Something was made of this in the exhibition, as Penn turned to platinum printing to try and create his idea of the perfect print. Showing a small selection side-by-side highlighting this development would have been good. As it was, I had to move back and forth between the prints to study the differences and development.

It is clear that his prints became better over time, both as materials and technique developed. The early prints (such as the one of Cecil Beaton pictured her) are quite flat in coparison to later prints. Reprints are also better than the vintages. Much has been made of the higher value of his Platinum prints, both due to the method and the fact that they demonstrate a great depth and subtlety of tone. One thing that is clear, howeer, is that thePlatinum prints influenced the later silver prints, as those show tonal work dveloping over time to mirror the platinum prints. Personally, I prefer the later silver prints.

One large problem I have with the exhibition is the lighting. I can accept that they wish to kep the lighting subdued to preserve the prints (and there was a note posted to that effect) but more could have been done. Not only was the lightling low (read; dim) but it varied in intensity and coour throughout the exhibition and was far too warm 9read: yellow0 for my tastes. so much so, that it was near impossible to spot the difference in toning between the platinum and silver prints. with modern lighting technology, I expect more from a world-class gallery, especially when they're charging decent money to get into the exhibition.

And then there is the subject matter itself. A wide range of the great and good from the Forties to very recent (Penn was photographing almost up to his death in 2009). almost all are presented in distinctive style even though the posing of the subjects changed over time. The early works feel a little distant, maybe even impassionate, largly due to the stood-back, full length nature of the work. through the middle section, from maybe the late 1950s through to the early 1980s, the connection with subject grows. The portraits are deeper and deeper studies of character. What was then surprising was that the very latest works, maybe the last 15-20 years of work, appeared to be very flattering of the subjects. Well know faces, whose images have been seen thousands of times in recent years, all appear very much younger than their ages at sitting might suggest. Does this represent a softening of Penn's attitude to his subjects in his later years?

Saying that the work represents a distinctive style, three woks stood out as different. the first was the portrait of Beaton shown above, which is a pose and style more becoming the subject and quite unlike Penn's other work work of the time. the second was a portrait of Grace Kelly from 1954, shown in the classic Hollywood style that seems to be a feature of portraits of her at that time. The third is of Richard Avedon from 1993, which looks mre like an Avedon print (although against a dar background) than one of Penn's others.

A slight aside: there is a book that has been published to accompany the exhibition. You might have seen a review of tha here, too, if I'd been inclined to buy it. At £25 it's pretty reasonable but Istill didn't think it was quite worth it. the main reason being the print quality. Despite being tri-tone and capturing a good sense of the tonal range of the originals, they were all printed far too light for my taste - deep blacks becoming a little too grey and the darker tones a bit washy. Not the best reflection of the originals nor a great example of book-printing, IMO.

Overall, a high-quality, interesting exhibition (despite the crumby lighting) that is well worth a visit.

SoFoBoMo: don't forget to pledge

2010-04-24T09:13:00.002+08:00

If you've signed up for SoFoBoMo, either new this year or in previous years, then you'll need to pledge to get yourself in the list and add to the number on the home page. To pledge; log-in to SoFoBoMo, go to "Your Account", hit the pledge link.

There's a good reason for this 2-step process. It means people need to pledge each year, which also means if you sign up one year and don't want to take part the next, that's also OK. We'll only count those that tell us they want to participate by pledging.

What he said

2010-04-20T21:45:00.002+08:00

Paul Butzi just posted about his (lack of) SoFoBoMo blogging this year. Same goes for me, more or less. Most of my efforts in that direction are going into the SoFoBoMo website. There's more stuff going up daily, so keep going back.

Here, I'll be posting just some progress stuff about my project thoughts and progress as time goes on. Most of that will probably also turn up on the forums, too.

If you've not signed up, what are you waiting for?

The camera everywhen

2010-04-13T23:14:00.003+08:00

Trowbridge, April 2010

I'm always amazed by photographers who seem to have a camera with them whereever they go - from breakfast in the morning until retiring for the night. Inside, outside, running errands, meeting friends.

I can't quite bring myself to those levels, especially with other people around. My camera always seem to detatch me slightly from things. while it improves my observation, it doesn't necessarily improve my engagement. And if I'm in a social situation, that's not much fun.

And then there are the times i don't quite feel like taking photos. For example, the two weeks away I've just had. I took just over 40 frames during a couple of walks around the neighbourhood. (I would have taken quite a few while I had a day in London, but I was carrying stuff that really didn't make camera wielding a practical prospect.)

I admire their dedication and the tolerance of those around them.

Other people's photos

2010-04-02T00:39:00.002+08:00

I'm away on vacation at the moment, visiting the area I grew up. Weather's been wet and cold so not much for taking photos. I have, however, been out a couple of times with a camera and not returned with a single picture. Trouble is, I keep seeing photo opportunities that I know look like other people's photographs and have resisted making pictures lest it feel like I'm copying.

The other side of this dilemma is a few years ago I wouldn't have even seen these opportunities, not having recognised them as the sorts of subjects I photograph. It took seeing other work to open my view of potential subjects.

A real dilemma. Do I just shoot it anyway, regardless of whether it looks like other work, or keep ploughing on looking for original (whatever that may mean) subjects, reducing the number of shots I take?

It may take a couple more outings before I get my head around this one.

New SoFoBoMo site is live

2010-03-26T07:06:00.002+08:00

After quite some effort behind the scenes, the new Solo Photo Book Month (SoFoBoMo) website is live. Still some design tweaking going on and quite a lot of content to develop (hopefully with your help). New design, new logo, lots of new features added and planned.

Go check it out, go register, get involved.

Past participants are already in the system, you just need to go through a simple password reset process to get your account active on the new system.

Art of books, books of art

2010-03-23T17:50:00.001+08:00

It has been occurring to me that there are possibly conflicting goals in the creation of a book of art, namely the function of serving up the art as the subject and the nature of a well-designed book as an object of appreciation in itself. At some point, one has to yield to serving the other.

As SoFoBoMo approaches, it's a conflict playing out in my thoughts about how to design a book. Until now, I've kept mine pretty simple, directed at serving up photographs in a simple manner: the old-fashioned one to a page, white border approach. But I've been toying with the idea of putting more effort into the design of a book as part of the work itself: spreads, bleeds, multiple images on a page etc. Something that might be more engaging to a viewer. Might that detract from the photography? Or might the photography serve as content to support a wider book experience? And can some fancy graphic and typographic design further enhance that experience?

My own collection of photobooks doesn't help in this regard. They're all pretty much traditional art books - all about the pictures, not the book as product. So they're all simple. And that's good, if you're serving up a collection of art photographs. One exception is the "History of Japanese Photography" which is as much an art history book as a book of art. It has all kinds of chnages in layout, white space around text, insert images, spread, bleeds, different background colours for images. But the overall experience sometimes feels a little forced - design for the sake of it, getting in the way of viewing the pictures. But not by much, I don't feel like I want the wh0le thing as simple text pages followed by simple pages of pictures. A balance to be drawn.

Difficult stuff, this, once you're past the basic mechanics. If I get the right idea, (one of) my SoFoBoMo contribution might be rather more novel than before, something of an experiment.

Hyporeality learning

2010-03-21T15:06:00.004+08:00

Hyporeality 87, Manila, March 2010

As I take more pictures for this series I'm learning some useful things about my photography:

This is turning out to be some of my favourite work.
It is making me think clearly about the relationship between forms and colours in a way sharp photos don't.
It makes me more reactive to the things around me. Better results seem to come from a looser shooting style.
I expect this work to continue for quite some time - it is a method and style easily translated to other places and subjects.
It's fun to do, which keeps me wanting to do it.

It's not real...

2010-03-17T22:45:00.003+08:00

...but it's fun.

Picked up via The Daily Telegraph come Thad & Sarah Lawrence. The 365 sets (Flikr - here and here) brought an instant smile to my face. Worth checking out their personal gallery on the commercial website, too.

Happy mistakes

2010-03-17T06:00:00.000+08:00

Unexpected mistake, Manila, March 2010

Sometimes getting it wrong yields interesting results.

Hyporeality continues

2010-03-16T22:25:00.000+08:00

Hyporeality 77, Manila, March 2010

Hyporeality 78, Manila, March 2010

I went out at the weekend and took some more of my Hyporeality shots. I'm enjoying taking these, they're quite a challenge to look at and are helping me figure out a whole bunch about my photography along the way.

Expect more here, so much so that I've given them their own label.

Now showing

2010-03-16T22:18:00.001+08:00

Picked up via Harvey Benge's blog, comes Stephan Zaubiter's "Cinema" series. Some interesting stuff. I immediately saw this work as a sort of "where are they now?" update to Sugimoto's "Theater" series.

On comparisons

2010-03-16T20:30:00.000+08:00

So the latest from Luminous Landscape is this short piece on making comparisons, in response to the minor debacle that was the comment on dynamic range comparisons. I'm kind of glad the later response went up, gives some balance and avoids me posting a rant against the original.

I agree that in print there are likely (I've not seen so can't say from experience) visible, visceral differences in output from DLSRs and Digital Medium Format (DMF). Large prints are almost certain to make that more apparent. Just as I can clearly see differences in the formats I shoot regularly once print size passes some threshold. All well and good.

Thing is, that goes no way to dispelling the myth propounded in the first piece that DMF has a larger dynamic range than DSLR. Unfortunately for LL, this is a measurable quantity and it doesn't matter what constraints you put on the range (such as the base signal to noise ratio), it is still directly measurable. And as comparisons over at DXOMark will show, there is precious little difference in modern DSLRs and DMF.

Another problem I had is that LL was using DR as a proxy for usable detail, although it is nothing of the sort. DXOMark has a separate measure for this (and the merits of that could be argued) in its tonal range measure. Again, objectively measurable. The one problem here is that when doing print comparisons, they re-base to a shrunk print - the lowest common denominator. It would be useful to see that also done for larger size (but then that would mean up-scaling lower resolutions, with attendant problems).

The biggest problem I had with the LL position is that they are using the subjective stuff, and ropey assessment of measurable values, to debunk the science as it doesn't agree with their conclusion. Unfortunately it doesn't work like that. Just because you don't agree with the measurements doesn't make them wrong. But likewise (to the chagrin of the measurebators) the numbers don't make the subjective preferences (opinions) wrong either.

Harvey Benge on editting

2010-03-11T20:34:00.003+08:00

From a few days ago come these words of wisdom from Harvey Benge on editting for a photobook. Worth reading, especially with SoFoBoMo 2010 (Solo Photo Book Month) on the way.

A garden is a novelty

2010-03-01T14:27:00.002+08:00

Green web

Trapped

Sticky blanket
All: Manila, February 2010

This is the fist time I've had a place with a garden, and with the warm, dry weather, I can see me having fun photographing the bugs.

An interesting challenge

2010-03-01T10:08:00.002+08:00

Floating leaves 2, Manila, February 2010

After my initial efforts picturing the floating leaves in digital, I reckoned it would make an interesting subject for a short series using the large format camera with the goal of producing some nice prints for the wall. And so, at he weekend, I decided to start on that effort, while the idea was fresh.

turns out it's quite a challenge for a few reasons. For a start, I've not done any close up work like this with the LF camera. there is the difficulty of working with the camera pointed at the ground, mounted low. Not too easy. Especially when it's suspended out over the water.

I also didn't realise how much the leaves move in the wind. In the course of the 45 minutes or so of fiddling around, they did 2 complete laps of the pool. With the narrow field of view I'm working with they traverse the ground glass in about 5 seconds. This will be a challenge of weather and shutter speed, too.

Needless to say, I didn't get a single exposure in. Instead i decided to bring it indoors and spend some time in the evening practising the set-up required. Below is a shot of part of my experimenting.

Staring at the floor, Manila, February 2010

With a 210mm lens mounted and working at about 2-3 feet above ground I'm getting out close to full bellows extension, hence the front standard hinged forward.

Another thing I've learnt from the digital trials is the difficulty of the white balance for these shots. It looks like I might have to get a grey card to help.

Fortunately there is no time limit on this - I can shoot almost any day while I'm living here, so plenty of opportunity to try things out. And I won't be exposing a single sheet of film until I'm happy I've got the technique sorted.

A blatant plug

2010-02-22T18:58:00.002+08:00

My friend Caroline le Barbier is having a photo exhibition in London of some of her photos from Nepal and Ecuador. Below is the flyer. A bit of self-interest in this one as I helped prep the originals for print (so if the prints are rubbish, it's probably my fault).

Prints are for sale, too, in aid of Medecins sans Frontieres.

Caroline ran an interesting process for the edit - she invited a large group of her friends from around the world to vote on their favourites, and so the resulting collection is something of a group selection. Only a couple of my picks made it (and I voted for all black and white). But it's a pretty good selection, nonetheless.

There will also be a couple of more opportunities to see the pictures later in the year.

So, if you're in London, drop by and take a look.

Floating leaves

2010-02-21T21:43:00.003+08:00

Floating leaves 1, Manila, February 2010

This is a subject that is likely to become a regular feature of my picture making in the Philippines. There is an endlessly fascinating selection of leaves floating on the pool which, due to the forces of wind and surface tension, form interesting clusters around the edges. And as they get cleared away and replaced on a constant basis, there is a continual replenishment and variation in the subject matter.

Some of the pictures might actually turn out quite good, too, with some practice.

On film cameras

2010-02-20T10:38:00.003+08:00

I'm sure you read the recent TOP post from Ctein and Mike J himself. interesting how so many comments flooded in about film being the real thing, digital's not all that etc etc. Phooey. And I'm still a film shooter.

I've never done any darkroom work and quite frankly don't really want to try. Too much faffing with chemicals in the dark for me and I'm perfectly happy with digital printing. but i do use a couple of film cameras regularly purely for the camera-ness of them. The large format does the movements that are not readily (or cheaply) achieved with a digital solution, and the rangefinder is a great camera for fast, light shooting (I'm still dismayed by the short battery life of the M9). If I felt I could get the same function out of a digital camera, I'd switch in a heartbeat.

Finally back online

2010-02-20T10:36:00.001+08:00

So the cable guy called this week and I'm back on the interweb. Woohoo. Interestingly, I've not been missing the TV, found a decent local radio station in the meantime, but I seem completely isolated from the world without an Internet connection at home. My how times change, I remember when etc etc etc.

Expect a bunch more posting, more pics and my photo a day will catch up, too.

All about books

2010-02-15T09:26:00.002+08:00

For those of you who are into the whole photobook thing, as I am, or have been contemplating putting one together, there comes this from the excellent Idiotic Hat. If you've been contemplating the notion of what a book is, go read that post.

Other side of the lens

2010-02-05T12:33:00.002+08:00

Things have been slow here of late as I'm still not online after moving into my new house, as evidence: this coming to you from my lunch hour. Neither has the camera been out of the bag. At least I'm 90% through unpacking.

Yesterday, however, I had an interesting photo experience being on the subject side of things - for it was giant coporate photo-shoot day. Mug shots of all, cheesy coroporate poses, pubilicity shots, groups shots etc etc. A large team set up shop: couple of photogs, couple of assistants, make-up and others. Must have been a team of about 8. Three studio sets. Piles of gear. So much, so typical, I suppose. (They seem to like their photographers here - the weddings I saw going on at the hotel all seemed to have large teams for the photography.)

The interesting thing for me, hoever, were the skills demonstrated by the photographer doing our team. Kathy, judging from the name on her shirt. A very engaging young lady - chatty, lively but professional. And she had an ability to remember names - first time out and then it was personal address from there on in. Even remembered all the names from the last time (which was a couple of years ago, I gather). A little thing that seemed to make things go so much smoother and a nice touch of personal engagement to keep us unwilling victims in the right frame of mind.

Continues to reinforce how little the skills of photography are about cameras.

Hyporeality: skies

2010-01-18T17:15:00.002+08:00

Hyporeality 10, Manila, January 2010

Hyproreality 56, Manila, January 2010

Hyppreality 65, Manila, January 2010

Geometry

2010-01-17T12:40:00.002+08:00

Ceiling shapes, Manila, January 2010

Is shape sufficient to be the subject of a photography and it still be interesting?

Hyporeality: buildings

2010-01-16T20:48:00.002+08:00

Hyporeality 6, Manila, January 2010

Hyporeality 43, Manila, January 2010

Hyporeality 59, Manila, January 2010

Tools for the jobs

2010-01-15T22:28:00.001+08:00

Reading the TOP camera of the year put me to thinking, as I occasionally do, as to what I'd be looking for in cameras. There will never be just one suitable, as far as I'm concerned, but I'm always on the look out for the ideal device - right tool for the job and all that.

So what am I looking for? Well, I break my camera needs down into 4 areas:

Landscape

All about quality images - tripod mounted, moderate wide (I'm not a real wide angle fan) to moderate telephoto lenses.

I have a dilemma for my landscape photography. I really like the flexibility of movements my large format camera gives me, enabling a type of photography not really available with digital (even putting an MF back on a field camera isn't quite the same and T-S lenses don't have the same control due to the small format). And yet the latest crop of 35mm DLSRs are offering super resolution (I really like the whole Sony offering). I'm sort of torn between ditching the LF and not.

When in doubt, stay put.

Street (out and about in town)

Small, discrete, wide-ish normal lens. Responsive a plus. I'm sorely tempted by the M9 or the Olympus EP-1. My little Lx3 has never really quite cut it. My preferred camera is my Zeiss Ikon but film is a bit of a hassle, especially now I've moved.

Travel

Similar criteria to a street camera, except I like a moderate telephoto lens. But my overriding criterion is battery life. I'm sure I've ranted about this before. I need something that'll go 2-3 weeks on a couple of batteries and only the mid-level DLSRs seem to do that. I'm currently getting 900+ shots from the Canons and none of the smaller alternatives get close to 500 it seems.

I'd really like a micro 4/3 system or travelling but they've a way to go to be suitable for my needs.

Wildlife

Noting but the all-singing, all-dancing SLR system with the long lenses. I'm really happy with Canon gear and will probably stay put, maybe with an extra body later this year (let's see what the new models have to offer). Stronger low light capability would be nice, however.

I was going to wrap up this post talking about how digital cameras aren't addressing the full range of photography application, or maybe not fulfilling their full potential or some such. But then I thought some and that's not it.

With my film cameras I'm happy with simple devices. A mechanical means of trapping measured portions of light onto some film. No fancy features on any of them. And yet I never wanted more. And then along comes digital. Programmed marvels of computing technology trapping those light portions in all manner of fancy ways. That opens up a realm of possibilities in use and function and interface. No longer mechanical but malleable electronic wizardry. Therein lies the problem. All that possibility opened up fosters a desire for just so. Not quite perfection exactly (there's really no such thing) but everything one could want. Once the range of offerings has been tasted, it makes one realise all that could be achieved. Sufficiency is no longer enough.

That is maybe my problem with assessing digital cameras - I know what I want, see it all offered but spread across many products. And I then want the best bits of each condensed into a single device. Thence the dissatisfaction: reality not meeting promise.

Hyporeality: signs

2010-01-14T20:45:00.002+08:00

Hyporeality 13, Manila, January 2010

Hyporeality 22, Manila, January 2010

Hyporeality 71, Manila, January 2010

Hyporeality: trees

2010-01-12T20:40:00.003+08:00

Hyporeality 3, Manila, January 2010

Hyporeality 11, Manila, January 2010

Hyporeality 35, Manila, January 2010

Hyporeality

2010-01-11T20:09:00.000+08:00

Hyporeality 1, Manila, January 2010

I've been catching up on my blog reading and came across the Landscapist talking of hyper-reality - the over sharpened world of digital photography.

That gave me an idea for a something of an exercise in the opposite direction. At the weekend I went out to take photos that aren't sharp, in fact decidedly out of focus. I set up the camera to approximate the angle of view and focus point that I have with my glasses off. Something of an experiment in presenting the unassisted view. Just what could I see without the remarkable technology that are spectacles? As a side benefit, it helps me understand exactly how much detail I really do normally see and perhaps take for granted.

I'll be posting a few of the results over the next few days both here and on my photo of the day.

Assigning value

2010-01-10T17:00:00.000+08:00

Let us start with the condition of an amateur photographer like me and probably you, too) who's in this for the love, not primarily to make money.

So how does this photographer assign value to his work? It must be worth something, and that may not necessarily be monetary. And if the aim is not primarily to make money, should it matter that anyone would wish to pay for it. And how does it measure up to others in the same position?

If you've asked those same sorts of questions, here are some thoughts I've been having on the subject (and you may also detect a hint of the economics reading I've been doing recently).

Let's start with the money bit. Any pictures I might produce or print have a very limited cost associated with them - the direct costs of reproduction. There is no cost associated with the making of my work. Remember the starting premise - don't do photography for the money, so I'd be doing my work regardless, for the pleasure it gives me. Therefore I cannot assign a value to my time: there is no opportunity cost of doing an activity I'd would do anyway. If I get to feeling that I need to assign monetary value to the time I spend doingg photography, that means that there would be something else I could or would be doing - suddenly I'm not doing it purely for the love.

But there are other qualities of value. the pleasure the product gives me. Memories it invokes for places I've been or emotions I've felt. The pleasure of seeing others enjoy my work - receiving praise thereby.

And I think one of the highest terms of value I might assign (although you may differ) would be that others (photographers especially) might want to own my work, either through a swap or other means. That's not that I want to actively market or make money, which defies the principle of my starting assumption.

Nothing to do with photography

2010-01-07T11:39:00.002+08:00

A slightly belated Happy New Year to all. I'm just back after my Christmas break, lucky to have escaped the latest wave of wintery weather sweeping the UK, which might well have seen me snow bound if I'd left any later. Balmy 27degC on landing in Manila. I'm now feeling drunk with jet lag.

I've had a pretty relaxing time overall. Quiet time a home with he family, avoiding external excursions due to the poor weather (not having much in the way of winter clothing - it's still in a shipping container - didn't help) and generally relaxing. I only checked my email once in 2 weeks (the only time I went near a computer) and managed to read 6 books in 12 days.

Therin lies the heart of the post title - I didn't once get out my camera the whole time. Didn't even feel the need to do some of my usual playing around with close-ups of the Christmas decorations. Strange for a photoblog, maybe, but it felt somewhat liberating not to be driven by a desire/need to take photos.

The real landscape

2009-12-21T10:58:00.003+08:00

Another post, whatever next. Flight delayed, time to burn in the lounge.

An interesting article on HDR techniques up on Luminous Landscape. And just as interesting the links to the BBC website on the UK Landscape Photographer of the Year.

To start, I agree with Alexandre Buisse on using HDR (and he makes some stunning images, go check out his book). I use it quite a bit for landscape work, always striving for the sort of effects he describes. It's a technique for reducing the contrast of a scene that is beyond the reach of the sensor.

And then there are the comments on the BBC site, decrying most of the posted competition winners as HDR, although that isn't necessarily so. And I have to agree with most of the negative comments. A lot of unreal looking shots, taken of "iconic" (read clichéd) scenes. It's not restricted to this year's entries, either. I have the books from the previous two years of competition and the content is disappointingly similar. Far too many shot processed for a dramatic, high-contrast effect (which goes equally for the digital as the film entries). It seems the way to impress the judges (and often the masses) with British landscape work is to go for dramatic lighting of well known scenes processed with contrast and saturation up tto 11. It's a style of photography that seems rather popular in the making and the viewing.

Where are the real landscape shots? Have the judges of these competitions ever been outdoors? Or maybe they're so swamped with worse excesses that their selections look tame in comparison.

Some things seen

2009-12-20T20:48:00.001+08:00

This is likely to be my last post before Christmas. I'm off home for a couple of weeks' vacation, to some much needed cold weather. In the meantime, here are a few of the recent pictures of stuff I found out and about. Some more festive stuff over on Impressions of Place.

Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year.

Junction box, Manila, December 2009

Four tyres, Manila, December 2009

Manila, December 2009

Square and round, Manila, December 2009

Yet another new blog

2009-12-16T21:10:00.000+08:00

Some time ago, Paul Butzi (who seems to do a lot of my creative thinking) postulated some ideas for photographic projects. One he suggested was a long-term collection of photos: one from every month for ten years. And that got me thinking - I had a move up-coming at the time (now completed) which would form an ideal start point for collecting photos of the places I live. Over ten years I'd expect to live in 3 or 4 different locations, forming some nice sections to a developing project as my life and surrounds develop.

And so I've started such a project: Impressions of Place. I'm putting it to its own blog because then I can write about my impressions as I gather together photographs. That keeps this blog to be more directly about photography and the new project as its own entity. Along the way I'll also post my usual eclectic mix on my photo of the day, and I might well collect impressions from places I travel to in the meantime: vacations and the like - to see how those impressions compare and contrast with those of my home location. I also want to see if my impressions and photography have influences on one another.

The way I'll write it will probably be 3 or 4 posts a month, together with a number of photographs. At some point I'll need to choose the photo of the month for each month. That will be a special post at the end of each month. I've already put together the first few posts.

Urban jungle

2009-12-16T18:10:00.003+08:00

Experiments in looking closer at things.

All: Manila, December 2009

Releiving boredom

2009-12-15T19:45:00.004+08:00

Or maybe exercising some creativity. I've been looking to inject a bit more self-motivation.

Bedroom abstract 1, Manila, December 2009

Bedroom abstract 2, Manila, December 2009

Bedroom abstract 3, Manila, December 2009

Bedroom abstract 4, Manila, December 2009

Amazing things with photography #4

2009-12-14T18:09:00.001+08:00

Think your camera is fast, well check out the fastest strobe work around. Amazing shot of a hummingbird in flight.

Unfamiliarity

2009-12-14T18:07:00.000+08:00

Manila, December 2009 (as it came out of the camera)

Use a camera for any length of time, take a bunch of pictures and you get to feeling you know how it works. Conventional wisdom in the photography game. But I also realised that one needs to be familiar with the equipment in a range of situations, too.

Last week our department at work had a social, so I was snapping a bunch of pictures at the restaurant with my LX3. I've taken loads of photos with it, am comfortable with it in a range of situations. Except this was new for me. Normally I'd have a rangefinder and fast film in this sort of environment.

Getting home, I found most of my shots were rubbish, grossly under-exposed for the most part. Something I hadn't realised was that the LX3 metering is strongly protective of highlights in its matrix mode, much more so that my Canon SLRs. And so, with a mixture of bright back-lighting and darkened table lighting, I got a lot of shadows (like the one at the top of the post). No flash - I don't do that. And after a few drinks and with the general aim to be quick, I wasn't chimping and playing around with settings.

At least I've learnt for the next time, I suppose.

Learning cycles

2009-12-04T20:44:00.000+08:00

Manila, November 2009

Two related trains of though in one post: a blogger BOGOF.

Like many amateur photographers, digital saw my skills improve dramatically. The short review cycle & low cost per exposure made it easier to experiment and review the results. Although I now have my kit mastered, and all the technical stuff down, digitial was handy to learn by playing with exposure & focus modes & all the extra bits beyond DoF. Having a screen to chimp away kept that cycle really short. Without the short feedback, the learning would be slower: for one, I'd also have to remember all the things I was doing at the time.
Having the sort of brain that likes to experiment and analyse these things also helped.

But I've really got past that. Now on a typical afternoon walk I'll take less exposures and return with more I like and develop. Hit rate has gone way up because I have the equipment nailed.

And that leads to the second train of though. Like Paul Butzi, I like to use the short feedback loop of digital to get to grips with what I've just been doing. Helps me learn about my photography and what it means. I could go out one day, try a bunch of things and use that learning the very next day. For times when I'm shooting consecutive days, that's really handy.

But there is also more to it than that. I find that keeping close to the taking of the picture helps with linking the results with the intention. What did I see, feel & understand by it? Which images reflect that state I was in? Waiting a month will have that lost, and I'd just be back to taking nice shots of stuff. I'm not an "Art is Verb" kind of guy like Paul but I find the means to the end is important in defining that end point. Understanding how I'm getting there helps me understand where I am, and can, go.

Sometimes I do go back to images after some time, or develop ones I previously overlooked. But those new images are different things than the ones of the time. And for the photographs I am taking at the moment, the understanding I get in the "right now" is important to me.

Uninfluenced

2009-11-28T21:00:00.001+08:00

One way, Manila, November 2009

Paul Butzi picked up on the series of posts Gordon McGregor made on artistic influences. Some good insights into someone's process, especially the sub-conscious parts.

Since the first post, I've thought long and hard about this. Do I have influences? Can I identify them?

I came to the conclusion that there is no work that has had that sort of impact on me. I've been taking photographs since before I ever looked at art in any meaningful way and yet there are still subjects from the very first photographs I took that continue in my current work. I also have similar likes in art as in the subjects I photograph.

Influence is more of an on-going process for me. I form new ideas and experiments from further work I see. I get inspiration from many sources, and that list grows as I study more of others work. But I can't really claim that anything has a direct and lasting influence in the way Gordon was approaching the idea. That's probably why my photography is all over the place in terms of subject and style.

Equipment choices

2009-11-28T20:02:00.001+08:00

Just a musing on seeing a couple taking photos of each other in the restaurant this evening. Also trying out a new Gorrilapod. Long exposures, timer stuff etc etc. Besides the point.

I often wonder, seeing people snapping away, why did they pick that camera? What causes people to make the choices they do? (I suppose it's not just cameras, either.)

A new photography source

2009-11-28T18:06:00.002+08:00

I've linked articles and photographs before but now the UK's Daily Telegraph has formed a new photography section - Telephoto. It is a collection of articles and photo-essays, focusing on art and documentary photography. Already it's looking good and covering some subjects a little less popular in the field. Worth checking out.

Learning methods

2009-11-25T21:05:00.001+08:00

Jeepney, Manila, November 2009

Paul Butzi has an interesting post about his fuzzy method of working. This put me back in mind of something I've been observing on people's learning styles.

Part of my day job involves teaching, coaching and advising people in my area of expertise. I am constantly amazed at how many people want "the answer" or "the rules" to a given problem, when there often isn't a single way to approach it, or method is problem-specific. I think the demand for photographic rules of composition or exposure is something along the same lines.

Like Paul, I'm something of a fuzzy learner. I like to have some guiding principles and play around with them, put them together in new ways, discovering what works and what doesn't. Eliminate the useless, and fill the gap with another trial. It's what I like to think of as a "Lego brick" method: a pile of bricks can be put to any use, once the rules for combining are figured out. This is the way I encourage others to work, too. A few guiding principles and lots of scope for personal "figuring it out" and creative thought. I'm not sure if my teaching method goes down well all the time.

And so it seems with photography. People want rules: for exposure, for composition, for subject etc. I think it is why "how to" books sell so well. An approach that is alien to me (I don't own a single "how to" book on photography subjects).

Maybe the human brain has two modes of learning: inclusion - do the things that are known to work, the rest might kill you - and exclusion - do anything as long as it's not proven to kill you. The safe at home mode and the explorer mode. In photography there is much more scope for exploration - it's not an inherently dangerous thing - but it might take effort to trick that caveman brain into believing it.

I've a feeling we're not in Kansas any more...

2009-11-16T19:37:00.000+08:00

Indeed, far from it.

Home for a month, Manila, November 2009

This is a post of explanation and introduction.

First the explanation - the reason I've not posted in a while is that I'm in the process of moving: job, country, house. I've just taken up a new job in Manila, Philippines - one week in and just getting adjusted. Things will remain slow around here for a while until I get moved into my new house early in the New Year.

Palms and steel, Manila, November 2009

Now some introduction to my initial thoughts on this place. First off, it's proving a little hard to get to grips with the place, largely because I'm a bit restricted in location. Living in a hotel in the middle of a commercial district, next door to the office, does restrict ones view of the World. Strictly speaking this is not Manila, but Muntilupa City in the south of the Metro Manila region but that's a nuance lost on most outside of the country. I won't actually be properly moved in until the New Year, awaiting the shipment of my stuff from the Netherlands.

Weather is interesting - it's nearly the coolest part of the year, yet is 30degC most days. Not seen any of the rain that goes with this time of year, either. Which makes for a strange build up to Christmas - more of that in due course.

Photographically, I'm struggling as to how to respond to the new environs. Normally I get to a new place and can snap away, but then most new places I've visited have had some element of familiarity. This place has none of that. And the weather doesn't encourage the long wlaks I might otherwise take, camera in hand. So for now it's just bits and pieces.

Inspiration, motivation

2009-11-03T05:10:00.002+08:00

Candle mass, Lisbon, October 2009

I'm sure we all face it: the constant grapple to understand what promotes good photo making and why it might go away. I've spent several months in a lean patch: few photographs, few opportunities.

Lisbon was a sudden high-spot. had the clear opportunity and put it to good use. It was possibly my most successful city trip, photographically speaking. And that had me thinking a little more as to why that might be.

Up front, I'll admit that I don't buy into all that pseudo-spiritual stuff about Muse and inner voices. If that's your thing, fine but it's not for me. I'm way too rational for that sort of carry on. I do find, though, that I need three things to be productive: motivation - the desire to take pictures, Opportunity - a location that in which I want to do so, and a camera in my hand that I want to use. I had thought practice was a criterion but the Lisbon trip put paid to that idea, I just hadn't any practice in a while.

therefore those three elements create the inspiration to snap away. And I had 2 particularly good bits of equipment with me to help - I'm finding the 40D really nails a lot of the pictures I wnat to take. Exposure and colour are good and I don't need to bracket everything is sight or tweak settings all the time. And the LX3 with the updated firmware is a pleasure to use, which is a first in a pocket camera for me.

Visiting a new place always creates both motivation and opportunity.

I also find the three elements have positive feedback - a good location generates motivation. the right camera does too. Motivation has me seeing more opportunities. And it can work in reverse.

Coming to this realisation I think will help me in future, especially in explaining (and preventing demotivation from) lean spells.

More from Lisbon

2009-11-01T00:37:00.002+08:00

Under 25th April, Lisbon, October 2009

A very interesting bridge.

Lumix LX3 firmware update: in action

2009-10-30T06:27:00.004+08:00

Lisbon, October 2009

Crikey! A photo on a photography blog.

Last time I posted a quick view on the Lumix LX3 firmware update (rev 2.1). Last weekend I was putting I to use in the pleasant sunshine of Lisbon. The main way I was using the new lens memory function was to set a fixed focal length of around 40mm-e and zone focus at f/4.

The review is simple: I really like this new mode. With all the zooming and focusing removed, te camera is very responsive. When waking up from off or sleep, the lens returns to the last position as promised. This makes it more fun to use as I'm not constantly battling the camera to do what I want. I took a lot more pictures as a result. And I expect I shall continue to do so.

This is the feature I most wanted when I first bought the camera and here it is. Now I have just the street camera I wanted. Of course, I've also got the zoom should I need it and a focus button when required.

Lumix LX3 firmware update: first impressions

2009-10-22T05:08:00.003+08:00

Just installed the new firmware for the Panasonic Lumix LX3 (version 2.1). Main reason for installing is the new "Lens resume" feature, which remembers the zoom and focus position after the camera is powered down 9either in sleep mode or by turning it off). Nice feature, suddenly I've got a snapshot camera that I can set to 40mm-e and zone focus.

As a result, I decided to test the focal lengths available to see if I could find somethng in the 35-40mm-e range. Turns out there are 13 distinct focal lengths available in the range, these are they as reported in EXIF, together with the 35mm equivalent focal lengths in parentheses (all figures in mm):

5.1 (24)
5.4 (25)
5.9 (28)
6.3 (30)
6.8 (32)
7.4 (35)
7.9 (37)
8.8 (41)
9.3 (44)
10.2 (48)
11.1 (52)
12.1 (57)
12.8 (60)

So I've set mine up 6 stops from wide (which is the default starting position) at 7.9mm. I'll probably also mark the lens barrel at this point with a silve pen so I've got a marker.

So far it seems to work OK, although I've just done a few test shots. A trip away next week will be a nice test out on the streets.

Windows computing for photographers: part 3, the boot drive

2009-10-21T03:22:00.000+08:00

This will actually be quite a lot less photography and quite a lot more general Windows computing. Non-computer nerds can probably look away now. Real experts should look away now, lest the horror of my mistakes proves too much. You have been warned...

In previous episodes I talked about memory upgrade & RAMDisk (easy) (part 1) and (part 2) a bunch of hardware purchases. This third installment will be about my adventures in boot disk land.

Life should have been so simple - install the new SSD, clone the old boot drive across, change boot sequence & then clone my application spaces. Then technology and user ignorance intervened. I made a lot of mistakes. Learn from my errors & my figuring out what I should have done.

Step 1: the failed clone

Somewhere along the way the cloning software messed up, ruining the Master Boot Record (I think). That put the computer out of action for a while as I figured out how to get things back. I forget exactly what i did but it was relatively easy after a bit of googling.

Step 2: the complete clone and failed reassignment

I tried again. this time I successfully cloned the boot drive to the new drive. Hooray! And then I got clever (ha, ha, ha) and tried to reassign the boot drive letter (C:) to the drive. Suddenly the computer wouldn't boot at all. And I managed to make te old drive "Inactive" (i.e. make it unbootable) so I couldn't even recover to the old situation. And, of course, I'd not cloned all the other logical drives off the old system before I got into this mess.

Step 3: recovering the mess

So there i was, computer a giant paperweight. Every online source effectively stopped at this point (with words along the line of "you're in real trouble if you get here") with no help on getting out of the hole. Fortunately I had my netbook to do some surfing. I also had a pile of disk drives and external enclosures for the final part of the upgrade (wait for part 4). Turns out I also had a disk copy of Norton Ghost that boots from CD. Hooray!

So I cloned all the old stuff using Ghost to one of the new drives and used the external enlosure via USB to the netbook to verify the copy.

Much searching for solutions later, I decided the only way out was to reinstall the OS on the SSD. Fortunately all my data and applications were on separate partitions and now cloned onto a different drive.

Step 4: now we're rocking

Windows install was easy, moving all the old data to the new drive was easy and I've ben rebuilding things over the past couple of weeks.

What I should have done:

Well at least started with the data transfer, then applications and finally boot drive. Instead I went in the reverse order. I should also have verified the boot clone before doing anything fancy. By working that way, I would have made myself independent of the old disks.

In conclusion:

Cloning boot drives can be quite simple, if you get a good step-by-step guide and follow it to the letter. If not, expect some (up to a lot of) fiddling. If all your stuff is on one disk in a single partition, you'll be in a world of trouble. Getting the new one to work, while the old one is in place is trickier. Finding out what to do when it fails is even harder. In the end, it might just be easier to reinstall the operating system - it's what I've done and it's going nicely.

As to the hardware: SSDs rock. Fast, quiet, low energy. Not cheap for the capacity but I'm not looking back now. Everything is faster, even with the previous improvements I'd done. Software installs take seconds, not mintues.

What would I do different?

Well, I think I should have looked to a more extensive upgrade. Maybe 2 SSDs, one small one for boot only and the larger one for the rest. The whole Windows cloning process seems designed for removing or reformating the old drive after the change.

Now I've gone through this all, my whole idea of an ideal computer set-up has changed. I can well imagine running a mirrored pair of boot disks in the future for security and speed.

In part 4, I'll cover changes to my main data storage, general comments on how it's all working and some subjective stuff on how this helps photographers (and ways to save cash while improving performance).

Always a step behind

2009-10-11T04:28:00.002+08:00

Right now I always seem a step behind where I want to be - too much to do, too little time, too easily distracted.

At the same time, I've not had any time to pick up the camera. No new photos, which caused a problem for the photo a day. However, I've been rebuilding my computer and the archive catalogue so I thought I'd drag up a few of the older shots - a week's worth of pretty cheesy sunset stuff from Mongolia a few years ago.

Hopefully I get back in the groove. I'm away all next week, maybe that will help.

Life's what happens...

2009-10-09T05:05:00.002+08:00

If anyone's been wondering what's been happening with the blog: crazy times over here at HQ. Finally got my computer back in action and learnt some useful things along the way. Expect a couple of posts on that, continuing my Windows computing series.

Still not been out taking photos for a while but I'll be fixing that soon. It's been a struggle to keep the photo a day blog fed, but I've just enough material to keep liming along.

Hopefully I can get a few posts completed that I have in preparation (mainly on technical matters) in the next couple of days. My life is about to get mad busy for a month or two, for reasons that'll be obvious in due course.

Hooray for Panasonic

2009-09-28T22:13:00.002+08:00

Panasonic have released new firmware for the LX3. Big deal, you might say, cameras get minor tweaks all the time. But this one is different, with a few proper functional improvements.

The big thing for me, and one of my continuing gripes about the LX3, is the new "Lens Resume" function which allows the zoom and/or manual focus points to be remembered when powering down. This means I can set a preferred zoom and zone focus and have it remember the settings. Very nice. I also like the fact that they supply a downloadable pdf user-manual for the new functions.

It's nice to see at least one manufacturer fixing/improving software and control issues through firmware revision. I wish the others would follow (are you listening, Canon?).

Noorderlicht 16 pt 2: the whole story?

2009-09-24T05:44:00.002+08:00

"Point of no return" Noorderlicht at the AA-kerk, Groningen, September 2009

There were several series presented at Noorderlicht that were documentary on places or events. Three stood out for me for a common reason I'll discuss:
Julian Germain's "Steelworks" looking at the impact on communities in the North of England brought by the closure of traditional heavy industries;
The headline show "Point of no return" curated by former Magnum president Stuart Franklin, a collection of work by Palestinian photo journalists focussing on the recent Israeli incursion into Gaza;
finally "Belgrade belongs to me" - work by three photographers (one Serb, two Dutch) looking at recent life in Belgrade, Serbia.

All three were presented in heavily political terms - respectively: the destruction of communities by Thatcherite policies, the death of innocent civilians by an occupying force (and Franklin's introductory essay had to be withdrawn under threat of legal action by AP, very much a political act in itself) and the poverty and lack of support left behind by NATO attacks in Serbia. So much, so common - especially on these particular themes.

But there is always more to any story. It was the last of these shows that really got me thinking on this at first (although I'd mentioned something along the lines looking at Germain's work), reflecting back more on the others later. When I visited Serbia a couple of years ago, and briefly Belgrade, I noticed something rather different than the grim picture being presented by all three photographers in the show. Indeed there is poverty and many grim neighbourhoods - understandable a few years after war. But I also saw a country and city under development. New buildings, a clean and metropolitan centre, possible hope for a better life in the coming years. And the history of the place - Belgrade's old Citadel showing the scars and reconstruction from centuries of warfare, a country strategically placed between Europe and Asia with the fertile lands provided by the Danube as it runs to the sea. But I don't intend to denigrate the work or view presented but there is rather more to the whole story, I feel. I also felt the photographers were focussed on despair wrought by personal experience but anecdote doesn't make for balanced evidence.

Likewise the work from England. Indeed many communities, dependent for many years on single industries, were devastated by their closure. But then strong unionisation, a lack of development in working practices and eventually uncompetitive behaviour played their part, as they have in other heavily industrialised parts of the Western world. Blaming the outcomes on a single set of policies is a popular and partisan approach to the subject. Not that I want to present either view as right, or indeed that any of that is my point. But stories such as this are more complex and I think it takes a strong care to be able to provide counter-point, especially to one's own views.

Which leads onto the Palestinian work. Shocking images for sure. A grisly display of destruction and dismemberment rarely, if ever, presented by Western news media. Ordinary people caught up in the middle of fighting, children killed, families displaced. But I was given to think: was this just a small slice? There was work presented by 11 photographers and yet several of the images were alternate angles from the same scene & subject. Was the story that narrow that repetition was necessary?

It is a notion that certainly comes up often: what is objectivity. I think a simple (and possibly simplistic) answer is showing all sides. Being able to argue for both cases. Challenging accepted wisom or group-think. It is something I try and practice often - the ability to see all sides of an argument, to play Devil's Advocate where necessary. I think it is necessary to informed debate, helps one more clearly formulate one's own views and hopefully leads to more considered decisions. Unfortunately I don't think I see enough balance in documentary photography to help. Sometimes the photographer needs to show us what he avoided as well as what he targetted.

Why optical viewfinders won't disappear

2009-09-24T02:20:00.000+08:00

I was going to title this along the lines of "Why the SLR will continue" but I think it's a bit wider than that. Also, this argument will throw up an anomaly that's worth noting.

In the digital world, it's all about battery life. And battery life is really important if you're away from electricity or needing to travel light. I regularly travel for 2-3 weeks when I might be 500 miles or more from electricity. Even when I'm not, I don't want to carry an array of batteries and chargers if I can help it.

Micro four-thirds is looking promising but has pretty limited battery life (in the order of 350 shots per charge). I regularly get 950 from my DLSRs. The difference on a long trip would be between 2-3 days per charge to 7-10 days. That's significant, the difference between a couple of batteries and a bag full.

As far as I can see, the big difference is the lower power required by an optical view-finder system. Without the screen/EVF to keep powered, the camera can use less power overall. The optical finder and separate metering systems of the SLRs are similar to the low power units of the film days.

There is that anomaly I mentioned: the Leica M9. Seems it only gets about 300 shots from a relatively high capacity battery. Erwin Puts even reckons as little as 100 using the 16 bit RAW. Can't understand why, as the DSLRs can achieve much more from essentially the same processing requirement.

It's an area that disappoints me in camera development - not enough focus on battery life. It seems as the capacities get bgger and cicuits more efficient that is ussed to pile in more features and ways to drain power. Would it be possible to create a digital camera with a stripped down processing system getting 2000 shots from a typical sized battery.

Noorderlicht 16 pt 1: the introduction

2009-09-23T04:32:00.002+08:00

As Doug Stockdale mentioned on his blog, we took the opportunity of his visit to the Netherlands to meet up in Groningen at the weekend and visit the Noorderlicht photo festival. it's always good to meet IRL with online contacts and we had much in common to discuss. It was especially good for me to be able to visit and discuss photo exhibitions with someone similarly interested.

As Doug mentions, it's really too much to take in effectively in one day - I reckon three days are really needed to fully appreciate the range of material on offer - pretty much the whole town is taken over with various exhibits, housed in all kinds of spaces.

This year's theme: "Human Conditions", which seemed encompass a lot of pocvert, destitution and conflict. That said, there was some strong work and powerful projects on display. I'll be picking up on some of the themes and thoughts I hand in further posts.

My closing point on this short introduction: I was surprised that somewhere as remote as Groningen would carry an international exhibition of this range and quality. It also turns out the town is something of an Arts destination in genral, with all sorts of exhibitions and activities on-going, broad even for a University town. Who'd have thought it would take nearly 10 years living in the country to discover that.

Some blog notes

2009-09-21T19:02:00.003+08:00

My main computer is still down - I've resolved that the only way to dig myself out of the hole is to reinstall the operating system and recover from there. Fortunately I've been able to clone all the data and applications so I'm hoping that's a relatively straightforward job (famous last words). Trouble is, it always takes a load of time to do this kn id of thing and rarely can you stop the process half way through. It's really been hampering my photography (or at least the online part of it).

After a pretty thin summer for blogging material, I've got quite a lot of new subjects I'll be wanting to post. I've found a string of interesting ideas out in web-land that has sparked some thinking, so hopefully plenty of that. I've got a few more photos as I've started shooting some.

Now to find the time to get round to it all.

Just a head

2009-09-18T15:51:00.000+08:00

London, September 2009

Back to photography

2009-09-18T03:12:00.002+08:00

London, September 2009

Last week I finally managed to get in some photography while I was in London and I've also got limited computing back, so now I can post some more photos. Good opportunity this weekend, too. Hooray!

Leica: cameras worth buying?

2009-09-14T17:10:00.000+08:00

Until now Leica have not made a camera I'd consider buying. When I bought a rangefinder it was a Zeiss Ikon for both superior function and cheaper price. Leica just weren't offering anything that represented something I wanted. Much as I'd love a digital rangefinder, the M8's problems were too much, especially at those prices.

And now we have three new Leica cameras on the scene.

The X1 - a rather nice looking poket camera. Nice controls & nice focal length lens. The one thing I'm a little less sure about is the large sensor (although I'm sure I've insisted it is critical in the past). The reason being versatility for point and shoot. I really like using my LX3 in f/4 and zone focus for quick shooting - the short focal lengths for small senosrs yielding large DoF. This means I don't have to worry about focus, even in low light. But quick focus would sort that and small print sizes (lower enlargement leads to greater DoF). Otherwise a very nice package for a compact.

The M9 - it seems a digital rangefinder that works. No significant IR and cyan image problems. Better handling and all the control simplicity of an RF. Looks like a very nice package. I have one cocern over aliasing (not just moire but other problems in fine detail) that did show up in some M8 images. I'll be looking with interest over the next few weeks - I might be saving my money for one.

The S2 - looks like a programmable camera. The initial impressions from Michael Reichmann, especially about the user interface, are right along my thinking. Price is definitely not in my budget but maybe the others will take a look and incorporate similar controls. certainly for landscape photography this looks to be a package that is very interesting.

So suddenly Leica have 3 different cameras that I'd like to own.

Three types of photograph

2009-09-01T23:36:00.001+08:00

I'm not sure that I've not ruminated along these lines in the past but here goes...

On the tram to work this morning I was thinking how best to describe the photography in one of the photobooks I own, with a view to writing a review. That led to the notion of three types of photograph:

Photograph as object - the fine print, fine art end of the spectrum. A photograph where seeing the physical print is as much a part of the experience as the content.
Photograph as subject - such that it is what stood in front of the camera is the key. It is all about capturing an image of something physical.
Photograph as idea - the notion of metaphor or representation. The means of presentation matters less than the response of the viewer.

I wouldn't say that these are pure concepts or even categories, more axes. Photographs may be mixtures of the types. I'm unsure whether means of presentation might influence one's idea of which a given picture may be (I can think of a few fine art prints that move from object to subject when seen in books rather than as a full-size print).

And so it followed, in my thought train, that message and medium become somewhat bound. How a photographer wants the work to be considered influences means of presentation (print, book, screen etc) and a corollary being that the means of presentation will affect the viewers response.

Creative limits

2009-08-28T23:35:00.001+08:00

I've not been doing any photography lately. Computer is still not working (although I had it going briefly a few days ago, before cocking it up shortly thereafter) but that's not much of an excuse. But this morning I realised that I've not been feeling a need for the additional creative outlet that photography provides.

Work lately has been exercising my creative talents. Lots of new thinking, developing concepts, putting existing technologies and working methods together in unusual ways. It's been good fun, if a little tiring. It's certainly a level of novelty and diversity of work I've not experienced in a while which is a good thing. That leads me to believe I have a certain capacity (or maybe need) for creativity which is being consumed during working hours thus no room for photography out of the office.

The rational photographer

2009-08-20T01:20:00.001+08:00

It's been something I've been thinking about for a while: my mental process when working, specifically for photography. My thinking has been prompted by several blogs I've read describing a sort of unconscious or emotional approach to the whole business. This post has finally happened thanks to Paul Butzi (again).

My thinking is far too rational to get lost in some unconscious "flow". Almost every shot, every experiment I try is logically thought out. Often this works just at the edge of conscious thought and can be hard to verbalise or explain but it is there.

Over the years I've often had cause to think on how I think. People often comment that I don't think like others, in that my mental processes seem to work differently than most. Not better, just different. I also think fast, churning lots of options in a short space of time. My brain is constantly evaluating the world around me, considering evidence, thinking of the options and possibilities. Good attributes for a scientific worker, not typical of the artistically inclined.

And so it seems to be with photography. I carefully evaluate everything, considering what I see, how I see it, how I want to represent it. It's a background mental process that seems to be constantly working. On the outside, it may be hard to tell - when it's going well the whole thing can take the blink of an eye. If you saw me plonk down my tripod and crank out the shots, at times it might seem unconsidered. And just because it takes you some time to work through a process doesn't mean it takes me the same amount of time.

Why do I not think this is some sort of instinctive approach? Because this thinking and outcome works just the way it does, for me, in scientific or mathematical work. Often I can "see" the answer but can then consciously step through the logic to get there. It is similar with my photography. See, analyse, devise, execute, test the variables. I don't always get it right and I then actively learn from the mistakes: make improvements, get new ideas, discover new things by accident. As my English teacher once said of me: efficiently analytical but lacking in empathy. It's the way I am so I work with what I've got.

This may be hard to understand: it's certainly tricky to describe. For the emotional crowd it is likely hard to relate to, just as I find the more emotional approach very hard to relate to my own experience. There was a point in time when I tried to explain others' process in terms of my own experience but I realised that was specious. That just becomes denial through ignorance. So I try hard to understand my own thinking and how others think and work. What I learn from other photographers seems to help with my understanding of others in general.

Media are multi

2009-08-18T05:36:00.002+08:00

Another interesting rumination from Paul Butzi. Leads me to think - paper media and electronic media are currently poles apart, maybe at odds with one another. But yet we want convergence, or at least translation: the ability to put together electronic files easily put to paper, or paper files readily turned into 1s and 0s.

The problem seems that those writing the standards are thinking in small boxes. Most mark-up is designed for online text, images are an after-thought. Printable structure is a whole other business. Yes, I realise there are fundamental differences in paper and screen display but there can be simple way to translate between the two even to the point of double-structureed files.

Much as I enjoy learning new stuff, I'm getting fed up of having to become an expert in various technologies just to get stuff done. it's one fo those things where the answer seems tangibly close yet just out of reach. For sure technology is moving on apace but I'm never satisfied when the answer seems tantilisingly close.

A little slow around here

2009-08-17T06:24:00.003+08:00

My blogging has slowed quite a bit, as regular readers may have noticed. More of the same reasons: not taking any pictures at present, which means I'm a bit off the photography thinking loop and I've massacred my computer (again). the latter is proving to be a real drag. While the netbook is handy for a bit of surfing, I can't really post photos (and have no access to the archive) and viewing photography is tricky.

I just need a good run at any of this to get back on track - if only I could find the time right now. First priority: fix the computer, second priority: take some pictures.

Photography independent of geography, pt 2

2009-08-12T01:05:00.000+08:00

Green poles, The Hague, August 2009

Colin Jago pondered if this answered my question about geography independent photography. Yes, in a way, but probably not how he imagined.

I had to read his post and the links a couple of times to really get to understand it. And it got me thinking severally about how I relate to photography and the world around me. I'm sure I've written about this before.

But on the notion of a longer-term project, I realised there is something there worth exploring, and that I can relate to as I move around. The notion of how my view of a place changes as I get to know it and/or as it changes around me. How do I see a place as I fly in? How does my visual sense of the place change as I spend more time? Does what I see change, do I change what I look at, do I stop seeing? There are times I jet in to visit briefly, be it vacation or business, places I visit regularly over a period of time, and new locations to live in.

I can see mileage in this one over a long period. And this will be much more about my relation to my living environment, just as my Processes of Nature project is about how I see the natural world.

Further experiments in JPEG compression

2009-08-11T01:10:00.002+08:00

This is an expansion of the experiments on JPEG that I reported in this post. It's worth reading that before continuing here.

This time I was looking to expand the idea to the limit - just how many iterations would it take to cause the image quality to break down?

I took the same image, working with Lightroom JPEG quality 75 and continued to successively expot the full size image. At the 35th iteration I found the first artefacts - pixel blocks, about 3x3 in size, in one of the dark patches. Nothing that would show up in print. In fact, it took a while to find it at all on screen at 100%. I then continued. At 80 iterations I got bored, happy that this is well past the number of successive saves I'd ever need.

I also tried an image that had been sharpened in the first conversion from uncompressed TIFF, using Lightroom's heavy screen sharpening. After 20 iterations there was no difference, apart from the sharpening - no artefacts, halos etc. I'd expect it to go many more iterations without problem.

JPEG torture test

I also devised a torture test, creating a multi-patch image with random detail running across it. This is a graphic image better suited to GIF than JPEG. Result: noticeable degradation around the wiggly line after 10 images at quality 75, but only against pure colour (one of the white patches and the pure green bottom left). The rest was intact, including edges between patches. The file size is small, reflecting the large colour patches: 340kB for a 6MP image, much smaller than the 1.2MB for the other, 10MP image.

Torture test after 10 iterations, Lightroom quality 75
Click for 100% view

Final conclusion on using JPEG for presentation and book making: I'm sticking to lower quality levels than before, using JPEG exclusively for creating photobooks and not getting too worried about compression settings.

Photography independent of geography

2009-08-11T00:26:00.000+08:00

Reading Paul Butzi's post about extending photographic challenges had me thinking along the lines of potential subjects.

For me, personally, either of his suggestions would be logistically difficult - it is rare that I spend an entire month in country, let alone 90 consecutive days. And to top that, over the next 10 years I expect to live in 3 or 4 different countries. Such is the life of a peripatetic.

By extension I have been thinking of potential subjects that would be independent of location. Not straightforward for someone whose photography tends towards that of location. So what subjects can I think of?

Colour is an obvious choice, as is some form of self-portrait. But the imaginative well seems shallow and has run dry rather quickly. Any ideas?

Nothing to see here

2009-08-10T12:22:00.002+08:00

Before yesterday, I'd not picked up a camera in about 6 weeks. Not really had the opportunity, I guess. Plus the afore mentioned lethargy. So I went out for a short walk yesterday afternoon to take a few pictures. And barely saw anything. I've maybe got 4 or 5 decent shots. I only managed 27 frames total.

Definitely need more practice.

Lethargy

2009-08-04T04:15:00.004+08:00

Afternoon rest, Reeth, Yorkshire, June 2009

Posting has been slow (although I've a couple in the works), reflecting my general mood at present. It's hot, it's humid, I'm not sleeping well and I can't think straight half the time. Oh, the joys of summer. To top it all, I've not picked up a camera in at least 6 weeks.

I hope I can break this cycle some time soon, if only for my sanity.

Amazing things with photography #3

2009-08-02T05:16:00.001+08:00

Courtesy of astronomy picture of the day (APOD), comes this incredible HDR shot of the sun's corona during the recent eclipse.

Some label changes

2009-08-02T01:41:00.001+08:00

I've decided to split up all my SoFoBoMo posts, largely to make it easier for me to manage them but also easier to find stuff. So now "SoFoBoMo" is used for general stuff related to the Solo Photo Book Month: advice, discussion, technical topics. Stuff specific to a particular year will be labelled "SoFoBoMo xxxx" where xxxx is the year number. That way, project specific stuff can be found separately and not get mixed up with the general advice.

SoFoBoMo 2010: learning materials

2009-07-30T11:00:00.001+08:00

If you're interested, or participated, in Solo Photo Book Month, then you've probably seen Paul Butzi's announcement about next year's event. And you've maybe seen Colin Jago's call for help with translations.

Another feature for the website that we are planning is learning material to help SoFoBoMoers with various aspects of planning, preparing and completing their photobook. The aim is to have two main parts to this: first a community supported Wiki with lots of useful info on relevant topics, presented in a way useful for the event and second downloadable instructions for various tasks, especially around using appropriate software for making the book. I'll be leading the charge on this front.

Topics that will definitely get covered:

image formats, pdf in general, pdf creation, colour management, book making software (Scribus, Pages, InDesign), layout principles.

But this post is also a call for help on two fronts:
If there are other topics you want covered, drop a comment here which gets published and I'll gather them all up and try and include them in the plan. Was there stuff you wish you'd known in advance? Stuff you still don't know but wish you did?

On the other hand I'm looking for volunteers to help put together material for the site. Got useful tips? Instructions on particular software? Want to help testing the instructions? Found some useful resources that got you through SoFoBoMo? Drop a comment (won't get published) with contact details and I'll get in touch with how you can help. No submissions just yet, just volunteers.

In due course there will be a community editable wiki etc on the website but for now we need to gather initial material to populate it once it's running. And we'll be encouraging translation of that stuff, too.

Amazing things with photography pt2

2009-07-30T06:21:00.001+08:00

Photography of wildlife behaviour at its best, courtesy of the Daily Telegraph.

Experiments in JPEG compression

2009-07-30T05:05:00.000+08:00

I wrote before about optimising jpeg compression for various output, mainly aimed at single conversion for on-screen view. Then a couple of comments on this post by Colin Jago had me thinking more about using jpeg images.

It was suggested, in reference to making photobooks, that TIFF (by inference, uncompressed images) are needed to retain image quality. I don't do that. when using Scribus I import all images as resized jpegs exported with a quality of 9 from Photoshop or 90 from Lightroom. By working with jpegs I minimise memory requirements and speed up software response. Am I losing quality in doing this?

So I've run a little experiment. I took the image above (selected for a mix of fine detail and smooth tonal areas), from its 16-bit uncopressed TIFF format and successively converted it to jpeg. that is, I converted to jpeg, took that jpeg and converted and so on. I ran 10 iterations. I tried 3 different qualities (90, 75, 50 from Lightroom), no sharpening applied in conversion. This is what I found.

The 10th quality 90 (jpeg 90-10) showed almost no discernible difference to the first jpeg (jpeg 90) which is indistinguishable from the original. That at 100% on-screen view. The one slight difference between jpeg 90-10 and jpeg 90 was slight posterization in the darkest shadows. By slight, I mean peering closely and changing my angle of view a lot. At full-screen view it is unnoticeable. It would not show in a print. Each jpeg in this series is 2.6Mb in size for a 10MP image.

jpeg 90-10 crop, click for 100%

jpeg 90 crop, click for 100%

The same story for jpeg 75-10 compared to jpeg 75. These files are 1.2MB for the same image.

For jpeg 50-10 there is definite loss of detail and a number of strange block artefacts in smooth tone areas. I had to go all the way back to jpeg 50-4 (4th in series) before it was indistinguishable from the original. The files in this series are a mere 581kB.

jpeg 50-10 crop, click for 100%. Notice the weird blocks in the smooth areas

jpeg 50 crop, click for 100%

Conclusion: it is quite feasible to use jpeg for successive output operations without losing detail. For short runs (3 or 4 successive conversions) it is feasible to use quite low quality (high compression) and not lose detail. Higher quality will support longer runs. I haven't yet run the 75 and 90 series to the point that they start to lose quality, that's a job for another day.

A bit of a hiatus

2009-07-19T05:50:00.003+08:00

It's not been a terribly good day, Murphy plaguing me all day. Worst of all I've broken my main computer (this come courtesy of my netbook) to the point it won't boot. That's what comes of trying fancy things with moving boot partitions. I reckon it'll take me a few days to recover that lot. Thank goodness for my rigorous back-up system.

PDF: a layman's explanation

2009-07-16T00:20:00.000+08:00

As Colin Jago points out, information on PDF formats and content is typically fairly obtuse. Heaven knows why.

Off I went to read the ISO standards to understand this stuff. When one digs in, there are some fairly simple explanations for this all. I shall try and elaborate.

PDF is now defined in a series of international standards and like all standards, they have to cover a wide range of uses and interpretations. Boiling standards to their essence is quite a skill, one which I get to practice frequently on a professional basis.

Essentially PDF breaks into 2 types - the generic document container and the specific print-ready file.

The general types of PDF (1.3, 1.4, 1.6, 1.7 etc) are wide-ranging descriptions of ways of publishing documents for various applications. Basically the standards define a very general container for a whole lot of data types. Some are application specific (e.g. PDF 1.6 is specifically for engineering data).

In their simplest use (and, I suppose, the one with which most people are familiar) they are just a way of formatting text documents in a way that they can be used across a variety of computer systems. In their most complex form they are multi-dimensional, multi-media applications with hyperlinks, cross-document linking, user input, and a variety of interaction capabilities all done in a way that a variety of computer systems can use them.

The standards lay down a whole lot of requirements on document structure and on the readers that present them to you.

In practice things get muddied by non-compliances, bad formatting and odd things getting embedded. Adobe help the user by providing Acrobat Reader with a pile of capability to try and sort the mess out so that you can use the content.

Then there are the PDF/X types. These are simplifications of the main PDF types specifically for printing and incorporating requirements for colour management data. There are basically 2 types, PDF/X-1 which is CMYK only and PDF/X-3 which also allows RGB colour spaces. The PDF/X standards pretty much says: text & pictures only, no fancy stuff, tell us the fonts & colourspace you're using.

The 2 big differences between the two types of PDF (normal and X-type) are

PDF/X is a simple, flat file. No layers, hyperlinks, multimedia etc. Just text and graphics for printing on paper.
PDF/X requires colour management data embedded so that the printer can print things properly.

There are a few niceties in PDF/X around font management and pre-determined output colourspaces that are best left to the pros with a direct working relationship with their printer.

How does this affect you, the humble photobook writer? In principle, not a great deal. If you're doing a basic photobook and writing a PDF file with embedded fonts, JPEG images with a colourspace and no fancy links, video etc anyway then there is essentially no difference between a PDF 1.3 and a PDF/X-3 file. In fact, there's little difference with PDF 1.4 either (which introduces transparency - if you don't know, you don't need to). Just write a regular PDF and it'll comply with the X-3 format. Or export as an X-3, which should take out any fancy stuff you (or your software) added inadvertently.

I hope that helps.

Movement

2009-07-16T00:09:00.000+08:00

Fork in path, Thirlspot, Cumbria, May 2009

As Colin Griffiths comments on my last post, I enjoy the process of lugging a big camera up big hills. But it is results driven. I want movements for angle of view & focal plane control. I want fine detail and smooth tones for large prints.

For the details and tones it is (for me) prohibitively expensive to go digital.
On investigating tilt-shift lenses for 35mm it's becoming clear that the only way to properly do the movements I want is to have a large focus screen.

The more I investigate options, the more I find I have the right one.

I'm thinking of poking around with Helicon Focus, which will be cheaper than a tilt-shift lens, but it can't do some things. Subject movement is an obvious one (and I work quite a lot in windy conditions). Soft clouds is another - I like to use a front tilt to extend depth of field in the land, which helps soften up focus on the clouds. Sure I can do all that in software, and use multiple exposures.

Here's the thing, though. Using movements in the field takes no more time than running a series of careful exposures and the time I need for the final processing is a whole lot less.

Digital solutions? Here's a couple of ideas.

Auto multi-focus. I set start and end points for focus and the camera runs a series between them.
Digital tilt focus. Can be manual with confirm or auto. Define the points you want in focus and adjust accordingly, just like the manual process. Asymmetric tilt/swing would help a lot for manual (auto can do fancy simultaneous movements). 2 points needed for single-axis movement (tilt or swing), 3 for 2 axes (tilt and swing).

Of course, there is one problem that all this digital stuff doesn't fix: reliance on power in the field. Maybe we'll get really good solar panels that will sort that out too.

Not at the limit yet

2009-07-15T01:49:00.000+08:00

Little Man and Skiddaw, Cumbria, May 2009
Shot on 120 roll film, 6x9 on an LF camera

Those who read the Luminous Landscape have probably seen this article by Ray Maxwell ostensibly on the applicability of Moore's Law to camera sensor development, coming to the conclusion that we're hitting the limit, especially in terms of resolution. The arguments didn't look right to me and this TOP article by Ctein neatly debunks the entire thing.

Even with my moderate grasp of the subjects of optics and digital sampling it didn't take long to confirm that the LL article was wrong and to be able to come up with my own calculations (which turned out to be very similar to Ctein's).

Maxwell omitted the Nyquist-Shannon sampling [WARNING: geeky maths link] limits which means we need pixels at most half the size of the given Airy disc or smaller to get full resolution data. Sensor arrays further reduce the pixel size required in order to sample each frequency. I reckoned we can go down to about 1/4 the given Airy disc limit. Of course Maxwell did his numbers at f/11 which suggests large pixels but optics tend to be optimised for larger apertures, with the photographer accepting the resolution/depth of field trade-off for smaller values. Even if we calculate at f/11, with the 1/4 Airy pixel size then that yields a limit of 1.5micron. For comparison a typical pocket camera 1/1.7", 12MP sensor has a pixel pitch of 2micron, so within the grasp of current technology. Compare that to the current 4-6micron for larger sensors and we could happily go to pixel counts 9-16 times those used today before hitting resolution limits.

So your 22MP 35mm full frame could stretch out to around 200-300MP and still yield noticeable resolution improvement. Another upside of extreme resolution is the ability to crop. I could see an argument for using wider angles and cropping for a lot of shots. Imagine only carrying a wide angle and mid-tele for everything. Shoot 100mm and crop the centre for a 400mm equivalent shot. Monster panoramas in one exposure.

Sufficiency is never enough anyway. The sufficiency argument has been touted since cameras hit 4MP.

And all of that ignores any future technology leaps.

[Hereby rewarding a healthy dose of scepticism and justifying my geek tag]

Amazing things with photography

2009-07-13T15:11:00.001+08:00

Soap bubble bursting over at the Daily Telegraph.