Focalplane Fotoblog

This blog is moth-balled!

2007-09-26T12:53:00.001Z

For the time being I am going to post all entries on the main focalplane blog. A sort of KISS thing which will essentially destroy my "hub and spokes" concept.

Photo-stitching with Photoshop

2007-04-13T10:04:00.000Z

I recently tried to capture a single frame of the wreck Napoli with my 300mm telephoto mounted on the D200. This effectively becomes a 450mm telephoto set up and I was surprised to find that I could not fit the wreck into one frame. So I took two.

The first thing I didn't do was set the exposure to manual. This meant I had to do some adjusting within Lightroom until the two frames had the same "exposure". I then straightened both images using the horizon as a benchmark. This was important for the stitching to work. Next I simply enlarged the canvas of one frame and copied the other image onto it, moving its layer around until it matched. The seam is just about impossible to detect. I then collapsed the layers and saved the image. I also changed the color temperature setting as the weather and light were not perfect.

Here is the result.

Fireworks Set on Flickr

2007-03-08T16:57:00.000Z

Here.

Photomanipulation and the Media

2007-03-08T11:53:00.000Z

This is a good example of how the camera can lie and how easy it is to detect the lie. Interesting that the photographer in this and other cases is the one who gets fired. Why not the editors for allowing such chronically bad examples of Photoshop cloning to get through to the publication?

Lightroom Flash Portfolio

2007-02-23T10:36:00.000Z

Here is the second upload from Lightroom using Flash for the slideshow. I altered some of the settings to align the style with Focalplane's Black/Green look.

Lightroom Web Page Generation

2007-02-23T08:25:00.000Z

Adobe has improved their web site generation capability with the release of Lightroom

Here is a simple HTML portfolio page. Other formats are available including those that use Flash. I'll add one of those later.

I should add that this suite of web pages took about 10 minutes to generate and upload. The layouts can be customized and I believe it should be easy to create a portflio layout that would match the Focalplane style sheet.

Lightroom Red Eye Removal

2007-02-21T18:33:00.000Z

This shot has been waiting for red eye removal so when I received Version 1 of Lightroom the other day I was pleased to see that they have included what appears to be a good red eye removal tool. It works very nicely and there is a lot of user control as to just how much red eye is modified. You be the judge:

Epson PictureMate 240

2007-01-27T15:00:00.000Z

Yesterday we bought a new Epson printer, the Epson PictureMate 240. This is not an expensive printer but then we all know that the real cost is in the consumables, particularly the ink cartridges. It also only prints on 6'' x 4" paper but is that really a limitation when you also have access to larger printers and print shops for the occasional enlargement?

What really comes across, however, is the incredible ease of use and quality of prints. It can be used with the camera's memory card or as a printer connected to a computer network. My first attempt used images downloaded to the camera's CF card from the computer; I then put the card in the printer and it worked a treat! We then put April's CF card direct from her Elph in the printer and sorted through several hundred images, selecting a few test prints. Again, excellent ease of use and quality.

Havinging come through the initial try out with flying colors, the next step will be to source a cheap supply of consumables! Any suggestions?

Through a Skylight

2007-01-07T22:17:00.000Z

A few days ago there was a full moon. It was also a rainy night but occasionally the clouds drifted by and revealed a clear sky. I looked up through a skylight and saw the moon behind the raindrops.

Out came the camera. Here is one of the results:

The Right to Bear SLRs

2006-12-18T10:56:00.000Z

This is worth a quick read. It applies to San Francisco but the gist of the article will probably fit most western democracies unless there are specific bye laws in place.

Hierarchical Keywords

2006-11-16T17:56:00.000Z

I am currently uploading several thousand images into the Lightroom database. This is taking several hours, so I am busy exploring the database functions within Lightroom and have discovered the concept of hierarchical keywording.

Imagine a photo of a brown pelican taken off the shore of the Gulf Coast, Texas in 2002, using my old Nikon F5. The only keywords I need to enter are: 2002, F5, Padre Island National Seashore, and Brown Pelican. This is becase the camera belongs to my camera>Nikon>F5 branch, Padre Island belongs to my America>USA>Texas>Gulf Coast>Padre Island National Seashore branch, and the bird belongs to Bird>Brown Pelican. The photo will come up in a broader serach, for example, Gulf Coast + Bird, without either of these keywords needing to be entered into the image database.

This nesting of keywords means (1) that the system is much less randomly organized, (2) that I am forced to think about the structure of potential search requests, and (3) that a lot fewer keywords need to be entered, thus saving a lot of time.

This is going to be one of the reasons that Lightroom will prove to be a huge success with photographers.

Nikon D40

2006-11-16T15:24:00.000Z

Today, Nikon has announced a new digital SLR, the lightweight D40. What is noteworthy about this entry level DSLR is its price, US$599, including consumer zoom lens. While not as exciting as the D2, D200 or D70s, this model opens up a huge market place for Nikon. Its specs are not bad but perhaps we should wait for some of the usual reviews to appear before getting too excited!

Lightroom is in Beta!

2006-11-16T13:32:00.000Z

I am enjoying the learning curve into Lightroom and feel that this will be a great success for Adobe. The more I get into the application, the more I like it.

But there is one annoying tendency with the latest Beta 4.1. And that is the default location of the library. Seems like Adobe only wants it to be on the computer users hard drive, specifically within the Photos folder (I'm using Mac folderspeak here). I have also noted that, while I could reference files on an external drive, so far the program will not recognize the iPod as a legitimate storage device to reference files from.

But I am making headway in using the enabled iPod hard drive as the place to store both images and library files. It's not been easy and I still wonder if one small mistake could screw up the entire organization. I have found Luminous Landscape's Lightroom tips useful - he, like me, wants to store images on an external hard drive. So, if you are interested in Lightroom's capabilities, his site is worth examining. And he also points out the emphasis in the title of this post: Lightroom is still in development, don't expect perfection!

Lightroom Killer Tips

2006-11-13T19:29:00.000Z

Lightroom is proving to be a very useful application and I am slowly getting used to it. Because Lightroom is in Beta, there is no manual or help available, but Adobe have come up with a series of tutorial videos that apply to the recent Beta 4 release. There are only a few videos (4 as I write) and they can be downloaded as they are published by iTunes and sync'ed with an iPod. Neat.

The iPod Set Up

2006-11-06T04:32:00.000Z

I have successfully set up my new iPod 80GB to store a Lightroom folder containing over 1300 full resolution jpeg images, entered as daily shoots (the basic Lightroom sub-folder). What I have also been able to do is sync to this folder so that low resolution images can be viewed on the iPod.

It all works rather well but, and this is something I am still researching, it would be nice if I could get the file name of an image viewed on the iPod screen so that I could then match it with the high resolution file. By storing images in Lightroom "shoot" folders, it is possible to narrow down a search but it would be much better if there was a way to see basic EXIF data. Maybe there is.

iPod photo storage

2006-11-05T18:56:00.000Z

I have finally done it - bought a real iPod (i.e. not a Shuffle). I am now the proud owner of an 80GB fifth generation iPod. It's superb.

Now my reason for posting this news in the fotoblog is simply that I have decided to use the spare hard disk space on the iPod to store my Adobe Lightroom library. The hard disk on my PowerBook is continually "nearly full" so something has to go. The beauty of the iPod concept is that it can be used as an additional storage device and, with its USB 2.0 interface, it communicates well with the PowerBook (and any other computer for that matter).

I will be backing up the image files and Lightroom library files on DVD and, eventually another hard drive, so there will be no risk of losing data if the iPod is stolen or otherwise incapacitated. Although I am not using iPhoto I will be able to preview the thumbnails on the iPod by syncing to the images. At least I hope I will be able to do that. More on this later.

The Camera Store, Calgary

2006-10-25T23:34:00.000Z

Lunchtime today saw me striding out in the bright sunshine, walking about seven blocks to The Camera Store, one of Calgary's better photo stores and a full service Nikon dealership. There I tried out several consumer zoom lenses and eventually bought the 18-70mm zoom that appears to be a useful piece of glass with excellent properties. It's my first "G" lens in that it has no aperture ring but it does have manual focus override as well as a silent wave motor for the auto-focus.

It is not exactly the travel lens I was looking for in a previous post but it will serve the "one lens fits most everything" rule.

Meantime, I guess I don't really need my 24-120mm zoom, so it will probably go on eBay after Christmas.

What is Intellectual Property?

2006-10-21T16:40:00.000Z

This post is interesting in that an infamous grafitti artist (known as Banksy) has engaged a London law firm to persue those who, in whatever small a way, sell items of small value that just happen to include an image of this individual's "art".

Intellectual property is often hard to define but I find it interesting that an individual can claim that his art, having been clandestinely stenciled on property owned by someone else, and without their permission and knowledge, is his intellectual property and therefore should be protected.

I wonder out loud to myself: "I bet he hasn't paid the owner of the property any royalties, assuming that he has made a fortune out of said art". I assume a fortune could be at stake here because London law firms don't come cheap.

My initial comment was that the image (that was affixed to t-shirts and sold to friends) also contained other items of art, including a copyright symbol stenciled onto the board fence. I have run into problems of photographing private property, when security guards politely asked me not to use a tripod in a private park area next to what is now called Williams Plaza in Houston. I moved on, having taken the photo anyway. If I were to attempt to sell this photo I could well receive a similar letter from a law firm, but only because the photo shows only the building and nothing else.

It turns out that Banksy lives a double life. On the one hand he stencils clever art pieces on property, then he sells images of that art for advertising. He's a political statement and an entrepreneur. But heaven forbid that a guy can make a few bucks selling t-shirts.

Adobe Lightroom

2006-10-19T06:08:00.000Z

Following a suggestion (scroll down to October 3), I recently downloaded the beta version of Lightroom and have to say that it is very slick, even though I find a complete lack of manual rather confusing. Certainly more professional than iPhoto and more user friendly that Photoshop, Lightroom should be a success when it finally hits the shops. I wonder how much it will cost?

Nothing but a 20mm (read 30mm) lens

2006-10-16T20:08:00.000Z

I just spent a couple of weeks in West Africa with the D200 and one lens, my 20mm f 2.8. This wide angle lens is the only one I have at the moment that is compact enough to travel with given the new cabin baggage laws in the UK. It is a wonderful lens even on the D200 where it is not so wide angle, behaving like a 30mm semi-wide. But there were times when it was most frustrating. Zoom lenses do have their advantages so it looks like I will be buying the consumer standard zoom when next in a country that doesn't have ridiculous sales taxes and other mark ups.

Pete's Cameras

2006-09-25T08:34:00.000Z

This post shows an interesting array of cameras Pete bought this past weekend and I rather fear he has caught a bug - the shutter bug, to be precise. But at least he recognizes the potential disease - kit nerditude!

It's a shame the Yashica twin lens reflex has a broken viewfinder screen but I rather think that a replacement could be found to make this a very useful camera. These TLRs were the Japanese equivalent of the Rolleicord (I doubt if they should be compared with the Rolleiflex but that's another subject for debate among kit nerds!) and as such could take excellent 2-1/4" square negatives and slides on 120 film.

The Box Brownie is the real classic here in that it revolutionized photography and made the Eastman Kodak Company the powerhouse in global photography, a position it has slipped from in recent years. Introduced in 1900 the Box Brownie went through many revisions but always provided a very cheap lightproof box with lens, shutter and registered focal plane for the roll of film. The developed black and white negatives would have been contact printed with very few photographs actually sent off for enlargement.

Showing my age, I have to admit that my earliest prints were all contact prints, a remarkably simple and effective way to obtain a positive from a negative with only small dishes of chemicals and a piece of clear glass being required. Heck, I might even try this again using my Rolleiflex T!

Nikon Software for the D200

2006-06-16T19:14:00.000Z

I just downloaded two pieces of software from the Nikon site - they are on a 30 day trial period after which the cost is $99. The first app is Nikon Capture Editor which is basically a neat downloading interface and a poor man's Photoshop. Nothing special over what Apple's iPhoto offers. In fact I didn't find it all that easy to use - perhaps it's one of those programs designed for Windows and quickly ported over to OS X?

The second app is more interesting. It's called Nikon Capture Control and it works with the D200 as a fancy remote. Obviously the camera and computer have to be tethered with the USB cable. This makes it a rather cumbersome duo with plenty of opportunity to mess things up with a misplaced swing of the arm or knee. The connection apparently requires the camera to be set to PTP and in this mode the images are stored directly on the computer's hard drive, not in the camera. The shutter can be fired by the computer which is neat but again not very flexible - a simple remote is a lot more portable! It could be very useful for microscope photography (something I don't do) as well as macrophotography in a controlled setting.

The software handles Nikon raw files and this is the main reason for considering purchase. I'll have to give it some serious thought!

So, How is it?

2006-05-24T17:03:00.000Z

The new Nikon D200 has quickly become a favorite. Having used a Nikon F5 and a Fuji S7000 before, many of the controls seem quite natural (which they are, having been ergonomically tested!) My point, though, is that Nikon and Fuji cameras do have a synergy and so it is no surprise that many of the basic controls are in the same locations.

The speed of the D200 is an absolute revelation. This is like using the F5! Digital lag is virtually non-existent and the ability to fire off shots is just like film without the potential wastage. The review screen lights up very quickly and is very large and bright.

My lenses work well with the camera though I miss the ultra wide capability of my 20mm f2.8. Sooner or later I will need to buy a DX ultra wide (money required in buckets!) Portraits taken with the 50mm f1.8 look great (they are not available for general review on Flickr as they are of my grandchildren) while one shot with the 300mm f4 demonstrates what can be done with this lens that is now an effective 450mm telephoto. I have not taken any macros with the 60mm f2.8 but am looking forward to that.

The other aspect I have not tested is bracketing shots for HDR. Each shot (up to 9!!!) requires a separate shutter release so a tripod is de rigeur and I did not feel like lugging my big tripod around with two grandchildren in tow as well! I seem to have forgotten where my smaller tripod has been stored.

The color definition of the CCD is excellent and I have lots of options to explore with the many settings available. This is just an early quick look report. A more detailed review will follow in a few weeks or months (there's a lot of exploring to do!)

Hello and Goodbye

2006-05-22T14:30:00.000Z

It is poignant that, to get to show you my new camera I have to take the picture with the one that will soon be going to a new home. In fact, it may well be the last shot I take with the excellent Fuji S7000, a camera that has served me well.

Now we can look forward to what the D200 can do!

Nikon D200 DSLR

2006-05-18T16:08:00.000Z

I'm keeping my fingers crossed as I think I have snagged a D200. These are like the proverbial "hens teeth" and are in very short supply. If all goes well, I'll have my hands on it on Monday!

Colin Gifford

2006-05-03T15:49:00.000Z

I just saw this and it reminded me that I have a copy of the photo essay book "Decline of Steam". A real classic.

Jessops and the Nikon D200

2006-04-30T19:06:00.000Z

Back on February 24 I ordered a Nikon D200. As reported in this post, the following Monday morning I received a call with the option to buy a D200 then and there. I deferred but said I was still interested. This weekend I asked about the status of my order. Turns out my expression of interest meant diddly squat and my order was removed from the waiting list. Guess what, Jessops, I won't be buying a new camera from you after all.

Whither HDR?

2006-04-25T11:11:00.000Z

After experimenting with High Dynamic Range (HDR) photography for a couple of weeks, the verdict is in. I like it! Photomatix is an excellent piece of software, simple to use but with enough room for experimenting without the complexity and learning curve of a Photoshop or Illustrator.

But I can't help but say that the extreme examples of HDR (my own included) seem to be favored over the more natural renderings (or, be be accurate, tone mappings). Judging by the comments on Flickr, my "Stormy Weather" has more appeal than a natural image such as "Dunscombe Cliff". I like both images but I much am more pleased with the natural result than the artificially induced storm.

And very few people seem to be using HDR for interior shots which is where the technique can really score. I have made a few interiors but the subject material isn't good enough to justify posting them. Perhaps this weekend when we are in Birmingham?

As the rain slashes against the window outside. . . .

2006-04-11T11:40:00.000Z

. . . I start thinking about new uses for HDR. When in Texas and other "sun-high-in-the-sky-at-midday" latitudes, there is a "rule" that says you should try to avoid taking photos in the middle of the day when the light is too bright. In other words, the dynamic range of film/sensor is too narrow to include all the highlights and shadows. Various techniques help, such as using a polarizing filter, but if possible it is usually best to wait a few hours or shoot earlier in the day.

Now we have HDR coming to the rescue. Potentially, because it would be hard to experiment with it today! Consider this a reminder for when the weather improves. . . .

Familiarity can make for a better photo

2006-04-09T16:07:00.000Z

When we spent most of our time in Houston there were a few places we would re-visit time and time again to photograph. Same subject, different seasons, different light, different ambiance. After a while we could look at the sky and think "it may be good down at the bayou in half an hour" or "thank god the humidity has gone, now's a good time for a sharp image with the 300mm".

The same thing is happening again. Recent photos of the East Devon Coast using HDR were visualized long before we got to the location. We simply knew what to expect and were not too disappointed.

Taking photos of the same subject over and over again may seem excessive (even though it is cheaper to do in the digital era) but a knowledge of the light, the angles, the subtle nuances really do create the opportunity for better results.

More HDR photos

2006-04-06T20:41:00.000Z

The HDR Flickr set is growing by the day. We've just spent a few days in East Devon and a number of HDR images were captured and processed. Not all have been uploaded but they will all be here. I am beginning to understand the variables in the tone mapping dialog box and in many cases I really prefer the simple "none of the tricks, all of the dynamics" approach. On the other hand, some hard tweaking can produce very interesting, if artificial, results.

HDR Test - a comparison

2006-03-31T13:51:00.000Z

Well, having said that HDR images should be judged on their own merit, I will now do the opposite and post two images, one the "normal" exposure of three images used to create a tone mapped HDR rendition. First the "normally" exposed image:

Next the HDR tone mapped image:

The photo was shot into the sun just after a rain shower. This gives a high dynamic range problem with highlights from the glistening roof tiles and lowlights in the sun's shadows. Even though the exposure bracketing on the Fuji S7000 only allows +1 and -1 exposures, this was enough to capture cloud texture and much of the shadow details. Take a look at the end of the roof gable (top left) and this shows just how much more detail is rendered using HDR. The shadowy areas of the courtyard are, by contrast, much brighter in the HDR image.

There are downsides. Wind was blowing the leaves around and there is evidence of this with multiple images of leaves visible on a high magnification view, particularly top right.

Photomatix & HDR

2006-03-31T09:09:00.000Z

After a week of trials I have decided to go for the Photomatix license. The first reasonable effort has been posted to Flickr but I am looking forward to taking a dedicated series of HDR photos soon.

HDR (High Dynamic Range) images look a little strange at first. The tendency is to want to compare the final product with the normally exposed image of the multiple images (in this case three) used to make the composite HDR image. But I think the better plan is to simply enjoy the HDR image for what it is - an interpretation by the photographer of what the photographer wants to convey to the viewer.

High Dynamic Range Imaging

2006-03-24T17:51:00.000Z

Flickr has introduced me to this technique, principally via the outstanding set of photos by Robert Silverwood.

At first glance these images seem a bit "out of whack". In truth, they are a bit "out of whack" but only because they present a different (but technically more honest) view of the subject seen through our eyes via that of the camera.

Slide film and digital sensors are particularly prone to having a limited dynamic range - the highlights are burned out while the lowlights are simply black shadows. Our eyes have gotten used to making up the difference between what we see and what the camera sees, but in truth we don't have that good a dynamic range built into our eyes anyway! Computers to the rescue. . . .

By making multiple exposures using the automatic bracketing capability in many digital and some film cameras (and manual cameras can provide the same exposures as well but need more effort) and then using appropriate image software, it is possible to blend the relevant pieces of a wider dynamic range into one image. I am currently evaluating Photomatix and am leaning toward paying the license ($99). But first I need to take some more challenging test photos and this weekend may give me that opportunity.

I will post some images when I am pleased enough with the results - watch this space!

B & H Photo D200 Review

2006-03-03T17:08:00.000Z

I received an e-mail from B&H Photo with a review of the Nikon D200. This is hard to find on their otherwise excellent website, so I am linking to it here.

Photographing Children

2006-03-01T16:42:00.000Z

In recent years there has been a lot of press and a lot of political talk about pedophilia. No doubt the disease is no more prevalent than it has ever been but today we are all a lot more conscious of it and its implications.

Yesterday I took my camera along to a children's indoor play area in Southam, Warwickshire. I was with my two grandchildren, my daughter and my wife. A family outing, you could say, and a natural event to want to record with a camera.

While taking photos of my grandchildren, my daughter thought out aloud "I wonder if photography is allowed in here?" I considered her question and initially thought little of it. But then it began to dawn on me that, under the present day pressures of life, it could have been very easy for someone to have made a complaint and for me to have become embarassed and defensive.

I continued to take photos of my grandchildren - and only my grandchildren - as I believed I had every right to do so. But somehow the experience felt less "wholesome" and I was half expecting a tap on my shoulder. So much so that later in the day, when we visited a park in nearby Leamington, I subconsciously left my camera in the car.

A phone call from Jessops. . . .

2006-02-27T14:02:00.000Z

The previous post details the situation with regard to obtaining a Nikon D200 DSLR. Three days after putting my name down on a 4-8 week waiting list I got a call this morning from Jessops in Birmingham. A D200 that had been ordered had come in and the buyer had decided not to proceed with the purchase. Would I like to take the opportunity to buy the camera?

Given the price and the timing I decided against it but kept my name on the list. The good things in life are worth waiting for!

Nikon D200 DSLR

2006-02-25T14:57:00.000Z

No, not yet! But I made another step toward thinking about it. While we were in Birmingham yesterday we went to Jessops of Cherry Street and in this (as April said) real camera store had a long chat with one of the knowledgeable salespersons.

Jessops sell their cameras for the same price as you can buy one on the internet. They also let you try it out before you buy. In the case of the D200 they are back ordered but when one comes in I will get a call and it will be delivered to the store in Birmingham for me to try out (taking lenses with me, etc.). If I then decide I really want a D200, I can buy it. They may not have one for about 2 months so we shall see.

When it comes to lenses, the D200 will multiply the effective focal length of everything I own by 1.5. So:

20mm f2.8 becomes 30mm f2.8 and therefore changes from an ultrawide to a not very wide angle lens;
50mm f 2 becomes 75mm f2 and therefore changes from standard to portrait;
60mm f2.8 MicroNikkor becomes 90mm f2.8 MicroNikkor and will be the better for it;
300mm f4 becomes 450mm f4 and will rock!

So the hole will appear at the ultra wide angle end and a 20/1.5 = 13mm lens would effectively replace the 20mm, except that it should not be a fish eye. Nikon's choices are somewhat limited but I am told that Sigma make a good wide angle zoom lens. Noting my "look" the salesperson offered me a demonstration using my own flash card - take a few pictures in the store, take the card home and process it in Photoshop - now that sounds like a good idea.

I also won't have a standard focal length lens except that I do have a 24-120mm Nikkor zoom. This lens is not particularly good (barrel distortion at the wide end, fuzziness at the long end) and I only use it for travel. It may make sense to buy one of the new specially designed for DSLR zooms.

So there we have it. Except we don't!

The Ultimate Way to Download and Save Digital Images

2006-02-15T15:06:00.000Z

I am going to state some obvious things here, but after going through a scare and thinking I had lost some digital images (which I hadn't, thank goodness) I have decided on a new system. It goes like this:

Download the images from the camera to a special folder on the desktop I have called "Temporary Images" (I am using OS X for the Mac, your terminology may vary).

Check that the images have indeed been downloaded. Only then consider erasing the images from the camera memory.

Upload the images to Flickr or a similar web-based photo storage site. You can code them "private" if you don't want people to see them.

Burn two CDs when the Temporary Images folder reaches a reasonable size (i.e. just under 700 MBytes) and store one at home, one somewhere else. Then empty the Temporary Images folder.

Now import the images into iPhoto or whatever image library software you may want to use on your computer.

That should cover just about every eventuality!

Except - what about the images you modify using iPhoto or Photoshop? Just make sure they get backed up along with the rest of your computer hard drive files. You do back up, don't you?

Sunsets are easy, Sunrises require a little effort!

2006-02-04T23:42:00.000Z

Google Earth and the Real Thing

2006-02-03T15:21:00.000Z

I am scanning a set of 1993 photos taken while working in northern Tunisia and the first one reminded me that I could check the locations of the photos on Google Earth.

Here is the photo:

Here is an oblique view of the same scene from Google Earth:

Most of northern Africa lacks vegetation and, if there are no sand dunes, the rock outcrops are extensive. Google Earth has the potential to be a great geological tool, allowing "armchair fieldwork". I have to admit, though, that the real thing is much to be preferred!

The Waiting Game

2006-02-02T18:54:00.000Z

Which is worse?

You switch on your digital camera (in my case a Fujifilm S7000) and wait for it to ready itself, then point and shoot on a moving subject. Some milliseconds later (actually many milliseconds later) the photo is taken. There is no guarantee that the subject is in the frame or that there is any composition. But. . . you quickly preview the image on the LCD and make a snap decision - keep or erase and shoot again. That is if you can!

You raise your film camera (Nikon F5) to your eye, frame a shot and click. The image you saw in the viewfinder should be what you will see on film. Except that it might not be exactly what you want - a blinking eye, a slight blur - and you won't see the image for a day or two. So you take several shots and hope one will be a keeper.

I am not really sure which is the worse situation as they both have serious limitations for knowing that the good shot you want has been captured.

Today I received back a box of slides that were taken at the same time as the Hatton Locks photos already posted on Flickr. I will now have to scan them and upload them. Which won't be just yet awhile. I think there are one or two keepers in the box!

Which is perhaps why I am so interested in a high end DSLR. Ultimately, the two options noted above will converge, at which time the simple convenience of digital will all but extinguish film. Just like transistors all but eliminated valve/tube stereos.

Choosing a new DSLR

2006-01-27T21:03:00.000Z

For about a year I have been thinking about replacing the all-film-but-you-can-scan Nikon F5 with a digital single lens reflex body. Of necessity the candidate must be able to accept my small stable of Nikkor lenses, which means that only Nikon and Fujifilm cameras will qualify for the initial cut.

I have been very pleased with my Fujifilm S7000 whch in many ways has proved to be much better than its predecessor, the Nikon Coolpix 950 (which died when some water was spilled on it). But that in itself is probably an unfair comparison. What if I were to spill some water on the S7000?

So I was thinking about the Fujifilm S3 Pro. In fact the sales representative at Jessops, Cherry Street, Birmingham all but convinced me that the S3 Pro would be ideal. We did discuss the then just announced Nikon D200 but, possibly because the camera was still vapor, it did not get a good sales pitch. His arguments were valid but perhaps, in hindsight, not all that relevant.

I say this because last night I e-mailed Ellis Vener in Florida. Ellis and I met several years ago at AZ Pro Lab in Houston (where we both lived at the time) after we had both posted on photo.net. Ellis is a professional protographer who makes a living with Nikons. His website speaks for itself. So what does Ellis think? Nikon D200 period.

Which means I have to wait a little longer. The D200 is back ordered everywhere and costs more than the S3 Pro.

Sigh, sigh, sigh.

Rolleiflex T - Buying and Using a Classic TLR

2006-01-24T10:14:00.000Z

Introduction

There was a time when the Rolleiflex twin lens reflex (TLR) camera was considered up there with the best cameras ever made. Many would still agree that the classic design, quality and durability of these cameras have stood the test of time. The original Rollei TLRs gave birth to the medium format single lens reflex cameras such as the Hasselblad that have also become classics. For there is something about the 6 cm (2-1/4") square negative 120 film format that in so many ways out-performs the 35mm format that superceded it. But now there's digital. . . .

When I could barely afford various 35mm cameras (in the 1960s and early 1970s) I craved for a Rolleiflex. In their day they were so cool - not that the word "cool" then meant what it means today! Two things prevented me from venturing into medium format: price of camera and price of film. Yes, I could have bought a Mamiya or other Japanese TLR but they were not that cheap. And the Chinese Seagull was not available then. But should I have done so, there would still be the cost of film, processing and printing to consider.

Which should not really be a put off (except when you don't have the funds) because in a way, the medium format approach is quite different from 35mm and even more different from digital. You actually take far fewer photos because you take more time on each one. This is partly because the system is fundamentally manual but also because you are aware of the cost of the process! Although I have never owned a large format camera I am aware that there the restrictions are even more pronounced with the result that even more time may be spent on perfecting the shot. This was Ansel Adams' approach and look where it got him!

Medium format remains a tour de force in photography for a number of reasons. First, the negatives and slides are so much bigger than 35mm that they can store a lot more detail. Even if cropped down to 35mm size, the resulting picture may be better than taken with an equivalent 35mm lens simply because there is less distortion in the center of a field of view than at the edges. Second, the format is dominated by cameras that require you to hold them lower down, more or less at waist level. This gives a different perspective on many subjects. As an aside, you can also hold the camera upside down above your head and use it like a periscope in crowds! Third, there is something "professional" about using a medium format camera. This might seem a little trite but wedding photographers who use medium format cameras can probably charge more than those who use 35mm. Digital and the need for instant gratification is changing all that but my experience is that wedding photogs who use medium format have always taken good photos whereas those who use 35mm have produced work that varies considerably from individual to individual.

Just how long film will remain available remains to be seen. Ultimately we can expect film to occupy a small niche rather like audiophiles and their insistence on using tube-driven amplifiers and analog recordings. Costs will rise but the quality of the photos should rise as well.

A Tour

Well, enough of the justification and rationale behind owning a Rollei TLR.

I found my Rollei in a second hand photo store in Houston, Texas. I was also able to pick up a few accessories at around the same time and these have proved to be as valuable as the camera. Rollei made special attachments for its cameras and items such as the tripod mount and lens hood are harder to come by than the cameras. Although I would have liked one of the last of the Rollei TLRs with one of the f2.8 lenses I had to settle for the Rolleiflex T model. Mine was introduced in 1958 and has the serial number T 2228321. It is fitted with an f3.5 75mm Carl Zeiss Tessar lens. The camera is designed to use 120 film (220 film is not an option) but could also take 35mm film with the necessary attachment. One final identifier: the logo on the top says "Rollei Honeywell" which means that it was specifically produced for the US market.

The accessories I bought included a new focusing screen (a vast improvement over the original), a lens hood and the pistol grip. I don't use the pistol grip but bought it because it is a cheaper way to obtain the Rolleifix tripod bracket that is very hard to come by on its own! A case of paying less to buy more. I was also hoping to use an old cable release but the thread on the camera shutter release is stripped - something I really need to attend to. Some Rolleflex Ts came with a light meter but these are quite likely to fail, so I was not too concerned about it and bought a second hand Sekonic Studio L-398 incident light meter that does an excellent job even though it is quite hard to learn to use.

Operating the Rolleiflex T takes some getting used to. There are two significant operating practices worthy of mention here.

The first, a universal problem with all reflex cameras, is that the image on the focusing screen moves in the opposite direction to what you would expect. This not only frustrates when panning but also when correcting for tilt. Placing the camera on a tripod means that this movement can be suppressed but even then the composition will be a mirror image of what you are taking and what you will see as a print. The viewfinder has a couple of neat aids. One is a flip up magnifying lens to help focus. The other is a "sports" finder that allows direct viewing of the subject; this is simply achieved by folding part of the lid down onto the focusing screen and using the finder at "eye-level".

The second quirk about the Rolleiflex T in particular is the fact that the exposure settings are governed by a single slider that accepts input as Exposure Values (EV). This concept is just about history today although it is still used behind the scenes in many fully automatic cameras. Once you understand the EV system it becomes second nature. The Sekonic light meter provides output in EVs, so whatever number is indicated can be selected on the camera and then the EV combination of shutter speed and aperture are set. Suppose we have EV12. This translates into 1/60 sec at f 8. It also means 1/125 sec at f 5.6 or 1/30 sec at f 11. So, having set the EV, it is a simple task to decide on whether shutter speed or depth of field issues need to dominate the actual choice of setting by rotating the combined shutter speed and aperture rings as one unit.

Loading and advancing the film is another area that needs some getting used to. The Rollei mechanism is a work of art and, I have been told, rarely fails. If it does, however, it may be impossibly expensive to repair - better to look for another second hand camera! Different Rolleiflexes have different loading procedures so I won't go into detail on this. Just make sure that you know which loading system applies to your camera! The crank is designed to calculate how far to advance the roll of film and seems to do this very accurately. The winding action not only advances the film, it also cocks the diaphragm shutter, so the only action between taking photos is a simple crank action. Not that you would probably need to but the fastest action might give about 1 frame every two seconds.

One tip about 120 film. Don't preload the film and advance it to the first frame, then put the camera away. This will place part of the second frame on a 90º bend and it is possible for that part of the frame to retain a "kink". Of course, this would also apply to a subsequent frame on the roll, so consider taking two frames of a potential "keeper", just in case!

What to Look For

When in the market for a used Rolleiflex, take a good look at the following:

1. Overall appearance - a sign of wear and tear and also any neglect. Is the leatherette still in place? Any knicks and scratches on the camera body? What about dust?

2. Lens - any problem with the taking lens - don't look further but walk away! Check for blemishes and scratches on the outer surface of the lens. Also check the inside rear surface though this should be well protected from most potential damage.

3. Shutter - test the shutter with the back open and fire off several "shots", checking that the leaves open and close the way they should and that the longer exposures seem to be accurate.

4. Other controls - make sure the focusing knob has the right feel - it should not be slack - and also check the exposure control rings.

5. The crank - the only way to test this properly is to load some film and shoot a roll. If you can buy the camera on approval, stipulating that it can be returned if it is not up to spec., this will allow a complete test of the mechanism to be made.

6. Flash synchronization - check that the flash works!

If the camera passes the test and you decide you like it - buy it! I seriously doubt you will be disappointed and remember, it should hold its value - after all, they haven't made one for years!

Look on the Back of Old Photos

2006-01-23T15:04:00.000Z

Many old family photos were taken by professionals and they usually advertised their business with a stamp on the back of the prints. Here is a good example from the family photo album. And on the back is some valuable information that would otherwise have been lost for ever:

Taken around 1937 on a pier. Obviously a British summer holiday! But where?

Turn the photo over and the rhyme says it all - Llandudno, North Wales!

Nikon F5 Review

2006-01-23T13:04:00.000Z

Hot on the heels of the F2 Review we go fast forward to the penultimate ultimate Nikon. Now that the F6 is out, the F5 can be obtained second hand for a very good price.

Summary

This camera body is built like a tank, but like a modern tank it's bristling with electronics and fully dependent on batteries. Probably the Rolls Royce of camera bodies.

Positives

Good ergonomics, fast reaction time, very wide range of attachments including backwards compatibility to older lenses. Flexible exposure controls.

Negatives

It's a heavy piece of equipment that is hard to hide from view in public places, particularly if the lens "looks" expensive.

Main Review

I've owned an F series camera since 1975, the first being an F2, the second the F5 which I bought in 1999. F Series cameras are built to last and they do. I seriously doubted that I needed to upgrade the 30+ year old F2 until I started to look into the F5's capabilities. Now I have basically relegated the F2 to my personal photography museum except when that camera's unique capabilities are needed (see the separate review).

The F5 works extremely well under almost all conditions except under water (without some sort of case, that is). I do not worry about it getting wet in heavy rain and have waded out to sea with it on a number of occasions. It has performed well in the desert of West Texas as well as in sub-zero temperatures in the UK. The key, of course, is to keep it clean and dry when subjecting it to damp and hostile conditions and I do not recommend changing lenses out in a thunderstorm. A good camera bag system is important in this respect.

The F5 has a fairly steep learning curve, partly because it has a lot of functions. But this should be said within the framework that the F5 is supposed to be used a lot, so once you start using it, the controls become easier to remember and utilize. I have to admit that there are numerous advanced features I rarely go near. But it's nice to know they exist.

The feel of a camera body is important for good composition and, when hand-held, for obtaining stable images. The F5 scores extremely well in this department, which is just as well, given its weight. The finger grip is remarkably tactile and seems to stick to your fingertips, allowing a "casual" approach to carrying the camera, so far without impunity. The viewfinder is basically 100% WYSIWYG and has excellent eyesight adjustment for those of us who wear glasses. This feature does mean, however, that my F5 cannot easily be used by others with markedly different eyesight "settings".

I use lithium batteries and generally get good use out of them, often twenty to thirty rolls of 36 exposure film even when using a 300mm telephoto with a lot of focusing. I have considered the rechargeable option but the cost of lithiums is easier on the pocket. I understand that rechargeable NiMH batteries don't have enough voltage to drive the F5.

Our current set of lenses that work with the F5 include a 20mm f2.8, a 50mm f1.8, a 60mm f2.8(macro), a 300mm f4 and one zoom, the 24-120mm f3.5-5.6. These are all autofocus lenses using the built in drive motor within the F5's body, coupled via a connection on the lens connector ring. This system is not as fast as the newer induction motors but even the 300mm f4 manages to stay in focus on panned action shots. This is one of the more impressive features of Nikon F5 technology.

Connecting a lens is simple and no different from connecting a lens to the much older F2 - one of the reasons for liking Nikons is their backwards compatibility. Once connected there is one thing to check, that the aperture ring is locked but there will be a visual reminder if it isn't so this is never a problem.

Loading film is also easy with an automatic take up that takes a little getting used to. The motor drive is very fast and relatively quiet. Shutter noise is higher than in a non-motor drive camera (such as the F2) but again it is rarely obtrusive in normal surroundings.

Exposure settings are fully flexible, from program through aperture and shutter priority to manual with metering. I usually use aperture priority but switching exposure modes is very easy. Likewise it is easy to modify an exposure setting to compensate for light or dark highlights. The exposure system is Nikon's own, using a database to recognize an image and select the exposure accordingly. This works most of the time but can let you down when shooting against the sun when it is worth adding some extra shots with exposure compensation.

Flash is fully automatic when used with an appropriate flashgun. I use an SB-28 and generally the results are good though sometimes there is under-exposure. This does not appear to be related to distance from flash (the obvious reason). Backlighting of the displays makes shooting in the dark easier but the F5 does not support the red focus assist feature of the SB-28.

The reason for owning an expensive camera body is more than simply ensuring that the film emulsion is in the right place to accept focused images, though that is an important starting point for discussion. The film path inside the F5 does its job well without scratching, etc. The fast rewind does not seem to introduce any bad effects (both abrasive and electrostatic). The lens mounting is metal and unlikely to wear out even with constant use.

As a stable platform for taking sharp photos, the F5 handles well. Its weight seems to help in this respect and it is far easier to maintain an even horizon with the F5 than with a smaller lighter camera (such as a pocket digital). The tripod mounting is in the right place though with larger lenses the on-lens bushing should be used. With a wide angle lens it is possible to obtain sharp hand held photos down to 1/20th of a second as long as the correct technique is followed.

The F5 excels in action photography, even without the latest induction motor lenses. Automatic focusing is not only accurate but the ability to pan a fast moving subject and keep it in focus is nothing short of amazing. The success rate in shooting photos of flying birds such as the brown pelican is quite amazing. The confidence this brings means that a lot less film is wasted in getting acceptable shots.

I cannot recommend this camera to a weekend snapshooting amateur, but to anyone who is serious about their photography, this camera or its lesser sibling the F100 is a serious contender for purchase by a professional or high throughput amateur.

Recommended

Yes, particularly if you are into serious film-based photography. Shop around for a bargain!

Nikon F2 Review

2006-01-23T09:53:00.000Z

This review was written some time ago but never published on focalplane.com.

Summary

A timeless camera body, still sought after by students of photography as an all round introduction to the artform.

Positives
Light, responsive and accurate with a relatively quiet shutter action. Has all the basics of a quality camera without too many bells and whistles. Not dependent upon batteries.

Negatives
Other than it's 30 years old (and all that that entails) there are no negatives (pardon the pun).

Main Review
This is a classic Nikon camera body. It works as well today as when I bought it new in 1975. But owning an F5 as well means I don't actually use it that much any more, except when I don't want to use the F5.

Well engineered, the F2 has a metal body that has withstood all manner of hard treatment over the years. I have used it for geological fieldwork in Indonesia and Tunisia (one place hot and humid, the other cold and dusty) and in the process it has rolled about on the floor of a jeep, been banged against cliffs while scrambling up an outcrop, dunked in a river and so on. It still works just as well as it did when I bought it in Singapore in 1975 (the shop has gone but the camera carries on!)

As someone once said, a camera body is simply a lightproof box that puts the right amount of light onto the film surface. For this to happen the shutter must work, the film plane must be flat and the lens mount must be accurately positioned with respect to the film surface. The F2 provides all this and more.

The film advance is manual and film loading and rewind are also accomplished using simple levers and cranks. Accessory winders are available on the second hand market if that is needed.

The shutter is a metal focal plane device that offers speeds up to 1/2000 of a second and, in conjunction with the self timer, accurate exposures up to 10 seconds can be achieved. Longer exposures are easy using the B setting (easier than on an F5 for really long exposures as there is no battery to drain!). The shutter release accomodates a unique shutter release cable (a possible drawback as this may be hard to find today).

An aperture preview button is available to stop down for checking depth of field. A lever associated with the preview button provides a mirror lock device (a feature lacking on many modern SLRs).

The lens release button is located by the lens mounting ring. The F2 takes just about any Nikkor lens ever made (there may be a few that don't work but they are very few!) though the non-autofocus lenses work best as their focusing rings tend to have a more manual feel. Lens mounting and dismounting is easy and straightforward.

My camera has a Photomic DP-12 pentaprism light meter. This is powered by two small batteries that last a long time (but I still carry spares!) and is the only part of the camera that requires battery power. The head is completely removable for changing out focuing screens as well as general cleaning. The meter is still accurate today. Aperture and shutter speed are visible in the viewfinder, along with + and - indicators for setting the correct exposure using a combination of shutter speed selector and aperture ring on the lens. The viewfinder gives nearly 100% of the actual film area.

The feel and use of the F2 is classic 1970s. That is to say it is not particularly ergonomic but the controls seem to be in the right place. This applies to portrait as well as landscape orientation. With a period (metal) lens and the DP-12 the cameras weighs in at around 2.5 lbs (over a kilo) which is quite heavy for what is a compact SLR camera. Put this down to the metal construction. It seems to help in holding the camera steady and straight.

The F2 can take excellent photos - it is a perfect tool for an aspiring photographer (student, semi-pro, etc.) who wants to learn photography from basics.

Recommended

Yes, if you can find one that has been cared for and doesn't cost too much. It may even be a collector's item!

Photoshop for the Clueless

2006-01-22T22:51:00.000Z

A great post on the Pete Ashton blog. So much better than "________ for Dummies"! As many Photoshop users will agree, there are two ways to 'shop a photo, one using the manual (where is it?) the other using a trial and error method (thank goodness for the undo button!).

The section on using the "Channel Mixer" reminded me to use this technique in going from color to B&W. Subtle control that is simply missing in the one-step "color -> greyscale operation".

The section on the oddly named "Unsharp Mask" filter has suggested a future project of making a simple matrix table of results from tweaking the variables on a typical image so that a default setting could be chosen based on how it looks, comparitively. Otherwise, Unsharp Mask always seems to be a bit hit and miss. So, we have some projects!

Photoshop Phun

2006-01-22T20:18:00.000Z

We were out with the cameras today, visiting the Hatton Locks on the Grand Union Canal. Affectionately known as the "staircase to heaven", 21 locks raise the canal over 140 feet up toward the Birmingham "plateau". Here is one of the images captured with the Fuji S7000:

Which shows the situation - misty morning but the sun was up there somewhere. I like the way the distance disappears into the mist, so this is a keeper for me. But could it be improved upon? Canal scenes always seem to look good in "Victorian" black and white, so I loaded the file into Photoshop, desaturated to greyscale and selected the brightness/contrast tool to produce this extreme result which I rather like:

But I suppose the question is, "would you like the modified result without seeing the original?" and to be honest I think you do need to see the original in this case. Which means it doesn't quite work the way it should.

What is the Focalplane Fotoblog?

2006-01-21T22:13:00.000Z

Surprisingly, it's about photography, but don't expect a gallery of photographs here. We already have Flickr and the Focalplane Galleries and Travelogues at Focalplane Hub.

Basically, this is a discusion blog about photography. Equipment, processing, publishing, printing, framing, etc. No special expertise will be presented, rather a diary of experiences and a forum for sharing "how it's done". Or, perhaps, how it might be done better!

So there will be an odd photo or two, but these will be to illustrate a point, demonstrate a process and so on.