Anthony On Photography

S5 Pro Shooting Settings: A Primer

2007-07-03T16:56:00.000-07:00

Many of us S5 Pro owners have used other Fujifilm cameras like the S1 Pro or S2 Pro. Still others have come to the S5 Pro after being dissatisfied with the work required with other cameras to produce images that seem to come much more easily with Fujifilm SLRs.

However, the S5 Pro is really unlike other Fujifilm SLRs, including the S3 Pro. To assist other users with how to set up and use the S5 Pro, I have prepared this small summary. It's not meant to be all-inclusive or comprehensive by any means, but hopefully it will help people decide how best to set their cameras.

Shooting settings on the S5 Pro are accessible by pushing the "Menu/OK" button on the back of the camera.

**Film Settings:
STD = standard camera performance without film simulations
F1 = negative film setting, more DR
F1a = negative film with more saturation
F1b = negative film, designed for skin tones
F1c = negative film setting, with more sharpness

F2 = Fujichrome. This gives a more slide-film like "snap" and saturated color to images. Some have likened it to being akin to a digital Velvia. I wouldn't recommend this for skintones, but your tastes may vary.

Note: when shooting RAW at 400% dynamic range, Hyper-Utilities will give you options that track with the above settings, but with different names. F1 = pro negative, F1a = F3a, F1b = F3b, etc.

**Dynamic Range Settings:

Auto DR is where the camera chooses the dynamic range. However, this is at the expense of camera speed. The camera will work as though you set the dynamic range at 400%, even if the camera ultimately only decides to output a jpeg at 100% DR.

400% Dynamic range or W2 DR gives you the most dynamic range, but at a price--the camera will be slower (i.e. your frames per second drops from 3 fps to 1.5 fps). Another issue: using 400% when you don't need it will give you duller looking images. Thus, users should either select the DR setting they want or use auto DR, rather than always leaving the camera on 400% DR.

Other settings for DR are 100% (standard), 130%, 170%, 230% (W1), and 300%.

In practice, again, users should avoid just leaving the camera on 400% DR. Auto DR is an excellent choice, but it slows the camera down. 100% works well in many situations, particularly when lighting can be controlled or does not have an excessive range. Thus, indoors, flash shooting indoors, on cloudy days or in a studio setting, 100% is the way to go.

**Color

This setting affects "color density" which I think most of us would call color saturation. Most S5 Pro users want usable jpegs, and setting the camera here is critical.

ORG--the manual doesn't recommend this for out of camera jpegs for viewing/printing, but I disagree. This setting avoids getting overly saturated images.

MEDIUM LOW--more saturated than ORG.

STD--the supposed standard setting, but in actual practice tends to produce skintones that can be too red / too saturated for some tastes.

MEDIUM HIGH and HIGH give even more saturation; I would suggest that these make more sense for landscape shooting or for specific effects.

Generally, ORG or Medium-Low are good for skin tones, I think.

**Tone

This setting is for contrast. Unlike the old S2 Pro, using ORG here is not a good choice, resulting in duller looking images. The manual doesn't recommend ORG either, unless you plan on post-processing.

I like Medium-Soft and STD tone best; the other settings Medium-Hard and Hard are too strong for my tastes.

This is a big switch IMHO from the S2 and S3 Pro where ORG tone was the preferred setting for most people!

**Sharpness

Use OFF if you plan on post-processing, but for out of camera jpegs, STD is plenty. Hard is best for high-contrast images like text. Medium-soft can help with portraits, so you don't see every pore, hair, and skin imperfection.

**Color Space

Your choices here are sRGB and Adobe RGB. If you know what you're doing, Adobe RGB is good. But if you aren't sure, stick with sRGB. sRGB is pretty much standard on many devices, including printers and you'll still get good looking images choosing sRGB. Using Adobe RGB when you haven't set your system and printer up for it is a recipe for mismatched color.

**ISO

ISO 100 is the lowest setting, and the least sensitive setting. Higher ISOs are more sensitive, but you run the risk of more noise in your images as you get closer to 3200, the maximum setting. See Noise Reduction about how to reduce noise.

**White Balance

Auto White-the camera sets the white balance in the image. Users report that they should "fine tune" the white balance in auto to get best results. See WB Fine Tune. The other settings include incandescent, 5 fluorescent settings, fine weather (sunshine/daylight), flash, shade, a specific color temperature in degress Kelvin, and up to 5 custom preset white balances.

**WB Fine Tune

You can adjust the color bias of your White Balance. I like a -1, -1 adjustment here, which helps to control overly red/magenta skintones. Your mileage may vary, obviously.

**Quality

RAW = data off the sensor. Remember also that you have an option here of 100% DR or 400% DR

RAW+jpeg = as the name implies, you get a jpeg file too, in addition to a RAW file.

Jpeg fine and jpeg normal. Fine = least compression highest quality, but normal gives you more images on your memory card.

With RAW, you *must* convert and post process the RAW file, in Finepix Studio or Hyper Utilities or some other utility like Photoshop CS3. And to get film options in Hyper Utilities, you have to shoot at 400% DR in RAW.

**Recording Pixels

This determines the size of your image in pixels, how large you can print without artifacts, and how big your files will be. L = 12 megapixels, M = 6 megapixels, S = 3.5 megapixels. The more megapixels, the bigger your can print, but your file sizes will be bigger. Generally, 6 megapixels is plenty, but if you plan on cropping or making huge enlargements, go for 12 megapixels.

Don't confuse megapixels with megabytes. In other words, don't expect a 6 megabyte size file from a 6 megapixel setting. It's normal to get around a 3 to 4 megabyte jpeg file at 6 megapixels.

**Noise Reduction

Two simple settings here: ORG and STD. ORG is a low-level of noise reduction and STD is a higher level. Generally ORG is pretty good for most situations, but at higher ISOs you may want STD noise reduction. Some people find the noise reduction to be too intrusive (smoothing/loss of detail/pattern noise/grain), and if this is the case for you, try ORG instead.

Dynamic Range Torture Test

2007-04-01T14:42:00.000-07:00

One of the interesting features of the S5 Pro is the expanded dynamic range feature. But, does it really make a difference that can be seen? I came up with the scenario that I might typically use--photographing someone inside a car without a flash, while hoping to keep as much of the detail outside the car windows. This would be roughly equivalent to photographing someone inside a house against a window and wanting to keep the outside scene through the window visible.

Now, normally what I would do is meter for the exterior, adjust the camera to ensure the shutter speed is at or slower than sync speed, and use a flash. This keeps the dynamic range within what a camera can handle. However, sometimes I don't want to use a flash or a flash will ruin the look I want.

Sadly, I didn't have a model handy for this torture test, but maybe in a few weeks...

So, here's the overall layout. It's a black interior of my auto on a sunny day. In the background is a neighbor's house. This shot was taken with the S5 Pro at the 400% DR setting, manual exposure at 1/15 and f/11 at ISO200. The meter actually recommended (correctly) 1/60 at f/11, but I deliberately set the shot at 1/15 to match what the D50 meter recommended for the D50 and to pick up more detail of the interior of the car:

Now, here's how three cameras, the D50, the D200, and the S5 Pro compare. These are 100% crops, which is why the D200 has a "zoomed" image look to it. All three cameras were at 1/15 and f/11 at ISO 200. Notice how the S5 Pro retains not only details from the tree in the background, but also shows a branch just outside the car window, in front of the roof. You'll probably have to click on the image to see the full-size comparison.

When I can get a real human to pose in the car, I'll redo this torture test. But in the meantime, be aware that the DR feature of the S5 Pro is real and it can make the difference between a white fluffy cloud and just a white blob in the sky.

Initial Review of the Fujifilm S5 Pro

2007-04-01T10:52:00.000-07:00

I finally have had enough time to sit down with a human and take some photos with the Fujifilm S5 Pro and make a real comparison with my other main camera, the Nikon D200. Lots of people have been wondering:

1) Which camera is better, the S5 Pro or the D200?
2) Are 6 megapixels enough or does the higher resolution of the D200 carry the day?
3) Is the dynamic range feature of the S5 Pro a real feature or just a gimmick?
4) Is the S5 Pro significantly slower than the D200, enough to make a difference in getting a photograph or not?

So, I'll try to answer some of these questions with this mini, initial review.

First off, handling the cameras and working with both of them, the first thing to notice is that both cameras use essentially the same body, that of the Nikon D200. If you pick up each camera, you can't detect any differences in how each camera feels in the hand. If you like the feel of the D200, you'll like the feel of the S5 Pro (and vice versa).

Fujifilm has modified some of the button layouts on the back of the camera compared with the D200. Perhaps the most significant of these is the "face detection" button on the lower left corner of the S5 Pro, which allows the photographer to magnify images to check focus and exposure on faces in the photographs. Note that face detection only works after the image has been taken. Unlike point and shoot cameras with face detection technology, an SLR camera cannot yet use face detection before the photo is taken because of the current SLR designs which use a mirror and pentaprism to deliver a live image to the eye-level viewfinder.
By comparison, point and shoots use the actual imaging sensor to deliver their images to an LCD, allowing the face detection software to work on a live image.

It's too bad that Fujifilm has gotten away from their very good design for menu controls used in the S1 Pro, S2 Pro, and S3 Pro cameras. The old 4-button controller under the LCD icon is superior in my opinion to the Nikon button layouts and nested menus, as it allowed quick access to the most used settings without a lot of layered menus. For the S5 Pro, Fujifilm has created a TWO nested menus controlled by different buttons. Pushing the button labeled "menu/ok" leads to a shooting menu of three tabs; pushing the button labeled "setup" leads to a two tab menu for camera setup. Worse yet, Fujifilm has a line here labeled "Shooting" which has options not found in the shooting menu.

Example: to set the amount of time the self-timer should delay, that's in the "Setup" menu under "Shooting." The "Shooting Menu" under the "Menu/OK" button doesn't have a way to change the self-timer delay.

The menus themselves are clear and easy enough to understand, but the menu system itself has the feel of a kludgy, no-thought-went-into-this system. After the previous Fujifilm cameras with their easier system, Fujifilm users deserve better.

Another gripe, this time related to the use of the D200 body: the switch to control the AF/manual focus system is positioned in such a way that it's possible to accidentally take the S5 Pro (or D200) off autofocus when holding the lens when zooming/focusing. I've done it myself with the D200, and I've learned to avoid it, but new users may run into this.

The rest of the camera and controls are pretty much straightforward. Formatting memory cards requires that two widely spaced buttons be pushed twice, just like on Nikon dSLRs. The LCD is big, bright, and clear. The compact flash door opens right into the users hand, which takes a bit of getting used to. I like the older system of the earlier Fujifilm SLRs, which had a flip down door on the back, but the D200 design requires Fujifilm to use the side system. The S5 Pro only takes 1 compact flash card at a time; no longer can Fujifilm users have two memory slots at their disposal.

The use of the D200 design means that the S5 Pro now takes a dedicated lithium battery. It's identical to the D200 battery, but it's not interchangeable with the D200 battery. The Fujifilm NP-150 battery won't work in the D200, and the EN-EL3e of the D200 won't work in the S5 Pro, although they are of identical form factor, voltage, and capacity. Battery life is excellent for the Fujifilm NP-150, and I was easily able to get the 300 advertised images with a fully charged battery, with a lot of "chimping" (viewing) of the LCD after the images were taken. The battery will hold a charge for a long time, an advantage over the old AA system of the S1,S2, and S3 Pro cameras.

For those who want to use AA's, the D200 battery grip will fit onto the S5 Pro. However, if you want to use the proprietary lithim batteries, you will need to buy the Fujifilm version to use the battery grip.

One important improvement of the S5 Pro over older Fujifilms is the incorporation of i-TTL, Nikon's state-of-the art flash system known as the Creative Lighting System. This system fires a quick preflash to judge exposure, then fires the actual flash for the photo. The preflash occurs before the mirror flips up, but the quick return mirror keeps the preflash delay to a minimum, unlike the older D70, where the preflash was distinctive enough to cause some subjects to blink during the main flash.

In actual shooting, the S5 Pro behaves pretty much like a Nikon D200 with a Fujifilm wide dynamic range sensor inside. That means great color, great out of camera jpegs, good focusing even in dim light, and good flash exposures. However, it also means that the camera will be slower in some settings and won't be able to take as many burst shots as the D200. The D200 can shoot at up to 5 frames per second; the S5 Pro manages 3 frames per second in regular dynamic range and 1.5 frames per second in wide dynamic range settings. Putting the camera on auto DR will also slow the camera down to 1.5 fps. Likewise, RAW shooting with wide DR setting will reduce the buffer depth down to 7 or 8 shots before the camera stops to write. As images clear the buffer, the camera will unlock and allow images to be taken again. Expect a wait of up to 20 seconds before the camera flushes the first RAW image out of the buffer. Users who don't shoot RAW or don't shoot big bursts are unlikely to find the camera to be slow. For sports shooting, the S5 Pro is acceptable, but the 5 fps of the D200 may make that camera more suitable for some types of sports shooting.

The S5 Pro is missing a few features compared to the D200. Missing features include the built-in intervalometer, the 30 second mirror lockup shutter release (this appears to need a firmware fix), and the great menu banks of the D200. This latter feature is a big loss; apparently Fujifilm feels that their film simulation modes make up for the loss of custom menu banks.

So, which camera is better? That will depend upon your style of shooting and your needs. That said, there's no question in my mind that the S5 Pro has much better image quality, especially at ISOs above ISO 400, where the D200 is very noisy. Color is more pleasing to my eye from the Fujifilm, and Fujifilm skintones are legendary. It doesn't take a lot of work to get great color from this camera. However, there is a cost in speed. The dynamic range feature will slow the camera down, which can make the camera less practical for some users.

As for resolution, there's no practical difference as the images below will show. At this level, the biggest variables are going to be the skill of the photographer and the quality of the lens used. Some stock companies have megapixel requirements which may push the S5 Pro out of contention, but otherwise, I wouldn't fixate on the 10 mp vs. 6mp debate with the S5 Pro. A 6mp image from the S5 Pro is very high quality and holds its own against a 10mp image from the D200, at least in jpeg. RAW comparisons will have to wait until the release of the HyperUtilities 3 in the U.S.

The dynamic range feature of the S5 Pro is real and practical. It's not a gimmick. But it means you'll get bigger RAW files and slower in-camera processing and fps numbers.

The S5 Pro is quick enough for most applications, although some sport shooters should probably look elsewhere for a digital SLR solution.

Now, on to the images...

Here's a shot of model Isis, taken with the S5 Pro and the D200, daylight WB, 1/125 at f/8 with the same lens, with out of camera jpeg output. The D200 was set to custom imaging, with minus tone comp, medium high sharpening, color mode I, sRGB, +3 hue. These settings are my own for getting decent skin tones out of the D200. The S5 Pro was shot in F1c color mode, which is designed for portraits with higher than default sharpening.

Next are 100% crops from these two photos. You can see that there's little difference in resolution between the two cameras, and that the variable is likely to be the photographer, not the camera.

This is obviously just an initial review. As Fujifilm releases its RAW software, I will update this review and take more photos.

The bottom line? The S5 Pro is fully capable of taking fantastic photos, and Fujfilm users finally have a camera body worthy of the very good sensor inside. There's a few rough edges that Fujifilm has to fix, like the menu system, but nevertheless, there's no denying that great Fujifilm color, which is subtle but very pleasing to the eye.

Why Did Fujifilm Do This?

2007-01-28T11:34:00.000-08:00

The upcoming Fujifilm S5 Pro is due to be released around the end of January 2007. Based on the D200 body, it uses a D200 battery--sort of. Instead, Fujifilm engineered the camera so that it will only work with the Fujifilm version of the D200 battery. Nikon calls their battery the EN-EL3e, while Fujifilm calls their battery the NP-150. Both are 7.4 volts and 1500 mAh batteries.

Physically, the batteries almost identical. Take a look:

As you can see, the batteries look virtually identical, with the exception of the shorter notch on the Fujifilm version of the battery. I have to wonder whether or not there's a switch in the Fujifilm S5 Pro that can sense whether the notch is there; if so, that may be the key difference between the batteries and not the internal chip of the battery. Probably one of hte first things I'll do will be to inspect the battery compartment of the S5 Pro.

So why did Fujifilm do this? Apparently, it was just to get some battery sales--a lousy reason. Many potential Fujifilm S5 Pro buyers are already users of the Nikon D200 and battery compatibility would have been a great impetus for D200 users to get an S5 Pro as a second camera. It's not known if the Fujifilm battery will work in the D200. A check of my D200 compartment shows no switch there to correspond to the notch, so it's possible, unless the difference is the internal battery chip.

Another question relates to AA compatibility. Previous Fujifilm SLR cameras used AA batteries for power, a source of both praise and damnation. Some users like the ease of availability and affordability of AAs while critics disliked the shorter life of AAs compared to lithium ion batteries.

The answer here is that the S5 Pro is the first Fujifilm digital SLR to be based on a true digital SLR, while prior Fujifilm SLRs were based upon film cameras. The S1 Pro was based on the film Nikon N60, while the S2 Pro and S3 Pro were based on the Nikon N80 film body. As a result, Fujifilm grafted the digital capture portion of the camera onto the film body, creating what some critics called a "Frankencamera." In doing so, Fujifilm used AA's as the power source, rather than develop a lithium ion battery pack.

For the S5 Pro, the use of an existing digital body, the D200, meant that Fujifilm had to keep the same power system to power the camera--but with the twist that only a Fujifilm battery would work. It's possible that a firmware fix or firmware hack might change this, but users shouldn't have to resort to this. Fujifilm should ensure compatibility between the battery systems, thus encouraging users to buy and use the S5 Pro in addition to the D200. Of course, Nikon might not like the idea of potention D200 buyers going for Fujifilm, so the battery issue actually helps Nikon.

Your Card Reader Makes a Difference

2007-01-27T22:43:00.000-08:00

Most of us upload images from our memory cards to a computer via a USB card reader. However, the speed of that upload is greatly affected not only by the card speed, but also by the reader!

First, USB 2.0 comes in different "flavors." USB 2.0 "full-speed" is the same as the old USB 1.1 standard, 12 megabits per second. USB 2.0 "high-speed" is theoretically much faster, at 480 megabits per second. In actual practice, there's some overhead so that speed is never actually reached.

Most people buy a card reader labeled USB 2.0 and a fast card--never realizing that there's big differences in USB 2.0 card readers.

I did some timings myself today and was surprised. I used two different Sandisk card readers, the Sandisk 8 in 1 card USB 2.0 card reader and the Sandisk Extreme USB 2.0 card reader.

The Sandisk 8 in 1 USB 2.0 card reader and Extreme USB 2.0 reader. Both are "high-speed."

Both readers are supposed to be USB 2.0 high speed. To test, I moved files from a couple of compact flash cards to my Dell Inspiron notebook via the USB 2.0 port on the computer. The results were...well, stunning.

Test One: 236 megabytes from Sandisk Ultra II 256MB card
Sandisk 8 in 1: 1 minute, 49 seconds
Sandisk Extreme: 24 seconds

Test Two: 1.48 gigabytes from a Kingston Elite Pro 50x 2GB card
Sandisk 8 in 1: 11 minutes, 52 seconds
Sandisk Extreme: 3 minutes, 58 seconds

In other words, although both card readers are USB 2.0 High Speed, one card reader is about 4 times faster than the other.

So, if you've ever wondered if your card reader is slowing you down, now you know. Your card reader makes a difference.

Nikon to Release D40...Apparently!

2006-11-04T20:13:00.000-08:00

Thanks to a huge error by a German department store, specifications for a new Nikon camera, called the D40, were released to the public prematurely. The new camera is scheduled for release in December, apparently as a replacement for the Nikon D50.

So, what are the specs?

Here you go:

6.1 megapixel sensor--identical to the Nikon D50 and D70s.
No optical stabilization; no vibrating sensor to fight dust.
Most importantly: No autofocus motor built into the camera. Only lenses with a built-in motor will work with this camera. That's Nikon AF-S lenses and Sigma HSM lenses. Other autofocus lenses will only work in manual.
Fewer autofocus sensors--only 3, instead of the D50's 5 sensors.
The camera will use a significantly smaller and lighter body than the D50, and the battery will be the EN-EL9, instead of the higher capacity EN-EL3 of the D50.
SD memory, of course.
Flash sync: 1/500, with i-TTL.
Metering: 420 segmented matrix metering

One last thing: Nikon expects to introduce a new entry level AF-S lens, the 18-55 AF-S f/3.5-5.6 lens, as the "kit lens."

Unusually Useful Software for Photographers

2006-10-18T22:38:00.000-07:00

Have you ever wondered how a photographer managed to make that spectacular shot? Or have you ever wondered whether an image you saw online was processed in Adobe Photoshop using Adobe Camera Raw, instead of being shot in jpeg? Well, a truly useful piece of software is Opanda's iExif viewer. With iExif, you can right-click on the image in question, select iExif from the drop down menu and instantly view all the available EXIF data stored within the image itself, including things like shutter speed, aperture, white balance settings, flash usage, metering modes, and even lens focal length. Best of all, iEXIF is FREE. That's right, FREE. Here's the link: http://www.opanda.com/en/iexif/index.html

Now for printing, I swear by Qimage. It's designed for printing, not image editing. So, you can print proofs, contact sheets, pre-set sizes, and a whole lot more. You can change background printing colors, add text to photos, or even put the file name on each print. Qimage can be found here: http://www.ddisoftware.com/qimage/ Unfortunately, it's not free, but upgrades are free for as long as ddisoftware sticks around.

Finally, one of the most useful tools is a file viewer. Camera companies love to ensure that they use proprietary file formats. As a result, if you're a Canon user, you can't see Nikon NEF files (or vice-versa) without using an expensive program like Photoshop---unless you use a free third-party file viewer, like Irfanview. This viewer is fantastic, because you can see Nikon NEF's, Canon CR2, Pentax PEF, Fujifilm RAF, Adobe DNG, Olympus ORF, and even Sigma's raw format. More than that, Irfanview also reads JPEG2000 files, a host of audio files like ogg vorbis, MP3, ASF, and others. Best of all, Irfanview is also FREE. Here's that link: http://www.irfanview.com/

So, check out these software options, and I'll bet you find them useful too in your work.

Image Quality versus Megapixels

2006-10-13T19:00:00.000-07:00

With Photokina safely behind us, it's time to evaluate where the industry is going. We really have seemed to hit a line in the megapixel wars, with no magical increases in megapixels. The Nikon D2xs is probably about as big as an APS sized sensor is likely to get at 12.4 megapixels, while Canon's 1Ds Mark II tops out at 16.7 megapixels on a 35mm frame-sized sensor.

Realistically, anything more than these numbers and issues like diffraction take away from image quality.

Not too surprisingly, Fujifilm is going in a totally different direction--their proposed S5pro, the successor to the S3pro, remains with a 6 megapixel imager that has 12 megapixels of sensors. Fujifilm did not up their megapixel counts as many had hoped.

Why? Fujifilm claims that it has chosen to focus on image quality as paramount--low noise images with lots of dynamic range.

Is Fujifilm right? Well,I'd say it's safe to say that Fujifilm is betting the company on it.

Nikon to Release a New Digital SLR

2006-07-20T21:56:00.000-07:00

Today, Nikon began a series of teasers in preparation for annoucing a new camera 20 days from now. Very little can be inferred from the teaser issued today, other than the promise of a more compact 10.2 megapixel SLR with more power, control, excitement, and versatility (than what, I wonder?).

Here's what little can be inferred from today's teaser:

The camera appears to have two control wheels, one in the front and one in the rear. Nikon's 1 control wheel cameras are always in the rear, so the rear control wheel can be inferred.
The controls appear to be more D200-like than D70 like, if the location of the "format" button is any clue.
It look like there's a pop-up flash, given the line on the pentaprism.
The pentaprism does not look like any current Nikon digital SLR, and in fact, it reminds me of the original Fujifilm S1pro which was based on the Nikon N60.
The signature "red rubber" in the grip is like the D50, D70 and D200.
It'll be 10.2 megapixels.

Undoubtedly, more details will be forthcoming over the next 20 days. Here's the link to the teaser: http://nikonimaging.com/global/

Upgraded Computer Processors for the Digital Darkroom

2006-07-15T15:31:00.000-07:00

July 27, 2006, will be an important day for people engaged in digital photography. That's because Intel will be introducing its latest generation of computer CPUs, the Intel Core Duo 2. The Core Duo 2 is a CPU with two internal processors--all on a one-socket chip. It's like having two computers on 1 chip. It means that a user can do things like burn a DVD while running something else in Photoshop simultaneously--without a speed impact. These chips promise incredible speed at prices which will be within the reach of even a modest digital photographer.

Those who have been following the world of computer processors know that for the last couple of years, Intel has been playing second fiddle to AMD. With its superior dual core FX-60 and FX-62 chips, AMD has made tremendous inroads into Intel's markets.

But now, with the introduction of the Core Duo 2, Intel has leapfrogged AMD. In testing by PC Magazine, modest Core Duo 2 systems perform as well as or better than Intel Extreme Edition Pentium 4's, despite having significantly slower clock speeds. Moreover, the Core Duo uses far less power to accomplish its tasks. This means that the Core Duo is a supremely efficient chip.

For the digital photographer, the dual processor core means that processes like running Photoshop filters can be accomplished in far less time. And programs optimized to work with dual cores will take advantage of the processing power.

More importantly for Intel, the Core Duo 2 puts them on a path to the future. The chip will be 64-bit compatible. Pretty much all of Intel's future chips will use the Core Duo 2 architecture. And there won't be any more Pentium chip!

Shocking though is performance even in modest Core Duo 2 CPU's. Check out this test of a *student* system which sells for $ 899.00 without a monitor: http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1895,1988081,00.asp

This system rivals systems costing far, far more--and it's all because the Core Duo 2 CPU truly appears to be a revolution.

So, on July 27th, get in line and check out the latest revolution in computer processors. It can only make your post processing faster!

What's Important to You?

2006-05-29T16:48:00.000-07:00

I spent a good part of May 2006 traveling, so my blog languished in the meantime. I took both my D200 and my S2pro with me whilst I traveled through Peru, and I had a very good time.

When I left the United States, if anyone had asked me what the most valuable thing I carried with me was, I probably would have named a lens or perhaps my D200 camera body. However, as the trip progressed, the cameras and lenses became less valuable to me. No, not because they got damaged or destroyed, but because something else became even more valuable than those items--something I would not have expected.

I first realized this when another traveler told me that she couldn't take any more photos because her memory card was full. I offered her one of my compact flash cards and she accepted it--and it allowed her to keep taking photos.

So by the time my trip was nearing its end, I began running out of high-capacity cards. And that's when it occurred to me that the most valuable things I had were my memory cards, both blank ones for taking photos and particularly the filled memory cards with once in a lifetime photos. By the end of the trip, I would gladly have sacrificed my cameras to save the memory cards.

When traveling, some photographers will use a backup device to clear cards. These devices can cost hundreds of dollars. While a backup device is good, I think it's cheaper and more efficient to simply carry more high-capacity cards. These days, a decent 2 gig card runs around $75 on sale, so carrying plenty of memory is easier than trying to backup 1 card repeatedly while on the road with questionable power sources.

So what's important to you when you're on vacation, photographically speaking? These days, memory cards are the same as negatives. It's your memory cards that magically gain in value on every trip.

Turn Down Your Flash Power!

2006-03-30T20:22:00.000-08:00

Last night, I was in a dark nightclub, so I was taking my photographs using a flash inserted into my digital SLR flash hotshoe. I was working with another photographer who was using a Canon Digital Rebel, while I was armed with my Nikon D200.

It was interesting to compare the entry-level Canon with my D200, because the entry-level Canon is missing a bunch of features which actually make it harder to do more than take snapshots--no flash exposure compensation, no rear curtain sync are two things that I immediately discovered upon playing with his camera. Even the Nikon D50 has flash exposure comp and rear curtain sync. Canon sort of added features to the Rebel XT, but the flash exposure comp is buried in a menu.

Getting back to shooting in the nightclub, so anyway, I started off taking photos using the default flash exposure settings, but I noticed that I was getting pictures that clearly appeared to be "flash" exposures with bright highlights, hard shadows, and skin that was too light.

Luckily for me, the D200 has a setting on the camera body to lower the flash power, which I did, by a -0.7 to 1.0 stop lower. The results changed the character of the photo--from harsh flash photos, I now had photos with the look of much more natural lighting. The lower flash power setting also allows more of the ambient light to be seen, as it's not washed out by the overwhelming flash at the default setting.

And when shooting fill flash in daylight, turning down the flash power is important too, or your shots won't come out right. I think daylight fill should look more natural, so that it's hard to tell a flash was used.

Another trick I did last night was to use a slower shutter speed and rear curtain sync. This allowed me to get some cool images of people dancing and showing movement, yet they're frozen by the flash that goes off when the rear shutter curtain begins closing.

But I digress--the point I want to make is that all too often, it's easy to just accept the camera defaults on exposures or flash power, with a result that looks artificial, amateurish, or contrived. The photographer must remember to take control of the camera to make the camera a tool, instead of being a button-pushing primate relying on a camera to make exposure decisions.

How to Repair Some Lenses

2006-03-27T21:04:00.000-08:00

While cruising the net, I found this interesting site regarding home lens repair. You might find it particularly instructive with a lens with a problem that keeps it from being useful. Here's the link:
http://www.hermes.net.au/bayling/repair.html

Metering Your Studio Monolights Without a Flash Meter

2006-03-25T23:00:00.000-08:00

Normally, to get the most out of studio monolights, a photographer needs a flash meter to measure the output of the flash so as to set the monolight power and camera exposure settings. With a flash meter, it’s easy to balance a few monolights to ensure that they are producing the desired lighting effects like rim lighting, hair lighting, etc.

However, flash meters can be pricey, even the least expensive Polaris flash meter is list priced at $299.95, although it sells for about $170 in camera stores.

However, with the advent of digital SLRs with built-in histogram analysis of images and color LCD screens, it’s now possible to meter your studio monolights with just the camera alone. It’s something of a process of trial and error, but even an amateur with no experience can do this.

What’s needed to properly meter without a flash meter? Here’s what you need:
1) your monolights
2) your digital SLR
3) someone or something to serve as a model. If no one is available, even a neutrally colored stuffed animal will work.

First, set up your monolights to the lighting configuration you desire. Then turn off all the monolights except the “main” light. Set the main monolight to a setting between ½ and ¼ power. Make sure there are no other sources of extraneous light like an unshaded window or recessed incandescent light.

Plug your monolight into the PC sync connector of your camera. Switch your camera to manual mode “M”. Set your camera’s shutter speed to the correct flash sync speed; typically 1/125 works on virtually all modern SLRs. Next, select the aperture you desire; f/8 is typically a good starting point if you’re unsure where you should start. Set your ISO to the lowest setting on your camera; usually this is ISO 100 or possibly ISO 200. Your white balance should be set to daylight or flash.

Now, you’re ready to take a photo—focus on the eyes of your model or stuffed animal and release the shutter. If all goes well, your studio light should go off. Check your image on the back of the LCD, along with the histogram. If the image appears either underexposed or overexposed, you then need to decide what adjustment you’re going to make.

Let’s say that the image is overexposed. You have two options—either power down the light a little bit or increase your f-stop. Take another photo and check your LCD and histogram. Adjust your light or aperture until you’re satisfied.

Let’s say that the image is underexposed; you need to get more light to the sensor. So, either power up the light or decrease your f-stop to let more light. Take another photo, check the image, and adjust your light power or aperture until you’re satisfied.

Now that you’ve got your main light set up, it’s time to set up your other lights. Turn the next light on and make sure the slave sensor is activated on the light. Aim it where you want. If you want it to have it accent a feature or serve as rim lighting, you’ll want it brighter than your main light. So set the power a little bit more than the main light. Take a photo (both lights should go off) and this time only adjust the power up or down on the auxiliary light after checking the photo. Don’t touch your aperture, shutter speed, or main light power because those features are already set properly.

Repeat this procedure with any other lights you might have. When you’ve finished with the last light—you’re done and ready to start shooting.

Don’t forget to erase your calibration shots when you’re done, so you’ll have plenty of room on the card.

Where to Get Your Camera Fixed

2006-03-25T21:19:00.000-08:00

At some point, it's likely that even the most expensive and well-built camera is going to malfunction and have some kind of problem requiring service. However, figuring out where to send your camera can be a mystery. Corporate websites often bury support options under layers of menus, making it difficult for all but the most dedicated user to find a phone number or mailing address.

So here are some addresses I've pulled off the web for a few of the major manufacturers:

CANON USA
http://www.usa.canon.com/opd/controller?act=OPDSupportDropDownAct
Canon Factory Service Center
100 Jamesburg Road
Jamesburg NJ 08831

Canon Factory Service Center
15955 Alton Parkway ,
Irvine CA 92618

FUJIFILM USA
http://www.fujifilm.com/JSP/fuji/epartners/ServiceSupportRepairContent.jsp?prodcat=507205

Fujifilm Factory Service Center:
Fuji Photo Film USA, Inc.
1100 King George Post Rd.
Edison NJ 08837
Attn.: Repair Dept.
Phone: 800-659-3854 (x3461)
Fax: 732-857-3471 or 732-857-3472
Hours: 9:00 am - 8:00 pm EST

NIKON USA
http://www.nikonusa.com/template.php?goingto=inc_service

Please ship it to our factory service center at the following address:
(east of Mississippi)
Nikon Photo Service Center
1300 Walt Whitman Road
Melville, NY 11747-3064

Please ship it to our factory service center at the following address:
(west of Mississippi)
Nikon Photo Service Center
841 Apollo Street, Suite 100
El Segundo, CA 90245

Please include a note describing the problem, as well as your name, address, telephone number and any other contact information you may think we need. Also include photocopies of your sales receipt and Nikon warranty. We recommend shipping the product insured via a carrier that provides you with a tracking number. Please enclose the product in a plastic bag and pack it in a sturdy box with several inches of a quality packing material on all sides. Please do not ship the product in its original box, and please send only equipment you wish to have repaired. Keep a record of the model and serial number. If the product cannot be repaired under warranty, we will send a service estimate for your approval. Our service center evaluates each product on a case-by-case basis and every consideration will be given to your circumstances.

Repair information is available on-line. We will send you a service order number shortly after we receive your product in for service. Once you have your service order number, you may approve or refuse an estimate, obtain information on the status of a repair, obtain a package tracking number, or e-mail a question to our service department. Please log on to www.nikonusa.com and click on "Service" at the top of the home page.

OLYMPUS
East Coast
Olympus Imaging America Inc.
400 Rabro Drive
Hauppauge, NY 11788-4258
Attn: Product Repair
1-800-622-6372
Fax: (631) 881-6580
9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. ET

West Coast
Olympus Imaging America Inc.
10805 Holder Street Suite 170
Cypress, CA 90630-5145
Attn: Product Repair
1-714-503-5700
Fax: (714) 229-1652
8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. PT

PENTAX
PENTAX SERVICE DEPARTMENT
12000 Zuni Street
Suite 100B
Westminster, CO 80234
1-800-877-0155

Flash Brackets

2006-03-24T20:33:00.000-08:00

In some of my earlier posts here in this blog, I've mentioned the use of a flash bracket to keep the flash in a vertical line with the lens when shooting portrait orientation photographs (that's long way up and down for those of you who were wondering). I dislike the side shadow that happens when you don't keep the flash in line with the lens, and the flash bracket is a good way to make shadows fall behind the person, not to the side. Plus, a flash braket really reduces the risk of red-eye by raising the flash. So tonight's post is a brief description of the kinds of flash brackets that are out there and what you're going to need to make the bracket work for you.

In the most basic forms, flash brackets come in two types: A) a bracket where the flash rotates or B) a bracket where the camera rotates. Each has advantages and disadvantages, which you will have to consider before you plunk your hard-earned cash down and buy a bracket.

I'm going to take a look at type B) first, primarly because I have some photos to put up here. To me, one of the biggest advantages of the camera rotating bracket is the ability to put the camera on a tripod. For some applications, such as posed photos for mixed individuals and groups, the use of a tripod can be invaluable.

So, here's the photos showing how a camera rotating bracket works:

Notice that in order for the flash bracket to work, there must be a cord in the camera hot shoe which also attaches to the flash bracket itself. This allows the camera to trigger the flash, even though it's not in the camera hotshoe--the cord itself acts as extension of the camera hot shoe. So when you buy a flash bracket, you've also got to buy a cord. And if you want your fancy-schmantzy flash to work in its specialized modes like Through The Lens (TTL) flash metering, you've got to buy a special cord dedicated to your camera model and flash.

Now, the other type of flash bracket is one where the flash rotates. In this scheme, the photographer turns the camera to the portrait orientation and rotates the flash so it sits vertically above the lens. This type of bracket really can't be mounted onto a tripod, so it's really aimed at a photographer who needs to move around. It also needs a flash cord to work properly too.

One disadvantage of the flash rotating bracket is that for some models, the shutter release ends up on the bottom of the camera. I myself don't find this to be a problem, but some photographers prefer the shutter release to be on top in portrait orientation. And if your camera has a vertical grip with release, buying the wrong bracket can make the vertical release pretty useless.

Of the two types of bracket, I find it easier to zoom and focus with a flash rotating bracket. It's easy for me to support the whole bracket with my left hand while zooming with my right. With camera rotating brackets, I find that the right hand has to always be on the camera, but that gripping the camera doesn't feel like a secure way to hold the whole contraption while zooming. If I need to shoot on a tripod with a bracket though, the camera rotating bracket is the only way to go.

There are modifications to the camera rotating bracket on some models, like a padded grip which allows the photographer to hold the bracket with the palm of the left hand while zooming with the left-hand fingertips. However, these brackets are large and heavy too.

Besides a flash cord, you might also need something to keep your camera from rotating on the bracket. What happens is that the camera is attached to the bracket via the camera tripod socket, but often there's enough play that the camera can "twist" on the bracket. To prevent this you may need a soft cushion on the bracket like cork or a special piece of metal called an "anti-twist plate."

Something else to be aware of: flash cords are often too long, so you end up winding them around the bracket and securing them with twisty ties or some other mechanism. Some people cut the cords and splice the wires back together, but that's too much work for me. Plus, what if I want a long cord someday?

The interesting thing is that walking around with an SLR on a flash bracket really marks the photographer as really serious and professional. People who wouldn't look at me twice if I had an SLR suddenly are in awe of my apparent professional status because I have a camera and flash attached via a bracket. Never mind that these people have never seen a photo I've taken or know what I do for a living--just seeing the camera and flash on a bracket is enough. So, if you need to compensate for photographic inadequacies--in more ways than one--get yourself a flash bracket and prepare to be amazed.

Got a new lens??

2006-03-23T22:33:00.000-08:00

Physician, heal thyself! After writing about getting off the upgrade cycle, the new lens I ordered a week ago arrived yesterday. I'm planning a trip to Peru for May, and I wanted to get a lens capable of taking some nice landscape shots while traveling to Machu Picchu, Cuzco, and Lima.

So, after a bit of research, I ordered a Tokina 12-24mm f/4 zoom lens from a company called "The Camera Box" for quite a discount--$ 463 delivered, or about $100 less than every other place I could find. I figure that it's a grey market lens; that is, a lens which is bought overseas then brought into the United States by someone other than the official importer. There wasn't a warranty card in the box. I figure that "The Camera Box" will handle warranty repairs, not that I'm expecting to need any.

Lucky for me, I had a search warrant this morning so I brought my D200 and new 12-24mm lens with me to take some photos. I have to say that this is a *very* nice lens. The angle of view at 12mm is superb--perfect for tight rooms. I was able to easily photograph the small dining area of an apartment, closets, etc. If you do any sort of interior real estate photography, this Tokina lens is the one to get! It focuses quickly and accurately, no problems at all. Images are nice, contrasty and sharp. I shot at f/8 and there's just a tiny bit of chromatic aberration visible at this f-stop. Chromatic aberration is visible as a purplish shadow in edge areas of high contrast. For example, I saw a purple line running along the edge of a white pillar contrasted against a dark shadow area behind the pillar. It was not objectionable and if I wasn't specifically looking for it, I wouldn't have noticed it.

I'll be playing around more with this lens to see if stopping down a little more eliminates or erases the chromatic aberration.

The lens itself has a nice lens hood and a good, center-pinch style lens cap. Lens quality seems very high to me. All in all, a worthy addition to my lens stable.

D200 and S2pro comparison photos

2006-03-20T19:56:00.000-08:00

Two photos below; one is from the Nikon D200 and the other is from the older Fujifilm S2pro. Both reduced for posting. Exposure settings are virtually identical. You can click on them for slightly bigger versions. Model is Yulia, whose website is http://www.yulia.info

Which image looks "right" to you? I know which one I prefer.

Nikon D200 against my Fujifilm S2pro

2006-03-20T18:30:00.000-08:00

For years now, my Fujifilm S2pro has been my "gold standard" for out of camera color. The SuperCCD sensor, coupled with Fujifilm's tuning of the camera is a superb imager. What's amazing to me is that this camera, which is nearing 4 years old, still manages to hold its own against much newer and faster cameras.

So, when I got my Nikon D200, my plan was to keep my S2pro as my backup camera. However, getting the D200 to be a good for out of camera color shooting jpegs has proven to be quite a challenge. The default D200 settings out of the box give accurate color, but in printed photographs, this is actually dull, non-pleasing color. Humans actually seem to see and remember more vivid than reality, apparently, because prints from my S2pro are more pleasing, but less accurate, in color.

Adjusting the Nikon D200 using their optimize image settings didn't work as well as I hoped. The "Vivid" setting gives nicely saturated images, but they end up overly red. Not noticeable with the porcelain figures I tried for comparison, but on real human skin, waaaaay too red.

Going back to the dpreview boards, I kept reading that people recommended shooting in RAW. However, that defeats the purpose of getting the camera to give me the color I wanted.

Complicating matters is the LCD screen on the back of the D200, which seems on my camera to have a greenish color cast to it. I like that it's so big, but the poor color accuracy of the LCD makes it hard to tell if my white balance is correct.

On March 19th, I shot a very nice model Yulia, http://www.yulia.info with both my D200 and S2pro for comparison and to tune my D200. The S2pro effortlessly made great out of camera jpegs. The D200....didn't do as well. In cases where the images were slightly overexposed, the whole image begins to go yellowish before going white. Really quite hideous. Messing with custom settings did not give me the happy results I was hoping for.

Bottom line: I'm going to have to settle for my D200 settings at simply activating mode III in sRGB color, with medium high sharpening. The images will be slightly redder than their S2 counterparts, but that's better than being bluer/purpler, which is what happened with my D200 images. I'll post a couple of photos for comparison separately. Why Nikon went with this Sony sensor instead of a decent Fujifilm sensor, I'll never know.

Rumor has it that Fujifilm's possible next digital SLR uses a D200 body. If the sensor retains the Fujifilm color and if the body remains like the D200, I'll be looking for an upgrade/replacement...for my D200, while keeping the S2pro as backup.

Get Off the Upgrade Cycle!

2006-03-18T11:08:00.000-08:00

The camera companies would love it if you would keep on giving them your hard-earned cash. So, to keep you paying, they upgrade their cameras all the time. The camera you bought just 6 months ago has already likely been surpassed, upgraded, or replaced by a newer model. Sometimes, the upgrades are simply cosmetic, i.e. a new color to the exterior or moving a button around, and sometimes the upgrades are minor, i.e. improved battery life or upgraded firmware. And about once a year, it's a complete replacement--bigger LCD screens, more megapixels, faster responses, etc.

Keeping up with the camera companies is expensive! And worse yet, it makes a user feel ripped off for buying a digital camera when he or she did--when your neighbor waits 6 months and gets a better camera for less than you paid, you can't help but feel like you got ripped off by the camera company.

So when should you get off the upgrade cycle? How do you get off the upgrade cycle? When is good enough...good enough?

In my opinion, there are two things you need to evaluate when it comes to getting off the circle of camera lust. One is your individual needs--i.e. what do you do or intend to do with the digital camera. The other is your budget. If you're fantastically rich and can indulge your whims without penalty, then why should you care if you're dumping a working camera and getting the latest and greatest?

For purposes of this discussion, I'm going to break photographers down into 4 groups--the snapshooter, the enthusiast, the semi-pro, and the professional.

For most people, who I would classify as snapshooters, a point and shoot digital camera will meet their needs. For typical snapshots, 4 or 5 megapixels is plenty of resolution, as these resolutions will produce fine 8 x 10 enlargements. Very, very few people ever enlarge more than that. Most cameras offer some kind of optical zoom, typically 3x. A typical user isn't going to want to carry a camera with more zoom power, as this requires a heavier camera with a bigger lens. The only reason for this user to upgrade or replace his or her camera is because the first camera stopped working.

Another group of users, the enthusiasts, is likely to use bigger, heavier cameras with stronger zoom lenses, like 10x or 12x zooms. This group of users is lured by the call of more megapixels and stronger zoom lenses. They get on the upgrade cycle because camera companies keep increasing the megapixel numbers of their cameras and because the companies have convinced enthusiast users that if they don't have more resolution, the photos they are currently taking are somehow worse. Enthusiasts are exactly the kind of people camera companies love, because enthusiasts will upgrade and buy profitable, more expensive cameras. It's more difficult for the photo enthusiast to get off the upgrade cycle, because they are so highly targeted in advertising. To break this cycle, the best thing an enthusiast can do is to get the best camera he or she can afford right from the start. The worst thing an enthusiast can do is to compromise in the beginning--because the enthusiast will subsequently end up buying another camera to "upgrade" to what they should have gotten to begin with.

Finally, there's the semi-pros and pros. Generally, these two groups tend to use digital SLRs, and both groups are also highly targeted in advertising, both for lenses and camera bodies.

For professionals, who are worried about having a competitive edge, upgrading has become almost a way of life. With film cameras, there wasn't the need to upgrade as often--but digital has changed the equation. In cruising through online forums, it's apparent that many pros now upgrade with each new generation of digital SLRs, i.e. an upgrade cycle of 12 to 24 months. That's to be expected, as the cameras are used to generate income. There's no reason for the pro to get out of the cycle, as long as they are making money. But for the semi-pro, a photographer who doesn't make a living out of photography but who practices photography at a level about that of the enthusiast, upgrading with each new generation is a costly proposition of questionable value.

The semi-pro is going to have the hardest time getting off the upgrade cycle. First of all, a semi-pro is likely to suffer from "lens lust"--the overwhelming desire to get better and better lenses at great expense. Second, a semi-pro is also susceptible to camera company hype over increased megapixels. And finally a "semi-pro" who actually is a "snapshooter" may come to believe that equipment is more important than the photographer--resulting in purchases for a neverending quest to improve shots, instead of acquiring skills that would make a bigger difference. For this type of photographer, what you'll see is a lot of expensive gear and lots of mediocre or even lousy photos.

For a semi-pro to jump off the upgrade cycle, they need to look critically at needs, results, and budget. If the semi-pro is getting the results, having needs met, and doesn't have the cash, upgrading makes little sense. If the results are lacking, further evaluation as to why needs to be done--it may be an issue of skills as opposed to equipment. Money may then be spent more wisely on training, rather than gear.

The best reason for a semi-pro (or really anyone) to upgrade is because a particular piece of equipment doesn't meet his/her needs while a newer piece of equipment does. Some examples--a landscape photographer who needs wider angle lenses or thephotographer who wants a camera with a faster flash sync speed because they find themselves shooting outdoors a lot.

The Bottom Line: Get off the upgrade cycle and save your money! Only buy when your needs aren't being met or when your gear dies. Don't fall for senseless hype about camera features if you are already getting good results with your gear.

What Is "Red Eye" and How Do You Get Rid of It?

2006-03-15T18:56:00.000-08:00

Many thanks to Bruce for asking me these questions in an e-mail.

We've all experienced the dreaded "red-eye" in photos when taking flash photos. The red-eye makes your subject look demon-possessed or crazy, often ruining what would otherwise be a good photograph.

Red-eye is caused by light reflecting off the back of the eye towards the lens of the camera. We've all seen this effect with animals like cats or dogs with glowing eyes in the dark when lit with a flashlight or headlight. The retina of the human eye is nowhere near as reflective as the retinas of many animals, so we don't see reflections under the same conditions.

However, when taking a flash photo, the intense light of a strobe flash is strong enough to reflect off the back of the human eye. In dim light, the pupil of your subject will be wide open to let in more light, and the iris will not close quickly enough when the flash goes off. So, with red eye, what you're actually doing is taking a flash photo of the backs of your subject's eyes!

This effect is much more likely to occur when the light souce--your strobe flash--is near your lens. This is because the light is shining directly into the eye, bouncing off the back, and bouncing directly into the camera lens. In technical terms, it's because the angle from the flash to the subject and back to the lens is pretty small.

Here's the conditions which cause red-eye:

Dim lighting, causing the pupil of your subject(s) to be wide open.
Use of a strobe flash, close in line with the lens of the camera.

So, the obvious solutions to red-eye: 1) eliminate the dim lighting or 2) move the flash farther from the lens.

Eliminating the dim lighting may be as simple as turning on more lights, causing the pupil to be smaller. Some cameras have "red-eye reduction" which amounts to using the flash to send out pulses of light to make the pupils of your subject's eyes smaller. However, red-eye reduction doesn't always work, and it slows down camera operations and takes battery power.

Moving the flash farther from the lens is the best way to reduce or eliminate red-eye. Even a few inches will make a tremendous difference. However, this requires you to have a camera where you can add an external flash. Many point and shoot cameras don't have the necessary hot shoe. And if you are shooting flash at an extreme distance, even a flash in a hotshoe may not eliminate red-eye, as the flash effectively becomes more in the same line as the lens when the subject is far away. However, in such an instance of distance flash use, it's unlikely that the flash is significantly lighting your subject; all it's likely to be doing is just causing red-eye.

If you have a point and shoot camera, take a look at how close the strobe is to the lens. If it's very close, that's probably why you keep getting red-eye. You'll want to activate the red-eye reduction mode of your camera, often by simply pressing the button with the lightning bolt until the camera display shows an eye (indicating red-eye reduction is on).

If you have an SLR and you're getting red-eye, you need to use a flash in the hot shoe instead of a built-in popup flash. Another option is to use a flash bracket and cable, which raises the flash even further away from the lens.

If you've got photos with red-eye, you can "fix" them in a number of ways. Most digital viewing programs/software now include red-eye elimination as an option. If you've got prints, there are pens for covering up the red-eye.

Red-eye is annoying, but it is preventable and even if it occurs, it's fixable. It's more likely to occur with the small point and shoots that are easy to carry around, but don't let that deter you from getting a once in a lifetime photo. You may never again be able to capture the moment.

How To Focus Your Camera

2006-03-14T20:18:00.000-08:00

All too often, a novice photographer will buy the latest and greatest in equipment, only to be disappointed and disillusioned when the brand-new digital single lens reflex (SLR) or super point and shoot camera makes images that are out of focus and no better or worse than the cheap digital camera they used before. It can be frustrating to get out of focus shots, but there's a few things a new camera owner needs to know about how to properly focus a camera to get the best results.

Let's focus first on SLR cameras, which allow the photographer to view through the lens to compose and focus. In the illustration above, a typical SLR viewfinder is shown. In this case, it's from the Fujifilm S3pro. Note that there are marked focus areas displayed in the viewfinder, and that the selected focus area in the center is highlighted. What a novice will often do is just center the subject in the viewfinder, then release the shutter. However, if the subject isn't under the selected, active focus point, then the camera will focus incorrectly and the photographer will end up with an out of focus shot. I've seen it a lot with shots of couples--the camera will focus directly between the two people and lock onto something in the background.

So when focusing with any camera, the things to remember are:

Make sure your subject is actually in focus. Don't just point and shoot. Look at the viewfinder; if the subject is out of focus, your image will be out of focus.
Focus on the eyes! I can't stress this one enough. A photograph where the person has sharp eyes naturally appears sharper than a photo where the nose is in perfect focus but the eyes are blurry. And once you've got the eyes in focus, lock the focus in place by keeping the shutter release partially depressed as you recompose.
Lock the focus, then recompose! I've seen people actually focus on the eyes, but fail to lock the focus. Typically, by keeping the shutter release partially depressed, the focus is locked, and you can recompose to put the subject where you want in the frame. If you don't lock the focus, then when you release the shutter, the camera will re-focus--on the wrong area!
The focus areas are rough guides. Don't rely on the markings to accurately define the sensitive area of the focus unit. The sensor may actually be slightly above, below, or to one side of the marked area, and you'll have to experiment to see where the sensor(s) focus best. Note that on point and shoots, the focus area may be unmarked; the sensor is usually in the center though.
Use the most sensitive focus sensor. Focus sensors come in three main types: vertical, horizontal, and cross sensors. They utilize contrast to determine focus. Cross sensors can sense both horizontal and vertical lines, so they are the most sensitive. Typically, they are used for the "center" focus area. Check your manual; more expensive cameras may have a lot more cross sensors. Otherwise, use the center sensor--it's your best best for a focused shot.

Okay, now that you've got that down, you're all set, right? No! Proper focusing also includes thinking about a more complex subject called depth of field which in simplest terms is the area that's in focus in front and behind the area you've immediately focused on. Depth of field is affected by your lens opening, called an aperture. The bigger the lens opening, the more "shallow" the depth of field; less area will be in focus in front of and behind the subject. That may be fine if you're only focusing on one person, but it can mean an out of focus shot if you're photographing a family, a group, or a landscape. The solution is to select an aperture that will ensure sufficient depth of field to get what you want in focus.

What about point and shoot cameras? Luckily, their sensors are smaller which means that the images naturally have more depth of field. They do have focus sensors, usually just one sensor in the center of the image. And again, typically depressing the shutter release part way will lock the focus, allowing the photographer to re-compose. So for point and shoot users, remember to focus on the eyes, lock the focus, and recompose before releasing the shutter. The smaller sensor should in most cases give you sufficent depth of field--which, when matched with the strong sharpening routines in a point and shoot, is why point and shoot digital cameras often look "sharper" than a shot with a digital SLR.

Besides improper focusing, another cause of out of focus shots is vibration and/or motion blur. What this means is that your subject moved or the camera moved or vibrated during the exposure. That's a subject for a whole new post, but the short answer is: choose a shutter speed that is sufficient to prevent blur from motion or vibration; or use a flash; or use a tripod.

A few simple steps will increase your percentage of "keepers" tremendously. Practice good technique and the good images will follow.

How Far We Have Come

2006-03-12T12:56:00.000-08:00

Watching the History Channel today, I was struck by the images taken of Mars in 1969 by the Mariner spacecraft. It got me to wondering--how did they get those images from Mars back to Earth? Obviously, they didn't send film back from Mars! So, back in 1969, NASA was using a primitive, but cutting-edge form of filmless photography.

A bit of research uncovered a press release from July 25, 1969, describing the photography system used by the orbiting spacecraft:

"An improved vidicon tube will store and transmit images. Its photosensitive surface receives 704 lines, with 945 dots (called pixels) per line--665,280 dots for each exposure. An electronic beam scans these for a tape recording system that will relay them to Earth receiving stations in the NASA-JPL tracking network. The quality of the pictures should be upgraded by the 30-fold increase in pixel-pickup since 1965."

If you stop to think about it, the power in the hands of the average point and shoot digital camera user is incredible. The Mariner series of spacecraft cost $554 million dollars to create, launch, and support. The cameras had a resolution of 945 x 704 (0.66 megapixels). Compare that with today's Canon Powershot A620, a typical consumer point and shoot camera with a resolution of 3072 x 2304 (7.1 megapixels) and $370 price tag. Not only has technology enabled the consumer to have better equipment than the best that government/military could produce just a mere 37 years ago, but the consumer gear is smaller, far less expensive, and far more user friendly.

Think about all the things that are "cutting edge" today for the government, from computers to communications systems. The Internet is a descendent of the original ARPANET, for example. What will we be seeing 35 years from now, when those secret, cutting edge technologies make their way into consumer products?

We have come very far; imagine how far we have yet to go.

Photographer Rights

2006-03-11T14:08:00.000-08:00

We all live in a post-9/11 world, where security issues have affected the way the average photographer operates. Even the most seemingly innocent activities, like taking tourist photos of landmarks, photographing playing children, or just carrying a camera around, have resulted in many photographers being confronted by security personnel or being viewed with suspicion. In some cases, photographers are told to surrender their gear, their film, and/or their memory cards. In New York, photographers have been told not to take photos on the subway. So what exactly are the rights of a photographer?

In the United States, the exact rules can vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. Thus, it's only possible to provide general guidelines, rather than specific legal advice. A number of websites exist with good guides to the rights of a photographer, including:

http://www.krages.com/phoright.htm Nice PDF format guide on rights.
http://www.rcfp.org/photoguide/ An excellent, state-by-state guide to privacy.
http://www.mobar.org/press/medhnbk3.htm A primer on privacy from the Missouri Bar Association.

Generally speaking, a photographer who is in an area accessible to the public can take photograph, so if you're standing outside a building or in a park or on the sidewalk, you are able to take a photograph. Even on private property, like a mall, you can take a photograph. Granted, mall security could throw you out, but they couldn't take your camera or your film/memory card, at least not without exposing themselves to legal consequences. Remember though, these are just general observations and not legal advice.

Some other things to remember though--it's important to respect a person's expressed right to privacy and it's important to always be professional and polite when dealing with police or security personnel who may approach you. So, even if you're standing on the sidewalk, using a super-duper telephoto lens to get a shot of a topless celebrity inside their residence 1/2 a mile away probably would be construed as an invasion of privacy. Likewise, acting in a disruptive manner with police when asked about your photography could get you into trouble completely unrelated to the photography. You might want to consider printing out one of the guides above (Krage's guide is designed for this) and carry it with you. In addition, always carry a photo identification, produce it promptly when requested, and above all, remain polite and respectful.

Outside the United States, what a photographer can or cannot do will obviously vary. For example, in Australia, after a man was convicted for covertly using his cell phone to photograph topless women on a beach, it appeared that Australia was moving towards making all photography on Australian beaches illegal. However, subsequent cases made it clear that while photography on beaches may be legal, offensive behavior may not be. In France, there are much stronger restrictions on photography than in the U.S., where the publication of photos without the consent of any person in the photos is illegal. Some overseas photography rights guides include:

http://www.sirimo.co.uk/ukpr.php A guide for UK photographers
http://www.4020.net/unposed/rightssummary/nswphotorights.pdf Australia guide for Australian photographers

Finally, let me point you towards an excellent webpage on photographer behavior, which has some excellent tips on how to deal with law enforcement:

http://www.vividlight.com/articles/3802.htm

It's definitely harder these days to be a photographer or even a tourist with a camera these days. Photography in the U.S. is not only about art, but also about exercising Constitutional rights. The current war on terror is about protecting those rights, so it's important that both photographers and security personnel behave professionally or we will all be losers.

Is This The New Digital Photo Album? Microsoft Introduces Ultra Mobile PC

2006-03-09T19:10:00.000-08:00

On Thursday, March 9, Microsoft unveiled a new category of personal computer. Known as the Ultra-Mobile PC or UMPC, this is a hardback book-sized, full-fledged Windows XP computer running touch-screen software (Microsoft Touch Pack), without the need for a built-in keyboard. Microsoft won't be manufacturing the computers themselves; instead, they were involved in creating standards for a reference machine. The actual computers will be made by companies like Samsung, Founder, or Asus, and they are expected to sell for $499 to $999. Availability is expected in the second quarter of 2006 (that's April to June 2006).

Here's the reference specs for the first generation of UMPCs:

Weight of less than 2 lbs (0.9 kg)
A 7-inch (17.8 cm) color screen
Input via touch screen (including on-screen keyboard) or via stylus
USB and bluetooth connectivity, allowing traditional keyboard to be used
Ethernet and Wi-Fi connectivity
Minimum battery life of 2.5 hours
Hard drives in 30 to 60 gigabyte range (same as most notebooks currently available)
Processors: Intel Celeron M, Intel Pentium M, or Via C7-M
Additional built-in features may also include memory card readers, digital TV tuners, webcam, GPS, fingerprint reader, etc.

Interestingly, the prototype machines being shown at CeBit in Germany feature a built-in stand, allowing the UMPC to stand on its own and act like a digital photo frame or mini movie screen. Given the USB connectivity and the possibility of built-in memory card readers, is the UMPC the new digital photo album? It sure looks that way.

On top of that, for those of us who shoot digital photos on vacations and on location, the UMPC may serve as the ultimate portable backup solution. The large (compared to other backup solutions) screen would allow us to inspect and preview digital images, share them with people like a photo album, and even do adjustments in Photoshop. USB connectivity means that an external DVD burner or hard drive could be connected for further backup of digital images. At home, the UMPC could function as a digital photo frame or even as a digital video recorder for your television set.

I don't know about you, but I am personally very intrigued by the UMPC. The proposed low price, relatively small physical size, full Windows XP capability, and connectivity options would make this a superb computer for travel, for backing up photos on location, and for sharing photographs as a digital frame or digital photo album. Traditional full-size tablet PC computers haven't caught on like regular notebooks computers in clamshell cases, but I think Microsoft may have come up with a winning formula for digital photographers on the go.

Where to go to find a model:

2006-03-08T22:07:00.000-08:00

I'm a regular reader of various forums at http://www.dpreview.com and just this morning, I ran across a good question, which now prompts me to post here tonight. A beginner photographer was lamenting the fact that he couldn't get any practice with his new camera, because he needed someone to serve as a model. He had tried his wife and his pet, but neither was helpful nor cooperative with his efforts.

So, for those of you looking for a model, here's some ideas:

Try a local college. Some students may be willing to model in exchange for a small fee, and you might find some art students or models from arts classes as well.
Try talking to someone at a modeling school, if your community has a modeling school.
One poster suggested trying a dance school, as the dancers often will want portfolio photos.
In addition, there's a number of Internet sites for models. The biggest is OneModelPlace at http://www.onemodelplace.com
There's also a MySpace type website known as Model Mayhem; http://www.modelmayhem.com
How about your local employment/unemployment office? Maybe you can find someone looking for work.

There's also a series of specialized words you probably should learn if you go to an Internet modeling site. Here's some terms for you:

TFP= time for prints (model will pose in exchange for a limited number of prints)
TFCD=time for CD (i.e. model will pose for free, if you provide digital images on a CD)
model release=signed permission from the model, allowing the photographer to do what he wants with the images.
comp cards--small postcard sized card with 3 to 5 photos of the model, often on both sides, used for promotion and containing key information like height, weight, eye color, hair color, etc.
Portfolio--also known as a "book", this is simply a collection of the work of the model or the work of the photographer.
Tear sheet--a page containing an image, taken from a magazine or other publication, typically depicting a model's work. May also demonstrate a photographer's work. Tear sheets can also be used to give ideas to a model or photographer for use during a shoot.

One important rule for any photographer working with any model--NEVER touch the model without first receiving permission and/or telling the model what you're about to do and why--i.e. "I'd like to move your arm to exactly where I'd like it. Is that okay?" Act professionally, and you'll leave a positive impression.

Nikon at Academy Awards-Photo

2006-03-06T21:24:00.000-08:00

Here's a shot of Keira Knightly (wowsa!) being photographed. The photographer is using a Nikon camera (looks like a D2x), SB-800 flash, and a flash bracket. Sorry for the lousy capture, but television resolution is significantly less than a digital camera's....

Digital SLRs at the 78th Academy Awards

2006-03-06T19:54:00.000-08:00

Well, last night I was watching the Oscar pre-shows and telecasts on ABC, E!online, and the TVguide channel, mostly just to gaze at the actresses as they walked down the Red Carpet. However, during these shows, I also noticed at least a few times that Nikon digital SLRs were being used by at least some of the Red Carpet photographers. It was fairly easy to pick out the Nikon cameras, thanks to the 5th battery compartment of the SB-800 flash being used by the photographers. I recorded the show, so if I get a chance, I'll do a frame grab later and post it here, to show you what I'm writing about.

In addition to Nikon dSLRs and SB-800s, I noticed that photographers were using flash brackets for their shots. Flash brackets, for those who have never seen or used them, are great for lining up a flash vertically with the lens, when the camera is in portrait orientation. This avoids casting annoying side-shadows and allows a more flattering portrait, often showing a butterfly-like shadow under the nose.

In sports photography, it's easy to spot the Canon cameras and lenses--Canon telephoto lenses often have white bodies. Nikon super-telephotos also come in both black and light grey finishes, and are also used for sports shooting, but there's no question that at least in the U.S., Canon is dominant in sports photography.

So, it's a bit refreshing for me, a Nikon-mount shooter, to see Nikon cameras and flashes being used at an event like the 78th Academy Awards.

What camera should you buy?

2006-03-05T11:13:00.000-08:00

Over and over again, people who know about my hobby will ask me, "What camera should I get?" I think all of us who have heard this question wish that we had a dollar for every time we've been asked this question.

My standard response is nearly always, "Well, how much do you want to spend?" I've found that what people are really asking me is "How do I get the best camera for the amount of money I want to spend?"

With that said, there's some things to consider when buying a camera these days. Anyone looking to get a camera who doesn't have any idea of the options needs to take these issues into account:

Film vs. digital-dollar for dollar, film cameras are far, far less expensive. If you are on a budget, film is still an excellent option, except that you will pay for film, processing, and prints. With the Internet and computers, digital photography has surpassed film photography in popularity, and the instant feedback is invaluable in getting good photos and learning photography skills. So, choose based on your budget and needs.
How much do you want to spend?--your camera choice is dictated by the cost of equipment. Cameras with more features usually cost more. For digital, increased prices usually means increased resolution (megapixels) and/or features. The cheapest digital cameras may not have a review screen, zoom lens or a built-in flash; a film camera at the same price will have a lot more features. And don't forget about accessories--for example, a digital camera will need memory cards and a single-lens reflex camera is going to need a lens and external hot shoe flash.
What do you want to do with the camera?--If you want to photograph a fast-moving indoor basketball game, your needs are different from the person wanting to photograph the family vacation. Hence, your choice of camera will be dictated by your needs and what you want to do. Consider what you want to do or accomplish and choose your camera accordingly.
Do you already have equipment?--If you have Nikon lenses, choose a product compatible with those lenses. If you have Canon AF lenses, choose a product compatible with those lenses. If you've a collection of Pentax gear, why would you choose a product line that renders that gear useless? Do you have a bunch of memory cards of a specific type? Then try to choose a camera that will use time, unless they are too small or obsolete (like SmartMedia).
Avoid technical dead ends--don't buy technology that's out of date or a dead end. So, don't get a floppy disk camera. For memory formats, compact flash and secure digital are likely to be the big winners. Sony's memory stick is not widely adopted, and therefore is heavily dependent upon Sony for its future. SmartMedia is dead. xD is used by Fujifilm and Olympus, but probably won't last. Low megapixel digitals just don't cut it either-some cell phones now have higher megapixel counts than expensive mid-level digitals of a just 6 years ago (2000). The point is--don't lock yourself into a dead end, or you'll just have to buy another camera anyway.
Actually handle some cameras--each camera is laid out differently. Each camera will feel different in your hands. Go to a store and "test drive" some cameras to see which ones feel right to you, which ones have the buttons in the right place, and which ones you can immediately rule out.
Do some online comparisons--Check out the online camera sites for comparisons and reviews. There's: http://www.dpreview.com , http://www.imaging-resource.com , and http://www.dcresource.com for starters. You can do price comparisons at http://www.pricegrabber.com and http://www.mysimon.com .

So, while making no specific recommendations here, thus saving me from having to update this post each time a new camera is released, I think there's enough here to help guide you in choosing the correct camera for your budget and needs. One thing is for sure--no matter what you buy, something better will eventually come out. Don't let that stop you from enjoying some photography!

Links you should check out

2006-03-04T11:28:00.000-08:00

I want to get some useful content on here as quickly as possible...so here's some useful links:

http://www.imaging-resource.com/ACCS/BATTS/BATTS.HTM This is a great battery comparison online, featuring comparisons of various rechargeable NiMH AA batteries.
http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/multi_page.asp?cid=6007 Want to figure out which memory card is the fastest in your digital camera? Check out this link.
http://www.pbase.com/copperhill/image/15473243 An excellent primer on cleaning your sensor. No need to buy their product(s) either.
http://www.frugalphotographer.com/index.htm Do you need some obscure film? Check out this site! You can still get 126 cartridge instamatic film(!)
http://www.modelmayhem.com Need to find a model or post a quick online portfolio? Try the free site, modelmayhem!
http://www.onemodelplace.com Another site to locate a model, a photographer, or a makeup artist.

Basic Studio Lights

2006-03-04T08:22:00.000-08:00

First, I'd like to thank Walter Matthews for pointing out that I forgot to mention mirror lock-up as another option to consider for low-light shooting. It really is a good way to eliminate the mirror-induced vibration which can affect shots at slow shutter speeds.

Next, I'd like to give some basic information on studio lighting. With the advent of digital photography and the instant feedback it provides, I think more and more people want to try taking studio photos in the comfort and convenience of their own home. Where such undertakings fail is in the lighting technique--a camera's built-in flash or even a flash in a hot shoe gives terrible lighting and/or distracting shadows. Personally, I generally find a side-shadow the mark of a amateur using flash, unless that's what the photographer deliberately intended.

At the very low end, one of the best things a photographer can do when doing portraits with only a simple hotshoe flash is to get a flash bracket and connecting cord. The bracket raises the flash and centers the flash with the lens when the camera is in "portrait" orientation (i.e. the camera is turned sideways). This isn't an option for point and shoot cameras though.

More expensive, but nevertheless excellent options include:

Continuous lighting solutions--these are lights which are always lit, sometimes called "hot lamps" and include a variety of light types like fluorescents, incandescent bulbs (think: household light bulbs), halogen bulbs, and other high intensity lamps.
Monolights--these lights combine a powerful strobe flash with a powerpack into one unit, often with a modeling lamp to help gauge how the flash will cause shadows or interact with other lights.
Power Packs and flash heads--these are lights which are connected via a cable to a central power pack, and can be quite powerful depending upon the powerpack.

There are advantages and disadvantages to each of these lighting types. Continuous lights can get pretty hot and they are generally not daylight color balanced, which means you have to do a custom balance. However, you can get continuous lights fairly cheaply if you have a very tight budget--see this website, for example: http://www.lonestardigital.com/affordable_lighting.htm

Monolights are more expensive. Avoid eBay cheapies like the Britek. I have a set and I burned out one of the monolights in about 6 months. It actually caught fire during a shoot. If you need an inexpensive, reliable monolight try http://www.alienbees.com

For powerpack units, a good place to start is with Novatron. http://www.novatron.com

The latest things I've seen involve whole panels which can act like flashes http://www.sunpak.com or continuous lighting using compact fluorescent bulbs instead of hot lamps.

And when you get your studio lights, you also need to think about light modifiers--ways to soften, concentrate, or alter light to meet your needs and intentions. That's a whole new topic by itself, but generally to start off with your choices will involve umbrellas, softboxes, barndoors, and/or grids/snoots. If you're just starting off, umbrellas are a cheap and easy way to learn, and you can add the other items later as you get more experience and more money.

Batteries!

2006-03-03T21:45:00.000-08:00

Power! Virtually all modern cameras require a power source, and even mechanical cameras get their power from springs. So, where are some online places where power-hungry photographers can go to get more power at the best price? Try these sources:

http://www.thomas-distributing.com This website is the best source I've found for Maha chargers, with competitive pricing on AA Nickel Metal Hydride (NiMH) batteries. The Maha chargers are very highly regarded by many (although not all) photographers as some of the best chargers around.
http://www.botac.com If you happen to use a camera that's powered by disposable CR123 lithium batteries, this is the best and cheapest source for those batteries I've found, with lithiums running at $1 to $1.25 each. Compare that to $8.99 for one battery at the local drugstore!
http://www.bugeyedigital.com This website features the Power2000 series of NiMH chargers, which I've found are good for travel. While not as fast charging as the Maha chargers, the Power 2000 chargers are compact, have folding outlet prongs, and charge each battery independently. So you can charge an odd number of batteries!
http://www.batterybarn.com This website has a decent listing for those point and shoot cameras which use proprietary batteries. And it has a high rating on resellerratings.com.

And if readers have other suggestions--leave comments and I'll check out the sites!

Tips for low light shooting

2006-03-03T21:18:00.000-08:00

Well, let's get off to a useful start. Tonight, I'm going to write about how to get the most out of your camera when shooting in low light levels. Here's some really basic tips:

Use a tripod. In low light, your camera isn't going to be getting enough light so that you, the photographer, can get a sharp, unblurred picture when the camera is handheld. This is because the shutter must remain open longer or your digital sensor must be active longer in order to ensure enough light is collected. A camera mounted on a tripod is really steady for those long exposures (generally considered anything longer than 1/30 of a second).
Increase your ISO. ISO is a measure of the sensitivity of your digital sensor or your film. In low light, you may need to increase the ISO, either through changing a camera setting for digital cameras or using a more sensitive film (a "faster" film) with a higher ISO rating. The increased sensitivity will mean faster shutter speeds, reducing the risk of blur. This increased sensitivity comes at a price though--usually seen as color noise in digital images and as increased graininess in film images. If you're using a tripod and have relatively static subject, you might not want to increase your ISO because of this reduced image quality.
Use a flash. Modern digital cameras aren't miracle machines. Sometimes, you're going to need to have additional light from another light source to get that image. So, if your images are too dark and your flash isn't turned on...try turning it on and using it.
Try the self-timer to reduce vibration blur. Many cameras come with a self-timer. This is great for low light where vibration can induce blur. Simply brace your camera, on a tripod for example, and use the self-timer feature and then don't touch or disturb the camera during exposure.
No tripod? Use what's around you! You need an available light photo, the light is dim, and you don't have a tripod? Well, look around! Maybe you can put the camera on top of a garbage can, a low wall, or a park bench. Use pocket trash to make sure your camera is level and aimed properly--a folded hanky can be put under an SLR lens for example to keep the camera level. Use the self-timer to reduce vibration.
Try bracing the camera! Also in the category of using what's around you is the idea of bracing the camera when shooting in low light. Brace the camera against a solid wall, a tree or light pole, or some other solid object. I have been able to literally handhold a camera at 1/4 second shutter speeds and get sharp images because I braced the camera against a concrete pole.
Consider the color of the sky. To my eye, skies look more dramatic just after sunset, but before they go completely dark. So if you like low-light night shots, try to time your activities to take advantage of the color of the sky for more dramatic photos.

If people come up with more tips, I'll happily add them here--just leave me some comments.

Welcome to Beginning

2006-03-03T20:49:00.000-08:00

Welcome to my brand-new web log or "blog". I was inspired to start this blog after visiting another photography blog, in which 1 post consisted of enough words to take up 16 word-processed pages in Microsoft Word and another post of 12 pages length, which consisted of insults and criticisms for photography enthusiasts and little of real photographic value.

So, here's some simple points to start things off:

I won't be going into crazy rants here.
Posts won't go on and on with no end in sight.
And I'll try to keep in on topic, i.e. photography and not photography forum posters.

Now...let's talk photography!