Skull-king around
February 22, 2008
This is from the “extra secret set” on Flickr that I mentioned in a post the other day.
Actually its not secret (although it was!) but its content filter is set to “Restricted” as it occurred to me that some kiddies or others of a very nervy disposition may find some of the images a little bit disturbing.
My mate and I were in one of our getting-to-be-a-habit messing-with-cameras sessions, and somehow or other this skull just happened to creep into the pics. So we decided to explore it a bit further. And ended up with a handful of reasonable shots that those who’re into that sort of thing may find a bit interesting.
And there’s something a bit bizarre about the skull too!
So if you want to see the full set firstly you’ll need a Flickr account and then you’ll need to ensure your content filters are off.
The Samsung GX10
February 22, 2008
Not being the sort of person to ever do anything by halves if I can possibly avoid it, I’ve actually got two DSLRs. In fact there’s a very valid reason for that… all to do with dust on sensors. But that’s another story entirely.
So, as regular visitors here (that’ll be me!) may be aware, one of these little beasties is a Canon - the EOS 400D or “Digital Rebel”.
When I first contemplated getting this perhaps I should have given it rather more thought than I did but, in fairness to myself, at the time I didn’t know a great deal about this digital photography stuff (nothing, in fact) so did what any sensible person would do and sought the advice of a trusted friend.
And not just any old trusted friend (not that I’ve too many of them) but a guy who actually knows what he’s talking about - a professional photojournalist/photodocumentarian.
Now, a bit of context wouldn’t come amiss here (so grab a coffee, settle down, and be prepared for a lonnng read!).
It was in fact this same guy who rather mischieviously encouraged me to launch into this digital photography caper in the first place.
I’d been involved in some form of activism/protest for quite some time as a direct spin-off from my rather over-the-top commitment to the anti-war protests of a few years ago and one of the conclusions I’d come to therefrom was that much of the “move to war” (we’re talking here about the Iraq war) had been driven by media spin.
This led me to look rather more closely at world events in general and it seemed to me that in many cases our “world leaders” are allowed to “get away with” particular courses of action as a direct effect of the (possibly premeditated) shaping of people’s assumptions, perceptions, and their “received wisdom” in general, by the mainstream media.
Perhaps this wouldn’t be of quite such serious concern but for the fact that much of the mainstream media (or “msm” as its known) is vested in the hands of just a very few individuals and corporations.
So for someone as opposed to the direction in which world events appeared to be (and seemingly still are) going as myself, clearly one of the main “battlefields” is in the world of media… encouraging/supporting alternative reporting and interpretation of the news, and indeed trying to secure coverage for events that the big boys (for one reason or another) choose to ignore.
Fortunately, with the increasing popularity of the Web (a social and cultural - to say nothing of technological - development on a par, to my mind, with the invention of printing and the discovery of radio) the ordinary citizen - that’s you and me - now has within their grasp, possibly for the first time ever, a relatively easy and accessible means of communicating with and informing, virtually instantly, the world at large. (Easily accessible at least for the developed countries… that’s an issue for a discussion elsewhere.)
And it seems that the much talked about Web.2 has encouraged (if not actually been in part responsible for) the phenomenon known as “citizen journalism”.
Which clearly feeds directly into the conclusions I’d already reached regarding the influence of the msm and which, slowly and circuitously, is bringing us back to the point of this post.
I don’t imagine for one moment that anything I can do will make much or indeed any difference to world events nor, at a more personal level, the way the society in which I live appears to be changing, but that very rational conclusion has never stopped me before… my middle name isn’t Don Quixote for nothing! (In fact, it isn’t Don Quixote at all but let’s not even go there cos otherwise I’ll have to start talking about tilting at windmills and stuff.)
Through the medium of the Web under-reported news can be given coverage, media spin can be balanced by alternative takes, in-depth background information on the issues of the day can be published widely (or “exposed” if you prefer), incredibly extensive research can be undertaken, and even activists can be organised and co-ordinated on a scale never before imagined possible… as witness for example the world-wide, unprecedentedly huge, anti-war movement of a few years back.
Given my fondness for gadgets, computers and stuff like that, and my former background in graphic design and PR, it was almost inevitable that the Web would prove the ideal outlet for much of my activist leanings, and so it was.
All well and good but, as the old saying has it, “a picture’s worth a thousand words”. Which was of course the lever with which my trusted friend maliciously beat me over the head to propel me into the world of digital photography (not sure whether or not I’ve forgiven him yet… I know its cost me a small fortune so far). I suppose I have to be truthful and admit that wasn’t the only incentive, but it was certainly a significant part of the inducement.
Anyway, my first acquisition was a Konica Minolta DiMAGE Z6 point & shoot - but that simply didn’t hack it for all sorts of reasons. Not least of which was the rather dubious although very compelling one that, when mixing with other “news gatherer” types (full- and part-time, professional and amateur) at various events the KM simply lacked “street cred”.
There. I’ve said it. No, don’t laugh. It may be a stupid reason but that sort of motivation plays a significant role in a lot of folks’ lives if they’re brutally honest with themselves.
In a word (um… many words in my case) I was a bit embarrassed to be mixing with other news gatherers with all their super-duper kit sporting only a touristy-type KM.
(The other, more reasonable motivation, was that whilst the KM had proven to be an easy and comfortable intro into the world of digital photography, it didn’t really “flick any switches” for me, so in that sense it was a bit disappointing. But I was sufficiently hooked to want to get something slightly better.)
Given these separate but converging impulses I once again consulted the oracle of all photojournalistic endeavour and he told me I really needed to get either a Nikon or a Canon DSLR. He even went so far as to admit (in a roundabout sort of way) that the precise model wasn’t quite as significant as the fact that it would be sporting the “right” neck-strap!
He actually recommended the Nikon D40. As much as anything else this was out of consideration for my learner status. Its small, relatively cheap (and getting cheaper almost every day), reasonably easy to use for someone of my expertise (or lack of it!), yet it still provides the features necessary to produce reasonably acceptable (in a pro sense) photos. And, most importantly, its got the right name!
So I went out and got the Canon EOS 400D. My middle name isn’t “contrary” for nothing y’know.
Right… imagine the story about dust on sensors being inserted here (otherwise I’m gonna have to ramble on for another ten thousand pages).
Having decided I wanted/needed a second DSLR, the only question remaining was, which one?
I suppose the most sensible thing (and certainly the best from a cash point of view) would have been to simply get a second 400D body. But that’s boring. And, having made up my mind to get a second DSLR I didn’t see much point in getting one of lesser spec, so found myself being drawn to the Nikon D80… or possibly the D40X.
(As an aside, it tends to be a habit of mine to get variations on a piece of kit serving the same purpose. At a practical level I’ve discovered its one of the ways I can learn most rapidly about the principles behind how things work. I’ll just not say anything about the five - at last count - computers I’ve got, in various shapes and sizes. But you need to know this to appreciate any comments I may make in future posts along the lines of “Hmm… its about time I got another computer”.)
Well, fortuitously at about the same time I heard of the Samsung GX10. Read a few reviews, liked what I read, read a few more, didn’t come across any significant negatives. And thus was plunged into a bit of a quandary. For I was still hung up on getting a Nikon (tried Canon… now wanted to see what the opposition had to offer). I must admit to a bit of the “analysis paralysis” creeping in that a new-found mate so accurately describes in a blog post here.
Which prompted me to do some more serious thinking. Along the lines of “What’s my real reason for being hung up on getting a Nikon?”, and “So what have I got against the Samsung that’s causing me to hesitate?” And I suddenly realised it was all to do with the name. Had the Samsung had a Nikon or Canon label on it I would’ve bought it like a shot, based purely on the reviews I’d read.
In all my reading and research its become clear to me that in the world of the pro photographer, the photojournalist, the photodocumentarian, even the serious enthusiastic amateur (which is pretty much how I’m beginning to regard myself), at the budget end of the range nothing else exists other than Canon or Nikon.
“Why should this be?” I asked myself. “Are they so far ahead of all the competition in terms of quality and results that nothing else can hold a candle to them, or is it all simply brand snobbishness?”
Of course, I’m not talking here about the truly pro cams like the Nikon D3 or the Canon EOS 1DS III but the more “serious enthusiast” models… i.e., the lower end of these manufacturers’ product ranges. And in that fairly wide price band there’s plenty of alternatives to choose from.
At this point I have to acknowledge that magazine reviews and the like aren’t always to be totally relied upon when it comes to providing a level playing field for different brands of a given type of product. They seem to indulge a sort of “flavour of the month” (or decade maybe) approach that doesn’t always best serve the consumer.
I know this from my much more extensive experience (in the dim and distant past) of high-end stereo equipment. And from computer gear. So why should cameras (another geeky-prone type gadget) be treated any differently?
I’m not saying that such publications consciously or premeditatedly promote particular brands over others regardless of the relative merits of other brands, but that they unwittingly follow a culture where some things are considered to be “in” or “cool” or “chic” or whatever whilst others are simply beyond the pale for little reason other than that their brand name doesn’t fit.
And, human nature being what it is, lots of people quite innocently just buy into the hype, which in turn encourages others, and so it goes in a snowball-type effect. (Hmm… we’re getting dangerously close to ranting on about media spin again here!)
Now, please don’t misunderstand me. I’m not knocking either Canon or Nikon. I’ve got a great deal of respect for the quality and reliability of their products, and I know there are thousands if not literally hundreds of thousands of folk out there who are committed Nikon/Canon fans based purely on quality considerations.
(But I can remember another brand being flavour of the month amongst pro photographers a few years back. When I had a brief dabble with film photography way back in the early 80s where were Nikon or Canon then? Well, one was making photocopiers and fax machines and I dunno what the other was doing. But the big name then was Pentax! (It was in fact an upper-range Pentax that I invested in, and rapidly discovered how truly crap I was at taking photos). And where are they now in the field of pro or serious enthusiast photography? Of course, there’s always been Leica and Hasselblad but they’re in a different league entirely… aren’t they?)
So, having reached this conclusion I decided to say go to hell with the street cred, the received wisdom, and opted instead to commit to the Samsung.
(Incidentally, I think I’m beginning to develop a bit of a love affair with Samsung. I’ve now not just got one of their cameras, but also replaced both my Nokia mobile phones with Samsungs and they’re brilliant! The styling is superb, they’re easy to use… oh, I could go on and on. Have Samsung always produced this class of kit and I’ve just never noticed I wonder, or are they aiming to go a bit up-market with their products? Also incidentally, I now notice that they’ve produced a rather tasty point & shoot which I’d be seriously tempted to get - in preference to Canon’s G9 - were it not for the fact that it doesn’t shoot in RAW. Damn!)
Ok, I’m fully prepared for someone to come along and shoot me down in flames for this decision, someone with a lot more experience of digital photography than I, but I settled for the Samsung… and mighty glad I did too!
The Samsung’s become my baby. Its great. I’m in love with it! Much better than the Canon. And its chunky, feels solid, built to last. Ok, it has its foibles (which I suspect are actually more to do with the kit lens than the camera itself) but I still prefer it to the Canon. And its coffee-proof (see this post)!
Coincidentally, its actually a clone/rebrand of a Pentax DSLR!
Here are all the most relevant specs:
Max resolution: 3872 x 2592
Low resolution: 3008 x 2000, 1824 x 1216
Image ratio w:h 3:2
Effective pixels: 10.0 million
Sensor photo detectors: 10.8 million
Sensor size: 23.5 x 15.7 mm
Sensor type: CCD
Colour filter array: RGB
ISO rating: Auto (custom), 100, 200, 400, 800, 1600
Image stabilization: Yes, Sensor shift
Auto Focus: Yes
Manual Focus: Yes
Auto focus type: TTL 11-area AF
White balance override: 8 positions, plus manual
Min shutter: 30 sec + Bulb
Max shutter: 1/4000 sec
Built-in Flash: Yes
External flash: Yes, hot-shoe
Flash modes: Auto, On, Off, Red-eye reduction
Exposure compensation: -3 to +3 EV in 0.5 or 0.3 EV steps
Metering: Multi-segment (16), Center-weighted Average, Spot
Aperture priority: Yes
Shutter priority: Yes
Focal length multiplier: 1.5
Lens thread: Pentax KAF2, KAF, KA mount
Continuous Drive: Yes, 3.0 fps, unlimited JPEG, 9 RAW
Movie Clips: No
Remote control: Yes, IR optional
Self-timer: Yes, 2 or 12 sec
Orientation sensor: Yes
Storage types: SD/MMC card
Uncompressed format: RAW (PEF or DNG)
Compressed format: JPEG (EXIF 2.2)
Quality Levels: Normal, Fine, Superfine
Viewfinder: TTL
LCD: 2.5″
LCD Pixels: 210,000
Battery: Lithium-Ion rechargeable
Weight (inc. batteries): 793 g (28 oz)
Dust and weather resistant seals, based on Pentax K10D
And for anyone who’s really interested my mate of the wayward nose (see comment appended to this post) shot a load of pics of the camera the other day and has uploaded them as a set to his Flickr photostream here.
Damn & Blast!
February 22, 2008
Much as I liked the previous blog theme I simply had to get rid of it cos on a wide hi-res screen such as I use the text area was far too wide.
Meaning that the length of line was out of proportion to the size of text and typographically speaking that’s a big no-no.
Dammit.
Well, I’ll give this one a test-run instead and see how it feels after a few days.
Fortunately this blog’s not been on-line for very long so hopefully no-one’s become too accustomed to the first theme and’ll think they’ve ended up at the wrong place with this better-proportioned new look (but I might still change the header… undecided at the mo’).
So far the only criticism that I have of it is that the link for comments is at the top of the post rather than the bottom. Might be able to change that through the style sheet… on the other hand, might just leave it as it is ’til I get used to it.
Shutting the stable door
February 21, 2008
Shortly after I got my first DSLR (the Canon) a pro photographer mate of mine gave it the once over, and buried admidst the wealth of tips he imparted there was one I took to heart more than the others. He (along with a load of other people) prob’ly thinks I don’t pay much attention to what’s said to me… due no doubt to my semi-permanent vacant expression and habit of being quite forgetful. Wrong! So there!
Lens hoods!
Now, from the reading I’ve done it seems lens hoods (y’know, those dinky bits of plastic that fit on the end of lenses and, to the uninitiated, turn an ordinary camera into a professional looking affair) are intended principally to keep stray reflections and unwanted light off the lens. Makes perfect sense.
However, that wasn’t the reason my mate suggested I always use one. Oh no. Given the context in which I shoot a lot of my pics (protests, demos, and similar such activities) there’s a very real risk that at some point someone’s gonna object rather forcefully to being snapped and will try to prevent it by pushing the camera away… with palm on lens! Which can leave nasty greasy streaks and, worst case scenario, if they’re wearing a ring or something could conceivably scratch the glass. Oh horror; there goes a few hundred quid down the drain.
So, matey says to me “Make sure you always use a lens hood as it’ll help protect the lens”. Obvious really. And I’ve never forgotten it. And I always (apart from extremely rare occasions) have the hood attached.
Phew. This is getting to be a long story.
Anyway, along comes my new lens (yes, the same one that’s formed the topic of quite a few previous posts so far)… but no lens hood with it. Have to buy that as a separate accessory (£17 it cost me as well!). Not in stock at the local Jessops, so order it. And yesterday I get a text message from them letting me know its finally arrived and ready to be collected.
Wander into town, shoot a few pics, then head towards my favourite haunt - The Bear Public House - where another mate of mine (yes, I’ve actually got two) happens to be the bar manager. En route stopping of course at Jessops to pick up the lens hood.
In the Bear, plonk myself down at the bar and, given that its fairly quiet in there (as in very few customers around) its not too long before out our cameras come and we start “playing” again.
Now, good as gold, I’d attached the hood to the lens… but, cos I hadn’t really anticipated using the camera, I’d affixed it in its carrying position (i.e., reversed, so that it wasn’t actually projecting beyond the lens itself). But out come the cameras, and we start shooting various strange and bizarre items, from various strange and bizarre positions. Now at some stage I just happen to be somewhere where my mate wants to shoot, so he pushes me out the way (nothing unusual in that I must add). Or rather, he pushes my camera out the way. And I just happen to be using the Canon. And he just happens to inadvertently push it away by palm on lens.
I don’t believe it! So what do I find? A nasty greasy smear all across the lens! Ok, it cleaned off readily enough, but so far that’s the only time that anyone’s pushed me in some way or another, and it would have to be the one occasion when I didn’t have the lens hood properly attached. Naturally, having laboriously cleaned the lens off (with the greatest of care) I immediately affixed the hood the right way round… but it really was just shutting the stable door after the horse has bolted.
So hat off to you mate #1… you were absolutely right!
However (yes, I’m not finished yet)… the damage wouldn’t have been as disastrous as it could have been anyway. Thanks to another tip I’d picked up somewhere in my reading.
Lens filters!
UV or Skylight filters. Theoretically (that is, I still intend to test this) they don’t make a tremendous difference to the shot, but they do serve to protect the lens (I’m talking about the circular screw-on variety of filter of course). Consequently, all my lenses (and I’ve now got… um… five) have either UV or Skylight filters on permanently. Thank heaven!
Latest Flickr Uploads #2
February 21, 2008
Just uploaded another huge batch of photos to Flickr. Basically three main “themes” are sort of covered (and an extra “secret” one that I’ll do a separate post about): The Bear Public House on Bedford High Street (this is getting to be one of the most photographed pubs in Bedford I’d guess… thanks to my mate and I) - this set also includes a few of my mate and I messing around as we often do… camera-wise I’d hasten to add; Bedford town bridge at night (early evening actually, but dark enough for them to have switched on the coloured floods… I’m always awed by the effect); and “sundry buildings” in the town.
However, the pic at the top of this post is probably one of the most interesting… cos I shot it with the new lens. More to the point, it was a really grey day (hence poor lighting), it was on full zoom, and I wasn’t using my brand spanking new tripod!
No complaints from me there.
And is it my imagination or are some of my pics getting a bit more “arty”? Hmm. Can’t be doing with that. Have to get a firm grip on myself in future.
I want this house!
February 21, 2008
From the time I moved to Bedford and spotted this house I was seized by an almost indescribable urge… I want it!
And every time I see it, even now, the longing is no less intense. Not being a particularly materialistic person, nor overly concerned by my physical surroundings, I find myself at something of a loss to explain this curious desire.
There’s just something about it that appeals to me so strongly its almost beyond words.
Needless to say, its not going to happen (sob sob!). For very good reason(s)… firstly, it appears to have been converted into flats or individual apartments (oh, the crime of it!), and secondly, I couldn’t afford it anyway. Not unless I won the lottery or something. And to do that I’d have to take part in the lottery in the first place.
Ah well, there’s no harm in dreaming I suppose
This is the neighbouring property, almost equally as nice…
(Addendum: Hmm… now I’ve fully embraced this post-processing lark I notice that I could have cropped that pic at the head of this post a bit better. Problem was, there was some rubbish on the left I needed to (and did) get rid of, but I didn’t want to cut any further into top or bottom (if I want to maintain the same aspect ratio, which I do), so I’m left with that bit of a house on the right which, to my eye, throws the whole pic out. Should have composed it better when I took the shot really, but options were a bit limited given the position of the house in relation to its surroundings. Oh well, try harder next time.)
Dismayed, disheartened, discoffee tastes foul…
February 19, 2008
Dunno what I did to this mug of coffee, but its horrible. A huge disappointment and not at all up to my expectations. I know I can do better… dammit, I drink enough of the stuff. Frustrating!
Bit like my photo exploits really.
Having spent ages yesterday sorting through the “mist photos” I shot (see previous post), ditching the truly terrible ones, refining the resulting lot even more, processing the remainder, converting to JPEGs and optimising, then uploading them to Flickr, what do I find?
Well, they looked ok in Lightroom, but on the Flickr pages some of them were truly embarrassing (must be something to do with seeing them against Flickr’s white background as opposed to the muted dark grey background I have Lightroom set to. And its not helped by the fact that I’m not using a colour-calibrated screen and, no matter what I do to it the screen on this machine’s got a distinct colour cast to it!).
So spent even more ages today going back to the original RAW files and doing some fairly significant re-processing.
Just as well really that my thoughts on post-processing have changed somewhat (see this post) since I’ve been involved in this photo lark.
I’m still not into the extreme processing (yet!) where the end result bears little relationship to “real life” as it were (like the HDR stuff though I have to confess it has great impact and I find it quite impressive) but I’m not now quite as averse to a bit of substantial tinkering and moderate cropping to achieve a reasonable effect.
Then more ages still replacing about half the original batch on Flickr with an internet connection that for some unaccountable reason was not up to its usual standard (and Lightroom seemed to be working incredibly slowly as well - maybe its about time I rebooted the computer).
Still, the upside of this is I suppose that its good never to be satisfied, cos that’s then a constant goad to try to improve. Anyway, that’s what I’m telling myself.


















