One more step on the learning curve
April 30, 2008
Ok, forget about stuff like focus, camera shake (hmm… must remember to tell you the fascinating story about my shaky hands one day), exposure, and all the rest of that super “proper photographer” type stuff.
This little batch is all about white balance. Again.
Further to a previous post where I was experimenting with manually adjusting the white balance using a white card, well, I had another read of my camera’s manual the other day (and before anyone comments, yep, I do know how to read and yep, shameful though it is to admit, I do occasionally refer to the manual!), and was a bit irritated to discover that whilst it explains how to manually tweak the white balance using a white card and various obscure camera settings, it actually suggests that using an 18% grey card will achieve better (presumably that means more accurate) results.
So, in town today, wander into the local Jessops and enquire whether they have any grey card in stock.
Well, at this point I have to observe that I’ve suddenly become deeply unimpressed by certain members of the Jessops crew (at least in my local branch).
For I’m met with a blank stare. Clearly some explanation’s in order. So, helpful little soul that I am, I explain that I want it to adjust my white balance (hmm… bit of a “side thought” here… I’m surprised none of the “politically correct advocates” - or, in my language, “bloody interfering do-gooders” haven’t yet picked up on that term as being racially offensive).
See light dawning in eyes of shop assistant. “Ah, that’s laboratory equipment isn’t it? We don’t stock that any longer.”
“That’s strange”, sez I, “cos its listed in your catalogue!” (I’m not 100% sure of this but took a gamble cos I’m fairly certain I’d seen it in the latest Jessops catalogue).
A look of “Dammit, he’s got me” flashed across the assistant’s face, whereupon he suddenly dived toward the front of the shop and started rummaging through an “end of line” bin.
And hey, triumphantly produced a grey card. A bit more expensive than I thought it was gonna be (dammit, I come from a printing/graphics background and I simply know these things aren’t that expensive to produce) but a grey card nonetheless.
Hastily shoving hand into pocket for the required dosh, I happily parted therewith. The actual card was a bit creased but as it was the very last one they had in stock, and as it had been reduced by a quid… hey, I’m not complaining. It’ll still do the trick (maybe).
Have to say though that some of the Jessops staff are in dire need of a bit of training. I took great delight in telling the lad “Look, this isn’t laboratory-type stuff. If you’ve got any customers who’re serious about using dSLRs then this is an almost mandatory bit of kit.”
But to return to the whole point of this post… this present small batch of pics were shot (in my favourite location of course, where the lighting’s really “challenging”… my few regular visitors will know exactly where I mean) having manually adjusted the white balance using the grey card. First impressions are that its even more spot-on than with the white card.
And another lesson I was reminded of (for the umpteenth time!)… the camera’s own LCD gives a totally different (and inaccurate) rendition than does a colour-calibrated monitor. Be warned!
Now I wonder if that’s deliberate?
April 30, 2008
Despite any appearances to the contrary (see this post) I’m not really into shooting pics of window displays.
However, this one (in a window of a major store on the local High Street) caught my eye (in a very literal sense!) and I just couldn’t resist snapping it.
Maybe I’m completely wrong, but it strikes me there’s something not quite right (or perhaps “respectable” would be a better word?) about the pose of that window-dresser’s dummy.
To clarify, the… um… “knees” of the dummy are just below adult eye-level to passers-by.
Or maybe I’m just a bit old-fashioned?
On the other hand, I was in the company of two friends (with a significant age gap) when I spotted this and we all agreed it was “just not right”!
Site stuff
April 29, 2008
No, panic not, I’m not thinking about changing the theme again. (Well, maybe I’ve thought about it a coupla times, but I doubt that I shall do it. Not in the immediate future, anyway.)
No, this is about something else entirely.
Thanks to the amazing WordPress folk I’ve managed to acquire a new domain name for this blog, which I’ll probably start flashing around at all my various places on the Web. Although the blog will still be available at fotdmike.wordpress.com, that address is actually now redirecting to www.fotdmike.com! Cool, eh?
Oh glee… yet another domain name to add to my growing collection.
Also, I’ve implemented an email contact form on this site so anyone who wants to email me (not that I’m encouraging it you understand, nor even assuming that anyone would actually be foolish enough to want to do that) can do so without leaving this site. The form’s to be found on both the Copyright and the About Me pages.
(Be warned though, I customarily take ages to reply to emails… if indeed I remember to do so at all!)
And finally, I’ve also updated the Flickr an’ Me page to reflect the current situation a propos using them to host/share my pics.
Opticians? Sneaky!
April 28, 2008
There was I sat at my desk quietly minding my own business doing some computer-type stuff, when I happened to casually glance up and out of the window.
Now there’s a very good reason for doing this periodically.
Last time I went for an eye test (”You’ll need to wear spectacles for reading small print Mr L, but your eyes are fine… for a man of your age”. Hmph!) I asked the optician whether constantly peering at computer monitors (which I seem to be doing for the majority of my waking hours) did any harm to one’s eyesight.
And was advised that no, providing the monitor’s at the right height and distance, and providing I rest my eyes periodically (say every 15 minutes) by looking away and refocussing (like, say, out of the window), there shouldn’t be a problem.
Now it was that last remark (about looking out the window) that’s causing me to begin to suspect that my optician is secretly in cahoots with photographic kit emporiums.
For it follows that the more photos one takes the more addicted one becomes to the pursuit, and the more addicted one becomes to the pursuit the more one wants to upgrade one’s kit, which necessarily entails spending lavish amounts of money.
This is how it starts…
So, to repeat, I happened to casually glance up and out of the window… and caught sight of some quite amazing cloud formations.
All thought of computer-related tasks went clean out my head. Knowing how quickly the sky can change (practically by the minute) I hastily grabbed my photo gear, jumped into some reasonable footwear, and headed straight for the nearest open places.
With the end result of adding yet another bunch of pics to my growing collection to… um… remind me what the sky looks like?
Something a bit different
April 25, 2008
In the full flush of my love affair with dSLRs I decided to abandon them and return to the good old point & shoot!
Well, perhaps that’s not strictly accurate, nor quite what happened.
So I s’pose I’d best come clean. Thing is y’see, strange as it may seem there are some situations where I can’t/won’t drag my camera gear along with me.
That’s not to say I’m totally without image-capturing devices. Oh no! Of course, there’s always the “camera equipped” mobile phone (heaven forbid), but more pertinently there’s usually my trusty old DiMAGE Z6 lurking somewhere in the unwholesome depths of my rucksack.
There was I then, out without photo kit, when suddenly it started raining. Quite heavily in fact.
Quick as a flash I thought “That’s rain, that is” (nothing if not observant, that’s me), “and I haven’t got very many rain shots.” (Notice how speedily I make all the right connections!)
Whip out the point & shoot, fire it up, and start feverishly clicking away.
Well, perhaps that’s not strictly accurate. (This seems to be getting repetitive!)
What I actually did was first mull over whether I could really be bothered to take any pics. Having laboriously reached a sort of tentative decision that I could, I then had to rummage around in the aforementioned rucksack for the camera. (”Dammit, I know its in here somewhere!”) Then check to see if it had any batteries in it (”Hmm, wonder if there’s any juice left in ‘em?”). Then press the “On” switch and wait a century or so for the thing to come to life (”Hello! Are you gonna wake up or what?”). Then familiarise myself again with how the thing works (”Ooh, this feels weird!”). And then, finally (wow, the excitement’s really getting to me now) fire off a shot.
I’d really only intended to take one or two. But looking at the result on the LCD thought to myself “Hey, they’re not at all bad.” Which was sufficient to encourage me to perhaps try just one or two more… and then one or two more… and so on.
Ok, the end results aren’t brilliant. But then again, I didn’t really expect them to be. They’re passable though (at least for my rough’n'ready purposes).
And I discovered something else. It was actually quite fun. No worrying about the aperture, or the exposure, or the white balance, or any one of a thousand other things (how quickly we start taking this process for granted!). Simply switch to Auto, point, and click away. (Hmm… that’s odd… I have a distinct recollection of having said something almost identical in the dim and distant past - well, at least all of seven months ago - about the Canon dSLR. S’pose that’s what’s called progress.)
What was particularly curious was that I found myself rather more impressed with this particular camera (specifically, a Konica-Minolta DiMAGE Z6) than I had been when I first acquired it. Ok, its got its shortcomings and it obviously can’t compare to a dSLR, but its also got some quite nice plus points.
Its dead easy to use for a start, absent many of the extra “features” that so many of the latest point & shoots seem to sport. The inclusion of which mean there are more variables to be concerned about instead of just getting on and snapping pics.
It fits comfortably in the hand (its not really a pocket-sized camera… which I s’pose is both a for and an against), and its got a decent viewfinder, also unlike the latest point & shoots (good for folk, like myself, who can’t get on with the notion of composing a shot in the LCD screen).
Its also got quite an impressive optical zoom (12x) which is apparently equivalent to about a 420mm lens! Seems that, in its day, this was one of its major selling points for few point & shoots could match that zoom capability.
In fact, having tended to abandon it somewhat since acquiring the dSLRs, I really should take it for a workout rather more frequently. In its own way this little session proved very satisfying.
Oh, and there was another reason for doing this little sort of mini-series of pics (13 in all)… it helps to illustrate something I said to a mate of mine in an email the other day: doesn’t really matter where I am, I’ll usually manage to find something to photograph [grin].
A question of balance
April 23, 2008
Sometimes, notwithstanding the fact that I’m a self-confessed “Idiot” (photography-wise at least) I almost manage to impress myself.
And this is one of those occasions!
Its the matter of White Balance. Generally, I don’t have much of a problem with it. Most of the stuff I shoot is outdoors and one of the camera’s own white balance presets (auto, daylight, shade, cloudy, etc) does the business admirably.
(Although even here I sometimes run into problems, such as when I recently visited a friend and the pics I shot of his closest town were, so he gleefully informed me, all exhibiting a somewhat cyan hue. Well, I fiddled around with them for a while but, on repeatedly getting feedback from friend to the effect that “that’s not quite right” I eventually said “Sod it” and just went with “as shot”. But that was about the time I was also colour-calibrating my monitor, so there may have been other variables in play.)
So to recap, shooting out of doors doesn’t generally present a problem… but indoors! Ah, that’s another matter entirely. Despite trying all the various camera presets (fluorescent, tungsten, etc) somehow I always seemed to end up with shots that simply didn’t look right colour-wise.
Of course I’m fully aware of that “Manual White Balance” option on the camera, but have studiously avoided it so far on the basis that its one of those weird “real photographer” type settings, despite the fact that its kept niggling away in the back of my mind.
But so p****d off have I become with the dismal failure (again colour-wise) of my indoor shots, necessitating significant post-processing to get them looking even half-way right, that I decided I’d have to firmly grasp the nettle, and venture into the mysterious realm of manual white balance.
First step then, read what the manual has to say (arghhh!).
So this afternoon found me in my local pub (although in point of fact its not strictly such, but that’s another story entirely), manual in one hand, camera in the other, specs perched on end of nose. (My “local” is actually the ideal place for such an exercise, simply because the lighting in there is so… um… challenging!)
Recite all the instructions (involving the use of a white card and various obscure camera settings) aloud to my mate (who happens to be the bar manager there). Not that he has any intention of helping me (awkward sod) but I find that doing such helps to “fix” the various steps in that mire which is my excuse for a mind.
Step myself through the process “for real”, and then take a few test shots.
Lo and behold… it works! Amazing! I’m really chuffed! What I end up with are a series of shots that (again colour-wise… boringly) are the closest I’ve come so far to the original (i.e., “real life”). Wow!
I’m especially pleased because my own particular “take” on photography is that generally pics should emulate, as closely as possible, the original scene.
If they fail to do that, then why bother with all the technical gadgetry of cameras and suchlike, and not simply (!) draw/paint a picture in the first place?
Ok, the resulting shots are pretty defective regarding exposure etc, but in terms of colour they’re definitely the biz!
So unlike yesterday’s photo session, today’s has definitely ended on something of a high note.
Ah well, can’t win ‘em all… revisited
April 23, 2008
…but at least I can win some of ‘em!
I’ve got this mate (yes, I do have at least one!). Who’s got this girlfriend (lucky him!). Who just happens to work in a shop. And has done one of the window displays for it. And asked him (my mate that is) to take a few pics of it (the window display that is).
Well, the opportunity was just too good to miss, so I just had to muscle in on the act in my own inimitable fashion.
So here’s the situation…
Shop window, loads of glass, sun reflecting straight off it (plus reflections of passers-by etc), shadows cast by photographers (i.e., us!) cos the sun was sort of to our backs.
Golden opportunity to revisit all the mistakes of yesterday (see previous post) re the polarising filter (for this was obviously exactly the right sort of situation in which to use it.
And its the first time I’ve ever tried to capture a window display. In the normal course of events its not really my “thing”.
I have to say (well, I don’t, but I will) that I’m quite pleased with the results. This time I was adjusting the amount of polarisation whilst facing towards the light source and I think that’s done the trick. Must remember that for next time I use it.
Re the display itself… given that “charity shops” (which is the nature of the enterprise in which she works) are necessarily limited in terms of stock and props, I think she did rather well in a tasteful sort of way, and I really like that she’s marked St George’s Day (the patron saint of England, for those that don’t already know) 23rd April.
