Tinkering with the insides of a camera when you have no idea what you’re doing sounds like a stupid idea, but it’s safer than you probably think, and easier too. And after all, how will you ever know what you’re doing if you never give it a shot? Read on for some pointers to help you along with your first few tries.

Today’s victim is this Nikkormat FTn. It was my first real camera, and worked like a charm for about a year (after I got it, it’s been ticking for at least forty) before the shutter gave up. While it obviously isn’t built exactly the same as every other camera, this step-by-step disassembly should give you a general idea of what to look for when you take apart an SLR of a similar vintage.

Here’s what I’ve got gathered for the task. From left to right, I’ve got a compass, tweezers, screwdrivers in lots of sizes, a magnifying glass, and a rubber pad (for unscrewing screws without slots)

At least, I think this thing is called a compass. You’ll need it to take apart screws that only have two holes with which to manipulate them. If you’re actually well equipped, I think you’re supposed to use a lens spanner but then you wouldn’t be reading this.

Alright, let’s start. Most of what you’ll want to get at is under the top plate, so all I’m going to show here is how to remove it. You first want to identify all the points where the plate’s connected. I’ve found two screws on the front, one on the side, the advance lever, and the rewind crank. Taking this in order, let’s go with the front screws first. (You can see this picture was taken during reassembly)

What I didn’t show was the washers held in place underneath that came tumbling out when the screws came off.  This is why you should try to work as much as possible with the camera sitting on a flat surface (not held up to your face), and have something underneath to catch falling parts. The ideal solution is a big washbasin lined with a white towel to prevent bouncing and make the bits more visible, but in this tutorial I used a whiteboard, hoping the rim would catch stuff. At any rate, now we can see the old-school aperture indexing mechanism underneath. I don’t think many cameras have this kind of top plate with a separate front plate so there’s not much to see here.

Here’s the next screw, just on the right side of the camera all normal like. Often cameras will have a screw in this spot on either side. Remember to use a correctly sized screwdriver to remove it, or you’ll end up damaging the paint (as I have here), or ruining the screw. You can’t just buy replacements for these most of the time so be careful.

Now for the controls on top. The advance lever obviously blocks the top plate from coming off, so we need to get it out of the way. The circular part is actually a slotless screw on most cameras, so firmly (but gently) apply enough pressure to get a good grip with the rubber pad, and then remove the screw.

A gentle pull on the lever will show you that it isn’t quite ready to come off yet. There’s another screw on top, which you remove by adjusting the compass to the correct size to fit the two holes, and rotating.

Now the lever comes off. Notice the wavy metal washer on top - this slips off easily, so make sure gravity is working in your favor before removing any parts, like I suggested before.

The rewind crank is screwed onto the shaft in a pretty normal way, but if you try to unscrew it you’ll notice it’s impossible to get any grip because the entire shaft rotates. You need to jam the shaft to let you unscrew the top part, which I’ve done with the back of a pair of tweezers. Make sure you’re not damaging the insides when you’re doing this though.

And here’s what’s left behind. The brass ring also needs to come off, which is where the compass comes in again.

Notice that the silver thingy on top actually comes off too. This needs to be in an exact position in order to get the fold out crank to sit right, so be careful during reassembly. I find it best to stack the parts as below, and then screw it back on upside down. Most rewind cranks share this design.

Throughout the process, you should be gently pulling at the top plate to see where it’s still fixed. If you give it a pull now, you’ll find that it’s now free! Provided you’re taking apart an FTn, of course. However, you can’t get giddy yet and rip the plate off because there could be wires attached to the underside of the plate. You’ll see here that I’ve already snapped one.

And now you can see the innards of the camera. Pretty amazing, isn’t it?

Here’s an earlier disassembly experiment of mine, a (thankfully already dead) Yashica Minister-700. It came apart pretty much the same way, but I stupidly didn’t document the process and ended up not being able to put it back together. I then ripped out the lens in a fit of fury and now use it as a loupe. One matter of interest with this camera is that to take off the top plate, you need to get at some screws under the leatherette - it’s facts like these that mean you should really try and look for documentation before taking apart an unfamiliar camera.

Well, that’s about it, everyone! Exploring the craftsmanship of days gone by can be really fun, but remember to be VERY CAREFUL every step of the way, and try not to do this to any camera which has any residual photo-taking value left. As you can see from my examples, mistakes are all too easy to make.

First, I’ll show you how to remove dust from a single photo in ACR. Load your image and select the “Retouch Tool”, hotkey “B”. Using this tool is very easy - click and drag to determine the size of the dust speck, then position the circle that determines the area of the image ACR will use to patch the photo. For this first step, it is best to use an image at a small f/ stop. For this image, I used an equivalent aperture of f/95 on an old Nikon telephoto lens. However, with most modern lenses, use f/22 or so. Also, make sure the reference picture is somewhat plain - a photo of a white sheet of paper, a photo of the sky, etc. Patterns, detail and shadows mask the dust, so you may not find all the dust in an image when using a regular photo.

Locate the specks of dust you’d like to remove. Shown here are two large specks of dust, boxed in red. The Retouch Tool is at the top, also boxed in red. Click the center of the dust speck, and drag so the retouch tool completely covers it.

Make sure the “Type” of Retouch tool you are using is set to “Heal”. Click and hold the mouse button over the speck of dust. Drag to the side of the speck, so that the red circle completely covers the dust speck. Let go, and ACR will automatically calculate the area it will patch the image from, shown with a green circle. You can manually set the area by dragging the red or green circles.

To cover another area / dust speck, just repeat the step. The other areas you used the Retouch tool on will now turn blue. If you want to go back and edit them, just click the blue circle.

Removing dust from an image is just that simple. However, to remove dust from multiple images, there is an extra step. With two or more images loaded, perform the same dust removal on one of the images. Then, with the raw file you removed the dust on still selected, press “Select All” at the top left of the Camera Raw dialog box.

Making sure your retouched image is still selected, press “Synchronize”. From the drop down menu, select “Spot Removal”, or make sure “Spot Removal” is the only button checked.

That’s it! You might want to check each image to make sure that the spot removal was performed successfully in each image. However, now that you know that every piece of dust is selected, it makes removing them from the individual images much easier.

See a higher resolution version of the final image here.

The key to proper exposure is to expose as much as you can before “blowing” the highlights. This means to make the image as bright as possible until your image has areas that are pure white. Most cameras will display this with a “highlights” feature, where areas on the screen will flash or blink. Take the photo one third of a stop lower than the exposure which gives you “blown highlights”, then follow this tutorial.

You only need one photo for this, preferably a raw image. You don’t need to bracket or anything else - this is a much simpler, more controllable technique than using “High Dynamic Range” programs.

The image above is the image as it appears straight out of the raw converter, without any changes. Feel free to download the .NEF and .XMP file here so you can follow along. The first step is to compensate for the shadows of the ground in Adobe Camera RAW. To do this, I used a “Fill Light” setting of 30. I adjusted the “Highlights Recovery” all the way to 100 to give the clouds and sky a darker appearance. If you did not shoot in Raw mode, you can use the “Highlights / Shadows” tool for the same effect - brighten the shadows in replace for “Fill Light”, and darken the highlights to replace the “Recovery” edit.

Critical analysis of this image shows there are two parts - the sky and the ground, or the areas that need brightening and the areas that need darkening. If we reduce the image to these two simple groups, it is easy to understand what needs to be edited, and how.

Now that we understand the areas that need to be processed, you must go about setting the brightness of each individual area. To do this, create a new Levels layer adjustment [under Layer > New Adjustment Layer > Levels], and determine the “white point” and black point of the given area. This isn’t always applicable - in the sky, for example, there is no “black point”. If you cannot determine a good black or white point, simply drag the sliders until you have the desired effect.

Remember, only look at the given area you are processing. If you are editing the ground, don’t bother about the sky as the edits you make will not effect this area in the end result. For the white point below, I used the bright Daisy flowers in the foreground. For the black point, I used a shadow in the tree line at the back.

Setting the white and black point as such blew the sky out - however, this was easy to correct. Using a soft, round brush on the levels adjustment layer’s mask erased the layer’s effect on the sky, returning it to the original muted highlights.

Next I repeated the process. However, this time I wanted to darken the sky - so I created a levels layer adjustment layer that darkened the overall image, then masked it off so that it only effected the sky’s brightness levels. This provided a subtle effect on the photo.

This technique can be used to change the appearance of individual areas of the photo. For example, I thought that the blues in the sky at the top left were too saturated and unnatural. I created a Hue/Saturation adjustment layer and turned saturation down to -15. Then, I masked it off so it only applied to the top left section. This left the top left section with less saturation, while the rest of the image was just as vivid.

If you have any questions on this tutorial, feel free to leave them in the comments! Also, if you’ve read this far, consider Digging this post.

The obvious first stop for Internet shopping is eBay. Like with anything else sold online, prices tend to be pretty low there, and you can often pick up insane bargains. For more popular models, search by “time remaining” to see bargains that may have slipped by the public’s eye. There’s also a massive selection of gear available, from 18th century brass barrel lenses to DSLR models so new they’re not even out in your country. At the same time, you have to contend with people who have no idea whether their wares work or not, outright scammers, and the fact that you may not be able to make any sense out of the blurry pictures that are the norm there. For your first purchase, it’s better to wait until you pick up some more experience before venturing into eBay - it’s too easy to get scammed, or get sent a dud by a well-meaning but uninformed seller. Often times, eBay is best for sellers, not buyers [note: I bought a somewhat rare PC-Nikkor from www.ffordes.net for $200 USD. I put it on eBay for $150, and it sold for over $350. People get caught up on bidding frenzies in eBay, it's best not to follow that mentality - Charles]. Make sure you check the prices of used equipment at other online stores before bidding.

It’s probably a better idea to save up a little more money and pay the extra for shopping at a reputable used camera dealer online. Some general photo stores, like B&H [arguably the best for new items, too], Adorama, and Ffordes have extensive preowned gear sections, and then there are stores specializing in secondhand stuff like KEH and Pacific Rim. These stores tend to be much harsher rating their gear than the average “EX++++ MINTY” eBayer (KEH in particular is known for spotless “bargain” lenses) [note: I have recieved three BGN lenses from KEH, none had any optical problems like scratches or dust. The BGN camera i bought metered perfectly, and was in good shape], and in case you don’t like what you get they tend to have good return policies too.

If your main concern is money, dealing with individuals over forums or Craigslist generally yields the lowest prices. With Craigslist or your local camera enthusiast forum, you should be able to check the gear locally - a huge advantage over eBay. And people on closer knit forums like photo.net, Fred Miranda, and Rangefinderforum tend to have reputations to protect, and prefer selling to other members as opposed to putting things on eBay.

A "BGN" quality Pentax Original

So all this time, I’ve had you worrying about the working condition of the gear you’re shopping for. What exactly should you be looking for before buying? With camera bodies, check that the shutter fires at all speeds - with older ones, you may want to time the 1 and 1/2 second settings, and that it fires upside down (Sometimes they don’t. Really!), and that the self timer works. Ensure that viewing surfaces like mirrors, screens, and finders are clear, and show no evidence of element separation. If you’re looking at a rangefinder, decide whether the patch is contrasty enough for your use, and make sure it’s in alignment. Also check the film transport (if any) to see whether it works too - hopefully you can load a roll. On digital cameras, check for dead pixels on the screen, and take a few test shots to see if the sensor’s okay.

With lenses, you want to be checking for fungus, which shows up as spiderweb-like marks. These don’t affect picture quality by themselves, but they secrete acid which burns scratches into the glass. Check for haze and element separation as well, but don’t complain if there’s a little internal dust when you shine a flashlight in - even new lenses have some. Then make sure the mechanics are okay, that the aperture opens cleanly at each stop, and that the stop down mechanism works correctly (you may have to mount newer lenses on a body and use DoF preview depending on your system). Of course, take test shots if you can.

A word of warning: once you start buying used gear, you may find it hard to stop! The truth is, even the newest, hottest models are available for cheap secondhand within weeks of release. Until you’re talking custom made cameras, every item of gear is invariably available somewhere in great usable condition for a massive bargain. Unless you’re really set on getting a warranty, most of the time I don’t see much of a reason not to buy used at all - and now you know how.

Load the photograph you’d like to correct. In this situation, I’m using a photo taken at an 1800mm 35mm equivalent. That is a long lens. For comparison purposes, this photo was taken at 20mm with a Nikon D300.

Here is the hazy photograph that we’ll be editing in this tutorial, shown at the red box / center crop from the previous photo.

The first step is to create a new level adjustment layer. Click the layer adjustment button in the layers palette and select “Levels…” from the menu.

You should see a screen like this. This is the levels adjustment layer screen. The black graph in the center with the three distinct spikes is called a “histogram”. If the graph is farther to the left, it means there are more dark pixels in the image. If the graph is farther to the right, it means there are more bright pixels. If the graph is very flat or spread out, it indicates the photograph has high dynamic range. If the graph is very narrow, as it is here, it indicates narrow dynamic range.

Since we only want to remove the blue haze from the image, rather than the overall tone, we are going to work on the color channels, rather than the RGB or “composite” of the three channels. If we work on the RGB composite, we will be effecting brightness, rather than the balance of colors in the image. Press “CTRL + 1″ to edit the red channel alone, or press the “RGB” drop down menu at the top and select “Red”.

Click and drag the black point and white point sliders underneath the histogram to the edge of the histogram, marked by the black pixels at the bottom.

If you look at your image, you’ll notice this changes the amount of red in the image. At this step, the image will appear to be unnaturally blue since we’ve altered the level of red in the image.

Now, click either the “Green” section in the levels drop-down layer, or press “CTRL + 2″. Make the same adjustments to the green section as you did to the Red section.

Notice how the black and white point sliders have been dragged exactly to the start of the histogram, indicated by the edge of the black graph in the image.

Now, looking at your image, you should see that the colors are much more accurate. Press “OK” on the levels dialog box. However, we did not change the overall brightness of the image [by much], so it appears to be very dark. Double click on the levels adjustment layer in the layers palette, and this time edit the “RGB” section.

As you can see, the graph has changed quite a bit since the first step. The data is more spread out throughout the graph, indicating better tonal range, but it is clumped to the left, indicating under-exposure.

Drag the highlight slider on the right towards the center, looking at the image to determine when to stop. If you hold “ALT” while sliding, you’ll see the image turn black. As you slide to the left, some pixels will appear. This means these pixels are over exposed - past 100% brightness. Data is lost in these pixels, so it is best to avoid these in area you want to show detail.

After adjusting the brightness of the image using Levels, the image appears to be taken on a perfectly clear day. After a little bit of sharpening, the image looks much better than before.

If you have any questions on this tutorial, feel free to leave us a comment.

When using a lens with a fast aperture, there are three things you’ll notice: better low-light performance, the possibility of more depth of field or blur, and how much sharper your images are at comparative apertures in similarly priced zoom lenses. As a quick definition, a fast lens doesn’t refer to the autofocus speed, rather the speed of the aperture. A “faster” aperture is one that lets more light in, allowing a faster shutter speed or a lower ISO.

1) Better low light performance.

Most zoom lenses these days have variable maximum apertures. This means that as you zoom in, the size of the aperture changes and less light is let through the lens, even if you’re already set to the maximum sized aperture (lowest f number). The designation of this usually follows the lens’s focal length on the box. For example, Nikon’s very popular super zoom, the 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6, has an maximum aperture of f/3.5 at the wide end, but as you zoom in, it is reduced down to f/5.6. While this can be compensated for with a slower shutter speed or a higher ISO, the low light performance of the lens is best at 18mm and worst at 200mm.

Now, let’s take a fast prime lens in to consideration. For example, the Nikon 50mm f/1.4D. Despite having no zoom function, this lens lets use use a maximum aperture of f/1.4, which is much brighter than the 18-200mm’s f/3.5. Not only this, but since the 18-200mm gets darker as you zoom, at 50mm the 18-200mm has a maximum aperture of only f/4.8.

With a fast prime lens, you can shoot at 50mm with a very fast aperture of f/1.4, rather than the slow aperture of f/4.8 using the 18-200mm. To put this in comparison, at f/1.4 and ISO400, if you required a shutter speed of 1/60 second, at f/4.8 and ISO400, you’d need a shutter speed of 1/8 of a second.

50mm f/1.4D - f/1.6, 1/3s, ISO800

2) Less depth of field

The wider aperture of the faster lens makes for less depth of field - the distances between which subjects appear sharp, which is useful in many situations. You can blur a distracting sign in the background when taking portraits, or you use it for creative effects. Using less depth of field is great for a more unique look that is really only available in digital SLRs or film cameras. When using a point and shoot or a camera phone, the image sensor is so small and the lenses are of a relatively high aperture that makes depth of field very hard to control in general photo taking - many portraits have the background in focus too. Notice in the image below how you are drawn to the subject’s eyes, rather than a distracting background.

Taken with a Sigma 20mm f/1.8 on a D300

3) Comparatively sharper images.

A prime lens’s advantage is often its simplicity. Light, inexpensive, fast. Also, since it does not need as many pieces of glass in the lens, it is less prone to flare or other issues that can lead to reduced sharpness. In the photo on the left, taken with a Nikon 50mm f/1.4D at f/5.6 on a Nikon D80, you can see that the lens is very sharp. On the photo on the right, taken with an 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6 at f/5.6, you can see that this lens doesn’t have the same resolving power as the lighter, cheaper, faster prime lens.

Both images at f/5.6, 1/60s, ISO160 on a Nikon D80

Recap and Suggestions

Having a light prime lens in your bag can make a world of difference when the sun goes down or you step inside, because of the faster aperture. However, the creative effects of this lens have usage even on a well-lit day or even in the studio. Even in the retail market, there are inexpensive prime lenses for all makes of camera. If you’re willing to look at the used market, there are thousands of these fast lenses because before the creation and optimization of the zoom lens, these were the standard lenses that came with the camera.

If you are a Nikon user, the 50mm f/1.8D is a good budget choice. If you have a bit more money and want a higher quality product, the 50mm f/1.4D is the way to go.

If you are a Canon user, the 50mm f/1.8 is a good lens at a less expensive price as the Nikon equivalent. However, you also have the option of more expensive 50mm f/1.4 USM, or the professional [and very expensive] 50mm f/1.2L

If you are a Pentax user, they have a 50mm f/1.4. If you prefer Sigma lenses, they too have a 50mm f/1.4 lens. For Olympus users, you’ll need a Sigma 30mm f/1.4 lens, as Olympus doesn’t have any normal lenses faster than f/2 for the 4:3 mount. Of course, the Sigma is available in the other major mounts as well.

Of course, these links are all to retail, new-in-box lenses with a warranty. If you decide to go the used route, especially for camera makers like Canon or Nikon, there are manual focus lenses from older film cameras like the Noct-Nikkor 50mm f/1.2, which had legendary sharpness even when used at its maximum aperture. Canon even made a short-lived lens for their Canon 7 rangefinder that had an aperture of f/0.95!

While the 50mm fast prime lenses are the most popular, they are not the only focal length available. There is the brilliant Sigma 20mm f/1.8, available in mounts for Canon, Nikon, Sony and Sigma, as well as expensive telephoto lenses like the Nikon 200mm f/2 or the Canon 135mm f/2L. The Nikon and Canon “portrait lens” solutions are generally a fast 85mm prime, such as the 85mm f/1.4D or f/1.8D in Nikon mounts or the Canon 85mm f/1.2L or f/1.8. There is also an expensive Zeiss manual focus 85mm f/1.4 lens of very high quality available in Nikon or Pentax mounts, with an auto focus model for Sony cameras.

Other features of fast prime lenses are things like “Tilt-Shift” features, available in a 24mm f/2.8, 45mm f/2.8 or 90mm f/2.8 manual focus Canon lens, or an 85mm f/2.8 manual focus Nikon lens.

While zoom lenses are the most common in photography today, there is a huge number of quality prime lenses at pretty much any price point, many of them offering things you cannot achieve in a zoom lens, like a fast f/1.4 aperture or Tilt-Shift capability.

If you have any favorite fast, prime lenses that you think we’ve left out, post them in the comments. If you’ve read this far, perhaps consider digging the story.

To verify that the camera is in fact empty, make sure the camera shows a red “S” in the window. If it doesn’t, give it two cranks on the film winder. If the film winder stops, then there is another frame available on the roll, and you SHOULDN’T OPEN THE BACK. If the film winder keeps going without stopping, then it is safe to open the door - just make sure you give it three or four winds to make sure the roll is completely rolled up.

The frame counter shows “S”, or most often just a little past “8″ [indicating the roll has been shot], so you are ready to open the back. Flip the camera upside down and you’ll notice a little latch that opens the back. Pull it downwards and you’ll notice the door opens with an audible “click”. Notice, also, the switch to the left of the frame counter window. It is set to either “8EXP” for 120 roll film or “16EXP” for 220 roll film ["4EXP, or 120 short roll, is no longer made]. Set this to the film you will be loading before opening the back.

The first thing to look for when you open the back is the pressure plate. The most common type of medium format film, oddly enough, is the shorter, older 120 format. 220 format, which skimps on some of the paper backing in the middle of the roll [allowing twice as many photos versus 120 format], is cheaper [per photo], and requires less time changing rolls. It does have the advantage of less wasted film, though. If you load up with Velvia 50, then the light changes or it gets dark, you can change to, say, Delta 3200 after eight shots rather than sixteen [on a 6x9 camera].

After switching the pressure plate [if necessary], put the camera front-down and pull the tabs on the bottom down, away from the camera.

This will unlock the empty roll to the left from the camera’s winding mechanism. Take the roll out of the camera by pulling down on the left-hand latch and lifting the roll out. Set it down to the side, as we’ll need it to put the new film in.

Verify again the roll size you are using - 120 or 220 - then open the packaging. I’m using a roll of Ilford HP5+ ISO400 black and white print film in 120 roll film size.

You’ll see two things when you open the package. The roll of film and a piece of paper taped on. Remove the piece of paper, but make sure you leave the film identifier [the part that says "HP5" in green letters, in this case] intact. We’ll slide it into the film memo holder at a later step so we can remember the kind of film that is loaded.

The film identifier is still intact, and we’re ready to load the film. Note the cross on top: many film types only have one slot, but that’s fine. These will align with the metal winding mechanism inside the camera.

Thread the tip of the film’s paper backing through the other roll’s opening in the center. Give a little bit of slack from the loaded roll and rap the paper backing around the empty roll until it is tight - you should not be able to see any black plastic on either roll

Gently place the two rolls into the camera, as shown. Don’t try to jam it in : just leave it resting like this, we’ll load each roll one at a time.

First, pull the left-hand tab down, and then press the roll’s cross / slot on the top fits in with the winding mechanism. Push the tab in and fold it down so that it fits. Repeat the process on the right hand side.

With both tabs pulled down, the film is guaranteed to be in the camera’s winding mechanism. With the back open, wind the crank until the “START” or arrow lines up flush with the red dot [seen to the top left of "UNEXPO--" in the previous photo. Keep an eye on the dot, you don't want to go too far over or too far short [although there is a tiny bit of leeway].

Wind the film crank four or five times. The camera should now be lined up with “1″ in the frame counter window.

Shut the back of the camera, and find the film identifier slip you put to the side earlier. Tear the end off, and stick it in the memo holder in the back as shown. If you still have the box that the film came in, you can use the side of the box that has the same information. It’s a better fit, but often times I buy film in packs of 5 because it’s cheaper that don’t have the cardboard identification slips. This helps identify whether the film is color or black and white, and the ISO of the film. In this case, I’m using ISO400 black and white print film.

That’s it! You’re ready to start shooting.

The solution to this problem is quite simple. It’s actually saved under the “File” menu under “Automate”, then “Batch”. The “Batch” command will run a script, then close the open image. It is not for usage if you want to, say, sharpen every open image, because it will sharpen them and then exit without saving. The “Batch” command is best used when you are finished editing and you want to save and exit, possibly with another action at the same time like “resize” or “sharpen”.

In order to save all the open images, we need to first create an “Action”, or an automated set of events. One of Photoshop’s best workflow management options is the “Action”, as they are simple to make and very powerful.

If you don’t have the action window open, hit “ALT + F9″.

Create a new folder called “Saving”. The name of the folder is unimportant, but it’s good to keep all the Actions related to saving the image together. Click on the “New Action” button, and create an action called “Save and Exit”, making sure to set the folder to the one you created in this tutorial.

Saving an image to JPEG using the batch command has two requirements in Photoshop. The image must be an 8-bit image and it must not have layers. Before pressing “record”, navigate to “Image” then “Mode”. Change the image to a “16-bit”, so that we’ll have the option to change to 8-bit while recording. After this, press the “record” button and get ready to create the action.

Once you press “Record”, Photoshop will save everything you do into the action file. Playing the action file back again will repeat whatever you did. Navigate back to “Image” then “Mode” and change the file back to an 8-bit image. In the “Actions” window, you should see “Convert Mode” come up underneath the action’s title, like this.

Now, navigate to “Layers” and then “Flatten Image”, second from the bottom. Flatten Image should appear underneath the “Convert Mode” step.

Now hit “SHIFT + CTRL + S” to enter the “Save As…” dialog box. It doesn’t matter where you save the image, nor what you choose for the title, as long as you make sure you select “JPEG”. As long as there is a “Save As…” step in this action, it’s fine — we’re then going to tell the batch command to over ride the “Save As…” command, allowing you to save wherever you want from within the “Batch” dialog box. After this step, hit the “stop recording” button.

Note that while “10″ is a good setting for perfect quality with a smaller filesize than “12″, it is often too big. Thankfully, when setting up the Batch command, it will prompt you with this dialog box again, so if you’re working with images that don’t need excellent quality you can drop it down to 6 or 8.

Now, navigate to “File”, “Automate”, “Batch”. Select the Action you just created from the drop-down box, and make sure you select “Open Images” to tell the script that you want to work with the images you have open in Photoshop. Make sure to select “Override Action “Save As” Commands”.

If you didn’t add the “Flatten Image” or “8-bit” commands, then any 16- or 32-bit images or images with layers will stop the Batch process and ask you to navigate to the folder you’d like to save them in. It’s frustrating, and if you hit “Cancel” it simply exits the image without saving. However, if you choose to save as a .PSD, you can leave the 8-bit or Flatten Image steps out of the action, and the batch process will go through without an error.

That’s it! You’ve now successfully setup a way to automatically save [as a JPEG] and exit every image you have open.

Expanding this tutorial

This process is not just useful for saving images as JPEG files. You can expand it to batch resize images for Facebook, or sharpen and then save and exit each image. So how do you do each of those steps?

To batch resize for Facebook using Photoshop, you simply need to resize the largest side to 604px. This is the native size of Facebook’s photo albums, so that Facebook doesn’t resize poorly. This will preserve the original sharpness you save at, which is very handy for uploading images you really want to look good.

Find out the size of your image, in pixels. Let’s take the 10MP Nikon D40x for example. It produces an image that is 3872 x 2592 pixels. In order to make the largest side [3872 pixels] down to 604 pixels, you’d need to scale it down by “604 / 3872 = 0.15599″ or 15.59%. Create a new action, and go to “Image Size”. Change “pixels” to “percentage” and enter a value of 15.59%, with all other steps the same.

Now, whenever you run this action, it will resize to “Facebook size” before saving - a very hand technique which will save time on uploads, and improve the quality of your facebook pictures.

You could also enter a sharpening step, a step to give the colors a little boost. Just make sure you have the three key steps : convert to 8-bit, flatten layers, save as. Other than that, anything is possible!

Certainly the most obvious reason to try out film is the look. Photoshop and other software has come a long way, but the easiest, most reliable way of getting that “film look” that’s so popular nowadays is to just shoot film in the first place. Film comes in different styles: there is high contrast, low contrast, saturated film, film with very low saturation, even infrared film or other specialty films like film for aerial photography. Many photography magazines have only just started allowing digital images [of course, film is still allowed and recommended], since a well-scanned medium format or large format slide has much more sharpness and clarity than the $5000+ Canons or Nikons in the field. Despite the “digital revolution” in photography, and recent announcements like Polaroid’s decision to stop making instant film [there are even other alternatives like Fujifilm's FP-100C, which is an even better solution that fits in many Polaroid cameras], film is far from “dead”, and the advent of digital means an abundance of equipment on the used market.

So how does this affect your camera choice? Honestly, not much. The main thing you have to do is make sure that the films you want are available in the size your camera will use - no point in switching to film for the super-saturated colors of Fuji Velvia slide film if you get a 110 camera, for which only a couple types of negative film are available. But most film is available in 135 (35mm) and 120 [medium format] formats, which covers the vast majority of cameras you’re likely to consider.

If you’re just in it for the look and want a seamless transition from your digital gear, you may also want to consider how closely your film camera’s ergonomics match with your digital’s. It’s an easy choice if there’s a direct counterpart, like the Canon EOS-1v and 1D, or the Nikon F6 and D2x, especially because your cameras can even share lenses. Otherwise, most film SLRs are simple enough to just pick up and use, but trying to use a twin-lens reflex or press camera without documentation can be quite a shock.

By the way, that so called “lomo” look can be mostly duplicated just by cross processing your film (using negative film chemicals to process slide film). Don’t feel compelled to pay extra for a mediocre plastic camera when you can get a real classic system camera for the same price. If you really want the vignetting and edge softness, you can stick a big hood on your lens and rub vaseline on the front element, and still be able to take sharp pictures with the same camera after switching lenses or washing the Vaseline off. There’s no need to limit yourself to only “artsy” fuzzy ones, in fact the Vaseline method is more economical than it seems. The film maker Alfred Hitchcock had a number of shots in the film Vertigo that had Vaseline on the lens - it gives a soft effect that is much easier to control than using a Lomo, Holga or a Diana, or putting an expensive “soft filter” on a lens.

The reason why quite a few pros (and amateurs too) still shoot film is the unparalleled image quality. Though 35mm film has been more or less matched by APS-c DSLR sensors, and almost overtaken by bigger ones, with a cheap medium format rig, you can easily get scans of 6,000 x 9,000 or 54 megapixels, by scanning a 6×9 slide at 2,600 dpi [many film scanners go as far as 6,400 dpi], far greater than your average DSLR. The new Epson V700 scanner is an economical choice that can help you obtain very large images at stellar quality. If you print big regularly, film is a compelling choice.

So if 35mm isn’t good enough, how big does your film need to be? The next step up is the 645 format, named for its 6×4.5cm negatives. Scanned well, this can already yield spectacular results, like this photo here, taken by Charles with his inexpensive Mamiya M645 SLR kit. And by inexpensive, we’re looking at ready to shoot kits of body/prism/standard lens starting under 250USD [note : I purchased a body / lens / meter for $199, then a second body for $75. The models were the M645J and the M645 1000s, the 80mm f/2.8 Sekor-C, and the standard metering prism]. That’s barely enough for a DSLR! Other cameras to look at are the Pentax 645 and the Bronica ETR series for a similar budget, and the Contax 645 and modern Japanese autofocusing models if you have quite a bit more cash.

The 120 and 220 rollfilms these cameras take can also be used for bigger negatives. Bigger SLRs like the Bronica SQ series and the Hasselblad V series shoot 6×6 squares, and then there are behemoths like the Mamiya RB67, Bronica GS-1, and Pentax 67 that shoot 6×7. And while that’s about it for SLRs, it’s also worth looking at old twin-lens reflexes like the Yashicamats and Minolta Autocords, as they give great 6×6 negatives at the cost of fixed lenses. Medium format rangefinders also exist, ranging from the Bronica RF645 to the massive Fuji 6×9 models. And then there’s large format, which these days refers to negatives 4×5inch or bigger - a 4×5 Speed Graphic, once the mainstay of photojournalists, can now be found for a couple hundred USD.

Another kind of quality you may be looking for is equipment quality. Now that some pros have more or less deserted film, their gear is available on the used market for rock-bottom prices. Don’t be fooled: the reason so many professionals are ditching film isn’t because of quality, it’s because of speed. Have you ever wondered why 35mm is “the” film format? It’s simply because you can shoot a very high number of frames per second, and the film is very small so you can carry a lot. Photographers looking to get on the front page of The New York Times don’t need quality — they just need the shot.

The medium format gear listed above is one example of “quality” gear, but there are also tons of bargains to be had in 35mm. If you’re looking for an SLR to complement your digital Nikon kit, why get a plastic consumer one when you can find a tough-as-nails professional F4 for under 300 USD? Prices on Canon’s EOS-1 series are also temptingly low. Going further back into history, you can pay around a hundred bucks for an excellent manual SLR like an Olympus OM-1 and have a beautiful photographic tool as well as a handy emergency hammer just in case you feel like driving some nails. Even the famed Leica M rangefinders that every reporter used to have are quite affordable; 600-800 can get you a charmingly beat up but perfectly functional M3, which will keep going for another fifty years provided you give it a little attention every so often.

Of course, this isn’t an exhaustive list of why someone would shoot film. I myself stuck with it for quite a while because I preferred the feel of aperture rings and shutter knobs over command wheels, and happily jumped ship when I found a digital camera providing the same experience [Brian uses an Epson RD-1s, a six-megapixel digital rangefinder]. But hopefully you now have a better idea of how to navigate the wide world of film cameras before you. As always, if there’s anything that’s still unclear feel free to post a comment.

Step One

The first step is to make sure the teeth aren’t colored because of a color cast in the photo. This can come from mixed lighting or improper settings of white balance. We’re going to do this using the Levels tool. Go to “Image > Adjustments > Levels” or hit “CTRL + L”. In each individual layer, drag the sliders until they meet with the main group of dotted pixels in the histogram.

The original image

Red Channel adjusted to 228.

Green Channel adjusted to 179

Blue Channel adjusted to 132

As you can see, removing the color cast has already made the teeth appear much whiter and healthier, along with giving the skin a nicer tone. We can now put on the finishing touches towards whitening the teeth.

The color cast has been removed

Step Two

Now that the overall white balance of the image has been corrected to some degree, we can start on the tooth-specific whitening. Enter “quick mask” mode by hitting “Q”. This mode is a way of making a selection using the brush tools. Select a soft, round brush and hit “D” to make sure your primary color is 100% black. Brush over the teeth using black, and hit “X” to switch to white if you make a mistake. Brushing in white applies the mask, brushing in white removes it. You can use shades of gray for a more transparent effect. Make sure you avoid the gums, lips and shadows!

Don't worry, it's meant to be like this!

After masking, you should have all the teeth you want to whiten covered in transparent red.

Step Three

Hit “Q” again to exit quick mask mode. You’ll now have a selection of the teeth, ready to be edited without brightening the rest of the face, gums, or lips.

The teeth are selected, ready for editing

Step Four

Now that you have the teeth selected, it’s time to remove the yellow color. Create a new layer (CTRL + SHIFT + N) and fill it with pure white. Change the layer’s blending mode to “color”, and reduce the opacity to around 30%.

The layer before using blend modes

The layer after blend modes

By setting a pure-white layer to the “color” blend mode, we’ve told Photoshop to strip the layers beneath it of color. Reducing the opacity to 30% means it takes off about 30% of the teeth’s color, so that our eyes cannot perceive the yellow tint.

Step Five

Now we must brighten the teeth, to match the edit to remove color we just made. Reselect the mask we already made by CTRL + clicking on the thumbnail in the layer palette, and go to “Layer > New Adjustment Layer > Brightness / Contrast…”. This step is more up to the individual image, but I recommend you adjust the brightness slider up until you see pure white, then taking it down 5%. Take the contrast down in order to further reduce any yellowing effects.

The teeth now have a natural bright sheen

The teeth look healthier and whiter than before

That’s it! If you have any further questions, post them in the comments.

The goal of this tutorial is not taking the photos to make the timelapse, rather assembling the photos into a timelapse of high quality.

Step One

Before importing, set Windows Movie Maker’s “default image duration” to it’s fastest setting of 0.125 at “Tools > Options > Advanced”.

First, you must import the necessary images into Windows Movie Maker. Hit “CTRL + I” and navigate to the folder where they are stored. Since Windows Movie Maker doesn’t support RAW or sizes about 1080p [1920x1080], I suggest you set your camera to the smallest JPEG size at “fine” or “high” quality. This means it won’t take as long to import all the images to your computer, it’ll take less space, and Windows Movie Maker will be faster.

Step Two

Under the “imported media” window, click on an image and hit CTRL + A to select all. Hold and drag the images into the timeline or storyboard at the bottom of the screen.

Step Three

At the left hand pane, select the “effects” option under the “edit” category.

Now, at the bottom of the screen, select the “Storyboard” view. Select one of the images and hit “CTRL + A” to select all.

Step Four

In the “effects” window, click on “Speed Up” and hit “CTRL + D” to apply it to all the frames you have selected.

If everything went correctly, each frame will now have a star at the bottom, indicating it has an effect paired with the frame. You can hit CTRL + D as many times as you want, if the video is still too slow.

You are now ready to play or publish the time lapse video. If you have any problems, post a question in the comments.

While YouTube is great for uploading a video from your webcam or home camera, it really didn’t catch on with corporate or professional users, like the BBC channel or UniversalMusic, until recently.

flickr is something of the opposite. The majority of users have a digital SLR, Photoshop, and are very enthusiastic about learning more about their hobbies — be it macro photography, DIY, lighting, color correction. flickr is a great place for photographers to learn and gain exposure. Similar to the production values of a BBC documentary, flickr video gives users a better chance to upload high-quality, well lit, properly produced videos.

YouTube can be seen as more of a ‘time-waster’, for browsing between lunch breaks.

So why the animosity created by the recent flickr video announcement? Are people afraid that there will be politically-driven videos, like C-Span debates or conspiracy theories? Are people afraid that it will be overrun by music videos or videos of skateboarders being punched by police officers?

flickr video will be a great place for art videos or short instructional videos. The hugely successful strobist blog could accept quick DIY project videos, rather than a page of photographs with accompanying text. The limiting factor of one minute and thirty seconds means that the user must really compress and edit the bad footage out and create a more polished product, whereas the high level of quality provided by the 150MB cap shows that this will be more about high quality videography rather than camera phone recordings.I tried to create a video tutorial about a feature of the D300, and even after refining it I found that it came out to be 2:13. Maybe the 1:30 time cap is a bit too limiting.

So what do I think should be changed about flickr’s video site?

First off, there’s a small bug in that when flickr links to a video, it does not link to it as http://www.flickr.com/video, it links to it as http://flickr.com/video. A small issue, but it looks odd if you link to both a video and an image in the same post.

As you can see by the image uploaded here, it’s an odd standard for videos — a 3:2 aspect ratio. However, this is the native output of both 1.5x crop and full-frame SLRs, 35mm film, 6×9 medium format roll film. It seems odd that a website primarily structured around photography would ignore the 3:2 aspect ratio, and go in favor of a 500 x 375 size video. Already the flideo function has caught on with timelapse photographers, whose native sizes are 3:2. The current aspect ratio is 4:3, that of YouTube, which doesn’t covers native video cameras and doesn’t cover native digital SLRS or point at shoots. It makes sense for YouTube to use a 4:3 aspect ratio, as they have a very large demographic of cameraphones and webcams — but this isn’t the goal of the flickr video [presumably].

Secondly, the 500 x 375 limit at one minute and thirty seconds shows that the 150MB file limit was not well thought out. Either lower the file size limit, or enlarge the video size / length. The screenshot I’ve uploaded was my timelapse video as played on my computer. It’s a 9.9MB file, 1440 x 1080, 11 seconds long. How would a user fill up 150MB in nintey seconds at 500 x 375 if an HD Video is less than one megabyte per second?

Thirdly, looking at the final video after it was uploaded to flickr, you’ll notice two things as compared to the original video in the above screenshot. Both the black bars at the top and bottom were removed by stretching the video, and the black bars at the sides were not removed. This is an odd choice by flickr — why stretch the videos? The ideal choice would be a simple online video editor, or a downloadable program [like the existing uploading tools], to help you trim off black bars as you see fit.

A final critique about the video system is that it doesn’t integrate with flickr’s existing setup. In order to watch a video while in a slideshow, you have to open the original 500 x 375 video on the video’s page, ruining the “on-black” setup that the slideshow uses. flickr could be a pioneer in online video by allowing the fullsize, original upload to play in the fullscreen slideshow mode — rather than the heavily compressed and downscaled 500 x 375. While videos and images interspersed in a slideshow have some shortcomings, they should be customizable like the rest of the website. There could easily be a “Start Videos Automatically in Slideshows” preference in your control panel.

flickr video, or flideo, is a project which is still in an infant stage — it needs to be reworked and fixed until we are satisfied with it. flickr’s choice to only allow “Pro” users the video upload prevents a lot of issues that YouTube has with copyright problems, but it also gives them the weight of this being a paid service, holding it to higher standards than YouTube.

That being said, there are many advantages over other online video hosts. Uploading the 9.9MB time lapse to flickr took less than a minute, and after uploading it was ready to view. YouTube’s video service to seven minutes to upload the same video and four minutes to process. The quality looks great, despite the small size, with no blocks or jagged edges and other compression artifacts. While YouTube is a completely different service aimed more towards giving anyone a spot to upload a video, rather than giving people a chance to upload high-quality videos with an aim towards art, a quality comparison can be made with the YouTube upload here. The flickr video equivalent is located at my flickr here.

If you have any questions or other points to add, leave them in the comments here.

The first step of this tutorial is to make sure the individual elements of the picture work together. There’s no point adding a teal colored eye liner on to a model with brown eyes and a brown dress on, as it will simply seem out of place. The colors I recommend in this tutorial are based on the model’s eye color and clothing at the time. I suggest that you change them to whatever matches your model.

Step One

I used this photo that I took on the beach with a D300 and a Sigma 20mm f/1.8. Her facial features are nicely lit with flat lighting, with no significant highlights or shadows. You should use an image with a well-lit face, or the effect won’t look as good.

A well-lit face is a must

Step Two

We will start by applying a little bit of lipstick. Part of what made the effect work in the picture on flickr was that it is very subtle. Many people applying digital make up make the mistake of going over board. Neon pinks, toxic greens and other colors that stick out could ruin the effect. I used the color “#BD3A23″, a reddish color that was suitable for the lips.

Start brushing around the lips, making sure you don’t cover the teeth or skin (or else they’ll turn red too!). If you make any mistakes just use the eraser. You don’t have to cover the lips perfectly, just apply the brush in the general area.

The brushstrokes don't have to match perfectly.

Step Three

Now that the lipstick is a coat of paint in an interesting color, it is time to match it to the luminosity of the lips, so that the lipstick matches the subtle changes in brightness that show texture in the lips. In order to do this, set the blending layer to “Hue”. If the effect is too strong, drop the opacity down to make it more transparent.

A subtle but welcome change

Step Four

The makeup in the photo matches her blue eyes, and I decided to make the effect very strong. I chose the color “#2BA1BB”, and teal / turquoise color that suits her necklace, dress and eyes nicely. Once again, brush lightly around the eyes, erasing if you brush over the eyes. Use the Gaussian Blur filter until you get a result similar to this. Depending on the image size, it should be around a 5-20 pixel radius.

I used a radius of six pixels

Step Five

Similar to step number three, we must blend the make up in with the texture of the skin.

That's it!

I also sharpened the picture and whitened the teeth. The digital makeup technique is best used subtly, when using colors that match the attributes of the photo.

1) A printer outputs significantly more dots per inch [dpi] than a standard computer monitor. When printing, you should generally aim for 300 dots per inch minimum, while a computer monitor generally only has 72 dots per inch. This means that if you are looking around you ten megapixel print at a 100% view in Photoshop, you are wasting your time. Considering 300dpi is just over 4x the resolution of your computer monitor, it is advisable that you only sharpen while viewing the image at 25% [or one forth] to compensate.

2) For small images and outputs, a smaller radius will give the appearance of a sharper image. Rather than using 40% or 50% and a radius of two, take it down to a radius of 0.5 or less. Here’s an example of an image sharpened using the following settings.

100%, 0.4 radius

3) Know your website’s maximum dimensions. Photoshop’s bicubic resizing algorithms are significantly more powerful than a website’s automatic resize function. If you are using Wordpress, the limit is usually 500 horizontal pixels. If you are using Facebook, the limit is 604 pixels in either horizontal or vertical aspect ratios.

Note how poorly your browser resizes images

To prevent the aliasing you see in this image, resize the image in Photoshop before uploading to the web. No matter how sharp the image, it will be represented poorly by the web browser.

4) Try sharpening in LAB mode. LAB mode is a more specialized color space (a method of storing information about a photograph’s data). Where as RGB stores values in red, green and blue channels, LAB stores values in “lightness”, “a” and “b” channels. When you adjust the lightness channel, you are not effecting colors. This lets you sharpen without causing as many artifacts, as it essentially only has to sharpen one third the amount to get the same result. To switch to “LAB” mode, go to “Image > Mode” and select LAB. If you switch, adjustment layers will be flattened, so be careful. It is best to do this at the final step before printing when you can completely flatten a document.

Other than that, sharpening is the same process as before: for smaller documents, use a smaller radius, for larger documents use a large radius and if printing zoom out to 25%.

Those lines make up a “depth of field” (DoF) scale, a handy tool for figuring out just what in your picture is and isn’t in focus. If you’re using an SLR, you can use your DoF preview button to stop down the lens and get a rough idea of things - which is why many modern budget lenses omit these marks - but in this case, being able to see the end result isn’t quite as good as having the scale. Why?

Here we can see the DoF scale as the bottom set of numbers on the lens. Just above that is the distance scale [white numbers are meters, red numbers are feet], and then at the top is the aperture ring. The lens is focused to one meter, as indicated by the 1 aligned with the big dot, and the aperture is set to f/8.

Let’s say you’re taking a picture of your friend in front of a distant mountain range. You want to get both him and the stunning natural scenery behind him in focus. Since your friend is a meter away from you, you set the focus to one meter - but how can you be sure that the background is in focus too?

To see what’s in focus, we can check the DoF marks corresponding to our chosen aperture. Since we’re at f/8, the area between the two lines marked 8 indicates the area at acceptable sharpness; here, from about 0.65m to 2m. But we know that the background is far enough away to use infinity focus, and the infinity mark isn’t within the sharp area marked within the scales.

We could stop down to f/16 or f/22 to get everything in focus, as the DoF scale indicates. But what if you’re set on using f/8?

This is where “hyperfocal focusing” comes in. This technique allows you to get everything in focus past a certain distance. To set your lens to the hyperfocal distance, just align the infinity mark with the corresponding aperture mark. As you can see, the line from “f/8″ is pointing towards the one meter mark, and the infinity mark. Now, we get everything from just under a meter to infinity in focus at f/8, a far greater depth of field than with the previous setting, and enough to get both your friend and the mountains in focus.

This technique isn’t just useful for “getting it all in focus”, though. In fact, it’s one of the most basic tricks in the book for street photography - at the hyperfocal distance, you no longer need to stop to focus at every shot, allowing you to snap away immediately after framing, or even from your waist, since you’d be sure that everything from the acceptable distance to infinity will be sharp. All you have to do in that instance is to make sure your subject is past the one meter mark, or the acceptable distance you define, and it’ll be rendered sharp.