Photofocus

Apple iPhone 4s Camera Review

scottbourne — Thu, 09 Feb 2012 14:58:05 +0000

I just finally got an Apple iPhone 4s. The camera included with this phone simply blows me away. I now see why under $200 point and shoot sales are dropping like a rock. The pictures you can make with this phone meet or exceed the quality that you can get out of many of the sub $200 point and shoot cameras. In fact, with proper lighting and technique, this camera can perform up to the level of some of the $400 and $500 point and shoots.

Let’s start with the basics. The iPhone 4s camera is an eight megapixel affair with better dynamic range than the old iPhone camera. The lens is sharper, the camera lag time better, and the lens faster. The white balance is more accurate and the low-light performance (while not up to par with DSLRs) is better than previous iPhone cameras. Both shadow and highlight detail are also better.

The new iPhone 4s has a fixed aperture lens of f/2.4. That’s one half stop faster than the iPhone 4 cameras.

One of my favorite features in the new iPhone 4s camera is the ability to press the volume button on the top of the camera to trip the shutter instead of having to reach around and press the menu button to make a photo.

The overall color and image quality are better than I would expect from a camera phone. The new sensor is completely redesigned and it features larger capacity pixels, gathering more light.

As with other iPhone cameras, there is very little manual control. You can touch the screen to force the camera to set exposure and focus automatically for that area. There is a small flash which can be set to fire manually or on auto – letting the camera decide when it is and is not necessary.

The iPhone 4s is one of the most user-friendly cameras in the world. Since you can access this camera for as little as $199 (including the rest of the iPhone) I think it’s a great value. The best camera is the one you have with you and I never go anywhere without my phone, so I always have a camera. And now – I always have a camera that is competent enough to take photos that could print as large as 8×10″ if properly exposed in good light.

I wish there were more options available via the iPhone’s preferences to control things like exposure, ISO, etc., but since this is after all a phone first and a camera second, I think the compromises are generally fair. Are there better smart phone cameras out there? I often hear that the Nokia phones have great cameras but then again every time someone tries to demo that for me their phone crashes. The iPhone just works. I’m very happy with it and can highly recommend it for anyone who is looking for a smart phone camera.

_______
This Post Sponsored by:
Viewbug - Fun Photo Contests /
Animoto – Great animated slide shows from your photos /
BorrowLenses.com – Renting Canon, Nikon, Olympus & Sony, bodies, lenses, etc. / SmugMug – Professional Photo Sharing /
Digital SLR Store - Cameras, lenses, accessories and everything else.

The Nikon D800 – First Thoughts

scottbourne — Wed, 08 Feb 2012 14:01:59 +0000

UPDATE: Within minutes of posting this – several of you claiming to be video experts say you disagree that the 36MP is good for video. So be it. I was simply reporting what I had been told. I personally don’t have a dog in this hunt. As my post clearly expresses, I personally think 36mp is too many for a 35mm sensor. Your mileage may vary.

I’ll start with the usual disclaimer. I am not one of the cool kids so I have never shot with a D800. This is not a review. Until I actually shoot the camera I won’t have a firm opinion, but looking at the specs, I am very confused about this camera.

Let’s step back in time. The D700 had about 12 megapixels. The D800 – its successor has three times as many pixels? Sorry but – WHAT THE YOU KNOW WHAT is that about?

Physics are physics. If you cram three times the pixels onto a sensor that is the same size as you used when your camera had 1/3 the pixels, something’s got to give. Yes the camera companies have come up with some neat tricks to make each pixel gather more light than it would have in the old days, but three times the pixels???

What this tells me is there is a bunch of back-end processing from the new processor that will make the image look smoother. Looking at the few still samples I’ve seen – they are a bit soft when it comes to details. This is no doubt why Nikon is releasing a D800E – canceling the anti-aliasing properties of the OLPF inside the camera. But I’d bet a bunch of money that’s not going to make the low-light religion shooters happy because eliminating that filter – WILL create noisier pics. Period. End of discussion.

So why 36MP? My guess is that Nikon is really betting on this being more of a video camera. The cinematic resolution you get from 36MP is probably more important to Nikon and their target audience for this camera than low-light performance with good detail. The video sample I’ve seen is tremendous. It looks very good for a $3000 camera.

Other changes? Much better video and audio. HDMI out that is uncompressed. Better metering and autofocus system. But a drop to four frames per second in FX mode – full frame. It looks nice but that darn 36mp count keeps sticking in my head.

The D800 costs the same as the D700 when it first came out. That’s a good deal. Over time the price of the D700 dropped to an average of $2500 and I expect the same to eventually happen to the D800. Talking with some video folks I respect, they agree with me that the 36MP move is all about video. I will test this camera before I make any final decision, but I am guessing I’ll stick with the D700 as a still camera and look at the D4 which has most of the video capability of the D800 but bigger buffer, faster frame rates and a bias that leans more towards stills.

I am sure the Nikon faithful will buy this camera no matter what. NPS members have already received their notification that they can pre-order the D800 so the March delivery date looks to be solid. But I think that if physics are still physics, Nikon missed a chance to nab some Canon 5DMKII owners who are tired of waiting for the III. If the D800 had 24mp instead of 36, all other things being equal – I am betting they would have made some converts. Time will tell.

Rest assured I’ll have my hands on one of these as soon as they are available and give you a full report.

Don’t Banish the Trashing of the Dress, Elevate It

scottbourne — Tue, 07 Feb 2012 13:20:13 +0000

Guest Post by Catherine Hall – Follow Catherine on Twitter

In wedding photography, the “Trash the Dress” trend has veered increasingly toward shock-and-awe novelty, rather than artistry. The phenomenon all too often leaves me feeling squeamish.

You know the drill: A beautiful bride in her lovely white dress gets convinced by a well-meaning photographer to trash her gorgeous gown for art’s sake. She ends up with food dumped on her head or is induced to take part in a mud-wrestling match. Whatever the scenario, her once-pristine gown is not only soiled, but irrevocably besmirched. The images, for the moment, might strike viewers as edgy because of the stark contrast between purity and perversion. Fast-forward 10 years into the not-so-distant future: You will find something amiss.

The current slippery slope of “Trashing the Dress” has lately become an empty gimmick and might even be an utter disservice to a wedding photographer’s clients. It first really exploded in the mid-2000s. At first, I even found it intriguing. It didn’t take long, however, until I grew entirely fed-up and disenchanted with the majority of the movement’s output. Images with no real content, no discernible message, and no artistic vision are not tolerated in our cutthroat and competitive industry but, somehow, trashing-the-dress has gotten off scot-free for far too long.

Some wedding photographers, no matter how well-intentioned, are relying not on genuine creativity, but instead a clever “hook.” Rather than an image that uniquely and originally reflects the true essence of a bride’s character and personal history, she ends up posing for a pre-fabricated rendering that has nothing to do with her. Just because something is “gritty” doesn’t make it art.

I do not advocate outright banishment of the trashing-the-dress trend, but I am making a stand against rash artistic impulses that are not thought-through to their fullest completion. I understand that there is some great photography that illustrates this theme, but as a whole have not found this to be the norm.

What about you? What is your opinion about Trash-the-Dress shoots?

_______
This Post Sponsored by:
Viewbug - Fun Photo Contests - Animoto – Great animated slide shows from your photos / BorrowLenses.com – Renting Canon, Nikon, Olympus & Sony, bodies, lenses, etc. / SmugMug – Professional Photo Sharing / Digital SLR Store - Cameras, lenses, accessories and everything else.

What Photographic Tools & Technology Will We Use Today And Lose Tomorrow?

scottbourne — Mon, 06 Feb 2012 14:10:41 +0000

I used to make photographs with film that I developed and printed in a wet dark room. When I started photographing art for painters I used polarized lights to provide non-reflective illumination on the art work.

When I first switched to digital, I scanned all my photos on a drum scanner, then stored them on floppy disks or magnetic tape drives.

These are but a few of the examples I can think of that point to technology and tools that are for me at least, gone by. I know there are people still using all of these tools. But I am not and nobody else I work with is either.

With the exception of a few die-hards, most people have moved on to newer technologies. This caused me to think about this looking forward.

What technology and tools do we use today that 15 years into the future we will barely remember? Send me your answer via Twitter – http://www.twitter.com/scottbourne

P.S. This is not an invitation for you to let me know you still use the technology and tools mentioned in this post. I get that one percent of you like older tech. I get it. But this is an invitation for you to tell me what you think you’ll be missing in the future – in any event. Thanks for staying on topic.

Photofocus Podcast Episode #101

scottbourne — Sun, 05 Feb 2012 14:15:22 +0000

Make sure you don’t miss a single Photofocus post – point your feed reader to the free Photofocus RSS Feed here and subscribe.

PLEASE BE PATIENT – OUR SERVERS SEE LARGE LOADS ON PUBLISHING DAYS. THE DOWNLOADS MAY GO SLOWLY BUT THEY WILL FINISH.

Download episode…

Photofocus Episode 101

Host: Scott Bourne (www.scottbourne.com or www.twitter.com/scottbourne)

Show notes by Bruce Clarke (www.momentsindigital.com or www.twitter.com/bruceclarke)

Welcome to Episode Number 101 of Photofocus with Scott Bourne. Photofocus is the show devoted to discussing photography and answering your questions about anything photography related including gear, technique, locations, etc. Your questions will shape the direction of this show so be sure to send your questions to photofocus@me.com. We will try to answer as many as we can but we get a lot of questions so we’ll try to take a collection of questions that represent a particular topic and present them together. This week, Scott shares his thoughts on the religion of low-light photography and answers some listener questions.

Discussion – The Religion of Low-Light Photography

There have been been many religions in photography. One of the more recent ones deals with low-light photography and how a particular camera performs in low-light. Scott loves to have good low-light performance in his camera but he doesn’t buy one just because of that feature because he doesn’t spend that much time shooting in low light. You don’t need to have the top of the line everything unless you can specify why you really need it. Scott thinks that many people today are just looking at low-light performance and forgetting about many of the other features when choosing a camera. One of the problems with religions is that it can go to extremes. So much so, that people are willing to write off an image before they’ve even seen it, just because it wasn’t shot using the latest and greatest equipment. If you get into a situation with low-light, you can always bring in light using reflectors or other lights.

Sponsor – Viewbug

Viewbug is a great place to find out about and enter great photo contests. Visit http://www.viewbug.com/photo-contests to learn more.

Sponsor – Animoto

Animoto will replace what you think of as a slide show. Upload your photographs and Animoto will make an amazing slide show for you. You can try it for free and create short slide shows. Head on over to Animoto.com and try it today. They now offer 720p videos.

Sponsor – Borrowlenses

Borrowlenses.com rents just about any piece of camera gear you need. Contact them today to rent the gear you need for your next shoot.

Sponsor – SumgMug

SmugMug is a great place to host and sell your photos and your videos.

Discussion – Recent Updates on the Photofocus Blog

Be sure to check out the blog for some recent posts about Aperture 4, Snapseed for the Mac, and some recent video posts on setting your White Balance in postand a time saving tip when working with Aperture. Many people ask Scott about about setting Custom White Balance in camera. If you are in the same lighting situation, Scott recommends setting your WB to a custom WB rather than Auto. On auto, you may find that your White Balance changes with every photo so if you set it to a custom WB, and the lighting doesn’t change, that will save you a lot of time in post production. If you still aren’t sure how to do it and you’d rather do it in post, check out Richard Harrington’s video on how to do it in post.

Another disturbing trend in photography that Scott has seen lately is with younger photographers constantly copying each other with the backlit image. Stop trying to be new and try to be you. Scott also recently switched things up in the studio and is now working off a 13″ MacBook Air with an SSD and finding that it works well. There was also a post on the site from Tamara Lackey and we have a post coming up soon from Catherine Hall. We also ran a poll recently about book publishing and we asked how many of our listeners were thinking of publishing a photo book and 2/3 of you indicated that you were thinking about it.

Listener Questions

This week we kick things off with a question about storing images outside of Aperture:

Question One – Aperture & iPhoto

Dave Calloway from Wisconsin writes: How do I store my images. Do I store them only in Aperture or do I put them somewhere else like iPhoto?

Scott: iPhoto does an auto-res thing to your photos that I don’t like so I tend to stay out of iPhoto and leave everything in Aperture. Make sure you are backing up your vault though and have it in a location where you can keep it off-site.

Question Two – Thoughts on DNG

We get a lot of questions about DNG and what I think about it?

Scott: DNG was a file format started by Adobe and it’s designed to be open-sourced but up until recently it hasn’t. I think once it’s open sourced then it has merit but one of the problems with it is that the camera manufacturers have to supply SDKs to Adobe so they can interlink with what’s going on. Manufacturers like Nikon are a little reluctant to cooperate with Adobe. They’ve gotten better but you may not get every feature in DNG that you’d get with .NEF or a .CR2 file format from Canon. I’m not a big believer in but one of the advantages is that you don’t have to worry about losing the sidecar file when you edit your images.

Wrap Up

We want themes and questions from you. Be sure to visit the blog at PhotoFocus.com for articles, how-to’s, videos and more. E-mail us at photofocus@me.comfollow us on Twitter. Don’t just take pictures – make pictures.

Scott Bourne is at www.scottbourne.com or www.twitter.com/scottbourne or www.3exposure.com or www.carloves.com

Show notes by Edmonton Wedding Photographers Bruce Clarke at www.momentsindigital.com or www.twitter.com/bruceclarke

Nik Snapseed for Mac – Mini Review

scottbourne — Sat, 04 Feb 2012 13:13:23 +0000

When Nik Software released Snapseed for the iPad it got quite a lot of attention. I’m one of those rare people who doesn’t use an iPad for content creation. My iPad essentially serves only two purposes…

1. To show off my portfolio
2. To consume data

I wasn’t all that interested in fixing photos on my iPad. But my laptop? That’s a different story. So when I heard that Snapseed was available for my Mac laptop, I went to the App Store, plunked down my $19.95 and started playing.

While most serious photographers I know (me included) like Nik ColorEfex Pro, Snapseed is much less expensive and frankly aimed at just having a little fun. That doesn’t mean you can’t do real photo work with it. You can. It’s just that it’s not meant to be a replacement for something like Photoshop.

Here are some of the key features:

* Tune Image—Quickly correct photos shot in difficult lighting situations, create depth and vibrancy with Ambience, or adjust White Balance, Saturation, Contrast and more

*Auto Correct—Automatically analyzes your photo and adjusts color and exposure, or you can use the sliders to add or reduce the enhancements

*Control Points—Make precise selections and enhancements in seconds with Nik Software’s revolutionary U Point technology

*Tilt-Shift—Creates a narrow in-focus area designed to simulate depth of field, common in a Miniature Scene look

*Details—Enhances details with traditional sharpening as well as Nik Software’s unique
Structure control found in the professional Nik Software product line

*Crop & Straighten—Rotate or straighten with simple slider controls and select from a variety of standard aspect ratios while cropping

*Grunge—Explore styles and textures without limits and give photos a totally unique look

*Drama—Add custom effects to a photo which range from subtle enhancements of textures to wildly creative and artistic effects

*Vintage—Nine unique nostalgic films, plus controls like saturation, textures and vignettes make any photo look like a vintage color film photo from the 50’s, 60’s or 70’s

*Frames—Add unique borders to photos by choosing styles and textures

*Black and White—Give photos a classic look with this darkroom-inspired filter. Select styles, grain, vignettes, and more for a perfectly nostalgic look

*Sharing—Share photos on Facebook and Flickr, email photos, and print them using your home printer

Some of my favorite tools are Grunge, Vintage, Tilt & Shift and Drama – all of which give photos a cool look very quickly. It is a simple workflow. You just drag your photo into Snapseed, make your adjustments, apply filters, export, etc.

One thing that would make Snapseed better is if it could export directly from Aperture or Lightroom, etc. Now you have to export the image from your editing application then drag it into Snapseed. It’s no big deal but it would be nice if it had better connection with other apps.

Snapseed supports:
• Mac OS 10.6.6 and 10.7.2
• Requires 64-bit processor (Intel Core 2 Duo or later
• JPEG, TIFF (in RGB color mode), and RAW file formats

It’s a very versatile program that is fun and easy to use. Within minutes of opening the program you’ll be an expert. Everyone from casual shutterbugs to serious shooters will enjoy Snapseed and at $19.95 it’s a no brainer.

Highly addictive and highly recommended.

Free Video Tutorial – Apple Aperture Time Saving Tip

scottbourne — Fri, 03 Feb 2012 14:23:48 +0000

Here’s a quick little tip that will save you time in Aperture.

DISCLAIMER: This post isn’t intended to be definitive – we’re not claiming this is the ONLY way or even the BEST way to accomplish this task in Photoshop or any other post-prodcessing program. We’re merely offering it as A way you might accomplish this task. These tips are free, offered only because they might be helpful to someone.