Equipment – Page 2 – Kevin Davis Photography

Gloves for Winter Photography

February 1, 2021February 1, 2021Kevin

Author Kevin Davis with the Meteor Mitt by Outdoor Research

Operating a camera can be difficult (or impossible) while wearing gloves or mittens. This problem is compounded if your fingers are very prone to becoming cold – perhaps your fingers get cold at a temperature that causes no trouble at all for some of your friends. That’s the subject of my video: Gloves for Winter Photography.

Available products change every year; companies routinely invent new models and some older models may be discontinued. Of those that I have personally owned and used, here are my favorite lightweight gloves for mild temperatures (all are touch-screen compatible):

#3 REI: Grip Gloves
#2 Black Diamond: Powerweight Liner Series
#1 Burton: Screen Grab Liner

In the past ten days, I have twice used a glove seen in the video, a pop-finger fishing glove by Palmyth, which I paired with a touch-compatible glove liner. In advance of a snow forecast, I selected these gloves to wrap burlap around shrubs, a task that involves twine and tying knots. And for photography, I used these same gloves to pilot an aerial drone. With my fingertips covered merely by a glove liner, operating the touch-screen was beautifully easy. However, for a flight that lasted less than 15 minutes, my fingers soon became cold. As the air temperature was 33 degrees (f), this solution was barely adequate and would be a terrible choice for a shoot lasting an hour at that temperature.

Shown here are a couple specific glove-mittens (a.k.a. glomitts) that I tried but personally decided that they didn’t measure up. Both include a pocket to hold a heat packet, which is a nice feature.

The first is an insulated glomitt from Cabellas. Unfortunately the finger openings were so snug that they could not accommodate a base-layer, a glove liner. Since bare fingertips is not practical for my cold fingers, this product was unacceptable.

The second is an unusual full-finger glomitt, the Heat3 Smart glove. The interior glove and exterior mitten are fully integrated, the glove is not removable. Having read very favorable reviews of this product, I tried it. However, I was disappointed and promptly returned them. Considering the cost of these gloves is $150 (or more), I can get a battery-heated solution for about the same money.

Despite the exceptional construction, the shortcoming of this glove occurs when in half-mitten mode. With the mitten folded back and fingers exposed, this product is no better than a lightweight glove. If I need an extended period of time making photographs (with the mitten folded back), it simply is not adequate. A slightly better solution is a half-finger glove with a lightweight glove underneath; therein, the fingers below the knuckle have a double-layer while the fingertips have a single layer.

I must also note that the Heat3 Smart gloves include a magnet. That can be problematic; see tip #7 in my video about gloves.

Recovering Family Photos from Film

May 16, 2020July 24, 2020Kevin

Recently, I borrowed some old photo albums from my mom. These photos were captured either on negative film or Polaroid instant film. For posterity sake, I am converting these old photos to digital.

For either negative film or slide film, a computer accessory to scan film can still be purchased today, but I had an old Nikon scanner collecting dust. This scanner is more than a decade old and the interface to a computer is Firewire, not USB. As Firewire has fallen out of favor, most computers do not have a Firewire port. However, my aging laptop does have a Firewire port. Yet I had to overcome two problems. First, having upgraded the laptop to Windows 10 last year, Win10 does not include a driver for Firewire. Second, the port on the laptop is a different size than the cable from the scanner.

With some difficulty, I eventually did install a legacy Firewire driver. And a bit of research online told me that Firewire connectors can be 4-pin, 6-pin, or 8-pin. Purchasing a 4-pin to -6pin adapter (which can be seen in the photo here) allowed connecting the scanner to the computer.

Nikon no longer supports this scanner and the last software release was intended for Windows Vista (a short-lived version of the OS in between Windows XP and Windows 7). After considerable research and effort, I could not get this software to function on Windows 10. However, in the past, I had also used a third-party application called VueScan and I found that I still had that 10-yr-old software installer. After installing that and configuring it to run in Windows-7 Compatibility Mode, I was able to successfully operate the scanner.

If you don’t have a film scanner, you can buy a new or used scanner … or send your film to a lab that provides scanning services. While I was still struggling to get my old scanner operational, I looked online and saw a used Epson V600 for less than $100. This was my backup plan, which I now do not need. The important feature here is that the V600 can scan both 35mm and medium-format films, which is important to me but may not be important to you.

Many labs provide scanning services; just search online. I have done this in the past with good results. The resulting digital photos may be provided to you via internet download or on a CD-ROM. (Be aware that labs may charge you a fee for each physical disk, perhaps $5.)

Two services can convert still-photo film, motion-picture movie film, and VHS videotape: LegacyBox and Kodak Digitizing Box (yes, Kodak, an old trusted name in photography). But I have not personally tried either of these services. If you only need to digitize 35mm negatives or 35mm color transparency film, other service providers may be less expensive.

Personally, I don’t want to digitize ALL the old film photos because most of them are discardable snapshots that do not show important memories. It makes sense to extract the few negatives or slides, scan them, and then return the original to where I found it. For this reason, I chose to do the scans myself rather than send it out to a scanning service.

A smaller number of photos were shot on Polaroid instant film. This is outside the capability of a film scanner. However, these can be scanned using a flatbed scanner or an all-in-one computer printer (printer, fax machine, scanner all in one). It just so happens that I acquired a new all-in-one last year and I have found that this is adequate to scan the Polaroid photos.

Hypothetically, let’s say you’ve just scanned a photo of somebody’s 18th birthday. (My mom was very careful to annotate each photo with the date and subject, usually written on the backside of the photo.) You’ll want to save that descriptive information with the photo. The final step in scanning an image is to rescue the “metadata” – the descriptive information. The digital photo will be either a JPEG or TIFF file. Both these formats include metadata and you will need some sort of software application that allows you to write that information, notably a particular item called “Description”. I personally used Adobe Bridge but there are numerous other alternatives.

How to share your mobile device (smartphone, tablet) video/audio to a TV screen

March 18, 2020March 18, 2020Kevin

Many devices today support sharing video and audio to a separate device. Getting it to function can sometimes be simple and sometimes be difficult, depending upon the specific devices. Sharing from an Apple iPhone (or iPad) to Apple TV should be easy to setup. Sharing from a Samsung smartphone/tablet to a Samsung smart TV should also be easy to setup. But the word “should” doesn’t always mean much.

Wired connection using an HDMI cable

Regardless of whether the TV is a “smart TV” or not, you may be able to connect the mobile device to the TV via an HDMI cable, set your TV to use the HDMI input rather than television. However not every smartphone or tablet supports this. For example, Motorola smartphones apparently do not support it.

Current iPhone models have a Lightning port and you will need a Lightning-to-Digital-AV-Adapter. (Rumor suggests that upcoming new iPhone models will instead have a USB-C port.)

An Android phone probably has a USB port. (Specifically, newer models within the past 18 months will have USB-C.) You will need a USB-to-HDMI adapter … or possibly an MHL cable, but most devices do not support MHL.

Wirelessly connect a smartphone/tablet/computer to a television

If a TV is not a smart TV but does have HDMI input ports, you can attach an external device to the TV which effectively adds “smart” to your dumb TV. Common external devices that support wireless sharing include:
Google Chromecast, EZCast, Apple TV, Samsung AllShare, Amazon Firestick, and Roku.

Using your smartphone/tablet/computer as the sending device and your smart TV as the receiving device, there are two basic requirements:

The two devices must be on the same local network (e.g. your home wi-fi).
The two must utilize the same stream-casting protocol.

The three dominant protocols today are: Miracast, Airplay 2, and Google Cast (a.k.a. Chromecast built-in) . Samsung’s Smart View is based upon Miracast.

Chromecast will not function without an internet connection; this is not true for Miracast and Airplay 2. Miracast is built upon a standard called “Wi-Fi Direct”, allowing two devices to communicate directly rather than over a network. (AirPlay is proprietary, specific to Apple.)

I have an Android tablet that has successfully connected with two different smart TVs, Amazon Firestick, and an audio amplifier; but my smartphone can only connect to one of those four. The phone supports only Chromecast while three of the other devices support only Miracast. The following table attempts to show such compatibilities and incompatibilities.

Casting

Stream “casting” and “screen mirroring” are two forms of wirelessly sending media (video and/or audio) from one device to another. Although they are different, the term casting may sometimes be loosely misused.

Technically, casting (a.k.a. stream casting) is a feature of a specific application, with support from the mobile device. YouTube, Netflix, Hulu, and iHeartRadio are a few of the apps that support casting. [Note to some friends using the Zoom videoconferencing app: this does Not support casting but you can certainly use screen mirroring; keep reading.]

Example: On an Android device supporting Chromecast, go to the settings (swipe down from the top of the screen). Enable: Cast. That should present a list of available destinations (e.g. a TV). The mobile device will send an invitation to the destination and may display the animated icon (illustrated above). Then launching the mobile YouTube app, it shows the connected icon (illustrated above) in the title bar at the top of the app. Upon launching any video within the app, the video and audio are wirelessly cast to the TV.

In the case of a video&audio app such as YouTube, casting to an audio-only device, the video plays on the mobile device as normal while the audio plays from the audio device. I don’t recommend this, as the audio is delayed and no longer synchronized with the video.

Display Mirroring

Display mirroring (a.k.a. screen mirroring) is a feature of your mobile device that wirelessly replicates your local device display on a remote screen (e.g. television). As this mirrors your entire screen, you can use ANY applications and those apps need not include any special features. (Possibly, you may also be able to use your TV as the source and mirror that to another device, but I cannot think of a scenario where that would be useful.)

The following photo shows the activation of mirroring on a particular model of LG smart TV. As you can see, the TV has identified that a Galaxy Tablet is nearby and enabled for casting/mirroring. The tablet may then prompt to authorize the connection, shown in the next photo.

The next photo shows the activation of Screen Mirroring on Amazon Firestick.

Samsung

Smart View is Samsung’s brand of Miracast. Smart Things is Samsung’s home automation, with the ability to control many smart home devices, including smart TVs.

In the TV on-screen menu, go to Connection Guide and enable screen sharing (screen mirroring).

In the tablet settings, enable SmartView, which should then present a list of available destinations, including the nearby smart TV. Easy peasy.

In one particular instance, I easily established mirroring from a Samsung tablet to a Samsung smart TV … but it eventually ceased for an entirely unknown reason and would not reactivate. I rebooted the tablet but that did not resolve the problem. Restarting the TV also did not resolve the problem. Seeing no resolution, I searched online to see if anyone else had encountered this problem and perhaps offered a solution.

In online discussion forums, a couple of separate people reported difficulty with S6 or S8 smartphones wherein the problem was solved by using the Samsung Smart View app instead of the phone’s built-in settings. However, the Android app store included a note suggesting a different app for connecting with newer model TVs – Samsung Smart Things. I installed that and tried it. Although this was also unsuccessful, it did report a useful help message: try unplugging the TV power (and then plug in again). To my surprise, that did resolve the problem.

Other protocols

Amazon Fling is very similar to Google Cast but never achieved wide acceptance
DLNA may be available in older products but not used in newer products
Intel WiDi (Wireless Display) was officially discontinued in 2016
DIAL (DIscovery And Launch)

How Many Megapixels Do I Need?

January 6, 2020Kevin

Problem #1

A friend had trouble emailing photos from his smartphone. His photos were more than eight megapixels and he was trying to email two dozen of them in a single email. His email did not want to send an email totaling 400 megabytes. The resolution of his smartphone camera captured far more pixels than he needed and the files were … not small.

Problem #2

If you upload a small photo to an online service, particularly social media, that service will likely attempt to enlarge the photo … and you may not like the quality of the result. While shrinking a photo typically does not have a negative impact on photo quality, enlarging can possibly have undesirable results because the enlarging process is attempting to invent pixels that did not originally exist.

Display on a smartphone

If you primarily look at photos on your phone, then 5 megapixels is more than you need.

Consider the display resolution of some popular smartphones:

Google Pixel 3 is 1080 x 2160 … 2.3 MP
iPhone X is 1125 x 2436 … 2.7 MP
Razor Phone 2 is 1440 x 2560 … 3.6 MP
Samsung Galaxy S9 is 1440 x 2960 … 4.2 MP

Print

Printing a photo onto paper is the most demanding application. As a general rule of thumb, high-quality printing requires between 240 to 300 pixels per printed inch. The bigger your print, the more pixels you need.

Example: A 5-megapixel photo should print well up to 8×10 inches
(8×240) x (10×240) = 4.6 megapixels

Facebook

The recommended upload size is 1,200 × 630 pixels. You can certainly upload a larger photo, but Facebook will automatically shrink it.

Instagram

By design, Instagram favors square photos. You can post a rectangular photo, the Instagram default is a square crop. Upon first uploading your photo, you have an opportunity to undo that crop, but you cannot subsequently edit the photo to change it after your posting is complete.

The recommended size ix 1080 × 1080 pixels. You can certainly upload a larger photo, but Instagram will automatically shrink it. If you upload a rectangular photo, it will be cropped to width 1080 pixels.

Twitter

Recommended upload size is 1200 × 675 (aspect ratio: 16:9): You can certainly upload a larger photo, but Twitter will automatically shrink it.

Display on a tablet

Consider three tablets.

Amazon Kindle Fire HDX 8.9” : 2560 × 1600 pixels, 8:5 aspect ratio
Apple iPad 10.2” (2019) : 2160 × 1620 pixels, 4:3 aspect ratio
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.1” (2019) : 1920 × 1200 pixels, 16:10 aspect ratio

If you size an image 2560×1600, it will display full-screen on the Kindle HDX 8.9” but may seem too large for both the iPad 10.2” and the Galaxy Tab A 10.1”. Not to worry, the tablet includes the necessary smarts to dynamically make your photo fit the device screen without modifying your stored photo.

You can certainly store photos with higher resolution than the device display; the only consequence is that the photos consume more storage space than is necessary.

eBook, part 1 – cover photo displayed in the ebook store

For the Kindle store, Amazon recommends 2500 x 1563 pixels.

eBook, part 2 – photos inside the book

In large part, this comes back tablet display screens. As the Kindle and iPad (described previously) are similar regarding 1600 pixels in the smaller dimension, you might size your photos to 1600 pixels. Amazon recommends twice this, 3200 pixels, but I don’t know why.

Upon uploading your eBook to the Kindle store, your photos will be automatically compressed. My latest ebook manuscript (with photos) was more than 12 megabytes before submitting, but Kindle compression reduced it to 4 megabytes.

The amount of royalty you earn from each book sale may be reduced because total eBook file size may incur a larger “delivery fee” per individual sale, perhaps fifteen cents per megabyte. An e-book with many high-resolution photos may incur a higher delivery charge and therefore reduce the royalties paid to the author.

One Year After The Fire

October 23, 2019October 23, 2019Kevin

Mid-October 2018, I photographed Wakefield Massachusetts using an aerial drone. As the autumn colors were not well developed yet, I returned a week later to make the same photo again. That’s the first photo here, October 23, 2018.

Some renovation work was in progress that day. You can see scaffolding against the steeple and one of the tall windows is laying on the grass.

In the evening later that day, a lightning storm passed through the area and this presumably sparked the fire that destroyed the First Baptist Church. The next day, I again put the drone in the air to photograph the aftermath of the fire.

Today is the one-year anniversary of that fire, so I returned to again make the same photograph, but without the church.

Outdoor Photography – chasing mother nature

June 28, 2019July 28, 2022Kevin

Rumney Marsh photographed with an aerial drone (sUAS)

I first visited Rumney Marsh in the month of May. Although I discovered some great photo compositions, the marsh was mostly brown. Presuming that the grasses would fully transform the landscape into a greener palate, I vaguely planned to return some weeks later. Shown here below is my first image from the May visit:

This year, spring in New England has featured more rain than normal. Dry days are a bit like currency – have to spend them judiciously. Five or six weeks later I returned to the marsh on a dry day and found the green grasses covered the land, as expected. Unexpectedly, coastal clouds were lingering and the water reflected white sky (not blue sky).

While that is a nice image, … I had imagined the water reflecting a blue sky. So, I returned later that same day after the clouds cleared away. That final image is shown at the top of this article.

In all three instances, the image required post-processing for HDR, particularly because the buildings on the horizon were too bright. So each of these three instances is a combination of multiple exposures, simply to control the dynamic range of light.

Image Quality : Mavic 2 Pro vs. (original) Mavic Pro

August 31, 2018August 31, 2018Kevin

The day of the new Mavic 2 release one week ago, numerous sites and YouTube channels already had reviews prepared. DJI had judiciously provided new Mavic 2 drones to people who would do these reviews. I have no intention of rehashing that stuff. I am interested specifically in the camera performance. Because I am largely interested in image quality, we’re talking about the Mavic 2 Pro, not the Mavic 2 Zoom. As for video quality, we’ll have to leave that for another day.

For high-quality images, DJI now provides this choice: Phantom 4 Pro, Mavic 2 Pro, Inspire 2 with Zenmuse X5s, Inspire 2 with Zenmuse X7. The unique value proposition of any Mavic is that it folds down to a size that can fit in a camera bag. A Mavic drone and remote controller requires physical space similar to a DSLR camera body and a zoom lens.

For photographers, is the upgrade worth it, from Mavic Pro to Mavic 2 Pro?
Yes, after brief testing this morning, there is no doubt in my mind.

With the advent of Mavic 2 Pro, the camera difference between Mavic and Phantom has been erased. Both the variable aperture (f/2.8 to f/11) and the sensor resolution (5472×3648) are on par with the pre-existing Phantom 4 Pro and superior to the original Mavic Pro. Note that this is a 2:3 aspect ratio compared to a 3:4 aspect ratio of Mavic Pro, Mavic 2 Zoom, and Zenmuse X5s.

Note that camera is new and not exactly the same as P4P. DJI bought a majority stake in Hasselblad a couple years ago and this apparently is the first fruits of that partnership. (Yes, DJI essentially owns the legendary Hasselblad company.)

According to the numbers, the angle of view is a bit different, though I did not notice during actual use. Mavic 2 Pro provides a FOV equivalent to 28mm lens on a full-frame camera. This is narrower than the original Mavic Pro’s equivalent 26mm and narrower than the Phantom 4 Pro’s equivalent 24mm. Despite being less wide angle, vertical lines can still keystone strongly and you may choose to correct for that in post processing.

Here are the problems with Mavic Pro that I hope are improved with Mavic 2 Pro.

Dynamic range in the Mavic Pro was not very good. In high-contrast scenes, highlights can easily blow out and/or the shadows block up. To mitigate this, I have sometimes captured multiple RAW exposures and then post-processed for HDR.
Using RAW capture, if the highlights do not blow out entirely, the camera still fails to resolve details in the highlights. For example, houses with clapboard siding in full sun – the separation of the clapboards may be entirely absent in the image. This seems surprising to me … if the story is true that the RGB color space has finer granularity in the highlight range compared to the shadow range.
Image noise, particularly in shadows. To mitigate this, I have relied upon heavy-handed post-processing. While noise reduction in Adobe Lightroom is very good, there is a price to pay – higher levels of noise reduction can deteriorate details throughout the brightness range.
With high magnification, images lack sharpness. In post-processing, I have found it necessary to apply twice as much sharpening compared to my hand-held cameras.
Color from RAW images is typically worse than any other camera I have used (except perhaps GoPro Hero3) and the images require heavy-handed post-processing. Of course, RAW images from any camera will always require some degree of post-processing.
Blue/red chromatic aberrations. I commonly see this around white baluster railings. Lightroom’s ability to mitigate chromatic aberration typically fails to resolve the problem.

In summary, the Mavic 2 Pro does achieve small improvements in all of these problem areas. So let’s look at some actual images from the new Mavic 2 Pro compared to the original Mavic Pro.

In high-contrast situations such as this scene with white boats and white houses, Mavic 2 Pro still has difficulty retaining detail in the highlights, but is not so bad that it requires HDR techniques to overcome it. It is still necessary to reduce the exposure by 1/3 stop to protect the highlights (this does not jeopardize shadow details) and also apply highlight reduction in post-processing.

[Click on an image to see the full resolution.]
[Images shown here are all RAW and individually post-processed to the very best of my ability using Adobe Lightroom.]

Noise reduction is still necessary but far less than with the original Mavic Pro.

Color of RAW images is much better, requires less correction.

Here’s an example (not a particularly good one) that shows Mavic Pro was unable to resolve the balusters and suffered chromatic aberration. Mavic 2 Pro did not exhibit either of these problems.

Click on the image to see larger version

Finally, a few notes that do not regard image capture.

If you’ve ever fumbled with the gimbal clamp on the original Mavic Pro, or worse yet have forgotten to remove the clamp before powering on the drone, rest assured that the new Mavic 2 Pro does provide an improvement. The gimbal clamp is integrated into the protective dome cover – remove the dome necessarily removes the gimbal clamp. See the photo below showing both the Mavic Pro and the Mavic 2 Pro.

Unlike the original Mavic Pro, the Mavic 2 includes 8GB on-board memory in addition to a micro SD slot. To access this memory from another device, connect a USB cable (included) to the Mavic 2 USB-C port and turn on power to the Mavic 2. (Remember to remove the gimbal clamp before turning on the Mavic.) After having inserted a micro SD card, the DJI GO app prompted whether to use that instead of the on-board memory. I am assuming that we must select one or the other and automatic switch-over is not supported, but I don’t know that for certain.

The transmission system between the drone and the controller is theoretically the most robust of any DJI product to date. Mavic 2 utilized second generation Occusync 2.0, while the Phantom line has yet to adopt the Occusync transmission system. Although Occusync 2.0 reportedly can operate at distances up to five miles, I personally have no need of that. Increased robustness of the signal is welcome, as I have seen unexplainable video signal loss when using the original Mavic Pro.

	Mavic Pro	Mavic 2 Pro
Diagonal Size (Not including propellers)	335 mm	354 mm
Obstacle avoidance	forward, downward	forward, backward, left, right, downward, upward
Flight time on single battery charge	27 min	31 min
Max speed	40 mph	72 kph
Built-in RAM	0	8GB
Cost (first released)	$1,000	$1,450
Battery cost	$90	$120
	Mavic Pro	Mavic 2 Pro
Photo ISO range	100-3200	100-6400
Video ISO range	100-1600	100-12800
Lens focal length	Equivalent to 26 mm on 35mm full-frame camera	Equivalent to 28 mm on 35mm full-frame camera
Lens aperature	f/2.8	f/2.8 – f/11
Max photo resolution	4000×3000	5472×3648
Max video resolution @ 30 fps	4K: 3840×2160	4K: 3840×2160
Max frame rate @ 1080	96 fps	120 fps
Max video bitrate	60 Mbps	100 Mbps
Video compression	H.264	H.265
HDR video	no	yes

Light Sources for Photography

July 12, 2018July 12, 2018Kevin

In a recent on-line discussion, someone offered a very confused (wrong) explanation of electronic flash options for photographic lighting. To straighten out the confusion, here’s a very brief overview of light sources for photography.

Light sources that strobe/flash

Studio strobe : Generally requires power from an AC wall-outlet
More power (more than batteries) enables more light and shorter recycle time.
Most studio strobes include a modeling light, which is a low-power continuous light that helps a photographer setup the light.
Monolight (a.k.a monoblock) : Self-contained studio strobe (does not have an external power pack). Some have an option to operate from battery.
Speedlight : a small battery-powered strobe with hot shoe; can be used on or off camera
Small strobe like a Speedlight but without hot shoe … is there a term for that?
Camera built-in flash

Light sources that do Not strobe/flash

Natural light, a.k.a. available light, ambient light … light not supplied by the photographer.
Continuous light (a.k.a. video light) … is a light source that does not strobe/flash.
Absolutely necessary for video applications, but can also be useful for still photography.
Hot light … a “continuous light” that generates much heat.
Tungsten and HMI (a.k.a. arc light) are examples of hot light technologies.
LED is an example of continuous light technology that is Not hot.
Flashlight / Light painting … this is a bit obscure, but some photographers have used a simple hand-held flashlight to “paint” light onto a subject during a very long exposure.

Light modifiers

Umbrella (There are reflective umbrellas and shoot-through umbrellas.)
Soft box
Beauty dish
etc.

Four Ways To Remotely Trigger Your Camera

June 28, 2018Kevin

Why would you want to trigger your camera when the camera is not in your hand? The most common reason is to make a selfie … where the resulting image doesn’t look like you are holding the camera at arm’s length. Here’s another example from personal experience about one month ago. On a pedestrian walkway that crossed a highway, my photo opportunity was inhibited by a tall fence; to make the photo, I placed the camera atop a telescoping pole and extended it above my head and above the height of the fence. (See the photo at the end of this article.)

Here are four methods to make a photo while the camera is not in your hand, beginning with the most rudimentary and finishing with the most sophisticated

1) Self-timer (Old-fashioned method #1)

Most people are likely familiar with this. Place the camera on a stable surface, push the button, then run away from your camera to join your family and friends in the captured photograph. Self-timer is a relatively ubiquitous feature, though it may be seldom used today by your average selfie photographer who doesn’t mind the look inherent in holding a camera with an outstretched arm. Every camera I have ever owned has included a self-timer,; he Android camera app in my smartphone is no exception.

2) Shutter release cable (Old-fashioned method #2)

This is a physical cable that must be connected to the camera. Although this is inexpensive and is still available for many cameras, it has fallen out of favor because it is inherently limited by the length of the cable.

Before the digital camera revolution, most professional cameras included a threaded hole to accept a universal cable release. It was a simple mechanical plunger. Experienced photographers carried a spare release cable because sooner or later the threaded connection to the camera was likely to break

While the mechanical cable release was both universal (compatible with most cameras) and ubiquitous, it was largely supplanted by an electronic cable release. The design is more like a light switch – the cable contains electrically conductive wires as part of an open circuit and pushing the button closes the circuit. This allows for longer cables and sophisticated external triggers (e.g. intervalometer, motion-activated trigger, etc). Unlike the universal mechanical cable, the connection to the camera is specific to the particular camera manufacturer; you need a cable designed to fit your camera.

For making selfie photographs with your smartphone, some selfie sticks include an electronic shutter release cable that connects a handle-mounted trigger button to the phone/camera. However, as the cable is subject to some physical stress, a wireless trigger is preferable and we consider that next.

3) Wireless shutter release

This achieves all the same goals as an electronic cable release but without the limitation of cable. These devices are widely available today for many cameras.

Some cameras include an infrared sensor and can be triggered using a remote infrared trigger. Some cameras can be controlled by a universal infrared trigger (not camera-specific) which may cost less than $15. Other cameras require use of a remote trigger specifically from the camera manufacturer. In either case, because the communication uses infrared light, it generally requires unobstructed line-of-sight between the remote and the camera.

Some cameras include wi-fi and and the ability to trigger the camera from a remote device via wi-fi. This does not have the line-of-sight limitation of infrared.

Similarly, if your camera supports Bluetooth, you may find a remote trigger that uses Bluetooth. For making selfies with a smartphone camera, some selfie sticks include a wireless Bluetooth trigger mounted in the handle. The distance limit for Bluetooth is typically far less than wi-fi. A Bluetooth remote might function at a maximum distance of 30 feet (9 meters), while a wi-fi remote might function at ten times that distance.

If your camera does not include infrared, wi-fi, or Bluetooth, you may be able to use a radio trigger, which consists of two parts, a transmitter and a receiver. I’ve used at least two different types. One is designed only to trigger the camera. The other (which I still use) is designed primarily a flash trigger, where one device mounts on the camera hot-shoe and a second mounts underneath a remote flash/strobe. However, a third device (all three are identical) can be used as a remote trigger for both the camera and the flash. As a prerequisite, the camera must have a special port/socket to connect an external trigger (the same port used in method #2 above) and the device mounted to the hot-shoe must also connect to the trigger socket.

In some cases, you may be able to wirelessly control camera functions far beyond basic shutter trigger. The GoPro Hero (versions 3, 4, 5, and 6) includes a smart remote that provides limited control of some camera features.

4) Smartphone or tablet app

An application for a smartphone (or other mobile device) can provide the ultimate remote control, including a live video image exactly as you would see if you were looking at the display screen on the camera. While this is only supported by specific camera models, the feature is becoming more common. I have one camera that supports this feature using wi-fi and another that can use either wi-fi or Bluetooth.

Some cameras may allow you to connect to an existing wi-fi network. More typically, you activate independent wi-fi within the camera; then, on your mobile device, use network selection to connect to the camera. (When connecting to your camera’s wi-fi, your mobile device will likely warn you that no Internet is available; this is normal.) After the connection is established, then launch the camera control application on your device.

As some cameras do not include this capability, you may be able to add this feature through a device such as the CamRanger Wireless Remote Control or the Case Air Wireless Tethering System.

Organize Your Batteries (for Photo and Video)

April 2, 2018April 4, 2018Kevin

Here is a little help for organizing batteries for your photo/video equipment.

If your camera bag has an available pocket, perhaps you dedicate that pocket to loose batteries. If not, then maybe batteries haphazardly occupy nooks and crannies at the bottom of your bag. While I have often bundled four or more batteries using a simple elastic band, it has been unreliable; the band eventually breaks and the batteries randomly spill about.

My first solution is a filter pouch, which originally was included with a lens filter. Though the filter manufacturer never intended this little fabric pouch to hold a set of batteries, it functions well for that purpose. When empty, the pouch occupies almost no space in a pocket or in a bag. When full of eight Eneloop rechargables, it is still possible to loose the pouch entirely … which is my current dilemma. (I know it’s around here somewhere.)

The second solution is similar, but specifically designed to hold a set of batteries. The Indicator Pouch is divided into two compartments; each will hold four AA batteries or one camera battery, but a DSLR battery might be big enough that the Velcro closure isn’t entirely secure. Optionally, the green or red tag may be used to remind you whether the batteries are charged or discharged. Unlike my old filter pouch, the Indicator Pouch has belt loops on the back side.

Finally, I like Storacell plastic battery holders; see the introductory photo. Different models are designed specifically for different size batteries. Available in a variety of colors, I use orange for AAA and yellow for AA. The 12-cell AA holder is the perfect size to supply three speedlites.

A solution that I have not personally used is a plastic clamshell box for batteries. Vaguely, I imagine opening the clasp and then all the batteries simultaneously fall to my feet and roll across the floor.