As some flowering cherry trees bloom early and some bloom later in the season, Kanzan Cherry is king of the late bloomers. (Also known as Kwanzan Cherry.) They are just now beginning to bloom in eastern Massachusetts. Though they appear as quite small red flowers today …. by Monday or Tuesday they will look like bold pink carnations.
The opening photo here is a past year at the Charles River Esplanade in Boston.
And here is what they look like today, about 15 north of Boston.
What I want: To create awe-inspiring photo, preferably unlike the images other people have created of the same subject.
Equipped with a guide book that helps to locate known waterfalls, I was surprised to discover that the access road was marked: No tresspassing for any reason. However, while the dirt road was apparently verboten, there seemed to be no prohibition to approaching the river a bit further downstream and then walking upstream. Walking upstream seems a simple proposition, but more often is difficult or impossible. On this day, I found my way, but did step upon a dirt road that may have been private property. I did not linger, but simply moved quickly away.
Arriving at the falls, I found concrete, ropes and a step ladder; not exactly the pristine wilderness that I had hoped for. Furthermore, access to the falls was limited to a single rocky ledge with very few options for camera shooting angle. Without risking gross tresspassing and without risking my life climbing down the cliff, I resigned myself to creating a rather documentary photograph and not spending extended time at this location.
A week later, I had three days in the Port Angeles area just outside Olympic National Park. The popular attraction here is the road to Hurricane Ridge, attaining an elevation of 5200 feet. The season being mid springtime, I anticipated a view of the Olympic mountains with snow-capped peaks. But clouds dominated the skies for the entire duration of my 3-days. From dawn til dusk, the great view of the mountains never materialized.
As the song says: You can’t always get what you want … but you might get what you need. Setting aside what I want, what do I need?
A walk outside with sod under foot and an eye toward the weather. My camera equipment must function A documentary photo, not perfect Survive the exploration without injury (slipping on a wet rock, or worse)
So, during my trip, it happened more than once. I did not get what I wanted … but I did get what I needed.
At the time for sunrise (about 5:39 am), the skies were entirely a grey haze and the sun did not show. After waiting four or five minutes with a drone in the air, I abandoned hope and packed up my gear. Walking back toward the road, only then did I see the red disc had risen through the haze. For a brief moment, I pondered whether to simply enjoy the spectacle or quickly re-deploy my gear; I chose the latter.
In retrospect, the haze was more than just morning fog; it was smoke in the atmosphere from Nova Scotia wildfires that month. ‘Cause that will filter light unlike normal morning fog.
Mostly (not completely), I’ve learned not to be disappointed when sunrise doesn’t manifest brilliant colors. That’s challenging because arriving at a location before sunrise implies effort to get up early enough to travel to my intended location. In this particular case, I had to travel by bicycle … before dawn. Because getting a car onto the island is a bit difficult, I left my car on the mainland. And although motorized scooters are common on the island, they are prohibited by law at this time of day.
I love the season of flowering trees; sadly, in the northeast, the season only lasts maybe six weeks.
Ornamental flowering trees are commonly planted in many different spaces ranging from residential gardens to corporate office parks. One category that commonly hosts plantings of beautiful trees is cemeteries. While it may seem odd to some people, I’ve seen people of all sorts and ages strolling through cemeteries, even having a picnic. Last weekend, I visited a cemetery in Wakefield. Although the crabapple trees had all dropped their colorful petals, I counted more than two dozen dogwood trees in bloom.
From that short excursion, I wanted to share a comparison of two images of the same tree but photographed with wide-angle lens and a telephoto lens. There are a few reasons why you might choose to use one or the other. When in doubt, shoot them both.
The first reason you might choose a telephoto lens is because you can’t get close enough to your subject. I personally encountered that scenario a couple weeks ago, stopping to photograph cherry trees in bloom at a cemetery where the gates were locked. I photographed from outside the fence using a 100mm lens.
The second reason you might choose to use a telephoto lens is to control the background. The narrow field of view may enable you to exclude elements from the background. And a wide-angle lens can include more background, for more environmental context. In the two photos I’ve shared here, both the telephoto and the wide-angle image do show the environment context, but a telephoto also allowed me to exclude the tombstones entirely.
A third reason to choose either telephoto or wide-angle is depth perception. Wide-angle lenses commonly exaggerate distance; multiple subjects in the photograph appear to be farther apart, compared to using a longer/telephoto focal length. Conversely, telephoto lenses tend to compress distance, making multiple subjects (at different distances from the camera) appear closer together.
Lastly, when you have multiple subjects at very different distances, a telephoto lens combined with a small aperture may allow blurring the background – if that’s the effect you’re seeking to create. Both the images here employ an aperture about f\4.5.
I have one surpassing criteria for an aerial drone …. image quality. This month, DJI introduced two new iterations of their drones, the Inspire 3 and the Mavic 3 pro. Personally, the first thing I need to know is how the camera compares to previous models. Lacking actual real photos from a new drone that I have not used, I must begin by comparing camera specifications. Digging up information can be surprisingly difficult because I’m seeking very specific fundamental parameters and sifting out the chaff is tedious.
Someone online recently asked which was the best for photography (which I presume excludes video). My answer was this: “Two words – variable aperture.” But I confess that I am particularly interested in the new 70mm lens with resolution of 48 MP.
I dug through the camera specifications online and composed this simple table of just the fundamental parameters.
Years ago, still-photo quality was my only concern, but today video quality is also a factor. Frankly, for the purposes of the video that I shoot, video quality is comparable across most DJI drones. I personally do not need 120 fps, nor do I require 5.1K. I do require DLOG recording.
A camera’s image sensor has one job – to record light. However, sensors generally can only capture a limited range of light from shadows to highlights. When the actual range exceeds the sensor’s ability, that’s “high dynamic range” or HDR.
Here are two recent examples where the range of light exceeded my camera sensor’s ability. The first is a sunset. No surprise – the highlights are super bright. The second example is less obvious – the surface of a lake reflects blue sky in some areas and elsewhere the light simply falls off to black.
The solution is the same. Capture multiple exposures and then combine them together as a matter of post-processing. Many cameras have this post-processing and a built-in option. Even my smartphone camera includes that feature. The results may be disappointing. My own experience with camera built-in HDR processing is 50/50 at best. The end result is so commonly disappointing that I routinely don’t trust the camera to do it. Instead, I do HDR post-processing using software in a desktop computer.
This technique generally requires that the camera doesn’t move when capturing the separate exposures. The composition of the two captures is exactly the same. If the camera moves slightly, that is commonly not a problem because the two can be aligned during post.
This technique doesn’t work with video. When shooting video, the camera angle usually changes during the shoot; to shoot the scene a second time will result in a different video composition. Two captures will never align. For video, the solution to HDR is different – capture the shot just once but use a special camera mode that is very low-contrast, often referred to as DLog. Straight out of the camera, that shot looks truly awful. It must be post-processed, expanding the contrast range to something that appears correct.
Some cameras today are using memory cards that did not exist ten years ago. It is time to again survey the state of memory cards. The last time I wrote about memory cards was 2014.
While many online comments assume Compact Flash (CF) memory cards are antiquated simply because they are larger than SD cards, that’s not true. CF might be considered as antiquated because of limited speed of data transfer – how fast can data be written to the card. CF cards, like older SD cards (UHS-I), may be “slow” when compared to some other card technologies.
For the past ten years, SD (secure digital) cards have dominated the market for cameras and other electronics. Unfortunately, labelling on SD cards can be quite cryptic. A single card may state: 250MB/s, UHS-II, U3, Class 10, V60.
“C” is original speed class C2 (2 MB/sec), C4 (4 MB/sec), C6 (6 MB/sec), and C10 (10 MB/sec).
“V” is video speed class V6, V10, V30, V60 and V90.
Memory cards are a form of NVRAM (Non-Volatile Random Access Memory). That implies two things. When the card is removed from electrical power, the data stored on a memory card does not disappear. That data can be accessed randomly; reading and writing is Not limited to serial or linear order.
Faster is better … maybe
There are two reasons but possibly neither reason is important to you.
Capturing video
When capturing video, the data rate out to your memory card will vary depending upon which codec and configurable parameters available with that particular codec. Let’s vaguely consider two examples, assuming the picture resolution is Ultra-High Definition video (a.k.a. UHD or 4K) and 30 frames per second:
H.264 is maybe 4 MB/sec (32 Mb/s) write to your memory card
Apple Pro Res 422 can be more than 60 MB/sec (480 Mb/sec) write to your memory card
Capturing bursts of high-resolution photos.
If a camera is going to produce RAW images of file size 30 MB each and you hold down the shutter release, capturing ten frames per second, that’s 300 MB/sec. The camera buffers the images internally until they can be saved to the card. The question is then: how much time before that writing is complete and you can press the shutter release again?
Under the hood
The most important difference between memory card technologies is what you can’t see.
The foundation of SDXC is UHS bus
The foundation of CF is Parallel ATA (PATA) bus interface.
The foundation of CFast is SATA III bus interface.
The foundation of XQD is PCIe.
The foundation of CFexpress is PCIe.
Next Generation is here
CFast is quickly fading away in our rear-view mirror. Some contemporary cameras do still employ these cards, including Blackmagic URSA and the Canon EOS C700.
Second generation XQD 2.0 debuted in 2012. Jointly developed by SanDisk, Sony and Nikon, XQD apparently defeated CFast but has not gained wide adoption. While XQD has been employed in a handful of Nikon cameras, it surprisingly has not appeared in Sony cameras. Perhaps the only non-Nikon camera to use XQD was the XF IQ4 by Phase One.
CFexpress was developed by a broad consortium of companies and, unlike XQD, does not incur licensing fees paid to Sony. Second generation CFexpress type B has the same physical size as XQD but can transfer data faster. Cameras currently supporting CFexpress cards include Canon EOS R5, Nikon D6, Nikon Z9 and Sony α7S III.
XQD and CFexpress can support 6K video and 8K video recording. CFexpress and XQD share the same physical size and durable packaging. Some Nikon Z-series cameras support either in the same card slot.
Consumer cameras will likely continue to use SDHC/SDXC/SDUC cards for several reasons.
Average consumers do not require durability/ruggedness of XQD and CFexpress.
Average consumers are not shooting 6K or 8K video
SD UHS-II cards are far less expensive than XQD and CFexpress cards
The very brief list
SDHC (SD High Capacity): between 4 and 32 GB;
SDXC (SD Xtreme Capacity): up to 2 TB;
SDUC (SD Ultra Capacity): up to 128 TB.
Data Speed
SDHC/SDXC/SDUC UHS-I: 104 MB/sec
SDHC/SDXC/SDUC UHS-II: 312 MB/sec
SDHC/SDXC/SDUC UHS-III: 624 MB/sec (The only product I can find is Sony SF-G Series Tough SDXC, $188)
CF (Compact Flash): up to 155MB/sec
CFast: up to 600Mb/sec
XQD: up to 1000MB/sec
CFexpress type A : up to 1000MB/sec
CFexpress type B : up to 2000MB/sec (To date, the fastest card has max write 1600MB/sec and max read 1700 MB/sec)
CFexpress type C : up to 4000MB/sec
Physical size
SD card is 32.0 × 24.0 × 2.1 mm
XQD is 38.5 x 29.8 x 3.8 mm
CFexpress Type A is 20 x 28 x 2.8 mm
CFexpress Type B is same as XQD
CFexpress Type C is 54 x 74 x 4.8 mm
Card Readers
Card readers that support both XQD and CFexpress are very rare. I found one that cost $150.
CFexpress type-A and CFexpress type-B are physically different. Card readers likely support one of these, not both.
Some card readers have multiple slots to accept different card formats. Such readers may only recognize one card at a time; if you insert two cards at the same time, it may only recognize the first card inserted.
To mention a few
The top two brands I have trusted are Lexar and SanDisk. Second tier Transcend. Third tier Kensington. While PNY probably deserves a spot in the top five, I’ve never actually owned a PNY card.
In 2017, Micron sold the Lexar brand. And, according to multiple reports online, a new brand, ProGrade Digital, was founded by some of the old Lexar leadership team.
Every year, I see some images shared online that viewers believe to be real but are digital creations that are not real. In many cases, the digital artist wasn’t trying to fool anyone but the image is shared without stating that it is digital art.
A friend showed me a “photo” that impressed him … reported to be a blue whale passing under a cable-stay bridge. As the length of the whale was similar to the length of the bridge, I did not believe it and suggested this was not a real photo. My friend seemed offended and asked “why would you question this photo?” Even the largest whale on earth simply isn’t that big. Later looking up details online, an adult blue whale may grow to a length of 100 feet. The bridge in the photo is the Samuel De Champlain Bridge and the section of the bridge in the image amounts to a length of approximately 1800 feet.
On several occasions, friends have share photos online of a bright red owl, sometimes identified as a Madagascar Red Owl. Commonly people believe they are sharing a real “photo” and are stunned by the beauty of the bird. The immediate problem is that owls are birds of prey and will not be highly visible to their prey; an owl should blend into its environment. To this point, at least seven years ago, I modified one of my own images and declared it to be an Aquitane Owl with blatant caption explaining that the coloring isn’t real and should never be misrepresented as real.
Some tropical birds are brightly colored; as a general rule, owls are not.
I have seen a few images that raised doubts, but a little research told me that the colors are not untrue, but perhaps digitally amplified. For example a black leopard with distinctive spots (not entirely black). And then there is a brown zorse (zebra horse) – apparently completely real.
To stabilize a camera for video filming, we have seen several types of stabilization: (1) Large Steadycam body-mounted on a vest. (This was invented around 1975.) (2) Hand-held stabilizers that rely upon counter-balance weight (3) Computerized gimbal operated with two hands and support cinema cameras such as RED, Sony, Canon, etc (4) Computerized gimbal that can be held with just one hand and support smaller cameras (5) Very small devices including camera and gimbal with a total weight of 16 oz or less. (6) In-camera mechanical techniques for stabilzation, either lens-shift or sensor shift (7) Digital image stabilization
Computerized gimbals have been a game changer, invented around 2012. The larger 2-handed category has been dominated by Freefly MoVI series and DJI Ronin series of products. These systems do not include camera, video monitoring, or follow-focus.
Today, DJI introduced another game-changer – the new DJI Ronin 4D. This is no longer just a stabilization device, rather it is a complete system, including the camera. Surely many film-makers will not readily abandon their trusted cameras and lenses, but at first glance, Ronin 4D does seem to be a game-changer.
Cost: The complete system is less than $10K. Compare this to assembling a comparable system from separate components. Either a RED Komodo or Canon C300 Mark III will set you back more than $8K and that does not even include any lens. The built-in ND filters is a pretty big deal; can potentially eliminate need for a bulky matte box. The LIDAR system looks truly amazing.
The Ronin 4D Cinematic Imaging System includes:
Cinema camera: 6K @ 120 FPS, or 8K @ 75 fps, or
10-bit Pro-Res
Six built-in ND filters
Computerized 6-Axis stabilization gimbal
7″ touchscreen video monitor, detachable and wireless
LIDAR focusing system
long-range wireless 1080 video transmit (with encryption and frequency hopping)
In addition to visiting Gloucester this weekend, I also ported all my photography and tools to a new computer. As I imported new images from a camera drone, I took the new computer on a test drive to verify that my tools were all in good order.
This scene had both very bright highlights and very dark shadows; I doubted that a single exposure could contain both the highlights and shadows. As you likely know, such situations are known as high dynamic range (HDR). I captured a bracket of three exposures. In retrospect, it was a wise choice. The middle exposure was spot on, however the foreground was nearly black and some background highlights were blown out – white boats and white buildings. The darker exposure provided correction for the blown-out highlights. The lightest exposure was used to replace the black foreground water with dark-blue water.
Initially, I processed each of the three in Lightroom and then combined them together using Photoshop. From Lightroom, open the three images using “Edit In” -> “Open As Layers In Photoshop”. Once opened in Photoshop, select all three layers and choose “Edit” -> “Auto-Align layers”. Here, there are six Projection options; I chose “Reposition” because the three images were identical composition that varied only by exposure.
A selection of the highlights was applied as a layer mask on the darkest layer, such that only the highlights are used from that layer. A selection of the foreground dark water was applied as a layer mask to the brightest layer such that the foreground is lightened. The resulting image is shown here on the right.
From there, I applied three image filters by Alien Skin. First was Bokeh, to blur the image – except for the schooner. Then I used two different variations of Snap-Art. All this was done through Photoshop. Upon saving all of this (TIFF file), I was back in Lightroom. Judicious use of brightness, clarity, and color saturation enhanced the simulated brush strokes. The end result is shown here on the left.
