Widowmaker Continued

This is a two image stitch, then cropped a bit off the top and bottom, and slightly at the sides. The light rocks have been tamed, the shadowed rock opened a bit, some 50/100/0 unsharp mask applied, and then the image toned using my add a solid layer, set blend to colour.

Kananaskis River - Widowmaker II

I photographed here last summer, and today Ken and I went back out. Forecast was for freezing rain so we were not sure the trip would fly, but as we left town, there was even a little sun breaking through on the horizon.

As we went west the clouds built up and they reached down to the ground and had those streaks in them that tell you it's wet somewhere. We actually hit snow as we pulled onto Highway 40 for Kananaskis Park, but with winter tires and a bit of care, we pulled off for the river.

I put on some studded overshoes and had no issues climbing around on sloped rocks, while Ken stepped gingerly without, but neither of us fell.

We had a good three hours photographing - my endurance is improving leaps and bounds compared to a few weeks ago when after an hour I had to sit down or fall down - so nice. I could have done a variation on the shot made last summer but instead concentrated on the rock formations across the river, and also behind and above me as I stood on river's edge.

Both images are stitches. The first is with the 300 mm. lens at f22 (and the foreground isn't sharp) but I figured it wouldn't really matter given the water was moving anyway. The second image is with the 120. By the time the stitching is completed, the irregular edges are trimmed and then there is some compositional cropping (very modest), we're looking at about 120 megapixels.  Interestingly, the first image looks better small, while the second is best full screen. You can click on either to see them larger (1000 pixels wide).

Stand by for some more images from the shoot in the next couple of days, and I think there is more to be made of the location in a future trip. I must sometime post an image of the white water when the dam is open and the kayakers find it lives up to its name - whole n'other setup!

Banff

We had four days in Banff before I started back at work last week, half time for now. I took the gondola to the top of Sulphur mountain and photographed with the Pentax, aware that with such a well known location and limited chance to move I wasn't going to shoot anything original, but it was fun, and my first day shooting outdoors since the surgery - I even hiked (slowly) over to the weather station and back to find some other views.

I don't know what peak this is. I made the photograph with the Pentax mounted vertically, and three images swung horizontally. It was an interesting shooting situation. Except for right next to the gondola building where there is a concrete pad, all of the boardwalk is very bouncy and the tripod shakes with every footstep, even ones 40 feet way in some situations.

I also found that there was a great deal of atmospheric disturbance - the image literally swam on the lcd - so I cranked up the iso to 400 (remember it was very bright) to give me a shutter speed of 1/1600 af f10, the lens my 300 FA f 5.6.

This was a high enough shutter speed to deal with shutter shake (exc. when people were nearby) and also to 'stop' the air movement. The result is an image that is reasonably sharp, considering. Below is a 100% crop. The full size print is 62 inches wide at 300 dpi.

Post Hip Replacement

It's five weeks tomorrow and 8 days till I can drive again - what a relief. Recovery has been going well - fatigue being a bigger issue than pain, but even that is improving. Haven't felt the need for pain medication in the last week and am just back from a six block walk, albeit with one crutch. Don't use an aid in the house but better safe outside in the winter. Fortunately it's a really mild January with temps above freezing so walking is very pleasant.

Did go photographing on Saturday but it was exhausting after about 90 minutes and I sat and waited for my friend, and even wandering around The Camera Store after was tiring. But today's walk was much faster than the one only two days ago and the more active I get the better I sleep.

I return to work part time Feb. 2, with mixed feelings.

Went to the 4mp movie yesterday, no crowd. Saw Imitation Game - great movie!

Hip Replacement

Got a call Thursday before last, surgeon had a cancellation, did I want to move up my surgery? This news in the middle of a busy day seeing patients. Well, there were issues with the previously scheduled date in Jan. like no locum and a lot of missed office during the recovery - so yes, 4 days ago on the 17th I had my left hip replaced - interesting process, lying there awake while they bang and saw and drill, fortunately with something to relax you so you don't freak.

Went for a walk outside today, barely a block in total but after my hip really stiffened up. Otherwise I'm pottering round the house with one or two crutches (turns out crutches don't have cup holders. I've learned that if I bend my operated leg backwards, I can bend forward and touch the ground without breaking the rule about not bending my hip more than 90 degrees.
Stairs are interesting - going up, lead with the good leg, down with the bad. For the most part I don't have pain just lying back on a recliner or lying on the sofa, minor discomfort sitting upright - actually better than I'd hoped for this stage.

With luck, some weight loss and a fitness programme, by spring I'll be ready to go out photographing.

Planetary Body?

Actually, a stainless steel pot sitting on a black ceramic stove top.

Rephotographing Negatives

A recent Luminous Landscape article discussed both the merits and the process for photographing negatives and slides, bypassing the exageration of grain and dust that tends to come with flatbed scanning of film.

It seemed both easy and practical. I happened to have a macro lens. One photographer used flash to back light the film, the other a small 4X5 inch light table. It was no longer available from Vistek but B&H sell the same thing made by Logan, for about $80 - very reasonable.

I ordered one and when the table arrived, set up my tripod at the corner of the dining room table, the light table sitting on the dining table, and the camera aimed straight down at such a height as to capture the entire 4X5 inch negative.

I grabbed a pile of negatives in their paper sleeves and started going through them - any that seemed to have strong composition, I'd photograph them.

At this point, some film comes out of the sleeve dead flat, no sweat. Others have a distinct curve and I'm going to build  some metal guides for the negatives so they end up near flat. Experiments have shown it doesn't take a huge curve at f 11 and only a foot away from the negative to blur the edges of the film.

This is very much a work in progress. Resolution - better than my 4870 flatbed scanner, grain dramatically less, dust - wow - so much less hassle.

The bad news, this image wasn't sharp when printed in the wet darkroom, now at least I can see why - the focus is on the centre lighter tree and there just isn't enough depth of field  - it makes an 8X10 but not a 13X19 of quality.

Tonality - excellent - detail - nice throughout the negative, nothing lost in rephotographing - I think we're really onto something here.

My 120 macro for the Pentax 645z goes to 1:1 so I can get full resolution on my old 6X6 negatives and adequate resolution for 35 mm.

Expect to see some old work - this from the early 80's, shot with a wooden lightweight field camera and 210 mm. lens.

Scrambled Eggs

Did I say I was a good cook, no I didn't. Actually, with my wife recovering from a total knee replacement, I've been scrambling in more than just cooking and burned the pot. An attempt to clean left it like this, so I figured... Time to get some steel wool.

A Sober Look At The Work Done

I want to do a book of my black and white photography.  I know that I'm unlikely to find a commercial publisher because I simply am not known enough to sell thousands of books of fine art photographs. The market is quite tiny anyway and compared to technical photography books, those sell at a rate that is probably 100:1

So I've been thinking, I need to get my work out there. An email arrived announcing the latest portfolio contest for B&W magazine. I've been in it a few times, but not in several years. A check of my hard drives shows submissions in 2008 and 2010 but frankly I can't even remember if I sent those in.

The contest rules state it can be a 'best of' collection, but I decided I'd limit myself to seeing how many strong black and white images I could find that I have made in the last three years, 2012 - 2014.

Well, much of my work in the last few years has been in colour, and with one thing and another, I have not been shooting as much as I used to, so finding some 8-12 strong images in monochrome from a three year period has not surprisingly been, shall we say, interesting.

Do I include the cowboy images - I think they are strong, but they sure don't fit when sitting next to a bunch of landscape and semi abstract industrial images. It's the usual question, that applies whether cropping or selecting a series of images for presentation - do the extra images or extra pieces of image add more than they take away.

My thinking right now is the cowboy images just don't fit, even though the rest of the images are a hodge podge.

I tried flipping a number of colour images to b&w and some certainly worked, but weren't better for the conversion and didn't stand out - so much for that idea. A couple of images did look good though in black and white and with further editing might just serve. Below are five that have survived the road to black and white. and I'm open to thoughts.

I'm fairly sure I'm not finished editing all the images. For example I did the first image last night, and made a print, but felt today that while it had potential, it was weak and so worked on the image further, adding some subtle highlights and shadows to the rubber bumper on the left, and darkening the wall on the right, while lightening the base of the wall, and then bringing back some highlights by using a straight curve, white point moved to the left and carefully painting into the masked layer in Photoshop.

But I need 8-12 images so on goes the selection process. Stay tunes for further iterations.

Back Out Shooting

Still a long way back to normal but oh, it was nice to be out shooting today.

I printed the image above on metallic paper and it works very nicely. Shot with the 120 mm. lens, wide open.

Atlas Coal Tipple, Wash Shed, Pentax 645Z

I can't speak highly enough of the Pentax 645Z files - there's just so much to work with - so much resolution, dynamic range, shadow detail that can be edited, and robustness of files when manipulated - probably too far in this image, but I saved it as a colour version before adding the extras so can blend that back for a more mellow effect.

Ah, that's better.

All Quiet, But About A Book

So what happened to all the work being done with my new Pentax 645Z?

Well, it started with a 30 cm. snowfall early in September that broke hundreds of branches on our own property alone. In the cleanup and haul to the dump (thank heavens for a stock trailer) I managed to hurt my back, to the point I have loss of function of the right hand and pain that keeps me from standing for more than a minute or two. Bad enough to prevent typing on my desktop computer never mind shooting more Paper images. Hell, I'm not sure I could even hold the camera.

It has however given me some time to think about book production. I have been thinking for some time of using Kickstarter to collect funding for a proper run of my book of black and white images, currently only a private blurb book that is far too expensive to be practical to market.

Before I can even think of starting such a task, I'll need to get detailed costing and timing on printing, packaging and shipping the book, as well as rewards for investors. I'll need to figure out how to deal with a bad print run and how to get rewards shipped in a timely fashion, as well as how to get the word out as broadly as possible.

It occurs to me to use canvas prints as rewards - shipped directly from the printer within Canada or US, or even to use as a reward a digital file that could be used by the investor to print at home, or have printing done locally even including framing.

As part of my research I have been looking at failed attempts on Kickstarter - I will be producing an introductory video, and won't be flogging signed pictures of me, and will have rewards that can be delivered promptly if funding is completed.

The worst nightmare I can contemplate would be  disastrous print run - funny green printing that the printer refuses to take responsibility for. This risk can be mitigated by careful choice of printer and inspection of the work done as well as full understanding of the printers proofing system, as well as reputation. Doing three books so far has given me considerable experience. Books of colour images intermingled with black and white run the greatest risk of poor results where this would be all black and white.

One obvious option for investor rewards would be a pdf digital book.

I will be studying problems and strategies, successes and failures to learn as much as possible before committing myself to this idea. I have already arranged free shipping of canvas prints as rewards and the next step is to talk numbers and dollars with a printer.

Is f22 Useable On The Pentax 645Z?

There has been a heated discussion on the Luminous Landscape Forum about whether one can use f22. It would appear to be divided between those who theorize that this should never be done (and have not done so) and the few who actually have done it and found it to work, within the parameters of adequate depth of field combined with sufficient resolution to satisfy them.

I was curious to see just what sufficient to satisfy means, and in particular if it would satisfy me. I used the single central image of the stitch made today, shot with the 75 mm. lens,  at f22.

I arbitrarily decided that a sharp up close 30X40 inch print would be my definition of sharp enough. As usual, I applied my normal amount of sharpening in lightroom, 58, .7, 70, 0 the same setup I had used with my D800e.

Once the image had been edited extensively, I applied output sharpening of 247, .7, 0 in Smart Sharpen. The result looked a tad over-sharpened at 100% on screen, an amount I was reasonably sure would produce a tack sharp print with no sharpening artifact.

The result - exactly as predicted. Inspection under a bright light as close as my bifocals will take me (8 inches).

So, f22 works just fine with the 75 mm. lens. Might it not work with other lenses - possibly.

Why didn't I compare it to 5.6 - because the question wasn't whether 5.6 would be sharper, the question I wanted answered (the same one Michael Reichmann wanted) is whether f22 works and it does.

Why 30X40 print - well, this was already going beyond 300 DPI - actually 206.4 pixels per inch. Printing larger would not be expected to produce perfect prints to be viewed from 8 inches at any aperture. In fact, the Pentax 645Z with 75 mm. lens did remarkably well and I completely agree with Michael - f22 is more than useable - it's just fine thank you.

Don't forget to click on this to see the whole section - which is about 3 inches across at 30X40!!!

Lessons learned:

Theory and Practice don't always match up.

Only the real world counts (ie. what happens in practice).

Diffraction is different from out of focus and responds much better to additional sharpening.

Sensor size controls the highest useable f-stop. I tested (in prints of real subjects - the only thing that counts) with my full frame 35 equipment and even with the 22 mp 5D2 and 3 and D800e, I could not go beyond f16, but I have proved to my satisfaction that I can with the modestly larger 33X44 mm. sensor of the Pentax.

So, how is this relevent to you? It isn't - except that you need to do your own test - with a real subject and in viewing prints.  You might have better eyes (more than likely), or closer vision (almost certainly if younger) or higher standards (I'm pretty damn fussy) or you might not standardize on 30X40 prints with the Pentax, or use a different camera or sensor size.

If you do the test - with a real subject, and look at the print (on its own, not compared to anything) does it satisfy you - that's the only relevant question. If it does, great - if not, well you've answered an important question for you and your equipment specifically.

Feel free to write - but ONLY if you have done the test, as I have described.

Kananaskis River Shallows

This was a three image stitch, with the 75 mm. lens. Why stitch with a 51 MP camera? Well, I have a 75 and a 35 mm. lens. The 35 was too wide and included some tree reflections from downstream, while mounting the 75 vertically gave me just enough height wise, but I needed more width than a single image would give.

Interestingly, within about 10 seconds of finishing the third image, I heard a roar of water from upstream - they'd opened the sluice gates of the dam, and within 30 seconds this entire scene disappeared under two feet of turbulent water. The kayakers started arriving and it was time for me to pack up.

Looking At Images - Brooks Jensen

 

You  will perhaps remember that I wrote the book Why Photographs Work. I recently started reading Brooks new book and before I started, I felt a bit awkward - do I say his book is better, or mine, or what. After all, I chose my way of writing deliberately so it seemed a bit weird to be then commenting on Brooks writing.

Turns out it wasn't a problem at all. I'm not Brooks, and he's not me, and I learned quite a bit from this book, that I am currently half way through.

For a start, Brooks has selected an interesting collection of both black and white and some colour work to discuss, many of the works beautiful to my eye, and perhaps more importantly, when an image doesn't first impress me, I'm intrigued to find out what Brooks saw in the image that I missed. It doesn't make one of us right, but it does broaden ones horizon to look at images that aren't obviously great. I may not get the image on first reading, or perhaps the tenth, but sometimes things will percolate for some time and guess what, you can't ever look at image the same again. And that ain't bad.

Brooks is of course editor of Lenswork, perhaps the most respected magazine of black and white photographs around. Some have faulted Brooks for his middle class white American relatively conservative taste, but over the years Lenswork has definitely pushed and changed my boundaries, widening my tastes in photography. Traditional black and white landscapes are a minority in both the magazine and this book. There are abstracts and documentary photographs, manipulated images, and yes, enough 'traditional' photography to suit most.

If there is one thing in particular Brooks brings to looking at these images, it is not surprisingly his vast knowledge of other photography that he references in about half of the images discussed. Although it's true that he doesn't include all those images (downright impractical without doubling the size of the book) but with the internet, a very small effort will show you the work he compares and contrasts. There is a great deal to be learned, dare I say; by everyone who follows his thoughts about the place of these images in both the history and art of photography. In this way his writing is fundamentally different from mine and even when he doesn't reference other images, his discussion of individual images often comes with a point he wants to make, about something to be learned, and the work is discussed in the context of all the photography that has gone before it.

This makes the book an excellent tool for learning about images, about strengthening our own photography, and about seeing in different ways.

Turns out I can happily give this book a hearty recommendation. Yes, I know, it's so much easier to read about technical stuff, but I'm betting this will do a lot more for your own image making.

You can see some of the pages here and order the book thus.

And can I remind you - every photographer needs at least a few Lenswork Folios - sets of beautiful prints of great work at a bargain price. What photographer doesn't wish he could go back and purchase Pepper # 30 direct from Edward Weston for $5. Well, some 80 years later, we're talking original work for $12.50 a print - what a bargain.

 

Pioneer Acres With Pentax 645z

Pentax 645 Update - Still Smiling!

The honeymoon continues. I love the camera and the lenses are performing well. I would NEVER go back to a camera without at least a tilting LCD screen. My used 35, 75 and 120 lenses didn't come with lens hoods so last night I made some from Edmund Scientific Flocking paper. Handy and they stuff back into the bag easily. Today I shot several images with very strong lighting just outside the frame and did not see any problems with flare (which I had seen previously with the 120 which surprised me as the front element is quite recessed). Anyway, problem fixed.

I took some images today with the 200 mm. lens at 1/6 second, some with the 2 second self timer, then later with the 12 second - the latter are sharp, the former definitely soft - so I need 12 seconds on the self timer for both the 200 and 300 mm. lenses - so now I know.

Several times today, rather than using live view magnified focus, move the magnified image to the extreme corner (slow), I simply turned live view off and checked focus with the view finder - turned out to work very well (I was focus blending so needed to find the near focus point which happened to be at the edges). This speaks well to the quality of the viewfinder.

When the Sony A7r came out, there were concerns for image sharpness in a vertical format because of shutter shake - although I haven't done any formal testing, lots of images shot vertically have not shown any concerns on the Pentax 645z.

I've been doing a lot of lens swapping, guessing incorrectly on the focal length I needed. It's possible that zooms would have avoided this but my feeling is only to a modest degree and I'm happier to accept the quality of the fixed lenses. This is a bit of a surprise to me - I hadn't thought I'd be as comfortable without my zooms, but so far it's been a non-issue.

Both the 25 and 35 mm. lenses have some barrel distortion, but auto correction with the 25 and manual with the 35 has not been a problem.

I know I have said it before, but I love how robust the files are. I can correct for barrel distortion, rotate the image, fix horizontal and vertical perspective and rotate the image, all on top of focus blending and followed by Akvis Enhancer without the image falling apart and still able to make a tack sharp 30X40 print.

That's all that I ever hoped for and more.

Does the Pentax do anything that smaller cheaper cameras can't do - no - it's simply down to print size. If you don't routinely go above 13X19, there are many cameras that would suit better and be more versatile.

Even if the Nikon 810 came with a complete set of Zeiss Otis lenses (not that I could afford them, my Pentax lenses cost between $200 - $1000 exc. for the 25 mm. so that's 5X$4500 less for a set of lenses - that's a lot more than I paid for the Pentax and 25 mm. lens combined. And to not have a tilting LCD, and to have to put up with stop down live view focusing - NO WAY.

Hatch

 

It was difficult deciding how to crop this image - I made the original with the entire valve on the left included including it's wheel (of which you see only half here), but in the end decided that a clean left edge was more important than the valve itself and it was the shadow of the valve that was important, with just enough of the actual structure to 'explain' the shadow.

Whether to include the base of the tank I'm less certain of - on the one hand, the image is cleaner without, on the other it provides framing for the tank. I'll probably try it both ways before making a final decision.

Paper

 

This is simply the start of a new project. Some years ago I purchased an entire box of 32X40 Crane Museo matte paper, warmtone. I never used it as the paper was way too yellow for selling prints at the farmers market under mercury lighting (the paper was a lovely cream at home).

Anyway I have decided to try MY hand at creating images with paper - hardly original, but creative none the less and this is just effort one, made quickly with a roughly torn wedge of paper. The lighting was from an overhead fitting above the dining room table, the cool lighting from a window behind the camera. Depth of field was restricted by choosing a moderately large aperture. Considering this was just a 'test of concept' I find I like it more than I expected and look forward to doing more experimenting.