I was at a party where the room was lit in a blue glow. Using a Fuji X-Pro1 with a 35mm f/1.4 lens wide open, I took this photo of a glass of white wine in the available light accented with some candles on the table.
Senin, 20 Mei 2013
Minggu, 19 Mei 2013
Replicating the Autochrome process
Recently, a friend asked me if I knew of any simple way of achieving the look of the autochrome color process with digital images. I was intrigued enough to do a bit of research and give it a try. I had an original autochrome glass transparency so I scanned it to use as my sample control image.
Autochrome was the first color process. It was invented by the Lumière brothers in France and introduced in 1907. It was an additive process consisting of three color layers each dyed a different color -- a blue-violet layer, red-orange layer, and green layer -- and resulted in a glass plate transparency. The exaggerated grain structure was a result of its being composed of tiny grains of potato starch. The muted, grainy look of Autochrome echoed the contemporary artistic look of Impressionist and Pointillist paintings. To me, the results also bear a strong similarity to the look of the Fresson photographic printing process.
I experimented with a few Photoshop techniques to achieve the look and feel of Autochrome, but settled on using the one that comes included as part of Alien Skin's Exposure 4 Photoshop plugin. I found it necessary to do some minor tweaking to the results to come closer to the grainy look, and then muted the images to fade them a bit.
In addition to using the plug-in I also added a color layer in OVERLAY mode, as described below, and added some noise to a level of 5-7. I found that the noise broke up the pattern of the grain a bit, added some more color to it, and also lowered the contrast. For some of the images I found it necessary to mute the colors even more by applying a Vibrance adjustment layer in Photoshop.
A full effect of the process requires seeing the images at full size so I included high res downloads with each file. Click on the caption links below the photos to download them.
Recently, a friend asked me if I knew of any simple way of achieving the look of the autochrome color process with digital images. I was intrigued enough to do a bit of research and give it a try. I had an original autochrome glass transparency so I scanned it to use as my sample control image.
 |
| This is an original Autochrome plate which I scanned in to use as a control sample for imitating the process. Click here to download a hi res version of this file. |
 |
| Click here to download a hi res version of this file. |
In addition to using the plug-in I also added a color layer in OVERLAY mode, as described below, and added some noise to a level of 5-7. I found that the noise broke up the pattern of the grain a bit, added some more color to it, and also lowered the contrast. For some of the images I found it necessary to mute the colors even more by applying a Vibrance adjustment layer in Photoshop.
A full effect of the process requires seeing the images at full size so I included high res downloads with each file. Click on the caption links below the photos to download them.
 |
| I found the Autochrome grain structure difficult to mimic and modified the default Exposure 4 settings as illustrated above. |
 |
| To provide a faded color cast and lower contrast similar to what I noticed in Autochrome images I added a color layer over the above image , and changed the mode of this layer to OVERLAY. I then decreased its opacity until it look right. For the tone of the color layer I chose a dominant color in my image and selected it using the color picker in Photoshop. |
 |
| Click here to download a hi res version of this file. |
 |
| Click here to download a hi res version of this file. |
 | |
| Click here to download a hi res version of this file. |
 |
| For the photo above and below I added this color layer in OVERLAY mode with opacity set to 35%. |
 |
| Click here to download a hi res version of this file. |
Jumat, 17 Mei 2013
An evening with the Wet Collodion Process
Last night I attended an introductory demo of the wet collodion process at the Center for Alternative Photography in New York. Wet plate was the principle photographic process from the 1850's through the end of the 19th century. The process was used to sensitize metal plates to make tintypes, and glass plates to make ambrotypes. The solution is very cumbersome to apply because the collodion, which is the carrier for the light sensitive silver nitrate, needed to maintain its wet state during the entire process, including the taking and developing of the image. For landscape photographers this meant having a darkroom tent with them when they were out in the field.
The wet collodion process was used by most of the famous 19th century photographers, including Nadar, Mathew Brady, W.H. Jackson, Carleton Watkins, and Roger Fenton. It is still used today by artists and purists who love the process for the unique characteristics.
Collodion looks like maple syrup and has a similar consistency. Once a plate is coated with the collodion it is dipped into a tray of silver nitrate, which then adheres to the collodion and makes the plate light sensitive. The plate must be then put in the camera, exposed, and processed all within about a three minute period so the collodion does not harden.
The wet collodion process is extremely fine grained, and with proper prep and processing also has exceptional resolution and permanence. Its sensitivity to the color spectrum gives it a unique look much coveted by artists who use the process today.
If you are in New York and interested in learning about early photographic processes, or want to know how to do them, I highly recommend the Center for Alternative Photography as a valuable resource. It is a non-profit organization dedicated to preserving all forms of early photography. Many of the courses are done in conjunction with ICP (the International Center of Photography) in New York, and encompass cyanotype, wet plate, calotype, salt paper, palladium, and many other interesting topics.
In addition to the courses, the Penumbra Tintype Portrait Studio is located on the same premises. You can arrange to drop by and for a very nominal fee ($75and up depending upon size) have your tintype portrait taken.
If you're really into early photographic processes, this place has a lot to offer.
All photos in the post were taken available light with a Fuji X-Pro1 using either the f/1.4 35mm lens or 18-55mm zoom. ISO was normally around 1600 except for the darkroom shots where I had to push it to 6400.
Last night I attended an introductory demo of the wet collodion process at the Center for Alternative Photography in New York. Wet plate was the principle photographic process from the 1850's through the end of the 19th century. The process was used to sensitize metal plates to make tintypes, and glass plates to make ambrotypes. The solution is very cumbersome to apply because the collodion, which is the carrier for the light sensitive silver nitrate, needed to maintain its wet state during the entire process, including the taking and developing of the image. For landscape photographers this meant having a darkroom tent with them when they were out in the field.
 |
| The Center for Alternative Photography in New York presents a variety of lectures, classes, and demos relating to older forms of photography. |
 |
| The demo was conducted by Eric Taubman, founder of the Center. After a brief intro, Eric took us through a step-by-step demo of the entire process from coating the plate to taking and processing the image. |
 |
| Collodion is poured onto the plate and any excess is drained off leaving a thin, even coating. From this point on the photographer has about three minutes to complete the entire picture taking process including processing the image while still wet. |
 |
| In the dark the wet plate is dipped into a solution of silver nitrate to sensitize it. |
 |
| The camera and subject are set up ahead of time in preparation for taking the photograph. |
 |
| As soon as the plate is sensitized it is transferred to the camera and the photographer guesses from experience what exposure time to use. The exposure is very slow so any portrait subjects had to hold very still. |
 |
| Developer is poured over the exposed plate in the darkroom. Developing takes only about 15 seconds, after which the plate is immediately rinsed in water to arrest the process. |
 |
| Rinsing the plate after development. Once the plate is rinsed it is no longer light sensitive. |
 |
| For added permanence, the plate is run through a fixer bath. |
 |
| The finished plate is then put out to dry and after a day or so is coated with varnish to make it permanent and protect it from scratches. |
 |
| Bottles of prepared collodion and developer. |
 |
| A 19th century book, The Silver Sunbeam, describes early photographic processes including wet collodion. |
In addition to the courses, the Penumbra Tintype Portrait Studio is located on the same premises. You can arrange to drop by and for a very nominal fee ($75and up depending upon size) have your tintype portrait taken.
If you're really into early photographic processes, this place has a lot to offer.
Details:
Center for Alternative Photography
36 East 30th Street
New York, NY 10016
917-288-0343
All photos in the post were taken available light with a Fuji X-Pro1 using either the f/1.4 35mm lens or 18-55mm zoom. ISO was normally around 1600 except for the darkroom shots where I had to push it to 6400.
Kamis, 16 Mei 2013
Sony Cyber-shot full frame DSC-RX1camera
a hands on review
Many of my friends in the photo industry have been telling me I would love this camera ever since it was announced. Although it is not a camera type I would normally use, I decided to give it a test drive to see what all the excitement is about.
This is a very unusual camera. It is a very small -- in fact, the smallest -- full frame camera coupled with a single superb Zeiss Sonnar 35mm f/2 lens. A package such as this is aimed at producing extremely high image quality, but the scale and limitations of the design raise questions of practicality of use. For this reason, there are two aspects of this review. The first part looks at the camera and lens combo in terms of its ability to deliver a quality image. The second part examines the camera-lens combo in practical terms of usage. In other words, does it work well as a system, and how would it fit into a typical workflow.
First, in terms of image results the camera is superb, ranking just below the current best of breed full frame cameras, the Nikon D800 and D600 series. Considering Sony's past relationship of supplying sensors to high end Nikon cameras, this is to be expected. When you couple such excellent sensor technology with one of the most legendary optical systems in the world, a Zeiss Sonnar lens, good things are bound to happen, and in this case they do.
My brick-wall tests show an over all sharpness that extends even into the corners at wide open apertures. Full open at f/2 there is only a slight trace of corner softness, which rapidly dissipates as the lens is stopped down, and practically disappears at f/2.8 and beyond. I doubt anyone would find this degree of corner softness objectionable. In addition, there is practically no vignetting and only slight barrel distortion present at any aperture.
The following images illustrate the resolution capabilities of this camera and lens. You can download the full res version of these brick wall tests below to check the results for yourself.
Chromatic aberration was another matter. I found excessive amounts of color fringing along the edges of typical shots of outdoor tree settings, such as the one below. Fortunately, this involved a simple lens correction in Photoshop, but this assumes you shoot in RAW and post-process images. With a high end camera such as this, I suspect most photographers would include post-processing as part of their workflow.
Noise levels at high ISO's were very good, as is the case with most of the high end, large sensor cameras coming onto the market now. What I term the noise threshold, that level after which noise becomes unacceptably excessive unless dealt with in post processing, peaks around ISO 2000. Below are some high ISO sample images to download.
Camera overview:
After selling off my Fuji X100 I pretty much swore off one lens cameras. I just don't see the need for them anymore with so many other quality options becoming available. As you might expect, with that attitude I have a prejudice coming into this review.
The RX1 is something of a tour de force, almost as if Sony set out to create the smallest full frame camera just so it could make the claim and garner the press play from it. At $2800 this is a very expensive camera, as you might expect from something containing such a large high end sensor and quality optics. Plus, if you are a serious user, you would probably want to add either the electronic or optical viewfinder to it for an additional $450-600, putting the entire combo around $3300. And don't forget to add several spare batteries to the package. You are going to need them. Battery drain on the RX1 is very high, probably due to its constant reliance on large live view.
All this begs the question: Is it worth the price. If it's quality you want, for that price you could buy a Nikon D600 and a great lens or two and be better off. If its small size and convenience you want, a Fuji X series with interchangeable lenses comes in at half the price.
A camera of this caliber and sophistication is going to make an external viewfinder more than an optional accessory. I preferred the optical finder. It is much faster to use, and with only one fixed lens is all you really need. Electronic finders are inherently slow, although I found the Sony version to be much more responsive than most. A hybrid finder, such as that on the Fuji X-Pro1 represents the best of both worlds.
The menu system looks similar to the Sony DSC-RX100. It is convenient and easy to use.
I personally found the camera body to be smaller than it needs to be, especially relative to its lens. It has what I call pregnant guppy syndrome, where the over-sized belly lens is too big for the tiny body, something that typically occurs when you try to downsize a full frame camera but cannot downsize the optics proportionately. Small as it is, the overall camera-lens-finder package is much too large to fit comfortably in a pocket. So you are going to have to wear it like a regular sized model. That being the case, adding an extra inch to the body, and incorporating a built-in viewfinder would have made this a much more practical package. In fact, adding interchangeable lenses into the mix would even have given the full frame Leica M some stiff competition.
Even though the sensor sizes are not the same, I found myself constantly comparing this camera to the Fuji X cameras, the X100s, XE1, and X-Pro1, and wishing the RX1 was more like the Fuji in terms of handling . In terms of image quality, the RX1 with its full frame sensor is going to win hands down. But for convenience and professional features the Fuji X models are far more practical, and for most typical image uses the results are going to look the same. It is only when taking the image to super-size that you will notice a difference. And if it's Zeiss lens quality you want, the new Zeiss Touit lenses are available with full auto control on the Fuji XE1 and XPro-1.
The RX1 weighs only 1.06lb (460g), is 4.5"(11.4cm) wide, 2.6"(6.6cm) high, and 2.8"(7.1) deep with the lens. By comparison a Fuji XE1 with similar lens comes in at only 14.67oz (416g), is 5.1"(129cm) long, 2.9"(74.9cm) high, and 3.1"(78.9cm) deep with an 18mm lens attached. In terms of size that is not too different, especially considering the added features the XE1 adds to the mix.
The RX1 has two crop modes available, 3:2 and 16:9. It does not have the square crop of the RX100. Once I discovered the 16:9 crop mode, the RX1 became more useful for me as a dedicated panorama camera. Of course all this does is crop the image so you do lose megapixels. Nonetheless, 16:9 still gives an acceptable 20mp image -- really nice for large panorama prints. The photos below were shot in the 16:9 panorama mode.
Conclusion:
If you are willing to live with a single, fixed lens camera -- something I no longer care to do -- then the Sony RX1 is best of breed in terms of image quality, and ranks right up there with the best full frame cameras available today.
The value of having such a small bodied camera producing such stellar results is negated by the large lens and inclusion of an accessory viewfinder. That, coupled with the extremely high price tag forces you to compare it to far more practical camera alternatives. For the price, you could buy a high end Nikon D600 or even D800. For half the price you could buy a Fuji Xe1 or X-Pro1. With all these alternatives you have the convenience of interchangeable lenses, and built-in viewfinder -- not to mention, they are far more convenient to use.
a hands on review
Many of my friends in the photo industry have been telling me I would love this camera ever since it was announced. Although it is not a camera type I would normally use, I decided to give it a test drive to see what all the excitement is about.
This is a very unusual camera. It is a very small -- in fact, the smallest -- full frame camera coupled with a single superb Zeiss Sonnar 35mm f/2 lens. A package such as this is aimed at producing extremely high image quality, but the scale and limitations of the design raise questions of practicality of use. For this reason, there are two aspects of this review. The first part looks at the camera and lens combo in terms of its ability to deliver a quality image. The second part examines the camera-lens combo in practical terms of usage. In other words, does it work well as a system, and how would it fit into a typical workflow.
 |
| The Sony RX1 is shown in the foreground, while its smaller sibling, the RX100, is tucked in a jeans pocket behind it. By its very nature as a full frame camera, the RX1 requires a large lens and, even though it has a small body, is not going to fit easily into a pocket for carrying. |
My brick-wall tests show an over all sharpness that extends even into the corners at wide open apertures. Full open at f/2 there is only a slight trace of corner softness, which rapidly dissipates as the lens is stopped down, and practically disappears at f/2.8 and beyond. I doubt anyone would find this degree of corner softness objectionable. In addition, there is practically no vignetting and only slight barrel distortion present at any aperture.
 | ||
| Brick wall test. While no one runs around shooting brick walls as a matter of course, a test such as this does illustrate the relationship of center to corner resolution in a way that can relate to more practical uses. |
Chromatic aberration was another matter. I found excessive amounts of color fringing along the edges of typical shots of outdoor tree settings, such as the one below. Fortunately, this involved a simple lens correction in Photoshop, but this assumes you shoot in RAW and post-process images. With a high end camera such as this, I suspect most photographers would include post-processing as part of their workflow.
 |
| Color fringing is quite apparent in this type of image with high contrast and an overly bright background. To be fair, most cameras would have trouble with a situation such as this. I did, however, find the RX1 fringing to be more excessive. Click here to download a hi res version of this photo. |
Noise levels at high ISO's were very good, as is the case with most of the high end, large sensor cameras coming onto the market now. What I term the noise threshold, that level after which noise becomes unacceptably excessive unless dealt with in post processing, peaks around ISO 2000. Below are some high ISO sample images to download.
 |
| ISO 800. Click here to download hi res version. |
 |
| ISO 1600. Click here to download hi res version. |
 |
| ISO 3200. Click here to download hi res version. |
 |
| ISO 6400. Click here to download hi res version. |
Camera overview:
After selling off my Fuji X100 I pretty much swore off one lens cameras. I just don't see the need for them anymore with so many other quality options becoming available. As you might expect, with that attitude I have a prejudice coming into this review.
The RX1 is something of a tour de force, almost as if Sony set out to create the smallest full frame camera just so it could make the claim and garner the press play from it. At $2800 this is a very expensive camera, as you might expect from something containing such a large high end sensor and quality optics. Plus, if you are a serious user, you would probably want to add either the electronic or optical viewfinder to it for an additional $450-600, putting the entire combo around $3300. And don't forget to add several spare batteries to the package. You are going to need them. Battery drain on the RX1 is very high, probably due to its constant reliance on large live view.
All this begs the question: Is it worth the price. If it's quality you want, for that price you could buy a Nikon D600 and a great lens or two and be better off. If its small size and convenience you want, a Fuji X series with interchangeable lenses comes in at half the price.
 |
| Optional electronic and optical finders are an available accessory. I think most users would want one or the other, although they do tend to bulk up the overall package. |
The menu system looks similar to the Sony DSC-RX100. It is convenient and easy to use.
 |
| Full menu |
 |
| Quick change menu |
 |
| The reason I find sharpness in the corners to be important is in landscape photos such as this. Focus was placed in the foreground of this image, and both foreground corners contain sharp detail. Click here to download a hi res version. |
 |
| This close-up shot was taken at f/16 for maximum detail. Click here to download a hi res version. |
 |
| Click here to download a hi res version of this image. |
The RX1 weighs only 1.06lb (460g), is 4.5"(11.4cm) wide, 2.6"(6.6cm) high, and 2.8"(7.1) deep with the lens. By comparison a Fuji XE1 with similar lens comes in at only 14.67oz (416g), is 5.1"(129cm) long, 2.9"(74.9cm) high, and 3.1"(78.9cm) deep with an 18mm lens attached. In terms of size that is not too different, especially considering the added features the XE1 adds to the mix.
 |
| The Sony RX1, RX100, and Fuji X-Pro1. I like the RX100 for its tiny size and quality. It is a camera I can always have with me. I like the Fuji because of its professional build and quality results. I use it a lot when I want to up my game and don't mind carrying something on my shoulder. The RX1 fits somewhere in between, being neither here not there -- too big for a pocket camera, and too small to have the added convenience of built-in finder and interchangeable lenses. |
 |
| The specs and price of this camera puts it into the pro leagues. So I expect it to perform up there with the best. This is a situation I was shooting with a Nikon D800 of a model in my studio. I substituted the RX1 to see how it would compare. Focus was quirky and slow because it had to be done in live view. Nonetheless, the resulting image was definitely of professional quality. Of course this comparison could only work where a 35mm lens could be used. |
 |
| The lens has a ring to move it into close-up mode. This is not really a macro feature. It doesn't get that close, and at 35mm getting too close raises other problems of perspective. What it does do is act as a focus limiter so the camera doesn't hunt for focus when shooting up close. |
 |
| This is about as close as this lens can go. Because it is a 35mm lens it causes a rounding distortion effect on the subject. |
 |
| The pop-up flash is similar to that on the RX100, but does not seem to have the same flexibility for bending it to achieve bounce flash lighting. |
 |
| The red button turns on the video record mode, something I did inadvertently way too many times by hitting it accidentally. The over/under exposure dial is positioned above it, similarly positioned as on the Fuji X-Pro1 but not nearly as susceptible to being turned accidentally. |
 |
| Once I discovered the 16:9 crop mode, I began seeing differently with the camera and ended up using it almost exclusively for taking panorama photos. |
Conclusion:
If you are willing to live with a single, fixed lens camera -- something I no longer care to do -- then the Sony RX1 is best of breed in terms of image quality, and ranks right up there with the best full frame cameras available today.
The value of having such a small bodied camera producing such stellar results is negated by the large lens and inclusion of an accessory viewfinder. That, coupled with the extremely high price tag forces you to compare it to far more practical camera alternatives. For the price, you could buy a high end Nikon D600 or even D800. For half the price you could buy a Fuji Xe1 or X-Pro1. With all these alternatives you have the convenience of interchangeable lenses, and built-in viewfinder -- not to mention, they are far more convenient to use.
Perhaps Sony will expand this model in the future to include interchangeable lenses and built-in finder with an RX2 model. Better yet, I would like to see an intermediary model between the highly successful RX100 and RX1, perhaps an RX10 with APS sensor, smaller lenses, and all the popular built-in accessories. In other words, make it more like a Fuji X camera. There is a reason the Fuji X series is rapidly becoming a cult classic. Sony would do well to take some lessons from that model and produce a slightly larger camera with more practical features instead of going for the smallest sized body just to prove you can do it. The small size works perfectly for the pocketable RX100, but to my mind the small size of the RX1 prevents the camera from reaching its true, useful potential.
This is a "hands on" review and reflects my personal opinion on using the equipment. If you are a user of this item and see it differently, please feel free to post a comment. I would love to compare your opinion and see sample images that support your findings. - TG
Selasa, 14 Mei 2013
Empire State Building - Limited Edition
Over the weekend I finished my portfolio edition of ten black and white prints of the Empire State Building. It is an edition of 20 on 13x17" paper with the largest side of the image being 16".
Completed in 1931 The Empire State Building has dominated the landscape of Manhattan
as its central icon. Although no longer the tallest building in New York, its Art Deco spire integrates with the city from almost every vantage point. No view of New York would be complete without it.
Here are the ten prints from the portfolio:
Over the weekend I finished my portfolio edition of ten black and white prints of the Empire State Building. It is an edition of 20 on 13x17" paper with the largest side of the image being 16".
Completed in 1931 The Empire State Building has dominated the landscape of Manhattan
as its central icon. Although no longer the tallest building in New York, its Art Deco spire integrates with the city from almost every vantage point. No view of New York would be complete without it.
Here are the ten prints from the portfolio:
Langganan:
Postingan (Atom)