On The Way To North Carolina ~ 33,000'

Posted by Art Sands on Sat, 06/20/09 21:06
[ Back to Index | Home | Previous Image | Next Image ]


Comments by Art Sands on Sat, 06/20/09 21:11

Borrowed a friend's Gulfstream V* for the week and went to the beach with my new Canon T1i

Continuing my descent into digital purgatory.



*just wishing re the GV.....actually a Delta flight


Comments by Jan Bjorklund on Sat, 06/20/09 21:25

The contrast between the clouds and darkness of the sky is quite striking with the inclusion of the wing tip creating a sense of place (I mean being on board the aeroplane).


Comments by Rick Longworth on Sat, 06/20/09 22:22

Deep dark sky and lots of highlights. Works for me!


Comments by Paul Bracey on Sun, 06/21/09 01:35

How do you like your new camera?

I just got an E-30 for my 50th birthday, and I'm having a ball learning how to shoot with it.


Comments by Steve Owen on Sun, 06/21/09 03:47

Good exposure to retain the details in the clouds. My grandfather always said, "Never let the truth get in the way of a good story,"
so stick with the Gulfstream!


Comments by Art Sands on Sun, 06/21/09 16:13

Thanks everyone for the comments - shot this in BW mode with red filter and then tweaked in PS

Paul,ended up returning the camera - not enough manual control for shots

(as a recovering 6x7 and 4x5 addict, hard for me to just fire away on automatic)

and the standard lens was ~equivalent of ~30- 75mm - not sure I would want to pay for the 28-200mm lens

Thinking about buying the new Canon G10 - simpler cheaper camera with built in zoom lens (max ~ 150mm) - 15 mb and more manual features - anyone else out there have experience with this one?

LOL Steve, have a lot of good stories that would benefit from your grandfather's wisdom


Comments by Art Sands on Sun, 06/21/09 16:15

Sea level


Comments by Linda Frey on Sun, 06/21/09 16:25

I like your shots, but on my monitor the whites seem blown out. Stupid monitor!

Too bad the camera didn't work out for you. Maria has a G10. Maybe she can give you her opinion of it.


Comments by Art Sands on Sun, 06/21/09 17:06

Linda - you should be able to adjust your monitor

Here's a grey scale


Comments by Art Sands on Sun, 06/21/09 17:10

I think I'm reasonably adjusted - how do others see the images?


Comments by Maria Salvador on Sun, 06/21/09 17:32

Hi! My G10: The reason I bought it was its size. The other reason was to write raw files. Colors always need a bit more saturation, easy to fix. Noise at any ISO above 100 and at any ISO with low light. With the right light it works quite fine. Stabilization works - although not so well as the Olympus.

http://www.photocritique.net/g/s?zzPFZn-pMARIA+SALVADOR
http://www.photocritique.net/g/s?zzPIOc-pMARIA+SALVADOR
http://www.photocritique.net/g/s?zzPKvn-pMARIA+SALVADOR
http://www.photocritique.net/g/s?zzPLcn-pMARIA+SALVADOR
http://www.photocritique.net/g/s?zzPRon-pMARIA+SALVADOR
These were all done with the G10.

Both these photos are nice and look good on my monitor. No noticeable blown outs.


Comments by Alias on Sun, 06/21/09 18:00

Hi Art !

I'm looking at your images on a calibrated 24" iMac.
Your gray scale shows 11 clearly separated tones.

The clouds are mostly zone IX with a few areas of Vl and Vll with very small areas of lV and V.
The overall impression is of brightness (I want to squint), with less than average local contrast and
much less contrast and therefore impression of detail than one might expect in an image of the
cloud itself.

The sand is mostly zone lXish with some Vll and Vlll with tiny sprinkles of X and some lV to V in the
deepest shadows.
Good texture in the fence lost in the large amount of relatively flat background.

I like the idea of both, think they might be very different in an actual print, but I do think you can
improve their tonal feel on the net.

Have a look at the histograms.
I don't believe in "shooting to the gram" but they do give some valuable clues.

Hope this helps.


Comments by Linda Frey on Sun, 06/21/09 18:24

I see eleven shades on your chart, Art, (oops a little rhyme there!) but the bright areas in the clouds still look too bright. The histogram when I open your photo in PS doesn't show blown highlights. Maybe I just have to adjust the angle of the monitor some.


Comments by Alias on Sun, 06/21/09 22:18

Sometimes a picture is a whole lot simpler than a bunch of words.

This is only to illustrate my words.

Hope you don't mind

.
------WebKitFormBoundarymeM6sU1+Dj5OP8cU


Comments by Art Sands on Sun, 06/21/09 23:53

Thanks everyone for the constructive feedback - interesting discussion.

Maria, thanks for your feedback - your G10 prints look great. What do you consider as noise?

Alias, thanks- I like your version. The contrast increase gives an interesting change in tone. I'm currently looking at this on my laptop which shows prints with slightly increased brightness than on my regular PC. I suspect every monitor shows prints a little differently. My beach print is also a little blown out on this screen.

I think one of the realities of B&W is that a slight change in contrast, tone, or brightness can make a tremendous difference in the effect of the print. This can be very frustrating doing dark room prints with silver paper because there is slightly variable dry down effect that darkens the print (especially if you are doing 16x20 or larger prints.) At times it becomes very difficult when reprinting a previous negative to get the same quality as a previous print.........digital printing is definitely less tortuous

Again thanks for the interesting discussion and feedback.


Comments by Richard Dong on Mon, 06/22/09 00:17

Dreamy image.


Comments by Paul Bracey on Mon, 06/22/09 02:16

Sorry to hear you weren't happy with the camera. Your sea level shot is terrific! I have a couple friends with G10's. They like 'em just fine but they do have issues with noise/grain at anything approaching high ISO settings. The other draw back is the sensor size (also blamed for some of the noise issues). It might be 14 megapixels, but they're crammed onto an itsy bitsy teeny tiny sensor. One of the main drawbacks to that is the way it plays out with regard to depth of field issues. If you always shoot at F8, or F11 (or higher), or you shoot an excessive amount of macro work with your film kits, maybe you'll love it. If you like the effects you get shooting with a wide open apeture, say F2 or F2.8, you're probably NOT going to like it. It's a great climbing camera, small enough to bring with you, but serious enough to make good pictures. I have another friend who bought an Olympus 610, which is also pretty small (the smallest digital SLR with Image Stabilization). With the 25mm (50mm in 35mm terms) pancake lens, it's almost as small as the G10, but you don't have the zoom capability with that lens. However, it is a pretty fast lens - F2 if I remember correctly, and discreet enough to make it perfect for things like street photography. But as soon as you put a decent zoom lens on it, it becomes a bit more cumbersome, making it - in my mind - inappropriate for activities like rock climbing. This sort of thing is where the G10 shines. But probably like you, I wasn't looking for a climbing camera. There was a lot to like about the Oly 610. The fact that it is pretty small was a good thing - especially if you tend to ALWAYS carry your camera. That seems a lot less likely once you get into an SLR kit, at least compared to something like the G10. Who knows? Maybe it just takes getting used to... We'll see... There were only a couple of factors in my decision making process that tipped the scales from the 610 to something like the Nikon D90, a similar Canon setup, or the E-30. If I was dropping that kind of cash, I didn't want to drop it on a camera I might drop. That's to say that the grip on the 610 was just not comfortably secure. It also had only 7 auto-focus points vs 11 in the better bodies. And given my budget, in my analysis the 12-60 (24-120) F2.8 glass was far superior to anything I would have been able to afford to put on the Nikon or Canon. Check it out, if you haven't already. It'll be interesting to see what you get. Cheers...


Comments by Paul Bracey on Mon, 06/22/09 10:19

610... 620... whatever... *grin*


Comments by Art Sands on Mon, 06/22/09 11:07

thanks for the info Paul - as a digital "virgin" - not sure what "noise" is - I do like to shoot at f8-11 with a longer lens to give focus on the subject with an obscure bg -

maybe I should just stick with my indestructible Pentax 67 :-) (I swear it looks like its been used in a couple of gang fights but works great)


Comments by Alias on Mon, 06/22/09 16:28

"as a digital "virgin" - not sure what "noise" is"

Think of it as grain only less attractive ;-)

It is dependent on several factors.
As with film, sensor size is important, and like film, the higher the ISO the greater the
noise, but there are other factors and, since you can't change sensors as you can with a
film camera, you are stuck with the characteristics of the camera you buy.
There are excellent algorithms to help deal with the problem, but some folks consider this
a critical factor in camera selection.

http://www.dpreview.com/learn/?/key=noise

------WebKitFormBoundary44cpoZ5k+EmaaSi6


Comments by Art Sands on Mon, 06/22/09 17:13

Thanks Alias - good reference

Actually grain in B&W can enhance the image - but then it is much more uniform than noise.


Comments by Alias on Mon, 06/22/09 18:33

http://www.dpreview.com/
is a wonderful resource with fair and valid information,
but it can be overwhelming to a "virgin" ;-)
The "Buying Guide" can be most helpful.
You can start with "Features search" to know what they think are relevant available choices.
Then you can compare features "Side by side" for two or more cameras.

The Camera database allows you to review any digital camera available.
This is one camera I can recommend
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/specs/Panasonic/panasonic_dmcfz50.asp
Light, ergonomic, with a 35 to 340 (equiv.) Leica lens, it has some features I really
appreciate. It wakes up quickly and is fairly responsive by digi standards.
It LOVES manual operation with genuine rings on the lens to zoom and focus. It does not
have a mirror, (a real benefit in reliability and total lack of induced vibration and noise).
And it is REALLY CHEAP if you google price.
It is getting long in the tooth, but it is a genuine cult camera like the M3 and Canon T90.

Compare this in "Side by side" with any other camera to see how the site feature works.

Might be a good choice while you are deciding ;-)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

"Actually grain in B&W can enhance the image"

Grain can enhance SOME images. ;-)

This is an example of digital noise:
http://www.photocritique.net/g/s?zzPBMn-pALIAS
Note the title, noise is one limitation, and the image is a handheld sunset reflection in a
black car sure to test the noise of any camera.