D5000 to D7100 macro test

So a few posts back I put "a new camera" on my list of things I wouldn't be getting anytime soon. Happily, due to a couple generous birthday cheques and mid-life crisis reasoning, I was able to get a new camera. (Plus my cousin Sheila recommended it as she has one as well and she has a lot of sway with me).  I decided on the Nikon D7100 based on a few features it had a I really wanted and the reviews of it saying it was as close to full frame sensor you could get for the price. It does in fact seem to have all the same features as the 610 except for the full frame sensor.

Because I need to know I didn't waste 1 000$ I did a few tests to make sure there was a noticeable difference in the images.

Basic shot - D7100 is on right

I think the sharpness and colour show the purchase was an improvement

100% side by side -  D7100 is on right

I was little disappointed there wasn't a bigger difference. The D5000 is 12 megapixels and the D7100 is 24. Maybe naively, I thought the new camera's images would be twice the size. There is a definite difference in the sharpness and clarity with the new camera though.

Differences I noticed right away
The D7100 is so much faster than the D5000 taking photos it took me a few days to adjust to it. The camera can also do 5 step bracketing over the normal 3 step which is a great help to me in some of my work.  There seems to a be less noise in low light shooting and the controls are much better situated after you get used to using them for a while. I miss the graphic menu system in the sense the D5000 visually showed you how much the lens was open when changing the f-stop, I just like visual queues over numbers but the menu itself was a lot more easy to understand in the newer camera overall.

My book for sale on iTunes!

My photo essay of Copps Hill Burial Ground his now for sale in iTunes in the ibook store for Canada and the USA! It will work on iPads and on Mac computers with Mavericks installed on them. I have no idea what to expect from this so please if you or anyone you know is interested in historical cemeteries, photography or Boston history... please tell them buy a copy and give me a stellar review!  It's 4,99$ !  I also did the illustrations taken directly from the stones themselves.

Film and digital differences still exist

I somehow persuaded myself to get a new camera after passing a certain age recently… better than a sports car I suppose. As usual when I have a new camera, it’s a digital SLR and it always makes me nostalgic for my film cameras. So, while I am in this mood I thought I’d bring up some of the differences between the formats that still exist, and might always exist between them. 

Conservation: Film is still the best way to conserve images. For one thing, a negative can be  reprinted and even scanned at different sizes and into different formats. It does degrade over time but so does digital and digital is less reliable over the long term for conservation. Digital files are pretty much in the highest quality they ever can be when you make them and it’s very hard to get them into a new, especially larger format without losing a noticeably in quality. 

Practicality: This is where digital shines. With one flash card you can take 100s if not 1000s of photos and they are all available to look at instantly. Processing film takes a room, chemicals and lots of expensive equipment. Not mention money. Once you have a a computer and a software for image processing (Photoshop is an example but there are more and more alternatives out there now) you are almost without limits as to how you can manipulate the photos and even make as many versions of it until you are happy with the results. many of the techniques in Photoshop are from ones used in dark rooms over the last century or so it’s just easier to accomplish now. 

The longevity of cameras: Film beats digital hands down in this respect. My old medium format from 100 years ago still works fine and can take awesome photos. Digital, is different, there is the every changing technologies, formats and the limit to the camera’s sensor lifespan. I also find digital cameras to be more expensive overall, something I don’t understand since they don’t last as long. 

Quality of image: This is a personal choice in many respects but I still find film a higher quality image and I think technically the amount of information in a digital image is still a long away off from the information you can contain on film, in most cases. I have yet to get images I like as much in digital that I got from my medium format camera. To be fair I don’t have medium format digital camera, nor the 10 000$ it would take to buy one. 

This conversation is pretty useless nowadays: While I might pine away for film, the fact of the matter is film is pretty much dead and even now is only used in a shrinking specialty market. Digital is not going away and the quickness and convenience of it doesn’t make it a bad thing at all. I do wonder and hope that eventually digital will catch up in the areas it it currently weaker in. 

Final Cut X revisited (v10,1)

Several years ago I had the chance to work with the beta version of Final Cut X, the replacement for Final Cut Pro Studio, Apple’s very efficient (but now dated) professional video editing software. Sadly, it was a giant mess and not even close to being a professional product despite having some innovative new features. Where do I stand on it now? 

Having received the new version s a gift to help me work on my new documentary, I decided to spring for the video tutorial class with Ripple Training, something I would highly recommend as a time saver. My first impression is that it hasn’t changed all that much (in look and feel anyway) and a few of the things that bothered me were still front and centre. Other, more important things maybe, had changed in very substantial ways. The most noteworthy improvement is the way you handle media now. A film is a collaborative effort between not just other people, but other softwares so the « iPhoto » method in previous versions made it unusable for most projects. The new library and improved keyword functions go a long way to fixing those issues. You can now save your project to external disks and open it on other computers easily, letting you work on a laptop, another studio, at home… where ever. Handling of media, especially new digital camera formats seems second to none at the moment. You will need a plugin for some formats like RED, but most conventional footage is handled natively and efficiently. The lack of useful plugins and features has been largely addressed, but not completely. The sound features, while not stellar, lets you sync clips to external video (I did have problems with a few and returned to Pluraleyes for more complicated files) and the reduce noise noise and reduce hum features are fast and useful but not totally professional grade. The magnetic time line can be a time saver but it does have its drawbacks as well. They have addressed some of the lack of sequences problems with « compound clips » which in many ways a useless renaming of the term sequences to appear they haven’t caved in to the need for this feature and are giving you something new. Colour correction is still basic but not bad and easy to handle.

On the negative side, the scrubbing tool can be a nightmare, I have it off more than on and it’s still not possible to organize a project’s clips in a way you like, but just in the way Apple has decided for you. For me, this means lots of wasted time getting things set up. I do like the key wording a great deal in this version but to be honest the whole FCPX release fiasco could and should have been avoided by rolling the best features into the old Final Cut Pro and keeping to editing conventions… this « new paradigm » offers nothing the old one didn’t have covered and changing the names of things is more about appearing innovative than actually being innovative. It is clear with this version, however, that Apple has listened to the complaints from professionals and has started to back away from its « my way or the highway » approach to what is a very personal field of work that needs to be a lot more flexible to personal workflows. The program does crash, but not very often and there are bugs, like spotty playback from time to time that requires rebooting the computer to get it right again. Round tripping to Motion is still not possible. (Motion itself is almost unchanged since it’s earliest version and while useful, it is still extremely slow with some more complicate tasks like 3D and emitters so it’s in no way a replacement for After Effects but it is a good extra tool to have in your arsenal.)

In conclusion:

I will be using FCPX, reluctantly, for my future projects despite its current deficiencies since it’s strong points are finally starting to outweigh to the weak ones. At the pace it’s developing it will be still be another couple years before it’s really something I will be happy to work on, but its getting there. 

Million Year Picnic doc started!

As I start my latest and long suffering in the shadows documentary about the Million Year Picnic comic book store, I am rudely reminded of how difficult it is to do one of these things all by yourself. Every film has challenges, but this time I am starting with all new equipment and new formats I’ve not used in a personal project before. 

For starters I am using a Canon xa10 to film things, using the 30p setting and a Zoom sound recorder which I have to admit is not so easy for me to figure out. Even with that I have got some good sound from it using my shot gun mic, keeping it close to the subject. 

The biggest problems so far is  getting it all together for editing in Premiere Pro CS6. I’ve been using Pluraleyes from Red Giant software to sync the video and Zoom sound, which works pretty good and very quickly. The problem after that is that .mov files are not easily processed by Premiere even though they are prepared especially for it by transcoding the MTS file to .mov using MTS converter. I experimented importing in Final Cut Pro 7 and the same issue. Oddly they play fine in quicktime and in Pluraleyes. I finally discovered I can use the XML import from Pluraleyes to get the interviews into the editing software, but it’s a time consuming and far from elegant process. I had to go back a version for that work properly, however. These thing never come easy! 

The interviews went fairly well despite not really having a space to do them in. I even had to do one in a stairway! Visually they look pretty good and the sound could have much, much worse so I can’t complain too loudly. I really need an assistant or two to work devices while I interview… it really is just too hard to do them all at once. Beggars can’t be choosers so I’m doing the best I can on my own. 

Next stage is to get supplementary materials, like photos, scans of ads, whatever I can get my hands on to enhance and inform the film more. I’ll also have to make several more interviews at least before summer is over. On my post production side, I’ve already made a 3D version of the store’s logo that can be animated, lower 3rds with animations and experimented with some other graphic elements. So… allons-y! 

Was AppleWorks a sign of things to come?

AppleWorks was Apple's long standing suite of programs used as an alternative to the Microsoft office suite. Office has and continues to have an on again off again relationship with the Mac so it made sense for Apple to have its own simplified version as a back up. It was quite capable and easy to use but one aspect of its interface might just make a comeback in light of recent developments in how software is being sold.

While Office has always been sold in a suite, adobe products have pretty much been separate products, but have more and more been grouped into suites until now you really have little choice but to get them all. Macintosh ended the AppleWorks suite years ago but just started giving away it's new suite of products for free with new computers, much like AppleWorks was.

The interface element whose time has come back might be the idea that instead of opening each software when you need it, you open the suite all at once and choose which function (word processing, spreadsheet, etc.) from a main menu. This way of using a suite has a few advantages. Shared resources and functions are not repeated in each program making updating easier and downloads smaller and faster. Another big plus would be that once someone is using  one part of a suite they are more likely to use the rest and with all the other functions one click away in the same software, it's much less likely the user will switch to a competitor's product.

Only time will tell if this old interface idea will resurface but it makes sense given the direction things are going. I know personally, I'd still be using AppleWorks if it were possible and the all in one place set up is part of the reason why.

2014 updates

This page (as you may have noticed) is updated with a new look. The Portfolio has a similar update, is rearranged and added a new demo-reel and a page for stuff on sale. Should be less complicated to fond things and the video page is less overwhelming and all on one page instead of in a clickable html database.

What I won't be buying anytime soon

Instead of reviewing things I have, I thought it might be interesting to mention things I not going to have anytime soon and some of the reasons for that. 

The new Mac Pro 

• It looks like a beautiful machine but the looks don't add up to something practical for the price. Yes it is very powerful, if you get the higher end version and price is actually less than speculated for the lower end version but the cost of peripherals etc just doesn't make it a viable option for me. I can see a big studio going for them but in that case the revolutionary look really doesn't matter much. My 2009 Mac Pro tower will have to last a lot longer! 

Adobe creative cloud 

• I have talked about this before. To much money for someone who doesn't constantly upgrade (like me) and the whole cloud, pay by the month deal is a dangerous rip off in my opinion. Why anyone would go for software that will not work and bring your entire business to a halt if you miss a payment or can't get online is a mystery to me despite the other possible benefits. 

Wacom iPad stylus 

• Looks great but won't work with my iPad 2 which isn't getting updated for quite a while yet. I am a little skeptical after their inkling product was such a bust. The Canadian price a little high as well, if you could even find it somewhere. 

Cinema 4d version 15

• I would love this, but since they went on a seemingly new version every few months schedule, I am so far behind I would have to pay close to 4000$ with taxes to get it now. (And it still lacks features some free software has, like smoke and liquid effects.) 

A new iPod (or any smart phone)

• My iPod can not be updated to the new iOS but it works fine and really isn't all that old. I still don't have any pressing need for a smart phone or the fees that come along with one. I can't survive without my podcasts while at the gym or at my part time job so I hope this thing keeps working a long time. I don't have the funds to buy a phone simply for the iPod part. 

A new camera

• My 12 megapixel Nikon serves me well but I'm not satisfied with the images as I was spoiled by using 120mm film for decades. I could really use a full frame Nikon but again 2 grand is not coming into the budget in the foreseeable future. 

A new bike

• Hey! Bikes are more tech-y than many admit and my 12 year old specialized Allez-sport is great but past it's prime for my 3-5000km a year needs. I simply don't have 2 grand to upgrade. And if you think that is a lot for a bike, you aren't a cyclist. I just hope the break covers on the handlebars don't completely fall off next summer. They can't be replaced anymore and I have several 150 km rides planned in the spring and a triathlon to celebrate my 50th year in 2014.  

Metropolis drawing series

Been trying to work out how I wanted to do this film as a series of drawings for years and think I have finally got something I like with this first finished peice. there will only be a few more then I'd like to tackle an image form "the crowd" I've been wanting to do but need a couple models to pull it off.

Is sharing now the same as stealing?

Digital media does present certain problems when it comes to sharing. You need to have compatible hardware and software for example.  Since nothing is in physical form, you can’t simply give your copy for someone to listen to, but you have to transfer it to their device. Some media has copyright protection coding that not only makes it hard to share or pass it to a pal, but even to another device that you own. 

Corporations are working overtime to convince people that they don't own the stuff they buy.  If the rights change to another company you might  find stuff you bought disappearing from your hard drive, disabled or charged an additional fee for. More and more consumers have the right to pay for things but have no control what happens to it when they don't want it anymore. If someone dies, what will happen to their giant media collection? Can it be left to someone? Truth is, no one really knows anymore. 

I am not saying that there are not problems to work out with these new technologies or that people should be able to just distribute things without any restrictions but the basic act of sharing should not be so easily made into criminal acts. Libraries could be considered (and maybe are  by some) as illegal entities distributing massive amounts copyrighted material freely to the public. Big companies have managed to extend copyright to a ridiculous extent. The people who created the media rarely get anything from sales anymore and the rights which used to pass into public domain after a few years can now be prolonged indefinitely, long after the creators have passed away. No one should be paying anyone to sing Happy Birthday at this point in time. There needs to be less delay in passing things into public domain and more making money by supporting new products and not just selling other people’s work who can no longer personally profit by it.

Yes there are nuances and complex legal arguments in this discussion to make but, in a way that’s the point I’m making. Its those arguments and the laws created by them that are turning sharing in far too many cases into stealing.