Musicians

I'm back... with musicians under different light conditions! These images were all done in May 2016 in DeKalb, with my D700 and 24-70 f2.8 lens.  No flash (of course!) and at ISO 6400.  I concentrated on composition mostly, thinking of getting a photograph that I'd like to see as a CD cover.  The performers are a good, local band, the Barb City Stompers, known for their repertoire of jazz and dixie and bluesy numbers. They're extraordinary performers and very well esteemed in this community.

I think I switched the image from FX to DX for this shot. It was the only way to get the framing I wanted.

Same here: I went from FX to DX.  Something one can only do with an FX body!

I like the effect of the dead space and the positioning of the player here. Not only is it unusual, it creates a contrast between the background and the idea of the music the player is performing. At least, that's what it does to me.

I will come back with another set of photographs from the Barb City Stompers... under very different lighting conditions.  In the meanwhile, let me get my newer Toledo shots ready too!

Sports Ain't Easy!

On November 6th 2015, we all attended a volleyball game at the Convocation Center of Northern Illinois University (where I teach). There was a game: home vs. U of Toledo (OH). Our reason was that my wife (also a professor) was going to get an award at the half-time ceremony.  Not one of us had attended a game, even though we had played volleyball in our lives, so we went and I discovered that shooting sports is twice as hard... no, three times harder than I thought.

First, when one has no choice in seating, there's the problem of location.  Then, when exactly should one shoot?  Ball in the air, ball in the hands of a player, being hit, on the floor?  And, finally (to get technical... it had to happen), when and how does one focus?  On the darn ball?  On the players?

Fortunately, I let the camera make two choices: exposure and white balance (although, in the end, I decided that in the future I'll check with Live View first about the white balance).  The problem I ended up having was composition.  See for yourself...

 Where is the ball?

Isn't that a desk in the lower left corner?  When did that happen?

Half volleyball in the air...

Well... I guess there's only so much one can do with an AF 24-120 that has been cropped to show only a frame the size of an APS sensor.  But then, not everything was that bad.  At least I took some moderately decent photographs... See below.

 This is a fait accompli and the point was scored.

 And the ball in the air, right in the middle...

I really liked the two pairs of hands up in the air... and far, far away from the volleyball!

So, I learned to be happy with my results... and that I'm not in any way, a sports photographer.  How can one show the excitement of the game in one or two shots?  I guess sports shooters already know how to get their images... and, if it's not them, their editors know what to pick.  In any event, we enjoyed the evening so much we're planning on returning...

And I'll be there, with my camera and lens.  

Coming soon... Snow!!  We had lots last weekend, but I wasn't going to step out and shoot icicles like I've done in the past.  No... I have something nicer... but it's still in the card.  So long!

Fairs and festivals

The midwest (where I live) is rich in local festivals and fairs, so, considering this fact, here are some illustrations of the one that takes place in my town, DeKalb, Illinois.

It's called the Cornfest.

Photobomb attempt.  In the end, she knew I was photographing her not by accident.

Two men running a food stand were making a small fortune thanks to their idea of posting their dishes in front of their window... and that was real food, not plastic imitations. See them on the right edge of the frame.

I always have liked this sign, and it looked even more cheerful against the background of the beautiful dusk sky. 

People checking out the Cornfest, walking about, hanging out... 

One ride I'd like to do: the Freak-Out.  Looks interesting... 

I will return with more photographs from other festivals, and, if I can, with the result of more experiments and other hints I may find in the vast Menu files of this camera.  Granted, it may be a few generations behind, but that doesn't mean it has to disappear.  Lots of people are still using their D700 bodies through their paces, so... let's keep it going!

From my (not so) old files

Since we started the new year, I decided to be prepared and create some folders in my computer for future downloads... and then, found these unposted, unexplored photographs. Here you go!

Here is to my adventures in DeKalb, in early December 2010. No people... nobody was crazy enough to go out on a beautiful afternoon like this one. Go figure... Hence, the empty bench above.

Trees with snow-heavy branches down Linden Drive, in DeKalb, IL.

Other group of trees, which make the neighborhood look like a fantasy winter wonderland.

When it comes to the practical side of the holiday, this was the fare for Christmas Eve: prime rib, healthy veggies rendered unhealthy with smothering amounts of cheese, Italian prosecco and a star of stars, my light fruitcake (loaded with nuts).

Needless to say, Christmas morning was another story this time. And I decided to play with the zoom just for the heck of it. See the results above and post your opinion.

Be back soon!

Having some fun

Here are some photos, just for the sake of posting. Later, I'll get into adding comments to them.

DeKalb, Snowy Classics

We thought we were done with winter, but there was a last kick in February. Then, the sun came...Sunny Classics

Finally, people broke out of their homes and into the streets: summer has come!

Time to take a peek at life's little treasures...

So that's all for today, folks!

Spring about to come!

Sure... and it looks like a bad joke, innit?

At least, one could believe something was afoot early in March...

Until we got a white surprise in the end... 

But before I continue, let me add that all of these images were made with my trusty D700.  I've been working (rather playing) with it at all times, and "exposing" it to some conditions that, admittedly, are not harsh, but still demanding... like the last photograph with the hydrant (the only one taken with my Tamron AF 200-400 zoom).  Temps were pretty low... but I've walked down colder sidewalks with this camera.

The tree up there is in my backyard.  That was during one of the first nice, sunny days this year.

The cat here belongs to a friend who lives in Madison WI.  It's a nice Maine Coon called Jiggy (she's a feisty player, and you can tell from her face).  

Last shot: March 28: snow around us (about seven inches), dressing up the boring fire hydrant across the street. 

Lately, I've taken to use relatively low ISO ratings.  It simply happens that I am far more familiar with the images I create at ISO 200 or 400 than anything done at ISO 1600 or higher.  Besides, with such luminosity, why should anyone bother with fast sensor speed?  

Or does someone do that?

I am awaiting for my Nikon AF ED 80-200 to return from the shop where I left it (in Chicago's Central Camera).  It turned out to be sick: sticky blades.  The repair will cost me a pretty penny... but I'm trusting on getting a decent lens in the end.  In the meanwhile, before getting my Nikon back, I'll keep playing with my current arsenal.

Comments welcome!

Pixel Peeping Syndrome

First things first...

Below, a nice sample of what this camera can do.  It's a piece of pottery from the Milwaukee Art Museum, shot with the lens wide open, at probably ISO 5000, Auto WB, and checked out some time later in the camera monitor.  It looked nice...  

Then, I downloaded it to my Mac... and I didn't quite like what I saw... 

When I bought this camera, I already had looked at all the possible images taken with it, found in Nikon ads (their website had some), Flicker and Nikonians.  One thing that really sold me was the almost absolute perfection.  As a friend said once about his conversion to digital, there was no grain. 

But then, how about them pixels?

Can you see the little devils?  I thought I had... in the RAW file!  This is too much... I want purity, clarity, sincerity, absolutely no granulosity...

Then, it dawned on me: I've become a pixel peeper. 

Must admit it: before opening the daffodil above (which, by the way, was done with my SB-600 at f8, in a futile attempt at reproducing the darkening of the background that relatively fast shutterspeeds can do with flash), I looked at it really close.  There they were again.  Heck!  There they are, under the naked eye, right above... and, alas, below too. 

Same little daffodil, a bit posterized because of my clumsiness at using Photoshop.  

BTW, the shot above was done with a close aperture, in P, with an SB-600.  My attempts at getting overexposed foregrounds and dark backgrounds are failing miserably...  But I'm even more frustrated because of this stupid habit of looking for flaws and pixelation.  

Is there a cure?

I guess I'll have to learn to live with it.  

In any case, for whatever is worth, I placed an order for Nikon Capture NX2 earlier this week.  It may be coming soon.  And my Nikon AF-ED 80-200 f2.8 lens is in the shop right now. 

However, life still looks good.

More about things later!

The Thing about Picture Control

Welcome to the mystery of picture control!!

Here's a photograph of Mimi, with Vivid Picture Mode.   It appeared striking in the monitor (very intense reds and yellows), so I was happy, despite the wild contrast between her fur and the seat of this very chair I'm on right now.  

Now, the same cat, under the same light and on the same spot... but with Neutral Picture Control.  The fur looked terribly flat, the colors were muted, the entire palette from the Vivid setting was gone.  

So, I switched to Standard.  Here I saw a type of compromise between Vivid and Neutral; an amicable middle ground in terms of color saturation and contrast.  

Now... that was before downloading the files into my computer and then resizing them (hopefully better this time) for internet viewing.  

Vivid... it doesn't look too vivid, does it?

Neutral doesn't sound half as bad as my description of the jpeg in the D700 monitor.  I'm feeling like with egg on my face...

Standard, however, still looks like an acceptable compromise here.

Lesson learned?

Besides never to trust your monitor... the fact that these shots look pretty much the same in my monitor leads me to wonder what the effect of this setting may be on prints.  

In the meanwhile, this is what I did with the files: they were all RAW (NEFs) downloaded to the computer via card reader and Nikon Transfer.  Then, opened with PSE 6 for Mac, and turned into JPEGs.  The consequent, intermediate JPEGs were resized in size and resolution (say, from whatever they were to 1550 on the larger side, and the resolution down to 150 dpi).  After this, I did a "Save for Web" function, and set the JPEG parameters in High.  Oh, and I also reopened the "cleansed" files and reduced the print size from 13 inches to 8 (on the large side).  In short, all files now should be clearly viewable in almost any screen size, not just in my 20-inch monster.   At no time whatsoever did I do any alteration in color or exposure here.  In short, except for the file conversion and re-compression, these are the photographs that came out of the camera. 

I'm interested in your reactions, and will appreciate comments.  Of course, soon enough I should have something to say about the prints of these images...

Couple of Issues for Shutterbugs

Here we go again... 

Here is a photograph of the cats, with the SB-600 flash aiming at them.  It was the best way to solve a problem I was having, as it can be seen below...

The cat in the foreground appears fairly well lit, but what about the one in the background?  Ben, when photographed with the SB-600 bouncing light off the ceiling, appears nicely exposed.  Mimí, behind the TV stand, was not.  I had to do something I usually don't, which is to aim the flash directly at them.  That was the best way to get the results I wanted.  Now...  a common exposure problem: exposure for highlights.  Which of the landscapes below looks better?  The one right below... 

Or this one?

The difference between them (in case it's not obvious) is a couple of notches of underexposure.  In fact, the landscape below was shot as per camera meter settings on A-mode.  It did give me a good color for the snow, as it appears right before sunset in my corner of the world.  So, I dialed two thirds of underexposure (thanks to the Quick Exposure Compensation feature; check b4 in the Custom Setting Menu) and shot again (with a slight change of position, so as to avoid the distortion effect of the post on the left), and... voilà!  Got the colors I wanted. 

Why this move?  Why tinker with the exposure?

The camera is a tool, and users tend to let it dictate their end result.  In this particular situation even though I wanted (and metered on) the sunset colors, the camera matrix meter dialed up the highlights.  It is a tendency of all digital sensors, and from what I understand, it's in their algorithm.  However, a photographer has something better: brains.  That's why, after noticing the slightly singed effect on colors, I took a second shot of the first photograph but with a slight underexposure.  This one allowed me to register the colors I wanted.

As for the snow?  One still can tell it's snow, right?  

Later on, some flash effects with this camera and the SB-600. 

Shooting in the cold

In very cold temperatures...

Of course, with the AF-S 24-70 f2.8 (minuscule speck of flare fixed in PSE here)...

And with the Nikon matrix meter.

I can report that the D700 worked wonders in very low temperatures.  The manual shows that the camera can work at 32°F, but then, any given camera can perform at this temperature.  The fact that this one, just like other Nikon bodies, can work flawlessly at something like 12°F really means the world to me.   Nice it is to add that the battery didn't lose significant amounts of power here: it left the house and came back at the exact same level.  Granted, it was not a long walk... after all, I am not insensitive to cold! 

Other findings: forget about perfect WB.  That's not a thing with this camera alone.  It's a problem with digital.  I recall some of the playful shots I made with a small Lumix under different light conditions and they showed a peculiar color cast.  Just in case, readers recently converted to digital (like me) expect a magical rendition of color under challenging lighting conditions...  rest assured that it won't happen.  Digital sensors ain't that smart.

More to come as I make a little more time.  

What to say about the Nikon AF-S 24-70 f2.8?

One word...

Or maybe two... 

If any, which would be the first?

Illuminating, perhaps?

In short, this lens is astounding.  Unlike other Nikon zooms, this one allows for a very well lit viewfinder.  Granted, something like this appears when I use my 80-200 f2.8, but there more things to say about this lens and it's less expensive brethren, the Sigma AF 24-70 f2.8 (for sale, by the way). 

The first is in the position and finish of the zoom ring.  Like in the Sigma 24-70 f2.8, it's close to the mount and camera body.  Unlike the Sigma's, it's very well dampened and smooth. 

The zooming makes the lens protrude out of its casing.  Like the Sigma, it is longer at its wider end (go figure...).  Unlike the Sigma, the protrusion is covered by the hood.  To the casual observer, this lens never changes its size.  

Finally, the filter size difference is significant.  With the Sigma, filters are size 82mm.  With the Nikon, they are 77mm (more affordable and common size).  

One big difference: the Nikon's barrel seems to be metal.  Sigma has a strong, firm barrel, but it's still polycarbonate.  Both, however, have a very confortable close-focusing distance, and then allow for decent closeup shots. 

All these shots were made with the D700 at ISO 5000 (at least) and wide-open .  The details are astounding, and the nicest thing is that this lens is surprisingly fast to focus, and extremely quiet, as it fits to any AF-S product.  

I will keep trying this glass under different conditions.  It's a keeper, and a very fit lens for this camera. 

Happy Thanksgiving!