« March 2007 | Main | May 2007 »
April 26, 2007
[ REVIEW — CANON SELPHY ES1 printer ]
CANON SELPHY ES1 printer
Price: $300
Recommended
The low-down: This is a portable dye sublimation printer that produces 10x15cm prints. The printer footprint is 200x105mm – a tiny desk area made possible by its curious paper handling mechanism. The paper and dye come together in a pack that inserts into the side of the printer and in the print process the paper is pushed out, turned through 90 degrees and then pulled back into the printer. It then passes through four times to lay down the three colours and a protective layer. It has to be seen to be believed. Print quality is excellent with good colour and high resolution. The finished print has a luxurious feel. And being dye sublimation the tones are nearly continuous with no printer dot pattern. Paper and dye ribbon come together in packs of 50 ($25) or 100 ($39). The Selphy connects to a computer and also works stand alone with input from memory cards, Bluetooth (with an optional receiver), infrared (from phones) and direct from camera. A wireless receiver is another option that works with cameras that connect to wireless networks. There is a tiny LCD monitor to use when the printer is not connected to a PC. And there is an optional battery pack to enhance portability.
Like: The consistency of output is reassuring. The paper is printed with a postcard form on the reverse.
Dislike: We find the stand-alone navigation so perplexing that we can only do it with the manual in hand. The tiny LCD screen is not much use for image editing.
Parting shot: This printer is an attractive complement to a compact camera. For anyone who is satisfied with standard postcard size prints it is well worth a look. We found that the setup stalled at the point where it is supposed to detect the printer and would not go past that point. The problem, we discovered, was that the supplied software does not work with Windows Vista – it was necessary to download an installer from www.canon.com.au to finish the installation.
Posted by terry at 06:13 AM | Comments (3) | TrackBack
[ FREEBIES FOR THE PHOTOGRAPHER ]
IF YOU ARE A REAL COMPUTER VETERAN then you will remember the program Paint, introduced by Microsoft to a grateful world in Windows 3.1.
There wasn’t a lot you could do with Paint. Make some squares and circles and fill them with solid colour. Draw a squiggly line. And that was about it, for the simple reason that most of us didn’t have video cards and monitors with the necessary resolution and number of colours to process something as complex and subtle as a photograph. Anyway we didn’t have digital cameras, so what did it matter?
Believe it or not Paint is still with us in Windows Vista. And it doesn’t do much more than it ever did except that now we have the processing and video power to load photos into it and draw squares and circles and squiggly lines across the picture in solid colours. That’s progress?
Windows Vista incorporates a well-developed web browser, Internet Explorer 7, and a new email client, Windows Mail, so why no new image viewer and editor?
Well, it turns out that there is one. It is called Paint.Net and can be downloaded from www.getpaint.net. It is free and it is a big advance on Paint. Like Photoshop it uses Layers as its editing metaphor and it has the controls for Levels and Curves that are indispensable in image editing.
According to the blurb on the Paint.Net web site the program was developed “as an undergraduate college senior design project mentored by Microsoft, and it is currently being maintained by some of the alumni that worked on it.”
Paint.net was intended to be a replacement for MS Paint but for some reason it never happened. For those of us who like a good Microsoft conspiracy theory the reason is obvious – why give away something that then becomes a free competitor to another of the company’s programs for which it charges serious money.
Microsoft Works Suite 2006 contains the application MS Digital Image 2006. The suite costs about $170 and is good value for money because it contains a full version of Word 2003 and Encarta 2006, but the Digital Image component adds nothing.
Both Irfanview and XnView are free and are better image viewing and editing programs than Digital Image. XnView is a remarkably capable piece of software that could well be all that most people need for their post-camera processing. It includes Curves and Levels and other sophisticated functions that make it a stand-out in this type of software. Both Irfanview and XnView are much better than any of the automated software supplied with cameras and both are lightning fast image viewers that handle just about every file format known to science, including the manufacturer-specific RAW files.
What makes Paint.Net special is that the student authors obviously set out to create an alternative to programs like Photoshop Elements and Paint Shop Pro for incorporation into the Windows operating system. Anyone who has used these commercial programs will delight in the clone-like interface and operation of Paint.Net. Perhaps someone at Microsoft decided that it was too complicated for the average user. Or, more likely, too good for them.
Paint.Net is free but future development is dependent on grateful users making a donation towards the work. In the meantime an international community of users is starting to create a library of plug-ins and add-ons.
*
Posted by terry at 06:11 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
April 19, 2007
[ REVIEW — SONY DSC W55 camera ]
Sony Cybershot DSC W55
Price: $450
Highly Recommended
The low-down: This compact camera has a 7.2 megapixel sensor and a Zeiss lens with a zoom range of 38–114mm (film equivalent). The camera is beautifully designed and constructed and has a face area slightly smaller than a credit card. It is 22mm thick and fits a pocket nicely. There is a small optical viewfinder that is not in line with the lens which means that parallax error must be taken into consideration. As with most optical viewfinders the image displayed is only about 80 per cent of the image captured. Nevertheless, full marks to Sony for continuing to fit a viewfinder to the W range. Colour, and focus are good. There is a tendency to overexpose evenly lit subjects. Resolution of fine detail is very good. Sony claim the battery will deliver 380 shots before needing a recharge. We will take their word for it. There is no optical image stabilisation but there is a high ISO setting, permitting higher shutter speeds. The tradeoff in picture noise is unacceptable. Even at ISO400 image noise is noticeable.
Like: The macro performance of this camera is particularly fine. We used the camera for some close, detailed work where we would normally use a DSLR with micro lens and we were well satisfied with the results. Closest focussing distance is 2cm.
Dislike: The printed manual is inadequate and the on-screen display is very difficult to use to set camera parameters. The full handbook is on a CD which we think is cheap skatery and is deterring owners from getting the best out of their camera. The menu system is so user-hostile that it is difficult to work out how to do something as simple as change the ISO setting.
Verdict: This is a good compact camera that we enjoyed using. Up to ISO 200 it produces fine images. It has selectable aspect ratios and it can take pictures in the right ratio and pixel dimension for widescreen high definition televisions, (16:9 and 1920x1080 pixels) but be warned, what is good for the telly is not necessarily good for printing. Even a high definition TV is a relatively low resolution device.
*
Posted by terry at 12:20 AM | Comments (43) | TrackBack
[ GETTING UP CLOSE AND INTIMATE ]
AUTUMN IS A WONDERFUL TIME OF YEAR for photographers. When the cool, dewy mornings kick in the little things around turn into lovely photographic subjects.
Flowers, leaves, spider webs, fungi and insects are bejewelled with tiny water droplets, veritable photo clichés challenging the photographer to find a new way of looking at the micro world.
It so happens that compact digital cameras, like the Sony W55 reviewed here, are very good at close-up photography. In the days of film cameras parallax error was always a problem because the closer the camera moved to the subject the greater the disparity between what was seen in the viewfinder and what was captured on film.
With the LCD screen acting as viewfinder on a compact digital camera you see exactly what will be captured on the sensor.
Compact digitals have another advantage over film – greater depth of field. Without going into the mysteries of optics the fundamental fact is that the smaller the aperture opening, the sharper the image will be from front to back. A typical sensor in a compact is only a few millimetres across, just a fraction of the area of 35mm film. This means that the lens and aperture diaphragm have a small diameter, even wide open. In fact this characteristic of compact cameras can be annoying with big subjects because the depth of field is so great it is almost impossible to get attractive out-of-focus backgrounds, but for close-up work it is ideal.
Pressing the macro button on a Canon compact (and some other brands) produces a change in the optical configuration of the lens, optimising it for close-up work. SLR users will remember that an effect something like this was achieved with extension tubes between the camera body and the lens – well now it is all done electronically by pushing a button.
Selecting the macro mode also affects the flash, reducing the output – but we never use flash for close-ups. On some cameras it also sets the auto-focus to the centre of the image.
One thing that all camera makers recommend is that a tripod be used for close-ups. If you are just a few millimetres from a flower or an insect there is no way that the camera can be held steady. And if the camera provides manual control of shutter speed and aperture then choosing the slowest shutter speed will make for the smallest aperture and the greatest depth of field and make the camera even harder to hold steady.
The best light for close-ups is what Kodak used to call cloudy-bright on their film instruction sheets. Flowers, in particular, look best when the light is even and diffused. Direct sunlight will almost always produce white highlights or inky black shadows. Take the flowers indoors and arrange them near a window for an attractive modelling light, lighter on the window side and slightly darker on the room side.
Sometimes nature doesn’t do the trick with the water droplets on the spider web or the petals. Who cares? We get out our trusty Plaspak Selecta Spray multi purpose sprayer and squirt a fine mist of water drops over the subject. It looks just like the real thing.
There are some fine examples of macro photography in the picture gallery at www.dpexpert.com.au/gallery/BM
*
Posted by terry at 12:17 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack
April 15, 2007
[ IMPORTANT — ADOBE CS2 UPDATES ]
THE AUTOMATIC ADOBE UPDATE notification has just popped up on the dpexpert computer. [Sunday 15 April, 1145 Eastern Australia time] We ran the update installation and it seems to have fixed the problems with Vista and CS2.
InDesign, which had stopped opening altogether, now works as it should. Photoshop is opening without demanding a re-activation. All other apps -- Illustrator, GoLive etc -- are opening properly.
At first glance it looks as though Adobe has fixed the Vista compatibility problems. We will keep this report up to date as we use CS2.
*
Posted by terry at 03:02 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
April 12, 2007
[ REVIEW—KaiserBaas Digital Picture Frame ]
Price: $400
Highly Recommended
The low-down: This digital photo frame has a diagonal dimension of 20cm and is mounted with an attractive surround suspended on clear plastic. There are picture surrounds of different colours that are easy to install. The LCD screen – 800 by 600 pixels – is of the quality of a high resolution notebook computer monitor and images are sharp and colour good. Images can be loaded into the frame from any type of memory card, including USB dongles, or directly from the computer. There is a small remote control and 16mb of internal memory.
Like: The image quality on this screen is particularly fine, and 20cm is a good compromise between size and price.
Dislike: We have found that all of these digital picture frames are user- hostile with confusing controls and inadequate manuals. The problem is that they all try to do too many things and as a result are frustratingly difficult to use. If the intention is to give a frame to a technophobe grandmother for mother’s day then it needs careful thought. The controls are a set of small buttons and switches that perform multiple functions depending on when and in what combination they are used. On screen menus are ugly and unhelpful. The manuals of all the frames we have tested are bewildering and the remote controls only make matters worse.
It ought to be possible to insert a memory card into its appropriate slot, press Play and it will load and display the images. Anything beyond that is unnecessary and detracts from the attractions of the frames.
Verdict: This is the best digital picture frame that we have tried. Its price seems to be about right by comparison with the competition, even if a bit steep for a single function gadget. The only way to judge the merits of these frames is to carefully prepare 20 horizontal images on a memory card with brightness, contrast and size all adjusted for best display on an 800 by 600 LCD, and then take it to a shop and ask them to demonstrate the various frames. The pre-loaded manufacturers’ promotional slides tell you nothing except that there are some exceptionally happy, tanned people with excellent teeth out there.
Posted by terry at 04:12 AM | Comments (6) | TrackBack
[ EXPOSE YOURSELF ]
IMAGING HAS DONE A LITTLE SURVEY OF DIGITAL PHOTOGRAPHER PALS to see how they handle the selection of exposure modes on their cameras.
Most digital cameras offer a bewildering number of possibilities. Spot, centre weighted and average meter readings. Aperture or shutter priority. Manual settings of aperture and shutter speed. And all those “scene modes” that we have never found a use for – beach, snow, fireworks, night scenes, portrait, sport, landscape and macro.
Our survey found only one respondent who leaves the camera on Auto. Auto takes over the decision making about ISO speed, shutter and aperture and when flash is used. On most cameras it uses average metering.
John S uses the P setting most of the time because, on his Nikon, he can dial through the different aperture/speed combinations to get the one that suits his subject. P couples aperture/speed according to the exposure value that it reads, and an aperture of f8 with a shutter speed of 1/100 second is the same exposure value as f10 at 1/60 second and so on.
Barbara leaves her Konica Minolta Z5 on P and spot metering. She meters from the brightest part of the picture which sometimes results in under exposure. That’s fixed with the camera’s exposure compensation controls. Most cameras have exposure compensation for a second shot at the subject.
Arthur uses evaluative metering as his default and changes to spot for high contrast subjects. Blown (clipped) highlights are more of a problem than black shadows and when the highlight is simply white there is nothing that can be recovered in post-camera editing. With portraits it is usually best to meter from the bright side of the face and let the shadows take care of themselves.
Arthur also brackets exposures for critical shots. He shoots with Canon DSLRs which will take multiple shots, one at the “correct” exposure and one under and one over, at f stop differences set by the user.
Some cameras can be set to mark blown highlights in image review. John S uses this to get an immediate impression of how many spots there are in his pictures that need adjustment. When he is shooting landscapes he takes readings from both the sky and the foreground and if there is more than three stops difference he brackets his exposures.
Murray has a special professional application for his Nikon D200 that demands accurate colour as well as exposure. He sets the exposure manually and after he has taken the shot he examines it with the RGB histogram and uses the colour balance adjustment slider to get as close as possible to what he is seeing with his eyes. He then saves the adjusted image.
Andrew copies lots of pages from books and he finds that white pages are always under exposed and dark pages over exposed. He uses both average and centre weighted readings but never spot. He uses P, M and A in different situations but never uses shutter speed priority. He finds the exposure compensation on his Canon indispensable.
As Murray says: the advantage of digital is that every image is free, so you just keep trying and ventually you will get the perfect exposure.
*
Posted by terry at 04:09 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack
April 06, 2007
[OPENING UP THE VISTA]
AFTER A YEAR OF DILLY DALLYING DPEXPERT has at last got around to getting a new computer.
Now we have a dual core processor, 4 gigabytes of RAM, 300 gigabytes of hard drive space and 512 megabytes of memory on the video card. Plus we treated ourselves to the Dell 2407WFP 60cm wide screen LCD Monitor with 1920 by 1200 pixel resolution that nearly persuades us that the CRT monitor has had its day.
Now for Windows Vista – to see what it has to offer the digital photographer that we didn’t get with XP.
Before buying Vista in one of its forms (home basic, home premium or ultimate) we downloaded the Vista Upgrade Advisor. This scans the system and advises which components need upgrading, which applications and peripherals won’t work with Vista and which version of Vista is best for the machine.
Any version of Nero, except for the most current one, must be removed before installation. Some old drivers for printers and scanners may need to be updated. Some programs will work but may have problems. And there must be a minimum of 15gb of hard drive space.
Installing over Windows XP was painless, except that Adobe programs think they have been installed illegally on a new computer and demand reactivation every time they open.
The Vista graphical user interface is a big improvement on XP. Machines with fast processors, lots of RAM and plenty of memory on the video card can run the flashest interface, called Aero Glass.
The Vista photo viewing and editing sub-program is called Photo Gallery and it is a disappointment. It opens fast enough to serve as the default image viewer, and it will even open some RAW files but it does not support editing of these images.
Only JPEG and TIFF files can be edited in Photo Gallery, and only to change white balance, saturation, brightness and contrast. Images can be cropped and red eye removed but there is no sharpening function. An attempt to open file types that Photo Gallery doesn’t like results in advice to change format by opening the image in Paint and then saving it in another form to reopen in PG. Not likely.
Movie Maker will turn images into a slide show and burn it to DVD, just as in XP, and it is possible to create a high definition show which is spectacular on the right monitor.
Nikon has a free download applet that makes Vista show NEF (Nikon’s RAW) files in thumbnail form in a folder window. Without this little add-on the files show with generic icons.
A group of images – including RAW files – can be selected in the thumbnail window and displayed as an instant slideshow but it seems that it can’t be saved.
The high resolution image handling of the latest Windows Media Player is excellent. HD video can be edited in Movie Maker and exported as a PAL HD file.
Vista is different from XP in look and feel, so a little relearning is necessary. However the changes are all for the better and the new operating system is smoother and more elegant in the way it works. We were surprised to find that it is slightly faster in opening applications and getting them up to working speed. We won’t be reverting to XP.
UPDATE: Since installing Windows Vista we have had endless problems with Adobe's CS2.3 At first the problem was that Photoshop demanded reactivation every time it was run. We uninstalled and reinstalled the program and almost immediately it said that we had activated too many times! And, after two days, our "30 day grace period" had expired!
InDesign won't even open and now we find that all the apps in CS2.3 are inoperative.
All attempts to reactivate the programs using the Adobe automatic reactivation-by-phone system have ended in frustration and rage.
It is clear that anyone running CS2.3 and not intending to upgrade to CS3 really must stay with Windows XP. A quick check on the Web shows that users everywhere are having these problems in various forms. Adobe says they are not to blame because CS2 was created well before Vista. Microsoft have nothing to say on the subject.
The bottom line is: Adobe CS2.x will not work with Windows Vista.
Posted by terry at 12:58 PM | Comments (9) | TrackBack
[REVIEW—HEWLETT PACKARD Photosmart A716]
HEWLETT PACKARD Photosmart A716 printer
Price: $500
Recommended
The low-down: This is a portable inkjet printer that produces 10x15cm and 13x18cm prints. The printer footprint is a mere 245x100mm and construction and finish are attractive. There is a carrying handle, 1gb of flash memory and an optional battery to enhance portability.
Paper and ink come together in what HP call a Photo Pack ($54). This contains 120 sheets of 10x15cm glossy paper and an ink cartridge.
The A716 is connected to a PC by a USB 2.0 cable but it also works as a stand alone unit. There are slots for all memory card types, a Pictbridge connector for direct printing from the camera and an optional Bluetooth receiver to print from mobile phones. There is a small LCD screen for previewing photos and doing elementary editing.
Print speed is reasonably fast with a very short time between pressing the print button and the printer springing into action. There is less sitting around waiting for something to happen than with most printers.
Output quality is generally good with the print matching the screen image. Colour and resolution are good but the ink dot pattern is visible under low magnification – something not seen from Epson and Canon printers. Prints dry almost instantaneously but with a blue cast in dark areas. The cast fades away after a few hours.
Slideshows can be created on the printer and played back on a TV. A remote control is supplied.
Like: The software is well thought out and easy to use. There is no real reason to avoid using a computer. In fact it is a lot easier to prepare images for printing on the PC than on the printer’s tiny LCD screen.
Dislike: We had several instances of paper mishandling where the sheet failed to feed cleanly or two sheets went through together.
Verdict: This printer is the ideal companion to a compact camera, for someone who only intends to produce postcard sized prints but might like occasionally to go up to the next size of 13x18cm. Cost per print is approximately 47 cents. The excellent Epson Picturemate ($330) in the small inkjet range.
Posted by terry at 12:50 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack