The Online Photographer

TOP Closing Up Shop*

*(Just for a few days)

I'm not the best fundraiser. Not more than once a month, and sometimes less often (because I forget), I've tried to selfishly remind people how they could help support TOP.

It's not so hard. The three main ways:

1. By checking out our advertisers, such as rawworkflow.com;

2. By making your Amazon and B&H Photo purchases through our links (we get a little commission when you do); or

3. By sustaining the site, i.e., making a recurring voluntary donation of $6, $2, $1, or 25¢ a month.** Sort of like subscribing to a magazine, only optional.

I usually take this opportunity to thank everybody who helps out in any of those ways. Which I hereby do, again.

However, a new book has convinced me that YOU should really thank these people, too! Assuming, that is, that you're one of the many who read this site without ever pitching in. According to the new book Free: The Future of a Radical Price by Chris Anderson, who's been making the television talk show circuit lately, the magic of digital distribution is that overhead is so low that lots of people can now enjoy something that is paid for by only a few.

...Which sounds good, I admit, if you're riding in the fat part of the canoe and never dipping a paddle in. If you're drafting behind the leader. If you live to put the lie to that old saying about the free lunches. But don't forget, I still need to pay my time, and times are tough as I'm sure you don't need to be reminded.

And the important thing is, it needn't cost you anything. If you are going to buy a camera or a lens or any one of thousands of other photo-related products, please consider buying it from B&H Photo. Or, if you need to buy a book or CD or piece of software, just check out Amazon first. (Here for those in the U.K.) And, pretty please, remember to use our links when you do buy from B&H or Amazon. It helps. A lot. Really.

Or click on our advertisers, or consider a subscription.

But seriously, thanks to all of you who have helped. You are very kind, and it's very much appreciated.

Vacating
Meanwhile, it's that time of year again—I'm closing up shop for a few days to get some old-fashioned August R&R. (The cheek—sticks his hat out, then goes on holiday.) TOP will resume its merry ways on, around, about, or in the vicinity of August 10th. The payoff for your patience? I am at my least curmudgeonly when I return from vacation. Although I admit it can be hard to tell.

In the meantime, why not delve into the Archives a bit? There's lots of fine stuff moldering away in there lonely and forgotten and not doing anybody enough good.

See you soon.

—Mike, One Man Fundraising Army, with slacker private

**By the way, quite a number of these have been canceled. When this happens, I assume it's something the subscriber did on purpose; but I've found several times that it comes as just as much of a surprise to the subscriber. So if you signed up to contribute and your subscription was canceled out of the blue and it was nothing you did, well, it was nothing I did, either. I don't know what's causing it.

Not-So-Random Excellence

Revisiting a couple of topics from the last couple of months:

Photo: W. Eugene Smith

First, a wonderful collection of Kodachrome photographs from the vaults of Fortune magazine, dating from 1939 to 2002, from artists as diverse as Dmitri Kessel, William Vandivert*, Dan Weiner, Robert Doisneau, and Alex Webb, as well as several not at all known for shooting color, such as Ansel Adams, Ralph Steiner, Walker Evans, and W. Eugene Smith (Smith's picture above was taken in 1957 for an article about the Connecticut General Life Insurance Company's then-new building in Hartford. The picture didn't make the issue). A tiny sampling online, but good to look at. (Coincidentally highlights one of Kodachrome's often hidden benefits, too—its good dark-storage archivability.)

We were talking about Kodachrome when it went the way of all things last month.

Photo: Luc Novovitch

On a related note, TOP reader Luc Novovitch passed by Kodachrome Basin State Park in Utah last week on his way to Escalante, and he confirms that the park is still there and still has the same name! (There was some question.) Above is a shot he took on his way through.

Photo: Stan Semuskie

In a "Featured Comment" to our post about adding an aerial shot to your portfolio, photographer Stan Semuskie told a cool story about being hired by Forbes magazine to shoot the home of Nike founder Phil Knight, and how he had a blast that day shooting everything he could see from the chopper. Stan has now put some of the selects from that shoot online; you can practically feel the rush of the air and the beat of the blades. Fun stuff.

On the often visually irritating Life.com site, Astronaut Bruce McCandless is
joined in space by a watermark and two enormous floating arrows.

Life.com has put up a set it calls "The 21 Greatest Space Photos Ever." I have to say I think the jury's still out on Life.com. The JPEGs are often of...well, variable quality, and the interface gets in the way of enjoying the pictures. Take #15 in the linked set, for instance—"the immediately recognizable human form" in the "vastness of space" yes, but then, the two arrows that also appear to be floating in the vastness of space compete with the human form and detract somewhat from the visual impact. (Speaking of that shot, I wonder if Astronaut Bruce McCandless is any relation to Chris McCandless, the protagonist of Jon Krakauer's fine if troubling book Into the Wild—there's a movie, too—I recall that when my father was a Director of NASA, one of the people under him was Walt McCandless, father of Chris.)

Finally, the always delightful Shorpy.com has some better JPEGs of the late Julius Shulman's architectural work than I was able to link to the other day, including a large, good-quality digitization of Shulman's signature picture.

Mike
(Thanks to Marc Rochkind, Luc, Stan, Robert Lee, and Werner J. Karl)

*Whose former assistant Carl Leonardi is a TOP reader.

Send this post to a friend

How I Use The Sigma DP2

By Laurence Matson

Modern photography is rife with Holy Grails, and certainly one of them is the reinvention of the street shooter’s ideal camera as originally embodied in the Leica M series—and in the hands of Henri Cartier-Bresson.

H.C.-B. is to street photography as Ansel Adams is to landscape photography. These three and other icons used a specific tool and molded their defining concept around the tool. The tool essentially becomes a defining factor in how you take pictures.

When Sigma set out to develop the DP series of cameras, they had a specific concept in mind: to house the technology of their DSLR cameras in a pocketable device. One of the models used during the concept phase was the Leica M. Although not pocketable and certainly not digital at the time, it was considered the first true street shooter’s camera.

At photokina 2006, Sigma showed the first concept of the DP1. It was small enough to fit in a large pocket and promised best-of-class image quality with the first APC-size imager in a compact camera. For many, this was the Holy Grail.

But no sooner was the DP1 announced than the discussions about performance began. And there was plenty of time for them; the time delay between the concept camera shown at photokina and the final version shown at PMA 2007 was considered horrendously long, to say nothing of the period from PMA 2007 and the final launch of the finished product. The longer this discussion went on, the greater the expectations—and skepticism—became.

What prospective users underestimated—and in some cases, what Sigma employees before an open mike admitted to underestimating—was the challenge of packing so much technology inside such a tiny package, and doing it for the first time. An honest appraisal of the DP1 was that they succeeded at the time of launch, but just barely. Firmware updates followed quickly to handle major issues, and adept users managed to produce some amazing images. But it was clear to many that a future DP camera would require more horsepower for processing and some changes to the interface.

Standing Guard, Hartland, Vermont

Enter the DP2. Once again, anticipation and expectations were high, and some felt that the "little camera with outstanding image quality" came up short. However, Devices are rarely perfect, and never are in the eyes of all. Devices have an intended function and propose through their designs how to go about it. Ultimately, the buyer has to decide whether the device suits his or her needs or not.

In my opinion and from my experience, the DP2 makes a very good street camera. It is not perfect, but it is certainly a step in the right direction. Here is how I use it for that purpose:

• Set the camera to M mode on the dial, and adjust the ISO, shutter speed and f-stop for the prevailing conditions. I tend to set it for ƒ/8 and adjust the shutter speed on the fly as light conditions change. If my final result will be B&W, I only adjust the ISO using the QS menu.

• Set focus to MF and use the wheel to set it for a hyperfocal point around 1.5–2 meters. Again, this can be adjusted on the fly.

• Use the fastest card you can. I use 32 GB Delkin class 4 cards. There might be faster cards around now.

• Use the OVF and keep both eyes open to see the action evolve. Capturing the moment is about anticipation.

• Turn off the LCD. It is a distraction.

Set up like this, I can capture an image every two to three seconds for as long as I want. There is no shutter lag.

If there is a company out there that listens to what its users want, it is Sigma. This has been shown time and again in their response with new firmware or products. As we move towards the DP3 and beyond, it is good for people to discuss problems openly in forums or blog comments. But as with any criticism, the constructive form is best, and this acknowledges what is right as well as what could use improvement.

-

Laurence Matson, one of the initiators and stalwarts of the Sigma Users Group, describes himself as a "strong Sigma and Foveon proponent." I invited him to write this "counterpoint" when he criticized my take on the recently introduced Sigma DP2.  —MJ

Laurence Matson's Sigma DP2 Gallery

Send this post to a friend

Twilight of Film Special

B&H is offering what might be thought of as a Recession Special on number of different bundles. Here's one attractive one, for example—the price amounts to getting the (exceedingly fine) lens for 1/2 off. At the link, click on "Zeiss" under "Brands" for lots more combos on sale.

It's a camera I liked a lot, one which for many people will have only one problem...the sensor(s)! Hey, at least it's full frame.

Mike
(Thanks to O.G.)

Send this post to a friend

Picture Postcards?!?

By Ctein

You want to be sitting down for this one.

I've made pretty clear my heartfelt belief that the future will lie in informational optics and computational photography and that photographic technology will end up looking almost unimaginably different from what we've been using for 150 years.

But, here's something I didn't imagine, and sure wasn't expecting it now. On the unbelievable/cool scale, it's definitely a 10. We might even have to write an 11 on the dial. For your edification and amazement, two references:

"MIT develops camera-like fabric"

"Exploiting Collective Effects of Multiple Optoelectronic Devices Integrated in a Single Fiber"

Partial Abstract: "We show that a tandem arrangement of subwavelength photodetecting devices integrated in a single fiber enables the extraction of information on the direction, wavelength, and potentially even color of incident radiation over a wide spectral range in the visible regime. Finally, we fabricated a 0.1 square meter single plane fiber assembly which uses polychromatic illumination to extract images without the use of a lens, representing an important step toward ambient light imaging fabrics."

Simple  description: It's a fabric, woven out of light-sensitive fibers,  that can make a photograph. All by itself. No lens. No camera. No nuthin'.

(Well, it is backed by a honking big load of computing. In 10 years, that will all be on a chip.)

Frankly, I didn't want to pay $30 to download the whole paper, but the abstract tells me enough to let me reverse-engineer the basic idea.

Normal, everyday light, on the sub-wavelength scale, can interfere with itself; it acts like a well ordered set of waves. The interference patterns depend on both the wavelength and the direction the photons are coming from. Take Newton rings, for example. Get two shiny surfaces really close to each other, and you'll see bands of bright and dark colors.

Newton rings tell us a lot about the light that creates them. That pattern depends on the distance the light has to travel between the surfaces, measured in wavelengths. The shorter the wavelength, the closer the bands appear together. The shallower the angle of incidence, the farther apart the bands appear. In other words, that pattern of light and dark bands contains information about the direction the light is coming from and/or its wavelength.

That, I think, is the physics behind the fabric: It's looking at the interference patterns within fibers, à la Newton rings, and from that, one can extract information about where the photons are coming from and what they're like.

Which is just what a conventional camera lens and film/sensor does.

I can't say how far this particular technology could be pushed; I just don't know.

But just imagine...

It looks kind of like a Polaroid SX 70 print. Hold it up in front of you,  grasping it by the lower right corner. An image of the scene the print "back" is facing appears on the side that you're looking at. Squeeze the corner between your thumb and forefinger, and the print freezes the image.

Heck, let's make the lower left corner a zoom control. There's no reason we should be hobbled by a fixed "focal length" in our magic print; it's all in the number crunching. Also, the print doesn't "fix" the image until you squeeze the corner two times rapidly. Then it's permanent. Otherwise, you can reuse the print, until you get a photograph you want to keep.

I told you you wanted to be sitting down for this one.

Ctein

Time for a Poll: Ctein

Online Surveys & Market Research

(If you're not seeing the poll field, click here.)

Olympus E-P1 PEN Review

By Ken Tanaka

If you’re at all attuned to camera news you are well aware of Olympus’s new PEN E-P1 camera. This 12.3 megapixel Micro Four-Thirds camera has stirred up quite a bit of excitement since its concept design was previewed at the 2008 Photokina. Olympus's own tagline has done much to ignite curiosity: "Not a compact. Not an SLR. It's a PEN."

The Pen E-P1 commemorates the 50th anniversary of Olympus's Pen series of half-frame 35mm cameras. These small, modestly-priced amateur/travel/family cameras, manufactured from 1959 to 1966, were quite popular in the period just before the single-lens reflex camera design consumed the market. Oly reportedly sold over 17 million PENs so I would imagine that they're hoping for similar success with the digital version.

Sentimentality aside, the main practical question for most people is whether or not Olympus's new PEN is a serious camera and not just a retro-styled toy. My answer is yes, the E-P1 is an earnest and versatile camera that can be fun to use. But it's also a camera with a few noteworthy shortcomings.

 

What follows are my notes after working with the E-P1 daily for over two weeks. I admit to frequently using the Leica M8 rangefinder as a comparative standard. While I recognize that most readers may not have experience with that camera, I feel that it presents a more appropriate functional and performance standard than either a compact digital camera or a DSLR.

Design, build, and finish
Although the E-P1 is quite small it's not truly a pocket camera. With its rangefinder-like body it's much smaller than a DSLR and even smaller than a Leica M rangefinder. In fact, it’s just a bit larger than a Canon Powershot G10.

When fitted with the ultra-slim 17mm pancake lens the E-P1 could be carried in a coat pocket. But with any larger lens you'll be carrying it on a strap or in a bag.

The E-P1 is relatively light at 335g plus a 40g battery. But it has a solid heft. Nothing rattles and there is no hollow-box feeling to the camera; it feels full and tight.

Moonwalk Day

Photograph AS11-40-5903, taken by Neil Armstrong of Buzz Aldrin, arguably the most used representation of Man on the moon. See the Apollo Image Gallery for the exact sequence of Neil and Buzz's photography on the surface, and to download high quality full-frame scans.

 
Forty years ago today, two Americans, Buzz Aldrin and Neil Armstrong, first did what had long been considered the quintessence of the impossible: they set foot on Earth's moon.

Pop Culture's ceaseless Distract-the-Citizens Project has lately been taking an extended detour over the predictable if technically untimely demise of the King of Pederasty, and in that context it is a nice antidote to recall that "moonwalk" once meant something other than a signature dance move. On the day that this happened, forty years ago, our nation—indeed, all nations—felt as one; we felt a pride unalloyed by irony, and sensed a seriousness that has been missing from the civic sphere more lately; and we felt, briefly, that the stars—real stars, not just the metaphorical kind—were the limit.

Of course, as space travel goes, a brief visit to our own barren moon is small beer. It's but a baby step compared to the daunting task of getting a living human to another planet and back, and the merest stirring stacked against the thought of a visit to a solar system other than our own. (I've never liked science fiction's chipper vision of humans flitting between galaxies—too far removed from the mute reality of real distances for me.)

Photograph AS11-40-5927: Buzz Aldrin unloading science experiments
from the rear of the Lunar Module.

Still, it's not difficult to conjure the pure wonder of what humanity did do, forty years ago today. All any of us really has to do is remember a night outdoors, camping perhaps, nestled in the darkness, far from the masking lights of the cities, looking up at the great cathedral of the heavens and contemplating the incomprehensible gulf between ourselves and the familiar half-lit pearl that so often graces our nighttime sky. It is easy to imagine men and women so ancient they could hardly be called civilized lost in reveries at the same sight and thinking much the same thoughts. The moon was the ultimate Everest—we planted a flag and then hightailed it back to where we belong, for no real reason but because it was there. But what a thing it is to have done.

Mike
(Thanks to Rod Sainty)

Send this post to a friend

Lillian Bassman in 1951

After we were talking about Lillian Bassman the other day, our friend Marc Rochkind (see below for a link to his blog) found a nifty article about her in the April, 1951 issue of Popular Photography which he has now scanned and put online. The article, by Walter Ian Fishman, is called "A Woman's Camera in a Woman's World." There are a few dated touches, like the line about the "girl and man," which sounds odd and patronizing now, but overall it's a fascinating look at Lillian Bassman at work.

Mike
(Thanks to Marc Rochkind)

Send this post to a friend

At Turnberry: What's Wrong With This Picture?

There was an unusual problem for photographers at the British Open Golf Championship that concluded in markedly unsatisfactory fashion at the Ailsa course at Turnberry links in Turnberry, Scotland yesterday. "Location is everything," Golf.com reported:

One clothing company has found a unique way to advertise at the British Open. Its logo is plastered on the sail of a large boat that has been cruising along the Firth of Clyde behind the ninth tee down to the 11th tee.

It's hard to miss it.

That's a problem for photographers, however, because that stretch is among the most popular for pictures. Along with the cliffside beauty, they often capture the image of players with the Ailsa Craig and Turnberry Lighthouse—sometimes both—in the background.

"Why would I want a photo of that?" one photographer said, packing up his gear and looking for a better spot.

Fire the writers! 
Speaking of the British Open—if that had been a movie script, you'd fire the writers. Fifty-nine-year-old Tom Watson, a five-time champion who led the field off and on all week, came down to the last hole with the win in hand—a win which would have made him the oldest major champion ever by eleven years. He played into the last hole well enough, but he got just enough of a bad break that he bogeyed the hole, allowing the much younger Stewart Cink, who had played under the radar all four days, to sneak into a playoff with him. The pleasantly surprised Cink then cheerfully outplayed a deflated Watson for the title—an outcome that no one, with the possible exception of Cink and his immediate family, wanted. Seldom has such a perfect story line been so capriciously sabotaged—even in sports, which is as famous for inexplicable endings as for dramatic ones.

 
"It would have been a hell of a story," Watson said. Photo: Robert Beck/SI

Must have been the same story writer who had the bright idea of bringing Michael Jordan out of retirement to play for the Wizards. That's the problem with sports—no one's in charge of the script. Of course no one really wants sports events to be scripted. But as Thomas Boswell wrote about yesterday (Ted Johnson sent me this): "What kind of napping divinity allows such mischief, even in the devil's game?"

Mike

Send this post to a friend