« Best Internet Post Ever | Main | Vile Rumors »

Thursday, 06 September 2012


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

The first shot in this post is super. Do you find you miss the viewfinder or is that sentiment becoming outdated?

I've had the RX100 for about a month now and really like it a lot. Still waiting for the release (versus candidate) update to Lightroom to play with the raw files, though. What the jpegs are showing me has made me rethink pocketable point and shoots for serious work...

I went to AIC several years ago just to see an Edward Weston exhibit.
The lighting was so dim on that (and all other photgraphy) that I should have borrowed a seeing-eye dog to sniff them out.

Apropos of "the sensor in the RX100 is a particularly talented one" the DxOMark results are out today for the RX100.

The numbers back up the comments. It bests the Nikon 1 and some 4/3 cameras. It's comparable with my E-PL1 (except in sensitivity). And of course knocks my Canon S95 into a cocked hat.


Very impressive.

Dear Mike and Ken,

What especially struck me about "The Days Orders"aside from its beauty, is that it is the only print I've seen from that period (1859) that, so far as I can tell, is in original, pristine condition. I say so far as I can tell, because I've never seen anything close to that good that's older than about 1900, so the materials in 1860 might be considerably different. That said, the "blacks" have exactly the depth and richness of tone I'd expect of an albumen print made last week. The very slight base yellowing *might* be deterioration, or it might be the natural color of the paper and emulsion of the period, it's that slight.

People say a well-made monochrome darkroom print should be able to last centuries, but this is the only one I've ever seen in "like new" condition from the 1800's.

It's a remarkable and possible unique acquisition.

pax / Ctein

Dear Folks,

Regarding the miniature, this one was about 18" wide and the detail is amazing. I strongly recommend clicking the in-column illo to see the 800 px version. The impression of reality is startling. The 14-42 at 14mm and f/5.6 seems to be just the right combination of field of view and depth of field to photograph these-- I look at the frame fullscreen on my laptop and it's hard to believe I'm not looking at a full-sized room.

It helps that the level of detail truly is amazing. In the full-res photo, I can see a miniature needle with thread hanging from it poked into the stamp-sized sampler on the work frame in the right half of the photo.

I could spend all day looking at those rooms.

And, because someone will ask, the camera was the OMD and the RAW files have been left essentially unmassaged, 'cause I'm on vacation and don't have time.

pax / Ctein
-- Ctein's Online Gallery http://ctein.com
-- Digital Restorations http://photo-repair.com

If the dollhouse stuff interests you, the other museum in town also has a longtime exhibit:


Regarding the Thorne miniatures, the Phoenix Art Museum has a substantial collection of them as well: http://www.phxart.org/collection/thorneroomsmain.php


How'd I get there ?
iPhone and big thumbs I guess.

Following John King's tip, I went over to the DXO site to check the comparisons for the Sony RX100. I previously used the Canon S95, so I know first-hand the RX100 has better IQ.

However, the Canon raw converter is nicer to use than the Sony one, so I decided to give the DXO Optics Pro 7.5 converter a go (I don't have ACR). I downloaded the trial version and tried a few images ... nice. Worth a look if your current converter is giving you the pips.

No doubt you passed Ferris, Sloane, and Cameron in those same halls.

Love the de Beaucorps paper negative and appreciate its inclusion here.

"...the display is beautifully back-illuminated using cool, non-destructive LED light. Really lets you see the subtle quality of the negative."

You'd make Fred Picker proud!

The comments to this entry are closed.



Blog powered by Typepad
Member since 06/2007