Archive for 'Photography'

Hyperlinks to memories

Another .net column has made its way online. This one’s about attention and the way that gadgets can remove you from the moment you’re filming, photographing or tweeting about.

Photos and videos are hyperlinks to memories, icons that your brain double-clicks to bring back the full experience – the sights, sounds, smells and sensations of a happy day or a crappy one.

Increasingly, though, we’re using gadgets to record the whole experience. That makes us passive observers, not active participants.

Owning a camera doesn’t make you a criminal

Me on security guards, snappers and deleting photos

Part of the problem is overzealous people in uniform, whether they’re security guards or serving police officers. The Metropolitan Police’s crazed anti-terrorism adverts (PDF), which brand photographers as potential bombers, don’t exactly help. But there’s also a problem with the law.

The idea that Section 76 of the Counter-Terrorism Act makes photographing the police illegal is pure fantasy. It doesn’t mention photos at all. Rather, it says that it’s illegal to gather or publish information about the police or armed forces that is “likely to be useful” to a mad bomber, foreign spy or Osama Bin Laden.

With pretty much everything in the world linked to terrorism these days – Icelandic banks’ assets were frozen under anti-terrorism legislation, while anti-terrorism surveillance powers have also been used to crack down on such threats to life and liberty as dog crap and fly-tippers – then it’s easy to see how that phrase can be misinterpreted, either by accident or by design.

Very quick example of video from the Sanyo Xacti HD-1000

As promised, here’s some quick footage from the Sanyo camcorder I was banging on about. The embedded version is standard definition, but you can view it in HD by clicking through to the Vimeo site.


Quick example of video from the Sanyo Xacti HD-1000 from Gary Marshall on Vimeo.

First impressions of the Sanyo Xacti HD-1000 and CA-8 digital camcorders

I’ve been playing with two video cameras over the last couple of weeks, both by Sanyo and both from the Xacti range: the Xacti CA-8 waterproof camera, and the HD-1000 high definition one. This won’t be an in-depth review, but I think I’ve played with them enough to get a decent picture (sorry) of their pros and cons.

The CA-8 first. The gimmick is that it’s waterproof to 1.5m for 60 minutes, and it is – me and my colleagues at BBC Radio Scotland have been having a merry old time dumping it in fish tanks, in baths and in the River Clyde. That side of things is great, but it feels as if the waterproofing took the bulk of the budget. Image quality is poor, low light performance is dismal, it’s standard definition and I really didn’t like it. That said, if you’re a running, jumping, mountain biking extreme sports kind of person, it may be worth checking out: like most camcorders its picture quality is best in normal daylight, and the waterproofing could come in handy if you’re doing sporty things.

The HD-1000, on the other hand, is great. Which is just as well, because I spent my own money on it (well, vouchers and stuff I’d got for my birthday). There’s lots to like about it, although there are a few major cons too. Crucially it’s only about £100 more than the CA-8: shop around and you can get it for about £320.

Pros first. It does full HD (although for reasons of space and “that’s good enough” I’ve been using 720p instead of the full resolution), it takes SDHC cards, it’s got a 10x optical zoom and there’s built-in image stabilisation. And by god it needs it, because it’s a pistol grip camera. That’s fine in most circumstances, but it’s not as stable if, like me, you have RSI. The positioning of the zoom control doesn’t help either, because it’s where the hammer would be if it were a real gun – so moving it with your thumb destabilises the camera, causing some pretty dramatic shaking even when you’re not zooming in.

The f1.8 lens does a reasonable job in low light and there’s a shoe connector for an additional light, although I do wonder what that would do to the already precarious balance of the camera.

It’s a very camera-y camcorder in a lot of respects, which I like – although I suspect many people will hate it. Go into the menus and there’s lots of tweakery: ISO speeds, aperture settings, exposure compensation, changing from multi-spot metering and 9-point autofocus to centre weighting… it’s all stuff you’ll be familiar with if you’ve got a reasonably high-spec stills camera, and fiddling can make a big difference to the quality of the footage.

Other than the stability, there are a few other downsides. Autofocus can be slow and easily confused, although it’s better if you switch on Face Chaser. This attempts to identify faces and keep the focus on them, adjusting brightness and contrast to avoid the face-in-the-dark syndrome that can affect cameras when they’re confused about lighting conditions. Battery life is adequate rather than brilliant, and the manual doesn’t emphasise the need for fast SDHC cards enough: try shooting in full HD on a basic SD card and the results will be disastrous. Last but not least, the Full Auto button really bugs me. Press it and the camera reverts to the default settings, which is great if your fiddling has made a complete arse of things, but as far as I can see it goes to the factory defaults and I can’t find a way of overruling it with my own default settings.

Overall, though, I’m really quite taken with it. You don’t expect a £300-ish high definition camera to be perfect, and the HD-1000 isn’t. However, when you consider that many manufacturers are flogging standard definition SD card cameras for more than the Xacti currently sells at, it’s excellent value for money. I’ll post some video soon – I just need to go somewhere interesting so I can film it.

HD video cameras: as long as tech is this confusing, we’ll need people to cut through the bullshit

A while back, I mentioned that taking baby steps into “proper” photography made me weep hot salty tears of frustration and rage, until a bit of informed advice and a few magazines cheered me up and translated the crap into plain English. It turns out that the world of digital photography is the simplest thing in the world compared to video.

It’s entirely academic at the moment – I’ll probably have to mug some schoolchildren at lunchtime in order to afford a pint or two tonight – but at some point in the near future I want to buy a video camera. I’ve learnt from my previous mistakes – best summarised as “don’t buy on price” – and I’ve got a pretty good idea of what I want.

It’s not complicated. I want a camera that has these features:

* High definition, because if I’m going to shell out on a camera I might as well get one that’s reasonably future-proof.

* Card storage, because I hate DVDs and like the security of being able to carry a few spare cards around.

* Mac compatibility.

And naturally, I don’t want to pay a million pounds for it. Even window shopping is suffering from the credit crunch.

So off I trot to the wonderful world of manufacturer websites and product spec sheets. And what a confusing load of crap it all is.

In no particular order, here are some of the things you need to know about:

* HD means different things depending on what you’re looking at. This camera here is HD, with 720p HD! This camera here is also HD, but it has 1080p HD! But this 720p one has better pictures than the 1080p because it has better fps and that one is better than the other ones because it is not interlaced and over here this one is the very bestest camera ever because it has magic space pixies that live inside it!

* The jargon around video cameras is even worse than with still cameras. In addition to all the f-stop stuff and JPEG profiles you’d expect, there’s CMOS and CCD and 3DDNR and BIONZ image processors and X many frames per second and face detection and AVC/H.264 and DIS and OIS and OMGWTFINEEDALIEDOWN.

* It’s not enough to go “no, Sony, your memory sticks are evil” and plump for something that uses SD cards. Different cameras have different levels of SD support, so some max out at a particular level of storage, others are utterly pointless unless you get SDHC cards. And of those, some of them don’t really work unless you go for Class 4 HD cards. Class what?

* Mac compatible doesn’t necessarily mean Mac compatible, because the combination of the highest HD resolutions and the AVCHD format used by some cameras isn’t yet supported by OS X software such as iMovie (although this may have changed by now. I’m too confused to keep looking).

Kudos to Techradar*, T3**, the Guardian*** et al for trying to explain all this stuff sensibly in reviews and product comparisons, but I can’t help thinking that this is the best option:

* Instead of buying an HD camera, take lots of still photos, print them out and wave them around really, really quickly.

* Vested interest: I write for it, albeit not about video cameras
** Vested interest: I’ve written for it, albeit not about video cameras
*** Vested interest: I’ve written for that too, albeit.. you get the idea

Panasodding camcorders

If you’re thinking about getting a cheap camcorder and you’re using Leopard, beware: I’m having huge problems with my El Cheapo Panasonic camera. It uses Mini DVD, which means I can’t play the discs in my Macs (they’re all slot-loading drives), so I need to connect it via USB.

Unfortunately Leopard doesn’t like Panasonic’s files (they’re .VRO format, I think) and Panasonic’s Mac software doesn’t like Leopard. So while I can connect the camera to my Mac, I can’t do anything with the video unless I convert it in MPEG Streamclip and shell out real cash money for Apple’s QuickTime MPEG plugin. Damn, blast and arse.

Is RAID enough to protect your pics?

Mrs Bigmouth wanted to watch our wedding DVD the other week, so she popped it in the player and said some very bad words when it froze. The disc has a slight scratch, rendering it unplayable a few minutes in. No worries: I’ll fling it through Handbrake, rip it to the Mac and make another one.

Nope. Too scratched for Handbrake.

I downloaded and tried a whole bunch of DVD ripping programs without success, but eventually Mac The Ripper came up trumps (on the third attempt) – so I’ve been able to rip the disc, ready to burn another one. Phew.  But if that hadn’t worked, I’d be up shit creek without a paddle: as far as I’m aware, the firm that actually did the DVD is no longer trading.

That’s got me thinking. As you can imagine, since Baby Bigmouth appeared I’ve taken a lot of photos, and a fair whack of video too. CDs and DVDs die, and recordable ones die more quickly than commercially pressed ones. And the photos and videos I’m taking are things I want to keep not just for weeks or months, but for years. Decades, even.

For now, I’m doing a couple of things. I’m backing up the best pics to Flickr, and I’m ripping video from mini-DVD to hard disk (not a pleasant task on the Mac, incidentally – Panasonic’s software doesn’t work on Leopard yet) and storing it in MPEG format rather than anything camera-specific. I’m then backing up to an external Lacie disk.

The problem is that I’m rapidly running out of room. The MacBook Pro is close to stuffed already, and the Lacie disk is filling up too. And there’s only so much you can stick on Flickr, particularly when you’re shooting hundreds of photos at very high resolutions.

So I’m thinking that the way forward is a networked RAID drive, something like the Western Digital 1TB model I’ve been looking at. It’s about £200 and has two 500GB drives in a RAID configuration, so everything you copy is duplicated from one drive to the other. That means I wouldn’t have to worry about keeping stuff on my various Macs and PCs – I could just dump it on the network drive and be confident that even if one drive fails, the other one will work.

I can, can’t I?

What I want to do is move key stuff – photos, video, iTunes library, archive of work documents – from individual machines to a network drive. Is a twin-disk RAID system robust enough for that, or should I look at something else entirely?

Any advice would be appreciated…

Scott Kelby isn’t very funny. Just as well the rest of his book’s good

My quest for a decent digital SLR book took me to Borders at the weekend where, after a bit of swearing – “all these books are thirty quid and written in gibberish!” – I found something that (a) looked decent and (b) wasn’t thirty quid: The Digital Photography Book, by Scott Kelby. And it’s very good, provided you skip the chapter intros which try far too hard to be funny and which fail miserably.

Everything else, though, is excellent. As Scott explains:

If you and I were out on a shoot, and you asked me, ‘Hey, how do I get this flower to be in focus, but I want the background out of focus!’ I wouldn’t stand there and give you a lecture about aperture, exposure, and depth of field. In real life, I’d just say, ‘Get out your telephoto lens, set your f/stop to f/2.8, focus on the flower, and fire away.’ You d say, ‘OK,’ and you’d get the shot. That’s what this book is all about.

And that’s exactly what I need. If you want lots of theory, it isn’t the book for you. If you want an idiot’s guide that doesn’t talk to you as if you really are an idiot, it’s well worth £13-ish.

Are my photos any better? Nope – but at least now I know why. And I’m fighting the urge to buy a zoom lens and a tripod.