Close, But No Cigar

DXO ProLab 4 has been given a shot. A more detailed analysis would be great, but time is pressing.

The advantage of ProLab is the one stop shop programme. This has turned out to be a bit of a double edged sword.

Not as intuitive as C1, but not horrible, it has lots to like and I am in the mood for a change.

The tools are deeper again than C1, each has their own “page” and some are much nicer to work with (the horizon tool is a favourite). Files imported with auto processing are good, almost perfect and the ability to off-set the processing time for Deep Prime or Prime noise reduction until export seems like a time saver, but I am struggling with Dropbox at the moment (very slow and consistently keeps doing things I have asked it not to, like “do not sync” if I miss a short window before it starts to).

Add slow processing to slow uploading and I might as well walk the files over to my employer (about 500m).

The reality is, C1 with a right click out to ON1 as needed, is faster to work with and fits my processes perfectly.

Results were interesting. Deep Prime seems to sometimes create slightly unnatural looking edges and textures, that ON1 either avoids naturally or the slightly less aggressive processing mitigates. Several times, hard pushed files showed nasty, artificial looking shadow to highlight transitions, that ON1 smoothed quite well, with similar noise and sharpness control. ON1 also has more fine controls at the NR level and allows C1 edits to be made before or after noise reduction.

Now here is an odd thing. I have recently switched from long term Lightroom use to C1 and had to adjust my eye to different colour and slider responses, but I feel my tastes have not altered drastically. See how the DXO files (right side) are all darker? Can’t explain that. They were processed at the same time, in the same place with the same screen. Maybe Deep Prime darkens the files?

The top one looks like a win to DP, but that is contrast. The issues show on closer inspection. The DXO file, when viewed way too close, is visibly more contrasty but “crunchier”, especially in the slightly out of focus areas. I can push the ON1 file a little and the files seem to respond, but I don’t see the need. The DXO files seem to need some backing off from even their own auto processing setttings to avoid this.

Shame really, as DXO promised a lot of benefits at the best overall price.

Japan POTD #12

Our favourite platform in Kyoto station, located on ground floor “around the back” on the Arashyama line.

Far from being a daily thing these are still coming.

White Noise

I have new computer.

Breaking with tradition I went lap top, likely due to he time of year (winter), for comfort and practicality.

The Mac book Air has the new M1 chip. This looks able to handle enormous loads, so, using cloud storage and asking less than Scorsese level movie needs, I went with the base model and so far everything is going great.

The double edged sword is, now I can load up all those better versions of the programmes I want.

I started with Da Vinci Resolve for movies, then Classic Lightroom, C1 and trial versions of DXO Pure RAW and Prolab 4. Last, but it turns out, not least, I loaded in ON1 NoNoise.

The last one came from a desire to tackle noise in a work flow friendly way.

Lets re-wind to the beginning.

I shot some night hockey in some of the worst Light I have encountered. ISO 6400+, f2.8, 1/250th with a hideous yellow-green caste kind of stuff. M43 is very capable, but that was stressing everything beyond my comfort level. I switched to my 75mm f1.8 for half the game, just to feel like I had something decent to show.

Not satisfied with the files, I decided to try DXO Pure RAW. This is a pre-processing programme, designed to tackle noise, lens and camera corrections all at once. The Deep Prime NR is amazing, but it took 5 hours to load up and process 600 images. I did it wrong, doing my vetting after processing not before, but that in itself is problematic. I want to select and process using C1, not by eye before and the difference is enough, that images I may normally dismiss can be usable after DXO.

Sure I am missing something obvious, but the time is still an issue.

Several comparisons included a new-comer to the fold. The usual DXO vs Topaz fight now includes ON1 NoNoise. No Noise, did not seem as powerful at first, but I think I missed the subtlety it offered and I failed to do direct comparisons.

What makes it more powerful to me is, it is a right click “edit with..”, a few seconds to render a single image (or proportionately more if you want several), then you can usually just hit done and save. The results are astounding, realistic and controllable (as are those from DXO and Topaz), but they are fast and easily intertwined into my standard processing work flow.

After trying LR and C1 as the test bed, the processed images look similar, but the unprocessed ones are a different story. I had forgotten the “marbling” noise in LR, especially with sharpening and NR applied at higher ISO’s.

A set of ISO 6400 and 12800 (!) test images later and I have a decent, reasonably bullet proof work flow set up. Import to C1, select candidates that need some help (most images at ISO 3200 or more), export to ON1 as TIFFs (tried DNG, but see little difference and the TIFFs seem clean and powerful), save back to C1, usually after little or no change to the auto settings applied, then complete my C1 editing. I then export the original RAW and TIFF into storage and the processed jpeg’s to the client.

Why C1 over LR?

Several reasons, some I needed to be re-acquainted with to really appreciate.

1. Better base file processing, meaning many images do not need any more work and those that do, don’t contrast obviously with the untouched ones. A few ISO 6400 files were good enough straight out of C1, but were clearly too noisy in LR.

2. The file sent to ON1 is better. The end product from both work flows looks similar, but why not start with a better file (surely the ON1 processing is gentler if the parent programme has done a better job). If I was using Pure RAW as a pre processor, I would likely stick with LR as the rental is significantly cheaper and I like the Adobe colours, but the genuine pain of pre-processing is a deal breaker.

3. More choices when exporting to ON1 and saving back to C1. LR only seemed to offer .psd export files, C1 had several options. I settled on TIFF’s for universal convenience and I read somewhere that C1 does not love (Adobe) DNG’s.

4. Much faster work flow generally (for me). The right click>select colour tagging is embedded now, much faster than LR’s left click>scroll>select.

The other concern that always lurks in the mind as much as speed, is cost. ON1 is $77 au at the moment, DXO PR $180au, PL4 $270au.

The first set of images below are ISO 6400 shots taken wide open with my 25mm f1.8.

So, a pleasant enough portrait at normal sizes of Lucy, my reluctant muse.

Clean, sharp, relatively noise free at high enlargement size.

Another, this time at 12800, an ISO I would not even contemplate using previously.

Still sharp, clean and vibrant. The Lightroom file was very mushy and unsharp at this level, but looked ok at normal size (often noise/grain can add to the perception of sharpness at distance, but detract from it closer in).

Another at ISO 12800.

Notice the detail on the nose (point of best focus-the eye is slightly out) and the lack of noise behind. These have not been extensively processed in C1, just exposure and contrast levels, with a little sharpening just to see what would happen. I have found the files are pretty robust, but little is needed to be done.

A little dark (noticing a difference between the screens on my 8 yr old iMac and the new Air).

lightened a little. Another ISO 6400 image. I would be more than happy to print this to the same size as a ISO 400 image. To it’s credit, C1 did an ok job of this one, but the fine detail was a little mushy.

A final one at 6400

Nice to be able to do fine art grade work at higher ISO settings.

DXOPR ISO 6400 file. Lots of colour correction needed and applied (one end of the ground was yellow, the other blue-green and the middle an unholy mix of the two). Something I found problematic with DXO Pure RAW was the lack of fine controls. Some files just looked a little “plasticky”. Still, impressive results, but any better than ON1 or worth the extra time? I also have DXO ProLab 4 to try out. This would be to replace all of the above with possibly one clean work flow, except my old iMac cannot load the current version, so not sure what to do there and the time issue is still real.

Further refining and testing is likely, for example, I am not sure if exposure/contrast adjustments should be done before export or after or if ON1 is best for these (It does more than just cleaning up noise).

So, how useful?

I can now handle ISO 100-1600 files natively in C1, handing off ISO 6400+ (!) files to ON1 as needed. The slightly slower flow is more than made up for by the vastly more pleasant files on offer.

This has the same effective high ISO benefit of shooting full frame and processing with C1, but keeps the benefits of M43 in all other respects. Sure a full frame camera could even go further, but no practical need. I can now use my 300 F4 in poor indoor or outdoor night lighting at ISO 6400+, 1/500th, which tops out my needs. More impressively, I can set auto ISO to 6400 without fear, instead of a very conservative 1600.

Microphones.....Geez.

So if I wrote a book on ways you can melt your brain right out your ears, I think microphone comparisons might be at the top.

Token image of one who could care less. Jealous much?

I have ordered the Zoom H1n and I am happy with that purchase. Universally respected and incredibly versatile, this is a good recommendation for any sound recordist in any field. At a pinch it can be any mic I need, but one feature that is begging to be used more, is that it can make another mic even better.

I have also, mistakenly, ordered the Rode Video Mic Micro, as it seems specifically googling the Movo VXR 10 pro, does not exclude a local retailer’s paid commercial for the Rode coming up in the first couple of entries. Looking identical and possibly fatigued from looking at too many reviews, I pushed go, paypal shot the order directly through and only when I got my email confirmation did I see my mistake.

Annoyed?

Yes.

End of the world?

Probably not.

After another day of listening to comparisons has led me to this conclusion (bared out by many good reviewers), that this field, much like imaging comparisons, has far too many variables, post production controls and listener subjectivity to make internet comparisons matter past a realistic point.

Just like image comparisons, comparing sound devices, without addressing every variable applicable to you and your circumstances specifically, is usually only a rough guide at best. Most cameras can produce nearly identical images with enough processing applied. Total pixels, lens quality, processing, handling and the subject all contribute as much to image quality as the camera and the same is the case for sound and mics.

If the mic is not totally crap, then something usable will come of it, especially if used well and appropriately.

Tammy Sypniewski points this out clearly in her excellent review comparisons, but another clue was the lack of commitment from most reviewers. They are keen to let you make up your own mind, not as keen to be too overtly opinionated, because they know it to. I appreciate this, but it took a while for me to get it.

If the retailer cancels my order (they did not), then I will get some of the options on my wish list below. The H1n will likely improve their already excellent sound and noise floor and give me long range control.

If the order is not cancelled, I will likely stick with the Rode, as the mount, dead cat and cable are very good and the mic is an industry standard, with plenty of people using it and the H1n together successfully. No harm, no foul and I can still stretch to the Takstar and probably the Neewer anyway, just out of curiosity (another thing taken from above is that all decent mics have their relative strengths and weaknesses).

Got the mic and it’s fine for the job it has to do.

Is the mic deep and resonant enough?

That can be added in and all reasonable mics sound great if used close to the subject and equally all tend to sound poor at a distance, but some are a little better (like with image noise, some cameras are better, but avoiding it is best). I tend to like deeper sounding mics, which it turns out is more about subject to mic distance, environment and processing. Excessive depth at the mic end may hide other problems.

Is the mic crisp and clear enough?

That is a tougher one to fix if lacking, but improving the pre amp (H1n) or “boosting” the mic to turn down often mediocre camera pre amp noise can help (this last needs a powered mic). Rode’s tend to sound deep and rich, but this can also hide an excessive noise floor under that depth, which is harder to clean up than just adding bass. Sennheissers on the other hand can sound higher pitched or thinner/crisper. Extra bass can be added easily enough and their base noise floor is lower, which is better.

The H1n fixes many feature deficiencies in cheaper mics, such as low noise filtering, improving pre amp quality, which reduces the noise floor (especially when compared to in camera amps) and other features like effects, so the base mic is all that is important. From that perspective, the best of the cheap ones seem to be the ones to go with for now.

The only things that actually matter it turns out are the practical things like price, accessories and fittings. Is the mic properly stabilised (for example the otherwise excellent Deity D4 has a poor shock mount, the Neewer CM14 and Takstar effectively lack a real one), is it powered or not, effecting features onboard or, is it sold without the needed extras like a dead cat (the Takstar does not even have one available).

Something that also became evident is the pricing. Most super cheap mics in the U.S. are actually not that cheap here. The Movo is meant to be 20-30% cheaper than the Rode, but in Australia it is comparable ($79 au Amazon), which is part of the reason I thought the cheaper Rode was a Movo. Most mics that are 30-70% cheaper that the Rode in the U.S. and Canada end up being only 10-30% cheaper or the same price here, making the Rode less odious to get (the one I ordered was actually $1.95 cheaper than the only Movo I came across). The exchange rate looks about right for all except Rode, who are comparatively cheaper here.

Short list;

Neewer CM14 mini shotgun ($25au). Excellent sound, poor accessories. If I end up with the Rode, then I will have two ways of tackling the same situations, with the accessories from the Rode used with both.

Takstar SGC 600 is very good ($50au), compared, in several accredited blind tests, favourably with the seven times more expensive Rode NGT in sound (not build or features), but like the Neewer it lacks needed accessories like a true dead cat option and real shock proofing. It is a powered mic with good range, so a good camera mount option. I am also struggling to find a legit one for a decent price.

Neewer CM15 which looks excellent ($?), but is hard to get at the moment. This mic fixes most of the accessory issues I have with both the above.

Some type of cheap LAV mic, but I have not tackled that monster yet.

Less likely;

Sennheisser MKE 200 ($150au), which is as dear as all of the above together, but has excellent form factor and the best wind proofing and handling.

Sennheisser MKE 400 ($300au) is probably the premium mic I would go for, offering better form factor than equivalent competitors.

Rode NT5 pencil mics ($500+/pair). These would be ideal for studio and music/event work, if that becomes a thing. Not realistic, but hey, a bloke can dream.

Another H1n maybe?

The Rode VM Micro ($75au) which I may be getting, has build, sound, mount, dead cat and cable quality on it’s side with good support, so it will be perfectly fine. If this comes, the MKE’s will not, but I will likely pick up the top two. The Movo VXR 10 pro was my preferred option here, but steep pricing in Australia and mixed feelings about the real sound benefits (subjectivity at play) compared to the Rode have pushed it back. My only real issue with the Rode is price compared to other options. It will not be a bad mic, just dearer than needed.

The Elephant In The Next Room Is Invited Over.

Video…….

Not interested!

Some things can only be told with a frozen moment, some not.

Or should I be……?

Not sure where this came from, but the other day, I was photographing the school production of Shrek and it just felt right that I try some video.

When covering these events, I often find myself repeating similar images because I am there and do not want to waste the school’s time and money, but sometimes I get bored with the repetition required to stay busy (move around you say, try new angles you say-true but not always possible). I always want that better shot, but sometimes you just know you have it and the third time the scene is repeated does not need to be covered as well as the previous two.

I gave it a go and managed five decent short clips with C4k, but I forgot to turn the sound on, because I set up the camera intending to just shoot “stock” footage with voice over or music added later (turns out we do not have the ability to broadcast sound anyway with our license, so I lucked my way out of that one). The recoding levels still show even with sound disabled. First lesson learned.

The EM1x is a decent video rig and I use the term “rig” deliberately, because it is more than just a decent video camera. The EM1x is likely the best “free hand” mirrorless video camera available as of this time (maybe the EM1 mk3 matches it), because it has awesome stabilisation and unlike the EM1 mk2, good face detect auto focus for focussing on approaching and receding subjects. So, a decent foundation, fixing two of the four things that need addressing, which are video quality, stabilisation, sound (see below) and lighting.

The reality is, after you get all excited about lighting, story boarding and capture rates, sound is actually more important than footage captured.

Mediocre video can survive if good sound supports it.

Poor sound kills otherwise excellent video.

I did the three day crash course similar to my lighting explorations, which consists of countless videos and reviews of X vs Y, then spoke with some friends who are more experienced at this than I. This led down ever more divergent paths until I felt I had some sort of handle on it.

Super Cardioid, WAV, recording floor and high pass filter are all old friends now.

Close to pulling the trigger several times*, I have finally settled on the core of my “beginners” kit.

The ubiquitous Zoom H1n ($170au, $220 with most needed accessories) seems to be the most versatile item available. It and can open up doorways that to be honest I do not fully understand yet. I have to buy a stabiliser for it at some point, but basically, I am ready to go.

1. It can be a clean pre amp and power source for another mic (Modo XVR 10, Rode or LAV).

2. It can act as a direct to camera, or computer mic.

3. It can act as a free form satellite mic for hand held work.

4. It can be a good enough on camera mic (better than say the Rode VM Go or micro).

5. It captures a wider area than a true Super Cardioid shotgun mic, which is good for some subjects (but can be made more focussed using another mic or by getting closer).

6. It can be the independent mic that several cameras sync to or to allow you to use a longer lens.

7. It can dual record with the camera giving you a backup track.

All this with decent 96khz 24 bit WAV sound. This means you can get cordless options of boom or LAV mics cheaper than buying a cordless option of either (just needs synching-which looks easier than I imagined) and run them at the ideal distance to subject, not the camera (closer = better quality). If I upgrade my shotgun option, then it is still a useful “B” mic or power source/pre amp.

The Movo VXR 10 Pro ($80au) looks to be the best “bang for your buck”, cheap-end shotgun/boom mic available (with some optional versatility and help from the H1n). It looks to be superior in most reviews to the Rode VM Go and VM Micro and equal in some situations to their dearer options**. It is also cheaper than any of these and comes with the most accessories. It helps also that this little mic can boom off of a very light weight pole, mono pod or clamp. The Diety D4 Duo is also an option and the Sennheisser MKE 200 with it’s awesome wind buffering but I will see how the H1n performs first.

As of this writing I have ordered a Rode VM Micro by mistake (stupid google search ad priority and my not double checking the order), which I may keep or return. Decent enough option I suppose and one vlogger has a good sample of the H1n pre-amping for one, which sounds great.

This will would fit in a small organiser bag (supplied with the XVR), then slot into a lens sized space in any bag I use, or it’s own bag with lights etc.

I may add the Rode LAV Go later, but maybe not as the boom option for the XVR offers deep and warm sound.

Lighting is already sorted (Neewer LED 660 bi colour as main, 480 rgb as fill and 176 as hair light), but I may add a 30w 10.6 or 45w rectangular “soft” panel later and the EM1x effectively negates the need for a gimbal (for my needs).

*I bounced off the cute little Sennheiser MKE 200/400 (best wind proofing and form factor), Rode VM Pro, Pro+ and NTG (the industry standards) and various other Tascam, Zoom and Movo options, but these two kept floating to the top.

**In a couple of blind tests, the XVR had the same raw sound quality as the Rode NTG in ideal circumstances (indoor boomed). The Rode and several other models below it blow the XVR away for features, but the H1n can help here adding filters and effects and for $80au it’s a steal.

Japan POTD #11

Filtered light. So very Japanese

Unexpected Problem

I have written often about my deep respect, love even, for my 75mm f1.8.

My Bokeh king, low light champion and portrait master, this lens is one of the core 4 lenses* I use daily.

But……

This winter I am having regular and annoying issues mounting the often cold lens onto a warm camera body. My day usually consists of moving from a warm space, through a cold one, then back to a warm one, and sometimes, such as a recent shoot of the school production, a humid one.

Hard to convey in a blog file, but this file will max out my A3+ printer resolution with plenty to spare. It was shot near wide open.

The 75mm invariably stays colder than the other lenses, being all metal, and lacking weather proofing, it fogs up on the rear element more often than not. I dismount it, let it clear, remount it and within seconds, fogged up again. It is quite nice “70’s” style soft focus, but not practical.

The pro lenses are sealed and most of my other primes are either plastic bodied or not employed in these situations, so no issue. I have started replacing it with a 45mm in the winter months. The plastic barrelled lenses do not seem to suffer as much from this issue.

If I do need to use the 75mm, I will endeavour to temperature stabilise it, but that is not always possible.

*Core kit is the 12-40 and 40-150 Pro with 25 and 75 “fast” lenses. Sometimes the 12-40 is replaced by the 8-18, but only if the light is predictable or the space restricted. In bright light, I may also switch to the 75-300 kit over the pro lens to save weight.

Japan POTD #10

Japan POTD #9

One of the many ceremonies or festivals to be found in Japan. Apparently there is one slated for every day of the year somewhere in the country.

Another of many images taken with the 40-150 kit.

Japan POTD #8

Old wood and good light.

Japan POTD #7

Hedgehogs, always popular in Japan, come in many sizes. These are 3-4ft tall. Perfect for the tiny doorways they have there!

A Good Lens

I hate buying new gear.

I especially hate buying expensive gear. I have been in this field for far too long and it has given me a jaded view of manufacturing consistency, unrealistic expectations and general gear satisfaction. This is mostly unfair, as Canon, Fuji, Olympus and Panasonic have rarely if ever let me down, but too much knowledge……

I especially, especially hate buying lenses. Cameras are fine. They work or they don’t, but lenses are one of those things I am suspicious of, usually for too long and usually my suspicions are proven to be unfounded.

My 300mm is a case in point. I bought it at the beginning of the year from the shop I worked at for 10+ years. I know for a fact it had been there since release, being the first we ordered when they came out. It sat and sat, suffering the fate of many top end lenses in a small shop in a small city, weathering price drops and rises until one day I had money and a need (but no longer worked there).

It offered me the one thing I demand of a lens, the ability to try before I buy.

I knew I would likely stay with the supplied firmware (really do not enjoy the Olympus process). I also knew that the lens was an early production model, often cursed with first batch gremlins until things settle down (like the 12mm f2). I used it, it worked well enough and I bit the bullet. Annoyingly, the shop got a new one in to replace it, which I would have liked to have had the chance to purchase, but honestly I did not think they would go for one again.

Months have passed (so fast), leaving me busy enough to just use it and not think too much about it.

ISO 1600 bite, hand held in a gloomy auditorium.

ISO 3200 at a notoriously gloomy swimming pool

Nothing is more satisfying than an image that surprises even you, the taker, for it’s sheer quality in trying circumstances.

That super crisp, contrasty snap that is the province of top tier telephoto lenses.

Focus is excellent giving me as many if not more keepers than the 40-150 pro. I often hold on too long, chasing subjects that are almost on top of me, rather than change to a smaller lens, sometimes with surprising results.

Stability, with or without the in-lens option is excellent. I often disengage all stabilisation when shooting fast sports (one less thing for the camera to deal with and irrelevant at 1/500th+ anyway), and just as often I forget to turn it back on for snap shots during and after the game. Rarely have I had a major problem down to 1/100th hand held, no help. This was something I also found with my old 400mm F5.6L Canon. Sometimes a lens is just well balanced.

To set the scene. I had walked from home down “Heart Break Hill”, a couple of hundred 40 degree meters to the school sports grounds, then had to go back home quickly, gear in tow, to fix a shoe blow-out (teach me to kick a soccer ball around at my age), return quickly to shoot two games of soccer (at the same time), then on my way back up said hill, I took this hand held snap. Imagine what a not tuckered out photographer, with a solid tripod supported, teleconverter matched lens, in high res mode could do!

Sharpness is deceiving. The lens looks less crisp or brilliant on the surface image when compared to the 40-150 pro, enough so that I can usually pick their respective images by eye easily enough. Look inside the image though, down to shirt texture or ball stitch level and you will see much more than you expected. I believe it is sharper than the pro zoom, but less overtly contrasty. This is likely the effect of greater micro contrast vs higher contrast. The files process very easily and handle strong light well.

The 300mm is better in strong light, the 40-150 better in poor, low contrast light. Perfect really.

The shot below was are cropped to 440x330 pixels (the original is of 2-3 players, taller than head to foot, much like the one above, but school rules do not allow a before and after with faces). This level of quality gives you lots of cropping options.

Weatherproofing has also proven itself several times.

Is it perfect?

Nearly, but there is a niggle.

The Bokeh is plentiful, but like I have found with so many other high sharpness, high micro contrast Olympus lenses, it is a little jittery in the background highlights. It actually looks less smooth than my 75-300 kit lens, which is a stop and a half slower.

So, where does it fit in with my over abundance of good tele options?

Number one choice for anything involving distance unless outright shutter speeds are an issue, then I will switch to the 40-150 and then the 75 f1.8 as needed. I have successfully used it indoors at pools and under lights, but at some point, around ISO 6400, I trade reach for speed.

Number one choice if reach with low speed hand holding are needed with a semi static subject as the lens stabiliser and overall balance do make a difference.

Last choice for light travel. The 40-150 and 75-300 kit lenses are much, much lighter, more versatile and surprisingly sharp.

The other win, uncharacteristically bought sight unseen at the same time, was the Leica 8-18, which is a little cracker. Not as worried about a wide angle or a lens bought solely for work, I think this one will change how I see wide angle lenses.

Japan POTD #6

Family and friends are very important to most Japanese. A common sight while visiting popular spots are locals doing exactly the same thing.

Japan POTD #5

This image is a favourite. Such a simple, perfect space.

Simple elegance of form

Japan POTD #4

A day out on the weekend, no effort spared. The Japanese always make the most of their spare time and like to connect with their past.

Japan POTD #3

The contrast of old and new is a common theme in Japan, not because of it’s irony or rarity, but because of it’s commonality.

Japan POTD #2

Oops. Already behind.

It is hard to express, from an arachnophobes perspective how big these are. Try size of your palm, assuming you are a full grown adult. Beautiful, placid, generally left alone, but big.

Shot with the amazing little 40-150 “anti-pro” kit lens.

Japan. POTD #1

In light of my last post and the reality of our travel situation, I have started the book/print project.

A side effect, or maybe benefit of this is a rediscovery of many files that will never make paper of any sort (or maybe the odd one will), but still have something about them, maybe nostalgia, maybe longing.

So, lets start a little project “photo of the day” or “postcards from Japan”. Something like that anyway.

No guarantee it will be reliable, but a pretty solid guarantee the images will only have one thing in common.

Greeting from Japan.

Don't Forget Yourself

It occurs to me, with little recent travel and an grim immediate travel future, that I have forgotten the habit of photographing for myself.

Dangerous stuff.

I feel strongly that neglecting to take images for yourself leads to a real loss of personal vision, style and creative drive. Getting good at one thing only or many things from only one perspective blinkers your skill set.

This quiet winter, I will have to take things in hand.

There are personal projects from existing work like the long neglected coffee table book on Japan, some prints of the same and more general subjects and there is always the eternal quest to perfect techniques, especially lighting.

My best route to creative balance would be to do some landscape sets, fungi photos (lots around at the moment), portraits of friends and family and some sports as able.

Candid snaps are fine, but limiting myself to shots connected to jobs only is not.

On one hand, I would love it if work kept me so busy, things like this did not come to mind, but on the other hand maybe this is a good thing. Maybe I need to balance my creative life better. I consider myself on call, but long distance travel is not an issue (where I live is 45 mins from the coast, 10 mins from primeval rain forrest or marshlands and 1 hr from rocky mountain landscape).

The other point, no less important, is that I cannot post 95% of what I take for the school, so I risk starving my posts of supporting pictures. Can’t have that.

Effort required, desire re-kindled, result guaranteed.

Lighting Kit Revisited

After a recent school ball shoot, I came to a few conclusions that freed up how I look at my flash kit.

1) My super light weight kit is brilliant, but for events with teens and adults, taller stands are needed.

2) Less is needed as a rule, so I can pack in a more focussed way, a bit less “boy scout”.

3) Not every little bit of gear I have has to have a place, concentrate on the winners, shelves the losers.

4) Expect to change as needed as some things fall away and others float to the surface.

*

In my camera bag there is always;

• Godox TTL flash with High Speed Sync (860 or 685).

• TX1 off camera controller.

• 60cm 5-in-1.

• Mini tripod and flash foot.

• Several black flagging foams (some double width to make snoots) and hair bands to hold them.

Optional extras;

• 16” mini circular soft box.

• 176 LED (a little hair light can make a snap look like a studio shot).

• 200cm light weight stand with reflector clamp in it’s own bag. This holds a flash, LED or reflector easily enough.

This little rig fixes most small scale problems and can at a pinch be promoted to “very tiny studio” status.

*

If something more formal is a real possibility, I have my Neewer shoulder bag kit handy;

• The other Godox (or for more grunt swap both Godox out for the YN kit below).

• 480 RGB LED background light. Adds colour control or can be a fill/focus aid.

• 32” Deep soft box for background control-feathering.

• 43” soft box umbrella (just because I have it). Good for overheads.

• 2x 42” shoot through or reflector (preferred) brollies for group coverage.

• 2x Bowens S-clamps.

• 1 reflector clamp.

• Tape for indoor and tent pegs for outdoor stand stability.

• 2x 200cm super light weight stands.

• 1x 220cm key light stand.

• (optional) 2x 1kg weights for the stands.

Separate;

• (optional) 150x200cm or 110cm 5-in-1 backdrop/reflector/diffuser/flag.

This kit drastically increases my capabilities, but comes in at only 3-4kg (without the weights). Four lights, even if one is the little 176 LED offers a lot of options and the modifiers are plenty for most smaller jobs. To be honest, this little outfit would likely handle most jobs. The little stands have their limits, such as a decent sized shoot through mod hanging off them at an angle, but if the load is centred (brollies-brolly reflector/ soft boxes), then they perform well.

Crappy photo. The black one (3 of) is the super light fold down (I could likely carry 40 of these if needed, they weigh nothing). These are limited to 2m, but hold 4kg or so and the legs can spread flat for maximum stability. The 2.2m middle sized ones (2 of) are quickly becoming my favourites. They take plenty of strain, but fit into my smaller lighting bag and the big one to the right (4 of) is the work horse, 2.6m heavy duty.

In-situ family snap of the “armoury”. It is hard to believe that all 10 stands, boom arm and 2x 72” brollies came in at about $450au total. The two poles to the left are K-Mart short curtain rails, each extending to 1.5m and joinable.

*

For even bigger groups and events, like the other day;

Neewer Strobe bag;

• 4x YN560’s (A/A/B/C).

• YN controller.

• YN560 III as spare (A or D) unit.

• Torch, spanner tool, hi-vis and utility tape.

• Gels.

Long Neewer bag with a trolley and a 40L roller case (as suits);

• 2x 48” soft boxes (these can also be used as deep, silver reflectors).

• 26” double baffle deep soft box.

• 2x 7” reflectors with grids and diffusers for maximum control.

• 6x12’ diffusion cloth. Allows me to “scrim” off windows, double or triple baffle brollies etc.

• 5x7’ black/white background cloth/flag (portable V-Flat).

• 2x 260cm stainless steel key light stands.

• 1x 220cm stainless steel stand

• 1x 200cm super light weight stand for rear light (it goes really low, which can be handy).

• 2x Bowens S-Clamps.

• 3x standard/multi brolly clamps.

• 2x Smallrig super clamps for the bars.

• 6x heavy duty muscle clamps (for the cloth or reflector options).

• Heavy duty reflector/muscle clamp.

• (optional) 2x Multi segment bars (1.5-3m total). For scrims, backgrounds etc.

• (optional) 660 LED. This acts as fill and focus aid or rim light.

• (optional) 2x 2kg weights for the C-Stand.

Options strapped to the trolley bag;

• 72” silver brolly.

• 72” shoot through white brolly.

• C Stand and boom arm for big brollies, overheads or outdoors in the wind.

• 110cm 5-in-1.

• 1.5x2m 5-in-1.

This kit can handle large school balls, creative formal portraits and larger groups easily. There are plenty of creative options, lots of grunt with the possibility of up to 6 discreet lights, although that would rarely be a good idea. The two sleeping giants are the flag/diffuser/reflector/backdrop cloth options that are the cheapest of the lot ($30 total) that are so very useful.

Pairing the 4’ soft boxes or using the 72” brollies makes an enormous Joel Grimes style “wall of light”, almost Liebovitz style. Soft, broad, wrap around light teamed with tightly focussed support light is the look here.

I picked this monster up recently for a very sweet $58.00au. It’s job is to handle off centre weight like a 72” brolly above the subject. Even at the usual price of $100 or so they are a frikkin bargain. It is hard to tell here, but the thing weighs a ton (near 10kg which feels like a ton when you lug it a ways) and goes 3m+. The central column is as thick as the barrel of my 45mm Oly lens!

This kit relies on gelled flash units for colour. I have found these to be stronger and more vibrant than LED’s so the extra effort is worth it. A trick I learned recently from The Slanted Lens blog is to gel strobes inside soft boxes to “crush” the shadows with deep, subtle colour.

*

And finally, if a supplied backdrop is required**, which I try to avoid, but you never know (again a studio would be nice);

• 2x 260 stainless steel stands with Smallrig bar clamps.

• Multi segment bar* (that can be added to the other section above for 3m’s total).

• 6-12 tension clamps.

• Various backdrops 5-9 feet wide, plain or mottle.

*the “multi segment bars” are collapsible curtain rails that can fit inside one another effectively infinitely. These are cheaper and thicker/stronger than the backdrop bars I have found (for reasonable money) and are attached using 2 Smallrig super clamps.

**I can provide most colours and shades simply through controlling light levels, angles and using gel or LED colour controls (even Photoshop), with any clean wall space, but sometimes provided backgrounds are needed for consistency. Personally, I prefer locations for relevance. I recently switched to shooting into the room, not against a wall, but that is sometimes not practical.

*

Finally;

There are a few of mods and stands that are cheap or damaged or too much trouble to bother with in the field, making up a decent little kit in my “test” studio.

All very self indulgent, but hopefully of use to anyone looking at setting up a little flash kit.

Travel well.