Category Archives: Digital Single Lens Reflex

(No) Snow Birds

The sun has been shining and temperatures hovered in the mid-forties for the past few days.  Not bad for December in northern Michigan.  Even so, this late in the year the pickings are sparse, and the birds appreciate the seed we put in the feeders.  I appreciate them stopping by during the day so I can make some images.

So as part of the deal with the birds, I took photos as they pecked at the seed.  I used my 200 – 500mm lens on my Sony A77 (Factoring in the crop factor, I effectively have a 300 – 750mm of lens.) and from the comfort of our kitchen made these shots over the past couple of days.  I adjusted my shutter speed between 1/500 and 1/1000, set the aperture at f11 and (because the birds were fluttering in and out of the sun and shade) set ISO on auto.

Here are handful of the shots I liked.


December 8, 2015

20030605 Grand Marsis-281

20030605 Grand Marsis-7720030605 Grand Marsis-20220030605 Grand Marsis-310




A “Better” Way to Begin

Amateur Photog Hkbk001I started dabbling in photography in the summer of 1969 when I inherited my grandfather’s 8mm Kodak movie camera.  Later that year I worked at a summer camp where I shot and later edited what I considered to be an entertaining eighteen minute movie of my seven weeks as a camp counselor.  At the end of summer I showed the movie to the camp director, his family and the other counselors.  They liked it too.  That night I loaned the film to a counselor so he could show his family.  He passed it on to still another counselor.  I think the movie then went to the camp director’s family and probably after that to another counselor.   With time I forgot who had it.  I never saw the movie again and that was pretty much the end of my cinematographic endeavors.

In the Fall when I returned college, I took with me the Fujica Compact Deluxe 35mm camera I had also inherited.  I enrolled in my first photography class and learned how to hold a camera, make a decent exposure, develop Tri-X film and make a print.  I was hooked… And since then I have never been far from a 35mm camera or the digital equivalent.

Browsing my local library in the early 70’s, I discovered The Amateur Photographer’s Handbook by Aaron Sussman.  There weren’t many books available for beginning photographers back then, so I checked it out and started reading.  The book offered detailed answers on film types, metering, filters, when to use flash, how to take candid people pictures, developing film, dodging and burning prints and much more.  Two months and several library renewals later I finished it.  At 562 pages, the book was not an easy read, but in its day an important book for any young photographer.  First printed in 1941, The Amateur Photographer’s Handbook was in continuous publication for over forty years.  In 1976 I was given a copy and since then have reread and browsed many time through my tabbed, yellow-highlighted and dog-eared copy.

I have an eighteen year old grand-daughter who shows a lot of interest in digital photography, but I’m not giving her a copy of the old book.  Now out of print for around twenty-five years, it is still a classic, but too long, too detailed and has too few photographs for a beginner.  I don’t want to scare Elizabeth away while she’s still in the early stage of her photo development (No pun intended.)

Instead, I gave her a copy of BetterPhoto Basics – The Absolute Beginner’s Guide to Taking Photos Like a Pro by Jim Miotke (published by Amphoto Books).

Over the years, I have read dozens and dozens of photography books.  BetterPhoto Basics tops my list of books for beginners eager to learn camera and photography basics.  Each topic (such as capturing a sunset, preventing red-eye, how to crop for impBetterPhoto Basics 002act and much more) is covered in one or two pages.  Explanations are well-written and there are colorful example photos on almost every page.  Author, Jim Miotke, also points out if a technique works best with point & shoot cameras, digital single-lens reflex (DSLR) cameras or both.

If there were a required text-book for the digital photography classes I teach, this would be the one.  It is a terrific learning tool, good for beginners and for old-dog photographers who need to be reminded every so often why the basics are so important.

That’s why I bought two copies; one for my grand-daughter and one for me.

January 28, 2013

RAW vs. JPEG… That is the Question

Over the past ten years or so in the short life of digital photography, the most nagging question in any group of professional or amateur photographers has to have been, “What format should I use, RAW or JPEG?”  The question for professional photographers has been answered.  In almost every instance RAW won.  RAW format saves all the digital information for each image in a raw, unedited form that provides the photographer with the photo data needed for professional photo work.

In the world of amateur photographers, many use RAW, many are happy with JPEG and a lot are wondering what to do.  So how does a photographer make up their mind?  Here is some basic information.

RAW (The name stands for “raw” file.) Almost every camera manufacturer has their own RAW software that comes with the camera.  Nikon’s proprietary software does not work with Canon or Sony.  Canon’s doesn’t work with Nikon and Sony and so on.  RAW files are the unaltered data captured by the camera and can be thought of as digital film before processing.  All RAW files need post-production.

JPEG (Joint Photographic Experts Group) format processes and compresses image data, in camera, to a smaller file size.  A smaller file size means it takes up less space on your memory card and hard drive, but also stores less data of each image.  How much less depends on the compression and quality settings that are determined in camera by the photographer.  File compression is nice, but file quality is sacrificed in the process.

Here is a list of RAW and JPEG pros and cons.

RAW format

  • RAW files are called “lossless” files.  All image information is held without sacrificing image quality.
  • Lossless is good if you want or need all that information to work with in post-production.
  • Because RAW files do not compress, each image file takes more space on the camera memory and computer hard drive.
  • RAW software saves the original image file and is never altered, so that even after the file is processed, the original file is preserved and available for additional processing.
  • Processing RAW files takes some additional time in post-processing.  However, new software such as Lightroom 3 that uses non-proprietary Adobe Camera RAW makes the conversion almost automatic.
  • Whether using your camera’s proprietary RAW software or if you use the Adobe Camera RAW converter software (that works with almost all cameras),you will need a relatively new, high-speed computer with at least 2 gigabytes (4 is better, 8 or more is best) of RAM to process you images smoothly as well as a large (500 – 1500 gigabyte) hard drive for image storage.

JPEG format

  • JPEGs are “lossy” files.  Each time the file opened and saved again, data is additionally compressed and lost.  The result of many opening and resaving files leads to loss of image quality (saturation, resolution, sharpness).
  • JPEG compressed files take less space on your camera memory card and computer hard drive.
  • The JPEG file format has been adopted as an industry standard.  It is pre-loaded in almost all digital cameras and easy to use.
  • JPEGs are compatible with all image editing programs (Picasa, Lightroom, Aperture, GIMP…).
  • No additional post production is required, but you always can.
  • JPEG files are based on the camera settings (white balance, exposure, and others) at the time you press the shutter.  (New post-production programs provide some leeway to adjust an image, but not as much as a RAW file.)
  • JPEGs can be saved at several sizes to save space on memory cards and hard drives.  Because large capacity memory cards that fit most cameras are now available and at prices that drop almost monthly, saving JPEGs at a less than large size less of a concern.
  • Images can be resized smaller if needed.
  • Upsizing a JPEG image often results in a degraded photo.  Third party software is available, but can be expensive.
  • Image “noise” (a grainy look) is more likely in prints made from a JPEG file.  (Software like Lightroom 3 and Picasa 3 do a much improved job of reducing noise in post-production.)
  • Cameras that support RAW can be set to save a JPEG image at the same time so that you have both files.

So, what works best for you?  If you aren’t sure start by asking yourself these three questions:

1)       How will I use the images?  (Large prints think RAW.  Small prints, images viewed on your computer or website, then JPEG will do.)

2)      How much time do I want to spend working on the computer? (RAW requires some additional time, but is getting easier with each generation images processing software.)

3)      Will my computer handle a lot of post-production processing?  (If you don’t have a fast processor with at least 2 GB of RAM and a large hard drive, then stick with JPEG until you can upgrade your computer.)

The secret here is to experiment.  If you are like a lot of photographers there will be times when you shoot RAW and others when JPEG works just fine.  The best thing is you can switch from JPEG to RAW in camera with every image you shoot.  So give them both a try.

February 7, 2012

Cordwood Point Association

On Beautiful Lake Huron

Why Michigan

A Southern Family in Northern Michigan

A Certain Slant of Light Photography

... the landscape listens, shadows hold their breath

Great Lakescapes

Michigan Nature & Landscape Photoblog by Neil Weaver

Joe McNally's Blog

The Blog of Joe McNally

Michigan in Pictures

Photos of the Great Lakes State