The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

An Icelandic Saga (learning from my mistakes!)

tashley

Subscriber Member
Got to run to a all day job. Real simple on the AFDIII body . Mirror lockup set self -timer to 3 seconds or more . Hit the shutter the self-timer goes and you got a shot. Now I get excellent results with all my lenses with this technique. The only time was high winds in Sedona with my 300mm the wind was gusting around 25 miles and hour and very low light. My 150mm I have gone minutes with no issues. No cable releases needed when using the self timer and that goes all the way to 30 seconds with camera after that and longer times I go to the electronic release. This has been with a 2 series Gitzo. I did order a 3 series just waiting for it to come. But my issues have been very rare and BTW the Phase back screen you can tell on the LCD if your sharp or not. You DON"T need a 3 inch LCD to check this or a laptop. I do this everyday with a Phase one back. Also the S2 is not higher res LCD than anything else in MF from my understanding just bigger. Need to check the specs but I think a Nikon has a bigger pixel count.
Hi Guy,

I do that for some subjects but for many it just doesn't work: if you're trying to catch a scene with a wave breaking in a certain place, or a beam of sunlight sweeping through cloud to illuminate a particular landscape feature etc, you need to prep by MUPing and then select the exact moment with the cable release... which I find you can only do by switching to MF having AF'd first...
 

tashley

Subscriber Member
Tim, you had lots of "home work" this a.m. with all those replies. Thanks for replying to my post.

Like others have suggested (and you surmised) it sounds like you were a bit under-gunned for support. I'll know not to chicken-out and go too light now, thanks.

Also, not sure how much tripod stuff you do, but I have found that some rigs (maybe most rigs) have a "weak spot" at which certain shutter speeds challenge the setup more than others vis-a'-vis vibration. It's often in the 1/15 to 1/30 second range, but dead weight on the rig usually fixes it. My Mamiya, even with mirror up, has quite a "whack" upon shutter release so I try to weight the rig when shooting at slower speeds. That's part of why I like a robust head and heavier leg-set.

I appreciate you sharing your experiences. It's a good reminder for me not to go too light, or take shortcuts (not that you were doing that), which I can tend to do if I'm impatient.

Thanks.
It's so tempting, especially with the spine of an ex-rower and compulsive computer user! Also, Icelandair charge £7 per kilo excess baggage one way (nearly three times what I paid per pound of my own flesh for the ticket!)
 

tashley

Subscriber Member
Tim, that crop is interesting. It doesn't look like general softness, but rather like a two-position blur. The "one large whack" theory seems to gain some credence here. Can you repeat it now? Does it fix it if you set the release to go off after 6 seconds?
I saw it in so many shots: I tend to press once for MUP and then pretty quickly (three seconds or maybe a tad less) press again to shoot but in a lot of shots where I was waiting for a wave, I actually had to re-press because the MUP timed out and I still got similar blur. The more I think about it the more I think it's likely to be a sympathetic vibration in the rig from the shutter, rather than the MUP reverb, but I will test the hypothesis... as indeed I test everything!

;-)
 

John Black

Active member
Carsten - I understood what you meant. My point was that Leica tweaked the DNG format in such a way that none of DNG portable storage / viewers can read the embedded JPEG in the DNG file. This topic has come up before. I think there is one device that does, but its rendering time is painfully slow (like 60 seconds per image). It's likely Leica will follow a similar approach with S2 DNGs (assuming they are DNGs), so it's safer to assume the S2 will NOT be supported by portable storage devices.

For reviewing images on site, if possible a laptop is vastly superior IMO. I like the portable storage devices, but a laptop offers much more.
 

tashley

Subscriber Member
In studio I have seen similar vibration (with close-up and macro), but I now hang sandbags from the center, beneath the camera/head, and on all three legs. This has stopped this "chop" looking vibration. In fact, with one combo I used to place a sandbag right on top of the camera because it was stubborn.

We see this in photomicroscopy much more, and weighting over a super-stable floor is mandatory. We often resort to steel plates and weights all around the setup.
My feeling is that you're right and that in the end this is not practical for use in the field where the shooting spot is cold, windy and reached via a foot hike. So I need to use one stop higher ISO and one stop wider aperture, both of which are do-able most of the time, and then I'll have the shutter sweet spot of 1/125th where the effect is absent. Luckily the shutter in the Cambo/Schneider combo allows 1/30th of a second even with wind and so on... and gives such great results.

Or get a D£X...
 

John Black

Active member
Another option if carrying a tripod is possible is the Really Right Stuff Hi-Capacity monopod support. I use one with my ZD dSLR and it has done wonders for the keeper rate. Generally I don't the shutter speeds drop below 1/80th, so a monopod is usually sufficient my needs. The RSS MH-01 is very nicely made and equally nice to use. The only downside is that the camera is permanently in the landscape orientation unless you're using a L bracket.
 

Dale Allyn

New member
My feeling is that you're right and that in the end this is not practical for use in the field where the shooting spot is cold, windy and reached via a foot hike. So I need to use one stop higher ISO and one stop wider aperture, both of which are do-able most of the time, and then I'll have the shutter sweet spot of 1/125th where the effect is absent. Luckily the shutter in the Cambo/Schneider combo allows 1/30th of a second even with wind and so on... and gives such great results.

Or get a D£X...
Tim, I agree. In the field we make all sorts of compromises and adjustments. I do a lot of "back country" stuff, hike in on foot, climb to awkward locations, etc. When I remember, I nearly always place weight on my tripod and often very gently place my hand over the prism of the camera to help absorb or dampen vibration. Working (or playing) in the field is different than studio or comfy "low-land" work.

:)
 

Jack

Sr. Administrator
Staff member
Hi Jack,

Tried flash and daylight and all the curves - the red channel is just blown but it's OK because it exports into LR as a tiff and can be cleaned up adequately there. It's the extreme reflectivity in bright sunlight of Icelandic fishermen's high vis jackets and trousers that does it!
I am confused because you said that C1 could not handle it, but C1 can still output a 16-bit TIFF, so I do not see what the benefit of exporting to LR has over say adjusting highlight levels in C1?

Cheers,
 

Dale Allyn

New member
I'm pretty convinced that if one knows C1 that lots of images can be well handled without export. Unfortunately, that doesn't describe me. :D I've been impressed by the results of some folks who obviously know how to use C1 well. I look forward to a time when I can learn to get more of the app, as I'm still doing my conversions in C1 and finishing in PS (Phase files).

It'll be worth it to me to sign-up for some guidance on the app at some point, so that I can get results like Jack and others do from C1. I love the RAW conversions, but don't use many of the tools to my best advantage, as I stubbornly cling to my other workflow. :)
 

tashley

Subscriber Member
I am confused because you said that C1 could not handle it, but C1 can still output a 16-bit TIFF, so I do not see what the benefit of exporting to LR has over say adjusting highlight levels in C1?

Cheers,

Though C1 shows the areas as being totally clipped beyond recovery, and on screen with highlight warning turned off those areas look posterised, if you export the file as a 16 bit tiff and then open them in LR you can then use LR adjustments to unclip and de-posterise. I know, weird, search me!

t
 

tashley

Subscriber Member
I'm pretty convinced that if one knows C1 that lots of images can be well handled without export. Unfortunately, that doesn't describe me. :D I've been impressed by the results of some folks who obviously know how to use C1 well. I look forward to a time when I can learn to get more of the app, as I'm still doing my conversions in C1 and finishing in PS (Phase files).

It'll be worth it to me to sign-up for some guidance on the app at some point, so that I can get results like Jack and others do from C1. I love the RAW conversions, but don't use many of the tools to my best advantage, as I stubbornly cling to my other workflow. :)
I love C1 now... even got mostly used to its workflow... it's just this one weird effect with the high vis clothing that seems to freak it out. And the recent update seems to have made it more stable on my eight core Xeon too....
 

Jack

Sr. Administrator
Staff member
Though C1 shows the areas as being totally clipped beyond recovery, and on screen with highlight warning turned off those areas look posterised, if you export the file as a 16 bit tiff and then open them in LR you can then use LR adjustments to unclip and de-posterise. I know, weird, search me!

t
So if I understand you,

1) You did not apply the highlight slider in C1 to the file, and

2) You output it to LR using LR as an OUTPUT image editor and NOT a raw converter and corrected it there -- and ostensibly that same work could have been done is CS.

I just wanted to clarify this point as it sounded like you originally were saying using C1 as a raw converter didn't work, but using LR as the raw converter did work -- and that simply made no sense to me ;)

Cheers,
 

Ben Rubinstein

Active member
I've had and owned both joystick heads and neither is particularly stable for serious work (use them for fast moving wedding work). I did use the 322 in the beginning with a Mamiya 645 Pro, cost me some decent images until I realised I needed a real head. I had the Manfrotto 468MG which is a great head though heavy, now shooting with a BH-40 which is tiny, light and incredibly strong though more prone to tightening droop than the 468 was. I'm using it with 35mm though, not sure I wouldn't want a bigger head for medium format.
 
J

jmvdigital

Guest
For what it's worth... I was having vibration issues with my Phamiya/P30+ after I got started shooting some macro with all three extension tubes on the 150D. The head is a RRS BH-55, and the legs were an older Slik 700 aluminum set. Even with a weight attached and waiting 10-15 seconds after MLU, I would still get vibration. Presumably, from the shutter, as mentioned. I picked up the sweet carbon Gitzo GT5541S. Those sticks are from their "Systematic" line; they hold 55lbs., 3-sections, with tubes about 1.5"-2" diameter. The thing is huge and ridiculous stable, even at only 5.9lbs. No center column, and a nice big flat head mounting plate. I was going to get the G1500, which is the aluminum equivalent; it's rated at 44lbs. and stands about as high, but it weighs 9.7lbs. The GT5541S isn't for the faint of heart (especially not at $850), but my primary concern was stability. Weight and size were secondary, the carbon just let me minimize those as well.

The combination of the carbon, larger tube diameter (stiffer), heavier weight, no center column, and Gitzo quality... solved my vibration problems.

I read somewhere that the Gitzo "Series #" is related to the maximum leg diameter. So a series 1 has the smallest legs, and Series 5 have the largest diameter legs. The larger the diameter, the stiffer the tube, even if the tube wall is thinner.
 

tashley

Subscriber Member
So if I understand you,

1) You did not apply the highlight slider in C1 to the file, and

2) You output it to LR using LR as an OUTPUT image editor and NOT a raw converter and corrected it there -- and ostensibly that same work could have been done is CS.

I just wanted to clarify this point as it sounded like you originally were saying using C1 as a raw converter didn't work, but using LR as the raw converter did work -- and that simply made no sense to me ;)

Cheers,
Jack, I'll test all this again later cos I did a lot of fiddling back and forth but in summary as I remember:

By the time the exposure slider, the highlight slider or the levels editor had been tweaked so as to remove all clipping in teh high vis clothing, the rest of the file was a mess as viewed in C1

But make the file look broadly well-balanced in C1 but still with blown high-vis areas, then export to 16 bit tiff to LR and those areas were warned as far less blown and more easily corrected without screwing up

Opening the RAW file directly into LR also gave better control over the blown areas.

I think....
 

Dale Allyn

New member
I'm getting very good results from the GT3541XLS (also part of the Systematic line). For me it, it's a sweet spot because I don't mind carrying it. The extra height is fantastic in steep terrain.

Lots of options if one is willing to take it along.
 

Jack

Sr. Administrator
Staff member
Jack, I'll test all this again later cos I did a lot of fiddling back and forth but in summary as I remember:

By the time the exposure slider, the highlight slider or the levels editor had been tweaked so as to remove all clipping in teh high vis clothing, the rest of the file was a mess as viewed in C1

But make the file look broadly well-balanced in C1 but still with blown high-vis areas, then export to 16 bit tiff to LR and those areas were warned as far less blown and more easily corrected without screwing up

Opening the RAW file directly into LR also gave better control over the blown areas.

I think....
Sounds like you may want your local C1 tech to walk you through the C1 adjustments. This is something we teach on our workshops, and once understood, C1 will deliver a superior file from a Phase back over any other raw converter -- though admittedly not all of the required C1 adjustments are intuitive.

Cheers,
 

carstenw

Active member
Carsten - I understood what you meant. My point was that Leica tweaked the DNG format in such a way that none of DNG portable storage / viewers can read the embedded JPEG in the DNG file. This topic has come up before. I think there is one device that does, but its rendering time is painfully slow (like 60 seconds per image). It's likely Leica will follow a similar approach with S2 DNGs (assuming they are DNGs), so it's safer to assume the S2 will NOT be supported by portable storage devices.

For reviewing images on site, if possible a laptop is vastly superior IMO. I like the portable storage devices, but a laptop offers much more.
I am not aware of anything unusual in the Leica M8 DNG format. I am a 3D graphics programmer by trade, and took a crack at writing a DNG decoder, and was able to dump the entire header without needing to know any special things about the format; just working from the TIFF 6.0, TIFF/EP and DNG specs.

I am not sure why some companies are not able to extract the JPG. Perhaps the JPG uses some unusual options, although I kinda doubt it.

Do you know where I could find out more about this? I am kinda curious.
 
Top