mattress festival: SCDG Thursday Night Scrimmage (23 May 2013)

The one thing that always amuses me when editing photos taken at the warehouse is all the mattresses in the background.  Still in the plastic-wrap shiny mattresses.





I'm still trying to get a feel for this camera.  Getting the the exposure close to correct in camera.  Figuring out how to develop the files.  And even hitting the focus seems a bit of a challenge.




My "goto" aperture is f2.8.  Compared with the M8, a 1.33 crop camera (a slightly smaller sensor than a full-frame sensor), maybe the M8 has a little bit greater depth of field than the Monochrom .  Perhaps, that's why the focus seems to be a little off more often with the Monochrom?  Maybe I need to start shooting more at f3.4? Or perhaps, I just need to try this camera with more generous lighting? It just might be easier to judge focus with a little bit more light than the warehouse offers. (Or maybe I need to get my eyes checked?)



I'm still a little perplexed with the histograms displayed on the camera and getting the exposure close to correct in camera.



It's usually best to get the exposure in the camera close to correct than try to take heroic measures in setting the exposure in software after the fact.  But this camera's files seem to be extremely malleable.  If that's the right term for it.



I can take an underexposed photo, push it a stop or so and then stomp down on the darker part of the level curve and create quite a nice digital print.



Perhaps, it's just as well I don't have a fetish for shadow detail.



Still, it would be better to try to get the exposure correct in camera, which would mean an even greater flexibility of manipulating the file in software afterward.



I just might need to bring both the Monochrom and the M8 to a scrimmage to compare and contrast the exposures.  The histograms and the metering.





A few more photo highlights.















the full flickr set is here:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/nocklebeast/sets/72157633674381088/

some of us actually give a shit about composition

I do not have a credential in graphic design.

My expertise in design (such as it is) comes from being a victim of bad design.

This week I'm being victimized by flickr.

Yeah, that's right, not Facebook.

 Flickr.

Okay, Marissa Mayer. We get it. We're not professionals. We're all rank amateurs.

But some of us amateurs actually give a shit about composition.



I don't appreciate that flickr's mosaic of set photographs ZOOM into a center square crop of the set highlight photo.

FLICKR IS ZOOMING IN ON TITS AND CHOPPING HEADS OFF!



KNOCK IT OFF, FLICKR!

thursday black and white scrimmage (9 May 2013)

Because sometimes even photographers need to practice.  I got this new camera, and I'm trying to figure it out.



Part of the appeal of the cameras I shoot with is I don't have to spend a lot of time reading the friendly manual to figure the camera out... or spend a lot of time in "menus."  Because, really, if I wanted to feel like I'm working a spreadsheet I'd use excel instead of a camera, right?



The camera's got a manual focus ring, an aperture ring, a shutter speed dial, and a shutter button.  Do you really need anything else?



Still, I suppose the friendly manual is useful for learning how Auto-ISO works or what's the difference between the flash going off on the first curtain or the second curtain.  Thanks friendly manual!





Still, there's some curious things about the operation of this camera.  Upon reviewing the images on the little TV screen on the back of the camera, a jpg histogram is displayed, and then a raw histogram is displayed.  The friendly manual describes these two displays, but their example shows the jpg and raw histograms to be nearly identical.  In practice they can be quite different, and so it's a little mind blowing to see histograms that don't seem to be consistent with my intuition on histograms I developed on my M8.



At the time, I just didn't understand what was happening. Really confusing.



And, I was probably trying to do too much with this new camera. Just like a freshy can't really learn how to do cross-overs, hockey stops and apex jumps in an hour and a half, perhaps it's the same thing with photographers as well.  Next time, I'll leave the colored-contrast filters at home and concentrate on what the camera does without filters.  I can experiment with filters after I get a little more experience with the camera and it's digital negatives.





It's interesting (to me, at any rate) how quickly I gravitated to using flash (on-camera and off) to create more contrasty lighting. 








This camera has a bit of a reputation for yielding gray low contrast digital negatives.  Perhaps I should spend a bit more time using the camera with out flash and learning how to coax nice looking digital prints from these sorts of negatives too.



A cool thing about this camera is that it apparently doesn't produce a lot of red eye.  Of course, there's no RED eye, because there is no red.  The colors we got are black and white and every gray in between.  Still, when you convert a photograph from a color Bayer filter camera that has red eye, you get this glow in the dark vampiric eyes.



Not so much much evidence of red eye with the monochrom (and I did dare aim the on-camera flash parallel with the lens axis)





a few more photo highlights!








the full flickr set is here:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/nocklebeast/sets/72157633497974524/

SCDG Boardwalk Bombshells vs Ventura County Derby Darlin' Vendolls

some photo highlights!

 
Is that the Surfrider Cafe Pivot Line?






an empty penalty box?


































I was a little slow on the draw

Tim's laughing at me because when I tried to get the shot, the camera was off.  Had to turn it on and shoot from the hip.

the full flickr set is here:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/nocklebeast/sets/72157633487483518/