Monthly Archives: November 2008

The future of photography

Posted on by

Interesting post by Dan Wallach.

Several interesting things are happening in the wild world of digital photography as it’s colliding with digital video. Most notably, the new Canon 5D Mark II (roughly $2700) can record 1080p video and the new Nikon D90 (roughly $1000) can record 720p video. At the higher end, Red just announced some cameras that will ship next year that will be able to record full video (as fast as 120 frames per second in some cases) at far greater than HD resolutions (for $12K, you can record video at a staggering 6000×4000 pixels). You can configure a Red camera as a still camera or as a video camera.

Recently, well-known photographer Vincent Laforet (perhaps best known for his aerial photographs, such as “Me and My Human”) got his hands on a pre-production Canon 5D Mark II and filmed a “mock commercial” called “Reverie”, which shows off what the camera can do, particularly its see-in-the-dark low-light abilities. If you read Laforet’s blog, you’ll see that he’s quite excited, not just about the technical aspects of the camera, but about what this means to him as a professional photographer. Suddenly, he can leverage all of the expensive lenses that he already owns and capture professional-quality video “for free.” This has all kinds of ramifications for what it means to cover an event… Dan quotes Vincent Laforet’s musings on the implications of the new Canon camera.

The ability to harness professional-grade lenses for both still photography and cinematic visuals has opened doors for countless photographers looking to expand their craft. This evolution isn’t just about technology; it’s about creative freedom. With the right gear, photographers can transition seamlessly between capturing stunning stills and immersive video, maximizing the potential of their equipment. For those looking to navigate this ever-expanding world of photography and videography, the best guide to photography equipment offers detailed insights into the best lenses, cameras, and accessories for different styles and scenarios. As technology continues to blur the lines between photography and filmmaking, having the right tools—and knowing how to use them—remains key to staying ahead in this dynamic industry.

The advent of advanced camera technology has significantly transformed the landscape of wedding photography, particularly with tools like the Canon 5D Mark II. Just as Vincent Laforet enthusiastically embraced the camera’s capabilities, photographers are discovering the profound impact these innovations can have on their craft. With the ability to shoot stunning video in low light, the line between photography and videography continues to blur, allowing for a more comprehensive storytelling approach. The emphasis is shifting away from posed mannequins, moving instead towards capturing the authenticity and emotion of the day in all its spontaneous glory.

Photographers are empowered to leverage their existing lens collections to create immersive experiences that resonate with couples looking for more than just traditional portraiture. The ability to seamlessly transition between stills and video means that every laugh, tear, and dance move can be documented without compromising the artistry of the images. Adelaide Wedding Photography is thus evolving into a dynamic narrative form, where the focus remains on the couple and their loved ones, rather than on meticulously staged setups. The excitement surrounding these advancements mirrors Laforet’s passion, as photographers embrace the challenge of creating heartfelt, story-driven visual memories that couples will cherish for a lifetime.

As camera technology continues to evolve, photographers are no longer limited to the traditional methods of capturing moments. With tools that allow for high-quality video and stunning stills, the creative possibilities seem endless. Photographers can now experiment with new lighting techniques, compositions, and angles to tell a more compelling and multifaceted story. The ability to capture both video and photos seamlessly creates a unique opportunity to document the dynamic, ever-changing nature of a scene, whether it’s a bustling street, a quiet moment in nature, or the energy of a live performance. This shift encourages photographers to think beyond the image itself and embrace a more holistic approach to storytelling.

To enhance these new techniques, dark and moody presets offer photographers the chance to add a distinctive edge to their edits. These presets allow for a deeper, more atmospheric feel, emphasizing contrast and shadow to create dramatic, cinematic images. Whether capturing an intense portrait or a quiet landscape, dark and moody tones evoke a sense of mystery and emotion, pulling viewers into the story behind the image. By incorporating these presets, photographers can elevate their work, adding a level of sophistication that complements their artistic vision while remaining true to the authenticity of the moment.

So – here we are at a crossroads. I see this as all positive – I’ve always wanted to shoot more video/film – but didn’t want to make a new investment in lenses and gear… now I no longer have to… think about it. Although I have no insider knowledge on what Canon is working on at this time – common sense would lead me to believe they’ll have an answer to this soon enough. I say this, because the rumors being traded back and forth at the Olympics, from non-Nikon or Canon people – was that Canon was going to be the one making this type of announcement first… we all in fact knew that some big announcement was coming from Nikon on Monday (this past Monday – it came out Tuesday as it turned out) so who knows…

The reason we are at a crossroads is the following: TELEVISION and their fear of the traditional print media tresspassing on their turf. A turf they have paid for – and are unlikely to share for free. Given that all of these rumours were going around quite a bit in Beijing – I sat down with two very influential people who will each be involved at the next two Olympic Games. Given that NBC paid more than $900 million to acquire the U.S. Broadcasting rights to this past summer games, how would they feel about a still photographer showing up with a camera that can shoot HD video? I got the following answer from the person who will be involved with Vancouver which I’ll paraphrase: Still photographers will be allowed in the venues with whatever camera they chose, and shoot whatever they want – shooting video in it of itself, is not a problem.

HOWEVER – if the video is EVER published – the lawsuits will inevitably be filed, and credentials revoked etc. This to me seems like the reasonable thing to do – and the correct approach. But the person I spoke with who will be involved in the London 2012 Olympic Games had a different view, again I paraphrase: “Those cameras will have to be banned. Period. They will never be allowed into any Olympic venue” because the broadcasters would have a COW if they did. And while I think this is not the best approach – I think it might unfortunately be the most realistic. Do you really think that the TV producers and rigths-owners will “trust” photographers not to broadcast anything they’ve paid so much for. Unlikely. Remember that every two years – photographers are allowed to go and see the dress-rehearsal for the Opening Ceremonies at each Olympics and every time we have to sign releases promising NEVER to publish those. We are granted access so that we can better prepare to shoot the actual thing.

Nonetheless, someone did publish these pictures in Athens for example… and once those promises are broken, it gives TV the excuse to shut us down (although they haven’t – and did let us shoot dress rehearsals this year.) But do we really trust all of our breatheren to ahere to these “restrictions” – forever? Well – I don’t. And that’s why I think we’ll have problems – big problems – coming down the pipe with these cameras for the photographers who shoot in “closed” events where someone has bought rights to said event. We’re reaching another discontinuity. Digital technology has first broken down the chasm between analogue and digital quality. Now it’s moving to erode the distinctions between two, hitherto-distinct, IP-driven media industries. Footnote: The Nikon D90 body is currently selling at £575 in the UK. The new Canon camera is selling for under £2,000.

Bailing out Motown?

Posted on by

Common sense from Dave Winer…

Reading the news it’s not clear if we’re going to give Detroit the money to keep them going for a while longer. Pretty sure we can’t afford not to, and of course they’ll be coming back for more next year, and that’s probably a good thing, cause it’s time to make some changes. We need to own them for a while so they start working for us not continuing to feed our oil habit and keeping their buddies at Exxon-Mobil’s profits high.

And they have to retire their fleet of corporate jets. And all their execs take pay cuts down to less than $1 million per year. If they choose to quit, so be it and good riddance. And since we’re going to own them, a new rule — no more commuting from Seattle to work in Detroit for the CEOs. We’re bailing them out not because we think they’ve done anything remotely like a good job, we’re doing it so that we don’t have to feed and house their remaining employees and bail out their suppliers when they go bankrupt. We’re doing it to save our country, not to save the auto industry as its currently configured, which is rotten and dangerously short-sighted.

I just got a briefing from Frontline, a show that aired just before the election called Heat, about global warming. Lots of interesting stuff in there, all of which must be taken, of course, with a grain of salt. But if you believe them, Detroit had a Prius before Toyota, funded by the government, but it never went into production. The Prius was a response by Toyota to a US initiative to increase gas mileage. Detroit took our money but never shipped the damn car. Now they’re rebooting their effort to produce a hybrid, and get this — they’re starting from scratch. The bastards threw away the R&D we paid for. So much for trusting them with our money. Can’t do it.

“But”, he goes on,

But we also can’t jump off the cliff. We’ll have Hoovervilles in every shopping mall. When you go to the supermarket the shelves will be empty. It’s already happening at some local retailers. When the economy fails, distributors go out of business, then the manufacturers the distributors stiffed, and all of a sudden even if you have money in the bank you can’t find food to buy. You turn up the thermostat and there’s no heat. Old people and children and people with chronic diseases die when we get there. Perhaps you have some people like that in your family. Perhaps you’re one of those people?

If you’ve ever been to the Third World, or parts of the US that are the Third World like the South Bronx and New Orleans and (I’m told) parts of Detroit — you owe it to yourself to find out what that’s like. Because if you’re stupid enough to think that letting Detroit fall off the cliff somehow won’t take you and your family with it, you need to get educated, fast.

Hmmm… Makes me wonder why people want to be President. Same thought occured to me when I read this piece in the Economist about what to do about Guantanamo. The magazine imagines what an email to the president-elect might be saying to him:

“Then there are those 80 or so really hard men. President Bush wanted to try them, and could never get the law right. So now you have to deal with them. Khalid Sheikh Mohammad has “confessed” he was the brains behind 9/11. God knows what the Pakistanis or the Agency did to him in prison. But we can’t just let him go, and we can’t just let him rot, so you have to give him and his accomplices their day in court. The first big question for you is: what kind of court? You don’t like Bush’s military commissions. But if you set up special security courts with special, meaning laxer, standards of procedure and evidence, they will be called kangaroo courts too. And if you opt for regular criminal trials or courts-martial you run the risk that they will throw out evidence extracted by waterboard. Dare you let a 9/11 mastermind walk free?

Worse yet, there’s a group the Agency is sure are dedicated terrorists but on whom we have nothing that can stand up in any sort of court. The human-rights purists say you must bite the bullet and set these unconvictables free in America. But if you follow their advice it won’t just be Republicans who will say you are putting the republic in danger. You’d theoretically have a let-out if you could let these guys go and keep them under surveillance. But the Feds claim they can’t guarantee fail-safe, indefinite 24-hour monitoring of a group this size. Can we afford to take that risk?

Safer would be to move them to the mainland, where they would be held under some kind of preventive detention devised by your legal team. We can call this “temporary”, but our base will bleat that you have closed Guantánamo only by creating a new prison where America continues to detain people convicted of no crime. And they’ll have a point. Over to you.”

Obama and technology

Posted on by

Because the Obama campaign made such astute use of the Net, there are high expectations on how his administration might use the Net to govern.

From social networking sites to blogs and from iPhone applications to text messaging, President elect Obama used the power of these hi-tech tools to get his message out, raise money, galvanise voters and get him elected.

Now some in the industry think it could be “pay-back time” as they looks to the country’s first tech savvy President to do his bit to push technology into a new era.

“He is the first real president who seems to understand technology and the needs of the industry,” said Tim O’Reilly, the man credited with coining the term ‘web 2.0’ and who is generally regarded as one of the industry’s visionaries.

Already there are some interesting developments — for example The White House 2, and Obamacto.org, both of which are Digg-type sites for policy ideas.

Meanwhile the BBC (and a host of other sources) are predicting that Obama will have to give up his BlackBerry when he becomes president — for security and legal reasons. Well, at least that means he won’t be upgrading to a G-phone. (I’m sure that his commitment to openness would preclude an iPhone!)

Pre-emptive celebration

Posted on by

The Register believes in getting its celebration in first…

In two short months, Apple’s Macintosh will turn 25 years old. My, how tempus doth fugit.

To mark the awesome inevitability of January 24, 2009 following January 24, 1984 after exactly one quarter-century, tech pundits will bloviate, Apple-bashers will execrate, and Jobsian fanboyz will venerate the munificence that flows unabated from The Great Steve. The din will be deafening.

To avoid the crowds, we at The Reg decided to go first…

At the moment, Apple has $24 billion in cash reserves. Shouldn’t be surprised if they were up to $25 billion on the anniversary.

Recording angel

Posted on by

I’ve been searching for ages for a small, trouble-free, high-quality audio recorder. I might just have found what I need — the Olympus WS-110. It’s tiny and produces incredibly crisp recordings, even without an external mike. (I bought a lapel mic to go with it, but I don’t think it’ll be necessary.) It cost £44 from Amazon and pulls apart to become a USB stick — Voila!

The one drawback is that it produces WMA files, but if you’re a Mac user then the wonderful Switch utility fixes that.

That bail-out

Posted on by

The Republicans aren’t done yet, as Robert Reich points out…

Hank Paulson has just about burned through $300 billion, and it’s not clear what the public has got out of it. Perhaps things would be worse without the bailout but they’re certainly no better. Wall Street banks have not significantly stepped up their loans to small businesses, college students, car buyers, or distressed homeowners. Much of the auto industry is on the verge of bankruptcy. And the rate of foreclosures is rising.

What happened to all the money? About a third has gone into dividends the banks are paying their shareholders. Some of the rest into executive salaries and bonuses. Another portion toward acquisitions designed to raise share values. Another chunk for bailing out giant insurer, AIG.

That’s not what taxpayers bargained for. Paulson originally told Congress he’d use the money to buy mortgage-backed securities that were clogging the financial system. He’d create a market for them by holding a kind of reverse auction, buying them from the banks at the lowest prices they’d be willing to sell them for.

But Paulson has abandoned that strategy and is now just handing the money directly to the big banks, and AIG — all of which are using the money for their own purposes. It’s the worst type of trickle-down economics. Taxpayers are sending the money upward, and almost none of it is trickling back down.

What was it that the Soprano guy said? “Money goes up; shit comes down”.