Going round: October's photo competition


For no reason other than I think it's a good idea, this month's competition theme is round. So anything that is circular, spherical, or your take on that shape, is fair game.

There's a 12" Fracture up for grabs if your entry is the one that catches our eye.

You have from today (Friday 5 October) until Friday 26 October 2012 to submit your entry. Yes, entry in the singular because it's one submission per person, please.

Here are The Rules, for your elucidation. Otherwise, good luck and we're looking forward to judging!

The Rules

  • If you decide to enter, you agree to The Rules.
  • You can’t be related to either me or Haje to enter.
  • One entry per person – so choose your best!
  • Entries need to be submitted to the right place, which is the Small Aperture Flickr group.
  • There’s a closing date for entries, so make sure you’ve submitted before then.
  • You have to own the copyright to your entry and be at liberty to submit it to a competition. Using other people’s photos is most uncool.
  • It probably goes without saying, but entries do need to be photographs. It’d be a bit of strange photo competition otherwise.
  • Don’t do anything icky – you know, be obscene or defame someone or sell your granny to get the photo.
  • We (that being me and Haje) get to choose the winner and we’ll do our best to do so within a week of the competition closing.
  • You get to keep all the rights to your images. We just want to be able to show off the winners (and maybe some honourable mentions) here on Pixiq.
  • Entry is at your own risk. I can’t see us eating you or anything, but we can’t be responsible for anything that happens to you because you submit a photo to our competition.
  • We are allowed to change The Rules, or even suspend or end the competition, if we want or need to. Obviously we’ll try not to, but just so that you know.

If you've any questions, please just ask!

Review: The Long Exposure eBook


Long exposure photography is about capturing space and silence, like visually holding your breath; it is about capturing the beauty and calmness of a scene... And it's really good fun to boot!

The new book by Ireland-based David Cleland is a fantastic introduction to the process of capturing long exposure photographs. It documents the simple steps he employs every time he embarks on a long exposure photo shoot.

bookinside.jpg

The e-book covers everything from the equipment you will need right through to post- production processing in Adobe’s brilliant Lightroom 4. This guide has been written with the beginner to the long exposure process in mind; however, the enthusiast and professional alike may find something of relevance also. The know-how in this book will enable you to capture stunning long exposure images on even the simplest of camera set-ups.

More info? Head to David's website - and dont' forget to keep an eye on his Twitter, while you're at it!

Becoming a better photographer - with Photo Forensics!

If you've been anywhere near a technology magazine in the past few months, you can't have failed to see a series of Tamron adverts, showing off their 'astonishingly compact and leightweight' lens with 15x zoom lens. However, when I was having a peek at the advert, I started wondering what, exactly was going on here.

The advert in question is this one:

screen_shot_2012_09_26_at_144731.jpg

Now, don't get me wrong, this is a lovely photograph. But I can't help but wonder whether we're all victim of somewhat false advertising here. There are a whole load of things wrong with this photographer, and as an observant student of photography, I'm sure you can spot at least some of them. Take a close look at the image, and think like a photographer - what are you seeing?

Depth of field

One of the problems I had with this photograph, are the claims about zoom length and depth of field. The two photos are a wide shot and a very up-close photos, and since this is a 18-270mm lens, it stands to reason that Tamron have taken one photo at each of the focal lengths. So, that means that the widest possible aperture the main photo could have been taken at, is f/6.3 (this is a f/3.5-6.3 lens after all). As such, the top photo would have been taken at 270mm and f/6.3.

screen_shot_2012_09_26_at_144735.jpg

The shadow and highlight on the adult's arm, along with the highlight portion on the boy's arm would indicate that the light is coming from above and left in this photograph. Lovely; but that leaves us with some questions. If we follow the 'sunny 16' rule, this photo would have to be taken at ISO 100 with 1/100th of a second at f/16.

However, there's a very distinct shallow depth of field thing going on, which leads me to believe that this image will have to have been taken wide open - at f/6.3. That's entirely possible, of course, but then the camera would have to be shooting at 1/4000th of a second or thereabouts. No problem, but there appears to be some motion blur on the droplets falling off the oar in the background - indicating that this image will have been taken with a shutter speed of 1/200 or less.

Of course, all of this is possible if they used a Neutral Density filter (in this case, to get from 1/4000 to 1/200, you'd need a ND4 filter or thereabouts) when taking this photo, but as far as a like-for-like comparison goes, that seems a little bit weird for an entry-level consumer lens.

screen_shot_2012_09_26_at_153319.jpg

Another argument for why this photo doesn't quite stack up in my mind, is that for this particular lens, you only have to focus up to about a 30ft / 10m distance. After that, you've focused to infinity, which means that even at f/6.3, you actually have pretty decent depth of field. If the top photo is taken from the distance implied by the bottom photo, I'd say that something really curious is going on in these shots: To me, it looks that the distance to the boat is about 10 meters - and if that is true, then the picture is a physical impossibility without extensive photoshopping.

Or rather: I can't really see how a 270mm f/6.3 lens could have taken this photo from the distance the bottom image would imply - especially considering how the boy is perfectly in focus, whilst the boat just in front of him, and the paddle just behind him is out of focus.

If you ask me, it looks as if the photo was taken from much closer than the inset photo claims, the lens blur on the foreground (on the boat) is genuine, whereas the person in the background has been blurred in Photoshop, after carefully applying a mask around the boy. That would certainly explain why there doesn't appear to be any further depth of field fall-off between the man's elbow / paddle and his face - they all seem to be blurred the same amount, which seems unlikely if the photo was taken in the way it is implied

Lighting

The other thing that I find weird in this photograph, is how it looks like the lighting is quite different in the two photos. If you look at the smaller, inset photo, you can see that the life vest the boy is wearing is significantly brighter than his face. On the main photo, however, we are getting remarkable detail and dynamic range in his face.

In fact, the fact that we have perfect definition in the directly sunlit arms of both the people in the photo is astonishing; you'd expect a lot less definition in the shadows in this image... Which makes me believe that this photo has either been through some rather extensive photoshopping to lighten the shadows (nothing wrong with that...) or that a reflector was used to achieve the top photograph.

Again, of course, there's nothing wrong with using a reflector, or photoshopping a photo to make it look better, but I can't quite help but think that whatever is going on here, it would take some expert photoshop or lighting skills to get that much detail out of the photo - and if that is the case, is it a honest comparison between the two shots?

No help from Tamron

Of course, I wanted to find out for myself how these photos compared to their originals, so I e-mailed Tamron back in May to get my hands on higher-resolution versions of the photos used in this advert. Back then, I received an out-of-office e-mail from their press office, but I never received a reply to that e-mail, nor to any of my other enquiries. A shame; I think it could have been really interesting to see how far off I was in my 'photo forensics'.

What can you learn?

Anyway - the point of this article isn't to point fingers - it is entirely possible that Tamron's photos are entirely above board, and that the photos shown are direct-out-of-the-camera versions of photos taken with the Tamron 18-270mm lens...

The point I'm trying to make is that you can learn an incredible amount about a photograph by just looking at it, without having any additional information about the equipment used. The key to learning something from this exercise is to ask the right questions, and apply everything you know about photography to the image to 'reverse engineer' how it was taken.

I made a habit of analysing photographs I've seen in magazines a long time ago:

  • Where does the lighting come from? Is it natural lighting, flood, or flash lighting? How is the light managed / adjusted / reflected / diffused?
  • What is the shutter speed and aperture likely to be?
  • What angle was the photo taken from?
  • What focal length lens was the picture taken with? Was it taken with a telefocus or a wide-angle lens?
  • What digital enhancements were done on the photo before it ended up on print?

By spending 30 seconds on any photo you see around you, you can train yourself to become a better photographer, even when you are miles away from your photographic equipment!

Photokina 2012: a round-up


Photokina is by turns exciting and exhausting. So much is going on you barely know where to look first or next. I've done my very best to keep you abreast of the major announcements here on Pixiq, but just in case you missed something, and to cover those announcements that I couldn't squash onto the front page, here's the Photokina 2012 round-up.

Canon

Canon's big news for Photokina was the full-framed sensor but diminutive-of-body 6D. Sticking with the 'small-is-beautiful' theme, they also updated their high-end compact camera range, with the G15 and the S110.

The G15 is coming in approximately 17% smaller than the G12 (yes, Canon skipped G13 and G14) but with the brightest lens in the series yet. It ranges from ƒ/1.8 at its widest (28mm in 35mm equivalent) to ƒ/2.8 at 140mm (also 35mm equivalent). It has a 12 megapixel sensor with a DIGIC 5 processor, sensitivity that reaches ISO 12,800, a burst rate of 10 frames per second, and everything that you'd expect from the G-series: Raw capability, full manual control, HDR mode, and image stabilisation. This one will be about £550.

I'm still languishing with a two-iterations-ago S95, which my little brother has currently seconded. If he decides to keep it, I'll be quite happy with the upgrade to the S110. This one has an ƒ/2.0 lens with 5× optical zoom, a 12 megapixel sensor and DIGIC 5 processor, just like its predecessor, the S100. However, its sensitivity now reaches ISO 12,800 and it comes with wi-fi and a touch-screen. All for about £430.

If you're looking for something with more zoom, there's also the SX50 HS, which has a 50× optical zoom (and plenty of accompanying image stabilisation), 12 megapixel CMOS sensor and DIGIC 5 processor, Raw capability, and manual control. It'll cost about £450.

Fujifilm

Fujifilm didn't get carried away at Photokina. But then they didn't really need to as the XF1 was named as star of the show. I admit it, I'm a tiny bit in love with it.

Hasselblad

Hasselblad seemed to turn more heads with its intention to start producing the EVIL Lunar camera than it did with its pre-Photokina H5D announcement. But then when one of the most famous names in medium format photography unveils a 24 megapixel, mirror-less, interchangeable lens camera that is going to sell for around €5,000, it might be a bit of an attention grabber. Not forgetting that the designs include the use of carbon fibre, wood, titanium, leather, and precious metals.

As for the H5D, it will come with 40, 50, and 60 megapixel options, as well as 50 and 200 multi-shot versions. It features improved weather-sealing, new, larger buttons and a brighter display, Raw + JPEG mode, and is bundled with Adobe Lightroom 4.

Leica

As well as five new cameras and the marketing decision to drop iteration numbers from the S and M series cameras, Leica also popped up with three lenses, some adaptors, and a clutch of binolculars. Lens-wise, you're looking at a 24mm ƒ/3.5 prime for its S series (that's a 19mm equivalent in 35mm format); a 30-90mm ƒ/3.5-5.6; and the first fully adjustable tilt-shift for its S series, a 120mm ƒ/5.6.

Lensbaby

Lensbaby went for a fun, cheap, and allegedly youthful addition to its range, the Spark. I reckon anyone can use it, though.

Nikon

Nikon's big announcement came in advance of Photokina, when it also dipped its toes into the smaller-sized but bigger-sensored waters with the D600. There was also a new lens for 1 Series of cameras: an 18.5mm ƒ/1.8, which should retail around £180.

Olympus

As for Olympus, they announced four new lenses, three new cameras, two turtle doves, and one re-branding.

Panasonic

Panasonic has added the GH3 to its Lumix range. You're looking at a 16 megapixel, wi-fi-enabled, weather-proofed camera here, but one that is definitely aimed at video, with its 1080 50p AVCHD output and promotional video by Philip Bloom. Not forgetting the headphone jack for external sound recording. It'll probably cost around £1,000 and be available from November 2012.

Pentax

Pentax unveiled their newest cameras in advance of Photokina. There's an upgrade to the K-5, in the form of the K-5 II; a specialist K-5 II S, which is the K-5 II with the anti-aliasing filter removed; and the Q10, which revamps the tiny Q EVIL camera.

Samsung

Two new lenses for Samsung: a 12-24mm ƒ/4.0-5.6 and a 45mm ƒ/1.8, both for their NX cameras.

Samyang

Samyang brought its 10mm ƒ/2.8 lens to the Photokina party. With an equivalent focal length of 15 or 16mm in 35mm format, it has been aimed at architectural and landscape photographers. It'll probably be ready in early 2013.

Sigma

Sigma announced that it is dividing its lenses into three categories for marketing purposes from now on: Contemporary, Art, and Sport.Contemporary is about the latest in technology and optical development; Art focuses on expression and optical power; Sport is probably self-explanatory, telephoto and super-telephoto lenses aimed at capturing things in motion!

Accordingly, it has released one lens in each of these categories. There's a 17-70mm ƒ/2.8-4.0 macro; a 35mm ƒ/1.4 prime; and a very tasty sounding 120-300mm ƒ/2.8, which is dust and moisture resistant.

Sony

Sony did the pre-Photokina announcement thing, unveiling its A99 full-frame, translucent mirror flagship, its pocket-sized full-framed RX1 compact, and the NEX-6 last week.

If you're thinking of splashing out on a new EVIL camera, the NEX-6 comes with a 16 megapixel CMOS sensor with a maximum sensitivity of ISO 25,600. There's a hybrid auto-focus system and 10 frames-per-second burst mode. And built-in wi-fi, which is the new must-have.

Tamron

Tamron added two lenses to line-up, both of which have piqued my interest. First there's a 90mm ƒ/2.8 macro, followed by a 70-200mm ƒ/2.8 telephoto. Both feature vibration compensation and ultra-silent drives, and will available for Canon, Nikon, and Sony mounts. No dates or prices yet, but I'll be keeping an eye open for them.

That's a wrap?

Well, it's certainly the headline offerings. It doesn't look at gadgets and gizmos, camera bags, printers, editing software, or just about anything else that Photokina has to offer.

But what is there to take away from Photokina 2012?

Definitely that wi-fi is the new must-have for any camera, and that sensor technology is bringing us to a point where full-frame is becoming a financial possibility for cheaper and lighter cameras. I don't think it will be too long before anyone who isn't completely dedicated to having the smallest camera possible will be shooting with a full-frame digital sensor as standard.

Lensbaby lets Spark fly


Lensbaby lenses are a whole heap of fun, and whilst they don't exactly break the bank, I can understand someone forgoing one in favour of putting the money towards a serious wide-angle or a shoulder-crunching telephoto. The latest addition to the Lensbaby lineup, however, might change that. It's the Spark. It's a 50mm selective focus lens with a fixed aperture of ƒ/5.6 and a retail price of $80, available for Canon and Nikon mounts.

It's dead simple to operate: you squeeze to focus and then tilt the lens to place your sweet spot and get the blur where you want it. Spontaneity and selective focus are go!

Lensbaby might feel that the Spark is 'designed to help young creative photographers express themselves,' (the words 'young' or 'youthful' are used three times in a three paragraph press release) but at $80 I reckon that it's ideal for anyone who'd like to play around with a tilt-shift lens. If you're on a budget, you're not going to find many lenses cheaper, let alone a tilt-shift; if you're toying with the idea of investing in a fully-fledged tilt-shift but aren't sure how much use you'd get out of it, what's to lose with a Spark?

Sure, you might regard the fixed aperture of ƒ/5.6 as a limitation, but really and truly, when you head out with a Lensbaby, you make the choice of which aperture you'll shoot with that day and be done with. It's no fun fiddling around with magnetic aperture rings in the street.

If you fancy one you can head over to the store on the Lensbaby website and purchase directly, Spark went on sale today. If you're not convinced that a Spark is for you, take a look at the gallery of images. They're pretty, regardless.

A Closer Look: Jonathan May


I've handed over the reigns to Gareth again today. He's taken a slightly different approach to his article this week: he's going to take a closer look at a photographer he admires, and examine just what it is that does it for him.

All yours, Gareth...

A Closer Look is a series of articles looking at the work of photographers whose work means something to me. When I am influenced by the work of others, I like to take less tangible elements away from the images. It isn't useful, in my opinion, to closely study the technical style of a given photographer, as you are at risk of losing your individuality. A more useful practice is to study what you love about an image beyond the immediately visible.

This week, I'm looking at Jonathan May, a photographer I became aware of when he was selected as a finalist in the National Portrait Gallery's Taylor Wessing 2011 Photographic Portrait Prize.

A small disclaimer: just because I admire May's work doesn't necessarily mean I can speak about it with authority – I merely aspire to describe what I like about it.

may.jpg

The first thing that strikes me about May's work is that it's often very positive in tone. This is extremely refreshing in the current climate, because so many photo stories, whilst absolutely beautiful and shot with a mastery that leaves me open-mouthed, are of subjects that are, frequently, unrelentingly bleak. Now don't get me wrong, I think it's  vital for photography to be able to highlight issues and tell stories that would go untold and unseen by the world. Not only that, but I think the people who bring such stories to the world are genuine superheroes (and possibly slightly unhinged): it's just that the saturation of such stories makes me yearn for something different.

You can see this immediately in his set L'Afrique. I feel that, in the West, we have a skewed image of Africa: a combination of the doom and gloom of the media and the plethora of photo projects that cover injustice, poverty, war and political horrors throughout the continent. It feels like from north to south, east to west, it comprises misery and human suffering. There is, of course, much of that, all of which needs to be exposed to the world and not kept a secret, but there is also a vast and beautiful culture and history which is seldom celebrated in the face of documenting all that is wrong with Africa.

May's shots of Africa exhibit a warmth, respect and admiration for African culture. It is refreshing to see a story of Africa that feels more celebratory than exploitative: in L'Afrique we become students, soaking in the beauty, gazing up at these people, learning, engaging on a human level.

afrique.jpg

The most important skill exhibited in L'Afrique is May's ability to act as the humble recorder whilst still applying his style, skill and proficiency to the images. If an image evokes more of the photographer than it does the subject, it's doing something wrong, in my opinion. This is something May is acutely aware of and he elevates his subjects whilst remaining anonymous to us, the viewer.

It's a feeling May achieves in many of his projects and is something evident in any story he tackles. I love his ability to find beauty in topics and stories that are infrequently covered. This is why one of my favourite photo stories of his is Greens: a look at crown green bowling, more specifically the bowling club his grandfather founded.

There is something quite beautiful in the telling of a story through the paraphernalia and objects that surround the people involved in the story, and Greens achieves this beautifully. An image of a somewhat chintzy clubhouse carpet with a table occupying the corner tells us as much as a one of his intimate, shallow depth of field portraits does. It's when these two are combined in a series that they unlock the power of one another: although they are strong images on their own, the effect is compounded when they are brought together, contrasting as they are in content.

greens.jpg

As a portrait photographer halfway through my first ever long-term photo project, I am fascinated with the idea that a portrait of someone can be greatly enhanced by an image of their surroundings, or of something that is illustrative in some way of who they are, as opposed to a single image of the actual person.

There are dozens of single images within Jonathan May's work that I love but, in the interests of not making this article tediously enormous, I will look at my absolute favourite and attempt to articulate why I adore it.

caravanport.jpg

This is a portrait from May's series Caravans, a story about a society that is often looked down on and dehumanised in many ways. The series itself has all the trademarks of May's work, but there is something about this particular portrait that, as I cycled through the images, was like a punch in the stomach: a good punch in the stomach, if that makes sense (it doesn't).

Initially, the intimacy of the composition grabbed me, so I brought it up in full screen. The background is uncluttered and plain yet far from blank: it further draws us to the subject's face. The expression that May has captured is utterly captivating: it's an expression that is both inscrutable and full of emotion at the same time. His mouth is ever so slightly curled up at one side, suggesting a smile may be breaking out. There is the tiniest hint of a wet glint in his eye, as if he is holding back a tear, but it's all so slight that we're not sure whether that is a projection of what we are seeing in his face or the reality of the situation. When I look at his face, I see a man remembering: an expression of fond reminiscence. We are the ones to lay down the final brushstroke, the canvas is left open for us.

And 'canvas' is an appropriate word here: the mesh of the door has muted and diffused the light and the wooden frame forms the right hand side of the image, creating the feel of a Renaissance-era painting, faded over time. I love the idea that something so beautiful can come from a seemingly innocuous shot of a man looking out of a window in his caravan. That, dear readers, is the magic of photography.

What I'd really like is for these columns to become discussion points about the artist in question. I want to hear what you think of Jonathan May's work – does it resonate with you? Does it excite you? Does it bore you? What do you like? What do you hate? Let's hear your opinions!


The illustration was by the mightily talented James, of Sweet Meats Illustration.

You can check out Gareth's photography here.

And if you're wondering about the copyright implications of reproducing May's work in this article, it's covered under fair dealing, as criticism and review.

Fujifilm's division of the Film Empire


There's still money to be made in film; it's knowing where

Watching the decline and fall of film has a certain something of the decline and fall of the Roman Empire about it. It's a peculiar analogy, I know, and one that isn't perfect–but then how many analogies are–so indulge me, would you?

For those of you who didn't get a kick out of Diocletian's Edict on Maximum Prices when they were at university, I'll give you a super-brief explanation and hope that Edward Gibbon doesn't come back to haunt me. By 285 the Roman Empire was monstrously large and without the benefit of telegraph cables or the intergoogles, far too unwieldy to control from one seat of government. There had long been a system of provincial rule with Rome at its heart, but in his wisdom Diocletian decided that the solution was to split the empire into two: a western half and an eastern half, to be ruled from two centres of power with two (or sometimes more) emperors. 

There were periods when the two halves were reunited under one ruler, but it was really the beginning of the end for the feted glory of Rome. The Western Empire was ruled from Milan or Ravenna, and sustained attack after attack from external enemies such as the Goths and Visigoths, eventually crumbling and making way for the Dark Ages or early mediaeval period in the 400s. The Eastern Empire's capital came to settle in Byzantium (which then became Constantinople and is now Istanbul), and continued in some form or another for centuries, becoming increasingly unrecognisable from the Rome from which it had sprung.

Now that I've subjected you to a grossly incomplete history of the fall of Rome, you're wondering just how it relates to film. Okay: the Western Empire is like the traditional use of film; it can't withstand the assault from digital technology and is disintegrating before our eyes. It is holding out in pockets, but the end is inevitable. The Eastern Empire, on the other hand, is like the novelty use of film; it's drifting further and further away from the principles that brought it to be, but it's holding on in some kind of adulterated form, becoming gradually smaller in influence.

And now of course you're wondering just what on earth spurred me to equate film to the Roman Empire.

Well, this week Fujifilm announced that it is ceasing production of films used for motion picture shooting. The shift towards digital production has made it unsustainable, so the company will now focus on supporting that, with lens production, colour management systems, and archiving services. This of course follows the announcement earlier in the year that it is ceasing production of some of its stills films, as well as the development of in-camera film-like image reproduction.

Meanwhile, Fujifilm has also introduced the Instax mini 8: a camera that can create credit-card sized instant prints. The camera comes in white, black, pale pink, baby blue, and pastel yellow. It's an upgrade on the Instax mini 7S, being smaller and lighter, with an improved view-finder and the addition of a high-key mode. It's being aimed very squarely at women in the late teens and 20s who want something fun and frivolous.

There's clearly still a market for certain types of film out there, and Fujifilm knows this. It's just a case of recognising which ones need to be cut loose, so those areas where digital is more effective, more economical, and more universally employed, and which it should continue to support–fun, frolicsome, and not altogether serious.

It's film, Marcus, but not as Augustus knew it.

From iPhone to Instant print, in one far-fetched leap


When I logged into my Kickstarter account today, I was met by the Impossible Instant Lab, and I was intrigued. The IIL is a way of making real photographic Polaroid prints from photos taken with your iPhone. When I first saw the video, I was wondering; Could this possibly be a joke?

Allow me to explan: The IIL appears to take a square crop from the middle of your iPhone, and turn that into a Polaroid print.

So far so good, but in the mind of a photographer, the science just doesn't stack up: On an iPhone 4 screen (which has a 1136-by-640 pixel resolution), you are essentially getting a 640x640 pixel crop. That's 0.4 megapixels.

Now, Polaroid prints have never been known for their astonishing quality, but even the least ambitious of Polaroid cameras has significantly higher resolving power than 0.4 megapixels. In fact, if you have a look at a high-resolution scan of one of Impossible Project's own films on Wikipedia, you can see that there's a lot of data to work with.

Don't get me wrong, there's definitely a place in photography for the 'lo-fi' or 'toy camera' styles of photography. In fact, I heartily encourage people to buy a crappy little film-based camera ($30 from eBay), and borrow the darkroom equipment at your local photography club (usually less than $30 including paper and chemicals, for about an hour), to learn more about photography, and to gain a deeper understanding of photography and how it works.

However... If you are using a $400 printing device to 'print' photos to pieces of film costing $3.75 per sheet, by using a twentieth of the resolution available from a $600 photography device, you're probably doing something wrong...

Check out the Impossible Instant Lab on Kickstarter to make up your own mind.

Flixel brings your iPhone photos to life


Flixel is an iPhone application that lets people easily create 'living photos'. Where traditional photos are completely still, a living photo contains a portion of seamless and infinitely looping motion. Whether it's hair blowing in the wind, or a flickering fire in the background of an otherwise still image, the effect can be mesmerizing.

shredding.gif

Flixel is a platform for discovering, creating, and sharing these beautiful (and occasionally quirky) living photos. The creation process is simple: record a short scene, 'paint' the portion of the image that will animate, then share on a variety of social networks including Twitter, Facebook, Tumblr, and Flixel's own.

After seeing rapid growth upon its initial launch in April, the company assessed feedback from its community and proceeded with a complete refresh of its platform. Flixel 2.0 makes it faster and easier than ever to create, view and share this incredible new form of art.

beach.gif

Flixel's transformation has included the ability to create living photos at double the original frame rate and in full color, while dramatically speeding up the viewing experience. Flixel provides fast and simple creation for the average person, while still providing artists the fine-grained creative control they need.

walking_by.gif

Inspired by Kevin Burg and Jamie Beck's 'Cinemagraphs', LeBlanc stumbled upon these beautiful moving images in late August 2011, and was immediately intrigued by the possibility of an iPhone experience.

"We were so enthralled by Cinemagraphs but burdened by the complexity and time required to create them." said LeBlanc. "With Flixel, we feel we've now achieved a creative experience that blends speed, simplicity, and art - pushing the boundaries of photography."

To showcase the beauty of this new art form, Flixel has produced a music video composed entirely of living photos created with its application:

 

 

For more info about Flixel, check out Flixel.com

Triggertrap, meet Android


Triggertrap's Android menu

When the team behind the universal camera trigger, Triggertrap, announced a mobile version of their time-lapse-tastic device at the end of April this year, it offered iPhone users 12 different means of triggering their cameras from their phones. As well as being able to react to light and vibration, it included distance-lapsing and eased time-lapsing (allowing you to control the intervals between shots) options, for added fun. Android users, however, felt a bit left out. But not anymore!

From today, Triggertrap will be available for download to Android platforms running version 2.3 Gingerbread or higher.

When paired with a cable and a dongle, Triggertrap for Andoid can control the shutter release on SLR cameras in eight different ways, including five different time-lapse modes, long-exposure HDR, and star-trail modes.You can download it for all of £2.99 or $4.99.

In order to make the most of Triggertrap Mobile, you will need a dongle, and the Triggertrap team has announced dongle version 2. This one is faster than version 1, is compatible with both iOS and Android devices, and with a total of nine different camera connectors, can service 280 camera models. That'll be shipping from the end of September and will cost £19, or £29.99, including a camera connection cable.

Just by-the-by, at the end of September, Triggertrap for iOS will update to version 1.4 and be available in French, German, Italian, Spanish, Portuguese, Dutch, and Norwegian. Russian, Chinese, and Japanese are on the horizon, too.

For anyone who took up my suggestion of bribing the team with single malt Scotch, boutique gin, or vintage wines, to get an Android version, it looks like your endeavours paid off!

August's metallic medallist


EMP/SFM by Wntrmute

In a somewhat tenuous celebration of the Olympics, we asked for metallic images in our August photo competition. Judging was a slightly stressful experience, with a flurry of emails bouncing back and forth to decide who'd bag the 12 " Fracture prize. Thanks be to the gods of competition that none of us was expected to provide scores on diving, dressage, or gymnastics in a split second!

Finally, we settled on Wntrmute's enigmatically titled EMP/SFM as our gold medallist. There was something about the sense of texture it conveyed, and the warmth emanating from the structure that did it for us.

As for our runners up, Fred Dunn snatched silver with Stay out, stay in, which we adored for its composition and the ability to make razor wire inviting; bronze went to praire_girl76 for her macro of a wire whisk, which was entry 191 in her 365 project.

7720081382_696fcae37b.jpg

7539446880_0423c6b718_n.jpg

Congratulations all of you, and thank you to everyone who entered. We'll be posting details of our September competition later today!

Self-portrait September


For my sins, that's a portrait of me, by me

For the past month, and for the next couple of months, Haje will be immersed in self portraits as he writes his latest book. No, no, don't get the wrong idea! He doesn't boost his ego by surrounding himself with inspirational pictures of his mush when he's writing. He's writing about self-portraiture. We thought, then, that you might like to share your favourite self portraits for September's competition.

Dress up or dress down, drag out your tripod, and set your self-timer. We want pictures of you!

A 12" Fracture is up for grabs for the entry that captures our imagination.

Entries can be submitted to the Small Aperture Flickr pool from today (Friday 7 September) until Friday 26 Septembr 2012. The next bit I want to put in big letters, but that looks ugly, so I shall restrict myself to bold: it's one entry per person. Thank you.

In case you missed what I said last month about the attributes that we look for in photos, I'll reproduce it here:

Both Haje and I have written on the subject of winning photography competitions, so you might want to look at those articles. It's probably also worth knowing that for both us, the story in your image is key. Haje's a stickler for good lighting, I'm hot on composition, and if Gareth joins the party he'll always comment on sharpness.

The Rules are here for your reference. Otherwise, good luck!

The Rules

  • If you decide to enter, you agree to The Rules.
  • You can’t be related to either me or Haje to enter.
  • One entry per person – so choose your best!
  • Entries need to be submitted to the right place, which is the Small Aperture Flickr group.
  • There’s a closing date for entries, so make sure you’ve submitted before then.
  • You have to own the copyright to your entry and be at liberty to submit it to a competition. Using other people’s photos is most uncool.
  • It probably goes without saying, but entries do need to be photographs. It’d be a bit of strange photo competition otherwise.
  • Don’t do anything icky – you know, be obscene or defame someone or sell your granny to get the photo.
  • We (that being me and Haje) get to choose the winner and we’ll do our best to do so within a week of the competition closing.
  • You get to keep all the rights to your images. We just want to be able to show off the winners (and maybe some honourable mentions) here on Pixiq.
  • Entry is at your own risk. I can’t see us eating you or anything, but we can’t be responsible for anything that happens to you because you submit a photo to our competition.
  • We are allowed to change The Rules, or even suspend or end the competition, if we want or need to. Obviously we’ll try not to, but just so that you know.

If you've any questions, please just ask!

Looking back; thinking forward: the Fujifilm X-E1


Unless they're identical twins, siblings are never exactly alike. So Fujifilm's newest mirror-less camera, the X-E1, was never going to be a faithfully scaled-down version of the X-Pro1. Sure, it has a 16 megapixel APS-C X-Trans CMOS sensor, the same as the X-Pro1, but it doesn't have the hybrid viewfinder; instead it has a high definition 2.36 million dot OLED eletronic viewfinder. Fujifilm believes that this electronic viewfinder can provide 'an experience similar to an optical viewfinder,' though. And of course, it takes X-mount lenses.

Its sensitivity ranges from ISO 200 to 6,400, extendable to 100, 12,800, and 25,600. If you want to employ the ISO auto facility, it takes in 400 to 6,400, which is actually a smidge of an improvement on the X-Pro1, which only went up to 3,200.

You can make full HD video (1920×1080) at 24 frames per second, and there's an external microphone jack to help get the sound right.

Whilst that might seem a neat package of a camera, it isn't all.

Looking back; thinking forward

Digital might offer flexibility that dips its toes into the rivers bounding our wildest dreams, but it doesn't get everything right. Frequently, people bemoan the loss of texture and colour in digital images, and from Fuji's perspective, they needed to go back to film to get that right.

The X-Trans CMOS sensor (already seen in the X-Pro1) comprises random arrangements of 6×6 pixel sets, reminiscent of the randomly scattered grains of fine silver halide on film, instead of perfectly organised sets. This colour filter array should minimise moiré and false colours without the need for an optical low pass filter. Bring on the bright, clear renditions of images!

Perfect order and regimentation might be necessary in our photo libraries, but not on our sensors, it would seem.

A film for the future?

Earlier this year Fujifilm announced that it's ceasing production of some of film formats, notably in the Velvia range. For lots of people who shoot on film, this is hugely disappointing. Whilst it's debatable if digital can ever faithfully recreate film effects, Fuji isn't dismissing the possibility and seems to be taking it as a challenge. The X-E1 comes with a series of film simulation modes that aim to recreate the effects of shooting on particular Fujichrome films.

Velvia, Astia, and Provia are all covered, there are two colour negative film settings, two indoor shooting options, and three filters covering monochrome and sepia. There's also a bracketing function that allows you to apply three film simulation to the same exposure.

If these simulations are effective, and don't look too much like digital-made-to-look-like-film, then it's an awesome option for people who miss the texture of film but love the flexibility of digital. But neither should the business ramefications for Fujifilm be overlooked.

I certainly don't think that Fujifilm will be shutting down its film production facilities overnight; I don't even think that they'll do it soon. Too many people are still using it and it is trendy. However, if this technology does prove successful, there will be less and less reason to persist in its manufacture. It's as if Fujifilm is testing viability and reaction here, and setting in place its contingency plans for a film-free future.

Availability

The Fujifilm X-E1 is available in black or silver. Body-only, you're looking at $1000, come November. You might want to add one of the new X-mount lenses to your shopping list. There's a new 18-55mm ƒ/2.8 - 4 or a 14mm ƒ/2.8 on offer at $900 and $700 respectively.

What happened with camera sales in July?

I'm sure that there must be more thrilling ways to spend a Monday afternoon than analysing the shipment and sales data of Japanese camera manufacturers–I don't know, rearranging all the books on my shelves according to some idiosyncratic and completely inexplicable system?–but that is just how I've spent mine. (Please don't believe that I'm too bats, American readers; it isn't a Bank Holiday here in England today, that was last week.) Whilst carefully tabulated figures arranged according to camera type, region, and date might've made my eyes go slightly gooey at one point, there are some interesting points that their contemplation has thrown up.

Overall, the volume of sales of still cameras has fallen by roughly 22% this July compared with July a year ago. However, revenue from these sales has not dropped comparably; it's down by 8.4%. So we're buying fewer cameras, but paying more for them.

Most alarming for manufacturers will be the 28% drop in the number of compact cameras sold, and as a consequence the 32.3% drop in revenue from them.

For consumers, it's worth noting that we're buying marginally more interchangeable lens cameras; their shipment rates are up by 4.3%, but that manufacturers are generating more revenue from them. The value of this July's shipments increased 20.3% on last July's shipments. Furthermore, in the Americas and Japan, volume of sales has dropped, but value of sales has still increased. (In Europe, both volume and value of sales of interchangeable lens cameras has increased by roughly 21%.)

There isn't a breakdown of the sales of SLR cameras and EVIL cameras, however, and that I would be interested to see.

Still, what do these random figures actually tell us about the market? First, and not very hard to read: we're buying far fewer compact cameras. I'd hazard that it isn't just people don't feel the need to own a compact camera if they're happy with the camera in their smartphone, but that if they're feeling a bit cash-strapped, a new compact camera isn't necessarily high on the list of priorities.

Second, Europe might be keeping the numbers of interchangeable lens sales afloat, but for the manufacturers, their margins are in the Americas.

Third, if you compare the figures for July 2011 against 2010, compact camera shipments were falling then, but not as significantly as between 2011 and 2012. Furthermore, the volume of interchangeable lens camera shipments appears to be slowing down; they're up on last year, but not by as much as 2011's were on 2010's. The last 12 months has been generally bumpy for camera sales, not forgetting that the floods in Thailand had an impact on production and sales.

The world economy isn't in great shape, so no, people won't be buying as many exciting electronic gadgets and gizmos. People for whom cameras are a luxury, not a necessity, will make do (although not perhaps mend); maybe those of us for whom a camera is a necessity are being more discerning in our purchases? And maybe, perhaps, the camera market is reaching saturation point?


Data source: CIPA
Note: This article refers specifically to Japanese camera manufacturers. Full list here.

Commissioning a website


I’ve been creating websites since around 1996 or so. When I got started, Netscape Navigator Gold was the, er, gold standard for creating web pages – it even came with a HTML WYSIWYG editor built-in. Cutting edge stuff. Oh how things have changed.

Throughout my web-life, I’ve seen quite a few different sides of websites: I’ve designed some (badly). I’ve programmed a few. I’ve been the editor of some major sites; I’ve specced and project managed the build of a load of very high-end sites, including one for a national broadcaster and one for a mobile phone company you may have heard of.

I’ve worked in SEO. I’ve contributed to open-source projects. I became a certified Scrum product owner, and embraced agile project management… etc. I guess, since I’ve done all these different roles at some time, what I’m trying to say is that I’ve started to figure out how it all hangs together.

So, what follows is a ridiculously comprehensive guide to how you can work with various agencies to get a great web-site built for you or your company.

Why you need a website

img_2664_edit_edit.jpg

There are plethora reasons for why you might want a website. Your competitors might have one, perhaps you wish to make information easily available to your customers, or you may be considering selling your goods or services on the internet.

While it can be cheap and easy to just fling something out on the internet and see what happens, it is worth considering what your hopes and aspirations are for your site.

Attract new customers

Attracting new customers is a logical reason for a website. If you sell widgets, you want your customers to find you when they type ‘Widgets’ into a search engine. You want to impress them with your site, and ultimately, you want these potential customers to convert into actual money-spending customers.

A good web site can be a phenomenal sales tool: It can help you stand out from the competition with the unique selling points of your products and services. If your product is better than that of your competitor – make a big deal out of it. Is it cheaper? Your website is your PA system shout your bargain prices from the virtual rooftops!

Marketing to existing customers

Of course, it’s not just about convincing new customers about how awesome you are: your existing customers will also benefit from you having a website.

With existing customers, you have a few benefits already. For one thing, they know your brand and they trust the service you deliver. They will want to stay up to date on what your company is up to, and how your new products and services can make their lives easier. Your site can explain why the new versions of your new products are better than the old ones, and hopefully cause the orders to come rolling in.

Enhance your reputation

Websites are great repositories of information, and you can leverage this to help improve your reputation. You can be quite public about how great your customer service is, for example, by running customer support forums.

Even if the customer relations part of your business is classified due to sensitive clients (or you might simply decide it’s not in your interest to have everything publicly available), it is possible to distill questions that are repeatedly asked to your customer service team into a Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) document.

Imagine the delight of a customer who runs into a problem, Googles it in an effort to find a solution, and ends up on your own website, with a complete and thorough solution to their problem!

Such a scenario is a phenomenal user experience, which sticks in the mind of your customers. It wouldn’t be the first time that a negative product experience (they did need to search for help, after all) was turned into a very positive one because of a well made website. People realise that things go wrong some times, and truth is, some times you end up with a better image of a company which screwed up but made things right quickly and efficiently, than a company which didn’t make any mistakes in the first place!

The Virtual Pamphlet

There are many ways people can end up on your website, but all traffic has one thing in common: They are there for a reason, to complete an action of some description.

They might wish to find a mailing address for your company so they can send you a crate of wine after a job well done (Hey, we can’t but hope, right?), maybe they want to buy something you’re selling, or they could be searching for instructions about how to use or care for a product you’ve made or sold.

Your whole website is a representation of all these things: Helping your customers in the best way possible. But it’s important to remember that you can get more explicit, too – if you need your website to be a sales tool, make it work hard for you. Get your visitors interested, convince them that what you’re selling is what they are looking for, and spur them into action.

A font of information

Back in the day, if you needed any information about a business, you’d have to find the yellow pages, find their number and call them. You would be forwarded through a hellish maze of automated telephone machinery, before you finally get to speak to someone, just to ask a very simple question. We’ve come a long way, haven’t we?

These days, websites have taken over a lot of the basic information distribution. Where is the coffee bar? Their website will have a map. When is the film you want to watch on at your local cinema? Check out their website for film listings. What are the opening hours of the library down the road? Website. The most recent shareholders report, that press release which was sent out last week, and the mailing address for the eastern district office? Website, website, website.

A good website can save you a lot of time (and, therefore, money). Instead of having to put resources into answering simple questions over the phone, let your site do the heavy lifting. Of course, if you want this to be possible, your site has to be easy to navigate and make it intuitive to find the kind of information you are looking for. That’s where a good web design agency comes in.

Creating a good website

1c9a2946.jpg

So, by now you probably have a pretty good idea of the kind of things you want your website to accomplish. You might be thinking of ways it can help you save money, things it can do to help you make more money, and so on. You’ll have noted that we have used the phrase ‘good website’ above a few times… So what, exactly, makes a good website?

Content is King

Often, it is easy to get distracted right at the beginning building a new website. It is easy to get lost in the pretty colours and nifty features we can / will / should add to a new site. It’s crucial to remember one thing: None of that is as important as the content you will have available on your site.

It is often said that people aren’t prepared to visit a pretty site without content – but they are willing to suffer a horribly designed and poorly presented website to get to good content.

The lesson to take away from this is that you have to think about your content as much – if not more – than you think about how the site looks and works. If you are using videos, make sure they are well-produced, short, and to the point. Get a copywriter involved to make sure your written content is as hard-hitting and clear as it can be.

For every piece of content you decide to put on your website, think ‘How does this benefit our users’ and ‘how can we make this content better?’

Finally, remember that your website is like a chain of information, and your site visitors might enter your site at any point. That slightly ugly page with the profile of your CEO, which is hidden away somewhere in the depths of your site, and that you were meaning to update ages ago? That might be the first page a visitor sees if they Google for some obscure term – immediately giving them a negative impression of your site and your company.

The web is all about sharing – so endeavour to do some. Write blog posts or news stories when something exciting happens at your company. Share your victories, celebrate your triumphs, and encourage your staff to write interesting pieces about aspects of what you are working on.

By consistently providing relevant, interesting information, you gain a lot of benefits: In addition to becoming a de facto go-to place for information in your field, you will attract inbound links from relevant sites. In time, this should be a cornerstone in your Search Engine Optimisation (SEO) strategy in the long run. Don’t worry; we’ll talk about SEO later on in this guide.

Understand your medium

In order to create a good and efficient website, you have to understand your audience, the internet, and how the two of them connect.

Internet users are incredibly fickle: They won’t start by reading your headline, then your introduction, then the body of your text, like they might read a newspaper or a magazine.

Internet users tend to flick from one thing to another. They won’t scroll down to read more, they won’t read instructions on how to use your website, and they won’t be guided.

Web users are getting clever, and they have one ace up their sleeves: If your site doesn’t give them what they want, there is probably anything between a dozen and a million other sites offering exactly the same information. you have to make the content on your site count. Your text has to be engaging, short, and to the point. Unnecessary content will quite simply not be read: At best, it will be ignored and at worst, it might encourage users to abandon your website completely.

Another trap many people fall into is to include all sorts of gadgets on a website just because it is possible. Complicated Flash menus can look nice, and flashy address lists can be cool; but what is the added value to the people visiting the site?

§Skip the bells and whistles – instead, put more energy into helping your visitors find the information or perform the actions they want to complete on your website as smoothly and elegantly as possible. As soon as a visitor feels as if you’re wasting their time, they probably won’t be back.

Look at the bigger picture

When you’re in building-a-website mode, it’s very easy to forget that there are more things out there than just your website. The site is important, no doubt about that, but ultimately, it’s merely a smaller part of your overall marketing strategy.

Just to take an example: In your company, does everyone’s e-mail signature promote the website? Does your website promote your newsletter? Does your newsletter remind your readers of your hottest sales offers? Does your product documentation reference your website? Do your business cards add value to the overall mix? Do you send out sales letters? If so, do they integrate well with the rest of your marketing? Are your advertising efforts as efficient as they can be?

Everything your business does should sing part of the same symphony: Advertising, website, other marketing efforts, customer support, even the products or services themselves. If you have a colour scheme, it should be reflected everywhere. If you have a logo, use it all the time.

Your marketing message should be completely saturating all communication channels you have with your (potential) customers. In short: think about the bigger picture, and figure out how your website is part of this.

Blogging

1c9a2920.jpg

There is a subtle difference between having a news site, and running a good blog on your site. The distinction is further muddled by the fact that many news websites currently run on blog platforms like WordPress or Movable Type, and some blogs aren’t really blogs at all.

So, just to get the distinction right; if you are running a site with stories about what you’re doing at your company, without linking much to other sites, then you’re probably running news on your site. That’s perfectly fine, and can be an efficient tool, but the internet has moved on from there.

The word ‘blog’ came from ‘web log’ and started originally as just that: A ‘blogger’ would surf the internet, and discover new articles and sites. As they did, they gave their opinion on the site, news story, or event, sprinkled with links containing more information.

Good bloggers often serve as hubs of information, comparing different sources, analysing how the sources’ angles or opinions differ, and pick apart poorly-written or badly researched pieces about a specific topic on the ‘net.

Cornering the market with a blog

Blogging can be extremely valuable to your company from a business point of view, especially if your industry doesn’t have a go-to news source.

Say, for example, that you’re the manufacturer of a very specific type of hinge used in car doors. This hinge is better than that on all other car doors in the world: Your customers are car manufacturers. Your competitors are other hinge manufacturers. People who repair cars (or super-geeky drivers) might also be interested in what you might have to say.

There won’t be too many blogs out there specifically about car door hinges, which is a good thing: when you start it, you have an opportunity to corner the whole market. Get a good writer involved, and start writing.

What are you doing differently? Perhaps you can write comparatively about various alloys you’ve used in door hinges. Maybe you can show some of the experiments you did that went wrong, and how you can learn from them. You can keep your readers up to date with cutting-edge news, musings on the future of technology, or perhaps some historical articles, about how things were done 50, 25, or even 5 years ago…

Sounds lame, right? But trust me: You stand far better chances at getting an in-depth, loyal following on your company blog by writing about something very specific, than about whole cars.

Sure, more people are interested in whole cars, but there are sites out there with a huge writing staff, lots of marketing money, and plenty of other resources. By picking your target audience carefully, you can be the biggest fish in a tiny pond – speaking directly to your potential customers (the 200 or so people in the world who are interested in car door hinges), instead of people who might be interested (the billions of people who drive cars), but who ultimately aren’t going to spend as much as a penny with your company directly.

Of course, you’ll have to be careful so you don’t give away too much information – you don’t want to leak your carefully guarded industrial secrets to your biggest competitors, but on the flip-side, you have to be a little bit brave as well. If appropriate, you can consider to link to your competitors when they do something impressive, for example.

How does your blog help your business?

The internet is absolutely huge: Chances are that if you are doing something, then there are people out there who are interested in the same thing as you. These people have friends who are also interested in the same thing.

By blogging authoritatively about things your readers are passionate about, you’re inviting all sorts of positive behaviour: People might comment on your blog post with great ideas for new posts, improvements to current posts, and maybe even suggestions for improvements to your products.

Even if suggestions from your readers aren’t directly related, you’ll often find that crazy ideas from the hive-mind that is the internet have a core of a good idea in them – if something seems like a good idea, send it on to the product development team, and see what happens. If it’s rubbish, you may have wasted 10 minutes of their time. If it turns out to be a stroke of genius, you might have made your company a lot of money – just by monitoring the comments on your blog!

There are many other advantages, too: Good articles attract links from around the internet. When we see something we agree with, we’ll post it on Facebook. We’ll share it on our own blogs, or forward it to relevant news sites for potential inclusion. All these inbound links have a great side-effect in addition to the extra traffic: When search engines see that big, important websites are linking to your site, they realise that your site has grown in importance. That means that your site will rank better in the search engines

Finally, blogging is a way of promoting good press. Are people saying good things about you? Tell the world in your blog. Are you doing something awesome? Spread the word. Are you excited about something as a company? Here’s your zero-cost platform for making everybody know about it. The journalists covering your industry will definitely be reading your blog – and with a bit of clever PR and a good relationship with the relevant publications, it’s a great way of getting the positive press you’re hoping for!

Considering a microsite

20120515_00478.jpg

A microsite does exactly what it says: It’s a small, self-contained site. The purpose of a microsite is to create a site that has a specific goal, rather than just a set of pages that are part of a bigger site.

Creating a microsite has a few advantages: It doesn’t have to plug into your main content management system (CMS) and it can be designed quite differently than your main site. This means that if you need an ad-hoc site for an event or similar, it can be quicker to develop a microsite than to try and integrate the new (and potentially temporary) section into your main site.

Microsites for specific marketing goals

Imagine you’re a motorcycle manufacturer who makes two different types of motorbikes, for example: One is a large, Harley Davidson-style chopper, and the other is a smaller, race-focussed sports bike. You could try to fit them both into the same website, but the former would probably look best when photographed and surrounded by open highways and canyons, whilst the latter would be more at home leaned over going around the corner of a race track.

Using micro-sites gives you an opportunity: you could building a main site for your company, and then a couple of micro-sites to cover your motorcycle models would be easier: you could stay on brand and encourage your designers to create a perfect design for the respective bike types and the customers likely to buy them, instead of making a half-way compromise. In addition, it would make launching additional models (or removing outgoing models) much easier!

The great thing about using a microsite is that you can separate your customers easier, which enables more specific marketing messages, without having to worry about customers getting ‘lost’ in parts of the site which are less likely to be of interest to them.

Planning and contracts

20120514_00206.jpg

Before you go anywhere near a coloured pen or a line of code, you’ll have to do a spot of planning.

Launch Timelines

It’s worth considering the time frame of the launch: Does the site have to launch to coincide with a particular event or product launch? Would it be acceptable if the site was delivered late? If not, then you need to ensure that delivery timeframes and deadlines are specified in the contract(s) you have with your suppliers.

Bear in mind that time will not be treated as a critical factor by the law unless it is specified as such in your agreement. Ensure it’s black on white. If it’s particularly vital that the site is live on time, it is worth considering adding penalty clauses to the contract(s), to further incentivise the timely delivery of your site.

Standards and constraints

As part of your planning, you should also tackle some big questions that might help you later on.

These ‘big questions’ are often known as ‘constraints’ – they are over-arching rules that every page on your site has to conform to.

Examples of constraints could be what do you want your URLs and TITLE tags to, for example. This particular example which will come in very handy when it comes to marketing (like SEO – Search Engine Optimisation) later on. If it is defined as part of your planning, it’s easy to get it implemented as part of the project. Changing the URL and directory structure of your site just before launch might be possible, but it won’t be cheap!

At this point, you also need to set some standards: Which web standards are your developers and designers working to? How is the code structure going to work? To which level do you require compliance with accessibility legislation, like the Disability Discrimination Act? Should the site be accessible to colour-blind people? If so, to what level, and how will it be tested at the end? How will traffic to your site be tracked? If you are using Google Analytics or similar, how should it be implemented?

Remember to get all the constraints and standards written into your contracts – that way, there can be no confusion about what your expectations are, and if your designers or developers fail to deliver the site conforming to the agreed standards, you can send them back to the drawing board to get the work re-done or amended.

Support and hosting

Support doesn’t really come into it until the site is launched – but it is something that needs to be agreed and be ready well before the time comes.

The same goes with hosting: Do you need one server, or more? What levels of traffic are you expecting? Are you willing to accept any downtime, or do you need a more robust and redundant system in place?

Ensure that all the support and hosting questions are resolved early on – nothing is more frustrating than having a site ready to go, but no hosting platform ready to launch on!

Content management System

Another thing you need to think about is whether you want to use a Content Management System (CMS).

Sites that are updated only very infrequently might not need a CMS. In some situations, it is easier to simply re-upload certain pages when they need to be updated. On the other hand, this does demand a technician with CSS, HTML, and some design skills to be at hand whenever you want to make a change to the site, and might mean that you would have to contact your web design company to make even minor adjustments to the site.

Most modern sites use a CMS, to make it easier to update content. The difference is that instead of uploading new files, you log into the CMS, and make changes there. Depending on the CMS and its configuration, you may be able to create new sections, pages, news articles, and edit the front page from the CMS, in a much more user-friendly way than editing the HTML code of your site manually.

Many CMSes are created so they are as easy to use as your online email service (like Hotmail or Google Mail): You simply click ‘new’ to create a new page or news article, and to edit one, you would click on it and type away.

Many CMSes have dynamic functionality that goes far beyond what is possible with uploaded ‘static files’. You might be able to set a press release to get published at a specific time, for example, or your site might be able to keep track of the stock levels of your products, so people aren’t able to buy more of a certain product when you are sold out.

Keeping data safe and secure

20120228_img_0896.jpg

The Internet can be a nasty place, and accidents do happen, unfortunately. You can never plan for all eventualities, but you can try, of course!

Security

Up front, it is worth thinking about how secure your site needs to be. If you only want a simple page showing the opening times of your nightclub, you probably don’t need to worry too much about security – although it would be good if nobody could hack into the site to change your opening hours or, much worse, distribute viruses or similar.

If you are storing data about people (names, addresses, etc), you immediately need to be more careful with security. How do you store this data? Who has access to it? How easily would a hacker be able to break in to download this information, or how difficult would it be to intercept it in transit?

Of course, if you are going to take payments via the internet, that raises the stakes even further. People would be (rightfully) upset if their e-mail address was leaked to a group of spammers, but the severity of the situation grows a lot as soon as credit card or bank details are involved.

If you’re planning to take payments, it’s worth involving a security consultant early on, to discuss what an acceptable level of security would be. Does your user data need to be encrypted? Does your site need to use HTTPS and a security certificate?

Is your data sensitive enough that you should worry about more than just external risks? What about potential disgruntled employees? How much access to sensitive data would an intern or work experience student have on your systems?

You may also consider whether you need to log all changes made to the site, multi-level access control (so some site users can read, edit, or delete only some bits of content, for example).

As a rule of thumb, more secure is more expensive from a development point of view – and if the risks are high enough, you may want to look into additional insurance as well, in case something does go wrong!

Backups

Even if nobody gets access to your data and tries to hack or steal it, remember that you need to protect it from mishaps. Hard drives break some times, data centres can go down, or there might be a bug in your software which causes it to corrupt or damage the data in some way.

Everyone who has lost a Word document at some point knows the importance of saving your data and taking regular back-ups, but this is even more important for business-critical data that might be stored on your web server.

There are myriad ways of doing backups in a web context, and everybody’s requirements will be different. Our best advice is to work with your web host or development company to create a good backup plan which is redundant, backs up often, and is easy to restore.

Considering Open Source software

20120122_img_6692.jpg

Open source software is ‘free’ software that offers some unique challenges and opportunities. Some open source projects are extremely active, secure, and well-developed, others are not quite as robust.

Using an open source software package as the basis for your own web site might save you a tremendous amount of time. After all, why should you waste your time and money creating a new blogging platform when there are half a dozen great ones to choose from?

Using open source can be a lucrative shortcut to your ideal site, but if you need to make customisations, remember that the way this is done is important. Some open source software works using ‘plug-ins’, which means that the core software can be updated without affecting your customisations. This is useful, because that means you get the full benefit from the open source community: Bug- and security fixes can be added to your site whenever they are released, keeping your site safer.

Some argue that open source poses a risk in itself: because the source code is available, in theory, hackers can look at the source code to find vulnerabilities and use it to attack your site. On the bright side, these kinds of bugs and weaknesses are often fixed very quickly on active open source projects – this is why it is extremely important to keep your site updated with the most recent software.

Special considerations when using open source

Not all open source software is completely free; some is only free for personal use, for example, and if you want to make money off your website, it could fall in another category. Your web development company should be able to advise you, but you should certainly obtain a guarantee from your developers that the software licences have been properly complied with.

In addition, the use of open source software increases the importance of including clauses in the contract related to the provision of support: Who is responsible for keeping the software up to date? Who fixes bugs when new ones are discovered?

Building the website

20120117_img_3347.jpg

The kids who live down the street from you are probably able to build a website. When you’re aiming for professionalism and more advanced build, however, it’s quite important to keep in mind that different people have quite different skills – and they all need to do different things.

A website usually starts with a goal – or a series of goals. The website for a shop, for example, might have “Helping customers find information about the shop”, “Increasing footfall to the shop” and “selling things online” as goals. To reach these goals, you need to jump through a series of hoops, which usually involves a series of different people.

If you are building a very complicated site, you might need to get an information architect involved, to find out which types of data you are storing, how they need to interact, etc. Most sites don’t need this step, and jump straight to…

Functional design

The design step. Now, it’s crucial to understand that we’re not talking about the ‘pretty pictures’ yet in this case. The graphical part of the site comes later.

The first design step is ‘functional design’ – basically, which part of the site is meant to do what? What happens when you search on the site? What happens if you subscribe to a newsletter? Which benefits does a logged-in user have, compared to an anonymous user? All of these things are addressed at the ‘functional design’ stage of a build. This should include things like what goes on each page, and should also outline the ‘business logic’ behind each step a user can make.

Let’s use the example of a shop, for example: Do you want to list your products alphabetically, by type, by price, or by some other order? If you want categories, are these defined up front, or are they changeable later on?

All of these choices are extremely important, and need to be considered up front. If you decide in the beginning of your project, for example, that all products are always ordered alphabetically, and later decide that your users should be able to order them by price, you might get a nasty surprise, because the site might not be coded with this in mind. So: As far as possible, think of all the functionality up front.

It is often a good idea to get some advice from an SEO agency or consultant as part of the functional design as well: some of the things search engines are very finicky about can be very tricky to fix late on in a project!

There are a few possible ways to deliver a functional design – usually, you would expect wireframes and a functional specification as outcomes of this step.

User testing!

Now that your functional design is well on its way, it is worth thinking about getting the site user-tested.

This can seem quite abstract, because we haven’t created any designs yet, but it is possible to talk your user through your wireframes. The idea is to take a small sample of your users through a user journey.

Set them a task: buying a hammer from the shop, for example, and ask them how they would go about it.

You’ll find that some of your users would reach for the search bar. Others might start browsing the ‘hardware’ section. But then, there might be someone else who wants to do something in a different way, or who gets stuck, because want to put ‘Claw hammer’ in the search box. Your shop doesn’t sell claw hammers, but what should happen when someone searches for something that doesn’t exist? Should you just tell them ‘no results found’, or should your site make a guess, and show a list of all hammers you have available?

These are the kind of things that even the best-prepared teams forget about from time to time, and a good group of user testers can give great recommendations to your site. If they find something major (say, 80% of your users want to search for ‘hammer’, but you don’t have a search function for your shop), you may have to go back to the Functional design to solve these problems.

Testing can seem like a step that is easily skipped, but the worst nightmares of website builds happen when you realise a problem too late: Then, you have to re-do a lot of work, which can cost a small fortune.

In general, for testing, the rule is ‘test early, test often’. It is better to spend a little bit of extra money on over-testing your site with actual users, than discovering the day before launch that there’s a huge flaw in your structure.

If you can afford it, spend a bit of money on testing, certainly after functional design, and again before the designs are fully polished. It’s incredible how frequently you’ll hear a test user say ‘Hey, but wouldn’t it be easier if…’

Develop the site

The outcome of the two previous steps is that we know exactly what the site is going to do, and which pages we need. The next logical step is to start developing.

Development is usually done by a separate team of specialists: developers. These are people who can write program code which makes your website do things: Output dynamic pages, process and store data, etc.

Some times, you might be best off with a simple off-the-shelf solution like a blog or similar, in which case the ‘development’ phase is practically nonexistent.

In other cases, you might want an existing software package adjusted with additional functionality, you might want some of the functionality changed for some reason, or you may decide to get the web site written completely from scratch.

Web forms, downloads, online shops, commenting forms, online help, forums… All of these things need to be coded (or at least implemented) by developers.

During development, the developers will make sure that the functionality of the site matches your functional design and the spec. Ideally, at the end of development, all the functionality of the site should be in place, but it won’t look very good yet, because it hasn’t yet received the beautiful design.

That is done by another team again, however…

Web design

There are many types of designers out there – Graphical designers tend to create printed designs, like posters, magazines, etc. Product designers design everything you see around you – the monitor you are reading this on, the computer it is connected to, down to the little switches and buttons you have in your car.

For your website, you’ll want a web designer – these are specialists in making web sites work well and function beautifully.

Design is a very subjective thing, and getting the look and feel of the site right is important, but it is much less important than you would imagine: As we’ve said before, people are willing to suffer a horribly designed site to get at good content and functionality. There’s no point in having a beautiful site that doesn’t work, or that doesn’t have good content.

Think of the web design as a thin layer of paint on top of all the things that happen ‘under the bonnet. It is often much easier to change a colour – or even the complete layout of a site – than it is to change significant things about the functionality of the site.

For huge projects, it might be a good idea to do a series of ‘concept designs’ – well-polished versions of a few key pages on your site. That way, you can decide whether the designers are moving in the right direction, or if you’d rather they did something different.

These concept designs can also be shown to your board of directors (if your organisation has one), your friends, and other people around your organisation. Getting feedback at this stage is very useful, because the concept designs are relatively simple to change.

It is often a good idea to user-test at the web-design step as well – Get some of your target users together, and get them to give feedback. Is the text easy to read? Do the colours look good? Do the users ‘feel’ as if they have a deeper understanding of the brand and what you are doing with your site?

Once you’ve agreed on the concept designs, it’s time to do the detail designs of all the pages required on the site.

Design implementation

Once the designers have done their bit, they hand it back over to a team of developers.

The people who did the development of the functional spec are often known as ‘back-end developers’; they do the heavy lifting in getting the site to do what you want it to. This time around, you might find that you need a different team of coders: The front-end developers.

As you might be aware, there are lots of different web browsers (like Firefox and Internet Explorer) out there, and your site has to work well in most of the browsers your target audience is likely to use. This is a specialised field of development that is quite different from the work the back-end guys did for you before.

Implementing design often takes a significant amount of time – and if you want changes done after this is completed, you’re often talking about a significant investment. This is why it’s a good idea to try to get the ‘look and feel’ of the site nailed down firmly before the design implementation phase.

User acceptance testing

An oft-overlooked phase of development is UAT – or User Acceptance Testing. This is done by the client (that’s you!) to ensure that the website you have had developed now is actually the website you were expecting.

If things on your brand new site don’t look like the detailed designs, if your site search doesn’t work, if users are unable to create an account, or if a particular page looks wonky in the Safari browser on a Mac, you’ve got a challenge on your hands. Often, this would mean that the project needs to be sent back to the relevant designers or developers to get fixed.

At this step, you will also want to re-visit the standards you set in the beginning of the project. Is everything compliant with relevant laws, like the Disability Discrimination Act? Do all pages validate to the design- and development standards you specified?

Content

Now that you have a shiny new site, it’s right back to the point we made in the start of this guide: Content. Before you launch the site, you need to add content to it (also known as ‘populating’ your site).

If you’ve got a shop, you may need to add pictures, descriptions, prices, and stock levels etc. If you’re running a news site, you’ll need to consider how many articles you want at launch, etc. Do remember, though: The content is more important than the design and more important than the functionality.

Get the content wrong, and your site isn’t going to work. That sounds pretty scary, right? The great news is that great content is automatically also good for SEO: Good articles tend to attract links, people send the pages to their friends, and you connect better with your visitors, too – it’s much easier to create good content and get people excited about it, than to try to put a marketing sheen on content which is rubbish.

Let’s get it out there!

20111229_img_0043.jpg

Launch strategy

The day of the launch, what happens? Are you just going to flick a switch? What happens to your old site? If you already have a site out there, it’s important to not alienate your current users in the process.

Both from a usability point of view and from an SEO point of view, you’ll want your old URLs redirecting to your new pages as well as possible. In addition, these redirects need to be the correct type of redirects (specifically, 301: Moved Permanently redirects are preferable).

Marketing

Now that you’re ready to get your site out there, you need to think about how you’re going to launch it. Are you going to just release it and see what happens, or are you operating a PR drive? Will you be doing advertising? Are you going to start an SEO push to get your site ranking better in the search engines as soon as possible?

Online marketing is a big, complicated mish-mash of many specialist fields. We’ve already mentioned SEO, but there is also Search Engine Marketing (SEM), which covers the paid-for advertising, like the contextual advertising that comes up when you search for something in, say, Google.

In addition, you might want to do a social marketing push to get ‘buzz’ around your site on Twitter, Digg, Reddit, Del.icio.us, Facebook, MySpace, and all the other social networking sites which your target audience might interact with. You may also wish to attempt a ‘viral’ campaign, which is related to all of these, but is a different set of specialists again.

In conclusion

Creating a website isn’t easy, and there are many pitfalls – our top advice would be to find a design and development company which isn’t afraid to give you advice, when they think they have a better solution than the one you have in mind.

Every day, millions of pounds are made on-line, and it’s time that you saw some of that money: Follow this guide, and you’ll be well on your way.

Good luck!

Subscription fees set to soar at SmugMug


SmugMug's new pricing scheme

There's a bit of a ruckus going on over at the blog of online portfolio and printing service, SmugMug, right now. It's all very polite and restrained, but there are a lot of angry and confused photographers trying to make themselves heard, and I don't really blame them.

Last night, an email dropped into the inboxes of some of SmugMug's members, informing them of changes to their subscription plans. 'That's not so bad,' you say, 'businesses need to earn a profit and they need to evolve,' and you'd be right. Except that some SmugMug users might be paying 66% more on their current fee for the same service, whilst others might be paying the same fee for a reduction in features. A bit steep, no?

Until now, SmugMug had three levels of subscription: Basic, Power, and Pro. They cost $40, $60, and $150 a year respectively. All of the accounts offered unlimited photo storage; the Power account offered a customised domain and site along with unlimited HD video storage; finally the Pro account added the ability to sell your images with your own markup and offer promotional coupons if you wanted, too. There were other bits and pieces, as well, but those were the key features.

Come 15 October, Pro users' accounts will be split into two categories: Portfolio and Business. Portfolio will cost $150 a year and offer (amongst other things) domain and site customisation, watermarking, and professional print options. The Business plan will be $250 per year for existing subscribers, whilst new users will be expected to fork out $300 each year for the privilege of all that's available to Portfolio users, with the addition of the ability to sell their prints at prices they set, the provision of discount coupons, and customised packaging, along with some other bits and pieces.

Consequently, existing SmugMug Pro users who wish to continue to sell prints through the site will have to pay an extra $100 a year for the convenience. SmugMug has made a rough guess at which of its subscribers will want to renew with Portfolio subscriptions and which with the Business plan and sorted them accordingly, but they can alter their preferences come renewal time if they wish, and that's just as well. There are a lot of SmugMug subscribers expressing their dismay, disappointment, and disgust on the SmugMug blog. It isn't just that a $100 increase in fees is a significant sum in one go (hell, if my car insurance renewal were to increase $100 in one go, I'd be looking for an alternative) but that SmugMug isn't offering any tangible benefits alongside it. In fact, users claim that they've been asking for feature improvements for some time, but nothing has been forthcoming. They're not too happy about the idea of paying for something that might or might not happen.

The platitude that SmugMug hasn't increased its prices in seven years isn't having the desired effect on riled subscribers. If anything, it's a claim that smacks of bad business practice, not only because SmugMug's directors haven't reacted appropriately to the market over the last few years, but SmugMug is likely to force its low band-width users–those who can no longer justify the cost of a Portfolio account, but put the least strain on the servers and therefore provided the business with its highest margins–into self-imposed exile. They might down-grade their accounts to Power level (which doesn't offer printing options), or look elsewhere. Either way, SmugMug would lose a valuable revenue stream; one user has gone so far as to suggest its a decision that could lead to the company's demise by summer 2013.

That's possibly a little over-reactionary, because there are a great many SmugMug users who love the operation, and in particular its customer service, and appreciate the up-front manner that Chris MacAskill, SmugMug's president, set out the changes. But it doesn't change the fact that it's a lot of money to ask for without any appreciable improvements.

There's been quite a lot of talk of users switching portfolio and print providers. So what, then, are the alternatives? If you're only looking for portfolio providers then there's the cutely named (and themed) Carbonmade and the far more grown-up looking Viewbook. If you want the SmugMug Pro experience (portfolio and printing) but without the pricing, then Zenfolio is the most commonly named alternative, but I've heard very good things about Photoshelter and I've enjoyed good experiences with Photoswarm.

Any other suggestions out there?

The ultimate pancake lens?

A team of applied physicists at the Harvard School of Engineering and Applied Sciences have recently created an ultra-thin lens that's capable of focusing light almost on the limits of the laws of diffraction. 

At 60 nanometres thick, the lens is roughly 1000 times thinner than a human hair and essentially two-dimensional. It's made by plating a super-thin wafer of silicon with a nanometre-wide layer of gold. The gold is then stripped away to leave a pattern of v-shaped arrows on the silicon's surface.

Shine a laser onto the silicon-gold surface and the gold v-shaped arrows act as nanoantennae that capture the light, hold on to it briefly, and then release it again. By calibrating the length of the delay between capturing and releasing the light waves, the direction of the light can be changed: you have, then, a super-thin lens. A super-thin lens that doesn't suffer from optical aberrations, like the fish-eye effect. Whatever the signal it's detecting, the resulting image should be perfect and won't need to be corrected. Sure, sometimes we like the distortion that we get off of our wide angle lenses, but not all the time.

By changing the specific size, angle, and spacing of the nanoantennae, they can be tuned to particular wavelengths of light, too.

At the moment, these lenses are operating at wavelengths that we use for fibre-optic communication. But there's potential to use them to create flat microscope objectives.

As far as the lead author of the research paper, Francesco Aieta, is concerned, these flat lenses could entirely change the manufacture of optical products: 'In the future we can potentially replace all the bulk components in the majority of optical systems with just flat surfaces.'

And from then, perhaps the ultimate pancake lens?


With thanks to the Harvard School of Engineering and Applied Sciences, and my friend Colin.

How the iPhone copes with only having a f/2.8 aperture


If you ask any photographer whether they would be willing to take photos with a fixed focal length lens, many would say 'yes'. Prime lenses are as old as photography itself, and there are many excellent reasons to embrace them. Ask the same photographer if they'd be happen to work with a fixed-aperture lens, however, and you wouldn't get many good responses.

And yet, this is the reality of taking photos with an iPhone 4: It doesn't matter how bright or dark your scene is, you're stuck with a f/2.8 aperture lens. This is a problem if you want to use the iPhone with an external flash (not that you could anyway - here is why) - but how does the iPhone cope with extremely bright situations?

The lower limits

As you (probably) know, an exposure is controlled by 3 factors: ISO, Aperture and shutter speed. If aperture is fixed, you have to deal with any lighting situations with the other two. In low light, the iPhone will ramp up the ISO.

In fact, if I press my iPhone against a dark surface and take a photo, the camera reveals its limits:

photo_2_2.jpg

This incredibly boring photo reveals the limits of the iPhone's camera: It won't use slower shutter speeds than 1/15th of a second, and it won't go beyond ISO 1,000:

screen_shot_2012_08_16_at_150955.jpg

The upper limits

Similarly, it's easy to test the iPhone's upper limits, by pointing the camera at a ridiculously bright light source. The sun will do. This photo:

photo_2.jpg

... Reveals the other set of extremes:

screen_shot_2012_08_16_at_151109.jpg

... Which is that whilst the iPhone is still stuck at f/2.8, the maximum shutter speed is an incredible 1/30,000th of a second.

Putting these two figures together (about 4 EV steps of ISO and another 11 EV steps of shutter speed) reveals the exposure range available to an iPhone  photographer: an impressive 15 stops of difference from the lowest light to the brightest lighting situations.

Of course, this is nothing compared to the extreme shutter speed, aperture, and ISO ranges of modern SLR cameras, but hey - it's not bad for a device you keep in your pocket at all times!

Make over your portfolio


When I first started to use Lightroom to post-process my images, I described its non-destructive capability as being able to go back to your teacher and ask for a new sheet of drawing paper when you'd messed up your finger-painting by adding a few too many red splodges. When you're editing your work first time around, this is marvellous, wondrous, and often absolutely heaven-sent. But what about second time around? Third time around? A few years down the road? You change, you learn more, fashions change, and suites are upgraded. You can still go back, dig out that original Raw file, and edit it all over again. Gareth is here to tell precisely why you should be doing this.

Today, we're going to look at some photos with horrible processing and make fun of them. You might think that is harsh, cruel, or even downright bad form, but I don't care: I'm here to kick the ever-loving shingles out of these images because they're bad. Compositionally and conceptually, they're fine, but the processing on them is horrible. So we're going to tear them apart (semi-constructively) and tell you what's bad about them, and how bad or unnecessary processing can lead to an inferior portfolio, and what you can do to improve your existing work without leaving your computer.

olddad.jpg

Easy on the clarity slider, buddy – I can only imagine this chap thought 'Maybe if I keep hitting "sharpen", the image will get better and better every single time! I've seen Manny Librodo's stuff – everyone loves that guy. Let's copy it!'

Add to that the weird yellow glow which I can only imagine is coming from a nearby burning Lancaster Bomber and you have an introspective moment ruined by gaudy, overblown highlights and a shirt that STANDS OUT like a neon, strobe-lit fifty foot long thumb. Ugh.

oldinaba.jpg

Someone get some ice on that guy's cheek, it appears to be approaching 1,000 degrees Celsius. Not only that, but I'm pretty sure that's a wig: nobody's hair is THAT shiny.

oldmoly.jpg

Now this is an absolute cracker. What better way to draw attention away from the background than to put a massive, gaudy vignette around your image? I mean he might as well have put a large, red arrow pointing at the subject, accompanied by the words 'HERE! THE THING YOU SHOULD BE LOOKING AT IS THE DUDE IN THE MIDDLE. OK? GLAD I COULD HELP, DUDE.'

As for the headshot, I see the Germans took down another one of our brave pilots. Better move away from that burning wreckage, my friend – it looks like you're within about a metre of it.

The Not-at-all-obvious Reveal

These photos all have something in common: they're all my photos. 'Crikey O'Reilly of the First Degree!' I hear you exclaim, as your monocle pings out and shoots across the room, ricocheting off your cat, Mr Plot Twist, and sends him screeching and careering out of the room.

We all know it's very easy to allow your online portfolio to go stale: we diligently replace our old images with new, better work, ensuring only a representative and varied handful of our best work is on display at all times. Don't we? Admittedly sometimes we forget, and we all probably need to update, replace and trim the deadwood more often than we do. However, there is another way a portfolio can go stale, something that is much harder to detect: I'm talking about our processing.

My process of keeping my online portfolio up to date usually goes as follows: look over recent shoots and pick some of my absolute favourite images, look at my existing online work, hold a sort of faux television talent show where I print out all the photos, consider each one intently, and then pause for a ludicrously long time–giving everyone involved the collywobbles, or just sending them catatonic with boredom–before announcing who's made the cut and is still in with an opportunity of landing themselves a Christmas number one and first album deal that everyone will promptly ignore after the next series. Oh, sorry, no, just a place on my website. But anyway, the point is, I clean out the deadwood and ensure that only my best work is on display... except there's something I've missed.

With every portfolio update, there are always a couple of images that never get cut. This usually is either down to them having a particularly interesting quality or because they are notable in some other way, such as being a portrait of someone well known (or well known in the videogame world, in my case). The problem is, these images tend to evade scrutiny with each portfolio update. Well it hit me the other day when looking at some of my images that survive the cut every time, just how rough the processing was and how much I had learned since I'd first taken them, processed them, and uploaded them with a glowing sense of pride to my website.

I decided to pull the original files off my backup external hard drive (you are all backing up your images, right?) and reprocess some from scratch. Not only did they look better, thanks to a more careful post-processing approach than my previous, ham-fisted attempts, the reprocessed images actually helped my portfolio look stronger as a whole, as these new images now fitted into to the overall aesthetic a lot better. What I ended up with was a more consistent look which reflects my current style, instead of a fairly consistent style punctuated by nasty little poorly processed shots.

It's a really great, uplifting thing to do: I was happy with what I had captured in these images but shocked at how I had treated them in post. In addition, it allowed me to reflect on what lessons I had learned from my days as a naive, wet-behind-the-ears but terribly enthusiastic post-processor to where I am today.

One of my biggest lessons? You don't need to over-process everything. Sometimes a shot benefits from an aggressive filter. Sometimes a vignette is appropriate: it depends on your customer, the target audience, and the theme.

For example, although I reprocessed a couple of the photos of game designer and artist Keita Takahashi, I retained the aggressive processing, because the images are intended to reflect Takahashi's wild and bizarre imagination. Seeing as the background is a mural painted by Takahashi himself, I wanted the images to feel like we were inside his imagination.

taka.jpg

More often than not, however, filtering and gaudy effects are unnecessary and often detract from the final image. Keep your eye on what's interesting in the original image and draw out that; if there's nothing of interest there, then it's probably not the photo for your portfolio.

Another lesson learned was the importance of good cropping, an understanding and respect of the power of composition and how it can can draw out a lot more from an image than a gaudy filter. 

moly.jpg

I looked at the image of Peter Molyneux sat at a table with the counters properly for the first time in a long time and wanted to crawl into a very tiny space, never to emerge, feeding on moss and small insects that were unlucky enough to scuttle into my awful, fauxtographic gobhole. What was I thinking adding that horrendous vignette?! If I wanted to draw attention to the subject, a good crop would do a significantly better job than a vignette on a whiteboard.

And just for completeness, here are the re-edited versions of the other two originals:

dad.jpg

 

inaba.jpg

It will hurt and it will force you to critically tear your own work apart but it's a bit like doing the vacuuming: the longer you leave it, the worse it will get, but you'll feel so much better afterwards.

 


The illustration is by the talented James of Sweet Meats Illusttration.

 

EISA awards 2012-2013: a bit like the Oscars


Nikon's D800: best over all camera 2012-2013

Righty-ho, the European Imaging and Sound Association (also known by the slightly more speaker-friendly term 'EISA') awards announcements took place this week, but so far the winners seem to have dribbled forth somewhat unsatifactorily, rather than presented themselves in a victorious flourish. So I thought that I'd rectify that as far as the photo awards were concerned. (There are other categories, too, like in-car electronics and green and whilst they might be interesting, this is a photography website.)

Actually, before I get on to the awards, in case you're wondering just who or what EISA is, and by what sort of authority they decide that this camera is better than that one, it's a group of 50 special interest magazines from 20 different countries. It's the likes of Amateur Photographer from the UK and Focus from the Netherlands who discuss winners and losers.

Okay, enough whitter, more winners.

The overall best camera for 2012-2013 was judged to be the Nikon D800. The judges thought that its resolution rocked, that its dynamic range and noise levels at high ISO were uncompromised, its 51-point autofocusing mechanism (the same as in the D4) was superb, and for the price it represented super value. Canon has held the top overall spot for the past two years, so Nikon might be smiling to itself about now.

However, Canon was by no means empty-handed. Its 5D MkIII waltzed off with the Advanced SLR prize and the Powershot G1X was named best overall compact camera, with the judges stating that its image quality can compete with many dSLRs. The gushing praise for the G1X was in strange contrast to the 5D MkIII; its blurb reads as if the judges knew it needed to win, but couldn't quite determine why.

The D800 wasn't Nikon's only success, either. The D4 was named as the professional SLR of choice, for its outstanding image quality, even in difficult shooting conditions, low noise, super-fast autofocusing capability, and a rugged design.

Meanwhile, over all favourite SLR went to the Sony SLT-A57. For the price it offers an impressive spec, great image quality, and is the perfect base for Sony to build on, and importantly, for photographers to progress.

Sony made the grade in two other categories: best travel compact went to the Cyber-shot HX20V and best advanced compact was the hot new RX-100. Sony has performed consistently well with its compacts at EISA, which suggests that it's getting something right there. Best tough compact went to the Olympus TG-1.

The spoils for the EVIL cameras were shared between Fujifilm, Olympus, and Samsung. (Be warned: each camera will now sound as if it belongs to a comic book super-villain clan.)  The Fujifilm X-Pro1 was named as best professional EVIL on the basis of its exceptional lens, great build, and revolutionary sensor design. The overall best EVIL was the Olympus OM-D E-M5, with the judges seeming to love its homage to cameras of yesteryear. Finally, the advanced EVIL title went to the Samsung NX20.

As for the lenses, the winners were Sigma, Tamron, and Panasonic. Sigma for its 150mm ƒ/2.8 Macro; Tamron for the 24-70mm ƒ/2.8; and Panasonic for its Lumix G Vario 12-35mm ƒ/2.8. (ƒ/2.8 is the new black, clearly.)

Last but not least, Adobe's Lightroom 4 was given the honours as best editing suite.

Now, whether or not any of these awards will influence your purchasing at all, I have no idea. I shan't be going out to buy a Nikon D800 because 50 magazine editors said it was awesome. But I suppose it's a bit like the Oscars: just because it might not make a huge deal of difference other than being able to stick an 'I am an award winner' label on the box, it's always lovely to get a seal of approval.