Evening clouds

Shot on the way up to Port Arthur, TX.
...

Choosing your web site host

Below I'm copying my article from a forum. I'm hearing about people experiencing problems with hosting providers. While the overwhelming choice isn't helping, you need to employ patience in the search, so once you upload your web site, you're not going to start loosing sleep over it soon after. And always DO READ the fine print. If you don't see one, ask for it.

I have a couple of hosts that I highly recommend. Each is somewhat different. First is great for a single site, second for multiple sites.

First is: Webstrike Solutions. This is a high quality host for not much money, although the cost is somewhat higher than you may be used to seeing. I used to host with them and was nothing but extremely happy with overall service, support, server up-time and site accessibility. They have recently updated their site and packages, but did leave ONE major advantage intact: you pay $30 set up fee and you have your site hosted for 12 months with no other charges. This is especially great for the uncertain ones, who are contemplating their own site, but cannot decide. If you cancel by the end of the 12-month period, you pay nothing more. Check their packages, it's worth a few minutes of your time.

I left Webstrike for unrelated reasons and am currently hosting with Host Gator. I simply needed a reseller package and the flexibility of setting up unlimited domains, something Webstrike did not have (and still doesn't I believe). Host Gator has been very good and I have no plans looking for a change at this time.

This is, of course, only a couple of good hosts. There is more, but there is far more bad ones.

So the word of caution for those who fall for the cheap $5 per month / 50gB storage packages. It never works that way. It sounds too good and IT IS. If you're not sure what to choose, log on to Web Hosting Talk. There is enough to keep you busy for days. In fact, it might get a bit overwhelming at first, but read on and you'll finally see through all the scams. Remember also, that many will "supply" good care in the early stages of your agreement. That's especially true, if you signed up long term and have a 30-day "leave-for-no-reason" guarantee.
...

The "American Queen"

"American Queen" - one of the few remaining river boats on the Mississippi. Here cought on a misty morning alongside in New Orleans, LA.
...

Foggy riverside

Yet another foggy day in the Mississippi river. Mornings are usually best. As the sun rises things change fast, although if the sky has "holes", it may bring along very interesting lighting.
...

Small web site about skansens in Poland

I have put together a small web site about open air museums (skansens) in southeastern Poland. I will add more images in a near future, as well as more info, directions, maps etc. Worth a trip, if you're headed that way.
...

Tank farm

Light (thus time of the day) plays big part in the way tank farms get rendered. It's like a never ending game of highlights and shadows going at each other.
...

Exposing for RAW?

There is an interesting article in 2007 November issue of Digital Photo Pro magazine (which I frequently enjoy) about exposing for RAW. It brings up an unknown to many (including myself) issue of using camera LCD preview and histogram as means of correcting exposure WHILE shooting RAW. What's the problem, one might ask?

Assuming the author is correct (as I have no way of checking that out, but have no reason to believe otherwise), the histogram and LCD preview on ALL digital cameras are based on processed JPEG file, EVEN if you only shoot RAW. This means that one is looking at a (vastly) different data that RAW records. In extreme cases, your RAW will horribly disappoint later on. You may get to thinking: what did I do wrong? everything looked great on the histogram?

One: keep above in mind in such situations

Two: try to adjust your camera JPEG settings to see if you can get preview match RAW more closely (useless if you shoot JPEG also and unlikely to give you exact match)

Three: learn correct exposure techniques so you rely on the technique rather than the preview/histogram

The mentioned article (titled: Exposing for RAW by Andrew Rodney) is about a so called ETTR technique, that's Expose To The Right, or expose for highlights and develop for such. Film shooters may remember the EFSDFH (expose for shadows develop for highlights), which in most cases gave us the most printable negative. However, the bottom line is only one:

expose to ensure detail where it counts most, yet don't lose the highlights (unless this is your wish, of course)

I can't copy the whole article here (obviously), but I do recommend reading it. It might just fix some of your shooting techniques. The whole article is available HERE. You can even print it.

Digital Photo Pro is a bimonthly magazine targeting the digital photographer. It is (in my opinion) a high quality publication, although somewhat uneven issue to issue. It goes at newsstand for $5.99 and can be subscribed to for much less.

Sailing in the "dust"

Foggy Mississippi river.

This ooold house

Shot in skansen in Sanok, southeastern Poland.

Preserving planet Earth

Can we really live without this?

Love the chimneys

Chalmette, LA

More options from Picasa

This image had a "graduated filter" applied, followed by "filtered B&W" and cropped. I'm working on a set of effects for Picasa feature comparison.

Nostalgic New Orleans

It's 17:45 on January 20th, 2008. The sun has set, but life continues.

Another photo adjusted in Picasa

This photo has been adjusted in Picasa using "focal B&W" and several levels of "sharpenning". Adjustments can be "stacked" or effects are cumulative. Some will get cancelled out, for example if you use "focused B&W" and other B&W modes, the first one will loose color.

JPEG replacement announced (kind of old news)

Well, here we go: a replacement format for the venerable JPEG has been announced last year, but may not get implemented until 2009. It's called (for now anyways) JPEG XR and is based on Microsoft's Windows Media Format also referred to as HD Photo.

JPEG XR was apparently chosen on Microsoft's promise to deliver the technology FREE of charge. JPEG consortium is going to be the governing body of the new format and it says that XR will be available once the "kinks" are worked out so it conforms to standard's specifications.

JPEG XR promises better quality with better compression (not lossless though). Official press release can be found HERE.

I've not been a Microsoft basher for a long time. However, after the Vista release I may just become one. I now begin to question Microsoft's agenda every time they come up with something. WMF has been around (and might well be a better choice for now), but I'm convinced that sticking to a lossy format by the JPEG "officials" is, to me, taking the whole thing into a blind alley. It only tells me that degrading image's information is somehow the ONLY way to go (NOT). Problem is, when you have a near monopolistic giant behind an idea, it just can't be good long term. Is there a chance that giving it "away" will at some point allow Microsoft to "screw" with it? The general tendency to view this is, that it'll be the EXPERTS to govern the new format, not Mr. Gates. Will they?

I think still image format gorillas should slow down and take this issue a bit more seriously (I bet this statement upsets them). Why not think lossless???

One more photograph from previous set up

This is another one from that $70 2-"cool"-light set up, slightly toned.

What I'd like to see in the digital progress

I'd like to see sensor improvements in noise handling far more than a pixel count (which has already reached an above-needed level, especially in small cameras). Call it "Quality over Quantity".

There should be a focus on cutting down the noise AND some strict standard of testing for such, by which ALL manufacturers would have to go by - well, that's a pipe dream.

I'd like to see serious effort on manufacturer's part, to put some R&D into a DSLR (for starters) that has replaceable guts, especially the sensor, CPU, and buffer, so we stop spending money on the box, instead we upgrade what really counts. And while at it, why not make it an OPEN standard so third parties can come in and HELP along the way.

There should be more focus on file format development, so JPG is scrapped entirely (and ANY lossy format prohibited from ever reaching the market). Here I do believe, that there is no reason to continue with JPG for any longer than necessary. I'm not talking RAW as we know it now (and forget TIFF altogether), I mean a format that does not loose or restrict anything from the original and NEVER will. Here may I mention the OpenRAW effort (which it seems has gone nowhere). What I'd like to see is a format that gives me what film always has - I shoot, I take care of archiving with best methods available, but what I shot is accessible to ME forever, no camera maker, no software developer will EVER have a chance to change that. NONE of these things are currently true.

Simple portrait in B&W

This simple portrait was shot using a $70 2-"cool"-light set-up with umbrellas. Not ideal, but quite satisfactory. Some more tweaking and would be even better.

Elements of Black and White Photography, review

Written by George E. Todd and subtitled "The making of twenty images". I have recently purchased this wonderful book for $5.00 and this is one of the better five bucks I have spent in recent times. I thought it would be only logical to review it here.

What struck me most at first , were the great many images that span the whole book. It's quite refreshing to see that in a photography techniques publication.

Book pertains to traditional B&W photography and covers just about every aspect, from exposing film to printing. Author uses a phrase from a fortune cookie to get the reader on the right track:

"None of the secrets of success will work, unless you do"

The layout is quite interesting and Mr. Todd takes the reader through the "... making of twenty images" by explaining entire thought process, from what he had found at the "scene", how it was evaluated, how it was shot, processed and printed. All technical data is given for every image.

Above is a sample page. The proof is shown along with the chosen frame, which will eventually become the final image.

As he goes through the paces of making a photograph, he focuses on certain aspects of the process, that was unique to that particular image. By the end of the book, most technical corners are covered.

Zone System isn't forgotten either, including a short but accurate discussion on defining ones personal film speed. In addition printing with the SplitGrade system is also covered as well as archival permanence, matting and exhibiting. Add to that a few good points on composition and you have found yourself a fantastic book that should help most aspiring photographers better their technique, even take it to a whole new level.

This however, is NOT the all-in-one book. So until you see it in person, don't throw away the rest of your library just yet.

Embeding Picasa based gallery in your website

Here I go again, bragging about Google's Picasa features. It must feel like I'm making money from promoting it. Anyhow ...
Having used Picasa2 for a little bit now (and creating my Picasa Web Album in the process), I must say I'm more and more impressed with how well Google thought this whole thing out. It isn't perfect, mind you, but for the cost of NOTHING it's impressive.

Here I'd like to mention the process of displaying images from your Picasa Web Album on your own web site (or blog etc.). Process takes just minutes, within a few clicks you will have your HTML code ready to copy into your web page. Then it's just a matter of pasting it in the right spot (which would be any of your choice on the web page) and sending the new page to the hosting server. DONE.

Check this out, all it took was 5 minutes (that long, because I forgot to save the links in proper configuration and it did not work at first).