OHSU Tram shoot

I went out on a photo practice shoot with Christie yesterday, and we chose to go to the top of the OHSU tram for some panoramas with tripods at night.  The timing wasn't great, though.  We timed it to get both dusk pictures and night pictures, however, the OHSU tram had other ideas.  The last tram down the hill was at 9:30p, and though sunset was officially at 9:02p, true darkness didn't really settle in until we were descending on the last tram.

That said, I do have a handful of shots that I am happy with:

Mt Hood in dusk light (I took about 12 pics of Mt Hood at various points in the night, and only this and one other have this color -- so I guess I got lucky with the light).
200m focal length, 0.5s, f/32, 320 iso

Marquam Bridge with OMSI in background
200m focal length, 3s, f/36, 400 iso
cropped to change from landscape to portrait orientation

Hawthorne and Morrison Bridges over the Willamette River with Portland city lights

112m focal length, 10s, f/32, 400 iso

cropped to remove lots of foliage

Of the three, the last is my favorite.  I am drawn to the myriad of city lights and the water reflections.

For full size pics, you can see them on flickr.

Renting a cool lens: 85mm f/1.4

Earlier this week, I rented a lens from Pro Photo here in town.  I did it almost on a whim.  Elise and Nolan started their summer gymnastics this past Tuesday, and for Elise's class, parents are only allowed inside the gym to watch the first and last classes (otherwise you can watch through a viewing window).  It occurred to me that for their last class, I would have a new baby, and not be able to take pictures too easily.  So I decided this one-time opportunity to take pictures of the summer gymnastics class had to be properly respected, by renting a good lens.

By "good lens," I mean one that has a longer focal length (since I can't get too close to the action) as well as a big aperture (since I can't use a flash and the indoor gym has some really dim areas).  Here is my path to the lens I ended up with.

July 2010 -- Elise takes the parent-involved gym class.  I use my absolutely brand spankin' new DSLR camera with an 18mm-200mm zoom.  I am able to move around easily (since it's a parent class -- Jay being the parent involved) and get good angles.  The pics are, however, mediocre, especially relative to what I hoped for.  I shot in Auto mode with no flash.  My ISOs were way too high, resulting in grainy pics.  My shutter speeds were too slow, resulting in blurry, grainy pics:

28mm focal length, 1600 ISO, 1/60s, f/4.0

August 2010 -- for Elise's last gym class, with a little of "what not to do" under my belt, I rented a different lens - a 50mm prime lens (prime means a fixed length, as opposed to a zoom lens).  Retail cost of lens about $500 (rental about $20).  I shot in "P"rofessional mode, which gives you some (not a lot) more control over automatic.  The result was much better:

50mm fixed focal length, ISO 400, 1/125s, f/1.8

June 2011 - I realized that this would be my best photo oppty for gym class this summer, so I rented a super duper lens.  The hard part with the 50mm lens was that I couldn't get good shots at the middle or back of the gym -- it was just too far away.  So, this time I tried an 85mm.  It was almost too close.  Overall I'm much happier with the 85mm (retail cost $1700, rental cost $25) over the 50mm in this gym.  The problem this go round, however, is that I, for whatever reason, chose to use lower shutter speeds than I needed.  Well, I didn't choose them, but I *thought* I set my camera to the following: f/2.0, MIN shutter speed 1/250s, MAX iso 400, shooting overall in "A"perture mode.  This means that the camera would use an f/2.0 aperture, and select the best shutter speed and iso within the range I set, given the light.

I thought that if the light was too dim within my constraints, that the camera would bump the ISO first, then muck with the shutter speed second.  I was wrong.  The camera chose to drop the shutter speed first.  Boo on me.  A tough lesson learned (and further reinforcement that I really need to shoot in Manual in scenarios like this).

For the record, one of the reasons I don't shoot in manual is because the LCD on the back of my camera is pretty limited.  I simply can't see the difference between a sharply focused vs blurry picture, when viewed on my camera LCD.  So, if I shoot in manual, I feel like I don't have enough information to really view the resulting photo and then tweak my settings.  It just looks good on my camera -- then I get home and download it and see the blurry pics and realize I needed to adjust my shutter.

The other reason I avoid manual is because in a setting like this gym, with very different light in different areas, it's just a lot of work to change all these settings on the fly, in between shots.

Anyway, the end result is that while the pictures are not grainy, they are indeed blurry.  Some of them came out all right, though.

85mm fixed focal length, iso 400, f/2.5, 1/125s.

It is hard to tell from the single pictures I posted here, but looking over the set of the 50mm photos vs the set of the 85mm photos, it is EXCEEDINGLY clear to me that the 85mm is just a vastly superior lens for this setting.  I LOVED using this lens.  I wish I had more time to use it so that I could have experimented more with other scenarios, and had more practice in the gym setting.  I felt like getting a truly "great shot" was actually within my grasp.

In a subsequent email stream, Christie mentioned that she'd heard the 85mm was also just a great portrait lens.  So of course, I figured a small session of candid portraits was in order.  God I love this lens!  The background blur (bokeh) is gorgeous.  My kids were just riding bikes and/or walking, and I played with both "S"hutter and "A"perture modes for about 10-15 minutes while dinner was cooking.  The only complaint I have is that with the 85mm length, man those little kids pop in and out of frame so very very fast.  One small step to the side and poof, you've lost your entire subject.  Using the 85mm lens, you really have to be on the ball to predict their direction of movement and you have to fire your trigger QUICKLY when they get in frame.  This is another vote for Manual -- because the camera is calculating less (ie none), the trigger responds just a hair faster.  It was, however, actually noticeable to me using this lens.

I thought it was interesting how much the nature of the bokeh changes, depending on how close my subject was.

iso 200, f/3.5, 1/160s

iso 200, f/2.0, 1/800s
I am posting this one because it is so interesting to me that although the three people are at a considerable length from my camera, the depth of field is so narrow for f/2.0.  Nolan and Jay are mostly in focus.  Elise is entirely blurry.

iso 200, f/2.0, 1/400s

iso 200, f/2.0, 1/320s
The far side of Elise's face and some hair is in focus, most everything else is not.
check out that bokeh!
I kinda love this picture, though it's far from frame-able.

iso 400, f/2.0, 1/250s
My pics of Elise turned out better than Nolan in this session but I had to throw one of him in.
This picture should be crisper -- he wasn't moving that fast.  I think the slight blur is due to my unsteady hand -- the 1/250s shutter should have been sufficient.
I love that the hair at the back is blurry -- especially since his hair is a mess right now. :)
I wish it was easier to capture the magic and light of brown eyes.

Zing

Just a brief quick post, about a recent product find. I am always searching -- one might say obsessed -- for the perfect bag. I never used to be a bag person. In fact, in/after college, I was known for NOT carrying any bag other than a tiny wallet for my keys and credit cards.

When I was pregnant with Elise, I wanted the perfect diaper bag (3-4 bags later I ended up with one that was "good enough"). When pregnant with Nolan, I wanted another perfect different diaper bag, given I had to haul different types of stuff for two. When I got my camera, I wanted the perfect camera bag. I tried just a basic camera bag but carrying both a diaper bag/purse AND a camera bag was just too bulky, and I returned the camera bag. I then tried a regular bag as a camera bag (too disorganized). Then I bought a camera bag that could carry other stuff in it... this one worked the best thus far, but I eventually stopped using it because the shoulder drop was a couple inches too short and the zipper did not open wide enough for my tastes. I could not configure the interior Just So to fit my stuff the right way. All this was bothering me on a daily basis. I eventually went back to just stuffing my camera in a normal bag, sometimes wrapping it in a towel for some protection.

I also investigated, but never tried, finding a small camera bag to stuff inside my normal daily bag. All the DSLR camera bags are so very well padded that they end up being quite large -- even the smallest ones -- and I was left with no extra room for my normal stuff.

Now I am pregnant with G3, and this means I need to carry yet more child stuff around. There's the baby stuff, and then the snacks and drinks for Nolan and Elise. I could get away with nothing for Elise, but she wants anything I have for Nolan. I have to carry stuff for Nolan because he still gets too hungry too often. Oh, the logistics and inventory of three little kids!

I figured that I should (again) look for a camera bag that can carry additional stuff. There were some possibilities out there, in the neighborhood of $200-$300, which is just too much. I ended up looking at some camera sling backpacks online that I thought would really do the job -- until I saw them in person, and they stick out about 14" from your back. It's just too big. It's all that darn padding!

I eventually abandoned the "camera bag first, diaper bag second" approach and eventually found a couple bags at Ellington that I think will work as my large-but-not-gargantuan diaper bag (I hate big bags that are bumping into everything all the time!). The search was now on for a camera bag that was small enough and lean enough to fit INSIDE the future diaper bags.

Now, I think I have it.

I saw this neoprene SLR cover at Pro Photo the other day and it was very intriguing. I looked it up online and it has good reviews, so I Ordered it. I have had it for three days now and I think I just might Love it. It is lean, taking up little additional space, yet I feel it adequately cushions my camera. It is simple to use. I fits my camera with my most-often-mounted lens almost perfectly. The cons are (1) it does not fit any camera accessories (spare battery, backup SD card, lens wipe), but I think I can easily just carry that stuff in a separate small bag, also inside the diaper bag; and (2) it doesn't work with my zoom lens. I can either buy a different cover that will fit my camera with my zoom lens, or resign myself to needing to carry both a camera bag and a diaper bag on zoom-lens days.

I present, the Zing cover (mine is blue, not this color):

Product info: Zing Standard SLR cover

Roses Macro Workshop

On Wednesday, I went to the Portland Rose Gardens to take a photography workshop/class with my Photoshop instructor. It was a class on macro photography, which I am keenly interested in. I used my macro screw-on filters and learned that using these filters (vs a proper macro lens -- mucho moola) can create what is called a "chromatic aberration" of blue, orange, and green halos (possibly other colors as well, of course -- that is just what I see in my own results). There are a couple photos that I really liked with these odd halos -- I emailed one to the instructor and asked his opinion, and he said that sometimes the screw on filters can create these anomalies.

The effect can be kind of cool, in a psychedelic way, but if you want to actually print the photos in an enlarged state, then the aberration is very very UNcool. Buying a macro lens (which has better optics, and no halo) is just not worth it right now though -- there are many other camera toys that I would prioritize higher.

Overall, actually, I am very happy with the photos. I wish I could get the drops of water to "pop" a little more. I was happy to achieve the right colors for what I remember of the flowers; I'm happy with my angles and framing while shooting; I'm happy (mostly) with the crispness of the photos, which seems better than what I am used to seeing with my camera; and I'm happy with my editing decisions with the photos, all edited from RAW. I'm definitely starting to feel more comfortable with this RAW thing.

Click through to my Roses Macro Workshop set on Flickr for better viewing.