no photography

More than ever before, there is confusion about when one may not or should not take a photograph. There has been discussion in the UK and a petition to prevent legislation about banning taking photographs in public places which has met stiff opposition. My own feeling is that, with discretion, if you are in a public space, and clearly not a security threat, then there should be no problem if you want to take a photograph for private/non-commercial use. Similarly, if you are in a public space, then there will be a possibility of someone taking a photograph, and you may be captured either intentionally or coincidentally.

Outside Tourist Shop in Bergen, Norway

Wellcome Institute London

Adult Shop, Soho, London

National Portrait Gallery, London

With the current ubiquitous nature of mobile phones with cameras, selfie sticks and tablets, it is may be difficult for users to understand why they cannot use their devices. Similarly with so many devices carried and used for a multiplicity of purposes, how can you police it? There has been recent press coverage in the UK of Benedict Cumberpatch being photographed on stage (typically a no-no) whilst acting in a theatre and stating that he wished his audience was more interested in the live performance than the facebook/instagram reverberations. It used to be that if you looked as if you were going to take a photograph in a theatre, the heavy hand of the usher would descend. Now it looks as if the era of anything goes has arrived because it is impossible to do anything else. The best a performer can hope for is not to be distracted by a battery of flashes, and most of the flashes from phones are pretty pointless anyway. Some love it and deliberately pose

There has been some shift from museums and galleries in the UK. The RA did not object to photographs being taken in the Summer exhibition this year. The Tate only seems to make a fuss some of the time during special exhibitions, and National Trust seems to have backed down in some of its properties. I think if you are not using flash and not in anyones way, it is no big deal. However, lighting may be difficult and if you don't plan, results are useless or disappointing at best.

It almost becomes a challenge to see what you can capture before you are stopped in some places where photography is not permitted. A quick in and out with a point and shoot, or pretend to be stupid, or only stop when requested.

I shall continue to explore the limits of possibilities, but on the other hand I am not in the business of offending people for good reason. What I will not condone is destinations where the no photography ruling is purely to try to convince you to buy their own postcards, which may be better, but don't reflect necessarily what you saw.

"Amateurs worry about gear; professionals worry about money; masters worry about light."

This is a well worn quote, and where this is going is that I went to a Latin American event yesterday with lots of sound and music and costumes. I wish I had taken my DSLR, as once you seem to have a proper camera, they let you get away with more and take you more seriously, in my opinion. However 99.9% of the people there were getting in each others' way with their camera phones. I know the newer iPhones actually take pretty good pictures and their electronics make it all very forgiving, but the one thing that they lack is the routine process of control. You can't set them on aperture priority (to control depth of focus), you cannot change and set ISO to avoid or capture motion blur and if the light is not great, they may not be sensitive enough. I took my travel camera TZ60, and had mixed luck.

The intelligent auto is a bit stupid, and in the following shot, set the shutter speed too slow(1/250), or did it? It gave a bit of motion blue, e
mphasising movement of the dancers. I like the colours.
Have a look at this:

I am trying to work out where I am, and hope I am about half way. May be writing the blog is an overestimate of my opinions and skills.

This may help you decide about DSLR vs phone

Courtesy of a web site comparing the two methods for travel photography.

Honda Jazz 6 wheel pickup: anyone else got one of these?

I had to look twice at this, as I did not actually see a six wheeler in Camden. I have a Panasonic TZ60. Set on intelligent auto i.e. point and shoot, it evaluates the scene and uses the best guess inbuilt pre-set. Sometimes it does stupid things. What has happened here is that I have taken the picture into the light (see shadows). The camera treats this as a backlit scene and rather than adjusting the exposure, it takes more pictures until the actual scene is correctly exposed according it its programmes. It appears that it gets a fix on static items e.g. the yellow stripes in the road, but if something has significant relative motion, there are multiple exposures at different locations. Thus the Jazz was travelling to me and the rear ghost is the first exposure. This can mean that under tricky lighting (for a point and shoot) there may be some interesting double exposure effects. The exif data shows 1/640 at f4.5, ISO 200.
Alternatively, this picture was what I saw after a purchase in Camden Market.

getting the hang of close up lenses

4th August
I watched a video on YouTube today about using the close up lens kits. I think I am getting the hang now, as I did not use the autofocus when I first used them. The concept is that by adding the diopters on to the front of the lens, the minimum distance at which focus is achieved is reduced - somewhat. This is todays best shot of a bee on the lavender in my garden.

This was taken with my 5D, a 24-105 lens, with the +4 and +1 lenses screwed on. ISO 100, aperture set at about 7.  Autofocus, no weighting. Taken in RAW and processed with a bit of boost of contrast and a bit of sharpening. The original shot was cropped to get the subject bee to take up more of the frame and this is where full sensor cameras will win as there is more there to crop. I had to take about 10 shots before selecting this one as the best. I need to see what the other bits of the kit can do.

Macphun software and photography competitions: what do they mean

I don't enter many competitions, although I may do now that I have joined a local photographic society. I entered one for our local U3a for the cover of the interests book, and I won with this picture:

It is a picture of underground trains at Finchley Central underground station, which is near where most of the local meetings take place. The brief was to find something of local interest, that should be shot in landscape mode and be suitable for a folded cover with the front being therefore in portrait mode. To be truly local, I thought this was pretty difficult and came up with the idea of the local trains. This was shot of a cloudy day from a bridge over the platform using the ledge as a steady. I used a fairly slow shutter speed to try and capture some motion blur (subtle). This has been passed through a piece of software that I like called tonality pro, which is a specialist B and W creation suite. I like it, and I think the £40 or so I spent on the software had be worth it.
There are many ideas that I wanted the picture to convey. Travel and movement, to and fro, the Northern Line which has strong associations, and a local landmark. I submitted several images and this was the one that came through.
I have since spoken to several people about competitions, and the feeling is that they are not only about what you do, but the instantaneous reaction of the reviewer: it is a lottery and just because you do not win (or do win) does not mean too much. You just have to keep plugging at it if you want to be part of the show. The last club one (actually the first for me) suggested that my chances are best if I stick to the quirky as at least this will stand out. I am not going to sit in a hide to get the best picture of a bird, or wade through swamps, or get up at the crack of dawn, so it is a matter of what passes in front of my lenses. Will competitions make me a better photographer? Well, what is in my mind is that if I am on the lookout for something appropriate, or have an idea, then I am thinking ahead to the picture that will emerge: seeing through photographer's eyes, noticing stuff, and thinking what I want to preserve. That sounds ok to me.

Close up lenses or lenses for macro

29th July 2015.
As a result of a Digital Photo magazine offer, I bought a set of lenses that attach to my Canon 24-105. I have toyed with the idea of buying a macro lens, but they are pretty expensive, and I don't know I would get the value, as I am not into nature photography and the like. But I like macro and it produces some nice abstract images.
You screw what looks like a circular filter over the front of the lens after taking off the UV filter. I have not quite mastered it yet, and the set comes with lenses that go from +1 dioptre to +10 dioptre, and when they fit, you can screw them on in stacks. This set set me back about £20 after discount. I meant to take a not of what I used for each shot, but it doe not really matter at this stage. Take a look at this, shot on manual focus, hi f number, hi ISO (because it was hand held and shot indoors). I call this 'fading flower'. I plan to unearth my tripod and take it out into the garden to see what else I can do. There were no instructions with the set as I found it, so it will be a matter of trial and error. Good fun.

Obvious things to note are narrow depth of field despite hi f number and very out of focus background (nice). I captured this in RAW, which is all I use on my SLR at the moment, and tweaked the RAW file sharpening it a little and reducing the noise. I also upped the colour temperature to be a bit more like daylight.