Here are a few random shots from Roppongi Tower in Tokyo.

Here are a few more random snapshots from Italy this time.
Wish i had more than 2 clips for drying negatives at the moment. It’ll take ages to get through my developing backlog..

I’m in the process of finally creating a proper photo gallery for my website with separate albums/galleries etc. That’s where i’ll start to put proper sets up, and put some more effort into projects i’ve started but never finished. I’m playing around with a couple different types of gallery software, but im not 100% keen on any yet. If anyone has some suggestion feel free to email me or post up here, it’d be very much appreciated.

Ok, this set of shots are just randoms from my most recent trip. I’m posting them up pretty roughly for the time being and will save the proper finished products for my new gallery when it comes to life.
Here are a few from Germany and Switzerland…

Well yes and no.
Yes i’m checking out a “new” lens i have, but no im not taking photos of brick walls and newspapers to pixel peep corner sharpness and other crap like that.
A few guys i know have started using alot of older manual focus lenses on their DSLR’s with terrific results. I’ve always been interested in doing this myself, but have never got around to it. That has now changed. Why shoot with old manual focus lenses on a DSLR? Well….

• Its a way of using some of the greatest lenses ever made (ie. there a massive variety of lenses to try),
• They’re generally smaller, lighter, and cheaper than modern lenses,
• Many have unique characteristics and draw nicer than modern lenses,
• Build quality that still shits over most modern lenses,
• Trying something different for the hell of it.

As you can see, theres several good reasons to consider using older lenses.
From using film cameras recently, i’d already built up quite a selection of Zuiko lenses for my Olympus OM bodies. Luckily, Zuiko have made some of the best lenses in history (no you cant dispute that its a fact), so i got a cheap adapter off ebay to start using them on my DSLR.

I’m not going to keep rambling on, so i’ll cut to the chase.
This afternoon i attached my newest Zuiko, a humble and underrated 100mm f/2.8 that cost me $55 including postage from the U.S. The light was going down, and the wind was pretty strong, but f/2.8 is still pretty respectable even if it’s not exactly “fast”.
Here is what i came up with shooting wide open at f/2.8 at 200ISO. There is no processing whatsoever, its straight from the RAW. No sharpening, no level/colour adjustments. I’ve also included a 100% crop of the image. **click images for full size, the resized ones can look a little soft**

100% crop

Shooting with a manual focus lens on the 400D isnt the best combination you can think of. The viewfinder is pretty small, and it doesnt have a focus screen designed for manual focus lenses. You can buy them and they’re relatively cheap, but i probably wont bother unless i upgrade to full frame. I’ll definitely be using my other manual focus lenses form now on though and im looking forward to using the 100mm for some portrait work.

Well now that my film scanner is dead i’ve been shooting some more digital lately.
Tonight my dad was working on his latest sculpture. It’s a commissioned work for one of Australia’s leading golf clubs. It’s quite an adventurous project actually. Golf is generally a conservative sport, especially when played on private courses which adhere to strict rules and tradition. Having a naked golfer at the entrance to you club isnt something that alot of people would be comfortable with. The club and members are making quite a bold statement and representatives from the R&A (golf’s governing body) loved the idea so much they’re footing most of the bill and are coming back over from Scotland for the unveiling which should be next year.
Anyway, i just got a couple shots of him tonight to check out the lighting conditions etc. I’ll be taking some black and white film shots at a later date.

Click the images for a larger view, especially the second. I just stitched two shots together for some fun. No real post processing done at all.

Well after seeing Tim’s test on noise reduction software, i thought i’d try one out myself. I’d never really compared different NR(noise reduction) processes before, instead i’d just basically given up high iso photography. I have to say, after mucking around with the software a little bit, im not so worried about using high iso settings on the DSLR anymore. I was quite impressed.
I only had 3 methods of NR which included DPP (Digital Photo Professional), Noise ninja, and “Camera RAW” with photoshop. I tried all on the same photo which i’ve taken a 100% crop sample of. I tried to include a mix of textures in the sample.
View the image below at it’s largest size and you immediately you notice each process produced quite different results.
The original photo was taken indoors with dim light. The digital noise isnt that bad really, i have other photos that are worse, but i chose this as it had several different textures and is common of the iso noise i get.
Camera RAW seemed to keep the most “faithful” colours, but blurred pretty much everything. Some detail was lost particularly in the edges, which gave an overall soft look to the photo. It seemed to get rid of both noise and grain which are two different things really. By getting rid of some grain it lost a bit of sharpness and detail.
DPP was a little less full on when it came to removing the grain. It still has quite a bit which helps keep some overall sharpness. To my eyes it has a nicer contrast and colour too. I’d never used DPP before, but it looks to be quite effective.
Noise Ninja was again different. I downloaded the 400D (Rebel XTi) NR profile from the manufacturer website and gave it a go. It appears to be bit of a mixed bag. I like how it’s kept some edge sharpness, more than the other programs, but it makes the skin look like plastic. Some people might like that as bit of an airbrushed skin shortcut, but its not to my tastes. The colour has again changed from the original, probably the most drastic out of all. It was also introduced some of its own fragments to the image which look a little messy, this might be treatable in the setting panel which i didnt play around with (i just used standard setting for all).

After looking at the 3 noise reduction programs, i have to say i quite like them all in one way or another.
I’d never used DPP before, but i liked how it treated the image. It still has some grain, but removes most of the digital noise which is what i want most. It had nice contrast i thought, and the colours looked fine too. The only downside is that theres not many options for individual settings. So fine tuning is pretty much out of the question. (It almost seems as though it was bit of an after thought with the DPP software, but thats another story).
Noise ninja seems very powerful with a large range of fine tuning options. I think once i play around with it i’ll be able to reduce the plastic skin look. The colours looked quite different from the original too, but thats probably another thing that can be fixed also. The program seems to need a bit of fine tuning which is to be expected i guess. But the whole idea is to minimise hours infront of the computer, if i have to play around with NN each time i use it, i’ll probably lose interest. Thats just a personal thing though.
Then theres Camera RAW which seems fine, but would probably be my last choice. It just seems to give bit of an overall blur to the image, which isnt all that useful.

I guess it all comes down to personal preference. If i can get Noise Ninja sorted out, i’ll use that the most. Otherwise i’ll go with DPP and its simplicity.

Yeah, it seems like i’ve only been posting b&w shots lately.
Thought i’d mix things up and post a couple colour shots i took a little while ago. I’m pretty wild.

Been shooting with the SP lately and its been terrific. Except for the fact that my light meter seems to be possessed! As in it’ll turn itself on or off depending on what it feels like. Luckily its been working most the times i’ve wanted it to. Thinking of taking it in for a CLA and maybe converting it to use the modern Alkaline batteries. Either that or get another one to use regularly, as i’ve become a little hesitant using my black SP as prices seem to sky-rocketing and i’d hate to loose it or drop it.
I’ve decided to start developing my own black and white film. Been thinking of it for a while now, and have finally been convinced by seeing a couple people i know get into it recently. I first learnt film developing and printing in high school and got some pretty impressive results, but i seem to of forgetting most of the details, so will have to relearn everything again. It’ll be fun though i hope! Think i’ll stick with Ilford chemicals and film at the moment, see how it goes, i forget what i used to use.
I’m going to need to invest in something that can scan film properly. My current film scanner is a flatbed scanner with film adapter but its useless. Results are really low res and overly grainy. So i have a few options; a better/newer flatbed film scanner which are quite cheap, or a dedicated film scanner which are relatively expensive. I’m really not sure what to go with yet.
Bought some Ilford XP2 Super last week. Been curious as to see how it looks with my Zuiko’s. I’ve only been using the Kodak BW400CN so far as it seems to be more common. Both are the same price though.
Really want to upgrade my 400D now. I want full frame, and something that can handle ISO noise better. Trying to find a secondhand 5D, but nobody seems to be selling, everyone must be waiting for the replacement to come out first.
Why is photography expensive… Sometimes i wonder why i didn’t take up something like whistling instead…
Oh, Happy Easter!