I came across a couple of different online image editors recently, specifically Photoshop Express and Flauntr.

Both work via a web interface and seek to provide a selection of simple tools for image manipulation and management. Now, before I go any further – replacements for GIMP/Elements/CS3 they aren’t, but they maybe fill a niche in the whole web portfolio sphere by allowing some tweaks here and there. 

Essentially both sites offer free registration and a certain amount of free web space (2GB for Photoshop, but no obvious limit mentioned for Flauntr) to host pictures for editing. Both allow image uploading from hard drive as well as imports from a range of photo hosting sites (including flickr in Flauntr’s case and photobucket in Photoshops). Finally both offer the ability to save your pictures back to your hard drive. It's worth noting at this point Photoshop Express is restricted the the United States only, but there was nothing stopping me creating an account and pretending to live there (I'm a bad boy...)

So far they’re both pretty similar.
 

Photoshop Express




Flauntr

 

They’re both reasonably well equipped with a standard set of tools (crop, rotation, resize) as well as with some more advanced stuff like sharpening and highlights etc.

What sets them apart?

 

Well, based on a lunchtimes play, I’d say that Photoshop Express is the easier product to use. The majority of features are on the left hand side of the page and usually have handy previews above the image you’re editing to show you what’s possible with the tool selected.

Express also offers some nice features, like the colour pop tool above which reduces the image to black/white and your chosen colour and what appears to be the clone/repair tool from it’s big brothers under the guise of a touchup button.

Photoshop Express - Pop colour Tool

Flauntr approaches the usability question from a slightly different angle, making use of a set of tabs to offer different functionality in sensibly clustered blocks. The downside of this is that unless you know what you’re looking for you have to spend a lot of time exploring to see what’s possible. I’d suspect once you know what you’re doing it will all be so much faster, but I could see this putting a new player off.

Flauntr also provides a pretty little tool called PicasR which allows you to blend your photograph with the colour tones from some old masters paintings resulting in some lovely effects. Here's a few samples based on this picture.
 

Flauntr - Carnlough with Beachside Colours
using



Flauntr - Carnlough With Sunsetsea Colours
using
 

What sets Flauntr apart though, and what makes me think it’ll be used by the web generation it’s aimed at is the addition of a couple of simple tabs for social networking and mobile sites. Using these it’s painless to take your photograph and sculpt it into something to use as your logo/screen saver on LiveJournal/Bebo/WhereEverTheKidsPlayNow

So, what do I think?

Well, I reckon if you’re into the infernal complexities of CS3 then this isn’t for you. However, if you enjoy playing with images or if you want to be able to make small tweaks to existing pictures quickly without needing to get too complicated then these are definitely appealing. If I had to pick one, right now it would be Flauntr – in a world where it takes years to get to grips with CS3, allowing 10 more minutes to learn Flauntr over Express is not much of an ask.

 

(Since the web is immortal, it’s worth noting that Photoshop Express was in Beta on build version 448357 and Flauntr was in Alpha with no obvious build number).

I finally got the chance to play with my new tripod tonight.

I'd purchased the tripod based upon a few reviews I'd read and the head because I wanted an economical, easy to use, ball head.

 

Manfrotto 190XPROB

The tripod is exactly what I was told to expect from anything Manfrotto. Solid, simple to use and pretty well featured. It's not too heavy at a little under 2kg's and height ranges from 8.5cm to 146cm (according to the specs!), though that excludes the head dimensions.

Leg adjustment is managed via pressure locks on the leg, and the vertical column via a small thumb screw device. The legs themselves have a range of preset angles from 25 degrees through to just under 90. The vertical column can be extended and flipped out horizontally for shooting at 90 degrees (or if you're into weird positions).

You can find the full technical specification here.

I really like the thing. It's easy to use, it's a good weight and it offers all the little gadgets my original cheapo tripod didn't. Things like a little spirit level bubble and a hook for hanging your camera bag (useful on a windy day to as as ballast). It feels solid. I've used that word a lot. Well, it is.

I'm expecting many many nights of fun with this.

 

484RC2 Ball Head

I'd set out looking for a ball head for a number of simple reasons.

1. I didn't like the 3 bolt pan and tilt operation of my original tripo - I could never get it to quite line up and still be happy the thing was secure

2. I'm kind of lazy and liked the thought of a simple one lock operation

Whilst I'm still happy a ball head is what I want, I kind of wish I'd spent a little more on something a bit more 'user friendly'.

Don't get me wrong, it's a great head and has a really good feel to it. It's well put together and things like the locking plate are an excellent size and do feel secure. The one lock nut does exactly what you'd expect and keeps the head and camera secure (so much so that I had the thing pointing vertically downwards at full tripod elevation with my heaviest lens on and still felt happy to go make a cuppa).

But, the failing for me is the position of the lock nut. Twice now I've opened it without thinking (not accidentally by brushing it or anything, just while setting up for a shot) and the camera has fallen to one side or the another with a 'thunk'. Yep, a 'thunk'. I've been telling myself that it's just the noise as the head stops moving and not the camera getting a 'thunk'. And I'm pretty sure I'm right.  It's just a little unnerving. It's all OK if you hold said camera in one hand and release the nut with the other, then it's all just peachy. But, still, things did go 'thunk'...

I've been reading The Digital Photography Handbook by Doug Harman recently.



Working from the very basics, (What's a digital camera then Bob?), through so some of the more advanced shooting techniques including motion blur etc, it gives a good basic overview of the world of Digital Cameras. Once the basics are covered, there are a series of good sections covering post processing, these include simple things like getting your pictures from your camera right up into cloning and special effects.

All in all I found it a good little read. Maybe a little patronising at times, but given it's aimed at the likes of me who knows nothing maybe I shouldn't complain about the few times it told me stuff I already knew...

The pictures in the book are all in keeping with the theme and for the most part you left feeling as if you will be able to achieve them as well (unlike some of the other books I've seen).

My only complaint is that the tutorials all appear to be for Photoshop Elements, which is a pain if you're just getting into the hobby and don't want to splash out for it on top of the camera, lenses, batteries, bags, memory cards... For such a cheap and friendly little book, they would have done well to use something like GIMP as the basis for tutorials.

Still, when all is said and done. It's a good little read for beginners and at under a fiver it's good value too...

OK, so I mentioned last week about laying my hands on a Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II Lens, well I'd heard a lot of stuff about "quality glass" and "better than the kit lens" before I used it, so I decided to have a play and see....

Let's be honest. If you're looking for a 50mm lens and you have the full studio Monty you're going to want to buy the F/1.2 or F/1.4 variant.

So I guess the questions I wanted to ask were....

1. Is the lens any good.

2. Is it better than the kit lens under similar circumstances

 

Is it any good?

My first impression of it was probably the same as a lot of people. It feels light and plasticy. Now I'm hardly a lens guru, but I expected some sort of weight from it - it is glass after all....

That said, it doesn't feel fragile or fiddly. The focus mechanism is pretty solid and all the bits for mounting to the camera all seem pretty robust.

Shooting at F/1.8 is a blasphemy to God. I can only imagine what its big brothers are like. I found with decent house lighting you could almost get away without flash (certainly if you were willing to chuck up the ISO a bit). The test pictures I've taken have all been the right side of clear (unless I've been messing...).

Here's a decent example of this from the great globe re-shoot of 2007!

(1/60, f/1.8, aperture priority, focal length - 50mm, ISO - 200, 17/10/07 19:44)

So, when all is said and done, it's a smart little lens for 70 notes.

 

Is it any better than the kit lens?

Right, lets get realistic. It's naive to assume that the kit lens is a top of the line lens. But, Canon probably won't ship a camera with a piece of crap - it'll hardly do their business model any good. Therefore, I think it's safe to assume the kit lens is OK. Certainly, my experience of it suggests it does what it says on the tin.

Indubitably, the fact it ranges from 18mm to 55mm is a nice advantage over the fixed 50mm lens as well. It's probably safe to assume most people buying the 400D are new to dSLR or trying to manage pennies and get the most bang for their buck.

So, is the 50mm fixed any better than the kit lens?

I set up one of babas teddies for a quick test (and it was quick, she wanted it to go for bed...). I also used house lighting and a standard hot shoe mounted flash (trust me, just buy one) since anyone in the market for this lens is unlikely to use studio lighting that much!

The first image is a composite of the 50mm and the 18-55. I'll be honest, I got the setting slightly out on the 18-55 so the focal distance is 45mm not 50mm. In both cases they were taken at F/11 from a tripod. There should be little or no difference in lighting or camera position between the shots. (The only image change is a little cropping to find Eyeore)

Oh, and I used the jpegs for this...

(Edit: The 50mm fixed lens is left, the kit lens is right - Thanks Geoff!)

 My initial impressions for this was that the kit lens produced better results, but looking again I've started to change my mind. The 50mm seems to be a darker colour, but there is less burn out around the nose as a result.

Zooming in on the old fellas ear....

(Edit: The 50mm fixed lens is left, the kit lens is right - Thanks Geoff!)

In this case I used the raw's because the loss in detail was a little obvious in the jpegs.

To my mind there isn't a lot of difference here. Certainly nothing I can pick up on.

 

Summary

So, I guess the question is if I had it all to do again, would I buy the 50mm instead of the kit lens?

I think the answer has to be a reserved no.

Why?

Because quite simply the kit lens has a better range of zoom and is more versatile as a result. Whilst it probably loses a little in terms of quality, as a starter lens it does its job just fine. 

So why not a definitive no?

Quite simply, two photos of Eyeore do not a professional test make. I'm new to the hobby, I can only see what I see. If someone I respected told me I was wrong, I would probably listen to them. Sure, I'd want to see their evidence now, but...

Would you kit bag it?

Oh dear sweet lord yes. for portrait shots and for low light and for family stuff and candid's and all the things I said I'd rarely post here it's just blooming lovely. It teaches you to move instead of just changing the zoom on the camera, it gives good photo, it does exactly what it says on the tin (erm cardboard box). And for £60 - £70 it's a bargain.

 

 

 

 

 

 

(Point to note. The images I've uploaded are tiny compared to the originals - web space and load times you know. If you want the original images to take a look yourself, drop me an email and I'll sort you out.)

Thought it was time for another piece of kit review.It's well known that low light needs either a bright flash or a longer exposure (either a wider aperture or a longer shutter speed). What I only discovered recently is that landscape shots can also benefit from it. those shots where the water looks like mist or the grasses have that ethereal (cool word) quality are all taken with longer exposure times.As a reformed Sabutamol addict (puff free for 2 years now), I've got this fantastic hand tremor (OK, it might be natural - Sabutamol could have nothing to do with it. Please don't sue me!) . Anyway, the tremor means a lot of my pictures are more blurry than I'd like. I'd thought the tripod I borrowed would help with this and it does to a degree.However, that moment when you push the button on the camera still can cause a shake - even on the tripod. so I bought me one of these....Canon RC-1 Remote Controller

The Canon RC-1 is a simple remote control for the Canon camera (it works for the 440D - no idea about yours). Incredibly simple to use, it allows pictures to be taken from a range of about 10 feet in front of the camera, though not really from behind (OK, no comments about taking it from behind you freaks).It comes with a handy strap clip to keep with your camera. This seems pretty robust and secure - certainly mine hasn't fallen off in the last few weeks.I have only one negative about what is otherwise a tasty bit of kit. When you change the camera to remote, it doesn't change back between sessions - Pain in the bot....erm...neck when you only use the remote occasionally like me. Anyway, at less than £20, it's worth the pennies in my opinion.

No pictures today (again!)

Instead I thought I'd mention this magazine (again!) and say that my first copy as a subscriber arrived last night. I've been buying this for the last few months and some of the articles are brilliant.

While hunting for my chosen toy and debating the whole passage of time, I bought a few different magazines. My responses to them ranged from "I wanna spend how much???" to "I just spent £4 on a book of adverts!". A lot of magazines seemed obsessed with selling me thousand pound lenses and cameras rather than telling me what was in my price range. Little things in Digital SLR Photography like how to make your own reflectors and how to improvise filter mounts make it so much more accessible to people on a budget.

It was their review of the D40X against the 400D helped push me into Canon's laps (mmmmm comfy), and it was their features of David Nightingale (Chromasia) and other fantastic photographers which makes me want to take better shots.

For those trying to learn the art, the fact the provide the exposure settings for a majority of their shots is superb (and it's why I do it to).

My one complaint is that their website doesn't live up to the quality of the magazine. 

If you're looking for a magazine on Digital SLR Photography you can't beat this. It does exactly what it says on the tin...erm cover.

Learning To Snap

One good thing to come out of the weekend was finally getting to put my camera bag through some proper carry time. Previously, I'd never carried it for more than 20 minutes at a time so I was reluctant to say it was a bag or a bag of sh...

On Saturday, that all changed.

But first, the bag itself!

The Lowepro Slingshot 100 AW

Manufactured by Lowepro, the Lowepro Slingshot 100 Shoulder Bag is their entry level sling bag.

This came as an upgrade option for the camera kit I purchased, and at the time I was nervous about it, but though it looked a little more sturdy than the standard Jessops bag.

According to Lowepro, it's possible to store a "Digital SLR with attached lens; 1 - 2 extra lenses and personal accessories". Mine currently holds a Digital SLR with 18 - 55 lens, a 55 - 200 lens, a flash gun, a UV filter, a polarizing filter, a Cokin filter kit (with filter box), all the manuals, the extra lens caps, a sun doofer for the end of a lens, that sandisk card holder I mentioned last week, a spare battery, a sink, 2 towels and an emergency 4 star Radisson SAS hotel*.

Now before I begin, let me just point out I'm a big bloke. not big as in a little tall, or a little overweight. I mean big as in I have my own gravity well - small objects keep sticking to me! "Where I walk, I blot out the sun", that sort of size. 

So anyway, Saturday saw me on an open boat (yes, the one in the picture from last week) and out for the day to Inishfree. Not the island from the poem, the one in the Atlantic, the one which if you miss the next stop is some island with a big copper woman with a book and a torch on it.  I had the bag in it's backpack position and was pleased to see that not only did the straps fit me (with some slack) but also that it was incredibly comfortable to wear. It felt light and I wasn't restricted in any way.

Upon beaching on Inishfree, a single click of a strap and the bag shifted from my back to my side, with the camera in a handy position to just lift out as needed. All the kit I needed was easy to get whilst still feeling secure. Watching other people on the island looking for a dry, clean spot to start rooting in their bags I was left feeling all superior - Well done Lowepro!

The handy little extras on their bag where great too. The screen cloth attached in the bag was a life saver for dealing with pesky rain drops and the water proof cover meant the kit all arrived back to base dry and snug - unlike its owner.

By my reckoning, I had the bag on my person for maybe 5 hours on Saturday. not once did I find it a burden. I was so impressed and comfortable with the bag that I ended up out walking on Sunday again to see if I could steal something from the weekends shooting.

To be honest, with the amount of kit I'd bought I was contemplating a new camera bag in the very near future. Now, I think I'll keep the 100 AW and maybe just buy something to keep the bits I don't need on a day out and about.

 I don't plan on rating kit on this site, but if you're looking for a cheap camera bag and don't have a lot of kit to haul, this one might be for you.

* OK, so I was exaggerating about the sink, towels and hotel.

I have no idea what other people are using to view image libraries. I'm sure there are some great tools out there, but when I first got a digital camera a friend recommended Picasa as a neat utility that did what I needed.

It provides a nice interface for scanning your images and number of functions including basic contrast, brightness and cropping. Most importantly when you're a camera noob like me it has a patented(?) Google-esk button 'I'm Feeling Lucky' which makes the changes it thinks the images need.

As a camera noob it's been my stalwart photo utility since the E550 came to live with me.

Lately I've been playing with Gimp, but thats on my list of things I need to learn so it'll be a while before I feel qualified to say anything about it other than "The name keeps making me snigger"

Almost forgot. Both Picasa and Gimp are free under their various license models.

During my purchasing frenzy over the last few weeks, I pciked up a Sandisk Large Memory Card Case. It arrived int he post today and after a bit of playing with it I thought I'd post  my initial impressions...

Capable of holding up to 4 memory cards of different shapes and styles (good for me who uses Xd and CF), the case is quite robust and looks likely to survive a decent amount of pounding. The inside of the case is a snazzy red rubber mold which holds all the cards I've tried quite well.

I have only two concerns.

Firstly, it stinks. Yes, stinks as in smells funny. When open there is a funny rubbery plastic smell - it reminds me of a musty wetsuit to be honest. All I can hope is it passes.

Secondly, the latches to secure the case closed look flimsy. Really flimsy. Now I know I didn't buy some secure case which would take a professional burgler three weeks and an arc welder to break into, but these look like they're going to break before I ever get around to using my spare CF card. After 30 minutes of use they are already beginning to show that familiar white line on the hinge thats common to plastic attrition.

Still, at less than £3 from Amazon I expect it'll survive long enough.

Learning To Snap