Apprenti Photographe

Some Snapseed Limitations

Two weeks ago I published a rather enthusiastic review of the ipad photo processing app Snapseed. I still like it a lot, but I'm also starting to see limitations that weren't necessarily apparent when I first played around with it. These are not necessarily all that surprising considering the really low price point, but it's always better to know the limits of any tool you decide to use. 

This post is just to illustrate one of these limitations which is in the way Snapseed processes shadows. Here is a picture I took in Greece during a baptism last week. I'm posting the original shot, the processed shot and a close-up of where the issue is. The artefacts that Snapseed generated are quite obvious. 

Here is the original shot (straight resized RAW>JPG in Lightroom):

This is the shot processed in Snapseed (RAW>Snapseed>JPG I'm assuming, although it maybe RAW>JPG>Snapseed>JPG):

Look at the bottom right corner, the shadow of the old lady's jacket. The gradual shadows are no longer gradual but rather appear as concentric rings of deeper shadow. 

Here's a close-up in case it's not visible enough. First, the original in full size: 

Next the Snapseed processed pic' in full size:

As mentioned above, it's hard to blame Snapseed for this considering the price point, but it's good to know the limitations too. Imagine if I decided to print this for a show, for example, in 40x60, then the artefacting would be extremely visible !

 

Snapseed Review

One of my early reasons for getting an ipad was the ability to load photos while preserving RAW format on the device while on the road, and also to sort through the photos and eliminate the obvious duds. I tend to be conservative during that elimination process, because the screen remains small and I'd rather keep a dud than risk eliminating a photo that has defects but can be worked on to produce something good. 

Meanwhile, I've found dozens of other uses for the ipad, but one thing that didn't work for me until now was photo processing. I got a fair few photo processing apps, most of them priced at a couple of bucks, so I was willing to take risks. 

The first one I got was Photogene. It was cheap, it could process RAW files (I shoot RAW only) and seemed to have a fairly full set of features for one wanting to process a photo for (say) blog publication. I used it a little, but in the end the interface wasn't that good, and more importantly I felt like it had the subtlety of a sledgehammer. Things like vignette for example, need to be delicate, to the point that while it affects your perception of a picture, you don't think "ah, the corners have been darkened". With Photogene I felt like every bit of processing was visible and this simply wasn't what I was after.

Then I got Touch Up, which turned out not to be a processing tool after all, but rather a tool to do partial desaturation, and I don't like partial desaturation. Plus, my fingers simply aren't precise enough to be used as a brush to select areas to work on. I've never processed a photo with it (but I could have researched it a bit more before buying). 

Recently I got PhotoForge2 on the recommendations of a friend, not realising that it was an iphone only app. Oh well.

Then came along Snapseed. Some months back I downloaded a trial of one of Nik Software's Lightroom Plugins, and I've been on their mailing list ever since (not a big deal, they don't spam, just send an occasional newsletter). That's how I heard about Snapseed. A photo processing tool for the ipad by the guys who produce the most recognized black & white processing tools in the trade seemed an interestiing proposition, and at less than 5€ I thought I needed to test it. 

The experience has been mostly positive, hence my decision to post this review. I encourage you to watch this quick video to familiarise yourself with how the app works: 

So, in a nutshell, here's what I think if this app: 

The Good Stuff:

• The interface is great: it's intuitive and easy to use, it doesn't sacrifice precision to achieve ergonomy, and most of all, it's consistent accross all modules. The notion that menu items are toggled by sliding up or down and intensity is set by adjusting left to right is extremely simple but very effective.

• The processing capability is considerable: while this isn't a full substitute for Lightroom (if only because it's destructive), the ability to tweak pictures offered by Snapseed is very broad, and the functions in the first panel cover most of what you might expect from packages that come 10 to 100 times what Snapseed costs. I did miss a few explicit functions (I'll cover that in the Cons) but not many.

• Control Points are awesome: One thing I didn't expect was to find features that I wish Lightroom had. Control points is one of those features. Control points is a system to do local adjustements on a picture. You place a control point in the area you want to affect, you squeeze it with your fingers to determine the area it will affect and then apply the changes in brightness, contrast and saturation you want. The control points intelligently determine what the area covers (based on color and exposure from what I could determine) and are hugely useful. One thing I always struggle with, for example, especially for concert photos, is deep shadows around the eyes. You can have a perfectly exposed face with deep shadows around the eyes. In Lightroom, burning those areas to lower the contrast between cavities and the rest of the face is pain-stakingly difficult. With control points, place the point on the eye, squeeze down the area they affect to the eye cavity, et voilà! To be honest, the coherent area selection doesn't seem to work 100% of the time, but it works often enough that it's a huge boon already.

• Creative editing options are cool (if addictive): The Creative Editing options include multiple black & white options (excellent), vintage processing (emulating various non-specified flavours of old films), a series of drama options (high contrast and micro-contrast), a series of grunge tools (essentially a combination of vignette, textures and coloring), center focus (several selective focus solutions) and frames. It's a very rich set of tools although it's also a bit more directive than the basic tools.

The Stuff that Could be Improved: 

• You can't run a full workflow on Snapseed: There are a number of small functions that are missing from Snapseed to allow you to run a complete workflow, and it's a shame because it's not much but forces you to do some finishing touches elsewhere. Essentially, here are the three biggies: you can't see your photos at a decent size when opening the original pic (which means you need to review elsewhere before launching Snapseed), you can't resize pictures (they will be exported at the original size) and you can't watermark.

• The app doesn't view or carry accross EXIF information: This is a really annoying omission for an app that otherwise targets serious photographers.

• A few basic editing functions are missing: Some of the functions that you would expect to see in a high-end processing tool (and again, that's what Snapseed is, despite the low price tag) are missing. The three I came accross were vignetting, sharpening and noise reduction. The first two exist as components of pre-sets in the creative editing options, but you can't control their application. The last one isn't there at all, as far as I can see.

• Too much randomness in texture options: Texture options (in Vintage or Grunge) are all applied randomly or sequentially, but you have limited control and replicability there. This is an issue because it makes it hard to really think of them as part of the creative process. Looking at the photos in the Snapseed group on Flickr, I see that many have had the same issue I had: you just use them by default, because you can. I forced myself to stop, but I can see this becoming another HDR: an interesting technique that is used by default and mars more pictures that it enhances. Can't really blame Snapseed for that, I guess, but something to keep in mind nonetheless.

• Few frame options, all funky: There are few frame options, and none of them are clean. It doesn't seem like it would be complicated to simply allow you to do a clean black or white (or whatever color) frame...

One issue with editing photos on the ipad is that because it's strongly backlit, the screen is a lot more luminous than most computer screens. As a consequence, photos that can seem adequately bright on the ipad turn out to be underexposed when viewed on any other screen. One suggestion for the Photogene people is to maybe offer an option at the end of the workflow to correct exposure based on the ipad's brightness before export...

Overall, my Snapseed experience is very positive. For the first time, I've processed photos on the ipad that stand on their own without me thinking "I need to process that again in Lightroom as soon as I'm home..." This app is very promising, and provided future versions integrate a few changes to allow the whole workflow to be done on-app, it could completely change my own habits for photo processing (to tell you the truth, I've already wondered how I should proceed to shift some of the old RAW files on my computer back onto the ipad...)

Lens Review: Lensbaby Composer

Pour lire cette critique en Français, cliquer ici.

I've now had my Lensbaby Composer for a little over 6 months, and I thought it might be interesting to others for me to write a short assessment of my use of this lens for those of my readers who are amateur photographers themselves. I will try to write it short and speak a little about technique, about creativity and also about perception.

The Lensbaby is easy if you're already an enlightened amateur

The Lensbaby Composer is a completely manual 50mm for digital SLR cameras. It's available for Canon, Nikon and a few other brands of DSLRs. Hence the "enlightened amateur" comment in the title here. The concept of this lens is that it has selective sharpness. By default, the center of the frame will be sharp and the further out from the center, the more it will be blurred. A tilting ball and socket allows you to orient the front of the lens to move the area of sharpness to other parts of the frame. A couple of examples to show this, this picture has the sharpness dead center wheras this one has it at the top of the frame.

Because it's important, let me stress again that this lens is completely manual: not only do you need to focus manually, but you also change aperture manually. This means that not only with the full auto mode of your DSLR likely not work optimally with the Lensbaby, but even in semi-auto or fully manual modes, the camera will not have control over all the exposure parameters (and has no information about aperture at all). To change the aperture, the Lensbaby is shipped with a set of discs with a various size apertures from F/2.8 to F/22. Changing the discs is easy: once the lens cap removed, you can see the disc at the bottom of the lens. You extract the disc with a magnet rod (also shipped with the lens) and you drop another ring, which automatically sets itself in the right place.

Even if manual focus requires some experience, it's not the part that I found difficult with the Lensbaby. The focus ring is smooth which allows you to focus fast. As with every manual focus, you need precision, but the sharpness in the sharpness area really is good (in my opinion). The main difficulty I've found was around lighting: when the lighting is low, it's very hard to know if you're sharp or not. As an illustration, this photo of Elise Caron is way too soft, whereas the sharpness on this one of Jamie McLean is quite good, even though the lighting conditions were similar.

In terms of build, the Lensbaby is reasonably solid although mine has a little bit of a rattle around the focus ring. It's not really a handicap but it's sometimes disturbing because you're not sure your focus is not going to move when you remove your hand. From a technical standpoint, the lack of communication between lens and camera didn't have any impact when I was shooting with my Canon EOS 1000D: even in Aperture Priority mode (Av), the camera exposed properly and appluied correct shutter speed parameters. Since I've started using the Lensbaby on my Canon EOS 7D, it's no longer the case and photos shot in Av mode are systematically under-exposed. Not a huge deal, but it forces me to go full manual and find the shutter speed by trial and error.

In terms of picture quality, the sharpness is - as I mentioned above - quite stunning for a lens in that price range, but there are strong distorsions in the extreme partss of the blurred area. When the sharp area is centered, you can't see it to the naked eye, but when it's not the blurred area opposite to the sharp area is often strongly deformed. The phenomenon is slightly visible on this photo of the Printemps, at the bottom, where the ligns seem to converge. I don't have any more marked examples because I try to avoid this effect. I don't know how the Lensbaby handles with a full frame camera, but I imagine these effects are more accetuated.

Finally, it should be noted that the Lensbaby easily generates noise. With my 1000D, the noise beyond 400 ISO was way excessive. With the 7D I can safely push to 800, beyond that I'm in unknown territory and never know if the photo will be acceptable or not.

Creative Lensbaby

Originally, I purchased a Lensbaby because the shots seen on the Lensbaby site pleased me, but also because many critics stressed the fact that the lens forced you to look at things differently and take a new approach to composition. From that point of view I haven't been dissapointed. The Lensbaby opens new possibilities and imposes new constraints, both good vectors for creativity.

The main use I have for the Lensbaby is to direct attention on a particular area of the picture. On various sites (Flickr, Lensbaby Studio Forum) I frequently see photos where nothing is sharp. I'm not disputing the artistic validity of that approach to the Lensbaby, but as for me I rarely appreciate such shote (with the exception of this photo of Brendan Bayliss). But I do use the Lensbaby to direct attention to the sharp area as on this photo of the Louvre Caryatids.

Because of my willingness to have a really sharp area, I rarely use the F/2.8 aperture ring which generates a sharp area so small that it's very hard (for me at least) to use properly. Generally I will oscillate between F/4 and F/5.6 and occasionally push to F/8 (macro excepted). I virtually never use rights closed beyond F/8 and when I do I often think I would have been better off using a regular lens (as on this photo of the Sacré-Coeur).

Another interesting creative aspect of the Lensbaby is the directional dynamics. The "artificial" blur created by the Lensbaby tends to converge towards the area of sharpness so that certain photos, when the lighting is adequate, will give the sense of a rush towards the area of sharpness. This photo of a flower field is a good case in point. It also allows to accentuate direction dynamics when the sharpness area isn't centered as on this photo of a Boston skyscraper.

Another aspect of the creative use of the Lensbaby (accessories excepted) is the possibility to accentuate (somewhat artificially) the depth of field blur effects. You often see F/1.4 portraits where only a very small part of the face is sharp (usually the eyes). It's possible to do the same thing with a Lensbaby, but the result is more radical, and often feels less 'natural' since the transition between sharp and blurred is more brutal, and the spread of blur is not tied to distance. This is how you get a portrait like Jon's. I like this effect a lot, but it doesn't please everyone, far from it (see below).

Accessories offer more creative possibilities, even though I haven't really tapped into that particular type of accessories yet. The wide-angle (35mm) and telephoto (85mm) kit is nice to have more versatility in terms of focal lengths. With the exception of the distorions mentioned below which are accentuated somewhat (especially with the wide-angle) and a loss of lighting that needs to be accounted for, they're very useful. The macro kit is also great, but in this instance, the specificty of the Lensbaby is less interesting in my opinion. With macro, depth of field tends to be very shallow anyway, DOF blur is therefore very present anyway. An image at F/2.8 with a +4 macro accessory will have such a small area of sharpness and such radical blur outside of that area that it usually creates an extreme abstraction.

One last comment on the creative aspects of the Lensbaby. There's a freshness to this lens, and I sense that it creates - after a while - a feeling that anything you shoot with it is original, when in fact you're simply shooting with a specific effect lens that not many people use. In other words, it's easy to be swept by the illusion that whatever you shoot with the Lensbaby will be interesting and/or creative. It nearly becomes addictive after a while, and you think you can never go wrong. It's not true of course, and once you become aware of that (which just happened to me recently) it's good to force yourself not to always take the Lensbaby with you and not to always use it for the same kind of composition.

Polarizing Perceptions

My taste for pronounced blurs and shallow depth of field probably predisposed me to liek what the Lensbaby allows you to shoot, but I quickly found out that this abundance of blur "not where you'd expect it" wasn't to everyone's taste. Several readers of this blog expressed their lack of taste for the Lensbaby photos because of this "unnatural" blur. Some comments on Flickr or other forums I frequent compare it to excessive photoshopping.

So it's important to be aware - if you're going to purchase a Lensbaby - that the result will polarize perceptions (pun unintended) between those who are enthusiastic about the results and those who are disturbed or disgustes by these strong and not always intuitive blurs.

Conclusions

I'm very pleased with my Lensbaby Composer and it has allowed me to shoot many photos that I'm excessively happy with. It's also nice to know that I haven't explored all of its possibilities since I haven't (for the time being) purchased any of the alternative optics (single glass, toy optic, pinhole, soft focus, fisheye). I think I'll let myself be tempted sooner or later, but in the meantime, I strongly recommend getting one if strong blurring doesn't scare you and if you're willing to learn how to use your DSLR manually.

Critique d'Objectif: Lensbaby Composer

To read this review in English, click here.

Cela fait maintenant bientôt 6 mois que j'ai acheté mon Lensbaby Composer, et il m'a semblé intéressant d'écrire un petit bilan de mon utilisation de cet objectif pour mes lecteurs qui sont eux mêmes photographes amateurs. Je vais essayer de faire rapide, de parler un peu technique, pas mal créativité et aussi perception.

Le Lensbaby, c'est facile si on est déjà un amateur éclairé

Le Lensbaby Composer (celui que j'ai) se présente sous la forme d'un objectif 50mm entièrement manuel à fixer sur un appareil Reflex Numérique (DSLR). Il existe en montures Canon, Nikon et quelques autres marques (je n'ai pas trop suivi). Donc on est déjà sur de l'amateur éclairé, comme je le disais plus haut. Le principe de cet objectif c'est qu'il a une netteté sélective. Par défaut, la zone au centre du cadre est nette, et plus on s'éloigne du centre, et plus c'est flou. Un pivot sur l'objectif permet d'orienter l'avant de celui-ci pour déplacer la zone de netteté dans d'autres parties du cadre. A titre d'exemple, voici une photo avec la netteté au centre et une avec la netteté en haut de la photo.

Ce qu'il est important de comprendre, c'est que le Lensbaby est un objectif entièrement manuel: non seulement la mise au point se fait manuellement, mais également le changement d'ouverture. Ca veut dire que non seulement le mode automatique d'un Reflex ne fonctionnera pas forcément de manière optimale avec un Lensbaby, mais que même en mode semi-manuel ou manuel, l'appareil ne pourra pas modifier tous les paramètres d'exposition (et n'a d'ailleurs aucune information sur l'ouverture). Pour changer l'ouverture, le Lensbaby est livré avec un jeu de disques plus ou moins ouverts, allant de F/2.8 à F/22. Changer les disques est facile: une fois le capuchon de l'objectif enlevé, on aperçoit le disque au fond de l'objectif. On va chercher le disque en place avec une tige aimantée (également livrée avec l'objectif) et on laisse tomber le disque souhaité à sa place (il se positionne parfaitement tout seul).

Même si la mise au point manuelle demande un apprentissage certain, ce n'est pas la partie qui m'a semblé la plus difficile dans l'utilisation du Lensbaby. La molette de mise au point est très souple, ce qui permet une mise au point rapide. Comme toute mise au point manuelle, il faut être précis, mais le piqué obtenu dans la zone de netteté est franchement bon (à mon avis). La seule difficulté que j'ai rencontré concerne l'éclairage: quand l'éclairage est faible, il est très difficile de savoir si on est net. A titre d'exemple, cette photo d'Elise Caron est franchement molle alors que le piqué sur celle de Jamie McLean est franchement bon à conditions d'éclairage similaires.

En termes de facture, le Lensbaby est solide encore que le mien ait un tout petit peu de jeu au niveau du pivot central. Ca n'est pas gênant en soi, mais quand on fait la mise au point, c'est parfois troublant. Techniquement, le fait que l'objectif ne communique pas électroniquement avec l'appareil ne me posait aucun souci du temps de mon Canon EOS 1000D puisque même en mode priorité à l'ouverture (Av), l'appareil calculait automatiquement et sans souci le bon temps d'exposition. Depuis que j'utilise le Lensbaby sur mon Canon EOS 7D, ce n'est plus le cas et en mode Av mes photos au Lensbaby sont systématiquement trop sombres. Ca n'est pas très grave, mais ça m'oblige à passer en manuel et à faire quelques essais préalables pour déterminer le bon temps d'exposition.

D'un point de vue qualité de l'image, si le piqué est - comme je l'ai dit plus haut - assez étonnant pour un objectif de ce prix, il faut néanmoins préciser qu'il y a des distorsions fortes aux extrèmes de la zone floue. Lorsque la zone de netteté est centrée, ce n'est pas perceptible à l'oeil nu, mais lorsque qu'elle est décentrée, le flou à l'opposé de la zone de netteté est généralement fortement déformé. C'est légèrement visible sur cette photo du Printemps, en bas, où les lignes du bâtiment semblent converger. Je n'ai pas d'exemple plus frappant parce que j'essaie d'éviter de faire des photos où c'est trop marqué. Je ne sais pas comment se comporte le Lensbaby sur un 24x36, mais j'imagine que ces effets sont accentués.

Enfin, il est bon de signaler que le Lensbaby bruite facilement. Avec mon 1000D le bruit au delà de 400 ISO était largement excessif. Avec mon 7D je peux me permettre de pousser à 800, mais au-delà je suis en territoire inconnu sans certitude que les photos seront acceptables de ce point de vue.

Lensbaby Créatif

A l'origine, j'ai acheté un Lensbaby parce que j'aimais beaucoup l'effet sur les photos que j'avais vues sur le site Lensbaby, mais également parce que de nombreuses critiques mettaient en avant le fait que cet objectif poussait à voir les choses différemment et du coup à composer autrement. De ce point de vue là, je n'ai pas été déçu: le Lensbaby ouvre des possibilités intéressantes et impose des contraintes, deux combinaisons propices à la créativité.

La principale utilisation que je fais du Lensbaby est de focaliser l'attention sur une zone particulière de l'image. Sur les divers sites (Flickr, Lensbaby Studio Forum) je vois fréquemment des images où rien n'est net. Je ne critique pas la validité artistique de ces photos, mais pour ma part j'apprécie très rarement une absence totale de netteté (l'exception étant cette photo de Brendan Bayliss). Par contre, je me sers fréquemment du Lensbaby pour focaliser l'attention sur un détail particulier de l'image, comme sur cette photo des Caryatides du Louvre.

En raison de cette volonté d'avoir une zone franchement nette, j'utilise très rarement le disque d'ouverture à F/2.8 dont la zone de netteté est tellement petite qu'il est très difficile (je trouve) de l'exploiter correctement. En général j'oscille entre des ouverture à F/4 et F/5.6 en poussant parfois jusqu'à F/8 (hors macro). Je n'utilise pratiquement jamais les disques plus fermés que F/8 et quand je le fais, je me dis que j'aurais sans doute mieux fait de prendre la photo avec un objectif classique (comme sur cette photo du Sacré-Coeur).

Un autre aspect créatif intéressant du Lensbaby est le dynamisme directionnel. Le flou "articiel" créé par le Lensbaby converge clairement vers le point de netteté si bien que certaines photos, lorsque l'éclairage est adéquat, donnent le sentiment de projection vers la zone de netteté. Cette photo d'un champ dde fleurs est un bon exemple de cela. Cela permet également des dynamiques fortes lorsque l'on décentre la zone de netteté, comme sur cette photo d'immeuble à Boston.

Un autre aspect de l'utilisation créative du Lensbaby (hors accessoires) est la possibilité d'accentuer (certes articiellement) des effets de flou de profondeur. On voit fréquemment par exemple ces portraits à F/1.4 dont seule une petite surface du visage est nette (généralement les yeux). Il est possible de faire la même chose avec le Lensbaby, mais le résultat est plus radical et souvent moins 'naturel' puisque la transition entre net et flou est plus brutale et que la répartition du flou n'est pas liée à la distance. C'est ainsi qu'on obtien un portrait comme celui de Jon. Personnellement, j'aime beaucoup, mais ce n'est pas unanime loin de là (voir plus bas).

Les accessoires offrent d'avantage de possibilités créatives, même si pour ma part j'en ai peu et que j'en fais un usage plutôt conventionnel. Le kit grand-angle (35mm) et télé (85mm) est sympathique pour avoir un peu plus de versatilité en matière de focales. A l'exception des déformations notées plus haut qui sont accentuées (surtout avec le grand-angle) et d'une perte non négligeable de luminosité quand on les utilise, ils sont bien sympathiques. Quand au kit macro, il est également très sympa mais pour le coup on sent bien que la spécificité du Lensbaby perd tout son intérêt en macro, ou les profondeurs de champ sont déjà extrèmement courtes et donc le flou de profondeur omniprésent. Une image à F/2.8 en macro +4 aura une zone de netteté très petite et un flou très accentué partout ailleurs, créant une abstraction extrème.

Dernier commentaire sur l'aspect créatif du Lensbaby: il y a un côté rafraichissant à utiliser cet objectif et je pense que ça peut créer le sentiment au bout d'un moment qu'on est plus original quand en fait on dispose juste d'un objectif peu diffusé. En d'autres termes, il est facile de tomber dans l'illusion que tout ce que vous ferez avec le Lensbaby sera intéressant et/ou créatif. Ca en devient presque addictif au bout d'un moment, et on a l'impression de ne jamais rater une photo. En fait, c'est évidemment faux, et une fois cette prise de conscience faite (j'en suis tout juste là) il est bon de s'imposer de ne pas toujours prendre le Lensbaby sur soi et de ne pas recourir systématiquement aux mêmes utilisations de la zone de netteté dans les compositions.

Perception

Mon goût pour les flous prononcés et les profondeurs de champ courtes me prédisposait sans doute à apprécier le Lensbaby, mais je me suis rapidement rendu compte que cette abondance de flou "pas là où on l'attend" n'était pas du goût de tout le monde. Plusieurs lecteurs de ce blog on fait part de leur manque d'appréciation pour les photos prises au Lensbaby en raison de ce flou "pas naturel". Certaines critiques sur Flickr ou d'autres forums que je fréquente comparent cela à du photoshopping excessif.

Il est donc bon de savoir lorsqu'on envisage l'achat d'un Lensbaby que le résultat sera très polarisant (sans jeu de mots) entre ceux qui sont enthousiastes et ceux que ces flous excessifs et pas toujours intuitifs déroutent ou dégoûtent.

Conclusions

Je suis très content de l'achat de mon Lensbaby Composer et j'en ai tiré de nombreuses photos qui me plaisent vraiment. Il est également plaisant de savoir que je n'ai pas exploré toutes les possibilités de l'objectif dans la mesure où je n'ai pour le moment acheté aucune des optiques alternatives (single glass, toy optic, pinhole, soft focus, fisheye). Je pense que je craquerais tôt ou tard, mais en attendant, je recommande vivement l'achat si les flous forts ne vous rebutent pas et que vous êtes prêts à un apprentissage des options manuelles de votre réflex.

Check This Out: Lensbaby Competition

La semaine prochaine, je serais l'heureux propriétaire d'un Lensbaby Composer, un objectif un peu bizarre à mise au point manuelle avec une zone de netteté sélective. En fait, techniquement je suis déjà propriétaire, mais il m'attend à Boston où je pars Lundi pour le boulot. Depuis que j'ai décidé de faire cet achat (somme toute assez modeste), je regarde régulièrement le site de Lensbaby ou de nombreuses photos utilisant cet objectif sont publiées. Lensbaby va même publier un livre de photos et a fait appel aux amateurs pour proposer les leurs. Ce sont les résultats de ce concours qui viennent d'être publiés, même si pour ma part je trouve que certaines photos de la section mentions honorables sont plus intéressantes que les gagnants... (La photo montrée ici est (c) Ken Ross)

Next week I will be the happy owner of a Lensbaby Composer, a somewhat strange manual focus lens with selective sharpness. Technically, I'm already the owner actually, but it's waiting for me in Boston where I will be next week. Since I decided to purchase this (reasonably priced) lens, I regularly check the Lensbaby website where many photos using their lenses are published. Lensbaby is even going to publish a book of photos and asked for amateur contributions. The results of that contest have just been published even if in my opinion some of the honorable mention photos are a lot more interesting than some of the winners... (The photo here is (c) Ken Ross)

Sigma 50mm 1.4

Il y a deux semaines, lorsque j'étais à Washington pour le boulot, j'en ai profité pour faire un saut dans un magasin de photo. Le cours du dollar étant super faible, il y a des bonnes affaires à faire, et j'ai finalement fait le saut pour m'équiper d'un 50mm 1.4. Le Canon que je visais n'était pas stocké, mais le Sigma équivalent (un peu plus haut de gamme, semble-t'il) était au prix du Canon en France, alors bon... J'ai commencé à m'en servir pour des portraits et des abstractions issues de mon imagination dérangée. Vous en verrez les résultats sur ce blog dans les semaines à venir. Mais je peux en tous cas vous dire que pour le moment j'en suis très content!

Two weeks ago, when I was in Washington for work, I passed by a camera shop. The dollar rate is so low that there are some good deals to be made for a Eurozone guy, and I finally decided to purchase a 50mm 1.4 lens. The Canon I aimed for was out of stock, but the equivalent Sigma (apparently a slightly higher standard) was at the price of the Canon in France so... I've started using it for portraits and abstractions from my deranged imagination. You'll see some of the results on this blog in the coming weeks, but meanwhile suffice it to say that I am very happy with that purchase!

Mogrify for Lightroom 2

J'apprends doucement à me servir de Lightroom 2 et aujourd'hui j'ai téléchargé mon premier plug-in. Il s'agit de Mogrify, qui permet de rajouter des bordures et des annotations au moment de l'exportation de Lightroom. Je dois dire que c'est un super petit freeware et j'avais pigé son fonctionnement quelques minutes après l'installation. Attendez-vous à quelques changements mineurs dans la présentation des photos à partir de maintenant! En tous cas, si vous avez de bons plug-ins à recommander pour Lightroom, faites le savoir!

I'm slowly learning my way around Lightroom 2 and today I loaded my first plug-in. It's called Mogrify, and it allows you to add borders and annotations to a photo when you export it from Lightroom. I must say it's a really nifty piece of freeware, and I had run of the controls within minutes of installing it. Expect some little changes in the way the pictures look from now on! And if you have good plug-ins to recommend for Lightroom, let me know!