asphotographics

Photographic Geotagging and Canon GP-E2 GPS Receiver Hacks

March 14, 2013February 16, 2017Posted in Photography, TechnologyTagged Canon, cartophilia, Garmin, geotag, geotagging, gps, iPhone, map

My Motivation

iPhoto on iPhone Map View — Map view in iPhoto on iPhone

I blame my father in-law. He keeps dissing the iPhone’s geotagging functions. Apparently, on his Android phone, it is easier to see where a photo was taken. Alas, this appears to be true.

On iOS, in the built-in Photos app you can choose Places and see all your photos on a map, but you can’t do the reverse (i.e., choose a photo and see it on a map). You have to install Apple’s iPhoto for iOS ($4.99CAD) to get the ability to click on a photo to see it on a map (see screenshot to the right).

Fathers, like customers, are always right.

The problem is, he got me interested in geotagging. Geotagging is something I have casually investigated before, but not something I got into seriously. I have become intrigued and after some intensive goofing around I spent the last week compiling what I now know about geotagging. Enjoy!

[toc]

How-to Geotag Photos

To paraphrase the clerk at my camera store, GPS tagging of photos is still in its infancy. While not really true (geotagging has been going on since the dawn of smartphones) geotagging falls under the category of “techy” at the moment. It should be more ubiquitous, but the technology is not as prevalent, or easy to use, as it should be. In the current state you have several geotagging options to explore.

Drag-and-drop Geotagging

The simplest, but perhaps the least inviting way to geotag is the drag-and-drop method. First, you need software that lets you drag photos onto a map (Flickr has this feature, as do Google’s Picasa and Apple’s iPhoto).

To geotag a photo, simply navigate the software’s map to the location where a photo was taken, drag the photo onto the map, and the software writes the geolocation data for that location into the photo. Do this for all your photos and you will be able to explore them on a map.

Their are two downsides to this method. One, it takes some time to do. Two, it is error prone. Many people (not me) are not very spatially aware and might have trouble remembering exactly where a photo was taken. Also, do you drag the photo onto the location where the photographer was standing (e.g., somewhere along the Avenue des Champs-Élysées in Paris), or the location of the photograph’s subject (e.g., the Arc de Triomphe)?

Additionally, if you use a photo site (such as Flickr) to geotag your photos, then your original photos (presumably backed up on your computer) will not be geotagged.

Smartphone Photography

Of course mobile phones and tablets almost all geotag by default. They have either built-in GPS receivers, use Wifi to mimic global position (WPS), or combine these two approaches. If you haven’t played around with your geotagged mobile photos then this is a good place for you to start exploring. Try using iPhoto’s Places feature.

GPS-equipped Cameras

This should be the future of geotagging. Every camera should have a built-in GPS receiver and Wifi. These microchips are cheap.

Currently, there are several dozen consumer-grade cameras with built-in GPS. The main concern with using built-in GPS seems to be deteriorated battery life.

My wife has a Panasonic waterproof camera with GPS, but we never use that function for fear of depleting the camera’s battery. She uses the camera primarily on canoe trips and a battery recharge could be days, or even a week away.

Buil-in GPS is the simplest option though and is really the only viable option for the average consumer.

(If you use Eye-Fi Wifi-enabled SD cards you can take advantage of WPS geotagging, which in urban areas is going to be almost as accurate as GPS. Outside of urban areas, or away from any wireless access points, WPS geotagging will not work.)

Combination of Camera and External GPS Receiver

If your camera does not have a built-in GPS receiver then you can still geotag your photos with the help of an external GPS receiver (logger). This is more cumbersome than having built-in GPS, but more accurate than manually geotagging with the drag-and-drop method.

I’ll break down this method into two categories: using your GPS equipped cellphone as a logger, or using a stand-alone GPS receiver (i.e., a receiver that is not also a web browser, email client, and espresso maker).

Smartphone GPS Logger

I can quite easily do geotagging with my iPhone and my Wifi Canon PowerShot S110 via Canon’s CameraWindow iOS app. All I need to do is start the geo logging function in CameraWindow and then go shoot some photos. When done shooting, I stop geo logging, connect my iPhone and PowerShot S110 via Wifi, and tell CameraWindow to tag all the new photos on the camera. Done.

Canon’s Camera Window app for iOS, which works with their Wifi-capable cameras, has a major flaw — you cannot export your geo location log. You can only tag photos that are on your Canon camera by connecting it to the iPhone via Wifi after generating a log. I can’t, for example, use the CameraWindow app to tag photos from my EOS M.

Thankfully, there are other apps available that geo log and allow you to export your logs. I’ve been trying out Geotag Photos Pro. The app’s logger fits in the functional category — full featured but not pretty. (The same company’s off-line desktop Java app for marrying the log data with your photos blows chunks. Their on-line version of the app is even scarier. Avoid them.)

After you create your log, you need to do something with it. The workflow generally looks like this: log with your smartphone while you take some photos; export the log to your computer (usually via email); and, on your computer run the log and your photos through some software to automatically geotag your photos.

Most logging apps export logs in standard GPX (GPS eXchange) format so you can use them in whatever software you choose. Adobe Lightroom has a geotagging feature that supports GPX logs. I currently use Adobe Bridge and Adobe Camera Raw for my workflow, neither of which natively support geotagging. I did find a plug-in script for Bridge by photographer Yagor Korzh that accepts GPX logs as input. It is no frills, but it seems to work fine in the few tests I ran. However, on OS X, I’ve settled on GPSPhotoLinker as my third-party geotagging software.

Traveling, which I have been doing a lot of recently, plus photography, just screams for geotagging. I almost always have an iPhone and a camera with me wherever I go, so I would like this geotagging method to work for me.

Apps that use GPS for extended periods have a tendency to deplete your phone battery rather quickly. When I am travelling I just never know when I might be able to recharge, so phone battery conservation is a high-priority. Thus, I have not used this method extensively in the real world.

This method also requires that you remember to start and stop logging. It seems like a lot of work.

(Here is a quick travel tip: charge your iPhone faster with Apple’s larger and more powerful 12 watt USB power adaptor (the kind that comes with the iPad) rather than with the slower 5 watt iPhone-standard power adaptor. Make the most of those few minutes in the airport boarding lounge. Carry the larger adaptor and you’ll also be ready to save a fellow traveller with an iPad in need of juice.)

Stand-alone or Dedicated GPS Receiver/Logger

If your camera does not have built-in GPS and/or you do not want to use your smartphone as a GPS logger, then you have two other options: use a stand-along GPS receiver that can log tracks and export those logs to your computer (e.g., a Garment eTrex); or, buy a dedicated external GPS receiver that is designed to work directly or indirectly with your camera model.

If you already have a suitable stand-alone GPS receiver, start there.

Canon GP-E2 GPS Receiver

Preview.app GPS Info Pane illustrating the plethora of geotag data added by the Canon GP-E2

At the moment I do not have a Garmin, Magellan, or other GPS receiver. As a Canon user my first option is the Canon GP-E2 GPS Receiver. The GP-E2 is a hotshoe mountable GPS receiver that is specifically designed to work seemlessly with Canon’s current line-up of EOS cameras. Thankfully, that includes my EOS M.

With the GP-E2 mounted on the EOS-M, photos are tagged with latitude, longitude, and direction of shot (thanks to a digital compass) the moment each photo is written to the camera’s SD or CF card. The GP-E2 also has a log mode which periodically writes location data to its own memory.

GP-E2 battery longevity is essentially a non-issue. On a single AA battery it can log every 15 seconds for up to 39 hours. If I shot four hours a day, I could get 9 days out of a single Ni-MH rechargeable. 1, 5, 10, 15, or 30 second, and 1, 2, or 5 minute intervals are also available.

I won’t have to worry about daily logs filing up the device either. Using the default 15 second interval, 69 days worth of logs can be stored on the device. At longer intervals, up to 128 days worth of logs are kept. That is plenty of time to get back to the computer to backup the logs. When the device memory is full the oldest logs are deleted to free up space.

This all sounds great, but there are a few downsides to the GP-E2.

One, it is bulky. On professional or pro-consumer EOS bodies it won’t really be noticed, but it sticks out like a sore thumb on my EOS M, especially if I use the tiny EF-M 22mm pancake lens. Though, at only 81 grams, weight is not a problem. Also, it can be used off-camera by attaching via the DIGITAL ports with either the supplied 25 cm or 1.5m cables.

Two, it is expensive. At $350CAD, the price is as high as the GPS satellites it communicates with. For $259CAD I can get a great stand-alone Garmin GPS that has almost all the features of the GP-E2 and then some (more on this option in a minute).

Three, while tagging photos in-camera on the EOS is super simple, using the logs to tag images from non-EOS cameras is a bit of a pain, to say the least (again, more on that later on).

Other GPS Receivers

As I mentioned above, the Garmin eTrex-series is very enticing. I have investigated the eTrex 30. It is relatively compact, which makes it a good option for travelling. If I had one, I would also use it while backpacking, canoeing, and mountain biking.

As a GPS logger, a device like the Garmin eTrex 30, would work essentially the same as any of the smartphone apps available, with one exception. A stand-alone GPS receiver is going to have substantially better battery longevity — 25 hours on two standard AA batteries, according to Garmin.

Where Am I? (Pun Intended)

Yesterday, I decided I would not get the Canon GP-E2 or a Garmin eTrex. I decided I would play around with iOS loggers for a little while longer.

Today, I changed my mind. My credit card company thanks me, I’m sure.

After purchasing the GP-E2, I took it home and put it through its paces. Though happy with the final results, I had a frustrating time getting it to do all that I wanted. Rather than keep that suffering/knowledge to myself, I decided I would share so others might have an easier time of things. Beneficence or catharsis — you decide.

Canon GP-E2 GPS Receiver Hack-a-thon

For the price I paid for the GP-E2, I rationalized that it would have to be a fully-capable device. It had to do the following, or I would consider returning it:

tag images on my EOS camera while mounted on the hotshoe;
easily log tracks, and allow tagging of images from my other Canon cameras;
allow exporting of track logs for use in other software if I choose not to use the Canon’s MapUtility;
and finally, allow tagging of photos from non-Canon cameras (contrary to the marketing material).

Geotagging Is For Techies

I’m a pretty sophisticated guy. I was a CTO and VP of Technology in a former life. At least I think I know computers and gadgets. However, it took several hours of Googling and goofing around before I was able to do all the things I wanted with the GP-E2.

First, the Canon MapUtility that comes with the GP-E2 isn’t as bad as most reviewers would have you believe. (Heck, it is not as bad as most software Canon produce.)

There is a gap in the GP-E2 manual though — they don’t actually tell you how to connect the GPS unit to the computer. So, let’s start there (I assume you’ve installed the included MapUtility software already).

Loading GP-E2 Log Data Onto Your Computer

If you are using the log mode of your GP-E2 you need to get the log onto your computer:

First, plug a mini-USB cable (which Canon does not supply) from your computer into the DIGITAL port on the GP-E2.
Then, turn the GP-E2 mode switch to ON.
Next, launch MapUtility.
Finally, import your logs. In the upper left of the application window, select the “GPS log files” tab. At the bottom of said tab, there is a button with a grey box and a blue arrow. Click this button to import your logs from the GPS device (you can also perform this operation using the File menu).

Congratulations, you now have your logs. What to do with them?

If you have photos shot with a Canon camera during the log timeframe, then you can simply drag them into MapUtility and have them automatically geotagged. Like all other geotagging utilities, MapUtility simply matches the time the photo was taken with the corresponding time in the log and assigns the most relevant location to your photos.

For example, I went outside to shoot some photos with my EOS M with the GP-E2 installed. I had the GP-E2 in LOG mode. As I shot photos on my EOS M, they were immediately tagged with location and direction data. I also had my PowerShot S110 along. While the GP-E2 was logging, I shot a few photos with the S110.

Back at my computer, I imported the geotagged EOS M photos and the non-geotagged S110 photos. I loaded the S110 photos and the GP-E2 log into MapUtility, and voila, the S110 photos are now geotagged.

Skirting Canon’s Proprietary-ness

What if you want to use your GP-E2 logs outside of MapUtility? Maybe you want to use the map features in Lightroom instead. Or, what if you want to use your GP-E2 logs in MapUtility, but with a non-Canon camera?

In these cases you will need to either, a) get your logs out of MapUtility; or b), get MapUtility to play nice with your non-Canon photos.

This is where things start to get messy.

Exporting and Translating the GP-E2 Logs

First, getting your logs out of MapUtility.

If you select a log in MapUtility’s “GPS log files” tab an enticing button becomes available which offers to “Export file for Google Earth”. Unfortunately this button does not do what you want it to. It exports a KMZ GPS track file which is stripped of any and all timestamp information. This KMZ can be converted into a KML file, and then into a GPX file, but your geotagging software will not be able to use the GPX file to match photos via date and time alignment.

This is where I found myself banging my head on my desk and preparing to return the GP-E2. At that moment however, I happen to open iPhoto, which I don’t use that often, and which really only contains my iPhone Photo Stream.

In a mapping sort of mood, I clicked on iPhoto’s Places. I saw a map plotting where each of my recent iPhone photos had been shot — on four continents in just five months! I was a bit taken aback and a bit impressed.

As I looked at a map, I saw a pin at a location where I didn’t recall taking any iPhone photos. I clicked the pin and saw photos of my wife huddled in her sleeping bag in the back of my pick-up truck a few hours before we started paddling down the White River last September. I clicked other pins, in strange or distant places and memories started flooding back. I never drive down that side-street, I thought. And then I saw pictures of my wife rolling our canoe towards the river on a crazy urban adventure. I don’t mind saying I had tears in my eyes.

I wanted to be able to explore all my photos that way. I was more determined to make the GP-E2 work for me. I had figured out how to tag photos from any Canon camera, EOS or not. Maybe I didn’t want to use MapUtility, but I could.

I decided to make one more attempt at exporting the GP-E2 for use in an alternative geotagger.

At the bottom of a forum thread I had already read, I re-examined a post that I had previously glossed over. I had already found the location of the log files on my computer and taken a look at them. They were in plaintext which was promising. The post I found made things clearer. The Canon GP-E2 is an NMEA-0183 compliant device. There is an excellent free utility available — GPSBabel — that can convert NMEA files to GPX. I quickly tried out the on-line version of GPSBabel and found myself with a lovely GPX file.

I loaded the GPX file and some sample photos into GPSPhotoLinker, and lo and behold I had geotagged photos.

So in short, to convert your GP-E2 logs to GPX format:

import your logs from the GP-E2 into MapUtility as described above;
located the imported logs on your computer (on a Mac they are in /Users//Documents/Canon Utilities/GPS Log Files, on Windows try C:/users//Documents/Canon Utilities/GPS Log Files);
use GPSBabel to convert the log file from NMEA-0183 to GPX.

On OS X, when you download and install the GPSBabelFE.app GUI, then the command-line executable binary is located at /Applications/GPSBabelFE.app/Contents/MacOS/gpsbabel. If you use the command-line version of gpsbabel, the conversion command will look something like:

gpsbabel -t -i nmea -f "20130308.log" -x nuketypes,waypoints,routes -o gpx -F "20130308.gpx"

If you use the on-line version of GPSBabel then the conversion form should look something like this:

Using Canon MapUtility to Geotag non-Canon photos

But what if I want to use Canon’s MapUtility to geotag non-Canon photos rather than exporting the GPS track log to another program? Well, I figured that out too.

Map Utility simply uses the EXIF “Make” tag contents (the name of the camera manufacture stored in each photo when it is produced) to restrict geotagging to photos taken with Canon cameras. Lame. Are Canon afraid that users will mess up existing goetags from other manufactures? Maybe, but this restrictions seems useless.

I used OS X Terminal.app and ExifTool to read the contents of of the “Make” tag on a sample photo…

exiftool -Make Non-Canon-Photos-Folder/photo1.jpg

Make                            : Panasonic

…temporarily changed the tag contents of a bunch of photos to “Canon”…

exiftool -Make=Canon Non-Canon-Photos-Folder/*.jpg

…imported these non-Canon photos into MapUtility, geotagged them, and then set the “Make” tags back to their original values…

exiftool -Make=Panasonic Non-Canon-Photos-Folder/*.jpg

As you can see, with exiftool you can easily batch manipulate EXIF data. You are not limited to JPEGs. ExifTool works with almost any file format that can contain EXIF, IPTC, etc.

Also, in the exiftool command you have the option of specifiing a single file as your source, a directory of files, or a list of files identified using wildcards.

In the above examples, the original files are renamed and kept as backups, but you can turn off this behaviour.

And finally, ExifTool can be used to geotag your photos using the data from your GPX or NMEA log files, allowing you to skip the MapUtility altogether. I think I’ll be working on a script to automate this soon.

If you are not comfortable using the command line, then I’m sure there is a GUI utility out there for you. Unfortunately Adobe Bridge does not let you modify EXIF camera data such as the “Make” tag. Not sure about Lightroom.

Conclusion

I’ve always loved cartography, globes, and paper maps. Maybe this is why I am so late to the GPS game. Except for navigating with digital maps on my phone, which I use when travelling in foreign cities, I’ve not used GPS much.

Last year, on a canoe trip, while navigating a huge lake, we got turned around and disoriented (well some of the group got disoriented). I knew which way we were supposed to be going because I photographed the sun rising that morning and I knew which way was North. We were supposed to be heading North. At that moment we were heading Southwest. The low autumn sun and the monotonous topography had confused people. One person had a handheld GPS receiver along and they simply confirmed the position I gave them. You see, GPS (technology) isn’t everything.

In the world of digital photography, however, I’m finding that GPS can be an interesting tool for documenting, remember, and telling a story.

This is what I have learned so far about geotagging. Well, actually just about getting photos geotagged in the first place. There is a lot still to be learned.

HDR Day At The Cabin

March 10, 2013February 16, 2017Posted in PhotographyTagged HDR

I’ve played around a bit with HDR (High Dynamic Range) photography before, but I often find the results overdone and unrealistic. Usually when an HDR image is overdone, the photographer simply labels it as “creative”. [pullthis id=”creative”]Creativity comes from mastering skills and having a vision — not from letting software get out of control.[/pullthis]

[pullshow id=”creative”]That said, there are times when I do find HDR useful and I wanted to get a little more practice with HDR techniques using the bracket exposure method (-2, 0, +2).

Yesterday was a good opportunity to get some test shots. I spent the afternoon wandering around the property at our cabin, creating some bracketed exposures. It was a good day day for HDR: the sun was out in full force; a recent blanket of snow was lingering in the trees; the trees were casting deep shadows all around; and, not to be under emphasized, there was very little wind, which meant that ghosting between frames could be minimized. For my own sanity I shot everything on a tripod.

Back at my computer I downloaded a few HDR software trials. (I find the Merge to HDR Pro feature in Photoshop to be a bit junky.) I decided to compare the results of Photomatix Pro, by HRD Soft, and HDR EFEX PRO 2, by Nik Software (I have been using Nik Software’s Snapseed on my iPad).

HDR EFEX PRO 2 seems like a good piece of software. It runs as a Photoshop plug-in, which I like the idea of, in theory. In reality however, it runs a bit slow for my tastes (I have a new Mac Mini on order, so I’ll try it again on on more modern hardware). There seem to be a lot of bells and whistles in HDR EFEX PRO 2 which can be good or bad depending on your point of view. I do like the before and after comparison view. The end results, from my limited testing, seemed fine. There seems to be a steep learning curve though to get the results I want.

Photomatix Pro might not be as pretty as HDR EFEX PRO 2, but what it lacks in sex appeal it makes up for in speed. It’s ghost removal tool is very easy to use and works wonderfully (again in my limited testing). I settled on using “fusion” mode for my images, as it was the easiest to work with and gave me the visual results I wanted — a little more contrast but at the expense of some shadow detail. There aren’t a lot of bells and whistles in Photomatix Pro, but for the moment it will do for me. I do wish it had the spot adjustment and graduated neutral density features of HDR EFEX PRO 2.

So, for $99 (minus a discount), I got the watermarks removed from Photomatix Pro and went to work.

I used unprocessed raw images from my Canon EOS M for all the HDR photos. Since this was my first time doing bracketed exposure HDR I made more exposures rather than less, and I am glad I did. I’d dug out and used my old Seconik L-508 light meter yesterday. I hadn’t used it in years and hadn’t bothered to calibrated it to the EOS M. It looks like all my neutral (0) exposures were underexposed by about half stop. As a result, I had to compensate in Photomatix Pro by boosting the mid-tones. Once I settled on a good group of settings though, I was able to use them with only minor tweaks for the rest of the images.

[pullshow id=”screaming”]I like the results, as images in themselves, but I’m still not sure HDR is the right look for me. [pullthis id=”screaming”]Hopefully, these images are not screaming “HDR” at you anyway.[/pullthis]

I also made some exposures with my Lensbaby Pinhole optic while I was out walking around. That lens creates the softest focus, lowest contrast photos you are ever likely to capture with an 18 megapixel sensor! At f/177 it might also be the smallest aperture 50mm lens I will ever own. The results are at the opposite end of the spectrum from HDR, technology-wise, but are fun none the less. I will share some of these pinhole photos if I get a good set created sometime.

Click each thumbnail below for a larger version.

P.s., A big thank you to my friend and fellow photographer, Rob. Rob is technical wiz and the first person I go to when I have questions about some new photography technique. Chances are pretty good that Rob will already have tried it out, tested the hardware, evaluated all the software, and will be ready to jumpstart me on the road to photographic discovery.

iPad Photo Editors

March 7, 2013February 16, 2017Posted in Photography, TechnologyTagged app, iPad, iPhone, mobile, photography

In Search of the Holy Grail of Mobile Photo Editing

I occasionally use iPhoto on iOS to clean up pictures to share while I am on the go. That is, if I am using an image from the built-in camera app or uploaded from my Wifi-capable Canon PowerShot S110. If I shoot something with Hipstamatic I usually just share the shot without any editing, and then clean it up later on my Mac in Photoshop if there is something I want to change or improve.

I’ve been travelling a lot recently and I’d like to have a fully mobile, professional-quality, photo processing solution with me on the road. Usually I do all my post-processing on my desktop Mac after returning home from a trip. But for longer trips, I’d like to being to do some post-processing on the go. For example, I’m going to Europe for two months this spring and will only be taking my cameras, iPhone, and iPad — no laptop (well, I don’t own one anyway). Normally, I don’t even carry my iPad while travelling, but this time we will mostly be staying with friends and family, so I don’t mind lugging it along.

There is one serious limitation to using an iOS-only post-processing photography workflow — there are no RAW photo editing iOS apps. While the iPad can import RAW files via the camera adaptor kit, there is no software available on iOS with which to take full advantage of the RAW camera data. (BTW, Macworld has a nice article about using the iPad in your photography workflow.) The holy grail would be the equivalent of Lightroom or Adobe Camera Raw on iOS.

In the absence of the holy grail, I decided to compare a few iPad photo editing apps to assess there strengths and weaknesses. My basic evaluation criteria was to what degree I could use each app to do my basic post-processing operations:

color balancing;
contrast adjustment;
selective dodging and burning (lightening and darkening for you new-school photographers);
cropping;
vignetting or de-vignetting;
sharpening;
black and white conversion;
batch processing; etc.

The ability to apply filters or effects was secondary in my evaluation. I didn’t even consider sharing capabilities. Again, I’m looking for something I can use to make my images look as good as possible (100%) using only an iPad (or iPhone), so I can shoot, edit, and share professional-quality photos I can be proud of while on the road.

The Apps

Photos

The built-in Apple Photos app has some editing features, so let’s start there. The tools at our disposal are: rotate, enhance, red-eye (reduction presumably), and crop. The crop tool is useful, as is rotate for those times when your cameras orientation sensor gets confused (looking up or down at an extreme angle). But rotate only works in 90° increments so it does not work for straightening slightly crooked photos. The improvements offered by the enhance feature are minimal (basic contrast correction as far as I can tell). I can’t speak to the quality of the red-eye feature as I so rarely use flash that my subjects never have the chance to get red-eye. That, and the fact that my wife blinks a lot, so even if I use a flash, hers eye are probably going to be closed anyway. (Pro tip I learned from Steve McCurry who shot the last roll of Kodachrome ever manufactured and who needed to make every one of thirty-six exposures count: give your subject a countdown from 3 to 1, tell them to pre-blink on 2, and then take the picture on 1).

iPhoto

iPhoto was the first serious photo editor released for iOS. And in many ways it is still the best. The UI is a bit confusing and clunky, but generally usable. The functionality is excellent and for a $5 upgrade over the built-in Photos app you get an advanced straightener; contrast and saturation correction sliders; a crop tool with free, constrained, or ratio modes; local adjustment brushes; and effects including gradient neutral density, vignette, black and white, vintage, toning, etc.

I try to get things right in camera as much as I can. Correct composition and crop. Proper white balance and exposure. But I still consider images just out of the camera to be about 75% complete. With iPhoto I can elevate that to about 85% complete.

Photoshop Touch

The iPad version of Adobe Photoshop Touch has been available for a while now. Surprisingly, the iPhone version of Photoshop Touch was only released this past week.

Photoshop Touch for iPad is quite a capable photo editor. On the one hand it supports layers, which can be a good or bad thing depending on how you look at it. I do very little compositing. On my Mac I, when editing photos, I using Photoshop layers almost exclusively for adjustments tweaks after doing most processing in Adobe Camera Raw. The layers feature in Photoshop Touch is just in the way. Now if I could add adjustment layers, I’d be a fan. But not yet.

One of the tools I use a lot on my Mac, be it in Adobe Camera Raw or in Photoshop, is the curves adjustment tool. This goes way back to my days as a scanner operator in pre-press. Thankfully, Photoshop Touch has curves and levels adjustment tools.

Photoshop Touch’s crop and rotate tools are superior to iPhoto’s due to the fact that you can enter numerical adjustments. Skew and reflect tools are also available. There is a comprehensive choice of selection, drawing, cloning, and touch-up tools. I can’t say much about the supplied effects, except that there are some.

With Photoshop Touch I feel I can get done about 90% of what I usually do on the desktop (accepting the fact that RAW processing is missing).

Snapseed

Snapseed, by Nik Software (a Google Acquisition), is an innovate app with a large suite of both basic tools and powerful effects. The UI is unique among apps I have tried, but is highly usable once you understand the basics. It has almost all the features of Photoshop Touch minus layers and the drawing and selections tools. And in a lot of ways the Snapseed offering is better. It has a nice Structure function in its Details suite (equivelant to Adobe Camera Raw’s Clarity function). I often prefer to use this type of local contrast enhancement instead of making global contrast changes (which I usually do with curves).

For basic photo post-processing, Snapseed seems like it could get me to 93% completeness. There are still several things missing though.

In particular, a histogram would help to ensure whites and blacks are not being clipped and make overall analysis easier.

The white balance tool leaves something to be desired. Why can’t they just offer an eyedropper for sampling neutrals?

The effects suite of Snapseed is better than any I have seen elsewhere. For the occasions when I want to get a little messy this is going to be my go-to app. One of the reasons that the effects are so good is that they are all parametrically driven. Every aspect of an effect can be adjusted.

This brings me to a suggestion that would make this a 95% app. Since all the adjustments and effects are parametric, having the ability to store personal presets would be amazing. Well, in the mobile app world this would be amazing. In the real world, the ability to store presets and batch process images is a necessity. So far I have not seen any iPad/iPhone app with such essential capabilities, with one exception. Which brings us to B&W Lab.

B&W Lab

Between 5 and 10% of the images I shoot I end up converting to black and white (or some sort of monochrome).

More photographers should explore black and white. Just because most digital cameras capture color images all the time, does not mean this is the best way to represent a scene or the photographers vision. When the photo is about shape, line, texture, or structure, it would probably be a more powerful image if rendered in black and white.

B&W Labs is the best app I have found for making black and white conversions on the iPad. It surpasses Snapseed’s Black and White suite. In Beginner mode there are very usable presets provided. Additionally, after you choose a starting filter you can modify every parameter of the preset via sliders. (The method of choosing a starting point in Expert mode is a little different). There is even a useable Tone Curve tool. You are limited to five handles on the curve, but that is more than enough for most situations. Performance is little slow, but not horrendous.

B&W Lab allows you to load the settings from any previously edited image into the current session. The feature, labeled History, is a little counter intuitive as are most of the UI elements. I’ve gotten used to the idiosyncrasies though and have no problem making great black and white conversions with this app. If they could allow you to batch apply History settings, then this app would be amazing. A histogram wouldn’t hurt either.

For black and white processing only, this app actually gets me about 98% completeness.

Image Blender

Image Blender is a little different from the other apps reviewed here, designed purely for compositing two images together.

The art of multiple exposure is almost lost in this era where every click of the shutter button results in a separate image file. In the age of film, creating multiple exposures was easy. Most cameras had the option to cock the shutter without advancing the film. Other cameras, like my 4×5 field camera, required the photographer to change film after each shot, and if they didn’t they could keep exposing the same piece of film over and over. (There used to be studio techniques involving multiple strobe flash bursts, one after the other, that required the ability to do in-camera multiple exposures. Alas, those techniques are lost to us digital photographers.) But I digress.

Much like Photoshop Touch layers, Image Blender allows you to set the blending mode between two images as well as the opacity of the top image. The output file always has the resolution of the smallest input file (not a problem if both inputs are the same size). Image Blender also has some masking features that I haven’t played around with yet.

Image Blender wouldn’t ever be my first choice for general post-processing of course. That’s not what it is designed for. But if I want to make a conceptual multiple exposure from two images, I would probably use it over Photoshop Touch layers. And if I need to make an illustration or banner for a blog post, I might use its masking features, although I might just go to the more familiar Photoshop Touch instead.

Conclusion

All of the main photo editing apps mentioned here — iPhoto, Photoshop Touch, Snapseed — were released over a year ago. That’s not to say nothing new is happening in this space. These apps are actively being maintained with updates coming out about quarterly. They keep getting better, but in my view as a photographer, looking for a professional mobile editing and workflow solution, there is still a lot of room for improvement. Whichever developer first releases a RAW processor with camera profiles and lens correction capabilities is going to make a lot of money.

In terms of display quality, processor power, and connectivity, I still believe in the promise of the iPad as a professional, mobile, post-processing solution. But at the moment, even after editing and sharing some of my creations while on the road, I will still be going back into Adobe Camera Raw and Photoshop on my Mac to re-edit images in an effort to eek out those few remaining percentage points of quality. Nothing but 100% will do.

Samples

For each app reviewed, I used an image from my iPad camera as a starting point and pushed the software to see what it could do. In iPhoto and Photoshop Touch, I just tried to improve upon the output of the iPad’s camera. I didn’t necessarily do the same operations in each app. I just used the tools at hand to maximize the image’s potential (not that it was a great image to begin with). I did the same in Snapseed, but have provided here a sample of one of the Vintage filters instead. The B&W Lab and Image Blender samples are self explanatory, I hope.

Paper Shadow Macros

March 5, 2013February 16, 2017Posted in PhotographyTagged EOS M

I’ve always been intrigued by the abstract lines, shapes, and shadows that are created simply by fanning out a stack of paper. After printing some greeting cards today I was playing with some cut-offs and decided to see what things looked like through a macro lens.

In about three minutes I had created a simple tabletop studio: white paper backdrop supported by my 80-200mm f/2.8; desk lamp with a 60 watt incandescent lightbulb as a light source; strips of heavyweight rag photo paper fanned out and held in place with bulldog clips as my subject; Canon 100mm f/2.8 Macro on a Canon EOS M body; Manfrotto 190 series aluminum tripod with ball-head and Really Right Stuff Panoramic quick-release clamp mount.

I just played around with moving the paper and the camera around to get different graphic compositions. The EOS M wouldn’t focus the 100mm macro at such close distances, but that was okay, because using manual focus I was able to experiment more. I was shooting at 100 ISO to keep the noise down and had a bit of trouble getting perfect exposures — with the shutter speed set to about 2.5 seconds the EOS M live view histogram, exposure meter, exposure simulation, and final exposure never really matched up. I set the exposure using the live view histogram and then adjusted fire based on the post-exposure result.

After a little whiskey, and a bit of post-processing, I had a half dozen interesting abstract shots. Click the images to see larger, un-cropped versions.

Canon PowerShot N: Reinventing The Compact Camera?

March 5, 2013February 16, 2017Posted in Photography, TechnologyTagged Camera, Canon, Canon Powershot N

I was probably the last to hear about it as I don’t really pay too much attention to news or announcements regarding compact (point-and-shot) cameras, but on January 7, Canon announced a very sleek looking little package they are calling the PowerShot N.

Like any camera (even pro-DSLRs) the Canon Powershot N has a few “flaws” (the built-inLED light — one cannot call such thing a flash — is a joke), but overall I like that they are pushing the concept of what a compact camera can be.

Aesthetically it is a cross between my Canon Powershot S110 (with the lens ring functionality) and my EOS M (with its round-edge squared-off body and strap mount posts). I absolutely love the symmetrical layout. A tilting screen always makes me nervous (durability), but is also a big aid in off angle viewing.

In fact, the way you can operate the camera controls and shutter from the lens rings, and hold the camera at waste level is very reminiscent of shooting with a twin lens reflex camera. Waist-level shooting is actually the best position for shooting street photography. It is a very stable and compact position (especially when the camera is tensioned off of a kneck-strap) and very stealthy (you are not holding a camera up in front of your face saying, “Hey look at me — I’m taking your picture!”)

Waist Level Photography — Waist-level photography compared to eye-level photography as illustrated in the BlackBird Fly Camera manual

It sounds like Canon are striking the right balance between serious camera and mobile photography accessory. I quite enjoy having Wifi on my Powershot S110, especially as I have not been travelling with a computer or even an iPad lately. The ability to photo-blog, or keep family up-to-date via my iPhone while still using a quality camera is very much appreciated. I also really like the PowerShot N’s ability to charge via a USB cable. A wall mounted charger is just one more thing to carry and you are not likely to have it with you when you really need it. It would be really special if the PowerShot N would automatically back-up files to the cloud when plugged in to a power source, the way iOS does with Photo Stream (this saved my butt in Argentina when I had my iPhone 4 stolen by pickpockets on the metro — I didn’t lose a single Hipstamatic because they had all been backed-up to my iCoud Photo Stream).

Personally, even with a go-everywhere, slide-in-my-pocket compact camera, I put RAW storage and Manual mode on my list of criteria. These are the reasons why I use the PowerShot S110. For the PowerShot N, RAW storage wasn’t mentioned in Canon’s press release, so maybe it will be included, but I have my doubts. If everything else was incredible, I could work with Program mode, but Manual mode would be so much better, especially as this is being positioned as a “creative” camera. To be creative you need control and that just doesn’t mean just having a half-dozen toy camera filters available.

I think I have enough camera’s to satisfy all my wants and needs at the moment, but I’m still interested in trying out the PowerShot N when it becomes locally available.

Read the Press Release and get the camera specifications over at the dpreview.com (the best photography review site in my opinion).

Mentations on Photographic Polarizers

March 2, 2013February 16, 2017Posted in PhotographyTagged filter

Circular Polarizers

A circular polarizer is a filter placed in front of a camera lens to reduce the amount of reflected light travelling through the lens and landing on the sensor (or film) in your camera. Today, almost all polarizer filters sold are circular polarizers which work with modern auto-focus cameras.

Professional photographers often use polarizer filters to:

remove unwanted reflections on shiny surfaces (e.g., a wind, glass coffee table, model’s glasses, etc.);
remove glare from water, snow, beaches, etc.;
reduce the effect of atmospheric haze in the sky area (make the sky “bluer”, enhance detail in clouds);
increase colour saturation (by removing light reflections and glare from tree leaves or any other moderately shiny surface).

Amateur Hour

In many instances an image can be vastly improved by the careful application of a polarizing filter, and yet I rarely see amateur photographers using such filters. I guess filters fall into the category of overly complex and hard to understand. Not being a physicist, I’m not sure I completely understand how polarization works, but I know that it does. And yet, almost anyone who drives a car, skis, or plays golf knows that wearing polarized sunglasses greatly improves vision in sunny situations.

Why then, are amateur photographers not using photographic polarizer filters more often? The answer, I believe, is two-fold. One, filters seem complex, and polarizers even more so. Two, camera manufactures do not include support for filters on 90% of cameras (i.e., no point-and-shoot that I know of has threads for attaching filters). In response, I say this: one, polarizers are dead-simple to use, and if you have lenses with filter threads there is no excuse for not using a polarizer under in many outdoor situations; and two, manufacturers choose not support filters on point-and-shoots because they think you are too dumb to use them even though they know that a polarizer will be a benefit in the vast majority of images you take with their cameras, but there is a workaround (more on that in a moment).

Some Samples

For a recent trip to Argentina, I decided to take my Canon EOS M and the EF-M lenses I have (22mm f/2, and 18-55mm f3.5-5.6). I haven’t travelled with an interchangeable lens camera for a while (I love my Canon Powershot S-series cameras). However, I surmised that there might be a few situations where a polarizer would be really valuable. Unfortunately the two lenses I was taking have differing filter thread sizes (43mm and 52mm respectively). Luckily my local camera store had a 52mm mid-grade Hoya in stock for about $50CAD (a large 77mm polarizer costs about $75CAD — approximately $1CAD per millimetre).

I mostly used the polarizer in and around the northern-Argentinian town of Puerto Iguazú in the province of Misiones. Misiones is primarily tropical jungle and famous for the enormous Iguazú Falls. In town the weather pattern was blazing sun in the mornings, building clouds around noon, and torrential rain in the afternoon. This being mid-summer, the only really bearable times to be out and about were during the relatively cooler mornings and evenings. The sun set at about 7:30pm, so the window for using the polarizer was between about 9 am and 12 noon. Most places around the falls were too wet and misty to use the polarizer at all.

The blue sky, intense sun, red earth, and green forest of every imaginable hue, lent themselves perfectly to the polarizer’s strengths. Without the polarizer, the sun and blue sky are reflected on every surface. The polarizer cuts out those reflections and lets the intense colours shine through.

Two pairs of images: un-polarized on the top, polarized on the bottom. All shot with the EOS M and EF-M 18-55mm. I always shoot raw, but have not done any post processing to these samples. Click the thumbnails for larger versions.

Top: un-polarized, 1/125 s @ f/7.1, ISO 200. Bottom: polarized, 1/80 s @ f/7.1, ISO 200

Negatives

One downside to polarizers is the fact that they substantially reduce the amount of light entering the lens. In these samples I had to reduce the shutter speed by about 2/3 (from 1/125 to 1/80 of a second) when using the polarizer. That is not too bad actually. A difference of a whole stop is not uncommon in cheaper polarizers. In handheld situations you might find you need to increase the camera ISO to avoid motion blur.

Another downside of polarizers is the possibility of some image degradation. You are introducing a couple of pieces of glass into the light path when you use a polarizer which may cause some loss of detail, vignetting, or other nastiness. With a medium quality polarizer with coated optics this can usually be avoided. I find that the increased saturation and reduced glare more than compensate for any loss in sharpness.

Righting Wrongs

I am currently reading Don Quixote, and this valiant old gentleman (a bit witless) is all about righting wrongs. How can more people take advantage of polarizing filters in everyday casual (i.e., amateur) photography and get the better quality images they deserve? There are several options.

Everyone should use an interchangeable lens camera with filter threads that support polarizers. Not likely. People like the compactness and ease of use of point-and-shoots. Going even further, let’s admit that mobile (smartphone) photography rules the world.
Manufactures could add filter threads to there point-and-shoot cameras. On many models this would be easy to do. On some, where the lens is hidden completely behind some sort of door when the camera is off, it might be impossible. Also, I am sure that point-and-shoot lens assemblies and zoom motors are not designed to have any sort of weight hanging off the front of the lens. A polarizer, UV filter, or such shouldn’t be a problem, but a large lens hood might be.
Manufactures could build polarizers right into the lens of point-and-shoot cameras. No need for a 52mm piece of glass stuck to the front of the lens. A 1omm filter inside the lens assembly and controlled by a tiny motor and touch-interface would do. This would increase the cost of cameras, so it would only make sense in mid- to high-end models, but it would also be a market differentiator.
You can use a third-party adaptor to attach a polarizer to just about any camera. I’ve ordered a couple of 36mm MagFilter polarizers from CarrySpeed. A thin magnetic ring is attached to the front of the camera with adhesive, and the filter attaches to the ring with magnets. Looks like a slick system. It will work on my Canon PowerShot S-110 (and any S-series camera going back to the S-90). It looks like it will work on my Canon PowerShot D10 waterproof camera. (Of course I wouldn’t use it underwater or in really wet conditions, but this is also just a really rugged sports camera and I have always wanted the option to improve its shots with a polarizer.) I even measured my LOMO LC-A and it will work on there (though I haven’t shot a frame of film since 2003). A similar filter is available for iPhone (but not the iPhone 5).
Ugly DIY. Enough said.

Will Apple build a touch-controlled, motor driven polarizer filter into the next iPhone. Probably not. If they did, would I get rich from the idea? Even less likely. I have a theory though: the saturated processing of apps like Instagram and Hipstamatic, or the vogue of HDR, are simply the bi-products of polarizing filters not being available for a vast spectrum of cameras and photographers. And yet the optical effect of a polarizer filter is vastly superior to anything that can be done in software.

So here is my advice. Read more about polarizers and how they can help your photography. Get one for yourself. Use it. Love it.

Canon EF 8-14mm f/4 USM L Fisheye Lens

February 27, 2013February 16, 2017Posted in PhotographyTagged Canon, fisheye

Wow, this site might actually turn back into a photography and design related blog!

On Simplicity

When Canon announced the EOS M mirrorless body, I was instantly intrigued. Okay, I instantly knew I was going to get one. I like simple things. I like my Mac Mini. I like canoes. And at some point, in my photography, I switched almost exclusively to my Hipstamatic app. The EOS M works with any EF lens and seemed to be the perfect combination of simple and versatile.

But this post is not about the EOS M.

On Fun

When I started shooting with the EOS M, I instantly missed the fun and creative distortions that I was used to getting from my iPhone and Hipstamatic. To get back some of that spontaneous creativity I decided to pick up a few Lensbaby Optic Swap lenses as well as the Lensbaby Composer Pro and Lensbaby Scout with the fisheye lens. After a couple of weeks I fell in love with the fisheye. After getting a glimpse at the potential of a fisheye lens, I decided to splurge and get a pro-level fisheye.

The Sigma 15mm f/2.8 comes highly recommended, especially if you are shooting with a full frame sensor. The EOS M has a cropped APS-C sensor, so I wanted something a little wider. The Canon EF 8-14mm f/4 USM L Fisheye is the world’s first fisheye zoom, and though a bit bulky and pricey it gives the most versatility. (Also, “pricey” is a relative term — you get what you pay for.)

Simply Fun

Here are some results from my first day shooting with the with the Canon EF 8-14mm f/4 USM L Fisheye. I got some okay test shots. All taken with the EOS M body and available light. Click the images for larger versions.

Title: Chandelier and Shadows

Specs: 10mm, 1/60s @ f/5.0, ISO 800

Comment: Fisheye as still-life lens. Oooh, artistic black and white. Very sharp throughout the image, even at f/5.0. I wanted to crank the contrast to bring out the shadow so I ditched colour.

Title: World’s Most Serious Baby

Specs: 15mm, 1/20s @ f/4.0, ISO 1600

Comment: Fisheye as portrait lens. Very little noise even at ISO 1600. A little bit of motion blur at 1/20s, but babies are worse than cats for trying to get them to stay still. The EOS M is not a very fast focusing body, even with USM lenses. A little bit of chromatic aberration on the contrasty edges (like the tops of the curtain in the background), but was totally removed by Adobe Camera Raw. BTW, this lens is not in the Adobe lens correction database. Can’t think why? The old Canon 15mm f/2.8 fisheye is in there as are my EF-M lenses. I think I’ll be manually removing a bit of vignetting but really the lens seems to be very even. Need to do more testing around that.

Title: Roughing It

Specs: 10mm, 6.0s @ f/7.1, ISO 100

Comment: Fisheye as architectural interiors lens. Go tripod, it’s your birthday. I need one of those hotshoe mounted bubble levels. Getting the lens perfectly level handheld is hard. Easier when you have a tripod with a level. Especially when you want to shoot with a 6 second shutter speed. With the fish-eye, it’s hard to keep light sources out of the shot. I’ve just kind of accepted that there will always be some blown-out elements that I will have to recover in post (thankfully I am getting pretty good at that).

Digital Camera Calibration

February 4, 2013February 16, 2017Posted in Photography, Technology

I’ve been testing several calibration tools for correcting digital camera images in a RAW workflow. These tools are designed to help set-up exposure and white balance, create camera and lighting specific colour profiles, and/or automate the processing of image batches.

ColorChecker Passport

The first tool is the ColorChecker Passport by X-Rite. This ColorChecker Passport is a folding plastic calibration target with three panels: 1) color target, 2) creative adjustment target, 3) neutral white balance target. I won’t go into full details here about how to use the ColorChecker Passport. Check out the X-Rite site for an excellent and straight forward how-to video. I’ll just provide a very quick overview of its functions. The colour target is used in conjunction with the ColorChecker Passport desktop software to create custom camera calibration profiles specific to your camera and lighting conditions. The creative adjustment target allows you to apply warming or cooling adjustments in post-processing. The white balance target helps you create an in-camera custom white balance during your shoot. All the targets are valuable in a RAW workflow. The white balance target is also valuable for a JPEG workflow.

I wish an 18% grey card was included for setting exposure. I know most people use the camera histogram for setting the exposure, but I get the sense that most camera histograms plot what would appear in a processed JPEG, and do not represent all the data available in a RAW file. I could be wrong, but I often find it difficult to evaluate critical whites based solely on the histogram. In my experience a good old 18% grey card gets me the exposure set faster and more accurately.

SpyderCUBE

The second tool is the SpyderCUBE by DataColor. I recently had to upgrade my old Spyder2 monitor calibration hardware as its software is no longer supported as of OS X Lion. I also wanted to upgrade my printer calibration tool so I splurged and purchased DataColor’s SpyderSTUDIO bundle which includes the Spyder4ELITE display calibrator, the SpyderPRINT output calibrator, and the SpyderCUBE camera calibrator, all packaged in an attractive and functional case.

The SpyderCUBE is a small (approximately 2 x 2 x 3 inch) device with the following features: 1) chrome ball for capturing and evaluating specular highlights; 2) two 18% grey facets for evaluating exposure and white balance (most likely in post-production as the facets are practically too small to us in-camera); 3) two white facets for evaluating highlights; 4) black facet for evaluating shadows; 5) black light trap for evaluating the black point; 6) tripod mount and small lanyard which provide options for placing the device in your set-up shots.

DataColor also produce a product called SpyderCHECKR which is similar to the ColorChecker Passport color target and which works with the SpyderCUBE. The ColorChecker Passport is a smaller physical package and provides greater functionality than the SpyderCHECKR. It would be nice to see a side-by-side comparison of the two products to judge the results.

Again, I’ll refer you to the DataColor site for full details on how to use the SpyderCUBE.

The Results

For color correction, there is no doubt that the ColorChecker Passport will give you better results than the SpyderCUBE. However, there are times when the SpyderCUBE will shine and outperform the ColorChecker Passport. In particular, the SyderCUBE seems to handle non-frontal lighting situations better than the ColorChecker Passport. With very strong side-lighting or back-lighting the ColorChecker Passport becomes unusable, but the SpyderCUBE still generates very usable (perhaps essential) information for processing such images. With such dramatic images colour is usually not as critical as modelling, so getting the highlights and shadows right is more important than ensuring subtle and accurate colour rendition.

Both of the devices are compact enough that there is really no excuse not to carry them in your camera bag. At this point, I consider them complimentary and will use one or the other as the situation dictates. I plan to take them with me on a two week journey to Argentina and I’m interested to see how they perform in the field (and with my wife patiently waiting for me to get the shots done so we can go shopping).

All of the samples provided below were processed in Adobe Camera Raw (CS6) with perspective correction applied in Photoshop. ACR lens correction was also applied.

ColorChecker Passport – Soft Frontal Lighting

Canon EOS M, EF-M 22mm ƒ/2 @ f/16, 20 seconds, tungsten lighting, exposure set with 18% grey card

In-camera custom white balance was set using the neutral white balance target, but final white balance was set using the neutral square in the top row seen at the edge of the frame. A custom colour profile was created using the ColorChecker Passport desktop application and applied to the image. White and black points were set to minimize clipping.

SpyderCUBE – Soft Frontal Lighting

Canon EOS M, EF-M 22mm ƒ/2 @ f/16, 20 seconds, tungsten lighting, exposure set with 18% grey card

Note how the black shadow facet on the bottom of the cube caught a lot of reflected light from the glass table. I used the black camera surfaces to evaluate shadow detail instead. Other dimensions (whites, highlights, white balance) were adjusted as per DataColor’s instructions.

SpyderCUBE – Backlit

Canon EOS M, EF-M 22mm ƒ/2 @ f/11, 1/60 second, dual Canon Speedlights set to ETTL exposure with manual ratio adjustment

All dimensions (whites, highlights, blacks, shadows, white balance) were adjusted as per DataColor’s instructions. Additional curve contrast adjustments were performed after black and white conversion.

SpyderCUBE – Side-lit

Canon EOS M, EF-M 22mm ƒ/2 @ f/11, 1/60 second, dual Canon Speedlights set to ETTL exposure with manual ratio adjustment

All dimensions (whites, highlights, blacks, shadows, white balance) were adjusted as per DataColor’s instructions. A graduated neutral density adjustment was performed to lighten the image from left to right to correct for side-light fall-off (the side Speedlight was quite close to the right edge of the frame). Additional curve contrast adjustments were performed after black and white conversion.

Bucksaw

December 3, 2012Posted in TechnologyTagged leather, wood

I’ve seen a few nice handmade bucksaws on the internet recently and decided I’d make one.

I used a 21″ blade from an ugly metal commercial bucksaw as the basis of my saw. I had a small piece of ash that just yielded the frame parts I needed. I chose maple for the tensioning toggle because it is dense and strong and I had some thin scrap laying around from paddle making. I used some leather cord for the tensioning string.

The milling of the wooden parts was was quite straight forward with the design’s simple straight lines. The longest time was taken trying to decide how to make the blade mounts. I had several ideas, but the most straight forward seemed to be just to tap the handles to take a hex socket cap screw. The screws are easily tightened and loosened by hand, and even without using a hex key are quite secure when the blade is under tension. The crossbar is attached to the handle pieces with blind mortise and tenon joints which were quite fun to cut. The lower grip saw kerf (made by the bandsaw but only the top portion of which is needed to hold the bucksaw blade) is filled with a 3/32 inch strip of cedar which provides a nice accent (visible in the bottom of the close-up photo of the grip).

The upper and lower grips of the long handle are wrapped with rawhide cord using what The Ashley Book of Knots terms common whipping. This is the first time I have used rawhide on a project and am glad to have added it to my repertoire. (I bought some more ash to make a pair of wood and rawhide snowshoes!)

The maple toggle was simply decorated with a wood burning pen. All the wood parts are finished with linseed oil. The leather tensioning cord is coated with beeswax (for improved weatherproofness) and tied into a loop using the double fishermen’s knot. The rawhide handles are sealed with three coats of Helmsman’s spar urethane.

The saw quickly and easily breaks down into a small, light package. I have some raw canvas that I am going to dye and which I will use to make a storage roll for the bucksaw. I’ll post pictures of the broken down saw and tool roll after it is complete.

Leather Buttons

November 16, 2012February 16, 2017Posted in TechnologyTagged buttons, handmade, leather

My sister is a button fanatic. She has a huge button collection, and many of her creations prominently feature buttons, either functional, or as decoration. Her blog regularly features button finds, and because of her I am always keeping my eye out for button related stuff.

When I came across a short but excellent article over at Ped’s & Ro describing an experiment in making buttons from leather, I was intrigued. The process seamed simple and the result elegant — the key ingredients of any good design. I decided to try my hand at creating some of my own leather buttons.

Please read the Ped’s & Ro blog for the detailed instructions. I will just add a couple of tips here regarding cutting out the buttons and finishing.

It is difficult to cut smooth curves in leather at the best of times. Combine thick leather and a small radius circle and you are just asking for trouble. The standard solution would be to use a round punch to create the button shapes, but typical round punches only go up to about 1/2″ in size, which is only good for smaller buttons. I didn’t have a round punch this size, and didn’t want to buy one for this exercise, so I economized and used my 1/2″ strap-end punch to make the circles (the “circles” are just really short 1/2″ straps!) I made some 1″ buttons with my 1″ strap-end punch, but it’s curve is not perfect so the buttons are not absolutely round.

I subsequently found (and purchased) a (rather expensive) versatile large punch set at Lee Valley (several punch sizes can even be used concentrically to create washers, etc.) The Lee Valley round punch set includes dies for cutting 3mm to 30mm holes. A good find.

I suppose there is no law that says buttons must be round, so if you are without a punch you could try other shapes.

I burnished all the surfaces of my buttons quite a bit, using gum tragacanth and a wooden edge slicker. The result is a smooth finish, but the process is a bit tedious given the small buttons and my big fingers.

After the buttons dried I finished them with a satin acrylic coating to protect them from the elements and hopefully keep them smooth longer.

I used one set of buttons on an insulated flannel shirt that I bought last fall. I wear this shirt all the time — outside in moderate weather, and inside on cold days. It’s great for slipping out to get some wood for the fireplace, etc. There was only one problem with this shirt — the original buttons were a tad too small and became undone whenever I moved, breathed, or the wind changed direction. The replacement leather buttons are a perfect fit, stay closed the way they are supposed to, and complement the existing leather accents.

I will definitely be making more leather buttons and working on refining the process.