Raw vs Jpg – Life Experience

I learned a little life lesson today.  I was running out of card space and still had much of the cross country meet to photograph.  So I quickly changed my camera to jpg from raw.  I didn’t bother to set the proper white balance as I’ve grown accustomed to setting a correct white balance in post processing of my raw files.  Take a look at the following photos… can you guess why one is black and white?

Unfortunately I wasn’t able to fix the white balance in the jpg photo of the group of runners.  I actually spent about 15 minutes trying to get it right… with no success.  So it became a black and white photo (hiding the greenish skin tones).

Lesson Learned:  Shoot RAW, no compromise (and carry enough memory cards).

Sitegrinder 2 – web design

The new lifeandlens.com home page and about page were created with Sitegrinder.  This is an amazing tool, especially for someone that is familiar with Photoshop.  It lets you create your website using a little known Photoshop utility called “layer comps”.

Its easy!  You just build the page, saving the Photoshop layers as you would if editing an image, and then click the Sitegrinder automation to build the site.  It lets you integrate slideshows, links, all the features you see on my site.

I highly recommend Sitegrinder for fast and easy web design!

My site is really straightforward.  The “background” layer provides the site dimensions and background color.  The “copyright” layer, “logo” layer and “picture” layers provide the look and feel of the site.  The “menu” layer automatically generates menu buttons with easy to use features.  The the “slideshow” layer tells Sitegrinder to build a slideshow using the images provided in the source image folder.  Sitegrinder outputs to a folder and then I use an FTP client to upload to the web.

Sitegrinder claims to be CSS compliant and fully editable in html editors.  I have yet to try this.

Give this tool a try, you’ll be pleased with the results.

Capture NX2 and Lightroom Workflow

this article has been re-tracted.  I am no longer using Capture NX2 on a regular basis.

Storing digital images? Firewire vs. NAS

Storing digital images?  Firewire vs. NAS

Which is faster for storing files… a Firewire connected 7200rpm hard drive or a GB connected NAS?  Firewire vs NAS?  (There is no point of comparing USB2.0 to Firewire as it is well established that firewire transfer rates are faster.)

Every photographer has the dilemma of figuring out how to store 100s of GBs of digital image files.  My workflow includes transferring images to Macbook pro after a shoot, eliminating rejects, categorizing keepers and then setting up a more permanent storage solution.  Once I am back to my office all files are moved from my Macbook hard drive to a bigger and redundant hard drive(s).  This test was performed to determine which method of storage would work more efficiently in my workflow.

The test was conducted by transferring a 683.7MB folder containing 68 photographs to and from my Macbook Pro.  The firewire Mini Pal 7200rpm 500GB device (Acomdata) was connected via the firewire 400 port.  The Western Digital My Book World Edition was connected via a wired high performance Gigabit switch. (Dlink DGS-2208… http://www.amazon.com/D-Link-DGS-2208-8-Port-Desktop-Switch/dp/B000FITKK8)

Test results:
NAS to Macbook Pro desktop- 1:37
Macbook Pro desktop to NAS- 3:01

Mini Pal to Macbook Pro desktop- :21
Macbook Pro desktop to Mini Pal- :31

Obviously write speeds to the Macbook Pro were faster than to the storage devices.  But I was surprised that the firewire, rated at 400Mbps, would be nearly 5x faster than the NAS rated at 1Gbps for downloads and 6x faster for uploads.

So the results are in and Firewire wins by a mile.  My workflow will now move images via firewire to the Mini Pal for regular manipulation and management.  I will continue to use the NAS for backups while unattended.

Note: as of 09/20/2008 the Acomdata Mini Pal was available at costco.com for $159.99.
Note 2:  It is worth noting that my Western Digital My Book World Edition is/was configured for RAID duplication of all data written to the drive.  So in truth the My Book had to write my data twice during the test.  But this is an acceptable condition of the test as this is a “real life scenario” that represents how I would actually use the My Book every day.
Note 3:  My Macbook Pro has a 5400rpm hard drive.