Minibar depleted yet?

Maybe I missed something but that is a bit left field! Anyhow on that theme I just heard an interview on the radio with Rob Halford of Judas Priest who has just published a new book. I am no fan of heavy metal (and judging from the interview neither is the Queen “why is it so loud?”) but he sounds a nice bloke still with his Black Country accent and some great stories.

Check if your local library has an online magazine service, if you are registered as a library user online there is a range of titles for free as downloads together with alerts for each new issue. I get AP, Digital Camera, Digital SLR, as well as Gardeners World etc. TBH I just browse through them quickly on an iPad and read very little but it is handy if you are away or on a train just for something to read and saves a modest fortune. The only physical magazines I get are Outdoor Photography, with minimal equipment reviews and plenty of great articles, and the bi-monthly from my sub to the RPS.

Interesting to read of the factors In getting ergonomics right, not just on the new camera but presumably others as well. With such fine tuning I wonder how they allow for different hand sizes and shapes? It would account though for the way the bodies handle.

Lubbyman, if the light isn’t evenly distributed in the first batch you could try applying a graduated filter to lighten them locally in post processing, a bit of tweaking should get it right.

Good luck Gareth, I’m still going through a mid-life crisis in my seventies! Long may it continue.

As John says, don’t overthink it. The only thing I would say is framed watercolours will be behind glass so best to take them in the raw as it were, and if they are in mounts then that will keep them fairly flat. Use the longest practicable focal length to minimise distortion and try to get as even a natural light as possible, using a reflector if necessary. Given there are so many paintings would it be best if you and the relatives pick out their favourites to tackle first?

II haven’t made a direct comparison between prints with and without PS of the same subject, the largest sheet I can print at present is A3+ but if I get everything right and there is lots of fine detail in the subject the results are stunning. I could get larger using a roll although that would rapidly deplete the small ink cartridges so I am tempted by a new A2 printer, in which case it is good to know that the photos are “future-proof”.

I have also been photographing sculptures and carvings for a national database, sometimes in tricky lighting conditions, and I have found zooming in on the computer reveals a bit more detail with PS. I could be wrong here but recovering detail in shadow areas appears easier with less noise. One time I made the elementary error of photographing an outside sculpture with lots of texture using PS only to find of course on the computer screen the background trees had pixelated due to wind. I returned later for a second single shot from the same position but as the sculpture was then in shadow the detail wasn’t there, however I was able to blend the two in Photoshop to get a clean background on my original shot.

A couple here have said that pixel shift hardly gets used but it really depends on your subject matter. I use it often for static shots where I want the maximum possible definition, for example an elaborate church interior which I can print large, or documenting artworks. I can see it being useful for product and still life shots as well.

Beautiful examples, I had to google this lens and it seems to be worth its weight in gold - literally! I can see why you wouldn’t part with it though.