Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
artuk

Travel photography in Singapore and Penang

Recommended Posts

artuk   

Please take a look at an article I've had published on the "Dear Susan" website, this time discussing travel photography in Singapore and Penang.

Although not photographed with Fuji cameras this time, I hope some of my experiences may be of interest to others, as it includes a mixture or architectural and street style photography.

Another of Dear Susan's contributors also wrote an interesting article on "un-destination" photography.

Thanks for looking,

Dear Susan - Singapore and Penang

G. A7ii + FE 16-35mm f4 ZA OSS 25s f11 ISO100.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kiwiana   

Hi artuk. Really like your selection of photos. You can see they were not taken on a Fujifilm camera. I like the rendering of these photos very much. It's got me thinking! They are really really good. Thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
artuk   
On ‎10‎/‎04‎/‎2017 at 10:24 AM, kiwiana said:

Hi artuk. Really like your selection of photos. You can see they were not taken on a Fujifilm camera. I like the rendering of these photos very much. It's got me thinking! They are really really good. Thanks.

I would be interested to know why you think you can see they were not taken with a Fuji camera?

I always found the dynamic range of jpeg files from my old X Pro-1 wasn't that great as highlights would clip very easily and need up to -2EV exposure compensation to recover them at capture. Raw files offered different challenges with some highlight retention issues.

The images in my article were processed with 2 different raw converters "to taste", including varying the colour response (film simulation as Fuji would call it). I do find full frame gives greater dynamic range, hence better highlight recovery and ability to lift shadows without noise. Larger pixels also seem to sharpen better at pixel level

I would be interest to understand why you think you can see they ae not Fuji files, and in what ways they are different or better? Working from raw is essentially a blank canvas to process as you desire - another owner could take the same photos with thr same camera and lens and the camera jpegs could look quite different in some cases.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dismason   

It's quite difficult to see what kind of camera the picture has been taken with. Most of today's cameras are built with the same components. The finnishing and the mood in the photo depends of the photographers post processing skills.
On your pictures, I clearly can see that you know the technology. I can also see that you have good skills in post processing. If the same pictures were taken with Fujifilm, I think they would have been softer with deeper colors (jpg-files straight out from the camera with no post processing).

Here you can see two photos that I have taken on our back yard. Which one is taken with Nikon D750 and which one is taken with Fujifilm X-T2? Both is converted to jpg with Lightroom and one click processed with Google Dfine 2.

 

KotkaLehto2.jpg

KotkaLehto1.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kiwiana   

To Artuk. Yes I can certainly see that these were NOT taken on a Fuji Camera. You said that they were taken on a Sony A711 camera and  that is where the difference lies!. What I merely said that these were superior and it shows. The A711 is a Full Frame, and the Fujis are a cropped sensor( Are'nt they?)  Take compliments in the spirit they were given, not a post mortem. Thanks!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Artuk,

I read this article and it is well written. I liked the pictures posted, especially a couple that were quite interesting, both compositionally and color wise. Personally, I like the PP that you do, keep it up. 

The one part I didn't quite understand is how you find a way to bash an X-Pro 1 in response to an article on a newer generation X-Pro 2. But that is just a minor gripe :)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
artuk   
4 hours ago, raagamuffin said:

Artuk,

I read this article and it is well written. I liked the pictures posted, especially a couple that were quite interesting, both compositionally and color wise. Personally, I like the PP that you do, keep it up. 

The one part I didn't quite understand is how you find a way to bash an X-Pro 1 in response to an article on a newer generation X-Pro 2. But that is just a minor gripe :)

 

Thanks for your comments. I am curious to know which pictures you found particularly interesting? Regarding post processing, generally I prefer a realistic and natural look, but for some of the city scapes by night I would regard the processing as less than realistic. However, I chose that look "in camera", as an artistic choice, and for stock use it can be worth having pictures that have "impact" and grab the viewers attention - much stock photography is of questionable artistic and technical merit, in my experience (although some is of extra-ordinary quality too).

The article was actually an edit of a longer item, some of which may form another article for Dear Susan talking in more detail about using E Mount cameras for (my) travel, and perhaps some of the paragraph about my X Pro 1 experiences may have made more sense in that context. I left it in as I felt it made a better explanation about the original catalyst for writing an article (albeit Dear Susan and I both "dripped the ball" and didn't publish the response until almost a year after the original article).

I dont feel I "bashed" the X-Pro 1 - I gave a short account of being seduced by it and then falling out of love with it. At release it was a deeply flawed camera for many reasons (that I didn't talk about), and some issues were not resolved for over 2 years, or never at all. As an example, why would a £1500 enthusiast camera not preview a manual exposure in it's EVF, and why would it take 2 years to fix that?   I felt the comment was relevant in the context of the catalyst for the article - Paul Perton's X Pro 2 experience in those places - given my (less than perfect) experience with the X Pro 1 and a visit to the same places at near the same time. I'm sorry if you feel my brief comments were "bashing" - I'm more than happy to provide you with a detailed list of issues with the camera at release, and why it therefore failed to meet the needs I had for it, if you are interested? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Artuk, 

I liked the following pictures - I felt some of the other similar pics were a bit too symmetrical (even the ones below have some symmetrical elements, but there is a depth, or its broken up by something else e.g. the moped). 

R.-A7ii-FE-16-35mm-f4-ZA-OSS-1-20s-f7.1-ISO1250.jpg

II.-A7s-FE35mm-f1.4-ZA-1-60s-f5.6-ISO10000.jpg 

LL.-A7s-FE-16-35mm-f4-ZA-3.2s-f11-ISO100.jpg
 

I am not a photo critic, this is my amateur opinion. :) 

As for using the word 'bashed', it was probably a stronger word than I intended. I was just saying that you may want to reconsider your reference to how a previous generation of a product didn't meet  your needs, perhaps (in my mind) implying that the current iteration may be deficient as well. 

No worries though, as I said, I felt it was out of context. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
artuk   
On ‎21‎/‎04‎/‎2017 at 6:05 AM, raagamuffin said:

Artuk, 

I liked the following pictures - I felt some of the other similar pics were a bit too symmetrical (even the ones below have some symmetrical elements, but there is a depth, or its broken up by something else e.g. the moped). 

R.-A7ii-FE-16-35mm-f4-ZA-OSS-1-20s-f7.1-ISO1250.jpg

II.-A7s-FE35mm-f1.4-ZA-1-60s-f5.6-ISO10000.jpg 

LL.-A7s-FE-16-35mm-f4-ZA-3.2s-f11-ISO100.jpg
 

I am not a photo critic, this is my amateur opinion. :) 

As for using the word 'bashed', it was probably a stronger word than I intended. I was just saying that you may want to reconsider your reference to how a previous generation of a product didn't meet  your needs, perhaps (in my mind) implying that the current iteration may be deficient as well. 

No worries though, as I said, I felt it was out of context. 

Thanks. Alas I love symmetry!  nothing irks me more than a photo that is nearly symmetrical but not quite. Someone here posted a night view of a building across a street, but the camera wasn't parallel to the buildings so there was some perspective distortion as the buildings were slightly further away on one side (but not in a way that appeared meaningful or intentional, it just looked "off"). Of course not every photo needs to be symmetrical etc but if it's something that needs symmetry then one needs to get it "right". For example the shop house fronts were a series of photos,and I could find no better way to represent them and show the viewer the intricate details and tired and worn look of many than by just photographing them straight on. Others may have done it a different way, but that's what I felt best showed what I wanted. Just my opinion.

As for my experience with the X Pro 1, I stand by my views on it - it was extremely expensive and full of things that weren't very good. I haven't tried the most recent cameras, as frankly for their price I would rather buy a full frame camera (UK prices often mean a high end Fuji camera is the same price as an entry level full frame model from another company). Some of the issues do still seem to persist based on some other user reports, but I cannot comment from first hand experience. Kaizen may sound lile a great idea, but I didn't enjoy paying a lot of money to be a beta tester for a product. 

My comments in the article were about my experience with my X Pro 1 and gave context to my article and photographs as a response to Paul's earlier write up. I made no general comments about Fuji, the X Pro 2 etc, and felt my generalised comments about the emotional relationship you have with tools such as cameras quite fair and not obviously biased. The article this one was edited from talked more about my experience traveling with E Mount, and hopefully may be published later. One of the comments I make in it is that I haven't any great emotional bond with my E mount cameras, although over time they have quietly impressed me with being able to "get the job done".  I actually don't like dewey-eyed emotional bonds with products as they often cloud our judgement, but accept that for many that emotional attachment is an important part of ownership.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this  



×