New G1-x images - this camera continues to impress

Thanks so much for your comments.
Clearly the G1X is great for high ISO, sharpness and resolution. But you also say that "The colour ... is simply wonderful". Since you shoot RAW, isn't the color a matter of PP rather than something inherent in the camera (or am I missing something?).
Yes. I do shoot RAW. But when the file opens on Digital Photo Professional which is my software of choice for RAW conversion, I have not had to increase or decrease the saturation setting, If anything, the PP has been quite minimal. So, this is the workflow - open in DPP, usually marginally adjust exposure (and usually minusing it by between 0.3 and 0.6), check the sharpness, adjust for shadow and highlights (usually for highlights) then open in Photoshop.

In Photoshop, dodge and burn a bit, adjust curves (which brings out some color), USM (and you can do a lot of USM), ADD in noise, save as a TIFF and done.
When you say "The .. quality of the images from it is simply wonderful" are you referring to factors other than high ISO, sharpness and resolution (since sharpness and resolution are quite good in G/S as well)?
I think it has a very film like feel to it, I like deep shadows, etc. When I use the NEX5, by comparison, images looks as if they were taken with a digital camera. The images seem buttery and smooth.
Dynamic range, for example, does not seem to be superior, unfortunately, at least according to bench tests.
No, you have to watch for that, I find myself underexposing by a third of a stop and not adjusting contrast until Photoshop, where I can do a quick mask on areas in danger of blown highlights. But the odd blown highlight is OK - film and my eyes - did it all the time.
Do you see a bigger difference hands-on and in priints than in the posted images we are all looking at, which would explain why I don't see it?
No, if its well printed by someone on good paper (matte) and not at the supermarket and your monitor is calibrated it will be fine!
Bottom line: What is it that you feel distinguishes this camera so clearly from the G/S cameras (of course with the good light/low ISO caveat)?
I think the bokeh, the low light, etc, and the DSLR-look of the images. I'm not trying to categorise the camera, but I dont want someone viewing the images to say this was done on a pint and shoot and this on a DSLR. The camera result should be transparent to the viewer!
Thanks for your input.

--
John TF
--
Peter Bendheim
http://www.peterbendheim.com
 
Some questions:

When you do street photography, do you ask permission before you take a photograph? If not, when faces are shown in photographs, do you get permission from individuals before posting them online? I would like to try some street photography but am unclear about these aspects of it. Any insights would be appreciated.
Gail, it's a such a minefield. You have to have a mixture of common sense and bravery. Especially in the US with issues around terrorism, 9-11, paedophilia, etc.

I never ask permission. While individual have rights (which I respect and if some said dont photograph me I wouldn't) the street is also to an extent a public domain. The minute you ask, you destroy the picture, it's gone forever. These are my personal rules:

1. I never use long lenses to photograph people from behind corners and bushes - no paparazzii stuff!

2. If I see the person has seen me and I sense any discomfort I've lost the shot. I walk away.
3.If the person has seen me but seems unperturbed, I carry on.
4.I don't operate ostentatiously with loads of gear.

5.I usually never ask if someone has noticed because the moment is lost. (I have had good images in exception to this rule, though)

6.Sometimes people can be rude and it can be quite disconcerting. I normally try to get over this quickly on the basis that I have had more successes than failures. But you need some bravado.

7. When people ask what I'm doing I answer truthfully. In this case, I would have said I'm a photographer documenting the experience of fairgrounds.
8. If someone has noticed and asks I almost always show them the image.

9.If someone has seen me, and then poses, I take the picture anyway, so they don't feel rejected.

MOST importantly I try to pre-visualise the shot. In some ways this is the most critical factor in street photography. By example, in the images there is a pic of the legs of rather tarty woman, and a young innocent child, which is something of a contrast. I could see them approaching from a distance. I was visualizing in my head how this might work out. It was all in the legs and feet not in the faces. Hopefully some lightness from the child, some snaky"ness" from the woman. I get my camera ready to anticipate this. IF it works out that way, then you have the shot! And better still you have it quickly without attracting attention because you "pre-saw" it. The more you try this the luckier you get !!!! Its amazing, and it requires a leap of faith and a belief in self and to sense the emotion that a scene stirs for you. And the more this happens the more you fade into the background and the less self conscious you get!!

But it is harder in a post 9=11 world. having said that, people should behave in public as they want to be seen. I remember once taking an image of a ship coming into harbour. In the foreground were two "lovers" on a bench locked in an embrace. The image made it onto a magazine cover. A short while later, a man called me to say he was furious that his picture was on the cover because his wife had seen the magazine and the other person was a lover he was having an affair with. My answer to him was that he should not do in a public place something that he would be ashamed of. But I come from a photojournalism background, where editorial is different from images you use in a advert, where you then need a model release, etc.
Also, I found your comments about the Nikon V1 interesting as I have a huge interest in this camera, particularly because of it's focus speed and accuracy. But, as you point out, it does have some quirks.
To many quirks for me, the more I use it the less I like it. It's not a photographer's camera and it has fiddly controls.
Now, if the focus and speed performance of the Nikon 1 and the sensor size of the G1X could be found in one camera, that would be some camera! Wonder who will get there first: Nikon or Canon?
Agreed, I wish the Canon was less sluggish (it is a bit, but NO more than any G series before it - yes, its not for everyone) I think some MF4/3 cameras are nearly there (such as the new Olympus OMD) so it might be neither Nikon or Canon :)
--
Peter Bendheim
http://www.peterbendheim.com
 
Sure..

Young man with hat

Camera Model Name Canon PowerShot G1 X
Shooting Date/Time 05/26/12 14:07:13
Tv (Shutter Speed) 1/160
Av (Aperture Value) 5.6
ISO Speed 160
Image Size 3603x2625
Flash Off
Color Space sRGB
Author Peter Bendheim Photography
Copyright www.peterbendheim.com
Owner's Name

Couple on grass

Camera Model Name Canon PowerShot G1 X
Shooting Date/Time 05/26/12 12:46:53
Tv (Shutter Speed) 1/200
Av (Aperture Value) 5.6
ISO Speed 100
Flash Off
Color Space sRGB
Author Peter Bendheim Photography
Copyright www.peterbendheim.com
Owner's Name
Comment

--
Peter Bendheim
http://www.peterbendheim.com
 
Yes. I do shoot RAW. But when the file opens on Digital Photo Professional which is my software of choice for RAW conversion, I have not had to increase or decrease the saturation setting, If anything, the PP has been quite minimal. So, this is the workflow - open in DPP, usually marginally adjust exposure (and usually minusing it by between 0.3 and 0.6), check the sharpness, adjust for shadow and highlights (usually for highlights) then open in Photoshop.
When I got the G1X I was, of course, much too clever and experienced to pay attention to that DPP piece of nonsense that came with the camera. Having Photoshop, you know...

Then I saw your photos, read this post I'm replying to, tried DPP and all of a sudden ALL my photos became plain better, much better than with PS5, particularly in colors. I lost a month of post-processing, way too clever for my own good. Thanks for the tip, I got a better camera. :)

Enrique
 
Great stuff! It's actually surprisingly good and you can transfer straight from inside it to Photoshop on the Mac (dunno about PC) Wish you success!
--
Peter Bendheim
http://www.peterbendheim.com
 
Thank you!

Enrique
 
Always been using DPP for all Canons - and then do some additional tweaking in PP or the like. The reason is that I think (not sure) that Adobe needs to reverse engineer the the process because Canon (like Nikon NEF) keeps close to themselves (I may be wrong here, so if anyone knows better, let me know). DPP has matured a lot and is perfectly fine for that initial conversion.
 
Thank you so much for taking the time to give me an incredibly useful and comprehensive reply! Much more useful than squabbling over whether or not a camera is a brick. ;)

I asked because several months ago I saw a street photo in one of these forums taken of a man who was obviously down and out. It was actually a good and interesting shot....but one that would cause your inner being to say, "There but for the grace of God go I."

The photo generated a lot of conversation, not all of it pleasant. I couldn't help but wonder if the man knew his photo was posted online and how he would feel if he found himself being the topic of conversation.

So a question for me, should I venture into giving street photography a try (for the challenge only, I'm not a pro), is where to draw the line in posting photos of people who don't know their photos were taken. As you pointed out, they would be taken in a public place, but I'd still wonder.

--
My S100 Galleries ~ http://www.pbase.com/gailb/canon_s100
My Canon S100 Blog: http://www.digicamhelp.com/topics/camera-logs/canon-s100/
 
http://nikonrumors.com/2012/05/17/nikon-working-on-a-new-coolpix-camera-with-a-large-r-sensor.aspx/
The more I use this camera the more I realize what a professional tool this is for travel and documentary and landscape photography....
You've taken some wonderful photos. Yes, the G1X is certainly the right tool with the right ergonomics, features and speed for your style of photography.

Some questions:

When you do street photography, do you ask permission before you take a photograph? If not, when faces are shown in photographs, do you get permission from individuals before posting them online? I would like to try some street photography but am unclear about these aspects of it. Any insights would be appreciated.

Also, I found your comments about the Nikon V1 interesting as I have a huge interest in this camera, particularly because of it's focus speed and accuracy. But, as you point out, it does have some quirks.

Now, if the focus and speed performance of the Nikon 1 and the sensor size of the G1X could be found in one camera, that would be some camera! Wonder who will get there first: Nikon or Canon?

--
My S100 Galleries ~ http://www.pbase.com/gailb/canon_s100
My Canon S100 Blog: http://www.digicamhelp.com/topics/camera-logs/canon-s100/
 
It's my pleasure.

Regarding your example, in the end it's down to personal ethics and one's intention, in my view.

In some instances, images of the vulnerable and poor can be socially changing and photography can be a powerful agent for change.

In other instances it can be exploitative of the vulnerable, and it is often easier to photograph people like this because they are more vulnerable and have less of a voice.

I generally believe that intentions can to an extent be deduced from the image and the portrayal - either it's sensitive and caring, or it isn't.

In the end though, we all need to live with ourselves and what we do or say, so perhaps that's the final yardstick.

It's a great adventure to embark on though!

--
Peter Bendheim
http://www.peterbendheim.com
 
What a great thread

I'm agonising over camera choice at the moment

I have a Nikon D70s and 18-70 which has kept me going for about 5 years. But I really need to commit to DSLR and add lenses or accept that I need a lighter system

I travelled alot when I was younger. If I could time travel a camera back I think that this would be it.

The price will need to fall before I pounce but its lovely to see what you've done with this camera.

Mean while I'll enjoy browsing and looking.

It took 2 years to choose the tent I took round the world.....

--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/john_clinch/
 
John, you have some outstanding images on your Flickr page.

I'd encourage everyone to go look, especially at your portfolio
http://www.flickr.com/photos/john_clinch/sets/72157601865406307/

I'd say that the G1-x would be a great second camera for someone like you looking at some of the shots on your page, like the kids up in the air. The G1-x may be too sluggish for that.

I don't think it's a primary or only camera. As much as I like it, I'd never suggest it could replace a DSLR. I'd seriously look at the new Olympus OM-D if I were you - it's compact, weather-sealed for those beach shots you have, and very portable. There is a post somewhere on Steve Huff's page with a link to someone who used the Olympus in China - very interesting I thought with great images.

A this stage of its evolution, the G series still falls into the P and S (advanced) category. As such its very satisfying.

Again, great shots, and again showing that an older camera is by no means creatively redundant.
--
Peter Bendheim
http://www.peterbendheim.com
 
Thanks for your genrous reply Peter

I understand that a G1 x wouldn't do it all. Particularly shots of our dog would be out of the question. I had been thinking of a GF1 or GX1 but theyare dumb autofocus as well and a viewfinder adds bulk.

I was amazed to find these shots on the Cameralabs review. You need to scrole down for the action shots. I assume they were prefocused.....

the search continues but i enjoy the search

--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/john_clinch/
 
Peter

I've been following this thread with great interest.

I've been using DPP for years with my DSLR and have a well tried workflow in place, I convert to TIFF and finish off in Photoshop as necessary and use a USM at the end if required.

A question please, what sharpening are you using in DPP with the G1X? This is one area I'm having problems with; the default settings appear way to over-sharp to my eyes, also do you use 'sharpness' or 'unsharp mask'?

I'm sorry to bombard you with these questions, you seem to have started quite a discussion here!

Many thanks
Chris
--
Chrislofotos
http://www.chrislofotos.com
 
It's a pleasure.

I'm still experimenting with DPP, but I agree, the default is somewhat too sharp.

Having said that, I'm amazed at how much sharpening RAW G1-x files take before they start degrading.

My current process is to use about 60% of the sharpening default on DPP.....then in Photoshop, once I've done the dodging and burning, I add a bit of USM. I start at around 60 at 0,6 threshold 0, and then I use the fade command to fade it back until I think it looks just right to my eyes.

Most importantly my images need to look right to my eyes @ 50 percent because that is the clearest and closest representation of them to the printed image, so my printer tells me. He also advises that I add in a bit of noise, just 1-2 percent Gaussian right at the end. This gives the image texture and kinda cancels or drowns out any camera noise. It's advice that's always worked for me.

Hope this is of some use.

--
Peter Bendheim
http://www.peterbendheim.com
 
Clearly the G1X is great for high ISO, sharpness and resolution. But you also say that "The colour ... is simply wonderful". Since you shoot RAW, isn't the color a matter of PP rather than something inherent in the camera (or am I missing something?).
Yes. I do shoot RAW. But when the file opens on Digital Photo Professional which is my software of choice for RAW conversion, I have not had to increase or decrease the saturation setting, If anything, the PP has been quite minimal. So, this is the workflow - open in DPP, usually marginally adjust exposure (and usually minusing it by between 0.3 and 0.6), check the sharpness, adjust for shadow and highlights (usually for highlights) then open in Photoshop.

In Photoshop, dodge and burn a bit, adjust curves (which brings out some color), USM (and you can do a lot of USM), ADD in noise, save as a TIFF and done.
When you say "The .. quality of the images from it is simply wonderful" are you referring to factors other than high ISO, sharpness and resolution (since sharpness and resolution are quite good in G/S as well)?
I think it has a very film like feel to it, I like deep shadows, etc. When I use the NEX5, by comparison, images looks as if they were taken with a digital camera. The images seem buttery and smooth.
Dynamic range, for example, does not seem to be superior, unfortunately, at least according to bench tests.
No, you have to watch for that, I find myself underexposing by a third of a stop and not adjusting contrast until Photoshop, where I can do a quick mask on areas in danger of blown highlights. But the odd blown highlight is OK - film and my eyes - did it all the time.
Do you see a bigger difference hands-on and in priints than in the posted images we are all looking at, which would explain why I don't see it?
No, if its well printed by someone on good paper (matte) and not at the supermarket and your monitor is calibrated it will be fine!
Bottom line: What is it that you feel distinguishes this camera so clearly from the G/S cameras (of course with the good light/low ISO caveat)?
I think the bokeh, the low light, etc, and the DSLR-look of the images. I'm not trying to categorise the camera, but I dont want someone viewing the images to say this was done on a pint and shoot and this on a DSLR. The camera result should be transparent to the viewer!
Thanks for your input.

--
John TF
--
Peter Bendheim
http://www.peterbendheim.com
Let me try to summarize your preference for the G1X over the S/G cameras:

like the saturation the camera gives you and the color you get from DPP on raw conversion.
"I think it has a very film like feel to it"
"I [prefer] the bokeh, the low light, etc, and the DSLR-look of the images."

That's much appreciated - thank you. Can you say anything more about the film-like character and DSLR quality of the images? Is it the color or perhaps the texture that you especially like? Or the bokeh, sharpness, clarity, etc.? Or is it simply the feeling you get from the images, which cannot really be described?

Thanks again.

--
John TF
 
Converting from DPP I find artifacts not present in ACR, though. :(

I turn sharpness down to 5, and I must try other settings. I'm new to DPP... Any suggestions will be appreciated.

Enrique
 
Try different settings for USM - or do the sharpening at the end in PP or LR after resizing.
 

Keyboard shortcuts

Back
Top