INTRODUCTION:
One of the most exciting and challenging photo projects I’ve ever tackled took place in Sept. 2009 while on assignment for UNESCO’s World Heritage Photo Project. The week I spent diving and exploring the Great Barrier Reef was an incredible experience that I’ll never forget, and one that I strived to capture with the images, stories, and HD videos I brought back with me. But as the project progressed, I began to wonder: how could I share the awe-inspiring beauty of the reef and the fascinating creatures that dwell there with an audience that wants more than a digital slide show? The answer was staring me in the face in the form of a program that I had used repeatedly to help plan my expedition–Google Earth. As I experimented with the powerful tools and interactive features I found hidden in Google Earth, I discovered a new and compelling platform that would allow me to share my experiences–including stories, photos, and HD videos–with an unlimited-size audience. And with the help of GPS data and satellite imagery, I can even take you to the exact locations on the reef where these experiences took place. Hopefully, the resulting Google Earth Multimedia (GEM) journal I’ve created with these tools will give you a better appreciation for what I discovered on the Great Barrier Reef, the most exotic, fragile and bio-diverse region on the planet.

To get started, make sure you have the most up-to-date version of Google Earth, available for free at Google Earth.com Then click on the following link to download a small (2KB), virus-free .kml journal file: Great Barrier Reef Journal. Once downloaded, drag the file into Google Earth to open it. (If you like what you see, send the GBR Journal file to friends via email or social media links.)

Below is a video introduction to the documentary, which will also appear on the opening page of the journal. Enjoy!

Great Barrier Reef Journal Intro from Michael J. McNamara on Vimeo.

The journal is interactive, and you can view it a number of ways. Within the “Itinerary” folder, there are “Day” sub-chapters containing stories, still photos, and HD videos describing the dive sights and creatures I encounterd. (Note: The videos may take a few seconds to open based on your internet connection.) Double click on any highlighted heading and Google Earth will open balloon windows and take you to the location of the event on the map. There’s also a PLACES folder containing placemarks and active links to photos, maps, supporting research, and contact info, while a PATH folder contains map-trails of where I traveled by plane and by boat.
One of the most exciting features of Google Earth is that it supports dynamic links. That means that new material can be automatically added to a journal without any further downloads (or “updates”) on your part. So while this “Introduction” contains material covering the first 5 days of the expedition, over the next few weeks I will be adding chapters covering the remaining six days on the reef. And each time you open Google Earth, new chapters I’ve added to the journal will automatically be available. (A very cool feature!) Before completion, the Great Barrier Reef journal will be joined by a second GEM journal covering my documentary of the Wet Tropics of Queensland, Australia––a World Heritage site that shares a common border with the Great Barrier Reef. While I didn’t film any shark feeding frenzies (see Day 5 of the GBR journal) in the Wet Tropics, my visits to the Flying Fox (large bat) Hospital, Bouncing Rock Beach, and waterfalls in the rain forest should keep you entertained. Stay tuned!

All photos and videos are copyright Michael J. McNamara 2009 unless noted.

For business owners, waiting around for a slow printer adds up to a waste of time and money. But how can you really determine the speed of a printer before you purchase it? And which one is not only fast but has the best balance of features and performance for the price? To find out, I ran the following six models through a gauntlet of tests to determine the best of the breed: (note: all prices are street prices as of Jan. 30, 2010.) Brother MFP-790CW ($139), Canon Pixma MX860 ($179), Epson WorkForce 610 ($129), Hewlett Packard Officejet 6500 ($159), Kodak ESP 7 ($149), and the Lexmark X7675 Professional ($189).

The summary results of the speed, image quality, font sharpness, and moisture resistance tests for all but the Kodak AIO are included in the following HD video.

FULL TEST REPORT:
For more information on the testing methods and settings I used, plus in-depth analysis of the printing, scanning, copy, card reading speed, energy consumption, and ease-of-use features for all six models, download the complete 32-page AIO Office Inkjet Printer Shootout Test Report

(To enable high res printing and other features in the full test report, request a password by clicking here.)

TEST PHOTO GALLERY

This gallery contains magnified details from high res scans of test prints referenced in the AIO report and AIO HD video. Click on the PicLens link to start a slide show, or scroll over and click on individual thumbnail images below:

[View with PicLens]

12►

It doesn’t get much bigger, or better, than the CES show in Las Vegas. And in Las Vegas, size matters! In this photo, Panasonic shows off its 152-inch plasma TV. Price? If you have to ask, you can’t afford it!

Every time I head out to cover the annual Consumer Electronics Show (CES) in January several questions go through my mind: Is it going to be warmer in Las Vegas than it is here in NY? Are the lines going to be as long again? And what will be the hottest technology at the show? The answer to the first question is always a gamble (appropriate for the town in question, don’t you think?): I’ve actually been to the CES show three times when it was snowing before, during, or just after the show, and several times when it was actually warmer in NY than in Nevada. This time around, however, I got a break on the temperature, as daytime highs in Vegas averaged in the mid to upper 60’s, and the show floor was even hotter, literally and figuratively! (Back just one day from the show and the temp outside my studio in NY right now is 1 degree! Brrrr!)

As for question number two: In the past I’ve referred to CES as the “Hurry up and wait!” show. This year, despite my best efforts to avoid the slowdown in Vegas by getting there several days early for “Press only” events, I ran smack into the slowdowns again. First, it took nearly 13 hours to get to Las Vegas (compared to a normal 8 hours), thanks to major incompetence on the part of U.S. Air (USeless Air). Second, the onslaught of approximately 110,000 attendees flocking to the show this year taxed the taxi system as usual, with wait time stretching from 20 to 40 minutes in many cases. And thinner than usual staffs at all of the hotels led to longer lines at check in, restaurants, and other venues. As a veteran of the show, I always pick a hotel near the monorail, stock my fridge with Starbucks coffee the night before to avoid morning lines, and take the monorail whenever I can. But this year, unusually long lines were also the norm at the MGM monorail station heading towards the show, and even my secret short cuts around the show floors were little help.

However, if I had to do it all over again, I would—but perhaps I’d stay a day or two after the show to enjoy the great weather I barely had time to enjoy, or wander through the show on its closing day to enjoy more of the incredible displays and new technology that I’m sure I missed. My primary goals at the CES show have always been to find new and innovative technologies that will affect the way photographers and videographers capture, display, and share their photos and videos. At this year’s show, there were many exciting developments on the capture front, and quite a few online, picture-frame, or cell-phone based “sharing” technologies announced. But I’d have to dub CES 2010 as the year that large screen TV’s finally got to the point where they can’t go much further—especially when it comes to image quality, 3D capability, thickness, or size. (I’m sure I’ll be proven wrong on the size, but size isn’t everything when you can’t even fit the current size champ, a 152-inch Panasonic plasma screen, through the doorway of even the typical mac mansion. See photo above.)

After analyzing last year’s CES show and a number of other big shows I had attended in 2008, I predicted the rapid growth of 3D capture and display technology during my presentation at the DIMA show prior to PMA in February, 2009. (What’s Next in Consumer Digital Photography? DIMA 2009). However, even I didn’t expect to see the advancements in 3D capture and display technology showcased by Panasonic, or the 3D and LED displays that wowed the audiences and stopped floor traffic dead at Samsung, LG, and Sony booths. Panasonic introduced the first pro-level, relatively compact 3D HD camcorder with a dual optic lens that helps feed a stereo view to dual HD sensors within the camera. I believe this model is just a hint of what’s to come out this year on the camcorder front—but I’ll bet money that Panasonic is working on a similar solution for its G-Series interchangeable lens hybrid cameras. At the same press conference, Panasonic introduced several large 3D-capable plasma screens, a 3D capable Blu-Ray disc player, and a announced a partnership with Direct TV to support a full HD, 3D channel in 2010. (Note: At the Panasonic press conference it was revealed that unless a “3D-capable” TV or monitor features a new HDMI version 1.4 connector, it won’t be compatible with standardized 3D playback devices such as the Blu-Ray player mentioned. Nice surprise to anyone who bought a 3D TV over the holidays featuring the advance 1.3 HDMI connector!)

While Panasonic gets my vote for numero uno on offering the best end-to-end solution for 3D technology, it had quite a bit of competition from the other display manufactures when it came to 3D TV and LED TV. At LG, ultra thin LED monitors were the big attraction, with colors that jumped off the screens. The same can be said of the LED displays at Samsung, which also showcased several 3D-ready LED models that combine the best of both worlds. Samsung gets my vote for having the best monitor display I’ve every seen in my life—on a scale that defies description, but hopefully can be approximated by some of the photos in the following gallery:

[View with PicLens]

123►

At home, I not only watch my HD videos on it. I’m looking to replace my ailing 2003 vintage- 57-inch Sony HD CRT rear projection model this year, and until I saw the Samsung 3D LED display, I was leaning towards an LED TV vs a 3D capable plasma or LCD model as my next purchase for the living room. For me, the color accuracy, expanded color gamut, and the glass-free viewing experience you get from an LG, Sony, or Samsung LED TV is superior to any other display technology. (Ok, I was impressed with the color and viewing angle on the 20+-inch OLED teaser Sony had hidden in a back room, but that’s still several years away from the mainstream especially when it comes to competing on size.) Also, for the moment, there really isn’t enough 3D content to make me want to purchase a TV based on its 3D capability (plus I’d have to add a 3D- Blu Ray device, and several pairs of high tech 3D glasses to the purchase.) Hopefully, with the success of 3D movies such as Avatar (which grossed over 1 Billion dollars worldwide in just a few weeks!) that will change over the next few years. But for now, I think I’ll wait till after this year’s Infocomm 2010 show to see what the other manufacturers bring out on the 3D LED front, then save up for next Christmas’s big screen for the family. Oh yeah, they want one too!

Also, check out the official CES video podcast interview done by Sarah Myers on day two of the show with yours truly:

Fortunately, I did my homework and researched exactly the baggage size and weight restrictions from each airline I would use. Further research and contacts at several consumer electronics companies helped me gather camera, computer, storage, lighting, communications, and GPS equipment that was light weight and compact. In the end, I found myself either carrying or rolling everything I needed, a minor miracle of technology when you consider that I had was able to take thousands of photographs and hundreds of HD videos underwater and above during the expedition, had no assistant to carry my gear, and didn’t incur any extra baggage fees along the way! I also somehow avoided any pulled muscles or a hernia.

Even two years ago I couldn’t have pulled it off because the equipment I needed to do both still and HD recording didn’t exist. But due to the compact size and extraordinary capabilities of the Panasonic Lumix GH1, I was able to combine both media capabilities into one camera (with an underwater housing and lighting system that was about the smallest ever put together for an interchangeable lens system. Next on the list was a lightweight, super-powerful Sony V-series laptop, pocket-sized 500 GB external hard drives from Western Digital, and a variety of other products I’ll list shortly.

I wanted to keep most of my camera and electronics gear with me at all times, so I got my hands on a Tenba Universal Rolling Photo/laptop case (my review of this case appeared in the Dec. issue of Professional Photography magazine) and packed it to the hilt with the equipment shown in the following photo:

In order for my shoot on the Great Barrier Reef to take place in September, 2009, only a few months after the Panasonic Lumix GH1 was announced and just weeks after the first units reached stores in the US, I need help from the Lumix team in Japan. Fortunately, they had developed a relationship with the Proof housing company (also located in Japan) which had built an underwater housing for the Lumix G1 in 2008. So when my two GH1’s arrived from Japan in early July, 2009, a custom underwater housing and two lens ports were included in the shipment.

Unfortunately, it was up to me to provide underwater flash and video lights that would allow me to shoot underwater at depths below 10 feet, where most of the red light in the spectrum has been filtered out by the ocean water. Of course, lights were also necessary for me to shoot during during night dives or to capture creatures hiding in caves. The problem right off the bat is that Panasonic doesn’t manufacture its own waterproof flash or video lights, and I wanted to put together a system that was lightweight and extremely portable. The photo below shows you what I came up with:

The setup above includes two INON S-2000 flash units (red colored at end of arms) and two FIX LED video and focus lights. All four of these are attached to the camera housing via an assortment of Ultralight connectors, ball joints, and arms. The reason I chose the INON flash units is that they’re capable of true STTL metering with the GH1 via fiber optic cable connections (note the thin wire running from each flash unit to the housing.) The GH1’s flash unit is popped up inside the housing, and fires a preflash just prior to the full power flash. Normally, the preflash is detected through the lens by a metering sensor that instructs the camera to fire the proper amount of full flash for the scene. (all of this takes place so quickly you don’t notice two flashes firing.) However, in this case the camera’s preflash gets detected by the strobes via the fiber optic cable, and the strobes send out a preflash that’s detected and analyzed by the camera. It’s a stronger preflash that fools the camera into sending a “full flash” signal that’s much weaker than normal. (A side benefit to that weak full flash? The camera battery lasts far longer than expected–typically over 500 shots with flash!) However, the INON strobes instantly calculate the difference and send out the perfect amount of full flash between them. The result is a “synced TTL” exposure that’s extremely accurate–and in this case provided by two flash units, extending the range of the flash and the versatility.

Having dual flash units mounted on this system allows for very creative lighting, and each flash can be dialed down or up in power to provide desired lighting ratios. Plus, I could manipulate the Ultralight arms to position the flash units above, to the sides, or below a fish or target in front of me, or move them to the proper angles when shooting vertical compositions–an impossible situation with a flash mounted on the housing or camera. The results speak for themselves in the following photo gallery

[View with PicLens]

12►

All photos taken by Michael J. McNamara for  Our Place World Heritage

Finally, the focus and video lights I chose, both FIX LED units waterproof to several hundred feet, allowed me to switch to the cameras HD movie mode and still have lighting at hand. One FIX light provided 500 lumens, and the other 1000 lumens when dialed to maximum output, lending a perfect 1:2 ratio. However, as I learned when viewing the videos vs the still images of the same subjects, LED lighting doesn’t provide the same color rendering index as the flash units, despite providing a color temperature of 6500k. They’re a bit weak in the red spectrum output, which is really needed underwater, so red objects appear less saturated when photographed or recorded on video when using the LED lights. By the way, the entire lighting system shown above cost approximately $2100, and I’m told the custom underwater housing cost approximately $4,000. Expect a number of housing manufacturers to offer production housings with fiber-optic fittings for under $2,000 in the near future.
Didn’t need the video lights much in this scene, which had enough lighting and action of its own:

Eye to Eye With A Shark from Michael J. McNamara on Vimeo.

Hey, did that White Tip Reef shark just give me the evil eye? Or was he wondering how I’d taste with a seaweed salad? This is a short preview of a 6 minute long full 1080p movie I made in the Coral Sea while doing a documentary for UNESCO World Heritage Photo Project, taken with the Panasonic GH1 in a custom housing.

I may have saved a hummingbird’s life this summer, and if the local Indians were right about their mystical nature, that’s got to count for something! The unusual episode began one morning as I walked from my house into the garage. Suddenly, a small dark object flew towards me, accompanied by a low buzzing sound. My first impression was that of an unusually large moth, or even a bat. But as I leapt back I realized it was a Ruby-Throated hummingbird, and quite a tired one at that. Somehow, it had become trapped in my garage the evening before (probably while in search of food or shelter), and was now so exhausted that it could barely stay aloft. Its clumsy attempts at landings on box tops and shelves were pathetic, and when it did fly it kept heading towards the ceiling looking for an exit that didn’t exist. I had no idea what was going on in its little birdbrain, or why it ignored the obvious escape route when I opened the garage doors, but I knew it was in danger of hurting itself.

If you’ve studied the amazing aerial capabilities of the hummingbird as much as I have, you’ll know there’s nothing more pathetic than a hummingbird that can’t figure out which way is up, or in this case, out. For years I’ve tried to get the perfect photo of these elusive creatures in flight or next to a colorful flower. But on dozens of occasions I’ve also been entertained by hummingbirds performing UFO-style acrobatics in dogfights with each other as they jockeyed for pole position around my hummingbird feeder, or hovered within inches of my face trying to figure out whether I was a friend or foe. I’ve seen these creatures move from zero to who-knows-how fast in the blink of an eye, dive at up to 60mph, stop on a dime and hold their position as if standing on air, turn their colors off and on to attract mates, and rotate their wings in a circle so they can fly backwards, up, down, and even sideways. No wonder they fascinate me and anyone else who’s visiting my house during the summer months.
I grew up only a few miles from where I live now, and had as close to a Tom Sawyer childhood as anyone I know. But despite the time I spent in the woods, I rarely spotted a hummingbird. Oh, I knew they were around, having discovered many of their abandoned nests while climbing trees or building tree forts, but it wasn’t till I hung up a hummingbird feeder that I learned how common they are in my area.

On a side note, hummingbirds are only found in the Western Hemisphere (the Americas), with 343 known species. In Australia, there’s a close-relative know as the Sunbird, which is more of a cross between a normal bird and a hummingbird when it comes to size, flying capabilities, and wing speed (proof of parallel evolution at work?)

Back to my story: finding a hummingbird struggling to get out of my garage was enough to put a temporary hold on my work plans (and since I’m my own boss it didn’t take long to get approval). But even I didn’t know how catch a hummingbird without hurting it. After all, these critters barely weigh as much as a quarter and are so delicate that a butterfly net could conceivably cause wing or body damage. As I tried to figure that out, I noticed how sluggish the hummingbird was acting, despite having a few minutes to rest on a wire holding up my garage door guide rails. When it did fly, it moved at about the same speed as a regular sparrow, and the sound from its wings was more like that of a fan set to its slowest speed versus its highest. Suddenly, it dawned on me that the bird wasn’t just tired from failed attempts to get out, it was running out of gas and probably starving!  Sure, most other birds in this situation could survive a day or more on their fat reserves, but a hummingbird needs a constant supply of energy to keep its heart beating at up to 1,260 times a sec, and it wings beating at up to 60 flaps a sec. Normally, it gathers most of that energy from sweet flower nectar, visiting as many as 1,000 flowers a day, or frequenting a hummingbird feeder, where the “nectar” is a mix of 1 part sugar to 4 parts water (talk about nature’s version of a sugar addict!).

In order to give my distressed hummer the fix it desperately craved, I took the feeder from my front porch and hung it on a support column about 8 feet off the ground in the garage. I knew the hummingbird would eventually recognize it, and hoped that once it got its blood sugar back to normal levels, it would figure out how to leave the garage without my help. I left the doors and windows open and took off for the office.

Two hours later I returned to find the hummingbird sitting on the feeder, obviously less stressed out—having consumed about ½ an inch of sugar water. To put that into perspective, on a busy summer day the feeder level drops about 1 inch, so either this hummingbird was really pigging out, or some of his friends had visited the garage while I was away. The good news is that a few minutes later he cleared out of the garage, and suffered no long-term effects of his incarceration. From that day on till mid-September (when they all start to migrate south), that same bird was a regular visitor to my feeder—and let me get closer than normal to capture photos and videos of it. Hopefully, he’ll enjoy his winter stay in South America and return here in April with more friends.

Casio EX-F1, a hummingbird lover’s best friend?

The above hummingbird-rescue experience taught me that one way to slow down a hummingbird was to starve it. Fortunately, I discovered a better way to get great pictures of one in flight. For years I tried to get a shot of hummingbird that captured its unique abilities. But whether using film or digital cameras, my best shots failed to capture little more than split-second moments in a hummingbirds life. (While I used a few of those to illustrate a story titled:  “How to Photograph Hummingbirds” for Popular Photography Magazine nearly 10 years ago, I never framed any since they didn’t really capture the essence of a hummingbird’s unique flight capabilities.) Shooting them with a normal video camera was another useless exercise, as they often moved so fast that the mere 30fps speed of video couldn’t keep up and they would blur across the screen. However, while developing content for a seminar I was teaching about the high speed photo capabilities of the Casio EX-F1 and FH20 digital cameras, I think I stumbled upon the perfect tool for capturing both high res still photos and dramatic slow motion movies of hummingbirds in flight.

How to Slow Down A Hummingbird from Michael J. McNamara on Vimeo.

In case you didn’t know, the Casio EX-F1 features the ability to capture up to 60 six pixel images at 60 frames per second. You can store all 60 at once after capture, or choose the ones you want saved. There’s also a function that continually fills the buffer and can records up to 30 images taken before you pressed the fully pressed the shutter along with 30 frames after, basically giving you a fullproof ½ second window to capture action after it happens. Another function triggers the shutter automatically when something moves into a frame, allowing you to set up a tripod-mounted camera, manually focus it along the flight path near a hummingbird feeder, and go check your email or have a cup of coffee. If a hummingbird comes in for its sugar fix, you’ll be greeted by a screen on your return that asks you whether to store all images or select the ones you want. Combined with the 30 shot before and after mode, it’s nearly impossible miss capturing up to 60 images at a time of a hummingbird in flight as it approaches the feeder. (Note, moving objects in the background also set off the trigger.)

Thanks to these functions and the EX-F1’s powerful 12X f/2.7 lens, I captured more sharp photos of hummingbirds in flight in a few days than I had in 10 years! (see 30 frame sequence here). Among them were my best, but they still didn’t reveal anything about how quickly and precisely these birds move through the air. It took the camera’s high speed video modes to do that! (See video above). My favorite is the 30-300fps mode, which when activated starts recording 30fps of video (normal speed for TV playback) at 400×320 pixels per frame. Then, at the touch of a button, it switches to 300fps and then back again when you press the button a second time. When movies captured at 300fps are played back on a computer or TV, a second of action that occurred in real time is stretched out to 10 seconds in the movie. In addition, typical camera movements or operator shake gets smoothed out, and even video shot during a fast panning action while following a hummingbird looks like it’s taken on a tripod or with a steadycam.
Now I can’t wait for the return of the hummingbirds in April. Wonder if my garage friend will show up again?

While visiting the Texas Instruments DLP booth at the Infocomm 2009 show, I spotted a computer display running DLP’s Total Cost of Ownership Calculator program. It looked similar to the active online version, so I decided to run an ownership cost analysis between two similar-priced and Lumens-rated projectors, the Infocus IN2104 (2500 lumen claimed brightness) and the Epson Powerlite EMP-1715 (2200 lumens). Before starting, I noticed that the primary data fields in the display program were set to a typical school district’s smart board scenario: buy 100 units, use them for seven years, run them five hours a day, 5 days per week, and 43 weeks per year. I went with that and then selected the model numbers from the dropdown. Next, I hit calculate  and within seconds the display revealed that I would save an incredible $164,000 in only 7 years if I bought the Infocus models. WOW!! That’s three times as much as the original cost of purchasing 100 Epson models! But how on earth could anyone save so much? And why didn’t I have to fill in all the additional fields regarding bulb life, bulb cost, labor cost, etc., before the computer calculated the savings? (Usually, when you don’t fill those in on the TCO online version, windows pop up with suggestions for the amounts to fill in.)

There was obviously something wrong with this display. First, in the final tally and spec windows (upper right corner in the image above), the Powerlite 1715 was replaced by the Powerlite 83+, possibly for reasons that had to do with the discontinued status of the 1715 model. That was harmless enough, but the spec lists showed a Standard Lamp Life of 3000 hours for both the IN2104 projector and the Epson Powerlite 83+, even though Infocus claims 2000 hours in its brochures (with 3000 hours achievable in economy mode). That lamp-life figure is used to predict the cost of lamp replacement over time, so using 3000 hours skews the results in DLP’s favor. Plus, the program automatically tacked on $1,500 per Epson unit for filter cleaning over the seven year period, $32 each for filters, and the maintenance costs for all 100 Epson projectors. The final came to $153,200! Meanwhile, on the Infocus side, there were no maintenance or filter costs, yet there was a price of $55,000 for the replacement & labor cost of bulbs (based on 3000 hrs per bulb). But that wasn’t right either, as the program failed to tally the cost of bulb replacement and labor for the Epson units. Had it done so, the program would have calculated at least $50,000 higher savings for choosing the Infocus units.

It took some after-hours research to figure out how these final costs were generated, but fortunately I had the online version of the DLP TCO to help me out. For cleaning and replacement cost, it appears the show display program input replacing a filter every 2500 hours, cleaning the filter every 100 hours of use, and labor costs of $20 per hour (to clean only 2 filters per hour). That works out to over $22,000 a year just to clean the filters on 100 projectors!  Perhaps there are some places in the world where dust blows constantly through open classroom or boardrooms, requiring filter cleaning every 100 hours (or once a month in this case). However, there’s no mention of 100 hour intervals between cleanings in the Powerlite 1715c or 83+manuals, despite what the DLP booth rep told me the 100-hour figure was based on. Next, is $20 per hour to clean two 3LCD projector filters per hour a reasonable figure (or a tongue-twister)? Even if the projectors are mounted overhead it only takes a few seconds (or a minute if you’re really working the clock) to clean or even replace a filter. The proof is in the video:

How easy is it to clean or replace a filter in a 3LCD projector? Check out the video.

Meanwhile, you can’t even enter filter costs or labor amounts in those fields on the DLP side of the calculator, since most DLP models boast Filter-Free designs. But the design logic for Filter-Free projectors was built on claims by TI and its DLP partners that their projectors have Sealed Optics that keep out the dust. (I’ve personally sat through dozens of presentations over the last year where the sealed optic feature was touted in DLP projectors, while the need for dust filters in 3LCD projectors was ridiculed for added costs and inconvenience.) However, at this year’s Infocomm show, there wasn’t a single mention of sealed optics in any DLP presentation or literature, and only a vague mention of semi-sealed optics in a press release for a new Mitsubishi DLP projector. And as I wrote this, I could only find one mention of sealed optics on any DLP partner site, and that was Dell’s:

The mystery behind this sudden disappearing act was cleared up at the 3LCD booth. Apparently, Epson challenged Texas Instruments on the fact that it couldn’t find sealed optics in DLP projectors. To support this challenge, a display at the 3LCD booth showed the results from an independent lab’s dust test of DLP projectors. Photos clearly illustrated how dust accumulated on the projector bulb, condensing lens, color wheel, and mirror assemblies (all part of the optical path) as well as the circuit boards within the unit. There were also examples of image degradation caused by dust, as well as data showing that dust accumulation decreases Lumens output significantly and shortens bulb life. Soon after that challenge began, claims for sealed optics disappeared from the DLP website and most other partner  sites.

A few weeks after the show (on July 9, 2009) the National Advertising Division of the Council of Better Business Bureau (NAD) found that TI was wrong to claim that its DLP projectors contained a sealed optical system, and TI agreed to remove mentions of sealed optics. This is an excerpt from that finding:

“The challenger (Epson) objected to the advertiser’ голова болит секс s (TI) claims that its projectors have a “completely enclosed” or “completely sealed”optical system, which is sealed in a protective tube from lamp to lens. It also objected to the message that because DLP-based projectors features such a system, they are impenetrable to dust, which results in certain performance and cost of ownership advantages over 3LCD-based projectors. The challenger noted that these claims not only appear in advertising published by the advertiser, but they have also been adopted and widely disseminated by the projector manufacturers that use the technology.

голова болит секс

In response to NAD’s inquiry, the advertiser asserted that it has discontinued, and will cease dissemination of, materials with claims concerning or visually depicting DLP-based projectors as “completely enclosed” or “completely sealed,” as well as completely free from or unaffected by dust.

голова болит секс

• голова болит секс

голова болит секс

Further, the advertiser said it will no longer use claims that DLP-based projectors have sealed optics or enclosed optics or are completely free from or unaffected by dust.

The advertiser noted that it is in the process of revising its DLP sales brochures and online advertising to reflect these changes, and that these revisions should be completed soon. It also stated that it has permanently discontinued the animation showing how dust affects LCD and DLP projectors, and the portion of the video showing the same, from its Website.”

I don’t like being mislead by false product claims. But what else can you call it? Imagine if Canon or Nikon sold “optically sealed” lenses or compact cameras that easily allowed dust to enter and accumulate? They’d be sued left and right.

Now that we know that DLP projectors are actually semi-sealed and open to dust,  the 10-million dollar question is: How can DLP manufacturers continue to claim that their  ”filter-free” designs provide lower maintenance costs over the life of the projector if dust accumulation shortens bulb life and creates image-quality problems? And how can you come out ahead on Total Cost Of Ownership with minor filter cleaning and replacement cost savings if you shorten bulb life and substantially increase the total cost for new bulbs? (Projector bulbs cost $300-$400 each, dust filters about $12!) It’s not easy, unless you believe the instructions that pop up on the TCO calculator when you fail to input the cost of cleaning labor for 3LCD projectors:

Apparently, there are quite a few purchasing agents in school districts around the country  who do believe that it costs $15-30 an hour to clean two filters per hour, and a few actually based huge (in one case, 2,000 units!) purchases on the results of the TCO calculator (See the DLP Case Studies.) However, given the recent revelation about “sealed-optics” and potential for short lived bulbs (not to mention image quality degradation), I wonder if any of those buyers will be asking for their money back? Or will they still think they got the deal based on yet another questionable cost added to the tally? This one called Color Decay, and described as follows in the TCO Calculator:

When I ran the booth version of the TCO calculator, it added $735 per Epson projector for the repair of LCD panel Color Decay (for a total of $73,500 for 100 units). That’s more to replace faded 3LCD panels than you’d spend on new projectors.  Where did this figure come from? Again, with help from  the online version, I discovered that the $73,500 was based on repairing the LCD panels in every one of those 3LCD projectors after only 2000 hours of use—even before it’s time to replace your first bulb at 3000 hours! Considering the 7525 hours of use in this scenario, that would mean that you’d spend nearly $200 every 2000 hours to repair faded LCD panels. If there was any truth to this repair cost, I can guarantee that thousands of owners of 3LCD projectors would be cursing and swearing at the manufacturers for making and selling defective products. Where is the evidence to support this 2000-hour self destruct sequence, or the extravagent repair costs? The only solid links I found to the existence of Color Decay in modern 3LCD projectors dates back to DLP-sponsored studies done using single-panel LCD projectors in 2002 and 2003. And after a close read, those tests only proved to me that if you ran old-model LCD projectors 24/7 for several months at a time, overheating might damage an LCD panel and not a single-chip DLP imager. If Color Decay does exist in modern 3LCD projectors, then TI should prove it.

By the way, many of the latest 3LCD projectors feature E-TORL lamps with bulb life ranging from 4,000 to 6,000 hours in standard (full) brightness, while the best single-chip DLP models max out at 3,000 hours, with 4000 in low (or ECO) modes. But if you compare those models using the online TCO calculator, or put in reasonable costs for replacing bulbs or cleaning filters with any competitive pair, something odd happens to the results in the TCO calculator. It tells you that you would save $0 if you purchased the 3LCD model, and not a negative number based on the total costs actually calculated on another line. (Also note that bulb replacement is the biggest cost overall.) That’s not fair, is it? If TI wants to keep calling this thing a Total Cost Of Ownership calculator, why doesn’t it work in both directions? Perhaps a better meaning for TCO would be Total Concoction Online.

It might have been illegal to take this scenic Fall photo in NY state simply because I was standing on a dam and this is a protected reservoir. (Photo taken with the Canon EOS 50D and EF 28-70mm f/2.8 L lens.)

The tragedy of 911 brings back haunting images of an unforgivable attack on innocent people, especially for those who lost loved ones and neighbors. In its aftermath, I agreed with everyone else that security had to be tightened to prevent such an act from reoccurring. However, I didn’t give my consent to allow the government to take away my rights without an argument, or for police to hassle me for simply taking scenic pictures in the woods and along the lakes that I once hiked and fished while growing up. Those are among the same parks and waterways that inspired painters of the Hudson River School in the mid-1800s, as well as generations of nature photographers and naturalists.

While I slept, or more precisely while I continued to commute to NY City for six more years after 911, it appears that concern for the safety of the hundreds of square miles of reservoirs, dams, streams, aqueducts, and watershed properties that deliver water to NY City residents mutated into mild paranoia. One of the current attack “scenarios” revolves around terrorists dumping a huge truck of poison, or worse–a biological weapon–into one of the reservoirs in an attempt to kill or sicken thousands downstream. Another has a truck loaded with explosives could seriously damage a dam and threaten to wipe out towns and schools downstream of the dam. I’m sure there are now plans to prevent or deal with suicide airplane crashes into the dams or bridges that cross over these waterways or lead into NY City. I’m all for that kind of planning and anticipation–in fact, that’s what I thought my taxes were being used for prior to 911 (but I was obviously mistaken since gov’t officials denied the plane-into-WTC attack had even been imagined by the experts who should have figured that one out in their sleep).

But preparing for or trying to anticipate ways that terrorists could infect the water leading into NY or in the wetlands surrounding any major city is one thing, while keeping individual law biding citizens out or restricting their rights to hike or take scenic photos on public property is another. How is taking photos of a dam or reservoir a threat anyway? After all, it would take a huge amount of explosives to damage a dam, several trucks of chemicals to create a health concern, or a hijacked commercial airliner to seriously impair a bridge or dam. (At least, that’s what my limited intelligence and military background lead me to believe. I could be wrong!) And if hikers and photographers were encouraged to visit these areas, instead of restricted, they would be more likely to spot something out of the ordinary.

So on a beautiful sunny Fall day it really made no sense to me when I was stopped and questioned about my photographic activities first by a local police officer, and second by a NY City DEP officer called in as back up. All this for taking photos of eagles and vultures flying over a lake and dam–simply because they happen to be part of the NY City water supply area nearly 100 miles away from the city.

Turkey Vultures love to ride the wind currents in this valley, but oops, this photo shows part of a water spillway, and I was warned that detail might be dangerous if it fell into the wrong hands.

Ok, I admit I actually walked onto the dam after passing a stop sign that was set up to prevent cars (or huge chemical tanker trucks) from driving out on the dam. There was no pedestrian fence or obstruction, and I had walked out on that same dam nearly every Fall for the last thirty years to take pictures of the water, soaring birds, and occasionally for romantic reasons. I certainly posed no threat to the city of NY–but the fact that I actually walked out onto this dam set off a Red Alert alarms to a passing policeman on mid-day patrol. 

Now, the funny thing is that just 10 minutes earlier I met a NY State Trooper on duty in a near by park and shared notes about some of the more beautiful scenes and overlooks in the area. We also talked about cameras and lenses as well, seeing he was in the market for his wife’s Xmas present. Plus, I had just returned several days prior from a three hour, all-access private photo tour of the Hoover Dam. So when I was stopped and the questions started flying about my dam fall photos, those memories probably added to the “Are you *&^*&%^ kidding me?” attitude look on my face. (After all, if the Hoover Dam isn’t threatened by someone carrying a camera, then how could a dam that’s 1/100 its size be in danger?) When I told the officer I had stopped to take pictures of Golden Eagles and Turkey Vultures riding the air currents around the dam and reservoir, plus the gorgeous fall foliage, he and the other officer who eventually showed up from the DEP were unconvinced. They asked me if I realized the danger my photos might pose if they fell into the wrong hands. (I didn’t bother pointing out that every important detail of that dam’s structure and placement were probably visible using Google Earth!!)

Just prior to my Dam bad experience, I discussed the beauty of the fall foliage and camera gear with a NY State Trooper at a nearby park. His only concern was whether I was having car trouble or not.

You know, despite my assurances, arguments to the contrary, and business card showing I was indeed a photographer, they were actually considering taking me in for my serious breach of security. That’s when I pulled my trump card and called my brother Tom, a retired Sheriff who once patrolled the very same public highway I parked along next to the reservoir. With some casual name-dropping (Excuse me Officer X, my brother wants to know if Sergeant Z is still working the night shift at DEP headquaters? No? He’s actually your Captain now? Wow! Tell him Tom Mc says hello!), the two police officers on the scene started to mellow out. That’s when I mentioned that the Canon EOS 50D I was shooting with had a great 3-inch monitor for viewing every picture I took at the dam. With that, the DEP officer went through every shot I had of the birds flying around, and then ordered me to erase all photos showing any parts of the dam or spillways before I could leave.

I did as told, and erased all the images from the camera. I didn’t erase the shots of the eagles, I didn’t reformat the card, and I didn’t take any more photos either (hmmm, I’ve heard there is software that could probably restore those erased photos…), which may explain the presence of some granite structures in the photos I’m including in this story.

At the end of this all I was given a ticket from the local officer for “abandonment of a vehicle” and told to go on my not-so-merry way. I’m thinking of fighting it in court and subjecting (I mean treating) the officer and traffic judge to a slideshow of the photos I took directly across the street from where I “abandoned” my car. But I can’t be sure if doing so might actually increase the fine, or if I might run into the same officer again next year when I go searching for great fall shots and eagles riding the wind currents–not from the Dam, but from the safety of my car’s open sunroof, of course.

Final note: I haven’t been able to determine whether what the officers told me is actually true: that it’s now illegal to take photos of any reservoir or dam in NY, and that you can’t even hike or walk around a reservoir without a DEP permit. I’ve heard of other photographers being questioned for taking photos near bridges, and planes being diverted away from reservoirs. A former co-worker of mine was actually detained in DC several years ago for taking close ups of government buildings on a search for interesting textures. But since my dam unforgettable day, I’ve noticed a ton of “no trespassing” signs (courtesy of the NYC DEP) posted on dozens of hiking trails as far as a half mile from any water or dam. That concerns me even more, because it looks like the NY state or the city is buying up land around the watershed (80 to 100 miles north) and locking it down to all but a few with permits to enter.

So my next plan is to get a DEP permit just to avoid problems in the future (if I can’t get one, that will be fodder for another story). I also plan to bring a super strong pair of binoculars with me the next time I go out to capture photos of wildlife in these areas. After all, you never know when I might spot the elusive and destructive Al Queda Duck, or the Hamas Heron sneaking around the Dams. If I spot one, I wonder if I will be allowed to shoot it before alerting the local deputy?

For more commentary on this topic, listen to the November 15, 2008 McNamara Report segment on Inside Digital Photo (slide to the 21min 15sec mark for that segment);

Canon’s EOS 5D Mark II captures true 1080p HD Video with sound. Image quality and AF controls are minimal in video mode, but depth of field and wide angle views make this a hot feature.

Once DSLRs arrived with Live Preview modes, I knew it was only a matter of time (and several image processing advancements) before the video signal being pumped to the camera monitor would find its way directly to the memory card. I expected the first hybrid models would be from either Canon, Sony, or Panasonic—all DSLR players with a large stable of camcorders. Surprise! Nikon beat them to the punch with its 12.3MP D90 ($899 street) featuring a live view mode that could be used to record 720p video (1280 x720 pixels per frame, at 24fps) with mono sound. Word had barely spread about this camera when Canon trumped it with its more expensive ($2700 street) 21.1MP EOS 5D Mark II featuring a full frame sensor and true 1080p HD video recording (1920 x1080 pixels per frame, at 30fps), plus built-in mono sound and a stereo sound input jack.

You can bet that other video-capable models will be introduced by a variety of manufacturers in 2009 and beyond, just as a Live Preview mode spread from a single Olympus DSLR in 2005 to 80% of the current DSLR models. But the question that many serious still shooters are asking is whether a video mode is a must-have feature in a DSLR, or more of a gimmick designed to appeal to the horde of compact camera owners moving up to a DSLR?

For more commentary on video recording with a DSLR, listen to the October 25, 2008 McNamara Report segment on Inside Digital Photo (slide to the 20min 45sec mark for that segment);

After all, the demand for a DSLR Live Preview mode didn’t come from pros converting over from 35mm film DSLRs, but from a new generation of photographers weaned on compact cameras and their “live view” LCD viewfinders. Those same compact shooters take video recording for granted as well—so why not offer the same function in a DSLR model made just for them?

Ok, I admit there’s a flaw in my logic: The Nikon D90, and more so the EOS 5D Mark II, are really not aimed at compact camera owners looking for their first DSLR. However, the point is that there wasn’t a measurable pent up demand from pros and advanced amateurs for a video recording function in their DSLRs, and now that is being offered, these same serious shooters are trying to figure out if it’s a feature that will help or hinder their ability to make a living with their cameras.

Current state-of-the-art camcorder with high res still capture (including models from Canon, Panasonic, JVC, and Sony) deliver acceptable to fairly decent still image quality, and allow for still image capture that doesn’t even interfere with video and sound recording. When shooting video on most of these models, you simply press the still image capture and a 2-6MP high res still photo is stored on a memory card, while video and sound are recorded to tape or a hard drive. This seamless switch between video and high res still capture modes makes it possible for pro videographers to capture and sell still images of an events to newspapers, magazines, and even wedding clients. In fact, some news organizations are replacing their DSLRs with hybrid camcorders to capture content for multiple platforms.

Unfortunately, switching to the video mode in either the Canon or Nikon DSLRs takes several steps. To shoot video, both cameras must first be set to live view mode—thus reducing the benefits of using the DSLR’s super sharp and bright optical viewfinder, its super-responsive AF system, and most of its advanced image quality and metering controls. Sluggish autofocus can be achieved using contrast detection AF, or after a short black out and delay caused by the mirror swinging back into place for phase detection AF. But once video recording is started, neither camera will adjust focus to follow the action or subject–a staple on most camcorders. Despite the bright and sharp 3-inch LCD monitors found on both cameras, it’s hard to tell if the subject is in focus in the first place, especially in bright light outdoors.

Other video “failings” include fewer image quality controls, reduced battery life due to higher video demands, intensive memory requirements for HD (even short clips take up 100’s of MBs), and generally rotten sound. In fact, the built in microphones on both cameras tend to pick up all sorts of camera and environmental noises, and only the Canon offers an external microphone input jack for recording stereo. Then, unless you have an image stabilized lens or are shooting with a tripod, the video jumps all over the place when you are panning, and freezes for a moment when you take a still photo.

So, is a video mode in a DSLR a useless feature? Not at all! In fact, I’m all for it—and think that cameras such as the Canon EOS 5D Mark II will actually be on the HOT list for pro videographers who want its unique video capability, as well as still shooters who are primarily interested in its awesome full frame and high res still features.

For videographers, the APS-C sized sensor found on the Nikon D90 and full-frame sensor found on the EOS 5D Mark II make it possible to shoot HD movies using a wide variety of affordable wide and ultra-wide angle lenses. (Want a 14mm equivalent field of view on an HD camcorder? HA! It will cost you a fortune.) Those larger sensors also dramatically improve depth-of-field control so that backgrounds can be blurred out with unparalleled Bokeh. (The relatively small 1/3-inch to 1/5-inch sensors found in typical camcorders require lens focal lengths that deliver too much depth of field and make it impossible to blur out a background, even at widest apertures.) For more information regarding the still shooting and video capabilities of the Canon EOS 5d Mark II, check out the incredibly well-written Canon white paper on the EOS 5D Mark II.

Having a video alternative may allow traditional still photographers to capture video footage that would be impossible otherwise. For example, underwater photographers could switch to video mode at a moments notice to capture the fluid motion of the rare Pacific Mermaid, while mountain climbers could record the mating call and ritual dance of the Himalayan Abominable Snowman. In both cases, it’s impossible to carry separate still and video cameras.

Before those unique video segments ever appear in a National Geographic HD special, the video from cameras such as the D90 or EOS 5D Mark II will flood internet entertainment sites dedicated to capturing the latest celebrity outing or “Girls Gone Wild” moment. For example, one of the best nightlife and fashion photographers I know, Shane O’Neal, covers a number of top clubs in Las Vegas, including the Playboy Club and Club Moon at the Palms Hotel and Casino. (www.shaneonealphotography.com). With an EOS 5D Mark II in hand, he is able to switch to the video mode and capture dancers, celebrities, and “wild” patrons doing what they typically do at these clubs after a few drinks, and post short video clips to the club’s web site along with still photos. In the past, capturing video required a separate videographer on hand (at an extra expense). But now he can do both, and no one knows he’s actually recording video with sound. The result? Some unique, and wild video that helps increase traffic, and may generate sales of hot video footage.

What’s next? I expect the next generation of dual-mode DSLRs to improve on video ease-of-use, sound recording, and AF speed and tracking performance. Then I expect to see some hybrid accessories, such as a dedicated flash unit with a built-in stereo zooming microphone, an external 5-inch LCD monitor, external Firewire-connected high-capacity storage drives dedicated to video recording, and additional powerpacks to handle the video power drain. But don’t expect the camcorder crowd to go away. In fact, 12MP camcorders are on their way.