Conclusions for the new year

I originally posted this as a reply to a discussion thread on DPR.

I don't have any resolutions in the sense of "I must do that" but I drew a few conclusions from what happened and what I've talked about with others:

1. Go back to raw+JPEG. I prefer the immediacy of JPEG and how my camera processes it. However, on a few occasions raw has been beneficial. My only regret is that then the JPEG is stuck at "fine, large" which to some extent defeats the purpose of having the SOOC JPEG.
2. No need for new gear at the moment. Close to a year ago I sold my previous setup and downsized to just a DSLR with a kit lens. I'm enjoying photography more than I had for the last few years.
3. Use wide angle judiciously. I analyzed my photos to see what I enjoyed and why my oldest stuff often seemed better. Before I got my first DSLR I was limited to 35 mm equivalent focal length. That seems to be my preferred angle of view so when I take my camera out of the bag I set the zoom to that angle and first try to frame this way.
4. Don't overthink the composition. When I'm having a hard time framing and start thinking about rule of thirds, leading lines etc. it just means that there is no photo in that scene. My old stuff was often just basic amateur's "move off-center and keep it straight" and somehow it worked.
5. Analyze which photos get the most likes and why. On average, people do prefer better photos. (That is true even for cat photos, although they have to be judged separately. :) ) If I can figure out what works I might learn something.

On pixel-peeping vs. image resolution

Good photographers don't pixel-peep. They check for sharpness, and know how far is too far.

I'm not a good photographer. Certainly not as good as I'd like to be. Given a good opportunity I will pixel-peep. I realized this recently and I think this is one of the reasons I don't enjoy photography as much as I'd like to.

I have a 24 MP camera. I have intentionally downsized to a kit lens and I refuse to use other lenses unless absolutely necessary. The sensor resolution is overkill for this lens so I use the camera at 13 or 6 MP (yes, I prefer JPEG). I've covered my typical scenes at all resolutions. What I've discovered is that on average I like the photos taken at 6 MP significantly more than the ones at higher resolutions.

Taken at 6 MP and cropped a little. Could you tell?

My theory is that I like 6 MP because there's no room for pixel peeping. Seen at 100% the image isn't much bigger than my monitor so even when zoomed in I'm still basically analyzing the whole photo.

I decided to stay at 6 MP for now but it is a crutch. This will bite me when 4k monitors become mainstream; sometimes it is a problem even now when I have to crop and/or rotate a photo. I'm looking for better ways to stay on course when judging my own photos.

A new life for photo prints?

One of the topics that frequently come up in photographic forums is ensuring that your photos survive in an accessible form. Computer crash, house fire, account owner's death, cloud-based company going out of business. There are many ways you, your relatives or your friends could lose access to the photos you'd want them to have.

A number of solutions are mentioned every time:

• print, print, print;
• backup, backup, backup;
• store multiple copies in many places;
• give your family the credentials to your cloud account.

Each of the above has its pros and cons so you should probably apply more than one solution at the same time. Of all the options prints are the best and the worst at the same time:

• they can be viewed directly without power or special devices;
• they are analog and thus copies will be degraded.

Here's a thought:

What if prints could double as digital backups?

Just think of it. Every time you order a print, some kind of NFC tag with the full copy of the original image file is embedded in the paper. Every time you give a print to your friend or relative they also get the file they can print again, read into their smartphone, etc.

You essentially get:

• an analog, easy to view hardcopy,
• an easy to retrieve copy of the image file,
• a way for others to order more prints without asking you for the file; these new prints could even be bigger and have more resolution!
• gratuitous distributed backup of the most valuable photos; after all people are most likely to want prints of the photos they care the most about.

These are just the most basic, originally intended uses. Off the top of my head I can think of these use cases:

• Photo-capable home printers often accept memory cards and/or USB connection from camera. If they had NFC photo readers you could just touch the print to the printer and get another one (although probably without a chip).
• Cameras could expose this NFC interface. You get into play mode and the photo that is currently displayed can be read off the camera by any reader. No fooling around with PictBridge or DPOF.
• If you can print a photo with the NFC tag, you should be able to print a photo index with all the photos stored in the tag.

We already have some technologies that could lead to this. Flash memory, writable optical storage, RFID, NFC, probably more. The tech may not be ready yet but so wasn't digital photography twenty years ago.

There may be some technical considerations:

• The NFC technology should be something that also has other uses. The more ubiquitous it is the easier it is to incorporate the functionality in devices and the bigger the chance this gets adopted.
• Data storage and transmission must have enough capacity to handle typical photos. 4 MB and larger JPEG files are not unusual today. There is the option of resizing the files to something more manageable but still acceptable for enlargements.
• The electronics embedded in the photo paper must be durable and provide some redundancy. It wouldn't do to discover that the faded print from your honeymoon trip cannot be re-printed fresh from the one you took out of the frame on the mantlepiece.

It's one of those things Kodak should have been working on rather than heading straight for bankruptcy. Oh well.