It has been an unusual summer for the Pocono region of Pennsylvania, if not for most of the mid-Atlantic region.  Brief periods of muggy partially sunny weather have offered inadequate solace for the long periods of days of gloomy skies with intermittent downpours that flooded our basements as well as our creeks and rivers.  Unusual for August, the Susquehanna River came near the top of its banks, and flooded many low-lying areas.

Despite this, summer goes on.

I am of an age, where the children of my contemporaries are now getting married.  I had 2 such ceremonies this year where I could be the guest, and not the photographer.

 Weather-wise the first wedding came off without a hitch, occurring during a rare appearance of pleasant sunny weather. The second wedding, which was held in a gorgeous lakeside lodge in Bucks County, was thoroughly rained out.  It was kind of sad to look out at the teeming rain, and see the archway, and the white chairs still forlornly waiting to be occupied.  Nonetheless it was a lovely ceremony, even held indoors.

The weather this year has certainly affected my photographic output.  Often the rainy periods occurred over weekends when I have time to shoot. Even when it wasn’t raining, the warm muggy air seemed to egg on the biting flies and particularly the mosquitoes.  The latter are breeding profusely given the persistence of vernal ponds and other areas of standing water.

This weekend, given the extravagant run off, I thought it would be interesting to photograph moving water.  How naïve.  I grabbed my X100f and a tripod, and gamely hiked out into the nearby State Forest intending to visit a hidden glen I know well.

It took about 5 minutes to figure out, that this wasn’t the day for unhurried tripod work.

I was almost instantly set upon by hordes of mosquitoes who would likely exsanguinate me, if I stopped long enough to set up a tripod.  They certainly provided me the incentive for a brisk walking pace.

I have another wedding to attend, this time for my niece Alex, in Jersey City this weekend.  The weather it is said, will have turned by then, providing bright blue skies, cool temperatures and low humidity.  I will probably shoot a few images, and try hard, as always not to get in the way of the hired gun.

 I am happy that she will not have to come up with a plan B.  And I am hopeful that this weather change portends a more hospitable late summer and fall.

 And hopefully, less mosquitoes.

 

Every once in a while, it is stimulating to leave what is familiar and comfortable, and venture into a place where we are challenged to adapt and extend our abilities.

In pursuit of this, some people travel to novel destinations, or take on a new physical challenge.  In photography, this can mean trying a new form of photography or working with new equipment. Recently, my exercise has been to shoot in a very unfamiliar format with the Laowa 9 mm f2.8 ultra wide lens.

We all have our comfort level.  In terms of focal lengths, I tend to work within a range of 35 mm to about 150mm (full frame equivalent).  These days I favor my Fujifilm equipment. So the X100 series 23mm f2 fixed lens( 35 mm field of view), the TCL-100 adapter(50 mm field of view) and the XF 56mm f1.2(roughly 85 mm field of view) get the bulk of my use, with the XF 55-200mm zoom available when required.

A 9 mm lens (13.5 mm field of view) is radically more wide angle than anything I typically shoot.  But I was intrigued by some images I saw online, shot with this Chinese-sourced lens. Curious,  I purchased one from the company website.

This is a small lens, smaller than anything I currently have for the Fuji lens mount.  It looks old-fashioned, it is made of metal with a metal lens cap and seems quite sturdy. There is a handy depth of field scale on the aperture ring. It interfaces securely with the Fuji X lens mount.

Setting the aperture and focus are  done manually  as there are no electrical contacts on the mount.  The body must be set to “shoot without a lens” in the menus to allow the set up to work.  One simply sets the shutter speed on “A”, and the light meter will set appropriate exposures on whatever aperture is selected. For the most part, this seems to work pretty well.  Exposure compensation also seems to be usable.

Ultra wide-angle lenses require specific framing if you are to obtain an interesting image.  I had very little experience with their use, so I went online and watched a variety of tutorials.  Pretty much everybody says the same thing:  first, you need to set the aperture fairly tight to maximize your depth the field.  On the lens this wide, at roughly f11, everything from about 1 feet and infinity is in reasonable focus. You need to pick a subject in the foreground and then get extremely, almost uncomfortably close to it. Then need to pay close attention to the background, as this focal length is very inclusive.  If your composition is right, then this should result in an interesting, fairly three-dimensional image.

With focal lengths this short, sometimes you have to get very low to the ground or shoot at unusual angles to frame a compelling image, or to exclude something unpleasant-looking.  A tripod is helpful, especially since any small movement of such a wide lens tends to alter significantly perspectives and angles of the seen.

I quickly found that if I could not get sufficiently close to an interesting subject, the resultant image would usually be completely uninteresting and flat. Every once in a while though, you can break the rules, and still end up with an interesting photograph. 

This was my first experience with a Chinese made lens.  Both the aperture ring and the focus ring rotated smoothly, and the former had click detents at 2 stop increments. The front element has a hydrophobic coating said to resist water droplets and mist.  The lens however, is not billed as weather-sealed. From the standpoint of built quality  it certainly felt like pretty good value.

Image quality was interesting.  This is not a fisheye lens and is designed to be rectilinear.I rarely found the need to set the aperture wider than perhaps f5.6 and found that from there to perhaps f11 the lens is not only very sharp in the center, but acceptably so in the corners. I have very little expectation that a modestly priced, ultra wide lens would be sharp edge to edge.

What was surprising was the light fall-off.  There is considerable corner shading even at tighter apertures, though obviously this can be easily corrected in post. I think this is particularly noticeable, because unlike my Fujifilm lenses, the camera has no lens information to use to correct optical aberrations “in camera”. 

I tended to shoot this lens on my XT 10, as the articulating screen of that camera was useful to frame images in some of the unusual angles required for wide angle photography.  I found the best way to deal with focus, was  use the focus peaking feature of the camera, but most of the time to bunch the sparkly bits towards the foreground, to prioritize sharpness there.

I did not shoot people with this lens. An optic this wide tends to do unflattering things to faces, particularly if you are close enough to fill the frame.  And most casual subjects will be uncomfortable with the proximity that the lens requires. Stay tuned, though.

This brings up what for me at least,  is  a major disadvantage of shooting at this focal length.  In situations where I am not shooting professionally, I am particularly wary of invading of peoples privacy and their property,procedure this for the sake of what is essentially my hobby. 

Particularly in rural areas, when armed with an ultra wide lens, you simply cannot take advantage of every scene.  In a cityscape though, where more interesting subjects are more freely accessible, things get somewhat easier.  Sometimes however, no matter where you are, it may just be impossible physically to get close to a subject or location to the degree the focal length requires.

I have been shooting the lens for several weeks.  I’m starting to develop a better sense of what will work with an ultra wide and what will not; my percent of “keepers” is going up.   Now, when I’m opening up a card in Photoshop, I am seeing images that often intrigue me, but don’t look like my previous work.

Which I’m pretty sure was the goal of this exercise.

 

As a photographer, it is natural to want to display your work for others to see.  Obviously, with social media, you can offer essentially the world (or, at least your followers), your latest efforts.  But what about your guests at home?  Printing and framing, are expensive and for me, impractical for the number of images I  would like to display throughout the year. 

Now you can certainly show work on a computer monitor, but this isn’t something that house guests think to seek out.  Coaxing someone to review your work on your computer always seem to me to be akin to breaking out the slide projector after dinner.  It makes most people cringe.

So I was on the website Luminous Landscape recently.  They posted a review, of two fairly novel products that looked really interesting to me, especially as I re-decorate, my home office workspace.  As it turns out, one can now purchase large digital display devices which are very appropriate for the wall display of photography.

Now digital picture frames have been around for a long time.  I have a 5 x 7 version sitting on the table in my den, which is pleasant for a slideshow of snapshots.  It is obviously too small and has insufficient resolution for serious work.  But there are apparently several manufacturers making display-worthy larger digital frames that offer a convenient and easy way to show one’s work (and other artistic works) in a gallery style.

The most aggressively marketed of these is the Meural.  This is a 27 inch, 1920 x 1080 resolution flat panel screen mounted to look like a matted framed object.  It is actually marketed along with a subscription service that allows you to display a huge variety of artworks licensed by the service.  It can be controlled from your computer or your mobile device.  It can also be loaded with your own images.  It has a unique motion sensor that allows you to swipe in front of the screen to change the artwork.

I, however, chose another product: the Memento Smart Frame.  It too looks like a matted frame, but for me, it has several advantages over the Meural product.  First, it has significantly higher resolution at 3240 x 2160 which also gives it a 3:2 aspect ratio rather than the 16:9 aspect ratio of the Meural.  It comes in two sizes: 25 and 35 inches, sold at US $599 and $899 respectively.

On both the Meural and the Memento products, it is possible to display other aspect ratios with the rest of the screen masked.  I find the images look much better if they can be displayed full screen.  Given this, most images work better at the 3:2 format (the native format of most sensors) than in the wider ratio.

The Memento Smart Frame is mounted to a wall using a specially designed bracket.  The 35-inch frame is capable of being mounted both horizontally and vertically.  I have the 25 inch which is only designed to be mounted horizontally. It is connected to an electrical outlet by a thin power wire which is relatively easy to hide.  You can also buy an optional flat power wire that can be taped to the wall and painted over.

The frame is activated by downloading an app to a mobile device, or your computer.  You can then connect the frame to your WiFi.  The app allows you to create different folders with images for display.  It will store up to 3000 images as jpgs.

You can decide to display 1 image or a variety of images which will display whatever time interval you select.  I will typically allow about 5 minutes between images so they can be appreciated, but a slideshow-like presentation would also be possible.

It also has the capability of having images uploaded remotely.  Thus it can be a sort of upscale version of those smaller digital frames marketed to seniors so their offspring can upload images of the grandchildren.

Another appreciated feature is the timer and light sensor which allows the frame to be off for prescheduled periods (like when I’m at work).  The frame can also be set to go off at night, and/or when there is no ambient light.  The frame also adjusts to the light level, and its color signature, contrast, and brightness can be adjusted in the app.

So how do images look?  From my point of view very nice indeed. I keep most of the controls near neutral, but it is important to adjust the brightness of the display so that the impression of backlighting is minimized. Once this is done, images are not immediately distinguishable from an actual framed print. Colors are vivid, and detail is excellent.  When displaying black-and-white in particular, the graduations are very pleasing, and blacks are deep.

I am so enjoying the Memento frame, I am thinking about buying a second one, perhaps a 35-inch version so that I can display vertically oriented images.  I also think of their other potential uses.

For instance, my last gallery show cost upwards of $2200 just for framing roughly 30 works.  In time when the price of these devices comes down a bit, I can imagine organizing a gallery show using four or five of these frames, each displaying perhaps 5 images sequentially.  Over the long run, this would save a lot of money and trouble (bubble wrapping and transporting framed prints is a nuisance). As opposed to the many hours it takes to create a standard display of prints, setting up this sort of show would be a breeze. I would only have to print the images I sell.

The Memento Smart Frame is a wonderful example of how technology is changing the nature of photography, and the display of artworks. And, it will only get better.

I am nothing if not a tightwad. I can’t help it.  Nonetheless, after approximately 20 years in digital imaging, I have finally broken down and acquired my first specifically-designed photo editing computer display.  This turns out to have been a really good idea, and one that was long overdue.

When I got started in computers back in the early 1990s, I bought what was for the time, a very nice computer desk, with a hutch and a matching printer stand.  It was quite modern and stylish for the times.  And just sufficient in size for a single CRT monitor.  I  have spent a lot of time at this desk.   More important yet, it was the place my two graduate computer engineer kids learned their craft. I think I developed a slight sentimental attachment.

Over the years I went through a variety of computer displays.  Cathode ray tubes, gave way  to flat panels, which were certainly more space efficient. When I became interested in digital photography, the display quality became more critical, and I would seek out IPS (in plane switching) panel displays of good quality. This technology allows one to view at wider viewing angles without a significant change in the appearance of colors.

Dedicated photography monitors, such as those made by companies such as Eizo, were just prohibitively expensive. Plus, my little desk from the 90s  limited my choices and prevented me from running dual monitors which would be very helpful both in photo editing, and for my work tasks.

My latest monitor was an 4/3 aspect ratio  NEC panel circa 2008 that  came highly recommended.  In the last several months, I noticed during calibration that it was  losing its luminance.  Given that pretty much all available monitors are now wide-screen format,  I was finally forced to bite the bullet and upgrade my situation.

Ultimately this led not only to new furniture, but to a significant redo of my home office/photo editing space.  I got rid of the old standby, and obtained  a large Hon desk for the work-space.  I painted the walls a more neutral gray, and changed the carpeting in attempt to match.  My desktop computer was already robust, so I merely needed a better display.  I looked at a variety of panels recommended by various websites, specifically  wide gamut panels that could display nearly 100% of the Adobe RGB color space.

For the uninitiated, there are multiple so-called “color spaces”.  These refer to the different “languages”, a digital device uses to interpret  color information.  Most monitors can display all or part of the more familier narrow “gamut” sRGB color space.  This is the “language” for instance, that your smartphone uses.

Photographers, particularly those that will print their work, will generally prefer to work in Adobe RGB, a broader color space.  Better digital cameras can generally be set to capture this more vibrant “dialect”.  Relatively few monitors however are capable of displaying this wider range of colors accurately.

There are some that do, most of which come in at a fairly high price point.  I ultimately chose the Ben Q  SW2700PT, a very well-reviewed full gamut display for roughly $550 (a comparable Eizo professional display costs $2900 US).  Despite its reasonable cost, it performs in a way comparable to higher price products.

The display comes very carefully packed with its stand. Included in the box is a monitor hood, the mark of a serious piece of kit designed for critical photo editing.  It includes a handy remote control with a sufficient cord either to sit on your desk or in its cubby, on the monitor stand.

It was easily assembled.  For the time being I am partnering it with my NEC monitor which is still functional, but no will no longer be used for any serious photography work.

Please bear with me on the technology, for I am hardly an expert.  For serious photographers  there are multiple advantages to this monitor compared to a more generic display.  First, as I understand it, each SW2700PT has its color profile carefully calibrated in the factory prior to its delivery.  The individual monitor’s profile is included in the box.

Monitors used for photography need frequent calibration to known standards, using specialized on-screen sensors, and software.  Once calibrated, the resultant “profile” is stored on the computer’s hard drive. This allows you to send files that will look the same on other calibrated devices (i.e. printers) 

The SW2700PT has sufficient memory that it can retain the color profile within its own hardware, rather than requiring it to be stored on the computer’s hard drive.  You can download  BenQ’s own calibration software from their website, which used with your own color calibrator, will store profiles that are directly accessible to the monitor’s remote control.  Using BenQ’s software makes re-calibrations much more straightforward then using aftermarket software which are generally designed to accommodate multiple types of displays.

If you have ever reviewed images on a dedicated professional photography or printing workstation, you know they tend to look dim. Most of the time we intuitively set our monitors to be brighter, and higher contrast, than actually is appropriate in a calibrated printing work flow.

Unfortunately, if you use your computer for both printing and casual use, you can end up viewing the online world in a less vibrant way.  I put up with this for years.  If I did brighten the screen, I had to remember to set it back to a more appropriate brightness/contrast levels prior to a print job.  This was generally a guess, and resulted in a lot of wasted paper and ink. Until things were dialed in, my prints generally came out too dark.

This is where the remote control comes in.  There are 4 buttons.  One is used to access the display’s menus. The others access three color profiles: sRGB, Adobe RGB, and monochrome.  More importantly, because everything resides within the monitor, you can also set a brightness/contrast setting for each.

Thus, for normal web viewing, I naturally use sRGB, which I have set for a pleasantly bright viewing screen and color reproduction that aligns with the web.  Switching to AdobeRGB dims things down to allow accurate photo editing and printing.  It is interesting to me that although AdobeRGB images reviewed in photo editing software look really nice, web content is overly saturated and unnatural.

The appearance of the monitor in Adobe RGB is striking, and for the first time I was able to see onscreen, the full spectrum of color, and nuance that  modern cameras imagers acquire.  It also has a fairly high resolution at 2560 x 1440 (not quite 4K) which allows you to view impressive amounts of detail.  This turns out to be not only important in photography (for accurate sharpening), but makes it much more pleasant to view text and waveforms, which is a part of my online medical work.

The monitor has a variety of other nice features including multiple inputs ( DVI-D, DisplayPort 1.2, HDMI and multiple USB ports). There is also an SD card reader.

I’ve been using the BenQ now for multiple months.  This is a situation of “I had no idea what I’ve been missing”.  As I scan between the new display and my old NEC monitor, there is no comparison in terms of color reproduction ( particularly in AdobeRGB), and resolution.

I note that there is a new version from BenQ, the PhotoVue SW271 featuring full 4K resolution for roughly $1100.  I’m sure that this would be a striking display, but for me at least, I’m not sure the improvement would justify doubling the cost.

If you’re serious about your photography, particularly if you are printing your work, this monitor is well worth a look.  If you’re coming from a more generic display, I think you will wonder how you did without it.

 

 

 

We never learn. 

Every year in the first weeks of April, I hear my warmth-loving friends lament  the  cool weather, and/or the lingering snow as though it were something unusual.  But this is April in the Pocono region.  Weather-wise, anything can, and does happen. It’s kinda like November, but in reverse. 

As I write this, It is April tenth.  The morning temperature is in the high twenties, headed for about 40 degrees later today. A half inch of snow has fallen overnight.

Now my childhood memories for this time of year tend to feature blissful afternoons after school. Dressed in shorts and a sweatshirt, it was warm enough to enjoy a pickup game of baseball (remember those) or to ride one’s bike.

The internet however, allows us to review historic weather data, readily available on multiple websites. Turns out this memory of mine is not really typical of early April in the Pocono region of Pennsylvania.  In fact I suspect that the warm afternoons I remember are representative of a fluke year, possibly 1967 ( I was 10) when April was rather warm. Most of the rest of my youth, the month was not so blissful.

It takes only a quick trip to the Weather Underground website to discover that at least in my part of Pennsylvania, April starts out with typical high temperatures in the low 50’s and by the 30^th of the month typically reaches the low 60’s.  Given this, there are opportunities for anything from bonnie summer-like days,  to significant snowfall events.  And oddly enough these weather swings tend to be fairly typical.

Oh, and by the way, May here is no picnic either.

For instance:  in our region, April 2017 was the warmest April on record.  The mean high temperature for the month was actually 66°, which is 3-4° higher than the average high temperatures for the very end of April.  And the month was warm pretty much from the first, to the 30^th with only a few cool spells.

Contrast that was 2016, which at least started out cool like this year prior to slowly warming as the month went on.

So April is the month, when I hedge my bets.  Once the snow melts, and the lawn firms up, spring cleanup is certainly reasonable.  Early-to-mid April  is however waaaay too early to take the plow off my UTV or put away the snow shovels.  This is true at least on the ridge-tops here, for as in the  fall, spring snowfall events  tend to be very altitude dependent.

I think back to April 16, 2007. It was a cold day in the Susquehanna river valley where I spend my workdays.  There was a wet snow falling, though it was unable to accumulate on the warm ground.  In late afternoon, I drove to my home (which is 13- 1400 feet higher in altitude than the hospital where I was working).

I noticed as I climbed out of the valley, that first the snow started to stick,, and then accumulate, deeper and deeper as I gained elevation.  At my home, there was 16 inches on the ground.  That was the most robust snowfall event of the season. It was also the greatest accumulation difference valley to mountains I can remember.  It is hardly the only significant snow event I remember occurring during the fourth month of the year.

So my approach with April is typically to stop complaining, and be grateful.  For even on the cooler days, it’s not as cold as it would’ve been in January when the sun arcs so much lower in the sky. When it’s warm, I bask in the sunshine and think back to that kid on his bicycle after school. 

I have faith that as the weeks pass, the warmth of spring will finally beat back the leftover chill of Winter.

Hopefully in June… towards the end of the month.

 

Today, I learned that I have completed a ritual that I have been participating in for the better part of 30 years. I am somewhat hopeful that it will be the last time it is necessary. I’m talking about recertifying in one of my medical specialties: Sleep Medicine, through the American Board of Internal Medicine.

Board certification has been a mainly voluntary way that physicians validate their expertise in whatever specialty they choose to pursue. In my case, over the years I have been “board certified” in four specialties: Internal Medicine, Pulmonary Medicine, Sleep Medicine, and Critical Care Medicine. For 3 of the specialties, I am required to sit for a day-long exam, every 10 years. If you are an older physician, you may be “grandfathered” into some specialties (which is why I don’t need to recertify in internal medicine).  :  If for instance,  I had trained one year earlier, I wouldn’t have had to recertify in pulmonary medicine 3 times during my career.  This fact alone brings the whole business into doubt.

Meanwhile, the boards keep subdividing care by inventing new specialties.  For instance (and there are many) as an internal medicine resident, I was trained to care for hospitalized adults, who naturally tend towards being geriatric.  That’s what internists did. Now there are boards in geriatrics. Cardiologists now sit for boards in echocardiography, nuclear, and electrophysiology.

 Pity the poor surgeons. They finish an arduous 5-year residency only to discover they’re essentially not qualified to anything without a fellowship.  For instance: abdominal surgery is the “bread and butter” of general surgery residents work. In 2018 this means colectomies for colon carcinoma. But the American Board of Surgery has created a specialty of Colo-rectal surgery. This means that you may have to be an underpaid servant for an academic colorectal surgeon, for two more years, before you go into practice. And the ABS will be able to extract more money from you, over your career, to keep you fully certified.

As anyone who is been through the board certification process will tell you, the process is arduous and expensive. Yesterday’s test for me was the culmination of 10 months’ worth of effort. For much of this I have been studying 2-3 hours a day, this despite the fact that I actively practice sleep medicine, teach residents, and run a sleep lab.

 When I was a young man, and first took my Internal Medicine boards, I insisted upon being a purist. I studied the major internal medicine textbooks, and some physiology books, and felt really good about my knowledge base. I know several others that took this approach. By and large, we all flunked. I then I got wise and bought the review materials (at some expense) from the American Board of Internal Medicine. Using these materials I subsequently passed.  But I didn’t know at as much internal medicine as I knew for the first exam.

Since that time, given the restraints of time allotted in a busy pulmonary/critical care practice, I have always attended the conferences sponsored by my specialty’s society and purchased their educational materials. And I have never flunked again.

For this recertification, I enroll at no small expense in the “maintenance of certification” process run by the Board of Internal Medicine I then purchased from the American College of Chest Physicians their online review course which was very done but also very pricey. I also purchased collections of review questions from the ACCP and a variety of sources which are extremely useful for testing practice.  Then you have to pay for the testing center. All of this costs me multiple thousands of dollars.

What is frustrating, given all of the effort involved, is that rather than ending up a review of good clinical practice, the review materials basically offer you a standardized medical dogma. Because the nature of multiple-choice testing is inadequate to the complexities of medical care, the board has needed to come up with a solution so that test grading can be precise.

Thus, a lecturer will say: “X” what I do in clinical practice, but for the Board exam the answer is “Y”. This blunts the clinical utility of the entire process. Shouldn’t the reason for recertifying be to ensure clinical competence? Instead, it becomes a measure of one’s ability to memorize facts that often questionably relevant to treating patients.

Another issue in this particular board exam (sleep medicine) is the addition of material that traditionally I would not be expected to master. As I understand it, the American Board of Internal Medicine in its infinite wisdom has chosen to partner with the American Board of Family Practice for this exam. I’m an internal medicine physician at my core, which is the specialty of adult medicine, I am not in any way, trained in pediatrics and like most people who are internal medicine based, I don’t practice pediatrics. Despite this, we have been required to learn pediatric sleep medicine which is rather distinct from the adult version.

Failing this exam would have significant financial consequences to me. It makes me wonder whether an internal med based sleep doc that flunks the test, particularly on the basis of the pediatrics material would have a legal course of action against the Board.  As this is a computerized exam, It would seem easy enough to delete the pediatric questions from the tests of those who are internists and add more material on adults.

It used to be even worse. For some reason, the physicians in charge of the especially boards seem to delight in making things even more arduous than they had been. 10-15 years ago they instituted a policy where we had to do “practice improvement” modules in our office. This involved, for instance, studying some process in our office, and then instituting some improvement, restudying the results, and reporting it to the ABIM. Given the already difficult nature of private practice, this was an absolutely over-the-top requirement. Most every practice I knew ended up in some way faking the results. A major pushback from medical societies finally caused this nonsense to be suspended.

So now it’s  time for the final exam. You’ve purchased all of the review materials and spent months and months reviewing, learning all of the official answers required of the Board.

November 20 of last year I went to a test center. Happily, one is located within the half hour of my home which means I no longer have to travel to a major city and pay for a hotel room in order to take the exam. I suspect however that many other physicians still have that expense.

In my particular center, the staff was extremely courteous. I suspect for them this is an adaptive strategy given the indignities they are forced to impose on those being tested. The security involved is over-the-top and was frankly demeaning and insulting. First, you need two forms of picture ID. For many people, this will mean a passport as well as a driver’s license. You can take nothing into the testing area except your clothing. Your watch, bracelets, wallet, obviously your cell phone, any coins or even tissues are not allowed in the testing room. They confirm this by making you turn out your pockets. All of your belongings are placed in a locker. You’re not allowed to drink coffee or chew gum. There are cameras that watch your every move. Your palm is scanned multiple times during the process, both to enter the room, and then every time you exit. Just going to the restroom is like being released and then readmitted to prison. The whole thing takes 6 hours, and frankly, at the end, you are grateful to be done

It’s so discouraging that at my age unless I am compelled, I doubt in 2021 I will recertify for my pulmonary boards again.  In another world where the process was more reasonable, I would out of pride, continue to recertify in all of my specialties.  But this has clearly become a racket. So I may have to retire early. And there aren’t many young pulmonologists to take my place.

As a senior physician, multiple boarded, who has been a 30-year “diplomat” of the ABIM I know this could be different. I certainly understand the importance of ensuring that physicians of all specialties remain competent. And I think it’s reasonable for first-time candidates to be put through a rigorous procedure for board certification. On the other hand, I think that having achieved board certification in a specialty, you have earned the right to some dignity and dare I say economy, in the maintenance of your credentials.

Currently, the ABIM provides so-called self-assessment modules, that we are required to do between board exams. They are open-book tests that can be done at home. There is, of course, a charge for participating. They seem to be targeted to force the review of the new literature, and developments, that are significant to clinical practice. They take time but they seem far more valuable clinically than the rote memorization of useless facts required to pass the 10-year exam. I certainly think they would be an adequate way to assess physicians for recertification.

As a physician, we are under ever-increasing demands from the hospitals, the health insurance companies, the plaintiff’s bar, and the federal government.

We certainly do not need to be harassed by our own specialty boards.

Every once in a while, perhaps while out shopping, or at a restaurant, I will encounter an old friend, whose life path has drifted out of my particular orbit. After spending some time catching up, I will be reminded of how much I enjoy their company, and will wonder why we didn’t make more of an effort to keep in touch.

In the last several weeks, I feel it had that sort of an experience with a lens. In particular, the Fujinon XF 60 mm f2.4.

This was one of the 3 original prime lenses introduced with the X Pro 1 in 2012. At the time, it was lauded by some is the sharpest of the trio (the 18 mm f 2.8, the 35mm F1.4, were the other 2 lenses).

I remember my initial impressions were that this was a bitingly sharp lens, noticeably more so than my Nikon primes. In fact, the quality of all of these original lenses probably helped pull me from using my Nikon gear, to shooting mainly with Fuji.

But just like with life, newer things come along, in this case, lenses that are faster and newer, and distract me from an old companion. After a time the 60 mm became lost in the back of my photography cabinet.

Several weeks ago while on my way out the door to go hiking, I picked up camera bag with my XT-10 body, which I noticed had no lens mounted on it. I opened a cabinet and on a whim, reached blindly to the back of the shelf, determined to utilize the first Fujifilm lens I grabbed. This turned out to be the 60 mm, which I have basically ignored for many years. I mounted it on the camera and have been shooting ever since.

To remind you, this is a macro lens, the first in the Fujifilm “XF” line. It is fairly diminutive, compared to for instance the 56 mm f.12. It’s nicely built, with not only a fairly deeply recessed small front element but then a rather large metal lens hood. All of this makes it quite resistant to lens flare as the sun’s rays rarely reach the front element.

Though the lens aperture is tighter than many of the other Fujifilm primes, the lens is quite sharp wide open at F2.4. For those of us that focus on landscape imaging, the modest deficit in light gathering is really not much of an impediment when shooting in the daylight hours. This plus its small size may make it preferable to the newer 56mm for shooting while hiking. If only it had stabilization…

On an APS sensor, the lens has a 90 mm equivalent field of view, which makes it ideal for the sort of late summer early fall photography, available now as it allows you to isolate the sporadic displays of autumnal color beginning to erupt at this time of year. It’s also wonderful to have its macro capabilities for close-ups of wildflowers and the other fall forest offerings.

And boy is it sharp! From f2.8 and above, the lens has incredible definition. Out of focus elements look lovely at f2.4-3.5. Mounted on the XT-10 it balances very nicely, though it is a bit long with the lens hood installed. Still an all, it’s very compact package.

One downside of this optic for outdoor use is that given its magnification, it is prone to artifacts from camera shake. I find that using my steel Gitzo monopod, and good shooting technique, I can get acceptably sharp results without a tripod. You just have to be careful.

I did a search on eBay and found there are a lot of these lenses for sale. I suspect that it is a common lens for Fujifilm users to unload. There is a wide range of price’s but it looks like you could acquire a nice used one for between $US200- $400. There is also a broad range of prices for new lenses of between $US300-$650.

Given my experience, I think I’m going to put this lens back into circulation for outdoor shooting, relying more on the 56 mm f1.2 for street, and indoor work.

If you have one in the back of your cabinet, pull it out. I suspect he will find it is indeed like an old friend.

 

 

 

 

In the highlands of Northeastern Pennsylvania, meteorological summer has passed by, without stopping to say hello, or even waving as it drove past.

I can’t say there was no hot weather, but for the first time in many years, I don’t remember any even slightly uncomfortable nights sleeping in my non– air-conditioned bedroom (most summers we have a week or so of nighttime temperatures in the mid-70s).

I suspect that my friends with boats and/or swimming pools were disappointed. I, however, loved the pleasantly warm days, and crisp nights. So the climate trend that I described in June, which helped to abort a gypsy moth infestation, continued for the next 2 months.

For a variety of reasons, I have not had a great deal of photographic output over the summer. I think that the summer season often distracts me from photography with a number of different diversions, and discourages me from photography in a number of ways. From the biting insects that plague me when I try to I set up my tripod, to the monotonous green landscapes, and the sunrises that are inconveniently early, I tend to lose some enthusiasm over the warmer months.

Usually, my interest in a new piece of gear stimulates me to get out and shoot, but at this point, I’m extremely content with the gear that I have. This is particularly true of the X100F, and the X Pro 2. I really don’t crave the next upgrade in focusing or sensor resolution.

I read with interest the introduction of the Nikon’s new flagship DSLR, the D850.  I should really be lusting after this camera, with its state-of-the-art backlit 47mp sensor, its 9 frames per second speed, but I’m not.  Two generations old now, my 36mp D800E still looks new, works beautifully, and produces gorgeous files that look great in as large a print size as I am likely to create.

Maybe I’ll buy a refurbed one in a couple of years.

  Also though, I can’t escape the feeling that big bulky DSLRs are like dinosaurs at the end of the Cretaceous; about to be overwhelmed by the smaller, more convenient and increasingly capable mirrorless cameras which are becoming a more dominant force in the market.

Meanwhile, things photographically are looking up.

 Here in the Poconos, the leaves are beginning to change color, and the sound of katydids punctuates the crisp night air. The big cinnamon ferns in the forest are beginning to change to a sort of golden brown, while the deer transform from the red coat of summer to their cold weather coat of gray. Sadly, the humming birds have disappeared south.

For my wife and I, there will be an upcoming trip to the Adirondacks, to enjoy Oktoberfest, and “peak leaves”.

There is also the fresh introduction of the Fujifilm XE-3. Hmmm.

There should be plenty to write about, and photographic in the upcoming months.

Stay tuned.

 

 

It has been a quiet summer here on the Pocono Plateau. The weather has been quite pleasant since mid June, though in the last week or so we’ve had several runs of severe afternoon thunderstorms that resulted in power outages  in our small community.  Otherwise the weather has been lovely.

I have noticed that my postings tend to fall off during the summer months. I think part of this is due to a certain contentment I feel with the onset of the season .

We had the usual march of summer flowers including honeysuckle, black-eyed susan’s, mountain laurel, foxglove and finally rhododendron.  Now the first cardinal flowers have appeared alongside stream beds.  I noticed yesterday that goldenrod is beginning to bloom.

In our neighborhood we had an abortive gypsy moth outbreak, but a fortuitous run of cool wet weather in early June encouraged several pathogens, which wiped out the caterpillars before they could do much damage. This undoubtedly saved several old Chestnut oak trees on my property who are already relatively marginal.

We have had the usual run of community events, including our Fourth of July celebration, summer cocktail parties, and the very pleasant wedding of the friend’s daughter that I help to photograph. I am really enjoying the combination of the X 100f, and the X Pro 2/56mmf1.2 for events like this.

The house is empty this summer. My daughter of course lives in Seattle, and my son, who is a graduate student, is doing an Google internship in that city. It is nice that they can be together.  We did meet up with them in State College, when they flew into attend a wedding.

Equipment wise, I have acquired a DJI Mavic Pro drone, and have been trying to master shooting smooth aerial video. Once I have something to show for it, I will share my experiences on these pages. It turns out there is definitely a learning curve to this.

Mostly though, I am enjoying the summer season. I am looking forward to some events with the potential to provide some content for these pages as the summer goes on.

So bear with me.  I’ll be back.

 

It has been almost 4 months since the UPS man walked up my driveway, and dropped off my X100f.  It has become, as was its predecessor the X100t, my most used camera body.  And over that period of time, I have definitely formed some opinions on the camera particularly compared to its predecessors.

I posted my initial review of the X100f here.

The “f” model  X100 some ways is the most revolutionary new model, at least since the “s” version of this small range finder-like body.  It slightly larger than its predecessors, mainly to accommodate the larger battery of the other cameras in the “X” series.  I was concerned that this would alter the physical joint using the camera, but over the months the differences mean nothing.  And the convenience of packing one battery type for a photography job or trip is well worth whatever additional girth the camera brings.  I also like the idea that in a pinch, the camera can serve as a charger for the pool of batteries either in a car or at home.

I have been using the camera a lot with the TCL  X100 Mark II, which automatically changes the camera setting to reflect the change in the field of view (35–50 millimeters).  This lens, like its predecessor, is optically excellent, and now I don’t forget to change the camera setting.

I’m pleased with the autofocus performance in general, but I am sometimes frustrated by the facial recognition, which is somewhat inconsistent even shooting multiple images of the same scene.  Sometimes it just won’t pick up the face.  It would probably be better, to turn it off and just use a focus point.  This is especially true since we now have the advantage of the joystick control.

I’ve noticed a few other things.  The focus mode switch on the side of the camera seems to have had its actions stiff and somewhat.  On the camera’s predecessor, I actually had some gaffer tape over the switch to keep it in the “S” setting as I often found that it would move unbeknownst to me (I generally only use manual focusing for panoramas, and almost never use continuous focusing).

I have never been overly impressed in the past with the resolution improvement of the new 25mp sensor relative to its 16mp predecessor, but I think I’m noticing more shake artifact in images with the newer camera.  Maybe as I age my hands aren’t as steady as they used to be.  Still, in all, I don’t remember this with the previous bodies.  Nothing in the leaf shutter mechanism is changed to my knowledge, and the camera still has a nice soft shutter sound.

I was already a fan of the Acros black-and-white film simulation on my X Pro 2, and though I shoot in raw, I often develop images in photoshop with this profile.  To my eyes, it is relatively close to the camera-generated image.

Overall I’m extremely pleased with my new camera.  The X100 series has become like an old friend to me, and in my collection, even among the other Fujifilm products, it is the easiest to reach for what I’m going out and about.  It remains discrete and non-threatening and wonderful for event and street shooting, and with the extra resolution wonderful for landscapes.  Also with its soft shutter and built-in neutral density filter, it remains my favorite camera for moving water.

It’s,  going to get a lot of use over the next several years.

.