Lightning Storm

December 8, 2016

Last night we had the most intense lightning storm we’ve ever seen.

No, this isn’t time-lapse video. At times, there were many flashes per second and the lightning was almost constant. It stretched over about 120 degrees of our horizon. The lighting lasted a long time – longer than our attention span – we finally gave up and went to bed.

The sound you hear in the video is wind. We never heard thunder, I guess because the storm was too far away – about 30 miles from us when this video was taken. Below is what the storm looked like on BOM’s weather radar. We were near the Point Perpendicular label on the map.

weather-radar

I’m glad it was as far away as it was. I can’t imagine a boat surviving long under this storm. Before the lightning, we spent much of the day sitting on a mooring in Jervis Bay with the wind gusting to about 40 knots. Australia has some wild weather! -Rich

Develop Your Digital Images?

December 7, 2016

What we see is very different from what our cameras capture. Even the best cameras are seldom able to match the images we hold in our minds.

before-after-2

I think one reason for this might be the missing dimension in camera images. What we see when we look around as we motor past an amazing beach or up a heavily forested inlet is a composite of what our eyes take in over time, not the camera’s image from one instant in time.

Another related reason is the much greater dynamic range of our visual system – eyes and brain. Basically, dynamic range is how great a range of light to dark we can distinguish. Is there detail in the darkest shadows as well as in the brightest whites? If so, there’s enough dynamic range for the subject.

Our eyes best the camera by adjusting the amount of light coming in, opening and closing the iris, and our brains composite what it receives into a single image, impression or memory. In bright areas, out irises close down to limit light and they open when we look at dark areas to gather as much light as possible. A camera uses one iris setting for the whole image. (An exception to this is a camera’s HDR or high dynamic range mode in which the camera takes multiple images at different exposures and puts them together into one picture, much the way our brains do.)

In one way, what I’ve said above isn’t exactly correct (and I’m sure those paying careful attention have already spotted this and are poised to send me a letter of complaint!). The camera does capture more details in the whites and blacks than we see in the picture. If it didn’t, developing the image wouldn’t help. Here’s an example…

dynamic-detail

On the left is the original image with a black area with no visible detail. On the right is an enlarged and adjusted image of that section, bring out the amazing amount of detail that was hiding in the darkness. It’s there. It just needs some finesse to make it visible. (Even more detail is hiding in photos taken in a camera’s raw mode than is in these jpg images, but that’s another story.)

When we observe this scene from the dinghy, we see the detail in the shadows. When we show friends our undeveloped images, it’s gone and the scene isn’t nearly as magical as it was in our experience.

All this is why I think you need to “develop” the pictures from a digital camera; to make them match what you actually perceived when you took the picture. And by “develop,” I mean photoshop them, or adjust them.

Photoshopped images get a bad rap as in “That’s not real. It’s been photoshopped!” I would argue that the only way to make a picture more real is to photoshop it.

Below is a gallery of original and photoshopped images from one of Cyndi’s recent blog posts. See for yourself. (Click an image to enlarge, then you can scroll through the pictures.)

These are all captured on a pocketable, point-and-shoot camera. Nothing special. This was a particularly hard batch of photos as there was a huge dynamic range that the camera didn’t capture well. The bright whites of the dead wood in the forest blew out the images while a lot of detail hid in the shadows. I’m not saying that it’s the best photoshop job that’s ever been done, but the pictures look a lot more like our memories of this dinghy ride.

Photoshop:

photoshop-box

The price of Photoshop came down not long ago, from thousands of dollars to an annual subscription price of about $10 US a month. For this, you get all the updates as well. For me, this is well worth the price.

There is a learning curve with Photoshop but it’s a very well done program and for as powerful as it is, it’s very intuitive and pretty easy to learn. To make it easier, there are thousands of tutorials online. I constantly refer to YouTube videos when I need to learn (or re-learn) how to do something.

Also included in the subscription is a program called Lightroom. It’s probably easier than Photoshop to learn and with it, you can do almost everything that you can with Photoshop. I don’t use it simply because I’m a long-time Photoshop user and it’s not what I’m used to.

For us cruisers that don’t always have an internet connection, the software lives on your computer and just needs to phone home a few times a year to verify an active subscription. In two years of using this plan, I’ve not had a single problem.

I know I sound like a Photoshop ad. I am a big fan, but there are many other programs that will help you develop your digital images. Google Picasa used to be one of them but it’s been discontinued, though I think you can still download it. There’s a free image viewer called IrfanView for the PC that allows a pretty nice range of image adjustment, though you’d never call it photo editing software.  I’m sure there are about a thousand options on the Mac. There are even some great editing apps for phones and tablets.

Some programs and apps have a push-button approach to correcting and enhancing pictures. Some of these will make images look almost as good as you can with Photoshop. Whatever you use, if it makes your pictures look better, and you like using it, it’s the right program.

“But all this takes so much time!”

Quit your whining. As I seem to say a lot, what else are you going to do? Scrimshaw? (OK, I stole that from someone and I don’t remember who, but it sums up a lot of cruising activities for me.)

Processing these images in Photoshop is one of my cruising creative outlets. Cyndi takes most of the pictures on our blog for two reasons: she loves doing it and she’s good at it. My contribution is making her pictures look as much like the scene did in real life as possible. -Rich

NSFW (not safe for work)

Saturday, November 3, 2016

We left lovely Lavender Bay early in the morning hoping to find a vacant mooring in Athol Bay (below the Sydney Zoo). We were in luck. Just two other boats and five moorings. The bay was peaceful and quiet, with the peace broken only by the occasional kookaburra outbursts. That changed a couple of hours later…

This was strange indeed. There were at least two boats with loads of fully dressed guys and one to three topless young ladies (not much in the way of bottoms either!). They appeared to be engaged in deep, serious conversations with the guys, mostly oblivious to the hoots, hollers and chants from the neighboring boats. What could they be talking about? Awkward!

Here are some pics from the chaos…

In a previous post, we lamented the broken promise of toplessness in the South Pacific (well, I did, actually). Who knew that Sydney would turn out to be the naked breast capitol of the South Pacific?

The evening ended (we thought) with the usual weekend fireworks display. Nope. The music went on ALL night! -Rich

harbour-fireworks-again