Saving space

Recently I was doing a few photo experiments using Raynox diopter and Movo extension tubes.

In total, I took 257 images (RAW + JPG). The total size when transferred to the computer was 6.33GB.

As I was doing a comparison of images at various mm ranges and as a combination of diopter + extension tube, I decided AGAINST processing the RAW images and deleted them instead.

How much disk space did I save? 5.29GB !! I was left with 1.04GB of JPG images. Now I will prune out the doubles.

Advertisements

File Management on Windows 3

Tags

, ,

After moving the files from the sub-directories into one single directory (File Management on Windows – https://twentymegahertz.wordpress.com/2017/10/05/file-management-on-windows), I was left with many empty directories.

Initially I used Windows explorer to click on the directory and it it was empty, I deleted the directory.

Then I thought of an alternative. I selected multiple directories and checked their properties. If the number of files were listed as zero, all the directories were empty and I deleted them at one go.

File Management on Windows 2

Tags

, ,

Recently, (File Management on Windows – https://twentymegahertz.wordpress.com/2017/10/05/file-management-on-windows), when I was wrote a scriptlet, I cam to know that Windows has a ‘move’ command. For all these years, I was under the impression that Windows only has ‘copy’, while Unix/Linux as ‘cp’ (for copy) and ‘mv’ (for move).

Ignorance!!!

File Management on Windows

Tags

,

Recently I got a zip file that contained many folders and each folder contained many documents. I wanted to remove all the folders and move all the files into one directory. As I was using Windows, I did not want to use Windows Explorer to manually do this activity.

I looked up and found a scriptlet on StackOverflow https://stackoverflow.com/questions/4357233/how-to-move-all-files-with-specific-extension-from-all-subdirectories-to-their-p

for /r "c:\source_directory\" %%x in (*.pdf) do move "%%x" "c:\target_directory\"

this moves all the files from the sub-directories into the target directory.

 

Unfiltered Part 2

Tags

, , , ,

In my previous post, I mentioned usage of UV filters. Here are a few comparative images – with and without the UV filter. Each image was taken with a Canon 700D, on a 55-250mm kit lens @ 250mm.

In the left-right arrangement, the left side image was using the UV filter, while the right side image did not use a UV filter. In the top-bottom arrangement, the top image was using the UV filter, while the bottom image did not use a UV filter.

Links

Unfiltered

Tags

, , ,

When I did my research while purchasing my next digital camera (in mid 2015), I finally decided to be brave enough to move up to a DSLR. After making that decision, I read about recommended accessories and decided to purchase UV filters for each of the kit lenses being offered with the camera. In reality, UV filters are not needed for digital cameras, but many will recommend their usage, primarily as a mechanism to protect the front portion of the camera lens.

In the month of May 2017, I came across an article (Yet Another Post About My Issues With UV Filters – https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2017/05/yet-another-post-about-my-issues-with-uv-filters/) that showed image distortion when using (cheap) filters. Mind you, I was using filters that were not very expensive. As a beginner, how can one justify spending 3K Rs on a filter as compared to 250 Rs?

After reading the article, I decided to experiment and I was astonished by the result!! The filters I was using, did add significant blurring to the images. I will post the images in the next post

After seeing the different, I have packed the UV filters.

Links

Organizing data

Tags

, ,

Simply collecting data and storing it on a hard disk is the process that we most commonly follow. But, the problem arises when we wish to retrieve the stored data some time in the future. For example, if we store camera photos in a single directory or upload them to Google Picasa or some other photo site, it will organize them by date.

Many years later, it becomes difficult to retrieve photos imply by scanning through them. Hence tagging them or storing them by the year or by event name becomes important.

Organizing data is a very difficult task and needs dedication. But it pays rich dividends in the end as the data volume increases.

For example, if for your photo collection, you store all files in one directory, the directory becomes too large. Also, you will not be able to locate picture as most of them will not have sufficient information in their tags.

To convert or not to convert . . . that is the question

I am having a Shakespearean dilemma regarding videos from my DSLR.

Recently, I shot a 5 minute video with my DSLR. It was only while transferring the video to the desktop that I noted the size of the video file – it was a massive 1.2GB!!! As I had multiple videos from the same event, their total size was 6.8GB.

At this rate, I will definitely follow the BigData trend by surpassing the size of the 10 year photo collection, within six months of the DSLR purchase. The size is definitely a consideration as I also have the habit of making two backup copies of the photos.

Then I decided to convert the MOV video into a DVD PAL compatible MPEG video. While the frame dimensions have been reduced a bit, with the MPEG video frame size probably being about 1/2 the size of the original frame (I am guessing here as VLC player mentions that it is playing the MOV video at 1:1 resolution in full screen mode and I only have a 17-inch monitor, as compared to the MPEG video frame, which has a black border around the frame when played at 1:1 resolution on the same monitor). While there is definitely a loss of size, the MPEG video file size is 1/10th of the original. So the 1.2GB MOV video file is down to a 120MB MPEG video file.

Considering I usually play these videos on the computer screen (an at max, on a 32-inch TV), I believe the MPEG video size is acceptable. But I definitely need to play the converted video on the TV, before making this statement.

But, in terms of size, the MPEG video file size is definitely an improvement and much more manageable.

Initially, I converted the MOV into an MPEG2 video file, whose file size was the same as the DVD compatible MPEG video, but the frame size was comparable to the MOV video, thus resulting in some pixalation. Hence the DVD compatible video is more acceptable, even if it’s frame size is smaller. At least it’s quality is better.

Changing the timestamp of files

While selecting the DSLR, I had searched for something that would generate MPEG video files. This obviously was a carry over from the fact that I had an old DVD player that did not play MOV files (which my older digital camera also used to generate). Even earlier, I used to convert MOV files to MPEG, to play them on the DVD player.

Then I went for the Canon 700D, which generates video in MOV format. After converting the format, I realized that the timestamp of the file was the same as the date of conversion and not the date the movie was recorded.

While this was also the case earlier, I decided to search for software that would allow me to change the various timestamps associated with a file. During this search, I found BulkChanger from nirsoft. Using this tool, it is possible to change the date as well as time for all three timestamps maintained by Windows, namely the date of creation, the date of last modification and the date of last access.

Link

Camera Accessories

Tags

, , , , ,

Recently, I had the chance to redeem a gift card on Amazon. So, what did I purchase? the following

  1. Rangers 57” Ultra Compact and Lightweight Aluminum Tripod with 360° Panorama Ball head, ideal for travel and work
  2. Raynox DCR-250 Super Macro Snap-On Lens
  3. Movo Photo AF Macro Extension Tube Set for Canon EOS DSLR Camera with 12mm, 20mm & 36mm Tubes (Economy Mount)

Why these? For one, the tripod was being offered for half its standard price.

Two, the tripod can be converted into a monopod / walking stick.

Three, being interested in macro photography, I wanted to try a double element diopter after finding out that a single element diopter (which I bought earlier) results in blurred images.

Four, I also wanted electronic extension tubes for macro photography (even though I recently bought non-electronic extension tubes) and the Movo extension tubes were in my budget. Actually, I decided to take a gamble on the Movo extension tubes as I made the decision based on Amazon reviews.

Happy to say that the Movo extension tubes are working great with my Canon 700D. I have done trials with the tripod and the diopter, but I have not reached a conclusive point of view.

I will post images shortly.