|
(Editor's note: One of the strangest requests I have
ever received was from this company. After being in this journal for nearly
5 years, they have asked to have their name removed from our site. Go
figure?)
August 11, 1998
My employer, (Name deleted by company request) Construction, has been working on a project for Boeing
Aerospace. Why does that matter to you? Easy. The rockets that Boeing
will build (Called "Delta IV" rockets) are to enhance communication and
internet services no matter where you are. In the near future, there'll
be no dead spots for cell phones and your internet will be through a satellite
dish- much the way that television is today.
One of the projects that (Name deleted by company request) is working on are these huge vats. These
will be used to treat metals that will be incorporated into the design
of the rockets. To give you an idea of the size, they are so large that
they can't be shipped by air, rail or interstate. The only way to ship
these giants is by barge. As we start the moving process for these, I'll
write frequent journals to show how it's being done and what the logistics
of shipping something that's the size of a fairly large 3-story office
building. You can see a Real Video image of the site and current work
going on there at http://www.theaustin.com
.
| During the actual construction, I've been asked to take
several images due to slight design changes. We shoot the images and
then send them to the engineering group at The Austin Company for
examination by either e-mail or FTP. The level of convenience for
the customer and (Name deleted by company request) is incredible. We are able to get immediate
feedback if needed by showing images in near real-time. The customer
is kept up to date and is constantly shown changes in a visual medium,
which when it comes to engineering, is critical. |
(Image deleted by company request))
Pipefitters
create some of the internal piping for the vats. |
| (Image deleted by company request))
Two
men inspect one of the huge vats that (Name deleted by company request) is building. Again,
in my mind, the color wasn't quite a vibrant as it is in the image.
I notice this especially in the red areas. I also noticed that while
shooting this image in particular and another unpublished image
that the viewer doesn't show the entire photographed image, which
I 'm also not crazy about. |
Part of the problem in doing this is the logistics of getting the
images to the point where the can be sent to the customer. In the
past, we have shot film and because I have no darkroom facilities
here, we outsource the processing and printing of all images. So,
this means that the film has to be dropped off and a second trip has
to be made to pick the film up. After this, we scan the images and
then load them to the FTP or attach them to e-mail. In all, a couple
of hours as a minimum for this entire process to take shape. I'd asked
to buy a digital camera a year or so ago to assist us in this type
of work. A lot of the photography that I do is technical in nature-
that is to say that I shoot a lot of parts for examination by our
staff or the customer. I also shoot images of the entire structure
part by part. The first reason for this type of imaging is that it
works as a visual reference to the components and where they are located
in the project. If we ever need to build another one like it- the
pictures are a great asset in deciding how things will layout within
the structure. The second reason is for insurance purposes and shows
that the entire structure was assembled and in tact when it left our
facilities here in Tuscaloosa. For me to do one of these shoots averages
about $100 in film and processing- not to mention my time which is
of considerable value ;-). So, a digital camera makes sense to use.
The images are available immediately and the can be stored on another
medium (preferably, a CD-ROM) for later use if needed. All of this
without the use of film and no trips to the processing place either-
works for me. |
| This past week, I'd had the day from hell. I was
under the gun on several things and getting yelled at by someone
for looking out for their back- not a great day and needless to
say, by 5p.m. I was ready to leave. Just before I left, Ron Comeaux,
our resident Cajun started asking me about digital cameras. I started
explaining the pros and cons of the digital camera and what we could
and couldn't use them for. Ron, you see, wanted to get the images
to the Boeing and Austin Company folks more quickly then what we
have been doing and had seen someone use a digital camera. So, I
was instructed to research and purchase a "low end" digital camera
for quick shots.
At first, I'd looked at the Sony models. I like the idea of using
a floppy disk to record on (Hey camera makers! One of you should
be smart enough to incorporate a ZIP disk into a camera...100MB
of storage- I could shoot all day...Build it smart and the masses
will beat a path to your door...). Two of our employees here at
(Name deleted by company request) own different versions of the Sony camera. Shannon Lyles,
who works in our Accounts Receivable department brought in her FD-7
model, which has a 10X zoom lens and several other nice features.
Bill Barnes, who's the comptroller here, brought in his FD-5 model,
which has a fixed focal length lens and is a lower-end version.
First, I like the grip that these cameras' have. It's has the feel
of a motor drive and the button falls onto your finger naturally.
The other nice feature is again, using a floppy instead of the PCMCIA
cards used by most cameras. |
(Image deleted by company request))
An
overall shot of part of the project. When shooting from a lift truck,
the bar that's holding you up tends to get more unsteady the higher
you go, so it's important that when I do this type of photography
that I can either use a higher shutter speed or be able to brace
the camera against myself or something more stable (The shutter
speed is typically the solution). I can't do either with the Sony,
which is what this shot was made with. It took several tries to
get an acceptable image simply because of the movement in the truck-
which is a simple, correctable problem with a film or high-end digital
camera. |
I was able to get 25 images onto one floppy, which to me is very acceptable.
I also like the interface that the user has to look at a single or several
images at one time. The LCD screen on the back of the camera is fairly
clear and easy to view in the right light conditions, however, get it
in sunlight and it's a different story. I mis-cropped several images in
my testing simply because it was hard to see what I was shooting. To me,
a simple shade (Similar to some of the old Speed and Crown Graphic cameras)
would not only allow better vision but would protect the screen as well.
The Sony models have a screen brightness setting to compensate for this
but I found them lacking the brightness needed to really help you see.
These cameras also have a resolution of 640X480 (at screen resolution,
which is 72 dpi), which is fine for a web site, but not for most publication
work. The uncompressed file size is about 900k. Another feature that I
really disliked (and the main reason that I didn't buy the cameras) is
that I don't like having to hold a camera away from my face. I use my
body to help steady the camera and this isn't possible with the Sony.
I made a trip down to the local Service Merchandise to look at the pricing
on these two cameras and while I was there, saw the Olympus D600L. I asked
the clerk to see the camera and immediately liked the feel. It has a grip
that feels like a pro camera and has an SLR viewfinder in addition to
an LCD screen. The Olympus also has several nice features and a variety
of exposure settings (Which neither of the Sony models had...). The flash
is also more stout and can use an auto exposure (Sony can not). The other
nice features are that the camera can be hooked directly to my computer
to download, it has a higher quality resolution of 1024X1280 pixels (Also
at screen resolution) a faster lens and one of the features that I like
is the ability to hook up a dye-sublimation printer directly to the camera
without having to go through my computer. This way, I can print out an
image without using up all of my resources on the computer. Olympus makes
a printer that hooks directly up to the camera and can produce 3.5X5 inch
prints, which are ideal for our customer's "hard copy" needs and cost
about $300. The ribbon and paper for the dye-sub runs about $40 for the
supplies to make 60 prints according to B&H Photo Supply in New York City.
| (Image deleted by company request))
A welder
cuts metal with a blow torch. I like this shot because of the mood
within the light. In person, the light hitting his face wasn't quite
as vibrant and I chalk this up to the digital cameras light gathering
characteristics. This is by far my favorite shot of the day. Because
of the need to hold the camera away from my body, I found that I
was shooting things slightly different than I normally would. I
also found that I don't have very steady hands and had several images
with noticeable "shake" in them. The background was also darkened
slightly in PhotoShop to add to the overall mood of the image. |
I also found that the pricing on the two kinds of
cameras was similar. With all of the extra features and options,
the Olympus was only $75 more than the Sony- which to me makes it
a no-brainer as to which one I should get. Gee, twice the quality
and nice-nice features for only $75 more...
On the down side, the Olympus does use a PCMCIA card, but it's
a 4MB card and will hold 45 shots per card, which should be acceptable
for my use. If it isn't I can simply load the images onto my computer
and walk outside to shoot more or simply buy another card.
In all, I was really pleased with what I found in the lower end
digital cameras. But, I also understand that these cameras are "consumer
grade" and this current crop of cameras won't ever reach the quality
level of a Pro digital camera (costing $12,000 and more...) or good
old film cameras. But for $875 you really can't beat the level of
quality that these low end cameras have. |
I bought the Olympus and am expecting it to be delivered tomorrow.
August 11, 1998
Mark Lent
|
