UWA odd angle postprocessing howto

[Marsu42]

Since I've got a ff and my 17-40L I'm more and more leaning to the wide end because the results look interesting to my eye.

Problem: I often have difficulties finding a horizon or post-processing rotate angle that looks ok-ish. This turns out to be most difficult if it's an odd-angle shot and there are no orientation lines or the lines aren't right angle themselves (like skew trees in the background or a sloped/non-even horizon on a hill).

What I'm doing is right now is subjective trial and error ("nah, another 0.1 degrees clockwise") but whenever I look at it again it still seems to be somehow odd. Most annoying is that a "gravity down" approach with the camera's sensor also doesn't always look correct. To me

Question: Do you know or have developed any guidelines on how to find the "best" post-processing angle? Do you often do tse-like perspective correction on these shots? Or do you simply accept the fact that these shots never look right unless you're there and your body know where the gravity is?

 

[IMG_0001]

I don't really have a solution for you, but I can totally relate. I have a Sigma 8-16, which I really love, but I also always struggle nailing the right tuning of the image.

I think problem is that we are fighting not one but two distortions. First, a perspective distortion due to the extremely short focal length, and second a complex optical distortion making straight lines appear to be somewhat curved even though the lens is supposedly rectilinear.

As a result, it is probably required that the image is slightly corrected for perspective (I find it to be mostly a problem with vertical lines) and curvature before having the horizon adjusted. I also crop more symmetrically than usual as I find this helps in balancing the distortion.

I am also trying to work harder on the composition at the time of capture in order to minimize perspective distortion. For example, I'll try to find somewhere to climb instead of pointing the camera upwards or I'll try to include the distortion in the composition so that it is more of an asset than a problem. Paying attention to the effects in the viewfinder is also part of the solution I guess...

For me another struggle is to keep unwanted articles (power lines, signs, ... feet...) out of the images. UWA capture so many things that were so tiny in the viewfinder that they did not seem problematic, but end up ruining the shot when viewed on screen.

 

[distant.star]

.
I would have the same question, and I don't know if there is an answer. What I believe is that the eye is seeking an anchor point that orients it. Without it, you're sort of adrift unless there is some other more compelling object in the scene.

There have been times when I used the LR5 corrections, but they can sometimes overcrop. And if it's a particularly difficult scene, they don't provide anything pleasing either.

If possible, I'll look for something near the center of the frame that should be horizontal or vertical and align that, leaving the rest to go whatever way the lens takes it.

Finally, if all else fails, I just eyeball it and figure what looks acceptable to me eye is probably as good as it gets.

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

Taking into account perspective, and looking at the banner on the ceiling, it looks like it needs to be rotated CCW a little.
Its very difficult to know

 

[mackguyver]

With wide shots like your examples, this is a common challenge and there are a handful of ways to address it - with #4 being the most useful when shooting man-made structures:

1. Shoot from a tripod and level the camera

2. Use natural lines. For landscapes, the horizon; for buildings, the verticals. In your examples, the building is curved but there is a natural horizon that would make the building level

3. Find the strongest/most dominant line - if there is a bold line that the eye is drawn to in the frame, use that and make it horizontally or vertically level

4. Try to compose your shot using one or more perspective vanishing points - in practice this means standing to the side of the scene, and/or tilting the camera up & down, etc. to get the lines to follow a logical pattern of perspective. This is one of the key elements to making wide & ultra wide shots interesting, at least for buildings and such. An interesting foreground is another key, but that's a whole other topic...

5. Use the line that crops the least parts of your image

6. Level for effect - be creative and try multiple lines until you find the one that matches how you want the photo to appear.

As for using tilt-shift lenses, they don't solve problems where you have multiple lines to level in a scene but do "fix" converging verticals and other items.

 

[IMG_0001]

With wide shots like your examples, this is a common challenge and there are a handful of ways to address it - with #4 being the most useful when shooting man-made structures:

1. Shoot from a tripod and level the camera

2. Use natural lines. For landscapes, the horizon; for buildings, the verticals. In your examples, the building is curved but there is a natural horizon that would make the building level

3. Find the strongest/most dominant line - if there is a bold line that the eye is drawn to in the frame, use that and make it horizontally or vertically level

4. Try to compose your shot using one or more perspective vanishing points - in practice this means standing to the side of the scene, and/or tilting the camera up & down, etc. to get the lines to follow a logical pattern of perspective. This is one of the key elements to making wide & ultra wide shots interesting, at least for buildings and such. An interesting foreground is another key, but that's a whole other topic...

5. Use the line that crops the least parts of your image

6. Level for effect - be creative and try multiple lines until you find the one that matches how you want the photo to appear.

As for using tilt-shift lenses, they don't solve problems where you have multiple lines to level in a scene but do "fix" converging verticals and other items.

#4 is pretty much what I was thinking of when writing about composition. All good advice I'll try to keep in mind the next time I shoot UWA.

 

[IMG_0001]

Taking into account perspective, and looking at the banner on the ceiling, it looks like it needs to be rotated CCW a little.
Its very difficult to know

But that would make the building lean uncomfortably to the left...

I personally would pinch the top a bit to compensate for the diverging verticals and then crop and level.

 

[Marsu42]

I don't really have a solution for you, but I can totally relate. I have a Sigma 8-16, which I really love, but I also always struggle nailing the right tuning of the image.

Good to hear I'm not the only one, I often fear I'm sounding completely clueless when posting threads like this esp. since I know I'm "horizontally challenged" and need a grid inside the vf.

Taking into account perspective, and looking at the banner on the ceiling, it looks like it needs to be rotated CCW a little.

Thanks for reminding me, I even vaguely remember even learning this in school and drawing perspective wireframes in art class, before computers became popular that is :->

Shoot from a tripod and level the camera

To me, this only works if it's a "take all in" type shot and the eye has references to guess where "up" is - but with many closer up uwa shots this looks wrong esp. if there are skewed lines in the picture that aren't aligned.

Try to compose your shot using one or more perspective vanishing points

I do this with architecture, and with excellent post-processing tools like dxo viewpoint (or ps) you usually can get some pleasing result even if you failed on the scene - though at a loss of resolution w/o a ts lens.

However, I'm currently mostly using my uwa for wildlife to get a "close up" effect. In these cases, I have to "balance" a non-level background against a non-level foreground in 0.1 degree steps until it looks least strange because w/o a clean background it's very hard to get an impression about the actual perspective/vanishing point or sometimes there's no horizon at all:

 

[mackguyver]

Had you posted these shots, I would have given very different advice! They are about 180 degrees from the original ones, and I like them. I plan to take similar shots via 100 ft / 30M Ethernet with my 1D X & laptop in the near future...

Anyways, I'd say that there are no real rules for cropping here if there are no reference or even straight lines. Basic composition guidelines would be what I would follow - animals looking out of the frame, balanced elements, natural yet dramatic perspective - i.e. not upside down, but at harmonious angles of 30 & 45 degrees and their multiples.

These samples are all pleasant to the eye, so I think you're on the right track. The middle one is tricky, but I see that you followed the reflection, which is always at 180 degrees and made that the anchor for the angle, and I forgot to mention reflections in my first post, but that is another important reference line.

 

[Marsu42]

These samples are all pleasant to the eye, so I think you're on the right track.

Thanks ... the thing is that these are samples of shots I had to turn in 0.1 degree steps since I wasn't able to find a good rotation right away. The important point I've learned is that there doesn't seem to be a magic bullet solution for these.

Your advice is still valid though, esp. concerning the vanishing point - it's just that I seldom do architecture these days, "been there, done that" and I now know how to nd-filter, focus-stack and bracket for good results. Tedious setup though. Crawling through the mud shooting wildlife is much more fun :-> and I find it esp. challenging to get different results from a "my mobile phone also has this focal length" type shots.

 

[IMG_0001]

Quite different images to those from the original post, but different in a positive way. I like those and I don't find that they look like they have an alignment problem. To me, only the last one might be a little off to the ccw direction, based on the trees, although the horizon looks about right at first glance.

 

[Marsu42]

To me, only the last one might be a little off to the ccw direction, based on the trees, although the horizon looks about right at first glance.

That's exactly what I'm talking about: Something always looks wrong, it's about *minimizing* the odd parts... for example the middle shot with the water has a completely "wrong" rotation vs. gravitation direction.

I would like to come up with some guidelines to speed up the trial & error process, but failed so far. Btw the first shots were really some random holiday shots, they just happened to have no right angles in them so they're ok for demonstration purposes.

One thing I can say is that vertical lines seem to be more important than horizontal lines, at least my eye is used to sloped horizons but not so much to skewed trees. It becomes tricky when the tress actually *aren't* vertical, in this case you need to shoot some space around to let the viewer see it and get some bearings or it tends to look wrong.

 

[mackguyver]

These samples are all pleasant to the eye, so I think you're on the right track.

Thanks ... the thing is that these are samples of shots I had to turn in 0.1 degree steps since I wasn't able to find a good rotation right away. The important point I've learned is that there doesn't seem to be a magic bullet solution for these.

Your advice is still valid though, esp. concerning the vanishing point - it's just that I seldom do architecture these days, "been there, done that" and I now know how to nd-filter, focus-stack and bracket for good results. Tedious setup though. Crawling through the mud shooting wildlife is much more fun :-> and I find it esp. challenging to get different results from a "my mobile phone also has this focal length" type shots.

I find wildlife more fun, too, particularly because it is so challenging, which makes it that much more rewarding when you get the shot you want. Going from shooting models where I had control of just about every aspect of the shot to shooting wildlife where I have control over almost nothing was a big adjustment, but one I like. My plans now that I have the 1D X with its Ethernet interface are to take UWA shots of the more dangerous and skittish wildlife from a distance. I too love the UWA photos showing the landscape & creatures or creatures from a unique angle. The problem is that I would be missing some limbs with alligators or be covered in biting ants if I lay on the ground waiting for the shy creatures to arrive

What type of horses are those? I know you've posted them before and I have meant to ask you. I think they're beautiful and interesting subjects and I'm surprised they are so tame.

Back to the angles - trees are particularly irritating because they are rarely straight, so I feel your pain. For the shots with no reference lines that you can't seem to get right, I'd try the following techniques - (1) rotate heavily to one side and then the other and then move the slider back and forth until you find the best angle, i.e. as you would do when manually focusing, or (2) try a number of rotations, save them, and then put them up side-by-side on the same screen and step back a bit from the screen. See which one looks best from a slight distance and that's the one to fine tune or use as is.

 

[Marsu42]

I find wildlife more fun, too, particularly because it is so challenging, which makes it that much more rewarding when you get the shot you want.

Problem is: If people don't realize how complicated this is, it can also be kind of frustrating because they're used to studio-type shots. That's why I seldom shoot insects nowadays, killing/capturing them simply produces better shots than crawling through the woods. I rather go for animals or environments that are visibly "outdoors" and non-staged.

My plans now that I have the 1D X with its Ethernet interface are to take UWA shots of the more dangerous and skittish wildlife from a distance.

Um, with what - robotic gear to move and aim the camera? My 6d has wifi control, but lv focus is slow (get a 70d for that), and you really really have to setup the scene like "squirrel grabs food" which I didn't come around to yet. I'm looking forward to see some results with this

What type of horses are those? I know you've posted them before and I have meant to ask you. I think they're beautiful and interesting subjects and I'm surprised they are so tame.

Well, tame to me, I know them for 2 years and it wasn't always the case - I'm now rather fluent at speaking horse and know when to step aside. Imho still much safer than driving a car, or a bicycle surrounded by cars for that matter.

They are horses of the "Konik" type, it's a project to back-breed the extinct European "Tarpan" wild horses which as usual where hunted down until none was left. For me "wild horse" doesn't mean "bad temper all the time" but "do what they want to do and nothing else" which can include being curious and playful. They're always happy to have another friendly set of eyes and ears around to watch out for predators

They are often used in landscape projects in Europe (PL, D, NL) and are basically not cared for at all, they are outside all the time w/o any man-built shelter and have to look for food themselves. This means they've got an actual archaic herd structure and act like most horses would act if people wouldn't keep trying to ride them.

You really gain respect for them when they are resistant to about every weather or disease/injury and survive in the hard winter living by digging up roots when you as a human wouldn't last for a day. In comparison to their senses, I feel blind, deaf and slow as a slug: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Konik

For the shots with no reference lines that you can't seem to get right, I'd try the following techniques [...] See which one looks best from a slight distance and that's the one to fine tune or use as is.

This certainly good advice, and I'll try to remind me of this - just like dof, "angle" seems to be very dependent on print/export size, what looks ok at small size or very near looks odd when being at a distance.

For these, *everything* has to be spot-on, not just the technical aspect but also the emotion or expression of the scene. But it's really rewarding to get this done as you don't find these shots anywhere. They even come with real non-digital rainbows

 

[mackguyver]

I find wildlife more fun, too, particularly because it is so challenging, which makes it that much more rewarding when you get the shot you want.

Problem is: If people don't realize how complicated this is, it can also be kind of frustrating because they're used to studio-type shots. That's why I seldom shoot insects nowadays, killing/capturing them simply produces better shots than crawling through the woods. I rather go for animals or environments that are visibly "outdoors" and non-staged.

My plans now that I have the 1D X with its Ethernet interface are to take UWA shots of the more dangerous and skittish wildlife from a distance.

Um, with what - robotic gear to move and aim the camera? My 6d has wifi control, but lv focus is slow (get a 70d for that), and you really really have to setup the scene like "squirrel grabs food" which I didn't come around to yet. I'm looking forward to see some results with this

What type of horses are those? I know you've posted them before and I have meant to ask you. I think they're beautiful and interesting subjects and I'm surprised they are so tame.

Well, tame to me, I know them for 2 years and it wasn't always the case - I'm now rather fluent at speaking horse and know when to step aside. Imho still much safer than driving a car, or a bicycle surrounded by cars for that matter.

They are horses of the "Konik" type, it's a project to back-breed the extinct European "Tarpan" wild horses which as usual where hunted down until none was left. For me "wild horse" doesn't mean "bad temper all the time" but "do what they want to do and nothing else" which can include being curious and playful. They're always happy to have another friendly set of eyes and ears around to watch out for predators

They are often used in landscape projects in Europe (PL, D, NL) and are basically not cared for at all, they are outside all the time w/o any man-built shelter and have to look for food themselves. This means they've got an actual archaic herd structure and act like most horses would act if people wouldn't keep trying to ride them.

You really gain respect for them when they are resistant to about every weather or disease/injury and survive in the hard winter living by digging up roots when you as a human wouldn't last for a day. In comparison to their senses, I feel blind, deaf and slow as a slug: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Konik

For the shots with no reference lines that you can't seem to get right, I'd try the following techniques [...] See which one looks best from a slight distance and that's the one to fine tune or use as is.

This certainly good advice, and I'll try to remind me of this - just like dof, "angle" seems to be very dependent on print/export size, what looks ok at small size or very near looks odd when being at a distance.

For these, *everything* has to be spot-on, not just the technical aspect but also the emotion or expression of the scene. But it's really rewarding to get this done as you don't find these shots anywhere. They even come with real non-digital rainbows

Thank you for the information about the horses - they sound very unique and I'm sure it's an experience being around them like that. They are also beautiful and you are fortunate to have such great subjects to shoot. I really like the rainbow shot - it all came together for you didn't it? Those rare shots are what I love about photographing nature and I'm sure you must be really pleased with how well it turned out!

On the remote shots, my plan is as follows - find a good spot, set up the camera low to the ground at 16mm with a nice composition, Av mode @ f/11 or 16 set to hyperfocal, and then drop back 30m to my laptop with a pair of binoculars. Wait until something comes near, then fire off some shots via my laptop. For example, a few weeks ago, some baby alligators were sunning on the rocks near the shore. I got some nice 600mm photos of them, but would have loved to have taken some close up UWA shots. They went into the water anytime I got that close, and besides, crawling on your belly near water full of alligators (especially their Mom) is not a good idea! Setting the camera up nearby would have been perfect and after a few minutes, they would have been in the perfect position. Another example is kingfishers - they are very shy, but have predictable perches. If I can set up the camera near their perches, I think I can get some great photos of them, and adding a UWA would give me a very unique angle.

How well will it work without being able to adjust the head? I won't know until I try...but I'm hoping to get some shots that work. I see it as a semi-automated camera trap

 

[Marsu42]

Thank you for the information about the horses - they sound very unique and I'm sure it's an experience being around them like that. They are also beautiful and you are fortunate to have such great subjects to shoot.

It also beats any other adrenaline-generating experience, they're not predators like alligators but still very effective fighting/defense machines that can convert you into a dead photog in no time. Like with people portraits, 90% of the skill is not how to handle the camera.

I really like the rainbow shot - it all came together for you didn't it? Those rare shots are what I love about photographing nature and I'm sure you must be really pleased with how well it turned out!

Yes, and I try to forget the other 10 near-perfect shots when something went wrong - horse didn't look, bad af (hello, 6d!), bad exposure/flash, I didn't get in the best position at the correct time. Good to know other people appreciate the results and not to be too shy I'm always getting very positive feedback for these.

I just have to keep doing more postprocessing rather than producing new shots, it's just that my experience still grows and I'm now getting more good shots in a week than in a year when starting out with photography... I wonder when I'll peak, didn't happen yet.

On the remote shots, my plan is as follows - find a good spot, set up the camera low to the ground at 16mm with a nice composition, Av mode @ f/11 or 16 set to hyperfocal, and then drop back 30m to my laptop with a pair of binoculars. Wait until something comes near, then fire off some shots via my laptop.

Well, just fyi you non-1dx photogs, Magic Lantern has a trap focus / motion detection and intervalometer mode which also works for these kind of setups. Problem is that to get the "uwa" look the subject has to be rather near the lens, meaning you cannot do hyperfocal and end up with a very small aperture - f11 isn't *that* deep. I'm positive this is something the new wifi-70d's fast lv af really shines.

Another example is kingfishers - they are very shy, but have predictable perches. If I can set up the camera near their perches, I think I can get some great photos of them, and adding a UWA would give me a very unique angle.

Sounds great, I recently saw a great squirrel shot that I suppose was taken this way, it's really worth it if you've got the time to set everything up and wait until the animal is posing. Imho the danger is that you might get a "staged" look, but that might not worry most viewers.

 

[mackguyver]

Thank you for the information about the horses - they sound very unique and I'm sure it's an experience being around them like that. They are also beautiful and you are fortunate to have such great subjects to shoot.

It also beats any other adrenaline-generating experience, they're not predators like alligators but still very effective fighting/defense machines that can convert you into a dead photog in no time. Like with people portraits, 90% of the skill is not how to handle the camera.

I'm sure they are quite dangerous given their size and I bet their kick is quite deadly. You do seem to have formed a level of trust with them

I really like the rainbow shot - it all came together for you didn't it? Those rare shots are what I love about photographing nature and I'm sure you must be really pleased with how well it turned out!

Yes, and I try to forget the other 10 near-perfect shots when something went wrong - horse didn't look, bad af (hello, 6d!), bad exposure/flash, I didn't get in the best position at the correct time. Good to know other people appreciate the results and not to be too shy I'm always getting very positive feedback for these.

I just have to keep doing more postprocessing rather than producing new shots, it's just that my experience still grows and I'm now getting more good shots in a week than in a year when starting out with photography... I wonder when I'll peak, didn't happen yet.

I'm not surprised to hear that others like the photo as well - it really works well and the rainbow takes it from very good to incredible.

Over the years, I have realized that it's better to get one great shot each shoot than 5-10 good shots. I have also found that to do that, I'm better off staying with one animal for while vs. chasing lots of animals. Post-processing came more easily to my as I have a background in graphic design, but I feel like there's always more to learn.

On the remote shots, my plan is as follows - find a good spot, set up the camera low to the ground at 16mm with a nice composition, Av mode @ f/11 or 16 set to hyperfocal, and then drop back 30m to my laptop with a pair of binoculars. Wait until something comes near, then fire off some shots via my laptop.

Well, just fyi you non-1dx photogs, Magic Lantern has a trap focus / motion detection and intervalometer mode which also works for these kind of setups. Problem is that to get the "uwa" look the subject has to be rather near the lens, meaning you cannot do hyperfocal and end up with a very small aperture - f11 isn't *that* deep. I'm positive this is something the new wifi-70d's fast lv af really shines.

I suppose hyperfocal was the wrong way to put it now that I re-read it - prefocused would be the right way to say it. In the case of the alligators, that would have been pretty easy. Also, you can always set LV to use "quick" mode, which I'm pretty sure works with EOS Utility as well. Also, I'm guessing that the ML setting requires the camera to be in LV, right? With the EOS Utility, I should be able to keep it in regular mode until something approaches, saving battery.

Another example is kingfishers - they are very shy, but have predictable perches. If I can set up the camera near their perches, I think I can get some great photos of them, and adding a UWA would give me a very unique angle.

Sounds great, I recently saw a great squirrel shot that I suppose was taken this way, it's really worth it if you've got the time to set everything up and wait until the animal is posing. Imho the danger is that you might get a "staged" look, but that might not worry most viewers.

True, and what I'm really hoping for are shots like these from Art Wolfe:

Elephant Seals

Giant Tortoise

or this: Argentine Gray Foxes which isn't quite as close, but still a wonderful shot.

 

[Marsu42]

Over the years, I have realized that it's better to get one great shot each shoot than 5-10 good shots.

Tell me more, I still have 1000+ "good" horse shots to select and postprocess ... but I intend to do a themed year documentary, so if I sub-select them according to "horses in autumn looking for water" not that much are left.

The problem with "very good" shots is that I cannot really specifically go for them with wildlife, but have to try for "good" and be lucky sometimes. With architecture, landscape, macro it's different - a lot of lighting, filter, camera (focus stack, hdr) and postprocessing setup *will* give you superior results.

I have also found that to do that, I'm better off staying with one animal for while vs. chasing lots of animals.

+1, that's why I'm always with the same horses so I can *anticipate* what they're going to do and prepare. Well, and I often visit some frogs, though they're not the exact same frogs it pays to know their habits.

Post-processing came more easily to my as I have a background in graphic design, but I feel like there's always more to learn.

I have developed my "style" and I'd say I'm also rather ok at it by now, it's justI cannot bulk-process wildlife but have to touch every single one by hand and apply some local filters (background cleanup, burning, dodging, vignette). This takes time, esp. with an outdated dual-core laptop, but often turns "yawn" into "good".

Also, you can always set LV to use "quick" mode, which I'm pretty sure works with EOS Utility as well.

It's known as the "shutter killer" but I guess with a 1d it's less critical - and you're correct, for ML lv has to be turned on that drains the battery quickly. If I'd use this, I'd get a battery grip, also for wifi.

True, and what I'm really hoping for are shots like these from Art Wolfe

Well, his postcard style often looks too hdr-ish and over-processed to me, but then again I know I'm too much on the neutral for some people's taste. Interesting site though, esp. for comparing my horse/frog shots (and I think I can compete with some).

Concerning the scenes you posted, the seal & esp. lions are great and what you can really do with wifi (or tethered), but the turtle would be unnecessary and difficult to frame via remote even if it moves slowly (proof: horizon problem). But I often see polar bear shots done by remote (like http://artwolfe.photoshelter.com/gallery/Polar-Bears/G0000BBQopsTJpsg), there recently even was a cinema documentary about it.

 

[mackguyver]

Also, you can always set LV to use "quick" mode, which I'm pretty sure works with EOS Utility as well.

It's known as the "shutter killer" but I guess with a 1d it's less critical - and you're correct, for ML lv has to be turned on that drains the battery quickly. If I'd use this, I'd get a battery grip, also for wifi.

I have never heard that, but I'll keep that in mind! I find the contrast AF on the 5DIII and 1D X acceptable - yes, it's not like the m4/3 cameras, but compared to the early Canon LV, it's lightning fast! Okay, not really, but it has gotten much better.

True, and what I'm really hoping for are shots like these from Art Wolfe

Well, his postcard style often looks too hdr-ish and over-processed to me, but then again I know I'm too much on the neutral for some people's taste. Interesting site though, esp. for comparing my horse/frog shots (and I think I can compete with some).

Concerning the scenes you posted, the seal & esp. lions are great and what you can really do with wifi (or tethered), but the turtle would be unnecessary and difficult to frame via remote even if it moves slowly (proof: horizon problem). But I often see polar bear shots done by remote (like http://artwolfe.photoshelter.com/gallery/Polar-Bears/G0000BBQopsTJpsg), there recently even was a cinema documentary about it.

I guess I was talking more about the composition vs. the overall shot and most of these were done with the camera in hand other than the fox shot (according to his book it was a wireless remote shot). Also, they were shot on Velvia which is part of why they look they way they do.

Anyways, I'm going to give it a shot - my only issue is that while my desktop is a brand-new rocket of a machine I built, my laptop is an ancient 2009 Core 2 Duo with the original battery that gives me rough 3-5 minutes (really) of runtime. The processing power is decent, but needless to say I need more battery life... The question is whether to get a new laptop, new battery, or buy an external battery. I might experiment with squirrels in the backyard with a long extension cord in the near-term.

Good luck with your horse photos - you should really think about creating a book. I have done two now, and while they are a lot of work, it's rewarding and gives discipline to your work.

 

[Marsu42]

The processing power is decent, but needless to say I need more battery life... The question is whether to get a new laptop, new battery, or buy an external battery.

I'd get a win8 x86 tablet, they're fast, battery-saving and you can run all the usual programs on them (LR, PS, EOS Utility, ...). Having an external battery pack wouldn't hurt though esp. if you only need to carry it to the back yard

Good luck with your horse photos - you should really think about creating a book. I have done two now, and while they are a lot of work, it's rewarding and gives discipline to your work.

Actually this is the very thing that has been suggested to me more than once. The site your books are on looks really interesting, I'd need something in the EU though (preferably Germany)... I'll send you a pm concerning this.