26 September 2008

Nik Software and U-Point Technology

I have recently become a very big fan of the Nik Software product range. Apart from a great suite of filters and tools in their product range the one aspect of their toolset that I find most appealing is the U-Point technology. With U-Point and Nik tools I have been able to achieve retouching in Photoshop that I would never have attempted before. Retouching in Photoshop is an art and can be quite difficult depending how far you wish to go. However Nik and U-Point have taken this black-art and turned it into childs-play.

U-Point control points were designed to allow photographers to make various adjustments directly on their images without ever having to create complex selections, masks or layers. The degree to which an image can be manipulated is now only superceded by the simplicity with which this can be achieved with U-Point. U-Point isn't revolutionary but more an evolutionary step as one could undoubtedly recreate the effects of U-Point in Photoshop; albeit with complex masks, layers and creative selections which naturally take much longer to achieve and more prone to error.

With U-Point powered Control Points, there is no need to ever create these complex selections, masks, or layers. With simple click and drag functionality, photographers can work directly on their image to control virtually any aspect of their photographic edits. Depending on the toolset the control point is being applied to, you can for the first time control specific elements of an image (such as the sky, skin, grass etc) independently of the rest of the image without the use of masks, layers or other complex procedures. With a control point you can adjust a specific area of object very accurately and by adding more control points to the image the U-Point blending technology works it's magic considering all enhancements and subtely merging these adjustments together. What used to be beyond my ability as a Photoshop user is now simplicity itself. The adjustments made are so visual that your post-processing speeds up dramatically allowing you to adjust colour and light as easily as capturing the original photograph or adjusting exposure. The end result is an image that better suits your intentions or desires.


So, what exactly is U-Point and how does it work then to make your life so much simpler?
With traditional post-processing performing retouching usually involves adjusting pixels at the RGB level or by using complicated and fancy selection tools to mask off objects or aspects of an image. Once these accurate selections are made (which is a very laborious and time consuming process) you then need to apply one or more appropiate filters such as levels, curves, color-balance etc. You also need to manage the interaction between these filters as they applied so that they blend seamlessly and you don't introduce artifacts or banding.

U-Point however changes this process as adjustments are made using a single method that is simple to use and extend. With a Control Point simply click on an area (or object or region) of an image that you wish to enhance in some way. Then by simply adjusting sliders left or right with the mouse you can effect control over your image depending on the underlying filter.
Currently the following Nik Tools allow for U-Point Control point adjustments:
· Nik Viveza: Brightness, Contrast, Saturation, Hue, Red, Green, Blue, Warmth
· Nik Sharpener 3.0: Sharpening Strength, Structure, Local Contrast and Focus
· Nik DFine 2.0: Contrast Noise and Colour Noise
· Nik Color Efex 3.0: Opacity Slider to localise filter effect
· Nik Silver Efex Pro: Brightness, Contrast and Structure

Once a Control Point is placed, the Control Point automatically:
· Reads RGB and location values for each Control Point that is placed on the image.
· Calculates additional values of hue, saturation, brightness (lightness), and image detail to create the complete and unique set of U-Point pixel characteristics.
· Incorporates the U-Point pixel characteristics into a central intelligent blending function. U-Point technology’s central blending function enables the user to adjust the entire range of parameters to control color and light (including, Red, Green, Blue, hue, saturation, brightness, contrast, and warmth, as well as the size of area to be controlled) using a set of sliders associated with each Control Point.

When an additional control point is placed on the image, U-Point pixel characteristics for that specific control point are calculated and are then factored into the central blending function. As more control points are placed on the image, the central blending function becomes more intelligent, enabling even more refined and precise changes in the image. The user controls color, light, contrast, and tonality by placing more control points on the image at specific locations. The control points are interdependent and communicate to combine and blend enhancements naturally, which can be easily adjusted or undone at any time, regardless of the order in which the change was made. The important thing is that the overall adjustment is seamless and professional.

Most of the U-Point properties are quite obvious although the size slider may need a bit more explanation. When the size slider is at 100% the Control Point effects all the pixels on your image. Lower values than 100% restrict the effect to smaller areas around that Control Point. By clicking on the 'Show Mask' icon at any stage you can visibly see the exact area that is to be affected by your Control-Point and refine it accordingly.

Once your Control point adjustments are in place and your filter settings have been applied most of the Nik product line now allows you to apply those changes as a Smart Object in Photoshop. If you haven't experiemented with Smart Objects in Photoshop I strongly recommending doing so as in this particular instance it's a great way of being able to modify the respective Nik Adjustments at any stage during the editing process if you change your mind. Of course you can also apply the effect of the Nik adjustment layer and brush in the changes on a seperate mask if needed.

U-Point is already available in Nikons CaptureNX, Apple Aperture and of course Photoshop. As an image retoucher I would really enjoy it if Adobe would introduce this U-Point technology into Lightroom as soon as possible. However it does seem unlikely that they will do so given the way they are forging ahead with their own selective adjustment tools in Lightroom 2.0? It isn't as powerful as the Nik technology however in my opinion.

If you haven't had the chance to try out the Nik Software range of products I strongly urge you to do so. The software unfortunately isn't cheap but the results are certainly impressive. The results may not always be perfect but Nik does a far better job far quicker than I could do with my current knowledge of Photoshop, layers, blending-modes and masks.

Be advised that in no way am I affiliated with NikSoftware, Nikon, Adobe or any of the other products mentioned here.

22 September 2008

Backup strategies

Have you backed up your computer lately? Have you backed up all your important and precious photographs to another hard drive; a CD or DVD? If not, stop reading this right now and go and do it. I'm serious. What are you still doing here? Stop reading and go make copies of all the data that is important to you? Use whatever mechanism you have available to you but go and do it now.

Aah, so you're back. How did it go? It's a bit painful and laborious isn't it which is probably why we tend to put it off and put it off until....well it might be too late.

The fact of the matter is that hard drives fail. How often do they fail? Well a respected Seagate hard drive comes with a 5 year warranty but on average a given hard drive will have an MTBF (mean time between failure) of 3-5 years if you're lucky, sometimes a lot less than that. So the simple fact of the matter is that the hard drive on which all of your photographs are now residing will fail at some point in the not so distant future.

Fortunately there are a plethora of solutions in the market-place to satisfy both the hardware and software requirements of automated backups to alleviate some of this pain. It is important however to formulate a strategy to make the process as seamless, accurate and painless as possible. Because there is such a variety of options available to you, you should make up your own mind as to how best to go about it. All I can do here in this blog is to relay my own experiences and what works best for me currently. It's important to note in reading my personal strategy however that I have a large investment in hardware and software of all kinds that does help the process. But this is not a requirement. The most fundamental part of any backup strategy is to ensure that you have at least one other working copy of your data at all times. You should preferably have two (or more) copies but that is not always feasible or practical. If you're completely paranoid one of those copies should be off site.

In my working machine at my office I have four hard drives which are utilised in the following fashion. Two drives are 160GB 10,000 RPM Western Digital Raptors. These drives are configured for RAID-0 with the sole purpose in inmproving performance as these super-fast RAID-0 devices allow the file system to be distributed across all disks and reduce latency for both read/write operations. What is important to realise is that RAID-0 is NOT a backup or redundancy strategy and this is an important consideration when talking about full system backups (later on in this article). In the event of failure of even one of the hard drives in a RAID-0 configuration it will be almost impossible to recover as the data on any one drive will be corrupt and incomplete.

The two other drives in my system are not setup for RAID but are configured with one drive being storage for my raw digital negatives that are in a work-in-progress status. The other drive stores the photograph derivatives that have been processed either in Lightroom, DxO Optics Pro or Adobe Photoshop and subsequently prepared for web and/or print output. These two drives are constantly backed up using synchronisation software and completed photographs are then deleted to make space for new incoming work. I use an application called Allways Synch and this software allows you to migrate only the changed files or folders from source to a backup destination. The software also allows for dual or one way synchronisation as you please however it works best for me by simply ensuring that my backup drives have an exact copy of whatever has been placed onto the RAW or DERIVATIVE drives at any stage. I use Allways synch in this manner to ensure that my Lightroom Catalogs, Digital Negatives, layered Photoshop files, web JPG output, print prepared TIFF files, documents, saved games etc are always backed up. Since the installation of Allways Synch I have saved about 32 hours of file copy operations as the application ensures that it only copies the new or changed files. That's also 32 hours of hard-drive thrashing that has been avoided increasing the longevity of those drives. There is no manual scouring of files and folders to determine what exactly needs copying over. The application is scheduled to run daily at midnight and this way I can walk away from my machine knowing that it will be securely backed up.

So where does Allways Synch backup to? It currently writes to a Drobo Unit that has four 1 terabyte (TB) drives in it. The Drobo unit utilises a data striping redundancy mechanism that is very similar in nature to RAID-5 however it works much better. It's better and simpler because with the Drobo unit you can mix and match drives as your need and budget allows. The unit can hold up to four drives of a maximum of 4TB in size each for a maximum storage capacity of 16TB per unit. However let's assume starting off with only two drives; once they start to full up the Drobo Unit alerts you to the fact. You can then simply slot in another drive of whatever capacity and the unit then makes that space available. It also then automatically and redundantly stripes data across all three drives for you in the background. Remove a drive and Drobo knows how to recover from just the remaining drives. Nothing could be simpler. With RAID-5 all drives have to be of equal capacity and recovering from a RAID-5 crash is a long process as the damaged drive is rebuilt from the working ones. It can be done, I recently had a hard drive crash on my Intel NAS RAID-5 server and it was simply a matter of removing the damaged drive, replacing it with another similar drive (500GB in this instance) and wait the requisite 24 odd hours while that drive was rebuilt. It worked well, it just took a lot longer than the Drobo and the Intel doesn't support drives of varying capacities.

So the Drobo is where Allways Synch backs up to. Because there is redundancy already built into the 4 1TB drives that's where most of my photographs now reside. If I was completely and utterly paranoid then these drives in itself should also be backed up to some other device (DVD for instance) and stored off-site. However because I am intrinsically lazy and confident that I can recover these photo's if I need them I have left it as is. Besides I can't honestly imagine backing up 4TB to DVD!! Some really very important photographs however (such as the wedding photo's for Renett and Johann are backed up to a seperate drive - my Intel NAS RAID - to be absolutely sure that data is uncorruptible). Previously I used a Digital Asset Methodology espoused by Peter Krogh in terms of creating RAW 'buckets' of 4.2GB each that could be backed up directly to DVD but since I have moved my DAM catalogs over to Lightoom 2 I have dispensed with that idea as I'm not writing to DVD anymore. For more on a DAM philosophy go to Peter's web site - The DAM Forum.

It has been proven also that backing up to DVD is not a fool-proof exercise. Writing DVD's can be prone to failure and the longevity of DVD's is also in doubt. Will we be able to read these DVD's in years to come? Look at those with tape drive backups of their data - they currently have no way of retrieving that. More simplistically can you still play those Betamax video tapes anywhere? With BluRay now replacing normal DVD's who knows what the future of this technology holds? So for now, I personally have dispensed with DVD backups altogether?


It acutally might be worth taking a step backwards for a second to talk about the process I follow when importing images from my cameras CF cards or the Epson P-5000 which I use to store photographs on when in the field. The process is effectively the same; it's just that in the field if a CF card is filled up then I will offload that to the Epson P-5000 so that I can reuse the card if necessary. If a card is filled up and not backed up to the Epson then it is placed in a Gepe card safe 'upside-down' so that I know it cannot be used until offloaded to either the PC or the Epson. Once a card is placed right side up in the card safe then I know that it must always be formatted in-camera before re-use. When back at the PC I begin the import process into Lightroom. During the import I convert my RAW images to Adobe's Digital Negative format (.DNG). I have adopted DNG across all my photographs for longevity and am comfortable that Adobe will continue to support and enhance the DNG format. During the import however for safety's sake I make an automatic backup copy of the images to a IOMega 250GB Firewire drive (supported by the Lightroom import process). This is just a temporary measure as due to the small nature of this drive the files are only kept there until that drive begins to fill up and then I delete the oldest imported files as we go. It's merely a safety net in case something goes wrong during the import process.

So what about the Intel NAS RAID-5 Server. This server has 4 500GB hard-drives configured as RAID-5 for data redundancy and recovery. This server comes into play with full-system backups and backups of all other purchased software, music and any other important data that I have. Most importantly for the purposes of this discussion however, the Intel NAS server holds the full-system backups of each PC in my office. These full system backups are generated using Acronis True Image Home which runs on each workstation. This application is not scheduled although in truth it could be. Once a system has been built to spec with all the requisite software (Windows, hardware drivers, Photoshop, Lightroom, Office etc) then I will use Acronis True Image to image the entire hard drive (remember those RAID-0 drives?) to the Intel NAS server. In this way if one of the system volumes should ever fail then that machine can be rebuilt from scratch quite quickly and will be up and running as before.

I have also recently just installed a Microsoft Windows Home Server on my network to determine it's efficacy. This is only a 180-day trial so we'll see how it goes but in essence all my machines on the network (all 6 of them) are automatically backed up each night by the server. These backups are stored on the Windows Home server and again should any machine fail it can be restored quite quickly. I have to ask myself the question though, shouldn't I be backing up those full system backups to the NAS server? Perhaps I will set that up tonight?

Does this all sound paranoid? Possibly? Overkill? Probably? But then again, I take comfort in the fact knowing that my data is secure and redundantly stored in the event of failure. I say again - hard drives fail! It's just a matter of time. Have you backed up your data lately?

19 September 2008

Microsoft AutoCollage

I was searching on Google recently looking for some collage building software for my wife Wendy. She has previously attempted to prepare a collage for one of her work functions in Photoshop and whilst it can certainly be done it is very time consuming and laborious. Fiddling around with multiple layers and layer masks takes patience and the inclination to do so.

There are some good collage packages on the web and I came across the Microsoft Research AutoCollage program which I want to tell you about today. This has just recently been released and after giving it a whirl on a few collages I must say I'm suitably impressed at the speed and ease at which you can create collages. It's not perfect but it's versatile, fast and it certainly couldn't be easier to use?


Microsoft Auto Collage is not a free program but you can download a trial version and play around with it to see if it works for you. The trial version will work for 30 days and will watermark the collage. If you wish to purchase the software it retails for USD19.95 on the Windows Marketplace website.

Start your collage building by opening the application and clicking the Image Browser ellipse '...' to browse to a folder that has your collage pictures. At the moment the software is restricted to a maximum of 25 photo's in a collage and there is no way to specify which of the 25 you wish to use from a particular folder. My suggestion is that you create a seperate folder in which you place your selected photographs.


Before creating your collage it's worth spending a little time setting up the environment. Do so by clicking on the Options button and selecting the size of your collage output. There are currently some limiations in terms of output size and you are restricted to imperial measurements or your desktop size. Click on the Advanced button and adjust the relative sizes of the image that you have ranked higher than the others. AutoCollage reads the EXIF data and determines the star ranking that you have assigned to your image using the Microsoft photo tools or some other image editing application such as Adobe Lightroom. You can also adjust the collage image overlap to taste. No doubt you will come back to this screen and adjust these settings once you get a feel for how the application operates.

Click the Input tab at the top and be sure to turn on Face Detection. Although not fool-proof this does stop the AutoCollage rendering process from obscuring faces during image overlap. When you have face dection on Auto Collage will draw yellow-boxes around the faces it can recognise during the import process.

Once you have the preferences setup be sure that the slider reflects the correct number of images otherwise you will get a warning message and an option to create a collage of the correct number of images. This slider seems totally redundant to me but nevertheless there it is. I guess it remains to be seen how Microsoft utilise this slider in a later version? When you're ready to generate your collage press the Create button and your collage rendering will begin by showing a revolving carousel of images as well as a progress bar on the top right. This process is incredibly quick for the work (blending and compositing) that AutoCollage is doing but then again with a maximum of only 25 images the process shouldn't take that long at all.


If you don't like the Collage result you could possibly adjust the star-rating of your images or simply press the Create button again and a new rendering will take place. The final collage can then be exported as a JPG, sent to friends via email or saved to your desktop as your wallpaper.

As a first release AutoCollage has some misgivings and these include:
· Maximum of 25 images in a collage
· No mechanism for specifying an image that you want dead-centered
· Small paper sizes up to a maximum of 8"x10" and would also be ideal if it supported metric paper sizes (A4 and A3 for instance)
· It would be nice to see the star-rating of images in AutoCollage so you know their relative rankings beforehand


However not withstanding these problem areas; for an incredibly simple 'quick-and-dirty' collage, it's hard to beat. Other applications have more features and slicker output perhaps but cannot match the ease of use at this stage. From an application point of view the Microsoft Research engineers have done some great stuff with face-recognition, automatic alpha blending and image segmentation. It's great to see it in action. Have fun.
P.S. Thanks to Stacey and Clive for letting me use photographs of their children that I just happened to have on my PC at the time I was creating screen-shots.

Addendum (2008-09-28): It turns out that I am completely wrong about how image ranking occurs for Auto Collage. Simply put it's a WHOLE lot more complicated than using star-rating of images. For a more 'scientific' explanation review this AutoCollage paper or visit the Microsoft Research website.

18 September 2008

Photokina 2008 and the Hype


Photokina 2008It's that time of the year again and photography forums around the world are buzzing with all the hype surrounding Photokina 2008. Photokina is the worlds biggest trade fair for photographic and imaging equipment and is held every two years at the Cologne trade fair in Germany. Leading up to Photokina (which opens on Tuesday September 23rd) the industry is abuzz with rumours and new releases.

It's quite amazing to witness all the hype and excitement that leads up to the start of this fair and often it's hard not to get caught up in it. As the camera manufacturers start releasing snippets of information about their new models the rumour mill begin to work overtime and dreams up all kinds of outlandish wishlists and feature-sets. When a manufacturer does finally release their specifications for a new camera the whiners and complainers start to kick in moaning about this missing feature or that unwanted functionality. Anything to beef up their post count on their favourite forums I guess? Sometimes it's quite laughable to beat witness to.

So let's focus on some facts here and talk about some of the news that has caught my interest and in particular Canon news as that is where my investments lie.

Canon's biggest announcement so far is of course their upgrade to the 'venerable' 5D. The Canon 5D Mark II was possibly overdue according to some pundits and by and large I don't think it has failed to impress. You can read a full review of the camera here on the DPReview.com site and even a hands-on summary. Key features of course must be the 21 mega-pixel full-frame sensor and the inclusion of HD 1080 video capture. Ironically both of these features are the ones causing most consternation amongst the photographers that I've spoken to.

They're saying: "Do we really need so many mega-pixels. Why are Canon chasng the mega-pixel marketing myth when we are still missing some key features".
They're also saying: "Why do we have video capture in a still camera. Why is this included, which is pushing up the overall cost of the camera when in fact R&D could've been better spent focusing on the refinement of some other essential features?"

In summary, here are the Canon 5D Mark II's Key Features
∙ New 21.1 Megapixel CMOS sensor with improved EOS Integrated Cleaning System (E.I.C.S.)
∙ New Full HD 1080 resolution movie recording
∙ 3.9 frames per second continuous shooting
∙ High performance DIGIC 4 providing superb image quality
∙ Maximum 310 large JPEG images in a single burst with a UDMA card
∙ 3.0” VGA (920k dots) Clear View LCD
∙ ISO 100-6400 (expansion from 50 up to 25,600)
∙ 9 AF points + 6 Assist AF points

I'm inclined to agree with some of the complainers. The 5D is traditionally a wedding photographers camera (yes, that's a generalisation I know) and many wedding photographers really don't need 21.1 mega-pixels. The video - while a nice feature to be sure - still comes across as a bit of a gimmick and not a real feature needed by hard core pro's that will likely use this camera. It certianly seems more like a marketing feature and an attempt to keep up with the likes of Nikon and Sony? Proper dedicated video cameras will do a better job for some time to come. Let still camera's take still photographs. Let video camera's take movies. No doubt the technologies are merging, but is it ready for prime time? I'm not so convinced?

To me the 5D Mark II is still missing some basic key features that the community has been going on about for a long time. Where is a simple one-click mirror lock up button for those landscape photographers? Why are there so few focusing points? Why are the focusing points so poorly arranged as not to facilitate the focus-recompose problem. Canon needs to spread their focusing points out a bit more, more in line with good composition (rule-of-thirds and the like). Improved AF functionality is still not there. Why not spend more money on f/2.8 vertical and horizontal focusing sensors or more focusing points? 3.9 frames per second still seems very low for a camera in 2008. Granted it's moving 21.1 megapixels of data with each frame but that's not the point is it? A 16mp camera at a frame rate of 8-10 frames per second would probably be more welcome? The 5D Mark II has a Digic 4 processor which is great, however given the other misgivings a dual Digic 4 might have been better received as well for better image processing at a faster rate. Perhaps Canon reserve this kind of high-end functionality for the 1D range?

Nevertheless, for photographers in the market for an upgrade at this point I am sure that the 5D Mark II is quite compelling on many fronts and will probably be snapped up at it's very reasonable price of USD2,700. For a 21.1MP camera compare this price to the Canon EOS-1Ds Mark III and those of us that bought this camera are hurting a bit at this price differential. That's the nature of Moore's law of techology I'm afraid.

What else is interesting from the Canon stable at this stage. Lens wise they've come out with a Canon 24mm f/1.4 L II USM lens. Ok, but it doesn't really catch my eye I'm afraid to say - more of a niche lens? At the PMA in March the 800mm f/5.6 was announced. Now that's much more compelling but for a whole bunch of different reasons for me in particualr being primarily a nature/bird shooter.
I have to be honest and say that for a point-and-shoot Canon's release of the Canon Powershot SX10 IS looks very interesting indeed. This looks like a great camera. I'm not in the P&S market but if I was - very nice indeed.



Leica have released their incredibly expensive Leica f/0.95 50mm lens. Ridiculously priced at £6290 and yet really an amazing piece of light gathering equipment. I can't really imagine using a f/0.95 lens? That's better eyesight than an Owl?
Sony have released their own high-end camera, the A900. At 24.6 megapixels they have also entered the megapixel war with vengeance and certainly there are some compelling reasons to look into the specifications of this camera if you don't already have a significant investment in Canon or Nikon glass?
Nikon's D90 also looks great no doubt.
For the consumer there's a veritable plethora of choices in the marketplace at this stage provided you have the spare cash and the wherewithal to make the right choices.

There are all sorts of other interesting oddities coming out of Photokina, like's Sandisks' 32GB CF cards, Epson P-7000 portable hard drives/video players and Adobe's announcement of Adobe Photoshop CS4 which is due to take place on the 23rd.

Now I was complaining about the rumour mongering at the beginning of this blog, so perhaps I shouldn't even begin to discuss Photoshop CS4, but what the hell; let's tread dangerously shall we?

Adobe have been extremely tight-lipped about CS4 and there really is quite a lot of excitement pending this release. There are naturally many nay-sayers, back-biters and critics alike about the Adobe product line but the fact remains that Photoshop is the most widely used imaging product in the marketplace. More people; professional and amateur alike use Photoshop to adjust, touch-up and manipulate their photographs than any other product. Adobe themselves have diminished some of that market share lately with the release of Lightroom and then you can throw into the mix Apple's Aperture, Corel's product line and many other smaller simpler applications. However, Photoshop; the behemoth that it is still remains the king (for now).

So what does the rumour mill have to say about Adobe CS4?
Two of the most sigificant features to look out for at the announcement on the 23rd are 64-bit support and the off-loading of some of the intensive processing on the graphics processing unit (GPU) of today's highly sophisticated graphics cards.

I have a big investment in my desktop of course with dual 64-bit processors and a very sophisticated NVidia GeForce 8800 GTX with 768MB RAM (yes I'm aware that this GPU is a bit old now but still delivers a massive computational punch which seems a shame to waste on high-end games and video only?). If Adobe Photoshop CS4 can see a marked improvement in overall image processing time with 64-bit and effective GPU usage then I think this will be a huge win regardless of any other improvements. Running complicated lighting filters and touching up massive 100MB tiff files could become a dream with proper use of all this computing power.

It's important to realise that a simple move to 64-bit processing is not a panacea to all of Photoshop's woes. The application doens't simply become faster overnight. It has to be effectively engineered by Adobe to make proper use of the dual-pipeline architecture and a larger addresable memory space to be more effective. A properly implemented 64-bit application will be able to process in-memory those massive stitched landscapes without having to rely on so much disk swapping which is notoriously slow and this is what in general hurts Photoshop. (Can you say roll-on solid-state drives?)

It goes without saying that Adobe has plenty of scope with which to imporve on their current CS3 release and you just have to read some of the complaints at the Dear Adobe site to be bemused and enlightened.

Roll-on Photokina 2008! We look forward to seeing what other exciting releases you have in store for us!

Please feel free to leave me some feedback by clicking on the comments hyperlink at the top of each blog entry (just under the date). Would love to hear your thoughts. Many thanks.

06 September 2008

Photoshop Gallery

Tried out the new Photoshop Express Galleries today by creating my own gallery there at: http://ianweatherburn.photoshop.com

It has some nifty features and some great ways of show-casing your images in a slide-show or 3D wheel and the like. I can't help but feel that CoolIris' Piclens gallery wall is simpler, easier to use and faster.

Anyway I created three albums so far for anyone to see. You can never have enough exposure can you? You can view these albums either via the main site or the specific album links below:
Wildlife Fine Art
Birds Fine Art
Landscape Fine Art

The Photoshop Express tools and gallery are still in beta, so I think there are still a few issues to iron out.
For one thing, it's very slow to do certain operations and sometimes the processing goes walk-about and never comes back.
Also it does appear to be very bandwidth intensive especially when loading up the galleries.

Of course this gallery doesn't dispense with my normal web galleries at:
http://www.ianweatherburn.com
but I thought it might be interesting to try.

Let's see where Photoshop takes this tool. Curiously enough at this stage there doesn't appear to be any Lightroom integration which is a major oversight but I would imagine that it will be forthcoming. That will be nice.

Also the ability to get more creative slide-shows might be nice. And well, as for the choice of possible music to add as a background to your slide-show; that's kind of laughable at the moment.