I've had my iPhone for 18 months now, and for most of that time it's been the best camera I've had to hand – so I've taken thousands of photos. Most of them never left the phone, but now that I'm about to take a screwdriver to it (busted headphone jack) I thought I'd rifle through and see if there's anything worth saving.

Perhaps unsurprisingly: lots of cat photos. And so, here's 18 months in (mostly) cat-snaps.

First up, Ralph, clearly puzzled by the shiny new gadget being shoved in his face:

Shortly after getting the phone, I was off to Kyoto and Hiroshima – Ralph helped to pack:

.. but I left the new phone at home. On my return, Hunter was just puffing around being cute.

Next up, lots of photos of Helen and I packing. The cats helped out by snoozing on the boxes:

.. then came the terrifying day of moving house:

.. and further terror in our new place.

They didn't come out for a day. Suddenly, though, a Ralph appeared:

.. and a furball:

.. it took a while before they could deal with the concept of two floors, though.

Read the rest of this entry »

A few months ago I reviewed the Garmin Forerunner 405CX GPS running watch – click here for the full review – and over the last fortnight I've also reviewed the new, cheaper Garmin Forerunner 110 for work – I'll put a link here when it goes online. In case anyone's trying to choose between the two, though, here's a comparison of the key differences – there wasn't room to fit this info in the magazine copy.

First, size. From the top they look much the same (405CX on the left, 110 on the right):

But from the side you see that the 405's much bulkier:

It's the GPS receiver on the bottom edge of the 405CX that adds bulk – the new 110 has certainly been shrunk. If you have small arms the 110 might be more comfortable, but with the 405CX you have the option of using the velcro strap shown above – note that this is included in the box, but the Forerunner 110's strap cannot be removed or changed.

Next, features. The Forerunner 110 has the following:

• GPS tracking (obviously)
• Stopwatch
• Lap counter
• Auto lap (every given number of KM/Miles)
• Light
• Heart rate and calorie monitoring if you buy the model with a chest strap

The Forerunner 405CX adds quite a lot, but the key additional features are:

• Virtual partner (track your progress against a set pace)
• Distance workouts (run for X KM or miles)
• Time workouts (run for X minutes/hrs)
• Interval training
• Highly customisable display that can show just about any statistics or info you choose.

Of these I'd say the workouts and virtual partner are the ones I miss most when using the 110.

And what about controls? The Forerunner 110 is managed using four buttons: it's a simple system and works fine. The 405CX has two buttons, plus the touch-sensitive bezel, which acts as four more and also a controller wheel. The 405CX has more to control, of course – see above – but I actually find the touch wheel slightly fiddlier than the buttons of the 110. It works, and only takes a few tries to get used to, but the 110's buttons will be immediately simple for everyone making it a better bet for technophobes.

And, speaking of technology, there's the matter of connecting the Forerunners to a computer. Here's how it's done:

On the left is the wireless module from the 405CX, and on the right is the 110's USB clip. The 405CX is fiddlier to set up, as the wireless unit needs drivers installed, but once that's done once it's simple to use: put the watch near the computer, turn it on and your run is transferred. The 110's system looks simple – clip it on, sync the data – but I found the clip fiddly to attach and, on one occasion, the watch crashed losing all my runs. If you like to check in after each run, I'd say the 405CX's simplicity makes it worth the extra cash – you simply plonk the watch near the PC, get in the shower and when you come back it's done.

Cost and Conclusion

The recommended price of the Forerunner 405CX kit is over £350, but it's now available on Amazon here for just over £200. The Forerunner 110 is meant to cost £150 without the heart rate monitor or nearer £200 with, but again you can get the cheaper version for around £110 here. The 110 is very good value, and does all the basics well, but all things considered I'd say it's worth paying more for the 405CX – slightly fiddlier controls aside, you get far more for your money: the virtual partner, workout settings, a better display, a range of straps to suit your wrist in the box, and most importantly the simpler wireless PC sync system.

Note: all Amazon links here are affiliate links, so I get a few quid if you buy from one. Amazon's prices are way lower than the RRP, and it's where I bought my 405CX.

I've experimented with merging multiple photo exposures together a few times now. Four years or so ago I managed to cobble two photos from a Pentax *ist DL together with the help of a lot of layer masking, and the result was okayish. In 2007, and armed with a copy of Photoshop CS3, I managed to bodge two handheld shots of the Eiffel Tower together into this:

.. which I still quite like, despite it being rather rough around the edges. This weekend, though, I've been testing Photoshop CS5, which includes an improved "Merge to HDR Pro" tool that can attempt to automatically remove some of the blurring caused by objects that move between exposures. And so armed with that, a tripod and a camera body that can auto-bracket exposures, I gave it another shot.

First I tried the docklands. Between getting harassed by a Barclays security guard and rained on a bit I did manage to get one shot of the dome:

.. and this shot of one of the docks, which came out fairly well:

But with next to no wind nothing served to test the ghost removal. And so to the south bank of the Thames near London Bridge, where it was blowing a gale and raining on and off. First I tried this postcardy shot:

.. and, as it turns out, the ghost removal worked a charm: without it this image contains three planes (top left) and a blur under the bridge where the boat was moving, but with the ghost removal option ticked both are sharp. For something a bit harder I tried some trees – these were blowing in a wind that was strong enough to smack me around the face with the camera strap:

Again, the tool did a fantastic job here – the trees are a tiny bit messy, but so much better than the green-blur-covered original. All in all, I was thoroughly impressed – getting a sharp HDR merge has gone from a task that takes a few hours to a matter of minutes on a fast computer. And although some HDRs can look really, really naff, I did get a shots that I quite like, including this:

And an elephant:

And a ruined church:

.. so the results don't have to be too lurid. All things considered I can't see myself using this technique that often, but for the occasional shot of buildings when there's a suitable wall or tripod available it could be a nice way to get a more complete image.

One of the great things about working on a computing magazine is access to a lab full of all sorts of geeky stuff – including a microscope. This belonged to PCW Magazine, may she rest in peace, but on Wednesday Anthony managed to get it working again, and so during lunch we rigged up a camera to take some photos. Here's the ball on the end of a .5mm Bic Cristal biro:

.. and the embossed letters on my (surprisingly spangly) credit card:

.. and the end of a pin on an Athlon CPU, which as it turns out is made of two metals:

We also managed to shoot some video. Here's the minute hand of my watch, ticking along 1/2600th of a revolution every second:

It's quite impressive. The camera setup we have is somewhat jury-rigged at the moment (picture here) but I'm hoping to find a proper camera adapter – Nikon used to make Coolpix camera mounts for this SMZ800 microscope. In the meantime, more pictures of stuff up close can be found here.

Cats, flowers, cats, flowers. Need to photograph something new.