Camera for structural inspections 5

[milkshakelake]

Anyone have a good solution for taking photos of structures? Problem: My iPhone takes the best pictures, especially in dark places. It doesn't look very professional to clients, though.

I've tried using Fuji X-E1 ISO 3200 F2.8 with shutter 1/125s, but the photos come out grainy and sometimes blurred because of the large aperture. I usually take a shot where my flashlight is pointed. I've also tried Sony RX Vii (more portable for tight crawl spaces and getting behind sheetrock) but have similar results. I'm wondering if I'm doing something wrong, because my iPhone simply takes clearer and more focused pictures. It has a mode where I hold up the camera for a few seconds in dark spaces and the results are usually good.

The other thing I was thinking about was using flash, but it would hurt the portability of the Fuji X-E1. And my poor Sony RX Vii can't keep up with recharging its flash with how many pictures I take, like 200 or so per building. It's not about the batteries, because I carry spares; it's about the time between shots.

 

[Celt83]

If you've got an iphone pro the lidar sensor aids the with the depth perception for some "smart" post processing when you take the photo. Also if you have the pro you can take advantage of that same lidar sensor for some rough point cloud capturing.

Point and clicks are almost extinct now that the phone camera technology has exceed what's capable at that price point. For the image quality, battery life, and ease of sharing I use my phone for all site photos.

 

[phamENG]

It doesn't look very professional to clients, though.

Nonsense. If they have half a clue about technology, they'll know how great cell phone cameras are. And if they question it, you can explain to them how it takes the best pictures, automatically uploads to a project file, features machine learning capabilities to sort and process photos, and saves the expense (that you'd have to pass on to them) of maintaining a professional photographer on staff with a van full of hardware.

 

[JedClampett]

I have a Fuji XP, but they don't make it anymore. Decent flash, good zoom, but the GPS is kind of wonky (you have to link to your cellphone). The batteries are wearing down faster and faster, but that might be because of the GPS. It was doggone cheap, but any replacement is upwards of $400.
You have to get used to turning off your flashlight or turning it away. Makes the pictures much better.

 

[skeletron]

I use to carry around a Lumix point-n-shoot for site visits. I observed similar resolution problems and, to be honest, it actually became a bit of a nuisance to carry around. I'd get back to the office and my photos would actually be just garbage compared to the 2-3 I took with the iPhone. I've switched to phone camera only. I don't think it's unprofessional in this day and age. Ultimately it is about the pictures and the information.

I liked the idea of a point-n-shoot but it didn't work out for me, and it was another thing to carry into tight spaces.

The best option, which is also not totally feasible, was having the drafter attend site with me. He ended up being a bit of camera-phile and took some of the best quality site shots I've ever reviewed. Used a Nikon D500 or D7500 or something. It was a bit big and bulky, but he was solely on site to take about 50-100 photos. The shots could have been straight outta an CSI episode.

 

[KootK]

It doesn't look very professional to clients, though.

I wouldn't sweat the optics of that. As a backup I do, however bring, my dive camera which works wonderfully. Durable, built for the dark, and built for the damp. Charged, I can get a full day of photo and video taking out of it. The newer ones can do wireless transfer too.

I don't feel that taking photos with my phone is perceived as unprofessional. What makes me look unprofessional is when my phone dies while I'm on site and I don't have another alternative. It may justbe my own organizational limitations but this has happened to me more times than I care to admit. I wind up either having someone else take the pictures, short changing the investigation, or wasting time charging up in my car or at a coffee shop. All of which suck of course.

 

[gte447f]

I agree with phamENG that a cell phone is perfectly acceptable for professionalism these days, considering the technology onboard those things. They are simply better. I guarantee that any photo you ever receive from a contractor is going to have been taken with a cell phone, and the same is probably often true for photos received from other engineers. That being said, I use an Olympus "Tough" series point and shoot, because it is, well, tough. It is much more robust and durable than my iphone.

 

[milkshakelake]

@Celt83 I do have an iPhone Pro. I'm not using point and clicks; the Fuji X-E1 has an APS-C sensor, which is probably 20x bigger than iPhone's sensor. The cameras cost about as much as the iPhone, and the lenses push it past that price. I'm wondering how my iPhone is so much better than these prosumer cameras. It's probably something to do with the software and post processing.

@phamENG It's all optics. A lot of these clients and developers are old school and are probably impressed by a serious looking camera, but you're probably right. I do have to set up an automatic backup feature; it's not simple on iPhone without using iCloud, Google Photos, OneDrive, or something similar, all of which have paid subscriptions. I'm looking into a self-hosted solution (Immich) for throwing the photos onto my servers when I'm in Wifi range.

@JedClampett When I turn the flashlight away, it gets too dark and the photos get grainy. I'm thinking of getting a dedicated flash unit if I decide to stay with the cameras instead of iPhone.

 

[gte447f]

Speaking of looking unprofessional, yesterday I showed up onsite for an assessment without a flashlight, and I had to use my cell phone as a substitute flashlight in a crawl space. Luckily, there was no one there to witness it.

 

[skeletron]

If it is purely for optics just get a DSLR with a nice camera strap and bag.

 

[milkshakelake]

@skeletron How did your drafter do that without using a tripod? My main problem comes from low light environments. The cameras I use are similar to the Nikon you mentioned and use the same size sensor.

@KootK Oh yeah, I've had cameras die on me, which is embarrassing. I bring two extra batteries all the time. I use my phone as backup, but I might just switch it around and keep the camera for backup.

@gte447f True, I think everyone is echoing that sentiment. I think I'll just switch to the iPhone and forget about the cameras.

 

[Tomfh]

I use iPhone for nearly everything, and occasionally a DSLR with telephoto lens for things out of reach of the iPhone.

 

[phamENG]

I've been mostly out of photography since before DSLR cameras became a thing (I'm only in my 30s, but I learned to take pictures on a camera with no batteries), but I'd guess the reason the iPhone is beating it is that they have different target use cases. The iPhone (and other smart phone cameras) are still pretty limited. The software has improved greatly to make digital zoom usable, and the other automated post processing is great. But the ability to change out lenses is where the big cameras shine. Try duplicating a 600 or 700mm telephoto shot with your iPhone. Probably won't happen. But that's usually not what we're taking pictures of.

That said, I have used a DSLR before - but only on jobs like a lighthouse I did on a remote island. Scaffolding wasn't really an option for the initial investigation, so I took a telephoto out and carefully documented the entire surface from the ground. But if it's just something in the room with me, my cell phone is all I use.

gte - happens more often than I care to admit.

 

[skeletron]

@MSL: I think he had a bit of a longer lens and a really steady hand. Big camera guy, though, so he was always doing the click, check the resolution, tweak, and then bang out masterpieces of site photos. I think part of the appeal was that I could focus on something other than pictures (still took some for my own record).

 

[milkshakelake]

I think based on these comments, I'm probably going to stick with the iPhone. I still don't know how it works its magic compared to my big boy cameras, but it works.

@skeletron Ah that's it, a steady hand and a love for photography. I'm usually fighting with the camera instead of loving it, and the other people in the office don't do photography, so we probably won't get to that level of immaculate crime scene shots.

 

[dik]

I've gone to tiny cameras... I take my Sony A6000 (real camera, but small) and use my A6400 for taking other pictures. They are excellent 'little cameras'... if I don't have my camera with me I use my Huawei P30 Pro... it takes excellent photos.

-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik

 

[GeorgeTheCivilEngineer]

Mostly I use the phone camera.

If it's a dedicated inspection and I need to get good shots on chimneys etc then the Nikon D3300 is fantastic. Being able to zoom in and then zoom in again on the screen at home (and is crystal clear) has been very useful many times.

Finally, I've a drone but I haven't used that much as it's a recent purchase and I'm still red-tape hoop jumping.

 

[TLHS]

Have those of you with the Lidar iPhones found it useful? I've considered that. Seems like a neat trick, but I don't know if I'd use the output much.

 

[phamENG]

I read recently they were getting rid of Lidar in phones. Something about it not being cost effective. But that may have just been a Samsung/Android thing.

 

[3DDave]

I suppose one big problem for conventional camera makers is the loss of market means a loss of development money. The cell phone makers have far more to spend, particularly on software. In addition, in this case, the typical advantages of larger cameras aren't useful. With a larger lens one can diminish the depth of field, producing that soft blur back ground and with replaceable lenses one can have far greater focal lengths than can fit into a phone. One can also use tilt-shift lenses for perspective correction.

Phones make up for that with tiny lenses that tend to make the subjects sharp. I suspect they also take many exposures for a single click and line them up to remove noise while also changing the exposure for each one to expand the range.

Where I expect any camera to excel is when mounted to a tripod, not just for reducing shake and blur, but also for giving the photographer time to compose the image - again, not something as critical in documentation.

One thing that should be part of this is the use of multiple flash segments, four to six of them, each fired independently for each exposure and located very close to the lens. Combining those images produces an outlining of each item by its shadow which would likely help in both establishing depth and discerning items that are close in appearance and separated in distance. I wish I could find the article/research paper that suggested it, but it's easy to see the effect by moving a flashlight and seeing the response in the shadows.

You can try getting a separate flash and flash trigger. The Vivitar 283 and 285 flash units come to mind and, driven by a suitable battery pack, will recharge nearly instantly. I put a 12 inch square fresnel lens in front of one from the focal point and could easily blast a large spot over 100 feet away.

It can be used to extend the range of the camera flash, but be aware that some cameras produce a pre-flash to estimate exposure and that will set off an independent flash giving a false impression.