One of the things I helped "show off" at the Expo conference was a new controller that I ran across. Actually, *I* didn't run across it - my friend Gregory Taylor did, and had one sent to me. It is the Manta controller from Snyderphonics, and it is one of the most interesting units I've used in the last five years.

The Manta is a thin, bus-powered USB device that speaks a special variant of the HI protocol; Jeff Snyder (the creator) built a special Max object that makes for a simple interface. Apparently, Jeff spent a fair amount of time with Buchla touch keyboards, and came away with the inspiration for the Manta. It provides a 6x8 hex grid of touch-sensitive pads, two virtual sliders and four buttons.

None of this may sound particular ground-breaking, but in reality it is outrageously inspiring. What makes it different from all other controllers is its feel - it is an etched metal plate, resulting in a device that doesn't require an active button press, but provides enough feedback to invoke a visceral sense of "playing" the device.

Each of the pads has an LED light behind it, so you can see the notes you are playing. But the roughness of the pads produces the most important feedback, and allows for playing without having to look at the device. When I first tried the Manta, I was immediately reminded of playing an autoharp, and I set out making a Max patch that would emulate that instrument.

After a little tweaking (driven by my 8 year-old son, who demands perfection), I came up with a nice, simple patch for autoharping. It provided some of the nicest music I've done in ages - mainly because it provides a different feel from any electronic instrument I've used.

At the Expo conference, I met up with Brad Garton, who had also approached the Manta from a guitaristic perspective. He chose to implement a machine-gun metal guitar patch, with requisite feedback and dive-bomb pressure controls. His patch and mine made for a hilarious combination: his Eddie Van Halen to my Melonie. Nevertheless, we turned a lot of people on to this crazy and unique controller.

Apparently, Jeff is deep into grad school finals, and won't have time to produce these units in quantity for a while. But if you get a chance to see or play a Manta, run (don't walk) for that opportunity. If you happen to be in Colorado, I'd be happy to show it off. Much fun, and and extraordinary example of instrument/controller design.

For those of you who missed it, the most recent set of new features for the iPhone included the ability to download podcasts directly to your device’s iPod app without connecting to the computer. Essentially, they have provided a pre-formatted list of all of your available episodes — accompanied by “download” buttons that add those files right to the official player app on the iPhone and iPod touch. That’s way more functionality than you can provide in a mobile version, and it’s all set up for you already.

As an iPhone user, this is great: it allows me to add a new podcast directly to my phone as soon as I hear about it — not to just start streaming it, but to actually store it for later listening, which duplicates the while “timeshifting” part of podcasting that you used to need the computer for. It also lets me add the latest episodes of a show to my phone without making a trip to my desk. When I’m traveling, this is essential, as my iPhone is synced with the iTunes library on my desktop computer, not my laptop.

As a podcast producer, it gets my content exactly where I want it: on the device that a potential listener is carrying with them right now, exactly when they are in the mood to listen to it. It removes the “I’ll listen later” mental excuse that people so often forget about, and it also provides the “media instant gratification” that iPhone users are now used to (for better or for worse).

I’ve set up Boston Behind the Scenes to do this, at least partially. I don’t have a browser-detection redirect set up, but I do have an “iPhone” link at the top of the page. I also have a mobile-friendly URL set up: http://bostonbts.com/iphone (on a computer, this link will just take you to the iTunes store — try it on your iPod or iPhone). Both lead directly to the iTunes app when clicked.

If you have an iPhone or iPod touch, do you like this setup? Would you prefer to have producers do this, make a mobile-specific site, or just leave their sites alone?

Saratoga, CA - April 1, 2009 The Sound Guy, Inc. has announced the release of PayPerNote 1.0, an advanced note management program.

PayPerNote analyzes audio or MIDI inputs and allows performers to view exactly how much they're getting paid on a per-note basis.

"Musicians are very generous and often get caught up in the moment, not realizing how little they're getting for their music," said Sound Guy CEO Earl Vickers. "Throughout history, recording artists have been taken advantage of by record companies, club owners, and even their own fans. Without some kind of visual cue, it's easy for a performer's mind to wander toward chord progressions or song meanings instead of focusing on the bottom line.

"During the Great Depression, musicians made less than a penny a note, and they had to keep a running tally in their head if they wanted to calculate their average return. Unfortunately, many performers still make less than a penny a note; however, with PayPerNote software, they can see at a glance if they're overplaying and need to dial it back."

PayPerNote lets artists set measurable goals for each performance. Given information about ticket prices, artist's percentage, attendance and show duration, PayPerNote displays a running estimate of per-note income. At the same time, artificial intelligence software computes the optimal note rate and flashes the screen if the performer plays too rapidly.

In a pay-to-play situation, musicians can see exactly how much they're paying for the privilege of helping the club make money. PayPerNote can also track online peer-to-peer networks and estimate how much money would have been made for each note of a given album if customers had actually paid for their music instead of stealing it.
PayPerNote's Audience Mode helps give concertgoers a deeper appreciation of the performance. Listeners often take blazing displays of virtuosity for granted and rarely have any idea how many notes were heard for each dollar of ticket price. In these challenging economic times, a band's survival may depend on making sure that customers understand they're getting their money's worth. By directing PayPerNote's display toward the audience, musicians can provide a subtle reminder of how much the fans are receiving - sometimes thousands of notes - for each ticket dollar.

PayPerNote works with Macintosh OS X and Windows XP and Vista.

The Sound Guy, Inc. is the manufacturer of Backwards Machine, ReSpatializer, and the award-winning SFX Machine family of audio effects plug-ins, including the new SFX Machine Pro for RTAS. For more information, visit http://sfxmachine.com .

Previous press releases may be found at http://www.sfxmachine.com/presskit/press_releases/more_press_releases.html .
# # #

Not everything about iPhoto is transparent. There are lots of goodies hidden beneath its attractive facades. For example, there's a recovery slider and clone stamp tool hidden in the editing tools. If you're using Faces, did you know that you can drag a face to the Library pane to create a Smart Album of that person? And because of Places, iPhoto can actually serve as your geotagging tool.

There are lots of things that Mac users need to know about iPhoto '09. Over the coming weeks I'll share some of those tips. Stay tuned.

Korg NanoKontrol

From what I can tell, the NanoKontrol is the most popular of the Nano series controllers. It is also probably the most intense device of the lot, featuring nine "channels" of slider/knob/button sets, a set of control buttons and a scene-saving system. I first ran across one of these at a seminar where I was teaching; one of the students brought the control up and dared me to use it as a control surface for a Max-based drum machine I was making. I was shocked by the size of the device, but decided to give it a swing. 2 minutes later, I was using it as the surface for the module, and was sold on this as a take-along control surface. I've subsequently used it for Max programs, Ableton Live sessions and even as an emergency remote for a Logic Pro session. I don't take this unit everywhere (because I seldom find myself traveling without a number of controllers), but when I need a lot of controls in a very small area, this is a goto device.

NanoKontrol Relationship Level: Good Friend

Korg NanoPad

Where the NanoControl might be the best seller, the NanoPad is the device I saw everywhere at the NAMM show in January. Featuring 10 pads, an X-Y pad and some mode switches, I saw it everywhere - used by the drummer in the Victor Wooten NAMM/Jam band, as a front end for all sorts of Groove Machine-y software bits and connected to the laptop of almost everyone else. I love a good drum pad, and this was going to be my Prom Date of the Nano series.

Alas, it was not to be. If you've ever met me, you know I'm not really an, um, petite individual. Normally this doesn't mean much when it comes to music gear, but in this case I just couldn't get over the top of it. I felt like a team of Shriners trying to squeeze into the little car before the parade - just too cramped for words. The next time I went to the music store, I asked to try out the Korg PadKontrol - it was just right, and the device I really needed. I guess that, when it comes to percussion pads, I'm a little more picky about having it feel right vs. having it tiny.

I bought the PadKontrol and decided to make the NanoPad go away. I put it in the mail for a friend of mine; giving the USPS a chance to bend, fold and mutilate the thing well past its manufacturing tolerances. Luckily, it is cheap enough that I could shrug it off and return to my PadKontrol for an evening's pleasure. It's not like we were married or something...

NanoPad Relationship Level: Bad Breakup Due to My Cheating

Korg NanoKey

This is the device I was least excited about: a two-octave keyboard that initially showed all of the charm of a cheap pencil case. I got a good deal on the whole set, so I picked it up - even though I was sure I'd never use the darned thing. I mean, it rattles when you shake it! That's never a good sign...

Alas, it won my heart with a combination of simplicity and portability. It doesn't try to do more than it can: it is two octave of clackity keys (moderately velocity sensitive), quick-access octave-switching buttons, a Mod button set (for Mod wheel emulation) and a CC-mode switch that I never use. There isn't much there, and there shouldn't be. It is simple as sin, but oh so very useful.

It's the portability that makes it My True Love. When traveling, I normally take either an M-Audio Axiom 25 or (if I'm cramped for space) an Edirol PCR-1. The Axiom is actually useful as a keyboard, but the PCR really isn't. On the other hand, the Axiom, while short, is still big - hence, not very friendly traveling companion. The PCR is thin, but still big; it is simply too big for my in-flight backpack. So it becomes part of the check-in pack, where it has to compete with audio interfaces, cable stacks and tube socks for room in the suitcase. It also plays pretty terrible, so I'm not all that jazzed by taking it along. Hence, I'm finding myself, more often than not, traveling without a keyboard.

The problem is that it leave me plunking out basslines and chords on the laptop keyboard, which is about as musical as a broken arm. No matter what they try, plinking on a QWERTY keyboard does not feel like making music. Hence, the reason why the NanoKey has become my betrothed: because the keyboard you will take with you is the best keyboard to have. Not only can I stick the NanoKey in my backpack for the flight, but I can actually use it during the flight. I get some crazy looks by the Frontier Airlines staff, but I couldn't care less...

NanoKey Relationship Level: True Love Conquers All

So there, after living with these devices for several months, is my view of the Nano series of Korg devices. A brilliant set of devices, but ones that may ebb and flow in your personal workflow. I don't doubt that there will be people that love the Pad and hate the Key, but these devices are so inexpensive that I can't imagine anyone not giving them a try.

No doubt these are tough times - times that can get one down, emotionally and creatively. But heck, are you going to let a tanking stock market sink your digital imaging creativity? Hope not!

However, if the winds have been knocked out of your creative sails, here are a few ideas that may stimulate the creative artist within. At the very least, I hope they distract your from the stock market chart, which looks like a bad - a very bad - histogram.

1)
Make an on-line book. I just made one with Mpix that I’ve been planning to make for about two years: Life Lessons We Can Learn From Mother Nature. What fun, not only making the book, but learning the software. Come up with a theme, pick your best shots, and get published!

2)
Test-drive a plug-in. Hundreds of plug-ins are available via the Web that expand the capability and creativity of Photoshop, Photoshop Elements, Aperture and Lightroom. Most are available for a free trail. Download a few and stay up to midnight creating one-of-a-kind effects. To get started, check out the Plug-in Experience - a site I started just for fun. Send me a plug-in picture and I’ll help to make your more famous!

3)
Go on a one-lens adventure. Challenge yourself. Go on-location with only one lens and see what kind of magic you can create in camera. You may be pleasantly surprised.

4)
Paint with light. Sit someone down in a completely dark room. Set your camera on a tripod. Set the ISO to 400 and the shutter speed to 10 seconds. Release the shutter with the camera’s self-timer. Now, with a flashlight, paint the subject with light. You’ll have to experiment to get your timing and painting techniques down - but when you do, you’ll love the creative results.

5)
Team up. Go on a shoot with a friend. From the same spot, try to take two totally different photographs.

6)
Go wireless. On-camera flashes are okay for snapshot. For more creative flash photography, get a wireless remote, which allows you to fire an off-camera flash placed in a much more creative position - for more dramatic lighting.

7)
Slow it down. Indoors, outdoors, during the day and at night, set your camera to a slow shutter speed and see how you can use motion to add a sense of movement to a still photograph.

8)
Break the Rules. For an entire day, break every photographic rule that you have ever heard about. Open your mind.

9)
Play with custom functions and picture styles. If you are like me, you probably don’t take advantage of the custom functions and picture styles on your camera. Well, guess what? They can actually help you take more creative images.

10)
Switch styles.
If you usually take landscapes with a wide-angle lens, take a few shots with a telephoto lens - which will isolates the elements in the scene. If you usually take people and pet pictures with a telephoto lens, take a few shots with a wide-angle lens for more of an environmental photograph.

Hey, if you have a few CS-4U ideas, please post them!

Best,
Rick
P.S. If you have Photoshop CS4 (Creative Suite 4)Extended, play around with the 3-D effects. Now that's a CS-4U (Creative Stimulus for you) tip that is totally cool and totally fun! Also, immediately after applying a filter, fade the filter for additional creative effects (Filter > Fade Filter).

Participants were first asked to identify moments of visual innovation on small sticky notes first, from the cave paintings to the proliferation of the iPhone, and then annotate those events on larger notes that would be used independently. This allowed the specific events to be organized in a timeline, while allowing the trends to emerge independently of chronology. Thus ideas across the board could be focused with a visual end-result. Given that the discussion was about innovation in visualization, the experience became noticeably meta.

The system employed in the session allows a safe space for people to come up with ideas in a collaborative way, fostering creativity, and allowing them to be organized in more than the obvious ways. It also allows for an end result that can be used as a jumping off point for future discussions and their iterations. In the hallway here at the conference, there's a mural that Clegg created which traces the evolution of culture and technology from 1925 to present, from the perspective of the life of computer pioneer Doug Engelbart.

The longer exposures captured the details in the shadows, but blew out the highlights on the cliff tops and the sky, while the shorter exposures rendered the sky acceptably, but lost all nuances in the reflections in the river to darkness. My plan was to combine the exposures to create one image with the best characteristics of each individual exposure.

Yosemite Afternoon, photo by Harold Davis. View this image larger.

HDR

Combining multiple captures to create an image with an exposure range beyond that possible in a single capture is known as High Dynamic Range imaging, or HDR for short. The trick is to compress the extended range into a single image that is pleasing, will display on a monitor, and is reproducible. Note that the exposure latitude within a single RAW capture also gives rise to the possibility of using HDR techniques using different versions of the one RAW file as the input, a technique that I’ve dubbed multi-RAW processing.

Hand HDR

Whether combining different exposures, or different versions processed from a single exposure---or even both these techniques at once---my approach has been to work in Photoshop to use layers, masking, the Gradient tool, and the Paintbrush tool to combine the variants. You can see an example of the results of this hand-crafted approach to HDR in the six-exposure blend that I used to create Yosemite Morning, taken the day after I shot the series used to create the Yosemite image that accompanies this story.

I'll be writing more about the details of my hand HDR process in an upcoming book---I also teach the technique in workshops---but for now let me mention some downsides: it is labor intensive, time consuming, can look funny if the layers aren't masked very carefully, and can be close to impossible to achieve in areas that involve complex interconnected details in mixed light.

Photomatix

Since we live in an age that tends to want instant results, most people try experimenting with software the does the HDR for them. I'm no exception, but I've been unimpressed with Photoshop's HDR automation.

So I was excited recently to get to play with Photomatix, which is probably the leading HDR software. The Yosemite image above, and the floral close-up below were both created in part with Photomatix. As you'll see, the words *in part* are crucial to understanding Photomatix's place in my scheme of things.

View this image larger.

With Photomatix, HDR generation is a two-step process. You open the images in Photomatix, and the software generates an HDR composite. Then, in a process called "tone mapping", you tweak the settings used in the mathematical algorithms that reduce the tonal range in the combined image in order to generate a single attractive and reproducible version.

Workflow

As a practical matter, I found Photomatix's rendering of my RAW files unacceptable. So my workflow went like this: I opened the set of images in the Adobe Camera RAW plugin, applying the same settings to each (experimenting with different RAW conversion settings on each file included is also possible, of course, although it adds more variables and complexity). I opened the files that resulted from these conversions in Photoshop, and saved them in the TIFF format (because Photomatix doesn't read native Photoshop PSD files).

Next, I opened the TIFF files in Photomatix and generated the HDR composite. As the documentation warns, the HDR image doesn't start out looking too good, so I worked to tone map it for more attractive characteristics. When I was satisified that the image was the best it could be, I saved it as another TIFF file.

Combined Approach

Some parts of the resulting HDR image were pretty wonderful (for example, the trees on the right). Others, not so good (the sky had a burnt, burnished quality, and the water was murky). I ended up layering-in versions in Photoshop to fix portions of the Photomatix generated image (the same general remarks are true of the floral image that also accompanies this story).

If my workflow with Photomatix sounds like a lot of work, you are right, it was. Then again, I'm happy to work if it helps my work (if you catch my drift).

Life is simpler but less rich

Also, my life would have been simpler in Photomatx if I'd shot in-camera JPEGs. The truth is that the markets for my work often require extremely high resolution, and JPEGs just won't do. I'm almost never happy with JPEGs compared to my results when I do the RAW conversion.

Conclusion

Paradoxically, I'm left with an appreciation both for what Photomatix can do with HDR, and for the limitations of the software. I'm sure I'll be using this software to process some portions of my imagery, just as I'm sure that my final versions will require hand work and layer masking with other versions of the files.

If you are an image creator who cares about your craft, the limitations in HDR software amounts to a good reason to learn hand HDR---combining many different versions shot at different exposure times, and processed individually from hand-tweaked RAW conversions, using layer masking---even if you expect to primarily be using automated HDR programs like Photomatix.

View this image larger.

Before I get to the steps in the progression, let me say that I've noticed a pattern in my work of moving from a literal subject to an abstraction, with many variatins along the way. Some examples: Oakland of My Mind; From Architecture to Fantasy; Stove Top Abstractions; Masked Avenger; Changes; Cherry Medley; Weaving. An early version of my manifesto claiming new medium status for digital photography combined with post-processing is When is a Photo Not a Photo?

Sometimes I want to show you the beginning and the process, other times I'd rather leave it mysterious. Please let me know which of these series works for you, and which doesn't. And whether you are interested in the process or would just like to see the beginning (the photo) or the end (the photo transmogrified).

Also, I'm thinking of offering an intensive workshop in my post-processing techniques. Basic Photoshop skills would be a prerequisite. The location would be somewhere in the San Francisco area, with dates to be determined. Please drop me an email if you're interested, and let me know if you'd prefer a one day or weekend workshop.

Anyhow, back to the story of the tin can progression, I went out the back door to photograph flowers in the rain. On the way I spotted luminous cans waiting to be recycled.

By the way, both photos in this story are with my Nikon D300 on a tripod and my 200mm f/4 macro lens and 36mm extension tube, stopped all the way down for maximum depth-of-field. I used manual exposure metering, and erred on the side of under exposure by about 1/3 of a stop for a "proper creative exposure" and more saturated colors.

I started with this interior lid, converted to monochrome in post-processing:

View this image larger.

Next, I photographed rain drops on this red can:

View this image larger

So much for photography! The green version comes from the red, and is an inversion of the A channel in LAB color mode. The blue version comes from the green version via the Hue & Saturation adjustment slider. With all three I had an RGB triad:

With the primary colors in place, it was a matter of repeated channel operations in LAB color space with conversions into RGB for Difference and Exclusion blend modes. Of course, all this could not be done without the latest Bruce Springsteen blaring on my headsets. Here's the sequence as it flowed:

View this image larger.

View this image larger.

View this image larger.

View this image larger.

Mid-January, yet another interesting software project was introduced by the Google labs: the Google Quick Search Box. According to its project page, Google Quick Search Box -- or "QSB" for short -- "is an open source search box that allows you to search data on your computer and across the web". That is a big understatement.

The lead developers of the Quick Search Box project are Nicholas Jitkoff and Dave MacLachlan, and not a single blog post I have read about QSB so far fails to point out that Jitkoff is the mastermind behind Quicksilver, one of the most ingenious productivity utilities available. The current version of QSB is still "just" a developer preview, but it already gives a good idea of where this project is headed, and where its differences to, and similarities with, Quicksilver lie.

This article explains in detail how Quick Search Box works. Hence, if you are already familiar with Quicksilver or its cousins -- Objective Development's LaunchBar or Many Tricks's Butler --, you may wish to skip ahead to the comparison between QSB and Quicksilver.

Finding stuff: basic searching with the Quick Search Box

QSB's basic operation is similar to that of Spotlight: you summon the Quick Search Box with a keyboard shortcut, and as soon as you start typing your search term, QSB starts displaying what it considers the best matches for that search in real time, hinting at the top match in gray letters inside the text entry field.

A fresh search in Google Quick Search Box: the five best matches plus a related Google search are listed; the top match is selected and hinted at in gray type in the search entry field; more matches are accessible via the "More" item; and the path to the selected item is shown at the bottom of the window (which window, unfortunately, cannot be resized).

Via a preference setting you can choose to see the three, five, or ten best matches. If QSB finds more matches, it says so at the bottom of the list, detailing what it has found, e.g., "More[:] 6 Apps, 1 Docs, 1 Other, 2 Webpages". This being an official Google application, the list of best matches always includes an item that queries google.com for the term you have entered and then brings up the standard Google results page in your browser.

On a side note: as I found out when I started using QSB, I often "park" my thumbs on my Mac's Command keys before completing a keyboard shortcut to trigger a command. As a result, QSB often came up even when I didn't want it to, because the default trigger for summoning it is tapping the Command key twice. This problem was easily solved by changing this shortcut, though: I'm using Command-Space now, which I had used previously as my Quicksilver trigger key combo (just in case you're wondering, I've now set Quicksilver to Option-Space, the Spotlight menu to Control-Space, and the Spotlight window to Control-Shift-Space).

Back to using the Google Quick Search Box: via the up and down arrow keys, you can select any of the top matches, or -- by moving the selection downwards beyond the "More..." line -- bring up the complete list of results, which -- again just as in Spotlight -- are sorts neatly by the type of objects found. Even in that list, some search results may be hidden, and by selecting the "Show all [...] ..." line and hitting Return, those hidden items are displayed as well.

Showing 'all' search results, sorted by type.

To open an item, you just hit the Return key: this launches an application, opens a file, visits a URL in the browser, sends a search query to google.com, plays an iTunes track, etc. As a handy navigation aid, at the bottom of the window QSB displays the path to the currently selected item. Clicking on any of this path's segments takes you to that location.

Part of GQSB's core functionality is that it learns what you mean when typing in a search term: whenever you open Mail after searching for "m", that increases the search rank for "Mail" for that search term. After using QSB for a while, the software will, thus, have learned your preferred abbreviations for certain applications, contacts, files, what have you, so that the search results are in line with what you think should be the best-matching for a specific search term.

Selecting search targets: searching in all the right places

QSB lets you choose which types of objects to include in the searches, and in which areas of your hard it should search for files. As examples, the list of Searchable Items in the preferences include your Address Book contacts, your Home Folder, your Documents and Downloads folders, your iChat Buddies, etc. Interestingly, Spotlight Results are also included on that list, so you need only use QSB as your single interface to query both search "engines".

The Searchable Items preferences let you select where to search and which types of data to search for.

The key difference between how the Google Quick Search Box and Spotlight look for matches is that only the latter searches inside files. Which is why I have not activated the Spotlight Results option in QSB, because Spotlight usually finds way too many matches for my searches to be useful. Instead, I use QSB to search by file name, and only if I really need to search the contents of files to find a choice morsel of data do I resort to Spotlight.

In addition to the list of searchable items, QSB offers two additional search-related options, named "Show website suggestions from Google.com" and "Show search suggestions from Google.com". When checked, QSB gathers website and search suggestions for your search term live from google.com and displays them inline with the other search results.

Google website and search suggestions shown inline with other search results.

Just like the google.com website, QSB supports some "special search" features: for example, typing in a U.S. zip code and hitting Return displays the current weather for that location, and there's a built-in calculator that displays the result of a mathematical equation right inside the search field.

The calculator in Quick Search Box: the result is updated live while you type and edit your equation.

Digging for information: refining your search results

A key feature of the Google Quick Search Box, and its most prominent advantage over Spotlight, is that you can easily refine your search by "drilling into" the data. Here's an example: when, after selecting a folder in a search result, you hit Tab (or right-arrow), the results list changes to display the files and folders contained in that folder. Shift-Tab (or left-arrow or Escape) take you back "up" one level, enabling efficient navigation along the whole folder hierarchy.

This also works in a similar fashion for other types of data like music tracks stored in iTunes's library: search for an artist's name, select it in the search results, and hit Tab to see all albums by that artist. Select one of these albums, hit Tab again, and you will see all tracks on that album.

When refining your search this way, QSB essentially changes your search context. Thanks to the Quick Search Box always displaying the previous context -- i.e., the search result that you are "digging into" -- in a lozenge-style box in the text entry field, you always know where you are (see the blue box around "QuickTime Player" in the text entry field in the next screenshot below).

As mentioned earlier, hitting Return will open the selected item in the search results list. However, what makes the Quick Search Box really shine is that, just like Quicksilver, it lets you apply many more actions to the selected search result than just opening it.

Now do something with what you found: applying data-type-dependent actions

When using Spotlight, there are exactly three actions you can apply to an object in the list of search results: open it, reveal it in the Finder, or show its Info box (triggered via clicking / Return, Command-clicking / Command-Return, and Command-I, respectively). The Google Quick Search Box is more flexible in this regard by offering a much broader choice of what to do with the items found during a search. It does so by maintaining "action objects" which appear in red in the search results. Which actions are available depends on the selected item's type.

For files including applications, there are four core actions: Show in Finder, (open in) Quick Look, Get Info, and Open. To apply any of these, hit Tab after selecting a file, and choose the desired action. The real gain in productivity, however, comes from actions that go well beyond this "application launcher" functionality.

Quick Search Box's four core actions for files. Like all actions, they are displayed in red.

Imagine you would like to call a friend of yours at work. That phone number is in your Address Book and you decide to display it in large type on your Mac so you can see it from across the room where your phone is located (for this example's sake, please bear with me for a second here…). With OS X's on-board tools, you would likely search for that contact's name in Spotlight, open the contact in Address Book from Spotlight's search results, grab the mouse and select "Large Type" from the work phone number's context menu (if you haven't stumbled over these menus yet, just left-click on the "home", "work", "mobile", etc. tags in Address Book).

Here's how to achieve the same result with the Quick Search Box: search for the contact's name in QSB, display that contact's details by "drilling down" via the Tab key, select the desired phone number, and apply the "Show Large Type" action. All without ever opening the Address Book application and without taking your hands off the keyboard.

That is a very simple example, so here's one from Quicksilver (that, as of now, is not yet possible with QSB): let's assume you want to email a file to someone. You would open your email client of choice, create an empty email, type in the recipient's name, attach the file, possibly via dragging-and-dropping it from the Finder, and send off that email.

How about this: search for the file in Quicksilver (or, in future, in QSB), search and apply the "Email to..." action, search for the recipient, and up pops a fresh email with the file already attached and the recipient entered in the address field. Takes less time, is more effective, feels more streamlined. Oh, and if you want to attach more than one file, just append your file searches with commas: this works flawlessly even when finding files in different folders.

Actions to adjust the Mac speaker's and iTunes's volume. These are examples for stand-alone actions that are not applied to a search result.

There's more to come: Quick Search Box's support for plug-ins

A key aspect of the Quick Search Box's architecture is that it is based on plug-ins, which allow expanding both QSB's search capabilities as well as adding new actions. Currently stashed away on a Debug pane in the software's preferences, you can browse the list of plug-ins that are included in QSB by default.

The list of plug-ins is displayed on the Debug preferences pane. As of now, there is no way yet, to install additional plug-ins.

Since the code to the Google Quick Search Box is open-source, anyone will be able to write such plug-ins for QSB, and the programmers' imagination is the only limit to what QSB will be able to do with the data on your computer.

Just while I was preparing this post for publication, a new release of QSB showed up in Google Software Update, and a new feature, among others, is support for Twitter: if you have a Twitter account, you can add it on the Accounts preferences pane, and send status updates right from within QSB. While that won't replace a dedicated Twitter client anytime soon, it is a nice proof-of-concept to show in what ways the Quick Search Box can be expanded via just popping in a plug-in.

Father and son: how the Quick Search Box compares to Quicksilver

As mentioned in the intro, one of the two lead developers of the Google Quick Search Box was the person behind Quicksilver. While both share the same core philosophy, there are some key differences between the two -- some of which are very welcome, some not so much.

Quicksilver's search panel features two separate panes for objects (like files, contacts, etc.) and actions. In some cases -- e.g., for the "Open with..." action -- it will display a third pane. Unlike QSB, Quicksilver does not sort the search results by type.

Compared to Quick Search Box, Quicksilver offers...:

More powerful search -- The one difference that Quicksilver users (including myself) will likely consider a major step backwards, is that, in its current implementation, QSB only supports literal searches, and it always starts searching at the beginning of a word. Quicksilver is much more flexible in that it searches inside of words, and it even searches for the individual letters in the search term as long as they occur in the order they were typed in.

Here's what that means in real life: when searching for "cal", QSB might find "calendar" and "too many calories", i.e., any object whose name contains words that start with the literal string "cal". Quicksilver, however, would also find any object whose name contains the individual characters "c", "a", and "l" anywhere in that name, as long as the characters are contained in the name in that order. Thus, in addition to what QSB would find, Quicksilver would also find, say, "iCal", "my name is carl", or even "backup of master image files", as well. (You can see another example in the Quicksilver screenshot above.)

I find Quicksilver's search capabilities extremely handy for using intuitive abbreviations for applications, say "c" for iCal, "du" for Disk Utility or "sd" for SuperDuper!, and I sincerely hope that, eventually, QSB's capabilities will equal Quicksilver's in this regard.

Separate panes for objects and actions -- While QSB combines both objects and actions in a single list, Quicksilver uses dedicated panes for objects and for actions. Thanks to actions showing in red in QSB's results list, they are easy to distinguish from objects, but it remains to be seen if this setup works as well as Quicksilver's separate panes once Quick Search Box supports as many actions as Quicksilver does already.

More flexible search targets -- What parts of hard disk QSB will search are determined by the pre-defined options in the Searchable Items preferences, whereas Quicksilver lets you freely add folders to its catalog of search targets. As a result, QSB cannot search folders located outside your Home folder, because these are not included in the list of Searchable Items. If, for whatever reason, you store important and/or often-used files in the Shared user folder or in non-Mac OS-standard folders, this will be a problem.

It would be nice if QSB would eventually support custom definitions as options for the Searchable Items, ideally in a format that could be easily shared.

Triggers -- Quicksilver supports a selection of triggers like keyboard shortcuts or mouse gestures, which you can use to execute custom actions. This makes some tasks even faster than Quicksilver or QSB already make them, and it is great approach to creating system-wide keyboard shortcuts, for example for launching AppleScripts. This is something I definitely would love to see in QSB.

More complex and complicated preferences -- Quicksilver is a very flexible utility for power users, and this is reflected in the complexity and sheer number of preferences, which easily overwhelms not only new users, but often also stumps seasoned Quicksilver veterans.

Just for triggering and basic search functionality alone, Quicksilver lets you configure all of these settings, making them much more difficult to grasp than the few options Quick Search Box offers.

Jitkoff and MacLachlan have succeeded in massively simplifying the preferences panes in Quick Search Box, and at least to me it does not feel that anything of major importance is missing. If giving up gratuitous configurability -- configuring the exact behavior of how the search field is summoned, what QSB looks like, etc. -- results in making the application simpler to use and also more accessible to new users, I'm all for it.

Downloading plug-ins from within the application -- Quicksilver has a built-in "plug-in store", so downloading and installing plug-ins to expand Quicksilver's feature set is as easy as clicking a check box to activate the respective plug-in: if it is not installed yet when it is activated, Quicksilver just does all the heavy lifting in the background and informs the user as soon as the plug-in is ready for use.

It is probably too early to lament the lack of this feature in the Quick Search Box, but I'm hoping it, too will make it into the release candidate.

Reaching a first-impression verdict: Quick Search Box is something to get excited about

Quick Search Box is still at development preview status: it is not feature-complete, some search results don't make any sense, it crashes, it freezes, and sometimes it just refuses to leave the screen. And yet, I am already very excited about the Google Quick Search Box: its user interface is much cleaner than Quicksilver's, it adds useful new features like central accounts support, and, unlike Quicksilver, it is simple enough to appeal to non-power users. As a result, QSB could bring the productivity promise of Quicksilver to the masses of Mac users.

Considering the differences between both utilities, I hope to see Quicksilver's more flexible search algorithm, keyboard triggers, and "plug-in store" to eventually find their way into QSB without making the user interface, including the preferences panes, any less simple and tidy than they are now.

Additionally, and this is an important point, the user documentation for Quick Search Box definitely must be more complete and easier-to-grasp than Quicksilver's, especially for the plug-ins. True, the basics of using the Google Quick Search Box are very simple and straight-forward. But its true power lies in the functionality offered by the plug-ins, so every single one of them should come with a well-written explanation (that is easy to understand even for an entry-level user) of which types of data supports and which actions it offers. Simply listing how many search interfaces and/or actions a plug-in adds (as shown on the Debug prefs pane in the current version) simply is not enough.

Despite all these things that QSB does not offer just yet, it has already replaced Quicksilver as my primary search UI, and I can't wait to see what the developers will come up with next.

What QSB's future holds: install it, try it, contribute to it

To get started with the Google Quick Search Box, visit its project page on Google Code. In the related wiki, you can get information about first steps with the software. If you feel like contributing to the project, or at least providing constructive feedback, join the GQSB discussion group.

And now for something completely different...

In recent weeks, news about changes at O'Reilly Media have been making the rounds. As part of these changes, all blogs published by O'Reilly will be combined into one central blogging hub. To select posts that cover topics which interest you, you will no longer (have to) visit dedicated sub-sites, but filter a single blog stream via a tag cloud.

Consequently, this post has been my last one for the blog on the Digital Media > Macintosh website Writing for this site has been a lot of fun, and I sincerely hope you found (at least some of) what I wrote worth reading. Having said that, I will use this opportunity to make a personal change as well: while I will keep writing for O'Reilly -- you'll most likely find my posts under the "mac", "audio", or "iphone" tags --, I will no longer blog on a weekly basis, but publish less regularly in favor of more comprehensive and in-depth posts. Maybe I'll see you there?

What will I be up to beyond blogging for O'Reilly? Probably the best way to find that out is to follow me on Twitter. Well, at least until I have taken the dust shields off my personal website again, that is.

Thanks again for stopping by, valued reader. Here's hoping that we'll be seeing each other again in some other corner of the 'Net.

Jump back to the beginning of the main article.

As part of the interview, Hannah and I proposed an assignment: Photograph a flower in a unique way—in a way that nobody’s seen before. The top three submissions are to be chosen by me and the Photo.net staff, and will get special recognition. I'm extending an invitation to participate in this "assignment" to you. The deadline is February 23, 2009.

If you are not already a member, you do need to register with Photo.net, but registration is free. Once you've set up a Photo.net account, you can add your assignment submission as follows: Your flower photo series must be uploaded to your Photo.net gallery in a folder titled "Harold Davis Flower Project" and your best single photo added to the comments section in the Harold Davis interview. Note that when you post a comment, you are given an option to add a photo. The image added should be no wider than 700 pixels. The photo must also be in your Photo.net gallery for consideration.

Further discussion about your assignment (should you choose to accept it) below.

View this image larger.

Here are some of my thoughts about the assignment:

Please bear in mind that one of the key requirements for this assignment is "originality"; that is, this is a flower as it has not been seen before. I'd like to see images that are technically imperfect but very experimental.

This is an "assignment." My request is that you go out and shoot for it rather than posting an image from your stock files.

In an interesting side discussion thread about the assignment, there are a number of good comments and the complaint that winter is not the best time to photograph flowers: "So, this assignment is really only for those that are in the Southern Hemisphere or have access to a green house or conservatory?"

Here's my response in part: True, I live in California where there are flowers in my garden most of the year...BUT some of my best flower photos involve inexpensive flowers from Trader Joe's, available all year round. Here's a recent Trader Joe's special. Also, winter frost creates great effects on flowers like this thistle.

So there are many ways to render unusual flower images even if you live in territory buried under whiteness, and without a florist. Think expansively, and don't be too literal about things! Logic is the enemy of the creative unconscious. At the same time, as poet Randall Jarrell put it, "Art being bartender is never drunk."

View this image larger.

My thought was to create a simple image of cherry blossoms against a white background. The elegance of the composition would be determined by the intersecting lines of two cherry branches.

View this image larger.

I went out with camera, tripod, and pruning sheers, and ended up creating the effect you see indoors on a light box. Here's a luminance channel inversion of the image in the LAB color space:

View this image larger.

Here are some cherry blossom images of d'année passées:

2006: Cherry Blossom Special; just getting to know cherry blossoms with digital:

2007: Cherry; playing with turning a photo of a cherry blossom into a "watercolor":

2008: Sunburst; experimenting with sensitivity (ISO) and cherry blossoms:

It's sometimes instructive to look back through one's work, particularly when there's such a strong (and seasonal) annual affinity for a particular subject like these cherries. I don't think photographing cherry blossoms will ever bore me!

As a Photoshop instructor and author, I need to be skilled at using both Mac and Windows machines. And like most of my Photoshop instructor friends, I use a stylus and a tablet for maximum brush control. For my Mac, I use a Mac Book Pro, and I tote my WACOM table everywhere I go. For my Windows machine, I use the Lenovo W700 Think Pad. What's especially cool about this machine is that is has a built-in tablet and stylus. How cool is that.

What? You say you'd like a table in a Mac. Well check out Axiotron to see a tablet not in a Mac but on a Mac :-)

If you have never used a stylus and tablet, I suggest you check out one - maybe at Photoshop World which is coming up in Boston in March. Once you use a stylus (which offers control like pressure sensitivity), I think you'll never go back to clicking with a mouse.

You can check out some of my tablet/stylus retouching examples in my O/Reilly book, Face to Face.

Take care,
Rick

My process of working on photos after they've been taken is an intentional effort to up the ante on this kind of visual metamorphosis. One sequence started with this White Hellebore:

Starting with this straight photo, I began the process of transformation:

Green Variation, photo by Harold Davis. View this image larger.

After taking the first photo, I let the hellebore flower soak for a couple of days in a sushi dish. The petals became extremely transparent, and I photographed the wet ensemble on a light box.

The green variation (above) and the blue variation (below) are further changes of state using Photoshop. These are LAB color space inversions with channels applied to the inversions in a variety of blending modes.

The blue version strikes me as very psychedelic, almost an emphatic presence in the flower, while the green variation is more concerned with textures. In the green transmogrification, the flower has become a textile.

Blue Variation, photo by Harold Davis. View this image larger.

Check out the recent Hannah Thiem interview with me on Photo.net and related discussion.

Some other post-hoc metamorphoses: Alstromedia Medley; From Architecture to Fantasy; Leaf Civilization; Oakland of My Mind.