|
GWBBQ posted:On top of calibrating your monitor, you have to profile your printer. If you scan with silverfast, you can have it print out a calibration page, scan it, and it generates an ICC profile for your printer. I haven't done it since I only have SF for a slide scanner, anyone tried it? Scanner-based profiling is super lovely and not even remotely accurate. If you have a printer that's otherwise completely unusable it might be an improvement, but you're way better off just paying for a proper profile (assuming you're not using an Epson, in which case you should just use Epson's profiles).
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2011 17:30
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 22, 2024 13:06 |
|
|
Zhentar posted:http://www.lensrentals.com/rent/calibration/colormunki $40 for one time use is a lot compared to $160 for a lifetime. All of my research points to calibrating at least once a month if I am remotely serious about having a properly calibrated display. It seems I should just bite the bullet and purchase another tool for my arsenal. Am I mistaken? And is buying a $160 spectrophotometer like bringing a knife to a gun fight? GWBBQ posted:On top of calibrating your monitor, you have to profile your printer. If you scan with silverfast, you can have it print out a calibration page, scan it, and it generates an ICC profile for your printer. I haven't done it since I only have SF for a slide scanner, anyone tried it? If I am not printing myself, my printer should be able to supply me with a profile or something, yes? I am going to check the place out in person today and will be asking them about it but I imagine if my monitor is calibrated appropriately then their super-dee-duper printers will have the correct profiles. mdtyson fucked around with this message at 18:37 on Jul 28, 2011 |
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2011 18:31
|
|
|
GWBBQ posted:On top of calibrating your monitor, you have to profile your printer. I have a Canon Pixma Pro 9000 and I never have a problem when I use Canon paper. I tried using some Illford and downloaded their ICC profiles off their site, but I keep running into WYSIWYG problems. I'm guessing I need to make my own profile for that paper? I don't print often and Canon paper is good and priced decently so I never bothered to fix the problem. Then again I got a big pack of 13x19 Illfort that I don't want to go to waste. mdtyson posted:$40 for one time use is a lot compared to $160 for a lifetime. All of my research points to calibrating at least once a month if I am remotely serious about having a properly calibrated display. It seems I should just bite the bullet and purchase another tool for my arsenal. Am I mistaken? And is buying a $160 spectrophotometer like bringing a knife to a gun fight? You're better off buying one and having it around. I think it'd only make sense to rent if you're a business and can charge someone else for it and write it off. You're going to at least get a couple years out of it, probably more. quote:If I am not printing myself, my printer should be able to supply me with a profile or something, yes? I am going to check the place out in person today and will be asking them about it but I imagine if my monitor is calibrated appropriately then their super-dee-duper printers will have the correct profiles. If you're sending out photos edited on a calibrated monitor out to a good lab, you shouldn't need to do anything more. That's their job. You could get the ICC profiles from the lab and Soft Proof your images, but from everything I heard, Soft Proofing doesn't work and is a waste of time.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2011 20:10
|
|
|
Haggins posted:You're better off buying one and having it around. I think it'd only make sense to rent if you're a business and can charge someone else for it and write it off. You're going to at least get a couple years out of it, probably more.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2011 20:17
|
|
|
evil_bunnY posted:Calibrators is the kidn of stuff you buy with your photography friends. Before I moved we shared one between 3 people. Great idea. Seems I'm on the right path then - to buy a calibrator. Should I just go with the most popular of my searches and buy it on Amazon or does someone have great first hand knowledge of why I should choose one over another?
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2011 20:26
|
|
|
I've a quick question, I was told about a good deal on a Tamron 17-50 2.8, with the caveat that it was a nikon, no worries I thought, I'll just get an adaptor so I can use it on my Canon 600D no problems. Upon the arrival of both items, I notice that it just reads the aperture as 0. This is the adaptor that I bought, is it a problem with the cheap adaptor I bought or will I have to adjust the aperture in another manner?
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2011 06:12
|
|
|
Cassa posted:I've a quick question, I was told about a good deal on a Tamron 17-50 2.8, with the caveat that it was a nikon, no worries I thought, I'll just get an adaptor so I can use it on my Canon 600D no problems. Upon the arrival of both items, I notice that it just reads the aperture as 0. This is the adaptor that I bought, is it a problem with the cheap adaptor I bought or will I have to adjust the aperture in another manner? That was a very bad idea, you should sell it and buy a Canon version. When you put a lens not made for your camera on, you lose all electronic control. No autofocus and no changing the aperture. You might as well be using a broken lens. Adaptors exist so you can mount old lenses that never had any AF or any electronic control to begin with. These old lenses should have the aperture control on the lens itself. Haggins fucked around with this message at 07:35 on Jul 29, 2011 |
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2011 07:33
|
|
|
drat my failed attempts at thriftyness! Thanks man. I'm sure someone out there will want it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2011 10:18
|
|
|
Does anyone have suggestions for a good place to print digital photos? My local Costco started putting a blue tint on everything.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2011 06:08
|
|
|
hedge posted:Does anyone have suggestions for a good place to print digital photos? My local Costco started putting a blue tint on everything. I used SnapFish last time I printed graduation photos, and they turned out pretty good. (Good as in paper/color quality, not good as in the actual content.  )
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2011 09:12
|
|
|
How do you shoot moving objects at night with a flash? I was shooting some drifting, and the flash froze the wheels and car in place when it fired. As you can imagine this sucks mega balls. What are you supposed to do to keep motion?
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2011 12:44
|
|
|
I am pretty sure what you're asking is impossible. Get a tripod and just shoot the light trails. e: or boost ISO way up and don't use a flash e2: or get a flash that you can fire without it being synched to the shutter and flash it like three times while you're exposing, then you get three ghost cars! That could be cool.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2011 13:01
|
|
|
A5H posted:How do you shoot moving objects at night with a flash? Shoot at a slower shutter speed and use 2nd curtain sync. The flash will still freeze the car but you'll also get a light trail from the motion. Why 2nd curtain? Because the mode fires the flash at the end of the exposure rather than the default of at the beginning. If you use first curtain you'll get a unnatural light trail that goes in front of the car, with 2nd it's behind the car.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2011 13:23
|
|
|
Well that sucks. Yeah I was using it on the second curtain. Just sucks. It was too dark to not use flash really.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2011 13:48
|
|
|
Can you post an example and the settings you used? I'm very interested in this. From what I understand, shooting at like < 1/100 on second curtain should give you the effect you want.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2011 14:01
|
|
|
I shot at like 1/20th with an aperture of about 2.5 and a 1/4 power 580. Everything looks crappy crap.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2011 14:04
|
|
|
Can you not strobe a 580?
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2011 14:35
|
|
|
Not sure, it wasn't mine so I was glad I worked out how to get second shutter firing tbh.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2011 14:37
|
|
|
evil_bunnY posted:Can you not strobe a 580? You can on a 580 but not a 430.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2011 14:54
|
|
|
hedge posted:Does anyone have suggestions for a good place to print digital photos? My local Costco started putting a blue tint on everything. Are you using a calibrated monitor along with Costco's color profiles? I'd be surprised if they still had a blue tint and probably would contact someone there to let them know if you're still seeing issues.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2011 18:56
|
|
|
evil_bunnY posted:Can you not strobe a 580?
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2011 21:29
|
|
|
Anyone know an easy way to modify the EXIF time for a group of photos by an offset of a number of minutes? I shot a wedding yesterday and forgot to sync the times between the two cameras. Lightroom was able to change the hour, but not by a smaller amount that I've found. They're about 11 minutes off which is pretty annoying.
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2011 05:57
|
|
|
BeastOfExmoor posted:Anyone know an easy way to modify the EXIF time for a group of photos by an offset of a number of minutes? I shot a wedding yesterday and forgot to sync the times between the two cameras. Lightroom was able to change the hour, but not by a smaller amount that I've found. They're about 11 minutes off which is pretty annoying. LR can do it, but it's not immediately obvious: http://photoshopservices.wordpress.com/2007/10/19/changing-the-time-stamp/
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2011 06:17
|
|
|
Does anyone have any experience selling photos on Etsy? I think I'm going to give it a try, and I have a good idea what kind of photos people would be interested in (decorative, macro, semi-abstract). I'm just wondering if it's actually much of a marketplace.
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2011 14:41
|
|
|
spog posted:LR can do it, but it's not immediately obvious: Awesome. Thank you!
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2011 15:50
|
|
|
BeastOfExmoor posted:Awesome. Thank you! Don't thank me, thank the LR team! I am amazed at how LR manages to combine user-friendliness with genuine power, it is hard to believe that it was made by Adobe.
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2011 17:03
|
|
|
Selling poo poo on Etsy is an agonizing process. Why can't I list multiple similar items?!
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2011 17:59
|
|
|
FLX posted:Would strobing result in a blurred car though? I mean ideally you'd want small bangs along the exposure then a big bang before second curtain, but no one makes anything like that I think.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2011 13:36
|
|
|
I just bought the Velbom macro slider, both because of the good reviews and because it is insanely cheap compared to others I've been reading up on. Question for those who have used it though: Is this rail easy enough to use when going beyond 1:1 magnification?
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2011 08:20
|
|
|
So I have a question about CPL's. I have a B+W 77mm that I've had laying around for awhile because I started reading about how CPL's do partial polarizing and having spin the thing to get a 'right effect' and whatnot. That sounds annoying. Is it possible to put it on for maximum polarization then set the exposure compensation up a stop or two, or will that completely negate the benefit of a CPL and/or distort the image in some negative way?
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2011 14:02
|
|
|
The reason you have to spin a CPL is because depending on what angle you are shooting to the sun, the angle of light coming into your lens changes and you need to be able to spin the filter to accommodate for that. As for the exposure compensation, I don't think it will really be necessary as your camera should be able to adjust its metering automatically.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2011 14:33
|
|
|
Playing about with compositing and I think I've fallen in the HDR hole via another route Kind of nauseating? Or am I being to hard on it? Compositing is really fun, but so is HDR I guess.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2011 20:06
|
|
|
Needs some cropping adjustment but I could see that selling a shitloads of postcards.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2011 21:03
|
|
|
Zegnar posted:Playing about with compositing and I think I've fallen in the HDR hole via another route I actually think it looks nice. I wouldn't put it on my wall, but I could see how someone might. Like a travel agency or something.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2011 21:18
|
|
|
Medusula posted:Needs some cropping adjustment but I could see that selling a shitloads of postcards. Agreed, in the best possible way. Maybe try getting it into stock images? I can see you making a little extra cash over time with that in your stock portfolio.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2011 22:40
|
|
|
OK so I've got something really really strange happening, extra flash is making my pictures more under exposed. This is the setup...  It's a 350D on full manual with a sunpak on camera flash. The flash to the right is the Vivitar 283 on M mode on an optical trigger. So if I sit on the chair and just have the on camera firing, this happens  OK, so lets see what happens if I keep everything as it is and fire the Vivitar to get some fill on the right side...  I really don't understand this at all, how can adding light make my pictures under exposed????
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2011 14:49
|
|
|
My guess is that the Vivitar is triggering off the on-camera metering preflash and that the added light is causing the camera to think there's more light from its own flash than there actually is and thus turning down the power. Naturally the Vivitar can't recycle fast enough to flash again during the actual exposure so you end up with no flash from the Vivitar and less power from the on-camera flash.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2011 15:27
|
|
|
MrBlandAverage posted:My guess is that the Vivitar is triggering off the on-camera metering preflash and that the added light is causing the camera to think there's more light from its own flash than there actually is and thus turning down the power. Naturally the Vivitar can't recycle fast enough to flash again during the actual exposure so you end up with no flash from the Vivitar and less power from the on-camera flash. Man that makes a ton of sense, any ideas on how to get round this?
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2011 15:47
|
|
|
AceClown posted:Man that makes a ton of sense, any ideas on how to get round this?
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2011 15:55
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 22, 2024 13:06 |
|
|
Turn your on board flash to manual instead of TTL. In TTL, though it looks like only one flash is going off, like MrBlandAverage said you actually have two going off; the pre flash so the camera knows what it needs to do and the real flash. In manual it's just one flash. I'm leaning towards MrBlandAverage's theory but another problem could be your sync speed. Unless you have a flash with high speed sync (430 & 580ex) you can't shoot at faster than 1/250 depending on your camera model. When working with flash it's always best to work in manual mode in your camera.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2011 15:57
|
|