dragon_fly1

<p>I have put them under very heavy weight for hours. Doesn't work. But this is what actually work very well: I make a "de-curler" with a heavy duty tube (I use a paper core from a spent inkjet paper roll) and a scrap canvas paper. Canvas is excellent because it's tough. I can tightly wrap about up to 30 prints at one time onto the tube (curling them the other way, of course) with the canvas. In about 10 min, they will be flat for mildly curled prints and in about 20-30 min for really curled prints.</p>

<p>Hi, I recently bought a DNP DS620A dye-sub printer for my event photography. For the most parts I am quite satisfy with it. The prints look great. The main beef I have is that except for prints coming from the beginning of the roll, the prints curl a lot. And I mean A LOT! That's the only complaint from my clients and a big one. Is there any trick to flatten these dye-sub prints? </p>

<p>DNP is sending me some sample prints. Hopefully their matte finish look better that I one I've seen from the Sony. Many of my clients like the matte finish.<br> Still, I would love to hear from anyone who use the Fuji in the field.</p>

<p>I went to a local mini lab that had a Sony UP-DR150 dye-sub printer. Ordered a matte, a textured and a glossy finish of the same picture. I can't hardly tell the difference. The matte is not matte at all IMO. It's just ever so slight less glossy. Same for the textured finish. Very disappointed. Hope the DNP printers give better result.</p>

<p>@Pete, Thank you for the reply. I know the spec. and have read quite a few reviews. But I am more interested in real world experience which can be quite different from advertised/published material.</p>

I have to look into it but I think the print cost is a lot higher with dye-sub in general. Another question. I understand that the DNP can print matte finish without having to buy separate matte media; instead it uses a thermal process to turn the finish to matte. Correct? If so, does the matte finish look good? Also, what do most people interface it with? Lightroom?

<p>I am looking for real world experience / comments on the Fuji Frontier-S DX100. I am considering to get one for my event photography business instead of relying on minilabs. Worth it?</p>

<p>Steven,<br> You are right. After thinking about it more, I don't really see a real benefit of PNG for what I do. I save most everything in PSD for myself. For clients I have always been giving out JPEG. I was thinking that PNG maybe a better "bridge" option between the two. Now, I am thinking to give out LZW compressed TIFF instead of JPEG. So the new question is this:<br> I know uncompressed TIFF is universally supported (except for web). How about LZW compressed TIFF?</p>

<p>Is lossless PNG inherently better in picture qulaity than JPG of the same file b/c the former is lossless?</p>

<p>Colin O,<br> When I save PNG with Photoshop, it never offers the options of compression levels or compression method. Other programs I use offers choices of compression level but not method. How do you choose lossy compression for PNG (not that I will but am just curious.)</p>

<p>Is PNG format suitable for photos? I like PNG b/c it is lossless. However, when I research on this, people seems to be saying that PNG is best for graphic arts files rather than photos but it is not clear to me. I don't mind that PNG results in larger file size than JPG as long as the image quality is good. Your thoughts.</p>

<p>@Dave, saving money and time is really NOT the reason behind my question (although I am the kind of person who hate to be wasteful). I am into gaining the knowledge.<br> @Craig, I already know I will only get negatives out of the process. But thanks for reminding me anyway.</p> <p>People do cross processing all the times. I am NOT that into it (I am more of a purist when it comes to photography), BUT I am also naturally a very curious person. The reason I ask about developing Scala together with other films is because I know many processional labs refuse to do any sort of cross processing at all (like E6 films in C41 chemicals) because, they claim, it will contaminate their chemical. I don't know whether it is true or not.</p>

<p>Hi,</p> <p>I am gonna experiment developing Agfa Scala in D76. A friend of mine like it much and recommend me to try.</p> <p>Just being curious here. Can I develop Scala together with B&W films (I have mostly Tri-X, TMax, Delta) in the same tank? I ask b/c Scala has a reversal film emulsion. Does the chemical process of developing it in D76 have a chance of contaminating (by-product of chemical reaction, for example) the developer; thus, ruining the B&W film that is in the same tank?</p>

<p>Thank you all for the replies. I'll try all the suggestions.</p>

<p>A newbie question.</p> <p>Just starting out shooting portraits. Right now, I do executive portraits quite often. I am having quite a bit of a problem lighting bald men or men with very short and thin hair.</p> <p>Typically, I use the Rembrandt or loop lighting with a kicker. The problem is with the kicker. It just makes the bald/thin hair head too bright, too dramatic, which is not suitable for executive portraits. Taking off the kicker or aiming it low gives me little or no separation from the background. Powdering the bald head is not comfortable (as it is weird from their POV) for my male clients, besides I don't find it working that well anyway.</p> <p>Is there a trick?</p>