eye-of-searle

Mike, ask the lab what scanner(s) they use for their high res scans. I found the lab I used was using a Nikon scanner. Something I could easily buy, and did. At $35 a roll, it makes sense to buy a scanner and do it yourself or go fully digital.

 

Jim

Marcio, Frontier scanners are not even close in terms of the results you can get from a dedicated film scanner. To reiterate what I said above, 4x6 prints are fine from the typical lab scanners but you can see a difference in 4x6 prints between those scans and scans from a good film scanner. 5x7, 8x10 and larger, the difference is substantial.

 

When I first started converting my negatives to a digital medium, I thought CD scans were top quality. Then, I had a custom lab do a high res scan at a cost of $18 for one negative. The difference was dramatic not only in the scan itself but also in being able to have much more "headroom" in terms of image manipulation. The more manipulation done to a file, the more info that is lost. Starting at 135MB compared to 2MB is nice.

 

At $18 a scan, I soon realized $550 dollars delivered for a Nikon Coolscan V was a good investment, plus I have complete control now.

 

 

Jim

A film scanner is FAR FAR superior to what you get on a CD from your local proccesor. The CD scans are about 1 to 2mb each in size. For example, a 14 bit scan from my Coolscan V is 135mb each. That's a huge difference. For 4x6 prints, not that big of a deal but for prints any larger, the difference in quality quickly becomes evident.

 

BTW, film scanning is not that hard. It takes some practice at first but excellent results can be had with a minimal learning curve.

 

Jim

Paul, the 35-70 2.8 is a great lens but your limited to 35mm on the wide end. If that is wide enough for you, then it would be a fine lens at a much lower cost. Both lenses are considered some of Nikon's best. In general, any differences between them at eqaul focal lengths would be minimal. You also get AF-S on the 28-70 2.8 if that matters to you. The question you need to ask yourself is whether 35mm is wide enough for you.

Does $100 to $150 include a head?

 

If so, you might look at the Slik 700DX. You get a lot of value for the money and it comes with a decent Pan/Tilt head.

Not gonna get any better than this in that zoom range.

 

http://www.nikonusa.com/template.php?cat=1&grp=5&productNr=1961

Scott,

 

How are you having you images scanned? Are they high resolution? A lot of people think Fuji Frontier scans done at local lab are high resolution when they are not. Those scans are a max of 2 to 3mb in size. The 14bit scans from my $550 Coolscan V are 135mb uncropped in size. Quite a difference in quality. High res scans at labs are quite expensive and the cost of a quality scanner is not much when your paying $10 to $20 per scan.

Classic Pearl works very well with HP printers. I use it on my 7960 with great results. I also use HP's Soft Gloss which is the same as HP's former Matte paper.

 

They both work great but they are not neccesarily interchangeable. Personally, I find Ilford Classic Pearl best mainly for Portraits and HP Soft Gloss best for most other types of photography. I am not really sure why but I just think the Pearl handles skin tones better and the finish is a more pleasing match for portraits.

 

Jim

Houston Camera Exchange and Camera Co/Op are Houston's two main professional camera stores. They will have a good selection and people who actually know what they are talking about. However, for a digital P&S, she will find better prices at Best Buy, Circuit City and CompUSA, etc. But, you will get very little usefull information at these places other than "This is the coolest design so it's really the best" comments. For hands on "informative" evaluation, Camera Exchange and Co/Op are probably the best choices, albeit at a higher price.

Edward, you keep saying that police were all around and you seemed to feel comfortable that the thugs would not do anything.

 

It takes a split second for somone to kill you! In rallies such as the one you were at there are thousands of people and the police can't watch everyone at all times. Group and gang mentality takes over people and bad things happen. To ignore this is dangerous. There is a time and place to stand up for your rights, beliefs, etc. Out-numbered 3 to 1 by thugs is not the time.

 

I am not a photojournalist but I can tell you "Good" PJ's know how to get "among" a conflict and they also know how to survive within it. Think about it. You "dodged a bullet" and you are lucky to only lose a lens shade. Report/document the news, don't become it.

 

Like others have said, let it go. It's not worth the effort and to continue to fight it is just giving them what they want.

 

Jim

Doh! I read all that just to find out you lost a lens shade?

 

Dude, your lucky you did not lose some teeth and some pride after being beat to a pulp by three large guys.

Another vote for the 28-105mm AFD. It's a great bargain and a great lens to boot. I have had mine for about 6 months now and I use it all the time. Nice contrasty images and the lens is sharp. I have been extremely happy with the results. It is 100% compatible with the F4. AF is not the quickest but I don't really need lightning fast AF. The macro feature is also a nice bonus.

 

Jim

What do you consider "plenty" of power? Elements 4.0 is a very resource hungry program. How much RAM does your PC have?

Let's try this again,<div></div>

Not my kid, but.....

 

http://i20.photobucket.com/albums/b220/JSEvans/Black%20and%25

I think every camera has little quirks about film loading. For example, on my Nikon N70 the film canister almost snaps into place on the fork and loading is extremely easy. On my F100 the film canister fits a little loser on the fork and this sometimes causes the film to be slightly misalligned crossing over the shutter and onto the take up spool which caused the camera to not advance the film. I just place my left thump on the canister when loading and this makes it work perfect. Not a big deal at all. And like others said, don't extend the film too far or the camera will not take it up. This is true for just about any auto advance camera.

 

Jim

"An example close to home - have you ever been to Grindstone City, Michigan? Don't expect to see any grindstones, people stole them all decades ago."

 

Great Ice Cream there! And yes, no grindstones except for the few in residents yards.

"You guys make excellent point about free time. Thanks. Now I'll be sure to ask about the constraints. Not being allowed on upper deck sounds pretty harsh, doesn't it?"

 

It sounds harsh, but it is true. Upper decks are for the travelers on the ship and not for the workers. Simple as that. There is limited activity space on a ship and that space is for the paying guests.

Photographically, it could be a great learning experience but in terms of being able to travel the world with a camera, you can forget it. You will work long hours, be confined to lower decks except when working and will have "little to no" time to actually get off the boat for personal time.

 

A coworker's son is a chef on a large cruise line and he works a lot of hours and rarely gets free time around or off the ship. When you are off the clock, you are not allowed to be on the upper decks.

 

If you want to improve your skils and treat it as a learning experience, then it's probably a great opportunity. But, it you think you will be able to get out and take personal photos, think again.

Sounds like the lab does not know how to print XP-2. In non technical terms, you can't just throw it in there like color negs and get good results.

 

My advise, find another Lab that knows how or cares enough to learn how to print XP-2 properly.

For top quality scans of hundreds of slides, you would be better off doing it yourself with a film scanner. Much cheaper. But it's then your labor time. A lot of it at that. High quality scans can run from about $12 to $25 plus dollars a piece. You can buy the very capable Nikon Coolscan for less than $600 delivered so it makes financial sense.

YOU SUCK!

 

Seriously, have a great time and post the photos when you get back. I have been dying to just take off for 2 or 3 weeks and just go where the lens leads me.

 

Jim

Ilkka,

 

"I wonder what the quality of that $2/roll negative development is. No scratches?"

 

The odds are against quality at this price but it is possible. I to use Walgreens to simply process and make a CD for proofs. I have become friends with one of the lab techs there and she always takes extra care with my film. She a great photographer herself and does her own film there at the lab and is very carefull and good at her job. I know when she works and I only take film in when she is there to insure proper handling. I don't typically get 1 hr turnaround but who cares when you get quality. She is also a stickler (sp?) when it comes to keeping the Frontier machine in top condition at all times. The other techs there could care less about handling the film so I just make sure she processes the film.

 

Jim

BTW, My other favorite file to shoot and scan is Fuji Reala color. It's simply an amazing film that scans very well and is easily converted to B&W in PS. And cheap!

I have shot both XP-2 Super and the newer Kodak BW400CN. I definitely like XP-S super much better for it's smooth grain (or should I say almost complete lack of) and contrast. I shoot it mainly at 320 and sometimes at 250 for a little punched up contrast. XP-2 scans great on the Coolscan V and you get to use ICE. BW400CN scans pretty good as well but I find I have to do more post scanning adjustment with it in PS.

 

I have a good lab that will process the XP-2 and provide a CD for proofs for about $5. I use the CD to pick out the potential keeper and then scan the choosen negs.

 

XP-2 cannot match the complete tonal range and contrast of Traditional B&W but it does come pretty darn close. Others will disagree. But hey, that's what PS is for right? I have yet to be dissapointed with XP-2 Super.

 

Jim