jdudley

Autofocus?

Kinda funny. YOu guys are killing this for having an "amateur" "gimmick" video feature. Yet you want autofocus, which only comes

on amateur video cameras. The best film cameras in the world work on manual/rack focus. Nothing like shooting a scene only to

have the camera shift focus all of a sudden, eh?

it's a fine idea, and a fine feature, as long as it doesn't hurt the still image capabilities.

Digicam purists. Whouda thunk it!

HMMM...looking back to last year's images (these are featured in my portfolio, so feel free

to look at them....they're the "SPCA FACES" folder), I had the exact same setup. Same

equipment (same lights, same wireless transmitter, same camera/lens, same room, even).

Many of those shots were also shot at 1/800s or 1/1000s, though many were also at

1/640s. None show this level of this weird pattern, though in a few of the far

underexposed shots, mainly at 1/1000 and above, it shows up a tiny bit. But it's not there

in the others.

So why would it be more pronounced this year than last? Is my camera going south?

Hmmm.....found a few posts with similar issues:

http://www.adobeforums.com/webx/.3c059101

One guy suggests it's the combination of external flash and shutter speed, since the D70

doesn't sync above 1/500 second. Could that be the problem? Obviously, the flashes fired

and are captured.

This problem seems particularly bad with this dog--some others aren't nearly as

noticeable, or it's not there at all. Similar settings overall (most pics were either 1/800 or

1/1000 second).

I guess I didn't realize the sync speed was only 1/500.

What SHOULD happen to the picture if I use an external flash (with a hot shoe-based

wireless transmitter) at 1/800 or 1/1000 shutter speed?

That image was with the ISO set at 200, no in-camera sharpening (or post sharpening),

F4.5, 70mm. 1/1000 sec, all in manual. I've got other shots across the 18-70mm range of

the lens (this is the decent kit lens that I got with the camera, the 18-70mm f3.5-4.5).

I can't figure it out. Why would it be in one shot, but not in another? Makes no sense.

I was using a couple of Alien Bees for lights, using a remote/wireless transmitter to

trigger them.

Well, I'm using CS2, with its raw converter. I don't have the Nikon software installed.

I'm trying to see why it's showing up in some pictures, but not in others. Looking at the

metadata to see if it's a low-light thing, high-speed-shutter thing, etc. All shots were

taken on the same day, at the same location, with the same camera & lens.

Weird, to say the least. And not terribly convenient.

I'll post more info in a minute.

Look at the attached pics. I'm experiencing a serious moire problem (I assume this pattern is considered

moire) with the D70. I can't say that I've ever seen this before, but it's showing up in lots of pictures from

my most recent shoot.

Why, exactly? I can see it when viewing at 100%, even 50% in some shots.<div></div>

PhotoRescue is great. It's saved my rear, and multiple other rears, since I first installed it.

HOWEVER--as previously posted, you're probably out of luck. The program (any program)

can only find files that are still on the card. If you erase pics, you're really erasing them from

the directory, which then "opens" the space to be re-used. Once it is re-used, there's no

recovering what was there. It's overwritten totally.

having said that....I'm not a fan of indefinite detention without charging someone of a crime.

Either show someone did something, or let them go.

He should have his day in court, and if acquitted, he should be set free. That's fair. We'll see.

Good grief. What a thread. Didn't want to start a political bashing. I was just pointing out

that blindly supporting a fellow photog, when we really have no idea of his innocence or

lack thereof, is silly. The COURTS should, and have to, assume innocence until guilt is

proven. But we, as bystanders, do not. I hope he, and the government, have their day in

court. And I hope it's a fair day. That was my only point.

Carruthers posting about right-wing paranoia and tazering people to death "out of

convenience" is just silliness. Odd that he used the word paranoia in a sentence that is so

paranoid itself. I assume, then, he knows this photog is innocent? His posts seem to

assume guilt on the side of the government in ALL situations.

You know, I'm all for sticking up for your bretheren. And of course, the government and

military have made plenty of mistakes. But every time they hold someone, it isn't a given that

it's an injustice. Maybe they really do have evidence. Let it play out in court--as it's going to

do now, as it should. I don't know the answers here, and neither does anyone else here.

It'll be an interesting story to continue to follow, for sure.