johnsloan

I use millers lab and their printers only use sRGB. I downloaded their icc profile, so should I do all of my adjustments with their profile? I am fairly new to all of this and am slightly confused as I find that when I make adjustments to my image with the millers profile, when I upload it to photo.net it comes out too dark and contrasty. Please help.

here is one saved for the monitor.<div></div>

My question is this. I just bought a sony vaio laptop computer with

a xtra bright screen. I am slightly confused as to how I should have

it set up. I am just learning about icc profiles and have downloaded

two, one from millers lab, and one from my local costco. My question

is this, when I am working in these "spaces" the image looks rather

flat. When I correct for this, it looks overly contrasty when

viewing in any other program besides photoshop. I currently use

pscs. Do I need to re-adjust each picture depending on the viewing

environment? In other words, do I re-adjust the pic if I am to

upload it to photo.net differently than I would if I were to send it

to Millers for printing? If so, do I view it in photoshop under

monitorRGB or something else? Please help, I am very confused!<div></div>

I use a white vinyl but the paper would be fine. One trick that I like is to lay a piece of white plexi-glass down. It keeps the background clean and makes a nice reflection.<div></div>

If you don't want to spend the money on a light meter yet (I recommend you get one eventually) then go and buy a grey card (about $5-$10) and take a reading of that through your camera. Also, rate your film at about 250-320. It adds a little room for error and increases the contrast a tad. I usually rate at 250 fwiw.

I have a friend who is selling his Bronica ETRSi with three lenses and three backs. I'm not sure what he is asking for them, but if you are interested, I can find out. He has a 50mm, 75mm, and 150mm plus two 220 backs and one 120 back. The camera has the ae prism and a motordrive. I borrowed it for a month (my son knocked my contax over onto cement) and it works very well. Just let me know!

How'd you light this? Also, what did you use to soften it? I like your crop and believe it is definitely you.

One way to watch for flash reflections in a window with an SLR is to look through the view finder and fire the flash manually with the test button. If you see the flash in the window, then move it until you can't.

I use the same lab and had the same problem. What happens, from my understanding, is they convert it to sRGB. That is the profile their printers are set up for. Also in 8 bit. I don't know if when they convert it there is a problem or not. They regularly have articles in their newsletter discussing the optimal way to send files to get the best possible prints. Just go to their customer only section and on the left hand side of the page is a newsletter link. Or else you could call and talk to one of the customer service people who should be able to steer you to a better explanation.

I also agree with Bruce about the website and coming up with some new promotional stuff for the coming year. I too am bored with my website (johnsloanphotography.com for anyone who would like to give some suggestions!)). I also have a bridal show in Jan., but what I am looking for is actual ways to increase sittings in Jan. Feb. Mar. and Apr. Any ideas for this ie. some kind of valentines promo. etc. I think I will try writing letters offering some kind of sitting discount for all of my High School senior families. Also, I did the negative selling thing and made a little money doing that. Just looking for some other ideas. Thanks!

With the wedding season pretty much done save for a few individuals,

and high school seniors and families winding down, what do you all do

for the dreaded Jan. Feb. Mar. season? I am a full time professional

photographer and am looking for other ideas to make it through the

slim season. Any advice or ideas would be great! Thanks in advance.

and the result of the pregnancy!<div></div>

I really like the look of grain for certain applications. I find that a lot of the clients I have don't care as much for it. Any way, here are a couple of samples. 3200 tmax rated at 1600.<div></div>

Hey Marc,

 

Just curious if you have had a chance to give a fair review of your

new toy. Do you notice a big difference in quality? Do you have any

images you could upload? Just curious.

I should have mentioned, I have a Nikon F-5 and D1X, and a Contax 645. My question was geared more towards the Contax. I am trying to figure out if I shoot with the camera in manual mode and set my exp. comp to the plus side, will it affect the flash out put. The reason I ask is because for some reason Contax decided to not make a fully compatible off camera flash cord and I am not able to + - comp on the flash. It still works in ttl, I just cant bump up the power or knock down the power with the + - comp on the flash. Trying to figure out a way to overcome this. In theory, it should work, just wondering if anyone has any first hand experience with this problem.

With all of the recent flash questions, I had one that keeps nagging

me and I don't feel I have a satisfactory answer. The question is

this, If I + or - compensate on my camera, will the flash do the

same? In other words, If I shot a white dress against a white wall

in program mode and set my exposure compensation dial to + 1 2/3 or

+2, will my flash expose properly or do I need to set it to +1 2/3 or

+2 also?

 

To expand on that, lets assume I am in manual mode and I set my

camera to f/4 1/60th (light meter reading) and I + compensate to + 1

1/3. Will my flash (in ttl mode) overexpose to +1 1/3? Thanks in

advance!

Nadine, if you re-read the post, you would realize that he actually underexposed by 1/3 stop (rated at 260 not 200). Still, slide film is very contrasty and coupled with the most contrasty of situations, I also wonder why slide film was used. By underexposing a little, that will help slightly with contrast while at the same time increasing the saturation. Normal development time should be fine. Good luck and let us know how they turn out!

Nikon: film,digital; Contax: MF film

Nikon: film,digital;

Contax: MF film

Todd,

 

With good anticipation, you could have shot this with any camera. The Hassleblad can be shot at about 2-4 frames per second with practice. With a flash that could keep up, no problems.

Hey Marc,

 

In that interior shot with the 30mm, did you use a tungsten filter or did the lab correct the color? Just curious. As for the digital film debate, I have just started using a D1X. I like it for the ability of being able to see my shot right away, but I can't seem to get my prints to look anywhere near what my film prints look like. I shoot with a contax 645 and an F-5. I have been happy with the black and whites I've gotten from the D1X, but my colors just look too orange and flat. I also get that plasticky feeling with skin. It may be something I'm doing, but for now, I am sticking with what I know and will continue to try and work out the kinks with the digital. I have also noticed that the images don't seem as sharp with the D1X, especially full length shots of people. On a side note, I just sold a 205FCC on e-bay with an 80mm 2.8 for $3700 in mint condition. A bargain when you consider that it is over $8000 new from B&H. I also sold a 45mm 2.8 for $1500, also in mint condition. Really sad I did however, I only bought them for investment purposes. I shot one roll of film through it to make sure everything worked and then proceeded to sell it. I kick myself everyday because of it.

Thanks all for the information!

I was just wondering if anyone knows of a freeware program for

converting raw files. I have PS 7.0. I shoot with a D1X Nikon. Any

help would be greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance!

I have had three of the lenses. The 80-200 ED IF push pull zoom, the 80-200 ED IF AFS, and now the 70-200 VR ED IF AFS. Whew! What a mouth full! The push pull (older version) I didn't like as the zoom mechanism got loose after use and would slide out when shooting slightly downward. The 80-200 AFS version was a great lens. It is supposedly slightly sharper than the new 70-200. The focusing is quick, but the important factor over the non AFS version is, it is quiet. When in a church and it is quiet, this is important. I do like the newer lens a lot and the VR is really amazing! I have hand held shots in the 1/30th range at 200mm and have gotten usuable results. It is, however, more expensive. If money is an issue, you will not be disappointed with the 80-200 AFS. Definitely get it over the non AFS version. But, if you can afford it, the 70-200 is a sweet lens!! You should be able to find the 80-200 AFS used for around $700-$900. Good luck!

These two were just done!<div></div>