fp56gallery

Just in case someone is looking for a Fisheye in great condition. Mine is on sale on Ebay: http://cgi.ebay.de/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=230235424160&_trksid=p3907.m32&_trkparms=tab%3DSelling

 

Franz

Remember that I had a similar problem two years ago. The problem was, if I remember correctly, the PS time tag (??). And it also happened in January.... When I changed OS-time to February, the problem was solved. Don't know if it helps. Franz

Thank you all for your help. I really appreciate every single piece of advice. What has become clear for me so far is that I will have to come several times to see most of the must see's in Northern America.

For this time I think I should stick to Alex Lofquist's advice: "If you try to see everything, you won't see enough of anything! I would stick with the area around northern Arizona (Grand Canyon) and southern Utah (Arches, Canyonlands, Bryce, Zion, Capitol Reef)." What do you think and what would be the best season to go there?

Thank you all for your help. I think Stephen's advice to plan for less places and take more time for each spot is important. Any more hints for a region with more interesting places without having to travel big distances?

I`m contemplating to make a trip to North America. I?m a commited nature

photographer living in Austria and prefer shooting in the mountains. Now I

would like to ask you "America specialists" for recommendations for a 3 to 4

week trip: Where would you go, at which time of year (not too much people

around), to which locations. Have heard great things about the famous indian

summer, Arches Nationalpark, Bryce Canyon Nationalpark, Grand Teton

Nationalpark, ... but where should I begin?

I`d further appreciate any hints about special books about the region

recommended, websites, where to hire a motorhome, ...! I should add that though

I prefer shooting in the mountains at home, I wouldn't exclude any other

interesting part of North America.

Thank you in advance for your support. Franz

http://www.digiposter.de/:good quality, current - timely limited -offer:

POSTER AUF FOTOPAPIER

 

Dies sind unsere zeitlich limitierten Aktionspreise f�r Poster auf Fotopapier.

 

Unlaminiert

Poster 35 x 50 cm / 40 x 40 cm nur 5,99 EUR*

Poster 40 x 60 cm nur 6,66 EUR*

Poster 45 x 60 cm nur 6,99 EUR*

 

Mit Schutzlaminat, matt oder glanz

Poster 35 x 50 cm / 40 x 40 cm nur 11,98 EUR*

Poster 40 x 60 cm nur 13,32 EUR*

Poster 45 x 60 cm nur 13,98 EUR*

 

Mit Schutzlaminat, matt oder glanz

und selbstklebender R�ckseite

Poster 35 x 50 cm / 40 x 40 cm nur 14,98 EUR*

Poster 40 x 60 cm nur 16,65 EUR*

Poster 45 x 60 cm nur 17,48 EUR*

 

www.pixum.de: cheaper, quality okay!

Have been shooting with Canon gear for about 15 years and never had to calibrate anything. 45.000 shots with my current EOS 5D with 17-40, 50 f1.4, 24-105, 70-200 and 300 f4 and - not to forget - Tamron 90: not a single problem!

In my opinion it`s a very impressive lens but you will have to deal with heavy vignetting and some weird colour artifacts in backlit situations. Can be fixed with RAW converters but if you shoot slides, you've possibly got problems in special conditions.

My 17-40 is much better in this special situations.

I really like most of the functionalities of lightroom, but what I don`t like at

all is the native Lightroom colour space. That space is larger than Adobe RGB

1998 (which I have to use) what results in some clipping when exporting my RAW

images to TIFFs in Adobe RGB most of the time.

What I like even less is that I get a warmish colour cast when opening RAW

imaqes in Lightroom, something that does'nt happen with ACR. I checked it with

the same images in both LR and PS.

This warmish cast is still there after exporting the images, even if I try hard

to get rid of it with LR instruments. So I finally have to work in Photoshop to

get neutral colours.

Why is there no possibility to choose Adobe RGB as the native colour space in

LR? I`d really enjoy that feature and I think there are more people who have to

work in Adobe RGB who would be very pleased if they had'nt to change colour

space with associated problems during their work.

If I missed something in my workflow, any help is very appreciated.

I?ve shot 45.000 images with my EOS 5D so far, mostly landscapes. Indeed I get some purple or green edges depending on the lens used and on light conditions. Backlit scenes are prone to this phenoenmon. One can deal with it when converting the RAW images in Lightroom or PS.

Im my opinion it`s not a real life problem as you will - in most cases - not see anything disturbing even in large prints. And that`s important for me, not what shows up when I dig into single pixels.

Franz

Thank you, Ellis, you are right. I thought that I had set the Adobe RGB (1998) colour space in LR. But there is no way to do this in LR, though I would like this possibility.

Franz

When I export files from LR 1.1 after having developed them and taken care of

the highlights and darks I find that the highlights and the darks I had

previously cured are again over 255 or below 0. I use Adobe RGB (1998) in both

PS and LR. What could be the reason for this?

Franz

I actually wanted to upgrade to PS CS 3 because of it`s better RAW developement

capabilities compared with CS 2 when I realised that I needed PS 7 for an

upgrade and only had the PS 6 version.

So I wanted to save some money and downloaded Lightroom from the Adobe Website.

I have to say that I only wanted it for RAW developement and maybe for some

fast webgallery production and not for archiving the images as I want to stay

with IMatch for that purpose, which does everything very well for what I need

as a semiprofessional stock photographer.

Now I find that the RAW developing is fine with Lightroom as I had expected.

But when I want to delete folders I only used for the import to or export from

Lightroom I`m realising big troubles. I can`t delete folders as I want, they

show up again in IMatch when I think I had deleted them and so on. Lots of

troubles. Furthermore I realise when I use Photomatix with images developed in

Lightroom, that Photomatix is not able to read EXIF-data and doesn't work

properly.

Is there anything wrong with my workflow or my LR settings?

Is there a way to use LR for professional way of archiving like in IMatch?

Should I return Lightroom and choose another RAW conversion software?

Thank you for your thoughts in advance. Franz

I?ve been shooting with a Canon 10 D and recently for about a year with a Canon EOS 5D, which succeded my Canon EOS 10 and Pentax 67 II. While I hardly ever use my analog bodies any more, I still enjoy to scan MF slides with the EPSON 4990. I would say that the quality of the 5 D files is near that of the scans from the 4990. Image agencies and their customer at least like the bigger files even more, maybe according to that special MF-look? Conclusion (at least for me ;-)) ): you will be fine with the 4990

Hope that helps. Franz

Kevin,

had the same problem when I upgraded from an EOS 10D a year ago. I had to change my habit to expose to the right with the 5D and started to expose to the LEFT. That solved that special problem for me. Franz

Looks fine for me. Not the best test motive, though.

My f4 300 L is uncredibly sharp. Maybe you got a bad copy?

Strg = Ctrl

Michael, the selection was done with the shortcut Strg+Alt+3.

Franz

Here is the same crop unedited after RAW conversion no USM. Image taken with 5D at ISO 200, 1/640 sec, 70-200 f4 at 145 mm.<div></div>

Here is a 100 % crop of the edited image.<div></div>

I`ve recently tried to use a "brightness level" to darken somewhat to

bright areas of an image. I selected the bright area of the image and

put it to an level to finally multiplying that level with the

background. So far so good. When I closely inspected the image I

realised, that there was an unwanted impact on not chosen parts of the

image too, making especially grass and leaves looking very soft, yes

somehow muddy indeed. Have I missed something regarding that technique?

Franz<div></div>

In my opinion it`s not the scanner. The 4990 gives (at least for me) great results if there is a good slide! Is it possible that your lens is a lemon?

Franz

Dale,

I`ve done the way the other direction, starting with a Pentax 67 II and Epson 4990, now more or less exclusively using an EOS 5D.

In my opinion you are realising the difficulties of MF, especially of the Pentax 67, that need some experience. With MF and slide film exposure is really critcal for getting good results. I`d recommend to get a good exposure metering device and learn to use it (light metering!). Then you have to tame the P 67 II when firing the shutter. In my opinion shutter shake is the greatest problem with that camera. You can either use a really heavy tripod, or a normal one and press the camera down when firing the shutter. That has helped me to get really good results most of the time.

Enjoy schlepping ;-))

Franz

I use a fast Windows PC with 2 GB of RAM but when I`m scanning one of

my 6x7 slides with the 4990 with ICE on the scanning time of one slide

scanned at a resolution of 2400 dpi will be about 20 minutes. I`m

really pleased with the image quality I get but it`s sooooo

slooooowwwww! Is there a possbility to make it faster?

Franz