brian_m2

<p>Hi Dan,<br /> Tried to email you just now but got a notification that the email dmp@gmail.com does not exist. Is that the right address? If we're able to connect, I'd like to take you up on your generous offer, with thanks.<br /> Brian</p>

<p>I echo what the others said, but here's some very basic information that's a little more at an amateur level, take it or leave it:<br>

1. Print out a photo and let it cure for 24 hours. Then view it next to your monitor under your editing lighting conditions. Adjust the brightness so that what you see on the screen matches what you see on the print next to it. This is an imperfect method because the screen is organically lit; but you can get a close approximation and this is what the Spyder Elite program advises with LCD monitors anyway.<br>

2. I have a 17-in MacBook Pro that I do not use for editing, but I have calibrated with a Spyder Pro Elite just because I could do it. Using that program I have the brightness turned on "7 ticks" from zero (completely black). If you have a MBP, you know what I mean. This does not necessarily mean you should, as print matching, as the name implies, depends heavily on what printer you're using (I use an Epson Stylus Pro 3880).<br>

Good luck.<br>

And buy a Spyder or other calibration tool.</p>

<p>There are DSS encryption options out there but anyone with a free copy of Handbrake can copy any DVD.</p>

<p>I think the lab is having some fun with you.</p>

<p>No, it's designed for someone new to LR3. </p>

<p>I have two recommendations for you as you begin to use LR:<br>

1. Understand that changes you make to the photo are virtual in every case - they do not affect the file jpg/psd/nef/tiff/etc. <br>

2. If you want to make different versions of the same pic, use the "snapshot" tool (look it up) instead of making a virtual copy. It will keep your catalogs much cleaner.</p>

<p>If you have $25 a month to spend, subscribe to Lynda.com. Lots of tutorials on LR3. Otherwise, look for iTunes podcasts on LR3. There are several. Finally, you could buy a Dummies book or, like I did, buy LR3 Classroom in a Book to really dive deep.</p>

<p>Yeah, that's quite a deal but it would be unprecedented in my memory. And they just came out with LR 3. I have to think it's not a full version offer, but who knows. </p>

<p>When I bought my 3880 I received a phone number to call that was to the "pro help," and they clearly knew their stuff much better than regular customer support. Check your box for a card with that number.</p>

<p>Do yourself a favor and purchase Lightroom 3. For what you do, it's the best tool and a great file management tool to boot. I promise you'll rarely open CS2 again (only for specialized tasks), and will provide you a better workflow than chucking CS2 and buying into Aperture. This way, you'll have a great management/editing tool in LR3, and still avoid redundancy with your CS2.</p>

<p>I have a 17-in MacBook Pro (1 year old) and an HP 2475w monitor. I think they're both great and while a power tower would give me more horsepower, I don't need it and my pro handles files plenty fast enough. Especially as I do most editing in Lightroom 3 anyway and only use PS CS5 for occasional editing. <br>

You have to upgrade to 8 GB RAM, per Leigh. Absolutely.<br>

I love the 17-in size and it fits into my work bag computer slot. I wouldn't dream of going with less screen real estate - it's great for working on pics outside the home. The monitor is not fantastic but you can calibrate close enough to work on pics. I have calibrated and profiled both monitors and don't see a hugely noticeable difference between them.</p>

<p>Any difference in speed of USB v. ethernet would be inconsequential compared to the amount of time a fairly large file will take to print. <br>

You say ethernet, but do you mean wifi (as opposed to a direct ethernet cable connection to your PC)? I use my 3880 via wifi and notice no difference in print speed. It's great.</p>

<p>AAAGGH! NSFW! NSFW! :)</p>

<p>The beauty of LR is you really don't have to think (very much). Instead of keeping track of which changes you've made to which copies of the same image (and then inevitably losing track of same), you can just make changes to the LR image ad infinitum. If you like an image you just make a digital copy of it, which essentially is like a "bookmark" for your changes thus far, and continue working with the photo to do new and interesting things. Meanwhile, the original photo sits in your hard drive, untouched.</p>

<p>True about Amazon, but if you complain you will always get your money back. Amazon knows its survival depends on having the best customer service available anywhere. I've sent things back that were well outside the return window - no problem. I've complained about third-party vendors who wouldn't return my calls and Amazon refunded my money - no questions asked.</p>

<p>Wow. The ThinkPad W700 is definitely a beast. But I do like my MacBook Pro 17 in. 3.05 GHz with the memory upgraded to 6. If I weren't so tired of Windows after so many years I might like the W700 better.</p>

<p>I'm new to LR and am trying out the LR3 beta. I thought that any changes made to an image in the Develop module would carry over when the same image is viewed in the Library or set to print in the Print module, but my sharpening and some of my tonal adjustments disappear when I switch to Library or Print modules (or for that matter, when I "edit in" PS). Is this a bug in the beta or am I not understanding something fundamental about LR? Thanks.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>See below what 5000K looks like on my 2004 G5 iMac. I can't believe folks actually set their display to look like that.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>My 5000K display does look warm, no doubt, compared to 6500K. All I can say is it matches the prints; so that's what matters to me. If I adjust the onscreen photo color temps to be cooler, I'll still get a print match. </p>

<blockquote>

<p>It's always allowed, Hannah. This is a discussion forum, and asking more questions that relate to the topic of the thread can always add more to the discussion.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>A gentle disagreement, Matt. Personally (and no disrespect to Hannah because she's obviously very concerned with acting politely), I think asking a question different from the OP's question in a thread - particularly very early in the thread before many responses have been given - is a form of thread hijacking and should be discouraged. I know that it's happened to me in other fora and it feels like interrupting. My 2 cents.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>I even had an iMac at the end of a 3 year Apple Care warranty period die. Apple replaced it with a brand new iMac with a new 3 year warranty for free.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Assuming your warranty had just ended (which is how I read your post), I can with almost 100% certainty promise you that Apple would not do this for you today.</p>

<p>I have a 17-in MacBook Pro (late 2009) with Snow Leopard and Spyder3 Elite. I calibrated by HP 2475w and my MacBook Pro screen at the recommended settings by the Spyder with ambient light detection on, which to my surprise advised me to set the color temp to 5000K. Which I did. I thought the colors would come out weird because everyone says to set temp to 6500K, but again to my surprise, they perfectly match the printer (Epson Pro 3880). I would recalibrate with ambient light on and set the temps to what the program says; you should get the same results.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Brian, so which category are you ? :)</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Ha! Benjamin, that's a fair question and one I suppose I walked right into with my post. Actually, I don't believe I am someone to whom Apple markets. I tend to be somewhat contemptuous (if you couldn't tell from my post) of slick marketing campaigns and appearance-heavy products. I find myself almost rooting for the "PC" guy in the ads to give the "Mac" guy the back of his hand one of these days to wipe the smarmy smirk off his face. :-) (At the very least, I would not even engage in a conversation with the Mac guy but would love to take the PC guy out for a couple of beers.) As I mentioned, I was just bored with Windows after using it for the last 25 years (had a Mac LC in college but went on the Windows train starting with my first real job). I use a Windows machine every day at work and found myself not really looking forward to getting back on the same kind of machine at night. So I switched to have a different experience that I could consider more recreational. Like I said, I do like the interface, though I don't think it's any more functionally useful than a PC's interface. I suppose I was influenced most by friends' recommendations, but that's about it.</p>

<p>I haven't had the same experience with iMac but I just switched to Mac after years with Windows and I must say I am not surprised by your report. Why did I switch? Simple; I was bored with Windows and wanted a change of pace. I like the look and feel of Mac and thought it would be better for what I do with it (photos and video). And I do like the interface better than Windows, so I'm not sorry. Yet. <br /><br />But I see that in my future. Apple, you see, markets to three kinds of people: morons who can't find their way around a computer; old people who can't find their way around a computer (nor should be expected to); and "progressive" reactionaries who just hate Microsoft. They perpetuate the fiction that Apple is better for "artists," but I think anyone on this board who knows their way around a computer will tell you there is no difference between what you can do on a Mac and what you can do on a PC. <br /><br />If Macs and PCs were political philosophies, PCs would be libertarians and Macs would be the Supreme Soviet, telling you constantly "you don't need to access that and you don't need to know how to do that because we'll do it for you." And like any paternalistic state regime, they view Mac users as a captured base and have little interest in customer service. Hence the high fees for basic service issues, and the unreasonable exclusions from warranty that you experienced. And forget trying to get the "bar" to think outside the box or truly help with an issue.<br /><br />In antitrust law this behavior is well known. Mac users have a sunk investment and face high costs to switch to another platform, particularly if they have invested in third-party programs made for Mac. So Apple can treat us however it wants, essentially. Like the "cool white look" and "mod" feel of the Apple Store and of Apple products? You should; it's what you're paying for, after all. <br /><br />In short, Apple doesn't sell computers. It sells a lifestyle and an image. So that's what you've paid for and things like customer service and making sure that the product actually works like it's supposed to, are given lower priority than they are at a struggling PC maker who is competing with dozens of other PC makers for customers. <br /><br />Like I said, I'm not sorry yet. But I immediately found that the slogan "It just works" is a load of crap. I've had to force-quit more applications on my brand-new Macbook Pro than I ever did on my old PC. Every time I open GarageBand it tries to download a guitar lesson and fails, giving me an error message and saying to "try again later." Apple's "geniuses" said that they couldn't help with it and also said that I had used up my one free "issue" and that further inquiries or inquiries on other issues would be fee-based. Check back with me in 6 months and I suspect I will by then be wistfully recalling the days when I could fix the problem myself.</p>

<p>I'm no scanning expert, but I suspect that the problem is with your setting of 2400 dpi. Very high quality prints up to 16X20 can be made with only 300 dpi. I know that the scan dpi and print dpi are not the same thing, but there's some correlation, I believe. I think you've set the scan resolution way way way too high. Those more knowledgeable than I can confirm or correct.</p>

<p>Thanks, this is very helpful. Why does the laptop not have controls for adjusting RGB gain? Can you really color calibrate without being able to adjust the gain? On my old CRT, in PreCal I adjusted the gain not only to achieve the desired luminance but also to ensure that each channel was within the specified parameter, and this eliminated color cast. How does the Spyder3 eliminate color cast without user adjustment of gain? Does it simply measure the color cast that the monitor brings to the party and then adjust the visual interpretation of the image accordingly to account for it?</p>