NullMcNullkins

So I'm trying to use PhotoShop 7.0 to resave some TIFF files as JPEGs

for printing, however when I go to "Save As" the only options I get

from PhotoShop are TIFF, RAW, and PSD. However, I can resave these

files using Nikon Capture Editor as JPEGs.

 

Thoughts?

The trick is to download the images using Picture Project. Otherwise, I don't know of a way access the files as NEF. After you've imported the NEFs using Picture Project, you can organize/edit them in whatever program you want.

I had this same problem...Nikon told me you need to run Picture Project to import them. Not sure what the deal is for a Mac, if that's what you're running

<div></div>

Supposedly there is a difference in the papers, but I couldn't tell you what the color/contrast difference is. Personally I love the Supreme paper. The normal stuff just feels cheap in comparison.

It doesn't really matter if you think a fanny pack will mark you as a tourist - just the way you handle yourself will. Don't worry so much, just keep a hand on your stuff and a good eye on what's going on around you. And while you won't look like a Spaniard, just try and be respectful, and you'll do fine.

 

As for the athletic shoes...there's a lot crazier shoes in Europe than in the US.

I'd guess your problem is that the Ritz left HyperSharpness turned on (assuming they use a Frontier). Some people like it, but overall it makes photos look craptastickier.

The black and white film is probably BW400 CN, the replacement for Portra 400BW and T400 CN.

Ilkka-

 

FYI, Portra 400UC *is* available in Europe. I've seen it in Rome, and in the UK, IIRC. HD200 is available in the US, but Royal Supra is only in the US through the likes of B&H.

Scott's right, it looks like the Hyper-Sharpness is switched on...If it's a Wolf, they're supposed to have it shut off, but because there are so many stores, it's hard to know which ones are good about paying attention to things like that. Take it back, and ask them to redo it with Hyper Sharpness off.

The last photo looks like they added some free dust to your picture, not flare. However, for the colors, it looks like they're printing them magenta/red, instead of a more green/cyan. If they added some cyan, and took out some magenta, and possibly darkened the photo, it'd probably be closer to what you want.

 

If you want brighter colors with Fuji film, take it to a lab that has a Fuji Frontier processor. If all of your shots are of plants and such, ask to speak to the operator, and let them know that you're looking for in your prints.

OK...Actually to the best of my knowledge the Ridgehaven ProEx is the only one with a Frontier...They maybe an alternative.

Kent,

 

Which ProEx did you try?

After getting off the phone with Kodak this morning, evidently Royal Supra and Portra 400UC *are* different.

 

I guess someone forgot to tell their online customer service.

Kodak says Royal Supra 400 is the same as Portra 400UC.

 

 

"Dear Ben:

 

Thank you for contacting Eastman Kodak Company regarding the US

equivalent to KODAK ROYAL SUPRA 400 Film available in Europe.

 

KODAK PROFESSIONAL PORTRA 400UC Film is the exact same thing as ROYAL SUPRA 400. (Same product, just different naming for the different region in which it is being sold.)

 

Here is a link for more information on 400UC:

 

http://www.kodak.com/go/portra

 

Thank you for visiting the Kodak website. If you should have future

questions on Kodak products or services, please call us at

1-800-242-2424, ext 19 (Monday-Friday, 9:00am-6:00pm EST). To learn

more about Kodak photofinishing chemical products, please visit our

photochemical web page located at:

http://www.kodak.com/go/photochemicals .

 

Regards,

 

Gary Spence

Kodak Information and Technical Support"

I'm going to Rome for about 10 months, and am looking for good,

inexpensive labs for C41 and B&W. Something along the lines of a

Ritz or Wolf, where I can get decent developing, but quality of

prints isn't as much of a concern as is quality of processing.

 

In the Italy section of the travel logs here, one of the posters

recommended an Agfa minilab...anyone have the name for them?

Can anyone recommend a lab in or near Toledo, Spain for burning CDs

from Compact Flash, as well as C41 processing. Looking for decent

quality C41, but can't have a pro lab price tag.

 

Thanks!

Nikon has announced a 10.5mm DX Fisheye, that with the latest version of Nikon Capture can be changed to a rectilinear.

Fuji Crystal Archive paper has an archival life of anywhere between 60-75 years without fading. (I remember hearing a claimed life of 75, and <a href="http://www.chimwasmp.org/loupe/digfuji.htm">this page</a> has a table for various papers, and comes up with 60 years in the table, but 70+ for the article.

"Although a Kodak representative told me that Royal Supra is the same as Portra 400UC, it's not true. Royal Supra 400 appears to be the same as High Definition 400. .... I don't think we're about to get a straight answer from Kodak on this. "

 

That's interesting. I e-mailed Kodak awhile back, and they said that Royal Supra 400 was Portra UC 400. While I've never checked the spec sheets myself, I was also told that they're identical, too.

Richard,

 

Printing hundreds of rolls a day lets one see many types of films. IME, Gold 400 very grainy, and the colors are not very good. There are much better choices.

 

In fact, the colors and grain are better in Superia 800 than what Gold 400 produces. However, YMMV.

If you go with Gold 400, you'll regret it. The grain is terrible and the colors are pretty bad.

 

Personally, I'd take Fuji Reala, Kodak Royal Supra 400 (Same as Portra 400 UC, but *much* cheaper), and some Agfa Ultra 100. If you get it processed along the way, I wouldn't worry too much about poor prints, as long as your negs are OK. Just use the prints as proofs and then get the ones you like color corrected the way you want them when you get home.

 

Take care and have fun!

They made a mistake, it happens. While it really sucks to be on the end of the mistake, keep in mind that:

1) The operator probably feels like crap. When those kinds of mistakes are made, it ruins your day.

 

2) They were up front and honest. Some labs would have blamed you, or admitted no-fault.

 

3) They probably do have a disclaimer saying it's not their fault, even if they are negligent.

 

4) You get what you pay for. This doesn't necessarily mean money. If you spend time to get to know the regular staff at the lab, and make sure they know what you're dropping off (You should know what you're dropping off, too) this kind of thing would happen less, and you'd probably get better prints, because they'll learn how you like your photos printed.

 

It's a live and learn situation. Hard, but there's not much you can really do about it.

If the prints in your folder are good examples of the results, I don't know if I'd call them washed out. They look like what most people would expect to get returned to them.

 

Where are you getting them processed? The operator has a lot of control over what kind of colors you're getting, so if you're not pleased either try another lab with a Frontier, or try and get to know one of the operators. As far as sharpness goes, I've yet to see a print come off a Frontier that isn't as sharp or sharper than one off of an optical printer...again, maybe a new Frontier operator is in order?

It was reading f/5.0 at the 28mm setting, which is what I thought was strange, when the lens clearly said f/3.5.

 

I tried a few different distances to focus on, and they all read the same.