curtis_basner

Darren,

 

I too use an Epson 2200 calibrated by Monaco EZColor. My experience is as follows:

 

The screen calibration appears fine, unlike Gary?s experience. I have a LaCie Electron Blue 22 monitor. I have it calibrated to 6500K.

 

I have had problems with the whole setup, however. The image I get off the printer seems to match pretty well with the calibrated screen image, however, I find that the image I have on screen changes significantly when converting from the AdobeRBG space (my PhotoShop CS working space) to the printer color space. The converted image looks like a significant amount of contrast has been added. I wrote to Monaco, and their response was ?The change you are seeing is expected as the Adobe RGB gamut must be compressed into the output profile gamut. You can convert first and then edit, but this can result in some loss of detail/posterization. Additionally, editing in a uniform "working space" color space is easier than in an irregular output profile space. Most users do the majority of editing in the working space and then do final tweaks in the output space. An alternative is to use Photoshop's soft proofing mechanisms.?

 

What?s frustrating is that I can?t get the same image back, after all the work in the Abobe color space and then converting. The ?tweaking? they mention seems to be both impossible and even if possible, a LOT of work. Monaco indicated I might have problems if I did all the editing in the printer color space, as per the quote. So I am sort of left with a question of what to do. The image in the printer space is never as ?good? as the pre-converted image in AdobeRBG. I?ve tried adjusting in curves, using brightness/contrast, everything, but no luck. The output using the canned Epson profile is actually better in that regard, not that far off, and not nearly as ?contrasty?. I?ve pondered trying to edit the printer profile, using the Monaco editing feature, but since I can never get the image as good as it was before the conversion, I feel that?s a waste of time. Not sure of my options, other than possibly just using the canned profile and that?s it.

 

I?d like to get a copy of the ?wedge? image that you speak of, though, as I?d like to see if the increase in contrast is visible on a print when printing both from the Epson profile and the Monaco profile. If possible, can you send a copy to cabasner@cox.net?

Okay....a follow-on to an earlier post by me...

I've downloaded the trial copy of Silverfast, and I'm now able to get

really good looking prescans of 120 negatives. My earlier post was

about the use of the supplied Minolta software for my Dimage Scan

Multi Pro film scanner, and the Minolta software was simply awful and

unusable. The Silverfast demo, when using Negafix, at least on Kodak

Portra NC 160, gives me a great looking prescan. I'm thrilled with

the image in the prescan. However, I'm experiencing another problem.

When I perform the actual scan, the final scanned image looks like

it's overexposed 3-4 stops, across the entire image. I've reverified

settings in the software to see if I was missing something, but I

don't think I've done anything wrong. Still, I'm not familair with it

other than doing a bit of reading nad watching the videos that are

included, and none of that addresses what I'm seeing. Again, the

prescan image is perfect, but the final scanned image is way, way

overexposed. I've written Silverfast, and indicated that I'd love to

buy their software, but I can't do so unless this problem is

addressed. Given the holiday weekend, I've not heard back yet, so I

thought I'd see if any of you Silverfast users have encountered this

problem, or if anyone has ideas about settings I may have missed. I

really like the program, but this is (obviously) not acceptable. Any

ideas would be hugely appreciated.

Hello all,

I'm sure someone has answered this somewhere in the forums, but I

couldn't find one, so here goes. I have a Minolta Dimage Scan Multi

Pro medium format film scanner. I have, since owning this scanner for

well over a year, had problems with getting decent image quality when

scanning color negatives. When I scan 120 Portra NC160 negatives,

(and actually ANY color negative), I find that that images (albeit

with NO adjustments AT ALL during the scan) result in pretty awful

color (washed out, inaccurate (leaning toward the cyan)) and generally

low contrast. I am using the Minolta supplied software. I know that

many folks use such programs as Silverfast or VueScan. I tried a demo

version of VueScan to see if the feature that is supposed to

'neutralize' the orange mask actually works, and found that the

quality of the scan didn't improve at all, and was perhaps worse.

 

Today, after doing a scan with no correction, I tried playing with

curves in PhotoShop, and I was able to get what looks a lot more like

the image I would have expected to see, but my 'playing' was

completely random, not systematic, and thus not necessarily

repeatable. In addition, even though the images look lots 'better',

they STILL don't have anywhere near the 'punch' of a pure digital

image. I'm terribly frustrated. Any ideas? If the answer is that

you just have to play around (that is, experiment ad infinitum) to get

good images, I guess I can accept that, however, I know that you true

professionals must have ways to get high quality 120 color negative

scans. Ive heard about add-ons such as the Scan-Hancer, which is

supposed to improve sharpness, but not sure about color and contrast.

 

Perhaps this will be addressed during any responses, but related to

this, is it better to try to manipulate the image during the scan, or

wait until the scan is complete and address changes in PhotoShop?

 

I'd appreciate any help at all. By the way, I've tried a whole

variety of different resolutions, oversampling, etc. with no

differences in the color/contrast problems.

Wow, Gary, thanks for the details! I think that the advantages of the Quantum system really aren't enough to make it worthwhile for me. If I want to do things that you are suggesting with the Quantums, I'd probably be perfectly happy with my 'big gun' studio lighting equipment, which includes a bunch of White Lightning flashes and Pocket Wizards. You've definitely helped make my decision to go forward with a 550EX purchase (and the wireless flash trigger), along with the new 1D Mark II or 1Ds that will be ordered sometime soon. Thanks!

Thanks, Giampiero,

You've answered in exactly the manner I was looking for! One question, though. You stated "You would simply put the third head on the same CH/Group as the MAIN and dial in a -3 on the head itself. They have a 1/3 increment so, you can achieve very fine adjustments." What exactly is CH/Group? I presume that each flash could be placed on an individual group (A, B or C per the Canon catalogue) If the main were placed on the A channel, I'm assuming you mean that the fill would be on the B (or C) channel, then the third flash would also be on the A channel, just with some setting of -3ev compensation, still on some 'auto' setting? Is this correct? Again, thanks for your response!! By the way, your images were wonderful!

Hello All,

I haven't been on photo.net much at all recently, and never in the

Canon forum, as I have been a Nikon shooter (D100) and medium format

film shooter, but I'm pondering the switch to Canon. I was at the

PPA show here in Las Vegas last weekend and was thrilled to see the

new 1D Mark II. I have questions about that camera which I will

post seperately, but here I want to ask about real world experience

with the wireless control for 550EX flash. I understand that with

an ST-E2 transmitter, the 550EX can be used remotely while retaining

TTL capability. I also understand that you can use multiple flashes

and simply dial in lighting ratios automatically. My questions are

these: first, does that auto 'ratioing' really work, in the real

world? Do people have examples of how well it does so (images)?

How simple is it to actually set up the settings on the ST-E2? Does

anyone have experience with the new Quantum T4D that supposedly

allows you to simply dial in fill flash brightness by setting f

stop differential? I gather it also is supposed to do this auto

ratio thing? Besides price, any advantages/disadvantages of the

550EX 'system' versus a Quantum?

 

Thanks in advance for any input.

I currently shoot a Nikon D100, but have been totally impressed with

the Canon products. I am pondering both a 1Ds and 10D, but wonder,

since I've already scratched the transparent LCD cover on my D100,

if such an accessory is available for either or both of the Canons.

Does anyone know? I'd prefer a genuine Canon product, but

aftermarket would be okay, if a Canon item doesn't exist. Thanks in

advance.

Hello all,

I just ordered a Minolta Dimage Scan Multi Pro MF film scanner

today, and I've been looking on the net at all kinds of things, just

getting ready (it comes Wednesday!). I've read the scanner manuals

that are downloadable from Minolta. On this site, as well as

others, some people state that the supplied Minolta software is

fine, others say that it's not. The naysayers seem to imply that

the Minolta software is not as sophisticated as one would expect for

such a high end scanner. Most negatives are associated with

negative scans (no pun intended). I've read that there are 2

recommended aftermarket software packages. Vuescan, and Silverfast

(the latter just became available for the Multi Pro). I've already

downloaded the Silverfast trial version plug-in for PS7, though I

obviously can't run it until the scanner shows up. Can anyone tell

me what the real rationale for spending up to $400 for Silverfast

will do for me, in practical terms, as compared to the included

Minolta software? Is it actual quality of the scans that you get,

or is it merely an ease of use difference? Does Silverfast, for

example, actually allow you to get 'more' out of the scanner

hardware than the supplied package? I understand that Vuescan is

quite inexpensive ($40 or thereabouts). What can it do that the

Minolta software cannot? What about the enhancements that come with

the Minolta software, such as Digital ICE, which gets a lot of rave

reviews? If I buy Silverfast or Vuescan, does Digital ICE work with

those packages, and if so, how do you run them?

 

Thanks for any answers in advance.

Hello All, I apologize up front if this question has been asked

before, and I know the answer is already out here SOMEWHERE, but

researching prior posts didn't give me an answer... I shoot

Hasselblad, and am pondering purchase of a 6x7 MF outfit (Mamiya

RZ67), and while I also have a Nikon D100 digital, I would like the

option of scanning negatives / transparencies from film. I know the

subject Minolta scanner has a 35mm negative holder that will hold

35mm strips up to 6 frames, but it's not clear from the Minolta

website, or the downloadable instruction manual for the scanner, if

strips of 3 or 4 frames of 6x6 or 6x7 images can be accomodated. I

typically leave my negatives in strips of 3 or 4, and I'm not really

interested in cutting them into single frames, but I will if I have

no choice. Can anyone tell me what the medium format negative holder

(s) (either with glass or glassless) for the Scan Multi Pro allows?

 

Secondly, does anyone have a website, or know of websites, where

scanned 6x6 and/or 6x7 frames have been posted, primarily portraits?

I'm sure there are hundreds out there, and I'm less interested, at

the moment, in the technical details than seeing the results that

one can achieve from such scans, thus I'd like to look at a variety

of scanned negative / transparency portraits.

 

Thanks in advance for any replies.

I know all of these newbie questions must become tiresome, but after

trying to get answers by internet research with no luck, here goes.

I am a long time photographer with 35mm, have done some work in MF

(Hasselblad), and most recently with digital, but there clearly is

no substitute for the awesome images one gets from large negatives.

In fact, I am considering an 'upgrade' to 6x7 (Mamiya RZ67) just to

increase negative size, but I would like to explore LF first. In

case anyone wants to know, my primary field of interest is

portraiture, and yes, I am aware of the inherent limitations of LF

with 'live subjects', though input on that would be welcome as well.

That said, I am totally new to the concept of LF, other than knowing

that the process of using LF is not nearly so simple as any of the

other formats. I know that you must focus on a ground glass, then

somehow insert the film on the film plane, make the exposure, and go

from there. The details of the process I will investigate next,

however, camera types seem quite confusing. I've looked at a number

of the manufacturer web sites (Toyo, Sinar, Horseman, Wisner,

Linhof, etc.) and found reference, on some of them, to 'view

cameras', 'technical cameras', 'field cameras' etc. I gather that

they area in actuality all 'view cameras' (correct?), but is there a

distinction in their functions (i.e., would a 'technical camera' be

used for a different application than a 'field camera'?). Are these

different 'types' of cameras different due to differing features of

the cameras themselves (i.e., does one actually have more

capabilties than another?) I am curious as to the perceived

differences.

 

Sorry to be so ignorant.

Hello All,

This is a really stupid question, but please just let me know if I

just have a bad memory, or if my camera is working as designed. I

seem to recall that when my F5 was brand new, when I started the film

rewind at the end of the roll, all I had to do was depress the 2

required buttons momentarily, and then the film would rewind by

itself. These days, in order for the film to rewind, I have to hold

the buttons down the entire time. It's not a big deal, but I wanted

to know if that's the way it's supposed to work. Thanks for any

responses.

Hi all,

Just curious if anyone has gone to the Nikon school, and what you

thought of it. If anyone responds, can you tell me what your

experience level was at the time you went, what you hoped to get out

of it, and what benefit, if any, did you gain? Was it worth the

money?

Hello All,

 

Hope this question isn't overly stupid. I am looking for opinions

regarding film choices for medium format portraiture. The work

would be primarily studio, with studio flash. I also realize that

there are probably a million opinions out there, and there is

certainly no 'right' answer, but just getting ideas. I have never

shot in B&W, and do not have any personal processing capability,

thus I will use a local lab. I understand we have a decent B&W lab

in town (Las Vegas). I am looking for a film that gives the best

detail and sharpness, (grain is less of a consideration), and which

is relatively forgiving with respect to the processing, given that a

lab will do the work. Thanks for any responses.

Thanks, all. I had a bad feeling on this anyway.

This may be a hopelessly ignorant set of questions, but here goes.

I am currently pondering the purchase of a D100. I understand that

a DX series flash must be used (if not using the pop-up flash) for

external flash photography. I own an SC-17 cord and an old SB-26

flash. What I'm interested in is knowing, if I purchase an SB-80DX

flash and the D100, what are my options for TTL with the SB-80/SB-26

combination? I'm sure that a sync cord of some type will need to go

to the SB-26, assuming that it can even be used in this type of

setup. I've used my SB-26 with my N90s and my F5 with great

success, both on camera and off, using the SC-17, but have never

attempted to use multiple Nikon flashes before. If the SB-80/SB-26

is a viable combination, how would one go about setting lighting

ratios, etc.? I know this may all sound pretty silly, as I guess I

ought to know these answers already, but any help would be sincerely

appreciated.

I left my F5 with the power on for about 8-9 days. It had a set of new alkaline AAs installed, and it appeared as if there was no significant drain at all. By the way, I called Nikon, aS I was concerned about having the camera energized for that long (it was brand new), and they told me there was nothing to be concerned about.

Has anyone heard anything (even rumors) regarding a possible new

Nikon digital camera that will compete with the brand new Canon D1s?

I realize that Nikon just recently came out with the D100, but

clearly that body is not in the same category as the Canon. The

Nikon D1x/h are also not that old, but clearly are also not up to

fair comparison with an 11 mp machine with a capture size equivalent

to a 35mm negative. I have too much invested in Nikon gear to

consider switching to Canon, but have become interested in pro

quality digital. Any information out there?

Almost every time I log into this site, and start searching through

images on the photo critque pages, after anywhere from 5-30 images

into my session, the images stop updating on my computer. After

that, no images on any page of the site are visible. I have to

leave the site and get back in to get images again. I don't think

it's a computer problem, as I am running a 2+ gigahz machine with

512 memory and a cable modem. Has anyone else experienced this?