steven_clark

<p>I'll add a counter: ultrawide lenses are so different in perspective you'll have no idea if you need them or not. Maybe rent one to try out?</p>

<p>Try fiddling with the cams on the back of the lens a bit. I know some models of lens let you lock the lens in stop-down mode by actuating the cam past a stop. if you've taken it off and on several times then it's probably not a bad mounting, but here are a lot of moving parts back there (3 cams/levers and 2 pins?).</p>

There's also North Coast Photo near San Diego. I know they do a pretty brisk business in mail order development. Black and white is easy to self develop but color standards were geared toward machine development and require controlled higher temperatures so the dwindling dip and dunk processors are still the way to go for color negs and slide film.

<p>I don't know if the TPU is removable in this model, but if it is you might try pulling and reinserting the cable running to it.</p>

Just to ask the most stupid question: have you made sure the window at the top of the film holders is open?

<p>To be clear DJI sells an integrated Micro4/3 camera (and a tuned fast compact 28mm-ish lens, and balance weights and adapter gears for a few others) on a gimbal to go with their drones. It looks like it only works with the fancy Inspire series. Otherwise most systems come with their own camera which is plenty good.</p>

<p>If you want to light a fire under them you may say that they have images owned by other people with effectively expired license terms that they risk getting sued for using if you don't help ferret them out.</p>

<p>About the only limit to TIFF is that it's an inherently 32-bit format and can't handle truly gigantic (over 2 GB) images.</p>

<p>For a used Mk1 5d that looks reasonable. I'd still lean towards buying used gear from KEH. It's their specialty.</p>

<p>There's a pretty limited set of browsers that handle color profiles properly, especially outside macOS. It's a bad idea to plan on it happening, hence the usual recommendation to just use sRGB.</p>

<p>I think there used to be a LOT of people who got a dSLR because those were the good cameras, not because they needed them in particular. These were the people I'd see wandering around with just the kit zoom. As the better smartphone cameras have increasingly gotten passable in more and more use cases I think those people are probably no longer buying separate cameras period.</p>

<p>I've heard a good rule of thumb that even contact prints really only carry about 1200ppi of information. I thought I'd repeat that here.</p>

<p>Usually you want to use 48-bit color when scanning negatives. You need to do significant post-processing to give them some contrast. Bumping up the contrast will improve the colors if done on the RGB channels instead of Lightness. Tweaking those curves can also be used for color balancing. And there you have pretty much my hobbyist workflow.</p>

<p>To be short: you probably don't have the time to build the skills you need this week. Think of it like the kind of output you'd get with your first week in the darkroom or the first couple rolls of manual exposure. It takes time to build up the film-scanning and post-processing skill set.</p>

No.

<p>From experience you need to use curves to shoulder off those shadows so the grain is less prominent and make some corrections to the color balance. This is usually better done in an actual image editor rather than the scan driver, but Epson Scan does give you some options.</p>

<p>On the Epson end it look like there are no longer "cheap" 6-color models (the RX 200 was $99 for example). So if you want that route you might as well start with the Artisan 1430 for $300 unless you need it smaller or to have a scanner then maybe a Photo XP-860 or 960 would work better. They've pretty much abandoned the Durabrite ink line so some of their 4-color printers are now much less quirky for photos (now having dye colors and only black being pigment). Starting at the Premium XP-520 ($129) they have a dye black ink as well as the pigment so you get decent glossy photos but also crisp waterproof black text.</p>

<p>As someone who wasn't around for the heydey of mechanical cameras and has taken a photography course since the 90s I'll counter that: If your film camera is at least as advanced as an A-1/AE-1 or OM-G or XG-7 and doesn't have a motor drive, you will probably not expend more than one fresh camera battery over the course of a semester (unless you forget to lock it). And electronic shutters probably are more stable with less adjustment than fully mechanically timed ones. Repair shops are in much shorter supply than batteries these days. Also mechanical bodies are heavier which can reduce your ability to handhold shots at lower speeds. The ability to shoot a camera without a battery is kinda cool but nearly useless for a less experienced user. I'd lean heavily towards late 70s cameras.</p>

Olympus, Canon, and Minolta manual focus systems all lack dSLR upgrade paths so their lenses are dirt cheap. If you have the money though I'll second just getting a Rebel with Manual mode so you can swap lenses. There are times with trick shots where it's really nice to be able to check how the exposure might turn out by sticking a sensor behind your lens and actually checking your settings. It's nice to not find out your exposure compensation was wrong when showing a contact sheet. I personally like my A-1 and AE-1 but be warned there are ways to manipulate the controls on an A-1 that flat out do not work! Read the manual, and when you get the an error code remember the double exposure system clears it (which is f'ing strange!).

<p>If you're doing video STM lenses are sometimes actually recommended. They tend to be quieter.</p>

Also the printer setting may be wrong. If normal is your quality setting, most profiles are set up for one of the highest quality settings.

You're using the wrong profile for that paper. Premium Photo Glossy is a different paper with a different consistency than its ultra premium RC cousin.

<p>In driver color management is usually a bad idea with Epsons (and probably anything else). There details beyond that. What paper are you using? What profile are you using (and what is the filename)? And what printer settings are you using? If you get any of those lined up slightly wrong the process goes awry. Matching a screen for comparison may be impractical usually your whitepoints are different so your eyes have to adjust anyway. I've noticed darker prints often look drastically different depending on how much light is available.</p>

<p>Your eyes are spectacularly good at compensating for low light, to the point it looks like the light isn't low. Camera meters will happily tell you just how crappy the light is.</p>

<p>Or you've got fogging on the inside of the scan bed?</p>