greg_whitten1

I'm lucky to have an 11 foot ceiling, but not lucky enought for 25'. How limiting do you think an 11' ceiling might be?

thanks for the other input on color. Matte gray will be the walls and ceiling.

Greg

I'm not sure if this is the correct forum, if not, let me know and

I'll re-post.

I'm building a new house and have a 27x25 space to use as a studio.

My interest is in portrait photography. The north wall has about 16

feet of windows. Right now the floor is just plywood and the walls

will be wallboard(it's a 2nd story above gameroom, etc.). Any ideas

on whether I need to put in a real floor, and if so, what color?

What color floor, walls, ceiling (white? gray?)

Thanks.

Greg

Thanks to each of you for your experiences and insights. You have helped persuade me to the 300mm f/4 IS and teleconverter: speed, IS, teleconverter use all add up to versatility. Plus, if the image isn't big enough, I can crop some. With a 400mm, if I can't get all the image in that I want, I have found it harder to add more of the subject post capture! While there is probably a 400mm or 500mm in my future, she will have to get along for a while without me.

Thanks again,

Greg

This is not a resolution or "which is best" question. I've read all

the posts comparing sharpness, etc. on the 400mm f/5.6 and 300mm f/4

IS prime lenses. I'm sure both are great and better than what I need

or deserve! My question is different.

For those of you who have or have had both 300mm and 400mm lenses,

what have been your preference for sports / wildlife shooting? I

shoot with a 10d. I have the 70-200 f/2.8 and shorter lenses. I

want a longer (probably prime) lens to play with and bring in the

wildlife, athletes, etc.

I love the thought of the IS and f/4 on the 300mm. However, I wonder

whether only another 100mm over my 70-200 will satisfy in the field

or if doubling up to the 400mm is really the way to go?

If you have or have had both lenses, what has been your experience on

which lens you used more and why?

Thanks.

Greg

Thanks to all of you for chiming in. Here is a link from luminous-landscape.com that explains this and, more importantly (to me), has comparison pictures:

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/understanding-series/dslr-mag.shtml

Greg

Hi - I would like to make a photograph of a fencing master by

lowering the light level in his gym to barely visible, opening the

shutter, having the master perform a manouver, and during the

manouver, firing my flash several times so that multiple images are

captured on the single photograph, so that the exposure is all based

on the various "pops" from the flash. The effect that I envision is

5-15 different impressions of him on the single frame, as he goes

through the manouever.

I have an EOS 10d and can use any of a 380ex, 540ez, 550 ex or 580ex,

or a manually operated vivitar 285. The camera will be tripod

mounted. I want the background to go black, so I expect to use a

very small aperture.

My questions include: (1) can any of these flashes automatically

fire in a "strobe" - like fashion? (2) any suggestions for the set-

up / technique / etc.?

Thanks.

Greg

Thanks for helping me with that. Now that I know my 70-200 is still a 70-200 and not a 120-320, I realize I need a 300mm or 400mm prime!

The Light is On in Dallas, a/k/a Greg

Hi - I have a Canon 10d. This has the 1.6x "crop" / "multiplier" due

to smaller image size. I've always thought of this as a multiplier

effect (i.e., a 50mm lens becomes equivalent to an 80mm lens[50mm x

1.6]). However, I'm not sure if that's accurate. When considering

the image size on the sensor, wouldn't it be the same size on sensor

as it would be on film, so that this is really a "cropping factor"?

If it was a multiplication factor, the image size from a 50mm lens on

film would be smaller than the image size on a sensor from an 80mm

lens (1.6x 50), right? My 70-200 doesn't create a larger image when

used on my 10d than on my EOS film cameras, right?

Thanks.

Confused in Dallas, a/k/a Greg

Thanks. I must have punched in my search wrong to have missed something so obvious!

Greg

Hi - I'm thinking of buying this lens for use on my 10D. With the

1.6x factor, I know that it will have an effective focal length of

1.6x65 or about 100. Does the magnification change also? Is it now

a 1.6x - ?

Also, if you could share any experience using this lens or other lens

at greater than 1x magnification would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks.

Greg

Thanks for your responses. I was shooting at "iso" 400 and 800 and just assumed that the flash would freeze the action. Next time I do this I need to get my brain out of portrait / landscape mode and into "their moving fast I need a fast shutter speed" mode!

Greg

I recently shot some photos of my kids' basketball games using Eos

10D and flash. Had the camera in manual mode or in aperture priority

mode. If you're asking "why" av / manual modes, the answer is that I

wasn't thinking! Several of my shots were blurred, due I think to my

shutter speed being too slow and relying too much on the flash to

freeze the motion.

My question is, what are the general "rules of thumb" for the shutter

speed necessary to freeze motion in people sports (not car racing)?

With or without a flash?

Thanks.

Greg

Thanks. Exactly what I needed.

Greg

I want a vertical grip for my EOS 10D. I can't find on the Canon

site, at B&H, Adorama, etc., the model number or product. Is it the

same that is on the 20D (BG-E2)?

thanks.

Greg

Hi - I want to paint on my inkjet prints with oil and/or acrylic

based paints. I use an HP 7960, which has water based inks. What

type of sealant / coating / spray do I need to use on the print prior

to painting so that the paint adheres and does not cause

deterioration to the underlying paper?

thanks

I made an "analogue" mistake with a print from my HP 7960: I tried

to clean a fingerprint off of it with water and light rubbing with a

soft cotton cloth (as I would with a print from my darkroom). If you

haven't tried this than you are smarter than me! I certainly don't

recommend the procedure as the image began to come up (almost like

latex paint put down over oil based paint).

My question is whether all inkjet inks and papers react this way to

water? Is there a way to clean a print? Does the Epson, Canon, etc.

have the same issues of water damagability?

Thanks

I've played with the trial version of the imaging factory's convert

to b&w utility for photoshop (elements 2 is what I use). Seems to

work well, but after 30 days I have to pony up $99. Ouch! Anyone

familiar with equally good but less expensive alternatives that

allow the degree of control that the imaging factory's software does?

Peggy - Thanks for the info. This seems to be what I had in mind, at least in effect. Not how I envisioned it, but if it works, it works!

Greg

Here is a suggestion for a different, and perhaps more user friendly,

way to display newly uploaded images for photo critique.

The way it is currently set up, we have to go through and load photo

by photo by photo, etc. It takes a while to see new photos, leading

perhaps some to lose interest (because of the time involved), before

finding a new photo that captures one's attention.

Would it work to have the new photos displayed 10-15 per page, in

thumbnail fashion, so that we can quickly scan a page at a time?

That way,we can see hundreds of new images in the amount of time it

would normally take to see 10 or 20 new images. Then, if there is a

photo which we would like to rate / comment, we could click that

photo to bring up the rating / comment screen.

Just my .02.

Thanks to each of you for your contribution. Making a "cold turkey" technology change is difficult, and input from those of you who have already made the change is invaluable to those like me who are in the process but have limited time.

Greg

Jay - Thanks for your recommendation. I'll check out Amazon for the book.

Greg

Hi - I have resisted digital for years, but now am jumping in with a

Canon 10D. In the past I have printed my own black and white prints

in a home darkroom. I am now rather confused by all the choices

digital printing has to offer. In the chemical darkroom, there are

millions of choices (which developer, fixer, what temperature,

agitation, concentration, paper, ad infinitum). Through much trial

and error I found what worked for me. I am much more hesitant or

unsure about the choices in digital photography / black and white

printing.

Bottom line, I need help in setting up my digital darkroom with

respect to printer, inks and workflow. I know there is a lot written

on various aspects of this, but for a guy who does not have a wide

and deep digital context in which to put the snippets of information

found in various places, I get oversaturated with information and

start to melt down.

My equipment will include: dedicated black and white photo inkjet

printer / inkset; properly calibrated monitor; photoshop 7; photoshop

elements 2; Canon 10D. With the Canon I will capture RAW and high

res jpegs with each image, so I can work with each.

My questions are really in 3 parts: (1) Post capture processing; and

(2) Printing; and (3) software.

(1) Post Capture Processing - What recommendations can you make for

converting the RAW or processing of the RAW or jpeg into a black and

white image suitable for printing (I don't mean dodging,

burning, "fixing" blemishes, etc.)? What are the best or at least

very good ways to get rid of the color and end up with a black and

white image to print on high quality paper for display?

(2) Printing - What are the best choices for a dedicated b&w photo

printer (budget of $400 - $800)? What about inksets? (Piezotones?)

Any special software? I don't mind spending money to get up and

running. I just don't want to have to spend money multiple times on

the same device, because I made poor choices the first time.

(3) Software - I need good monitor calibration software / spyder? I

have PS and PS Elements 2. I will have Capture 1 for manipulating

the Raw files. Anything else needed?

Finally, any good books / sites from black and white photographers

that lay all this out?

Thanks for your help.

I put a Maxwell screen in my C330. I previously had a C330F with a Beattie Screen (sold that kit a few years ago b/c needed the cash). I can't make a side by side comparison, but I would not shoot a C330 without the Beattie or Maxwell screen.

My Maxwell has the split image (like my old Minolta x370 / x700). It is very bright, contrasty, very much easier to focus. Focus is quicker and more reliable. No guessing. These screens are 125 - 150 (can't remember how much with shipping), so some people may complain about the expense.

If so, ask yourself some questions: how much is it worth to you to be able to focus your camera reliably in lower light conditions? how much to be able to shoot at 2.8, 3.5, 4.5 and not have to worry about whether the focus is spot on (b/c anything less than perfect focus at such large apertures means no depth of field and an out of focus image); how much is it worth to you after spending an hour or so in the darkroom to print a good, sharp print vs. realizing in the darkroom for the first time that focus was not quite on b/c the original blankety blank viewfinder was too dim / too uncontrasty to focus? How much is it worth to you to not have to tell your ______ [wife, friend, client, kid, etc.] that the portait didn't turn out well b/c you couldn't focus properly? you get the "picture."

If you have experienced these frustrations, but otherwise like the camera and format, instead of spending $1,000 + on some other kit, try the $140 route and you will probably be very pleased.

O.k., I'll stop the sermon (I don't work for Maxwell either, but from my conversations on the phone with him about his screens and installation, he seems like a great guy).

Also, I installed the screen myself, with new foam (provided with the screen), etc. based on the very good instructions from Maxwell.

Greg

Thanks to all for your input.

Greg

I have been shooting Tmax 400 at 200 - 250 (Minolta, manual focus

35mm). When using a polarizing filter or various others (yellow or

orange), shutter speeds are getting very long, but the negatives have

been easy to print. I have processed with D-76 and developed paper

with Kodak Dektol and with ILford Universal. I print with a condensor

enlarger.

I would like to shoot a 400 speed film at 400, i.e., gain another

stop, without increasing grain. I am certainly willing to change

film, film developers and paper developers.

For those who have been down this road what have you found in terms

of a "true" e.i. 400 film?

(originally posted in the non-black and white film and processing

forum by mistake)

Thanks.

Greg