RaymondC

<p>Re: the older lens. Not the AFS version. Bro bought this lens for a song and it does indeed have fungus - two sides like a web like feature. Doesn't affect images. Vinegar and water to clean right? He did take off the top element but the glass seems quite thick. How does he get between that? There also seems to be a web like thing further inside the lens as well. Hopefully that is reachable for a clean without a further dismantle. </p> <p>Cheers.</p>

<p>A naive question. If you are anywhere but the west side of the USA and you plan to do a sunset shoot. Would there be things blocking your view if you are looking for a clear water level view? I am not in the USA but I am now trying to position myself at the west coastline for a sunset. </p> <p>Thanks. </p>

<p>I had a D70 apart from the BGLOD recall which I had to return it a few times to them. I had PCB, aperture arm, aperture control unit replacements as well as a AF fine tune. My card unit failed after 7 or 8yrs. I reattached the ribbon cable and it worked for sometime until I tried it again and broke the ribbon clip, got a $50US refurbished card unit and DIY and been fine since.... 10yrs plus still kicking. Not the ideal camera for photography pursuits but for casual pictures of people it is fine. For my own stuff I am shooting slide film now. I guess for controlled shooting on a tripod the D70 is still OK for A4 and A3 prints.</p>

<p>How good is the RX100 for these situations:<br /> Mainly handheld at ISO 1600-3200 widish aperture of say street photography at night with neon lights ie - Asia.<br />And occasionally by itself - Tripod and long exposures at lowish ISO.</p> <p>With its larger sensor but not quite as larger as a crop sensor SLR. I figured this might be a nice camea paired with a film camera as I enjoy shooting slide film but slide film is too slow for color night street photography. It might be a nice camera when I am with friends at a dinner or at a cafe etc. than lugging my dSLR.</p> <p>How is the focus like, there is no manual focus ring I suppose. So I am relying on the electronic focus point? Can I frame and recompose as well? How is with lens flare and long exposure grain etc... We still have a Canon A510, I know not on the same class but at low ISO it was terrible. But in bright light it was quite OK for casual snaps.</p>

<p>I can understand that in the past, if we shot B/W they printed it in the darkroom, contast filters, dodge and burning. All these little steps. I took up photography in 2004 I didn't do that myself but I can understand. If we shot C41 film, we might soften the image ie portraits and correct color cast or expect the lab to do it. But when many people shot slide film they projected the slides at home or at a camera club. But I can understand a professional or the few might oursource the digial post processing. At the camera club, back a few years, we had a sport photographer who was associated with the All Blacks rugby team and he projected the slides.</p>

<p>Yes - I do edit the scans to match the actual slide using whatever limited skills I have. Althou one could calibrate their scanner with a E6 iT8 target ....</p> <p>But hey. Now I will think twice when I see a photograph. He had a paid for seminar that I attended. He has been on trips with the likes of John Shaw, Freeman Patterson, the CEO of Adobe. I am not saying they all do it. But this photographer showed us what they do in Adobe Lightroom with his "2 minutes" PP. He shows us the before and after images - original RAW and a fully prepped version. He then reset the file and spent a moment showing us in 2 or 3 steps what they do. </p> <p>They would:<br> Desaturate the image and alter the WB/tint or maybe a split tone. <br> They do use tripods but only when they have to. Shoot a landscape image handheld at ISO 800 and then add NR.<br> Darken and brighten certain areas, add vignetting. <br> If an image was taken in a cloudy day with things are overcasted. They would make the clouds even moodier, then selectively they would brighten up the foreground / buildings and add saturation. </p> <p>Maybe I am still stuck in the last century. I shoot a slide. I look at the actual slide. If I shoot color negative film or digital I make very slight global changes with a slight S curve, some sharpening, maybe straighten the horizon, 5% cropping. A bit like in the days - you drop off a roll of film and you get back a set of 6x4 prints. </p> <p>He did mention, you either sit there for 2 weeks and wait for the sun or you can adjust the photograph. </p> <p>One image he showed that he cut off the penguin's head ... so he threw it into Photoshop and extended the canvas and using the clone tool he said he painted back the top of the head. Likewise if the leg wing of the bird was cut off he could grab the other wing and adjust some how for left wing. </p>

<p>I wasn't meaning the industry as in sales or manufacturer. I was meaning something like the photographic society. Amateurs joins clubs or read magazines. Put images thru for judges to rate them etc. If one was getting a photograph crtiiqued could one do without post processing. </p> <p>http://www.rps.org/</p>

<p>Yeah probably post processing was always there ... with b/w and still there was/is the darkroom, people did processing color neg film with wedding work and I hear some talk about color darkroom but I don't know anything about that. Maybe also with color slides and now diigtal. Maybe I just belong to that minority that wants nothing to be done after the shutter is pressed and if is to be scanned to get a file out of it it, it is to just match slide.</p> <p>Maybe post processing more accessible these days? Apart from b/w work, before digital the average person who shot color film probably didn't have their own scanner and software. </p>

<p>I am not a pro. I am with a camera club. In the camera club some have put their portfolio like a selection of a couple of images to be judged and if they meet they get a recognition, we're with the UK photography society thingy. Here in New Zealand.</p> <p>When they say to improve and grow as a photographer .. post processing is part of that right. If one ask many of the industry figures - here are my images straight out of my camera either digital or film it is gonna be difficult to cut the mustard.</p> <p>There are people who shoot images in certain ways that's a personal thing and that's fine but to many figureheads it may be an image that potential wasn't exploited. They might say post processing as a tool could have been used but it wasn't used.</p> <p>I asked a question, some would say there is the previsualisation and the post editing visualisation. They visualise from start to end of how they want their end result.</p> <p>Yeah .. there is a landscape pro that I attended an seminar and he said it - he shoots 617 Kodak E100G on his Linhof and he takes out footprints off the sand. He would use dodge and burn.</p> <p>Maybe I am dreaming if I am wanting to photograph slides so I look at the slide on the lightbox so there is no computer involvement. Employing filters or film like Velvia and I demand the mother nature and things out of my control to be a certain way so I revist and revisit the same scene. If they are not, at the time, it would be recorded as. But I can clearly see the argument a decision in darkroom is lighroom and a decision with Velvia is post processing. Maybe my style is to do everything in camera and nothing after the film is developed. But like I say, the photography industry now afaik is about post processing right ... they see that as a integral part. Maybe I am one of these who hide in the cave and do photography in perculiar ways- to me clearly most out there incorporate fSLR or dSLR with post processing. </p> <p>All the speakers at my camera club, not one have not used post processing. Film or digital.</p>

<p>Re: limiting. I mean film is more limiting in what I can do. I mean that, with film the ISO i slower, I cannot shoot 200 images per day for 14 days. Digital allows you to shoot more, you can try to wing it with a higher ISO, a image stablised lens at a 200mm at 1/10 by firing multiple shots and hope to get away with 1. In processing there might be more things that you can do. With film the ISO isn't that wide, once it is scanned you might not be able to edit as much as you can with a RAW file.</p> <p>I enjoy shooting slides but at $20US for 36 images cost I do think about. It's not like I would be handholding a 200mm at low light and fire off 20 shots to get one with Velvia 100 or Portra 400. Or doing some street photo or sports with film. With digital one could lie on the wet sand and take a shot at ISO 1600 that's not that possible with film. Like one encounters on a holiday tirp.</p> <p>On one side I enjoy slide film and the other there is less things you can do with it and taking 2 systems is not always possible.</p> <p>I've travelled overseas with a film camera. At home, times when I listen to professional photographers speak at a seminar. I am kinda thinking yeah ... it does open my eyes for other opportunities but when I shoot just film - in the afternoon the light might be boring or in the evening markets I don't bother to take my camera out b/c I know ISO 1600 etc .. it just won't cut it. So I wait for the golden hour or the twilight and get there earlier, stand there, tripod and camera all set up, fire a few frames and I walk away. I might hop to another area to take another shot - but it is again setting up that tripod, press the cable release and I imagine digital shooters might have taken 5x different versions already when I've just taken 1. I arrive home after a 5 day trip and I have 3 or 4 rolls. </p>

<p>Thanks all, I've read a few of your replies and will read the rest and read them again slowly. </p> <p>I will try to explain it again. I have a Nikon D600 and film bodies and I am contemplating with a medium format. I like slide film b/c once it is developed it is wysiwyg. When I scan the film yes I do need to adjust it in software to get it to match how the actual slide looks like, custom calibrated printer and monitor of course here. Yes, there is the slower nature, more thought process, fewer shots, more careful way of film that I also enjoy. </p> <p>What I am getting at is. After listening to professional photographers (some renown) those who offer international workshop tours etc. Post processing is a significant part of their successful images. They might desaturate images, darken certain areas and brighten certain other areas. Yes, you can do that in the darkroom and you can do that once C41 film is scanned and processed in software but with a slide, you can do that too but it is gonna be quite different to the original - it's no longer "match slide". So while eg slide film provides me enjoyment with the slower process, need to wait for the result etc .. in terms of the result - if it is going to be viewed by others it may have more processing involved it is not going to look like the original, I thought about maybe am I making it too much of a fuss of insisting myself at times to shoot slide film than digital and thus limiting myself. </p>

<p>How much processing are you doing with slide film? You have to scan them first of course. I can understand that with b/w film, after it is scanned it goes into Lightroom as you do when put them thru the Darkroom, as I also understand with color negative film since it has to be converted to a working image first.</p> <p>People are shooting more digital, thru my camera club some pro's have talked about Lightroom and Photoshop editing and it's the way now and as I can understand those who do nature or portrait photography processing is involved be it if one shot digital or film. More in the past, with slides, they handed over the film afaik then the editors did whatever they wanted. If today, one scans slide film into the computer, process it with a software, it is going to be different than the original right?</p> <p>That being the case, while I still enjoy shooting film and having its unedited way - ie view the slides on a light table. Going by today's standards, if I were to edit my slide film, seems more straightforward just to shoot digital? And, if I choose not to edit it, it seems to be for my eye only considering the current style at present. </p>

<p>I understand the P67 would require a 3 series Gitzo CF with say a 180mm lens. With the Hasselblad 500CM and a 150mm - the shutter is at the lens, can I get away with my Gitzo 1228 or my 1550T in a pinch? I usually do sunrise / sunsets / twiights / waterfalls.</p>

<p>Here where I am. My lab uses a Nortisu or a Frontier system for scanning and printing, it's a complex all in one unit. I now just develop and I scan myself. One time they gave me a Photo CD by mistake so I got that for free. The scans are not as good as my Epson V700. Let alone better scanners you can get. It could also be what kind of settings they used as well. </p>

<p>I bought a Coolscan 4000 off a pro it seems like. It had issues before but I thought it was x64 bit related cos Nikon Scan throws up errors with the hacked driver. Then I used Vuescan which ignored the errors than 2yrs after being used sparingly, I shoot like 10 rolls a year so .. you get the picture. Suddenly it stopped working, it seems ok until you plug it into the computer and it doesn't get detected. Tried lubricating and even using a electrical contact cleaner and taking the motherboard off and wet cleaning all the circuit boards to no avail. I have got a friend to call Nikon Tokyo about servicing b/c they are nice scanners but they say they cannot fix a no parts, they can do a CLA though. </p> <p>I wish I bought a new CS instea dof this Epson at the time, I wanted convenience with it but I haven't shot one roll of film that is larger than 35mm. Imacons are too $$, so for me it is really just outsourcing the scan job, I may try the macro lens way, I have a lens already maybe off a lightbox maybe not 1:1 will try it out and see how it stacks up. </p>

<p>In case of fire etc etc ... The reason I ask is that I know some a person that he recently just splurge on the cyclinder Mac Pro and then Promise Pegasus HD RAID unit which is at the Apple store as well ie - 4x drives. That's some serious disk space. Then the question is how does one get that offline? We only have 50Mbps upload speeds for fiber optic in New Zealand. Generally the data is not unlimied usage. With a download of 100 or 200Mbps. But still you can imagine ...</p> <p>I don't shoot that much so it's ok but again I still shoot film for this hobby so I guess there is only one copy and any scanned copies are not the same but I guess better than nothing ... But I have 2 HDs in machine so 2 copies there, and 1x external. Looking at putting 1x in a bank safe. But again, I've only got 250GB of stuff.</p> <p>Cheers.</p>

<p>These days who buy new film cameras right .. I had this camera for a good few years, I don't shoot that much, maybe 10 rolls a year and got 2 rolls of C41 film that had scratches on them, enquired at the lab and I looked at my camera pointed it out to them. I think I agree with them that I had similar looking scratches on the back pressure plate on the door, was asked to clean the camera. </p> <p>I did shoot off with one roll of film just 2 days ago, got those book without any cleaning they came back without marks. This is the first time I saw scratches. How popular are they? Many people incl non photographers would never thought of how fragile cameras are, they just load film and head out.</p> <p>Cheers.</p>