frank_holub
-
Posts
17 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Events
Downloads
Gallery
Store
Posts posted by frank_holub
-
-
The link is here! Looks good so far...
http://www.dpreview.com/news/0410/04100101kminolta7dgallery.asp
-
-
I'm looking for the "best" options for continuous-tone printing. I
know there are plenty of dye-sub printers out there but I'm wondering
if there are any "real" photopaper printers. I think an example might
be a Fuji Pictro, but I'm thinking about something that would be more
suitable for a small studio or home environment. Hopefully able to
print borderless prints in sizes from 4x6 to 8x12. I do not need high
volume nor do I wish to spend thousands of dollars.
Any Suggestions?
Frank
-
As far as the shadow from the pop-up in portrait shots is concerned, I just put a piece of cardboard in front of the pop-up... Actually I use one of those clip-on name tag thingies and clip it to the Minolta logo in front of the pop-up (or maybe on the lens hood). This setup leaves a gap between the card and the flash, Thus it blocks the direct light that causes the shadow but still allows the flash to control the remote flashes perfectly.
The name tag thingy is a few cents from almost any office supply store.
Frank
-
I have been stuck with my Maxxum (Dynax) 9 in the rain to the point the entire top surface got wet. This amounted to a brief downpour... The camera was fine and did not have any problems. However, I suspect that if one were to leave any top line camera (Maxxum 9, F5, 1v, etc) out in the rain all night, It would have problems. I would be even MORE concerned about my lenses. Repeated exposure to rain (some would say ANY exposure to rain) would certainly promote fungus and other bad things to happen.
Bottomline, a brief bit of rain will likely not ruin your Dynax 9. Of course, I know some folkes that seem to think that a single drop of water will destroy thier camera.
I took the accomanying unprotected rain photo with a Canon Digital Rebel (300D) in Prague earlier this year - The rain lasted only a few moments. I also took (not posted) an almost identicle shot of the same couple in a much heavier rainstormm with my Maxxum 9 a couple years earlier. I wasn't trying to be in the rain - it just happened.
Frank
-
I was basically wondering the same thing. I'm fully prepared to buy a new 5600HS flash and a new "D" lens, however, I was wondering if I can use my 5400HS flashes in wireless mode with the 7D with the pop-up or with a 5600HS as the control flash...
Frank
-
Personally I'm thrilled K-M is coming out with the 7D. Sure, having an 8 MP sensor would have "felt" better and given me a nice "warm and fuzzy" feeling but I have found the 6 MP of the Canon DR (300D) works just fine. The real difference between 6MP and 8MP is slight at best and really more hype then anything (for an 8x12 it's the difference between 250dpi and 288dpi).
The REAL benefit of the 7D over the Canons should be evident the second we hold it in our hands and start shooting. I have the above mentioned Canon DR and a Maxxum 9, I also often use a Canon 1n, for me the '9 is simply the better camera - period. I have never used a Maxxum 7 but I hear many like it even more then the '9.
Beyond the ergonomics and the fact I just like my 9 better then any Canons I have used, AntiShake is what will really set the 7D apart for me. When I really start to think about what it will mean, I find those extra two MP's don't mean as much in comparison. I often handhold tough low light shots and the extra 2 or 3 stops will make a big difference. While only a faster shutter helps action shots, for nighttime street scenes, no flash ?museum? shots, natural light portrait shots, twilight landscapes ? basically 80% of the shots I take that would otherwise require a bigger and far for expensive piece of glass ? the A-S will be a very welcome feature.
The rather slow (1/160) flash sync is a non-issue with HSS and I?m intrigued by the ?interval? mode and something about remote data storage via ?DiMAGE Transfer? (any clue?).
When my dealer gets one I?ll be first in line.
-
Google actually wrote an email to me. I have copied in here...
Hi Frank,
Thank you for your note. Google's Image index doesn't exclude content based on embedded copyrights. Google follows standard web protocol in not crawling sites with specific instructions in their robots.txt files. We also do not crawl pages that use meta tags to restrict access by robots. For more information on both of these features, please refer to http://www.google.com/webmasters/3.html#B3
At present, we have no process for manually adding images to our results. We're working continuously to crawl more images to increase the quality and quantity of images in our index. If your images appear on a publicly available webpage, it's possible that we'll add them in the near future.
Regards,
The Google Team
-
I have 2988 images that could be indexed by Google. Only about 300 of the images are indexed when I do a site:my-spot.com on Google Images and the results shown are capped at about 100 images. After Google dismissed my copyright theory by telling me in an email, "Google's Image index doesn't exclude content based on embedded copyrights." I started to think maybe that due to some server problems I was having that Google dropped me into the dead link bucket but then I noticed that about 17 of the top 20 images under 'rose' were all new! I was in the top 20 (1st page) for 'rose' before this.
So... Now, a week later, what I really think is that big G just "flushed" the Images database so some fresh photos would come up...
Frank
-
I'm sorry if this is the wrong forum to post this, but I wasn't sure
where it should go...
For the past 6 months a number of my images have had some very good
placements in the Google Images search. These images were driving 200
to 400(!) page views (not just hits) per day to my site! Last week I
noticed that my images had completely disappeared from the Google
Images site - That's ALL of them - from the listings AND the cache!
My web pages (html) are still in the same place so I know that my
whole site isn't missing from Google's database.
I do not have any images that are "mature" or would cause a problem
with thier "Safe Search" filters so I find it kind of odd that every
image dropped off. But, Here is my theory...
A few months ago I embedded a copyright notice in the EXIF data of
each of my images. I suspect that last week Google started filtering
out all images that contained data in the EXIF copyright field...
This is likely due to the fact that Google has been getting a lot of
flak for caching images...
For more info see...
http://news.com.com/2100-1032_3-1024234.html
Has anyone experienced anything similar?
Frank
-
...and the back side too!<div>
</div>
-
Sorry for the broken link... Here is the image...<div></div>
-
See...
http://www.geheugenkaart.be/english/store/viewitem.asp?
idproduct=8979362
So... Is this photo for real? If so, it looks like everyone is going
to get their wish...
Frank
-
Thank you for this article about Minolta's Wireless Flash system. I have been using this system ever since I got my Maxxum 9 system and love it. One shot that nicely shows how it can improve an otherwise normal shot can be found here...
-
Yep - Picture Window Pro has my vote as well, I've been using it 3 or 4 years. For photo use, it simply cannot be beat. The user interface can be a bit weird if you're used to the Adobe products but once you're over that you'll find the functionality awesome.
Also, you get support directly from Jonathan Sachs who writes the software. I've had features added in the past just by asking, Try that with Adobe...
16 Bit per channel support throughout.
BTW A new version of Picture Window Pro (v3.5)was just released.
All for $90.
Frank
New Gallery of Images from 7D
in Sony/Minolta
Posted
I think it is safe to say the AntiShake system works well. The most impressive photo must be the religious statue (8 of 21 I think).
1/6 of a second at 75MM focal length! If I use the reciprocal rule, it means the shot should have been shot at 1/75. If my math is correct, that equals about 3 1/2 stops (not including any crop factor). Also, the noise level at ISO 3200 looks good to...
Can't Wait!