steve_bright1

I need to get some lab prints made from my digital images. I have

been using CostCo for a while and have been very pleased with the

results on their glossy Fuji Crystal Archive paper. However, my new

client wants a finish which is very similar to Epson Premium Semi

Gloss, which is a kind of lustre finish - if you hold it at an angle

to the light it looks as if there's millions of little sparkles

instead of a mirror finish.

 

CostCo in the UK only do the gloss finish, so could anyone advise me

of either a) a lab in the UK which does prints with that finish, or

b) what type of lab printing paper has that finish, so I then know

precisely what to ask for.

 

Many thanks for your help.

I have been informed that there is no import duty on goods imported into the UK from the Channel Islands. However, VAT is due if the value of the shipped package is over a certain limit (about GBP 15-20 I think). The carrier will also make an admin charge for collecting the VAT (around GBP 10) for the Royal Mail.

 

If you import into the UK from outside of the EU (and the Channel Islands) you get billed for: import duty on the shipment value (including shipping costs), VAT on that figure (i.e including the duty), then the carrier's admin charge.

 

PS. How can we get the pound sign to work? That's a UK currency pound sign, not the '#' symbol which is sometimes referred to as a pound in the US.

Slightly late, only just spotted this thread. Hope you had a great day. This was taken at the USS Arizona Memorial, Pearl Harbor.<div></div>

If you use a hammer too hard it could distort the metal and make it even more difficult to get off.

 

You can buy a cheap plastic filter wrench from camera stores. Alternatively, how about trying an elastic band? Use a wide one and put it onto the metal of the filter, doubling it up if necessary to get a good tight fit. Hopefully you can then get enough twisting power from your hand onto the filter without your hand slipping. Works great for jam jars too.

Irfanview can do it: file->batch conversion/rename. Using the 'advanced options' you can resize to either an absolute size or a percentage of the original.

 

Reasonably quick, can handle raw files and it can save the images in a variety of formats.

 

Only significant drawback for me is that it doesn't handle the exif orientation flag, so all the vertical images come out sideways.

 

It's free too!

Did you check out this handy photo.net article? <a href="http://www.photo.net/equipment/wacom/">http://www.photo.net/equipment/wacom/</a>

The 1270 along with quite a few other Epson printers will by default leave a white margin of 3mm on the front and side edges, with the rear edge (i.e. the last one to come out of the printer) having a 14mm margin. That said, if you tick the 'maximum size' box on the paper size tab (I think it's that one), the rear margin will be reduced to 3mm, so you'll get a 3mm margin all the way round.

 

So, say for example you want to print an image on A4 paper (210x297mm) with a 10mm border all the way round, you'll need to size your image in Photoshop so that it's 190x277mm. Then increase the canvas size so it's 204x291mm. Then send it to the printer, ticking the maximum size box. The image will be neatly centred on the paper with a 10mm border.

 

Similarly for an A3 sheet (297x420mm) with a 10mm border all the way round: Size the image so that it's 277x400mm. Increase the canvas size to be 291x414mm. Send it to the printer, ticking the maximum size box.

 

During the canvas resizing operations above, you could achieve the same effect by ticking the 'relative' box and specifying a 14mm increase in both the horizontal and vertical directions [14mm being two lots of 10mm borders less two lots of the 3mm margin the printer gives you]. Oh, and you'll be wanting to leave the anchor point in it's centred default position.

 

Sounds a bit complicated, but once you've done it a couple of times it becomes second nature.

<p>A few sensor cleaning links for you. There have been numerous threads on this and many people recommend the top link - it has a very detailed description.

<p>

<a href="http://www.pbase.com/copperhill/ccd_cleaning">http://www.pbase.com/copperhill/ccd_cleaning</a><br>

<a href="http://www.luminous-landscape.com/essays/sensor-cleaning.shtml">http://www.luminous-landscape.com/essays/sensor-cleaning.shtml</a><br>

<a href="http://www.bythom.com/cleaning.htm">http://www.bythom.com/cleaning.htm</a><br>

<a href="http://www.fujifilmsupport.com/faq/tech/ccd_clean/s2_clean_ccd.pdf">http://www.fujifilmsupport.com/faq/tech/ccd_clean/s2_clean_ccd.pdf</a>

<p>It's a bit nerve-wracking at first, but you get used to it. I started cleaning mine myself after sending it back to Canon to be cleaned - they just rearranged the dust.

<<Most of the time, using a bulb blower will be enough>>

 

But give it some hearty squeezes first to get rid of accumulated crap before you direct the blower at the sensor!!

I would definitely recommend any reasonably adept person to attempt to clean the sensor themselves, only sending it back to Canon as a last resort. Last summer I didn't do enough research on cleaning sensors and just sent the camera straight back to Canon UK.

 

Over the next two months, the camera went back and forth three times - they couldn't clean the sensor satisfactorily and even scratched it. They replaced the sensor twice. The to-ing and fro-ing stopped when I decided to clean it myself. Canon never did manage to clean it properly.

Sounds like a dead/hot pixel and most unlikely to be sensor dust. Check out <a href="http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=004TjW">this thread</a> for similar experiences. I would recommend running the <a href="http://www.starzen.com/imaging/deadpixeltest.htm">deadpixel test</a> program mentioned for evidence/proof, then send it back to Nikon.

Did you buy the lens second-hand? Is the front element clean? This may sound like a dumb question, but I bought a lens off Ebay that on first glance looked like new, yet all the images shot were really low on contrast and hazy. It was only on closer examination in a really strong light that I could see the deeply-recessed front element was absolutely filthy. Once it was cleaned it was fine.

I have had two Minolta angle finders of slightly different vintages and they both fit the viewfinder of a Canon 10D. I'm not that familiar with the Canon range, but I presume that if they fit the 10D than they'll also fit most other Canons.

 

You might be able to pick up a Minolta finder on ebay.

Sounds like the lines are parallel to the print head movement direction fom what you describe. It could be that you need to carry out the 'head angular adjustment' procedure. This is normally a service procedure, so you won't find it described in consumer literature.

<p>

However, you can download a <a href="http://www.epson.co.uk/repair/pdfs/inkjet/stylus%20photo%20870-1270%20service%20manual%20rev%20b.pdf">service manual for the Epson 1270</a>. It's 13Mb!

<p>

I know you've got a 1290, but I believe that the 1290 is mechanically very similar to the 1270.

<p>

If you were to carry out this procedure yourself, you'd need to use a special service program to print the appropriate test pattern (not a nozzle check). You can get the <a href="http://www.epson.co.uk/repair/programs/stylus/sp870,1270/sp871270.zip">program for the 1270 here</a>. Trouble is, I have no idea whether that would work with the 1290. Alas, I haven't managed to locate either the service manual or program for the 1290. You also have to use Win98 for the program and connect the printer using a parallel cable; a USB connection won't work with the program.

With desktop Epson printers, when a cleaning cycle is done, ink is sprayed onto a foam pad on the right hand side. This foam pad is in the capping assembly and is surrounded by a raised rubber seal. After soaking the pad with ink, you'll hear a fast whirring sound. This is the ink pump operating which sucks the ink from the pad, down a tube into the huge absorbent pad in the base of the printer.

 

The motor which works the pump then turns in the opposite direction which winds out a rubber wiper blade to the left of the capping assembly. The print carriage then moves to the left and right which effectively wipes the head over the blade to scrape of excess ink.

 

It's an ingenious mechanism which is quite fascinating to watch.

If those lines are on the image direct from the camera, I reckon it's a fault with the camera electronics. The only other possibility I can think of is if the sensor has been 'cleaned' unsuccessfully - but that's unlikely as those lines are too straight to suggest any manual involvement. Send it back, or at least talk to Canon about it.

To Hyun Yu:

 

I don't have a 17-40 (yet) so can't say for sure, but I can't recall anyone on these fora complaining about chromatic aberration. Your purple fringing is more likely to be caused by the Bayer pattern interpolation algorithm. Check out <a href="http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=006JMx">this thread</a>

Maybe someone who actually owns one could confirm, but I believe (backed up by searching the threads) that there is a length limitation of 44".

I'm confident it isn't dust. Dust shows up as dark, generally out of focus, randomly placed blobs. What you have there appear to be light, single-pixel-high short streaks.

 

At first glance I wondered whether they were sharpening artifacts. Have you changed the parameters at all?

 

Unless it's something like that, I would suggest you get it back to Canon for fixing. Even if the camera shop's exchange period has lapsed, it should still be under warranty?

 

Try to talk to someone technical at Canon Servicing, and point them at this thread.

Ditto, the ASPI layer. I put in some explicit details in <a href="http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=0067NQ">this thread</a> a while back.

Windiff (a Micro$oft tool) allows comparison of either a pair of files or whole directories. In the latter case it will report whether one directory has more files than the other, or if individual files differ, saying which file is more recent. You can then double click on a file and see an exact breakdown of where the differences lie, although that bit's only really useful for textual files.

 

I got it off the NT resource kit CD, but I think it's available for download from MS.

Julio, I'm not sure what your problem is, and I don't have access to PS now to try and replicate it, but to clarify:<p>You need to put the gradient fill in a separate layer on top of all the other layers. You can experiment with moving the layer later, after you've got the technique to work. Don't group the gradient-fill layer with any other layer. The opacity of the gradient should be set to 100% all the way across. Because you're working with screen blending mode, layers have an additive effect, i.e. the total black (0% luminosity) of the centre portion of the gradient layer will mean that the underlying image will 'shine through' unchanged. The corners of your gradient layer are a little less black (around 5% luminosity). This has the effect of boosting the brightness of the underlying image by that amount, which should counteract the vignetting.

<p>Your mileage may vary, but if you're getting white in the corners it sounds like your gradient may be going from black to white whereas it should be going from black to almost-black. Or maybe the vignetting is so dark that the information is not recoverable.

<p>Hope this helps, Steve

I reckon it's a scam. At <i>first</i> glance the site looks professional, but you only have to spend a few seconds looking to see that it's really pretty amateurish - some of the buttons are clunky, there's mixed font usage. Also, practically all of the Dutch people I have met would write better English than that.

<p>Looks like the domain was registered only a couple of months ago, to a guy who has an email address hosted out of Australia.

In photoshop:<ul>

<li>Create a new layer

<li>Select the gradient tool with the circular pattern

<li>Click on the gradient in the tool bar

<li>Set the left colour to black

<li>Put one slider as a midlway point in the gradient and slide it out to around where the vignetting starts, say 90%.

<li>Make sure the colour of that midway slider is also black

<li>Set the right-most slider to be the vignetting level, say around 5% luminosity (i.e. nearly black)

<li>Click in the very centre of the image and drag out to one of the corners. Make sure you don't overshoot the corner by much

<li>The layer will now be filled with black/almost black

<li>Set the blend mode of this layer to be 'screen' and your image should appear, with the vignetting lightened</ul>

<p>You'll probably need to to tweak the position of the middle slider and the final luminosity level in the gradient tool, but you can keep repeating this procedure without causing any damage to the image itself.

Having been photo shopping in HK on several occasions I would say that it is not always a great experience.<br>Read Bob Atkin's article <a href="http://www.photo.net/equipment/caveat_emptor.html">caveat emptor</a>. Many of his comments apply to the shops in places like Hong Kong, Singapore, San Francisco etc. Watch out for grey imports - ask to see the international warranty card issued by the official HK distributor before you buy. Call the distributor before you shop to ask what you should be looking for.<br>If you go into a few shops asking for price quotes, you'll soon get a feel for the base price for the article. Then, if you get a really good price, you can be fairly sure it's a scam - grey import, incomplete goods (no lens hood, no <i>special</i> battery etc). BTW - the guy in the corner on the phone is probably talking about you to neighbouring shops - asking what you're interested in, how much they quoted you.

<p>The Hong Kong Tourist Board used to run a system of shop accreditation. I don't know how successful or meaningful it really was, but you can check out their <a href="http://www.hkta.org">site here</a>.

<p>It's a minefield - take care.