cooper8168

Anyone? I've searched the forums here and this specific problem, as far as I can tell, has not

been addressed.

I should also say that I keep the monitor calibrated with the Spyder 2. In case I wasn't clear -

it's not as though I'm getting prints that are drastically different from what Print Preview is

showing me - they are pretty much the same. I can see the image dull-out in the preview

window when I select those paper/quality-specific profiles, when in the past they remained

as I wanted them. It's almost as though the image in the preview window grays/desaturates

out when I select those profiles. Really weird.

Hi all - been about a year since I last posted. Wow!

<p>I've been having a problem with my print workflow that started about 6 months ago but has only

now gotten to the point that I really need to fix it.

<p>My equipment: Epson R2400 with stock inks, Aperture (latest version), iMac 2.33Ghz fully loaded

and updated. I typically print on Epson Premium Luster or Enhanced Matte (I change K cartridge

accordingly).

<p>Once upon a time, I had this workflow working perfectly. Prints were coming out <i>exactly</i>

as I wanted them to, really better than expected. Then something changed, but it wasn't hardware.

Somewhere along the line, I'm guessing in a software update, all my profiles changed. I typically do all

my adjustments in Aperture, then in the print dialogs do the following:

<p><MENU>

<LI type="square">In the 2400 settings, I turn color management off, and in the Print Settings, I select

my paper, switch to Advanced, and typically choose Best Photo or whatever quality I'm needing.

</MENU>

<p><MENU>

<LI type="square">Then in the Aperture print settings I choose the ColorSync profile that matches the

paper and

quality I selected in the above Print Settings window, keep Black Point Compression checked, and I'm

off. As I said - this has worked flawlessly up until recently.</MENU>

<p>The one thing I noticed that has changed is the available profiles in Aperture's ColorSync Profile

pulldown menu. It used to only show paper profiles specific to each paper and quality, ie. "SPR2400

PremLuster BstPhoto.icc". Now, it shows not only those specific profiles, but also more generic paper

profiles, such as "SPR2400 PremiumLuster", with no quality specification.

<p>The problem is this: When I now select the paper/quality-specific profile, as I used to do, the

prints come out all washed-out and flat. It even shows this in the preview window. It's slightly better

when I select these new generic paper profiles, but still not like what I had. This is true with both types

of paper I use.

<p>I've attempted all the usual fixes, such as trashing all my profiles and re-loading new ones from

Epson, re-installing Aperture and Epson software, and trashing prefs. Heck, I've reloaded all software

that even remotely related to photography so many times, I can't even count any more. Nothing - just

washed-out, dead-looking prints every time. And it all changed when I noticed those new generic

profiles mentioned above.

<p>I did make one hardware change <i>after</i> I first started experiencing these problems. I went

from a PPC Dual 2.8Ghz G5 to the iMac, but as I said, these problems first occurred on the G5 and

continued with the new iMac.

<p>Any thoughts?

I do that trip 3 or 4 times a year (one of the benefits of having a handbag company that

utilizes Italian leather- buying trips!). Going again in three weeks. I've discovered over

the years that I never use anything longer than 85mm. My current travel kit consists of a

D200 with a 17-55 f/2.8, a 50 f/1.8 and a 85mm f/1.8. Occasionally I'll bring my

12-24mm. If I had to pick two lenses, I'd leave the 50mm at home. The 17-55 (or

similar) would do just fine if I wanted to take only one lens (I did the trip numerous times

with just a 28-105 or a 18-70 before I finally got the 17-55). So in your case, I'd probably

bring the 12-24, 50 and 85. There just aren't very many times that I find myself wishing I

had more reach, and my back thanks me for it.

I am unaware of any restrictions beyond what you mention.

OK, I don't get it. I'm under 100k and below 511 in width. Shun?

Sorry!

I agree with what Greg and Matthew have said about the old Tamrac with the leather and

quick release. The leather is more of a brushed suede, so it's quite comfortable around

the neck. It also stays vey cool on hot days, unlike sheepskin and other methods I've tried.

I like it much better than neoprene, which for me gets unconfortable when the weather

gets sticky (but I admittedly turn into a human faucet in extreme humidity). I have a few

of those Tamrac straps floating around my bags - they are just so comfortable.

<p>I believe the model number I have is the <a href="http://www.bhphotovideo.com/

bnh/controller/home?

O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=112416&is=REG&addedTroughType=search">Tamrac

N-45</a>. In any event, they are readily available and pretty cheap.

I think you'd be better off posting this in the <a href="http://www.photo.net/bboard/forum?

topic_id=1701">Digital Darkroom</a> forum.

<i>If you leave your SLR, be it a D200 or FM3A or something else, under a hot sun for so

long that can change the color of a clear piece of plastic, there are more important things

to worry about...</i>

<p>For me, it wasn't like that at all. I had both D200's indoors for most of the day and

only took them out for a few minutes at a time. There was definitely no camera damage.

If there was, then I think it's Nikon and not me that has some important things to worry

about if you can't use the camera in 110-degree heat for a few minutes at a time without

sustaining some kind of damage. I had my old D2X on a racetrack in the middle of the

Nevada desert last summer and saw none of this discoloration with the included protector.

Track temps were over 125 degrees and I was out there all day long.

<p>Gotta be a bad run of those protectors, I'd think.

Same thing happened to mine when shooting on a 110-degree day a few days ago. At first I

thought something was wrong with the lens or sensor, but like you was relieved to discover

that it was the protector. The problem was also magnified by the polarizing sunglasses I was

wearing at the time.

The brown streaks are still barely visible on one of my D200 protectors (more visible through

the aforementioned sunglasses). It never happened on my other D200, used under the same

conditions. I'm not gonna worry about it - I'll just buy another protector (or a Hoodman)

when it starts to get annoying.

When I purchased my D200, my thought was to keep my FM3a and small collection of MF

primes. After getting deep into the D200, I found that I never used the FM3a and

eventually sold it, putting the money towards a second D200. However, I eventually

reasoned that it wasn't because of film that I no longer used the FM - it was because of the

AF. I just got so used to the AF that I didn't like switching back to the MF. To test this

theory, I picked up one of those factory-refurbished F100's that were recently available on

eBay. Now, when shooting for fun, I find that I reach for the F100 sooner than the D's. A

recent batch of slides that I picked up from the late AIM (RIP) really drove it home for me.

I held out as long as I could, but eventually purchased the 17-55DX for the D's and just

use a 24 and 50mm prime for the F100 to cover the wider end. I really struggled with this

decision because I didn't want to purchase such an expensive lens that couldn't be used

on both the film and digital bodies. I ultimately decided that I wanted to keep the F100 as

light as possible, so the obvious crossover zoom choice, the 28-70mm, was just too heavy

(and having owned one at one time, I have to say that I prefer the 17-55 anyway).

Everything longer crosses over.

This setup works really well for me and satisfies virtually all my needs. Now I just have to

decide whether or not to keep my Mamiya 6, which is slowly gathering dust.

Your current charger will work internationally - you just have to make sure you have an

adapter (not a voltage converter). You can get them at Radio Shack for under ten bucks -

just go to radioshack.com and search "foreign adapter plug". I'm assuming because you

mention the MB-D200 EN-EL3E that you are talking about the D200.

The more I get into Aperture, the less I use Photoshop or Capture. The learning curve is not

so much a mountain than a bluff, but when you figure out how it handles, it just makes

sense. And for me, Aperture's print utility alone is worth the price of admission.

Like I said, bad RAM most of the time...

And if you think that was easy, wait until you put in that second hard drive that you know you

need to get!

Support, schmupport.

I had one and let me just say that you get what you pay for. However, if you never get the

chance to use a higher-end tripod, you may never know the difference and be perfectly

happy with the Dynatran. I dumped the Dynatran for a B/M 3021 and then added a Velbon

630A later.

I highly doubt Spotlight has much if anything to do with this. We don't have Spotlight

disabled on any of our machines and it doesn't slow things down anywhere near what M is

describing. We're creating 200mb files a minute or so apart for hours on end at times and

Spotlight doesn't interfere one bit with our immediate editing process. I still say it's bad

RAM, or at the very least, it's hardware related. Tell you what - call Josh at Macenthusiasts in

LA, tell him you're a friend of mine (so he won't charge you) and ask him what he thinks. Bet

he says bad RAM or hardware.

Even if the profiler says that it sees 4GB of RAM, one of the chips can still be bad. It happens

quite frequently, especially in new machines. Systematically remove chips and see if it

speeds up at all. Or just have Apple swap out for all new chips. More often than not, I find

that performance issues in new machines are due to a bad RAM, and my Mac dealer

(Macenthusiasts in LA) attributes most problems like this to bad memory. Of the 10-odd

G5's in my studio, two or three had to have a chip swapped when new. It happens.

Works fine, though I was a little skeptical at first as well. You have to cut paper by hand, but

it's not that bad because it auto-feeds. I found the only difficult task to be the initial feed

and making sure it's lined up properly, but I'm ham-fisted at times.

And also check to confirm that processor performance is set to Highest in the Energy Saver/

Options pane under System Preferences.

Was it bought new or used? In any event, whenever we add a new G5 to our chain, everything

on the new machine gets wiped and re-installed from the ground up. This is especially true

if it was a used machine.

Also, which dual-monitor card is installed?