justin_craig

what FAQ are you refering to? What is resolution? Puhlease

 

I did a search and nowhere did anyone mention that PS CS RAW conversions upsample your files. I think that if one had read my post it would have been obvious I had understood what resolution was about and was just confused by CS upsampling.

Of course its hard to discern this over a forum, and I was expecting some folks to not really get that. Maybe I shouldnt have used such newbie like language, but then again I didnt think this forum would have such hardnosed posters. Well now I know, and thats fine.. thanks for the responses....

Hi all,

 

Thanks for your responses.Regardless of what a monitor displays most of what has been said makes sense to me and I think I have figured it out. Bear with me here:

As stated its the pixel dimensions that really matter and the resolution is just the pixel density, determined by the actual size of your image and the # of pixels.

So back to my example.

JPG image at max setting is at 2048 by 3072, res is at 180 and actual size is at approx 11 by 17. Adjusting the res in the image size dialog box to 360 yields the same pixel dimensions ( I had resample unchecked) but now my actual size is tiny 8.5 by 5.5.

 

With the converted RAW file there is some upsampling going on, this is because in PS CS when you convert from RAW there is a pull down menu allowing you do increase the image to 6144 by 4096 with res at 360. This gives an image at 4096 by 6144 at aprox 11 by 17 inches with resolution 360. Where have all the extra pixels come from?, the image was upsampled when converted from the RAW file to a photoshop file. This allows me to print an 11 by 17 image at 360 ppi. Unlike the JPG image which is still at 3096 by 2048.

 

Am I right? If so then to get the 11by14 prints Ive seen from canon 10Ds (and as claimed by folks shooting with the 10D) then the JPGs must also be upsamled to get 360 ppi at 11 by 14 inches in the image size dialog box.

I had previously thought that upsampling was a no no but I guess that if PS has been doing it with out me knowing and Ive been satisfied with the results then its not so bad.. all those JPG shooters must be doing it.....

 

I hope thats right. Probably a lost cause if not. Thanks again for your responses.

Justin

OK OK so this might be a can of worms and I thought I understood the

basics but maybe not so here goes.

 

I usually shoot RAW with my canon 10D and convert with photoshop CS.

Converted RAW files come out to be 3072 by 2048 at resolution 360. I

ptint with an Espon 1280 at 360 and everything works out well.

 

However for the hell of it I shot some JPGs ( max setting) the other

day and of course they didnt need conversion, they just uploaded

straight onto my hard drive. However when I opened them and went to

image size they were at 3072 by 2048 but only at 180 resolution,

making them half as big as the RAW files.

 

Shouldnt they be as big as the RAW files in terms of resolution?

I should be able to print way bigger than these JPGs afford me (I see

people posting 11 by 14s from 10D JPGs all the time). Any ideas

whats going on or what Im not undertanding?

 

Thanks,

Justin

Thanks all,

Sounds like Im a heavy hiker compared to most. The real question I suppose is are you in it to hike or to photograph, with out the photogear I go ultra lite - no more than 20 lbs easy to accomplish with all the new ultra lite gear out there. I use a granite gear vapour trail for my lite over nighers- adding photo gear demands heavier loads and sturdier support which in turn means heavier packs- the thing is sometimes I feel a tad silly lugging 15lbs more than anybody else on the trail. I keep thinking there has to be a ligher way and still be able to bring the MF abliet a ligher model than the GS-1- a hassy maybe - yikes....

Hi all,

 

So whats your favorite equipment for multi day back packing trips in

your favorite wilderness area. Im curious to see how other people

haul thier camera gear and camping gear over miles of wilderness

trails.

I have an Arctyrix Bora 80 pack to lug my GS-1 and insanely heavey

tripod around ( bogen 190) and am looking at a gitzo mountaineering

tripod to cut 3 lbs off the 5 (camera) +5.5( tripod/head)= 10.5 lbs

load.

The big question is how light a tripod can I go with my GS-1, I have

a light slik U8000 that I use for 35mm but it is probably way too

flimsy for the GS-1.

 

Anyway Im curious as to other philosophy, gear and tips for combing

photographic quaility with enjoyment of a backpacking trip (ie the

lighter the better).

 

Cheers,

Justin

I spent hours at REI and other outdoor gear places to find the most comfortable pack that would fit my Bronica GS1, heavy manfrotto 320B I think tripod, a light meter, extra clothes, a 2L bladder pouch for easy hydration, a good healthy lunch and Med kit. And it had to be supper comfortable and have side pockets and compression straps to attach my treking poles.

 

Too much you say! I finally found something that would work and its was cheap. Its a marmot backpack designed for over nighters or long day hikes or even as a sumit pack. Unbelieveable pack for the price ( $50)and very very comfortable. Wish I could remember the name but REI does have it right now. Allthough I would encourage anyone to shop elsewear if they can.

 

Only downside is access, but unless your going short distances and have the camera allready attached and over your shoulder your gonna have to put the pack down and take everything out anyway.

Thanks Nadine and everyone

 

I came to to the same conlusion as Nadine last night and did some test shots. One thing Im still not sure about, I dont have the sync cord for my GS-1 ( it requires a PC cord) the instuctions say it syncs to all speeds down to 1/500th on X sync only so presumably it wont sync correctly without the cord attached to the X socket on the camera. My thinking was to go to go as slow as possible (1/60) to make sure I catch the flash burst, but perhaps I can go faster which would be needed since I'll be shooting in brigth conditions.

 

What does the xsync setting do anyway? way cant I just select a slow shutter speed that the camera is known to sync with ( most 35mms are 1/125).

 

Thanks all its been an education.

"Anyway, those two exposures get added together, so that should be accounted for in your exposure calculation. Maybe you need to meter at 800, too? (which would give you f/64 or so)"

 

 

Yes this is what I was concerned about, does this mean then that I should cut the exposures in half ie set the flash to 1600 and the camera to 800?

or does the flash measure ambient light as it is bursting also and therefore all I should be concerned about is the extra time that the shutter is open than the flash is flashing. This is a problem because I cant sync my flash and camera( which is too bad cos apparently the GS-1 can syn upto 1/500).

 

Im in flash confusion...help.

Whoops yes I did mean 800 for the flash speed...

 

let me digest these posts a while...

Heres a rookie question regarding flash photography.

 

Im trying my hand at fill flash in sunny conditions with my Bronica

GS-1 and the only manual flash I could get my hands on, an old cannon

speedlite 199A.

 

Because the 2 units dont talk to each other Im trying to figure out

how to do this manually.

Here goes:

Set the camera ASA to 400 ( for 400 speed film).

 

Set the flash ASA to 200 ( for fill flash reduction).

 

Meter the subjects with the shutter speed at 1/60th ( pressumed x

sync speed) this will give the apeture to use.

 

Dial the apature on the camera and on the flash.

 

Hope like hell that the flash apeture wont be too small and require

that you have to stand on top off the subjects for meter range to be

effective.

 

My main concern is that combined ambient and flash exposure will be

too much. Ie if the flash burst cuts off when exposure has been

reached wont the shutter remaining open over expose the picture.

 

Thanks for any advice!!

J

Thanks all,

 

The lords of light ah yes let me pray. And good point about the XP-2 being contrasty perhaps I should opt for the kodak chromogenic although I have had pleasing results with XP-2 in sunny contrasy conditions- my local lab did a good job of pulling 3/4 stop. Stick with what you know is what I say also the reason I dont want to mess with fill flash besides the fact that I dislike using a flash- I really think it affects the way people interact with me as a photographer.

Anyway yes inside might have to be an option if its windy I did have nightmares about blowing viels and cold uncomfortable grimmaces, too bad considering the setting.

Otherwise I like the other suggestions of using conventional film and pulling the heck out of backlit shots- Ive heard that chromogenic film doesnt pull too well- which hardly seemed to bother me at the time as the long exposure lattitude would capture the high and low details.

Anyone have any luck pulling XP2 or Porta more than 3/4 stop.

 

Thanks again,

J

Hi,

 

I have one of those 'friend asked me to shoot his wedding'

situations. Im mostly a landscape photographer. I am following

conventional wisdom here and told him to expect nothing and pay

nothing. So its a pretty relaxed situation. And bedides they arent

paying for a pro.

Anyway, any tips for the following technical situation?:

 

The wedding takes place outside, in a park situated next to the

ocean, were theres a good posibility that it will be quite windy, I

checked out the light at the time of the wedding and if its sunny

I'll be challanged with strong side/back lighting( side if I use the

ocean as a backdrop).

I'll be shooting XP-2 with a Bronica GS-1 (6*7) so Im not too worried

about exposure lattitude, but am about shadows on faces. Heres the

kicker I dont shoot flash and certainly dont have time to find one a

learn how to use it ( I dislike flash photography, the proccess not

the results), so fill flash is out of the question.

Anyway Im trying to decide where to place folks for the 'formals' (

group shots). So far the only thing I can think of is inside, but the

building isnt all that exciting.

Thanks for any tips.

Justin

Thanks all,

 

So it seems that higher dilutions and longer dev times are needed here to get the compensating effect. And even then Im stuck with larger appearing grain.

Ive found Tmax developer to be a little kinder to the fim both in terms of shawdow detail and grain so maybe I'll just stick to that- with reduced agitation and pulling if need be to control contrast. Too bad cause theres something I really love about the rodinal suped film - tonality perhaps, sharpness too.... Ive yet to try actuol which Ive heard is good too.

 

It'll be fun to try some of your suggestions in a slower speed film however, maybe some APX100 or Tmax. And also with a different developer in fast films to try and save highligts in night people photography etc- HC110, Microphen....

Apologies if this is an exhausted subject, but here goes.

 

I have been playing around with Rodinal in Neopan 1600 (35 mm)

getting OK results at 1+50 and IE 640 ( could do with more shawdow

detail.)

 

I thought Id have go at using it as a compensting developer by

reducing the agitation. ( reducing agitation would hopefully exhaust

the developer localy at highlight areas but keep it working at

unexhausted shawdow areas, thereby rendering more shawdow detail but

holding the highlights from blocking up- from Ansel Adams The

negative) So I went 8 mins with agitaion once per 3 mins constant

the first 30 secs.

 

What I got for my troubles was lacking in shawdow detail, but worse

than that grain more apparent than my 1+25 dilutions ( this was at

1+50).

 

So dont higher dilutions decrease grain?

Did the reduced agitation just lose my shawdow detail because its

not dilute enough ( 1+50)? Did I not decrease agitaion enough?

Does reducing agitation increase grain because it encourages

clumping?

Is using it as a compensating dev in 35 mm format just fruitless?

Do I need to give extra exposure to film Im going to use a

comensating developer on? in which case wouldnt just pulling the

highights work just as well?

Do I have the concept of compensting developer wrong? ( Ie very

dilute developer)

 

I feel like I might have opened pandoras box but its fun anyway...

Thanks Andy,

 

I am just starting to do a lot of black only- having being encouraged by folks in this forum. Indeed I have noticed a chocolate tint to the heavyweight matte. I have also noted how luminant these prints are though. All though Im not getting the greatest of blacks as others claim..

I like this Black only buisness, way less ink and hastle and I can still use my printer for color....

 

Justin

Hmmm....

 

I am sure I am selecting black only and I see no tint with espon glossy paper, so I thought it might be the paper. Interesting suggestion that it might be the print driver getting mixed up.

 

I shall try it with the printer driver off and see what that gets me.

 

thanks for the responses....

Hi all,

 

Is it just me or is there a red tint to ilfords gallerie pearl finish

paper?. I am printing Black only with an Epson 1280 here and there

shouldnt be a tint.

 

I guess it sorta looks cool like a warm tone paper, but dammit I want

true B and W. This is a lovely paper otherwise, nice smooth tonal

gradations, sharp etc.

 

Does anyone have any other favorite papers they use for Black only

printing especially ones that get real blacks ( I find Enhanched

Matte to not quite get there). And that are available in 4*6 size?

 

Thanks.

Justin

Another data point for your survey:

 

Rodinol in APX 100 is gorgeous

 

It is even good for Neopan 1600 ( ASA 800 ) allthough I bet Hans would disagree and I would say it certainly has a certain "look".

 

Rodinol is great for Tmax 100 horibble for Tmax 400 allthough I kind of like the super grain Ive gotten from this combo-it worked for a few photos I had - grainy shots of a swelling ocean.

 

And really really really horible for HP5+

Wow sproket holes huh!!!

 

anyway - thanks for all your responses as always there are many different perspectives-

As for the contrast gain in Neopan 1600, yeah I guess you cant get everything in one film, all though I think Neopan comes as close as most films get. Thanks for the info , 2 new developers to try.....

I meant to say give microphen or Actuol a whirl.

 

Thats a nice shot Hans, I asume you shot at EI 800-1000. Also how does the Delta 3200 look in that dev?

So are microphen and actuol both powder stock developers ?

 

Justin

Thanks for the replies so far !!!

 

As per Hans' experience I have found neopan 1600 to be more like 1000 ASA with normal development ( 4.5 min 20 C )

 

I can live with the contrast increase that Ive gotten from pushing this film to get to 1600- I live in Seattle after all- where the sun dont shine and consequently most light is flat. Perhaps I can lower the contrast here even more by reducing the agitation as Lex suggests. I have had some outdoor night time shoots and they certainly could have done with a little less contrast in the facial tones.

 

The chart there is also interesting as while neopan is fine grained the Tmax developer isnt supposed to be all that fine grained compared to other devs. I guess what I was looking for was another devel that gave me the push processing ability but also the fine grain that neopan has.

Perhaps I'll give the Microdol a whirl. Its powder though huh thats a pain.

Justin

Hi all,

 

Ive been trying out different developers w/ neopan 1600.

Im trying to get a combo that will retain neopans fine grain, but

also let me shot at EI 1600 or even 3200. Also trying to keep the

contrast from getting too much.

So far Tmax developer looks the best out of D76, Rodinol ( great but

too slow) and Tmax developer. ( 20 C 6.5mins 1+4 dil continous

agitaion 1st min 5secs every 30 secs)

I have a bottle of DDX to try next.

 

Anyone out there have any experience these and with any other

deveopers? Or have any speed enhancing developer ideas?

 

35mm format BTW.

 

Thanks,

Justin

I have had nice results with TMax developer with Neopan 1600.

Shawdow detail is retained at 1250 EI.

 

Very like TRI X, put Im dont think I could push TRI X to 1600.

 

delta 3200 also is not so fast in Tmax dev but I havent tweaked with the dev times yet.....

 

Thanks for sharing...

Hi all,

 

Looking for a spot meter to work with my Mamiya C330, Looked at a

digispot and a sekonic L358 with 5 degree spot attachment.

 

Anyone looking to part with same or similar equipment for cash?

 

Thanks