jeff_henderson

I would like to see them release a ff rangefinder so that an optical viewfinder will be an option for shooters looking for a

smaller body with smaller lenses. I am not sold on the EVF yet.

The day I took this photo, I was out shooting specifically with the

intention to shoot images of subjects I thought that perhaps Sarah

would be drawn to. I have so much respect for her work......<div></div>

<p>Peter, my additional thoughts on this is that if you are going to do your own processing then multiple bodies are not necessary. One of my instructors for a photo class I took used, as a template, a piece of string with knots tied in it so he could count out how many frames into the roll he was. This is predicated on taking notes while shooting so you know which scenes require which processing times. You also need to be consistent with your film loading. I imagine multiple tanks would be required as well. Blank frames between scenes is helpful as well; this would give you some room for error as well as making handling the film easier, ie, loading onto a reel.<br>

I have never done this myself, but my instructor spoke of it as though it were no big deal. I imagine you just need to keep track of what you're doing.</p>

<p>It is my understanding of the Zone System that the reason it is used is to create a negative that is more compatible with the latitude of photo paper. Film has much greater exposure latitude than does the paper, which is one huge reason why photographers using traditional darkrooms will burn, dodge, use contrast filters, and paper flashing techniques. They need to cram onto the paper all of that latitude captured on the film. So the Zone System was developed to reduce the need for those techniques, and for many photographic scenes eliminate them as a means of matching the tonal scale of the film to that of the paper, and relegated them to being a means of being more creative with your printing instead of being more of a necessity.<br>

So now we come to this: are you going to have images from your Zone System exposed/processed film printed in a traditional darkroom? Or will you be scanning the film? If you are planning on scanning it, then I believe learning good exposure techniques would be the extent to which you would need to go with shooting film. Scanning film in order to obtain the full latitude (dynamic range) captured on the film has a number of solutions such as multiple passes with different settings and then blending in Photoshop for example. So I don't really know what the Zone System has to offer you if this is going to be your means of output.<br>

If you are going to print these the traditional way then I have some thoughts there but it's late and I need to go to bed. I'll come back and see how you answer this question and if need be I'll post my other thoughts concerning this matter.</p>

<p>Might I suggest that you contact the instructor of the photojournalism class you will be taking and see what exactly you will be required to have equipment-wise for the class? This would allow you to start off with a bare bones kit saving money initially, and also ask for guidance from your instructor. S/he may have a bias toward one brand or another, but it would still be useful to get feedback from someone in their position regarding the equipment used for the type of photography they will be teaching you in the courses you will be taking.</p>

I will give my opinion as well since I have experienced this problem before myself. This looks to me, as others have said, to be a problem occurring during the processing of the film. Don't know if it's too much or too little agitation, but definitely a processing problem.

Brian, I appreciate your response to my concern. This explains why I'm not seeing the

image the same way here; I'm using a Mac with Safari as my browser. Mystery solved!

Thanks again, Brian.

 

Best regards

 

Jeff

Hi Steve, thanks for you reply. I do save as an sRGB prior to saving for web. After a little

more experimenting I have noticed that my embedded sRGB profile is being stripped away

for some reason. It's there after "Save for Web" has been done by photoshop, but gone if I

down load it off this site. What in the world would cause my profile to come up missing?

 

Thanks again for your response.

 

Best regards,

 

Jeff

When I post images at here at photo.net they lose contrast. I am able to post the exact

same image file at other sites without this occurring. What is going on? Anyone have any

suggestions as to why this is happening and what to do about it? I am using the "Save for

Web" feature in PS CS 1 and make sure the embedded profile is sRGB and is preserved

while using the "Save for Web" feature. Any thing I might have missed.

I frequented the site for 2 years or so. That's a rather elaborate scam on someone's part to

keep the site up and running for at least that long. Not sure when the site first appeared

on the net. Wonder how many people's images have been ripped off?

Still no phototalk.net? Anybody with any new info? It's Oct. 28th and it's been quite some

time since this site has been gone. Maybe gone forever?

I'm glad I finally got the idea to do a search for phototalk.net here at photo.net. I have

images posted over at phototalk myself and have been going crazy wondering why the

heck I can't log onto the site. I have now found my answer and look forward to the site

being operational again soon.

paypal through a seperate account sounds like that could have some advantages down the road. I didn't realize they worked that way. always thought it was cc only. Thanks for the tip, I'll be looking to do that here soon.

 

Thanks for all your help everybody. I appreciate it very much.

 

Jeff

Thanks for the additional posts and advice. As far as paypal goes, I didn't use them in the

first place because I don't use credit cards any longer and only pay by check, cash or

money order these days. I still don't see what the big yank is about cashing a freakin'

check. Stamp the freakin' back and hand it to the freakin' teller all-freakin'-ready.

 

Ok, I'm done venting. Thanks for listening. Hopefully this will be resolved soon as I am

having a difficult time managing my gallery images because every time I want to up-load

something new I have to first decide what to delete. I like this site very much but wish

somebody could do something about the efficiency of cashing checks or at least make

membership subscriptions available only by cc so nobody runs into these types of

problems.

Thanks for the update, Jeff. I'm hoping to keep this thread alive as well since I really would

like to have full membership benefits and hope that some one in a position to do

something about the situation reads this and can look into this. I never would have

thought I'd have to beg someone to take money from me. I wish my landlord were like

photo.net.

Yes, I have checked to see if the check is cashed and no it hasn't been cashed yet. I sent it

to the address given on this site along with a return address on the envelope. I havn't been

able to make contact with any official personnel associated with this site and I am hoping

that posting here is going to help get some questions answered.

 

I'm giving this until the end of April 2005 and then I'm cancelling my check.

Ok, here we are going on 5 months since I sent my check and nada. What gives? Any

moderators or someone with connections reading this please help. 5 months is plenty of

time to process a check so what is up? Somebody do something, please.

Hi Jeff,

 

Thanks for the reply. I don't feel it's too big an issue either, I just can't believe it's taking

this long. In photo.net's defense, this is a huge community that they have to deal with here

and I'm sure the volume must be tremendous.

 

I hadn't heard anything about people having trouble with Paypal. I personally don't use

credit cards anymore because I overuse them, if you know what I mean. Have some cool

toys, though!

Matt, Ray, thanks for the replies. I'll just sit tight and hope for the best.

I really appreciate this thread as I have been feeling very frustrated by the lack of

comments I've been receiving on images I've posted for critique. I became a member here

because of the great photographers that are here and hope to learn from them some of

their techniques and so far that just hasn't been happening.

 

Thanks, Hanna, for the helpful tip on how to get comments on photos. I realize that I have

a responsibility to share the knowledge I have with those who are not as experienced as I

am, but have been reluctant to give a full and honest critique because a lot of newbies are

very sensitive. Any thoughts on how to go about handling giving honest yet helpful

critiques to newbies?

I know that new subscriptions are processed once a month, but I sent my check on Nov.

18, so it's been about a month and a half and still not listed as a subscriber. My check has

not cleared yet, I checked today. I supppose it's possible it took 2 weeks for USPS to get

the check from here to there and it arrived right after the processing cycle and I need to

wait a few more days.

 

If anyone who has anything to do with processing new subscribers and you see this,

please check into this for me, please. I'm very anxious to have full benefits and am

beginning to wonder if that's ever going to happen.

Thanks, Pascal! I shall return in kind, if I haven't allready added you to my list.

Oh, great, the only person interested in me is G SS and they are an anomally (sp?). Just my

luck.

I've experienced the same thing. I'm new here so maybe I'm not meeting some criteria I'm

not aware of.

I have been reading most of what people have been saying here and I think there is a

lot of good advice/anecdotes here based on people's own experiences and beliefs,

and all that I read are good, valid points. I believe I have some valid points as well,

and I'll tell you what I believe, take it or leave it.

 

I have come to the realization that, like what many people have stated above, that you

are more than likely not going to find a good paying job in photography. If you go

looking for a job you will wind up at a department store shooting sterile, non-creative

portraits, or working in a lab, as an assistant, etc., etc., etc.....

 

However, this does not mean that there isn't any money to be made in photography,

it only means you will have to work for yourself. There are many different ways to

make money with a camera, and you may have to be flexible and somewhat diverse to

have enough business coming in to pay the bills. So of course some business and

marketing classes will be a necessity to being sucessful. Also, consider what types of

photography you like doing and find working pros that you could do some volunteer

assistant work for and get some up-close views of what it would be like to actually

work for a client in that particular field.

 

So basically what I'm getting at is have a clear direction some time in the near future

as to exactly what types of things you want to do with photography, and limit it to a

few different fields, too, so that you are focused professionally. Being focused

professionally is going to help reinforce your reputation in those circles you run in. Be

specialized and be the best damn photographer you can be in your chosen

specialties, network, promote yourself actively and vigorously and good things will

happen.

 

As for photo school, my opinion is that this is a great place to hone your skills and

get valuable experience doing different things photographically since a college will

have much greater resources/equipment than you do. School is also useful for, of

course, instruction and you get feed-back on your work from other talented people.

Don't underestimate how much that can mean in terms of your growth as a

photographer.

 

As far as a degree in photography; get it if you want, but don't expect to get hired in

some place with a 401k, full dental, medical, etc, that all will come out of your

pocket.