glendicrocco

<p>Thanks guys.</p>

<p>I've done the research and am ready to purchase but I'd like to know if anyone would recommend one over the other (apart from the screen size difference). Is anyone dissatisfied with the PA24's lower resolution and PPI? I'm running a MacPro (early 2008) with an ATI Radeon HD2600 XT (DVI dual link). Thank you.</p>

<p>After reading the advice here, I was better prepared for a welding shoot and came away satisfied with the results. The welder was very helpful in faking the shot in order to get the sparks flying however I asked him. He changed rods and the direction of the welding plate to modify intensity and angle. <br /><br />I used two Lowel Omni tungsten lights (500w) with barndoors for fill behind the welder's mask and lower right, checking exposure first without the welding. Shooting with a Nikon DSLR, I used a 50mm lens (1.5 crop factor) at f5.0 and a shutter speed between 1/10 and 1/20 of a second, ISO 160. I didn't use a filter other than a UV, no sensor damage. The camera was on a tripod. I used a welder's helmet for protection--you can't see anything but the arc and spatter, so I just kept my finger on the shutter and would fire about ten shots for each go-round until I was confident we had enough variety and proper exposures.</p>

<p>I'm using a Mac Pro Quadcore 2x2.8 Ghz with 8GB of ram for editing photos in Photoshop CS3. I export D80 raw files from Lightroom as 16bit tifs at 240 or 300dpi into CS3. Usually I'll add an adjustment layer or two to the fie. Saving a tif file takes much too long, probably around ten seconds or more and the progress bar shows up. I don't have this issue with older D70 files or other camera files. There is something going on with D80 file compatibility. They also take longer to render in iViewMedia/ExpressionMedia. All other processes on the Mac are handled well.<br /> Anyone else with the same issue?</p>

I can cut down to 7 feet and just under 30,000 pixels by eliminating a couple of images. If anyone has done this can you

share the step by step process? Thanks.

I started using ImagePrint five years ago and I immediately saw better results with color prints especially. There was also

less bronzing on glossy medium. The stock Epson profiles have probably improved by now and CS3 offers a better printing

interface, so I'm not sure if the RIP is still needed, but I've been very pleased with IP and their variety of profiles. I paid

$500 for it and only needed to upgrade after four years for an additional $250.

Kurt, yes the file is 42,500 pixels wide by 4680 high. Can't be done on Mac for sure?

 

The quote I had gotten was for a Kodak Endura print made on a Durst Lambda. I had seen a long continuous print recently

at a show at Powerhouse in Dumbo, Brooklyn. It makes a great impact compared to individual prints. They used a Canon

IPF6100. Thanks for your answer.

After getting price quotes from commercial labs of about $300, I've been looking into making a 13" x 10' print (that's ten feet) on the Epson

2200. I haven't found any user experience info on this. Here are the details:<br><br>

 

Epson 2200<br>

Roll papers considered: Epson Premium Luster 13"x32', Moab Lasal Luster Paper 13"x50', Moab Fiber Satin Paper 13"x50'<br>

Colorbyte Image Print v.7 (lite) RIP<br>

MacPro<br><br>

 

Is the 2200 capable of making a continuous 10' print? I have a series of seven color images laid out at 9.5"high x 14.25"long and one

vertical image at 6.33" x 9.5".<br><br>

 

To proof, I'm can make individual prints using sheets of the same paper or less expensive equivalent.<br><br>

 

Has anyone done this and if so, can you share some user tips?<br><br>

 

I'll also need to mount the print (no framing or matte) to hang.<br><br>

 

Thanks.

I use Colorbyte's Image Print RIP which interpolates an image to 360dpi before printing. I have been saving copies of my

images meant for printing at 360dpi in PS (without interpolation) in order to avoid interpolation with ImagePrint. From this

thread, I take it that this is unnecessary? Why then does ImagePrint interpolate to 360dpi?

At the Toscana Photographic Workshop in Tuscany I took a weeklong workshop with National

Geographic photographer, Bob Sacha. Bob is an excellent teacher and communicator, very

thorough in conveying both the spirit of photojournalism and in covering important

techniques such as using handheld flash creatively. He's a New Yorker and teaches at ICP as

well. Bob knows very well how to nail the narrative of a story. He's spent years working side

by side with the photo editors at National Geographic.

I would also recommend TPW. Great place to be surrounded by at least a half dozen great

photographers in any given week. The focus is more on the spirit, aesthetic, editing and

presentation, less on technical skills. The atmosphere and town are excellent. And so is the

food. You'll find a wide range of students of all ages. Most are from Europe, but there are

some from the States as well.

Currently I've been using Capture 4.4. Now with NX, there's a nice new interface but in the

three days I've been testing it I found the editing layout to be very counter-intuitive. I'm

making far more clicks to get a simple edit done. There's more screen space for the image

with all of these menus collapsed but it's not worth the trade-off in editing convenience.

When you "expand all" the menus collapse each time you open a new image.

 

My G4 has 2gb ram and a dual 1.42 processor. NX isn't any faster than Capture 4.4 for me.

As far as the control points, they're okay but you can accomplish this with adjustment

layers in PS or by exporting Raw files with different exposure values into PS and layering/

erasing.

 

The image quality of Capture has always been very good, good enough to avoid the

tweaking you need to do to make an image look good in ACR. But this new version of

Capture...to me it's 90% marketing, 5% new and improved, 5% new and inconvenient. What

happened to the "open with PS" button?" You have to go into the File menu to transfer the

image.