paulglenn

There is a tutorial in the July issue of Popular Photography & Imaging also.

http://www.popphoto.com/popularphotographyfeatures/4334/how-to-show-an-action-sequence.html

Dan - I'm in the market too. I have a Canon i9100. It's not worn out... still makes beautiful prints... it's fast!... So what's the problem? I just don't have a lot of faith in the stability of Canon's inks. Some prints I've matted and framed 2 years ago have developed wierd color shifts. Subtle, but still enough to bother me. So what will I get? Probably Epson 2400. I've also been yearning to print B&W without a magenta cast. HP printers are great for B&W, but I have a problem with having to replace an ink cartridge when only one of the tri-colors are really out of ink. To me that's a blatant ripoff.

From the reading I've done, Epson is the way to go for me. (I just wish I'd discovered Photo.net when I bought the darned thing!)

Lisa,

Sometimes "replace color" in Photoshop works wonders on flare. However, in this case, since the flare color is the same color as skintones of the bride, it probably wouldn't be too effective.

Bob,

Get up earlier (much) than everyone else, and the further you go from the beaten path, the better. Critters know when and where they can graze in peace. Good luck!

TT - I have an i9100. Don't know if the i9900 is the same, but on the i9100, the inktanks are part of the printhead assembly, which can be easily removed. I've got a spare printhead/inktank assembly and here's what I do when I store it:

Put a piece of saran wrap over he printhead. It should be a little wet with ink, and the saran wrap will form a wet seal onto the printhead. Use rubber bands to hold this in place. Then put the whole thing in a air-tight plastic bag... suck as much air out as you can before sealing. Store the assembly so it is oriented as it is when installed in the printer.

An alternative is to print a nozzle check every week or so.

Then again, these printers may have a place where they "park" the printhead that keeps the printhead from drying out, so I don't know if the above procedure is necessary since you're putting the whole printer into storage.

Assuming you're using AI Servo focusing, here is a link from a recent post to an article I found informative. I now consider my first shot in a sequence sacrificial.

http://photonotes.org/other/ai-servo.html

(Go to the 2nd article - AI Servo Information.)

Well, there's the shutter and mirror... I expect them to make a noise. I can live with that. But the cheesy sounding effect that I guess is supposed to mimic a film winding mechaninism... Yes, George, I would give anything to be able to turn that off. Kind of cheapens the whole experience for me.

At least I've always considered this to be a sound effect. Is it or isn't it?

Anupam,

I believe you can do this in CS2 - through Adobe Bridge. If you don't have CS2, try software from Opanda (I haven't, but have run across posts that mention this EXIF editing software).

Search Photo.net for "edit exif opanda".

Don't know why this hasn't occurred to me before, but does paper

thickness matter when doing a simple print head alignment? Seems

like it would, but I'm too cheap to burn an 8-1/2 x 11 to find out.

Anyone done a comparison? (My prints look great... guess I'm running

out of things to worry about.)

Daniel,

Reading the short series about color management located at the following website may help...

http://www.earthboundlight.com/phototips/printing-without-pain-part1.html

C...

I bought a 55-200 for my Rebel last year, just getting back into photography after being "out of it" for 20 or so years. I don't know if the lens was a "II" or not, but I was somwhat appalled by the build quality of the 55-200 I had. (Not to mention the quality of the 18-55 that came with the camera!) Since then, through reading the excellent information available on Photo.net, I've discovered the "L" lenses, and pro-sumer grade Canon lenses. Just got my 70-200 f/4 L today... along with a 24-85 (not an "L" but GREAT compared with the quality of my first two lenses.) Oh man, these babies are nice!

The focusing mechanism went out shortly after I got the 55-200... after 2 months in the shop, I got it back, and it sounded like sand was grinding inside while focusing. From what I've read (after the fact), this lens has a "different" kind of USM mechanism - I don't know the technical details, but you can't use use the manual focus with "AF" engaged as you can on a ring-type USM lens. (Canon lens experts out there correct me if I'm wrong!) The front of the lens barrell wobbles around a bit too as the 18-55 does.

Bottom line? The 55-200 made a horrible impression on me. Needless to say it is no longer with me. Maybe I had a "dud" lens.

As many people have indicated when posting... get good glass! (Thanks for the advice!)

If I had known then what I know now. (Still learning)

Have you tried printing black & white images with the i9900? I would be interested to know how that works with the 9900. I presently have an i9100, but grayscale images just don't cut it with the Canon inks!

This is an opportunity for Canon and third party ink suppliers... but will they see it? Due to the easily changeable printheads, users can easily have a set of color inks and a set of b&w inks. I'm doing this presenlty using Lyson Quad Black ink, but due to the characteristics of the Lyson inks, the prints only look good in daylight or equivalent light. I'm still not satisfied with that. InkjetMall is working on PiezoTone inks for the Canon printers, but haven't started selling them yet.

Paul Glenn

I have a 9100, and have noticed banding only when I use thick (76 # in a recent test) papers. I have not tried the "envelope" setting on the printhead to get around this, as I don't normally print using such papers. (was trying a sample paper from Red River, and have noticed banding only when trying other thick paper samples.) Perhaps try the envelope setting - even on regular thickness paper - and see what happens???

The only other output problem I have had is with grayscale images with high noise - taken at ISO 1600. With tonal graduations between the highest highlights and the deepest blacks, the shift is not smooth, but produces "bands" of a different type than referred to here. (And the whole "grayscale with a 9100" topic is perhaps another thing altogether... after exerimentation, I finally bought another printhead and loaded it with Lyson QuadBlacks)

Other than these two things, I am extremely happy with the 9100 - as far as output goes, at least. If I had to do it over, I would probably buy the Epson 2200, just because of the longevity of the inks.

Paul Glenn

glenpaud@hotmail.com