amul

<p>While I was out of town, the power to my fridge went out for an unknown number of days, possibly as long as 2 weeks. The freezer had both film (exposed and unexposed) and frozen meat in it. The meat has become extremely rancid.<br>

Should I be worried about contamination to my film? It's not like I'm going to stick the stuff in my mouth or anything, but I won't be able to develop the exposed film for quite a while. Anything that might eat film as well as food will have a while to feast before I was planning to get back to the darkroom.<br>

Are there any other concerns I need to worry about? Chicago got quite hot during that period and my apartment's A/C blew as well, so anything might have happened in that freezer.</p>

<p>Thanks, Georg! That's exactly what I'm looking for.</p>

<p>Out of curiosity, do we actually see black-and-white through the lens?</p>

<p>Several years ago, I ran across a monacle-like loupe which was, if I recall correctly, produced by one of the major lens-filter manufacturers. When the photographer looked through the object, the scene was rendered in black and white, somehow.<br>

<br /> At the time I dismissed it, but lately I've found the idea strangely intriguing and want to buy one. Of course, I can't find it anywhere. Does anyone know what I'm talking about? Hope beyond hope, does anyone have a link to somewhere selling the cursed things?</p>

<p>John,</p>

<p>I suppose a better way to phrase my question would be, "If I were to set up a contest, what steps do I need to take to make sure it is worthwhile to the people entering the contest?"<br>

I'm somewhat versed in PLUS and appropriate usage rights, so that part wouldn't be an issue.</p>

<p>By "shared fictional setting," I mean that we've created a world, much like is done in science fiction (eg, "I, Robot," "Lord of the Rings," "Gattacca" etc.), and have released the setting material under a Derivatives, Share-Alike Commercial license. The writers tell stories set in the world, the artists draw scenes, fashion designers create outfits worn by the inhabitants of the world, etc. We release this setting material publicly, not just to the original team of collaborating artists.<br>

The term that's being bandied about is Alternate Reality Fiction. For a more indepth explanation, see this article that was written by someone not associated with our project (called "Continuous Coast"): http://gameshelf.jmac.org/2008/10/alternate-reality-fiction.html</p>

<p>I'm working on a multidisciplinary project including writers, fabric artists, and several other mediums to create a shared fictional setting for our projects to exist in. One idea I had about generating income and publicity for this project was to throw contests, in which participants are encouraged to create their own pieces set in our world (we release our setting material under a Creative Commons license).<br>

The writers in this project are very surprised that I consider it normal to pay entry fees for a contest. They're so shocked that I find myself questioning my own beliefs about the commonality of entry fees for visual art contests.<br>

I'd be interested in hearing other people's opinions about whether or not entry fees are common for photographic contests, visual art contests, and non-visual art contests. What is the general practice for these? What distinguishes a scam contest from a legitimate contest?</p>

I'd suggest joining a professional organization like the ASMP or WPPI, whichever ones are most active in your area. Start regularly attending events to get to know other people who are serious about their photography business. Maybe one of them will click. I hear a lot of comparisons between looking for business partners and finding a potential marriage partner, so expect the same sort of success ratios.

 

In the meantime, you can pull second shooters from their lists of assistants. Again, I've found these people to be more reliable than any other method of seeking assistants.

 

I also encourage you to avoid craigslist like the plague. In my experience, free services have too much noise from idle daydreamers to be worth sifting through.

<p />How do you get the lighting effect in the Van Cleef and Arpels' <a

href="http://www.visit4info.com/advert/Van-Cleef-Arpels-Magic-Alhambra-Collection-Van-Cleef-Arpels-First/52208">Magic

Alhambra Collection ad?</a>

 

<p>It seems like a large softbox is being used as a fill, located adjacent to

the camera. The key light must be another softbox to the photographer's right

and parallel to the model. It's the highlights on the photographer's left that

have me stumped, as well as the ratios.

 

<p> It seems like a great deal of retouching also contributes to the almost

porcelain look of the model.

The article you're pointing to suggests a problem with the K100D sync system. I'm not sure if it applies to my flash, as I bought it around December.

 

I know that the flash reads lens data from the camera, and will adjust zoom length as I adjust the lens. I'm supposing that indicates it is a different problem.

Histogram 3<div></div>

Histogram 2<div></div>

Histogram 1, in jpg this time.<div></div>

Histogram 1

I'm using a Pentax K10D and a Sigma EF-500 DG Super. I recently upgraded from

the *ist DS. I noticed that with the DS, I generally had to shoot one stop

overexposed in order to get a full histogram range. Now I'm discovering that the

problem seems to be even worse with the K10D and the flash - typically needing

+1.5 to +2.0

 

This is my first time working with a TTL flash.

 

The following three histograms are captured from the raw converter before making

any adjustments on the computer. The first histogram is at normal settings (+1.0

overexposure on the camera). For the second, I told the camera +1.0 flash power.

The third, I also told the flash to give me +1.0 flash power. All the histograms

are essentially identical.

 

What am I doing wrong?<div></div>

I'm also interested in Ben's question regarding a focusing pentaprism screen. That would be darn useful, especially considering the SR compatibility with legacy lenses.

I'm considering the Sigma EF-500 for use with my *istDS and ZX-5n. I also use

several all-manual 35mm and medium-format cameras, but I'm guessing that nearly

all of the functionality gets stripped away at that point. Does anyone have any

experience with this flash and Pentax cameras?

 

A forum search has turned up no hits except in casual mention. I've also been

unable to find other flashes, aside from the Pentax AF-360FGZ, which purport to

work with the DS and have guide numbers above 100. My reason for choosing the

EF-500 over the AF-360fgz is based on guide number.

 

I typically shoot in extremely low-lighting conditions, from a distance of about

12-30 feet (bounced off the ceiling), and would prefer to be shooting closer to

f11 than f2.8 (especially since I frequently have to focus manually in these

conditions).

I'm finding myself in the same position as you two are. Have you had any luck? My results today (first time printing photos on this thing):

 

ICM - Off : Incredibly dark, noticable color banding

ICM - On (Off unchecked): slightly less dark than ICM/Off, but still unacceptably dark, significant magenta color cast

Photo Enhance (Auto Correct): Loss of shadow detail, magenta color cast

 

This is the point at which I started hunting for answers on the Epson site and got incredibly frustrated. I can't even figure out if the RX700 prints at 300 or 360 dpi.

<p>I was about to pull out all my backpacks and try shoving my medium format kit into them, but then I read DN's post, and completely agree. Most photography stores have them out on display. Bring your gear, and shove it in there. It's the best way to tell.

 

<p>I use a variety of LowePro and Tamrac cases (I bought the bulk of my film equipment used off ebay and got a bag with practically every body). I've never heard of KATA before.

 

<p>Just to add some fuel to your debate, have you checked out <a href="http://www.zuca.com/">Zuca</a>? I saw them at a convention and am drooling over them. It's a roll-cart, not a backpack, and they don't have camera inserts (yet) but those bodies have withstood getting hit by a truck (the Zuca was trashed but the camera equipment inside was okay). The Zuca can also work as a step stool to help get you above head-height (I think they're about three feet tall). They don't recommend it, but if you extend the carry-grip, you can use it as a makeshift brace so you don't fall forward. I desperately want one.

J,

 

Have you tried cycling the display options? While in Slideshow mode, press "D" to cycle between Display options (Scale to Fit, Full Screen, and Centered). I'm guessing you're on Centered, which is the default I believe. On the other hand, I've never used that large a monitor - let me know if it works!

<div></div>

Nevermind, I found it - In Slideshow, hit W to toggle between Window Mode and Full Screen mode.

Steve,

 

That doesn't seem to help. I'm not looking for the Preview Panel, I'm trying to figure out why View->Slideshow (command-L) opens a window rather than a full-screen slideshow. Or am I misunderstanding you?

When I switched Bridge to a distributed cache, it started displaying my

slideshows in a window rather than in full screen view! I must have changed an

option in preferences somewhere by accident, but I can't seem to find it again.

I miss my full screen preview mode! Help?

If you're sure that compatibility isn't an issue, and since you seem to dismiss Systems Familiarity as a consideration, then I'd guess that the only factors left to consider for you are budget and software compatibility (eg, which OS are your programs native to?)

I'm trying to convert a nude photograph into a landscape. I've played around

with the saturation levels to increase the sense of distance and light, added a

skyline and later will be adding a few trees, etc. Right now, I want to add a

river or a series of steps along the shadow line on her stomach leading to her

armpit.

 

I thought that I could paint an appropriate color, add a Layer Style/Texture to

it and then set the blending mode to Color. But rather than subtly alter the

coloration, it adds texture, regardless of blending modes.

 

Even if that works, there's still the question of how to adjust the edges of the

river to meld with the skin.

 

Any advice, suggestions, etc would be greatly appreciated.<div></div>

Bruce is on the money with this one.

 

The point of most of the various conversion techiques is to preserve data up to the point where you output. As all printers are currently 8-bit, you're not going to see a difference between images where the conversion process occurs at the same point (eg, before any other edits). 16-bit is padding for rounding errors.

 

Ultimately, there's no point in working with larger file sizes unless you can see the difference in the final output. I can see a difference between my 8-bit work copies and my 16-bit copies, and I can see a difference between using Greyscale 20% Dot Gain and RGB. Further, the differences I see are important to me, and that's why I've selected the choices I use.

 

You should do the same, and bugger anyone who gives you an answer that you didn't look up yourself. Follow their techniques, and decide for yourself if they're worth integrating.