clives

Elements 3 promos talk about the file management system. "All of

your images in one place." (Or some such...)

 

I don't want all of my images in one place. I want to be able to

store them in my folders according to clients, family, topics (fly

fishing, business clients, consulting projects, recreation etc etc.)

Will Elements 3 allow me to over-ride the dedicated Elements 3

filing system so I can place images where I want them? I assume so,

but want to know for sure.

 

Thank you!

 

Clive

I am almost embarrassed to ask....DO I NEED CS OR CAN I GET AWAY

WITH ELEMENTS 3?

 

Some background ...

 

I sell pictures (i.e. license rights to use images for commercial

purposes) ... for years I have shipped slides or I scan slides and

upload to ftp sites. I bought PS5 years ago and have used PS LE. I

bought PS Elements 2 two years back. I have digital camera (Nikon

Coolpix) and know the basics of digital manipulation.

 

Although I sell images, I am not a POWER digital image geek--my wife

would argue. :) I mess with recreational fishing pictures and images

of my grandkids. I do basic tweaking of images that I scan for

possible sale. I figure my ad agents and their staff or hired image

experts are the real experts. I do not (and don't plan to) refine

digital images for commercial printing so I can sell prints (say) at

a gallery, nor do I do weddings or studio shots for fees. I leave

the fancy work to the experts. But I like to "mess" with images

doing basic manipulations.

 

FINALLY I am buying a K-M Maxxum 7D next week. (It's a heavy money

hit and mental hit for a retired old f**t...) I have PS Elements 2

and plan to get Elements 3 to handle the RAW images--assuming I

choose to shoot RAW.

 

I strive to take "perfect" pictures before I shoot. I've learned a

lot of 'technique' in the past 45 years of taking pictures--and

100,000+ images later. I like to think my images are pretty decent

to start with. :)

 

Now the question ... If you understand my needs, (I am not sure that

even I understand my needs), is PS Elements 3 adequate? I really do

not want to drop $1,000 CAD on CS and feel I likely would not use

the many (many) features it offers...

 

Your wise advice is appreciated. Thank you!

 

Clive

I take a lot of digital images, however 99 percent for personal use

only. I have Elements 2 now. I do "sell" images to ad agencies, but

still using slide stock for those sales. Plan to get Maxxum 7D DSLR

soon and MAY start offering digital images for sale. In the past

three years my use of Elements 2 has been pretty basic image

manipulation--the standard "fixes."

 

QUESTION #1: For non pro image manipulation will Elements 3 (Versus

CS)likely be adequate? What are the two or three main benefits of CS

over Elements 3?

 

QUESTION #2: The previous thread showed that Adobe offers a price

reduction on CS with purchase of Nikon or Canon DSLR. Anyone know if

that applies to the Maxxum 7D as well? I could not find on Adobe

site.

 

Thanks in advance for comments. I won't reply as I am leaving in the

morning for two weeks vacation. :) Will check in on return.

 

Cheers!

 

Clive

A wild and crazy guess. I was having difficulties years ago with an 8000. I removed the lens and much to my embarrassment, there was a small piece of (are you ready for this?!) gum wrapper inside. That fixed whatever the problem was at the time. Worth taking the lens off if not done so. I also know my old camera would do strange things when the batts were low. A few times it acted funny and I had to turn the unit off, remove the batteries and put them back. Then it worked. (But since you've already replaced the batts that's not it. Good luck.

Frank, Thanks. That is most strange. When I copy and paste the URL I posted above it does not work either. Howver, when I go to "Favorites" (bookmarks) and click I go to that site and it is the same URL as I posted. And I cleared my cache so it's not loading off my computer versus the real site. Strange. Thanks. Clive

Just in case you've not seen this site...there are dozens of manuals

for current and older Minolta and KM cameras and accessories here..

 

http://kmpi.konicaminolta.us/eprise/main/kmpi/content/cam/cam_Support

Center/ManualResults

Suzanne .. you will have top copy the URLs and paste in the Address window .. hit enter.

Remove the <> .. thus ...

 

http://www.friedmanarchives.com/Wedding_Sampler/pages/Silhouette.htm

 

http://www.friedmanarchives.com/Wedding_Sampler/pages/Dory%20and%20Flowers.htm

 

http://www.friedmanarchives.com/Wedding_Sampler/pages/PICT1880.htm

As noted, power is the issue. I was out the other night with a fresh battery. It was about -25?C. (Quiet. No wind. Very nice actually. Trees were pretty with fresh snow. Tried flashlight painting. Neat.) Within minutes I was getting a low battery warning. When I came in and let it warm up--I was just across the street in the park--the low battery warning went away.

 

If you cannot plug in to power, the previous suggestion to have one or two extra batteries and KEEP THEM WARM is excellent. (Inside shirt pocket is good.) Also if and when possible, keep the camera inside your jacket.

Gregory's comments are the best. There are many f1.7 and f1.4 50mm lenses on eBay. Cheaper than paying a techy to repair the old lens.

A tangential comment. I have three grandkids and know all about "not posing"...man they do not stop still for a second.

 

Anyway ... I rarely find a use for wide-angle lenses for kids. On the contrary, moderate telephoto lenses are most useful to get in close. THEN it becomes a matter of "what is the effective range of the on-board flash?" That solution was discussed in the above post.

 

As for the true value you are looking for ... just find a wall and take a series of images at 24mm ... 28mm ... 35mm ... and see how wide the range covers.

 

I love the word "confuzzled".

 

Good luck! And HNY!

You know what causes RE right? ... light reflecting back off the eye retinas. It is worse in dark rooms because irises are wide open. In lighter rooms, irises are smaller and RE is lessened. R.E. reduction pre-flashes cause the irises to become smaller. Does not always work (as noted) if subjects are not looking at the camera.

 

There are ways to reduce RE ... mainly by planning WHEN POSSIBLE...it is not always possible. There is NO way to prevent it all of the time. Just not possible with many cameras. (How many use cameras with a removeable flash?)

 

It is often impossible to NOT use a flash indoors. (...especially with smaller digitals with small sensors and poor low light--high ISO--response to dark, resulting in noisey images.) But if you have to use a flash indoors TRY to do so in daylight and have you subjects sit near a window. If folks are coming for a visit and you need images, take them during daylight if possible. There will be less red eye when their irises are somewhat closed in response to higher ambient light levels.

 

R.E. is worse with kids because of the iris:eyeball diameter ratio...the iris opening is relatively wider in kids' eyes. R.E. reduction tends NOT to work with kids who cannot be commanded to stare at the camera's R.E. feature--the pre-shot light blast. Consider using a flashlight to shine toward the childrens' faces just prior to the exposure.

Not really an answer....idle ramblings.

 

My Nikon Coolpix 995 has logged 13,000 images in 3 years. Still seems okay despite being dropped onto concrete 2X from a height one one meter and 1.5 m!! I know my SLRs never survived that sort of unintentional abuse...as I guess the heavier DSLRs won't either.

 

I will buy a DSLR before my Coolpx dies just because like others have noted "I want one." Like many things in our society we buy obsolescence and seem to thrive on it. Whether or not that is environmentally sound or not is another matter. Our economies seem to like it. It IS a vicious circle.

The previous reply is correct. Let a technician tackle this. Taking apart these complcated lenses is like brain surgery. I had an old Minolta lens with oil on the aperture vanes. The oil became "thick" which caused problems. The key point being, some sort of lubricant was necessary (on this older lens) in order for the aperture to function properly. (It WAS an old lens--maybe new ones don't have lubricants.)

 

Let a technician tackle this.

Neat question. Makes me feel old though. :)

 

First camera? Nameless cheapo 120 film camera although my dad had a Brownie. (Mid 50s)

First camera that I took a lot of pictures with for the university yearbook was a Leica IIIC --- which I still have.

First SLR = Minolta SRT 101

Current main film camera is a Minolta Maxxum 7. (Also have Mamiya 645, a 35-mm Nikon Action Touch water-proof and my main digital, an ancient Nikon Coolpix 995, 3.2MP)

 

My wish camera. It WILL be a K-M Maxxum 7D to go with my Minolta AF lenses. Will get one in 2005 when the price of the 7D drops (???) or waiting for the K-M 8MP DSLR.

Regarding the camera. If you are new to photography you might consider an upgrade to a 6 or 8 MP SLR that does not have interchangeable lenses. If you purchase an interchangeable lens DSLR you will need to buy two or three lenses to go with. The money soon adds up.

 

Regarding "Google photoblog" as a means of making money with pictures. I know NOTHING about this. I am going to take a guess that it is unlikely someone could make a LOT of money here. They have THOUSANDS of registered contributors. I have sold pictures to ad agencies for about 15 years and make a bit of money (some years quite a lot)--it's not my real job. There CAN be huge money in ad photography. But as a relatively new photographer I am guessing you will find that being a Google photoblog is not a sure way to justify the investment

 

Get the new camera. Take thousands of pictures and start building up a reputation for quality images. In the mean time, register as a blog and see how it pans out. Make the investment, but I would not make the new camera and lens investment based on being a Google blog.

You will find the manual here..

 

http://kmpi.konicaminolta.us/eprise/main/kmpi/content/cam/cam_SupportCenter/ManualResults

Ignoring the "noise" issues of lower-end digitals...it can be an issue in contrasty situations....

 

But at 300 dpi (considered photo-grade rez), a 4 by 6 print is 1200 by 1800 pixels or 2.16 MP. So, the answer to the question (as noted a the start), is yes.

Side note ... I hope Nikon comes out with a consumer grade DSLR so that Konica-Minolta is forced to drop the silly opening price on their 7D! Cheers! Clive

I won't fault anyone for being enamored by the mountains--I love them too. But I've lived on the prairies for 36 years and can tell you they are spectacular. If is unfortunate that it takes massive grandeur (i.e. mountains) for people to be visually stimulated.

A winter's day on the prairies of full of photographic opportunity. Catch a setting sun glaring through blowing ground snow...an abandoned house or barn...a piece of machinery forlorn in a field....the prairie grasses or wheat stubble poking thru the snow...

 

There are no voids on earth. A seemingly empty horizon is a full sky. A seemingly flat plain is full of contours and wonderful shadows--especially in winter with the low sun. Pay attention. It is alive with beauty. And listen to the wind in the grass or hear the snow crystals shuffle along the snow crust. Hear your crisp footsteps.

 

You will never feel as alive as will will on the prairies. You will feel freedom at its very best. The miles of apparent nothingness are full of beauty. Look and you will see it.

 

Have a wonderful time wherever you go. Travel smart. Travel safe.

 

Welcome and Cheers!

 

Clive PS: The battery blanket is a bit much, BUT as the ex-Alaskan said you must have a "block heater" for your car. I rarely use one here in S Alberta, but they are a must a few times a year.

Good point Rick. I did not mean to criticize by saying I would not use ISO 800--I would not in daytime. Night time is a different ball game :) Pictures of motion at night are tricky. Compromise is a must.

 

Wrote on my website....( stole it from somewhere) ... "It is better to have a grainy image than a blurry image."

Practice is good.

 

As the others have noted you MUST learn about shutter speeds. It is unfortunate that in this P&S "automatic" age that folks know little about speeds and apertures and the effects they have on images. Understanding is important for good images and for helping understand when images are less than ideal.

 

Your first step though should be to buy and use a sturdy TRIPOD. Keeping the camera still is your best bet for sharper pictures. ISO 800 is extreme and (no offence) but I'd never use ISO 800 UNLESS it was for action only and I had no other options. But you can stop (or slow) ots of action at a shutter speed of 1/250.

 

What worked last Saturday afternoon will not work for a late afternoon game when the light is lower. Light energy drops dramatically later in the day which requires lower shutter speeds or larger apertures--lower f-stop numbers. Sunny days way different than cloudy days.

 

Some tips below...not read myself for a couple of years...hope is all clear.

http://members.shaw.ca/clives/photoguide2.html

 

Good luck,

 

Clive

Unless someone already mentioned...buy a digital camera with an OPTICAL zoom (or both), versus a camera with ONLY a digital zoom. Dig zoom is effectively pointless for anyone with a simple photo editing program that will crop images. You likely have some sort of photo editing program anyway--comes with Win XP home ed.

No real help re your query. Minolta no longer exists, but Konica-Minolta is alive and well and putting out some nice cameras.

Thanks for the comments so far. Bill, I sent you an e-mail requesting the samples. Thanks.

 

The K-M DSLR 7D seems to be hot speed wise. Up to 12 frames at 3 fps without a breather. Way more than I'd ever use--even my grandkids don't move that fast. My Maxxum 7 does 4 fps and I don't use it. (Used the 3fps a few times shooting flying geese with the Minolta 700si.)

 

I have four lenses for the Maxxum 7...500mm mirror, 100mm macro, 100-300mm APO zoom and 28-85mm standard zoom. Lens quality is good--maybe not the best, but good for me so far. Will be sweet to get all of these in front of a digital sensor.

 

Thanks again!

 

Clive