pascal_b.

Hi Randall,

I live in Ireland. Strongly recommend the West. Have a look at my site if you want to get some ideas... www.photographsofireland.com

All the best

Pb

I'd say, go for it! Indeed prices of Polaroid scanners have dropped significantly in the last years and yet my experience is that they produce very good results. They are very well built and usually produce sharp scans. If you can find one in good condition at that price, frankly you're not taking a big risk...

Good luck

P.

I find the west coast of Ireland (from south to North) very dramatic for a photographer... Light and landscapes. Water everywhere, sea, lakes, rain. Reflections... Diversity.

Scotland has architecture (postcard villages + pretty Edinburgh). It is also more austere and rugged.

You might want to have a look at my site: www.photographsofireland.com

Good luck

P.

I was there in July and was not bothered by the crowds one bit.

Agree with Tofino. It's quite out there, the sort of place that has a human dimension to it as well... which makes the stay fascinating...

Also, not mentioned but absolutely amazing if you're into colours: Butchard gardens near Victoria. The most beautiful gardens in July... Pick an overcast day and make the trip...

Also, if you have a few days and a bit of cash, get yourself to a wild life photo shoot.

Slan

P.

Hi Gerry,

You're lucky because Horseshoe bend is the easiest most beautiful thing to shoot.

Go 2 Page, northern Arizona, horseshoe bend is only a couple of miles south of Page, on the right, posted from the road. Park your car, walk for a few hundred yards in the sand. Bend a little bit, not too much, there you are. Absolutely smashing view!

The immensity of the landscape requires medium or large format (I think). If you want to see some quality photos of the damn thing, go to the photo lab in town, they have some large photos on display...

I would suggest it is difficult to be original on that sort of shot but at the same time it is still quite a nice trophy to bring back to a light table...

While you're in the area don't miss the slot canyons...

Good luck!

P.

a sub question to my previous post in this forum:

What about finding a guide (or a workshop) for a few days in February

(with focus on wildlife)?

Is this feasible with a such a short notice?

Thanks again

P.

Hi there

I was planning to go to Yellowstone second week of February while I am

in the States. What kind of photos can I expect roughly?

Thanks for your help

P.

Budapest, Prag or Vienna definitely.

Good luck

P.

As usual with Indian people, photography is a bit of a sensitive issue that you can adress (not necessarily sort out) by chatting to people and ask permission for photos. On top of that, Chiapas has had its own problems over the last years and therefore has seen numerous photographers flocking to San Cristobal to catch some of the action. On a photography trip to San Cristobal a few years ago I started to take the easy photos first (kids on a market), came back the next day with the images, gave them away to the mothers and only then got permission to take more intimate images. Takes a bit of time but rewarding...

Buildings, architecture: no problems whatsoever.

Villages around: you can take photo alright but I strongly suggest you bring a guide with you (or for that matter that a guide brings you with him...). You can easily find somebody in the streets of San Cristobal. In fact, it is all very touristic...

P.

Hi there

I believe Rolfe Horn has done some work in Japan of the type you're describing... I saw something about him in an OP a couple of years ago... And that guy seems to be doing business at www.45f.com

Slan

P.

Just get yourself a reverse converter 120V to 240V in any Radioshack in the States. Get at least 40W and you're in business. Costs about $40 or $50 as far as I can remember.

The only thing you need to worry about is the transport. Print heads are very delicate.

Also you will notice that the US is indeed the land of plenty. You will find more inks and papers than you will ever use. Papers are not the same size though.

Good luck

P.

I'm afraid John that Bob is right about resolution. Whatever resolution you scan at, enlarging from a 35mm will always show. I used to own a 2700 dpi scanner and produced beautiful A2 prints. I now scan at 4800 dpi with my DMP and you would not see much difference on the prints... They are still beautiful but they are still enlargements from 35mm. That's just the way it is: 3.5cm X 2.5cm make a small rectangle. Which brings me to the next thing: if you don't scan medium format, you don't need a DMP.

I don't really want to get into a dpi debate with people who use microscopes to look at images. People have their own way to do things and I respect that. My experience is based on my naked eye and my customers's naked eyes.

Having said that and to answer the question, I think the DMP is a very decent scanner. From all the research I've done before my purchase I found it is a little bit cheaper than the Nikon (if you consider the extras you might have to buy with the 9000) and maybe easier to use. I can also say that my experience with their repair department is good.

Whatever scanner you finally get, you will probably be very happy with it. Don't spend too much time deciding between both, they will give you the exact same results.

Good luck

P.

Hi there

Could somebody suggest a very good glossy paper for use with the Epson

7600 (Ultrachrome). I'm not over thrilled with premium glossy 250 from

Epson (I find it a little bit dull) and I am looking for something

very punchy. Also a place to get it online...

Thanks for your help

P.

I used to scan my images on a polaroid scanner with no ice device. I tried that dust and removal software but It removes much more than you would like and produce a too soft image.

ICE is a pretty sophisticated device that I am now using. No comparison with dust and removal...

The only solution is to do the cleaning by yourself in photoshop. Very time consuming but free.

All the best

P.

Hi there

I guess I'm gonna get myself hammered over this but what is so cool about vuescan after all?

Joe, you are saying that among other things sharpness improves with Vuescan. How?

I too own a Minolta multi pro and I must confess I'm not overly impressed by the sharpness of the scans. If you leave the sharpening off you get a pretty soft scan, if you sharpen at 200% you get too much noise. The only decent way to sharpen an image is still to do it in Photoshop. I have tried Vuescan, spent ages doing a scan at 48bit, checked the manual focus and then unchecked it, and did not get anything better.

I would be very curious to see a test where Vuescan scans sharper than Minolta software. Can you elaborate?

Re colour and shadow detail: I am quite happy with multi pro and its software. Take a decent slide, I mean a slide that is not 1/2 stop under or over exposed, and you will get what you see.

(I'm talking velvia 50, 35 mm or MF and landscape).

Thanks for your time

P.

Hi there

Anybody any experience of scanning and preparing photos for a large

volume printer that will use cmyk .eps types of files?

I need to scan photos and send them on a disk to a printer. I would

guess it is not only a matter of saving my pics in cmyk mode and eps

file and that there is more to it.

How can I prepare the file so that the printer will more or less print

what I am saving (seeing) on my disk?

Please ask for precisions if unclear.

Thanks as always

P.

I know it's probably not the answer you want to hear but if you do a quick search in the scanners related topic on this forum you will find all sort of up-to-date infos. I think that anything useful that could be said regarding medium format scanners has been said recently on this forum... And it is rather difficult to find a decent medium format scanner for less than $1800...

P.

Some serious people seem to suggest that the pro series from Viewsonic do the business. By the way, if you do a lot's of editing I would suggest a little bit more than 19'

Good luck

P.

Sharp transparencies nicely scanned will always make very good A2 prints, very good. What I am saying is that medium format does not bring you automatically to the next level. In order to get impressive results you have to master an expensive equipment (new camera + new scanner).

I think you would be better off using your 35mm equipment at its most rather than going for the compromise of medium format + flatbed.

Good luck

P.

Hi there

Anybody any idea of where to find an Epson 7600 refurbished these days?

thanks a lot

P.

HI there

I have a film scanner multi pro from Minolta and an Epson 2200. I was

planning to calibrate my monitor and/with the rest of the chain and

was planning to buy the monaco ez color bundle (monaco ez + optix).

Will I need to also get an IT8 card? That card seems to exist only for

35mm or 4X5. Which one should I look at?

According to some contributors, a flatbed scanner is also needed at

some point in the process. Surely this might put me off any

calibration attempt.

Can somebody sum up the exact equipment I need to calibrate monitor

with scanner with printer please?

Thanks very much for help

P.

Thanks for your time Kevin. Yes, I do own a few Nikon bodies (including the F100) and all sort of lenses. I've been shooting with Nikon for years. The only reason I got into MF was for a interior photography job and I must say I enjoy myself, that's why I'd like to get a bit further into it and get some decent equipment. Decent but still affordable (vs the money I'll be making from it). My client wants medium format transparency which is why my Nikon is not an option (even with the 35mm Schneider you are suggesting). I'm not slagging Hasselblad, don't get me wrong. The results are fantastic, lenses are really sharp and images are to die for. I suppose I'm just missing a motor winder, a proper built-in light meter and a better exposure compensation than 1/2...

For all these reasons, I find Hasselblad a bit expensive for me. Which is why I was looking for a compromise, a medium format camera that would allow me to carry on interior photography while also sometimes replacing my Nikon when I'm shooting out there on the field.

Thank for your help

Pascal

Right, right, right. Thanks very much for your answers. I'm just not ready for the 4X5 move quite yet (gave me too many headaches at College!). No, seriously, I don't do large or beautiful or interesting interiors, I do ordinary, boring rooms and I don't have much time to do them. Polaroid are definitely not an option for example. I try to do my best within... well, I have to compromise. And already it takes me 4 to 5 hours to do only one room with a Hasselblad 501...

I agree that Fuji GX 680 III looks like the best medium format option. The price is still a bit high (for a body + 3 lenses).

Any other suggestions? I suppose I was more looking for Pentax, Mamya and co. Or should I stick to Hasselblad for example?

Sorry about downsizing expectations

Thanks

P.