roberthanson

<p>The purpose of running a calibration on a monitor and profiling it is to take into account the minor variations in components that will make identical equipment slightly different. When you profile the monitors and then set the video card to see them as one monitor it will apply your profile from one of the monitors to both of them. The result will be that one monitor will be correct and one will be off a little. Try setting up the video card the other way and make sure that the profile that is being used for each is the correct one. I think it will be interesting to see how close they are, kind of a test on how good profiling is. I am not familiar with those monitors so I don't know how well they calibrate some monitors do this better than others.</p>

<p>The purpose of running a calibration on a monitor and profiling it is to take into account the minor variations in components that will make identical equipment slightly different. When you profile the monitors and then set the video card to see them as one monitor it will apply your profile from one of the monitors to both of them. The result will be that one monitor will be correct and one will be off a little. Try setting up the video card the other way and make sure that the profile that is being used for each is the correct one. I think it will be interesting to see how close they are, kind of a test on how good profiling is. I am not familiar with those monitors so I don't know how well they calibrate some monitors do this better than others.</p>

<p>Like Terry said they used a beam splitter there is a company called Virtual Backgrounds that furnishes this equipment it runs $3000-$7000. Google Virtual Backgrounds and I think you will find them. You have to send them a quote request to get pricing.</p>

The best place as far as I am concern is Lynda.com. The coarse selection that they have is extensive and for a flat monthly or yearly fee

you can use any of them. They cover most all of the Adobe products and a lot of others.

I just shot my first wedding and I have not apprenticed with anyone. My advice, assuming you go ahead with this is. Visit the church

and reception hall ahead of time find out how it will be lit and decide what exposures/lens you will use take some test shots. Make up a

shot list that is in the order that you plan to take the shots, I used this for two things to not miss shots and to plan where I would be with

what lens to obtain the shot. I used two cameras one with a wide angle 17-35 and one with 28-70 both 2.8. I only made 2 lens changes

during the whole thing I would haved been able to easily do more but I planned to make the fewest possible to cut down on the potential

mistake factor and distraction. I used a Fong lightspere and it worked out well for the ceremony pictures however I was using a D3 at

iso 1600. I used a D2x at iso 400 for formals shot in the sanctuary. The formals were shot with two shoot through umbrellas and

SB800's with one on the camera with the lightspere 3 total everything was set manual. This worked out ok but the sharpness was not

as good as I hoped it would be I think due to shooting at or close to the lens shortest focal length and near wide open. The relative

position of the camera and the sensor on the remote flashes also restricted my movement some and still get the remotes to fire. If I did

this again I would use a monolight or 2 and radio wireless more setup weight etc but a lot more flexibility in what you can do. If I shot it

with Sb800 I would use the D3 and go up on the iso to be able to stop down a little to improve the sharpness. I also shot about half of

the formals before the ceremony and the rest between the ceremony and reception this worked out quite well but it required the wedding

party be ready 3 hours before the ceremony. It also required some organizing so the groom did not see the bride before the ceremony.

Talk to the couple and the minister so you know what they want/don't want you to do flash etc. Also is you can go to the rehearsal that

way you will know where people are going to be when and you can plan where you need to be to get the pictures you want. If I do it

again I would also take more shots with the 70-200 2.8 that I had along but probably not a lot. In summary have a detailed plan that you

know pretty much by heart, things may well change from the plan but if you know your plan and what lens exposure etc you will use and

where you will be able to react to the change much more quickly.

Regarding lens I do not have either of the lens you mention I have the Nikkor 17-35 2.8 and the 28-70 2.8. The comment I made about

color cast was a misstatement. I had in fact shot a custom white balance with both cameras using a elastolyte type grey screen. The

resulting white balance gave a warmer look than I care for but when I sit down with the bride in a week she may like it. The light was a

mixture of flash, window light with some stained glass and a fairly bright day, and church chandeliers that were a mix of tungsten and

compact flourescents. I appreciate all your comments. Actually shooting the wedding was fun even if it was a lot of work I may look to do

more of them.

Since I had never done a wedding before I was concerned about being efficient and not burning a lot of time on light setup or lens changes.

As a result I put together a game plan that minimized lens changes and used the D3 when I had no opportunity to adjust settings or

lighting. With 20-20 hindsight I could have used the D3 without a big time penalty. To your question why didn't I use the D3, answer

stayed with the original game plan, bad decision in the flow of the shoot. Reason for MF is to obtain a little more resolution in the bigger

groups. However if I used more light and had the option of stopping down,use a little longer lens to minimize distortion, plus wireless to

allow moving to best fill the frame I expect the results would be nearly as good. After evaluating the pictures I took I also decided that I

don't care for the color cast that the "natural light" gives and I am taking it out of most of them.

At the risk of starting another dialogue on the best way to light formals at a wedding here are my observations from using 3 SB-800 with 2

shoot through umbrellas and one on the camera with a Fong Lightspere. Camera for the formals D2x iso400, lens Nikon 17-35 2.8 AF-s.

Shot all the pictures manual camera and flash settings, don't like the surprises you can get with TTL. Generally the results were good but

the sharpness using the lens at the wide limit or close with a aperture of 3.5 was not as good as I wanted. Also while I used the shoot

through umbrella setup I was still restricted in where I could be with the camera and obtain reliable firing of the slaves. The different groups

positioning really required my moving more than I could to make the best use of the sensor resolution. Also I kept the framing loose to

make sure I didn't create perspective issues and this was also detrimental from a resolution point of view. I would have much preferred to

have Pocket wizards on the slaves and reliable firing but if I did that I think I would rather invest in 2 Profoto Compact 600 with the Wizard

built in. If you recall from my original question the options were SB-800 or Profoto D4, as it turned out I used the SB-800 but I would use

the D4 or Compact 600 and probably my Contax 645 and film for the formals if I do this again. I didn't realize the lengthy discussion my

last question prompted I hope this one doesn't do the same. Using the D3, which is what I used for the ceremony may have been a better

choice for the formals than the D2x.

Russ I know that the focal length you used on the f4 shot was 16mm what was it on

the f2.8? I am familiar with the DOF site and depth of field considerations. The

ambient light look is just a different look than the studio strobe approach everyone has their favorite. I have not shot that much high iso with the D3 yet so am a little

conservative in that area. Don't have a problem with it for reception and that type

picture which is almost never printed very large.

Russ another reason that I am leaning toward the D4 is the alter area and step are

quite deep like in your first picture here and I wanted to get more light to the back wall

but it depends on what the decorations are like when I get there. In any case I will

definitely be making use of your approach in some situations that I have been

shooting. Never have shot much shoot through so just don't think to try it especially in

a large area where the extra fall off from shooting through takes more power.

Sorry I have not responded sooner a little internet provider issue. Russ thanks for the

input that would certainly solve the sensor problem. However from the trials I did I

would be limited to large apertures. I still may use the Profoto D4 pack with the two

umbrellas which give a lot of latitude in how you can shoot it. Edward what would you

use on a mono umbellas or?? I will be shooting the event with a D3 using a D2x as

backup. I like the SB800 for the portability but since the wedding is family I can

conscript people to move equipment. Will find out today as I will be going to the

church the wedding will be in to setup and test the options.

I tried to setup two 60" umbrellas for wedding formals using three SB800's master on camera and

slaves on the umbrellas. Using ttl I could not get the flash unit that had the sensor pointing away

to consistently fire, this was especially true when I was behind the umbrellas with the camera. So

to be successful with this setup it apparently is necessary to shot from in front of the umbrellas

with a wide angle lens?

Thanks sometimes I read too fast to read.

Thanks for your suggestions I will do some trial shots in our church, the wedding

church is 4 hours away. The times that I have had problems with the wireless SB800

it was in our church and the slaves were spread out more than they would be for this

and the master on the camera was pretty directional, I was not getting reliable firing of

the slaves. What was the aperture for the SB800 shot and what was the slave setup

manual or ??

Next weekend I will be shooting my step sons wedding. The formals will be shot in the sanctuary

and at this time I am planning to use a Profoto D4 with 2 60" umbrellas and a 3x4 softbox. I have

3 SB800 that I could use but these are not always reliable firing with the wireless setup. Also I

have seen pictures of a wedding shot in this church with a Canon 580 or Quantum not sure and

while the people were lit ok the background was quite dark and had the cave look. Concern I have

with the setup I am looking at is getting weird catchlights in the eyes. Any input would be

appreciated.

 

Rob

The units that I currently have are air cushion but too light weight to hold the Acute

heads without bending especially at full extension. Even the 6' stands I have are just

not rigid enough. I was setting up lights to do the formal wedding pictures in a church

and needed about 10' because of the rise of the podium area in the front of the church.

Thanks a lot for the ideas I will probably go with some of the Avenger units, although I

have not looked at the Matthews Beefy baby. Any other ideas are welcome.

I am only using the head to hold the softbox no clamp. How do they work?

I have a Profoto D-4 and the flash heads that go with it. The question is what are your

recommendations for light stands make/model to adequately support these heads and a umbrella

up to 60" or softbox 3'x4'. The light stands I have are light weight aluminum and look like they

have "ED" when these heads are mounted on them. My preference would be for stands that are

lighter for some portability but if you say I can't have both stability and portability ok. Thanks for

the help..

I have a rotary paper cutter that has an attachment for mounting a roll of paper and cutting

guide for cutting repeat lengths. I believe the brand is Rototrim but I am not sure I am

currently traveling. The cutter will go to 24" wide and is very well built. The down side is I

think it cost $250 maybe more I don't remember. On the plus side it is a excellent

commercial grade cutter.

It is critically important that the brightness setting used when doing the calibration is done

correctly for your viewing conditions and then NEVER changed. If the brightness is not set

right I have found the problem that you describe is the most common result. What kind of

monitor are you using? It is much more difficult to set this right with LCD than with a good

CRT. I have had a lot more problems trying to do this on a MacBook Pro than with a old NEC

crt. Many people suggest that it is not even possible to correctly evaluate a picture for

printing on a laptop lcd no matter who makes it. I would agree it is marginal.

You can also correct perspective with the crop tool. This is done by starting a crop the

dimensions can be blank and the resolution blank. Draw the crop outline generaly around

the area you want by clicking and dragging the crop box, let the left mouse button go so

you have the crop area with the grayed out surrounding. When you let go of the mouse

button the tool bar will change and you will have a check box for perspective, check the

box. Now position the sides of the crop box parallel with reference lines in the picture

that should be a square or rectangle by dragging the corners of the crop box. Then hit

return and a new picture will be generated with the corrections you made. Remember to

make a test copy to try this on it works pretty well but is not as sophisticated as the lens

correction filter.

Here is another good place to compare light modifiers.

http://www.profoto-usa.com/products/lightshaping/softlight.asp

Do the files have an alpha channel in them? I have had problems with files that contain alpha

channels in other applications.

Is anyone using the Lacie 526 monitor? If so how do you like it and what did you use to calibrate it? Did

you have any problems doing the calibration? I am looking at one of these or the Eizo CG211 for my next

monitor and with that much money involved would like to make the right decision. Thanks for your

feedback.

As others have indicated Portra is not a high saturation film, problem 1. Second the

parameters used during the scan may be giving you a poor file, from what you indicate a

levels adjustment may solve a good part of the problem. Last but not least I calibrate a 15

Macbook Pro but it only gets it as good as it can be and that is very marginal to really see

accurate color, it is definitely not good enough to color match prints I have never

compared to what you get on another crt or lcd. If the color of the files are much different

when pulled up on a web site from what you see on your screen before you load them on

the site it would suggest that your file is not been tagged as srgb and therefore rendering

poorly. I use a calibration unit made by x-rite who also make the Eye One since they

bought out Mcbeth. If I purchased a new calibration device I would buy the Eye One now.

You definitely need to turn off the auto brightness the calibration will only be good for the

brightness level at which it is done.