maxmalossini

<p>It'll work fine.<br>

Being without a desktop, what you suggest is actually my current set up: laptop screen is disabled, and external lcd monitor is my main, only, monitor.I tuck away my laptop, then use only a good wireless mouse/keyboard and I have the monitor right there, clear of any clutter. It's like having a imac 24''! Well, sort of :)<br>

This way it's also easier to calibrate even with cheaper spyder 2, although more pro calibration devices can easily handle two monitors.</p>

 

<p>Talking about printers price: just bought the r2880 from very reputable online vendor (am I allowed to write name of company?) for $689, minus $200 rebate; final cost for a new r2880: $489. Not a bad deal.</p>

<p>Wow, that's a lot of homework :)<br>

[beloved darkroom work seems like a simple task compare to all this]<br>

I'll put everything together as soon as I have a chance, then get back here in a few days.<br>

Thank you</p>

<p>Is it the luminance (in the "HSL" menu) or the brightness (in the "basic" menu) that I want to play with? According to you, Frans, I shouldn't mess with the brightness?<br>

By the way, what is the difference between these two commands?<br>

Thanks,<br>

Max</p>

<p>Peter, I know, that seems like an obvious fix, but then during calibration the software tells me not to touch anything (including brightness) otherwise even the colors would get dis-calibrated.<br>

I will try to recalibrate the monitor, but first set the monitor brightness to the low values that seems to match the print. I'll see if that works.</p>

<p>Compared to my previous posts, things are getting better: monitor is calibrated with spyder2, color profiles are correctly set and managed by Lightroom2, not the printer. Well, this is what i am convinced of.<br>

Print: the colors are indeed accurate BUT the whole image is obviously less bright than what I see on the screen.<br>

I reprinted the same image after boosting up the brightness to +110 (almost blinding when looked at the screen) and this second print is much better, although It's missing a certain "punch" that i do see on the screen. Same story for bw printed with the advanced bw mode.<br>

So, to summarize: colors are fine but entire image is underexposed/less bright.<br>

I believe the brightness setting on my monitor must be off, in fact if I turn the brightness down to 30 or 40 out of 100 than I get more accurate match print-monitor. But settings like that make the monitor so dull and dark, and the print is still a little less vibrant, more dull.<br>

Any suggestions? Thank you,<br>

Max</p>

 

<p>Thank you. Patrick, I'm not sure what you mean with your last point (no, I don't "know how to print without any questions", that's why I'm asking :)<br>

Keep in mind, I am starting from scratch, [although I spent many years in a darkroom.]<br>

1. yes, I calibrated my monitor<br>

2. no. Not only I don't know where to stop, but barely where to start!<br>

3. not sure.<br>

4. yes<br>

I find Kelby's book very good, although at this initial stage I could use a "precedure" type approach, something like: import raw images; develop; go to print module; choose this and this and this, check this and that; press print. I am very aware that things cannot be simplified that much, and I have to learn and decide what works best for me, but a starting procedure would give me something to build on.<br>

It seems like I am missing the big picture (pun intended!). The more I learn about details/techniques the farther away i am from getting a decent background knowledge.<br>

For example: what I am planning to do (hopefully today) is to print a few versions of the same image (such as raw non-developed, raw-developed, and then a different develop on virtual copies) with all the LR2 data printed next to each, so I can see differences and similarities, and I can also verify color accuracy against the monitor (I calibratd it yeasterday so haven't tested the results yet).</p>

<p>I'm getting frustrated. I have been reading the kelby lightroom 2 book and trying to use what I need.<br>

Right now I just would like to get a good print from my r2880.<br>

I have about 1000 questions. I will only ask one at a time, hoping that it will be self-contained:<br>

äfter developing a raw image, and before going to print it, is it advisable to change its format?<br>

Thank you,<br>

Max</p>

 

<p>An an amateur I say: great! Now more than ever I know I can do better than some professional photographers :)</p>

 

<p>It's all new for me, so be patient.<br>

Just got the Epson r2880, just got Lightroom2, just got a d50, so, yes, a big climb ahead of me, I know. I have many jpg, many tiff (scanned negs), and many nef files that I am planning to use as my training material (some are really good shots and whenever i can make decent prints they will be Keepers). I printed two photos on epson premium photo luster etc. as soon as the printer was set up (no resizeing, reshaping, renaming, retouching...): not happy: just as I expected the colors were very different from the monitor (I use an external monitor from my laptop). Is there another way to calibrate your monitor (trial and error? mmh) besides buying one of those devices? And if it really is essential, shouldn't it be in each printer's shipping box? Or, were the prints disappointing because i wasn't choosing the correct color spaces or profiles or similar stuff?<br>

Although I am mostly focused on bw, I still would like to get some good color prints. Thank you. Max M.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>This is what sometimes works for me: I pick a project, an idea, that I want to explore (such as "windows" or "people reading" etc...). Then I either go out and find subjects or, more likely, I sort of stage the shot that I want to produce. It may be frustrating at the beginning, but as soon as you start thinking about shooting possibilities/scenarios, you'll be surprised at how many more good ideas come out of the initial effort.<br>

digression: I used to be skeptical about staging a photograph, but now I completely changed my mind: where is the ability of the photographer if you just go on a street and shoot hundreds of images? Of course you are bound to get one or two good shots. The real ability of the photographer is to have something to communicate and to know how to do it through a photograph, that's why it's ok to stage your shots (unless it's photo journalism, of course).</p>

<p>I will be going for a weekend in nyc at the beginning of March.<br>

I only visited a few times before, and this time I want to find some museums and temp expositions specifically about photography, or where photography is a relevent part.<br>

I know about the International Center for Photography and I will definitely visit that.<br>

Do you have any other suggestions? Thank you,<br>

Max</p>

<p >Background: amateur, mainly b&w. Urban landscape, still life, people. N90s, d50. will soon buy a Epson r2880. Will soon post photos on photo.net :)</p>

<p >When I was printing in the darkroom 15 years ago, grain was never an issue. Grain was there, and it was ok. A good photo is a good photo, that's roughly my philosophy.</p>

<p >Well, now in my transition to digital, there is a lot of talking about what size print versus mega pixels, digital noise at high ISO etc.</p>

<p >My question is: given my tolerance to film grain, how concerned should I be about enlarging my prints from digital files?What do people mean when they make those charts about megapixel and print size? Does it mean that if I print bigger I'll see those little ugly square-ish pixels?</p>

<p >Example1 (trying to revive the past): I have some beautiful prints (about 11x17) of which I am very proud, photos taken in Paris in the early 90’s, printed on good fiber paper, many hours in the darkroom. Now I sent out those negs to be scanned (4000ppi, 16-bit) hoping to recreate those prints in my digital darkroom (it’s in the making: I bought Lightroom2, Epson r2880 is almost on its way). Will I be able to (eventually, I know) make as good of a print?</p>

<p >Example2 (what I started to do and will be doing in the future): I bought a used d50 (first digital slr for me). I am looking forward to learning bw conversion from raw etc. As far as making prints (I like them “large”, let’s say at least 8x10 and up to 13x..) what issues should I expect from my d50 raw files? Will they be “grainy”? Comparable to a tri-x neg enlarged to a 13x19 print? Better? Worse?</p>

<p >Are there serious limitations to making large prints from my d50? Should I just look at a used d200? (that’s about what I can do now, budget-wise).</p>

<p >I am aware there are learning curves for a lot of this; and I know I should experiment and decide. May be I am not seeing some big warning signs? (such as “don’t except any gallery-looking prints neither from your d50, nor from your scanned negatives…”)</p>

<p >May be you can also direct me to some good visual examples or articles of what I'm talking about?</p>

<p >Thank you for your patience,</p>

<p >Max</p>

<p>I know there are several ways (ten or so?) to convert a color image into b&w.<br>

In this aspect, is Lightroom2 limiting for bw conversion? And if it's not limiting, why bother with Elements?<br>

[Lightoom 2 for educators is $99.]</p>

<p>Thank you.<br>

I'll pick up on Patrick's description: what I want/plan to do is darkroom work.<br>

Since I will be printing with the 2880, do I need a lot of "help" from my software to make the prints right, or are all these software's well equipped with printing dialogues/options/setups?<br>

Also, two of you mentioned the tablet. I believe that would be useful if there is a lot of retouching involved, but again, I'm not sure. But if there is the bamboo deal including Elements, then I might just consider that option, too.<br>

I'll wait a couple of days for more ideas from you helpful members, although I'm leaning towards Elements with a later upgrade to cs4 in mind.<br>

By the way, the Nik's silver efex looks great, but wow, kind of expensive. I will probably try the trial since it's a Element/cs4 plugin.</p>

 

<p>As part of my (slow) transition to digital, I now have to decide what software to buy.<br>

I do mainly black and white, I have many negatives that are now out to be scanned at good quality(?) and I'm hoping that eventually I'll be able to reprint some of my favorites just like I did in the darkroom 15 years ago (I am also buying a 2880 soon).<br>

I don't think this matters but I am currently using both a n90s and a d50.<br>

Anyway, my question is: is Elements 7 a good choice or should I go for photoshop cs4? Again, if that matters, I'm interested mainly in bw, and, at least for now, I tend to dislike those over-manipulated fake looking images that are now everywhere. I don't plan to work on thousands of images per year, either.<br>

note: I am an educator so it looks like I can get a good deal: elements 7: $69. CS4: $299.<br>

Thank you,<br>

Max</p>

<p>You are correct Patrick, everybody states the quality is superb, even those who rated one star.<br>

These reviewers are experiencing hardware malfunctioning, then hours on the phone with cust. service, then returning the printer, the next printer is still malfunctioning etc.. Epsons actually accepts these exchanges, which means they must be aware of some potential defects with some r2880's.</p>

 

<p>Yes, I noticed. That's great, although it may just slightly raise a suspicion, given the several complaints in various reviews from other sites. or may be it's part of the stimulus packet! It _is_ stimulating me, after all!<br>

Now it costs just like a refurb 2400.<br>

Max</p>

<p>Epson had a rebate offer for $150 on the purchase of a r2880 printer. The rebate was stated to be valid until 2/4/09, so I decided to wait a few more days before making this [for me] big purchase. Tonight there is no more rebate, just the full $799.99 price (it would have been 649.99).<br>

What a dirty move.<br>

I emailed cust. service. We'll see what they have to say.<br>

Sorry guys, I guess I needed to vent my frustration,<br>

anyone had similar experiences?<br>

Max</p>

<p>I am slowly transitioning to digital everything (will be ordering a r2880 in the next couple of weeks).<br>

I remember many hours spent in my darkroom, and using leftover strips of paper to print proofs, then adjusting exposure etc. before making a large final print.<br>

This used to save a lot of paper and also allowed for placing the strip across critical area of the image to make adjustments more accurate.<br>

Do people still do this from Photoshop or similar? I Imagine it would be like selecting a certain (small-ish/long-ish) area and then only print that much. Then re-feed the same sheet and use a different portion of the sheet to print another strip.<br>

Some of the fine art paper can be quite expensive and that could potentially save me some money and ink.<br>

I only have a lcd monitor, so what I see (esp. in b&w) is not necessarily what will print.<br>

If the answer is no, what kind of paper+ink saving tips do you have?<br>

Thank you for your input.<br>

Max</p>

<p> </p>

Thank you everyone.

Tom, you are right, but at this time my biggest limitations are budget and time.

I'll see how it goes with one of these choices (possibly d50 for < $300), then in a year or so I'll be able to

make a more educated decision.

Max

I am buying my first digital slr, I have some good Nikon lenses, some D some not, so I'll go for a used Nikon.

Unfortunately I also have a budget!

I like bw and that's mainly what I do (portraits, still, architecture..) no action photography, no weather

concerns either.

(I will still keep my n90s and use film, but it's getting expensive since I use good labs).

Ideally, and occasionally, I do print (send out to be printed) my better photos, and I like my prints fairly

large (around 8x11 or larger).

Anyway, if I want to stay within a $400 limit, this is what is out there from good sellers: d70 and/or d70s for

less than $300, and a few d40 and/or d40x for a little less than $400. All of the above in ex or ex+ conditions.

There is also a d50 for $310.

Could you suggest one vs. the other?

[i am aware that neither cameras will meter old type Nikon lenses, I have a good light meter and slowly

transitioning to d-type anyway].

Thank you so much,

Max M

Money and time. Unlike many others, I don't even have a decent computer to process images; then it would cost too much to find digital camera/lenses with same features as my n90s, fe2 etc. Finally, I shoot mainly b&w.

As far as labs that do a good job on tmax3200 or delta3200, I would definitely recommend San Miguel Phot Lab (http://www.bestlab.com/). They provide professional quality service, and the price is fair with several options, including scans.

Take care,

MM

Ottima idea, Federico. La provero` al piu` presto.