john_markanich

Not a direct answer but related. Cut your LCD's on time to whatever minimuns your camera allows both pre and post shot. Avoid 'chimping' except when you absolutely have a need to take advantage of this particular feature. Your battery life will increase substantially. For me, coming from years of film, this was easy. For someone who is coming into photography as a digital-only first-timer this may feel like computing without a monitor. If it weren't for the necessity of accessing so many of the cameras functions on the LCD I could do without the thing entirely.

Dave, could you tell us your favorite RAW conversion workfow. I'm in the same situation as Noah (a G9 thru to CS2). I've been using either Canon's Zoombrowser to convert to TIFF or Adobe's RAW converter to make a DNG which I then open in Bridge. Both methods work, both are equally slow.

Lately I've been getting a MS IE pop-up advising that there is a problem loading with the current photo.net page I'm

on and that it has to abort. It isn't kidding because if I click on anything further, sure enough, I get the

familiar '...page cannot be found' notification. Is anybody else having this problem?

Wayne, the difference shows up first in the Histogram. When you first open a properly exposed JPEG the Histogram is a nice full 'mountain' of information hopefully with no spikes at either end. After adjusting levels, contrast and/or color balance -but before resaving- the refreshed Hisrogram looks like a pocket comb laying on its back. If you are planning on printing the image to anything larger than 4X6 those gaps in the Histogram will be filled in by the whatever software you're using and appear as flat, posterized areas without any gradual tonal transition. Not pretty. If you are only shooting for the Web or review on a Monitor you may never notice the posterization.

Try this site for a short discussion pertaining to IR and related products for a number of cameras including the G7/G9.

 

http://www.lensmateonline.com/newsite/G7ir.html

Why does a 12mb RAW file from my G9 swell to a 68mb PSD after only minor

levels, curves, color balance and sharpening adjustments? Same thing happens

when converting to TIFFS. No layers involved.

Evan, I don't have all the needed adaptors and I'm just trying not to add to my collection :)

 

James, thanks, that's exactly the kind of info I was lookin for.

I have a ViewSonic PT795 CRT Monitor (circa 1999, works fine) but I either

can't find or never received a manual with it. I see that the monitor has 4

Type-A USB Recepticles on the side and 1 Type-B USB Recepticle on the back.

My question is do I have to make a direct connection from the Type-B port back

to a USB port on the computer in order for the Type-A's to become active or is

the connection handled internally through the monitors connection?

 

Thought I'd ask before starting an under-the-desk Rubik's Cube "Plug&Pray"

marathon.

A coated UV, Skylight or (not widely available) clear glass filter from a reputable manufacturer such as Hoya, Tiffen, B&W, or Heliopan will not soften an image to ANY visilble extent. A UV or Skylight has the added benefit of reducing the slight blue haze sometimes present in outdoor scenes, which is thought to be a good thing. I seriously doubt that stage lighting, which presents its own mixed bag of problems, would be affected by such filters. Go with the filter for the physical protection of the front element of the lens and just keep it clean. Be mindful that a wide angle lens may require a "thin mount" filter to avoid vignetting.

My Canon G9 offers two choices when formatting a memory card; "Format"

and "Low Level Format". The manual does not explain what the difference is

other than to "Low Level Format" a card when the recording/reading speed

drops. Can anyone offer some insight into this?

I need a high capacity memory card and suitable card reader for a Canon G9.

It can take SD, SDHC, MMC, MMCplus or HC-MMCplus cards. Does anyone have any

experience with any of these. I looking for 4gbs of memory and the reader has

to have a connecting calble since all of my USB ports are in the rear of the

compter.

Thank you all for the clarification's and links.

Does anyone know if the RAW files from a Canon G9 can be processed in CS2?

Has Adobe added the camera to ACR for CS2 or will I have to upgrade to CS3?

Yes Brian, I have a 28-80 f2.8/4 L lens. I bought it around 1992 when they first came out so it must be an early one. I shoot mainly transparency film. Comming from a manual FD (non-L) lens system I can tell you that the difference was real and instantly apparent. The color depth especially into the shadows is remarkable as is the lack of any color fringing (think tree branches against a clear sky). The lens cost over 1 large at the time but was worth every penny. It has been my main 35mm optic for the last 16 years and I intend to carry it with me into digital capture when a 5D'ish FF upgrade appears.

Nice concept and composition. Any of the color balances are fine even your original. What catches my attention in the large attachments are the wacky eyelashes. One seems too high on the lid the other appears to be peeling off. No reflection on the girl, she's lovely.

The CD's are begining to pile up and I'm about to do away with the jewel

boxes. Is it OK to label a CD with a CD marking pen and where on the disc

should I mark it? Would the same advice be true for a home burned

DVD?

Make sure you have the correct media selected. Some off-brand papers require a non-intuitive choice so you may have to experiment.

Tamron lenes are darn good optics but I have never seen a common 35mm lens reach the tonal depth and richness of a Canon L series lens. I've used both brands and can tell you that the depth into the shadows without the bleached-out effect in the highlights achieved by an L lens is superb. $$yes. My bag, L.

 

If the zoom range, speed, size or knock-around value of the Tam. fits your eye socket then go that route.

The humidity is present somewhere (room or materials) and is being driven by warmth into the relatively cool space between the print and the glass where it condenses. Rather than trying to track down the source of the humidity right now why not just run a dehumidifier during non-gallery hours.

 

A hygrometer ($20 radio shack) can tell you and the gallery owner if the ambient space is damp. (You can see the expensive versions of these instruments sitting in the corners of museums and better galleries)?

I use Pec and Pec pads all the time to clean slides and the subsequent high gloss surface of Ilfochrome print material. I've found it necessary to wear clean cotton gloves just to avoid getting body oil on the pad which then ends up being very visible on the slide or print. Make sure to peel the gloves off by pulling on the cuff and not the finger tips with your one bare hand as that would transfer oil on that surface too. Obviously, never handle a pad with bare fingers.

Thanks for the responses & clarifications. Being an Ilforchrome printer at home I would look at a slide mount and know immeadiately if I should dial in my tested Ektachrome color balance or (a different) balance for Kodachrome. Now I'll have to mark the mount myself when the processed film is returned while my memory is still fresh or closely examine the emulsion side in good light. If I remove the film chip from the mount I may get lucky and catch a designation but then I'll have to remount the film for projection in a carousel.

I've just received back a processed roll of Kodachrome 200 from a Kodak

licensee, Dwayne's Photo out of Parsons, KS. They did an excellent job. No

complaints and the turn around time was execellent.

 

The only strange thing was that the box (same familiar shape and color) was

labeled "KODAK Slide Processing diapositives Kodak". In addition, the

word "Kodachrome" does not appear anywhere on the box or on the slide mounts.

The cardboard mounts only display the printed word "Kodak" and the faint

embossed impression of month/year/frame number.

 

In my short 44 years behind the eye cup I've never heard the

word "diapositive" related to Kodachrome slides. Have you?

 

(Times they are a changing).

Living here in NJ I can't help you much with local sources in the Austin, TX area but can recommend B&H, Adorama, Freestyle, Photographers Formulary or Calumet. Rare is the hometown camera store that can hold the variety of brands, quantities or sizes these guys can. You have to face it, film is shrinking.

If the different brands all recomend the same developer/time/temp/agitatin combo then yes, you can develope them together. That said, I wouldn't. If these are important shots then try two differing rolls at first. If they emerge with equal densities then do a few more in the next batch, etc. The stop, (proper) fix and (plentiful) wash steps don't matter much.

I copy stuff 'as it originally appeared', that is for example, if text from say a street sign or store front advertisement were present I would copy the slide so as to be able to read the text normaly.