frank_a._bridges

I ve tried everything in windows xp resolution .

. I"ll go back to my old pc when working in photoshop.

 

thanks anyway

So what do i need to do in settings?

 

Thank you for your reply.

I just bought a lcd monitor, now the people in my photos look short and fat.

what am i doing wrong?

I appreciate everyone's answer.

But I didnt say what Geoff said. There are thing s i do in pse 1 that i could take forever learning to do in pse6. So, i am going to try to install pse6 and leave pse 1 alone.

I cant find this question in the

archives.

 

Sould i uninstall pse 1 before i install my new pse 6?

I dont think Wolf was being a jerk. Everything in SB is good. They have caused me to make some expensive mistakes. In lines per mm, The new Epson flatbeds are better.

Jack, i was using the Power Retouch kit which has tools for sharpening,contrast , conversion to B&W. I was happy with it but I can do without it if PSE 6 has a better tool than PSE1. PR costs the same as PSE6 ,I think.

I have been using pse 1 with a plug-in for sharpeneing and up-sizing. The plug in

has expired and cost about a 100.00 us dollars to re-install . I was very happy

with it.

My question is simple: Should I buy PSE 6 and forget about the pug-ins since

the price is about the same ?

I went the Kiev route 12 years ago because I didnt have the money for a real outfit.

The lenses werent bad , but both bodies I had were junk. It was a huge mistake.

I have the MSCDIV and an Epson 3200 flatbed. There really is a world of difference in optical quality.

The interesting thing about the Contessa 45mm Tessar is that it is sharp edge to edge being stopped down to f 5.6. I have had several 4 element lenses that were sharp on the edges only at f11 or f16

I have read one should expose c-41 B & W film at asa 200 instead of

the rated 400 on the film package. I wonder if that rule applies to

scanned film or just to wet darkroom printing. Some people say a thin

negative scans better.

My experience is thus:

A maxwell screen on a TLR will give you an easy focus compared to an old folder which usually has a dim rangefinder. A Tessar type lens on a Rollei is much, much sharper than the same type lens on any of my four folders. Maybe I have just had bad luck with folders. I would gladly sell my folders if I could get what I paid for them including repairs, but I wouldnt sell my TLR's.

Mark Hamma is an expert on the Rolleiflex. He has repaired two of mine.

The instruction manual refers to it a a Record. But people on this

forum call it a Billy record.

Thank you for the info. I own Kingslakes book, but I just assumed the actual production was farmed out to B & L .

Who manufactured the Kodak Commercial Ektars?

White Oak ARP church. Rolleiflex MX

Richard, ask Mark how long it would take. He has done work for me in one day on three occasions. www.markhama.com

David, you are too late. I pressed it and the Anderson rod fell out.

Just received a D with no manual, and cant find an "on line" manual.

What is the red button for behind the rewind knob just next to the

rangefinder window?

Mike, I have six double film holders 4X5 with dark slides that are sitting in my closet. If you want them , you can have them for free.

Bill, some of the pictures ARE boring. But, this is about the only forum in which there are no snobs. Nobody here really gives a d@mn whether you own a IIIf with 90mm Summicroid 1.2, or whether you develop in Microlaxitive or Preparation H.

Funny- I always though it was Eugene Onegin.

I read about the Lynx series of yashica rangefinders as being the

poor mans Leica. What about the Minister 2.8? Is this lens inferior

to the Lynx ? I know it is slower, but what about the quality?