adam_kern

Thanks for the quick replies. I think I'll go for the Dell running Intel dual core. I'm not really a game player (I have PS2 for that!) so the ability to run 3D programs fast is less appealing than being able to run PS2 without having to close other programs. The performance boost that an AMD CPU might give over the Intel doesn't seem to justify spending more than the ridiculously cheap price I can get from Dell. ($1199 for Dell 9100 and 24" LCD widescreen)

I just spotted a great deal on a Dell computer and I'm thinking

about getting it, as I don't currently have a good computer to

process my images. Will CS and CS2 take advantage of a dual core

CPU, or is it better to go with a single core CPU that has

hyperthreading? How much of a performance difference is there

between the AMD dual core chips vs. the Dell chips for this

application? Thanks!

These are great cameras. I've made many images with my Elan that I sometimes still cannot believe were not shot by someone else. Not only are these very capable cameras, remember with film the camera is not always even the most important factor. Film choice, lenses and *pro processing* make all the difference.

 

The EF 50/1.8 is a great prime lens. Keep it for sure! The 28-105 is a general-use zoom and while useful, I suspect you'll default to the 50mm prime often. I personally know little about the 380Ex but the first thing I'd check is that it's E-TTL compatible.

 

Also, thank you Yakim for your great response. Sometimes these posts--I don't understand why--elicit flames from other contributors. Your helpful and informed responses are appreciated.

Are there any users of Canon DSLR's located in Hyde Park, Chicago

that might be interested in showing off their cameras?

 

I'm a dedicated film user thinking about purchasing a 20D to

complement my Elan7E. It's a tough sell because with the

combination of a tripod, pro film, shutter release and Gamma labs

downtown I really like my results. I've played with the 20D at

stores and read reviews ad nauseum and it seems nice, but that's not

the same as actually trying it out side-to-side with my current

setup. Unfortunately I don't know anyone here yet who has a 20D (or

1-series DSLR for that matter). So, I'm wondering if anybody wants

to do a little photo-outing where we can take some shots so I can

really see how shooting digital compares before taking the plunge.

 

Thanks!

 

Adam

I searched the site and couldn't come up with a good answer. I

refrigerate all of my films before use and let them come to room

temperature slowly. However, if I can't develop a film for a few

weeks, is it a good idea to rerigerate it in the interim? On the

one hand, my understanding is that the film is in its "weakest"

state chemically after exposure but before developing and could

therefore benefit from cooling. Conversely, how do I put it back in

the fridge after having opened it without causing condensation to

form?

 

Does this equation change for different types of film (slide,

negative, B+W...)?

 

Thanks!

 

Adam

Hello all,

 

I am currently using a Dell X300 laptop as my main computer. I'm

thinking about getting a spyder II or other calibration hardware and

a question came up about the computer-to-monitor interface.

 

How advantageous is it to use a DVI connector as opposed to a

regular analog, VGA-style plug? Does it only aid in the automation

of the calibration hardware function, or does it tremendously

improve image quality as well?

 

My computer doesn't have a DVI connector (ultraportable laptop) but

if there is really a huge boost in performance, there is a computer

clearnace convention coming up in town next week and I could

theoretically buy a desktop box and a video card to take advantage

of my display, which has DVI inputs. Or should I not worry about

it, buy the calibration hardware and use it on the laptop and

external display with the analog interface?

 

Adam

I also use the Lee filter system and I too cut down the filter to fit inside the plastic frame. I don't think those pins will press through the gel very easily. Just be sure not to cut down the gel too much!

 

I think those gels are made to be cut, for instance, if you want to put one over a light or flash. Since it's Lee they're still ridiculously expensive considering what they are, but gels from other companies, like Kodak, are dirt cheap.

 

Adam

What's the storage life of a normal CD-R?

Not that this really helps you decide on a setup for your macro work per se, but if you are after some general photos of human anatomy there are several excellent books on the market that are essentially photo compilations of anatomy. Rohan and Yokuchi comes to mind. They do amazing dissections and have full-page pictures that you could scan if you got the right permissions. I think Rohan put ~350 slides in the latest edition.

 

If you have to take the pictures yourself, then yes, I agree that you should worry a bunch about light before lens reach. Depending on the level of instruction and pickiness of the instructor, I would also consider getting a grey card to calibrate photos along with a good background (water-proof, for obvious reasons). Make sure that grey card gets into the shots regularly. As for the light itself, when photographing organs--or anything wet and shiny for that matter--you have to worry about excessive glare. This might be a good time to consider using a polarizer in your macro work, a softbox or both. I have seen many images of otherwise excellent dissections that are difficult to look at under projection because of high glare in the original capture.

 

Also don't forget to put a ruler in the shots and clearly label orientations and axes. After having just gone through human anatomy and looking through many, many such images I cringe at the thought of seeing more unlabelled kidneys.

 

Adam

If you look online at nationalgeographic.com you will find an excellent archive of recent years' articles complete with details on what films, settings and techniques the photographers used. I've learned a lot from looking at their pictures and comparing to the information from the photogs. Just click on an edition, and then on an article, and look for selects of certain photos along the vertical banner on the left-hand side.

 

http://magma.nationalgeographic.com/ngm/archives.html

 

Enjoy!

 

Adam

What about an external hard drive connected via either USB 2.0 or Firewire? Would that serve to be a good place to put a PS scratch file? I'd imagine not if we're using USB 2.0, but what about Firewire?

 

It sounds like making two separate partitions on one physical drive won't do that much for me. Is that the consensus?

 

Clearly if I had a desktop I'd use two hard drives, one for the system and one for PS and it's scratch file, but alas, I'm stuck with the laptop.

 

Thanks for all the great ideas!

Hey all,

 

I'm just getting started experimenting with photoshop and am trying

to see if I can speed up my computer's performance a little bit. Is

it a good idea to partition my hard drive and place the photoshop

swap file on the second partition? I remember reading something

about this but a search of the site didn't yield much. If I do

create a partition, what size partition should I create for the task?

 

The computer is a Dell X300 laptop with a 40GB 5400 RPM HDD, 1152MB

RAM, Win XP, Photoshop CS.

 

Are there any other tricks to speeding things up? Thanks!

Thanks for the reply,

 

Ok I guess it does make sense to still use Velvia to get a Velvia "look". What I was thinking was whether or not I could use a higher ISO film, or even a fast print film and then post-process to make the image satisfactorily "Velvia-like". I know I'd be changing the equation alot by going to print film in terms of dynamic range and color management, but was thinking about how possible it would be to allow PS to let me get a slide look without actually shooting ISO 50 slides.

 

The low-noise high ISO capability of the 20D is what is getting me to think about switching; however, what I shoot is wide-angle, low-light documentary style, which leaves me in somewhat of a quandary. I utilize the full frame capability of 35mm film, but would appreciate low light ability with slide-like (i.e. high saturation) output to print/digital.

 

Let me ask another way; using PS either on scans or digital RAW files, what's the best way to go about getting a Velvia "look"?

 

I am currently importing my images as .TIF files from Nikon View, cropping and then converting to 16-bit Adobe RGB. I then adjust levels individually for each channel based on color markers I place within the frame. Then I adjust individual colors with curves, and then adjust contrast with curves. Then I turn up the saturation a bit to get a Velvia look. After that I use an edge sharpening mask overlaid on the master in a lab channel color space, and finally do any small touch-ups and a global unsharp mask. Any recommendations on getting my files to best emulate Velvia?

 

Adam

Hello all,

 

I have spent the past two days doing a hardcore crash course in PS

CS and I can now adjust contrast/colors with curves, do some basic

masking, dual step sharpening, etc...

 

The files I am working on are generated by a Nikon 5000 slide

scanner, a very expensive piece of equipment owned by my school--and

used by me between the hours of midnight and 6 AM.

 

My question is this: If, when I scan slides, the saturation, levels

and other pertinent values all need to be tweaked, how much does it

matter what slide film I shoot on? For example, why not shoot on

cheap Sensia and crank up saturation, rather than using Velvia

50/100? (Assuming these slides will not be displayed the old-

fashioned way on a projector.) Or, is the issue that if I am trying

to maximally emulate the "look" of a certain film I will be most

successful if I use that film? e.g. if I want the high saturation

look of Velvia then it's better to start with the data coming off of

a piece of Velvia.

 

The answer to this question feeds into my decision on whether or not

to purchase a 20D to replace my Elan7E. I believe that I get higher

ultimate resolution on the slide scanner (5782 x 3946) than I would

with a 20D (3504 x 2336 according to www.dpreview.com). From that

perspective, and given the budget, it would make sense to stay with

the hassle of film scanning. That being said, photoshop is very

impressive...

 

Adam

So is it then fair to say that Adobe RGB is best for printing, while sRGB is best for monitor/web viewing?

 

If this is the case, how does one accurately assess files onscreen before printing when using Adobe RGB?

 

Adam

Hi,

 

I'm thinking about purchasing a 20D and am considering what type of

storage to use. Is there any advantage to getting an SD card

adapter to use inside the camera? I know that nominally SD cards

are faster than compactflash, but would the compactflash bus inside

the camera be a limiting factor if I used an SD adapter? SD is

particularly attractive to me since my laptop has a built-in SD

reader, although I can also get a compactflash to PCMCIA adapter and

read a CF card that way as well.

 

Adam

Hi all,

 

I'm trying to calibrate my monitor for the first time using Adobe

Gamma. I am using a Dell X300 laptop and outputting the video to a

Dell 1901FP flat panel LCD monitor. I am trying to create profiles

both for the internal flatscreen and the external one.

 

What I can't figure out is how the hardware contrast, brightness and

gamma control settings relate to those found in Adobe Gamma. In the

Windows control panel there is an Intel Extreme Graphics control

dialogue that has options to select gamma, contrast and brightness

(in addition to things like screen rotation, etc...) My impression

is that this dialogue directly controls the video driver/video

accelerator.

 

How should this be changed in relation to the Adobe Gamma settings?

 

For instance, when adjusting the external display, Adobe Gamma says

to set contrast to 100% and tone down brightness until the displayed

black box is almost completely black. Should I be toning down the

contrast and brightness controls on the monitor itself, or the ones

in the software Intel Extreme Graphics dialogue? Concomitantly,

when adjusting the built-in LCD in the laptop, I assume I should be

adjusting the software Intel Extreme Graphics sliders to control

contrast and brightness, since there is no external button that

controls these parameters. (Right?!?)

 

One thing that I've noticed is that when at the stage of adjusting

the gamma slider in the Adobe Gamma wizard, I can never get

the "center box" to "blend in" with the striated pattern surrounding

it. What is supposed to happen--am I supposed to see the solid

central area give way to striated lines?

 

This is all very confusing for a first-timer. I've read a bunch

online but still haven't found answers. Please help! (Yes yes I

know I really should buy an Eye one or something along those lines,

but $$$ dictates using Adobe Gamma for now.)

 

Thanks!

How about for laptop users? I am running a Dell Latitude X300 with a 40GB 5400 RPM HDD and 1152 MB RAM. I have an external Maxtor 160 GB HDD connected via USB 2.0. Would it be a good idea to put the PS CS scratch file on the external disk? I could also go buy a firewire cable for the external drive--would that be better or change the answer to whether or not to put the scratch file on the external disk?

 

Adam

This is all really great input. I appreciate all the comments. The drive to do thorough research on my part is driven mainly by the fact that I am a grad student and a new lens is big $$$ in my budget. At the same time, the best advice is to just get out and take pictures. So, I think I have made my choice and will hopefully be able to report back with images--thanks boys and girls!

 

Adam

Ok, one last question on this topic:

 

Everyone agrees that the EF 28mm f/1.8 lens should only be used wide

open as a crutch.

 

However, when stopped down, how does it compare to its f/2.8

sibling? Does the 28mm f/2.8 beat the f/1.8 at all aperatures?

 

Another way of putting this is: is it worth the extra $$$ for USM

and the extra speed is only for emergencies?

 

Thanks, I'm going to buy one or the other based on these responses.

 

Adam

So some people say the 28mm f/1.8 is the best lens canon makes, and others say it's horrible and trumped by the f/2.8. Please explain!

P.S. I am shooting on 35mm film (Elan 7E), so if the Tamron lens distorts, it matters to me!

 

Adam

Hi all,

 

I've been reading the recent posts below regarding wide angle primes

with great interest. Many people have experience with the Tamron 28-

75 f/2.8, which gets high marks. I am thinking about buying the

Canon EF 28mm f/1.8 prime.

 

How does the image quality of the EF 28mm f/1.8 prime compare to the

Tamron 24-75 f/2.8 zoom set at 28mm? (Obviously aside from the

difference in lens speed.)

 

Adam

Hi all,

 

This is a continuation of earlier posts. I am using a Nikon Super

coolscan 5000 that belongs to my school to scan 35mm

transparencies. Unforunately, the computer that they have the

computer connected to has a terrible monitor and I am not in a

position to purchase calibration hardware to implement on that

machine.

 

My question is this: Is it worth complaining to the department to

see if I can calibrate the monitor, or can I just do raw scans on

the computer, put it on a USB key and then load it up in photoshop

on my personal machine and adjust levels there? Put another way, is

it advantageous to make a preview scan, adjust levels and then do

the full scan (say at 4x multipass) or is there no loss associated

with doing all levels adjustment post-scan?

 

Thanks!

 

Adam

Hey all,

 

I just started doing positive scans here at school on a department

Nikon Coolscan 5000. Unfortunately the radiology department is not

perfect and the computer they have it hooked up to has a crummy

monitor (and no photoshop, only Nikon software). The intended use

for them is not fine art slides but batch (read: overkill) scanning

of lecture slides.

 

I've done a search of the site and have read up on monitor

calibration techniques but they are all A) Way too expensive for me,

e.g. the Gratag-MacBeth Eye One systems and, B) I am not sure if I

can/should really install hardware on their system in the first

place.

 

What is a good, relatively inexpensive way to calibrate the monitor,

understanding that the job won't be quite up to full professional

snuff? I know there are ways of calibrating white and black points

just by looking at pictures over the net, but what about gamma?

 

Thanks!

 

Adam