melmann

<p>Gerry,<br>

I should have been more specific. I got mine from the FlashZebra website - didn't notice which cameras it listed after I saw the round, screw-on connector. Haven't seen this type of connection on other brands. My E-510 has a basic USB connector - doubles as the download port as well as remote link. Shame on Olympus for changing their connection. They even altered the USB output plug on the E-3. Now I have to have two remotes and two download cables to haul around. You'd think a company so hot about the 4/3rds 'standard' would stick with other industry accepted standards as well.</p>

<p>Brian,<br>

Definitely get them. They are so much more substantial than the manufacturer supplied ones. Go ahead and get the ANR glass as well - it'll get rid of your "not flat enough" problems with sharpness. A couple of hours with mine to dial in the height for medium format film scans and now I get the sharpness I want.</p>

<p>David's right, though, flatbed just won't pull out all the information you can see in the film. Depends on how big you plan to print or how compulsive you are about sharpness!</p>

<p>Gerry,<br>

I have that cable for use on my E-3 and Pocketwizard trigger. Plugs into the Camera/Flash outlet on the PW. Works like a charm from any angle for me. Really useful when you're out on your own and want to put yourself in the picture. </p>

<p>Edward,<br>

Thanks for that link - it does describe the workflow I follow and I get the results described. For color prints I've found increasing the brightness around 30% helps. For out of gamut I've found changing to a different but similar profile might help (Canon's Photo Paper Plus Semi-Gloss has a couple of profiles available, for example) and I can use Select>Color Range>Out of Gamut to make a selection for the Hue/Saturation adjustment. I do all of this before turning on the "Simulate Paper Color" switch.</p>

<p>All my images are converted to AdobeRGB before printing.</p>

<p>For B&W, though, I don't really have a good workflow that consistently delivers good results on the papers I use. Feels like it's always guesswork, even when I use the profiles for the specific paper type. I'm trying to duplicate the richness I see from photographic papers and maybe that's my hurdle. Should I use a different color space (Greyscale?) or make adjustments in the LAB mode before printing?</p>

<p>Thanks for the comments.</p>

<p>I'm using CS5 and NIK plug-ins to generate B&W images - some directly digital, some scanned from film. What I'm seeing on the screen after all my adjustments and applying paper profiles (Canon Photo Rag and Hahnemuhle Bamboo & Photo Rag) looks nice - rich blacks, nicely graduated tones. When I hit the "Simulate Paper Color" box it immediately looks like I dropped a foggy piece of transparency over the image. Contrast falls significantly and blacks turn grey.<br>

Is there a technique in CS5 or NIK to compensate for this fog so my prints will come out with more contrast or at least look like they do before I apply the paper color simulator? When I change the brightness or contrast using Levels or Curves it makes the tones muddy instead of clearing up the fog. The NIK Pro Contrast and Tonal Contrast tools do the same.<br>

The prints sometimes come out clear and sometimes not - seems to depend on the subject matter and adjustments. I'd prefer to have more confidence that what's on my screen will show up on the paper.</p>

<p>For medium format I'm pleased with Velvia 50 and 100, Ektachrome 100G. Tried Ektar 100 and didn't like the look - dull colors and not much contrast. B&W is Tmax 100, Plus-X 125, and Portra 160VC (scanned in as 16 bit greyscale - love the tones on this one). Don't pull/push films. I scan everything using a V-700, 2400ppi for archive, 4800ppi for printing specific images.<br>

For 35mm I'm working through my last rolls of Kodachrome 64. Don't know what I'll use in this size after all that's gone. Might do strictly B&W with Tmax.</p>

<p>Lauren,<br>

I recently bought a V-700 for medium format scanning but have done one 4x5 a friend gave me. You can see the resulting image here:<br>

http://melmannphoto.wordpress.com/2010/07/21/what-goes-around/</p>

<p>Search photo.net and you'll find opinions strongly for and against flatbed scanning of negatives. Judge for yourself based on the quality of image you want as an outcome and the use you'll have for it. I like the V-700, use the EpsonScan interface, and scan both negatives and transparencies. If you go this way look into the adjustable height film holders as a way to optimize the clarity of your scans.</p>

<p>Paul,<br>

Covering the DOF range with multiple images is a challenge for me as well. I find CS5 to work fine for me but my workflow attempts to get more individual images at the different focal points. I use LiveView on my Olympus E-3 and manual focus using the LCD screen on the back. For complicated subjects I might sketch what I'm seeing and indicated specific points to focus on so I'll know I get complete coverage. With this is get good overlap of focus on the images and CS5 seems to have little problem merging them with no blurs between images.</p>

<p>Craig,<br>

Thought about that right before hitting <enter> but didn't see a way to do it. Thanks for taking the time to put the right information up.</p>

<p>Check out Kirk Tuck's review of the Canon 5DMkII and the reasons he's using in for certain assignments instead of Olympus. He's still pleased with both systems, but offers observations and reasons why he chooses one over the other. Good insights from a practicing commercial photographer.</p>

<p>http://visualsciencelab.blogspot.com/</p>

<p>I have the Mamiya 6MF and can confirm it's very quiet. All you get when you press the shutter is a soft "click" comparable to closing the snaps on a light jacket. In loud conditions the only way I know the shutter fired is that I can advance the film!</p>

<p>Francisco,<br>

I see that does work, however I'm looking for a way to apply a saved setting to the scan as it it being previewed or initially scanned. The Epson instructions imply that is possible although they give no clear way to do it. Most software of this type allows you to determine settings at the first and then have them applied as the software starts working. Or at least point to an image or set of images and apply settings to them. I find the Epson software wants to stay stuck on Original Settings almost all the time, trying hard to ignore any custom settings I set up, save and want to apply.<br>

I like the interface on this and don't want to learn a different program unless this one issue is unresolvable.</p>

<p>I've just started using this scanner on medium format negatives/slides. Really like what I'm seeing. But have a question the manual just doesn't address.</p>

<p>Scanning in Professional Mode I set up my adjustment settings and then save them as a specific named setting. Before Preview I select the appropriate saved setting for that film. Hit Preview. Get Previews. But when I look at the top of the menu it's gone back to the default settings. If I again select the saved setting for that film I get a message saying this Preview will be lost. And I can't Scan without Preview first.</p>

<p>Couple of questions:<br>

1. Will the Scan of a Preview made using my selected settings apply those settings to the Scan or will the settings that I see be applied, the default ones?<br>

2. How do I have the settings I want applied to the Preview and Scan. </p>

<p>Noticed I can change the default settings for each thumbnail before scanning to the settings in my saved versions. But why would I do that - I want to use the saved settings for all the images in the Preview.</p>

<p>Appreciate any advice. Thanks.</p>

<p>David,<br>

When you set a Control Point in NIK it creates a mask you control with the sliders. To see the mask, look on the right column under the Control Points section. For each Point you set there is a checkbox on the far right of each line. Click that on/off to see the mask.</p>

<p>Dan, I've found the selection capability of NIK software to exceed PS CS4, especially for fine detailed objects like tree branches, hair, etc. Been using the Complete Package since March and significantly reduced the amount of time I spend in PS making selections and adjustments.</p>

<p>Gerry appropriately keeps taking us back to the sense of the article - use the camera/lens/system that will get the job done. If you're a fine artist and your schtick is to shoot wet glass plates and print on polished graphite then obviously you've tied yourself to a specific system to help you stand out. For the rest of us, it's the final image that is of value, not necessarily a specific means (camera/lens/system) to create it. I'm warming up to the idea of a bi-system approach for digital, though, as it broadens my limits in the low-light, large crop, big print arenas. I'm already bi- with my use of film and digital, again to achieve specific results. And to satisfy my bias that film still produces better images. But that is a discussion for a different community.</p>

<p>Gerry,<br>

Thanks for connecting us with a very nice article. I really like his personal take on his experiences and how he continually caveats his remarks as his take on each system. I've shot Olympus since OM-1 days and currently use an E-3 and E-510 with pro lenses. I like the system for the lenses and build. The weathersealing is great; came in handy while standing in the rain next to a lake in Glacier National Park. As far as controls and layout, experienced photographers learn how to manipulate their gear to get maximum results. I've found pros/cons for each system's approach yet still lean toward Olympus' mainly because my hands are not big enough to stretch for Canon's.</p>

<p>I've test drove the 5DMkII and reached similar conclusions as the writer. It's a great tool for certain conditions. I know the limitations of my system and so far the vast majority of my photography stays within them. If I ever have an ongoing need for low-light photography or wall-sized enlargements I know I'll have to use a different system, which I'll probably rent until assured it works for me. What I really want from a DSLR right now is greater dynamic range, preferably equal to my B&W medium format film.</p>

<p>His best comment to me is to use what gets the client what they want. For the pro that's all that matters. Most pros I've talked with actually are disappointed when asked what brand they use - they'd much rather discuss shooting strategies, composition or great locations.</p>

<p>Like Jeff I have the whole package as well and have been very pleased with it over the past 4 months. The noise reduction and sharpening tools are better than Photoshop for me. The Silver Efex Pro really gives me better control over B&W conversions. Viveza make fine adjustments for color and brightness a breeze.</p>

<p>I've pretty much stopped making selections and layer masks in Photoshop for general workflow, relying on NIK to handle the bulk of my adjustments.</p>

<p>I found it more economical to get the whole package rather than buy a few now and more later. The components work together so well you'll find yourself using them as a package anyway.</p>

<p>Don't have any data on this, just a sense compared to the past. I use SanDisk Extreme III 4Gb cards in my Olympus DSLR kit, downloading via Firewire 800 to a Mac using the SanDisk Extreme reader. I download in LR, converting RAW files to DNG and copying to an external HD - the reader is piggybacked via Firewire 800 to the HD which is connected to the computer via Firewire 800.</p>

<p>Anyway, these cards are probably a year or so old and it seems they are getting slower in the download. I format in camera after every download. Do CF cards change their read/write speed over their life? Is so, is there a way to recover the original speed? Or am I just imagining this?</p>

<p>I have the opportunity to be an AIR with the National Park Service this summer and fall, spending time at Homestead National Monument. If you're in Nebraska in May or September please come by and let's talk about the program. I'll be blogging during my time there - melmannphoto.wordpress.com</p>

<p>Hope to see some members! Thanks.</p>

<p>9000 - dye inks<br>

9500 - pigment inks<br>

What is your expectation for longevity of prints?</p>

<p>I've been printing on the 9500 for several months and find it good for B&W on fine art paper as well as color on glossy and semi-gloss. Do a search on the comparison in Photo.net - I'm sure there are many opinions and experiences to draw from.</p>

<p>Eric,<br>

I have scanned Kodachrome slides on this device with great success. You should try a few and see how the color balance looks - might need a custom balance to get the colors right. Scanner seems to err on the blue side with Kodachrome. Rarely use multipass - takes significantly more time and doesn't really improve a good, sharp chrome. ICE gives mixed results on Kodachrome although it will work. Better to get a soft brush and air puffer to clean the slides well beforehand. I use 16-bit linear because I know I'll be making adjustments in Photoshop - regular 16-bit is fine for archiving.</p>

<p>Just for fun I scanned a Kodachrome at full everything on the scanner and generated a 250Mb file. If you're willing to spend the time and storage space for this then go for it but I usually go with about half the full scan resolution, get 25Mb files and am happy for my applications.</p>

<p>I use the software that came with the scanner and am pleased with the results. Like lots of scanners it can be tempermental - do I turn it on first and then launch the software or the other way around? Sometimes my Mac just quits recognizing the scanner and I have to shut everything down and start over. It's part of the joy of scanning.</p>

<p>Can't help with your electrical question. Have fun.</p>

<p>Dennis,<br>

I've been printing color and B&W on a Canon 9500 Mkll for about 4 months and am pleased with the results. Printing on everything from glossy to fine art rag. If you're a Mac user and haven't upgraded to Snow Leopard yet, and you buy this printer, don't upgrade your operating system until Apple and Canon get together on a driver that gives you control over the printing process.</p>

<p>I've had a commercial site on Zenfolio for about 4 months now and am pleased with the service as a starting point. I didn't want to deal with handling credit cards and such, printing, framing, shipping, etc. and Zenfolio gave me a one-stop place to put galleries for people to order from. I like that they offer different product partners and customizable pricing. The price for their pro level is reasonable compared to other sites I researched. They seem to upgrade the capabilities of the site often and are responsive to concerns and recommendations.</p>

<p>The order process does take too many steps to get a framed, matted print - I support Robert's idea.</p>

<p>If it's making a clicking noise when you insert the holder but no motion then you've got a stripped gear on the motor. I had a similar problem on mine and had to send it back to Minolta for repair. Unfortunately that was several years ago - don't know who repairs them now. Perhaps someone else can supply a link.</p>

<p>If there is no action or sound at all you might try turning everything off and re-booting. Sometimes the computer and scanner just stop talking to each other and you have to re-introduce them to each other. Scanners are picky creatures with a mind of their own.</p>

<p>As I noted, when importing RAW images to LR my Develop Settings are None. From this I understand there is no sharpening being performed upon import. I also have sharpening turned off in my camera.</p>

<p>Colin, I used to develop in LR and applied sharpening there to my RAW images but now I move them to PS CS4 for processing, including sharpening. I found more control with the CS4 sharpening tool. That is, until I started using the NIK software.</p>

<p>Andrew, NIK has two sharpening systems, one for RAW (apparently applied before processing in CS4) and output, which can be adjusted for the specific need such as display, inkjet, etc. Based on what you've said and my reading, this is the only place I'm applying sharpening to my images given my workflow. I looked over Bruce's article and recognize some of the masking techniques from other reading. I'll experiment with it vs. NIK and see which works for my images. His comparison to color management is apt - sometimes it feels like alchemy with unpredictable results....</p>