andrea_lee3

<p>Thanks for the responses, guys. I think that Aperture's 'secret sauce' in converting Canon raw might not be directly analogous to that of the Nikon raw converter -- and after all there's a higher bit depth and that much more sensor information to work with. I've recalibrated my monitor and am working with the brightness set at the halfway mark. I also changed the colour space from AdobeRGB to sRGB, but I'm a bad scientist; I've changed too many variables so I don't know what made the difference! </p>

<p>Wasn't sure whether to ask this in the EOS forum or the digital darkroom, but I don't have the same problem with the Nikon D200. I just got my 5DII and love it -- except that when shooting raw the processed images in Aperture come out about a half stop underexposed. I know there's a simple fix in that I can set EV+0.5, but it would be great if the default settings worked! Anyone have similar experiences?</p>

<p>This isn't as silly a question as it may sound, and I'm just starting out with Nikon, so please indulge me. I have a 17-55 DX mounted on my D200 and I love the way it feels, how quickly it focuses, and the great engineering and optics. I've decided to take the plunge into building a DX system rather than hold out for the day when I'll have enough money to buy an FX system, but it's hard to tell which are the crap lenses without testing them out for a few days -- which few camera stores will let you do these days. Is a G or N designation like the Canon "L" badge of honour? is the 10-24 better than the more expensive 12-24? Help!</p>

<p>When I started out with Alpa they were very basic and absolutist, and I had to cut my own fresnel screen and mark out the frame edges with a pencil. So if enough customers asked for it they'd probably make one. Not sure if I'd get it, though; I'm pretty happy with my workflow, but other photographers shooting different subjects will have a different opinion :)</p>

<p>They've probably been taking pictures already, using their mobile phones! It's hard to find anyone these days who hasn't snapped a single image. I would start with the images they have, why they took those pictures, and then move on to how they could improve them, and what they would be able to do with 'real' cameras.</p>

<p>A bit of a blast from the past, this! I agree with you that perspective is something that shouldn't change whether you are looking through the naked eye at 6 feet, through the viewfinder of a 35mm camera, or an 8x10. But the effect of the format on how that same perspective is rendered onto film changes with the format. Let's take the opposite extreme: a Minox camera with a 15mm lens at its fixed aperture of 3.5 will give you an 8x11mm frame with everything in focus; a large format at 4.5 you'd get sliver-thin DOF. A portrait lens is defined as twice the length of the diagonal, which would be about 600 mm for 8x10, which is unwieldy and unnecessary. I've done beauty shots (i.e., just the face) with a 300mm with no distortion and a DOF shallow enough to be of artistic use. I'm not claiming that large format magically changes the rules of perspective, but as far as achieving a particular result the way the format works is not the same as for 35mm or medium format; the equipment works for us in a different manner. </p>

<p>Yes, but I wouldn't do it myself. You need someone with access to the proper tools and a steady hand!</p>

<p>This is the kind of tricky shoot where you'd want to use a digital camera, or in the old days, lots of polaroids. They have a tendency to reflect light all sorts of ways, but the right gleam shows how beautiful they are. Since you're going with hot lights, trust what you see in the viewfinder, and good luck!</p>

<p>I will pass on one of the best pieces of advice I got when I was starting out as an apprentice: you can never have too many flash sync cords. ;-) It's true!</p>

<p>These are nice photos, clear and crisp. Martin, as an analogue Minox user can you let us know your subjective impressions -- is it a branded toy (as the cheesy ads on the Minox website suggest) or a 'real' camera that is the genealogical successor of the LX?</p>

<p>There is a setting buried deep in the manual that will allow you to dial in compensation, but it's usually simpler to do it mentally. The most tricky one is the polariser but since you're shooting 35mm you can bracket as suggested above.</p>

<p>Kodachrome is 'neutral', which means is doesn't exaggerate colours the way a film like Velvia does. Many contemporary fashion photographers prefer films like Provia 100, Astia or Ektachrome 100 G for this reason, apart from the long turnaround time that K-14 needs. But with a good makeup artist and lights it can be magical -- as the many fashion spreads it was used for can attest. You can always try a warming filter (81B or something like that) on the lens.</p>

<p>I'd suggest the posh centre of town (like Mayfair) for the second shoot, where there are lots of flower gardens - there's a lovely one opposite the Connaught - and not too many kids and picnickers. For the first I'd avoid going into the 'hood with camera gear, a model, and presumably lights. But then one doesn't have to go very far to run into graffiti in London!</p>

<p>It's a 5x4 large-format camera with a coupled rangefinder based on a converted polaroid camera. A Linhof Technka will, with the right cam for the right lens, also give you coupled focusing but with a separate (optional) viewfinder. The Littman is also lighter, but doesn't have the indestructible build quality. </p>

<p>This is a recurring thread, but here goes: in the UK, it's available from no less than Jessops. In the US, Dwayne's has it, which is where it will go for processing anyway. <br>

People tend to get attached to certain films for reasons of nostalgia, and most of them have direct contemporary counterparts. One film that doesn't, not really, is Kodak technical pan which comes with its own bespoke developing solution. Most NOS will be expired but it's still worth a try for portraiture - you'll probably need high power strobes.<br>

Another format altogether, but try and shoot some Polaroid 55 P/N (5x4 large format) while you can!</p>

<p>Thanks for the answers. It certainly helps me understand what's probably went wrong -- and maybe it's my imagination but I think the digital process print machines of recent years aren't as punchy as an an old enlarger-type that's run with fresh chemicals. I've also wondered why it was a nominal cost to have a CD of scans made -- the machine is using those to print! </p>

<p>After I got my prints back from the local high street 1-hour C-41 process, I was disappointed with the prints I got from my Ektar 100 and XP2 - they were soft, with mushy edges and messy detail in the shadows. I took the same negatives and made some b/w prints using traditional darkroom methods and they were much sharper in 8x10 enlargements than the 4x6 prints that came out of the machine. Does anyone know what goes on in the commercial machines that makes the prints so disappointing? For anyone there based in the UK, the labs in question are Snappy Snaps and Boots, if that helps.</p>

<p>I got mine from mx2.co.uk. </p>

<p>http://uk.insight.com/content/homepage/deals</p>

<p>Hey guys, can you give some more information on Ektar, if you've used it? I mean subjective impressions, not the stuff from the box or the website.</p>

<p>Yup, do a forum search. Minox ML, Rollei 35 and a little bit bigger Leica minilux zoom.</p>

<p>It's too short to wear bandolier style, which is useful if you have more than one (camera) body.</p>

<p>Has anyone managed to use one of these with a Leica? I know it seems silly but when a heavy lens like a 75/1.4 is mounted it can slip off the shoulder pretty easily. But the eyelets are typically idiosyncratic, so I had to switch back.</p>

<p>Am thinking of getting a wide angle for the M6 but don't want to have to use an external viewfinder. I remember that the viewfinder itself (the entire view, regardless of framelines) is equivalent to a 28mm or a 24mm... does anyone know which it is?</p>

<p>Or something like the Metz 76 MZ 5 and the rollei can screw into the baseplate. It's a nice portrait combination.</p>