isaacallenimages

<p>Had NO clue... Explains a lot! Thanks for the head's up. I haven't tried the Exhibition Lustre but will get a few samples. I've tried Epson but haven't been totally satisfied. Additional recommendations welcome!</p>

<p>I print using Epson 3800 and 7880 printers. Historically used Ilford Galerie Smooth Pearl luster for general printing and open editions. It has always printed what's on the screen (for the most part) perfect and all around good paper. I use Hahnemuhle Byreta for edition work (love it). <br>

Getting back to issue... sorry. I have had issues lately ordering the Ilford from my primary suppliers, either on hold, back order, discontinued. Wondering if anyone else has been experiencing this? I need an alternate luster that is comparable. Anyone have an "as good or better" recommendation? What about Hahnemuhel's Photo Luster 260? I have used Moab Lasal A2 cut sheets but not their rolls. Seems on the sheets artwork prints darker on Moab than what I get w Ilford.... Any thoughts? Thanks!</p>

<p>Hi all,<br>

I've recently upgraded to CS6 and Windows 8. I've noticed a few oddities, THE most important of which is printing. B&W is fine. Color is COMPLETELY off and in left field. What I see onscreen and then what comes output from the printer (Epson 3800) are just awful. Muddy, flat, zero. ALL of this was perfect in CS5 with regards to WYSIWYG printing. I've also noticed such oddities as when working on a file and layers there is this flickering going on where the background changes from the default dark gray to a transparent background, then between layers (turning on and off), I've seen vibrant color there one second then muted or not there the second (most recently after setting a vibrance layer w saturation then flattening), or moving to a different layer. (Another annoyance is the crop tool! For the life of me can't crop $#!t!) At first I associated this with the fact that I hadn't activated my Windows 8 yet which sometimes MS does that, they make all sorts of nuisances appear onscreen thinking you're using an illegal copy. But I've activated and still getting this.<br>

I'm wondering if anyone else is getting this sort of thing and if you have any suggestions? And yes, I've applied all latest updates, drivers, etc. printer settings are as they've always been, Epson 3800, Ilford Galerie papers, proper profiles, etc.<br>

Thanks for any input to share.<br>

Isaac</p>

<p> </p>

<p>All, thanks so very much for your contributions. On a side note.....<br>

I have Tiffen's DFX2. It works nicely BUT... I've been aggravated by a licensing issue and weeks to get resolution. Suffice to say, I had a hard drive crash a few months back and needed to reinstall everything including DFX2. I installed a new SSD drive in my computer to be the MAIN OS drive, then left the SDE drive as my data drive. Install eveything, ran the install for CS4 and Tiffen and no problem. Soon thereafter I began experiencing blue screens. Eventually this led to me considering replacing the drive again and yet another install. Since my computer was older, I decided to go with a new computer. Ordered said new computer, moved SSD drive (OS drive) over to the new computer again to be the main OS only, used the new TB drive that came with the computer as my data and simply did a reinstall of the OS and apps and did a copy/restore of the data to the new TB drive.<br>

OK... so this brings me to the longer story getting longer. When I tried to activate the license again, it wouldn't. Followed their online instructions to try differning licensing servers and deactivating the license/reactivating via internet .... NOTHING. Spent almost three weeks back and forth with Tech Support in emails telling me to do this and that. Finally, the tech requested that I go back to the OLD install and follow the directions for deactivation. Failed.... <br>

Brings me to today. After almost three weeks dealing with Tech Support, they finally explained to me why my license wouldn't work. Apparently their licensing somehow is tied or accesses the motherboard, which I'm not sure what they could possibly do other than possibly grab the computer's MAC address as a validation point. Not only do you need to remember to deactivate your license properly before moving to another drive or a computer, but YOU HAVE TO USE THE COMPUTER AND MOTHERBOARD IN ORDER TO DO SO. Now this won't be an issue if you migrate from old to new and follows those instructions. But just remember.... If you have a computer hardware or hard drive crash as I did, good look. You may go through hell getting the license deactivated. They take the possibiliy of "illegal installs" seriously and make you wait.<br>

Just in case any of you wish to know..... Hence, this is why I want to leave Tiffen and go elsewhere. But I made a $299 investment a while back and need to get my money's worth.<br>

Good luck!</p>

 

<p>I see only one or two threads about digital filter software so I thought I'd just ask.... Do any of you PROS out there have any recommendation on digital filter software (64 bit fo Win7) OTHER THAN Tiffen's DFX2? I'm looking to replace it after struggling through weeks of tech support banter regarding deactivating/reactivating licenses. It's gotten old. Hopefully there is a product out there that in the end has more filter options and is better rated overall, not to mention easier to actually speak with a live tech support individual who'll work with you.<br>

Thanks, Isaac</p>

<p>Many thanks everyone for your contributions. VERY helpful. <br>

Marta, I like your idea but perhaps "original reproduction" would be appropriate? That's sort of contradictory according to the terminology but possibly more accurate?<br>

In the end, I feel the use of "original" in some manner would work, since the entire process is hands-on "by me".</p>

<p>Before you tell me that this topic has been covered for the 100th time..... maybe someone has a different professional perspective that could shed some enlightenment. <br>

I'm often in a situation either with an exhibit or show with differeing views on what is "original" vs. "reproduction" and subsequently how I need to market my work in these venues. In general I'm mostly asked (or required) to label my digital photography prints, whether open or limited editions, as reproductions. But honestly I am having a hard time with this.<br>

If my interpretations are correct, "originals" are those in which the artist directly supervised the entire process, and "reproductions" would be something say like I shot the original photograph in 35mm negative but then I scanned it to a digital file and reproduced accordingly (like a painter who "photographs" his work and reproduces a thousand as monotypes or something. So, with that in mind would I be correct to consider my artwork as "originals" in the sense that it was carefully produced and printed under my direct supervision - I shot the photo, performed all post processing/editing from RAW through to the artistic image final, and lastly mastered all printing output on my own equipment.<br>

So, what would you suggest is the correct path? I'd like to know if I'm supposed to label as a "reproduction" just because digital photography is the process of reproducing a single image over and over, either in limited or open edition quantities or not .....<br>

Any takers?</p>

I often get requests from people to mat one of my artwork images and then place a quote or poem underneath on the

matboard before framing. Since my handwriting is liken to that of a serial killer, it would be pointless for me to try.

 

Does anyone know of any mat company that does custom mats and can imprint wording directly on the matboard,

centered, etc.?

 

Thanks

Thanks to everyone for their input and best regards to all :)

I only use it for those dreary rainy soggy days, not during winds. Let me check out the GolfSmith JP/AP ...

I have been trying to locate a nice, STURDY and flexible umbrella that will easily clamp onto my tripod for trekking

the great outdoors. What I've seen doesn't have a wide enough canopy for my personal taste. At one point WalMart

sold this great little umbrella with a screw on clamp but alas, they no longer carry them in SoFla markets. So.... I'm

asking for your help. Any recommendations?

 

The only couple of things I found were:

Popabrella (this is way to small a canopy for my equipment to be protectede from the elements):

http://www.x-tremegeek.com/templates/SearchDetail.asp?productID=14965&ta=detail_img&pi=Y&st=3

 

Anyone ever used this and if so, what type of umbrella did you use to go with it (seems overkill for me)?

http://www.filmtools.com/boumho29.html

Thanks everyone!

I'm looking at these as well. Jack, can you use brushes or other means to apply effects to specific image parts w/ Tiffen's software in some way?

Thanks so much for everyone's input. These are all great. I'll be off tomorrow so here's hoping there are tons of great shots to follow :)

 

All my best, Allen

Sorry for the typos (telephoto, not telePHONE LOL) :) Typing too fast with no error checking!

I have Nikonx TC17E II teleconverter, which I use with AF-S Nikkor 300 1:4D

lens. Don't want to spend thousands on a higher telephone 500+mm lens or

similar through Nikon so looking for a quality alternative brand that has zoom

and at least up to 500mm that would adapt to this TC. If anyone has any info,

please hit me up.

 

Thanks, Isaac

www.isaacallenimages.com

Thanks Lou. I've always found Cades Cove to be a gem.

 

OH... Something I forgot to add to my list, NIGHT PHOTOGRAPHY shots (a rarity). It's going to be full moon next week so capturing rural landscapes, mood lighting, etc. at night would be a true find. I know Cades Cove closes but maybe there are some historic places, overlooks, fences, trees, bridges, parks, etc. someone may know of that would be extremely moody if shot timed exposures at night.

I know many of you die hards won't share your secrets publically. lol I'm the

same way (sometimes). But I'm heading to the Smokies next week, through

Cherokee, Gatlinburg, (maybe Cades Cove), either back to Atlanta via Townsend,

TN or back through Cherokee and out via Highlands/Dillard, Ga areas en route to

Atlanta. Looking for hidden gems, quiet places, pathways, old barns/buildings,

dogwoods, spring flowers in places where movement and mood can be combined

(water, clouds, etc.). Shooting mainly digital B&W. If you care to post,

please do. If you prefer email, that would be great.

 

Thanks,

Isaac

William, I appreciate your more conceptual viewpoint. The one thing that several artists in my area have pointed out to me was that you should go with the same pricing that you have at the shows. Some think that should be "inlusive" of the commission. To me, that could mean taking a major loss. Like your comment, I personally feel that whatever the gallery wants in commission should simply be tacked on to "my" professional price. Would this be the professional and ethical approach? That a patron may see a pricing difference if they see in the gallery vs. show?

Currently doing the art festival circuit and have been approached by galleries

to exhibit and sell artwork from time to time. Can someone offer insight into

pricing? Knowing most galleries ask high commission, should I stay with the

price I sell the work at a show for, or negotiate a higher price to compensate

between the commission and the costs associated with making the piece in order

to make a "decent" profit? And what are "average" gallery percentages?

 

Thanks all.

Isaac

Carol,

While their deadline has already passed, the Atlanta Dogwood Festival provides such an example:

 

http://www.dogwood.org/category.aspx?categoryID=9

 

Isaac

I am considering art shows for 2007. A few require that digital photography

artwork that is produced by any mechanical means, i.e., giclees, photo-offset,

or any other reproduction technique must be labeled a ?REPRODUCTION?.

Additionally, artwork must be signed and numbered.

 

For someone new to the art show venue who currently does not do limited but

rather open editions, I obviously don't fit that part of the show's

requirements. But I have heartburn with the "REPRODUCTION" statement. While

my artwork comes with an artist's statement that the piece is an original

digital print, the original of which exists only as a digital file created by

me, that the digital file was printed by me using a specific printer, inks and

paper and signed at the time it was printed, I have to assume that by their

terms it's still to be considered a reproduction and I need to include that in

my statement.

 

I am curious how others feel about this in general and welcome your input.

Michael, I have gotten purple frindging before but it's usually rare and does have a "purplish" halo. This is different. And it's usually in fall foliage shots which I have a ton of. Always the golds/oranges that have this etherial glow. Again, PRE processing even (before sharpening) although I will try some sample tests with varying sharpening settings to see how the results go. While the colors begin to pop the detail gets a bit lost. If sharpening plays a part, is there a better technique than using Nikon Caputure's sharpening? Maybe Extensis? I usually stay away from Photoshop's.

I shoot with a Nikon D70. But I have glowing edges when shooting

golds/yellows and they're most noticeable against blue backgrounds (e.g.

sky). I'm not sure if it's the camera, the lens or my post processing

techniques. I've tested with various lenses including my Vibration Reduction

macro and still get the results so I'm wondering if maybe I need to think of

adding custom curves to my camera, changing "SPECIFIC" settings or something

to try and alleviate this. My post processing generally is limited to

sharpening, highlight/contrast, etc. and pushing hue a bit but punching

saturation to get colors to pop. But that's about it. Even tests BEFORE any

processing shows a bit of the glow but it worsens as I add layers and process.

 

Thoughts anyone on how to overcome this?

That wasn't the best SAMPLE of glowing edges ... Sorry folks