dave_osborne

I'm trying to find the serial number on my Nikon 105/2.8 AF Micro and can't for

the life of me see it.. Can anyone tell me where it should be?

 

Thanks,

Dave.

Hi,

 

I need to produce a data dump of IPTC info from a few hundred images.

The output will be a tab delimited file containing one line per image with

Title, Caption, and Description fields among some other data.

 

I'm not afraid of getting my hands dirty with a bit of scripting but could do

with a shove in the right direction as to what packages I should be looking at

which can query IPTC info from image files.

 

Eg. is there a perl library that does this? PHP module?... or is there a

software tool already written which allows production of such a data file

without myself having to script it from scratch?

 

Any pointers would be most appreciated.

 

Regards,

David Osborne

http://www.davidosbornephotography.co.uk/

Hi Jim,

You may have found this by now but Alamy have created a new blog on you Contributors page. And one of the posts attempts to explain what's happened with AlamySearch which might make things a little clearer.

Cheers,

David Osborne

http://www.davidosbornephotography.co.uk/

"When you print small, you won't notice the small sized (radius) noise dots that's added by the add noise filter."

 

Perhaps downsizing to the small print size before adding the noise would help.

Hi there,

I use Gallery2 as well.

Did you try the Checkout module which is supplied with Gallery2..? I find it does everything I need it to.

The more eagle-eyed of you will have noticed that's only really one question... I decided against the second one.

Just in case you didn't realise.. you can try it for free - fully functional I believe except it watermarks.

Hi there,

 

I was looking for some advice with this.

I've just calibrated my laptop display with Pantone eye-one display 2.

End use is for photo editing for stock.

 

I have 2 questions:-

 

1. Whenever I set a target gamma (2.2 is what I want), at the end of the

calibration I end up with a 'current' value of .2 higher than the target. So

when I target 2.2 I get 2.4. If I set 2.4 I get 2.6 etc etc.

Anyone know why this is happening?

So to get a 'current' gamma setting of 2.2 I need to target 2.0.. is this a

valid means of getting 2.2?

 

Any pointers would be appreciated.

I'll attach the last calibration summary I got..

 

Regards,

Dave O

I know what you mean about Gallery2. I use it for my website and spent most of the customisation effort stripping things out of it. It doesn't need to be as complicated as it tries to be by default. By editing the theme's photo.tpl & theme.tpl, and uninstalling unnecessary modules you can remove most things.

And if you make all your albums accessable by the Guest userid you can remove all the user admin functions too.

 

Before Gallery I used Jalbum for a static gallery which was good enough.. so if you don't need site searching or anything scripty then that might a good call.

It pretty much agree with Roger... I switched to Noise Ninja after using Neatimage for some time. NN does a great job of calming the grain/noise without overdoing it, which I felt NI did often.

Thanks for the replies. It seems to be able to achiev sharp focus thoughout all focal lengths manually but just can't do it via AF @ 50mm. Seems a bit strange. Think I'll just return it. Cheers.

Cheers Peter... it is a bit of an annoying expense trying to work out which is the best filter size for your particular selection of lenses innit.

I guess using 77mm is probably the best way to future proof but step up rings do annoy me.

Good point about the f3.5 vignetting.. that might actually be what I was seeing - I need to do some experiments.

Cheers again.

Anyone got any ideas?

 

I've picked up a used lens (nikkor 28-70 AF f3.5-4.5) and it seems to have a

problem focusing.

 

It focuses fine at 70mm and from 28-40mm, but around the 50mm mark the autofocus

tracks forever and won't lock on to anything. This happens with a D200 and a F80.

 

Anyone seen this? any way around it? or is it just a faulty lens?

 

Cheers, Dave.

Thanks Aaron, that's what I was looking for.

A polariser's a little thicker than a UV filter but sounds like it may be better without a step-up ring.

 

Now to find someone to swap a 72mm for a 67mm!

18mm = 27mm equivalent field of view on a D200 so it isn't really hugely wide.

I've no problem with the variation of the polarisation effect, just looking for someone who uses a 67mm pol filter on this lens @ 18mm to let me know whether they get vignetting or not.

I've got a 18-70 DX (on a D200) which I use mostly for its wide end and often

use a polarizing filter.

 

Currently I use at B+W 72mm(long story) pol filter on a 67-72 step up ring and

get a bit of vignetting @ 18mm.

 

Not sure if it's the thickness of the stepup ring which is doing this so wanted

to ask if anyone uses a 67mm pol filter and is vignette free @ 18mm?

 

And if you are exactly which make of pol filter do you use?

 

Cheers,

Dave.

First off, I'm not a lawyer so if I were you I wouldn't take my advice. But the way I think of it is the following.

If a picture was taken in a public place you have the right to use those pictures for non-commercial use without a release (commercial usually taken to mean advertising for promoting something). So use in an exhibition is not usually considered to be commercial use - unless used in the brochure to advertise the exhibition etc.

If taken on private property it gets a bit more complicated but generally if you were allowed to be there to take pictures the same non-commercial use applies.

But as I said - ignore me.

If I try with ICE off the same pattern is there only stronger.

 

It's not present in all frames, and not throughout the entire frame when it does occur.. it's in strips. I scanned the same frame twice with Nikon Scan & Vuescan without cleaning and the dirty marks matched up in both. So I'd *think* that means it's on the slide - but I don't have a powerful enough loupe to check.

Nice one - cheers. I'm switching to AF for some lenses (seem to be missing focus an awful lot since switching to a D200) but was inclined to stick with AIS for 24mm and wider... so you've helped me make up my mind.

 

Now to work out if I need to keep my 105/2.8 AIS micro as well as the AF!

Oh and while we're at it.. does anyone know about the 105/2.8 micro AIS vs. AF?

I'm thinking of switching my 24/2.8 AIS for an AF version. Most of the reviews

of the 24/2.8 neglect to mention whether the AF version is optically the same as

the AIS (which always gets good reports).

 

So what's the score..? 24/2.8 AIS & AF - much the same or not?

BTW I scan with ICE on.

Recently I've started noticing some strange marks in my scan files. Mostly just

noticable on smoothly textured parts of the image at 100% it looks like

clustered strips of dirty marks which run vertically from top to bottom of the

frame (looking at the from in landsape orientation) but not always exactly

vertically, sometime on a slight diagonal.

I've attached a 100% crop of one such area.

 

Anyone seen it before? Do you think it is my scanner.. perhaps dirty? or

something up with the development of the slides? This has occured on many

different rolls of e6 but I think all have been developed in the same place.

 

This is mostly with Astia 100F and Nikon Coolscan V.

 

Thanks for any suggestions.

Dave.<div></div>

For Bessas I've used all of the following and they have a good reputation...

 

In the UK:

http://www.robertwhite.co.uk/

 

In Scotland and great for used bessas:

https://secure.ffordes.com/index.htm

 

And in the US:

http://www.cameraquest.com/

I've had to pay VAT on a couple of lenses I bought from KEH before shipped to UK.

They use UPS who have an annoying habit of delivering the parcel and then billing you for the VAT 2 weeks later just when you think you've got away with it.