peter_lawrence

You might want to give Keeble and Shuchat Photography in Palo Alto or Adolph Gasser in San Francisco a call. Both camera stores have well stocked used camera departments. And they both carry the F6 new too.

Folks,

 

The proof is in the pudding, as they say.

 

If you don't already have a copy of Capture NX, just download the free 30-day trail version

of Capture NX from the Nikon website, and see and compare the results for yourself.

 

Just covert the same NEF files, onetime using Adobe ACR (or Lightroom) and another time

using Capture NX, then compare. If you don't notice any difference, or any improvement,

by using Capture NX, then stick to Adobe ACR (or Lightroom). It's an easy comparison to

do side by side.

 

Just don't take my or Tony's word for it, do the comparisons using your own images and

decide for yourself.

 

For me, I prefer the Capture NX conversions because the Capture NX converted images

have a higher degree of fidelity, IMHO, to the actual scene I saw when I pressed the shutter

of my D200.

 

It's not about the colors being more or less saturated, or the images being more or less

contrasty, etc.. It's about the images being more accurate and faithful to what I saw in the

field.

 

But again, don't take my word for it; instead download the free trial version of NX and do

the comparisons yourselves.

 

(Tony, thanks for taking the time to provide links to some examples.)

In terms of RAW conversion of Nikon D200 NEF files, Capture NX from Nikon produces

noticeably superior results compared to any Adobe product (be it Adobe Camera Raw,

Lightroom, etc.). So if you want the best raw conversion for your D-200 NEF files, use

Capture NX.

 

In regards to manipulating exif data, I prefer to use Photo Mechanic from Camera Bits.

 

I still use Photoshop CS3 when necessary, especially when fine-tuning a photo, so I think

it's worth the price to upgrade from CS2 to CS3. But to covert your NEF files, use Capture

NX.

First, calling it "dust" is a bit of a misnomer. It could be dust, but more likely its larger

solid particles, often times small metal shavings from the metal mounting ring of your

lens.

 

That said, there are ways to help minimize the chance of these small particles from

landing on your camera's sensor.

 

First, be sure to clean the metal base ring of lens you are attaching to your camera with a

slightly damp lint-free cloth. This will greatly minimize the chance of any dirt or metal

shavings on the lens ring from reaching your camera sensor.

 

Second, turn off your DSLR before your change its lens. This will minimize the chance of a

electrical charge attracting dust and other particles onto your sensor.

 

Third, position the DSLR lens opening so it faces down, toward the ground, when changing

lenses. This will help minimize the chance that dust particles will float inside your camera

body and onto your camera's digital sensor while you are changing your lens.

 

Even after following these three easy steps, you might end up with particles on your

sensor, but based on my own experience, the frequency of this happening is greatly

reduced if you do follow the three steps that I outlined.

If you DO NOT value your time or photos, then go ahead and buy a Cokin grad ND filter.

But they really aren't neutral despite how Cokin labels them. Because of that, they are

useless, IMHO.

 

Purchase either Hitech, Lee, or Singh-Ray grad ND filters. They work as advertised, the

Cokins DON'T!

 

Personally, I use Singh-Ray grads and am very pleased with them. Others I know use

Hitech and Lee grads, and they are satisfied with those. No one I know who ever used a

Cokin grad ND filter was happy with the results, so don't waste your time and money on

them.

<br>

Here's a link to the Bozeman Daily Chronicle article that provides more details of the

incident:<br>

<br>

<a href="http://bozemandailychronicle.com/articles/2007/05/25/news/20jim.txt">http://

bozemandailychronicle.com/articles/2007/05/25/news/20jim.txt</a><br>

<br>

There are also very photogenic tropical beaches in Hawaii, Mexico, and Central America. The

key to finding them deserted is simple. Get to the beach at or before sunrise!

 

Most tourists don't start heading over to the beach until well after breakfast. You should

easily have most beaches to yourself (and maybe a few other photographers and a few early

morning joggers or fishermen) during the first couple hours of daylight of any day.

I use both Capture NX and Lightroom.

 

I use Lightroom to organize, view, and select the photos I want to work on, but use

Capture NX to do the actual RAW conversion of the NEF file and also for the basic image

editing including setting the white/black control points, contrast, brightness, etc.

 

For sharpening for output, I use Photoshop CS2 (which I already owned before purchasing

Capture NX and Lightroom). If I didn't already own Photoshop CS2, I'm not sure which

program (Lightroom or Capture NX) I would use for output sharpening.

 

I get consistently better, more faithful, RAW conversions of my NEF files with Capture NX

(or even Nikon's PictureProject) than I do with Lightroom's built-in RAW converter. So to

convert your NEF files, I would recommend that you use either PictureProject or Capture

NX if you want the best quality conversions.

 

But Lightroom's conversion of NEF files isn't that bad either, I just think Capture NX does a

better job.

If you want to make B&W prints, then get the R2400, otherwise get the R1800 to save money.

 

The R1800 produces outstanding color prints (and so does the R2400), but it's in B&W

printing where the R2400 really outperforms the R1800. Both do an excellent job producing

color prints.

While of course no one will ever have the valley to him or herself, one nice thing about

Yosemite Valley is that it's SO EASY to get away from all the crowds. You don't have to

walk more than 100 feet (not 100 yards) from a road to get separated from 99.9% of

people who visit the valley on any given day.

 

Also one will find VERY FEW people up and about for sunrise shots, even in May. The few

who get up will be dedicated photographers like yourself and not the typical Yosemite

tourist. The sunset shots will be a lot more crowded especially at the popular scenic

points like Tunnel View or Sentinel Bridge.

According to the official Curry Village reservations website, the Curry Village tent cabins

<b>DO NOT</b> have electrical outlets.<br>

<br>

As quoted from its website:<br>

<i>"These canvas-covered tents are wood-framed on a raised wooden platform and will

accommodate up to five people. They are equipped with beds with linens and electrical

lights, but no electrical outlets, telephones, televisions or plumbing."</i><br>

<br>

<a href="http://www.yosemitepark.com/

Accommodations_CurryVillage_LodgingDetails.aspx">http://www.yosemitepark.com/

Accommodations_CurryVillage_LodgingDetails.aspx</a> <br>

<br>

Dave,

 

Was the WiFi signal you picked up on the west side of Curry Village open to anyone, or did it

require some sort of password to log in? Was it intermittent, or was it available all the time

you were there?

If you are staying in a hard-sided cabin (with or without bath) or a standard room, you'll

have

at least one two-prong outlet to recharge your camera batteries and computer. If you're

staying in a tent cabin, you'll need to find someplace else. I'm not sure if the Curry Village

Guest Lounge has power outlets available to guests.

 

If not, you can head over to the Yosemite Lodge Mountain Room Lounge, the bar at the

Yosemite Lodge. The Mountain Room Lounge has power outlets by some of its tables, and

should have WiFi Internet access available too (but sometimes the Lounge's WiFi will be

down).

CompUSA hasn't closed its doors completely, but it did cut it retail stores in half. Here in

the San Francisco Bay Area, CompUSA is closing all its stores in the South Bay (probably it

couldn't compete with Fry's), but its stores around San Francisco and the North Bay are

remaining opening. CompUSA stores in Fresno, Bakersfield, and Santa Barbara are also

remaining open.

 

All the stores in Southern California (Greater Los Angeles and San Diego Areas) are being

shut down though.

 

It's a major retrenchment of CompUSA, but it hasn't closed down completely, just yet.

Boris,<br>

<br>

You do the readers of photo.net a disservice by misdirecting them to Galen Rowell's

STOCK PHOTOGRAPHY archives, instead to the archives of Galen Rowell's FINE ART PRINTS,

which is the more relevant archives for this discussion.<br>

<br>

Since googling for "Galen Rowel fine art prints" (or any similar phrase) brings up the

CORRECT URL for his FINE ART PRINT archives at the VERY TOP of the search results, it

seems that you went to great trouble to misdirect the readers of photo.net to the wrong

archives.<br>

<br>

Do you have an axe to grind with the late Galen Rowell or Justin Black? To me it appears

that you do.<br>

<br>

BTW, those who are interested in viewing the fine art photography of Galen Rowell (and

not his stock photos) can go the correct URL: <a href="http://www.mountainlight.com/

gallery.html">http://www.mountainlight.com/gallery.html</a><br>

<br>

What I like best about Lightroom is not its photo editing features, I have plenty of

software, including Photoshop CS2, Capture NX, and Lightzone that seem to have all the

photo editing features I need.

 

What I like best about Lightroom is it photo workflow and digital assets management

(DAM) features. Now, if you already use a DAM software product like iView Media Pro, or

Aperture, and/or a high-end browser like Photo Mechanic, then Lightroom might not give

you any extra benefits except for tighter workflow integration.

 

But if you do not already use a digital assets management software package, then Adobe

Lightroom is a good one to start with that's very easy to use.

 

So to me, Lightroom compliments Photoshop, it doesn't replace it.

I've spotted many Grizzly Bears over in California, out in broad daylight, usually hanging

off of flag polls. <b> :-)</b><br>

I don't think the established "Art World" has a bias, per se, against landscapes

photographers, but as Jay alluded to, they tend to seek out new concepts over the tried

and true. They also favor artwork that makes strong statements, and preferably has

unique points of view.

 

As much as I love and admire Galen's landscapes and find them visually stunning and

unique, for a collection of his work to be exhibited at a major modern art museum like the

Whitney, I think it would require coming up with a central and compelling theme to the

collection that would be exhibited.

 

As an example, a compelling collection of Galen's work centered on Tibet could become an

exhibit that could interest the East Coast art world. Or a collection centered on

mountaineers and their struggles, challenges, and rewards of scaling the world's highest

mountains could be the basis of another exhibit.

 

In regard to Jack Dykinga's work, a collection worthy of an art exhibit could be built

around his photographs of endangered Sonoran Desert plant life.

 

I think the key is to come up with an exhibit that the East Coast "Art Establishment" would

find BOTH artistically and intellectually compelling AND also unique. A collection of

exquisite and unique landscape photographs by themselves (with no central unifying

theme) wouldn't be enough.

 

BTW, I do not think the acceptance Ansel Adams in the East Coast art world was because

he made a deliberate effort to schmooze influential curators, but more likely because very

early in his career Adams gained a very important and influential supporter of his work,

Alfred Stieglitz, who helped promote Ansel's work to the East Coast art establishment.

I've always found it funny that no one complains about receiving underserved 7/7 ratings

on their photographs, especially photographs with absolutely no originality. It's rare to

see someone get a 7/4 rating or 7/3 rating on his or her photograph (a photograph that's

aesthetically very pleasing but not original). Yet, these are probably one of the most

common types of photographs on photo.net.

 

Instead, people hand out 7/7's like there's no tomorrow, especially to their friends'

photographs.

 

So IMHO people who a willing to receive 7/7's should also be willing to receive 1/1 (even if

their photographs do not warrant such a low rating.)

 

Frankly, I feel most people who post photographs here on photo.net are more concerned

about getting high ratings versus getting honest critiques of their work. That's one reason

why I never have posted my photos on photo.net. I don't take photographs to "compete"

with other photographers; I just photograph for my own personal enjoyment.

 

Yet here at photo.net, it seems the most important thing for many photographers who

post their photos on this site is to get the highest ratings possible so their photos appear

in the Top Rated Photos page. Whoopee!

 

Get a life! Photography is more than just receiving 7/7's on photo.net.

 

BTW, I used to honestly rate and comment on people's photos here on photo.net thinking I

was providing a small service to fellow photographers who wanted honest opinions about

how others viewed their photographs. I've stopped rating and commenting on photos

here because I realized only a VERY TINY fraction of people who post their photographs on

photo.net want an honest critique of their work. Most just want praise and high ratings

regardless how phony the praise and ratings might be.

 

I think the best thing Philip could do with the photo.net rating system is to get rid of it

completely, including the Top Rated Photos page. Just allow people to comment on other

people's photographs.

 

And the front page of photo.net could just display some of the photo.net staff's favorite

photographs taken by photo.net users, as chosen by the staff, and rotated in and out of

the front page as the staff sees fit. No ratings needed.

 

Of course, a lot of photo.net users would hate this idea because they would be unable to

manipulate the system to get their photographs selected for the front-page view. Oh well,

too bad for them.

What's the purpose of your trip to Europe? Do see and experience the sights, or to take

the highest quality photographs? In other words, is this a sightseeing trip or a

photography trip?

 

If the main purpose of the trip is to sightsee, then DON'T take a large tripod. Maybe take

miniature tripod or clamp that can fit in your daypack, but skip the large tripod.

 

But if your main purpose of the trip is to photograph the places your visit, then take a

lightweight (read carbon-fiber) full-sized tripod to maximize the quality of your

photographs.

 

You need to realize that a sightseeing trip is usually very incompatible with serious

high quality photography. When sightseeing, you will want to travel light on your feet and

not be encumbered with all your serious photographic equipment. In a trip where your

photography is the main focus of the trip, the priorities are switched and you'll want to

have all the photographic equipment necessary (including a high quality tripod) to be able

to obtain the best possible photographs.

<br>

The subject line should have read: Warning from Canon: Don't edit EOS-1D or EOS-1Ds

TIFF files <b><i>with</i></b> Vista Windows Explorer or Photo Gallery!<br>

Canon USA has issued a very serious warning (Service Notice: TIFF Image Loss with Microsoft Windows

Vista) to EOS-1D and EOS 1Ds users not to use the new Microsoft Vista Windows Explorer or Windows

Photo Gallery to edit their TIFF files.<br>

<br>

The Warning from the Service Notice:<br>

<b><i>"We have discovered that the original image data of TIFF (RAW) images shot with an EOS-1D or

EOS-1Ds Digital SLR Camera, and rotated or edited using Windows Explorer or Windows Gallery on a

computer running Windows Vista, will disappear from the computer's memory. The image data that

disappears cannot be recovered."</i></b><br>

<br>

Canon's workaround for this serious problem:<br>

<b><i>"When you rotate TIFF images, or edit the properties of TIFF images, shot with an EOS-1D/EOS

-1Ds Camera, please use Canon's ZoomBrowser EX image browsing/editing software instead of

Windows Explorer or Windows Photo Gallery when using a PC computer running Windows Vista."

<br>

</i></b><br>

Here's a link to the full Service Notice issued by Canon USA:<br>

<b><a href="http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/controller?

act=PgComSmModDisplayAct&keycode=2112&fcategoryid=215&modelid=7474">Service Notice: TIFF

Image Loss with Microsoft Windows Vista</a></b><br>

<br>

<br>

Hope no photo.net user has lost any image data because of this Microsoft Vista bug.<br>

<br>

As others have already mentioned, there's only a slight chance that Tioga Road (Hwy 120)

from Lee Vining to and through Yosemite to Crane Flat will be open during your stay in

California.<br>

<br>

Here's a link to the opening and closing dates of Tioga Road through Yosemite for the past

27 years: <b><a href="http://www.nps.gov/yose/planyourvisit/tiogaopen.htm">http://

www.nps.gov/yose/planyourvisit/tiogaopen.htm</a></b><br>

<br>

If Tioga Road is still closed during your visit, you'll need to get to Yosemite the long way.

The most scenic way would be to go north on Hwy 395 and then over the closest pass that

might be open in early May.<br>

<br>

So far, it has been an unusually light snow year in the Sierra Nevada, so you might get

lucky and have either Sonora (Hwy 108) and/or Monitor and Ebbets passes (Hwy 89 and

Hwy 4) open by May 1st. But I wouldn't count on it quite yet. The next pass north of

these, Carson Pass (Hwy 88), will be open because it's open year-round.<br>

<br>

After going over the nearest open pass (be it Sonora, Monitor/Ebbets, or Carson) you'll

need to head west until you reach Hwy 49 and then travel south on Hwy 49 (through some

very photogenic Gold Rush towns) to the western segment of Hwy 120. Then take this

portion of Hwy 120 east into Yosemite.<br>

<br>

Expect a 5-hour drive (via Sonora Pass) to a 7-hour drive (via Carson Pass) from Bishop to

Yosemite Valley if Tioga Road is closed during your visit.<br>

<br>

As Gary mentioned, May is primetime in Yosemite Valley so it shouldn't be missed if

you have the time to get there.<br>

<br>

Another option would be to get an Apple Mac Mini with an Intel Duo Core Chip and 1GB of

memory for about $675 and then install Windows XP on it. You would then have a PC that

runs both Windows and Mac OS X.

Anyone who shoots with Nikon DSLR's should purchase and use Capture NX! It's worth the

money for its RAW converter AND its photo editing and adjustment tools. I agree 100%

with Obi, Capture NX coverts Nikon RAW (.NEF) files better than Lightroom or any other

RAW converter. And its editing and adjustment tools are superior to those found in

Lightroom.

 

That said, you should ALSO purchase Lightroom. I feel Adobe Lightroom is an excellent

program for sorting and selecting your best photos (it blows Nikon's PictureProject

software out of the water), and it's also a great way to ensure that your photos get backed

up on a regular basis.

 

Adobe Lightroom is also fine for quick and simple adjustments to your photos. But I

wouldn't use it to covert your Nikon RAW .NEF files -- use Capture NX instead.

 

With my Nikon D200, I don't waste time converting my RAW files to JPEGS. Instead, I shoot

in RAW+JPEG mode. That way, I have my JPEGS ready to post or e-mail the moment I

download the images off the D200 into my computer. BTW, both Capture NX and

Lightroom can VERY EASILY convert and save your photo images as JPEGS too.