corkman

<p>On the question of results and resolution, this is addressed to Cara St hilaire's comment: PPrinting on canvas also is quite forgiving." With respect to Cara, the problem with large prints from low resolution has nothing to do with "forgiving." It simply comes down to subject matter ... a low resolution photo has far frwer pixels per inch than the same image in high resolution. In other words they hey are two different photographs, one, the high resolution one, sends significantly greater visual information to theviewers eye. They are two different photographs, one vastly superior to the other except in the rare exception of a photographer wishes a blurred, or soft, image in the name of style. </p>

<p>JUAN CARLOS: I use the traditional method favored by photographers all over the world. The clothing I wear on photo shoots all have a built in "magic pocket" which guarantees that no compulsive lens cap thief will ever find them. The downside of the "magic pocket" method is that it also guarantees I will never see them again. Hope this helps. Bill</p>

<p>Good God Landrum, you certainly unleashed a flotilla of random thought on the subject that would fill one of earth's smaller oceans, or part of it. My simple answer to the question is; if you feel it is a solitary pursuit, then it is. I am a writer first, because it's my profession. A photographer second, because I enjoy it, and like the challenge. But as a writer ultimately I have to sit down by myself and write something which, indeed, is a solitary endeavor. In one sense, writers, photographers, artists, auto mechanics, steam fitters, bakers, cabinet makers, fashion designers, etc. etc. all end up doing what they are paid to do in a solitary setting called their <strong>own mind, </strong>because there are some things in life you simply can't do well with somebody leaning over your shoulder offering advice, criticism or whatever. That is called a distraction and always has a bad outcome. But if for some reason you dwell on the actual execution of what you're doing, discounting all the other people and interests in our life and general pursuit of happiness ... then your priotities are misplaced, and you could very well have a problem.</p>

<p><br /> Gerhard...Grass (with two S's) is green because God (take your pick) likes what green filters does for black and white conversions, and hates what red filters do for them. Also, grass does get yellow eventually, hence God's love for yellow filters and their relationship to black and white conversions. God is also not crazy about blue filters and God preceded both Canon and Nikon, but in the photographic world, not by much. Regards, Bill.</p>

<p>Carolina. I have been photographing a lot of fast moving sports (motocross and hydroplane racing) over the past few years with the 80-200 with the D200 and while at first, because of it's weight, it took some getting used to. I learned this much: Handheld shots of objects from the side panning with them is very difficult but not impossible when you set the right shutter speed and use continuous AF. It is superb with the subject moving toward or away from you. A monopod is an absolute necessity, but useless with panning shots. Unlike those who complained of slow focus, I've never had that experience. And I too tired of the heft but my solution, the 18-200 VR, was not the answer. And I've never regretted saving the six or seven hundred bucks difference between this lens and the 70-200 VR. Bottom line conclusion: All lens have limitations and trade offs, but if your ultimate goal is sharp, quality images never settle for less than good glass.</p>

<p>Jin, thanks so much. The opening in a new window didn't work but you got me thinking BROWSER (I've always used Firefox) and I reinstalled the browser software and VOILA! It worked. At some point in the last few weeks the browser software got corrupted for a reason that's beyond me.Even stranger, the browser worked fine with the dozens of other sites I use so that tricked me into thinking it wasn't a browser problem. Then I stretched my memory, which isn't as reliable as it used to be, and recalled that weeks ago I downloaded the JAVA software that Photo.net recommends for uploading more than one image at a time, and that's when problems started. I since removed that JAVA plugin, but obviously it wasn't a clean removal. My only conclusion is that Firefox (or the version I was using) don't get along with those JAVA plugins. Sorry for being so long winded, but if other members have experienced the same problem this might offer a way to fix it. Anyway, thanks again for taking an interest and providing a path to a successful conclusion.</p>

This problem began a few weeks ago and so far I haven't found a solution. I'll be brief as possible. When I

download new work and place it in my "recent" folder, at first they appear as normal as thumbnails, and a click

brings them up to size. But then, hours later, or a day later, all that appears is the title in type, when I

clock on it I get the full page with critiques, etc, but no photo, just the title in type. When I open the Recent

folder, with five or six submissions, there are no thumbnails, just the titles in print. Since I'm getting

ratings and critiques I'm assuming others are getting the graphics, but not me. I go to other folders of older

pics and the thumbnails are there as they should be and work fine. Another thing that happens is that when I

click on Show Details sometimes it works, but most of the time it doesn't. Also when I place the pointer over the

pages pull down menus, sometimes the menu appears, sometimes it doesn't. I've been an active member for over 5

years. My computer is relatively new and nothing about the software or system has changed. My questions: What

the hell's going on. Is there a solution? Or has Photo.net's server been having problems? Am I the only one

having these problems? Would love some feedback on this 'cause I'm at the point where logging on is just too much

of a hassle anymore. Thanks for listening, Bill.

Chauncey. The last time I checked (a couple minutes ago) the price of a NEW D300 at B&H was $1,599.95. I'd up my budget a hundred bucks and go with a new one. Just a thought. Bill

<p>I'm with Martin. High Key is the way I'd go. I added a vignette around it and in a beautiful frame the high key image can be stunning. Give them the color version without the highlights on the forehead and they should be happy. Bill</p>

<p>The simple answer is yes, let them have it. Just say, "I shot this on the run and it's not as sharp as I'd like it to be, but I thought you'd like to have it."</p>

<p>Calvin. The modes spell MAPS, and that's all they are. Different ways of getting where you want to go. If I used Manual at a motocross race, I'd spend my entire day looking down at the camera's settings and twirling knobs, talking to myself, and missing the unpredictable and extremely fast action of the riders. I rely on Shutter mode, because that's a must, changing it based on whether the action is coming straight at me (1/500) or I'm shooting from the side (1/1500). I change ISO to account for whether the sun is out, or ducked behind the clouds, or whether the sky is in the background or not. I have to trust the camera's instincts somewhat or at the end of the day I'd have zero keepers. In static situations similar to what's in your portfolio, Manual on a tripod with some exposure bracketing will get you where you want to go. And like everyone else, I keep the camera on P just in case. Regards, Bill</p>

<p>Shun, this has been beyond wierd for me. I always look for the simpliest solutions first, but this one never occurred to me. I guess I should be feeling really stupid, but in this case I'm giving myself a pass. I believe that there is still something wrong, and not of my doing, that it happened at all. And you're right. I wouldn't know how to recreate it. In retrospect all I did was use an off camera flash in a photo shoot, something I've done scores of times before, and there was the x250 problem defying logic. I always tailor settings for whatever I'm shooting using the buttons on the camera, and don't remember ever using the menu to create settings, nor have I ever "banked" menu settings. I've thought of upgrading, to D300 when the price is right. But have so far resisted that move by questioning myself asking, "For what you do, what specifically is your problem with the D200, and how much further ahead would you be with an upgrade, and wouldn't the money be best spent on a quality lens you'd really like to have?" That calms me, and my wallet, down. Anyway, thanks so much for your interest and help. Bill </p>

<p>SUCCESS!!! There was one suggestion above that I missed last night, probably because at that point my eyes were glazed over, and my mind was mush. Anyway, first thing this morning put batteries back in and......nothing! Problem still there. Then looked at the posts once again and noticed Ralph Hensley's suggestion for the first time. He wrote "Just turn the sub-command dial the opposite way, and it will take you up through the slow speeds and back to the high speeds at the other end." I almost laughed, seemed too simple to be true. But tried it and BINGO! It worked. Problem solved. Crazy, but true. That's definitely not in the manual. And I suspect if I'd called the Nikon hot line I wouldn't have heard it from them either. Thank you all for your time and generous willingness to help. It takes a village to raise a child. It takes a the PN photo community to raise a photographer. Regards, Bill</p>

 

 

 

Ralph...thanks for the suggestion. I'll definitely try that when I power up again tomorrow. Bill

<p>Shun. The "camera thinks I'm shooting with flash" is where I'm at at this point as well. The suggestion about the pop up flash was a good one. I looked at it carefully. It clicked into place when closed. The seams were tight. I looked inside to see if there was any dirt - there was some light dust that I removed. The little switch that is moved into position when the top closes was in working order. So there's nothing visibly that suggests it isn't working properly, and after I did this the shutter speed problem was still there. I also checked the off camera mount and it looks totally normal. A real puzzler. Tomorrow when the batteries are put back in I'll see if that works. I appreciate you attempt to help. I've seen your name often in other forums and came away impressed with your pragmatic, knowledgeable way of diagnosing problems so I really appreciate the time you given to help solve my dilemma. Tomorrow when I put the batteries back in, I'll know if that works. If not, I'm at a loss where to look next. Thanks so much for you help. Bill</p>

<p>Shun (sorry about getting your name wrong the first time) - The sub-command dial will take me through the full range of f stops in both Manual and Aperture modes. And the command dial does take the shutter speed through the full range of slow speeds, but stops at letting me go above 1/250.<br>

Brooks, yes I realized it was on the top synch flash speed, and no flash is deployed or mounted. But it is acting exactly like I am shooting flash, which is what I was doing at my last shoot with an SB800 on a stand before the trouble started. I've also remounted the off camera flash, used it, dismounted it, and opened the on camera flash and used it, but when I go back without flash the problem is still there. I really think the microsystem is stuck in and time warp and thinks I'm still shooting flash.<br>

If this were an old TV set giving me trouble I just give it a swift kick, but this is probably not the best way to handle a digital camera problem.<br>

I'm going to pull the batteries, leave it off overnight, and see if that works. If not, I'll fall back on my D70 backup for tomorrow's shoot.<br>

Thanks to everyone for taking your time to try and help. When I do finally solve this puzzle, I'll come back to this post and give you all the feedback. Regards, Perplexed and Frustrated.</p>

<p>Chen. No problem switching modes. One curiousity is the fact that in Apeture setting I can get a higher shutter speed, but not the speeds I need for shooting motocross, and still can't get it out of x250 in shutter mode. I will follow your suggestion and leave the battery out overnight. Thanks so much for your help. Bill</p>

<p>Richard. Oooops. Now realize that what I thought was a reset button, the kind you activate with the point of a ballpoint pen, wasn't that at all. It was simply a hole to accommodate a matching pin on the MB battery grip to keep it from swiveling. I think reset on this camera is the function reached on the menu. I'm back to the battery thing. thanks again, Bill</p>

<p>Thanks Richard. At first I was going to tell you there is no reset button on the D200, then I realized that there might be one after all be cause I use the MB-D200 grip that holds two batteries. Removed that and sure enough, there was a reset button. Pushed it in and held it, but didn't solve the problem. Going to try the battery removal trick next. I appreciate your help. I'll report back after a couple hours and let you know where I am with this problem. Regards, Bill.</p>

<p>This is my last resort. I've read and reread the manual, searched Nikon's site, and googled the problem to death without result. I've had my D200 for three years, taken several thousand photos with it, and suddenly have a problem that's driving me crazy. The shutter speed in shutter and manual modes is stuck on x250 and with a sports shoot coming up, I can't make it move above the x250 speed. I know that the x250 speed is related to flash synch. I know that it's no coincidence that this happened right after shooting a public relations photo with a single SB800 on a stand, something I've done countless times. But this time, nothing I've done, including resetting all the camera's settings back to default, changes the fact that I can't make it budge. I've concluded that either the camera's computer is corrupted, or (my fondest wish) is that there is some very simple solution that someone can suggest to solve the problem.</p>

If you don't use nik Silver Efex you're not serious about black and white. Periodl

<p>Have used the D200 for 4 years now. Got the 2 battery grip at the same time I got the camera. As others have said, the grip not only eliminates any battery problem, but gives you better balance and feel for handheld shooting. Not a single problem. Except for high ISO, which it doesn't do well in, it's the a camera that has made me think twice, three times, four times, five times about upgrading and I always go back to the old saw...if it ain't broke don't fix it...and don't spend a fortune upgrading it until you really, really have to. One of Nikon's best in a long list of bests.</p>

<p>If the contention that Canon is favored over Nikon is true, which is debatable as you'll note in many responses, it might have something to do with history as well. My first SLR was the Canon AE 1 that was introduced in 1976 with memory serves me. I bought it when it first came out and it was a remarkable camera, the first microprocessor CPU-equipped SLR, and the world's best selling SLR by a wide, wide margin. That comera would certainly have had an impact in the evolution of the Canon/Nikon comptetive wars. PS - When it went digital it was Nikon and the D70.</p>

Thanks for the tip. I figured there must be a simpler way to accomplish this, though I'm still left with the question of how I got it right more than 350 times when I wasn't even aware of this issue. Another of life's little (computer related) mysteries! Appreciate your input, Bill.

Now that's funny - tough to compete with food! If it were me, bacon would be involved. If you're a fan of irony you'll enjoy this. Even though I got the right file in the loop, decided on the "bad" file to submit for critiques and it's gotten two 7/7 ratings to date. Go figure. Thanks again, Bill.