jwallphoto

<p>It's the real thing if you feel like it's real when you're doing it.</p>

If your experiences are upsetting, then maybe offering a CD or CDs is all you should agree to, and then just say no to all the additional requests. I've always uploaded pix in similar situations to Kodak Gallery so that anyone who wanted to order a print could do it. Yes, they have to sign up, but if that's too much trouble for them, screw 'em (putting it nicely, of course). ;)

<p>If these are your first test images, pick other images. I don't know if they check the histograms, but they do view at 100%, so I'd be more worried about missed dust specks.</p>

<p>I'd like to continue the deceased's discussion of the merits of nanocrystal lens technology for the next three days. Anyone in?</p>

<p>By the way, the advent of focus-stacking doesn't change the importance of background, but it gives nature photographers a tool they didn't have a decade ago. The shot of the Indian Warrior wildflowers at the bottom of this blog post is an example. You couldn't have gotten the front and back flowers in focus while keeping a soft background without focus-stacking (at this distance; this is an uncropped image), which lets you use a large aperture such as f/4 for each stack: <a href="http://jwallphoto.blogspot.com/2009/02/lily-pond.html">http://jwallphoto.blogspot.com/2009/02/lily-pond.html</a></p>

<p>Consider the issue of heat. I had lens elements delaminate from leaving the lens in a hot car.</p>

<p>Think about the 18-200mm too.</p>

<p>You might think you could hurt the end result in several ways, but the software engineers seem to have foreseen and solved them. Check out my post: <a href="http://jwallphoto.blogspot.com/2009/01/stack-stitch-voodoo.html">http://jwallphoto.blogspot.com/2009/01/stack-stitch-voodoo.html</a><br>

I think you could get an excellent result with the technique you describe, and in fact it's probably the best way -- and the only way to ensure you keep the same magnification ratio. However, it isn't necessary. You can get good results just by turning the focusing ring in very slight increments. I haven't done a stack in a while, but I recently downloaded an update to CS4 that supposedly corrects even the minor stacking artifacts that I've noticed in my shots. I'm hoping I can get out this weekend to check it out.</p>

<p>If your subject doesn't move, there's nothing like focus-stacking. CS4 has it built in, and it works great: <a href="http://jwallphoto.blogspot.com/2009/01/focus-stacking.html">http://jwallphoto.blogspot.com/2009/01/focus-stacking.html</a></p>

<p>Have you checked this out?<br>

<a href="http://gigapansystems.com/system-page.html">http://gigapansystems.com/system-page.html</a></p>

<p>That's really cool. It looks like a Velella gone wild with tentacles. I don't see any rhinophores to make it a nudibranch, but I know very little about them. I'd ask someone at <a href="http://jellieszone.com/index.htm">http://jellieszone.com/index.htm</a>.</p>

<p>I have the 12-24mm and use a thin-mount B+W. You don't need a thin-mount filter to prevent vignetting, though, and there are downsides to having a thin-mount filter. You can't put a lens cap on one, for one thing. The cap that comes with the filter will fall off. It does not clip in because there's nothing to clip into.<br>

I also find my B+W filter very difficult to clean for some reason. I got suntan lotion on it once, and I've never gotten it completely clean since.<br>

It's nice to have the thin-mount on the rare occasion I want to stack it with an ND filter; however, you will have slight vignetting at the widest setting -- and you won't see it unless you have 100% viewfinder accuracy (which my D200 does not).<br>

The filter size is also the right one for the 300mm f/4 AF-S lens, which I also use it on.</p>

<p>I had an F3 refurbished and the shutter speeds dialed in for $125 at Apollo Camera Service in Oakland, CA (510-891-9486). He doesn't have a web site or email.</p>

<p>This page might be of interest:<br>

<a href="http://www.pbase.com/cameras/ilford/xp2_super_400">http://www.pbase.com/cameras/ilford/xp2_super_400</a></p>

<p>Check out this guy's Flickr page and note his set-up.<br>

<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/johnhallmen/">http://www.flickr.com/photos/johnhallmen/</a></p>

<p>Tony S., they don't have the part I need. It's not even listed.<br>

FWIW, beware of buying parts when there is no photo of it. I ordered what I thought would be three rubber feet for my legs (two have fallen off), but ended up getting three caps for the center post (which I definitely don't need since I don't use the center post!).</p>

<p>I've had the same thing happen at Tennessee Valley in the Golden Gate National Recreation Area -- and the building was a barn!</p>

<p>I second everyone who recommends upgrading your printer. The ink technology on even a cheapo R280 is far superior to the 1280. I also had lots of headaches with that printer. I also feel kinda bad for the people who bought prints I made with it. Fading is very noticeable after just 2 or 3 years.</p>

<p>Tony, I don't see that promotion (the 30% off trade-in) on their web site. That'd be a tempting solution.</p>

<p>Ernst Haas. <a href="http://www.afterimagegallery.com/haas.htm">http://www.afterimagegallery.com/haas.htm</a></p>

<p>Thanks for the helpful replies!</p>

<p>I've recently gotten into shooting macro panoramas (blogged <a href="http://jwallphoto.blogspot.com/2009/01/macro-landscapes.html">here</a>) and have a rant/observation and question about the Kirk FR-1 focusing rail vs. the Adorama rail.<br>

The rant is that the Nikon D40 - D90 can all be triggered with a cheap wireless remote (ML-L3), but there is no such thing for any of their higher-priced cameras, including the D200 which is what I have. The reason I care is that when mounting my macro panorama rig on my Adorama rail, I cannot use the remote release cord. It gets in the way, preventing sidelong movement of the rail. The simple yet annoying workaround is to use the self-timer to release the shutter.<br>

My question is whether anyone has tried a set-up similar to mine (D200 w/ 200mm micro lens mounted to the rail at the lens's collar so the D200 can be rotated into a vertical position) with the Kirk FR-1 rail. I'd love to be able to use the quick-release mechanisms the Kirk rail offers, but I'm wondering if the remote cord will still get jammed against the knob and prevent full side-to-side movement.<br>

I know this is complicated to picture, but I don't have a picture of the set-up.</p>

<p>This has been a good tripod for the last 3 years or so, but it's going downhill fast. Two of three rubber feet have fallen off (the second one just yesterday), and one of the legs no longer locks at any angle. (It's not the leg-length locks, but the angle clip-stop locks at the top of each leg.)<br>

I have ordered replacement rubber feet, but I can't find any info on the leg-angle mechanism.<br>

Any ideas short of buying a new tripod would be appreciated!</p>

<p><a href="http://groups.google.com/group/easternsierrabirds/browse_thread/thread/e75507fe38a78d8f">http://groups.google.com/group/easternsierrabirds/browse_thread/thread/e75507fe38a78d8f</a><br>

Good group to check out in more detail.</p>

<p>Ton, you are missing something. Members of a book club discuss the books they read with eachother.</p>