alioffe
-
Posts
704 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Events
Downloads
Gallery
Store
Posts posted by alioffe
-
-
<blockquote>
<p>While that has impacted the forums, photo.net has an active community who do post photos, and if you look at the newsletters, you will see that there is a lot going on here beyond the forums. There are new people posting images and commenting on other people's images, which contribute to a growing community interested in showing, sharing, and getting comments on their photos. I see this as a positive change, it's more photo-centric, doesn't have endless debates about the same old stuff, and will help to keep photo.net current rather than looking dinosaur-ish, which the forums often do.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>May be the community is growing, but not in terms of quality of pictures and not on photo.net. (This is off-topic but still...)<br>
Let me demonstrate it. Photo.net stores selections of posted pictures for the last 5 years. Go to "Gallery"->"Browse gallery". Make selection, for example, of 5 year old Landscape photos. You will see 3000 beautiful pictures. Now instead of going "Next page" go to "Previous page" and you will see the last pictures from 3000 selected. Note the rate of the last pictures. Now make selection for the last 1 or two year old posted photos and do the same: look at the last page. Do you see the difference? The rate of the pictures is less and the quality too. (While the rating system is separate topic, but I generally agree with the fairness of it on photo.net)<br>
This is about every category. I checked "Birds", "Fine Art", "Documentary". You name it. For the last years we even have less than 3000 pictures in some categories, while 5 years ago we easily did.</p>
-
<p>William, Please forgive me for misleading. I reviewed EXIF and found you are right: it was IS and most likely it was ON. Please disgard my comment above and thank you for noticing.<br>
As per conditions, this church has big windows (see attached) The wheather was cloudy. I also reviewed other pictures taken on the same ceremony and found that ISO for them was in range 125 - 2500 while aperture f / 4 - 4.5. I used aperture priority mode and automatic ISO and the exposure time was no shorter than 1/200 but often 1/80 or like when focus length was short (of course IS was VERY helpful).<br>
Based on this observation I would not recommend use the lens without IS. IS is generally OK for church because on the ceremony people usually moving slowly. </p><div>
</div> -
<p>For me it was OK. Depend on conditions of course but taking pictures in church surprisingly was OK</p><div></div>
-
<p>Cannot tell about 7D, but I compared 5D and 5D3. I've been using 5D for 6 years and recently started to use 5D3. The difference in metering is very noticeable. Evaluation metering in 5D3 is definitely worse: often underexposed 1 and even 2 stops. Of couse the grey card test does not demonstrate the problem, but in practical life situations 5D3 fails more often than 5D.</p>
-
<p>I noticed that some leaves on flowers bended like they are gently pressed by a glass. I do not know how it is done but I want try to use flatbed scanner</p>
-
<p>Additionall I've got<br>
"get Perfect suite 6.1 and save 100$"<br>
But the discount works only 24 hours (!?)<br>
Marketing, sooo marketing</p>
-
<p>In their download registration e-mail I found:</p>
<blockquote>
<table width="100%" border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td >
<p >Thank you for requesting an onOne Software download. Get started now and make your images extraordinary! Click the Mac or Windows links below to start downloading.</p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top">
<table width="100%" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="2">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td width="250">Product</td>
<td width="100">Type</td>
<td >Mac Download</td>
<td >Windows Download</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top">Perfect Layers 2</td>
<td valign="top">Free</td>
<td valign="top" width="90"><a href="http://www.ononesoftware.com/downloads/downloads_start.php?utm_nooverride=1&ref=mp_demo_email_init&prod=pl2m" target="_blank">Mac OS X</a></td>
<td valign="top" width="140"><a href="http://www.ononesoftware.com/downloads/downloads_start.php?utm_nooverride=1&ref=mp_demo_email_init&prod=pl2w" target="_blank">Windows XP/Vista/7</a></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p >How to Buy<br>
If you downloaded a trial version and are ready to purchase the full version, visit the <a href="http://www.ononesoftware.com/store/?ref=demo_email_init" target="_blank">onOne Software Store.</a> You can easily convert your trial version to the full version with the license code you receive after purchase (no need to re-install).</p>
</blockquote>
<p>So I presume what I downloaded is a trial. Not sure what "if" means here. But no one told this is a "full version"</p>
-
<p>Apparently this is a trial version.<br>
Do not know limitations yet but I will try</p>
-
<blockquote>
<p>I bought a PA241W, the retail version of the i1DP</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Thank you, guys<br>
I have done the same. Also I called to NEC customer support and they told that I can buy NEC's software in Canada by phone, but not online. Just their web site prevents it. So essentially I can download the software and than obtain the key by phone. I will do it later when motor is arrived and I test its compatibility with video card.</p>
<p> </p>
-
<p>Thank you Andrew,<br />The problem I'm facing currently is that NEC does not distribute SpectraView software outside of the US. I cannot buy it even in Canada. So I cannot buy i1Display Pro (Sensor+software ) + SpectraView software + NEC monitor</p>
-
<p>I'm trying to optimize purchase of NEC monitor + calibration/profiling<br>
Can I buy/download for free i1Display Pro but software only without sensor?<br>
My idea is to buy NEC MultiSync PA241W-BK-SV 24.1" Widescreen LCD Monitor with SpectraViewII Color Calibration Solution<br>
Because I own other not NEC monitors I'd like to use the sensor from the NEC's kit and X-Rite software for profiling other monitors<br>
Thank you</p>
-
<p>I was in both with 5D+24-105/f4. For the Zoo was certainly not enough. For SeaWorld it is OK(be not too close to the splash. 70-200 is comfortable). For the Zoo - 100-400mm is preferable choice. I could take pictures of baby-gorilla, baby-elephant (in Safari Park), playing apes, but was very zoom-limited. So I took mostly video with x20 zoom</p>
-
<p>Mr. Burke,<br>
I'd rather be not so sure that if a good labeled "Made in ..." it is really made of 100% components manufactured, assemled, QA tested, packed and so on in the country the label is made for. In modern world of cooperation, when even a simple thing includes tens components and involves in the PROCESS many international companies it is hard to say where exactly the thing is "Made in".<br>
Said that I must tell that I'm not qualified to discuss this matter regarding "Made in Japan" or any other "Made in..." label. But as example, I could give a refernce on "Made in Canada":<br>
Regards and happy X-mas!</p>
-
<p>I use 5D too. And I have feeling that I need higher ISO (I love travel and tripod is not acceptable most time) and better AF (especially in low temperature. I love winter and my 5D fails to AF in below 0C enviroment).<br>
Otherwise it is fine. I'd rather wait 5DIII</p>
-
<p>I'm also not happy with the AF accuracy. I cannot add any helpful advice to the above, but only my personal experience with 70-200/f4 IS + 5D. I'm experiencing very often AF inaccuracy under some, I think, perfect conditions: good light, contrasty objects, central focus point. Especially on long end of focal length. Particularly focusing on infinite distance. The focus is inaccurate in 50% cases or so and it is so obvious: just look at distance scale. Each focus attempt gives a different result. I think, it is nothing to do with lens/camera calibration because the results (forward or backward) are pretty much random. I think it gets worse under low ambient temperature (but still within working limit). Unfortunately it spoiled many my pictures because due defect of poor vision I have no control on it</p>
-
<p>"Can I delete LR3.2 file without impact?"<br>
This is usually what you want to do, but only after you are sure that the upgrade works without problems. As a general rule I could recommend also firstly to rename the old directory (file) to something like "XXX-LR3.2" rather then delete it and run the application to be sure that everything is OK. This way you can always roll back the old version.</p>
-
<p>My "old" spider does not work either. They said that they are not supporting it on Win 7 and are not going to. What I did I prepared the profile on XP and then copied it over into Windows 7 directory (where all monitor profiles are located). Then use Windows 7 profiler selector. Looks like it worked. Do not remember details right now. Try it yourself. If you will have difficulties I'll try to recall the procedure.<br>
And yes, they have 64-bit driver, but for Win XP 64bit. But for me it was some kind incompatibility any way. But someone claimed it worked.</p>
-
<p>My "old" spider does not work either. They said that they are not supporting it on Win 7 and are not going to. What I did I prepared the profile on XP and then copied it over into Windows 7 directory (where all monitor profiles are located). Then use Windows 7 profiler selector. Looks like it worked. Do not remember details right now. Try it yourself. If you will have difficulties I'll try to recall the procedure.<br>
And yes, they have 64-bit driver, but for Win XP 64bit. But for me it was some kind incompatibility any way. But someone claimed it worked.</p>
-
<p>Thank you Tim,<br>
for pointing this out. I tried to adjust the curve in LR. In LR this is done in ProPhotoRGB space. Then I moved to PS and converted to sRGB. AFTER CONVERSION THE BANDING INCREASED (easy to see when use "Preview" in conversion dialog).<br>
<em>May be Meike is right: after a certain point - convert to "printing" space and do the rest of adjustments?</em><br>
Then I move to 8-bit mode and saved as jpg. During the saving I the stripped profile.<br>
The posted image on the web in internet explorer looks the same as what I see in PS after conversion. I read somewhere that attaching profile before posting on web (as well as printing in shops) does not make a difference, but only increases size of the file. I guess this is because the web just expect to have sRGB image. But conversion to sRGB is a must. Without conversion it is absoltely not right.<br>
Anyway I'm not satisfied with my result. I will work on this image more and let you review the final result :) Thanks again for pointing me the direction</p>
-
<p>Tim,<br>
I tried to follow your recommendation in Lightroom. The best I achieved is<br>
<a href="../photo/12291290">http://www.photo.net/photo/12291290</a><br>
Note: there are also other adjusments, which hopefully makes this defect less noticable.<br>
My skills are far away from your level. So a lot things to learn.</p>
-
<p>Thank you Tim,<br>
I will try later to apply the curve to the complete picture<br>
<a href="../photo/12270170">http://www.photo.net/photo/12270170</a><br>
and see how it is improved.<br>
I have built custom profile using X-Rite passport. It does not help here. I guess the problem may be that the profile is built under certain luminocity. It works well under normal conditions in the middle of the histogram, but at extreme end it is required a different profile because as you mentioned the characteristic is non-linear. So the interpolation method may not work. I have built a few profiles under different conditions (brightness, color cast) and all of them give me a different results. So there is no a single ideal profile for the camera.<br>
My uneducated guess also that any profile is an interpolation. The standard color checker includes 24 colors. It is known that 24-color checker includes a few "popular" colors such as blue sky, skin, green grass and so on. But what about that ones which are not included and may be far away from the color checker? how accurate they are reproduced/interpolated?<br>
Also interesting that such mistake happens on sunrise/sunset conditions and normaly not seen. Google "sunrise" images and dozens images with a similar halo are found.</p>
-
<p>Peter,<br>
I tried to play with local hue, saturation and luminocity adjusments. The problem is that in LR the whole picture is affected (you can see the picture here: <a href="../photo/12270170">http://www.photo.net/photo/12270170</a>). As soon as one has deal with such delicate gradient I guess any manual adjusments is noticable. At least I was unsuccessful.<br>
First of all I'd like to understand the nature of this problem. I'm pretty sure that the film photographie does not have such problem. My conlusion so far is this is a digital artifact which is a consequence of either error in RAW conversion or some kind restriction in RAW workflow and I'm trying to push the digital process to hard.</p>
-
<p>Peter,<br />I understand what you are saying, but I'm afraid that this is more serious than just clipping which could be correted in LR. I can adjust exposure to the level when only sun disk is 100% in all channels and cliiped. Than in yellow area the red is 97% (in other channels is less) and then it is less while moving away from the center. It does not help. See attached picture. Also as I told I played with adjusments and profiles it does not help much<br />Daniel,<br />What about the picture converted to B&W. It looks like id does not have the halo. The distortion means the loss some information in red channel. So the converted picture is expected to have this loss as well. Unless the B&W converter knows exactly what the loss is and compensates it accordingly. I do not think it is possible.<br />Is there a way to read and display RAW file without profile conversion?</p><div></div>
-
<p>Thank you Craig for the quick response. I'm using the LR 3.3, CR 6.3. If you talking about Fill and Recovery options, yes I have Fill setting. Now the next image with Fill = 0. It makes it even worse.</p><div></div>
Is there a situation where film is better?
in Canon EOS Mount
Posted
<p>- Long exposure<br>
- Medium and Large formats and<br>
- Slides<br>
In postprocessing of digital I have never achieved such colours like on Velvia or Astia. So I miss them very much </p>