mstudio

Francis van Boxtel,

Not rude in the least bit nor am I offended, point well taken.

Docomentary is the wrong word, would personal documentation be any different?

If it's the same, ill just refer to them as my shots of Bolivia. Thanks for the insight, if

we think we have nothing more to learn than there's a problem.

Vivek, Erik cleared up what I didn't undersatand, sorry for no descriptons or info.

First time asking for opinions, besides I don't have enough time. In general it's my

documentary of 9 days in Bolivia.

Thanks Erik for your input. The mumy shot was done with limited time to adjust my camera, I

had to be quick because cameras were not allowed. I saw your Bolivia shots, it's nice to see

different perspectives.

Hi,

Curious for some feedback.

Thanks

Not sure how to make this a live link.

http://www.photo.net/photodb/presentation.tcl?presentation_id=359681

Its' called bronzing which most Epson's have. The black may look rich from certain angles

and hazy from other angles. I have an epson r800 and a canon i9900.

I like the clear coat on the epson but my blacks are superior on the canon, no bronzing.

Also make sure your image is BW and not rgb or cmyk and that your printing in grayscale.

Gwen, I have the same problem, i've read that people have used Imove and output it to

Final Cut HD but that seems to be overkill and complicated to me. I would also be happy if

mac had a stand alone slideshow that I can burn on a CD. Not sure why companies ignore

this market. I bet at least 40% of photographers are on Macs, anyhow i'm sure it will happen

soon, I think Bridge or Aperture will have to compete.

Wow, this is strange, i'm taking a snap shot of my settings which says sRGBprofile, when I

post it or open it in PS is says wide gamut rgb, go figure. I'm going to reinstall PS.

Thanks Greg and Paul. I was up late trying every scenario possible and the only time I see

a difference which is for the worse is when sRGB isn't selected, every other scenario with

various sRGB's and different boxes checked or not checked gives me the same desaturated

image. I'm about ready to give up, I just bought ShowitWeb which would have made viewing

proofs very convenient but it just doesn't make sense to show images that are sub par.

If you have any other ideas, please let me know.

I found this info below which is exactly what's happening, desaturated images. The

problem is my images are in sRGB.

"If you work with photos in a wide-gamut color working space such as ProPhoto RGB or

Adobe RGB, you might want to convert the image profile to sRGB before optimizing it or

including it in a Web Photo Gallery. Most web browsers can?t read embedded color profiles

and assume an sRGB profile. If your images look desaturated in a web gallery, convert

them to sRGB in one of the following ways. It is a good idea to work with a copy of the

images."

Anyhow, it seems like no-one has a solution.

Ronald, the images look fine when I open them through bridge. I thought PS dictates the

color not the computer. How do I sync everything?

Anne what profile do you use? Also, I remember when I used to change profiles in

PS the colors would also change, now when I change them, the colors stay the same, maybe I

need to reinstall PS.

After my images are corrected in Photoshop they look dark in Bridge, especially my black and whites.

When I create a Showit Web gallery the colors shift and the images look light, they lose their richness.

When I open up the images from the new showit gallery folder they look fine. I asked about this problem

before but now with the added Bridge problem, I still can't figure it out. My color profile is North American

General purpose 2, sRGB1966, regardless of the setting, I would think Bridge would flow whatever setting

is asigned from Photoshop. I have a feeling they are both part of the same problem but I really don't know.

Thanks in advance for your help.

Duplicate a layer, go to selective color ond bring down the cyan in the yellows or neutrals and

erase the areas that are not green. Heres a quicky.

"The competition around here is advertising weddings for $300-500. After viewing their

webby-pages, I doubt if any of them even took photography in high school."

They would be your competition only if you charge $300-$500. There's a market for

everyone. Don't fear the ones that didn't go to school and are bad, frankly you shouldn't

fear

anyone if youre good. You also left out the ones that didn't go to school and are realy

good and charge alot more than $500.00. Competition is good and forces people to be

better.

Since so many want to believe that one can't achieve quality with auto mode I must inform

you that you're wrong. That's ok, it works wonders for me. That's all I use because for

right now that's all I know but I do counter my lack of traditional knowledge in

photography with a 14 year jump start in photoshop and photo retouching, and a lifetime

being an artist. Eventually I will master the technical aspects of manual mode and lighting,

but for now it certainly doesn't slow me down or keep me from getting the quality shots I

want or need. Many technical photographers will never be able to purchase an artistic eye

or even develop their own because in most cases it's something that can't be learned or

bought. To much focus is on technical rather than the art of a powerful image. Both

aspects are important but if you have no composition, no timing, no power, no feeling or

interesting aspect to the image, I personally don't care how sharp or "perfectly exposed" it

is or what gear you use. What a wonderful time we live in. So touche to the "superior"

haters of auto mode and technology.

It's probably a competitor with spam software. One person can have rotating IP addresses

and flag you in a minute.

Multiply a layer and overlay a layer reducing the opacity as you like. I personaly like white

whites and dark blacks even if it blows out in certain areas.

How big can these quick time shows be? when I exported foto magico to a quicktime

slideshow they were quite small, I didn't see a setting to increase the size. Thanks for your

time.

Does anyone know a quality slide show for mac that can be exported as a stand alone and viewed on a

mac and pc. Aperture has a nice slide show but no export. I tried the Foto magico demo but the export

can only be read by a mac, also the standalone is huge.

Thanks.

Hi Kim and thanks,

Yes, my workflow is the same, what's strange is when I open up the converted or smaller

jpeg in photoshop it looks fine. It seems that something is happening within the flash

gallery. By the way, I enjoyed your web-site, very nice photography. I notice you give a cd

with high res images, I've been debating whether or not to offer this myself anymore

because I have no control over the quality of the prints, who knows what kind of crummy

printers, software, paper and inexperience they might have which ultimately reflects our

work. What's your thoughts on this?

Thanks Mike,

My images are 8x12 300dpi. I'm using the automated web gallery with the highest quality

jpeg, so it says. I'm using srgbiec1966-2.1/us web coated swop.I did mess with my color

profiles this week because I was having problems with my black and white prints but I

would assume i'm mixing apples with apples when converting my high res images which I

am happy with. Whats a good standard color profile and a good black and white profile.

Sorry this turned into multiple questions now.

Thanks again for your help.