avery_nelson

<p>Colin,<br>

Thanks for your insight, and taking the time to respond. I'm hearing from the adobe related forum that certain cameras, including ALL Sony cameras don't take into account multiple focus distances (though different focal lengths are considered).</p>

<p>Cheers,<br>

Avery</p>

<p>Hello,<br>

I've read through all the Adobe provided documentation for the Lens Profile Creator, but a few things are still unclear. If someone with experience with LPC can provide some insight -- I'd greatly appreciate it!<br>

I'm attempting to profile a Sony SEL18200 on a Nex-5N.<br>

1. When shooting the actual images... it's not clear if you should move the camera (on the tripod) left, right, up, down to keep the camera sensor generally in-plane with the image. I thought I read that you do move left, right -- but only tilt (no move) up/down, see below. Can someone who has created a profile please elaborate on the normal movement of the camera while shooting the sequence of images for a shooting interation?<br>

2. The focus distances mentioned in the guide are 1x, 2x, 5x of the minimum focusing distance (about 12" for my camera). For this 18-200mm lens, 1', 2', 5' doesn't seem to make much sense or offer the opportunity to use both ends of the spectrum, with respect to focal distance. Are there recommendations for a zoom of this range (on an APS-C)?<br>

Thanks!<br>

-A</p>

<p>Notes:<br>

Here's what the guide says, though I have read some persons who said the software doesn't work well if you tilt the camera instead of keeping the sensor generally in-plane with the subject:<br>

Here is one typical framing sequence:<br>

i. First shoot centered, straight on.<br>

ii. Tilt the camera up, thereby effectively framing the chart at the bottom-center of the image.<br>

iii. Tilt camera down, thereby effectively framing the chart at the top-center of the image.<br>

iv. Move camera a bit to the left (so that when turning to the right to face the chart, it is about 10 to 30 degrees). Take a series of shots similar to the first three, above, except that the chart is framed at the center-left, top-left, and bottom-left areas of the image.<br>

v. Move camera to the right, and do the same for the center-right, top-right, and bottom-right areas of the image.<br />...<br>

e. When framing the chart in different areas of the image frame, use a combination of physically moving and tilting the camera to achieve an optimal balance for LCP generation.<br>

i. Only moving the camera to frame, so that image plane stays perfectly parallel to the chart, can have an adverse affect on LCP calibration data.<br>

ii. Only tilting the chart may cause depth-of-field issues, where part of the chart may go too far out of focus due to the large angle of the chart in regards to the image plane</p>

<p>Thanks, Louis. The reason I decided to go the print-at-home route was exactly what you mentioned -- effectively the ability to have full creative control of the process from start to end (it certainly isn't cheaper than getting prints online). As you allude, it's also a major undertaking (esp, when I'm just learning LR, PS, metadata & geotagging, and putting together a website); however, I decided I needed to start decorating the bare walls of my living room :) I'll play around with a few of the papers you mentioned (esp. that Moab Entrada you mention) -- but the fine tuning will definitely come with more time. Regardless of order, I'll probably want to check out most of the epson papers and the other ones that have been mentioned here.</p>

<p>Hmmmm... I too would think Apple should cover that.<br>

It's a bummer to hear about your issues, but this does make me chuckle a little... I went through 2 of those jaundiced 27" monitors before telling Apple I didn't want it back. It sounds like the yellow bug infested iMac monitors are in fact 'buggy lemons'. Apple should really take a hit for producing such a poor product.</p>

<p>Eric and Louis,</p>

<p>Thanks so much for the feedback. Based on the fact I'm new to printing and want to keep things simple at the start (e.g. proven profile), I think I'll start with a handful of the Epson papers while peppering in 2-3 of your recommendations, as well.</p>

<p>It's a bummer you can't test more low/mid-range papers in small quantities (say 5 or less sheets)... for instance, that Epson Luster is only available in packs of 50. I have seen that there are a few shops that will sell the fancier papers in sample packs -- but have only seen a couple places that do this. I'd welcome further recommendations...</p>

<p>I'm curious about the use of double-sided papers... are these used typically for proofing, contact sheets, etc... or something else?</p>

<p>Alright, thanks for the feedback. This confirms my suspicions that the Epson package is more of a sure-fire thing that I should probably use as my foundation/starting point, and perhaps test out a couple alternate papers, as well.</p>

<p>Does anyone know of any retailers that will sell sample packs of... say, Epson paper. e.g. 3-5 sheets of each type, versus having to buy 50 sheets of the Epson Luster?</p>

<p>BTW -- if anyone is considering an R2880 right now, they can be had for $450 after rebate (form on Adorama and B&H website). Seems like a pretty decent deal.</p>

<p>To begin with --- my apologies for yet another 'what paper should I use' thread!</p>

<p>I'm amateur who is entirely new to printing... as in haven't printed a thing online or at home in probably 5 years or more -- though years ago I used to do a little conventional b&w printing. I mention this, because other than having a preference for 'matte', I really have no developed paper tastes or appreciation (yet!). Hopefully going through this learning exercise will help me understand what I like.</p>

<p>I have an Epson R2880 in the mail (will be using canned profiles), and want to get 5-10 papers to try out. <strong>What would be a good 'set' of papers to test out?</strong> I'm basically trying to avoid building a stock of garbage papers that won't ever get used.</p>

<p><strong>Recommendations for sample size </strong>(originally I figured I would order 20-packs of 8.5x11 paper, if individual samples are not available)<strong>?</strong></p>

<p>Here are kind of the areas I'd like to find papers for:<br>

- High-value option for large-volume, small (4x6) snapshot prints (e.g. the prints of snapshots you'd give away to friends after a trip, etc)<br>

- Mid-quality<br>

- High-quality/creative color AND b&w printing (e.g. What I'd hang that on my living room walls to have around for a while)</p>

<p>Finishes - Would like to try everything from glossy to matte to a speciality paper or two.</p>

<p>Typical subject matter:<br>

- Photos taken in the outdoors while rock climbing, mountaineering, skiing, biking, etc (mountains, snow, rock, forests, etc). Especially have some prints to make that have a lot of alpenglow lighting.<br>

- Non-portrait, friends & family pictures</p>

<p>Epson-paper wise, I've heard good things about: Ultra Premium Presentation Paper Matte, Velvet Fine Art Paper, Exhibition Fiber Paper.</p>

<p>Thanks!<br>

Avery</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>on older PowerPoint version (its been awhile since i test it) you can clearly see the difference in PowerPoint when you place a sRGB vs adobe RGB image in the document..so it will be a software limitation, not a projector limitation</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Thanks for the clarification. Sounds like I will need to verify what my software supports prior to projecting any pics.</p>

<p>I am entirely new to printing, and will be printing with an Epson R2880.</p>

<p>When selecting a paper, what are the pros and cons of using an Epson paper & profile, versus using a third-party paper & provided profile (e.g. Ilford)?</p>

<p>I.E. -- are there significant drawbacks to not using Epson papers, if I cannot create my own printer profiles?</p>

<p>Thanks, Ken and Roger. Sounds like a year should be no problem and 2+ years may even be reasonable.</p>

<p>Thanks, Ken</p>

<p>edit: disregard</p>

<p>Patrick, mac allows a 'copy', but not a 'cut'.<br>

Moving files should be easier than having to open two windows :) Really, it's quite lacking. If you've never moved files using cmd-x, then cmd-v within the same window -- you might not 'miss' this feature, but it's rather hard to escape once you are accustomed to this more streamlined method.</p>

<p>Thanks, Patrick.</p>

<p>One question... "2. make powerpoint or else presentation with a projector or on your tv."</p>

<p>If you are projecting directly from a computer on a high-end projector, why does the image need to be sRGB. Are projectors limited to colo(u!)rs in the sRGB color space, or are you implying this is a software limitation? I suppose the same question pertains to e-mail... I do understand browsers only work in sRGB.</p>

<p>Thanks!<br>

Avery</p>

<p>Alberto,<br>

I'm a relatively new user of LR, but purchased it because I wanted powerful metadata (keyword) management. If you rely on the LR catalog, and occasionally write your metadata back to the xmp/dng for redundancy, then you will be able to leverage LR's ability to use hierarchy, exporting vs not exporting parent keywords, etc. I've done a fair bit of testing around LR's keywording abilities and how to export hierarchy, and IMO it's definitely the way to go.</p>

<p>Avery</p>

<p>I have pretty much fully transitioned from PC to Mac, and am a systems IT professional. To Kevin's point, yes -- OS's work differently and you have to be able to adapt. However, while there are a lot of great things about Mac OS, Finder is an absolutely horrible application for file management; Windows, no-contest, wins in that area.</p>

<p>There is a product called Pathfinder that offers a lot of the windows-superior features such as showing a tree of folders on the side, two panes within one window, allows CUT (cmd-x) and paste of files, etc. It costs a few bucks, but for power users who are accustomed to a more capable file management -- it is well worth it.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Geo-tagging?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>If you haven't seen it, there is a third-party (well-maintained) geotagging plugin that works pretty well:<br>

http://regex.info/blog/lightroom-goodies/gps</p>

 

<p>Based on real-world/practical experience, what is the life of a K3 ink cartridge, once opened?<br /> Also, what are the symptoms of an ink that has 'expired' (just drying up, or actual color/longevity issues)?</p>

<p>I know that Epson claims 6 months, but in for an occasional print user like myself, it may be 18 or 30 months before using up a cartridge (depending on printer model). Furthermore, it may sometimes be a month or more between prints (or, say using the matte cartridge).</p>

<p>Any insight would be appreciated, as this type of information would help me in deciding which printer is most appropriate. Buying a printer with larger cartridges would not make sense if the inks really only last 6-12 months.</p>

<p>Thanks!<br /> Avery</p>

<p>Eric,</p>

<p>Thanks for the feedback and your assessment of the K3 inks' capabilities of printing bw. Sounds like the 2880 is the way to go, once the budget permits.</p>

<p>I am curious... does anyone know the practical life (versus Epson mentioned 6-month) of the K3 inks, stored in-cartridge... with only intermittent printing?</p>

<p>Thanks!<br>

Avery</p>

<p>Eric -- yes, I think I will want to print larger than 8x10, but I don't think it'll be a regular occurrence So, when those needs arise, I can send it out to one of the better online services, or even work with a local lab.</p>

<p>If I can't find anything smaller that will also print B&W, then I may go with the R2880; however, I'm mainly a hobbiest -- so forking over $600 for a photo-specific printer isn't ideal since most of my pics will be viewed on my website.</p>

<p>I guess I would also consider a used R2400 that is in good shape... however, assuming I have to replace the inks right off the bat, spending more than about $150 on a used one doesn't make much sense.</p>

<p>I've looked a several manufacturers, but it doesn't seem there is a smaller format (e.g. 8" wide) printer that does a good job at printing both color and bw (i.e. various shades of gray ink). The epson 2880 seems to be the smallest...<br>

Are there any smaller printers (say up to 8x10...) that do a great job of printing both color and bw?<br>

Thanks!<br>

Avery</p>

<p>Submitted. Oddly enough, it gives me no case or tracking number.... off into the black hole, I suppose.</p>

<p>Thanks for the info on how it *should* work. If you use DNG, are ALL .xmp settings stored in the .DNG?<br>

I've been doing some testing with trying to move between LR and Bridge/PS, and am getting some very unexpected results. I believe it may be a bug, but please let me know if I'm doing something wrong (to synch LR -> XMP). Here's what I did:</p>

<p>Imported a directory of photos into LR.<br>

Added additional tagging to photos<br>

Check the LR preference to replicate data to xmp's<br>

Restarted LR<br>

Selected the photo and clicked "save metadata to file". Status bar indicates success.<br>

Go to Br or Ps and open the photo. The original tag values exist.<br>

Look at the FS level, and the XMP file reflects the new tag values<br>

Repeat above for a photo who's XMP was modified by CR after the original import.<br>

This time, when clicking "save metadata to file" it tells me the file has been changed since import and asks permission to overwrite.<br>

Allow overwrite<br>

Now, the new tag values show in Br/PS.<br>

Round 3: Delete all xmp files<br>

Close Br/Ps<br>

In LR, highlight all photos, and click "save metadata to files"<br>

Review the actual files; they have the new metadata/tags.<br>

Open Br/Ps. The only ones showing new tags are the ones that I previously modified on both sides, and then gave LR explicit permission to overwrite.<br>

Purging Camera Raw cache seems to have no effect.</p>

<p>Thoughts?</p>

<p>Thanks for your responses. I guess I'm a bit learly of the database side of things, for compatibility and technical reasons, including the fact I synch my desktop and laptop.</p>

<p>Andrew -- for clarification: Bridge offers the Camera Raw preference option to save image settings in "sidecar .xmp files" or "camera raw database".<br>

<br /> What I do not know is if the Camera Raw database is directly compatible with the Lightroom database. <strong>Does anyone know if Bridge and PS CS5 can reference the LR database, to gather and store metadata and camera raw settings?</strong><br>

<br /> I retagged some images in a demo copy of LR3, and they are stored in the LR catalog; however the .xmp is not updated (I see there is an option to do so under catalog settings > Metadata). I do want to be able to continue to use bridge, and do not want to store data in two locations (.xmp and the LR catalog)... just one. <strong>Is this possible, using either (and only) .xmp or the LR catalog?</strong></p>

<p>I've searched the forums, but software seems to become outdated at the speed of light.</p>

<p>I am looking for recommendations for software to consider for tagging photos. Basically, I am going to go back and tag the past several years of photos -- so efficiency is key. If you know of something that fits the bill, I'd be interested in hearing about it. I have CS5 PS/Bridge, but it is not very efficient.</p>

<p>Must Haves:<br>

- Support for RAW formats (especially .RAW, RW2, .NEF) and XMP files<br>

- Efficient/streamlined approach to tagging (e.g. pre-configured tags you drag and drop, or similar)<br>

- Uses recent standards</p>

<p>Really Nice to Haves:<br>

- Runs on Mac<br>

- Geotagging capable (using an interface like google earth)<br>

- Low-cost</p>

<p>Thanks!<br>

Avery</p>