william_carter1

I've read various threads here and on other sites referring obliquely to price

increases this month, but it's always "well, you'd better buy a ____ before the

January price increase!" with no further info. Is there somewhere I can find

more detailed info about the expected increase?

 

Thanks.

You'll find a ton of info (probably more than you want) here: http://

groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/

I do it in iDVD all the time. You can add music to slideshows and the

resulting DVD will play on a DVD player connected to a TV or on a Mac. I'm

99% positive that these DVDs will play on a Windows computer w. a DVD

drive, but I don't use Windows so I can't say for sure.

In OS X, just selecting "center image" will never get the image centered on the

page, for reasons others have explained above. Therefore, until Epson or

Apple gets their acts together (each says that this problem is the fault of the

other company), this is the best remedy I've seen: http://www.computer-

darkroom.com/ps7_page/page_layout.htm

Was your testing with Photoshop 7 standard "bicubic" or the newer "bicubic smoother" in Photoshop CS?

I bought one from Adorama a few weeks ago.

Colin: I'm sure you're right -- manually re-creating the effects that this plug-in

can do is probably possible given sufficient Photoshop proficiency, but

difficult. That's what makes it such a great tool. I have PixelGenius' PhotoKit

for the same reason -- the workflow improvements are significant. (Actually, I

think your plug-in has some effects that PhotoKit doesn't -- I'd have to do a

side-by-side comparison).

 

Eagerly awaiting a Mac version.

Whoops -- just saw in an earlier posting you (Peter) said "Another direction

might be 16-bit image support and Macintosh platform support." As a Mac

user, I strongly vote for Mac support, even if that means you have to make this

into shareware rather than totally free. It looks like a great tool. Granted, I

know how to do many of the effects, but not all, and it probably would take me

a lot longer to do them manually than thru this tool. Great work. Also, support

for 16-bit layers would be great, particularly as more people are moving to

Photoshop CS, which supports 16-bit layers.

 

I'd have more feedback if only it were Mac-compatible. :-)

Any chance of a Mac version?

"Eye-One can only profile one display for each video card you have installed on your system. If you have two monitors, but only one video card, you should choose one monitor (likely your LaCie) as your color critical display and leave the other for tools, palletes and other non color critical stuff."

 

Does this apply to Macs as well? I have 2 20 inch Cinema Display (one old one and one of the new aluminum models) that I profiled with the Eye-One Display and have noticed that they look different as well. (I have no idea what video card my G5 has, but I assume there's only one card). I assumed that this was because they are different pieces of hardware, despite the fact that they're both named "Cinema Displays." Nonetheless, you would think that after profiling, they would look the same -- after all, the whole point of a profile is to conform your display to an abjective standard yes?

Possible? Sure. Desireable? No. The screen itself is not terrobly accurate,

and any slight change in viewing angle will result in a color shift.

 

What I did was buy a display. I got the 20 inch Cinema Display, but the 17

inch is good. (I've also heard good things about Formac displays). There's an

added benefit of going the powerbook + display route: you can use a dual

screen setup and have your tool pallettes and such on your powerbook

screen and use the Cinema Display (or whatever display you get) to display

only the image you're working on. Or have Photoshop on one screen, with

Illustrator on the other. Etc.

I would wait. One of 2 things will happen: (a) the new displays will be better and cheaper than the current lineup or (b) the new displays won't have any features you particularly want, but their release will drive down the selling price of the current models. Witness what happened with the price of G5 PowerMacs when the new revisions were announced about a week ago.

 

I have the 20 inch and love it. If I were buying today, though, I would definitely wait. Unless I were in urgent need (not desire -- actual need).

See this thread elsewhere: http://www.robgalbraith.com/ubbthreads/showflat.php?Cat=&Number=214522&page=0&view=collapsed&sb=5&o=&fpart=1

 

About halfway down, someone gives a link for downloading the profiles.

The last response is interesting -- for black only prints, I find the Eboni to be

much less warm and closer to neutral than black-only with the OEM Epson

black inks. I;ve never noticed any "blueish" tint. And I currently have Eboni in

my 9600 for printing black-only and full color -- for full color, I don't notice any

difference from full color prints with the OEM inks. But that could just be me...

No, what the person said at MIS is not correct, in my experience. I've used the cartridge referred to in Clayton's article (ARC-T0348-K) in my 2200 and it works fine. In fact, I have 2 extra unopened ARC-T0348-K carts that I'm happy to sell you (I'm selling my 2200, so I won't need them anymore). Email me off list at chipcarterdc@hotmail.com.

Ask for John Massman at Logix (logix-usa.com -- don't know the phone#).

Just ordered a refurbished 9600 from them at a very good price.

Anyone have recommendations of canvas papers to try with the 2200?

Also, I've never printed worked with canvas before -- anything I

should know (e.g., in some of the searching I've done, I've seen

references to "pre-stretched" canvas -- but I don't know what

stretching is, why you do it, etc.)? And how do you mount your

canvas? For paintings I've seen them stapled to wooden frames -- I

assume this is something a frame shop could do?

 

Thanks.

I used to do my levels first in 16 bit, then do everything else in 8 bit. I discovered, though, that when you do levels (or other contrast-type adjustments) in 16 bit, there's a bit of a color shift -- really, it just punches up the colors. I read a while ago that if you make these adjustments (levels, curves, etc) as an adjustment layer, then change the "mode" to "luminosity" instead of "normal," you'll get the adjustment in contrast w/out the adjustment in color intensity. Thus, since adjustment layers only work in 8 bit mode, I now go straight to 8 bit; do Levels as an adjustment layer; then change the mode to luminosity, unless I want some additional punch in the colors.

 

FYI, I have never noticed any difference in the final print based on doing adjustments in 8 bit rather than 16. I imagine that if one's doing extensive adjustments, this could become more of an issue...

OK, this is probably a stupid question. The Epson 3200 (just got the

scanner yesterday) manual says to place the film in the holder "shiny

side down." This means emulsion side UP. In my previous film

scanner (as well as in the wet darkroom, of course), you put the film

in the holder with the emulsion (dull) side down and the shiny side

up. Am I reading this right -- in this scanner, you place the film

emulsion side up? Is this true of all flatbed scanners? Or am I

misreading the manual? Thanks!

I just went thru this exact same process. See this thread: http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=002CWJ

 

The short of it is, I had a G4 i-Mac; my windows laptop died, so I needed a new laptop (I do a lot of work away from the office). So, sold my i-Mac; got a 15 inch powerbook G4 1Ghz, 768Mb Ram and the 20 inch Apple Cinema Display. Absolutely love this set up -- no regrets at all. The two screen setup (palettes on laptop screen, image on LCD) is incredible. And I really like the accuracy and quality of the Cinema Display. I don't miss not having a "real" desktop at home at all.

 

For this kind of setup to make sense, however, you haveto really need a laptop anyway, like I do.

Which color correction tools are diabled? Do you mean curves, levels, etc.?

To answer your question about the Contax 645 specifically: in my experience, yes it will stand up to the conditions you describe as long as reasonable care is taken. I took my Contax 645 Kit to Ghana for several weeks last summer -- no problems at all, with the exception that the rubber eyepiece thingy came unglued, presumablydue to heat and humidity. Other than that, no problems. Where I was in Ghana, it was VERY hot, dusty and humid, and I traveled in bumpy buses on back roads.

 

No problems with battery drain -- I took 4 extra lithium batteries but only went thru 2 of them. I also had the battery grip loaded up with AA batteries, but only used them briefly after the first lithium died. I'd estimate that I shot about 50-60 rolls of 120 film.

 

I'll add one last comment: there are shots that I did not take because it was too much of a pain to switch lenses, for example. Also, there are some shots where there was camera shake -- not enough to ruin the shot, but enough that it was noticeable when I starting printing, especially at larger print sizes. While I really liked the COntax 645, and it works great, and it's more ergonomic than most other medium format cameras for handholding, there's a more limited set of conditions where you will actually use it, and use it well, in travel photography. Having gone this route for my trip to Ghana, if I had to do it again, I'd go with a 35mm camera, a great general purpose zoom, and several primes. If I needed 11x14 or 16x20 prints, I'd scan the film and use Genuine Fractals of Photoshop interpolation if necessary to get the larger sizes.

 

But, if you're committed to taking the Contax, again, go for it -- I think it will work reasonably well, as it did for me.

I'm the person who posted a while ago that I now have a 6008AF (see my earlier messages under my profile). I have no comments on AF speed, as teh AF lenses are not released yet. Please see my earlier posting for more comments.

 

Also, I recevied the following email from Kurland Photo a few days ago re: the redesigned flash system:

 

"Hi,

 

The Rollei 3562 adapter is now in stock at $195.00

 

Thanks,

Eli"

 

I haven't bought one yet, so I can't comment on the improved flash situation either. Except to say that the explanation in the instruction book isn't enitrely clear.

 

Will continue to report when I get an AF lens (I'm more interested in the 80mm than the 180mm or the zoom).

I should have elaborated on my procedure for the Velvet paper. I followe dthe instructions in the manual exactly, meanign that I re-started under OS 9, loaded the paper throught he manual feed, and adjusted the lever as described int he manual to accomodate the thicker paper.

If anyone's still listening to thsi thread, I have a couple of questions. First, I have a 2200 and it's great, both for color and black and white. I bought some Epson Velvet Fine Art and printed a b&w I had previously printed on Epson's Premium Glossy Photo Paper and Archival Matte. The print on the Velvet had a STRONG green cast (viewed under indoor light). FYI, I used the Matte Black cartridge instead of photo black and selected Epson Velvet as the paper profile. Anyone else noticed a heavy green cast on this paper, or am I doing something wrong (BTW, I followed the suggested b&w procedure on Luminous Landscape for printing w. the 2200)?

 

Second, the print on the Velvet Fine Art using the Matte Black ink had what appeared to be dark streaks from the rollers. They can't be dirty already -- I just got the printer 3 days ago. None of the prints with the Premium Glossy or Archival Matte had this problem (even the ones I printed after switching back to the Photo Black ink). Is there some special cleaning or "purging" procedure I need to do when I switch to the Matte Black cartidge to avoid this?

 

 

Third, I really like the substantial feeling of the Velvet Fine Art; I was not particularly impressed with the "feel" of the Archival Matt (although the print looks great). The Velvet feels like a sheet of double-weight wet darkroom paper; the Archival Matte feels somewhat flimsy -- about the same as the Premium Glossy. If this green cast on the Velvet is inherent in the paper, does anyone have suggestions on other papers that have a similar weight and feel?

 

(I realized that this will be less of a problem once the prints are mounted, but until then I'd prefer a more substantial paper that will be less prone to damage).

 

Thanks.