steve_singleton3

If Intel-based Macs can run XP software through the Boot Camp utility, it seems

equally possible for OS 10.X to run on a Wintel box. Anyone done this? That

might be the perfect way to take advantage of the best features of both. I'm

sure Apple would prefer to sell the CPU and not just the OS, but if it works to

double up on one platform, why not the reverse?

Entering the brave new world of digital capture with a D200, I need a primer on

image processing software. There seem to be three levels: entry level programs

like Nikon View--which I gather many prefer to Picture Project for getting

images off the memory card and into the PC; then intermediate software like

Nikon Capture or Capture One to provide more sophisticated controls and batch

processing options; and finally CS2 for getting the most from each image.

Assuming the goal is to provide the best quality digital files to commercial

clients for publication, what software tools and information sources would best

set me on that path?

Going back to your question about external flash as well as TTL, I'd observe that the ability to place the flash on a bracket, or hold it away from the camera with a connecting cord, provides a real advantage over a little on-camera winker in terms of avoiding redeye, dropping shadows behind your subject, and facial modeling. External flash usually offers more power as well as bounce or diffuser options. Indoors, where the flash supplies virtually all the illumination, TTL never showed me any compelling advantages over auto flash. TTL earns its keep outside with the ability to integrate flash and ambient exposure for daylight-balanced fill flash--a real benefit.

I just noticed that my PC no longer recognizes its second hard drive,

which I had partitioned for Photoshop scratch and redundant storage. I

assume it's failed and needs replacing (reseating the connections made

no difference). Would an external drive perform the same tasks as

well as another internal? If so, any specific suggestions would be

welcome.

Distance between the subject and background is a key factor. In my experience, black velvet (or velveteen) is needed to photograph small products. It acts as an effective light trap to prevent light from reflecting back toward the lens. For people, however, I've used much less expensive, and wider, black felt from the fabric store to produce a nice black background. With at least six feet of distance between a portrait subject and the felt, I've had good results as long as I take care to flag stray light off the cloth. In a professional situation, you might prefer a more elegant solution, but for occasional use the felt can work well--certainly better than black background paper.

In strictly economic terms, using a lab rather than rolling your own probably makes more sense when you're starting out, as everyone does, with a limited budget. Using the lab, you pay only for the prints you need, whereas the fixed costs of the printer and supplies is there whether or not you have paying customers. Better to put your time and initial after-camera dollars toward books, seminars and self-assignments, as well as gear that will help you make good images--lighting equipment, a sturdy tripod, etc. As your business grows, there will be plenty of time to decide when and if your own printing capability makes sense for you.

An impending shoot calls for posing six people on a white background.

Since a 9' roll is all I can get, I'm thinking of making a 12'

background in two pieces, running the paper wide and then taping a

"floor" piece to it to make a cove about 3 or 4' up. Three questions

about this approach: 1. Is it an enormous amount of trouble to

eliminate the paper seams in Photoshop? 2. Can I get away with a

single background light behind the tightly-posed group or would two

lights from either side produce a better effect? 3. Is there a better

way to approach this? Any help will lower my stress level for the

holidays.

Follow the advice given, then have your mom open the disk on the Mac at school to check your work.

As a way of sharing family history, I'm interested in a digital

printer that will allow BO prints of old photographs as well as

printing some images with titles on CD sound recordings. The r200

sounds like the least-cost option if it would work in BO, but

longevity is a concern. Presumably the r800 would take more archival

MIS Ebony pigment ink--except that it isn't yet available in that

cartridge. The other approach would seem to be splitting the

functions--dedicated CD printing with a Lightscribe drive and buying

an inexpensive BO printer like the C86 with MIS inks. Does anyone

have advice/experience with BO printing on paper and plastic? Any

advice appreciated.

Say what they will, bosses are not always rational. If you can show him images that represent what the camera purchase will mean to the firm, you may gain some price flexibility by stimulating a non-financial region of the cortex. It worked for me years ago, when I wanted to print a 4-color issue of the in-house magazine I produced. I shot the image I wanted to use on the cover, matted to show the exact crop, and handed it to my boss along with the question, "I'd like to print this in color, what do you think?" He loved it, showed it to his boss who loved it, came back and said, "Yeah, go for it." He never even asked how much it would add to the publication budget. This won't work every time or on every boss, but it's good to remember to play to your strength as a creative person. Don't just tell, show!

As I prepare to calibrate a new monitor, I wonder if it will be

relatively color correct for photos but less than optimum for working

with text, which I do more often. My concern may prove irrelevant,

but I do wonder: Is it possible to establish a proper color

calibration, then change settings to work best for text and switch

back and forth? Or is that asking for trouble in terms of

maintaining calibration? How do people handle optimizing monitor

characteristics for different tasks?

As BG said, upgrading is the best way to get a legal, registered copy of PS at the least cost. Starting from scratch, I bought a new, unregistered copy of PS 5.0 for $50 or so on E-Bay, installed it, then upgraded for the $170 or so. Do check with Adobe to see what their policy is, but doing it this way is both ethical and frugal.

What kept me working in the traditional darkroom over the years was seeing examples of beautiful b&w prints that put my efforts to shame. These included both talented local printers as well as the Westons and Adamses of the world. Rather than someone telling you things in the abstract, or viewing images on the web, I'd suggest you obtain actual print samples to see what the standards are in the digital world. I did that a few years ago and determined that, for me at that time, digital b&w wasn't up to the best I could do in the darkroom. But times and techniques change and I'm looking again. Clayton Jones, for one, generously provides much information about his black-only techniques and will provide one of his prints for $10 (http://www.cjcom.net/digiprnarts.htm). When you find work you admire, you can begin tailoring your film, development, scanning and printing technique. Until then, you might follow the traditional b&w advice of settling on one film and development combination and getting to know them very well.

Extreme overdevelopment or reticulation seem the most likely causes of excessive grain. You don't mention whether or not you wash in running tap water, but I know from experience that a toilet flush or water running elsewhere in the house can cause enough of a spike in wash water temp to reticulate the emulsion. Something to consider as you retest.

A couple of quick points about Bangkok: The royal palace complex is fabulous and worth a visit if that were the only thing you see. Most of the klongs have been filled in for development; what remain are mostly for tourists and not necessarily worth your time. Finally, locating an English-speaking driver/guide, perhaps a college student like yourself, can pay huge dividends in getting you beyond the guidebook spots, translating, negotiating better-than-tourist-rates, and helping you connect with people. You might make contact through the internet before you arrive.

First, if you don't have a hot shoe, how do you trigger the flash? With a PC cord, you can do it. If you try to fire the flash by pushing the test button during an exposure, you're doomed outdoors.

 

Another unknown is the capabilities of your flash. If it operates in automatic mode only, you'd have to a. accept what it gives you, b. lie to it by increasintg the film speed setting on the flash to reduce the amount of fill and allow the daylight to dominate, or c. trick the sensor by taping a piece of neutral density material over it. Any of these methods call for experimenting.

 

For flashes that have the ability to vary power in the manual mode, you'd set the camera for daylight exposure using synch speed and the aperture that the meter calls for. Then you'd estimate flash-to-subject distance and look at the chart on the flash. Dial the power output of the flash down (probably) until the power output of the flash coincides with the distance--1/4 power at 10 feet to match an exposure of f/8 for instance. At that flash power setting, the flash would equal daylight at a 1:1 ratio. You'd also want to experiment by dialing the flash down one, two and three stops below the 1:1 output level to see what degree of fill you prefer.

 

Alternatively, you could use a reflector like white foamcore or even a silver car window sunshade to bounce fill light in and forget the flash entirely.

Congratulations on your trip. When my son was 12, he and I traveled in the southwest for two weeks. It was the best thing I've ever done as a father. Want ice cream for breakfast? Hey, why not! I agree with the poster who pointed out that your son may be bored while you're hauling out the photo equipment. On my trip, this problem was solved because my son was young enough not to require a fishing license. We camped where he could fish and I could photograph. Whatever your answer may be, I'd give some thought to it. My advice is to take minimal camping gear so you'll have the flexibility of stopping where there might not be a convenient motel. Granted, there are long stretches of country with not much to see, but I too would probably stay with the backroads most of the time. Having to slow down to go through little towns in the west helps break the monotony and opens the possibility of surprise, which you certainly won't find on the interstate.

I did exactly this and it worked fine. Fully legitimate for under $200.

If Matt's prints are too contrasty now, why in the world would he want to increase contrast by extending development? Most standard development times, as given by manufacturers, are standardized for diffusion enlargers. Using condensers, you'd need to cut back 15-20% to get in the vicinity of #2 contrast. If you didn't make that adjustment for the condensers before, you shouldn't have to do so now. To get the new setup dialed in, why not use the previously successful contact prints as a reference and the same negs until the results are in the ballpark. That way you've eliminated negative development as a variable. To see if filtration is an issue with the VC paper (my guess), you could always buy a small package of #2 graded--but you're going to need filters anyway. Once you're producing OK contact sheets, then you can start refining film speeds and development times to fine tune.

You mention food. There is a book called "Road Food" that will probably be in your local library. Maybe another in that series as well. It's an interesting guide to little out-of-the-way cafes and joints that have interesting and tasty regional comfort food. That's how I found Doe's Eat Place in Greenville, Mississippi--a classic if ever there was one.

As Neil said, I would bring it home. I was in Nepal in March and had a few rolls of print film developed in Banepa--good looking Konica machine and sleeved negs comparable to a U.S. mini-lab. But all of the slide film and a few print rolls I brought home. Your best shot at getting a good answer would be to try to connect with newpaper photographers in Kathmandu via e-mail and ask their opinion.

Somehow, it's hard to learn complicated camera movements by looking

at tabletop photos of cones, spheres and rectangles. Can anyone point

to a set of technical assigments, preferably outdoors, that require

advanced technique to put theory into practise? This seems like a

good way to learn the subleties of view camera capability and to have

fun doing it.

Note that the bino viewer for the 6x9 Arca does not include a magnifier at all. That makes it fine for framing a scene quickly, but not for focus adjustment. For me, the 4x5 magnifier is just enough to do the job.

There is a lot to be said for simplicity. On a recent trip to Nepal, I tried to take enough different kinds of film in 35mm and medium format to handle anything I might encounter. Mistake. One fast film and one normal daylight would have handled everything. The few rolls of print film I shot, I wound up wishing were also slides. Murphey's Law also determined that whatever emulsion was best for a given shot would be a worse choice for the subject around the next corner. If I were leaving tomorrow, I'd probably leave half the gear and film variety home and be ready to shoot quickly at any time. In short, I think you're right to keep it simple.

Thanks to advice from this forum, I recently bought an unregistered version of Photoshop v5 for $83, then a Photoshop 7 upgrade for $135. The result is a legitimate, full retail version registered with Adobe for $218. If PSE2 ownership qualifies for an upgrade, follow Ellis' advice and go directly to the upgrade. Those too are available on E-Bay, Amazon, as well as on-line and local retailers.