rapyke

<p>The Oly DSLR is one of the most adaptable out there - Make certain you have a 4/3 DSLR as opposed to an M4/3 and then head off to the Internet and buy an adapter. Make sure you get an OM to 4/3 and not an Micro 4/3 or MFT adapter if that is what you need.<br>

They are getting a bit hard to find these days, but, they are still out there.</p>

<p>I posted a <a href=" </a>to flickr the other day that I took on my first digital camera - an Olympus E-410 complete with the 14 - 42 mm kit lens. It is a beautiful image of its sort, IMHO.<br>

What makes me miss that camera most though, is how much fun the thing was. It cost practically nothing, it was light weight and easy to use (if you ignored the tunnel-like viewfinder) and I still had all my film gear to use for jobs and 'important' outings.<br>

As I look back now at the images that little 4/3 sensor made I shake my head in wonder; it was the best B&W camera I have owned in the digital age.<br>

Like several old lenses I have used, it was 'alive' and I miss it.<br>

What about you?</p>

<p>I have no idea yet, just got the email.<br>

<br />Here in Sweden there is a 'union scale' for these things - I do not have any idea where to start in the American market. In dollars. Assume single use for trade show displays - I am assuming they want the image as a background (it is a B&W abstract). Every possibility from a banner to back lit signage for a big 'booth'. </p>

<p>At this point though, that is all they have asked about.</p>

<p>My first instinct was to start at $500.00 and to be prepared to drop in negotiations - is that reasonable?</p>

<p>Hello, I have just received a message from a large manufacturer who wants to use one of my images at a trade fair as a background image for all of its banners and signs. I have not talked with them yet and do not know if they also want to use it in brochures or other applications as well.</p>

<p>I am in Sweden and the 'customer' is based in Canada, the trade show will be in Miami & they are a multi-national corporation.</p>

<p>What should I open negotiations with?</p>

<p>Any suggestions are most welcome, especially on this July 4th weekend!</p>

<p>Ron Pyke<br />Sweden </p>

<p>Here is a recent shot from my Silver body 44M<br>

<p>The OP worded his post poorly.<br /><br />Wide aperture lenses <em>are</em> better, generally speaking. If you doubt this, just check out the price lists at Nikon, Canon, (_____Insert brand name here____). <br /><br />Are wide apertures needed in every (most) situations? Certainly not, but can anyone actually defend the idea that they are not necessary/nice to have?</p>

<p>If you doubt the need for wide aperture lenses, perhaps you should talk to a portrait photographer, or, a photo journalist. One needs full artistic control and one often needs ISO 6400 and above AND f 1.4 or more to 'get the shot'.</p>

<p>Maybe the problem is the same as when you discuss cameras...</p>

<p>Why would anyone pay $40,000.00+ for a medium format camera to snap pictures of your kid's birthday parties? Important pictures, yes, but probably not in the $40,000.00 range I'm guessing. I'll bet most people today would be happy with a well composed picture from a phone camera or a reasonable point and shoot.</p>

<p>If you hire a pro to shoot the event though, it is very, very likely they will have that wide aperture lens on the front of their camera as they dodge the flying bits of cake and ice cream...</p>

<p>Does this mean you should only use wide aperture lenses? Of course not. If you have the choice you use the best lens for the job at hand. An f 1.4 - f 22 lens simply gives you more options than an f 5.6 - f 22 lens.</p>

<p>Thanks so much for all the great feedback! photo.net really is the best photo board on the Internet.</p>

<p>I maybe should have been a little clearer about our 'group'... we are a century-old, publicly funded organization in Sweden. Our goal and mission is to encourage photography as an 'art'. We do not do normal photo-club things, but we do try to make certain that we have equipment on hand that people cannot necessarily afford on their own - lighting systems, high-end Mac computers, projectors, printers (or, these days, contracts with local pro-shops to print at very low cost for members and for shows)...</p>

<p>This scanner will live in our offices and will be used by members in the presence of our tech-guru, or by 'trained' members to scan archival materials, etc. It will never be used as a 'drop by and use it as you like' sort of machine. We have Macs equipped with various processing software options, so, that side is no problem.</p>

<p>The Nikon is exactly what I had in mind when I started to look for a scanner, but the price on the british version of the 'big' auction site starts at more than we have in the budget for this and these are units shipped from Russia with no follow-up on the sale - just a bit too dodgy.</p>

<p>We will, in all likelihood, settle for the PLUSTEK OpticFilm 120, which seems to be the <em>only</em> viable option in the Swedish marketplace just now.<br>

<br>

As an aside, we are likely to inherit a drum scanner in the next year, so that should give us all the range we need into the foreseeable future.<br>

<br>

Again, thank you all for your fabulous answers and feedback!<br>

<br>

Happy New Year.<br>

</p>

<p>Hello,</p>

<p>The photo group I belong to has decided to purchase a scanner, but, I have quickly understood that this is not necessarily a simple thing to do well - any help would be appreciated.</p>

<p>The device should, ideally, be able to scan B&W & colour (negatives and transparencies) and it would be a bonus to be able to do both 35mm and medium format (120, 220). It will be used by various users with varying ability levels, on one of several macs and potentially on PCs too, if someone wanted to work with their own laptop.</p>

<p>Our agreed upon budget is: up to $2,300.00 (us) or about 1,675.00 Euros.</p>

<p>Any suggestions?</p>

I, I'm afraid, get more than a little lost

by these threads... It is about pictures,

right?

Film, digital, point and shoot,

rangefinder, SLR, DSLR, mirror less...

These are all meaningless if there are

no pictures at the end of the day.

Choose the tool and processes that

work for you and have fun!

Just my non-geek opinion.

Lightroom 5 allows you to change the

copyright and creator fields... Library

view, in the right hand menu.

A rooster!!!

Now, why didn't I think of that?

LOL

I hate to toss monkey wrenches around,

but, has anyone taken a hard look at

the Fuji X-Pro1?

I used to shoot nikon, then Olympus,

then pentax (k-5),but now fuji.

It is better

Um, sorry, but I don't see the problem

(yet). It is your photo, just write to

them and tell them you expect to be

compensated at X rate and credited on

any future releases.

If they say no, then you have a problem.

Just my opinion though.

<p>Yes, I agree, the 60 is slow and frustrating at times... there are compensations though.<br>

<a title="Gustav the cat by R A Pyke (SweRon), on Flickr" href=" src="http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3708/8885131048_34585e299a.jpg" alt="Gustav the cat" width="375" height="500" /></a></p>

Have you investigated the Fuji X 100s?

The drawback is that it has a fixed lens,

but there are many other

compensations - a leaf shutter being

one of them.

<p>I want to post a link to a story about a young fellow who was recently handcuffed by police and searched after taking a picture of mall security guards 'taking down' and 'arresting' a person in a Burnaby, British Columbia, Canada, shopping mall.</p>

<p>He was later released by police, but the question is an interesting one - does the 'news' nature of the situation override the right of a property owner to refuse permission to take photographs?</p>

<p>Interestingly, the security guards kept demanding he delete his photos, but he was shooting film... Perhaps another good reason to shoot film has been found?</p>

<p>The link to the story is <a href="http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/story/2012/10/25/bc-teen-photographer-arrest.html">here</a></p>

<p>Good photo too I might add.</p>

<p>I agree that, as a working photographer, you need a back-up, but, when one of your cameras is off for repair you are left with one body (or at least one less)... you need the gear back ASAP.</p>

<p>All of the major camera companies understand this and, to the best of my knowledge, all of them offer pro services to working pros, that includes such things as 72 hour turnaround on repairs, loaner gear, etc.</p>

<p>I shoot with Pentax and all you need to do is prove you make 51% of your annual income with a camera and you are in the program... Easy and worth it.</p>

<p>I can't imagine it is any tougher with Canon, Nikon, Hasselblad, Leica, etc. </p>

<p>Yesterday, at a McDonalds in central Sweden, I tried to surf into photo.net for some light reading to go along with my gourmet lunch... Their free WiFi blocked access declaring that photo.net was an adult-only site, which contained nudity and obscene material.</p>

<p>WTF?!?</p>

<p>Is there a section of the site I am missing?</p>

<p>OK, so, I am involved in a project with a local non-profit group that is trying to document its 100-year history. Specifically, I am scanning photos brought in by members while others take the oral history associated with the image. No problem there... not until <em>'the big board of pictures'</em> came in, that is.</p>

<p>Someone has brought in a huge Masonite board with some really great photos from the 1940s and 50s... all the pictures are (white) glued to the board. The chances of getting them all off there, without destroying them, are not good. So, old fashioned 'copy stand' work is in order, but these pictures are warped and dog-eared and not in the best shape in the world.</p>

<p>I really want to collect these though, so, I will toss out the question - any miracle way to get these things off this board safely?</p>

<p>If there aren't any good ways to do that, my thought was to re-glue as many of the warped and loose images as I can, try to get them somewhat flat, take pictures of them and then extract as single images in 'post'. (That's the cut and paste part...)</p>

<p>This is an unpaid project and I guess I am looking for a quick fix that will offer good results... or do I just bite the bullet and do individual shots of 80 or so photos...</p>

<p>*sigh* I have to learn to sit on my hands whenever someone says "Can anyone help..."</p>

<p>Thanks for any suggestions you might have!</p>

<p>One of the masters of photography and the photographic print, Ansel Adams, said:</p>

<p>"You don't take a photograph, you make it."</p>

<p>He also said:</p>

<p>"There are no rules for good photographs, there are only good photographs."<br /></p>

<p>Mr Adams was very clear in his writings and work, about the separate and different nature of photography and printing. </p>

<p>Is there really any doubt about this? </p>