bmichel

<p>If Aperture works for you now -- it does for me -- you can keep it -- albeit unchanged -- at least through the new OS X (Yosemite) cycle. We simply do not know what OS X Photos capabilities are. I am concerned about any Apple dumbing-down of the capabilities. I could not care less about being able to see all of my photos on my Mac automatically also on my iPhone. Or vice-versa. The preview for iOS 8 at https://www.apple.com/ios/ios8/photos/ is not encouraging if that is also the rationale for the OS X incarnation.</p>

<p>I have a Prime Film 7250 Pro3 that looks like an older relative of the Pacific Imaging Prime Film XA. I am scanning old film shot by consumer cameras, so image quality has not been such a big issue for me. My big issue with the scanner may remain for the XA. It is that sometimes the individual frames are not properly detected. This gets frustrating at times. It does not seem to relate to the physical quality of the film strips but to their logic for detecting an image. Once the first image is aligned, one would think that all it needs to do is go down 36+mm and make slight adjustments for the remainder of the film. The preview is much too slow for my purposes as it is at 300 dpi. All I want is a rough image so I can determine whether to scan or not. Perhaps this is remedied. Customer service from PIE was good.<br /> <br /> There are several reviews for both scanners, including mine for the 7250, on B&H.</p>

<div></div>

<div></div>

<p>The patent goes on to say that the parameters specified are representative of a range and any reasonable values should be part of the claim. It is hard to think that other photographers have not done something like this already. So much for prior art.</p>

<p>The economic claim appears to be that the photographs would not require any further processing to eliminate extraneous details such as the edge of the object platform. So, why not simply treat this as a trade secret rather than potentially going after retailer X for similar quality photos as infringement. </p>

<p>The whole patent system stinks. Witness the cat fights between Apple and Samsung. Many patents should not have been issued. </p>

<p>1937 Cord</p><div></div>

<p>Using sex to sell is nothing new. Cord went out of business in 1937. </p><div></div>

<p>A few from a visit to the Auburn Cord Duesenberg Automobile Museum in Auburn IN. </p>

<p>A mammoth 1932 Duesenberg convertible.</p><div></div>

<div></div>

<p>A guardian of the city of Lucca.</p><div></div>

<p>More from Italy. Near San Giuliano Terme. Took this from a bus. Set aperture and shutter in Tav mode. Good results at higher ISO. Love it. </p><div></div>

<p>From a hike today. These two butterflies exhibited great camouflage. One looks like a leaf and the other fits right in to the colors of the log. All I had was my W90 so not a great image, but interesting.</p><div></div>

<div></div>

<div></div>

<p>I was also eyeing the Lumix ZS40 -- impressive specs for such a small camera -- as an alternative to carrying a Pentax K-5. An issue is battery drain and time to lock on to a location. That may be improved in this new model. If you don't have a lot of time before you depart, perhaps you could get one from a place like B&H where you could return it if your testing proved unsatisfactory. </p>

<p>Across the bridge at the Pitti Palace. In an elaborately and fancifully decorated grotto.</p><div></div>

<p>The famous Ponte Vecchio in Florence. Populated by jewelry shops and hordes of tourists,</p><div></div>

<p>A few from a trip to Italy and France. I was unsure that I wanted to carry a K-5 and lens, but glad I did it. Particularly for decent photos at high ISO.</p>

<p>In Florence at the Cathedral of Santa Maria del Flore. This was taken from our hotel hand-held. Noise is not too bad.</p><div></div>

<p>Sarah, would investing in a DSLR that is weather-resistant and has two card slots be out of your price range? Consider that all the alternatives discussed require a device that apparently would be extraneous to your life back home, is extra weight, potentially fragile and may be problematic to keep charged. An issue would be whether your solar charger could handle the higher voltage of the DSLR battery. </p>

<p>If you need or want to stay with simpler (and much lighter) cameras, then a dedicated card backup device may be the best of the not-very-good solutions out there. See what is available from B&H or other reputable dealer. An issue is whether the device can do incremental backups (add new images from the same card) vs. just copying a card once. </p>

<p>There are several specific backup devices similar to the one Cesar mentioned. However, if you are in remote areas this would be just another battery to worry about recharging. Plus weight and potential fragility of the hard drive. If you could find a worthwhile additional use for a small pad such as maps or journals, then that may make sense. The iPad is rather expensive for such usage.</p>

<p>The ideal product for me would be a device that could incrementally copy from one card to another. Extra cards are cheap while the battery requirements and device size would be minimal. I have a faint recollection that Sony? had such a product years ago. Does anyone know of such a device?</p>

<div></div>

<p>Battery life for the WG-3 may be rather poor. I am basing that on my experience with my W90. I think the battery is a bit larger now. If you will only take a few photos where the camera could get wet or submerged, then consider a disposable waterproof film camera (guess they still are made). </p>

<p>Good suggestions above. The Q series might be a good compromise. The Nikon N series looks comparable, but pricey. </p>

<p>We have some scrapbooks of sentimental value that I would like to digitally archive. The pages are too large for a flatbed scanner. </p>

<p>I am thinking of laying the individual pages on a flat surface and shooting vertically. This would eliminate any need to try to hold the pages perfectly vertical and flat. </p>

<p>I briefly experimented with reversing the center post of my tripod and locking the ball head at 90. I plan to use a Pentax K-5. This looks like it would work, but getting and maintaining alignment would be a bit clumsy. I am not sure what lens I will use, but I think a 75mm would do it. B&H suggested some sort of a boom that would attach to the tripod. That might be a bit easier to use if the document was on a low table. </p>

<p>I am open to any suggestions, including some way of doing this with vertical pages. </p>

<p>Also, suggestions for lighting are welcome. It may be that I cannot safely remove a page from the plastic holder, so errant reflections could be a problem. Would a macro ring light be useful?</p>

<p>My Pentax K-5 (and assuming more recent models) has a menu option to turn off all high-ISO noise reduction. I will take their word for it. My limited experience at high (6400 - 12800) ISO RAW with the auto option was acceptable.</p>

<p>Thank you for still another unique and thoughtful series.</p>