ellery

<p>"I'm shooting macros, I manually focus 100% of the time"<br /><br />That is exactly what I was going to add...but for even most of my attempts at macro, I have found focusing with the focusing ring less useful rather simply moving the camera...but in principle this is somewhat the same thing requiring you the photographer to make sure the focus is correct....<br /><br />You have to be aware how the camera chooses focus and how it can go wrong and how to adapt as such...and you have to be aware of how auto focus can possibly need adjustment occassionally (luckily not with my purchases so far, but it happens) for front/back focus problems...<br /><br />No one I believe could say that autofocus systems are a great feature to have and to utilize...its not a perfect tool....it can fail and get tricked up....but it is very much useful....<br /><br />I have not personally to date dedicated much time to using manual focus, but because of my leanring in macro, I have developed a better sense for doing it *when* the need arises...<br /><br />Most of the time, I do not have such a need to be honest...so if it were me I would invest in lenses that allow me to use most all the tools in the toolbox regularly....but I am not you...and you could consider all other things about what and how you want to shoot and make your own decision.....good luck!</p>

<p>Nikon covered under warranty....got the approval email today and will just await for them to finish the repair and mail it back to me!<br /><br />Thanks Nikon. At least the fixed the freaky problem without annoyance...or so it appears so far.</p>

<p>I use a neck strap all the time...and this lens has not a single blemish or mark on it. Im not really sure how they could claim drop (although I suppose technically it would be possible to drop it, and it would leave no mark)....<br /><br />I am powerless...alls I can do is wait and hope I am not turned down at this point....if they claim drop, what the heck could I say otherwise? Nothing I am guessing....except to express irritation with Nikon.<br /><br />Again, to be clear, they have not assessed the lens yet folks....I may be naive, but I am perfectly hopeful that they will simply cover it...<br /><br />Brooks, likely very sound advice....if this all goes bad for me, Im sure my future decisions will bias in that direction.</p>

<p>I assume that is the case....my guess is that there are certain types of damage that have "drop" "signatures" - damages that are very likely due to self inflicted damage vs. defect? <br /><br />Everyone who breaks such a lens, will claim they did not drop it....I would hope that they can tell the difference and also they would not just claim drop in most cases even if it is not evident to avoid the costs.<br /><br /><br /><br /><br /></p>

<p>well rub it in why dontchya phil ;)<br /><br />They told me via phone that average turn around is 2 weeks....usually more only if there is some part shortage or special order needed.</p>

<p>Not sure if this is helpful....but I just wanted to tell you that I had a problem with my new lens I bought back in the beginning of April.<br /><br />Suddenly yesterday the focus went all haywire...prior to this is was working BEAUTIFULLY....next thing I knew, I pressed the shutter to focus and the focus went all schizo on me....going all the way in and out as if searching for focus, but also stopping in between and going back and forth making a slight jarring noise when stopping and going....<br /><br />Does the same thing on my D7100 and D90 bodies....3 other lenses focus worked perfectly....I tried it with VR on and off...tried different focus drive modes and all that....checked the connection....perfectly clean....<br /><br />Called Nikon yesterday and when I put the phone up to the lens and allowed her to hear it, she said I would need to send it in for service.<br /><br />I have NOT dropped it...so Im not sure what went wrong? well, at least it is under warranty....have never had one of my lenses have an issue requiring service so far...im nervous....I have LOVED this new lens, and it is painful now to wait for it to get back :(</p>

<p>Has there ever been a PN poll for monitor viewing sizes.....that is to decide to use say 800 or 1200 wide .....I tend to always use 800 high....<br /><br />My 19 inch current monitor fits 1200 wide just about right to see all the photo once enlarged....but on my wifes laptop (which I often use to browse) - 800 wide is more appropriate...<br /><br />My guess is 1200 wide is more of the time ok....unless more and more people are using 13 or 15 inch laptop monitors...?</p>

<p>As it relates, I tried printing a photo of some flowers that were pink in color today taken in my neighbor's flower garden. <br /><br />My current TN monitor is uncalibrated and I printed to my artisan 710...<br /><br />Just last night I printed a shot of a unique water lilly in my region - it was mainly white and green and that print turned out fine as far as I could tell...<br /><br />But this pink flower, oh boy, it printed something more like purple....<br /><br />I did soft proof...soft proof looked good (on my uncalibrated monitor)...<br /><br />I then tried to edit the image to make the purple more to look pink...that made things worse...<br /><br />I guess trying to edit data you cannot see on an uncalibrated monitor is futility :)<br /><br />Im off to order my new monitor now....<br /><br />My current monitor as well, if I shift even just a bit, the color/contrast/brightness can very noticeably shift...although it was not enough to go from that pink to purple...</p>

Hadn't thought of that

<p>the lula tutorial I am more than half through on printing discusses the issue of borderless printing...<br /><br />The printer has to spray beyond the border of the paper and essentially "crop" a bit of the image...and spray ink into the printer (although I understand they are designed to allow this)...<br /><br />But I too am a bit interested as to why people want borderless prints....having to handle the area of the print with your fingers....<br /><br />But that is a side note I guess....but I will avoid borderless within CNX2 for sure<br /><br />Chris, yeah, thanks! Good point. In my research so far, it seems that alls you need to do is select the wrong button in some of these settings (page layout, printer settings, color profiles, etc) and devastation ensues :(<br /><br />Thanks for that heads up.</p>

Lol - well that is reassuring :)

 

We shall see

<p>I have heard about this concern when I was reading through previous posts that I had searched on that....any tips on that "biggest challenge" of course would be great....<br /><br />I think my initial big screw up was to use "use output resolution"....that ended up making screwing up the whole ordeal...now that I have read a bit I "think" I know why that happened.<br /><br />My monitor is about to be ordered...NEC PA 241w with i1 display pro and spectraview software...once I run that, then ensure that the printer profile is good...perhaps create a custom profile (I think I will not do that until my prints prove problematic with included ICC printer profile)...my current printer is nothing high end...epson artisan 710....I figure I will tinker with this for a while while I get my feet wet and consider something else a bit later...unless this proves woefully inadequate.<br /><br />But you pretty much answered my question, you do print from CNX2 and get "WYSIWYG" - so that is an affirmation that I can at least for a while bypass PS...If/when I pull that trigger...I will go into an obsession of reading, watching videos, and tinkering with it in the late of the night.....and I think at this point, for my purposes that distraction can wait just a tad longer.</p>

<p>So I have read through the chapters in Mike Hagen's book on CNX2 regarding printing...and I have read in articles and watched in tutorials about what you need to do to get good prints in say LR and PS.<br /><br />I have only really used CNX2 so far, never PS (have used PSE a bit). Nor do I have LR.<br /><br />My plan in the coming month is to start doing more printing at home and before I delve into that, I have a specific question about CNX2.<br /><br />Is softproofing using CNX2 adequate for me at this point? How much am I missing out regarding quality printing abilities not using PS or LR? <br /><br />I know this question could easily rabbit hole into other questions (what monitor are you using, printer, how large of prints, what will you be doing with these prints)...but I am looking perhaps for any guidance as to whether or not CNX2 would do the job great for me and if so, do folks have any pointers or tips to avoid pit falls.<br /><br />I am in the midst of learning alot of the info needed to have a proper color management workflow....im not there, but getting there....but most of the info out there is geared toward LR and PS.....<br /><br />It looks like I will do fine with CNX2 - it has similar menu choices as the LR/PS tutorials have shows....but any help from more advanced CNX2 users would be appreciated.<br /><br />Thanks</p>

<p>ok, no worries.....im not too worried about that at this point...ill be using brand paper....I only would guess that much later with more skill and nuance would I care to tinker as such....so its not a pre-requisite really. THANKS!<br /><br />Now I just will have to wait a bit longer and I will buy it.....or not wait :0</p>

<p>oh man, salespeople in various stores are just terrible.....<br /><br />When I was shopping around for my very first SLR 5-6 years ago, I recall with horror advice given....<br /><br />I recall one guy at a best buy telling me something like "they are getting to the point where in even very dark rooms, flash is unnecessary" - this guy was not just talking about modern FX bodies with high ISO performance, apparently these cameras are much much more....lol<br /><br />This example of a guy showing photos as "better" or "worse" only looking at an LCD is equally absurd and hilarious - exactly the kind of ignorance you expect from salespeople in many cases.<br /><br />"7. I think good viewscreen resolution is important (pls correct me if its not that crucial)"<br /><br />Well, I personally enjoy such a feature, but overall, it is over very little importance in the scheme of things. Best thing I use it for is to judge focus with on the fly, look at the histogram, and to get a general sense for how the shot turned out. The camera manufacturers are smart to try and make your shots looks as nice, contrasty, a bit saturated, sharp etc for your review....because...well, this example is case and point....for new comers to the scene who are interested, it does not seem obvious at first glance to question what you see on the LCD as such. <br /><br />of course, also, the comparison with the two cameras in your post....who knows what camera controls or settings he had up...was one shot in RAW or Jpeg with "neutral" or minimal picture controls and the other was set up with Jpeg with more aggressive picture controls such as "vivid" - that could alter your perception entirely as well....<br /><br />People on this very site back when I bought my first camera were giving me this very same advice, and it worked out just fine. I know folks that shoot nikon, cannon, my family photographer has in the past shot one, then later switched to another.....<br /><br /><a href="

If I buy the xrite i1 pro (with ought colorchecker passport - not sure I need that honestly) - 209

 

99 for spectraview software

 

NEC pa 241 without bundle - 739

 

That puts me at about 50 dollar premium based on my comparative shopping - not bad

Also - will the device that comes with the sv combo work to create printer or paper profiles all the same as the stand alone

version?

That is what I will do

 

Also - buying separate - will the install be any more complicated? Should be the same I suppose just all bought separate

 

In the tutorial vids discussed they appear to have done just what we are talking about and it appeared quite easy

<p>Just watched the bit on monitor calibration in the video tutorials.....solidified my tendency to want the NEC 241w....<br /><br />Can you use the device that comes with NEC combo deal on other monitors?<br /><br />Also, your name Andrew was mentioned a few times :) - something to do with "I had no idea what this was, so I called Andrew" ..... its good to know that we have such big nerds on here to help us aspiring nerds!<br /><br />Take Care yall (yeah, I live in the south)....<br /><br />Ill give you all an update in a few weeks on the likely purchase....</p>

<p>I see...(regarding TRC's) - got it....<br /><br />Just finished that article....it helped gain a bit more clarity on some of the issues indeed....excellent write-up.</p>

<p>"sRGB’s gamut is a limitation for more demanding output, such as a printing press or many of the ink jet and photo printers so commonly used today."<br /><br />This bit from the document caught my eye....reminded me that I want to get the ICC profile for my current printer Andrew just for fun in order to know how wide this printer's gamut really is. I figure for a little while (a few months or until xmas, or longer?) I can use this printer to practice printing to get the swing of getting consistent prints....<br /><br />Ill try and dig that up tonight if I can remember....</p>

<p>"chromaticity coordinates".....oh, I am learning geek terms....saweet :D<br /><br />"</p>

<p align="left">The other attribute is called the gamma encoding of the working space. This gamma encodinghas no relationship to the gamma of your display! Rather, this gamma value defines how edits applied to an image are spread over its entire tonal range. As you edit an image using 2.2 gamma encoding, corrections appear to produce the same degree of change in shadows, highlights, andmidtones. This behavior is known as perceptually uniform, an advantage of synthetic color spacesthat are rarely achievable in other color spaces."<br /><br />Im confused by this bit in my reading so far....it says it is not related to the gamma of the display but then makes mention of the "2.2 gamma encoding"<br /><br />I thought the 2.2 was a reference to the gamma (TRC)? Trivial detail perhaps, but this caused my brain to skip.</p>

<p>Im not sure I follow that point....<br /><br />Using something like that nifty color think program you used in the video...is there a 3D mapping of the "color space" that the human eye can detect? <br /><br />I guess that prophoto goes beyond it, but the benefit there is to successfully capture data...whereas adobe RGB will clip a bit of data (less than sRGB)....assuming I am recalling your video on that subject accurately.</p>

<p>I just want to say, that no matter what, this forum ends up delivering!<br /><br />I always start from a question and it leads to 50 other questions that I had not thought of....im psyched...I am learning more in the past 2 weeks than I have in the last year...<br /><br />Im confident that much of this is going to give me more insight into my photography :D</p>

<p>I am now a ways into the tutorials, just now getting into color management - as my veteran patients say.."im trackin'" - <br /><br />As far as sRGB monitors, their tutorial in the initial discussion on color management makes the same treatment as Andrew's video did....they use a photo of a colorful sign and map it in color think and show how much data is lost in sRGB (ALOT)....of course, there are examples where less is lost, or even none.....but I think that this all creates a very strong argument for wide gamut....assuming a) that you plan on printing and b) you care to retain as much of that detail/color as possible...<br /><br />compelling images can be made and printed in sRGB....its not a dichotomy....but why chop off the data (btw, when will we get a prophoto wide gamut monitor :0 :0 )</p>