benbangerter

<p>As Ray suggested, you might see if Eric Chan has any advice to offer: <a href="mailto:ericchan@csail.mit.edu">ericchan@csail.mit.edu</a>.</p>

<p>The maintenance cartridge has a chip, which presumably records the amount of ink deposited. So unless you have some way of resetting the chip, replacing the absorbent pad is unlikely to solve your problem. I have yet to experience the problem, but I suspect that once an ink cartridge reports it is nearly empty or the maintenance cartridge reports it is full, you will be unable to print. I would certainly try cycling the power. It surprises me that you are unable to unlock the ink cover in any event.</p>

<p>Do you have the same issue with Epson Exhibition Fiber? It is similar in weight, thickness and stiffness to IGFS, but with a whiter base. While I have not experienced the same problem you have with GFS, I have experienced head strikes about an inch in from the trailing edge of the sheet (B/W, 8.5"x11" paper). I overcome this by providing better support for the paper as it emerges from the printer than that provided by the output tray. I place magazines on the output tray, to a height such that the paper emerges about a millimeter above the added support. This reduces or eliminates the droop of the paper as it emerges, which reduces the tendency of the paper's trailing edge to lift up. You might also try creating a slight curl in the paper, with the coated side bowed out, to help keep the trailing edge down. This has been discussed in one or more earlier threads, so you might do some searches. Good luck, and let us know if and how you resolve the problem!</p>

<p>Holding down the up-arrow on the keypad for >3 seconds doesn't release the ink compartment door? If not, you have bigger problems than an overloaded maintenance cartridge.</p>

<p>I recently had a failure of my C: drive to boot WinXP, so decided to reinstall WinXP on a new (and larger) drive. So I am now in the midst of the onerous job of rebuilding my system. I had created a number of custom settings in the printer driver for my SP3800, which must have been stored somewhere on my original C: drive. The question is: Where? I can still read and copy files from the original C: drive, just not boot from it. So I assume that if I knew where the custom settings were stored I could copy the file(s) over to the new drive and be back in business. Can anyone help?</p>

<p>Here is a video of a 747 landing:</p>

<p><a href="

 

<p>If you take Google Earth to St Martin, you can find many photos of planes landing over Maho beach. The 747 is pretty cool, and some of the photos are a lot more dramatic (scary) than that cited in the original post!</p>

<p>I also have the Canon RC-1, which I ordinarily use, since it attaches to the camers strap.</p>

<p>I have a Jue Ying remote control (labeled: for Canon, Nikon, Sony, Pentax, Konica Minolta). It's cheap, it works (EOS 300D), not much more to say.</p>

<p>You might want to read Alain Briot's thoughts on the subject of marketing photography. This should get you started:</p>

<p><a href="http://beautiful-landscape.com/Thoughts61.html">http://beautiful-landscape.com/Thoughts61.html</a></p>

 

<p>I had the same issue with my 5D. The surface also had an odd oily odor. Isopropanol and cotton pads cleaned it up, and took the odor away as well. My guess is that it is excess plasticizer from the rubbery coating.</p>

<p>I also have one of those Vivitar 300mm f/5.6 T-mounts that Lex described. Unfortunately there is a lot of haze on the inner surfaces of the front two elements, so the contrast is quite bad. I don't have a spanner that would allow me to take the thing apart so that I could clean the glass, unfortunately. But at a weight of 31 oz (heavier than my 5D body!), I find the lens comes in handy for cracking walnuts.</p>

<p>The two Spiratone 400mm f/6.3 lenses I own (from fleaBay), one Pluracoat, one not, have an interesting quirk. The rear element of each of these, despite being glass, has a tendency to accumulate a hazy coating. But the lens is easily disassembled, the rear element removed and cleaned, and reassembled with no difficulty. [ I have also observed that some wine glasses in my kitchen cabinet develop a haze over time, while others in the same cabinet do not. Odd...]</p>

<p>Think of it this way: Assume for simplicity you have a lens that does not have internal focusing. When the lens is mounted to a camera and set for infinity focus, let's say the distance from the rear surface of the rear element to the film/sensor plane is <em>d</em>. When you focus on a subject closer than infinity, the lens is moved toward the subject, so that distance is greater than <em>d</em> - the closer the subject, the greater the distance from that rear element (or any other plane of reference in the lens) to the sensor. If you are able to move the lens <em>closer</em> to the sensor plane than d, you have focused "beyond infinity," and nothing will be in focus.</p>

<p>Some sort of blended color channel approach, as you have phrased it, is likely the best way to proceed. As an alternative to a perceptually accurate gray scale conversion, this route offers the possibility of simulating the effects of the various filters used in b/w film photography. The question is of course what formula to use. From the Wikipedia entry for Luminance (relative):</p>

<p>"For RGB color spaces that use the ITU-R BT.709 primaries (or sRGB, which defines the same primaries), relative luminance can be calculated from linear RGB components: Y = 0.2126 R + 0.7152 G + 0.0722 B"</p>

<p>This is the relationship adopted for broadcast television many years ago, reflecting the fact that the human visual system is most sensitive to green light, and least sensitive to blue, among the three primaries.</p>

<p>Among the frequently cited books on this topic are:</p>

<p><em>Real World Color Management</em>, by Bruce Fraser<br>

<em>Color Management for Photographers</em>, by Andrew Rodney</p>

<p>Probably as definitive as you are likely to find.</p>

<p>Too much CA - I think I'll pass.</p>

<p>All Polaroid is these days is the name. The value of the intellectual property is pretty much negligible at this point. Sad, perhaps, when you think of the brilliance of Edwin Land and what his company once was. That same fate awaits Kodak...</p>

<p>Rob - I really wish I had not clicked on that link...</p>

<p>If you like bugs, Thomas Shahan may be your guy:</p>

<p><a href="http://www.lightstalking.com/macro-bugs">http://www.lightstalking.com/macro-bugs</a></p>

 

<p>At the risk of extending this thread unnecessarily -- old barns are great subjects for photographs. Some deteriorate slowly and gracefully, others quickly and not so gracefully. This barn in my area changed dramatically between Nov. 7 and Dec. 11 this past fall. Each time, I pulled into the driveway of the property, knocked on the door, got no response, and took the photos. Perhaps I should start a "No Words" thread!</p><div></div>

<p>Sarah, you can use the <em>Adobe DNG Converter</em>, a free download:</p>

<p><a href="http://www.adobe.com/products/dng/">http://www.adobe.com/products/dng/</a></p>

 

<p>Those Spiratone 400mm f/6.3 lenses are surprisingly good - I believe at one time they were referred to as "girl-watcher" lenses. They are quite sharp, but are a bit low in contrast and have significant CA, both of which shortcomings can be overcome to a considerable extent in post-processing (talking digital body here, of course). They must have sold a ton of them. At any time there are likely to be a few available on the auction site.</p>

<p>Vraiment - all the more reason to use plastic paper! =8o</p>

<p>I mostly use Epson PLPP - a good all-around paper for color and b/w, when RC (i.e. plastic) paper is acceptable. For a nice fiber-based print, GFS or EEM is hard to beat!</p>

<p>Patrick - methinks Ziggy's bikini girls are <em>she-males</em>, n'est-ce pas?</p>