julie_a.

<p>Thanks, Rob. I did go in there, and while there is not an actual box to check, the lettering there is faded (like it's "off"). When I tried to click on it, though, nothing happened. Like it isn't able to be turned on anyway?</p>

Ugh so I really think the video card is the issue, but it doesn't have any override in

the control panel! Now what do I do?

Yes, Robbi, I did do that. But I will look at the other thing tomorrow when I get back

home.

Oh sorry, yes it was flat. Robbi, I will look into that!

<p>Dan, the colorimeter was indeed flat. Support walked me through an advanced calibration and they made sure that I checked that. I have Windows 7 ultimate. I have a radeon 6700 series video card. It's supposedly a good video card but how would I find out if that's the issue?<br>

Ellis, I tried it at standard settings first, and then my lab's settings. It was pink both times. But the lab asked to calibrate at D50, 2.2 gamma, 80 luminance. The first time I tried it at D65. Pink both times, and very dark. The monitor was clean. I'm using the colorimeter that came with my i1 display pro, and I'm using an ASUS 278Q. <br>

Wade, it was indeed warmed up. It was on almost an hour when I ran it.<br>

I'm so frustrated by this and I appreciate all the help. </p>

<p>Keith, I did use it under normal lighting conditions, but to be sure I tried to recalibrate it under different conditions and the monitor didn't change.</p>

 

To view the images I looked in lightroom, Photoshop and the windows viewing utility. Pink and dark

in all.

Everything, and I do mean everything, looks pink. My images, the internet

browser even has a pink cast on it. I'm using the xrite i1 display pro.

I thought the same thing about what's the point of calibrating, but support is

blowing it off and just telling me to.live with it. I'm very frustrated.

I had never calibrated my monitor before, and always got great prints from my lab. Well,

last week I got some back (not corrected by lab), and they were dark and cool, so I figured

it was time. I installed the I1 display software and ran the calibration. It turned my screen

very dark and very pink. A call to support yielded the same results. When I said the color

was still very whacked out, the rep suggested that soft proofing would likely be helpful. I

asked "But what about using the computer for internet? For netfix or video games? I looks

awful and I almst need squint at it." She basically might as well told me that tough, that

was just the way I would have to., deal with it.

This is not a cheap, crappy monitor. It's hard tbelieve my computer will just have to look

like crap for any other use if I want to get good prints.o

Advice? Insights?

Yesterday my battery drained in just two hours after fully charging. Recharged, but

then, I could only shoot one frame before my camera shut down with error code 30.

I'm told this is a shutter prob/dead camera. But, today, its firing like normal again, no

error code. What does this mean?

<p>Oh, and I do not have room to build a darkroom nor am I committed enough yet to at this time.</p>

<p>Ok, sorry, guess I need to add details: I am in Chicago, but I have no problem sending them out or paying a little more if I may get better results that way (especially since many of you say the scanning will not come out too great). My camera is an old Nikon fe2 35mm and I'm not sure that I will make large high quality prints, but I'd like the option. </p>

 

<p>I just dug out my old film camera after 15 plus years. <br>

Where can I get the film processed? Will the company that processes them also scan them so I can store or share? <br>

Also, how are most people working with film in this digital age? Are they normally "worked on" after scanning or left in their all-natural film glory? <br>

Thanks for any info!</p>

<p>It is an FE2</p>

 

<p>Ok, great! Off to buy new batteries then!</p>

<p>I found an old manual film Nikon I had years ago. When I depress the shutter on any shutter speed besides M250, I can't hear it (the mirror?) "release". I have to move the dial over to "B" to get it to release. Why is that happening? Is this something I'm doing wrong, or is the camera in need of repair?<br>

Thanks for any help. I'd love to play around with it a bit, and it's been a long time since I've had a film camera!</p>

 

<p>I'm looking to limit files in a "digital package", honestly, mostly so I can upsell. For instance, package A offers files printable to 8x10, package B (more expensive) allows printing to 11x14, etc. Also, to get me possible extra sales on large wall prints.</p>

 

<p>I'm looking for a formula on resizing image files to print only to a particular size. Can anyone point me in the right direction? I've googled it and while I see plenty on resizing, none specifically to limit prints to a certain size.</p>

 

<p>It depends on your market. I'm in a big city, and I'd say the session fee alone ranges from 200-300 per session for professional photographers. The packages and files are then separate.<br>

Sure, there a lot of shoot and burn, 50 dollars and you get all the images photographers out there, but that's a bad place to put yourself if you want to actually make a living off of it. My advice is to start off at the low end of the normal range until you have a pretty good sized portfolio, and work your way up as you get busier. If you start too low, when you finally DO raise your prices, you'll be looking for a new customer base, as people get "spoiled" by prices that are very low.</p>

 

<p>Thanks guys. I think I'm going to try all the other suggestions on here before jumping into the 1.2, including Philip's. If this many are happy with the 1.4, as well as Philip is with his options, I think the best option is for me to try those out first before buying anything.<br>

I don't care about a "red ring" unless that's truly the best in my own eyes. I don't shoot with, or even know many, other photographers (hence no one to "show-off" to) and my subjects wouldn't know if my lenses were anything special or not. I just know how impressed I was with my 85 1.2 (once I worked out the microadjustment) and thought maybe I'd have the same experience with the 50, that's all. </p>

<p>Ok, Louis, when you say that "even a rank novice can see the difference", that says to me that the difference is indeed worth the extra money. I really don't understand? <br>

If it's your job to be nitpicky about optics, I would think that you would absolutely recommend something that you feel the difference is so great that anyone could see it. <br>

I guess the "novice trap" reference kinda rubbed me the wrong way. I have been away from photography for quite some time (hence the need to learn so much about the digital end of it), but I'm not new to it. While I appreciate the help I get on this forum immensely sometimes, I can even see among others commenting in this thread how easily people get snarky and competitive (well it IS mostly men on here), and that's kinda how I felt that comment came off. I saw a huge improvement in my images with the last lens upgrade. I wished I had "fretted about my lenses" much earlier instead of wondering why I couldn't get what I wanted with the crap lens I was using. <br>

<br />But you are right, I asked for your opinion, and you gave it. I should have taken it as that and not gotten so sensitive about the other part.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Yes Mark you might be right. I just feel like I get distortion, and I'm not sure why since it's on a crop sensor cam. Maybe I'm imagining it, or again, just being nitpicky. <br>

Philip, I am often shooting under f2, though, and it does really bother me when my images don't look sharp. But I guess it wouldn't hurt to try it out for myself to see. I will definitely look into the Leica and Contax. What is it that you like about them, other than the price?</p>

<p>@Mark, I do have the 35 1.4 already (currently in for repair). I like the 35 but I do a lot of portraiture, and I feel like I get too much distortion at the distance I'm often shooting at. I love the 85 (although I had a rough time before I microadjusted), but I'm shooting with a cropped sensor cam and it's just not appropriate for everything. I was hoping the 50 would be better for more "full body" portraits. Also, I'm considering upgrading my camera in the next year for a full frame sensor cam and feel like the 35 will DEFINITELY be too wide then for what I'm normally shooting.I'd sell the 35 if I liked the 50 most likely.<br>

Oh, also, I just feel like even at 1.4 with my 35, I'm not particularly feeling like I get a very shallow DOF (which I tend to favor on a lot of images). My 85 is great at the same, and I was hoping the 50 would be as well.</p>

<p>@Sheldon, I just saw your images (thanks for posting those, by the way), and the L image does indeed look to have better contrast and color. I know that a lot of people would dismiss it, but not me. I think I may rent them both and do a side by side comparison like you did here, to be sure. </p>

<p> </p>

<p>@Louis, I've heard this said about equipment not making the image, and as unpopular as my opinion is, I have to PARTIALLY disagree.<br>

Although I still consider myself somewhat a novice to the digital end of it (because I feel there is so much to learn), I am not new to photography per se. When I upgraded my lenses after buying my earliest DSLR, the quality in my images was immediately, greatly improved. I felt the same when I upgraded my body. This may not be the case with a 1.2 vs a 1.4..... the difference may indeed be negligible....but I am extremely picky about color and contrast, and it's possible it may indeed make a difference to me. <br>

I just feel that photographers can do quite a disservice to those newer to it by telling them their equipment doesn't matter. <br>

@JDM, I do understand why the differences may be important, and I'm always pursuing the creamy bokeh and dramatic separation of my subject from the background, as I do mostly portraiture. And great color is a big thing for me. Someone else may not think this is worth the extra money, but again, I can be VERY nitpicky. For me, it's not about having "the best" equipment, just what I feel good about purchasing and gives me what I want. </p>

<p>I guess I asked this knowing already that only I can answer if it's enough of a difference to push me into the more expensive lens. We all have our own opinions about what's important in the results I guess and trying them both would be my best bet in deciding.</p>