AlanKlein

<p>I don't really care about the prints. Who processses and provide decent CD? How's Adorama? Cost?</p>

<p>After you're gone, your wife's next husband will throw out all your stuff.</p>

<p>Well, Len, anything more than 5 minutes and you have to pop some popcorn and pass out some <em>No Doz!</em> :)</p>

<blockquote>

<p>My father's slide shows used to last the best part of an evening with a break for tea and biscuits half way through.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Yeah, he would have had a riot on his hands if he skipped the tea and biscuits after all that time!</p>

<p>I agree Steve. The only variable I would add is for slide shows.</p>

<p>Usually you're trying to tell a story. Like a trip you went on with relatives. Or maybe a birthday party for Aunt Mollie. Then pick the pictures that are decent that tell a story- have a beginning, a middle and an end. Viewers aren't looking at the pictures as we do here on this site or at a fine art museum. The pictures have to go together and should be fairly decent but don't waste a lot of time with editing. Basic cropping, sharpening a little, tones and contrast stuff is good enough. There's not enough time as each picture passes on the screen too quickly for pixel peepers to find fault. And family and friends won't care anyway.</p>

<p>I found that a show of around 5 minutes is more than enough so you don't lose people's interest. Allowing 5 seconds per picture plus disolves between them means around 50-60 pictures. Include a song or two that matches the story (you can download from Amazon any song for around a dollar) and rolling credits to add a little theatrics. Don't go overboard and you might even get people to watch. I have to tell you that background music keeps the show going and holds interest, even for me when I'm watching my own stuff. It imporves the pictures a 1,000%.</p>

<p>The best part is when you see the faces of someone watching who is involved in the original shots. Recently, my cousin's wife lost her 93 old mom. She gave me a picture album of old B/W's from the 1940's of her mom and dad before they got married. I scanned the pictures, put together a DVD to play on HDTV and their computers, added big band songs of the 40's like Glenn Miller, and they were absolutely delighted with it. I also re-printed the pictures together as an album so her sister could insert the pictures in a second album. What a joy.</p>

<p>For those special single shots, photoshop them to the best, do a nice blowup, frame them <em>and give them away to the people who would treasure them</em>. Don't keep them!</p>

<p>I finally figured out how to get the most value and happiness out of photography. <em>Doing it for others!</em></p>

<p>Prettiness in landscapes is like eye candy while a compelling photo you get a sense of awe. Or maybe just an "aha" moment when you "get" the picture and smile. But I wouldn't get too crazy about this overall. There are more important things in life. Just enjoy the photos you take and others show you. Be happy.</p>

<p>Think about what you want to do with them afterwards. I've been getting a big kick out of burning DVD's to show on HDTV of slide shows (or Windows Media Videos for computers), adding background music, titles, scenes etc and then giving them to family members. They love them especially if they're in them. Otherwise when you get done scanning you go from a bunch of slides sitting in your closet unseen to a bunch of digital pixels sitting in your computer unseen. By the way, you can do this with your digital camera photos too. Why wait to scan to make your family happy.<br>

<br />Technically, I use Adobe Photoshop Premiere 8 and/or Elements 8 for the software end. I scan with an Epson V-600 flat bed. Remember you don't need a lot of pixels for HDTV (1200 x 1800 pixels for 35mm equivalent is all you need to more than fill up the 1080 high screen or for a computer monitor). You can see some of the scan results with the V-600 in my portfolio. They're all scans of 120 medium format and 35mm slides except for the last 3 which are regular digitals. Good luck. Alan</p>

<p>Just curious. I only scan MF 120 and 35mm. I have a V600. Would I really find any advantage of going to a V700 or V750? Thanks. Alan</p>

<p>A professional makes money from photography. An amateur doesn't.</p>

<p>Let me correct my original post if this makes an difference. I'm using a Epson V600 not a V500. I'm sorry for the mistake.<br>

Does the different model change anything? </p>

<p>Thanks Andrew but I'm a little confused. I've been setting the scanner on 24 bit 2400 pixel scans. Why would you recommend not to use 24 bit but rather 8 bit? And why does the quantity of bits determine whether you should process the data in the scanner rather than in the computer. Why are these things imporatant? What's happening?</p>

<p>Should I use the settings on the scanner or just scan without any selections and adjust in Photoshop? I'm using an Epson V500 which has everthing from curves and levels to sharpness and color correction and ICE.</p>

<p>I'm scanning 35mm (old Kodakchromes and Ektachromes) and 6x7 120 transparencies (Velvia 50) and negatives (Ektar 25). Thanks. Alan.</p>

<div></div>

<p>I'm not familiar with this camera, but is there a dark slide to remove before you snap the pictures?</p>

<p>Rules are created to help explain what the brain already finds pleasant. To train us and make us aware what makes things feel good and work in our brain. They aren't created in the abstract by some tyrant who thinks he knows what's right and wants to impose his thinking on us.</p>

<p>If you use an adverb to describe a noun, the brain says "tilt". The brain knows something is wrong with the sentence. So you create a rule that reminds you not to use an adverb with a noun but rather adjectives. When someone says, "Excuse my English, (or French ir whatever), he knows that he's not following the rules and your native ear hears the descrepancies. So rules remind us, teaches us what the brain already knows. Ain't that tru?</p>

<p>Jim Here's a landscape shot using a 50mm WA (equiv 30mm in 35mm format) taken with an RB67. Good luck and have fun with whatever the choices you make. Alan</p>

<p><a href="../photo/11776351">http://www.photo.net/photo/11776351</a></p>

<p>Thanks all for your responses. Alan</p>

<p>Awhile ago when I had 16"x20" prints made of my 120 6x7mm film, the printer first took 4"x5" shots of my 6x7mm transparencies and printed from the 4x5's. I still have the 4x5"s.</p>

<p>Are the 4x5" of any advantage today? Would they be better to print from again or scan rather than using the 6x7's?</p>

<p>Why scan different film differently? Other than ICE, I don't make any other settings and do adjustments in the computer. AmI making a mistake? (I'm using an EPson V500 scanner).</p>

<p>Thanks Alan</p>

<p>Jeff, I was refering to general outdoor photography not photography where the scene is setup in a studio as in the example you presented. But you make a good point. There is some photography that does parallel painting in starting with a blank canvas. It's just not the usual situation. But even with that kind of photography you have issues the painter doesn't. Is the model's clothes wrinkled? Is the makeup proper? The painter doesn't have to deal with that.</p>

<p>It's worse for the rest of us none studio photographers. We're stuck with exposure isues like skies burning out against too dark foregrounds. We have to use graduated neutral density filters to make the picture work. Or we find when we look at the picture in our computer that somehow that "damn" branch or utility cable we didn't see wound up cutting across the scene and ruining the composition. The painter doesn't have to deal with that. He just creates the brightness with his paint and leaves out things that don't belong. </p>

<p>I think Photoshop and other programs are giving us some of the tools of the painter. But ultimately the best photos have to start with the right shot when exposed. And most scenes have problems that are hard to overcome so the shot "fails". Maybe that's the way it's suppose to be. If we all made perfect shots all the time, it would get boring. There would be no reason to keep trying and advancing.</p>

<p>Thanks for the suggestions. Thanks going to save time and make it easier. I'll give them a try. Alan</p>

<p>A painter takes a blank canvas and fills it with interesting things, good light all in a nice composition. The photographer takes a canvas already filled with many wrongs things he tries to eliminate if possible, often bad lighting and tries to assemble it in a pleasing and interesting composition.<br>

In many respects, taking a good photo is much harder than painting. The painter creates the reality he wants while the photographer has to find it.<br>

I hope these thoughts cheer up all of you who think they are finding it hard to get an outstanding photo. It <em>is </em>hard.</p>

<p>Ok, no separate frames. How about if you only want to scan one of the three pictures? Can you do that so you don't waste a lot of time scanning the other two or can you just black those two out to scan faster?<br /><br />The betterscanning holder - how is it compared to the one Epson gives you with the unit?<br>

I've been just using ICE )not that great) and none of the other settings doing everything but ICE in Elements. How do you operate?<br>

Thanks. you're really been helpful.</p>

<p>How do you set the V500 to scan the three pictures on the MF 120 film strip so the Epson program creates the

three separate picture files rather than one long picture file? It works with 35mm slides but not with 120

film strip. (I'm using 2400 pixel sample and 24 bit color - is that good settings too?

)<br>

What's the best way to get rid of the red in Elements for skin tones? I have some old Velvia 50 with

lots of saturation of red.

<br>

 

<br>

thanks Ala

<p>It's the improved version.</p>