bob_ogden

<p>A friend who is a monk was challenged about his cameras and his musical instruments in this very context.<br>

His answer? "It's not what you have, it's what you do with it."</p>

<div></div>

<p>Les Vogt,<br>

Did you read the part about budget, or are you offering to sell him a drum scanner for £200? If that's the case, I'll take one, too. Or even a good condition Nikon 8000 or 9000.</p>

<p>I got mine when they were first released. I got it from B&H with a 50 sheet pack of 13x19 paper and free overnight shipping.<br>

Canon was giving $300 Visa (or AMEX but you get the gist), so by the time it arrived I had spent a net $85.<br>

I use it mainly for note cards that I sell at art and craft shows and a local farmers market, but I've also printed 11x14 and 12x18 prints that have earned first and second places in local competitions.<br>

I've been a little hesitant about using third party inks, but I suppose at some point I'll need to try Precision Color.</p>

<p>All RB67 backs will fit all RB bodies. There are advantages to the newer Pro-SD backs, but the older backs will fit and work just fine.<br /> I have an original RB67 Professional (first model) and have all three generations of backs.<br /> Contrary to what Dave Wilson posted, the "67" in RB67 means 6x7cm. Hence, the rotating (revolving) back. The tripod doesn't have to support the imbalance of having the camera turned for portrait orientation.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>When I asked the Freestyle rep, he was quite open about the Arista EDU being Foma and Premium being Tri-X.<br>

Try asking them about any of your concerns.</p>

<p>I use a hanging clothes storage bag (2'x2'x5') in the spare bath after running the shower to settle dust.</p>

<p>I'm not sure of the rules here regarding other sites, but this is one I'd take to APUG.org . They have a forum specifically dedicated to these processes.<br>

Mods, remove it if I'm out of line.</p>

<p>It's been a while, and I thank you for your responses. What I found was that Print Shop Pro wants a color space. Even though I'm working with B&W negative scans, I found that I had to convert them in Elements to Adobe RGB, save the image and then start PSP. </p>

 

<p>It doesn't open the files. I think before I try again, I'll see if there are any driver or software updates I may have missed.<br>

It's not a show stopper since I can use the PSE print functions, but at this point I just feel like this is something I should be able to do, and can't. <br>

I really do like the printer's output on both B&W and color and think it's a good value for those of us who want to make quality prints at a slightly lower price point. Ink consumption isn't bad, and I have no desire to make borderless 11x14 prints, so I've settled the two biggest gripes I've heard about this printer. My observation is, if internet forums are an indication, there's no printer made that is not an ink hog in someone's mind. <br>

I've also steadfastly refused to run even one sheet of plain paper through it. That should help with some issues I've heard about almost all desktop printers relating to dust. I have a document printer for that purpose. </p>

<p>Thanks, Ellis. I'm starting to think printing direct from PSE is the way to go for this.</p>

<p>I've meticulously followed the Canon on-screen manual for Print Studio Pro, but cannot get native black and white files, either scans or digital conversions, into PSP for printing. I have no problem with color, either scans or digital.<br>

I'm using PS Elements 11 with both XP and W7 machines.<br>

I can print using the print command, but would like a little more flexibility that Print Studio Pro offers.<br>

Can someone help?<br>

<br />Thanks.</p>

<p>There's nothing wrong with the Arista film and paper. The OP seemed to focus on contrast as a primary issue.<br>

Have you used contrast filters?<br>

Since I started using this combo about a year ago I've found that this paper whether glossy or matte likes a #3 filter to start with if you have a good negative.</p>

<p>I use one of those hanging clothes bags with a steel frame in the spare bath.</p>

<p>"I admit it. Since I had my D600, I haven't printed one image out yet."</p>

<p>Funny. When I do use a digital it's a Nikon D40, and I use every bit of the sensor I can. I enlarge to 11x14, and have gone larger using Genuine Fractals. I print and mount them to leave around the house for my wife to go nuts over.</p>

<blockquote>

 

</blockquote>

 

<p>My first SLR was an Asahi Pentax Spotmatic I bought in the Naval Exchange in Da Nang in 1969. I later sold it to buy a Nikon FTn. Other than the stability in Nikon's lens offerings, I still question whether that was the best choice. I do still use the Nikon frequently, using an adapter for hearing aid batteries for the meter. When that option runs out I still have a Pentax Spotmeter V.</p>

<p>Here's a way around the 16 bit vs. 8 bit. You own LR. Use it for Raw conversion and PSE for your editing.<br>

People seem to get hung up on one issue and fail to see that you own the solution. <br>

And, yes, PSE11 will most likely do 90% of anything you'd want to.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Even a tiny company like a Fotokemika / EFKE could do it with great results.</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>Really? Is that why they're out of business?</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Having done a 6 week "blur tour" in a pickup camper, the best advice I've seen yet is from Bob Flood. Concentrate on one small region and expect to be overwhelmed by the great scenery and photo ops.<br>

You have about a 20% chance of actually seeing Denali on any given trip. We spent a week in the park, and the mountain came out on the eighth day while we were on the road to Anchorage. Needless to say, it delayed our arrival by a few hours. Well, overnight actually. This is not to say the other days were a bust. We went into the park on a couple of days and got great photos in both overcast and broken clouds. There's a lot of interesting side trips in the area.<br>

If you choose to go the Kenai route, be sure to stop and check out the "combat fishing" on the Russian River. Saturdays it's nuts when the salmon are running. Google "combat fishing in Alaska".<br>

As suggested, <em>Milepost</em> is a great resource.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>In answer to the OP's original question, I can say I have the predecessor to the V330, the V300. For his stated use and understanding he won't be getting drum quality scans the scanner will scan 35mm negs with good sharpness and color rendition.<br>

Of course, they can be greatly helped with Elements or the editor of your choice.<br>

The dust removal on this is somewhat questionable, so start with clean negs unless you're addicted to the clone stamp tool.<br>

The holders, as is typical of most flatbed scanners, do nothing to aid in maintaining flatness of the negative.<br>

That said, I also have a 4490 that I picked up in a thrift store. No neg holders, no power supply. $10 for the scanner and roughly $40 for the rest and I now have a decent scanner for 35mm and 120 size film. Meaning, keep an eye out for deals.</p>

<p><em>"Finally, I find those comments that FX is not expensive out of touch. FX *is* expensive. FX used to be *very* expensive. Even a D600 represents a big chunk of the average monthly household income in the US</em><br /> That may be true, but if one is serious about photography, <strong>saving 3-5 years to be able to afford the gear to do it in one specialty shouldn't be too much of a burden</strong>. I've been spending basically all the money I can on photography for 19 years. I am not considering it's unduly expensive. It is what it is. If I wanted to, I could easily get by with far less equipment. If one e.g. chooses not to own a car, then someone who has a day job and lives in the western world can easily free enough money to practice photography."</p>

<p>Unfortunately, those who try to do that find the technology, thus the price, a moving target. That movement is always away from the potential buyer.<br /> I'm sure there are not more people than can be counted on one hand on this board who will strongly disagree with me.<br /> The question was why manufacturers won't support their existing product. Nikon was for generations famous and much loved for just this. Now, it's about getting the next-gen product out with a next-gen price tag.<br /> Before any stealth Nikon reps come down on me for this let me say I don't lay all the blame at Nikon's feet. There is this segment falsely called investors (really traders) who insist on daily ROI for their money. Even the great Japanese economy isn't thinking long term anymore. Long term these days is quarterly at best.</p>

<p>Or the self-timer...<br>

Even my old Nikon FTn has a self-timer.<br>

This is good advice and coupled with the advice to use a wall or post to steady the camera will help with slow shutter speeds. <br>

This was shot at 1/4 second. When a friend asked if I used a tripod, I replied, "no, I used a lamp post."<br>

<img id="yui_3_7_3_3_1355932052972_469" src="http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8205/8223896277_8fa3517ee9.jpg" alt="" /></p>

<p>See if you can find a copy of Aaron Sussman's <em><strong>The Amateur Photographer's Handbook</strong></em>.<br>

It's not a "Do this and the result will be" kind of book. There's a lot of basic principles of photography and solid technical information. The kind you truly learn from. Once again, it's pre-digital, but what's film but another type of sensor? It's all about capturing light and shadow.<br>

It's out of print, but good copies can be found on Amazon or ebay.</p>

 

<div></div>

<p>Regarding the last roll of Kodachrome, I happened to have the American Photo article at hand, which states that he used an F6.<br>

Now, whether this can be undeniably confirmed or denied by internet research, I'm not sure. </p>