deantaylor

<p>hello</p> <p>A beginner asks about tethering options for the D7000...</p> <p>1) Have you insights to share regarding the freeware dCC?<br> 2) Nikon's own program: reliable, or bug-laden (from your experience)?<br> 3) options beyond those two?</p> <p>thank you</p> <p> </p>

<p>"--use the trial period with each to understand what works for you; we cannot tell that for you."<br /> <br /> hello<br /> <br /> If you would rather not help with an informed response--informed by your own experience with a product, in the interest of sharing your learning--then, that is your prerogative. Simply go to the next thread--it's easy!<br> <br /> By the same token, please do not attempt to speak (using "we" when you meant "I"!) for those who actually *enjoy* sharing what they have discovered with beginners--I specifically identified myself as a 'beginner' seeking the benefit of more experienced photographers.<br /> <br /> Pardon the contradiction--but, "we" can inform someone about the basic parameters, features, etc., of a processing program. It is this information I am after--*always*. Then, with these insights, I might make the transition that much more easily--get it?<br> <br /> *Obviously* I was not asking anyone to tell me about me--rather, the information sought is of a *general* nature...again, *always*!<br /> <br /> All inquiries at any information forum are connected to an individual--but, there is some *overlap* from person to person, some commonalities.<br /> <br /> Thanking you in advance for creative (and, patient!) assistance here at the information forum!<br /> <br /> Best,</p> <p>Dean</p>

<p>hello</p> <p>A turn of the screw: what if you stand to earn money on the image--i.e., someone offers to <br /> pay you for the right to duplicate your creative property (is it correct to assume that the <br /> image in question may be copyrighted?). Does a commercial duplication of the image<br /> change the scenario at all?</p> <p>thank you both for your commentary...</p> <p>Dean</p>

<p>hello</p> <p>A beginner asks about how to secure the right to publish a photo taken of a stranger<br /> (via, e.g., a street photography outing).</p> <p>For example, I notice an interesting subject for a monochrome photo. I ask (and receive)<br /> permission to capture their image--and then, how do you secure the right to use their<br /> image, for example, online?</p> <p>It seems an awkward proposition--especially if it's not likely you'll meet again...what are the legal<br> ramifications for something like the scenario I've cited?</p> <p>thank you</p> <p>Dean</p> <p> </p>

<p>hey Lex!</p> <p>thanks once again for weighing in!</p> <p>To be certain about your comment: are we saying that the Picture Control Utility allows me to 'modify' or <br> 'enhance' the D7000's innate program?</p> <p>If anyone has tried this, please comment here regarding its utility--might it actually offer worthwhile<br> enhancement? How have you put it to use?</p> <p>thanks mate!</p> <p> </p>

<p>hello</p> <p>Please take a moment to differentiate the various uses of Nikon Picture Control Utility 2.0,<br> Capture NX-D and View NX-i</p> <p>thanks to all!</p> <p>Dean</p>

<p>hello</p> <p>As you know, both CaptureOne and Adobe PS offer a subscription for approx. $10/month...</p> <p>I just viewed a YT video (taken with the proverbial saltgrain) and the CaptureOne (versus Lightroom and Adobe CameraRaw) seems to provide a noticeable improvement:<br> <br /> <p>also...</p> <p>the Nikon pair-- View NX-i / Capture NX-D --was just downloaded...we'll try this too (of course, the View NX2 was deleted during the download...).<br /> <br /> please weigh in regarding the Adobe vs Capture subscription...</p> <p>thank you</p> <p>Dean</p>

<p>hello<br> As you are aware, Adobe has a software package which includes Lightroom and Photoshop, for approx. <br> $10/month--which I would like to try...</p> <p>My question is: as far as you are aware, will I be able to transfer the jpeg files from the D7000 to the Adobe package--in the same way that I was able to get photos into View NX2?</p> <p>http://www.adobe.com/creativecloud/photography.html</p> <p>Best,</p> <p>D.</p>

<p>hello</p> <p>Thank you, Lex.<br> I have a micro jpeg photo I'd like to upload here--with meta data posted for evaluative purposes.<br> It is in the View NX2 editor, but I cannot seem to get it into a PC file to upload it here for viewing. </p> <p>How would I accomplish this first step?</p> <p>Best,</p> <p>Dean</p> <p> </p>

<p>hello</p> <p>A beginner asks about the View NX2 (arrived with D7000) for processing both jpeg and NEF--there seems<br> to be various chronic concerns posted on the net...has Nikon purged software bugs yet, or, is it<br> still unreliable, from one degree to another?</p> <p>Initially, what I have in mind is b/w processing--will the Nik Silver Efex serve here, or is it<br> not an option?</p> <p>thank you</p> <p>Dean Taylor</p> <p> </p>

<p>hello</p> <p>To follow up, located a mint micro Nikkor AF 105mm 2.8D for use on the D7000 (experimenting with it now--<br /> will post a couple of micro photos...). I haven't explored it as a portrait lens yet...</p> <p>thanks to everyone who contributed!</p> <p>Dean Taylor</p>

<p>hello<br /> <br /> Yes, the camera and lens controls were not in full manual setting, and I tried adjusting the focus with the shutter release half pressed--as noted nothing happened vis a vis focusing (whether something dreadful was occurring internally prompted my anxious post here). I also tried changing one or the other--either the camera to 'M' and lens staying on 'AF' or vice versa--and half pressed the shutter, and <em>I could 'feel' the camera focus screw moving</em> (but not necessarily in the sense that it was struggling against my own hand adjusting the ring).<br /> <br /> Nevertheless, a nagging doubt persisted (and, terror), and I stopped my own attempt at override and placed both settings to 'M for the focus control to function, (and, then posted here--with an acute sense of dread). Yet, indications here (e.g., via Rodeo Joe) are that I did not damage any mechanism, either camera or lens...</p> <p>(later on, back at the ranch...)<br /> <br /> <br /> Additionally, there exists what appears <em>a tiny lock ('latch' ?) with an orange/white marking</em> on one side of the aperture ring. To wit, a photo may assist here (latch at ~ '2.8'):</p> <p><img src="http://forums.steves-digicams.com/attachments/general-discussion/181139d1315451938-help-nikon-af-micro-nikkor-105mm-f2-8-d-2.81.jpg" alt="" width="768" height="1024" /></p> <p>At another forum, a response to a similar anxious thread seems to urge latching it immediately--here it is:</p> <blockquote> <p><em>Set it to f/32.</em><br /><br /><em>You are not supposed to use the lens settings for aperture with modern AF cameras. The aperture ring is only there for compatibility with older camera models. Instead, always set the aperture ring to the highest f/stop number (f/32 on this lens, where it's shown in orange). Then, the camera will control the aperture iris based on it's exposure settings. </em><br /><br /><em>For example, if you switch to Aperture Priority Mode on your camera's mode dial, you use the control wheel on the camera to vary the aperture (watch your viewfinder to see it changing), not the aperture ring on the lens. The aperture ring on the lens should be set to the highest f/stop number for use with modern film and digital cameras. When it's set that way, the camera will keep the aperture wide open (so that the AF Sensors see more light to focus and your viewfinder is brighter) until the shot is taken. Then, it will close the aperture down to match your exposure settings on the camera at the time the shot is taken.</em></p> </blockquote> <p>Here is the link:</p> <p>http://is.gd/A5shAP</p> <p>I much prefer the response from, e.g., Rodeo Joe, to the somewhat ominous quote...</p> <p>--but, to latch or not to latch...</p> <p>thanks to one and all for both your time and shared learning!</p> <p>Dean Taylor</p>

<p>hello<br> A question arises regarding the Nikon D7000 and micro AF Nikkor 105mm f/2.8D (first <br> acquaintance with both--a matter of one day, or so...).</p> <p>The camera is in AF (via two-position switch on left front side) and the lens is set to 'A' <br> but a quite small, preferred object of interest is out of focus--to manually use the focusing ring <br> would one need to reset <em>both </em>the lens and camera, or just one or the other?</p> <p>also...</p> <p>Is it possible to damage either camera or lens if, in AF mode, the focus ring is <br> turned? Or, does the camera and/or lens somehow 'disengage' (lack of better term)<br> if the focus ring is moved while the camera is in the process of focusing?</p> <p>thank you</p> <p>Dean Taylor</p> <p> </p>

<p>hello</p> <p>First, sincere thanks to you pros for sharing your expertise--</p> <p>The aesthetic consideration here is to shoot a close-up portrait--no background (read: 'bokeh') as contrast, simply the tight head view filling the frame, but without the facial distortion (protruding 'this,' or receding 'that,' etc.) we find as the effect of using certain lenses.<br> As an aside, it would seem, then, that the current lens may obviate the Nikon 50mm f/1.8 normal lens under consideration...(not for portrait use, but other circumstances one may encounter)...</p> <p>thank you all</p> <p>Dean Taylor</p>

<p>hello Stephen<br> Not contradicting, merely seeking clarification here, vis a vis a photo.net critique of the lens:</p> <blockquote> <p><em>The 105 Micro is not the best portrait lens. Because it is primarily intended as a macro lens, it can be focussed very precisely at distances shorter than 1 metre. <strong>The focussing throw from infinity to 1.5 metres, however, is very short. This makes manual focussing (on the eyes of your subject, most likely) rather difficult.</strong> Other lenses are more suited for portraiture, for instance the fast AF 85 f/1.4D lens and the AF 105 f/2 DC and AF 135 f/2 DC lenses. These "Defocus Control" lenses allow you to change the appearance of out of focus elements so that they appear softer or coarser. I can find no fault with the 105 Micro when used as a general short telephoto lens taking landscape or city photos.</em></p> </blockquote> <p>As a beginner, I would ask for clarification on his pov...<br> http://www.photo.net/equipment/nikon/105-micro/</p> <p>thanks again!</p> <p>Dean Taylor</p>

<p>hello</p> <p>A beginner asks for a complement lens to the micro Nikkor 105mm f/2.8D and D7000...<br> Considering a used Nikon close-up portrait lens...</p> <p>thank you</p> <p> </p>

<p>To recap, if I prefer a tight head shot, minimal-to-no background, the 105mm might serve me <br /> well, i.e., minimal-to-no perspective<em> trompe l'oeil</em>...</p> <p>thanks, mate!</p> <p>To pursue it further, can you fathom another lens offering similar value for what I am after: portrait and some macro work?<br /> Nikon Nikkor AI-S 105mm F4 Micro Lens 105/4 AIS</p>

<p>yes, every concern has already been covered nine thousand times--understood, Les.<br> But, there are those souls who like helping others, and the immediacy of a new thread invites <br> current interaction. Right? <br> thank you</p>

<p>hello</p> <p>It has been mentioned that some lenses will produce portrait 'distortion'--e.g., <br /> protruding nose, small ears, etc.--avoided by using a different focal length lens.</p> <p>Looking at several lenses, all Nikon: 35mm f/1.8, 50mm f/1.8 and 105mm f/4, for a Nikon D7000 (the<br /> 105mm is in the mix for another creative interest: macro use).<br> <br /> What is to be expected with tight portrait shots for each, for example, which one minimizes<br /> the distortion mentioned above?</p> <p>thank you</p> <p>Dean Taylor</p> <p> </p>