howard_grill

The photo was taken indoors so there was no breeze. However, the focus bracketing and using f16 instead of 22 sound like good ideas to try.

Thanks.

Thanks for all the responses. In regards to the questions....I use a sturdy tripod, an electronic cable release and mirror lock up so I doubt camera shake is the problem. The shots I took were with a Canon 180mm Macro so the optical quality is there. Yes, though, I do have eyesight problems, but wear glasses (though I really need bifocals but am resisting) when I shoot and manually focus, though when I do so I see the focus confirmation light come on to confirm my focus. I usuall shoot at f16 or f22 with Velvia or Provia.

I suppose it could be my manual focusing. But when I look at the leaves very closely it does look like the transition zone from one color to the next is blurry and not very razorlike, so maybe I am also expecting something that is not possible.

I am ashamed to say that I have never posted an image on the discussion boards...I found the directions to do so so if I get a chance later today I will try to post a sample, though I am not sure how meaningful a low res image will be.

Howard

The sites recommended are great. For a terrific mailing list with lots of helpful and knowledgable folks participating try here:

http://www.listmoms.net/lists/#photoshop

and scroll down to "photoshop" and take it from there!

Howard

I have taken several macro shots of leaves of the type of tropical

plants that you might buy in Home Depot or that you might see

growing outside a botanical garden...you know the type I mean...neat

green stripes of various shades, nice veins etc. The mag is from

1:2 to 1:1. However, when I get the shots back, though nicely lit

and exposed, the stripes and veins, or at least the transition areas

between them etc never quite seem to be razor sharp. However, when

I look at these leaves closely I am not at all sure that they are

perfectly sharp in 'real life' though it seems like they 'should be'

for the image not to look soft. I am not sure if I am explaining

myself clearly about this but suspect that those folks that might

have done similar shots will know what I mean. Should these type of

images be able to demonstarte exceedingly sharp patterns or is this

something that, at this level of magnification, does not exist.

Howard

Daniel..I took a look at the Canon site today in terms of the sample image downloads. The samples I saw from the 1D MkII were all jpeg images on the order of 2 MB dowloads...so I would think the quality of a RAW 8.2 MB shot would be of far superior quality than the samples offered on the website. Am I understanding the website images correctly?

Howard

I guess I, like I presume many others, are trying to figure out where and at what price to jump into digital SLR, currently having only an old digital point and shoot that is 3 megapixels.

I am a serious hobbyist and photography is very important to me. I shoot mostly nature shots (not so much wildlife) and enjoy macro and am starting to get into more extreme macro as well.....so fast frame rates are not that important to me, but capturing fine detail (and getting the best quality from those L lenses) and being able to get clean, low-noise shots at higher than 100 ISO (for when the wind just won't seem to die down fully and that 1/4 sec exposure just won't do) is important. I want to print up to 13x19 on the Epson 2200...well I usually leave about 1 1/2 inch border so maybe just 10x16 in actuality.

The price issue is difficult. I realize that when it comes to digital there is always something new and better on the horizon. I am trying to be realistic in that I am wondering at what point what is already available will suit me and my needs for a reasonable period of time. It seems like prices are always coming down and I know that you can't worry that prices will drop...because they always will...but what is reasonable?? Would I feel 'right' splitting with $7000 for a 1Ds...I don't think so. How about $4500 for a 1DMkII...well a little more reasonable but still not an amount that I can feel is 'right' (though I could potentially do it) especially when I got my 1V for something like $1200. Especially if I were to find that it did not meet my needs for a reasonable period of time. At least an expensive lens can always be used. If the 1Ds were $2500 I would buy it tomorrow.

So what do I want from digital?

Able to print 13x19 with good sharp detail

More immediate feedback, easier to experiment when the results are right there

Less noise than the grain I now get from scanning Velvia

Less time spent scanning

Even a 1.3x mag factor is fine as it will extend the telephoto range and I can use the 1v for very wide angle when my 20mm becomes a 26mm

The ability to change ISO and white balance rapidly and on a frame by frame basis

What I don't want:

$7000 cameras to achieve the above results

I like slides..I mean they are fun to look at on the lightbox and with digital I know that I will lose that tangible, hold it up to the light feel

I guess this is a bit rambling but I am just trying to get a feel if what is out there now will do what I want as well as if waiting another year or so would suit me better. Again, I realize there will always be something better in a year, but the question is will it be better for what I want to do and at a more reasonable price?

Howard

I am not knowledgable enough digitally to answer this based on

specs. I realize that ultimately the proof of the pudding is in the

image but there is not much out there on the 1D MkII yet. If my goal

is to print 'critically' sharp images at 13x19 inches, but no larger,

and I don't mind the 1.3 vs 1.0x mag factor difference is there

likely to be a very noticable difference in image quality between the

1Ds and 1D MkII?

Howard

I agree with Sergey. I have a 600 f4 IS and had intended to put it into me Pro Trekker unmounted. Yes, you can get it in there, but as Sergey has said it is a tight fit and I personally did not feel comfortable carrying such an expensive lens packed so tightly into the pack as I really felt it was not getting adequate padding. Went and bought a Super trekker and it works right with the unmounted lens. It does not stretch the pack and even lets you put a bit of extra padding at both ends of the lens. You need a good strong back to haul it though!

Howard

Hi! I am signed up for instant e-mail alerts for the nature

photography forum and realized that I was getting very few of them.

It looks like I am getting the opening question in a thread but none

of the subsequent responses that others post. Any idea what is going

on with the alerts...how can I troubleshoot this?

Howard

I have never done this before but your results look nice to me. I am posting to let you know there was an article on putting the moon into your landscape shots in the latest EOS Magazine.

http://www.eos-magazine.com/Mag_curr.html

Unfortunately you can't read the article from the link, but the magazine is quite nice, particularly if you happen to be a Canon shooter.

Howard

I got my Sony 520P today. It is no sharper than the LaCie...in fact the LaCie is sharper than the Sony. I am starting to think that perhaps I am just being too demanding. Looks like I will be returning the Sony and keeping the LaCie.

Howard

Updated the drivers and it 'turned' from a Plug 'n Play to a Lacie and now the settings give me a choice for the higher refresh rates. However, tried all the suggestions and adjustments but no change in the slight 'uncrispness' of text.

I ordered a Sony CPD-520P and one of the 2 will end up going back.

Howard

Dave, Thanks..I need to give that a try. I dowloaded the file. If I then unzip it what do I do to install it as a driver in Windows and have it associated with the monitor so that it becomes the monitor's driver. I guess I need a touch of hand holding here. I appreciate it.

Also, the Color Synch profile that is also able to be downloaded...I assume this is not needed if I am going to calibrate the monitor with a Colorvision Spyder, correct?

Thanks.

Howard

HMSDOC@aol.com

After some consideration and research I decided on purchasing a new

LaCie 22 inch Electron Blue IV Monitor for the new system that I

built.

I can't say that I am totally, 100% satisfied. It's, well, OK in my

opinion, but not great. I am trying to decide whether to keep it or

return it either for another of the same or to, perhaps, try a SONY

21 inch 520P.

Here are my issues and I am hoping someone can tell me if this

is 'normal' for the monitor or not, as it seems to otherwise get

great reviews and has a fantastic reputation. Perhaps I am simply

expecting too much. I did speak with Tech support at LaCie, but,

frankly, the guy I spoke with, while trying to be helpful, was not

particularly knowledgable at all.

The text seems slightly unfocused or perhaps less crisp than I had

expected. I have not loaded PS into the system to look at images yet

and perhaps I should, but the various logos etc from the gaphics

card demos etc play nicely and look crisp (the graphics card is an

ATI 9800 Radion PRO, so that is not the issue.

I tried using the convergence control...but in the manual it talks

about adjusting a white line on the display, however, the lines on

the control are lines that are divided into different colors (ie not

white but the top 1/2 is green the bottom 1/2 blue with the next

line being 1/2 red and 1/2 green etc) and do not seem to change when

I adjust the control. The tech support guy thought this was odd, but

then went to look at an Electron Blue IV he had there and said that

it was the same on his and that he didn't think this control would

help anyway. I tried degaussing but no change as well as trying the

constant brightness button.

Of note, the monitor is listed as a Plug 'n Play in device manager

with no specific LaCie drivers. I asked about that and tech support

said that that is the way it should be but that maybe "I could get

some Mitsubishi drivers off the web".

Also even though the monitor is supposed to support higher refresh

rates at 1600x1200 than 85Hz that is the highest refresh rate I have

as an option from Windows XP Pro. Tech support said that it may be

that way because I don't have those drivers that I am not really

supposed to have but that maybe I could get from Mitsubishi. The

whole thing sounds very fishy to me.

Again, the monitor is NOT bad..it is just that the text and icons

etc don't look really super crisp and sharp to me, or at least not

as crisp and sharp as I expected. Is this 'normal' for the monitor?

Are the issues I described above for the refresh rate, drivers etc

normal?

I would appreciate any help or advice here as I might well choose to

return it, but I don't have much time to decide. Has anyone used a

Sony 520 or 520P, which is the other monitor I was considering (was

also looking at Mitsubishi, but as far as I can tell they don't have

individually adjustable RBG guns).

Thanks.

Howard

Mark, thanks as that helps a great deal. It confirms what the ColorVision tech guy told me (that more modern All In WoNder cards work) and goes against what the Pantone guy said (that none of the All In Wonder Cards work). So I would presume that the 9800 will work as well.

Howard

Also, 2 more questions.

Has anybody any experience with the Samsung 900 NF (19 inch natural flat) monitor?

Also, with regards to using dual monitors where you use one large 19 or 21 incher with a small 15 inch for palletes, when you are not using PS can you essentially turn the second small monitor off, or somehow work on just the one monitor? For example if using Word, I would want the entire program to run on the big 21 inch monitor with none of it on a small 15 incher..can this be done?

The reason I was thinking of a 19 and 17 or 2 19s is that it seems like it would be nice to have the second monitor be reasonably large in case you wanted to have a document or something like that open at the same time for use and I think a very big size discrepancy would be difficult.

Howard

Kevin, what do you mean by a gutter in the middle? I would put the image being worked on on one screen and the pallettes on the other. What do you mean by a gutter between them?

Jim, I have heard that the LaCie calibration is superior but it is quite expensive and there is one great thing about the Spyder...I already own it? Given that, which do you prefer? Also does the G520 (just want to make sure you are referring to the G and not the more expensive F) have separately adjustable RGB guns?

Howard

Have you seen or used the Sony CPD G520 21 inch monitor or the LaCie Electron Blue IV 21 inch monitor?

Howard

I am building the system myself with a Gigabyte motherboard with a new Intel 875 chipset with 800 FSB, an Intel 3 GHz chip with hyperthreading and 2 GB RAM. I plan to use a RAID 0 array for the scratch disc because I suspect I will be writing to the disc quits a bit.

I am still undecided about the graphics card and the monitor(s) but am leaning towards an ATI Radion 9800 PRO card and a 21/17 or 19/17 inch dual monitor combo.

Any monitor recommendations...the only requirement for me besides quality in general is that I want one with individually adjustable RBG guns to help with Spyder calibration.

Howard

Yes, I do know about that, but I don't yet have the card.

Howard

OK, I know there have been previous threads regarding graphic card

choice and am not looking to beat a dead horse, but I am building a

new computer and am going around in circles about what videocard to

choose.

I am looking for a card mainly to work with large Photoshop files

(500-600 MB range), though I would like to have the opportunity to do

some gaming if I want to as well, but the system is geared primarily

for 2D image editing. I want to use (or at least have the option to

use)dual monitors. Is there a real 'optimized for 2D' type of

card...like Matrox sells itself as, or would any modern 3D gaming

card like the ATI Radion 9800 be just as good for 2D image editing

and still maintain the gaming option without giving anything up in

terms of Photoshop usage?

Specifically, I am looking at the Matrox Parhelia but, from what I

have read, the drivers can be a bit buggy on an Intel 875 chipset

board...in fact Matrox tech support says they ordered the board at

the end of Sept to test (Gigabyte 8KXP) but have not yet received it

yet. For Gods sake, I ordered one and got it in 72 hours...if you

think I am kidding go look at the tech support forum at Matrox. Also

I wonder how long they are going to be around in terms of long term

driver support. The other card I am looking at is the ATI Radion

9800 PRO. This also supports dual monitors. I believe that Matrox

does support dual moniotrs better but I think the ATI dual system

will easily support the very basic dual monitor functions that I

would be interested in using. Also the Matrox, for the same price,

is a premier gaming card...not that I have big gaming plans but I

might want to once in a while and, if the differences in 2D imaging

are only subtle the gaming option comes essentially for free as the

price of the two cards are similar.

Also, in some internet posts and forums some say there are

differences between the 2D imaging and Photoshop use. Problem is,

there are the same sort of statements being made for Matrox, nVidia,

and ATI cards in about the same frequency...which leads me to believe

that any differences must be subtle...but I don't know for sure.

Anyone with any thoughts or assistance on these issues?

Howard

Let me start with the question and then why I ask it. Does anyone

know if the ATI Radion 9800 PRO (non-All-In-Wonder)videocard supports

gamma corrected lookup tables?

The reason I ask is that I am considering purchase of this card and I

want to use my Spyder with PhotoCal for monitor calibration. On the

Pantone website it says that Radion All-In-Wonder cards will not work

with a Spyder, the reason being that the All-In-Wonder cards do not

support gamma corrected lookup tables. There are also various

references to this on several web postings and forums. When I called

Pantone, the tech support guy said this was true but that he thought

the non-ALL-In-Wonder series cards support the gamma corrected lookup

tables, though he was not 100% certain and he suggested I call

ColorVision tech support directly to be certain. Now,the tech guy at

Colorvision said that the lack of support for gamma corrected look up

tables in the All-In-One series was true, but only refered to much

older cards in that series and that to the best of his knowledge all

new ATI cards (including All-In-Wonder) support gamma corrected

lookup tables and thus the Spyder/PhotoCal. When I pointed out that

the manual I had just downloaded from the Pantone website said that

the All-In-One series had a problem because it did not support the

lookup tables his response was that the website must have a very old

manual posted. All this does not transmit great confidence to me

before I buy the card. The ATI tech support was no more helpful, and

I contacted them twice.

So does anyone know for certain if the Radion 9800 PRO (non All In

Wonder) supports the lookup tables and thus the Spyder/PhotoCal? Has

anyone succesfully used the Spyder with this particular videocard.

There is a small program that can be downloaded from Colorvision that

they say will tell you if your card supports the lookup tables but,

of course, that doesn't help if you don't have the card yet.

Thanks.

Howard