March 06, 2015, 07:37:36 PM

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - jondave

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 7
Lighting / Re: Light Meter Help
« on: August 05, 2013, 12:44:27 AM »
It's purely a matter of preference. I'm using a Sekonic 758D, it has a 1-degree spot meter function which allows you to meter far away objects with its viewfinder, though this model would  be out of your budget. Best to read reviews, see which features match up well with your Minolta.

Software & Accessories / Re: Pixma Pro 9000 II prints are dark
« on: April 09, 2013, 07:51:13 PM »
Interesting point - but I always assumed that cheap inks also have drawbacks with regards to longevity, resistance to sunlight etc.

OEM inks are not as trumped up as you think they are. Epson and Canon make it seem so because it's in their interests to protect the HUGE margins they make on it.

The are a lot of crap inks out there, don't get me wrong. But the best ones are not hard to find, and perform even better than OEM (in terms of color gamut for the most part). And they save you heaps of money - the best ones don't even cost a quarter of OEM. Guilt-free color-lab quality prints that costs pennies, yeah baby. It's quite addicting actually.

In fact, it is the same OEM ink manufacturers that make the the top of the line refill inks.

Essentially what this all means is that for any non-professional (or for me, at least) it is simply impossible to get great prints without investing a lot more money and a lot more time. Both of which I am able to invest only to a certain extent. It just looks like I have to reduce my expectations, and that frustrates me.

It actually depends what your definition of great prints are. In my opinion, what you're getting is already great - in comparison to what most people not using LR/Photoshop, icc profiles, and professional home printers get.

But it seems what you want is the peak of Mt. Everest, which means you do have to invest time and money to reach. Nothing comes easy my friend, such is the bitch called Color Management. So I say take the plunge, get a spectro. Best investment you'll ever make.

Software & Accessories / Re: Pixma Pro 9000 II prints are dark
« on: April 09, 2013, 10:49:43 AM »
i have also found that creating my own custom ICC profiles for the papers i use much more reliable than using each manufacturer's canned ICC profiles. the canned profiles will get you close, but if you have exacting expectations then you really need to create your own custom profiles.

i use the Color Monkey by X-rite to do both screen and print ICC profiles. it does a fairly decent job but i have never....NEVER....been fully satisfied with any print that has ever come out of an inkjet printer. there is always something that is just slightly off...but i end up just chalking it up to differences between the two different formats or the random and frequent printer errors that occur.

i absolutely loath desktop printing...its a horrendous task to undertake if you have the highest expectations. trouble is, making a print is ingrained upon my consciousness as "part" of the photographic process. my wife knows when i am doing prints by the stream of expletives coming from my office and she knows to steer clear of me for a few hours.

anyway....good luck. seriously.....


I never did trust the canned profiles... I used them once, uggh. Never again.

Customised ICC profiles for BOTH your monitor and printer is the only answer. I'm personally using an X-Rite i1, and the difference vs canned profiles is night and day. Colormunki is ok, but the best results can only be had with a spectro or having your profiles done through a color lab.

Another side benefit of buying your own spectro to create your own profiles is that you will be able to use 3rd party ink and paper (only the good quality ones of course). The money you'll save will more than make up the initial cost of the spectro, believe me.

I have 6 pcs coming in that's not taken yet, let me know if anyone's interested...


That being said, if you print your own photos (assuming your printer is also properly profiled) or use a pro lab for your printing needs, then you would need a wide gamut monitor to ensure your prints are as accurate and as close as possible to your post-processed output.

Owning a wide gamut monitor is really all about your output - if your output will not be displayed through a wide-gamut environment, either in your clients' monitors or through lab print, then you don't need it. It's like how you don't need a D800 if all you're doing is post photos online or print A4 sized photos.

Landscape / Re: Critique needed
« on: February 12, 2013, 05:37:49 PM »
I agree to what's been previously mentioned, but more than anything else straighten your horizon in camera. You can do it in post but you'll be cropping precious pixels.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: 18 Stops of Dynamic Range - RED Dragon
« on: January 16, 2013, 07:19:48 AM »
Can an actual sensor engineer shed light on this matter? It's totally useless comparing a dedicated RED video sensor to a dedicated stills photo sensor, the R&D process is completely different. So what if the RED 4K sensor can capture 18 stops of DR? It's only 8 megapixels (4096x2160) for God's sake, I bet it will absolutely SUCK at taking stills photos.

All I read here is the usual biased 'Canon sucks' bashing. I want to hear real facts from an engineer saying that Canon's sensor tech is easily improveable and they're just slacking off.

I think they're too busy wasting time with the "M" series as a consumer camera.  The average Rebel user is
probable content with the 18-55 and 55-200.  They haven't been flocking to the various ~17-~85 faster zooms,
and while the 10-22 is an excellent lens, it's price point discourages the average "consumer" photographer.
It will be interesting to see if there's an "L" series lens for the mirrorless camera but it would probably have to
wait until Canon releases a "real" mirrorless body.

L-series lens for the M? The M is an enthusiast body at best, how many enthusiasts will buy lenses 2-3 times the cost of the body?

EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: Inside the Canon EOS-1D C
« on: January 10, 2013, 07:33:24 AM »
Quote from: Canon U.S.A.
You shall not alter, modify, disassemble, decompile or otherwise reverse engineer the Software and you also shall not have any third party to do so.
And if someone does, do they get sued or just loose warranty?? And what if someone hacks it in Thailand where USA can't sue? Just asking...
what you do to your camera is your business you only loose your claim to any waranty.
The person that offers modified software/frmware could be sued when that person isn't some anonymous entity on the net.

You can do ANYTHING and EVERYTHING you can possibly want, no one is stopping you. Just don't get caught. ;)

EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: Inside the Canon EOS-1D C
« on: January 10, 2013, 02:40:20 AM »
I can't wait for someone to try and get 4K video on the 1D X and have it burn up in a torrent of fire. Then everyone will realize that heatsinks are important and there's a reason for the price difference.

Only one way to find out - could the whiners here chip in and give me $12k? I'll buy a 1DC, open it up and take the heatsink off, shoot 4k video and see how long it can record til it melts down.

Wait, no one wants to cough up the dough? I thought so.

EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: Inside the Canon EOS-1D C
« on: January 10, 2013, 12:58:57 AM »
Secondly if the end user is NOT modifying the firmware itself but instead has found a way of tricking the installer into loading the 1DC firmware onto a 1DX. How is that modifying the firmware? Its no different to people loading updates to their Android phones that are not standard or the old Modem firmware update hacks of years past.

I'm pretty sure someone can do this. The question is if that someone has the balls to publish it for others to use.

You just don't get it do you? EULA's are not black and white, it's mostly gray. A big gray pool where high-priced lawyers swim in.

EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: Inside the Canon EOS-1D C
« on: January 10, 2013, 12:33:55 AM »
BTW George Hotz modified the firmware of the PS3, so he DID break their EULA, If on the other hand the PS3 was just a PS2 with say new funky controllers and all he did was work out a method of flashing the PS3 firmware onto a PS2 without modifying it at all, so you could play all the PS3 games with the PS2 controllers, that would be a different argument.

So you're a lawyer now? You willing to bet your life savings to pay for the lawyer defending the idiot who'll crack Canon's 1DX firmware?

No worries coutts, someone besides ML will do it.

Ha, easy for you to say, you're not the one getting your hands dirty. I dare you to find someone who will.

What some here don't understand is that this is not about what's legally binding or not. Canon can bring you to court anytime of the day. They don't have to win the case, they just need to waste your time and money defending yourself.

So tell me, why would someone with the expertise to break Canon's 1DX firmware waste his time and effort giving away his work for free to a small number of 1DX users, at the risk of Canon's bloodhounds chewing him up until he's bankrupt?

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Cannot Keep Screwing It's Customers Over
« on: January 09, 2013, 06:36:05 PM »
In my opinion all Canon products at release date are to much overpriced. After 1-2 years prices become more or less normal, however, still much higher comparing to such companies as Tamron and Sigma. Maybe some time ago Canon and Nikon were only two leading companies in lens production, however, latest test show that Tamron (especially with their SP 24-70 mm 2.8) and Sigma can compete with quality, however, their prices ar much lower.

In my opinion, Canon has a very good and quite loyal custormer base, however, people do not like to be screwed and, if Canon pricing does not change, then they will start loosing to other lens producers. I still have an biased opinion that Canon and Nikon cameras are the best, however, Sony, FujiFilm and other manufacturers are trying to change that concept in people's minds... especially whn  mirrorless cameras are becoming more and more popular. Nikon and Canon can not boast having strong positions in this rapidly evolving segment.

Boo hoo. Do you know how much margin they make on Coca-Cola? Beer? Cars? Apple's iPhones & iPads? LEICA???No one's screwing anyone, you have no right to tell me I got screwed by Canon when I bought my 5D3 and my 24-70 Mk II. If you don't want to buy it, don't. Businesses price their products by how people perceive its value, and what quantity they actually want to sell. Supply and Demand.

EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: Inside the Canon EOS-1D C
« on: January 09, 2013, 06:08:54 PM »
If Apple Inc cannot bring the jailbreakers to justice what hope of Canon Inc? They have better luck stiffing the grey market imports.

4K video should not cost that much!

Really? Let's see you learn programming and crack the firmware yourself.

they would “bring the might of its legal team” to anyone that attempts to modify at the software level,


leave your customers alone - we bought your over priced camera - let us do what we want with it.
 besides - it did not cost you anything for ML to do their work.

~ we can sue you too you know - you have no business what we do with our cameras.

Really, sue Canon? Is that the advice you gave to George Hotz vs. Sony?

Honestly, I don't expect the ML team to break this. It would take too much work to benefit a small few. Plus they know the implications of possibly pissing off Canon. It's not impossible for Canon to lock out ML on ALL cameras, would you honestly want that to happen?

Seriously, some people just have no respect for IP.

First time I've heard of this. In my experience you get what you pay for, especially for equipment calibration. So if you want to take the plunge, just be sure you can return it if you're not happy.

The thing with with printer calibration is you're at the mercy of 1) the accuracy of your scanning instrument and 2) the quality/quantity of your target patches. Using a scanner, you'll be making icc profiles based on corrections of a corrected target. It's like post processing a jpg file from a P&S camera, if you know what I mean...

I would recommend you get a SpyderPrint, I think it's a bit cheaper than the Colormunki. Or better, get an X-rite i1 and use good quality refill inks. Believe me, the cost of the i1 is peanuts compared to the money you'll save on ink.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 7