July 24, 2014, 02:50:19 AM

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 - zim

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 45
61
EOS Bodies / Re: Calumet Photo Files Chapter 7 Bankruptcy
« on: March 15, 2014, 03:43:41 PM »
How many apple-esque stores have Canon opened so far, was there not an announcement some time ago about them doing that?
Seems to me that’s the way to go I don’t think they even need to have tills just come in try and learn. Very soon the only way to try before you buy is going to be CPD for Pros and trade shows for everyone else, not a good business model.

62
Animal Kingdom / Re: BIRD IN FLIGHT ONLY -- share your BIF photos here
« on: March 11, 2014, 09:35:18 AM »
Anybody care to venture a guess as to what happened to the birds in flight in this image?  ;)

OK I'll bite
When's a reflection not a reflection?..... when the source is missing  :o

The only solution I've come up with is that the UFO on the far left has death rayed the lower bird and is levitating it up to the mother ship to perform some hiddious experiments on  the poor thing.

....... that might be wrong  ???

63
Reviews / Re: Why the DxO bashing?
« on: March 11, 2014, 09:02:08 AM »
It's his second alias in three months. He was mikea in December. Edward (eml58) gave him a good beating and off he went. Reappeard as Nalle Puh (Swedish for Winnie the Pooh) and apparently he's gone again. Can't say I'll miss him. But on the other hand, he does stur up some good discussions  :P

true true, and his spelling is getting better

64
Black & White / Re: The TRI-X 'look'...
« on: March 10, 2014, 02:58:43 PM »

Additionally, I have discovered that using my 100mm macro to photograph my negatives gives really phenomenal results over straight scanning. You actually retain the grain structure in the negative rather than the weird pixel/grain hybrid look you get from scanning

Really??
That's very interesting, I'd love to know more about your setup for that please.
I considered getting an old FD slide duplicator (I already have an FD/eos adapter) but a quick Google put me off the idea at the time.

Regards

It was actually a forehead slapping moment for me.

It started with me acquiring a 1904 stereo viewer and the idea that I would like to produce my own stereocards. Picked up the kodak stereo camera soon after and shot the test roll. Then came the frustrations of trying to get decent scans out of my epson 3200 with the odd format of the stereo negatives. Back when I got the thing I felt that I got some decent results scanning 120 frames but with the slight curl of 35mm format coupled with the paired images being separated by three frames it was a complete nightmare getting anything remotely acceptable.

After a couple hours scouring the internet for different solutions, I ran across some guys blog expressing the same frustrations about direct scanning that I had and that his solution was to photograph his negatives with his macro lens. This was the forehead slap moment. Brilliance is often so simple...

Anyway, I use a simple light box (same one I used in art school for tracing stuff and viewing print files of negatives). I place the negative emulsion up and place a cleaned piece of glass over it. The guy from the blog suggested taking 4 sections of the negative and merging them in PS to maximize detail and resolution but as I was already shooting a smaller format and just doing a quick handheld shot I just did a single frame at the largest RAW setting.

Works brilliantly! I did have to do a perspective crop in PS as it was hand held my edges weren't perfectly straight and you do have to invert the image to get a positive but the results were CLEAN. Totally beats even the results I used to get scanning 4x5s on a Flex scanner.

Additionally, I used to have to do dupes when I worked at the lab and I always was surprised how much was lost in that process. I would say this process beats those results by a long shot as well.

If you have the 100mm L you should give it a try. I doubt you'd be disappointed. I'm sure the non L would yield superior results as well.

Unfortunately don't have a macro but..... This is doubly brilliant for me because I now have three valid reasons to move my wish for a 100L up the list!!   ;D

Really appreciate the info.

Regards

65
Photography Technique / Re: Three days in The Big Apple
« on: March 09, 2014, 03:52:56 PM »
Staying in midtown?  First and most important rule.  GET OUT OF MIDTOWN!  Midtown is mostly tourist stuff anyway.  Sure, you have to photographer the Chrysler building and the Empire State Building so get it out of your system.  The other thing that is kind of in midtown is Grand Central Station.  Spend a few hours in Grand Central Station .  Good place for people & architectural photography.  Save this if it's raining and you need to be inside.  Now, lets get you out and about.  Take the F train to York Street in Brooklyn (buy yourself a 3 day unlimited card, subways is the best way to get around, safe & fast).  Walk through DUMBO to Brooklyn Bridge Park (this is a short walk but gets you under 2 bridges and the best views of Manhattan.  Continue in the park under the Brooklyn Bridge to the Squibb Park rope bridge.  go past the bridge and take some photos of the skyline  with the burnt out pier pilings. Now up the Squibb Park bridge  to the Brooklyn Heights Promenade  (think Moonstruck).  You then have the choice to walk through Brownstone Brooklyn or walk over the Brooklyn Bridge to lower Manhattan.  This should fill up a day and a memory card or 2.
Another day you can catch a subway to the Lower East Side (F train again to Essex Street) walk around the Lower East Side and then walk over the Williamsburg Bridge to hipster Brooklyn in Williamsburg.  Take the L train back to the end (8th Avenue and if you have anything left in your legs you can walk visit the Chelsea Markets and walk up the HighLine Park.  You might also want to take the tram to Roosevelt Island and see Freedom Park.  Great views of Manhattan here.  As to Museums the Museum of Modern Art can be hit or miss and is usually impossibly crowded.  There is plenty to see and photograph at the Metropolitan Museum of Art.  Here is my best tip.  It is open until 9PM on Friday and Saturday.   The crowds really thin out after 5PM.  Go at 5 stay until 9. If it's nice out it is safe to walk around the Central Park reservoir at night.  Other ideas are the Brooklyn Botanical Gardens and one of my favorites is Green Wood Cemetery.  Not hard to get too and definitely something special that the tourists don't see.  Once again GET OUT OF MIDTOWN!  Midtown is for tourists.   You can do well with just the 24-105.  Thats is what I use about 95% of the time.  The wide angle will be useful too.  If you don't have a Black Rapid or something similar you might want to consider it.  Takes a big load off your neck and will add hours to your shooting day.  BTW Grand Central Station and I think the museums frown on tripods.  Best time and place for a tripod is Brooklyn Bridge Park at night.  Welcome and have fun


Been their once and that right there really really makes me want to go back, have to admit we did get caught in the 'tourist trap' some what, but it's a very enjoyable trap to get caught in. Difficult to balance the must sees with further afield attractions especially with a family addicted to shopping!
+1000000

66
Black & White / Re: The TRI-X 'look'...
« on: March 07, 2014, 08:00:56 PM »
You guys are making me rethink my vow to never go back in the darkroom!  ;D

Darkroom = kitchen+ blackout sheets
There are times when I really miss my dads big old enlarger the smell of chemicals and the magic of an image developing.

Meh nostalgia, it was a pain in the ass setting it up  ;D

67
Photography Technique / Re: Three days in The Big Apple
« on: March 07, 2014, 07:42:43 PM »
Have breakfast in the tick tock diner New Yorker hotel..... Enjoy!
Never had a problem anywhere I went in that lovely city but I'm from Glasgow so maybe I know instinctively how to conduct myself to avoid trouble!

68
Black & White / Re: The TRI-X 'look'...
« on: March 07, 2014, 07:18:11 PM »

Additionally, I have discovered that using my 100mm macro to photograph my negatives gives really phenomenal results over straight scanning. You actually retain the grain structure in the negative rather than the weird pixel/grain hybrid look you get from scanning

Really??
That's very interesting, I'd love to know more about your setup for that please.
I considered getting an old FD slide duplicator (I already have an FD/eos adapter) but a quick Google put me off the idea at the time.

Regards

69
Photography Technique / Re: Upsizing a landscape picture technique
« on: March 01, 2014, 08:03:49 AM »
Canon photo
Pix Dims
W 3597
H 2400
Doc size:
w 50 in
H 33.3 in
Res 72

Nikon Photo
Pix Dims
W 3600
H 2400
Doc size:
w 12 in
H 8 in
Res 300

Not an answer just an observation but I'd have expected the document size for both to be 12x8 and 300dpi
for printing?
You sure the Canon image was scaled up correctly?

Regards

70
EOS Bodies / Re: Hardware Hack for EOS Cameras Coming Soon? [CR1]
« on: February 27, 2014, 06:40:46 PM »
Wot Nikon are going to start modifying 5D3s  :P

71
EOS C300 Dual Pixel CMOS AF Feature Upgrade


Isn't that basically a new camera?  :o

72
EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 7D Mark II Coming in March? [CR1]
« on: February 24, 2014, 04:09:02 PM »
Having said that, I've just bought myself a Grey 70D (for the record, £626 and some pennies from Panamoz!! Best I've found since ProCameraShop crawled up its ass and died)

Hi Khufu, how did you get on with Panamoz in general and import duties specifically?
I got the feeling that Panamoz was ProCameraShop reincarnate.
Didn't really like their import duties get out of jail card in T&Cs so put me off.
£626 is a ridiculously good price for uk though.

Regards

73
EOS Bodies / Re: sotchi - canon prototypes
« on: February 23, 2014, 05:34:35 AM »
These are fun to look back on! This guy was shooting with the "new" 200-400mm x1.4, 600mm, 1DX and 5D3 before either camera was on sale. The 1DX had just been announced, the 5D3 was unheared of and people were speculating that it may be a sneak peak of the 7D2. this was on or before January 23rd 2011... and there was black tape over the Canon branding ;)



Google Image Search '5D III prototype', it's fun to look back on!


Ah fun times I remember it well, particularly the argument over whether that was a detachable grip or not!   ;D

74
Canon General / Re: Handstrap upgraded...
« on: February 23, 2014, 05:23:27 AM »
Nice handstrap, great box set!!

75
EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 7D Mark II Coming in March? [CR1]
« on: February 21, 2014, 05:33:07 PM »
I think it is clear Canon have created a demarkation of the xxD to allow for a top end model, in the same way we have xxD controls on the 6D. For this reason I'm pretty sure the new 7DII will have 'top end' control interface and be about 50% more expensive than the 70D. This would put it just below the 6D: to use current UK prices including VAT - 70D = £858, 6D = 1379. Add 50% to the current 70D price and voila ! - you have £1287. Job done for Canon.

+1 hope your right about that.
And if your willing to go grey that would probably be about £1094 (70D - £729 grey)

Interestingly the 7D is currently at £1029 (bricks and mortar) making a 7D2 at £1289 look like a real bargin even with quite modest on paper improvements say 1 stop better ISO performance, 5D3 quiet mode and AF without the jitters. I say on paper because I think that in the real world that would be a hell of a good camera!

On the other hand....

First pic of Nessie taken with a Canon 7D2.... Scientists are sceptic about the authenticity of the 7D2  :P

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 45