May 23, 2013, 11:22:56 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 - YellowJersey

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 8
1
Third Party Manufacturers / At least we have Canon quality control
« on: November 22, 2012, 11:31:43 PM »
I stopped by my favourite hang out, my local camera store, the other day. I perhaps spend a little too much time there since I appear to be on a first name basis with literally every employee there... but I digress.

 While chatting to the people to whom I like to give lots of money in exchange for fancy photographic toys, I asked them how the 5D mk III was doing against the D800. The answer actually surprised me, given the doomsday prophecies you hear around here. Apparently, they've had more returns for the D800, and the D4 and D600 to a lesser extent, than any other camera. I know the left-focusing problem on the D800 was one of the big ones, as was the dust in the D600, but apparently lots of little things have been going wrong, too. It would appear that Nikon's quality control might be in need of a shakeup.

 My purpose here isn't to light a Nikon flag on fire and piss boiling oil into its eyes. I actually have an enormous respect for Nikon and have long maintained that the photographer makes the camera, not the other way around. Hell, I've seen some pretty jaw-droppingly amazing stuff come out of the Pentax K series that makes anything I've ever shot with my 5D mk III look like a pile of crap. My point, rather, is to express a thought I've held for some time now: balance. It seems to me that there's been a balance between Nikon and Canon for a while now. There always seems to be some kind of equalising factor that restores this balance so that, in the end, neither has such a huge advantage that tips the balance too far to one side.

 Anyway, given some of the posts I've read about how Canon is dying and Nikon is the glorious saviour that will lead us all to the promised land, I thought that a bit of a reality check might be in order.

 

2
Software & Accessories / Re: What is wrong with my settings?
« on: November 03, 2012, 09:29:01 PM »
Great!  Just curious. How does chrome look?

 Haven't tried it in chrome... I don't usually use chrome. The add-on I have is only for firefox...

Off topic - it's such a shame that Lamborghini ruined the Countach in its later versions. The original LP400 had such beautiful, uncorrupted lines but the final Anniversary model looked like it had been pimped by a 14-year old using a cheap body kit.

 I know, it was such a classic design.

3
Software & Accessories / Re: What is wrong with my settings?
« on: November 03, 2012, 06:50:36 PM »
YES! Fixed it!

 I've been trying all the things that you guys have suggested, but to no avail. Then, I downloaded a firefox colour management add-on, set it to srgb, and it worked. Not sure exactly why it worked when everything else didn't, but now the problem is fixed, and I'm happy. :)

4
Software & Accessories / Re: What is wrong with my settings?
« on: November 03, 2012, 12:24:34 AM »
Try creating a new user, log out of current profile, log in as new user and see if problem persists.

 Just did that... and it worked. New user created and the photos look fine. Now, how do I change my settings so that they match the new user's?

5
Software & Accessories / Re: What is wrong with my settings?
« on: November 02, 2012, 11:33:37 PM »
Ok, just plugged in a second monitor and the colours came out exactly the same way. Also tried Chrome, but to no avail.

6
Software & Accessories / Re: What is wrong with my settings?
« on: November 02, 2012, 10:35:45 PM »
Based on your settings your Laptop has a built-in graphics card the Intel HD 4000 (not a very good one by the way - I deliberately avoided Intel HD 4000 and 5000 when I purchased a Toshiba Satellite for my son this summer) as opposed to a dedicated one, but anyway you need to check if the card or the screen is faulty when this issue arises -> so attach an external monitor to your laptop and run it either as duplicate or extended display (doesn't matter which).

If the problem persists on both screens, you either have a motherboard/card problem or a configuration problem, alternatively if the colour looks screwed up on your laptop whilst appearing fine on your external monitor (you can use a standard TV set as long as it has a VGA input socket) then your laptop LCD is the culprit.

You need to identify the real issue by a process of elimination first.

 Is that still the case when the image looks fine when I download it and view it using irfanview? The dull colours only appear on certain photos when viewed online (using firefox). Firefox is the only programme that shows the colours like this, which leads me to believe it's some kind of settings or profile issue.

7
Software & Accessories / Re: What is wrong with my settings?
« on: November 02, 2012, 09:38:03 PM »
Have you noticed this anywhere apart from Facebook? I wouldn't be suprised if they do something funky with uploaded images to convert them all to the same colour profile for their face recognition and maybe don't handle some properly. I've never had results that bad but have noticed some photos I've posted there don't look as good as elsewhere.

Maybe the difference is some are converted from RAW and some are out of the camera or you process them a different way?

 It's not just facebook, and it's not with every photo. Only some photos appear this way on my monitor when viewing them online  (and if I download the photo, then it looks fine).

The first one definitely has a yellow tinge. Also are these two separate shots or did you color the car?

 I didn't take these. These are simply photos that a friend posted on facebook. It's only when viewing internet photos that this colour variation occurs.

8
Software & Accessories / Re: What is wrong with my settings?
« on: November 02, 2012, 08:12:46 PM »
Try Firefox and see if its better.  IE does not support icc profiles

This is firefox. lol 

9
Software & Accessories / What is wrong with my settings?
« on: November 02, 2012, 07:33:39 PM »
So I calibrated my display (using an eye-one) and while I'm satisfied for photo editing and viewing, my internet seems to dull colours significantly, but only with certain photos. However, if I download the photos and view them (using irfanview) they look fine. Here are some screen caps showing this phenomenon along with my colour management settings.




10
Canon General / Re: How many of us are making money out of photography ?
« on: September 20, 2012, 12:18:35 PM »
I don't make any money off of it, but I'm not really sure I want to. You see, I never want photography to stop being fun and I worry that if I tried to make money off of it then it would become more about the money and less about actually enjoying myself. I'd rather be less wealthy and having fun than more wealthy and not having fun or not having as much fun.

11
Software & Accessories / Colour consistency
« on: August 31, 2012, 11:27:35 PM »
I'm curious to hear what people do in regards to getting consistent colour across prints and various monitors. I'm by no means pro, but I've got an online gallery and I want my photos to be as consistent as possible between monitors. I just got my brand spanking new laptop (Lenovo T530) a few weeks ago and am completely gobstruck by the colours on this thing (calibrated using an eye one) They're extremely vibrant and it's an utter joy to look at photos on it. But while things look awesome on my new laptop, they look really dull and boring on the other monitors (not calibrated) in the house.

How does one achieve consistency? Is that even possible? Would it make sense to edit photos for posting online using one of the other monitors and then use the new laptop's screen for prints?

12
Lenses / Re: Canon 14-24 2.8 - With our powers combined....
« on: August 31, 2012, 11:00:27 PM »
Actually, very few who have tried a 14-24 are really that thrilled.  It is notorious for flare.
Sure, in the studio with controlled lighting, its very good, but, in the real world with a sun and reflections off cars, roofs, buildings, Flare Flare Flare, it seems to just grab it out of nowhere

Always the voice of reason.

13
EOS Bodies / Re: Shooting leveled landscape pictures
« on: August 22, 2012, 09:59:43 PM »
YellowJersey - how do you enable the in-viewfinder level on the 5dmark3?

I second this question.

 Turn your camera on and hit "MENU"
 Then go to the orange options (second from the right, custom controls)
 In the second menu (C.Fn2: Disp./Operation) you'll see "Custom Controls" at the bottom, open it up
 Enable "VF electronic level" for M-fn button. You can also enable it for DOF preview button,

 When you want to level your shot, just hit M-fn (or DOF button, whichever you've enabled as the VF electronic level) and you'll see different autofocus points have a box around them showing your axes. It's quite a useful function.

14
EOS Bodies / Re: Shooting leveled landscape pictures
« on: August 22, 2012, 07:19:13 PM »
If there's one feature I'll happily debase myself in gratitude for is the in-viewfinder and liveview level in the 5D3. I love it in ways that I should probably talk to my psychiatrist about.

15
Software & Accessories / Re: Laptop for photo editing
« on: July 24, 2012, 09:30:43 PM »
No brand listed, but leaving that aside I'd recommend a business class laptop, that should easily last you 2-3+ years in terms of build quality. That said, I'd find out which one supports the highest capacity SODIMM modules. Some only support 4GB per module, the newest ones may support 8GB modules. If you only have 2 DIMM slots, I'd recommend finding one that can support 8GB modules, which will let you cram 16GB into your machine in the future. I'd also only purchase 1 DIMM from the manufacturer, unless you can get the 2nd one at dirt cheap prices because they usually way overcharge to add higher capacity or a 2nd memory module. Generally it's easy enough (except MacBooks) to add in a 2nd, or replace both modules and buy them from a 3rd party like NewEgg. Plus you'll save a bunch of money. That's what I did with my Lenovo, bought it with 1 4GB module, bought another 2 4GB modules (I have 4 DIMM slots), and so now I have 12GB of memory running in my laptop which is plenty for Lightroom/Photoshop.

The other thing to consider is if you are going to be doing any gaming, or anything that can take serious advantage of the GPU I'd look into getting a somewhat beefier one. I'm not really up to date on them GPU scene these days, so I'd read around to see which ones are better.

The brand is Lenovo. I'm currently running a T500 with an Intel Core 2 Duo with 3GB of RAM. In my options, Option 1 (the back ordered one) is a T520 with a 160GB serial ATA SSD, Options 2 and 3 are various configurations of a T520 with a 128GB SSD SATA 3, and Option 5 is a W530.

 It looks like the T520 and T530 have 2 DIMM slots that can handle up to 8GB per slot. What I could do is get the T530 w/ Intel Core i7-3820QM (2.70GBz, 8M Cache), get the minimum 4GB of RAM (throw away), and then put x2 8GB sticks. That would put the total cost of the machine at around $2200 CAD. So that would give me 16GB of RAM over 8GB in option 1.

The question remains, would doubling the RAM and getting an extra 200MHz of processing power be worth the extra $500? Particularly when for about $100, I could just get 16GB of RAM put in the T520 when I finally get it.

 What about the SSDs? Is a 128 SSD SATA 3 worth it over a 160 SSD serial ATA?

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 8