Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10 »
 on: Today at 10:24:12 PM 
Started by Mike Sellers - Last post by mediumcool
Have you tried replacing the motherboard battery? A dud battery can cause start-up problems.

 on: Today at 09:52:34 PM 
Started by Smoothjazz - Last post by sgilbert
ALPA used to offer downloadable GG overlays in various sizes/formats that could be printed on clear plastic and cut to fit the GG.  You could choose various sensor sizes, shifts, etc. 

They've now "improved" their website, and I can't find them anymore.  If you're interested, you could contact ALPA and ask about them.

 on: Today at 09:49:54 PM 
Started by glocke12 - Last post by Jimmy D Uptain
I've been using Aperture for several years now, and since APple will no longer be supporting ( Angry), I am now in the process of evaluating LR and C1 Pro as alternatives.

So far, C1 Pro seems to be coming out ahead in all areas from the management side of things to also the raw processing side of things (frankly Im stunned by how good the imported NEF files look in capture 1 compared to LR and Aperture).  Im still trying to get a handle on importing and the differences between catalogs and collections, but I am really liking what I see so far with that program.

Downside so far is no integration of NIK software, and some features that I got used to in Aperture are not in C1 (such showing where the focus points are).

What are other Aperture users here going to switch to?

The way C1 works with NIK or any other editor is pretty easy.

Just right click on the photo,  pick "Edit With".

Once thats open, just Click "Open With" at the bottom.

If your third part app isn't on the list, you can find it by clicking "other".

Remember there are some settings you may want to change at the top, like whether you want it to be a Tiff or Jpeg.

I just tried it with Silver Efex Pro and it converted the RAW to a Tiff and opened it up in SEP. I made some adjustments then saved.

The adjusted file appeared in C1.

If you want to open the RAW file in another Raw convertor, right click and pick "Open With".

I hope that helps.


 on: Today at 09:48:30 PM 
Started by Deardorff - Last post by Telecaster
You can indeed compare the results of different electronic cameras/sensor formats via print. My approach is simply to make the best 15x20" or 14x21" print I can from each camera/lens config, then place the prints side by side and see how they look. I don't try to equalize pixel counts prior to printing, but I do make sure I'm putting at least 300ppi on the paper. This means sometimes up-rezing a bit.

The most significant things I've learned from doing this are: 1) All my current gear can handle 15x20/14x21" with ease; and 2) All my current cameras, when fitted with top quality lenses, can resolve spatial detail that can't be seen in a 15x20/14x21" print from my Epson 3880. This happens to be my largest print size aside from the rare ~15x30" pano.  Smiley


 on: Today at 09:45:05 PM 
Started by Volant Productions - Last post by E.J. Peiker
You want the Metabones Mk IV not the Mk III as suggested above.  it addresses a number of small issues and has replaced the Mk III.

 on: Today at 09:23:27 PM 
Started by Deardorff - Last post by dwswager
Am wondering why comparisons of digital cameras have to be up or down rezzed to make a comparison?

With film if I wanted to make a comparison I made prints of the same size from the same of similar film. Comparing a 35mm negative to a 120 negative to 4x5 negative to an 8x10 contact print was easy to so. Printed each to 8x10 and set side by side and looked. Got closer or magnified if needed.

Same with 16x20 size prints from various sized negatives.

Could then do them developed in specific developers or even printed on specific papers if we wanted.

Why isn't it that easy with digital?

The big problem with that is how do you show a print to your online audience? 

In a way, since lower resolution is more standard than higher, by downreszing to a common size, you can compare two cameras at equal output.  If larger size is the target, then I think upsampling to a common size would be more indicative.  But you are correct in general that larger film and larger and higher pixel count sensors both have an advantage and that get subverted in a downsampling scheme.

 on: Today at 09:20:39 PM 
Started by Smoothjazz - Last post by dchew

Dave Chew -- how do you make your masks?


When I ordered the GG I asked for 2 24x36 masks, knowing I would cut them to custom sizes, and the std 40x54. I tape them to a self-healing cutting mat and measure carefully then cut with a fresh blade. I practiced on some old transparency sheets I found.

The 40x90 was the tricky one because the window goes almost to the end of the mask. Here they are:

 on: Today at 09:18:40 PM 
Started by Deardorff - Last post by eronald
You don't need software to sharpen an image. The name "unsharp mask" comes from a darkroom technique which is, in fact, the foundation of the software technique.

It gets worse: I think some chemical developers are edge-enhancing.


 on: Today at 09:12:25 PM 
Started by Telecaster - Last post by Telecaster
He made all that up didn't he?

The best critiques of reality often come in the guise of fiction. Though thinly veiled in this case IMO.  Wink


 on: Today at 09:11:49 PM 
Started by PeterAit - Last post by dwswager
I am giving Helicon Remote a try but am durned if I can figure out how to connect my camera and phone. It must take a specialized cable, but where do I find it? Thanks in advance.

First the smartphone must support USB host controller capabilities (in mobile world it is called On The Go (OTG)).  You then need the OTG adapter that converts the micro USB to USB port.  Then use the USB Cable that came with the camera plugged into the OTG adapter.  You do not need the Samsung one, just one that works.

I run both my D7100 and D810 with my Samsung Galaxy Note II and Helicon Remote Android.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10 »