Re: Digital Slide scanners

The way I scan medium format now uses the Leica BEOON copy device. It is essentially a dedicated kit of extension tubes and a stand to take a Leica M body and lens, with masks and settings for 1:1, 1:1.5, 1:2, and 1:3 reproduction ratio framings. With adapters, I fit my Leica SL body and

Re: Digital Slide scanners

It would be nice to come up with something for medium format that doesn't cost a terrible amount of money. Right now I'm thinking that a light table and a slab of anti-newtonian glass would be best. On Sun, Apr 9, 2017 at 9:58 PM, Bill wrote: > On 4/9/2017 1:56 PM,

Re: Digital Slide scanners

On 4/9/2017 1:56 PM, Larry wrote: Which slide copier is that? I have the slide copier K. I suspect the Pentax ones are all pretty much the same. http://www.bdimitrov.de/kmp/misc/macro/auto_bellows_slide_copier.jpg On April 9, 2017 11:44:30 AM MST, Bill

Re: Digital Slide scanners

Which slide copier is that? On April 9, 2017 11:44:30 AM MST, Bill wrote: >On 4/7/2017 10:58 PM, Alan C wrote: >> A slide duplicator or bellows setup works well (easily & quickly) for >> 35mm slides but is very problematic for negatives. A scanner would >allow >>

Re: Digital Slide scanners

On 4/7/2017 10:58 PM, Alan C wrote: A slide duplicator or bellows setup works well (easily & quickly) for 35mm slides but is very problematic for negatives. A scanner would allow copying of other formats too. In the end, the limiting factor will be your budget. My Slide Copier K has a negative

Re: Digital Slide scanners

I created customized camera calibration profiles for my Leica SL that do the correct inversion for both color and B negatives. they're now almost as easy to capture with the copy setup as slides. "Almost" because the inversion means the controls in the Lightroom develop module work reversed

Re: Digital Slide scanners

A slide duplicator or bellows setup works well (easily & quickly) for 35mm slides but is very problematic for negatives. A scanner would allow copying of other formats too. In the end, the limiting factor will be your budget. Alan C -Original Message- From: anotherdrunkensot Sent:

Re: Digital LX sort of.

On 04/03/2015 2:18 PM, P.J. Alling wrote: So today I mounted the FA 20-35mm F4.0 on the K-5II, and felt the same cognitive dissonance that I always felt mounting the mostly plastic, (though really optically excellent), lens on my LX, and realized I have pretty much a digital LX, just not in the

Re: Digital Camera Watch report from CP+ Yokohama

On 12/2/15, Paul Stenquist, discombobulated, unleashed: But let's start wringing our hands. I did that when the MZ-D was cancelled ;-) -- Cheers, Cotty ___/\__Broadcast, Corporate, || (O) |Web Video Production --www.seeingeye.tv _ --

Re: Digital Camera Watch report from CP+ Yokohama

On 12/2/15, Mark Roberts, discombobulated, unleashed: It's pretty routine now. Even for smaller companies. I'd be surprised if Pentax made prototype models any other way. Bright pink Play Doh next. -- Cheers, Cotty ___/\__Broadcast, Corporate, || (O) |Web Video Production

Re: Digital Camera Watch report from CP+ Yokohama

On 2/12/2015 12:47 PM, Mark Roberts wrote: P.J. Alling wrote: On 2/12/2015 12:33 PM, Mark Roberts wrote: Paul Stenquist wrote: It appears to be a crude wood or clay shape model. Looks like it was made on a 3D printer. I expect it was produced by the traditional clay modeling methods.

Re: Digital Camera Watch report from CP+ Yokohama

Matthew Hunt wrote: On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 12:42 PM, P.J. Alling webstertwenty...@gmail.com wrote: I expect it was produced by the traditional clay modeling methods. Three D printers are really only big in labs, and with geeks. Dpreview says it's 3D-printed:

Re: Digital Camera Watch report from CP+ Yokohama

I think they just finessed some of the details on the mockup. There's a little bump on the back where the button for switching between cards is on the back of the K-3. I'm thinking that IF/when the product is finally available it will have a card select button there, and the built in pop-up

Re: Digital Camera Watch report from CP+ Yokohama

On 2/12/2015 12:59 PM, P.J. Alling wrote: On 2/12/2015 12:47 PM, Mark Roberts wrote: P.J. Alling wrote: On 2/12/2015 12:33 PM, Mark Roberts wrote: Paul Stenquist wrote: It appears to be a crude wood or clay shape model. Looks like it was made on a 3D printer. I expect it was produced by

Re: Digital Camera Watch report from CP+ Yokohama

It sure seems like they are more than 10 months away from a finished, ready to sell product. jco On 2/12/2015 2:22 PM, John wrote: I think they just finessed some of the details on the mockup. There's a little bump on the back where the button for switching between cards is on the back of the

Re: Digital Camera Watch report from CP+ Yokohama

/12/2015 12:45 PM, Jack Davis wrote: My feeling as well, Paul. Jack - Original Message - From: Paul Stenquist pnstenqu...@comcast.net To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net Sent: Thursday, February 12, 2015 9:21:52 AM Subject: Re: Digital Camera Watch report from CP+ Yokohama

Re: Digital Camera Watch report from CP+ Yokohama

On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 12:42 PM, P.J. Alling webstertwenty...@gmail.com wrote: I expect it was produced by the traditional clay modeling methods. Three D printers are really only big in labs, and with geeks. Dpreview says it's 3D-printed:

Re: Digital Camera Watch report from CP+ Yokohama

On 12/02/2015 3:21 AM, Dario Bonazza wrote: Hi all, please anjoy: http://dc.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/news/20150212_688027.html Looks like they have smarter people on board now, as they haven't missed the 40th anniversary of the K mount. Dario I'll take the one on the right. bill -- PDML

Re: Digital Camera Watch report from CP+ Yokohama

On 2015-02-12 20:46 , Bill wrote: I'd be surprised if Ricoh wasn't making 3D printers. http://www.ricoh.com/release/2014/0908_1.html -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly

Re: Digital Camera Watch report from CP+ Yokohama

I'm amazed that Apple hasn't gotten into 3D printers (yet). (If they did, this is the one they would probably make: https://www.youtube.com/user/formlabs1/videos ) They are certainly more common than P.J. asserted. My employer has a Stratasys refrigerator-sized 3D printer in their precision

Re: Digital Camera Watch report from CP+ Yokohama

On 12/02/2015 11:42 AM, P.J. Alling wrote: On 2/12/2015 12:33 PM, Mark Roberts wrote: Paul Stenquist wrote: It appears to be a crude wood or clay shape model. Looks like it was made on a 3D printer. I expect it was produced by the traditional clay modeling methods. Three D printers are

Re: Digital Camera Watch report from CP+ Yokohama

On 12/02/2015 9:49 PM, steve harley wrote: On 2015-02-12 20:46 , Bill wrote: I'd be surprised if Ricoh wasn't making 3D printers. http://www.ricoh.com/release/2014/0908_1.html In other words, the model was probably made in house by Ricoh. bill -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List

Re: Digital Camera Watch report from CP+ Yokohama

On Feb 13, 2015, at 8:29 am, John sesso...@earthlink.net wrote: The 3D printer manufacturers couldn't afford to make them if the only market was college computer labs. They're making a big impact in corporate RD prototyping. That's no surprise to me... we were ordering rapid prototype (as

Re: Digital Camera Watch report from CP+ Yokohama

On 12/02/2015 12:40 PM, Mark Roberts wrote: Matthew Hunt wrote: On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 12:42 PM, P.J. Alling webstertwenty...@gmail.com wrote: I expect it was produced by the traditional clay modeling methods. Three D printers are really only big in labs, and with geeks. Dpreview says

Re: Digital Camera Watch report from CP+ Yokohama

Not sure how closely this prototype is actually going to be to the real camera, but it appears similar in layout to the K-3 except: No LIVE VIEW/Record Video button? No headphone jack or mic jack? Doesn't appear that this camera will do video (not that this would be a deal breaker for many). It is

Re: Digital Camera Watch report from CP+ Yokohama

But let’s start wringing our hands. On Feb 12, 2015, at 11:18 AM, Darren Addy pixelsmi...@gmail.com wrote: Not sure how closely this prototype is actually going to be to the real camera, but it appears similar in layout to the K-3 except: No LIVE VIEW/Record Video button? No headphone jack

Re: Digital Camera Watch report from CP+ Yokohama

It appears to be a crude wood or clay shape model. Obviously, there are features missing. On Feb 12, 2015, at 11:18 AM, Darren Addy pixelsmi...@gmail.com wrote: Not sure how closely this prototype is actually going to be to the real camera, but it appears similar in layout to the K-3

Re: Digital Camera Watch report from CP+ Yokohama

So will the button layout be like a K-3 or like the new K-S2? Looks like a tilt screen on the back, built in wifi, or is that considered consumer level like the built in flash, which the model seems to lack. Inquiring minds want to know. I still think the vibe in the design should be MZ-S

Re: Digital Camera Watch report from CP+ Yokohama

Paul Stenquist wrote: It appears to be a crude wood or clay shape model. Looks like it was made on a 3D printer. -- Mark Roberts - Photography Multimedia www.robertstech.com -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE

Re: Digital Camera Watch report from CP+ Yokohama

On 2/12/2015 12:33 PM, Mark Roberts wrote: Paul Stenquist wrote: It appears to be a crude wood or clay shape model. Looks like it was made on a 3D printer. I expect it was produced by the traditional clay modeling methods. Three D printers are really only big in labs, and with geeks.

Re: Digital Camera Watch report from CP+ Yokohama

My feeling as well, Paul. Jack - Original Message - From: Paul Stenquist pnstenqu...@comcast.net To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net Sent: Thursday, February 12, 2015 9:21:52 AM Subject: Re: Digital Camera Watch report from CP+ Yokohama It appears to be a crude wood or clay shape

Re: Digital Camera Watch report from CP+ Yokohama

P.J. Alling wrote: On 2/12/2015 12:33 PM, Mark Roberts wrote: Paul Stenquist wrote: It appears to be a crude wood or clay shape model. Looks like it was made on a 3D printer. I expect it was produced by the traditional clay modeling methods. Three D printers are really only big in labs,

Re: Digital Film - Wouldn't it be Great?

Tom, Yes, I miss the days of Kodachrome and 'what you shoot is what you get!' I don't need more hours in front of the computer screen on account of photography. But I do think my images have improved, and God bless shake reduction. Regards, Bob S. On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 9:49 PM, Tom C

Re: Digital Film - Wouldn't it be Great?

From: David Parsons parsons.da...@gmail.com On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 10:49 PM, Tom C caka...@gmail.com wrote: I'm pained by the necessity to somehow adjust every image that I think meets my standards. Luckily or unluckily that's 1% or less of the images I take. It used to be zilch. I either

Re: Digital Film - Wouldn't it be Great?

From: Bob Sullivan rf.sulli...@gmail.com Tom, Yes, I miss the days of Kodachrome and 'what you shoot is what you get!' I don't need more hours in front of the computer screen on account of photography. But I do think my images have improved, and God bless shake reduction. Regards, Bob S.

Re: Digital Film - Wouldn't it be Great?

On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 10:49 PM, Tom C caka...@gmail.com wrote: I'm pained by the necessity to somehow adjust every image that I think meets my standards. Luckily or unluckily that's 1% or less of the images I take. It used to be zilch. I either made the shot or I didn't. There was no

Re: Digital Film - Wouldn't it be Great?

On 01/11/2012 8:49 PM, Tom C wrote: One of these days I'll sort through the reams of transparencies boxed away and find out. Am I better or am I simply changed? You've been democratized. One of the advantages us darkroom guys had over hand it over to the lab for a picture guys was that

Re: Digital Camera Noise Testing

Tom, You're right, the K7 images have a lot of noise when you use JPG. Shooting RAW, they have much, much less, and it cleans up well with LR3. http://photo.net/photos/RickW --- On Wed, 8/24/11, Tom Cakalic caka...@gmail.com wrote: From: Tom Cakalic caka...@gmail.com Subject: Digital Camera

Re: Digital Camera Noise Testing

From: Paul Stenquist The K7 is a nice camera in terms of build and ergonomics, but it's a noisy beast -- no better than the K20 and probably not as good as the K10. The K5, on the other hand, is by far the best of the Pentax breed. You won't have any trouble convincing the rest of us that the K7

Re: Digital Camera Noise Testing

On Aug 24, 2011, at 17:59, Tom Cakalic wrote: I attempted a series of 10 10-sec exposures @ ISO 800 last night with the K-7. Ambient temperature around 60 degrees F. I had noise reduction turned off. The camera had been operating for 3 minutes before starting. First the camera gave up

Re: Digital Camera Noise Testing

On Aug 25, 2011, at 9:19 AM, John Sessoms wrote: From: Paul Stenquist The K7 is a nice camera in terms of build and ergonomics, but it's a noisy beast -- no better than the K20 and probably not as good as the K10. The K5, on the other hand, is by far the best of the Pentax breed. You won't

Re: Digital Camera Noise Testing

There are still hot pixels in RAW pictures. RAW processors are usually good at removing them though, so you might think that they aren't there. LENR modifies the data in the RAW file. On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 7:11 PM, Bruce Walker bruce.wal...@gmail.com wrote: I hope you are shooting RAW, but

Re: Digital Camera Noise Testing

Shoot in RAW, and the Adobe RAW conversion tools (such as what imports the images into LightRoom - not sure if you use that) will remove all of them hot pixels for you without any need to fool around with filters and whatnot.   I shoot 2-hour-long concerts at ISO 1250 and when editing I

Re: Digital Camera Noise Testing

On 11-08-24 6:59 PM, Tom Cakalic wrote: It's occurred to me that many digital camera tests including the most popular sites do not give an accurate representation of noise generated by the camera sensor(s). While they may do a fairly decent job of reporting on noise at a given ISO, there seems

Re: Digital Camera Noise Testing

The K7 is a nice camera in terms of build and ergonomics, but it's a noisy beast -- no better than the K20 and probably not as good as the K10. The K5, on the other hand, is by far the best of the Pentax breed. You won't have any trouble convincing the rest of us that the K7 is noisy. Paul On

Re: Digital Camera Noise Testing

DXOmark concentrates on sensors and includes noise in the data: http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Cameras/Camera-Sensor-Database/Pentax/K5 Click on Specifications tab, then SNR 18% Now move your cursor over the color bar to the right of the chart. You should see a crop of a photo with the amount

Re: Digital Camera Noise Testing

Most reviewers rated the K20D as slightly less noisy than the K7. Probably not enough to make a major difference. The rest of the package made the K7 a better camera. On 8/24/2011 8:08 PM, Paul Stenquist wrote: The K7 is a nice camera in terms of build and ergonomics, but it's a noisy

Re: Digital Body and Manual Lens Question

-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of Paul Stenquist Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2011 10:46 AM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: Digital Body and Manual Lens Question If the manual focus lenses are A series, you'll have all the autoexposure options that the K10 offers. With M and K series lenses

RE: Digital Body and Manual Lens Question

From: David J Brooks On Thu, Aug 4, 2011 at 10:57 AM, Norm Baugher nbaug...@baugherphotography.com wrote: Ahh, the infamous green button... What about angle of view issues? Just turn your head a bit more and you will be fine Ok Dave, I'll try the 360 deg spin. Norm -- PDML Pentax-Discuss

RE: Digital Body and Manual Lens Question

A lenses: no limitations except manual focus. K-M lenses: manual exposure as well as manual focus. -- J.C. O'Connell (mailto:hifis...@gate.net) Join the CD PLAYER DISC Discussions : http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/cdplayers/ http://launch.groups.yahoo.com/group/cdsound/ -Original

Re: Digital Body and Manual Lens Question

If the manual focus lenses are A series, you'll have all the autoexposure options that the K10 offers. With M and K series lenses, you'll have to use a workaround for exposure. Basically, you set a stop on the aperture ring, and press the green button. That causes the camera to set an exposure.

RE: Digital Body and Manual Lens Question

Ahh, the infamous green button... What about angle of view issues? Tks, Norm -Original Message- From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of Paul Stenquist Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2011 10:46 AM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: Digital Body and Manual

Re: Digital Body and Manual Lens Question

The Pentax DSLR will have a 1.5 focal length multiplier effect, making a 50mm lens have the angle of view of a 75mm lens on your DSLR. A 35mm will be the equiv. of a 52mm lens on 35mm. Darren Addy Kearney, Nebraska -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net

Re: Digital Body and Manual Lens Question

On 2011-08-04 08:45 , Paul Stenquist wrote: If the manual focus lenses are A series, you'll have all the autoexposure options that the K10 offers. With M and K series lenses, you'll have to use a workaround for exposure. Basically, you set a stop on the aperture ring, and press the green

Re: Digital Body and Manual Lens Question

On Aug 4, 2011, at 10:58 AM, steve harley wrote: On 2011-08-04 08:45 , Paul Stenquist wrote: If the manual focus lenses are A series, you'll have all the autoexposure options that the K10 offers. With M and K series lenses, you'll have to use a workaround for exposure. Basically, you set a

Re: Digital Body and Manual Lens Question

On 2011-08-04 12:15 , Larry Colen wrote: On Aug 4, 2011, at 10:58 AM, steve harley wrote: note that with the green button, if you normally use exposure compensation you have to apply it as a shutter adjustment after using the green button, every time; this is what keeps me from using my M

Re: Digital Body and Manual Lens Question

A or K? With A lenses of course you lose autofocus, and for AS to work properly the focal length of the lens when the image is captured, for best results. Which makes A zoom lenses less than optimal using AS. Of course that's also true for the original K mount zoom lenses as well, except

Re: Digital Body and Manual Lens Question

of view issues? Tks, Norm -Original Message- From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of Paul Stenquist Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2011 10:46 AM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: Digital Body and Manual Lens Question If the manual focus lenses are A series

Re: Digital Holga

At current conversion rates that's just $126, maybe four times the price of a film Holga. A bargain!, if you're into that sort of thing, (and I'm not being sarcastic for once). On 3/17/2011 10:10 AM, Eric Weir wrote: Digital Holga at Japan Exposures. [They sell Pentaxes.] There's a link to

Re: Digital Holga

For $19 there's CameraBag Desktop: http://www.nevercenter.com/camerabag/download/ -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.

Re: Digital Holga

I heard recently that Holga is also making their lens available (probably Nikon and Canon mounts) for around $30. On Thu, Mar 17, 2011 at 7:10 AM, Eric Weir eew...@bellsouth.net wrote: Digital Holga at Japan Exposures. [They sell Pentaxes.] There's a link to a video review.

Re: Digital Holga

On 2011-03-17 11:14 , Darren Addy wrote: For $19 there's CameraBag Desktop: http://www.nevercenter.com/camerabag/download/ and if you have an iPhone or Android phone, a couple of dollars will get you similar tools with a similar resolution to the Digital Holga -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail

Re: Digital Holga

So it's it's marginally cheaper than buying a Holga, getting a third party body cap and a hot glue gun and building your own, thought probably not as much fun... On 3/17/2011 1:25 PM, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: I heard recently that Holga is also making their lens available (probably Nikon and

Re: Digital Holga

On Mar 17, 2011, at 11:21 AM, P. J. Alling wrote: At current conversion rates that's just $126, maybe four times the price of a film Holga. A bargain!, if you're into that sort of thing, (and I'm not being sarcastic for once). I'm looking for the impossible -- the digital equivalent of

Re: Digital Holga

I think that any of the E-Px from Olympus or the GF1 with the Oly 17 or Lumix 20 would fill the bill. Yes, I know there is no optical viewfinder but it's not a problem holding it stable with a short lens. Used ones are coming. . . On Thu, Mar 17, 2011 at 4:02 PM, Eric Weir eew...@bellsouth.net

RE: digital bw

Very true! I'd say it took me about a year to be completely comfortable making BW conversions that looked exactly like I wanted them to. Colin, I like me some contrasty BW, but there's nothing like an image displaying the whole array of greys:

Re: digital bw

On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 12:00 AM, Bob W p...@web-options.com wrote: Very true! I'd say it took me about a year to be completely comfortable making BW conversions that looked exactly like I wanted them to. Colin, I like me some contrasty BW, but there's nothing like an image displaying the

Re: digital bw

On 19 November 2010 09:46, Godfrey DiGiorgi gdigio...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 12:00 AM, Bob W p...@web-options.com wrote: Very true! I'd say it took me about a year to be completely comfortable making BW conversions that looked exactly like I wanted them to. Colin, I like me

Re: digital bw

I apply filters in post, using a BW conversion plugin that I originally downloaded from a link at Mark Roberts software page. The whole procedure is rather simple. 1.) Make the best Color photo possible from file, using the raw converter. 2.) In the picture editing software tweak it if

Re: digital bw

I used those filters at one time, but they're not compatible with later versions of PhotoShop. Plus the new BW conversion features of both PS and ACR allow more fine tuning than did the filters. Paul On Nov 19, 2010, at 12:38 PM, P. J. Alling wrote: I apply filters in post, using a BW

Re: digital bw

I used that method to create this BW image from my last years contirbution to the annual. It's a new BW rendering as I couldn't find the earlier example I created, and is probably a bit less dramatic. I chose to use the Yellow filter to keep the tones as close to the color original as

Re: digital bw

Hum, for a better comparison, you probably would want to see it on it's web page... http://dl.dropbox.com/u/1604247/PESO/PESO%20--%20surfclubmadisonctbwyellow.html On 11/19/2010 4:05 PM, P. J. Alling wrote: I used that method to create this BW image from my last years contirbution to the

Re: digital bw

On Fri, 19 Nov 2010 16:07 -0500, P. J. Alling webstertwenty...@gmail.com wrote: Hum, for a better comparison, you probably would want to see it on it's web page... http://dl.dropbox.com/u/1604247/PESO/PESO%20--%20surfclubmadisonctbwyellow.html I've used that filter occasionally too, but

Re: digital bw

On 19 November 2010 12:38, P. J. Alling webstertwenty...@gmail.com wrote: I find it's better not to over think the procedure. That's pretty good advice, P.J. But can you quantify how long is overthink? 5 mins? 50 mins? Just want to know if I'm overthinking or not :-) —M. \/\/o/\/\

Re: digital bw

It takes me about 10 minutes to process a BW from the time I decide it should be BW. Sometimes if it's shot under difficult lighting a bit more to dodge burn and maybe mess with the contrast. But I usually decided on the level of contrast I'm looking for before I start. On 11/19/2010 6:24

Re: digital bw

The only filters that I feel are necessary/useful in the digital world are Neutral Density filters (for those times you want longer shutter speeds at equiv. apertures or gradient NDs) and maybe polarizers. Other than that, you can do the filter-thing for various BW enhancements with a

Re: digital bw

On Nov 18, 2010, at 2:02 PM, Collin Brendemuehl wrote: I've been looking at a lot of digital bw work this week. When you digitroids do this, do you employ filters like we filmaniacs do? I'm thinking that this might be a good Saturday a.m. experiment. When I look at the work on Pentax

Re: digital bw

Yeah, LR has sliders for each color (10 or 12 different colors and shades, IIRC). I really like how LR handles BW conversions. On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 2:21 PM, paul stenquist pnstenqu...@comcast.net wrote: On Nov 18, 2010, at 2:02 PM, Collin Brendemuehl wrote: I've been looking at a lot of

Re: digital bw

On Nov 18, 2010, at 11:16 AM, CheekyGeek wrote: The only filters that I feel are necessary/useful in the digital world are Neutral Density filters (for those times you want longer shutter speeds at equiv. apertures or gradient NDs) and maybe polarizers. In most cases, I'd agree with you. I

Re: digital bw

In fact, I've used the LR low-contrast and high-contrast presets for making BW and they do pretty well. I always tinker but on a couple occasions just went almost entirely with the preset, because it was so good. -Tim On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 11:32 AM, David Parsons parsons.da...@gmail.com wrote:

Re: digital bw

I use Matt Kloskowski's black and white presets as a starting point at times. http://lightroomkillertips.com/2009/presets-better-black-and-whites/ On Nov 18, 2010, at 1:45 PM, Tim Bray wrote: In fact, I've used the LR low-contrast and high-contrast presets for making BW and they do pretty

Re: digital bw

Paul the heretic Stenquist wrote: That's probably the result of sloppy conversions. I don't employ filters, but I convert using the ACR BW function, which allows you to control the gray level of each color independently. It's actually superior to BW film in many ways. I believe Lightroom

Re: digital bw

The only minor tinkering I've done in this area is use a polarizer on the BW preset and compare that to a post color conversion. Felt the color channel conversion capabilities were superior. --- On Thu, 11/18/10, Collin Brendemuehl coll...@brendemuehl.net wrote: From: Collin Brendemuehl

Re: digital bw

I haven't looked at the Pentax Photo Gallery in a very long time, but I assure you that what I print is hardly 3 tones. ;-) I capture raw format and use Lightroom (and/or Photoshop) to render BW. Rendering BW is not a Saturday a.m. experiment if you want to be skilled at it. Regards filters, for

Re: digital bw

Collin Brendemuehl wrote: Paul the heretic Stenquist wrote: That's probably the result of sloppy conversions. I don't employ filters, but I convert using the ACR BW function, which allows you to control the gray level of each color independently. It's actually superior to BW film in many

Re: digital bw

Photoshop allows a large measure of filter effects in converting color to BW, using slider tools that show the preview of the filter's effects. The biggest problem I have when shooting digital is blown highlights that I cannot burn and basically have to replace using cut a paste from an

Re: digital bw

Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: Rendering BW is not a Saturday a.m. experiment if you want to be skilled at it. Boy, *that's* the truth! Especially if you're skilled at BW darkroom printing: There's a whole new set of techniques to learn and old ones to unlearn. The latter is harder :) -- PDML

Re: digital bw

Some good information. Thanks all. But do you ever feel like rendering bw is like rendering lard? It takes a long time and it's messy but good pie crust and pastry are better that way. I feel the same way about the chemical darkroom and only wish days were longer. There is so much I want to

Re: digital bw

I'm in the process of setting up an old school BW darkroom just because I miss the process/smells/etc. The only film I really plan on shooting from this point forward will be BW that I develop myself. I'm also interested in exploring alternative processes in the monochrome world. However, if you

Re: digital bw

On Nov 18, 2010, at 2:57 PM, Collin Brendemuehl wrote: Paul the heretic Stenquist wrote: That's probably the result of sloppy conversions. I don't employ filters, but I convert using the ACR BW function, which allows you to control the gray level of each color independently. It's

Re: digital bw

Paul the heretic Stenquist printed BW in the darkroom for thirty years. And yes, I've done split printing with different contrast filters. I've also used a wide variety of papers and chemicals, along with contrast control development of the film. No darkroom techniques can match the results

Re: digital bw

No, when doing BW conversion from colour I handle the filtration in post (Note I've been known to do this with both colour film and digital. Provia 100F in particular makes just lovely BW images). BW images online tend to be overly contrasty as that grabs attention (and I say that as someone who

Re: digital bw

On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 12:10 PM, Jeffery Smith jsmith...@bellsouth.net wrote: Photoshop allows a large measure of filter effects in converting color to BW, using slider tools that show the preview of the filter's effects. Filter effects isn't the right expression, nor is converting color to

Re: digital bw

I'll be the first to admit that the digital color stuff still gives me a hard time. I'm not resistant when it comes to modern digital technology (and converted from the typewriter to the word processor very quickly), but all of the parameters in digital photography can be a bit overwhelming

Re: digital bw

Collin Brendemuehl coll...@brendemuehl.net wrote: When I look at the work on Pentax photo gallery, the Bw efforts seem to share a common fault: 3 tones -- near-black, near-white, zone 6. There just is not the tonal variance. I don't see less tonality in my digital B/W. I usually shoot in

Re: digital bw

On 18 November 2010 15:03, Godfrey DiGiorgi gdigio...@gmail.com wrote: I capture raw format and use Lightroom (and/or Photoshop) to render BW. Rendering BW is not a Saturday a.m. experiment if you want to be skilled at it. Very true! I'd say it took me about a year to be completely

Re: digital bw

On Nov 18, 2010, at 4:08 PM, Ralf R. Radermacher wrote: Collin Brendemuehl coll...@brendemuehl.net wrote: When I look at the work on Pentax photo gallery, the Bw efforts seem to share a common fault: 3 tones -- near-black, near-white, zone 6. There just is not the tonal variance. I

Re: digital bw

.Very true! I'd say it took me about a year to be completely .comfortable making BW conversions that looked exactly like I wanted .them to. . .Colin, I like me some contrasty BW, but there's nothing like an image .displaying the whole array of greys: M. When I look again @ my favorite portrait

Re: digital bw

On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 3:38 PM, Jeffery Smith jsmith...@bellsouth.net wrote: I'll be the first to admit that the digital color stuff still gives me a hard time. I'm not resistant when it comes to modern digital technology (and converted from the typewriter to the word processor very

Re: Digital Photography School K-x Review

On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 3:00 PM, Charles Robinson charl...@visi.com wrote: On Apr 1, 2010, at 10:23, William Robb wrote: How could anyone be dumber than Ken Rockwell? I thought the same thing myself, but the proof is there. I especially liked: These are 100% crops, reduced a little to fit

  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   >