Mannesty

Joined: 17th February 2005

All Forum Comments

Topics Created Topics Contributed Forum Comments Photo Comments

All Forum Comments

Mannesty
I'm not sure if PS Elements 3 has the tools to do it but this is how I would do it in PS CS/CS2.

Open the foreground shot in PS and use the Extract Tool to 'cutout' the part of the foreground that you want to keep. This will then appear on its own layer with a transparent background. The extract tool works best with subjects having a well defined/contrasting edge. Hairy animals are more difficult.

Open your background shot as another layer beneath your foreground shot.

Alternatively you can use layer masking. Open both pics on 2 different layers with the foreground on top, then choose the appropriate tools/options to gradually reveal your background.

Lack of time prevents my giving detailed 'simple' instructions. Have a play with both and see how you get on.

Comment by Mannesty posted on Adobe Photoshop Elements or Capture One for RAW ? at 13/05/2006 - 09:43

Mannesty
Brian, and is Mrs McBrian still talking to you?

Just out of interest, where have you bought them from? I got my 16-45 from Park Cameras but I've ordered the 12-24 from TechDirekt. Park delivered next day, TechDirekt order is on 2 week delivery ! ! ! They were out of stock at the time, great price though at around £450'ish. Well I think so, If you got yours much cheaper . . . I don't want to know.

Comment by Mannesty posted on Wedding Photography Tips at 01/05/2006 - 16:13

Mannesty
Ken, don't get too carried away. Time for a cold shower I think

Comment by Mannesty posted on repair at 02/05/2006 - 15:30

Mannesty
Sad indeed. I had an istD repaired by Pentax UK a few months ago. The repair cost was reasonable and it came back well packaged. It'll be a result if they were to give you a 645NII as a replacement though, will it not?.

Comment by Mannesty posted on repair at 02/05/2006 - 14:24

Mannesty
I sent a couple of messages through ebay's messaging system too. I got replies but I didn't get the usual copy of the users reply via email. That made me think this user was not quite 'kosher'.

Comment by Mannesty posted on Possible Bargain at 02/05/2006 - 17:35

Mannesty
Referring to the original post, it looks like this was a scam. Both cameras disappeared a few hours before auction end, with no bids. The user who was selling them is no longer registered with ebay. Just goes to prove, if it looks too good to be true, it probably is.

Comment by Mannesty posted on Possible Bargain at 02/05/2006 - 16:45

Mannesty
Seller has (0) feedback and has only been registered a short time. Sellers do have to start somewhere I guess. Might be interesting.

I have a few Pentax bits for sale too if anybody is interested, view them at http://search.ebay.co.uk/_W0QQsassZmannestyQQhtZ-1

I've got to recoup the money I spent on Brian's AF140C, beautiful ring flash Brian, thanks. I hope you can purchase those excellent lenses soon.

Comment by Mannesty posted on Possible Bargain at 01/05/2006 - 15:40

Mannesty
APS-C is here to stay, certainly for a few years at least. Improvements will be made to address the current issues and the result, I'm sure, will be an outstanding product for most of us.

I'm hoping that we *ist-D owners will get some of the firmware advances that are going into the *ist-D2 passed on to us in the form of a firmware upgrade, just as DS owners did when the DS2 was released. I think Pentax owes us that at least for all the feedback and wish lists we've given to them

Comment by Mannesty posted on New pentax models at 02/05/2006 - 12:29

Mannesty
Quote:
the CCD has a much higher noise level than a full frame Canon 35mm sized chip.
I believe the Canon uses a CMOS sensor, which I think is substantially different to a CCD. This might account for the difference in 'noise' performance between the two systems.

Given the noise issues with the Sony 6.1 meg CCD used in our Pentax digitals, some serious changes in design will have had to have been used in a 10 Meg chip and a greater than 60% increase in pixel density. 10 - 6.1 = 3.9, so the increase in density = 63.93% when expressed as a percentage of the original 6.1.

I am assuming of course that the new camera will have an APS-C sized sensor. If not, I and several others here have perhaps wasted a lot of money on DA lenses.

As for the digital 645, I seem to remember reading somewhere that its sensor is a full-sized 6 x 4.5 - if I can find where I read it I'll post a link. But then, it could have been in that dream I had where Tesco were giving away 645D's with a box of cornflakes. Just my luck . . . they'd sold out of cornflakes

Comment by Mannesty posted on New pentax models at 30/04/2006 - 15:00

Mannesty
What, these models? http://www.pentax.co.jp/english/news/2006/200615.html#gaiyo

Check this thread from February 2006 https://www.pentaxuser.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=2289&highlight=645d

To answer you question, there is a 99.9999% probability that the *ist-D replacement (I'm guessing it'll be called *ist-D2) will retain the APS-C sized sensor. What will be interesting is its 'noise' ellimination performance at medium/low light levels and medium/high ISO settings.

The 645D will probably be far too expensive for most of us on this forum, but wait 'til they start appearing on Ebay in 10-15 years time. It's imminent arrival has definitely influenced the price of used 645 lenses.

Comment by Mannesty posted on New pentax models at 30/04/2006 - 13:49

Proudly supporting Pentax User

Samsung Logo Asahi Pentax Logo