All Forum Comments
Comment by ProAudio posted on just arrived, hello everybody! at 01/10/2010 - 12:59
I know that it is not always cost effective to print your own photos but realize there is a time and place for it just the same.
I don't always want to send it to the lab.
What really is the color or WB of my shots? Or another way of asking is why my LCD screen, CRT screen, printed photos all look so different from each other and which one reproduces the colors my eye knows best?(I do all of my color correcting on my computer crt display, not on my computer LCD display).
I do understand that printed color and digital colorometry get to the end result in vastly different approaches. There must be a platform that ties it all together?
There seems to be very minimal amount of discussion with regard to printing the excellent photos that so many amateurs take.
If you are are serious about printing what might be the best balance between printer type, cost and software to make it all work?
Ink Jet? What really is the difference in the inks (particularly the "photo color" that HP suggests).
Dye sublimation?
Do all ink jet inks still have tendensy to be vitually water soluble inks?
Are any inkjet printers producing archival (to me that means more than 5 years photos?
How about thermal wax printers? Xerox Phasor series for instance.
I use a color laser with good results as it is fast and cheap copy.
There are a couple of photo paper vendors that sell Laser Photo Paper..hmmm is it really so?
Have not tried it yet.
It just seems odd that there is so litle discusion about the printed end of our photo endeavors.
Metalic papers at the labs? Wonderful results.
Perhaps this is a subject that is only a concern for the professional photographer?
I still send out most of my better photos for production. It would be nice if I could do it in house without serious expense.
It was worth it years ago to set up for c-41 color. What do you think might be the equivelant digital setup to print today?
What are your thoughts and experiences?
Ron
Mt Pleasant WI
I don't always want to send it to the lab.
What really is the color or WB of my shots? Or another way of asking is why my LCD screen, CRT screen, printed photos all look so different from each other and which one reproduces the colors my eye knows best?(I do all of my color correcting on my computer crt display, not on my computer LCD display).
I do understand that printed color and digital colorometry get to the end result in vastly different approaches. There must be a platform that ties it all together?
There seems to be very minimal amount of discussion with regard to printing the excellent photos that so many amateurs take.
If you are are serious about printing what might be the best balance between printer type, cost and software to make it all work?
Ink Jet? What really is the difference in the inks (particularly the "photo color" that HP suggests).
Dye sublimation?
Do all ink jet inks still have tendensy to be vitually water soluble inks?
Are any inkjet printers producing archival (to me that means more than 5 years photos?
How about thermal wax printers? Xerox Phasor series for instance.
I use a color laser with good results as it is fast and cheap copy.
There are a couple of photo paper vendors that sell Laser Photo Paper..hmmm is it really so?
Have not tried it yet.
It just seems odd that there is so litle discusion about the printed end of our photo endeavors.
Metalic papers at the labs? Wonderful results.
Perhaps this is a subject that is only a concern for the professional photographer?
I still send out most of my better photos for production. It would be nice if I could do it in house without serious expense.
It was worth it years ago to set up for c-41 color. What do you think might be the equivelant digital setup to print today?
What are your thoughts and experiences?
Ron
Mt Pleasant WI
Comment by ProAudio posted on Printers??? and Printing Photos at 30/09/2010 - 08:36
Welcome to the forum Harry!
I am just slightly over 1 year with my K-7 and am very pleased with it for the most part. There really is a lot to learn about the camera and it's capabilities. Every week I find a feature or function that just amazes me.
When I was in your position a year ago I actually had pulled the trigger on a the K-20 but was unable to get one new anywhere. The K-7 had been on the market for only a month or two when I decided to purchase up to the the K-7 instead of chasing an elusive K-20.
It sounds like you are at the same crossroads between the K-7 and the just released K-5
Wait a month or two and you will probably see the K-5 drop by 20% or more in price.
Just stirring the pot!!
Good luck and good shooting!
Ron
MT Pleasant WI
USA
I am just slightly over 1 year with my K-7 and am very pleased with it for the most part. There really is a lot to learn about the camera and it's capabilities. Every week I find a feature or function that just amazes me.
When I was in your position a year ago I actually had pulled the trigger on a the K-20 but was unable to get one new anywhere. The K-7 had been on the market for only a month or two when I decided to purchase up to the the K-7 instead of chasing an elusive K-20.
It sounds like you are at the same crossroads between the K-7 and the just released K-5
Wait a month or two and you will probably see the K-5 drop by 20% or more in price.
Just stirring the pot!!
Good luck and good shooting!
Ron
MT Pleasant WI
USA
Comment by ProAudio posted on Old glass, new body at 28/09/2010 - 14:13
Hello Mike!
Welcome to the forum!
Ron
Mt Pleasant WI
Welcome to the forum!
Ron
Mt Pleasant WI
Comment by ProAudio posted on Hello from the north east! ...and advice please! at 28/09/2010 - 13:59
Hello Chris!
Last week I loaded the latest version of Picasa and was amazed at the true life color in PEF as well as JPEG. Side by side, one jpg the other PEF.
I shoot raw + JPEG even though my mem card is slow to read all of the data. It doesn't get in the way of what I am using the K-7 for right now.
When the photos came up side by side in Picasa I nearly did a double take as there was barely any noticeable difference in them. They were true to color too!
When DNG from the K7 I had some issues.
Last week I loaded the latest version of Picasa and was amazed at the true life color in PEF as well as JPEG. Side by side, one jpg the other PEF.
I shoot raw + JPEG even though my mem card is slow to read all of the data. It doesn't get in the way of what I am using the K-7 for right now.
When the photos came up side by side in Picasa I nearly did a double take as there was barely any noticeable difference in them. They were true to color too!
When DNG from the K7 I had some issues.
Comment by ProAudio posted on K7 RAW Images at 09/01/2010 - 23:42
What does this firmware change accomplish ?
Comment by ProAudio posted on New "silent" K7 firmware... at 31/12/2009 - 03:57
Greetings!
I look forward to exchanging ideas and learning more about the world of Pentax
My earliest days in photography were accomplished with among other models a Pentax K 1000,
Pentax Me and Supers. I also had a wide assortment of SLR and range finder cameras from Minolta, Yashika as well as Vivitar. All of these were manual mode cameras. Some had the benefit of built in light meter but otherwise fully manual mode. I acquired quite a bit of glass for the Pentax and must say that it was a favorite line to me. Second order was Yashika.
Having a budget for only these old cameras forced me to learn a lot about composition, light and depth of field. When I went to manual medium format it was a very simple transition.
I popped for a 2.3 megapixel camera from Kodak around 1998 (DC-240) for about $500.00 That was a lot of money for the time but I have to say that it delivered everything it said it would.
Since that time I have purchased a couple more point and shoot digital cameras but none of them equaled the color or exposure capabilities of the DC-240. I have a Sony 7.3MP that has lots more MP but is very poor in every other way. If it wasn't a gift to me I was have given it away.
Also an FE-290 Olympus that I bought for it's wide angle capabilities is a big disappointment too. Noisy pictures, limited control of exposure, and limited sensitivity. (It is actually better than that DSC 650 Sony.) All very standard in most point and shoot cameras.
I have been using the 35mm SLR's until about 2 years ago when it became apparent that film availability is limited and it has pretty well run it's course as the quality of DSLR came up and prices came down.
The only film camera that I will probably continue to use is my Koni Rapid Omega 200 6 x 7 medium format rangefinder. Getting very expensive to use but still worth it I think.
That brings me to my current state of the art DSLR. Pentax K-7 I purchased in Sept with a bit of apprehension. I had decided to purchase the K20D but when I went to pull the trigger on that purchase low and behold the model was dropped and I could not find a reputable dealer with one ion stock..
I was considering the D90 from Nikon but decided the advantages of the K-7 really out weighed the D90 with quite a few points to spare.
I was nixed a bit though in couple of lab reviews of the K-7 and the K20D the K20 came out with measurably better color than the K-7. I believe the D90 was rated on par with the K20 also.
Does anybody know exactly why specifically the K20d out performed the K-7 in color tests? It was rumored that Pentax changed manufacturers for the CMOS sensor for the K-7. Samsung / Sony??
Any truth to that reasoning? It is a minimal and shouldn't affect real word photos I am sure.
The gear is used for personal pleasure and creativity as well as shooting interior and exterior residential and commercial real estate.
ProAudio Ron
Mt Pleasant WISCONSIN
USA
I look forward to exchanging ideas and learning more about the world of Pentax
My earliest days in photography were accomplished with among other models a Pentax K 1000,
Pentax Me and Supers. I also had a wide assortment of SLR and range finder cameras from Minolta, Yashika as well as Vivitar. All of these were manual mode cameras. Some had the benefit of built in light meter but otherwise fully manual mode. I acquired quite a bit of glass for the Pentax and must say that it was a favorite line to me. Second order was Yashika.
Having a budget for only these old cameras forced me to learn a lot about composition, light and depth of field. When I went to manual medium format it was a very simple transition.
I popped for a 2.3 megapixel camera from Kodak around 1998 (DC-240) for about $500.00 That was a lot of money for the time but I have to say that it delivered everything it said it would.
Since that time I have purchased a couple more point and shoot digital cameras but none of them equaled the color or exposure capabilities of the DC-240. I have a Sony 7.3MP that has lots more MP but is very poor in every other way. If it wasn't a gift to me I was have given it away.
Also an FE-290 Olympus that I bought for it's wide angle capabilities is a big disappointment too. Noisy pictures, limited control of exposure, and limited sensitivity. (It is actually better than that DSC 650 Sony.) All very standard in most point and shoot cameras.
I have been using the 35mm SLR's until about 2 years ago when it became apparent that film availability is limited and it has pretty well run it's course as the quality of DSLR came up and prices came down.
The only film camera that I will probably continue to use is my Koni Rapid Omega 200 6 x 7 medium format rangefinder. Getting very expensive to use but still worth it I think.
That brings me to my current state of the art DSLR. Pentax K-7 I purchased in Sept with a bit of apprehension. I had decided to purchase the K20D but when I went to pull the trigger on that purchase low and behold the model was dropped and I could not find a reputable dealer with one ion stock..
I was considering the D90 from Nikon but decided the advantages of the K-7 really out weighed the D90 with quite a few points to spare.
I was nixed a bit though in couple of lab reviews of the K-7 and the K20D the K20 came out with measurably better color than the K-7. I believe the D90 was rated on par with the K20 also.
Does anybody know exactly why specifically the K20d out performed the K-7 in color tests? It was rumored that Pentax changed manufacturers for the CMOS sensor for the K-7. Samsung / Sony??
Any truth to that reasoning? It is a minimal and shouldn't affect real word photos I am sure.
The gear is used for personal pleasure and creativity as well as shooting interior and exterior residential and commercial real estate.
ProAudio Ron
Mt Pleasant WISCONSIN
USA
Comment by ProAudio posted on Greetings from S.E Wisconsin USA at 16/12/2009 - 19:57
There are many threads that will help you along on this site to help you choose the "right" digital for your specific intended uses.
Here is a site that is very helpful too:
link (dpreview)
Good luck!
Ron