All Forum Comments
I worked it out by hand and seem to have done it wrong. Should be APS-C f/8 for that comparison and f/9 for 1/1.8".
Comment by Tyr posted on Returned K5 - Where to now? at 20/05/2011 - 07:49
Algernon wrote:
I've had similar shots from P&S. These were taken at f/2.4 a lot of P&S cameras have similar sized apertures.
Erm... You don't seem to understand how DoF works. P&S cameras (2/3in sensor) with an f/2.4 aperture will have the DoF of an APS-C DSLR lens at f/25!I've had similar shots from P&S. These were taken at f/2.4 a lot of P&S cameras have similar sized apertures.
Comment by Tyr posted on Returned K5 - Where to now? at 19/05/2011 - 22:43
Elements 9 can be had for less than £60. Elements is good.
Comment by Tyr posted on Software advice please at 19/05/2011 - 22:25
Try Flickr, Photobox or Picasa all keep the EXIF intact.
Comment by Tyr posted on Returned K5 - Where to now? at 19/05/2011 - 13:57
Same amount of ink as 4xA4 pages. I now printing photos on our old Canon printer dried it up quite quickly.
It can be very difficult to gauge printer quality and economy online.
It can be very difficult to gauge printer quality and economy online.
Comment by Tyr posted on It's that time again (printer advice) at 19/05/2011 - 13:38
Algernon wrote:
There's something wrong with the two pictures you posted. The look like they've been taken with a 2Meg point and shoot If they are from jpgs you need to set the jpg size to 16M and the Quality to ****
The viewfinder looked small to me but it's OK now that I have put a KPS 1.3x magnifier on it. link
I don't see how they look like P&S images the DoF is impossible for a P&S.There's something wrong with the two pictures you posted. The look like they've been taken with a 2Meg point and shoot If they are from jpgs you need to set the jpg size to 16M and the Quality to ****
The viewfinder looked small to me but it's OK now that I have put a KPS 1.3x magnifier on it. link
The images may be slightly misfocused. I don't know how a DA70 could wobble as there is nothing to wobble.
You stripped the photos of the EXIF data so we can't help there.
Comment by Tyr posted on Returned K5 - Where to now? at 19/05/2011 - 13:37
Most dedicated graphics cards have a 10-bit LUT and this will help with monitors which also have a 10-bit LUT, but only if they are wide gamut monitors.
If they are just sRGB monitors then it is completely pointless as an 8-bit LUT will cover all possible sRGB colours easily and with no problems. You can get perfect accuracy on the data side of things like this. Colour output will then only be affected by the quality of the panel.
10 or 12-bit LUT is good if you are doing ARGB photo work, video, CAD, publishing, printing or anything else that requires accuracy on a greater gamut. You need the larger LUT to correctly address the additional colours.
So it is all dependant on workflow, cost and end product.
If they are just sRGB monitors then it is completely pointless as an 8-bit LUT will cover all possible sRGB colours easily and with no problems. You can get perfect accuracy on the data side of things like this. Colour output will then only be affected by the quality of the panel.
10 or 12-bit LUT is good if you are doing ARGB photo work, video, CAD, publishing, printing or anything else that requires accuracy on a greater gamut. You need the larger LUT to correctly address the additional colours.
So it is all dependant on workflow, cost and end product.
Comment by Tyr posted on Another Monitor Question... at 19/05/2011 - 11:30
jules wrote:
Erm, you don't need a Fire Pro card for a 10-bit LUT. Also it would be a HUGE waste of money as FirePro cards are just for 3D CAD. They do nothing for 2D applications.prsjnb wrote:
You should, IMHO, add the Eizo Flexscan S2243W - 22" to your list, which uses a PVA screen, covers 95% of the RGB colour space and has a 10-bit LUT (which requires a graphics card with 10-bit capability to obtain benefit e.g. AMD (Radeon) FirePro series; s/h examples of which can be bought for little cash on e-bay): link. Colourconfidence are selling them for £388.00 inc VAT, which is par for the course, and are including a free GrafiLite daylight balanced viewing lamp. For an extra £99.00 you can have a bundle that includes a GREGTAGMACBETH eye-one display 2 calibration device, representing a good saving when compared with the price when bought separately link
I paid the premium for an Eizo monitor about 5 years ago and have never regretted it and I'm seriously considering upgrading to one with a larger screen in the near future.
I know John Riley is a big fan of the Dell Ultra-sharp range and he speaks from personal experience. There are many reports (from both professional reviewers and users, however, indicating that QC can be an issue with these; although in fairness many went on to say that Dell were very good at replacing them when notified.
You pays your money and takes your choice
Best wishes,
Jon
You got any expereience of the little calibration widget that comes with the Eizo? Is it in any way useful? I know it's not an Eye One solution but It may do to be going on with, if it gets me near enough I'd be happy...You should, IMHO, add the Eizo Flexscan S2243W - 22" to your list, which uses a PVA screen, covers 95% of the RGB colour space and has a 10-bit LUT (which requires a graphics card with 10-bit capability to obtain benefit e.g. AMD (Radeon) FirePro series; s/h examples of which can be bought for little cash on e-bay): link. Colourconfidence are selling them for £388.00 inc VAT, which is par for the course, and are including a free GrafiLite daylight balanced viewing lamp. For an extra £99.00 you can have a bundle that includes a GREGTAGMACBETH eye-one display 2 calibration device, representing a good saving when compared with the price when bought separately link
I paid the premium for an Eizo monitor about 5 years ago and have never regretted it and I'm seriously considering upgrading to one with a larger screen in the near future.
I know John Riley is a big fan of the Dell Ultra-sharp range and he speaks from personal experience. There are many reports (from both professional reviewers and users, however, indicating that QC can be an issue with these; although in fairness many went on to say that Dell were very good at replacing them when notified.
You pays your money and takes your choice
Best wishes,
Jon
AFAIK all current RADEON HD5/6 series cards have a 10-bit LUT. Unless you are going to be gaming or doing 3D work high end gaming or workstation are a complete waste of money.
I'd always use a colorimeter for calibration, there is no better way.
Here is a review of the 2209WA with lots of information. Only 8-bit LUT but it would be pointless to have more in an sRGB display.
http://www.prad.de/en/monitore/review/2009/review-dell-2209wa-part10.html
Comment by Tyr posted on Another Monitor Question... at 19/05/2011 - 08:47
Do you print your own or get them printed somewhere? If you can get two prints, an sRGB and an AdobeRGB and compare them side by side then you can decide.
Comment by Tyr posted on Another Monitor Question... at 18/05/2011 - 14:49
My workflow is also all sRGB although I shoot RAW. I use sRGB because all the printing firms I use use are calibrated to sRGB. That makes it pointless to have anything that goes beyond that at the moment.
For video work though a wider colour gamut monitor is better as PAL/SECAM covers 85% of AdobeRGB, NTSC is about 75% AFAIK. So an AdobeRGB display can be calibrated correctly for video work as it has a wider gamut than either main format.
For video work though a wider colour gamut monitor is better as PAL/SECAM covers 85% of AdobeRGB, NTSC is about 75% AFAIK. So an AdobeRGB display can be calibrated correctly for video work as it has a wider gamut than either main format.
Comment by Tyr posted on Another Monitor Question... at 18/05/2011 - 14:37
