Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 ... 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 »
 61 
 on: April 22, 2014, 09:25:04 PM 
Started by markadams99 - Last post by markadams99
Winter shot - snow looks dingy grey, not "snow" white (I know snow isn't always white - I live in Canada!). It looks like "processed grey", though, and not a natural shadow grey. In fact, it appears the highlight parts of the snow are grey.

Good point. Thanks.

 62 
 on: April 22, 2014, 09:20:49 PM 
Started by markadams99 - Last post by ehackett
Great!  Can't wait for summer...and fall.

 63 
 on: April 22, 2014, 09:19:40 PM 
Started by Atina - Last post by eronald
Timothy,

 Thank you.


Edmund

For what it is worth to this discussion, here is a post I made on another board comparing the CCD an CMOS in the Hasselblad offerings. 

I've been asked for some comparisons between the H4D-60 and the H5D-50c.  These first three pairs were shot at ISO 100 (which is base ISO for the H5D-50c; base for the H4D-60 is ISO50).  All were shot  within a minute of each other, and from the same stationary tripod.  These are all straight out of LR5 with no corrections or sharpening. 

With the HC 100
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/23138385/h4d60_iso100_f11_45th.jpg
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/23138385/h5d50c_iso100_f11_40th.jpg

With HC 50 II
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/23138385/h4d60_iso100_f8_15th.jpg
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/23138385/h5d50c_iso100_f8_15th.jpg

With HC 50 II
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/23138385/h4d60_iso100_f8_125th.jpg
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/23138385/h5d50c_iso100_f8_125th.jpg

When I first used the new camera I had the impression that the colors were hotter--a little more saturated and vibrant--than my older rig, but this isn't evident when you compare them side by side at ISO100.  The H4D-60 exposes 2/3 of a stop higher than the H5D-50c across all settings, but this is probably due to normal camera variation.  I'll be damned if I can tell any difference in resolution or sharpness between these two cameras.   The major differences are, of course, the crop factor and the ability of the H5D-50c to sing at higher ISOs. 

I'll continue to posts comparisons, next at higher ISO and faces. 

 64 
 on: April 22, 2014, 09:14:48 PM 
Started by arionelli - Last post by lowep
I do like setting up with the waist level finder as well as the rotating back idea of the Hy6 a lot, from my previous time with a basic 'blad configuration in film, and it may swing me away rom the M or the Contax 645 (another of my previous faves).

what is the difference shooting Contax 645 with WLF and doing the same with a basic blad apart from rotating back and of course there is not as big a clunk when the mirror claps?


 65 
 on: April 22, 2014, 09:12:24 PM 
Started by nihil - Last post by Scott Martin
i1Profiler, like Monaco Profiler before it neutralizes the grey axis all the way tot the black point, whereas PMP leaves the black point alone. So PMP will leave the black point at RGB=0,0,0 whereas MP and i1P might set the black point to RGB=0,23,8 to try and neutralize a magenta, yellowish cast. I've suggested that i1P give us the ability to choose between the two behaviors but I think that's wishful thinking. Neutralizing the black point is probably the right approach and a colorful black point represents a failure in the calibration process prior to profiling. All said I'll take the i1P results and exceptional Perceptual rendering anyway. Perceptually it is fantastic. If you have a beef with it the correct approach is to improve the calibration prior to profiling.

 66 
 on: April 22, 2014, 09:06:38 PM 
Started by Keithw1975 - Last post by Scott Martin
I print mainly with canvas on a 9900. Can the S70 print with gloss or semigloss finish? You stated that no coating was necessary. What kind of finish will the S70 leave after printing on canvas? I am not sure we can afford a S70, but after waiting 6 years for Epson to upgrade the 9900, we may look into it. Is there clogging with the S70? Thanks for anyone's input.  Smiley

Strangely, the Surecolor S70 prints in a way that's pretty compatible with both matte and glossy canvases. The inked areas honor the surface it's printed upon. Clogging is similar to the 9900 (I suspect they share the same printhead). And the 9900 isn't too shabby - pinnacle of aqueous technology, except for some possible inkset improvements...

 67 
 on: April 22, 2014, 08:57:00 PM 
Started by chuckn - Last post by chuckn
Trying something new, at least for me. Thoughts??

 68 
 on: April 22, 2014, 08:52:33 PM 
Started by nihil - Last post by samueljohnchia
V1.5 renders the grayscale slightly darker towards the black point than earlier versions of i1Profiler for me too. This is by lowering the separation between the darkest tones, albeit slightly, and it does nothing to better the dmax for what I profile. My profiling experience is limited to relatively neutral native output, so I don't face any issues with dmax. Like Jan, I've been happy with the quality of the profiles after quite a bit of tweaking and investigation. V1.5 compared to earlier versions of i1Profiler has smoother gradations in dark blues - that the main tweak they have made in the profiling engine. It does sacrifice a bit of blue edge gamut separation.

But V1.5 is very buggy for me. Lost of connectivity with i1 Pro 2 at random (halfway during a large patch measurement process is not fun), increased errors in measurements and a strange bug when measuring light patches or paper white, very slow profile generation (sometimes very very slow at random) and more resource hungry than V1.3.2. Crashes without warning frequently.

 69 
 on: April 22, 2014, 08:46:41 PM 
Started by KPV - Last post by KPV
Hi Guys,
I have a quick question after some unexpected performance at a shoot today.  I had to shoot the complete staff at a dental office.  I was using on location studio lighting and tethered to Capture One with USB3.
I use the back button focus on my Canon 1Dx routinely.  It allows me to focus separately from the shutter button and then grab the decisive moment at the instant I need to without waiting for the camera's autofocus to grab focus and allow a shutter release.  It is a wonderful way of working and I have used it for the last 5 years.  I had my Mamiya 645DF+ set to this functionality as well.  In other words, I changed CF9 to 1 and CF12 to 1.  This allowed me to use back button focus.  I don't recall any issues with it.  However, last night I updated my camera body firmware and digital back firmware to the latest versions from Mamiya and Leaf and when I used the camera today something odd occurred.
I would achieve focus with the back button.  Ok, good.  I would get the double beep focus confirmation.  Then, when I wanted to press the shutter button to grab the shot, it would refocus with the shutter button press!  What the heck??!!  This turned into a big problem.  As the M645DF+ has only three focus points, and basically requires a "focus and recompose" methodology, I would get great focus on my subject's eye, slightly recompose and press the shutter to find the camera trying to refocus on the neck or chest area after the recomposition.  Ugh!
Am I missing something here?  Is this my own short sightedness or is this a result of a glitch in the latest firmware?
Thanks in advance,
Ken

 70 
 on: April 22, 2014, 08:46:02 PM 
Started by Atina - Last post by DandA
I haven't posted here in quite some time but have actively followed this discussion.  Out of necessity, I have to use the right tool for a given job and that mean most often it's the various pro level CMOS based Nikon DSLR's.  Yet when large files are required for clients or shooting for personal use, I always opt for a CCD based camera.  The scientist in me (formal training) does want to know the theory is behind the differences I see between most CMOS and CCD based cameras but the artist/photographer in me knows what I see and like and what works best for the clients I serve.  They too often prefer the final product derived from the CCD based cameras, even when comparable comparisons from both types of cameras are shown to them. 

The present day CCD cameras I utilize are the Lecia M9 and Pentax 645D.  I've also used on a fair number of occasions the Leica S. All three in many respects have a look that I foten don't find with CMOS based cameras no matter how much I work with and treak the files.  Sometimes I can come close and sometimes not.  Many variables involved.

No doubt there are many advantages to utilization of a CMOS chip and if those advantages are absolutely mandatory to use for a task, then of course I won't hesitate, but again if I have a choice, make mine CCD.

In any case, I have an open mind and most welcome the discussion and opinions of all here, regardless of their personal choices and reasoning.  Thats how one learns and grows.

Dave (D&A)

Pages: « 1 ... 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 »
Ad
Ad
Ad