TexasCHLforum.com

RPB wrote:I guess I could throw out/sell my old stuff and get back into photography, buy all new equipment and editing programs... but I haven't.

If you do decide to go that route, I'd be interested in some of the old stuff. Particularly certain Minolta AF lenses and 120 gear. http://www.texasphotoforum.com" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; and http://www/apug.org" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; would also be good places to look for buyers.

Hybrid processing (process the negs and scan them in at high res) has really expanded the horizons for film. You can still get the classic look, with all the editing/archiving/printing advantages of digital.

WildBill wrote:In addition to my full-size Bogen tripod I own on of these:

Another thing that helped with the cave photos and some other shots I've done is learning to be creative with the tripod. In areas where there just wasn't enough room, I would leave it folded, but with the legs extended to full length, so it basically became an awkward monopod. Set the bottom against the trail edge and use a foot against it to hold it there, and a hip pinning it against the rail, and shots up to 10 seconds become possible with very little setup time.

Buy more than one tripod too; the $30 WalMart one is handy for times when you won't drag out a much more expensive one, and you're more likely to just let it live in the trunk so you'll have it when you need it.

steve817 wrote:ETA: By the way KD5NRH, I'm digging the cave shot.

Thanks. The trick was finding a P&S that offered a good aperture priority mode that would actually handle fairly long shutter times. 10 seconds at f/8 was enough for this shot, but there were several others in the cave that needed 15-30 seconds, and a few of the other cameras I looked at only went to 10 seconds in aperture mode.

Carlsbad is easily the most photographer-friendly show cave I've found, with no prohibitions on tripods or monopods, and the rangers were actually holding up crowds to let the few of us with tripods finish up long exposures.

steve817 wrote:I'm with you on the color correction thing. MPix has served me well in that regard and the best part is, I don't have to mess with it. I used EZprints years ago. It was the first one I used as a matter of fact. It had been so long since I used them, I forgot the name of the company until you brought it up. I went to MPix because I wanted to check out the metallic surface prints they offer and ended up liking all of their services.

EZPrints is offering metallics now. Looks great on astrophotos, B&W film scans and some architecture shots.

steve817 wrote:I got a little off track. My point was that the end product is the same.

In general, yes, but there are some other things to bear in mind for printing. I generally use SmugMug for my best photos because they have the fastest customer service and the best guarantees of any of the sites I tried. All products on the lower account tiers go through EZPrints, and I've never had a problem with those. Before I dropped my Pro membership, I did have a few printed through both EZPrints and Bay Photo, and I could only tell the difference with the photos side by side in full sunlight. The only thing they don't offer is panoramic prints. (You can use the "no crop" option to print a panorama on a larger paper size and cut the blank areas off yourself, but it's not usually cost effective for really wide shots. IIRC, printing direct through EZPrints and MPix will allow panoramas with the small dimension being any standard size of photo paper roll stock, and charging by the inch of the long dimension.)

If you don't mind tying up your internet connection with the uploads, their unlimited storage is worthwhile. I don't upload every "keeper" but I've known several pros who do, and have terabytes of photos on their site without any problems. (So it's not the "unlimited unless you actually try to use a lot" like some ISPs used to be.) $40 per year (though the Power account at $60 does offer some nice features like custom layouts) for an unlimited offsite backup of all your family photos isn't too bad in the long run. If anybody wants to set up an account, PM me and I'll track down a $5 discount URL for you. I think they're still offering free Pro level accounts for some non-profit and educational organizations, too, and that's an excellent way to get your scout troop or chess club's photos online, especially if you have a lot of people taking pictures, since the Pro account allows assistant passwords so everybody can upload their own shots for the primary user to arrange.

The big benefit of SmugMug for printing is the color correction that they offer. Getting the color perfect on an uncalibrated monitor is like trying to zero a scope without a rest. I'm not sure exactly how their correction works, but the only time it has ever failed to do a better job than I did was a shot that had an intentional color cast removed when I forgot to uncheck the correction box. Even then, they got it looking pretty good :)

steve817 wrote:A former acquaintance of mine who was a photographer turned me on to the process. He would do weddings but didn't really like to. On his website he discussed the process and said that even though he shot digital, his prints would outlast most marriages...even the good ones.

I've got dot-matrix printouts that will outlast most marriages these days.

For that matter, the Canon Chromalife ink I use at home is supposed to be rated for 100 years in normal use. (Presumably, this would mean framed or otherwise protected from handling and out of direct sunlight.) Probably longer in albums where the prints are protected from light except when actually being viewed. Most good quality photo printers will make a print that anybody who doesn't spend a lot of time closely examining prints won't be able to tell from a darkroom print. Fooling the rest of us is, realistically, less of a priority outside the marketing department.

dalto wrote:When I said "obsolete" I was not trying to imply that they could no longer be used. The point I was trying to make was to spend your money more on glass and less on the camera body. I actually advocate buying used older generation camera bodies.

This is why I've stuck with Sony for my DSLR; they bought out the old Minolta lines and kept everything compatible with my Minolta AF glass. It also means that I only need one of each lens even when I'm carrying the Alpha and two Minolta film bodies. I also got lucky recently and got a 50mm f/1.7 and a 70-210mm f/4 for free because the previous owner didn't think they were even worth mentioning on the deal. I guess he didn't check eBay; those two lenses together would bring around $300-350 used.

philip964 wrote:1. Shoot film. Your digital pictures unless printed in black and white probably won't be here for your grandkids.

Make sure you archive those digital photos well, too, and keep the film negatives in labeled envelopes. One of the things that bugs me about some of the family negatives I've been scanning in is that noone alive knows who some of the people in those photos are. Digital at least makes it easy to pin down the date of the shot, and most file formats have something along the lines of a notes field where you can put in extra information. This is one reason I also like to get my film scanned in fairly quickly; having the date on the scan be at least close to the actual date the photo was taken can narrow things down for those who find the photos later.

2. Focus and properly expose. That's much easier now with digital, but see above.

Somewhat easier, but no amount of postproduction work can put back information that isn't there to begin with. Missed focus is pretty much permanent, and missing the exposure by too much will result in lost detail in either shadow or highlight. Knowing how to use the camera you have is key here; even an older point and shoot camera can do a lot if you have the right features and know how to make them work for the situation at hand. This is a very low light shot with a 5MP Canon S2 IS that I picked up at a pawn shop for $100; I know a lot of the people that had nice SLRs with them that day have nothing that will compare with this, simply because they didn't have tripods with them, and left their cameras on auto modes that just can't handle such an extreme situation.

FWIW, an 8x10 of this is hanging over my shoulder right now and it looks just as good as some of the shots from my 10MP cameras. There's an 11x14 of it over my wife's desk that shows no pixellation until you're in danger of getting noseprints on the glass.

3. Move in closer. Once you have decided the photo your going to take, move in closer and take it again, this one will be better.

To an extent. There's a reason a lot of great portraits are taken with 50-85mm primes; you have to move to a good distance to frame the shot well with them.

5. Take pictures of things that will change with time. That is the magic of photography. For this reason take photographs with cars in them. Sure take a picture with mom and the kids without your family car in the photograph, but trust me your son when he is old will appreciate the one with the car in it more.

This also goes back to number one; the car or the house may be what jogs someone's memory as to who the people are or what year the photo was taken. We're expecting another baby soon, and without the scan date on this file and the information on the envelope the negative is in, for example, there's no way I could be sure that I'll remember which one it was 20years from now.

8. I know sometimes your are rushed, but try and take at least a few photos stopped outside of the moving car you are riding in.

This is one of the reasons I want to do some serious bicycle touring someday; it's easy to stop for a minute and get a few shots when you're only doing 15MPH anyway. A wireless remote makes it a lot easier to get yourself in the shot too; no rushing to try to beat a 10 second timer.

dalto wrote:I just want to point out that you can print your digital pictures if you are so inclined. You don't to shoot film to get prints.

And even if you do shoot film, unless you specifically track down one of the few processors who will still darkroom print your photos, any prints you get back will be inkjet prints of your scanned negatives. The quality of the ink used will determine how long these will last.

One site that should also be mentioned in any "help me pick a camera" thread is http://www.dpreview.com" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;