Digital BW, The Print

I think I've just become a believer -- that DSLRs have made the grade.

I took my new Canon 5d2 to the Disney Concert Hall in L.A. on Monday, with just the Canon 35mm f/2 lens.  I fired off a number of "snapshots" of the outside of the building.  The first 16x20 just came off my old 7500 (using Eboni-6), and those 21 mp make all the difference.  I think I'm a convert.  

Actually, I worry that it's too easy.

I've put a shot of the Disney Concert Hall on my web page for those who are interested.  What a great subject.  (The music inside was also very nice.)

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

> I took my new Canon 5d2 to the Disney Concert Hall in L.A.
> on Monday, with just the Canon 35mm f/2 lens.  I fired off a
> number of "snapshots" of the outside of the
> building.  The first 16x20 just came off my old 7500 (using
> Eboni-6), and those 21 mp make all the difference.  I think
> I'm a convert.  

That's a sexy looking building, and what a great shot!

> Actually, I worry that it's too easy.

I dunno.  Don't you think we deserve it after all these years fussing with film and nasty chemicals for hours isolated in dark rooms?  "Too easy" is just fine with me!

Regards,

Ken

Thanks Paul, I've been drooling over that camera. Now I need a bucket.

Sarah


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "pr_roark" <pr_roark@...> wrote:

>
> I think I've just become a believer -- that DSLRs have made the grade.
> 
> I took my new Canon 5d2 to the Disney Concert Hall in L.A. on Monday, with just the Canon 35mm f/2 lens.  I fired off a number of "snapshots" of the outside of the building.  The first 16x20 just came off my old 7500 (using Eboni-6), and those 21 mp make all the difference.  I think I'm a convert.  
> 
> Actually, I worry that it's too easy.
> 
> I've put a shot of the Disney Concert Hall on my web page for those who are interested.  What a great subject.  (The music inside was also very nice.)
> 
> Paul
> www.PaulRoark.com
>

erm, sorry if that was a little too graphic. ;*)


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "pr_roark" <pr_roark@...> wrote:

>
> I think I've just become a believer -- that DSLRs have made the grade.
> 
> I took my new Canon 5d2 to the Disney Concert Hall in L.A. on Monday, with just the Canon 35mm f/2 lens.  I fired off a number of "snapshots" of the outside of the building.  The first 16x20 just came off my old 7500 (using Eboni-6), and those 21 mp make all the difference.  I think I'm a convert.  
> 
> Actually, I worry that it's too easy.
> 
> I've put a shot of the Disney Concert Hall on my web page for those who are interested.  What a great subject.  (The music inside was also very nice.)
> 
> Paul
> www.PaulRoark.com
>

Hi folks:

This weekend is the last one in which a show of my prints will be on  
exhibit at Alfa Art Gallery in New Brunswick, NJ and I'd like to  
invite Digital BW members to a free lecture at 3pm on Saturday, 4/11.  
I will give a free 30 minute slide presentation/lecture about the  
show, GRANDmarks - NYC, and I will answer questions about the  
cameras, lenses, canvas, papers and printers used. About half of the  
prints are about 40x60 inches in size, printed on an HP Z3100 using  
the grayscale driver mode which uses 4 gray/black inks. The canvas  
was coated with Breathing Color Glamour II and stretched on heavy  
duty stretcher bars (about 1.75 inches wide).

Some of the photos from the show can be seen here:
http://tinyurl.com/dnz2rb

and the address of the gallery is below:

Alfa Art Gallery
108 Church Street
New Brunswick, NJ 08901

On the same day, from 4-8pm, a Photoshop CS4 workflow/tips lecture  
and demonstration will be held. For more info and a $20 discount on  
the event, visit this page:
http://tinyurl.com/PSL2009A

All the best,
Andrew
---------------------------------------------------
Andrew Darlow
Editor, The Imaging Buffet
http://www.imagingbuffet.com
Author, 301 Inkjet Tips and Techniques:
An Essential Printing Resource for Photographers - http:// 
www.inkjettips.com




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Websites like dpreview.com have said for years that it's no longer about megapixels.

I disagree - people like me are not aiming to print 4x6" snaps, but more like 18x18" - so, keeping my images to between 20-50mp gives me what I'd be wanting from a film camera.

I only have a D70, so stitching mosaics is my only option - but it works well, mostly. Unfortunately it takes a lot of disc space, because there's a lot of redundancy with all the overlapping images.

If it wasn't about megapixels, then 35mm would have made large format cameras obsolete. 

Some people just needed medium or large format. I am one of those and for us, we still need medium format in the digital era.

Common sense!

Great photo by the way - I'm glad you find the camera adequate.

Richard

____________
www.richardsmallfield.com 

   "The first problem for all of us, men and women, is not to learn, 
   but to unlearn."
   --Gloria Steinem, women's rights activist, editor (1934- )

Hey Andrew:

You need to get off the east coast and come west! Lots of us out in AZ and
Ca.

David

On Thu, Apr 9, 2009 at 8:58 PM, Andrew Darlow <ad@andrewdarlow.com> wrote:

>
>
> Hi folks:
>
> This weekend is the last one in which a show of my prints will be on
> exhibit at Alfa Art Gallery in New Brunswick, NJ and I'd like to
> invite Digital BW members to a free lecture at 3pm on Saturday, 4/11.
> I will give a free 30 minute slide presentation/lecture about the
> show, GRANDmarks - NYC, and I will answer questions about the
> cameras, lenses, canvas, papers and printers used. About half of the
> prints are about 40x60 inches in size, printed on an HP Z3100 using
> the grayscale driver mode which uses 4 gray/black inks. The canvas
> was coated with Breathing Color Glamour II and stretched on heavy
> duty stretcher bars (about 1.75 inches wide).
>
> Some of the photos from the show can be seen here:
> http://tinyurl.com/dnz2rb
>
> and the address of the gallery is below:
>
> Alfa Art Gallery
> 108 Church Street
> New Brunswick, NJ 08901
>
> On the same day, from 4-8pm, a Photoshop CS4 workflow/tips lecture
> and demonstration will be held. For more info and a $20 discount on
> the event, visit this page:
> http://tinyurl.com/PSL2009A
>
> All the best,
> Andrew
> ---------------------------------------------------
> Andrew Darlow
> Editor, The Imaging Buffet
> http://www.imagingbuffet.com
> Author, 301 Inkjet Tips and Techniques:
> An Essential Printing Resource for Photographers - http://
> www.inkjettips.com
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>  
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Peter De Smidt <pdesmidt@...> wrote:
>
> Great image, Paul!
>

Thanks, but the real credit goes to Frank Gehry, the architect. 

I uploaded another one at http://paulroark.com/Disney-1.jpg  

On this one there was a reflection of the sun on the metal skin (stainless steel?) that was about like shooting directly into the sun.  I was curious what the auto exposure would do with it, and it blew out the highlight.  Interestingly, however, it did capture the panel separation lines, and the final result actually looks very much like it did in person.  I'd usually just discard an image with such a highlight, but this one looks quite nice in the print.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

Great image, Paul!

Like the highlight results you could (sometimes) get developing film in 
PMK Pyro. 

Like Ken, I appreciate the easy (dry, well lit, sitting down) although 
if I had not gone through the wet, dark, standing up phase for 30+ years 
I might not appreciate it as much.

Cheers,
Kip

pr_roark wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
> On this one there was a reflection of the sun on the metal skin 
> (stainless steel?) that was about like shooting directly into the sun. 
> I was curious what the auto exposure would do with it, and it blew out 
> the highlight. Interestingly, however, it did capture the panel 
> separation lines, and the final result actually looks very much like 
> it did in person. I'd usually just discard an image with such a 
> highlight, but this one looks quite nice in the print.
>
>
> 


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

pr_roark schreef:
> I think I've just become a believer -- that DSLRs have made the grade.
> 
> I took my new Canon 5d2 to the Disney Concert Hall in L.A. on Monday, with just the Canon 35mm f/2 lens.  I fired off a number of "snapshots" of the outside of the building.  The first 16x20 just came off my old 7500 (using Eboni-6), and those 21 mp make all the difference.  I think I'm a convert.  
> 
> Actually, I worry that it's too easy.
> 
> I've put a shot of the Disney Concert Hall on my web page for those who are interested.  What a great subject.  (The music inside was also very nice.)
> 
> Paul
> www.PaulRoark.com 
> 
>


Paul,

Good to see the perfect picture and to read the above.
I have the 5D2 here too for 10 days now.
Had to wait two months before it arrived though.
For years I withstood the temptation to get a DSLR and this time I went 
for it.
That also means I have an awful lot to learn.

-- 
Met vriendelijke groeten,   Ernst


New: Dinkla Canvas Wrap Actions

|      Dinkla Grafische Techniek      |
|         www.pigment-print.com        |
|                 ( unvollendet )                 |

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Ernst Dinkla <edinkla@...> wrote:
>
> pr_roark schreef:
> > I think I've just become a believer -- that DSLRs have made the grade.
> > 
> I took my new Canon 5d2 to the Disney Concert Hall in L.A. > Good to see the perfect picture and to read the above.
> I have the 5D2 here too for 10 days now.
> Had to wait two months before it arrived though.
> For years I withstood the temptation to get a DSLR and this time I went 
> for it.
> That also means I have an awful lot to learn.
> 

I have my 5DII for a month now, it replaced my 20D so I was converted already. But the 5DII is major step. In terms of resolution, but also in high ISO performance. That's perhaps the major improvement coming from film. 1600 ISO is still great, 3200 still very acceptable. It changes the way you consider available light. And for studio-like situations, compact speedlights are powerful enoguh. I So far, I've mainly done portraits with it using my 100/2.8 macro.

I love it...

Joost

Hi Paul -
On the screen image, there really no indication of burned out  
highlights - It's really quite beautiful, with just the right tonal  
range for the subject.
It's good that you didn't discard the image!
Best,
Clay Price
www.cpricephoto.com

 >Interestingly, however, it did capture the panel separation lines,  
and the final result actually looks very much like it did in person.  
I'd usually just discard an image with such a >highlight, but this  
one looks quite nice in the print.

 >Paul
 >www.PaulRoark.com

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

You were right to keep the highlight - it really lifts the print IMHO - I'm guessing the material is Titanium , like the Guggenheim in Bilbao?
Either way its a stunning pic and it oozes quality even on my crappy screen - looks like another big chip off the film facade....
Steve the fence-sitting luddite  
  ] 



  --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Peter De Smidt <pdesmidt@...> wrote:
  >
  > Great image, Paul!
  >

  Thanks, but the real credit goes to Frank Gehry, the architect. 

  I uploaded another one at http://paulroark.com/Disney-1.jpg 

  On this one there was a reflection of the sun on the metal skin (stainless steel?) that was about like shooting directly into the sun. I was curious what the auto exposure would do with it, and it blew out the highlight. Interestingly, however, it did capture the panel separation lines, and the final result actually looks very much like it did in person. I'd usually just discard an image with such a highlight, but this one looks quite nice in the print.

  Paul
  www.PaulRoark.com



  

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

On Apr 9, 2009, at 10:22 PM, pr_roark wrote:

> I think I've just become a believer -- that DSLRs have made the grade.
>
> I took my new Canon 5d2

I've been a DSLR enthusiast for many years, but there's no doubt that  
the 5D Mark ll brings it to a new level. Meaningful increase in  
resolution (to the point of challenging the best of lenses), and  
significantly increased dynamic range, are the two key improvements,  
though there are others. The latest Nikons offer similar improvements  
in low light shooting, but the resolution of the 5D Mark ll stands out  
even in that company. Those huge files take up harddrive space though;  
fortunately drives are cheap these days, but I also find myself  
weeding out images from each shoot more diligently than with previous  
cameras; no reason to save blurry 21 MP  high bit files!

C. David Tobie
Global Product Technology Manager
Digital Imaging & Home Theater
CDTobie@...


  ----------



Datacolor
www.datacolor.com/Spyder3




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

On Apr 10, 2009, at 12:23 AM, Richard Smallfield wrote:

> Websites like dpreview.com have said for years that it's no longer  
> about megapixels.

Companies like Olympus have been saying that as well; but their  
flagship camera is a 4/3 system, easy to carry, camera thats also easy  
on disk space, with its modest file size, so it only makes sense to  
have that opinion. And they are right, for many types of output, but  
as you say: for large prints, pixels still count, as does dynamic  
range. But one has to have at least a 17 inch wide printer, ideally a  
24, or else be cropping files heavily, before those extra pixels  
become critical.

C. David Tobie
Global Product Technology Manager
Digital Imaging & Home Theater
CDTobie@...


  ----------



Datacolor
www.datacolor.com/Spyder3




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

On Apr 10, 2009, at 12:36 AM, David Neely wrote:

> You need to get off the east coast and come west! Lots of us out in  
> AZ and
> Ca.


You will notice that Andrew's workshops are very affordable. Thats the  
new wave in, well, most everything: eat locally, teach locally, etc...  
which allows for such pricing. In California he's an expensive  
imported speaker, and the rates would have to reflect that.  
Fortunately there's lots of good local talent out there. If this trend  
continues, I may find myself spending less time at Tuscany Workshops,  
and more at Maine Workshops, which is a local drive for me, but lacks  
that magic which a faraway climate offers...

C. David Tobie
Global Product Technology Manager
Digital Imaging & Home Theater
CDTobie@...


  ----------



Datacolor
www.datacolor.com/Spyder3




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

On Apr 10, 2009, at 1:47 AM, pr_roark wrote:

> On this one there was a reflection of the sun on the metal skin  
> (stainless steel?) that was about like shooting directly into the  
> sun.  I was curious what the auto exposure would do with it, and it  
> blew out the highlight.  Interestingly, however, it did capture the  
> panel separation lines, and the final result actually looks very  
> much like it did in person.  I'd usually just discard an image with  
> such a highlight, but this one looks quite nice in the print.

You can just barely see the pop-top tab showing in this one. <G>  
(Pardon my architectural criticism...)

C. David Tobie
Global Product Technology Manager
Digital Imaging & Home Theater
CDTobie@...


  ----------



Datacolor
www.datacolor.com/Spyder3




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Hi David:

Thanks for the encouragement! I'll let you know if I go on tour. I  
agree with David Tobie. There are some very good live workshops out  
west at places like the Santa Fe Workshops.

All the best,

Andrew
---------------------------------------------------
Andrew Darlow
Editor, The Imaging Buffet
http://www.imagingbuffet.com
Author, 301 Inkjet Tips and Techniques:
An Essential Printing Resource for Photographers - http:// 
www.inkjettips.com

On Apr 10, 2009, at 12:36 AM, David Neely wrote:

> Hey Andrew:
>
> You need to get off the east coast and come west! Lots of us out in  
> AZ and
> Ca.
>
> David
>
> On Thu, Apr 9, 2009 at 8:58 PM, Andrew Darlow <ad@...>  
> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> Hi folks:
>>
>> This weekend is the last one in which a show of my prints will be on
>> exhibit at Alfa Art Gallery in New Brunswick, NJ and I'd like to
>> invite Digital BW members to a free lecture at 3pm on Saturday, 4/11.
>> I will give a free 30 minute slide presentation/lecture about the
>> show, GRANDmarks - NYC, and I will answer questions about the
>> cameras, lenses, canvas, papers and printers used. About half of the
>> prints are about 40x60 inches in size, printed on an HP Z3100 using
>> the grayscale driver mode which uses 4 gray/black inks. The canvas
>> was coated with Breathing Color Glamour II and stretched on heavy
>> duty stretcher bars (about 1.75 inches wide).
>>
>> Some of the photos from the show can be seen here:
>> http://tinyurl.com/dnz2rb
>>

Have just gone from the 5D to the 5D II, and can't believe the difference with the multi-purpose (but heavy) 28-300mm--wow!
I've been lurking on this forum for a long time, and have to say, you guys are the smartest & the best--Paul R, Jon, Tyler, Ernst, Joost...  Although I work almost exclusively in color now, I've learned so much over the years in the most broadly, sophisticated sense.  THANK YOU!

Lauri

www.laurirobertsonphotography.com

Ernst Dinkla <edinkla@...> wrote:

...
> I have the 5D2 here too for 10 days now.
> ... I have an awful lot to learn.

Learning these new computer-cameras is no small task. I feel I'm just at the beginning even though I'd purchased a Canon Rebel several years ago as "training wheels."

I'm inclined toward simplicity and avoiding having to learn lots of new software.  So, some of what I'll be testing is whether these raw files and the various adjustments in the converter are really that significant for what I do.  

One bottom line question I'd like to know is whether any image information is lost when one converts a raw file to a 16 bit RGB file with no special adjustments at all.  (I'm just using the Canon software to convert now.)

With the old Rebel, I tried to find more highlight information in the raw file by converter adjustments, and I found no difference at all from what I could achieve in Photoshop by adjusting the tiff file after just converting the raw file with default settings. 


Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

On Apr 10, 2009, at 11:13 AM, robertsonlauri wrote:

> Have just gone from the 5D to the 5D II, and can't believe the  
> difference with the multi-purpose (but heavy) 28-300mm--wow!

I owned that lens. It pumped so much dust into my 5D I had to get rid  
of it! I don't intend ever to use a push-pull lens on my new 5D Mark  
ll...

C. David Tobie
Global Product Technology Manager
Digital Imaging & Home Theater
CDTobie@...


  ----------



Datacolor
www.datacolor.com/Spyder3




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

On Apr 10, 2009, at 11:17 AM, pr_roark wrote:

> I'm inclined toward simplicity and avoiding having to learn lots of  
> new software.  So, some of what I'll be testing is whether these raw  
> files and the various adjustments in the converter are really that  
> significant for what I do.

Learning to process RAW files in Lightroom is absolutely critical,  
both for quality, and for quantity. Its a whole new interface and  
logic to learn and can be frustrating at times, but I recommend biting  
the bullet and doing it, you won't be sorry.

C. David Tobie
Global Product Technology Manager
Digital Imaging & Home Theater
CDTobie@...


  ----------



Datacolor
www.datacolor.com/Spyder3




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Richard Smallfield <r.smallfield@...> wrote:
>
> Websites like dpreview.com have said for years that it's 
> no longer about megapixels.
> 
> I disagree - people like me are not aiming to print 4x6" snaps,
> but more like 18x18" - so, keeping my images to between 
> 20-50mp gives me what I'd be wanting from a film camera.

The 5d2 at 21 mp is about the bottom of the range of what I can live with.  I expect to upgrade in 3 years to a 40 mp model -- hopefully with seriously more DR. 

However, I have (at least) one reservation about increasing MPs on these DSLRs -- finding optics that can do justice to the 5d2 is already a challenge.  It seems that the larger formats have advantages in capturing high amounts of information regardless of the sensor or film resolution.  Note what Leica is doing -- trashed the R and is going to a larger sensor size.  With diffraction limits, I assumed the ability to use larger apertures offset the smaller format size, but maybe not.  Maybe there are other factors.  At any rate, the bottom line is obvious from how sharp the very old, historic large format images are -- larger formats seem to be able to capture more information more easily, regardless of sensor/film resolution.
 
> ... stitching mosaics ...

I do it, but it's a pain.  

The gap I see in my current setup (that I'll temporarily plug with stitching) is that the Canon wide angles are not very inspiring.  The MTF of even the new 24 L II is not that impressive.  I waiting anxiously for the new 24 TS L II (and the lottery prize I'll need if it's really any good).  I'm actually inclined to think dedicated wide angle rangefinders might be the answer on the wide side. 

I also initially thought the Sony (Minolta) sensor-shaking image stabilization was not the way to go due to the mass of the full frame sensors.  Now I'm less certain.  I have no IS lenses now, but with the high ISO performance of these new DSLRs, it makes me wonder what an f/1.2 with a sensor-shaking IS system could do.  Canon is already shaking the sensor to get dust off, so maybe adding the sensor-based IS would not be that big of a deal (patents aside).

At any rate, while the 5d2 is certainly not the ultimate DLSR, it does appear to deliver some very nice image files for a reasonable price. 

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

On Apr 10, 2009, at 11:45 AM, pr_roark wrote:

> The 5d2 at 21 mp is about the bottom of the range of what I can live  
> with.  I expect to upgrade in 3 years to a 40 mp model -- hopefully  
> with seriously more DR.
>
> However, I have (at least) one reservation about increasing MPs on  
> these DSLRs -- finding optics that can do justice to the 5d2 is  
> already a challenge.  It seems that the larger formats have  
> advantages in capturing high amounts of information regardless of  
> the sensor or film resolution.  Note what Leica is doing -- trashed  
> the R and is going to a larger sensor size.  With diffraction  
> limits, I assumed the ability to use larger apertures offset the  
> smaller format size, but maybe not.  Maybe there are other factors.   
> At any rate, the bottom line is obvious from how sharp the very old,  
> historic large format images are -- larger formats seem to be able  
> to capture more information more easily, regardless of sensor/film  
> resolution.

Your first comment brought this suggestion to mind, the later one  
confirmed it, you sound like a potential customer for a Digital  
Hasselblad.  The HD39 back captures 39MP,and there are some fantastic  
lenses available for it... with simpler lens configurations than 35mm  
style DSLR lenses, the image quality is less effected. There is the  
question of price, however...

C. David Tobie
Global Product Technology Manager
Digital Imaging & Home Theater
CDTobie@...


  ----------



Datacolor
www.datacolor.com/Spyder3




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

I would love to go to the Workshops in Santa Fe or basically any excuse to
go there! But the costs are way too high for me, an almost retired teacher.
If they were more affordable then I would love to go....

David

On Fri, Apr 10, 2009 at 6:58 AM, Andrew Darlow <ad@...> wrote:

>
>
> Hi David:
>
> Thanks for the encouragement! I'll let you know if I go on tour. I
> agree with David Tobie. There are some very good live workshops out
> west at places like the Santa Fe Workshops.
>
> All the best,
>
> Andrew
> ---------------------------------------------------
> Andrew Darlow
> Editor, The Imaging Buffet
> http://www.imagingbuffet.com
> Author, 301 Inkjet Tips and Techniques:
> An Essential Printing Resource for Photographers - http://
> www.inkjettips.com
>
> On Apr 10, 2009, at 12:36 AM, David Neely wrote:
>
> > Hey Andrew:
> >
> > You need to get off the east coast and come west! Lots of us out in
> > AZ and
> > Ca.
> >
> > David
> >
> > On Thu, Apr 9, 2009 at 8:58 PM, Andrew Darlow <ad@...<ad%40andrewdarlow.com>>
>
> > wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> Hi folks:
> >>
> >> This weekend is the last one in which a show of my prints will be on
> >> exhibit at Alfa Art Gallery in New Brunswick, NJ and I'd like to
> >> invite Digital BW members to a free lecture at 3pm on Saturday, 4/11.
> >> I will give a free 30 minute slide presentation/lecture about the
> >> show, GRANDmarks - NYC, and I will answer questions about the
> >> cameras, lenses, canvas, papers and printers used. About half of the
> >> prints are about 40x60 inches in size, printed on an HP Z3100 using
> >> the grayscale driver mode which uses 4 gray/black inks. The canvas
> >> was coated with Breathing Color Glamour II and stretched on heavy
> >> duty stretcher bars (about 1.75 inches wide).
> >>
> >> Some of the photos from the show can be seen here:
> >> http://tinyurl.com/dnz2rb
> >>
>
>  
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Hi David:

I agree that many workshops are only offered for multiple days.  
That's why I like to do 4 hour or one day workshops.

Another option to consider is to find someone who offers a workshop,  
or who is a consultant, and ask them to work with you via phone, e- 
mail and/or mail (to send prints/test charts back and forth) for a  
few hours. I do that type of consulting very often with clients.

All the best,

Andrew
---------------------------------------------------
Andrew Darlow
Editor, The Imaging Buffet
http://www.imagingbuffet.com
Author, 301 Inkjet Tips and Techniques:
An Essential Printing Resource for Photographers - http:// 
www.inkjettips.com

On Apr 10, 2009, at 12:17 PM, David Neely wrote:

> I would love to go to the Workshops in Santa Fe or basically any  
> excuse to
> go there! But the costs are way too high for me, an almost retired  
> teacher.
> If they were more affordable then I would love to go....
>
> David
>
> On Fri, Apr 10, 2009 at 6:58 AM, Andrew Darlow  
> <ad@...> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> Hi David:
>>
>> Thanks for the encouragement! I'll let you know if I go on tour. I
>> agree with David Tobie. There are some very good live workshops out
>> west at places like the Santa Fe Workshops.
>>
>> All the best,
>>
>> Andrew
>> ---------------------------------------------------
>> Andrew Darlow
>> Editor, The Imaging Buffet
>> http://www.imagingbuffet.com
>> Author, 301 Inkjet Tips and Techniques:
>> An Essential Printing Resource for Photographers - http://
>> www.inkjettips.com
>>
>> On Apr 10, 2009, at 12:36 AM, David Neely wrote:
>>
>>> Hey Andrew:
>>>
>>> You need to get off the east coast and come west! Lots of us out in
>>> AZ and
>>> Ca.
>>>
>>> David
>>>
>>> On Thu, Apr 9, 2009 at 8:58 PM, Andrew Darlow  
>>> <ad@...<ad%40andrewdarlow.com>>
>>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Hi folks:
>>>>
>>>> This weekend is the last one in which a show of my prints will  
>>>> be on
>>>> exhibit at Alfa Art Gallery in New Brunswick, NJ and I'd like to
>>>> invite Digital BW members to a free lecture at 3pm on Saturday,  
>>>> 4/11.
>>>> I will give a free 30 minute slide presentation/lecture about the
>>>> show, GRANDmarks - NYC, and I will answer questions about the
>>>> cameras, lenses, canvas, papers and printers used. About half of  
>>>> the
>>>> prints are about 40x60 inches in size, printed on an HP Z3100 using
>>>> the grayscale driver mode which uses 4 gray/black inks. The canvas
>>>> was coated with Breathing Color Glamour II and stretched on heavy
>>>> duty stretcher bars (about 1.75 inches wide).
>>>>
>>>> Some of the photos from the show can be seen here:
>>>> http://tinyurl.com/dnz2rb
>>>>
>>
>>

C D Tobie <CDTobie@...> wrote:

> ... you sound like a potential customer for a Digital  
> Hasselblad. 

I would appreciate the image quality of digital MF, I'm sure.  But ... 

> There is the question of price, however...

That's one of the big issues.  Given the economies of scale in electronics, I think the price/performance gap between the DSLR and digital MF will be much higher than in the mechanical days.  Right now, it doesn't look like it's justified for the type of photography I do.

Also, I got real tired of hiking with my heavy Rollei SL66 outfit.  Something about age ...

Additionally, I'm a huge fan of tilts.  The Hasselblad system looks like a real kluge.  I'm suspicious my Canon 90 TS can outshoot it.

Finally, with MF I missed the ability to buy a variety of new lenses, which I find a source of creativity.  A new toy -- I mean tool -- causes me to get out to see what it and the new perspective it allows can do. 

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

On Apr 10, 2009, at 1:29 PM, pr_roark wrote:

> Additionally, I'm a huge fan of tilts.

I misread that the first time; I see now that there is an "L" in  
there. I was going to ask what restrictions you felt existed for  
shooting nudes with a medium format camera; I find it to be ideal... <G>

C. David Tobie
Global Product Technology Manager
Digital Imaging & Home Theater
CDTobie@...


  ----------



Datacolor
www.datacolor.com/Spyder3




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Good tip. I concur with Paul and others, although can't back up with  
tests and numbers, but my subjective, anecdotal response is that the  
5D II is better all around than the previous iteration,  features of  
course, but image quality, too. At an amazing price for all of it.  
This would have been an $11,000 camera less than   ten years ago,  
without the movies.

James

Sent from my iPhone

On Apr 10, 2009, at 10:28 AM, C D Tobie <CDTobie@...> wrote:

I have this lens and I use it on a number of older nikon bodies without an adaptor. Its an amazing lens on my D3 and a damn good lens on my D300
 
Mike

--- On Fri, 4/10/09, Peter De Smidt <pdesmidt@...> wrote:

From: Peter De Smidt <pdesmidt@...>
Subject: Re: [Digital BW] DSLR Convert
To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
Date: Friday, April 10, 2009, 12:55 PM








You can get an adapter to use the Nikon 14-24mm f/2.8 AF-S on your D2. 
No autofocus, though, but set it at a hyperfocal distance and you're 
good to go for 99% of shooting.















[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

You can get an adapter to use the Nikon 14-24mm f/2.8 AF-S on your D2.  
No autofocus, though, but set it at a hyperfocal distance and you're 
good to go for 99% of shooting.

> You can get an adapter to use the Nikon 14-24mm f/2.8 AF-S on your D2. 

That should've been "...on your Canon 5d Mark II."

Sorry.

So, Paul, one wonders where to, now, for Nikon and Canon.

They are catching up with the resolution of 35mm 25iso film. (I miss APX25 and Tech Pan.)

But, given the limitations of pixel density and lens resolution, what more can the 35mm camera achieve?

How far will they be prepared to push pixel density in DSLRs?

Higher dynamic range, obviously, will become a more major point of difference between manufacturers - but at what point will the seeking of more MP in a 35mp camera reach its ceiling? And, at that point, will Canon and Nikon have to follow Leica and move to MF?

In the film days they didn't do that - but now that resolution lies within the camera body (not just film and lens) - and they have to compete, will they move the Leica way? But the cost of developing a new range of lenses and larger sensors etc would make the product very expensive.

All this makes me want to hunt around for a second-hand Rolleiflex. Or keep stitching 30mp mosaics with my D70 - the curator I was talking to thought I'd used a Hasselblad, anyway - and he used to teach photography.

Will we reach the stage we reached in film within a decade, where the 35mm camera body has delivered all it can - and the only points of difference will be user-friendly design,  ergonomics and optics - throughout the ranges of bodies?

Sorry - a bit OT in a printing forum.

Parting thought: "Predicion is always difficult - especially about the future." (Neils Bohr??)

I do love this forum :-)

Richard

At 03:45 a.m. Saturday 11/04/2009, you wrote:
>The 5d2 at 21 mp is about the bottom of the range of what I can live with. I expect to upgrade in 3 years to a 40 mp model -- hopefully with seriously more DR. 
>
>However, I have (at least) one reservation about increasing MPs on these DSLRs -- finding optics that can do justice to the 5d2 is already a challenge. It seems that the larger formats have advantages in capturing high amounts of information regardless of the sensor or film resolution. Note what Leica is doing -- trashed the R and is going to a larger sensor size. With diffraction limits, I assumed the ability to use larger apertures offset the smaller format size, but maybe not. Maybe there are other factors. At any rate, the bottom line is obvious from how sharp the very old, historic large format images are -- larger formats seem to be able to capture more information more easily, regardless of sensor/film resolution.
>
>The gap I see in my current setup (that I'll temporarily plug with stitching) is that the Canon wide angles are not very inspiring. The MTF of even the new 24 L II is not that impressive. I waiting anxiously for the new 24 TS L II (and the lottery prize I'll need if it's really any good). I'm actually inclined to think dedicated wide angle rangefinders might be the answer on the wide side. 
>
>I also initially thought the Sony (Minolta) sensor-shaking image stabilization was not the way to go due to the mass of the full frame sensors. Now I'm less certain. I have no IS lenses now, but with the high ISO performance of these new DSLRs, it makes me wonder what an f/1.2 with a sensor-shaking IS system could do. Canon is already shaking the sensor to get dust off, so maybe adding the sensor-based IS would not be that big of a deal (patents aside).
>
>At any rate, while the 5d2 is certainly not the ultimate DLSR, it does appear to deliver some very nice image files for a reasonable price. 
>
>Paul
>www.PaulRoark.com

____________
www.richardsmallfield.com 

   "Some editors are failed writers, but so are most writers." 
   --T. S. Eliot (1888-1965)

> Learning to process RAW files in Lightroom is absolutely critical,  

David,

it is most interesting that you refer to Lightroom "only"

I agree, I love LR and have the 2.0.
I have to say that (at least to me) the B&W conversion from LR is much easier to use than PS3 (never tried PS4)

I was wondering how many pros do rely on LR alone vs using both LR and PS

Thanks, Marco.

That explains everything  :)
 
Have a great Easter
 
Mike

  _____  

From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com [mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Peter De Smidt
Sent: Friday, April 10, 2009 2:24 PM
To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Digital BW] DSLR Convert





> You can get an adapter to use the Nikon 14-24mm f/2.8 AF-S on your D2. 

That should've been "...on your Canon 5d Mark II."

Sorry.






[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Richard,

> So, Paul, one wonders where to, now, for Nikon and Canon.
> 
> They are catching up with the resolution of 35mm 25iso film. 
> (I miss APX25 and Tech Pan.)

I shot with both of those and agree that the resolution, particularly with APX 25, was substantially more than the 5d2 can achieve.  However, the 5d2's 21 mp can make a print that is better than either film, in my view.  I think one reason is that the noise is so low that one can sharpen much more with the good DSLRs.

 
> But, given the limitations of pixel density and lens 
> resolution, what more can the 35mm camera achieve?

I'm not sure, but I do expect higher resolution and DR.  It would be interesting to hear from a physics type as to when they really start to hit the wall based on the wavelength of the red light.  For the noise issue, I think coat-tailing on the semi-conductor industry's R&D helps a lot, but the computer industry fabrication is way beyond red light's potential restriction.

>... at that point, will Canon and Nikon have to follow Leica 
> and move to MF?

Part of me suspects Leica is doing what it's doing in part because it really can't compete with Canon and Nikon in a head-to-head battle.  So, they must do something different.  I hope they don't sink their whole ship with this S2 program.  The M line really needs to evolve faster than I see it doing. It strikes me as odd that they are starting a whole new SLR line when what I see is live view evolving to the point where the flapping mirror and those second rate retro-focus lenses can be eliminated.  Oh well, they didn't ask me (and I'm too cheap to buy Leicas anyway).

> All this makes me want to hunt around for a second-hand Rolleiflex.

I can't part with my Rolleis yet, but I expect they won't get much actual photo usage any more.

> Will we reach the stage we reached in film within a decade, 
> where the 35mm camera body has delivered all it can ...

Probably.  Then we'll be talking about cell-phones with 40 mp -- the ultimate Blackberry.  Only the old ----s will be carrying the antique DSLRs.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "robertsonlauri" <laurirobertson@...> wrote:
>
> Have just gone from the 5D to the 5D II, and can't believe the difference with the multi-purpose (but heavy) 28-300mm--wow!
> I've been lurking on this forum for a long time, and have to say, you guys are the smartest & the best--Paul R, Jon, Tyler, Ernst, Joost...  Although I work almost exclusively in color now, I've learned so much over the years in the most broadly, sophisticated sense.  THANK YOU!
> 
> Lauri
> 
Lauri,

Lauri,

Thanks for the post. I have been sitting here for the last couple of months considering moving up from my 5D to a 5D II. I have continued to vacillate considering that while the number of pixels goes up ~64% the resolution only increases ~29%. Then again the bit depth increases 400% and interestingly the resolution of the 5D II is almost exactly a full frame of 35mm film scanned at 4000 dpi. 

An old rule of thumb was that there was little to be gained from drum scanning film beyond 2500 dpi. (The thought being that even though you could extra more info you would be hard pressed to get that extra info onto a print. ) In addition you eliminate a processing step so those 21MP, would reasonably be worth say a ~40MP film scan. In the range of a 6X7 neg scanned at 2500dpi? Guess I will have to buy s 5D II to find out.

Martin Wesley

Lightroom as opposed to other conversion software, simply because  
everyone I know has their library in Lightroom, not, say, Aperture. As  
for Photoshop, that is mostly relegated to special postprocessing  
these days: localized edits and other selection/layer based stuff,  
with the global adjustment done in Lightroom.

C. D. Tobie
Global Product Technology Mngr.
Digital Imaging & Home Theater
Datacolor.com
CDTobie@...

On Apr 10, 2009, at 5:56 PM, "the_mark_pv" <QTRIP_grp@...>  
wrote:

>> Learning to process RAW files in Lightroom is absolutely critical,
>
> David,
>
> it is most interesting that you refer to Lightroom "only"
>
> I agree, I love LR and have the 2.0.
> I have to say that (at least to me) the B&W conversion from LR is  
> much easier to use than PS3 (never tried PS4)
>
> I was wondering how many pros do rely on LR alone vs using both LR  
> and PS
>
> Thanks, Marco.
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, and other  
> resources as they are often being updated.
>
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
>
> If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish  
> to unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting  
> this same page.
>
> Please follow these basic guidelines:
> - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages  
> to keep them short.
> - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or  
> flames. Hostile, aggressive or argumentative users may be removed  
> from the membership without notice.
> - Keep your posts and threads related to the group topic of digital  
> B&W printing. Users who persistently make off-topic posts may be  
> removed from the membership.
> - By posting on this forum you agree to abide by the group rules and  
> guidelines, and to abide by the actions and decisions of the group  
> Owner and Moderators. See “Group Topic, Rules and Guidelines” in  
> the Files section:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/files/
>
> BY PARTICIPATING IN AND/OR POSTING MESSAGES TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE  
> PRINT YAHOO! GROUP YOU EXPRESSLY UNDERSTAND AND AGREE THAT THE “OWNE 
> R” AND “MODERATORS” OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP SHALL  
> NOT BE LIABLE TO YOU FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL,  
> CONSEQUENTIAL OR EXEMPLARY DAMAGES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, DA 
> MAGES FOR LOSS OF PROFITS, GOODWILL, USE, DATA OR OTHER INTANGIBLE L 
> OSSES (EVEN IF THE  “OWNER” AND “MODERATORS” OF DIGITAL BW,  
> THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP HAVE BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH D 
> AMAGES), RESULTING FROM: (i) THE USE OR THE INABILITY TO USE THE DIG 
> ITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; (ii) UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS TO OR ALTER 
> ATION OF YOUR TRANSMISSIONS OR DATA; (iii) STATEMENTS OR CONDUCT OF  
> ANY THIRD PARTY ON THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; OR (iv) AN 
> Y OTHER MATTER RELATING TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP.
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>

At 07:22 PM 4/10/2009, you wrote:
>Part of me suspects Leica is doing what it's doing in part because 
>it really can't compete with Canon and Nikon in a head-to-head 
>battle. So, they must do something different. I hope they don't sink 
>their whole ship with this S2 program.
>Paul

Paul-

Well, you know I'm going to take up for Leica ;-)  The only reason 
they can't compete with Canon and Nikon is because 90% of 
photographers have never even tried a Leica digital.  If they had, 
there would be no competition.  The Leica M8 is closer to film than 
any other digital camera.  (Of course, some photographers don't want 
closer to film!)  I'm really looking forward to the S2, but probably 
will have to wait to buy a used one 10 years from now!  In the 
meantime, the M8 is perpetually upgradeable, unlike most digital 
cameras.  My M8's will keep me happy when my Canons are gathering 
dust!  I'm a rangefinder type photographer, though. YMMV!

Tina

Tina Manley
www.tinamanley.com

Hi Tina,

> At 07:22 PM 4/10/2009, Paul wrote:
> >... I hope they don't sink their whole ship with this S2 program.

> Paul-
> 
> Well, you know I'm going to take up for Leica ;-) 

I thought I might get a rise out of you.

> ... The Leica M8 is closer to film than any other digital camera.

Leica M is a great camera system.  My concern is really that I wonder if Leica isn't putting so much into the S2 that they won't be able to push the M to where (I think) it ought to go, including a full frame, high MP sensor to take advantage of those Leica M wide angle lenses. 

> I'm really looking forward to the S2, but probably 
> will have to wait to buy a used one 10 years from now!

I fear most are in that position.  Also, I have to come back to the weight issue.  I suspect they are cutting out a significant part of their market by making a camera system that is too heavy.

>... the M8 is perpetually upgradeable, unlike most digital 
> cameras. 

It used to be said that no one ever lost money on a Leica.  A buyer could always re-sell them at about the same price that was paid for them.  With the advent of digital, this Leica advantage would seem to be nearly impossible to retain.  Perhaps that is why they came up with the idea of upgrades.  For those not familiar with this, see http://www.dpreview.com/news/0802/080204leicam8upgrade.asp
But I note that these are not free.  Also, can they really upgrade the sensor?  While they might offer a harder glass cover for the LCD, can they make it bigger?  

I wonder how long it'll be before Cosina has a 25 mp full frame that can take the M lenses.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

> Your first comment brought this suggestion to mind, the later one  
> confirmed it, you sound like a potential customer for a Digital  
> Hasselblad.  The HD39 back captures 39MP,and there are some 

Don't they have a 50MP back now ? The sensor is from Kodak.

BTW, those things are HUGE (the sensors). I wonder how can they get any yield out of those wafers !

Marco

> Lightroom as opposed to other conversion software, simply because  
> everyone I know has their library in Lightroom, not, say, Aperture. 

Thank you.

I used to use Dxo a lot, but it's much heavier.
For whatever reason (silly) I am OK at LR storing the settings in its database, but not at DXO doing the same.

I now use Dxo only for images that have lots of noise. In that field I think it still outshines PS and LR

Ciao, Marco

> 
> I wonder how long it'll be before Cosina has a 25 mp full frame that can take the M lenses.
> 
> Paul
> www.PaulRoark.com 

I hope that project doesn't have to wait till the Voigtl\ufffdnder Bessa III 
(Fuji GF670) MF folder becomes a success.

Right now Samsung may have the best concept for a high quality compact.
Its Micro APS could have a flange to sensor distance short enough for M 
lenses too, it is possible on the Micro 4/3 and the sensor factor 
doesn't have to increase the flange to sensor distance like on a DSLR. 
On the other hand if Samsung licensed more than the Schneider name on 
the lens it should have lenses equivalent to the Schneider Digitars for 
MF digital backs. The wide angles you would like to have. Improve the 15 
MP sensor of the GX20 and you are in Leica M territory. True a 
rangefinder would be nicer but that is still possible. I don't think 
mechanical coupling to the rangefinder is still needed, there are other 
solutions.

Cosina + Zeiss + Fuji wouldn't be a bad combination. That Zeiss M 
analogue rangefinder made by Cosina was just to test the waters. Imagine 
an improved Fuji sensor in it, it will still be the champion on dynamic 
range. Wished they had done that instead of the MF folder creation. As a 
folder user I think that 670 would have been a terrific idea 5 years ago 
but it is too late now.

Anyway there's no budget left so I can wait for that compact, quality 
rangefinder.


-- 
Met vriendelijke groeten,   Ernst


New: Dinkla Canvas Wrap Actions

|      Dinkla Grafische Techniek      |
|         www.pigment-print.com        |
|                 ( unvollendet )                 |

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "pr_roark" <pr_roark@...> wrote:
>
> I think I've just become a believer -- that DSLRs have made the grade.
> 
> I took my new Canon 5d2 to the Disney Concert Hall in L.A. on Monday, with just the Canon 35mm f/2 lens.  I fired off a number of "snapshots" of the outside of the building.  The first 16x20 just came off my old 7500 (using Eboni-6), and those 21 mp make all the difference.  I think I'm a convert.  
> 
> Actually, I worry that it's too easy.
> 
> I've put a shot of the Disney Concert Hall on my web page for those who are interested.  What a great subject.  (The music inside was also very nice.)

Beautiful, Paul, an inviting study of tone, form, and texture. Has Richard Gery seen it? He should, and I would think he'd be pleased! I think your highlights are fine. I know that metal is not quite chrome, but we wouldn't be bothered by "blown" highlights on chrome. It's the nature of the beast.

My latest project was to shoot a new metal roof of a local church, the architect wanted me to capture that. I checked my histogram after each exposure, finally had to accept those highlights. No way to get texture there, without everything else going too dark. Finally decided a few overcooked highlights were part of the subject. (My camera was not up to yours, but that's no excuse!).

Tell us about the paper you used, and the framing... was it under glass? I'm becoming less and less enamored of glass myself.

Paul

For what it¹s worth, I used to shoot my black and white landscape work with
large and medium-format film.  For some time now I¹ve been going with direct
digital capture, currently using a Nikon D700 and a Hasselblad H3D.  I got
the latter primarily for my freelance work, where I specialize in
photographing artwork for museums, galleries, and artists.  But I¹ve been
really pleased with how easy it is to carry it around and use it in the
field.

Having said that, though, I would add that it is indeed a steep investment,
and that there are both rewards and limitations.  The obvious reward is the
size of the sensor; mine is 39 MP.  They also have a 50 and are about to
release a 60 MP version, though I believe that those sensors have more but
smaller megapixels, which is an issue with regard to image quality.

The lenses are very nice.  Their rendering of out-of-focus areas is very
smooth; they are very sharp, and I also appreciate the option of autofocus,
now that my eyes aren¹t as young as they used to be.  I especially
appreciate the 28 mm, which is equivalent to about a 20 mm lens on a 35. The
80 is actually sharper than the 120 macro.

On the minus side, the camera only creates RAW files, and they have to be
worked with in Hasselblad¹s Phocus or Flexcolor software ­ ACR, etc. won¹t
open them.  The software is quite sophisticated.  You can have it
automatically correct for each particular lens¹s distortion, vignetting, and
chromatic aberration if you choose.

Depending on what/how you shoot, it can be great to work with the camera
tethered to a computer and operated through the software.  For the landscape
work it¹s not a problem to shoot onto a CF card, do some work to the file in
Phocus, and then export as a 16-bit TIFF for final editing in Photoshop.  I
enjoy CS4¹s ability to control conversion to black and white using the
slider equivalent of filters.  It¹s like being able to decide later on
whether to use a yellow or orange filter without having to miss what¹s going
on in front of you in the landscape while you pull the filters out and try
to get them on the lens before the light changes.

The native files are 18 x 24² at 300 ppi, and the software allows you to
export the files at larger sizes (within reason) with little or no apparent
loss of quality.  It¹s not as fast to use as something like the D700, and
it¹s camera that you should try to use below freezing or above 100 degrees,
but hey, you can¹t have everything...

Stephen Petegorsky



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

DXO has some great features, but it's tough to keep up with the big  
guys in the larger field. Years ago at the first ProPhoto Summit I was  
asked which RAW conversion software I thought would end up being the  
standard. My answer was: the one built into the workflow software that  
becomes the standard. And that's looking more and more to be the case.

C. D. Tobie
Global Product Technology Mngr.
Digital Imaging & Home Theater
Datacolor.com
CDTobie@...

On Apr 11, 2009, at 12:44 AM, "the_mark_pv" <QTRIP_grp@...>  
wrote:

>> Lightroom as opposed to other conversion software, simply because
>> everyone I know has their library in Lightroom, not, say, Aperture.
>
> Thank you.
>
> I used to use Dxo a lot, but it's much heavier.
> For whatever reason (silly) I am OK at LR storing the settings in  
> its database, but not at DXO doing the same.
>
> I now use Dxo only for images that have lots of noise. In that field  
> I think it still outshines PS and LR
>
> Ciao, Marco
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, and other  
> resources as they are often being updated.
>
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
>
> If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish  
> to unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting  
> this same page.
>
> Please follow these basic guidelines:
> - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages  
> to keep them short.
> - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or  
> flames. Hostile, aggressive or argumentative users may be removed  
> from the membership without notice.
> - Keep your posts and threads related to the group topic of digital  
> B&W printing. Users who persistently make off-topic posts may be  
> removed from the membership.
> - By posting on this forum you agree to abide by the group rules and  
> guidelines, and to abide by the actions and decisions of the group  
> Owner and Moderators. See “Group Topic, Rules and Guidelines” in  
> the Files section:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/files/
>
> BY PARTICIPATING IN AND/OR POSTING MESSAGES TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE  
> PRINT YAHOO! GROUP YOU EXPRESSLY UNDERSTAND AND AGREE THAT THE “OWNE 
> R” AND “MODERATORS” OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP SHALL  
> NOT BE LIABLE TO YOU FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL,  
> CONSEQUENTIAL OR EXEMPLARY DAMAGES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, DA 
> MAGES FOR LOSS OF PROFITS, GOODWILL, USE, DATA OR OTHER INTANGIBLE L 
> OSSES (EVEN IF THE  “OWNER” AND “MODERATORS” OF DIGITAL BW,  
> THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP HAVE BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH D 
> AMAGES), RESULTING FROM: (i) THE USE OR THE INABILITY TO USE THE DIG 
> ITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; (ii) UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS TO OR ALTER 
> ATION OF YOUR TRANSMISSIONS OR DATA; (iii) STATEMENTS OR CONDUCT OF  
> ANY THIRD PARTY ON THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; OR (iv) AN 
> Y OTHER MATTER RELATING TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP.
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>

At 11:29 PM 4/10/2009, you wrote:
>I fear most are in that position. Also, I have to come back to the 
>weight issue. I suspect they are cutting out a significant part of 
>their market by making a camera system that is too heavy.

But it is smaller than most 35 
DSLR's:  http://www.dpreview.com/news/0809/08092301_leica_s2.asp

"With a custom 37.5-megapixel, 30 x 45 mm sensor that is 56% larger 
than full frame, it establishes parameters of imaging excellence that 
are well beyond those obtainable by conventional pro-caliber 
DSLRs.... Remarkably, all of this has been incorporated into a camera 
that is smaller than a full-size professional 35mm SLR, and still has 
the unmistakable look and feel of a Leica."

It all sounds too good to be true, but they haven't announced the 
price yet.  I'll probably stick to my rangefinders. I do intend to 
upgrade at least one of them, eventually.  I hope to get out of the 
cycle of having to buy a new digital camera every year or so!

Tina

Tina Manley
www.tinamanley.com

"Paul Whiting" <paulmwhiting@...> wrote:

 
> Tell us about the paper you used, and the framing... 
> was it under glass? I'm becoming less and less enamored 
> of glass myself.

The 16 x 20's I've made of the Disney Concert Hall are using my stantard Eboni-6 on Premier Art Smooth BW, and they are under acrylic.  The PA Smooth BW, when matted with a creamy natural paper mat board make the Disney Hall look metalic -- which, of course, it is.  I think it's the slightly high Lab A of the PA BW and the "selenium" look that may be doing it, but it really works.  The web images don't convey the full effect of this.

I may try the Arches un-coated with one of these images today, as well as seeing how the 5d2 file holds up at 22 x 28.  

My collection of un-usable scratched or defective acrylic grew in the process of framing these jet black sky images.  The last piece I had -- and had to use -- still was not perfect.  I hate the glazing, but I'm stuck with it for at least the large prints for a while.  

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

> My collection of un-usable scratched or defective acrylic grew in the >process of framing these jet black sky images.  The last piece I had >-- and had to use -- still was not perfect.  I hate the glazing, but 
> I'm stuck with it for at least the large prints for a while.  

I still have some screen cleaner, consisted of a couple of grades of a very gentle paste with extremely fine granules. I used to use this on an old Radio Shack portable computer. I've also heard you can use certain kinds of toothpaste.

Maybe it's not worth the hassle, just throwing that thought in.

By glazing, do you mean the appearance of the acrylic? Do you prefer this to glass? It certainly would be lighter, easier to hang.

Paul

re: 40MP

of course the other issue with so many megapixels is that you get a humongous file size which slows down read/write time on memory cards.

good thing they're working on the 2TB memory cards.

http://www.engadget.com/2009/01/08/sony-sandisk-announce-plans-for-2tb-memory-sticks-high-speed-m/

I just, very sadly, sold my M6 and some lenses so that I could upgrade lenses for my Canon 40D.  While I might have been able to strike a better deal, I lost a considerable amount of money. My impression is that digital has sent Leica prices downhill.  I have held onto a number of older cameras with the hope that film cameras will go the way of mechanical watches at some point:)  Sorry for the OT post.

Steve

> 
> It used to be said that no one ever lost money on a Leica.  A buyer could always re-sell them at about the same price that was paid for them.  With the advent of digital, this Leica advantage would seem to be nearly impossible to retain.  Perhaps that is why they came up with the idea of upgrades.  For those not familiar with this, see http://www.dpreview.com/news/0802/080204leicam8upgrade.asp
> But I note that these are not free.  Also, can they really upgrade the sensor?  While they might offer a harder glass cover for the LCD, can they make it bigger?  
> 
> I wonder how long it'll be before Cosina has a 25 mp full frame that can take the M lenses.
> 
> Paul
> www.PaulRoark.com
>

"Paul Whiting" <paulmwhiting@...> wrote:

> > ... scratched or defective acrylic ...

> 
> I still have some screen cleaner, consisted of a couple of 
> grades of a very gentle paste with extremely fine granules. 
> I used to use this on an old Radio Shack portable computer.
>  I've also heard you can use certain kinds of toothpaste.

I've used silver polish.

> Maybe it's not worth the hassle ...

I don't think it is worth the hassle for most scratches.

> By glazing, do you mean the appearance of the acrylic? 

Glazing causes reflections that wipe out the dmax in many diffusely (non-spot) lighted viewing areas.  

> Do you prefer this to glass? It certainly would be 
> lighter, easier to hang.

For shipping and for safety in my native, earth-quake prone southern California, I almost must use acrylic.  I think good glass would be better for viewing and scratch resistance.  The Getty uses acrylic with an optical anti-refection coating.  (While I love non-profits, the cost of the outstanding, optically-coated acrylic would make my photo venture way too non-profit.)

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

I think the upgrade idea is a good one for Leica and I wish more would go that route - some of the issues I have with digital products generally are that they are not made to last , are superceded every 5 minutes by new models with dubious "improvements" and even if they do last any length of time you soon find you cant buy consumables , or spares or whatever - all rendering perfectly serviceable kit useless.....
I suppose we shouldnt be surprised that manufacturers have adopted the worst traits of the computer industry since those are the roots of the technology , still , it gets my goat!
Like Tina I'm sticking to my Leica M's for the time being....
Steve  



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Tina Manley wrote:

> ... it is smaller than most 35 
> DSLR's:  http://www.dpreview.com/news/0809/08092301_leica_s2.asp
> 
> "With a custom 37.5-megapixel, 30 x 45 mm sensor that is 
> 56% larger than full frame, ...
> and still has the unmistakable look and feel of a Leica."
> 
> It all sounds too good to be true, but they haven't announced the 
> price yet. 

It sounds like they're shooting for a very high level of performance, and something that is distinquishable from the rest of the pack, not only by way of format size but also, perhaps, new patents that will keep the competitors, including used Leica lenses, at bay.  Those lenses are almost certainly going to be larger for a given speed, magnification, and feature set.  I hope there is enough of a niche to make it profitable for them. 

> I'll probably stick to my rangefinders.

I've been using a rangefinder medium format (Bronica RF645, Tech Pan film, usually with a wide angle, 45 mm lens) as my main camera for several years.  I think the rangefinder can own wide angle, and with advanced live view, maybe more. 

> I hope to get out of the cycle of having to buy a new 
> digital camera every year or so!

That would be nice.  The need to upgrade digital cameras -- one way or the other -- might be an inherent part of a fast-moving technology.  I hope Leica has found some method that at least partially deals with this problem. 

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

"Disney-1" -- http://paulroark.com/Disney-1.jpg -- the firt shot I took at the Disney Concert Hall, just rolled off the 7500 at just over 22 x 28 inches.  It may not be perfect, but it's definitely good enough.  This is by far the shortest time line from shot to 22 x 28 "keeper" that I've experienced.  The 5d2 has definitely passed its first field test with me. 

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com 

> I think I've just become a believer -- that DSLRs have made the grade.
> 
> I took my new Canon 5d2 to the Disney Concert Hall in L.A. on 
> [Sunday, April 5], with just the Canon 35mm f/2 lens.  
> I fired off a number of "snapshots" ...

>> I hope to get out of the cycle of having to buy a new
 >> digital camera every year or so!

 >That would be nice. The need to upgrade digital cameras -- one way  
or the other -- might be an inherent part of a fast-moving technology.
 >I hope Leica has found some method that at least partially deals  
with this problem.

If we can get the world economy back to a level that supports Chinese  
inventiveness, perhaps we can look forward in a few years to a digital  
add-on backs for Nikon F's and Leica M's!

Myron

paul, how did you create that digital mat and frame on the disney building shot on your website?

"c1asia" c1asia@...> wrote:
>
> paul, how did you create that digital mat and frame on the 
> disney building shot on your website?

I scanned a mat board on a flatbed for the texture.  The rest is just hand drawn bevel selections with appropriate shading.  I have the originals -- horizontal and vertical -- as *psd files with a slection for the interior and then just drop in the resized images.

Those bevelled/shaded fake mat borders are fun.  You can do that on paper and have an entirely fake mat board under glass that most will never notice is not the real thing.  I've played around a bit with that concept to make tunnels and windows that one looks through or out of to see the images.  You can get some rather interesting and unusual display options.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

On Apr 10, 2009, at 8:23 PM, blueto49 wrote:

> Thanks for the post. I have been sitting here for the last couple of  
> months considering moving up from my 5D to a 5D II. I have continued  
> to vacillate considering that while the number of pixels goes up  
> ~64% the resolution only increases ~29%. Then again the bit depth  
> increases 400% and interestingly the resolution of the 5D II is  
> almost exactly a full frame of 35mm film scanned at 4000 dpi.

Well, I find both the increased resolution, and the increased dynamic  
range to be important. The dynamic range for any image size, the  
resolution for larger prints only.
>
> An old rule of thumb was that there was little to be gained from  
> drum scanning film beyond 2500 dpi. (The thought being that even  
> though you could extra more info you would be hard pressed to get  
> that extra info onto a print. ) In addition you eliminate a  
> processing step so those 21MP, would reasonably be worth say a ~40MP  
> film scan. In the range of a 6X7 neg scanned at 2500dpi? Guess I  
> will have to buy s 5D II to find out.

Much of what you were scanning was film grain. But as you note  
yourself, direct digital capture is worth more, pixel for pixel, than  
a scan. I would claim a higher rate than 2:1, but that would depend on  
how grainy the film was, and how good the scanner was, so I won't  
propose a number of my own.

C. David Tobie
Global Product Technology Manager
Digital Imaging & Home Theater
CDTobie@...


  ----------



Datacolor
www.datacolor.com/Spyder3




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

> I took my new Canon 5d2 to the Disney Concert Hall in L.A. ... 

I'll hang a 22x28 image of the Concert Hall -- 
http://paulroark.com/Disney-1.jpg -- at Gallery Los Olivos next weekend for locals who might want to see the results enlarged in person.  I'll be there May 7, as usual. (In the meantime, I'm off to Yosemite to give the 5d2 a test drive there.)

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com